Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; Groundfish Retention Standard, 12627-12632 [2013-04262]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
The FRFA incorporates the economic
impacts and analysis summaries in the
IRFA, a summary of the significant
issues, if any, raised by the public in
response to the IRFA, and NMFS’
responses to those comments. A copy of
the IRFA, the RIR, and the EA are
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Statement of Objective and Need
In 2011, there was a herring catch
limit overage in herring management
area 1A equal to 1,425 mt. In accordance
with regulations at § 648.201(a)(3), this
action deducts the 2011 management
Area 1A overage from the 2013
management Area 1A catch limits. Since
the 2013 specifications will not be
finalized by January 1, 2013, and the
2012 specifications will be in place at
the start of the herring fishing year, this
action revises the rolled over sub-ACL
for Area 1A for 2013 from 26,546 mt to
25,121 mt to account for 2011 the catch
overage. When NMFS finalizes the 2013
herring specifications, it will deduct the
1,425 mt from the final 2013 Area 1A
sub-ACL.
A Summary of the Significant Issues
Raised by the Public Comments in
Response to the IRFA, a Summary of the
Assessment of the Agency of Such
Issues, and a Statement of Any Changes
Made in the Final Rule as a Result of
Such Comments
There were no issues related to the
IRFA raised in public comments.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Description and Estimate of Number of
Small Entities To Which the Rule Will
Apply
All participants in the herring fishery
are small entities as defined by the SBA
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as
none grossed more than $4 million
annually, so there would be no
disproportionate economic impacts on
small entities. In 2011, 93 vessels were
issued limited access herring permits,
and 2,149 were issued open access
herring permits.
Total herring revenue in 2011 equaled
approximately $22.4 million for limited
access vessels, and $43,000 for open
access vessels. NMFS estimates the
reduced sub-ACL in Areas 1A to equal
approximately $400,000 in lost revenue
for the fishery in 2013. While this action
reduces the amount of fish available for
harvest, both the fishery-wide and
individual-vessel economic effects are
anticipated to be minimal, because the
reduction overall and per vessel is
relatively minor, as compared with the
fishery’s overall revenue, and because it
only affects one of the herring
management areas.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
Description of Projected Reporting,
Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
There are no new reporting or
recordkeeping requirements contained
in any of the alternatives considered for
this action. In addition, there are no
Federal rules that duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with this rule.
Description of the Steps the Agency Has
Taken To Minimize the Significant
Economic Impacts on Small Entities
Consistent With the Stated Objectives of
Applicable Statutes, Including a
Statement of the Factual, Policy, and
Legal Reasons for Selecting the
Alternative Adopted in the Final Rule
and Why Each One of the Other
Significant Alternatives to the Rule
Considered by the Agency Which Affect
the Impact on Small Entities Was
Rejected
Amendment 4 analyzed the effects of
deducting ACL/sub-ACL overages from
the subsequent corresponding ACL/subACL. During a year when the fishery
exceeds the ACL/sub-ACL, fishery
participants may benefit economically
from higher catch. In the subsequent
year, when NMFS deducts the amount
of the overage from that ACL/sub-ACL
and the amount of harvest is lower,
fishery participants may experience
negative economic impacts. Since the
participants in the fishery from year to
year vary, there could be a minor
economic impact on the fishery
participants operating in Area 1A in
2013 due to the overage deduction from
2011.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: February 19, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
performing the functions and duties of the
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–04261 Filed 2–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12627
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 110321210–3057–02]
RIN 0648–BA93
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area;
Groundfish Retention Standard
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS publishes a regulatory
amendment to modify the groundfish
retention standard (GRS) program in the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (BSAI). This final
rule removes certain regulatory
requirements that mandate minimum
levels of groundfish retention by the
owners and operators of trawl catcher/
processor (C/P) vessels not listed in the
American Fisheries Act (AFA),
commonly referred to as either non-AFA
trawl C/Ps or Amendment 80 vessels,
and Amendment 80 cooperatives
participating in the BSAI groundfish
fisheries. The GRS program was
implemented to increase the retention
and utilization of groundfish; however,
NMFS has discovered that the
regulatory methodology used to
calculate compliance with the GRS
requires individual Amendment 80
vessels and Amendment 80 cooperatives
to retain groundfish at rates well above
the minimum retention rates
recommended by the Council or
implemented by NMFS. As a result, the
GRS imposes significantly higher than
predicted compliance costs on vessel
owners and operators due to the
increased level of retention needed to
meet the minimum retention rates.
Additionally, NMFS discovered that
enforcement of the GRS has proven far
more complex, challenging, and
potentially costly than anticipated by
NMFS. This action is necessary to
relieve Amendment 80 vessels and
Amendment 80 cooperatives from
undue compliance costs stemming from
the minimum retention rates while
continuing to promote the GRS program
goals of increased groundfish retention
and utilization. This action maintains
current monitoring requirements for the
Amendment 80 fleet and establishes a
new requirement for Amendment 80
cooperatives to annually report
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
12628
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
groundfish retention performance as
part of the report submitted to NMFS.
This action is intended to promote the
goals and objectives of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the fishery
management plan, and other applicable
law.
DATES: Effective March 27, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the
Environmental Assessment (EA),
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA) prepared for this action may be
obtained from https://
www.regulations.gov or from the Alaska
Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection of information
requirements contained in this final rule
may be submitted by mail to NMFS,
Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802–1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian,
Records Officer; in person at NMFS,
Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street,
Room 420A, Juneau, AK; or by email to
OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov or fax
to (202) 395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Seanbob Kelly, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the U.S. groundfish fisheries of
the BSAI in the Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ) under the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP). The North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) prepared the FMP pursuant to
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other
applicable laws. Regulations
implementing the FMP appear at 50
CFR part 679. General regulations that
pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at
subpart H of 50 CFR part 600.
This final rule implements a
regulatory amendment to modify the
GRS program by removing certain
retention requirements. Under this final
rule, Amendment 80 vessels and
Amendment 80 cooperatives are
relieved from undue compliance costs
stemming from the mandatory GRS
rates; however, NMFS is implementing
new reporting requirements intended to
maintain the increased retention rates
achieved by the fleet under the GRS
program. NMFS published a proposed
rule for this regulatory amendment in
the Federal Register on October 15,
2012 (77 FR 62482). The 30-day
comment period on the proposed rule
ended on November 14, 2012. NMFS
received two comment letters during the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
comment period on the proposed rule.
These letters contained two unique
comments. A summary of these
comments and NMFS’ responses are
provided in the ‘‘Comments and
Responses’’ section of this preamble.
