Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization Program, 28523-28531 [2013-11571]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: April 30, 2013.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–11541 Filed 5–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 680
[Docket No. 110207108–3430–02]
RIN 0648–BA82
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization
Program
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues regulations to
implement Amendment 41 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Bering
Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner
Crabs (FMP). These regulations amend
the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Crab
Rationalization Program (CR Program)
by establishing a process whereby
holders of regionally designated
individual fishing quota (IFQ) and
individual processor quota (IPQ) in six
CR Program fisheries may receive an
exemption from regional delivery
requirements in the North or South
Regions. The six CR Program fisheries
are Bristol Bay red king crab, Bering Sea
snow crab, Saint Matthew Island blue
king crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands
golden king crab, Western Aleutian
Islands red king crab, and Pribilof
Islands red and blue king crab. This
action is necessary to mitigate
disruptions in a CR Program fishery that
prevent participants from complying
with regional delivery requirements.
This action is intended to promote the
goals and objectives of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the FMP, and other
applicable law.
DATES: Effective June 14, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of
Amendment 41 to the FMP, the
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA),
and the Categorical Exclusion prepared
for this action may be obtained from
https://www.regulations.gov or from the
Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:08 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Environmental Impact Statement, RIR,
and Social Impact Assessment prepared
for the CR Program are available from
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this rule may
be submitted to NMFS Alaska Region,
P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802,
Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer;
in person at NMFS Alaska Region, 709
West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau,
AK; and by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or
faxed to 202–395–7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gretchen Harrington, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule implements Amendment 41 to the
FMP. NMFS published a notice of
availability for Amendment 41 on
December 13, 2012 (77 FR 74161). The
comment period on Amendment 41
ended on February 11, 2013. NMFS
published a proposed rule to implement
Amendment 41 on January 30, 2013 (78
FR 6279). The comment period on the
proposed rule ended on March 1, 2013.
NMFS approved Amendment 41 on
March 13, 2013. Additional detail on
the effects of this action is provided in
the notice of availability for
Amendment 41 (December 13, 2012, 77
FR 74161) and the proposed rule
(January 30, 2013, 78 FR 6279). NMFS
received eight letters containing nine
unique comments on Amendment 41
and the proposed rule.
Amendment 41 and this final rule
apply to quota share (QS) and processor
quota share (PQS) that have a regional
designation for either the North Region
or South Region. NMFS assigned a
North Region designation or a South
Region designation to the QS and PQS
issued in six CR Program fisheries:
Bristol Bay red king crab, Bering Sea
snow crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands
golden king crab, Western Aleutian
Islands red king crab, Saint Matthew
Island blue king crab, and Pribilof
Islands red and blue king crab. The
North Region is north of 56°20′N.
latitude. The South Region is south of
56°20′N. latitude.
A QS holder’s annual allocation,
called IFQ, is expressed in pounds and
is based on the amount of QS held in
relation to the total QS pool for that
fishery. NMFS issues IFQ in three
classes: Class A IFQ, Class B IFQ, and
Class C IFQ. Three percent of IFQ is
issued as Class C IFQ for captains and
crew. Of the remaining IFQ, 90 percent
is issued as Class A IFQ and 10 percent
is issued as Class B IFQ. For the CR
fisheries subject to this rule, NMFS
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
28523
issues Class A IFQ with a North Region
or South Region designation, and that
Class A IFQ must be delivered within its
designated geographic region. For PQS
holders, NMFS issues an annual
allocation of individual processing
quota (IPQ) with a North Region or
South Region designation. NMFS issues
Class A IFQ and IPQ for each region at
a one-to-one correlation for each of the
six CR Program fisheries subject to this
rule. Holders of Class A IFQ designated
for a specific region must deliver to a
processor holding a matching amount of
IPQ for that region. Holders of
regionally designated Class A IFQ and
IPQ may not use that IFQ and IPQ
outside of the designated region, except
as provided for in this rule.
In recommending Amendment 41, the
Council recognized that weather
conditions or other natural or man-made
circumstances can hinder harvesting
activities and restrict access to
processing facilities in the North or
South Regions. Environmental or manmade conditions have created obstacles
to regional deliveries in every year since
implementation of the CR Program.
Each year, icing conditions have been
an obstacle to delivering crab harvested
with North Region IFQ in the North
Region. For an entire season, deliveries
to a floating processor that served most
of the North Region were prevented by
a fire that disabled the processor.
Natural or man-made catastrophes
could result in lost revenue to
harvesters, processors, and
communities. Safety risks increase
when harvesters attempt to meet
regional delivery requirements in
inclement weather (e.g., icing
conditions) and other potentially unsafe
situations. Unforeseen delays in
delivering crab could result in deadloss
(crab that die before being processed).
Harvesters may avoid or delay the
harvest of regionally designated IFQ,
thereby increasing the potential for
unharvested crab or crab harvested later
in the fishing season. Such changes in
fishing behavior could result in unused
IPQ, increased processing cost, loss of
market share, and loss of revenue to
remote communities dependent on
revenues from crab deliveries and
processing.
Amendment 41 and this final rule
promote the safety of human life at sea
and mitigate economic harm by
allowing participants to receive an
exemption from regional delivery
requirements in situations where events
prevent participants from delivering
crab harvested with North Region IFQ in
the North Region or South Region IFQ
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
28524
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
in the South Region. This final rule
implements an exemption process to
allow fishery participants to respond to
an emergency situation during the crab
fishing year in accord with provisions
that they established before the season.
The preamble to the proposed rule (78
FR 6279, January 30, 2013) provides
detailed information on the
implementing regulations for
Amendment 41.
In summary, this final rule establishes
a process by which IFQ holders, IPQ
holders, and affected communities
could jointly apply for and receive an
exemption from regional delivery
requirements. This final rule
implements a two-step process for an
exemption from regional delivery
requirements: A preseason application
and an inseason notice of exemption.
Both parts of the application are on one
form: The Application for Exemption
from CR Crab North or South Region
Delivery Requirements. This application
process allows the parties to apply for
an exemption from the regional delivery
requirements without extensive
administrative review by NMFS.
Under this rule, both the preseason
application and the inseason notice of
exemption must be signed by one or
more members of the following three
groups: (1) Holders of Class A IFQ in a
CR Program fishery subject to this rule;
(2) holders of the IPQ in a CR Program
fishery subject to this rule; and (3) a
representative of each of the affected
communities. Additional description of
these groups is provided in the
preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR
6279, January 30, 2013).
The preseason application process
allows the affected parties to enter the
crab fishing season knowing the steps
that the parties would take to avoid an
exemption, the circumstances that
would trigger an exemption, the steps
they would need to take to obtain an
exemption, and any mutually-agreed
upon compensatory actions that the
parties would take as a result of
exercising the exemption. The
preseason application process itself has
two parts: (1) The development of a
framework agreement by the parties;
and (2) the submission of a preseason
application to NMFS. If the parties to a
NMFS-approved preseason application
conclude during the crab fishing year
that circumstances have occurred that
justify an inseason exemption under the
framework agreement, those applicants
must do two things to obtain an
exemption. First, they must enter into
an exemption contract with each other
and, second, they must jointly submit
an inseason notice of the exemption to
NMFS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
Amendment 41 and this final rule do
not prescribe specific conditions or
terms of agreement for the framework
agreement or exemption contract.
However, the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council’s (Council’s)
Statement of Council Intent should
guide the parties in establishing the
required contracts. The preamble to the
proposed rule contains the Statement of
Council Intent and the range of private
arrangements that the Council
considered and that the parties could
put in the framework agreement and the
exemption contract (78 FR 6279,
January 30, 2013).
This final rule also includes a
reporting requirement for IFQ holders to
provide NMFS and the Council with the
means to assess the exemption in terms
of the Council’s Statement of Council
Intent for Amendment 41. In a crab
fishing year when an IFQ holder
submits a preseason application for an
exemption from the regional delivery
requirements, the IFQ holder must also
submit an annual Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to NMFS.
Response to Comments
NMFS received eight letters of public
comment during the public comment
periods for Amendment 41 and the
proposed rule. NMFS received letters
from crab fishery participants and
organizations, the City of Saint Paul,
and a Community Development Quota
(CDQ) entity. NMFS summarized these
letters into nine separate comments, and
responds to them below.
