Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Program, 29556-29563 [2012-12153]
Download as PDF
29556
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Florida and in the Gulf EEZ is no longer
included under the South Atlantic or
Gulf Coral FMPs.
Florida’s Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) is
currently responsible for the majority of
the management, implementation, and
enforcement of octocoral harvest
because the majority of octocoral
harvest occurs in Florida state waters. In
the absence of Federal regulations, the
FWC regulations on octocoral harvest
apply to adjacent Federal waters (68B–
42.006 of the Florida Administrative
Code).
Need for Correction
After the regulations implementing
CE–BA 2 and the Generic ACL
Amendment became effective on
January 30, 2012, NMFS determined
that the quota for Gulf allowable
octocoral, specified in paragraph (b) of
§ 622.42, was inadvertently retained in
the regulations. The final rule
implementing the Generic ACL
Amendment removed the allowable
octocoral quota for the Gulf EEZ, and
the final rule implementing CE–BA 2
removed the allowable octocoral quota
for the South Atlantic EEZ. However,
these two final rules became effective on
the same day and the Gulf allowable
octocoral quota was inadvertently
retained in the regulations through the
final rule implementing CE–BA 2.
NMFS’s intent was to remove the quota
for both Gulf and South Atlantic
allowable octocoral from the regulations
because the quota is no longer managed
under Federal FMPs. This correcting
amendment is necessary to remove and
reserve paragraph (b) in § 622.42.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Correction
As published, the final rule
implementing CE–BA 2 contains an
error in the regulatory text. In § 622.42,
paragraph (b) should be removed and
reserved. All other information remains
unchanged and will not be repeated in
this correction.
Classification
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
NOAA, finds good cause to waive prior
notice and opportunity for additional
public comment for this action because
it would be unnecessary and contrary to
the public interest. This correcting
amendment removes a paragraph of
regulatory text that was incorrectly
retained. NMFS incorrectly retained the
quota for Gulf allowable octocoral in the
CE–BA 2 final rule. The Generic ACL
Amendment removed octocoral from
Federal management in the Gulf EEZ.
Notice and comment is unnecessary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
because the public had notice and an
opportunity to comment on the removal
of the quota for Gulf allowable octocoral
when NMFS promulgated the proposed
rule for the Generic ACL Amendment.
The public has been led to believe that
the quota for Gulf allowable octocoral
was removed from the regulations on
the effective date of the final rule
implementing the Generic ACL
Amendment. The delay caused by an
additional public comment period
might cause confusion among regulated
parties and would therefore be contrary
to the public interest.
For the same reasons, the Assistant
Administrator also finds good cause,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), to waive the
30-day delay in effective date for this
correcting amendment. This correction
removes regulatory text that the public
believed was previously removed and
does not change operating practices in
Gulf or South Atlantic fisheries.
Because prior notice and opportunity
for public comment are not required for
this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other
law, the analytical requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., are inapplicable.
This rule has been determined to be
not significant under Executive Order
12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
Dated: May 15, 2012.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
Accordingly, 50 CFR part 622 is
corrected by making the following
correcting amendment:
PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE
CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH
ATLANTIC
1. The authority citation for part 622
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
§ 622.42
[Amended]
2. In § 622.42, paragraph (b) is
removed and reserved.
■
[FR Doc. 2012–12156 Filed 5–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3210–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 0906041011–2432–02]
RIN 0648–AX91
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Halibut and
Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota
Program
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues a final rule to
modify the Individual Fishing Quota
(IFQ) Program for the Fixed-Gear
Commercial Fisheries for Pacific Halibut
and Sablefish in Waters in and off
Alaska (IFQ Program) by revoking quota
share (QS) that have been inactive since
they were originally issued in 1995.
Inactive QS are those held by persons
that have never harvested their IFQ and
have never transferred QS or IFQ into or
out of their IFQ accounts.
This action is necessary to achieve the
catch limit from the halibut fisheries
and optimum yield from the sablefish
fisheries in Alaska in accordance with
National Standard 1 of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, and this action will
achieve more efficient use of these
species. The intended effect is to
promote the management provisions in
the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of
1982, the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area, and
the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska.
DATES: Effective June 18, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of this
rule, the categorical exclusion
memorandum, the Regulatory Impact
Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (RIR/IRFA), and the Regulatory
Impact Review/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (RIR/FRFA)
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
requests may be submitted by mail to
NMFS, Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802–1668, Attn: Ellen
Sebastian, Records Officer; or in person
at NMFS, Alaska Region, 709 West 9th
Street, Room 420A, Juneau, Alaska.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this action
may be submitted to NMFS at the above
address and by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or by
fax to (202) 395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peggy Murphy, (907) 586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Management of the Halibut and
Sablefish IFQ Fisheries
Management of the commercial
fishery for Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus
stenolepis) in and off Alaska is based on
an international agreement between
Canada and the United States. This
agreement, titled ‘‘Convention Between
United States of America and Canada
for the Preservation of the Halibut
Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean
and Bering Sea’’ (Convention), was
signed in Ottawa, Canada, on March 2,
1953, and amended by the ‘‘Protocol
Amending the Convention,’’ signed in
Washington, DC, March 29, 1979. The
Convention is administered by the
International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC) and is given effect
in the United States by the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut
Act).
The Halibut Act (section 773(c))
authorizes the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) to
develop halibut fishery regulations,
including limited access regulations that
are in addition to, and not in conflict
with, approved IPHC regulations for
U.S. Convention waters. Federal
regulations governing the halibut
fisheries appear at 50 CFR part 300,
subpart E. Halibut regulations may be
implemented by NMFS only after
approval by the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary). The Council has exercised
this authority most notably in the
development of the IFQ Program
codified at 50 CFR part 679, subpart D.
Federal management of the
commercial fishery for sablefish
(Anoplopoma fimbria) is authorized by
the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area and
the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska
(FMPs). The FMPs were prepared by the
Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) (Magnuson-Stevens
Act) and implemented by regulations at
50 CFR part 679.
IFQ Program
The Council and NMFS developed the
IFQ Program for the halibut and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
sablefish fixed-gear fisheries in waters
in and off Alaska. The Council adopted
the IFQ Program in 1991 under the
authority of the Halibut Act and the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. The preamble to
the proposed rule for the IFQ Program,
published December 3, 1992 (57 FR
57130), details the conservation and
management background leading to the
Council’s adoption of the IFQ Program.
NMFS implemented the program on
November 9, 1993 (58 FR 59375)
through Federal regulations at 50 CFR
part 679. Fishing under the IFQ Program
began on March 15, 1995. The IFQ
Program is designed to maintain the
social character and economic benefits
of the commercial, fixed-gear fisheries
that Alaskan coastal communities rely
on as a source of revenue. The Council
and NMFS intend the IFQ Program to
provide economic stability for the
Pacific halibut and sablefish commercial
fisheries and improve long-term
productivity of the resources.
The IFQ Program limits access to the
halibut and sablefish fixed-gear fisheries
in waters in and off Alaska to persons
holding QS. Quota Share was initially
issued to persons who owned or leased
vessels that made legal commercial
landings of Pacific halibut or sablefish
during 1988–1990. The intent was to
assign initial QS only to those fishermen
then currently active in the halibut and
sablefish fixed-gear fisheries. Once
issued to a person, QS is held by that
person until it is transferred, suspended,
or revoked. The IFQ Program allows
fishermen to transfer QS to other initial
issuees or to those who have a
Transferable Eligibility Certificate,
giving them flexibility to determine
what type of investment to make based
on when, where, and how much halibut
and sablefish they can harvest.
The amount of halibut and sablefish
that each QS holder may harvest is
calculated annually and issued as IFQ
pounds on an IFQ permit. An IFQ
permit authorizes participation in the
fixed-gear fishery for Pacific halibut in
and off Alaska, and in most fixed-gear
sablefish fisheries off Alaska. IFQ
permits are issued annually to persons
holding Pacific halibut and sablefish QS
or to those persons who are recipients
of IFQ transfers from QS holders.
Persons holding QS have harvesting
privileges for IFQ pounds of halibut or
sablefish that are derived annually from
their QS holdings. The amount (in
pounds) specified on an permit is
determined by the number of QS units
held for a species, the total number of
QS units issued for that species in a
specific regulatory area, and the total
allowable catch (TAC) of that species
allocated for IFQ fisheries in a particular
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29557
year, as modified by adjustments from
the prior year’s harvest.
The IFQ Program requires IFQ permit
holders to be on board the vessel to
maintain a predominantly ‘‘owneroperated’’ fishery. A narrow exemption
exists for initial recipients of QS. Initial
recipients of catcher vessel QS may be
absent from a vessel conducting IFQ
halibut or sablefish fishing, provided
the QS holder can demonstrate a
minimum specified level of ownership
of the vessel that harvests the IFQ
halibut or sablefish, as well as
representation on the vessel by a hired
master designated under IFQ
regulations. This exception allows
fishermen who historically operated
their fishing businesses using hired
masters before the implementation of
the IFQ Program to retain the flexibility
of using hired masters under the IFQ
Program.
Description of Final Action
This final rule authorizes NMFS to
revoke halibut and sablefish QS that
have been inactive since they were
originally issued in 1995. Inactive QS
are those held by persons who have
never harvested the IFQ derived from
initially issued QS and who have never
transferred QS or IFQ into or out of their
IFQ Program accounts. NMFS will not
revoke the inactive QS of any person
who responds in writing to NMFS
within 60 days after NMFS issues a
Notice of Determination of Quota Share
Inactivity, requesting that the inactive
QS not be revoked. The action provides
halibut and sablefish fishermen holding
active QS an opportunity to fish for
currently unavailable QS and more fully
harvest these species’ TACs.
The background and need for this
action were described in detail in the
preamble to the proposed rule
published in the Federal Register on
August 23, 2010 (75 FR 51741). In
summary, amending the IFQ Program
regulations will improve access to all
available QS, increase the operational
flexibility of fishermen participating in
the IFQ fisheries, and increase yield
from QS to help achieve optimum yield.
In addition, data collection,
recordkeeping, and reporting of inactive
QS and the administrative tasks for
managing inactive QS are eliminated.
Less information to administer and
manage will streamline aspects of the
IFQ Program, reduce administrative
costs, and promote efficient use of IFQ
Program and participant resources. To
achieve these objectives, the final rule
authorizes NMFS to revoke inactive QS.