There were no changes to the regulatory
text between the proposed rule and this
final rule.
Background
The following discussion provides a
brief review of the rationale for this
action and the regulatory changes to the
management of Amendment 80 vessels
and Amendment 80 cooperatives in the
BSAI that are implemented with this
final rule. A detailed review of the
provisions of this regulatory amendment
is provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule (77 FR 62482, October 15,
2012). The proposed rule is available
from the NMFS Alaska Region web site
(see ADDRESSES).
In June 2003, the Council adopted
Amendment 79 to the FMP and the GRS
program. Amendment 79 revised section
2.2.1 of the FMP to include the
management objective of improving the
retention of groundfish where
practicable, through establishment of
minimum groundfish retention
standards. The GRS program required
certain non-AFA trawl C/Ps to annually
retain a minimum percentage of
groundfish catch. Table 1 shows the
minimum GRS percentages established
for the GRS program. The rationale for
the GRS is described in the preamble to
the final rule implementing the GRS
program published on April 6, 2006 (71
FR 17362). The GRS program became
effective in 2008.
TABLE 1—ANNUAL GROUNDFISH
RETENTION STANDARD
Annual GRS
(percent)
GRS Schedule
2008
2009
2010
2011
......................................
......................................
......................................
and each year after .....
65
75
80
85
Amendment 80 to the FMP and its
implementing regulations modified the
GRS program to encourage participants
in the fishery to join an Amendment 80
cooperative (72 FR 52668, September
14, 2007). Vessels that are assigned
Amendment 80 quota share (QS) and
that are eligible to fish in the
Amendment 80 sector are commonly
called Amendment 80 vessels. Under
Amendment 80, all Amendment 80
vessels, regardless of size, and
Amendment 80 cooperatives were
required to meet the GRS. Eligible
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
vessels participating in an Amendment
80 cooperative were authorized to
aggregate the total catch and total
retained catch by all vessels in the
cooperative for purposes of calculating
the cooperative’s compliance with the
GRS. These changes created an
incentive for vessels with lower
groundfish retention rates to join a
cooperative that included vessels with
higher groundfish retention rates, which
would offset the lower retention rates of
those vessels.
Concerns With the GRS Program
In June 2010, NMFS reported to the
Council two key concerns with the
enforcement and prosecution of the
GRS: (1) The regulatory method used to
calculate compliance with the GRS
required the fleet to retain groundfish at
a higher rate than the rate initially
considered by the Council; and (2) the
agency was encountering difficulties in
effectively enforcing and prosecuting
the GRS for an individual vessel, and
these difficulties would be exacerbated
in the prosecution of a single
cooperative comprised of several
vessels, or multiple cooperatives. NMFS
explained that compliance with and
enforcement of the GRS had proven far
more complex and challenging, as well
as potentially more costly, than
anticipated at the time it approved the
GRS program. NMFS determined that
the likelihood that additional vessels
may be unable to meet the GRS, as
calculated by NMFS, in future years
would unnecessarily increase
compliance and enforcement costs.
NMFS also noted that since the GRS
program was implemented, the
retention rate of groundfish by the
Amendment 80 fleet had increased
substantially and available information
indicated that the Council’s objectives
for groundfish retention had been met.
Representatives of the Amendment 80
sector also testified that vessel operators
that met the GRS in 2009 would face
significant additional challenges in
meeting the increasing standard. Vessel
operators reiterated NMFS’ concerns
that it may not be possible for vessels
operating individually in the
Amendment 80 limited access fishery,
or collectively in a cooperative, to
achieve the highest GRS required in
regulation. Additional information on
the concerns raised by NMFS and
Amendment 80 participants can be
found in the proposed rule for this
action (77 FR 62482, October 15, 2012).
Emergency Action
After considering NMFS’ report and
public comment, the Council
recommended that NMFS take
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
emergency action to relieve vessel
owners and operators from mandatory
compliance with the GRS. On December
15, 2010, NMFS published an
emergency rule that exempted
Amendment 80 vessels and cooperatives
from GRS regulations during 2010 and
2011 (75 FR 78172). The preamble of the
emergency rule describes NMFS’ and
the Council’s justification for emergency
action, and it is not repeated here. An
extension of this emergency action was
published on June 2, 2011, and was
effective until December 17, 2011 (76 FR
31881).
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Rationale for This Final Rule
This final rule is intended to provide
a long-term solution to the problems
identified by NMFS and the Council
with the GRS program. NMFS and the
Council determined that this action is
necessary because the circumstances
that justified the GRS have changed.
NMFS and the Council determined that
the regulatory constraints imposed by
the GRS no longer achieve the goals that
led to their establishment. This action is
intended to mitigate higher than
expected compliance costs of the GRS
borne by the Amendment 80 sector.
Furthermore, NMFS and the Council
have determined that this action is
needed to mitigate management and
enforcement costs that were not
foreseen when the regulation was
promulgated. NMFS and the Council
have determined that the additional and
potentially significant compliance costs
associated with the GRS are not
warranted because the improvements in
retention rates by Amendment 80
vessels through 2010 have met the
Council’s objectives of improved
retention and utilization, and reduced
bycatch.
Summary of the Regulations
Implemented by This Final Rule
There were no changes between the
proposed and final regulations in this
final rule. This action establishes the
following changes at 50 CFR part 679:
• Removes the definition of
‘‘Groundfish Retention Standard (GRS)’’
from § 679.2;
• Adds requirements for cooperative
reporting and third party audits to
§ 679.5(s)(6)(iii)(D) and (E);
• Removes the prohibitions specific
to the GRS at § 679.7(m);
• Removes the requirement that
Amendment 80 cooperatives meet a
minimum GRS at § 679.7(o)(4)(iv);
• Revises improved retention and
improved utilization regulations at
§ 679.27(b)(4);
• Removes regulations implementing
the GRS at § 679.27(j); and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
• Revises regulations at § 679.93(c)(1).
The final rule removes regulations
implementing the GRS at §§ 679.7 and
679.27. To meet Council intent for this
action, NMFS revises regulatory text at
§ 679.27(b)(4) to remove references to
the GRS program and removes
§ 679.27(j), which contained the bulk of
the GRS program’s regulations. This
final rule does not change the use caps,
sideboard limits, permitting,
monitoring, or catch accounting
requirements established for the
Amendment 80 sector. This final rule
retains regulations at § 679.27(b)(4) that
require Amendment 80 vessels to meet
a 15 percent utilization standard for all
retained groundfish species listed in
Table 2a to part 679 that are used in the
calculation for percent of retained
groundfish.