Comment 1: The proposed rule is
consistent with Amendment 41 as
adopted by the Council. We encourage
NMFS to move forward expeditiously in
implementation of the regulations so
that they can be in effect for the 2013/
2014 crab fishing year.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the
comment.
Comment 2: In the preamble to the
proposed rule, NMFS used incorrect
coordinates to describe the line between
the North Region and the South Region.
The correct line is defined at
§ 680.40(b)(2)(i)(A).
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
the coordinates in the preamble to the
proposed rule were incorrect and
includes the correct coordinates in this
preamble to the final rule.
Comment 3: The Council intended
that the regional delivery exemption
apply to compensatory deliveries (e.g.,
allowing Class A IFQ and IPQ
designated for one region to be used in
another region to compensate for
deliveries made earlier under an
inseason notice of exemption). The
proposed rule could be interpreted to
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
render the parties ineligible to make
compensatory deliveries in the crab
fishing year following the year that they
were stipulated in the exemption
contract. Under the proposed rule,
parties entitled to compensatory
deliveries could potentially be denied
the benefit of their bargain without their
agreements and through no fault of their
own. This result would be contrary to
the fundamental premises of the
contract-based approach to regional
delivery exemptions adopted by the
Council under Amendment 41.
Response: The Council intended that
the regional delivery exemption apply
to compensatory deliveries.
Compensatory deliveries can occur in
the crab fishing year that they were
stipulated in the exemption contract or
in the crab fishing year following the
year that they were stipulated in the
exemption contract. Under the proposed
rule, compensatory deliveries would be
possible. However, the proposed rule
did not include any regulations
specifically addressing the use of
compensatory deliveries, either in the
crab fishing year or in the following crab
fishing year, and, as proposed, did not
provide the most efficient process for
exempting compensatory deliveries in
the following crab fishing year from
regional delivery requirements. To
address this public comment, NMFS has
modified the final rule to more clearly
address compensatory deliveries and
the process to be followed for exempting
compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year.
The Council considered
compensatory deliveries as one possible
form of compensation that the parties
could put in the framework agreement
and the exemption contract, as
discussed in Sections 2.4.2 and 2.4.3 of
the RIR (see ADDRESSES). Compensatory
deliveries could be used to address the
loss of economic activity under the
exemption and the loss of revenue to
both IPQ holders and communities.
Compensatory deliveries could be used
to address both an IPQ holder’s
potential losses (if the exemption was
used to send deliveries to a different
processor) and a community’s potential
losses (for any deliveries to a different
region under the exemption).
A compensatory delivery would occur
when the parties to the framework
agreement and the exemption contract
agree that a certain amount of
regionally-designated IFQ crab may be
landed outside of the region on the
condition that some amount of IFQ crab
is later delivered to that region. For
example, the parties could agree to a
compensatory delivery of IFQ crab not
subject to regional delivery
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
requirements (Class B or Class C IFQ) to
the region that lost deliveries under the
exemption. Alternatively, compensatory
deliveries could come from a different
CR fishery or from Class A IFQ
designated for another region. The
amount of a compensatory delivery
would be negotiated and may differ
from the amount redirected, particularly
if made from a different fishery.
The RIR discusses how compensating
the community for losses with a
compensatory delivery of IFQ crab
designated for another region may be a
more agreeable resolution to all parties
than a payment to the regional entity or
its designee. The RIR specifies that, in
the framework agreement, the parties
would commit to subsequent
compensatory delivery in a region. The
RIR notes that compensating a
community or region with deliveries of
IFQ crab designated for another region
would require that the IFQ and IPQ
holders have agreements with the
community representative for the IFQ
and IPQ used for compensation.
Because the Council clearly analyzed
and considered compensatory deliveries
(including compensatory deliveries that
may occur in the year following the
approval of an exemption) during the
development of Amendment 41, and the
public has requested additional
specificity in the regulatory text
concerning the use of and process for
compensatory deliveries in the year
following an exemption under the
proposed rule, NMFS determined that
modifications to the proposed rule text
are needed to more closely align the
final rule with Amendment 41 and
clarify the exemption process.
NMFS has made three changes in the
final rule to address and facilitate the
use of compensatory deliveries in both
the crab fishing year they were
stipulated in the exemption contract
and in the following crab fishing year.
These changes do not require parties to
the framework agreement to establish
agreements for compensatory deliveries,
but if the parties establish such
agreements, the changes require that
provisions for compensatory deliveries
are clearly described in the framework
agreement and exemption contract, and
that the required forms are signed by all
of the affected parties.
Administratively, compensatory
deliveries among regions are subject to
the same procedure established by this
action to exempt deliveries from
regional delivery requirements.
Consequently, representatives from both
regions must sign the framework
agreement, exemption contract, and
corresponding forms to allow for
compensatory deliveries among regions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
For example, if a Class A IFQ holder,
IPQ holder, and the representative of the
affected community in the North Region
want to have a specific amount of South
Region Class A IFQ delivered in the
North Region as compensation for a
delivery of North Region Class A IFQ in
the South Region, then the Class A IFQ
holder(s), IPQ holder(s), and
representatives of affected communities
from both the North and South Regions
must sign the framework agreement,
preseason application, exemption
contract, and inseason notice of
exemption.
NMFS would treat the compensatory
delivery the same as an original
exempted delivery in that it would be
made using IFQ and IPQ that were
exempt from the regional delivery
requirement. Therefore, the IFQ
holder(s), IPQ holder(s), and the
community representative(s) for the IFQ
and IPQ used to make the compensatory
delivery in either that crab fishing year
or in the following crab fishing year
must sign the framework agreement,
preseason application, notice of
inseason exemption, and exemption
contract. If any party to a framework
agreement or exemption contract
believes that any other party did not
comply with their contractual
obligation, that party could seek redress
as a private civil matter.
First, NMFS changed the regulations
for the preseason application at
§ 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(B) to add a new
paragraph (6) that requires the
framework agreement to specify any
arrangements for compensatory
deliveries in the crab fishing year or the
following crab fishing year. This new
provision ensures that the IFQ and IPQ
that would be used to make the
compensatory deliveries are subject to
the framework agreement and are
available for the exemption contract.
Second, NMFS changed the
regulations for the inseason notice of
exemption at § 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(B) to add
a new paragraph (5) that requires the
exemption contract to specify any
arrangements for compensatory
deliveries in that crab fishing year or the
following crab fishing year. This new
provision ensures that the compensatory
deliveries are covered in the exemption
contract.
Third, NMFS changed the regulations
at § 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(F) to extend the
effective period for the exemption to
cover any specified compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing
year. Under the proposed rule, the
exemption would have been effective
for the remainder of the crab fishing
year in which NMFS receives the notice
of exemption. This change will clarify
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
28525
that, if the inseason notice of exemption
specifies that compensatory deliveries
will occur in the following crab fishing
year, the exemption will remain in
effect for the specified IFQ and IPQ in
the following crab fishing year.
The final rule does not permit
compensatory deliveries for more than
one crab fishing year after the year that
NMFS receives the notice of exemption
because allowing compensatory
deliveries to occur at some
indeterminate time in the future would
be administratively burdensome to
track, was not specifically analyzed in
the RIR prepared for this action, and
public comments generally requested
that compensatory deliveries be allowed
in the crab fishing year following the
notice of exemption.
Comment 4: There is no logical basis
for requiring that parties enter into a
framework agreement for a subsequent
year as a condition of being eligible to
make compensatory deliveries required
under a framework agreement and
exemption contract from a prior year.
We respectfully suggest two changes to
address this issue.
First, revise § 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(E) to
provide that applicants who do not
submit a timely preseason application
will not be eligible to receive an
exemption for the relevant crab fishing
year, other than an exemption to make
compensatory landings in fulfillment of
their obligations under an existing
exemption contract.