Halibut and sablefish QS was initially
allocated to persons who qualified to
hold an IFQ permit pursuant to
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
29558
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
regulations at § 679.40(a). These
regulations specified no minimum
amount of halibut or sablefish QS to be
issued. As a result, small amounts of QS
were initially issued to just over 200
persons who to date have never fished
the IFQ derived from that QS, or
transferred the QS to another person.
Thus, the recipients of these QS
allocations have left their QS inactive
for the entire 16 years since it was
initially issued. They presumably have
elected not to participate actively in the
IFQ fisheries, are no longer in the
commercial fishing industry, are
deceased, or have been unable or
unwilling to divest or otherwise transfer
their inactive QS. Persons holding
inactive QS have had the same
opportunity as persons with active QS
to participate in the IFQ Program by
fishing their IFQ or transferring their QS
and IFQ.
As a result of inactive QS, some IFQ
and a portion of the TAC is not
harvested. This reduces economic and
social benefits from IFQ harvests
typically realized by fishery dependent
businesses and the public. Consumers
are deprived of product, active IFQ
fishermen are precluded from
harvesting the IFQ derived from inactive
QS, and new entrants to the IFQ
fisheries are denied access to halibut
and sablefish QS held by persons who
have never participated in the IFQ
fisheries. This final rule will improve
operational flexibility of active program
participants to harvest species TACs,
and will allow broader opportunity to
achieve the halibut fishery’s constant
exploitation yield and the optimum
yield from the sablefish fisheries as
required by National Standard 1 of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Moreover, even though QS is inactive,
NMFS must perform routine
administrative tasks to process, monitor,
and maintain data on inactive QS,
including recordkeeping, regular
correspondence with the IFQ permit
holder that holds inactive QS, annual
allocation of IFQ pounds, and data
reporting. The administrative work
detracts time from NMFS managers that
can be used more productively.
Additionally, IFQ permit holders help
pay for the program costs through the
IFQ cost recovery program (§ 679.45) by
remitting a fee for IFQ species landed.
When QS remains inactive, no landing
fees accrue to the program, although the
IFQ permit holder with the inactive QS
continues to receive administrative
support from the IFQ Program. This
action will eliminate the administrative
tasks and costs for managing inactive
QS, because the rule removes that QS
entirely. Less information to administer
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
and manage will streamline aspects of
the IFQ Program to the benefit of QS
managers and program participants.
Reducing the administrative costs and
burden will allow for more efficient use
of IFQ Program resources.
This action revokes inactive halibut
and sablefish QS. The portion of the
annual halibut and sablefish TACs
represented by the revoked QS and
associated IFQ will be distributed in
future years among IFQ permit holders
in an amount proportional to their IFQ
allocation. Alternatively, if a permit
holder requests NMFS not to revoke his
or her inactive QS, then NMFS will
assign an active status to that QS
because the permit holder took action in
making the request. This QS retained by
request will remain integrated with
previously-active QS and the associated
IFQ will continue to be issued annually.
Revoking QS will not change the
initial recipient status of the QS holder.
Hence, if a person was initially
allocated QS that is revoked under this
action and subsequently acquires new
QS in the future, that person retains the
benefit of being an initial recipient of
QS for purposes of retaining the
flexibility of using a hired master.
Public Notice
In June 2006, the Council acted on a
multi-part IFQ regulatory amendment
package that included this action on
inactive QS. The Council adopted a
preferred alternative to (1) revoke all
inactive halibut and sablefish QS from
the QS pools and (2) redistribute
inactive halibut QS through a lottery if
the final amount of revoked inactive QS
exceeds the number of QS units
equivalent to 50,000 pounds (22.7 mt)
for all IPHC regulatory areas in the year
of the lottery. NMFS separated the
Council’s multiple recommendations
into different regulatory amendment
packages. This final rule is the final one
of the series recommended by the
Council in 2006. As a result, several
years have passed between the Council’s
action notifying the public of the
pending change to the IFQ Program and
publication of this final rule.
Since Council action, NMFS, Alaska
Region, has maintained a Web site
listing of inactive QS and the
information needed to facilitate
voluntary transfers of QS. NMFS also
contacted persons holding inactive
halibut or sablefish QS by direct mail.
NMFS notified these persons of the
status of this action in letters sent by
direct mail in January 2008 and again in
March 2009. NMFS communicated that
it was pursuing rulemaking that, if
implemented, would require persons to
notify NMFS in writing that they do not
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
want their inactive QS and associated
annual IFQ revoked. In between these
notification letters, the amount of
inactive halibut QS declined below the
threshold poundage to conduct a lottery
prompting the Council, in February
2009, to reaffirm its previous
recommendation for the Preferred
Alternative, but without the lottery.
NMFS also provided broad public
notice of the Council’s intent to
withdraw inactive QS with publication
of the proposed rule (75 FR 51743) in
the Federal Register, August 23, 2010.
The RIR/FRFA prepared for this
action (see ADDRESSES) finds that when
the Council initially considered the
proposal in June 2006, 534 persons held
865,586 units of inactive halibut QS
(280,000 lbs [127 mt] in 2006
equivalents). Inactive sablefish QS
equating to 57,522 units (16,000 lbs [7.3
mt] in 2006 equivalents) was held by
seven persons. As of December 21, 2011
(the most current data available), 202
persons held 156,218 units of inactive
halibut QS (10,597 lbs [4.8 mt] in 2011
equivalents) and two persons held 9,281
units of inactive sablefish QS (695 lbs
[0.32 mt] in 2011 equivalents). Overall,
the communications with IFQ permit
holders stimulated transfers of inactive
QS that resulted in a 62 percent decline
in the number of persons holding
inactive halibut QS and a 71 percent
decline in the number of people holding
inactive sablefish QS. The decline in QS
units was also similar for both species:
Inactive halibut QS declined 82 percent
and inactive sablefish QS declined 84
percent.
Official Notice and Record
This final rule implements regulations
authorizing NMFS to send each holder
of inactive QS a ‘‘Notice of
Determination of Quota Share
Inactivity’’ (Inactive QS Notice). The
Inactive QS Notice will be sent by
certified mail to the address of record at
the time the Inactive QS Notice is sent
(§ 679.43(e)). The inactive QS holder
bears the responsibility if the Inactive
QS Notice is not received because the
inactive QS holder has not notified
NMFS of a change in the address of
record. The Inactive QS Notice will
describe the inactive status of the QS,
identify the IFQ permit holder, and
provide the date the authorized 60-day
response period will end.
NMFS will issue an Inactive QS
Notice alerting a holder of inactive
halibut or sablefish QS that their QS are
considered inactive based on records
maintained by NMFS. An Inactive QS
Notice will be issued if official records
indicate that the QS holder initially
issued the QS never landed their IFQ
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
halibut or IFQ sablefish, or transferred
any QS or IFQ to or from another
person. The official record of an IFQ
halibut or IFQ sablefish landing
contains the IFQ permit number to
which the IFQ landing was credited.
The number of landings and weight of
each landing will be based only on
legally submitted harvest
documentation. Legal documentation is
an IFQ Landing Report submitted under
§ 679.5, which indicates, among other
data, the amount of IFQ halibut or IFQ
sablefish harvested, the IPHC or
groundfish reporting area in which the
IFQ amounts were harvested, the vessel
and gear type used for the harvest, and
the date of harvesting, landing, or
reporting. NMFS presumes that the
official record data sources are correct.
If a person believes the official record is
incorrect, his or her claim can be raised
in a separate correspondence to NMFS,
Restricted Access Management Program,
Juneau, AK (see ADDRESSES) prior to the
end of the 60-day response period
specified in the Inactive QS Notice.
Options for Persons Holding Inactive
Quota Share
A person who holds inactive QS has
two options when responding to an
Inactive QS Notice. During the 60-day
response period specified in the Inactive
QS Notice, the person holding the
inactive QS could (1) do nothing,
thereby resulting in revocation of the
inactive QS; or (2) request in writing
that the inactive QS be considered
active and not revoked. Alternatively, a
person holding inactive QS could
exercise options that have existed since
the beginning of the IFQ Program in
1995 to either transfer some or all of the
inactive QS, or harvest halibut or
sablefish based on IFQ derived from the
inactive QS. These options are further
explained below.
NMFS will revoke the inactive QS of
a QS holder who fails to respond to
NMFS within the 60-day period
specified in the Inactive QS Notice.
NMFS will remove revoked QS from the
QS pool and will not generate an annual
allocation of IFQ poundage for IFQ
halibut or IFQ sablefish. Any IFQ
derived from the inactive QS also will
be revoked at the time that the inactive
QS are revoked. After inactive QS are
revoked, the previous holder of those
QS can participate in the IFQ halibut or
IFQ sablefish fisheries only if they
subsequently receive QS or IFQ, or both,
by transfer.
A person holding inactive QS who
wishes to retain the inactive QS may
notify NMFS in writing that he or she
does not want the inactive QS revoked;
this written notification must be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
received within the 60-day response
period specified in the Inactive QS
Notice. This notification will
demonstrate sufficient activity in the
IFQ Program to allow NMFS to activate
the otherwise inactive QS. After
receiving the QS holder’s timely written
notification, NMFS will allocate IFQ
based on the activated QS as it has done
since the beginning of the IFQ Program,
and the holder of such QS will continue
to benefit from the initial recipient
privileges specified in the regulations
implementing the IFQ Program
(§§ 679.41 and 679.42). The IFQ halibut
and IFQ sablefish harvesting privilege
for an initial recipient of QS will
continue as it does for all other initial
recipient QS holders.
A person holding inactive QS who
fails to respond to the Inactive QS
Notice from NMFS within the 60-day
response period may appeal to the
NMFS National Appeals Office to
submit his or her response late pursuant
to § 679.43. As a practical matter, any
other written challenge of the Inactive
QS Notice received within the 60-day
response period will be considered a
request to not revoke the inactive QS.
Such challenges will activate the
otherwise inactive QS by demonstrating
a reaction and, therefore, at least
minimal activity in the IFQ Program.