Current regulations at § 679.5(s)(6)
require each Amendment 80 cooperative
receiving allocations of Amendment 80
species to annually submit a report to
NMFS detailing the use of the
cooperative’s quota. This final rule adds
a requirement at § 679.5(s)(6) for an
Amendment 80 cooperative to calculate
and report its annual aggregate
groundfish retention rate using the
methodology initially established in
regulation at § 679.27(j)(3). This
additional reporting requirement is
intended to provide NMFS with
information as to whether the
groundfish retention rates achieved
under the GRS are being maintained by
the Amendment 80 fleet.
The catch and production data
needed to calculate annual groundfish
retention are generally available to both
NMFS and the Amendment 80 entity
responsible for meeting current observer
and production reporting requirements
established for the Amendment 80 fleet.
The authorized representative of an
Amendment 80 cooperative could
request that NMFS verify these data (see
ADDRESSES). These data could then be
used by an Amendment 80 cooperative
to calculate its annual groundfish
retention rate. In addition, this final rule
requires each Amendment 80
cooperative to have a third party audit
the cooperative’s groundfish retention
calculations and include these findings
as part of the annual Amendment 80
cooperative report. Each third party
audit will require the Amendment 80
cooperative to retain a third party to
complete an audit of the cooperative’s
groundfish retention calculations. The
third party audit will also require the
cooperative to coordinate with NMFS
and the appropriate Amendment 80
entities for a release of confidential
observer and production data to the
third party auditor.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12629
This final rule does not require the
owners of vessels participating in the
Amendment 80 limited access fishery to
report annual groundfish retention to
NMFS. Instead, NMFS determined that
it will prepare information on
groundfish retention performance for
Amendment 80 vessels participating in
the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery. NMFS currently produces these
data as part of its inseason management
report to the Council and will continue
to report these retention rates to the
Council during the October Council
meeting.
This final rule also revises regulations
at § 679.93(c)(1) to continue to require
that the Amendment 80 sector weigh all
catch, and to prohibit the pre-sorting of
catch prior to weighing.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received two comment letters
during the public comment period for
the proposed rule to implement this
regulatory amendment. One comment
letter was received from a representative
of the affected fishing industry and
contained two unique comments; the
other comment letter was received from
a member of the public and did not
contain any comments relevant to the
proposed rule. A summary of the
comments and NMFS’ responses follow.
Comment 1: The commenter
expressed general support for the
proposed regulatory amendment.
Response: NMFS acknowledges this
comment.
Comment 2: The proposed rule would
require an Amendment 80 cooperative
to report its groundfish retention rate in
its annual cooperative report and would
continue the requirement that
Amendment 80 cooperative reports be
submitted to NMFS. The information
contained in the cooperative reports is
confidential under NOAA
Administrative Order (NAO) 216–100,
50 CRF 600.405, and section 402(b)(1) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Although
NMFS states in the preamble of the
proposed rule on page 62487 that it
would provide Amendment 80
cooperative reports to the Council,
NMFS is prevented from providing the
cooperative reports to the Council given
the confidential nature of information
contained in the reports.
Response: In the preamble statement
highlighted by the commenter, NMFS
incorrectly stated that it would provide
the annual cooperative report to the
Council for purposes of this rule.
Instead, NMFS anticipates providing to
the Council and the public information
on groundfish retention rates. NMFS
will do so, consistent with section
402(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
12630
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
applicable agency regulations and
policies regarding any confidential
information.
Classification
The Administrator, Alaska Region,
NMFS, determined that this final rule is
necessary for the conservation and
management of the groundfish fisheries
off Alaska and that it is consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable laws.
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 agency shall
explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule
or group of rules. The preambles to the
proposed rule and this final rule serve
as the small entity compliance guide.
This action does not require any
additional compliance from small
entities that is not described in the
preambles. Copies of the proposed rule
are available from NMFS at the
following Web site: https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This FRFA incorporates the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a
summary of the significant issues raised
by the public comments, NMFS’
responses to those comments, and a
summary of the analyses completed to
support the action. NMFS published the
proposed rule on October 15, 2012 (77
FR 62482), with comments invited
through November 14, 2012. An IRFA
was prepared and summarized in the
‘‘Classification’’ section of the preamble
to the proposed rule. NMFS received no
comments to the IRFA. The description
of this action, its purpose, and its legal
basis are described in the preamble to
the proposed rule and are not repeated
here. The FRFA describes the impacts
on small entities, which are defined in
the IRFA for this action and not
repeated here. Analytical requirements
for the FRFA are described in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
sections 604(a)(1) through (5), and
summarized below.
The FRFA must contain:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
1. A succinct statement of the need
for, and objectives of, the rule;
2. A summary of the significant issues
raised by the public comments in
response to the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis, a summary of the
assessment of the agency of such issues,
and a statement of any changes made in
the proposed rule as a result of such
comments;
3. A description and an estimate of
the number of small entities to which
the rule will apply, or an explanation of
why no such estimate is available;
4. A description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other
compliance requirements of the rule,
including an estimate of the classes of
small entities which will be subject to
the requirement and the type of
professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record; and
5. A description of the steps the
agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small
entities consistent with the stated
objectives of applicable statutes,
including a statement of the factual,
policy, and legal reasons for selecting
the alternative adopted in the final rule
and why each one of the other
significant alternatives to the rule
considered by the agency which affect
the impact on small entities was
rejected.
The ‘‘universe’’ of entities to be
considered in a FRFA generally
includes only those small entities that
can reasonably be expected to be
directly regulated by the final rule. If the
effects of the rule fall primarily on a
distinct segment of the industry, or
portion thereof (e.g., user group, gear
type, geographic area), that segment
would be considered the universe for
purposes of this analysis. In preparing a
FRFA, an agency may provide either a
quantifiable or numerical description of
the effects of a rule (and alternatives to
the rule), or more general descriptive
statements, if quantification is not
practicable or reliable.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised
During Public Comment
No comments were received that
raised significant issues in response to
the IRFA specifically; therefore, no
changes were made to the rule as a
result of comments on the IRFA.