Second, add language to
§ 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(F) so that it would read
as follows: ‘‘If a preseason application is
timely and complete, NMFS will
approve the application. If NMFS
approves a preseason application for an
exemption, the applicants will be able
to receive an exemption during the crab
fishing year in which the preseason
application was filed if the applicants
comply with the requirements for a
preseason application specified below at
(p)(4)(iii). In addition, if NMFS
approves a preseason application for an
exemption and receives a related
complete notice of exemption that is
based on an exemption contract that
includes an agreement for compensatory
deliveries, the exemption necessary to
make such compensatory deliveries will
be effective the day after it is filed with
NMFS in accordance with Section
680.4(p)(4)(iii), below, by the party
authorized to file it under the terms of
the related inseason exemption
contract.’’
Response: NMFS agrees that it is not
necessary for the parties to enter into a
new framework agreement in order to
make compensatory deliveries specified
in an exemption contract in the
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
28526
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
following crab fishing year. As
explained in the response to Comment
3, NMFS has modified the proposed
regulatory text in this final rule to
address and facilitate compensatory
deliveries in the crab fishing year
following the inseason notice of
exemption. Compensatory deliveries in
the following crab fishing year would be
made under the framework agreement
and preseason application (and
exemption contract and notice of
exemption) submitted in the crab
fishing year in which the emergency
occurred. When applicants receive an
exemption, the exemption would cover
the compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year that are
specified in the exemption contract.
NMFS determined that the
modifications described in the response
to Comment 3 and contained in this
final rule are the most efficient and
effective way to implement the changes
recommended by public comment.
Therefore, the specific regulatory
changes suggested by the comment are
not necessary.
In response to the first suggested
change, § 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(E) does not
require a new preseason application to
fulfill compensatory deliveries that are
specified in an existing exemption
contract. This regulation states that, if
NMFS does not receive a timely and
complete preseason application on or
before October 15 of a crab fishing year,
NMFS will deny the preseason
application; those applicants will not be
able to receive an exemption for that
crab fishing year. This remains true;
NMFS will not grant an exemption
without a timely and complete
preseason application. However, with
the changes to the regulations described
in the response to Comment 3, once
applicants receive an exemption, the
exemption would cover the
compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year that are
specified in the exemption contract.
The second suggested change to
§ 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(F) is also not necessary
to allow compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year. This
paragraph explains that NMFS will
approve a timely and complete
preseason application. If NMFS
approves a preseason application for an
exemption, the applicants will be able
to receive an exemption during the crab
fishing year if the applicants comply
with the requirements for an inseason
notice of exemption. With the changes
to the regulations described in the
response to Comment 3, once applicants
receive an exemption, the exemption
would cover the compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
year that are specified in the exemption
contract.
Comment 5: We respectfully suggest
that § 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(A)(3) be revised to
read as follows: ‘‘Be signed by the
required applicants specified in
paragraph (p)(3) that also signed the
preseason application, or, if filed to
make compensatory landings, be signed
by the party authorized to submit the
notice of exemption under the terms of
the related inseason exemption
contract.’’
Response: NMFS determined that this
suggested regulatory change is not
necessary to allow compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing
year. With the regulation changes
explained in response to Comment 3,
when applicants receive an exemption,
the exemption would cover any
compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year that are
specified in the exemption contract.
Parties would not need to submit a new
inseason notice of exemption to make
compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year.
However, it is important to note that
the framework agreement, the preseason
application, the exemption contact, and
the inseason notice of exemption all
must be signed by the holders of the IFQ
and IPQ that are subject to the
exemption, including the compensatory
deliveries, and by the community
representative for the community or
communities where the specified IFQ,
including compensatory deliveries,
would have been landed. For
compensatory deliveries, this means
that the community representative that
would have received the delivery used
to compensate an exempted delivery
must sign the required documents.
As explained in the RIR, a
compensatory delivery of Class A IFQ
designated for another region could only
occur with the consent of the Class A
IFQ holder, IPQ holder, and the
representative of the affected
community in the region from which
the compensatory delivery originates.
The RIR notes that to compensate a
community or region with deliveries of
IFQ crab designated for another region
would require that the IFQ and IPQ
holders have agreements with the
regional representative for the IFQ and
IPQ used for compensation.
Administratively, these compensatory
deliveries are part of the same
procedure as the original exempt
delivery. Consequently, representatives
from both regions in a fishery would
need to sign the framework agreement,
exemption contract, and corresponding
forms to allow for compensatory
deliveries.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Comment 6: We respectfully request
that § 680.4(p)(5) be revised to require
that each Regional Delivery Exemption
Report identify all compensatory
deliveries made during the crab fishing
year that is the subject of the Report, all
outstanding compensatory delivery
obligations to be fulfilled in a future
crab fishing year or years, and the party
or parties who are authorized to file the
related compensatory delivery
exemption request(s) under the terms of
the related exemption contract(s). We
believe this information would assist
NMFS with identifying compensatory
landings as a subcomponent of regional
landing relief, and in determining who
has the authority to file compensatory
landing exemption requests.
Response: NMFS agrees that the
Regional Delivery Exemption Report
should include information on
compensatory deliveries and has added
a requirement to the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report at § 680.4(p)(5)(i)(D).
This final rule requires that the report
include an explanation of the
arrangements for any compensatory
deliveries, including all compensatory
deliveries made during the crab fishing
year and any outstanding compensatory
delivery obligations for the following
crab fishing year. Note that NMFS is not
requiring any of the parties to file
compensatory delivery exemption
requests as suggested by the comment.
Compensatory deliveries would be
made under the inseason notice of
exemption in which the compensatory
deliveries were specified, regardless of
whether they occur in the same crab
fishing year or the following crab fishing
year. Also, as explained in the response
to Comment 3, the final rule does not
permit compensatory deliveries for
more than one crab fishing year after the
year that NMFS receives the notice of
exemption.
Comment 7: The proposed rule, at
§ 680.4(p)(5)(ii), requires IFQ holders to
submit a Regional Delivery Exemption
Report to IPQ holders and community
representatives on or before June 15,
and to submit the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to NMFS on or before
June 30. We note that the crab fishing
year currently extends through June 30,
and it is conceivable that IFQ crab
delivered under an exemption may not
be landed until then. Therefore, we
respectfully request that the deadlines
for submitting a Regional Exemption
Delivery Report to IPQ holders and
community representatives be extended
to July 15, and the deadline for
submitting the Report to NMFS be
extended to July 30. These extensions
should provide IFQ holders with
adequate time after the crab fishing year
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
ends to prepare and submit the required
Regional Delivery Exemption Reports.
Response: NMFS agrees and has
changed the deadline at § 680.4(p)(5)(ii)
to July 15 and the deadline at
§ 680.4(p)(5)(iii) to July 30.
Comment 8: One comment expressed
a general concern with Federal fisheries
management.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that
comment but determined that it does
not relate to the scope of this action.
Comment 9: One comment generally
supported the Crab Rationalization
Program.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the
comment.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Summary of the Changes from
Proposed to Final Rule
NMFS made changes from the
proposed to final rule in response to
public comments. NMFS made four
changes to allow for compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing
year that are discussed in the responses
to Comments 3 and 6.
• NMFS changed the proposed
regulations for the preseason
application at § 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(B) to add
a new paragraph (6) that requires the
framework agreement to specify any
arrangements for compensatory
deliveries in the crab fishing year or the
following crab fishing year.
• NMFS changed the proposed
regulations for the inseason notice of
exemption at § 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(B) to add
a new paragraph (5) that requires the
exemption contract to specify any
arrangements for compensatory
deliveries in the crab fishing year or the
following crab fishing year.
• NMFS changed the proposed
regulations at § 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(F) to
extend the effective period for the
exemption to cover any specified
compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year.
• NMFS changed the proposed
regulations for the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report at § 680.4(p)(5)(i) to
add a new paragraph (D) that requires
the Regional Delivery Exemption Report
to include an explanation of the
arrangements for any compensatory
deliveries, including all compensatory
deliveries made during the crab fishing
year and any outstanding compensatory
delivery obligations for the following
crab fishing year.