The options to activate otherwise
inactive QS by either transferring some
or all of the inactive QS, or harvesting
halibut or sablefish based on IFQ
derived from the inactive QS, will
continue to be available to a person
holding inactive QS through the end of
the 60-day response period specified in
the Inactive QS Notice. No additional
period of time will be provided to
demonstrate these activities.
Written Response to Inactive QS Notice
The Inactive QS Notice provides the
person holding the inactive QS with the
opportunity to request in writing that
inactive QS and IFQ remain active.
NMFS will accept written responses by
mail, courier or hand-delivery, or fax.
The response deadline will be 60 days
after NMFS sends the Inactive QS
Notice and will be stamped on the
Notice and identified as the Response
Date. Responses must be received by
NMFS no later than the date printed on
the Inactive QS Notice, or, if sent by
mail, postmarked by that date. If
delivered by hand or carrier, the receipt
date will be the date the response is
stamped received by NMFS. If sent by
facsimile, the receipt date will be the
date stamped received by NMFS. Any
other form of response, including email,
will not be accepted. The Inactive QS
Notice will be constructed to allow the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29559
bottom half of the document to be
separated and used as a mail-in
response form to NMFS indicating
whether the holder of the inactive QS
wants to retain the QS. The following
statement will be printed on the mailin response form as an expression of the
QS holder’s request to not revoke the
inactive QS: ‘‘I [print first name, middle
initial, and surname] request that NMFS
not revoke my quota share authorized
by my signature on this date; Signed
[Write signature], Dated [Enter the
current date].’’ A holder of inactive QS
may also respond without using the
provided form, but must include the
same information, names, signatures,
and dates as specified on the mail-in
response form. Each completed form or
other response statement received by
NMFS by the response date and verified
correct will result in a letter of
acknowledgement issued to the person
identified as the holder of the inactive
QS or his or her legal representative.
The letter will serve as final agency
action advising that QS will be ‘‘active’’
and no further response by the person
holding the inactive QS or by NMFS
will be required.
Previous Response to NMFS Letters
Any previous request to NMFS to
activate inactive QS is not sufficient for
NMFS to change that QS status. If a
response was submitted to NMFS
regarding inactive QS and the IFQ
permit holder has since officially
activated the QS by completing a
transfer or fishing the IFQ, then no
further response is required. If a QS
holder previously responded to NMFS’
letters about inactive QS and requested
he or she be able to keep the inactive
QS, then the IFQ permit holder must
again submit that request pursuant to
this final rule to avoid revocation of
inactive QS.
Public Comment
NMFS proposed this action in the
Federal Register on August 23, 2010 (75
FR 51741). NMFS received two
comments during the public comment
period for the proposed rule. These
comments are addressed below.
Comment 1: The commenter
maintains that this action will result in
an increased number of hooks deployed
and therefore will increase the risk that
short-tailed albatross will be caught and
drowned in the halibut longline fishery.
The commenter considers this
redistribution of TAC and the current
use of improved seabird bycatch
avoidance measures in the halibut
fishery to be a change in the action
previously analyzed in the 1998 Bering
Sea Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
29560
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Halibut Fishery Biological Opinion
(1998 Biological Opinion) issued by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on
March 13, 1998 (https://alaskafisheries.
noaa.gov/protectedresources/seabirds/
section7/pachalibut.pdf). In addition,
the commenter considers the increased
population of short-tailed albatross to be
a change in the environmental baseline.
For these reasons, the commenter
recommends that NMFS reinitiate
section 7 consultation with FWS on the
effects of the Pacific halibut fishery on
the short-tailed albatross. The
commenter also recommends
restructuring the observer program to
require observers on commercial halibut
longline vessels.
Response: NMFS disagrees that reinitiation of consultation with the FWS
is required under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA), 16
U.S.C. 1536.
Section 7 of the ESA and
implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
402 require each federal agency, in
consultation with either the FWS or
NMFS depending on the species
involved, to insure that any action
authorized, funded or carried out by
such agency is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any
endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat of any
endangered or threatened species. In
April 1997, NMFS re-initiated
consultation regarding the effects of the
Pacific halibut commercial fishery on
the endangered short-tailed albatross. In
March 1998, the FWS issued its 1998
Biological Opinion that the Pacific
halibut fishery is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of the
endangered short-tailed albatross.
The 1998 Biological Opinion included
an incidental take statement authorizing
incidental take of up to two short-tailed
albatross every two years. It stated that,
as provided in 50 CFR 402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is
required ‘‘when discretionary Federal
agency involvement or control over the
action has been retained (or is
authorized by law) and if: (1) The
amount or extent of incidental take is
exceeded; (2) new information reveals
effects of the agency action that may
affect listed species or critical habitat in
a manner or to an extent not considered
in this opinion; (3) the agency action is
subsequently modified in a manner that
causes an effect to the listed species or
critical habitat not considered in this
opinion; or (4) a new species is listed or
critical habitat designated that may be
affected by the action.’’ 1998 Biological
Opinion, page 30. The 1998 Biological
Opinion analyzed the effects of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
authorizing the commercial halibut
longline fishery in the Bering Sea
Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska on
the short-tailed albatross. The halibut
and sablefish harvest quotas have been
managed under the IFQ Program since
1995; specifically, the IFQ Program
analyzed in the 1998 Biological Opinion
allocates the entire total TACs of
sablefish and Pacific halibut to the IFQ
fleets commercially fishing for these
species. In other words, revoking
inactive QS will not increase the
number of hooks deployed in the fishery
relative to the level of harvest analyzed
in the 1998 Biological Opinion, because
that opinion assessed the possibility of
a 100 percent harvest rate, which is
higher than the current actual harvest
rate. Furthermore, the amounts of
sablefish and Pacific halibut likely to be
made available for harvest by this final
rule constitute only a very small
proportional increase in harvest of the
sablefish and Pacific halibut TACs. For
example, in 2011, 204 QS holders out of
a total of 2,954 held inactive QS, and as
a result, approximately .02 percent of
the IFQ TAC for halibut and sablefish
was not harvested. Consequently, NMFS
determines that the final rule does not
modify agency action in a manner that
causes an effect to the short-tailed
albatross that was not considered in the
1998 Biological Opinion.
Furthermore, FWS previously
concurred that revised NMFS
regulations implementing improved
seabird avoidance measures in the hookand-line fisheries off Alaska are not
likely to adversely affect the short-tailed
albatross. Thus, NMFS disagrees that
improved seabird avoidance measures
and revised regulations to implement
these measures is a change in the action
requiring re-initiation of consultation.
In addition, although the short-tailed
albatross population has increased,
NMFS disagrees that this population
increase amounts to a change in the
environmental baseline that reveals
effects of the action that may affect the
short-tailed albatross in a manner or to
an extent not considered in the 1998
Biological Opinion. In the 1998
Biological Opinion, FWS analyzed the
upward trend in the short-tailed
albatross population and expected this
trend to continue, which it has. Because
the 1998 Biological Opinion considered
the effects of the halibut fishery on an
increasing population of short-tailed
albatross, NMFS disagrees that the
upward population trend is new
information constituting a change in the
baseline. Therefore, re-initiation of
formal consultation is not required
based on the increasing population
trend of short-tailed albatross that was
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
analyzed in the 1998 Biological
Opinion.
NMFS recognizes the commenter’s
concern about the effects of the
commercial Pacific halibut longline
fishery on short-tailed albatross. NMFS
agrees that data collected by observers
on commercial halibut longline vessels
will likely improve the knowledge of
the effects this fishery might have on the
short-tailed albatross. The 1998
Biological Opinion’s reasonable and
prudent measures include a requirement
to implement a plan to investigate all
options for monitoring the Pacific
halibut fishery in waters off Alaska. In
October 2010, the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council recommended that
the halibut fishery be subject to observer
coverage under the restructured North
Pacific observer program. The extent of
observer coverage in the halibut fishery
and the implementation date of the
restructured observer program have yet
to be determined. NMFS is developing
the proposed rule for the restructured
observer program and will inform the
public of the potential effects of this
action when the details become
available.
While NMFS does not believe that
reinitiating section 7 consultation is
warranted at this time, NMFS is
compiling research data that will
support a future re-evaluation of the
effects of the Pacific halibut and
groundfish fisheries off Alaska on shorttailed albatross, Steller’s eider, and
spectacled eiders. This explanation will
include updated information on the
improved seabird avoidance and habitat
protection measures, new seabird
bycatch mitigation research, and the
potential impacts of a restructured
observer program. NMFS anticipates
that the requisite information and
analyses will be available in the next
year. NMFS is working with the public
on Alaska fisheries issues that may
affect ESA-listed species and will keep
the public informed of the progress in
developing the restructured observer
program to ensure concerns are
addressed.
Comment 2: Delay the inactive QS
action until alternative options are
identified for residents of small rural
communities (less than 1,500 people) in
the Gulf of Alaska to sell their category
D QS to a Community Quota Entity
(CQE) that represents the community.
Revoking inactive QS would preempt
future opportunity to transfer inactive
category D QS to CQEs. Quota share is
specific to regulatory areas and vessel
categories. Halibut category D QS is
specific to vessels 35 feet or less, length
overall.
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Response: This action provides IFQ
permit holders with inactive QS an
opportunity to retain QS by request and
avoid removal of inactive QS. Permit
holders responding to NMFS that they
want to retain their inactive halibut or
sablefish QS will have their QS status
changed to active. IFQ permit holders
also have the option to fish or transfer
the QS to activate it any time prior to
NMFS revoking the QS. Accordingly,
NMFS sees no need to delay the action.
The CQE Program allows CQEs
representing communities in IPHC
regulatory Areas 2C and Area 3A to
purchase halibut category B and C QS
and prohibits them from purchasing
halibut category D QS. One of the
primary reasons the Council established
this prohibition was to help ensure
halibut category D QS would continue
to be available to new entrants and crew
members who wanted to start their own
businesses. There was concern that an
influx of CQEs in Area 2C and 3A
would drive up the market for halibut
category D QS, and result in more
expensive, and less available, QS for
individuals. Generally, category D QS
are the least expensive category of
halibut QS, as they can only be used on
the smallest category of vessel. Category
D QS are often used by smaller
operations, or new entrants, and there is
a relatively small amount of halibut
category D QS designated for each
management area.