Number and Description of Small
Entities Regulated by the Final Rule
The entities directly regulated by this
action are those C/Ps that are members
of the Amendment 80 sector that target
flatfish, Atka mackerel, Pacific cod, and
Pacific ocean perch in the EEZ of the
BSAI. The Small Business
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Administration has established size
criteria for all major industry sectors in
the United States, including fish
harvesting and fish processing
businesses. Effective January 5, 2006, a
business involved in fish harvesting is
a small business if it is independently
owned and operated, not dominant in
its field of operation (including its
affiliates), and if it has combined annual
gross receipts not in excess of $4.0
million for all its affiliated operations
worldwide. A seafood processor is a
small business if it is independently
owned and operated, not dominant in
its field of operation, and employs 500
or fewer persons on a full-time, parttime, temporary, or other basis, at all its
affiliated operations worldwide. A
business involved in both the harvesting
and processing of seafood products is a
small business if it meets the $4.0
million criterion for fish harvesting
operations.
NMFS estimated the number of small
versus large entities by matching the
gross earnings from all fisheries of
record for 2009 with the vessels, the
known ownership of those vessels, and
the known affiliations of those vessels
in the BSAI or Gulf of Alaska groundfish
fisheries for that year. NMFS has
specific information on the ownership
of vessels and the affiliations that exist
based on data provided by the
Amendment 80 sector, as well as a
review of ownership data independently
available to NMFS from Federal fishing
permit and license limitation program
license applications. The vessels with a
common ownership linkage in 2010,
and therefore affiliation, are reported in
Table 2 in Section 2.2.5 of the analysis
for this action (see ADDRESSES). In
addition, those vessels that are assigned
to an Amendment 80 cooperative and
receive an exclusive harvest privilege
are categorized as large entities for the
purpose of the RFA, under the
principles of affiliation, due to their
participation in a harvesting
cooperative.
NMFS knows that as many as 28
Amendment 80 vessels could be active
in the Amendment 80 fishery. Those
persons who apply for and receive
Amendment 80 quota share (QS) are
eligible to fish in the Amendment 80
sector, and those QS holders will be
directly regulated by the final rule.
Vessels that are assigned Amendment
80 QS and that are eligible to fish in the
Amendment 80 sector are commonly
known as Amendment 80 vessels.
Currently, there are 27 Amendment 80
vessels that will be directly regulated
based on this action. One vessel owner,
who could be eligible for the
Amendment 80 program and could
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
apply for Amendment 80 QS, has not
applied to NFMS to participate in this
sector. Therefore, this vessel will not be
directly regulated by the final rule
unless and until the owner is approved
to participate in the Amendment 80
sector and is assigned Amendment 80
QS. Based on the known affiliations and
ownership of the Amendment 80
vessels, all but one of the Amendment
80 vessel owners are categorized as large
entities for the purpose of the RFA.
Thus, this analysis estimates that only
one small entity will be directly
regulated by the final rule. This one
small entity could be linked by
company affiliation to a large entity,
which then could qualify the entity as
large entity. Complete information,
however, is not available to determine
any such linkages.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Recordkeeping and Reporting
This action is projected to have a de
minimis impact on the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements of small
entities participating in the BSAI
groundfish fisheries. Some
recordkeeping and reporting may be
required of individual firms. Those
firms that already record and report
catch data will likely not be
significantly impacted by this final
action. It is not possible to determine
which firms will be most impacted by
the requirements, since the information
each firm collects is based on what it
needs to operate its business and the
current reporting requirements. The
regulations implemented by this final
rule are not expected to impact the
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for any other entities in
the fishery.
Under this action, NMFS will not
require the individual owners and
operators of Amendment 80 vessels
participating in the limited access
fishery to annually report groundfish
retention performance. Instead, NMFS
will prepare retention estimates for each
vessel in the limited access fishery and
present these data to the Council
annually as part of the inseason
management report.
Description of Significant Alternatives
to the Final Rule
The suite of potential actions
included two alternatives. A detailed
description of these alternatives is
provided in Section 2 of the analysis for
this action (see ADDRESSES). Alternative
1 is the ‘‘no action’’ alternative.
Alternative 1 does not address the
unintended and unforeseen burden of
the GRS on directly regulated small
entities and is not consistent with the
purpose and need of this action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
The Council’s preferred alternative,
Alternative 2, has been selected as the
action alternative. It removes the GRS
from the GRS program for the
Amendment 80 sector. Removal of the
GRS will result in significant
operational benefits and cost savings to
all directly regulated entities. An
Amendment 80 cooperative will
monitor the cooperative’s aggregate
groundfish retention rate and will report
its annual groundfish retention
performance to NMFS, avoiding
mandatory compliance standards and
their associated costs.
The Council also considered an
alternative to revise the GRS to require
groundfish retention at rates similar to
the estimates presented in the analysis
prepared for the GRS program. The
Council determined that, while revising
the GRS could reduce economic
hardship imposed on the Amendment
80 sector by more closely correlating
groundfish retention rates with
historical retention rates, it would not
address the monitoring, enforcement,
and prosecution issues that arise from
the requirements for annual
determination of vessel compliance
with the GRS program. Because this
alternative would not resolve the
problems for the program, the Council
decided not to forward this alternative
in the analysis for the proposed action.
Based upon the best available
scientific data and information, and
consideration of the objectives of this
action, there are no alternatives to the
proposed action that have the potential
to accomplish the stated objectives of
the MSA and any other applicable
statutes and that have the potential to
minimize any significant adverse
economic impact of the proposed rule
on directly regulated small entities. The
preferred alternative provides greater
economic benefits for participants than
Alternative 1 by allowing participants to
maintain or improve the retention rates
achieved under the GRS without the
compliance costs associated with
meeting a retention standard greater
than that intended by the Council or
NMFS. The lack of any quantitative data
makes it impossible to rigorously assess
the relative differences in expected
economic impacts among the
alternatives. The Council chose to
recommend, and this final rule
implements, the preferred alternative
because it best meets the goals of this
action and minimizes the potential
negative impacts to directly regulated
small entities by relieving regulatory
requirements that no longer meet the
intent of the GRS program.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12631
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that
has been approved by OMB under
control number 0648–0565. Public
reporting burden for the Amendment 80
cooperative report is estimated to
average 26.5 hours per response, which
includes a new requirement for an
additional third-party audit, estimated
to average 1.5 hours per response. These
estimated reporting burdens include 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
ADDRESSEES) 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: February 20, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,
performing the functions and duties of the
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 50 CFR
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
§ 679.2
[Amended]
2. In § 679.2, remove the definition of
‘‘Groundfish Retention Standard
(GRS).’’
■ 3. In § 679.5, add paragraph
(s)(6)(iii)(D) and paragraph (s)(6)(iii)(E)
to read as follows:
■
§ 679.5
(R&R).