Additionally, NMFS changed the
deadline at § 680.4(p)(5)(ii) to July 15
and the deadline at § 680.4(p)(5)(iii) to
July 30, as discussed in Comment 7.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
OMB Revisions to Paperwork
Reduction Act References in 15 CFR
902.1(b)
Section 3507(c)(B)(i) of the PRA
requires that agencies inventory and
display a current control number
assigned by the Director, OMB, for each
agency information collection. Section
902.1(b) identifies the location of NOAA
regulations for which OMB approval
numbers have been issued. Because this
final rule revises and adds data
elements within a collection-of
information for recordkeeping and
reporting requirements, 15 CFR 902.1(b)
is revised to reference correctly the
sections resulting from this final rule.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304(b) and 305(d)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS,
has determined that Amendment 41 and
this final rule are necessary for the
conservation and management of the
BSAI crab fisheries and that they are
consistent with the FMP, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, and other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for the purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(FRFA)
This final regulatory flexibility
analysis (FRFA) incorporates the Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a
summary of the significant issues raised
by the public comments in response to
the IRFA, NMFS’ responses to those
comments, and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the
action.
NMFS published a proposed rule to
implement Amendment 41 on January
30, 2013 (78 FR 6279). An IRFA was
prepared and summarized in the
‘‘Classification’’ section of the preamble
to the proposed rule. 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.
NMFS received eight letters of public
comment containing nine unique
comments on Amendment 41 and the
proposed rule. None of these comments
addressed the IRFA or the economic
impacts of the rule generally.
Number and Description of Small
Entities Regulated by the Action
This action creates a process whereby
IFQ holders and IPQ holders who enter
an agreement with a community
representative may apply for and
receive an exemption from regional
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
28527
delivery requirements. Estimates of the
number of small entities holding IFQ are
based on estimates of gross revenues.
During the 2009–2010 fishing season,
nine entities held IFQ subject to
regional delivery requirements; three of
these IFQ holders were small entities. In
that same season, 14 of the 22 entities
that held IPQ subject to regional
delivery requirements were small
entities. Six small community entities,
including two CDQ entities, are directly
regulated by this action.
Description of Significant Alternatives
to the Final Action That Minimize
Adverse Impacts on Small Entities
A FRFA must describe 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. ‘‘Significant alternatives’’ are
those that achieve the stated objectives
for the action, consistent with prevailing
law, with potentially lesser adverse
economic impacts on small entities, as
a whole.
No significant alternatives were
developed for this action. The Council
considered two alternatives; status quo
and the proposed action. The status quo
is no exemption from the regional
delivery requirements. The proposed
action is an exemption from the regional
delivery requirements. For the proposed
action alternative, the Council
considered a number of options to
improve the functioning of the
exemption and minimize adverse
impacts on small entities. The Council
also considered and eliminated from
further considerations several
alternatives that the Council determined
would have limited the effectiveness of
the exemption in achieving its intended
purpose.
The analysis shows that this action
minimizes the economic impacts of
status quo on small entities by allowing
participants to receive an exemption
from regional delivery requirements in
situations where events prevent
participants from delivering crab
harvested with North Region IFQ in the
North Region or South Region IFQ in
the South Region. Overall, this
exemption process allows participants
to receive an exemption from regional
delivery requirements in situations
where events prevent participants from
delivering crab harvested with North
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
28528
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Region IFQ in the North Region or
South Region IFQ in the South Region.
The Council considered a number of
options to improve the functioning of
the exemption and minimize adverse
impacts on small entities. The Council
considered options that would allow
communities benefiting from a ROFR to
select a regional representative to act on
their behalf rather than the ECC entity.
The Council did not choose that option
because of the potential difficulties that
communities could encounter in
selecting the regional representative and
because of the additional administrative
costs and burdens associated with this
option. In addition to providing an
expedited administrative process, the
approach selected by the Council
maintains the original intent of CR
Program community protection
measures in that it preserves community
interests by providing not only a
regional linkage for certain PQS, but
also a close linkage between certain PQS
and the community of origin for that
PQS.
The Council also considered and
eliminated from further consideration
several alternatives during the
development of Amendment 41. These
alternatives are described in detail in
Section 2.2.1 of the analysis for this
action (see ADDRESSES). Generally, the
Council perceived these alternatives as
limiting the effectiveness of the
exemption in achieving its intended
purpose.
The Council considered and rejected
alternatives in which NMFS would fully
administer regional exemptions by
determining whether specific conditions
existed to qualify for an exemption from
the regional delivery requirement. The
Council did not advance these
alternatives because the Council viewed
them as overly expensive to administer
and likely to prevent the exemption
process from fulfilling its purpose as
described in the Council’s purpose and
need statement for this action. The
Council and NMFS recognized that the
necessary fact finding to make such a
determination (e.g., that a specific
amount of ice was prohibiting
harvesting or delivery of crab in a
specific location) would not only delay
decision making, but could also be
costly. Verification of conditions could
be difficult or impracticable due to the
remoteness of the location and poor
quality of data available.
A factual finding would require
NMFS to not only complete an
assessment of the event that arguably
prevents a delivery, but also of the
potential availability of other processing
facilities in the region to overcome the
barrier to the delivery. These findings
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
would require factual assessments of
circumstances in remote areas. Such
findings typically require time, which
may jeopardize safety in emergencies,
and information, which may not be
available to NMFS. In addition, the need
for administrative review of these
findings could result in additional
delays. Consequently, the Council
elected to pursue alternatives that
would not rely on agency administrative
discretion. Instead, the affected parties
would define the terms under which
they would apply for and receive an
exemption. This approach also allows
the parties flexibility to develop
mitigation and compensation
requirements that would, in turn,
minimize the need for the exemption
and, if an exemption is necessary,
ensure that the parties potentially
harmed by the exemption receive
reasonable compensation.
The Council also considered an
alternative that would have defined
specific exemption criteria in
regulation; however, the Council
eliminated this alternative because
NMFS and the Council recognized that
this approach might be overly restrictive
and could not be adapted as
circumstances might require. The
Council also elected not to recommend
an alternative that specifically defined
compensation because the Council
deemed this alternative too prescriptive
to effectively balance the competing
interests of parties, which are likely to
change with the circumstances
surrounding the granting of an
exemption. Similarly, the Council chose
not to advance alternatives that would
redesignate IFQ and IPQ to compensate
for landings redirected under the
exemption because they would be
administratively complex given the
inability to rollover IFQ from one year
to the next.
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting
Federal Rules
No duplication, overlap, or conflict
between this action and existing Federal
rules has been identified.
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
The reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements will be
increased if parties enter into the
agreements and contracts required as
part of a completed Application for
Exemption from CR Crab North or South
Region Delivery Requirements. This
action adds recordkeeping and reporting
requirements necessary to implement
Amendment 41, namely submission,
prior to the start of the fishing season,
of an application and affidavit affirming
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that IFQ holders, IPQ holders, and
community representatives have entered
into a framework agreement. A second
notice and affidavit affirming that those
parties have entered into an exemption
contract is required if the parties subject
to the framework agreement wish to
seek an exemption during the fishing
season.
Participation in an Application for
Exemption from CR Crab North or South
Region Delivery Requirements is
voluntary, but necessary to deliver crab
outside of a designated region when
circumstances necessitate an exemption
from the regional delivery requirements.
The professional skills necessary to
comply with reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for small
entities impacted by this rule include
the ability to read, write, and
understand English; the ability to use a
personal computer and the Internet; and
the authority to take actions on behalf
of the designated signatory. Each of the
small entities must be capable of
complying with the requirements of this
rule. Each small entity should have
financial resources to obtain additional
legal or technical expertise that they
might require to advise them concerning
the framework agreement or the
exemption contract.
IFQ holders that sign a preseason
application must also prepare and
submit an annual Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to NMFS by July 30.
By July 15, IFQ holders must submit a
copy of the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to IPQ holders and
community representatives that also
signed the preseason application. In
response to the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report, community
representatives may voluntarily submit
a Community Impact Report and IPQ
holders may voluntarily submit an IPQ
Holder Report.
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. As part of this
rulemaking process, NMFS has posted a
small entity compliance guide on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/
sustainablefisheries/crab/rat/
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
progfaq.htm. Contact NMFS to request a
hard copy of the guide (see ADDRESSES).
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This rule contains collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which
have been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
OMB Control No. 0648–0514.
Public reporting burden per response
is estimated to average 20 hours for the
Application for Exemption from CR
Crab North or South Region Delivery
Requirements; 5 hours for CDQ
Notification of Representative; 20 hours
to prepare the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report; and 2 hours to
complete the Community Impact Report
or IPQ Holder Report.