After NMFS received Comment 2, the
commenters submitted the comment as
a proposed regulatory change to the
Council. In February 2011 the Council
recommended that NMFS amend
Federal regulations to allow Area 3A
CQEs to purchase a limited amount of
halibut category D QS with restrictions.
NMFS intends to develop a proposed
rule according to the Council’s
regulatory recommendation and, once
approved, could proceed with a call for
public comments. Following a review of
the public comments on the proposed
rule and subject to approval by the
Secretary, NMFS may publish a final
rule to implement this action. Holders
of inactive halibut QS who reside in
CQE communities who want to retain
their inactive QS may do so by
responding to NMFS in writing within
the single 60-day response period and
requesting that NMFS change the status
of his or her QS and IFQ to ‘‘active.’’ If
regulations are changed in the future to
allow CQE purchase of halibut category
D QS, then persons who activate their
QS by request, lease, or by documenting
a landing by the deadline in this action
could transfer their activated QS to
enhance fishery participation of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
individual CQE community residents
and CQE communities.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
NMFS has changed the method of
response to the Inactive QS Notice from
mail only as in the proposed rule.
NMFS determined that the requirement
that response to the Inactive QS Notice
be submitted only by U.S. Mail was too
restrictive. Therefore, NMFS has
broadened the method of submission to
include hand-carried responses or
responses by facsimile. This change is
consistent with methods of submission
authorized in other regulations under 50
CFR part 679, where NMFS has required
an application or response by a date
certain. NMFS did not make any other
changes from the proposed rule,
published August 23, 2010 (75 FR
51741).
Classification
The Administrator, Alaska Region,
NMFS, determined that this rule is
necessary for the conservation and
management of the fisheries managed
under the halibut and sablefish IFQ
Program and that it is consistent with
the Halibut Act, the FMPs, the national
standards and other provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other
applicable laws.
Regulations governing the U.S.
fisheries for Pacific halibut are
developed by the International Pacific
Halibut Commission, the Pacific Fishery
Management Council, the North Pacific
Fishery Management Council, and the
Secretary of Commerce. Section 5 of the
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982
(Halibut Act, 16 U.S.C. 773c) allows the
Regional Council having authority for a
particular geographical area to develop
regulations governing the allocation and
catch of halibut in U.S. Convention
waters as long as those regulations do
not conflict with IPHC regulations. This
action is consistent with the Council’s
authority to allocate halibut catches
among fishery participants in the waters
in and off Alaska.
Executive Order 12866
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866. This final rule
also complies with the Secretary’s
authority under the Halibut Act to
implement management measures for
the halibut fishery.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
A final regulatory flexibility analysis
(FRFA) was prepared for this rule as
required by section 604(a) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). A
FRFA incorporates the initial regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29561
flexibility analysis (IRFA), a summary of
the significant issues raised by the
public comments in response to the
IRFA and NMFS’ responses to those
comments, if any, and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the
action. A copy of the RIR/FRFA is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The proposed rule was published in
the Federal Register on August 23, 2010
(75 FR 51741). An RIR/IRFA was
prepared and described in the
‘‘Classification’’ section of the preamble
to the proposed rule. A copy of the RIR/
IRFA is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). The public comment
period ended on September 22, 2010.
NMFS received two unique comment
letters. Although neither of the
comments directly addressed the IRFA
or significant economic impact on small
entities, Comment 2 referred to the
potential for indirect economic impact
on CQEs, which are not directly
regulated by this action. No changes
were made in the final rule from the
proposed rule.
The RFA emphasizes (1) predicting
adverse impacts on (1) small entities as
a group distinct from other entities; and
(2) considering alternatives that may
minimize the significant economic
impact on small entities, while still
achieving the stated objectives of the
action. The requirements for a FRFA are
contained in section 604(a) of the RFA
(5 U.S.C. 604(a)) and a complete
description of the requirements are
listed in the FRFA. The need for, and
the objectives of, this final rule are in
the section of the preamble titled
‘‘Description of Final Action.’’ The legal
basis for this final rule is described in
the preamble section titled
‘‘Management of the Halibut and
Sablefish IFQ Fisheries.’’ A summary of
the public comments and NMFS’
responses are presented in the preamble
section titled ‘‘Public Comments.’’
Descriptions of the voluntary
compliance requirements of the rule are
subsumed in sections of the preamble
titled ‘‘Options for Persons Holding
Inactive Quota Share’’ and ‘‘Written
Response.’’ Sections of the preamble
titled ‘‘Public Notice’’ and ‘‘Official
Notice and Record’’ describe multiple
steps NMFS has taken to alert persons
with inactive QS of their options to
activate QS and minimize economic
impacts on these small entities from
revoking their QS. Each of the above
RFA requirements that are discussed in
the preamble are not repeated here. The
remaining FRFA requirements are to
describe and estimate the current
number of small entities to which the
rule applies, explain why each one of
the other alternatives to the rule that
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
29562
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
could have affected the impact on small
entities was rejected, and include a
statement of the factual, policy, and
legal reasons for selecting the alternative
implemented by this action. These
FRFA requirements are summarized
here.
For purposes of a FRFA, the Small
Business Administration (SBA) has
established that a business involved in
fish harvesting is a small entity if it is
independently owned and operated, not
dominant in its field of operation
(including its affiliates), and has
combined annual gross receipts not in
excess of $4 million for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. A seafood
processor is a small entity if it is
independently owned and operated, not
dominant in its field of operation, and
employs 500 or fewer persons on a fulltime, part-time or temporary, or other
basis at all its affiliated operations.
Because the SBA does not have a size
criterion for businesses that are
involved in both the harvesting and
processing of seafood products, NMFS
has in the past applied, and continues
to apply, the SBA’s fish harvesting
criteria for these businesses because
catcher/processors are first and foremost
fish harvesting businesses. Therefore, a
business involved in both the harvesting
and processing of seafood products is a
small business if it meets the $4 million
criterion for fish harvesting operations.
Directly regulated entities in this
action are persons that hold halibut QS
or sablefish QS and whose future
harvests would be deducted from the
species’ TAC. Currently, NMFS does not
possess sufficient ownership and
affiliation information to determine the
precise number of QS holders
considered small entities in the IFQ
Program. Lacking more precise data on
small entities, NMFS estimated the
maximum number of small entities that
are adversely impacted by this action to
equal all inactive halibut QS and
inactive sablefish QS holders, or 219
entities. The analysis also assumes that
recipients of the additional QS from the
proportional distribution of the IFQ
from revoked QS will benefit from this
rule, and these entities are therefore are
not discussed further.
Small entities that could be impacted
by this action are the QS holders whose
inactive QS will be revoked unless they
voluntarily comply with the
requirements specified in regulation to
retain the impacted QS. At the end of
2010, the most recent year with
complete data, the amount of inactive
halibut QS was 195,038 units, or 19,374
net lb (8.8 mt), held by 219 unique
persons, which is the maximum number
of small entities that could be impacted
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
by this action. The maximum number of
small entities holding inactive sablefish
QS that could be revoked by this action
equals 3 unique persons. These small
entities held 9,281 inactive QS units of
sablefish, equal to 661 round lb (0.3 mt)
of sablefish.
Even if a small entity’s QS and
associated IFQ is revoked by this action,
the initial issuee status of the QS
recipient is not extinguished should the
QS holder decide to re-enter the IFQ
fishery. There is no projection of the
number of persons who will have their
inactive QS revoked but who will reenter the halibut or sablefish fishery at
some point in the future. At most the
number of persons will not exceed the
total number of QS holders that will
have QS and associated IFQ revoked at
the end of the 60-day response period.
It is not possible to determine the
precise number of the 219 small entities
holding inactive halibut and sablefish
QS, as of the end of 2010, that will
activate their QS before the end of the
60-day notice period. Not all activated
QS can be expected to result in landed
catch as some entities may choose to
hold QS for reasons other than for
fishing. However, the amount of QS
retained under such circumstance
would be miniscule compared to the
overall amount of QS allocated to both
fisheries.
Small entities that transferred some or
all of their halibut or sablefish IFQ but
never harvested any IFQ halibut or IFQ
sablefish will not be subject to
revocation of their QS under this final
rule.
All inactive QS revoked by NMFS at
the end of the 60-day notice period will
be removed from the NMFS QS
database. The pounds of annual IFQ
represented by the revoked QS will be
distributed among IFQ permit holders
with active QS in an amount
proportional to their IFQ allocation in
the years following the revocation.
Based on available data and more
general information concerning the
probable economic activity of vessels in
the halibut and sablefish IFQ fisheries,
no vessel operation directly regulated by
the IFQ Program could have been used
to land more than $4 million in
combined gross receipts (the maximum
gross revenue threshold for a small
catcher vessel) in 2005 or 2008, the
years analyzed for the Council’s 2006
and 2009 selection of a preferred
alternative. All entities directly
regulated by this action are considered
small entities under the RFA, and have
gross annual revenues less than $4
million. The action will not have a
significant adverse impact on affected
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
small entities relative to the status quo,
no action alternative.
NMFS considered the effects and
costs of this action in analysis of
alternatives independent of all entities
status as small entities. Each one of the
other significant alternatives considered
by the agency and rejected by the
Council also impacted small entities.
The Council reviewed the status quo, no
action alternative of not revoking
inactive halibut or sablefish QS, and
two action alternatives to withdraw
inactive QS. The two action alternatives
were merged into one alternative when
the provision for a lottery to redistribute
revoked QS to eligible persons was
rescinded from the preferred alternative.
The lottery provision depended on there
being at least 50,000 lbs (22.7 mt) of
inactive QS units available for
revocation. Because NMFS and the
Council determined the amount of
inactive QS fell below that threshold for
all IPHC regulatory areas, they decided
to eliminate this provision. NMFS is not
aware of any additional alternatives to
those considered that would accomplish
the objectives of this action and that
would minimize adverse economic
impact of this action on small entities.