*
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
Recordkeeping and reporting
*
*
25FER1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 37 / Monday, February 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(s) * * *
(6) * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) For each Amendment 80
cooperative, the percent of groundfish
retained by that Amendment 80
cooperative of the aggregate groundfish
assigned to that Amendment 80
cooperative as measured by the flow
scale measurement, less any nongroundfish, PSC species or groundfish
species on prohibited species status
under § 679.20.
Substituting the value for
GFroundweight into the following
equation:
GFR% = (GFroundweight /TotalGF)*
100
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Where:
GFroundweight is the total annual round
weight equivalent of all retained product
weights retained by all Amendment 80
vessels assigned to that Amendment 80
cooperative for each IR/IU groundfish
species.
PWspeciesn is the total annual product
weight for each groundfish species listed
in Table 2a to this part by product type
as reported in the vessel’s production
report for all Amendment 80 vessels
assigned to that Amendment 80
cooperative required at § 679.5(e).
PRRspeciesn is the standard product recovery
rate for each groundfish species and
product combination listed in Table 3 to
this part.
GFR% is the groundfish retention percentage
for an Amendment 80 cooperative
calculated as GFroundweight divided by
the total weight of groundfish catch.
TotalGF is the total groundfish round catch
weight for all Amendment 80 vessels
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:27 Feb 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
(E) For each Amendment 80
cooperative, a third party must audit the
Amendment 80 cooperative’s annual
groundfish retention calculations and
the Amendment 80 cooperative must
include the finding of the third party
audit in its Amendment 80 annual
cooperative report.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 679.7
[Amended]
4. In § 679.7, remove and reserve
paragraphs (m) and (o)(4)(iv).
■ 5. In § 679.27,
■ a. Remove and reserve paragraph (j);
and
■ b. Revise paragraph (b)(4) to read as
follows:
■
§ 679.27 Improved Retention/Improved
Utilization Program.
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00042
*
Fmt 4700
retained by all Amendment 80 vessels
assigned to that Amendment 80
cooperative using the following
equations:
(b) * * *
(4) For catcher/processors not listed
in § 679.4(l)(2)(i) using trawl gear in the
BSAI, all species listed in Table 2a to
this part, except for groundfish in
prohibited species status.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. In § 679.93, revise paragraph (c)(1)
to read as follows:
§ 679.93 Amendment 80 Program
recordkeeping, permits, monitoring, and
catch accounting.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) Catch weighing. All catch are
weighed on a NMFS-approved scale in
compliance with the scale requirements
at § 679.28(b). Each haul must be
weighed separately, all catch must be
made available for sampling by a NMFScertified observer, and no sorting of
catch may take place prior to weighing.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–04262 Filed 2–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
*
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
ER25FE13.001
12632
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 37 (Monday, February 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12627-12632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04262]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 110321210-3057-02]
RIN 0648-BA93
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea
and Aleutian Islands Management Area; Groundfish Retention Standard
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS publishes a regulatory amendment to modify the groundfish
retention standard (GRS) program in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (BSAI). This final rule removes certain regulatory
requirements that mandate minimum levels of groundfish retention by the
owners and operators of trawl catcher/processor (C/P) vessels not
listed in the American Fisheries Act (AFA), commonly referred to as
either non-AFA trawl C/Ps or Amendment 80 vessels, and Amendment 80
cooperatives participating in the BSAI groundfish fisheries. The GRS
program was implemented to increase the retention and utilization of
groundfish; however, NMFS has discovered that the regulatory
methodology used to calculate compliance with the GRS requires
individual Amendment 80 vessels and Amendment 80 cooperatives to retain
groundfish at rates well above the minimum retention rates recommended
by the Council or implemented by NMFS. As a result, the GRS imposes
significantly higher than predicted compliance costs on vessel owners
and operators due to the increased level of retention needed to meet
the minimum retention rates. Additionally, NMFS discovered that
enforcement of the GRS has proven far more complex, challenging, and
potentially costly than anticipated by NMFS. This action is necessary
to relieve Amendment 80 vessels and Amendment 80 cooperatives from
undue compliance costs stemming from the minimum retention rates while
continuing to promote the GRS program goals of increased groundfish
retention and utilization. This action maintains current monitoring
requirements for the Amendment 80 fleet and establishes a new
requirement for Amendment 80 cooperatives to annually report
[[Page 12628]]
groundfish retention performance as part of the report submitted to
NMFS. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the
fishery management plan, and other applicable law.
DATES: Effective March 27, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the Environmental Assessment (EA),
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) prepared for this action may be obtained from https://www.regulations.gov or from the Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection of information requirements contained in this
final rule may be submitted by mail to NMFS, Alaska Region, P.O. Box
21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer;
in person at NMFS, Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A,
Juneau, AK; or by email to OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to (202)
395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Seanbob Kelly, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the U.S. groundfish fisheries
of the BSAI in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (FMP). The North Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council) prepared the FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other
applicable laws. Regulations implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR part
679. General regulations that pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at
subpart H of 50 CFR part 600.
This final rule implements a regulatory amendment to modify the GRS
program by removing certain retention requirements. Under this final
rule, Amendment 80 vessels and Amendment 80 cooperatives are relieved
from undue compliance costs stemming from the mandatory GRS rates;
however, NMFS is implementing new reporting requirements intended to
maintain the increased retention rates achieved by the fleet under the
GRS program. NMFS published a proposed rule for this regulatory
amendment in the Federal Register on October 15, 2012 (77 FR 62482).
The 30-day comment period on the proposed rule ended on November 14,
2012. NMFS received two comment letters during the comment period on
the proposed rule. These letters contained two unique comments. A
summary of these comments and NMFS' responses are provided in the
``Comments and Responses'' section of this preamble. There were no
changes to the regulatory text between the proposed rule and this final
rule.
Background
The following discussion provides a brief review of the rationale
for this action and the regulatory changes to the management of
Amendment 80 vessels and Amendment 80 cooperatives in the BSAI that are
implemented with this final rule. A detailed review of the provisions
of this regulatory amendment is provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule (77 FR 62482, October 15, 2012). The proposed rule is
available from the NMFS Alaska Region web site (see ADDRESSES).
In June 2003, the Council adopted Amendment 79 to the FMP and the
GRS program. Amendment 79 revised section 2.2.1 of the FMP to include
the management objective of improving the retention of groundfish where
practicable, through establishment of minimum groundfish retention
standards. The GRS program required certain non-AFA trawl C/Ps to
annually retain a minimum percentage of groundfish catch. Table 1 shows
the minimum GRS percentages established for the GRS program. The
rationale for the GRS is described in the preamble to the final rule
implementing the GRS program published on April 6, 2006 (71 FR 17362).