Public reporting burden includes the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information.
Send comments regarding these
burden estimates, 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
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
50 CFR Part 680
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 8, 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, NMFS amends 15 CFR part
902 and 50 CFR part 680 as follows:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:08 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
28529
exempt North Region IFQ and IPQ or
South Region IFQ and IPQ from the
PART 902—NOAA INFORMATION
prohibitions at §§ 680.7(a)(2) and (a)(4).
COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER
(2) Identification of eligible
THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT:
applicants. Eligible applicants are:
OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
(i) IFQ holders. Any person holding
regionally designated IFQ for Bristol
■ 1. The authority citation for part 902
Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow crab,
continues to read as follows:
St. Matthew blue king crab, Eastern
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Aleutian Islands golden king crab,
Western Aleutian Islands red king crab,
■ 2. In § 902.1, in the table in paragraph
or Pribilof red king and blue king crab,
(b), under the entry ‘‘50 CFR’’;
■ a. Remove entries for ‘‘680.4(a), (b)(2),
or their authorized representative.
and (c) through (m)’’; ‘‘680.4(b)(1)’’; and
(ii) IPQ holders. Any person holding
680.4(b)(3) and (n)’’; and ‘‘680.5(e) and
regionally designated IPQ for Bristol
(f)’’;
Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow crab,
■ b. Add entries in alphanumeric order
St. Matthew blue king crab, Eastern
for ‘‘680.4(a) through (p)’’; ‘‘680.5(f)’’;
Aleutian Islands golden king crab,
and ‘‘680.42(a) and (b).’’
Western Aleutian Islands red king crab,
The additions read as follows:
or Pribilof red king and blue king crab,
or their authorized representative.
§ 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned
(iii) Community representatives. (A)
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
For communities that hold or formerly
*
*
*
*
*
held the ROFR pursuant to § 679.41(l),
(b) * * *
the community representative that signs
the preseason application, the
Current OMB
CFR Part or section where
control number framework agreement, the inseason
notice, and the exemption contract is
the information collection re(all numbers
quirement is located
begin with
the ECC entity, as defined at § 680.2.
0648–)
(B) For North Region St. Matthew blue
king crab PQS and North Region Bering
Sea snow crab PQS that was issued
*
*
*
*
*
without a ROFR, the community
50 CFR
representative that signs the preseason
*
*
*
*
*
application, the framework agreement,
680.4(a) through (p) .............
–0514 the inseason notice, and the exemption
contract for Saint Paul and Saint George
*
*
*
*
*
shall be either:
680.5(f) .................................
–570
(1) Both Aleutian Pribilof Islands
Community Development Association
*
*
*
*
*
680.42(a) and (b) ..................
–0514 (APICDA) and the Central Bering Sea
Fishermen’s Association (CBSFA), or
(2) the community representative that
*
*
*
*
*
APICDA and CBSFA designate in
writing to NMFS by December 9, 2013.
Title 50—Wildlife and Fisheries
(i) Either APICDA or CBSFA may
PART 680—SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF revoke the designated community
THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE
representative by providing written
OFF ALASKA
notice to the other entity and to NMFS.
(ii) If either APICDA or CBSFA
■ 3. The authority citation for 50 CFR
revokes its designation of a community
part 680 continues to read as follows:
representative after October 15 of a crab
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109–
fishing year, the revocation will not
241; Pub. L. 109–479.
affect the validity of any action taken by
the designated community
■ 4. In § 680.4, add paragraph (p) to read
representative pursuant to paragraph (p)
as follows:
for that crab fishing year, including
§ 680.4 Permits.
signing the preseason application, the
framework agreement, the inseason
*
*
*
*
*
(p) Exemption from regional delivery
notice, and the exemption contract.
requirements for the Bristol Bay red king
(3) Required Applicants. Multiple
crab, Bering Sea snow crab, St. Matthew parties may apply for an exemption;
blue king crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands however, a complete preseason
golden king crab, Western Aleutian
application and a complete inseason
Islands red king crab, and Pribilof red
notice must be submitted by a minimum
king and blue king crab fisheries—(1)
of one Class A IFQ holder, one IPQ
Apply for an Exemption. Eligible
holder, and one community
applicants may submit an application to representative.
Title 15—Commerce and Foreign Trade
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
28530
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(4) Application for an Exemption from
the CR Program Regional Delivery
Requirements—(i) Application Form.
The application form consists of two
parts: a preseason application for
exemption and an inseason notice of
exemption. The application form is
available on the NMFS Alaska Region
Web site (https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov) or from NMFS
at the address below. NMFS must
receive both parts of the application
form by one of the following methods:
(A) Mail: NMFS Regional
Administrator, c/o Restricted Access
Management Program, P.O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802–1668; or
(B) Fax: 907–586–7354; or
(C) Hand delivery or carrier: NMFS,
Room 713, 709 West 9th Street, Juneau,
AK 99801.
(ii) Part I: Preseason Application. (A)
A complete preseason application must
be signed by the required applicants
specified in paragraph (p)(3), contain
the information specified on the form,
have all applicable fields accurately
completed, and have all required
documentation attached.
(B) Each applicant must certify,
through an affidavit, that the applicant
has entered into a framework agreement
that—
(1) Specifies the CR crab fisheries that
are the subject of the framework
agreement;
(2) Specifies the actions that the
parties will take to reduce the need for,
and amount of, an exemption;
(3) Specifies the circumstances that
could be an obstacle to delivery or
processing under which the parties
would execute an exemption contract
and receive an exemption;
(4) Specifies the actions that the
parties would take to mitigate the effects
of an exemption;
(5) Specifies the compensation, if any,
that any party would provide to any
other party;
(6) Specifies any arrangements for
compensatory deliveries in that crab
fishing year or the following crab fishing
year and;
(7) Is signed by the holders of the IFQ
and IPQ that are the subject of the
framework agreement and by the
community representative that is
authorized to sign the framework
agreement.
(C) Each applicant must sign and date
the affidavit and affirm that, under
penalty of perjury, the information and
the claims provided on the application
are true, correct, and complete.
(D) NMFS must receive the preseason
application on or before October 15 of
the crab fishing year for which the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
applicants are applying for an
exemption.
(1) If a preseason application is
submitted by mail, the date of receipt of
the preseason application by NMFS will
be the postmark date of the application;
(2) If an applicant disputes whether
NMFS received a preseason application
on or before October 15, the applicant
must provide written documentation
that was contemporaneous with NMFS’
receipt of the application demonstrating
that NMFS received the application by
October 15.
(E) If NMFS does not receive a timely
and complete preseason application on
or before October 15 of a crab fishing
year, NMFS will deny the preseason
application; those applicants will not be
able to receive an exemption for that
crab fishing year.
(F) If a preseason application is timely
and complete, NMFS will approve the
application. If NMFS approves a
preseason application for an exemption,
the applicants will be able to receive an
exemption during the crab fishing year
if the applicants comply with the
requirements for an inseason notice of
exemption specified below at paragraph
(p)(4)(iii).
(G) If NMFS denies a preseason
application for any reason, the
applicants may appeal the denial
pursuant to 50 CFR 679.43.
(H) NMFS will notify all of the
applicants whether NMFS has approved
or denied the preseason application.
(iii) Part II: Inseason Notice of
Exemption. (A) A complete inseason
notice must:
(1) Identify the IFQ amount and IPQ
amount, by CR crab fishery, subject to
the exemption;
(2) Contain the information specified
on the form, have all applicable fields
accurately completed, and have all
required documentation attached; and
(3) Be signed by the required
applicants specified in paragraph (p)(3)
of this section that also signed the
preseason application.
(B) Each applicant must certify,
through an affidavit, that the applicants
have entered into an exemption contract
that—
(1) Identifies the IFQ amount and IPQ
amount, by CR crab fishery, that is
subject to the exemption contract;
(2) Describes the circumstances under
which the exemption is being exercised;
(3) Specifies the action that the parties
must take to mitigate the effects of the
exemption;
(4) Specifies the compensation, if any,
that any party must make to any other
party;
(5) Specifies any arrangements for
compensatory deliveries in that crab
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
fishing year or the following crab fishing
year; and
(6) Is signed by the holders of the IFQ
and IPQ that are the subject of the
exemption contract and by the
community representative that is
authorized to sign the exemption
contract.