Compared to the status quo, this action
allows holders of inactive halibut or
sablefish QS to voluntarily relinquish
their inactive QS or transfer that QS
prior to the end of the 60-day response
period. The objective of this action is to
relieve an operational restriction created
by a lack of regulatory authority. The
original impetus for the IFQ Program QS
lottery has been superseded by ongoing
changes in the characteristics of the
halibut and sablefish fisheries QS
holdings—specifically, the increased
transfer of inactive QS and elimination
of latent IFQ.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 states that, for each rule or group
of related rules for which an agency is
required to prepare a FRFA, the agency
shall publish one or more guides to
assist small entities in complying with
the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘‘small entity
compliance guides.’’ The guide explains
the actions an IFQ permit holder with
inactive QS may voluntarily take to
avert NMFS revoking inactive QS
pursuant to this final rule. The preamble
to this final rule serves as the Small
Entity Compliance Guide. This action
does not require any additional
compliance from small entities that is
not described in the preamble. Copies of
the final rule may be obtained from the
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 97 / Friday, May 18, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
NMFS Alaska Region Web site at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Collection of Information
This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which
has been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
Control No. 0648–0272. Public reporting
burden for a letter requesting NMFS not
revoke IFQ Program QS is estimated to
average 15 minutes per response,
including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding this burden
estimate, or any other aspect of this data
collection, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to NMFS (see
ADDRESSES) and by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax
to (202) 395–7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:15 May 17, 2012
Jkt 226001
Dated: May 15, 2012.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is amended
as follows:
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et
seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447.
2. In § 679.40, add paragraph (a)(10) to
read as follows:
■
§ 679.40
Sablefish and halibut QS.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(10) NMFS revokes inactive QS if the
person holding inactive QS does not:
(i) Respond in writing to NMFS,
within 60 days after NMFS issues a
Notice of Determination of Quota Share
Inactivity (Inactive QS Notice) sent to
the address of record as defined at
§ 679.43(e) of this part, requesting that
the inactive QS not be revoked.
Responses must be received by NMFS
no later than the date contained on the
Inactive QS Notice
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (a)(10)
of this section, ‘‘respond in writing’’
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
29563
means write a statement directing
NMFS to change the status of QS to
‘‘active’’ and sign and date the statement
or complete the form attached to the
Inactive QS Notice and send by U.S.
Mail, courier, hand delivery, or
facsimile to the NMFS, Alaska Region as
provided on the Inactive QS Notice and
printed on the front side of the form.
The written response must be received
by NMFS no later than the date
contained on the Inactive QS Notice or
if sent by mail, postmarked by that date.
If delivered by hand or courier, the
receiving date is the date the notice is
stamped received by NMFS.
(iii) For purposes of paragraph (a)(10)
of this section, the term ‘‘inactive QS’’
means halibut QS or sablefish QS, held
by a person who received an initial
allocation of halibut QS or sablefish QS
and has not taken any of the following
actions:
(A) Transferred any halibut QS or
sablefish QS pursuant to § 679.41;
(B) Transferred any halibut IFQ or
sablefish IFQ pursuant to § 679.41;
(C) Landed any halibut authorized by
IFQ halibut permit(s) issued to that
person; or
(D) Landed any sablefish authorized
by IFQ sablefish permit(s) issued to that
person.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–12153 Filed 5–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\18MYR1.SGM
18MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 97 (Friday, May 18, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29556-29563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-12153]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 0906041011-2432-02]
RIN 0648-AX91
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific
Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Program
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule to modify the Individual Fishing
Quota (IFQ) Program for the Fixed-Gear Commercial Fisheries for Pacific
Halibut and Sablefish in Waters in and off Alaska (IFQ Program) by
revoking quota share (QS) that have been inactive since they were
originally issued in 1995. Inactive QS are those held by persons that
have never harvested their IFQ and have never transferred QS or IFQ
into or out of their IFQ accounts.
This action is necessary to achieve the catch limit from the
halibut fisheries and optimum yield from the sablefish fisheries in
Alaska in accordance with National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and this action will achieve
more efficient use of these species. The intended effect is to promote
the management provisions in the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982,
the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area, and the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska.
DATES: Effective June 18, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of this rule, the categorical exclusion
memorandum, the Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (RIR/IRFA), and the Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (RIR/FRFA) 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 requests may be submitted
by mail to NMFS, Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668,
Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer; or in person at NMFS, Alaska
Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, Alaska. Written
comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects
[[Page 29557]]
of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this action
may be submitted to NMFS at the above address and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or by fax to (202) 395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peggy Murphy, (907) 586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Management of the Halibut and Sablefish IFQ Fisheries
Management of the commercial fishery for Pacific halibut
(Hippoglossus stenolepis) in and off Alaska is based on an
international agreement between Canada and the United States. This
agreement, titled ``Convention Between United States of America and
Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern
Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea'' (Convention), was signed in Ottawa,
Canada, on March 2, 1953, and amended by the ``Protocol Amending the
Convention,'' signed in Washington, DC, March 29, 1979. The Convention
is administered by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC)
and is given effect in the United States by the Northern Pacific
Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act).
The Halibut Act (section 773(c)) authorizes the North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) to develop halibut fishery
regulations, including limited access regulations that are in addition
to, and not in conflict with, approved IPHC regulations for U.S.
Convention waters. Federal regulations governing the halibut fisheries
appear at 50 CFR part 300, subpart E. Halibut regulations may be
implemented by NMFS only after approval by the Secretary of Commerce
(Secretary). The Council has exercised this authority most notably in
the development of the IFQ Program codified at 50 CFR part 679, subpart
D.
Federal management of the commercial fishery for sablefish
(Anoplopoma fimbria) is authorized by the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area and
the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska
(FMPs). The FMPs were prepared by the Council under authority of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C.
1801 et seq.) (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and implemented by regulations at
50 CFR part 679.
IFQ Program
The Council and NMFS developed the IFQ Program for the halibut and
sablefish fixed-gear fisheries in waters in and off Alaska. The Council
adopted the IFQ Program in 1991 under the authority of the Halibut Act
and the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The preamble to the proposed rule for the
IFQ Program, published December 3, 1992 (57 FR 57130), details the
conservation and management background leading to the Council's
adoption of the IFQ Program. NMFS implemented the program on November
9, 1993 (58 FR 59375) through Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679.
Fishing under the IFQ Program began on March 15, 1995. The IFQ Program
is designed to maintain the social character and economic benefits of
the commercial, fixed-gear fisheries that Alaskan coastal communities
rely on as a source of revenue. The Council and NMFS intend the IFQ
Program to provide economic stability for the Pacific halibut and
sablefish commercial fisheries and improve long-term productivity of
the resources.
The IFQ Program limits access to the halibut and sablefish fixed-
gear fisheries in waters in and off Alaska to persons holding QS. Quota
Share was initially issued to persons who owned or leased vessels that
made legal commercial landings of Pacific halibut or sablefish during
1988-1990. The intent was to assign initial QS only to those fishermen
then currently active in the halibut and sablefish fixed-gear
fisheries. Once issued to a person, QS is held by that person until it
is transferred, suspended, or revoked. The IFQ Program allows fishermen
to transfer QS to other initial issuees or to those who have a
Transferable Eligibility Certificate, giving them flexibility to
determine what type of investment to make based on when, where, and how
much halibut and sablefish they can harvest.
The amount of halibut and sablefish that each QS holder may harvest
is calculated annually and issued as IFQ pounds on an IFQ permit. An
IFQ permit authorizes participation in the fixed-gear fishery for
Pacific halibut in and off Alaska, and in most fixed-gear sablefish
fisheries off Alaska. IFQ permits are issued annually to persons
holding Pacific halibut and sablefish QS or to those persons who are
recipients of IFQ transfers from QS holders.
Persons holding QS have harvesting privileges for IFQ pounds of
halibut or sablefish that are derived annually from their QS holdings.
The amount (in pounds) specified on an permit is determined by the
number of QS units held for a species, the total number of QS units
issued for that species in a specific regulatory area, and the total
allowable catch (TAC) of that species allocated for IFQ fisheries in a
particular year, as modified by adjustments from the prior year's
harvest.
The IFQ Program requires IFQ permit holders to be on board the
vessel to maintain a predominantly ``owner-operated'' fishery. A narrow
exemption exists for initial recipients of QS. Initial recipients of
catcher vessel QS may be absent from a vessel conducting IFQ halibut or
sablefish fishing, provided the QS holder can demonstrate a minimum
specified level of ownership of the vessel that harvests the IFQ
halibut or sablefish, as well as representation on the vessel by a
hired master designated under IFQ regulations. This exception allows
fishermen who historically operated their fishing businesses using
hired masters before the implementation of the IFQ Program to retain
the flexibility of using hired masters under the IFQ Program.
Description of Final Action
This final rule authorizes NMFS to revoke halibut and sablefish QS
that have been inactive since they were originally issued in 1995.
Inactive QS are those held by persons who have never harvested the IFQ
derived from initially issued QS and who have never transferred QS or
IFQ into or out of their IFQ Program accounts. NMFS will not revoke the
inactive QS of any person who responds in writing to NMFS within 60
days after NMFS issues a Notice of Determination of Quota Share
Inactivity, requesting that the inactive QS not be revoked. The action
provides halibut and sablefish fishermen holding active QS an
opportunity to fish for currently unavailable QS and more fully harvest
these species' TACs.
The background and need for this action were described in detail in
the preamble to the proposed rule published in the Federal Register on
August 23, 2010 (75 FR 51741). In summary, amending the IFQ Program
regulations will improve access to all available QS, increase the
operational flexibility of fishermen participating in the IFQ
fisheries, and increase yield from QS to help achieve optimum yield. In
addition, data collection, recordkeeping, and reporting of inactive QS
and the administrative tasks for managing inactive QS are eliminated.
Less information to administer and manage will streamline aspects of
the IFQ Program, reduce administrative costs, and promote efficient use
of IFQ Program and participant resources. To achieve these objectives,
the final rule authorizes NMFS to revoke inactive QS.
Halibut and sablefish QS was initially allocated to persons who
qualified to hold an IFQ permit pursuant to
[[Page 29558]]
regulations at Sec. 679.40(a). These regulations specified no minimum
amount of halibut or sablefish QS to be issued. As a result, small
amounts of QS were initially issued to just over 200 persons who to
date have never fished the IFQ derived from that QS, or transferred the
QS to another person. Thus, the recipients of these QS allocations have
left their QS inactive for the entire 16 years since it was initially
issued. They presumably have elected not to participate actively in the
IFQ fisheries, are no longer in the commercial fishing industry, are
deceased, or have been unable or unwilling to divest or otherwise
transfer their inactive QS. Persons holding inactive QS have had the
same opportunity as persons with active QS to participate in the IFQ
Program by fishing their IFQ or transferring their QS and IFQ.