The GRS program became effective in 2008.
Table 1--Annual Groundfish Retention Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual GRS
GRS Schedule (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008.................................................... 65
2009.................................................... 75
2010.................................................... 80
2011 and each year after................................ 85
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment 80 to the FMP and its implementing regulations modified
the GRS program to encourage participants in the fishery to join an
Amendment 80 cooperative (72 FR 52668, September 14, 2007). Vessels
that are assigned Amendment 80 quota share (QS) and that are eligible
to fish in the Amendment 80 sector are commonly called Amendment 80
vessels. Under Amendment 80, all Amendment 80 vessels, regardless of
size, and Amendment 80 cooperatives were required to meet the GRS.
Eligible vessels participating in an Amendment 80 cooperative were
authorized to aggregate the total catch and total retained catch by all
vessels in the cooperative for purposes of calculating the
cooperative's compliance with the GRS. These changes created an
incentive for vessels with lower groundfish retention rates to join a
cooperative that included vessels with higher groundfish retention
rates, which would offset the lower retention rates of those vessels.
Concerns With the GRS Program
In June 2010, NMFS reported to the Council two key concerns with
the enforcement and prosecution of the GRS: (1) The regulatory method
used to calculate compliance with the GRS required the fleet to retain
groundfish at a higher rate than the rate initially considered by the
Council; and (2) the agency was encountering difficulties in
effectively enforcing and prosecuting the GRS for an individual vessel,
and these difficulties would be exacerbated in the prosecution of a
single cooperative comprised of several vessels, or multiple
cooperatives. NMFS explained that compliance with and enforcement of
the GRS had proven far more complex and challenging, as well as
potentially more costly, than anticipated at the time it approved the
GRS program. NMFS determined that the likelihood that additional
vessels may be unable to meet the GRS, as calculated by NMFS, in future
years would unnecessarily increase compliance and enforcement costs.
NMFS also noted that since the GRS program was implemented, the
retention rate of groundfish by the Amendment 80 fleet had increased
substantially and available information indicated that the Council's
objectives for groundfish retention had been met.
Representatives of the Amendment 80 sector also testified that
vessel operators that met the GRS in 2009 would face significant
additional challenges in meeting the increasing standard. Vessel
operators reiterated NMFS' concerns that it may not be possible for
vessels operating individually in the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery, or collectively in a cooperative, to achieve the highest GRS
required in regulation. Additional information on the concerns raised
by NMFS and Amendment 80 participants can be found in the proposed rule
for this action (77 FR 62482, October 15, 2012).
Emergency Action
After considering NMFS' report and public comment, the Council
recommended that NMFS take
[[Page 12629]]
emergency action to relieve vessel owners and operators from mandatory
compliance with the GRS. On December 15, 2010, NMFS published an
emergency rule that exempted Amendment 80 vessels and cooperatives from
GRS regulations during 2010 and 2011 (75 FR 78172). The preamble of the
emergency rule describes NMFS' and the Council's justification for
emergency action, and it is not repeated here. An extension of this
emergency action was published on June 2, 2011, and was effective until
December 17, 2011 (76 FR 31881).
Rationale for This Final Rule
This final rule is intended to provide a long-term solution to the
problems identified by NMFS and the Council with the GRS program. NMFS
and the Council determined that this action is necessary because the
circumstances that justified the GRS have changed. NMFS and the Council
determined that the regulatory constraints imposed by the GRS no longer
achieve the goals that led to their establishment. This action is
intended to mitigate higher than expected compliance costs of the GRS
borne by the Amendment 80 sector. Furthermore, NMFS and the Council
have determined that this action is needed to mitigate management and
enforcement costs that were not foreseen when the regulation was
promulgated. NMFS and the Council have determined that the additional
and potentially significant compliance costs associated with the GRS
are not warranted because the improvements in retention rates by
Amendment 80 vessels through 2010 have met the Council's objectives of
improved retention and utilization, and reduced bycatch.
Summary of the Regulations Implemented by This Final Rule
There were no changes between the proposed and final regulations in
this final rule. This action establishes the following changes at 50
CFR part 679:
Removes the definition of ``Groundfish Retention Standard
(GRS)'' from Sec. 679.2;
Adds requirements for cooperative reporting and third
party audits to Sec. 679.5(s)(6)(iii)(D) and (E);
Removes the prohibitions specific to the GRS at Sec.
679.7(m);
Removes the requirement that Amendment 80 cooperatives
meet a minimum GRS at Sec. 679.7(o)(4)(iv);
Revises improved retention and improved utilization
regulations at Sec. 679.27(b)(4);
Removes regulations implementing the GRS at Sec.
679.27(j); and
Revises regulations at Sec. 679.93(c)(1).
The final rule removes regulations implementing the GRS at
Sec. Sec. 679.7 and 679.27. To meet Council intent for this action,
NMFS revises regulatory text at Sec. 679.27(b)(4) to remove references
to the GRS program and removes Sec. 679.27(j), which contained the
bulk of the GRS program's regulations. This final rule does not change
the use caps, sideboard limits, permitting, monitoring, or catch
accounting requirements established for the Amendment 80 sector. This
final rule retains regulations at Sec. 679.27(b)(4) that require
Amendment 80 vessels to meet a 15 percent utilization standard for all
retained groundfish species listed in Table 2a to part 679 that are
used in the calculation for percent of retained groundfish.
Current regulations at Sec. 679.5(s)(6) require each Amendment 80
cooperative receiving allocations of Amendment 80 species to annually
submit a report to NMFS detailing the use of the cooperative's quota.
This final rule adds a requirement at Sec. 679.5(s)(6) for an
Amendment 80 cooperative to calculate and report its annual aggregate
groundfish retention rate using the methodology initially established
in regulation at Sec. 679.27(j)(3). This additional reporting
requirement is intended to provide NMFS with information as to whether
the groundfish retention rates achieved under the GRS are being
maintained by the Amendment 80 fleet.
The catch and production data needed to calculate annual groundfish
retention are generally available to both NMFS and the Amendment 80
entity responsible for meeting current observer and production
reporting requirements established for the Amendment 80 fleet. The
authorized representative of an Amendment 80 cooperative could request
that NMFS verify these data (see ADDRESSES). These data could then be
used by an Amendment 80 cooperative to calculate its annual groundfish
retention rate. In addition, this final rule requires each Amendment 80
cooperative to have a third party audit the cooperative's groundfish
retention calculations and include these findings as part of the annual
Amendment 80 cooperative report. Each third party audit will require
the Amendment 80 cooperative to retain a third party to complete an
audit of the cooperative's groundfish retention calculations. The third
party audit will also require the cooperative to coordinate with NMFS
and the appropriate Amendment 80 entities for a release of confidential
observer and production data to the third party auditor.