(C) Each applicant must sign and date
the affidavit and affirm that, under
penalty of perjury, the information and
the claims provided on the notice are
true, correct, and complete.
(D) NMFS must receive the inseason
notice at least one day prior to the day
on which the applicants want the
exemption to take effect. If an inseason
notice is submitted by mail, the date
that NMFS receives the inseason notice
is not the postmark date of the notice.
(E) The effective date of the
exemption is the day after NMFS
receives a complete inseason notice.
Any delivery of North Region IFQ or
South Region IFQ outside the
designated region prior to the effective
date of the exemption is prohibited
under § 680.7(a)(2) and (4). Any
processing of North Region IPQ or South
Region IPQ outside the designated
region prior to the effective date of the
exemption is prohibited under
§ 680.7(a)(2) and (4).
(F) An exemption is effective for the
remainder of the crab fishing year,
unless the inseason notice of exemption
specifies that compensatory deliveries
will occur in the following crab fishing
year and then the exemption will
remain in effect for the IFQ and IPQ
specified for compensatory delivery in
the following crab fishing year.
(5) Regional Delivery Exemption
Report. (i) Each IFQ holder that signs a
preseason application, described in
paragraph (p)(4)(ii) of this section, must
submit a Regional Delivery Exemption
Report to NMFS that includes an
explanation of—
(A) The amount of IFQ, if any, set
aside to reduce the need for, and the
amount of, an exemption;
(B) The mitigation measures
employed before submitting an inseason
notice;
(C) The number of times an
exemption was requested and used;
(D) The arrangements for any
compensatory deliveries, including all
compensatory deliveries made during
the crab fishing year and any
outstanding compensatory delivery
obligations for the following crab fishing
year;
(E) Whether the exemption was
necessary; and
(F) Any impacts resulting from the
exemption on the fishery participants
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
and communities that signed the
preseason application.
(ii) On or before July 15, IFQ holders
must submit a copy of the Regional
Delivery Exemption Report to the IPQ
holders and community representatives
that also signed the preseason
application.
(iii) On or before July 30, IFQ holders
must submit the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to NMFS at the
address in paragraph (p)(4)(i) of this
section.
(6) Public Notice of the Exemption.
NMFS will post the effective date of an
exemption and the Regional Delivery
Exemption Reports on the NMFS Alaska
Region Web site (https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov).
■ 5. In § 680.7, revise paragraphs (a)(2),
(a)(4), (a)(7), (a)(8), and (a)(9) to read as
follows:
§ 680.7
Prohibitions.
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(2) Receive CR crab harvested under
an IFQ permit in any region other than
the region for which the IFQ permit is
designated, unless:
(i) Western Aleutian Islands golden
king crab are received following the
effective date of a NMFS-approved
exemption pursuant to § 680.4(o), or
(ii) The IFQ permit and IFQ amount
are subject to an exemption pursuant to
§ 680.4(p).
*
*
*
*
*
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 14, 2013
Jkt 229001
(4) Use IPQ in any region other than
the region for which the IPQ permit is
designated, unless:
(i) Western Aleutian Islands golden
king crab IPQ is used following the
effective date of a NMFS-approved
exemption pursuant to § 680.4(o), or
(ii) The IPQ permit and IPQ amount
are subject to an exemption pursuant to
§ 680.4(p).
*
*
*
*
*
(7) For an IPQ holder to use more IPQ
than the maximum amount of IPQ that
may be held by that person. Use of IPQ
includes all IPQ held by that person,
and all IPQ crab that are received by any
RCR at any shoreside crab processor or
stationary floating crab processor in
which that IPQ holder has a 10 percent
or greater direct or indirect ownership
interest, unless that IPQ crab meets the
requirements in § 680.42(b)(7) or
§ 680.42(b)(8).
(8) For a shoreside crab processor or
stationary floating crab processor, that
does not have at least one owner with
a 10 percent or greater direct or indirect
ownership interest who also holds IPQ
in that crab QS fishery, to receive in
excess of 30 percent of the IPQ issued
for that crab fishery, unless that IPQ
meets the requirements described in
§ 680.42(b)(7) or § 680.42(b)(8).
(9) For any shoreside crab processor
or stationary floating crab processor east
of 174 degrees west longitude to use
more than 60 percent of the IPQ issued
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
28531
in the EAG or WAI crab QS fisheries,
unless that IPQ meets the requirements
described in § 680.42(b)(8).
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 680.42, revise paragraph
(b)(1)(ii) and add paragraph (b)(8) to
read as follows:
■
§ 680.42 Limitations on use of QS, PQS,
IFQ, and IPQ.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Use IPQ in excess of the amount
of IPQ that results from the PQS caps in
paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, unless
that IPQ is:
(A) Derived from PQS that was
received by that person in the initial
allocation of PQS for that crab QS
fishery, or
(B) Subject to an exemption for that
IPQ pursuant to § 680.4(p).
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Any IPQ crab that is received by
an RCR will not be considered use of
IPQ by an IPQ holder for the purposes
of paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this
section, if the IPQ is subject to an
exemption pursuant to § 680.4(p).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–11571 Filed 5–14–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\15MYR1.SGM
15MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 94 (Wednesday, May 15, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28523-28531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11571]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 680
[Docket No. 110207108-3430-02]
RIN 0648-BA82
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea
and Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization Program
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations to implement Amendment 41 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner
Crabs (FMP). These regulations amend the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands
Crab Rationalization Program (CR Program) by establishing a process
whereby holders of regionally designated individual fishing quota (IFQ)
and individual processor quota (IPQ) in six CR Program fisheries may
receive an exemption from regional delivery requirements in the North
or South Regions. The six CR Program fisheries are Bristol Bay red king
crab, Bering Sea snow crab, Saint Matthew Island blue king crab,
Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab, Western Aleutian Islands red
king crab, and Pribilof Islands red and blue king crab. This action is
necessary to mitigate disruptions in a CR Program fishery that prevent
participants from complying with regional delivery requirements. This
action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMP, and other
applicable law.
DATES: Effective June 14, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of Amendment 41 to the FMP, the Regulatory
Impact Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and
the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this action may be obtained from
https://www.regulations.gov or from the Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The Environmental Impact Statement, RIR, and
Social Impact Assessment prepared for the CR Program are available from
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
rule may be submitted to NMFS Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer; in person at NMFS Alaska
Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK; and by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or faxed to 202-395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Harrington, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule implements Amendment 41 to
the FMP. NMFS published a notice of availability for Amendment 41 on
December 13, 2012 (77 FR 74161). The comment period on Amendment 41
ended on February 11, 2013. NMFS published a proposed rule to implement
Amendment 41 on January 30, 2013 (78 FR 6279). The comment period on
the proposed rule ended on March 1, 2013. NMFS approved Amendment 41 on
March 13, 2013. Additional detail on the effects of this action is
provided in the notice of availability for Amendment 41 (December 13,
2012, 77 FR 74161) and the proposed rule (January 30, 2013, 78 FR
6279). NMFS received eight letters containing nine unique comments on
Amendment 41 and the proposed rule.
Amendment 41 and this final rule apply to quota share (QS) and
processor quota share (PQS) that have a regional designation for either
the North Region or South Region. NMFS assigned a North Region
designation or a South Region designation to the QS and PQS issued in
six CR Program fisheries: Bristol Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow
crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab, Western Aleutian
Islands red king crab, Saint Matthew Island blue king crab, and
Pribilof Islands red and blue king crab. The North Region is north of
56[deg]20'N. latitude. The South Region is south of 56[deg]20'N.
latitude.