As a result of inactive QS, some IFQ and a portion of the TAC is
not harvested. This reduces economic and social benefits from IFQ
harvests typically realized by fishery dependent businesses and the
public. Consumers are deprived of product, active IFQ fishermen are
precluded from harvesting the IFQ derived from inactive QS, and new
entrants to the IFQ fisheries are denied access to halibut and
sablefish QS held by persons who have never participated in the IFQ
fisheries. This final rule will improve operational flexibility of
active program participants to harvest species TACs, and will allow
broader opportunity to achieve the halibut fishery's constant
exploitation yield and the optimum yield from the sablefish fisheries
as required by National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Moreover, even though QS is inactive, NMFS must perform routine
administrative tasks to process, monitor, and maintain data on inactive
QS, including recordkeeping, regular correspondence with the IFQ permit
holder that holds inactive QS, annual allocation of IFQ pounds, and
data reporting. The administrative work detracts time from NMFS
managers that can be used more productively. Additionally, IFQ permit
holders help pay for the program costs through the IFQ cost recovery
program (Sec. 679.45) by remitting a fee for IFQ species landed. When
QS remains inactive, no landing fees accrue to the program, although
the IFQ permit holder with the inactive QS continues to receive
administrative support from the IFQ Program. This action will eliminate
the administrative tasks and costs for managing inactive QS, because
the rule removes that QS entirely. Less information to administer and
manage will streamline aspects of the IFQ Program to the benefit of QS
managers and program participants. Reducing the administrative costs
and burden will allow for more efficient use of IFQ Program resources.
This action revokes inactive halibut and sablefish QS. The portion
of the annual halibut and sablefish TACs represented by the revoked QS
and associated IFQ will be distributed in future years among IFQ permit
holders in an amount proportional to their IFQ allocation.
Alternatively, if a permit holder requests NMFS not to revoke his or
her inactive QS, then NMFS will assign an active status to that QS
because the permit holder took action in making the request. This QS
retained by request will remain integrated with previously-active QS
and the associated IFQ will continue to be issued annually.
Revoking QS will not change the initial recipient status of the QS
holder. Hence, if a person was initially allocated QS that is revoked
under this action and subsequently acquires new QS in the future, that
person retains the benefit of being an initial recipient of QS for
purposes of retaining the flexibility of using a hired master.
Public Notice
In June 2006, the Council acted on a multi-part IFQ regulatory
amendment package that included this action on inactive QS. The Council
adopted a preferred alternative to (1) revoke all inactive halibut and
sablefish QS from the QS pools and (2) redistribute inactive halibut QS
through a lottery if the final amount of revoked inactive QS exceeds
the number of QS units equivalent to 50,000 pounds (22.7 mt) for all
IPHC regulatory areas in the year of the lottery. NMFS separated the
Council's multiple recommendations into different regulatory amendment
packages. This final rule is the final one of the series recommended by
the Council in 2006. As a result, several years have passed between the
Council's action notifying the public of the pending change to the IFQ
Program and publication of this final rule.
Since Council action, NMFS, Alaska Region, has maintained a Web
site listing of inactive QS and the information needed to facilitate
voluntary transfers of QS. NMFS also contacted persons holding inactive
halibut or sablefish QS by direct mail. NMFS notified these persons of
the status of this action in letters sent by direct mail in January
2008 and again in March 2009. NMFS communicated that it was pursuing
rulemaking that, if implemented, would require persons to notify NMFS
in writing that they do not want their inactive QS and associated
annual IFQ revoked. In between these notification letters, the amount
of inactive halibut QS declined below the threshold poundage to conduct
a lottery prompting the Council, in February 2009, to reaffirm its
previous recommendation for the Preferred Alternative, but without the
lottery. NMFS also provided broad public notice of the Council's intent
to withdraw inactive QS with publication of the proposed rule (75 FR
51743) in the Federal Register, August 23, 2010.
The RIR/FRFA prepared for this action (see ADDRESSES) finds that
when the Council initially considered the proposal in June 2006, 534
persons held 865,586 units of inactive halibut QS (280,000 lbs [127 mt]
in 2006 equivalents). Inactive sablefish QS equating to 57,522 units
(16,000 lbs [7.3 mt] in 2006 equivalents) was held by seven persons. As
of December 21, 2011 (the most current data available), 202 persons
held 156,218 units of inactive halibut QS (10,597 lbs [4.8 mt] in 2011
equivalents) and two persons held 9,281 units of inactive sablefish QS
(695 lbs [0.32 mt] in 2011 equivalents). Overall, the communications
with IFQ permit holders stimulated transfers of inactive QS that
resulted in a 62 percent decline in the number of persons holding
inactive halibut QS and a 71 percent decline in the number of people
holding inactive sablefish QS. The decline in QS units was also similar
for both species: Inactive halibut QS declined 82 percent and inactive
sablefish QS declined 84 percent.
Official Notice and Record
This final rule implements regulations authorizing NMFS to send
each holder of inactive QS a ``Notice of Determination of Quota Share
Inactivity'' (Inactive QS Notice). The Inactive QS Notice will be sent
by certified mail to the address of record at the time the Inactive QS
Notice is sent (Sec. 679.43(e)). The inactive QS holder bears the
responsibility if the Inactive QS Notice is not received because the
inactive QS holder has not notified NMFS of a change in the address of
record. The Inactive QS Notice will describe the inactive status of the
QS, identify the IFQ permit holder, and provide the date the authorized
60-day response period will end.
NMFS will issue an Inactive QS Notice alerting a holder of inactive
halibut or sablefish QS that their QS are considered inactive based on
records maintained by NMFS. An Inactive QS Notice will be issued if
official records indicate that the QS holder initially issued the QS
never landed their IFQ
[[Page 29559]]
halibut or IFQ sablefish, or transferred any QS or IFQ to or from
another person. The official record of an IFQ halibut or IFQ sablefish
landing contains the IFQ permit number to which the IFQ landing was
credited. The number of landings and weight of each landing will be
based only on legally submitted harvest documentation. Legal
documentation is an IFQ Landing Report submitted under Sec. 679.5,
which indicates, among other data, the amount of IFQ halibut or IFQ
sablefish harvested, the IPHC or groundfish reporting area in which the
IFQ amounts were harvested, the vessel and gear type used for the
harvest, and the date of harvesting, landing, or reporting. NMFS
presumes that the official record data sources are correct. If a person
believes the official record is incorrect, his or her claim can be
raised in a separate correspondence to NMFS, Restricted Access
Management Program, Juneau, AK (see ADDRESSES) prior to the end of the
60-day response period specified in the Inactive QS Notice.
Options for Persons Holding Inactive Quota Share
A person who holds inactive QS has two options when responding to
an Inactive QS Notice. During the 60-day response period specified in
the Inactive QS Notice, the person holding the inactive QS could (1) do
nothing, thereby resulting in revocation of the inactive QS; or (2)
request in writing that the inactive QS be considered active and not
revoked. Alternatively, a person holding inactive QS could exercise
options that have existed since the beginning of the IFQ Program in
1995 to either transfer some or all of the inactive QS, or harvest
halibut or sablefish based on IFQ derived from the inactive QS. These
options are further explained below.
NMFS will revoke the inactive QS of a QS holder who fails to
respond to NMFS within the 60-day period specified in the Inactive QS
Notice. NMFS will remove revoked QS from the QS pool and will not
generate an annual allocation of IFQ poundage for IFQ halibut or IFQ
sablefish. Any IFQ derived from the inactive QS also will be revoked at
the time that the inactive QS are revoked. After inactive QS are
revoked, the previous holder of those QS can participate in the IFQ
halibut or IFQ sablefish fisheries only if they subsequently receive QS
or IFQ, or both, by transfer.
A person holding inactive QS who wishes to retain the inactive QS
may notify NMFS in writing that he or she does not want the inactive QS
revoked; this written notification must be received within the 60-day
response period specified in the Inactive QS Notice. This notification
will demonstrate sufficient activity in the IFQ Program to allow NMFS
to activate the otherwise inactive QS. After receiving the QS holder's
timely written notification, NMFS will allocate IFQ based on the
activated QS as it has done since the beginning of the IFQ Program, and
the holder of such QS will continue to benefit from the initial
recipient privileges specified in the regulations implementing the IFQ
Program (Sec. Sec. 679.41 and 679.42). The IFQ halibut and IFQ
sablefish harvesting privilege for an initial recipient of QS will
continue as it does for all other initial recipient QS holders.
A person holding inactive QS who fails to respond to the Inactive
QS Notice from NMFS within the 60-day response period may appeal to the
NMFS National Appeals Office to submit his or her response late
pursuant to Sec. 679.43. As a practical matter, any other written
challenge of the Inactive QS Notice received within the 60-day response
period will be considered a request to not revoke the inactive QS. Such
challenges will activate the otherwise inactive QS by demonstrating a
reaction and, therefore, at least minimal activity in the IFQ Program.
The options to activate otherwise inactive QS by either
transferring some or all of the inactive QS, or harvesting halibut or
sablefish based on IFQ derived from the inactive QS, will continue to
be available to a person holding inactive QS through the end of the 60-
day response period specified in the Inactive QS Notice. No additional
period of time will be provided to demonstrate these activities.
Written Response to Inactive QS Notice
The Inactive QS Notice provides the person holding the inactive QS
with the opportunity to request in writing that inactive QS and IFQ
remain active. NMFS will accept written responses by mail, courier or
hand-delivery, or fax. The response deadline will be 60 days after NMFS
sends the Inactive QS Notice and will be stamped on the Notice and
identified as the Response Date. Responses must be received by NMFS no
later than the date printed on the Inactive QS Notice, or, if sent by
mail, postmarked by that date. If delivered by hand or carrier, the
receipt date will be the date the response is stamped received by NMFS.