This final rule does not require the owners of vessels
participating in the Amendment 80 limited access fishery to report
annual groundfish retention to NMFS. Instead, NMFS determined that it
will prepare information on groundfish retention performance for
Amendment 80 vessels participating in the Amendment 80 limited access
fishery. NMFS currently produces these data as part of its inseason
management report to the Council and will continue to report these
retention rates to the Council during the October Council meeting.
This final rule also revises regulations at Sec. 679.93(c)(1) to
continue to require that the Amendment 80 sector weigh all catch, and
to prohibit the pre-sorting of catch prior to weighing.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received two comment letters during the public comment period
for the proposed rule to implement this regulatory amendment. One
comment letter was received from a representative of the affected
fishing industry and contained two unique comments; the other comment
letter was received from a member of the public and did not contain any
comments relevant to the proposed rule. A summary of the comments and
NMFS' responses follow.
Comment 1: The commenter expressed general support for the proposed
regulatory amendment.
Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment.
Comment 2: The proposed rule would require an Amendment 80
cooperative to report its groundfish retention rate in its annual
cooperative report and would continue the requirement that Amendment 80
cooperative reports be submitted to NMFS. The information contained in
the cooperative reports is confidential under NOAA Administrative Order
(NAO) 216-100, 50 CRF 600.405, and section 402(b)(1) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act. Although NMFS states in the preamble of the proposed rule
on page 62487 that it would provide Amendment 80 cooperative reports to
the Council, NMFS is prevented from providing the cooperative reports
to the Council given the confidential nature of information contained
in the reports.
Response: In the preamble statement highlighted by the commenter,
NMFS incorrectly stated that it would provide the annual cooperative
report to the Council for purposes of this rule. Instead, NMFS
anticipates providing to the Council and the public information on
groundfish retention rates. NMFS will do so, consistent with section
402(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
[[Page 12630]]
applicable agency regulations and policies regarding any confidential
information.
Classification
The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, determined that this final
rule is necessary for the conservation and management of the groundfish
fisheries off Alaska and that it is consistent with the Magnuson-
Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
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 agency shall explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. The preambles
to the proposed rule and this final rule serve as the small entity
compliance guide. This action does not require any additional
compliance from small entities that is not described in the preambles.
Copies of the proposed rule are available from NMFS at the following
Web site: https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Executive Order 12866
This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
This FRFA incorporates the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA), a summary of the significant issues raised by the public
comments, NMFS' responses to those comments, and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the action. NMFS published the proposed
rule on October 15, 2012 (77 FR 62482), with comments invited through
November 14, 2012. An IRFA was prepared and summarized in the
``Classification'' section of the preamble to the proposed rule. NMFS
received no comments to the IRFA. The description of this action, its
purpose, and its legal basis are described in the preamble to the
proposed rule and are not repeated here. The FRFA describes the impacts
on small entities, which are defined in the IRFA for this action and
not repeated here. Analytical requirements for the FRFA are described
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), sections 604(a)(1) through
(5), and summarized below.
The FRFA must contain:
1. A succinct statement of the need for, and objectives of, the
rule;
2. A summary of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a
summary of the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement
of any changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments;
3. A description and an estimate of the number of small entities to
which the rule will apply, or an explanation of why no such estimate is
available;
4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report
or record; and
5. A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
The ``universe'' of entities to be considered in a FRFA generally
includes only those small entities that can reasonably be expected to
be directly regulated by the final rule. If the effects of the rule
fall primarily on a distinct segment of the industry, or portion
thereof (e.g., user group, gear type, geographic area), that segment
would be considered the universe for purposes of this analysis. In
preparing a FRFA, an agency may provide either a quantifiable or
numerical description of the effects of a rule (and alternatives to the
rule), or more general descriptive statements, if quantification is not
practicable or reliable.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised During Public Comment
No comments were received that raised significant issues in
response to the IRFA specifically; therefore, no changes were made to
the rule as a result of comments on the IRFA.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by the Final Rule
The entities directly regulated by this action are those C/Ps that
are members of the Amendment 80 sector that target flatfish, Atka
mackerel, Pacific cod, and Pacific ocean perch in the EEZ of the BSAI.
The Small Business Administration has established size criteria for all
major industry sectors in the United States, including fish harvesting
and fish processing businesses. Effective January 5, 2006, a business
involved in fish harvesting is a small business if it is independently
owned and operated, not dominant in its field of operation (including
its affiliates), and if it has combined annual gross receipts not in
excess of $4.0 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide. A
seafood processor is a small business if it is independently owned and
operated, not dominant in its field of operation, and employs 500 or
fewer persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis, at
all its affiliated operations worldwide. A business involved in both
the harvesting and processing of seafood products is a small business
if it meets the $4.0 million criterion for fish harvesting operations.
NMFS estimated the number of small versus large entities by
matching the gross earnings from all fisheries of record for 2009 with
the vessels, the known ownership of those vessels, and the known
affiliations of those vessels in the BSAI or Gulf of Alaska groundfish
fisheries for that year. NMFS has specific information on the ownership
of vessels and the affiliations that exist based on data provided by
the Amendment 80 sector, as well as a review of ownership data
independently available to NMFS from Federal fishing permit and license
limitation program license applications. The vessels with a common
ownership linkage in 2010, and therefore affiliation, are reported in
Table 2 in Section 2.2.5 of the analysis for this action (see
ADDRESSES). In addition, those vessels that are assigned to an
Amendment 80 cooperative and receive an exclusive harvest privilege are
categorized as large entities for the purpose of the RFA, under the
principles of affiliation, due to their participation in a harvesting
cooperative.
NMFS knows that as many as 28 Amendment 80 vessels could be active
in the Amendment 80 fishery. Those persons who apply for and receive
Amendment 80 quota share (QS) are eligible to fish in the Amendment 80
sector, and those QS holders will be directly regulated by the final
rule. Vessels that are assigned Amendment 80 QS and that are eligible
to fish in the Amendment 80 sector are commonly known as Amendment 80
vessels. Currently, there are 27 Amendment 80 vessels that will be
directly regulated based on this action. One vessel owner, who could be
eligible for the Amendment 80 program and could
[[Page 12631]]
apply for Amendment 80 QS, has not applied to NFMS to participate in
this sector. Therefore, this vessel will not be directly regulated by
the final rule unless and until the owner is approved to participate in
the Amendment 80 sector and is assigned Amendment 80 QS. Based on the
known affiliations and ownership of the Amendment 80 vessels, all but
one of the Amendment 80 vessel owners are categorized as large entities
for the purpose of the RFA. Thus, this analysis estimates that only one
small entity will be directly regulated by the final rule. This one
small entity could be linked by company affiliation to a large entity,
which then could qualify the entity as large entity. Complete
information, however, is not available to determine any such linkages.