A QS holder's annual allocation, called IFQ, is expressed in pounds
and is based on the amount of QS held in relation to the total QS pool
for that fishery. NMFS issues IFQ in three classes: Class A IFQ, Class
B IFQ, and Class C IFQ. Three percent of IFQ is issued as Class C IFQ
for captains and crew. Of the remaining IFQ, 90 percent is issued as
Class A IFQ and 10 percent is issued as Class B IFQ. For the CR
fisheries subject to this rule, NMFS issues Class A IFQ with a North
Region or South Region designation, and that Class A IFQ must be
delivered within its designated geographic region. For PQS holders,
NMFS issues an annual allocation of individual processing quota (IPQ)
with a North Region or South Region designation. NMFS issues Class A
IFQ and IPQ for each region at a one-to-one correlation for each of the
six CR Program fisheries subject to this rule. Holders of Class A IFQ
designated for a specific region must deliver to a processor holding a
matching amount of IPQ for that region. Holders of regionally
designated Class A IFQ and IPQ may not use that IFQ and IPQ outside of
the designated region, except as provided for in this rule.
In recommending Amendment 41, the Council recognized that weather
conditions or other natural or man-made circumstances can hinder
harvesting activities and restrict access to processing facilities in
the North or South Regions. Environmental or man-made conditions have
created obstacles to regional deliveries in every year since
implementation of the CR Program. Each year, icing conditions have been
an obstacle to delivering crab harvested with North Region IFQ in the
North Region. For an entire season, deliveries to a floating processor
that served most of the North Region were prevented by a fire that
disabled the processor.
Natural or man-made catastrophes could result in lost revenue to
harvesters, processors, and communities. Safety risks increase when
harvesters attempt to meet regional delivery requirements in inclement
weather (e.g., icing conditions) and other potentially unsafe
situations. Unforeseen delays in delivering crab could result in
deadloss (crab that die before being processed). Harvesters may avoid
or delay the harvest of regionally designated IFQ, thereby increasing
the potential for unharvested crab or crab harvested later in the
fishing season. Such changes in fishing behavior could result in unused
IPQ, increased processing cost, loss of market share, and loss of
revenue to remote communities dependent on revenues from crab
deliveries and processing.
Amendment 41 and this final rule promote the safety of human life
at sea and mitigate economic harm by allowing participants to receive
an exemption from regional delivery requirements in situations where
events prevent participants from delivering crab harvested with North
Region IFQ in the North Region or South Region IFQ
[[Page 28524]]
in the South Region. This final rule implements an exemption process to
allow fishery participants to respond to an emergency situation during
the crab fishing year in accord with provisions that they established
before the season. The preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 6279,
January 30, 2013) provides detailed information on the implementing
regulations for Amendment 41.
In summary, this final rule establishes a process by which IFQ
holders, IPQ holders, and affected communities could jointly apply for
and receive an exemption from regional delivery requirements. This
final rule implements a two-step process for an exemption from regional
delivery requirements: A preseason application and an inseason notice
of exemption. Both parts of the application are on one form: The
Application for Exemption from CR Crab North or South Region Delivery
Requirements. This application process allows the parties to apply for
an exemption from the regional delivery requirements without extensive
administrative review by NMFS.
Under this rule, both the preseason application and the inseason
notice of exemption must be signed by one or more members of the
following three groups: (1) Holders of Class A IFQ in a CR Program
fishery subject to this rule; (2) holders of the IPQ in a CR Program
fishery subject to this rule; and (3) a representative of each of the
affected communities. Additional description of these groups is
provided in the preamble to the proposed rule (78 FR 6279, January 30,
2013).
The preseason application process allows the affected parties to
enter the crab fishing season knowing the steps that the parties would
take to avoid an exemption, the circumstances that would trigger an
exemption, the steps they would need to take to obtain an exemption,
and any mutually-agreed upon compensatory actions that the parties
would take as a result of exercising the exemption. The preseason
application process itself has two parts: (1) The development of a
framework agreement by the parties; and (2) the submission of a
preseason application to NMFS. If the parties to a NMFS-approved
preseason application conclude during the crab fishing year that
circumstances have occurred that justify an inseason exemption under
the framework agreement, those applicants must do two things to obtain
an exemption. First, they must enter into an exemption contract with
each other and, second, they must jointly submit an inseason notice of
the exemption to NMFS.
Amendment 41 and this final rule do not prescribe specific
conditions or terms of agreement for the framework agreement or
exemption contract. However, the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council's (Council's) Statement of Council Intent should guide the
parties in establishing the required contracts. The preamble to the
proposed rule contains the Statement of Council Intent and the range of
private arrangements that the Council considered and that the parties
could put in the framework agreement and the exemption contract (78 FR
6279, January 30, 2013).
This final rule also includes a reporting requirement for IFQ
holders to provide NMFS and the Council with the means to assess the
exemption in terms of the Council's Statement of Council Intent for
Amendment 41. In a crab fishing year when an IFQ holder submits a
preseason application for an exemption from the regional delivery
requirements, the IFQ holder must also submit an annual Regional
Delivery Exemption Report to NMFS.
Response to Comments
NMFS received eight letters of public comment during the public
comment periods for Amendment 41 and the proposed rule. NMFS received
letters from crab fishery participants and organizations, the City of
Saint Paul, and a Community Development Quota (CDQ) entity. NMFS
summarized these letters into nine separate comments, and responds to
them below.
Comment 1: The proposed rule is consistent with Amendment 41 as
adopted by the Council. We encourage NMFS to move forward expeditiously
in implementation of the regulations so that they can be in effect for
the 2013/2014 crab fishing year.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 2: In the preamble to the proposed rule, NMFS used
incorrect coordinates to describe the line between the North Region and
the South Region. The correct line is defined at Sec.
680.40(b)(2)(i)(A).
Response: NMFS acknowledges that the coordinates in the preamble to
the proposed rule were incorrect and includes the correct coordinates
in this preamble to the final rule.
Comment 3: The Council intended that the regional delivery
exemption apply to compensatory deliveries (e.g., allowing Class A IFQ
and IPQ designated for one region to be used in another region to
compensate for deliveries made earlier under an inseason notice of
exemption). The proposed rule could be interpreted to render the
parties ineligible to make compensatory deliveries in the crab fishing
year following the year that they were stipulated in the exemption
contract. Under the proposed rule, parties entitled to compensatory
deliveries could potentially be denied the benefit of their bargain
without their agreements and through no fault of their own. This result
would be contrary to the fundamental premises of the contract-based
approach to regional delivery exemptions adopted by the Council under
Amendment 41.
Response: The Council intended that the regional delivery exemption
apply to compensatory deliveries. Compensatory deliveries can occur in
the crab fishing year that they were stipulated in the exemption
contract or in the crab fishing year following the year that they were
stipulated in the exemption contract. Under the proposed rule,
compensatory deliveries would be possible. However, the proposed rule
did not include any regulations specifically addressing the use of
compensatory deliveries, either in the crab fishing year or in the
following crab fishing year, and, as proposed, did not provide the most
efficient process for exempting compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year from regional delivery requirements. To
address this public comment, NMFS has modified the final rule to more
clearly address compensatory deliveries and the process to be followed
for exempting compensatory deliveries in the following crab fishing
year.
The Council considered compensatory deliveries as one possible form
of compensation that the parties could put in the framework agreement
and the exemption contract, as discussed in Sections 2.4.2 and 2.4.3 of
the RIR (see ADDRESSES). Compensatory deliveries could be used to
address the loss of economic activity under the exemption and the loss
of revenue to both IPQ holders and communities. Compensatory deliveries
could be used to address both an IPQ holder's potential losses (if the
exemption was used to send deliveries to a different processor) and a
community's potential losses (for any deliveries to a different region
under the exemption).
A compensatory delivery would occur when the parties to the
framework agreement and the exemption contract agree that a certain
amount of regionally-designated IFQ crab may be landed outside of the
region on the condition that some amount of IFQ crab is later delivered
to that region. For example, the parties could agree to a compensatory
delivery of IFQ crab not subject to regional delivery
[[Page 28525]]
requirements (Class B or Class C IFQ) to the region that lost
deliveries under the exemption. Alternatively, compensatory deliveries
could come from a different CR fishery or from Class A IFQ designated
for another region. The amount of a compensatory delivery would be
negotiated and may differ from the amount redirected, particularly if
made from a different fishery.