If sent by facsimile, the receipt date will be the date stamped
received by NMFS. Any other form of response, including email, will not
be accepted. The Inactive QS Notice will be constructed to allow the
bottom half of the document to be separated and used as a mail-in
response form to NMFS indicating whether the holder of the inactive QS
wants to retain the QS. The following statement will be printed on the
mail-in response form as an expression of the QS holder's request to
not revoke the inactive QS: ``I [print first name, middle initial, and
surname] request that NMFS not revoke my quota share authorized by my
signature on this date; Signed [Write signature], Dated [Enter the
current date].'' A holder of inactive QS may also respond without using
the provided form, but must include the same information, names,
signatures, and dates as specified on the mail-in response form. Each
completed form or other response statement received by NMFS by the
response date and verified correct will result in a letter of
acknowledgement issued to the person identified as the holder of the
inactive QS or his or her legal representative. The letter will serve
as final agency action advising that QS will be ``active'' and no
further response by the person holding the inactive QS or by NMFS will
be required.
Previous Response to NMFS Letters
Any previous request to NMFS to activate inactive QS is not
sufficient for NMFS to change that QS status. If a response was
submitted to NMFS regarding inactive QS and the IFQ permit holder has
since officially activated the QS by completing a transfer or fishing
the IFQ, then no further response is required. If a QS holder
previously responded to NMFS' letters about inactive QS and requested
he or she be able to keep the inactive QS, then the IFQ permit holder
must again submit that request pursuant to this final rule to avoid
revocation of inactive QS.
Public Comment
NMFS proposed this action in the Federal Register on August 23,
2010 (75 FR 51741). NMFS received two comments during the public
comment period for the proposed rule. These comments are addressed
below.
Comment 1: The commenter maintains that this action will result in
an increased number of hooks deployed and therefore will increase the
risk that short-tailed albatross will be caught and drowned in the
halibut longline fishery. The commenter considers this redistribution
of TAC and the current use of improved seabird bycatch avoidance
measures in the halibut fishery to be a change in the action previously
analyzed in the 1998 Bering Sea Aleutian Islands and Gulf of Alaska
[[Page 29560]]
Halibut Fishery Biological Opinion (1998 Biological Opinion) issued by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) on March 13, 1998 (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/protectedresources/seabirds/section7/pachalibut.pdf). In addition, the commenter considers the increased
population of short-tailed albatross to be a change in the
environmental baseline. For these reasons, the commenter recommends
that NMFS reinitiate section 7 consultation with FWS on the effects of
the Pacific halibut fishery on the short-tailed albatross. The
commenter also recommends restructuring the observer program to require
observers on commercial halibut longline vessels.
Response: NMFS disagrees that re-initiation of consultation with
the FWS is required under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act
(ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1536.
Section 7 of the ESA and implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
402 require each federal agency, in consultation with either the FWS or
NMFS depending on the species involved, to insure that any action
authorized, funded or carried out by such agency is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened
species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat of any endangered or threatened species. In April
1997, NMFS re-initiated consultation regarding the effects of the
Pacific halibut commercial fishery on the endangered short-tailed
albatross. In March 1998, the FWS issued its 1998 Biological Opinion
that the Pacific halibut fishery is not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the endangered short-tailed albatross.
The 1998 Biological Opinion included an incidental take statement
authorizing incidental take of up to two short-tailed albatross every
two years. It stated that, as provided in 50 CFR 402.16, re-initiation
of formal consultation is required ``when discretionary Federal agency
involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is
authorized by law) and if: (1) The amount or extent of incidental take
is exceeded; (2) new information reveals effects of the agency action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an
extent not considered in this opinion; (3) the agency action is
subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the listed
species or critical habitat not considered in this opinion; or (4) a
new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be
affected by the action.'' 1998 Biological Opinion, page 30. The 1998
Biological Opinion analyzed the effects of authorizing the commercial
halibut longline fishery in the Bering Sea Aleutian Islands and Gulf of
Alaska on the short-tailed albatross. The halibut and sablefish harvest
quotas have been managed under the IFQ Program since 1995;
specifically, the IFQ Program analyzed in the 1998 Biological Opinion
allocates the entire total TACs of sablefish and Pacific halibut to the
IFQ fleets commercially fishing for these species. In other words,
revoking inactive QS will not increase the number of hooks deployed in
the fishery relative to the level of harvest analyzed in the 1998
Biological Opinion, because that opinion assessed the possibility of a
100 percent harvest rate, which is higher than the current actual
harvest rate. Furthermore, the amounts of sablefish and Pacific halibut
likely to be made available for harvest by this final rule constitute
only a very small proportional increase in harvest of the sablefish and
Pacific halibut TACs. For example, in 2011, 204 QS holders out of a
total of 2,954 held inactive QS, and as a result, approximately .02
percent of the IFQ TAC for halibut and sablefish was not harvested.
Consequently, NMFS determines that the final rule does not modify
agency action in a manner that causes an effect to the short-tailed
albatross that was not considered in the 1998 Biological Opinion.
Furthermore, FWS previously concurred that revised NMFS regulations
implementing improved seabird avoidance measures in the hook-and-line
fisheries off Alaska are not likely to adversely affect the short-
tailed albatross. Thus, NMFS disagrees that improved seabird avoidance
measures and revised regulations to implement these measures is a
change in the action requiring re-initiation of consultation.
In addition, although the short-tailed albatross population has
increased, NMFS disagrees that this population increase amounts to a
change in the environmental baseline that reveals effects of the action
that may affect the short-tailed albatross in a manner or to an extent
not considered in the 1998 Biological Opinion. In the 1998 Biological
Opinion, FWS analyzed the upward trend in the short-tailed albatross
population and expected this trend to continue, which it has. Because
the 1998 Biological Opinion considered the effects of the halibut
fishery on an increasing population of short-tailed albatross, NMFS
disagrees that the upward population trend is new information
constituting a change in the baseline. Therefore, re-initiation of
formal consultation is not required based on the increasing population
trend of short-tailed albatross that was analyzed in the 1998
Biological Opinion.
NMFS recognizes the commenter's concern about the effects of the
commercial Pacific halibut longline fishery on short-tailed albatross.
NMFS agrees that data collected by observers on commercial halibut
longline vessels will likely improve the knowledge of the effects this
fishery might have on the short-tailed albatross. The 1998 Biological
Opinion's reasonable and prudent measures include a requirement to
implement a plan to investigate all options for monitoring the Pacific
halibut fishery in waters off Alaska. In October 2010, the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council recommended that the halibut fishery
be subject to observer coverage under the restructured North Pacific
observer program. The extent of observer coverage in the halibut
fishery and the implementation date of the restructured observer
program have yet to be determined. NMFS is developing the proposed rule
for the restructured observer program and will inform the public of the
potential effects of this action when the details become available.
While NMFS does not believe that reinitiating section 7
consultation is warranted at this time, NMFS is compiling research data
that will support a future re-evaluation of the effects of the Pacific
halibut and groundfish fisheries off Alaska on short-tailed albatross,
Steller's eider, and spectacled eiders. This explanation will include
updated information on the improved seabird avoidance and habitat
protection measures, new seabird bycatch mitigation research, and the
potential impacts of a restructured observer program. NMFS anticipates
that the requisite information and analyses will be available in the
next year. NMFS is working with the public on Alaska fisheries issues
that may affect ESA-listed species and will keep the public informed of
the progress in developing the restructured observer program to ensure
concerns are addressed.
Comment 2: Delay the inactive QS action until alternative options
are identified for residents of small rural communities (less than
1,500 people) in the Gulf of Alaska to sell their category D QS to a
Community Quota Entity (CQE) that represents the community. Revoking
inactive QS would preempt future opportunity to transfer inactive
category D QS to CQEs. Quota share is specific to regulatory areas and
vessel categories. Halibut category D QS is specific to vessels 35 feet
or less, length overall.
[[Page 29561]]
Response: This action provides IFQ permit holders with inactive QS
an opportunity to retain QS by request and avoid removal of inactive
QS. Permit holders responding to NMFS that they want to retain their
inactive halibut or sablefish QS will have their QS status changed to
active. IFQ permit holders also have the option to fish or transfer the
QS to activate it any time prior to NMFS revoking the QS. Accordingly,
NMFS sees no need to delay the action.
The CQE Program allows CQEs representing communities in IPHC
regulatory Areas 2C and Area 3A to purchase halibut category B and C QS
and prohibits them from purchasing halibut category D QS. One of the
primary reasons the Council established this prohibition was to help
ensure halibut category D QS would continue to be available to new
entrants and crew members who wanted to start their own businesses.
There was concern that an influx of CQEs in Area 2C and 3A would drive
up the market for halibut category D QS, and result in more expensive,
and less available, QS for individuals. Generally, category D QS are
the least expensive category of halibut QS, as they can only be used on
the smallest category of vessel. Category D QS are often used by
smaller operations, or new entrants, and there is a relatively small
amount of halibut category D QS designated for each management area.
After NMFS received Comment 2, the commenters submitted the comment
as a proposed regulatory change to the Council. In February 2011 the
Council recommended that NMFS amend Federal regulations to allow Area
3A CQEs to purchase a limited amount of halibut category D QS with
restrictions. NMFS intends to develop a proposed rule according to the
Council's regulatory recommendation and, once approved, could proceed
with a call for public comments. Following a review of the public
comments on the proposed rule and subject to approval by the Secretary,
NMFS may publish a final rule to implement this action. Holders of
inactive halibut QS who reside in CQE communities who want to retain
their inactive QS may do so by responding to NMFS in writing within the
single 60-day response period and requesting that NMFS change the
status of his or her QS and IFQ to ``active.'' If regulations are
changed in the future to allow CQE purchase of halibut category D QS,
then persons who activate their QS by request, lease, or by documenting
a landing by the deadline in this action could transfer their activated
QS to enhance fishery participation of individual CQE community
residents and CQE communities.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
NMFS has changed the method of response to the Inactive QS Notice
from mail only as in the proposed rule. NMFS determined that the
requirement that response to the Inactive QS Notice be submitted only
by U.S. Mail was too restrictive. Therefore, NMFS has broadened the
method of submission to include hand-carried responses or responses by
facsimile. This change is consistent with methods of submission
authorized in other regulations under 50 CFR part 679, where NMFS has
required an application or response by a date certain. NMFS did not
make any other changes from the proposed rule, published August 23,
2010 (75 FR 51741).
Classification
The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, determined that this rule
is necessary for the conservation and management of the fisheries
managed under the halibut and sablefish IFQ Program and that it is
consistent with the Halibut Act, the FMPs, the national standards and
other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable
laws.