Recordkeeping and Reporting
This action is projected to have a de minimis impact on the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements of small entities
participating in the BSAI groundfish fisheries. Some recordkeeping and
reporting may be required of individual firms. Those firms that already
record and report catch data will likely not be significantly impacted
by this final action. It is not possible to determine which firms will
be most impacted by the requirements, since the information each firm
collects is based on what it needs to operate its business and the
current reporting requirements. The regulations implemented by this
final rule are not expected to impact the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for any other entities in the fishery.
Under this action, NMFS will not require the individual owners and
operators of Amendment 80 vessels participating in the limited access
fishery to annually report groundfish retention performance. Instead,
NMFS will prepare retention estimates for each vessel in the limited
access fishery and present these data to the Council annually as part
of the inseason management report.
Description of Significant Alternatives to the Final Rule
The suite of potential actions included two alternatives. A
detailed description of these alternatives is provided in Section 2 of
the analysis for this action (see ADDRESSES). Alternative 1 is the ``no
action'' alternative. Alternative 1 does not address the unintended and
unforeseen burden of the GRS on directly regulated small entities and
is not consistent with the purpose and need of this action.
The Council's preferred alternative, Alternative 2, has been
selected as the action alternative. It removes the GRS from the GRS
program for the Amendment 80 sector. Removal of the GRS will result in
significant operational benefits and cost savings to all directly
regulated entities. An Amendment 80 cooperative will monitor the
cooperative's aggregate groundfish retention rate and will report its
annual groundfish retention performance to NMFS, avoiding mandatory
compliance standards and their associated costs.
The Council also considered an alternative to revise the GRS to
require groundfish retention at rates similar to the estimates
presented in the analysis prepared for the GRS program. The Council
determined that, while revising the GRS could reduce economic hardship
imposed on the Amendment 80 sector by more closely correlating
groundfish retention rates with historical retention rates, it would
not address the monitoring, enforcement, and prosecution issues that
arise from the requirements for annual determination of vessel
compliance with the GRS program. Because this alternative would not
resolve the problems for the program, the Council decided not to
forward this alternative in the analysis for the proposed action.
Based upon the best available scientific data and information, and
consideration of the objectives of this action, there are no
alternatives to the proposed action that have the potential to
accomplish the stated objectives of the MSA and any other applicable
statutes and that have the potential to minimize any significant
adverse economic impact of the proposed rule on directly regulated
small entities. The preferred alternative provides greater economic
benefits for participants than Alternative 1 by allowing participants
to maintain or improve the retention rates achieved under the GRS
without the compliance costs associated with meeting a retention
standard greater than that intended by the Council or NMFS. The lack of
any quantitative data makes it impossible to rigorously assess the
relative differences in expected economic impacts among the
alternatives. The Council chose to recommend, and this final rule
implements, the preferred alternative because it best meets the goals
of this action and minimizes the potential negative impacts to directly
regulated small entities by relieving regulatory requirements that no
longer meet the intent of the GRS program.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that has been approved by OMB
under control number 0648-0565. Public reporting burden for the
Amendment 80 cooperative report is estimated to average 26.5 hours per
response, which includes a new requirement for an additional third-
party audit, estimated to average 1.5 hours per response. These
estimated reporting burdens include 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 ADDRESSEES) 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: February 20, 2013.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, performing the functions and
duties of the 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 50 CFR 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
Sec. 679.2 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 679.2, remove the definition of ``Groundfish Retention
Standard (GRS).''
0
3. In Sec. 679.5, add paragraph (s)(6)(iii)(D) and paragraph
(s)(6)(iii)(E) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).
* * * * *
[[Page 12632]]
(s) * * *
(6) * * *
(iii) * * *
(D) For each Amendment 80 cooperative, the percent of groundfish
retained by that Amendment 80 cooperative of the aggregate groundfish
retained by all Amendment 80 vessels assigned to that Amendment 80
cooperative using the following equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR25FE13.001
Substituting the value for GFroundweight into the following
equation:
GFR% = (GFroundweight /TotalGF)* 100
Where:
GFroundweight is the total annual round weight equivalent of all
retained product weights retained by all Amendment 80 vessels
assigned to that Amendment 80 cooperative for each IR/IU groundfish
species.
PWspeciesn is the total annual product weight for each groundfish
species listed in Table 2a to this part by product type as reported
in the vessel's production report for all Amendment 80 vessels
assigned to that Amendment 80 cooperative required at Sec.
679.5(e).
PRRspeciesn is the standard product recovery rate for each
groundfish species and product combination listed in Table 3 to this
part.
GFR% is the groundfish retention percentage for an Amendment 80
cooperative calculated as GFroundweight divided by the total weight
of groundfish catch.
TotalGF is the total groundfish round catch weight for all Amendment
80 vessels assigned to that Amendment 80 cooperative as measured by
the flow scale measurement, less any non-groundfish, PSC species or
groundfish species on prohibited species status under Sec. 679.20.
(E) For each Amendment 80 cooperative, a third party must audit the
Amendment 80 cooperative's annual groundfish retention calculations and
the Amendment 80 cooperative must include the finding of the third
party audit in its Amendment 80 annual cooperative report.
* * * * *
Sec. 679.7 [Amended]
0
4. In Sec. 679.7, remove and reserve paragraphs (m) and (o)(4)(iv).
0
5. In Sec. 679.27,
0
a. Remove and reserve paragraph (j); and
0
b. Revise paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.27 Improved Retention/Improved Utilization Program.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) For catcher/processors not listed in Sec. 679.4(l)(2)(i) using
trawl gear in the BSAI, all species listed in Table 2a to this part,
except for groundfish in prohibited species status.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 679.93, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.93 Amendment 80 Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring,
and catch accounting.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Catch weighing. All catch are weighed on a NMFS-approved scale
in compliance with the scale requirements at Sec. 679.28(b). Each haul
must be weighed separately, all catch must be made available for
sampling by a NMFS-certified observer, and no sorting of catch may take
place prior to weighing.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-04262 Filed 2-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P