Regulations governing the U.S. fisheries for Pacific halibut are
developed by the International Pacific Halibut Commission, the Pacific
Fishery Management Council, the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council, and the Secretary of Commerce. Section 5 of the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act, 16 U.S.C. 773c) allows the
Regional Council having authority for a particular geographical area to
develop regulations governing the allocation and catch of halibut in
U.S. Convention waters as long as those regulations do not conflict
with IPHC regulations. This action is consistent with the Council's
authority to allocate halibut catches among fishery participants in the
waters in and off Alaska.
Executive Order 12866
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This final rule also complies with
the Secretary's authority under the Halibut Act to implement management
measures for the halibut fishery.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
A final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) was prepared for
this rule as required by section 604(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA). A FRFA incorporates the initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA), a summary of the significant issues raised by the
public comments in response to the IRFA and NMFS' responses to those
comments, if any, and a summary of the analyses completed to support
the action. A copy of the RIR/FRFA is available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES).
The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on August
23, 2010 (75 FR 51741). An RIR/IRFA was prepared and described in the
``Classification'' section of the preamble to the proposed rule. A copy
of the RIR/IRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). The public
comment period ended on September 22, 2010. NMFS received two unique
comment letters. Although neither of the comments directly addressed
the IRFA or significant economic impact on small entities, Comment 2
referred to the potential for indirect economic impact on CQEs, which
are not directly regulated by this action. No changes were made in the
final rule from the proposed rule.
The RFA emphasizes (1) predicting adverse impacts on (1) small
entities as a group distinct from other entities; and (2) considering
alternatives that may minimize the significant economic impact on small
entities, while still achieving the stated objectives of the action.
The requirements for a FRFA are contained in section 604(a) of the RFA
(5 U.S.C. 604(a)) and a complete description of the requirements are
listed in the FRFA. The need for, and the objectives of, this final
rule are in the section of the preamble titled ``Description of Final
Action.'' The legal basis for this final rule is described in the
preamble section titled ``Management of the Halibut and Sablefish IFQ
Fisheries.'' A summary of the public comments and NMFS' responses are
presented in the preamble section titled ``Public Comments.''
Descriptions of the voluntary compliance requirements of the rule are
subsumed in sections of the preamble titled ``Options for Persons
Holding Inactive Quota Share'' and ``Written Response.'' Sections of
the preamble titled ``Public Notice'' and ``Official Notice and
Record'' describe multiple steps NMFS has taken to alert persons with
inactive QS of their options to activate QS and minimize economic
impacts on these small entities from revoking their QS. Each of the
above RFA requirements that are discussed in the preamble are not
repeated here. The remaining FRFA requirements are to describe and
estimate the current number of small entities to which the rule
applies, explain why each one of the other alternatives to the rule
that
[[Page 29562]]
could have affected the impact on small entities was rejected, and
include a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for
selecting the alternative implemented by this action. These FRFA
requirements are summarized here.
For purposes of a FRFA, the Small Business Administration (SBA) has
established that a business involved in fish harvesting is a small
entity if it is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its
field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual
gross receipts not in excess of $4 million for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. A seafood processor is a small entity if it is
independently owned and operated, not dominant in its field of
operation, and employs 500 or fewer persons on a full-time, part-time
or temporary, or other basis at all its affiliated operations. Because
the SBA does not have a size criterion for businesses that are involved
in both the harvesting and processing of seafood products, NMFS has in
the past applied, and continues to apply, the SBA's fish harvesting
criteria for these businesses because catcher/processors are first and
foremost fish harvesting businesses. Therefore, a business involved in
both the harvesting and processing of seafood products is a small
business if it meets the $4 million criterion for fish harvesting
operations.
Directly regulated entities in this action are persons that hold
halibut QS or sablefish QS and whose future harvests would be deducted
from the species' TAC. Currently, NMFS does not possess sufficient
ownership and affiliation information to determine the precise number
of QS holders considered small entities in the IFQ Program. Lacking
more precise data on small entities, NMFS estimated the maximum number
of small entities that are adversely impacted by this action to equal
all inactive halibut QS and inactive sablefish QS holders, or 219
entities. The analysis also assumes that recipients of the additional
QS from the proportional distribution of the IFQ from revoked QS will
benefit from this rule, and these entities are therefore are not
discussed further.
Small entities that could be impacted by this action are the QS
holders whose inactive QS will be revoked unless they voluntarily
comply with the requirements specified in regulation to retain the
impacted QS. At the end of 2010, the most recent year with complete
data, the amount of inactive halibut QS was 195,038 units, or 19,374
net lb (8.8 mt), held by 219 unique persons, which is the maximum
number of small entities that could be impacted by this action. The
maximum number of small entities holding inactive sablefish QS that
could be revoked by this action equals 3 unique persons. These small
entities held 9,281 inactive QS units of sablefish, equal to 661 round
lb (0.3 mt) of sablefish.
Even if a small entity's QS and associated IFQ is revoked by this
action, the initial issuee status of the QS recipient is not
extinguished should the QS holder decide to re-enter the IFQ fishery.
There is no projection of the number of persons who will have their
inactive QS revoked but who will re-enter the halibut or sablefish
fishery at some point in the future. At most the number of persons will
not exceed the total number of QS holders that will have QS and
associated IFQ revoked at the end of the 60-day response period.
It is not possible to determine the precise number of the 219 small
entities holding inactive halibut and sablefish QS, as of the end of
2010, that will activate their QS before the end of the 60-day notice
period. Not all activated QS can be expected to result in landed catch
as some entities may choose to hold QS for reasons other than for
fishing. However, the amount of QS retained under such circumstance
would be miniscule compared to the overall amount of QS allocated to
both fisheries.
Small entities that transferred some or all of their halibut or
sablefish IFQ but never harvested any IFQ halibut or IFQ sablefish will
not be subject to revocation of their QS under this final rule.
All inactive QS revoked by NMFS at the end of the 60-day notice
period will be removed from the NMFS QS database. The pounds of annual
IFQ represented by the revoked QS will be distributed among IFQ permit
holders with active QS in an amount proportional to their IFQ
allocation in the years following the revocation.
Based on available data and more general information concerning the
probable economic activity of vessels in the halibut and sablefish IFQ
fisheries, no vessel operation directly regulated by the IFQ Program
could have been used to land more than $4 million in combined gross
receipts (the maximum gross revenue threshold for a small catcher
vessel) in 2005 or 2008, the years analyzed for the Council's 2006 and
2009 selection of a preferred alternative. All entities directly
regulated by this action are considered small entities under the RFA,
and have gross annual revenues less than $4 million. The action will
not have a significant adverse impact on affected small entities
relative to the status quo, no action alternative.
NMFS considered the effects and costs of this action in analysis of
alternatives independent of all entities status as small entities. Each
one of the other significant alternatives considered by the agency and
rejected by the Council also impacted small entities. The Council
reviewed the status quo, no action alternative of not revoking inactive
halibut or sablefish QS, and two action alternatives to withdraw
inactive QS. The two action alternatives were merged into one
alternative when the provision for a lottery to redistribute revoked QS
to eligible persons was rescinded from the preferred alternative. The
lottery provision depended on there being at least 50,000 lbs (22.7 mt)
of inactive QS units available for revocation. Because NMFS and the
Council determined the amount of inactive QS fell below that threshold
for all IPHC regulatory areas, they decided to eliminate this
provision. NMFS is not aware of any additional alternatives to those
considered that would accomplish the objectives of this action and that
would minimize adverse economic impact of this action on small
entities. Compared to the status quo, this action allows holders of
inactive halibut or sablefish QS to voluntarily relinquish their
inactive QS or transfer that QS prior to the end of the 60-day response
period. The objective of this action is to relieve an operational
restriction created by a lack of regulatory authority. The original
impetus for the IFQ Program QS lottery has been superseded by ongoing
changes in the characteristics of the halibut and sablefish fisheries
QS holdings--specifically, the increased transfer of inactive QS and
elimination of latent IFQ.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule,
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance
guides.'' The guide explains the actions an IFQ permit holder with
inactive QS may voluntarily take to avert NMFS revoking inactive QS
pursuant to this final rule. The preamble to this final rule serves as
the Small Entity Compliance Guide. This action does not require any
additional compliance from small entities that is not described in the
preamble. Copies of the final rule may be obtained from the
[[Page 29563]]
NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Collection of Information
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which has been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Control No. 0648-0272.
Public reporting burden for a letter requesting NMFS not revoke IFQ
Program QS is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden
estimate, or any other aspect of this data collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by
email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395-7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the 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: May 15, 2012.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is amended
as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447.
0
2. In Sec. 679.40, add paragraph (a)(10) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.40 Sablefish and halibut QS.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(10) NMFS revokes inactive QS if the person holding inactive QS
does not:
(i) Respond in writing to NMFS, within 60 days after NMFS issues a
Notice of Determination of Quota Share Inactivity (Inactive QS Notice)
sent to the address of record as defined at Sec. 679.43(e) of this
part, requesting that the inactive QS not be revoked. Responses must be
received by NMFS no later than the date contained on the Inactive QS
Notice
(ii) For purposes of paragraph (a)(10) of this section, ``respond
in writing'' means write a statement directing NMFS to change the
status of QS to ``active'' and sign and date the statement or complete
the form attached to the Inactive QS Notice and send by U.S. Mail,
courier, hand delivery, or facsimile to the NMFS, Alaska Region as
provided on the Inactive QS Notice and printed on the front side of the
form. The written response must be received by NMFS no later than the
date contained on the Inactive QS Notice or if sent by mail, postmarked
by that date. If delivered by hand or courier, the receiving date is
the date the notice is stamped received by NMFS.
(iii) For purposes of paragraph (a)(10) of this section, the term
``inactive QS'' means halibut QS or sablefish QS, held by a person who
received an initial allocation of halibut QS or sablefish QS and has
not taken any of the following actions:
(A) Transferred any halibut QS or sablefish QS pursuant to Sec.
679.41;
(B) Transferred any halibut IFQ or sablefish IFQ pursuant to Sec.
679.41;
(C) Landed any halibut authorized by IFQ halibut permit(s) issued
to that person; or
(D) Landed any sablefish authorized by IFQ sablefish permit(s)
issued to that person.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-12153 Filed 5-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P