The RIR discusses how compensating the community for losses with a
compensatory delivery of IFQ crab designated for another region may be
a more agreeable resolution to all parties than a payment to the
regional entity or its designee. The RIR specifies that, in the
framework agreement, the parties would commit to subsequent
compensatory delivery in a region. The RIR notes that compensating a
community or region with deliveries of IFQ crab designated for another
region would require that the IFQ and IPQ holders have agreements with
the community representative for the IFQ and IPQ used for compensation.
Because the Council clearly analyzed and considered compensatory
deliveries (including compensatory deliveries that may occur in the
year following the approval of an exemption) during the development of
Amendment 41, and the public has requested additional specificity in
the regulatory text concerning the use of and process for compensatory
deliveries in the year following an exemption under the proposed rule,
NMFS determined that modifications to the proposed rule text are needed
to more closely align the final rule with Amendment 41 and clarify the
exemption process.
NMFS has made three changes in the final rule to address and
facilitate the use of compensatory deliveries in both the crab fishing
year they were stipulated in the exemption contract and in the
following crab fishing year. These changes do not require parties to
the framework agreement to establish agreements for compensatory
deliveries, but if the parties establish such agreements, the changes
require that provisions for compensatory deliveries are clearly
described in the framework agreement and exemption contract, and that
the required forms are signed by all of the affected parties.
Administratively, compensatory deliveries among regions are subject
to the same procedure established by this action to exempt deliveries
from regional delivery requirements. Consequently, representatives from
both regions must sign the framework agreement, exemption contract, and
corresponding forms to allow for compensatory deliveries among regions.
For example, if a Class A IFQ holder, IPQ holder, and the
representative of the affected community in the North Region want to
have a specific amount of South Region Class A IFQ delivered in the
North Region as compensation for a delivery of North Region Class A IFQ
in the South Region, then the Class A IFQ holder(s), IPQ holder(s), and
representatives of affected communities from both the North and South
Regions must sign the framework agreement, preseason application,
exemption contract, and inseason notice of exemption.
NMFS would treat the compensatory delivery the same as an original
exempted delivery in that it would be made using IFQ and IPQ that were
exempt from the regional delivery requirement. Therefore, the IFQ
holder(s), IPQ holder(s), and the community representative(s) for the
IFQ and IPQ used to make the compensatory delivery in either that crab
fishing year or in the following crab fishing year must sign the
framework agreement, preseason application, notice of inseason
exemption, and exemption contract. If any party to a framework
agreement or exemption contract believes that any other party did not
comply with their contractual obligation, that party could seek redress
as a private civil matter.
First, NMFS changed the regulations for the preseason application
at Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(B) to add a new paragraph (6) that requires
the framework agreement to specify any arrangements for compensatory
deliveries in the crab fishing year or the following crab fishing year.
This new provision ensures that the IFQ and IPQ that would be used to
make the compensatory deliveries are subject to the framework agreement
and are available for the exemption contract.
Second, NMFS changed the regulations for the inseason notice of
exemption at Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(B) to add a new paragraph (5) that
requires the exemption contract to specify any arrangements for
compensatory deliveries in that crab fishing year or the following crab
fishing year. This new provision ensures that the compensatory
deliveries are covered in the exemption contract.
Third, NMFS changed the regulations at Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(F) to
extend the effective period for the exemption to cover any specified
compensatory deliveries in the following crab fishing year. Under the
proposed rule, the exemption would have been effective for the
remainder of the crab fishing year in which NMFS receives the notice of
exemption. This change will clarify that, if the inseason notice of
exemption specifies that compensatory deliveries will occur in the
following crab fishing year, the exemption will remain in effect for
the specified IFQ and IPQ in the following crab fishing year.
The final rule does not permit compensatory deliveries for more
than one crab fishing year after the year that NMFS receives the notice
of exemption because allowing compensatory deliveries to occur at some
indeterminate time in the future would be administratively burdensome
to track, was not specifically analyzed in the RIR prepared for this
action, and public comments generally requested that compensatory
deliveries be allowed in the crab fishing year following the notice of
exemption.
Comment 4: There is no logical basis for requiring that parties
enter into a framework agreement for a subsequent year as a condition
of being eligible to make compensatory deliveries required under a
framework agreement and exemption contract from a prior year. We
respectfully suggest two changes to address this issue.
First, revise Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(E) to provide that applicants
who do not submit a timely preseason application will not be eligible
to receive an exemption for the relevant crab fishing year, other than
an exemption to make compensatory landings in fulfillment of their
obligations under an existing exemption contract.
Second, add language to Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(F) so that it would
read as follows: ``If a preseason application is timely and complete,
NMFS will approve the application. If NMFS approves a preseason
application for an exemption, the applicants will be able to receive an
exemption during the crab fishing year in which the preseason
application was filed if the applicants comply with the requirements
for a preseason application specified below at (p)(4)(iii). In
addition, if NMFS approves a preseason application for an exemption and
receives a related complete notice of exemption that is based on an
exemption contract that includes an agreement for compensatory
deliveries, the exemption necessary to make such compensatory
deliveries will be effective the day after it is filed with NMFS in
accordance with Section 680.4(p)(4)(iii), below, by the party
authorized to file it under the terms of the related inseason exemption
contract.''
Response: NMFS agrees that it is not necessary for the parties to
enter into a new framework agreement in order to make compensatory
deliveries specified in an exemption contract in the
[[Page 28526]]
following crab fishing year. As explained in the response to Comment 3,
NMFS has modified the proposed regulatory text in this final rule to
address and facilitate compensatory deliveries in the crab fishing year
following the inseason notice of exemption. Compensatory deliveries in
the following crab fishing year would be made under the framework
agreement and preseason application (and exemption contract and notice
of exemption) submitted in the crab fishing year in which the emergency
occurred. When applicants receive an exemption, the exemption would
cover the compensatory deliveries in the following crab fishing year
that are specified in the exemption contract. NMFS determined that the
modifications described in the response to Comment 3 and contained in
this final rule are the most efficient and effective way to implement
the changes recommended by public comment. Therefore, the specific
regulatory changes suggested by the comment are not necessary.
In response to the first suggested change, Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(E)
does not require a new preseason application to fulfill compensatory
deliveries that are specified in an existing exemption contract. This
regulation states that, if NMFS does not receive a timely and complete
preseason application on or before October 15 of a crab fishing year,
NMFS will deny the preseason application; those applicants will not be
able to receive an exemption for that crab fishing year. This remains
true; NMFS will not grant an exemption without a timely and complete
preseason application. However, with the changes to the regulations
described in the response to Comment 3, once applicants receive an
exemption, the exemption would cover the compensatory deliveries in the
following crab fishing year that are specified in the exemption
contract.
The second suggested change to Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(F) is also not
necessary to allow compensatory deliveries in the following crab
fishing year. This paragraph explains that NMFS will approve a timely
and complete preseason application. If NMFS approves a preseason
application for an exemption, the applicants will be able to receive an
exemption during the crab fishing year if the applicants comply with
the requirements for an inseason notice of exemption. With the changes
to the regulations described in the response to Comment 3, once
applicants receive an exemption, the exemption would cover the
compensatory deliveries in the following crab fishing year that are
specified in the exemption contract.
Comment 5: We respectfully suggest that Sec.
680.4(p)(4)(iii)(A)(3) be revised to read as follows: ``Be signed by
the required applicants specified in paragraph (p)(3) that also signed
the preseason application, or, if filed to make compensatory landings,
be signed by the party authorized to submit the notice of exemption
under the terms of the related inseason exemption contract.''
Response: NMFS determined that this suggested regulatory change is
not necessary to allow compensatory deliveries in the following crab
fishing year. With the regulation changes explained in response to
Comment 3, when applicants receive an exemption, the exemption would
cover any compensatory deliveries in the following crab fishing year
that are specified in the exemption contract. Parties would not need to
submit a new inseason notice of exemption to make compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing year.
However, it is important to note that the framework agreement, the
preseason application, the exemption contact, and the inseason notice
of exemption all must be signed by the holders of the IFQ and IPQ that
are subject to the exemption, including the compensatory deliveries,
and by the community representative for the community or communities
where the specified IFQ, including compensatory deliveries, would have
been landed. For compensatory deliveries, this means that the community
representative that would have received the delivery used to compensate
an exempted delivery must sign the required documents.
As explained in the RIR, a compensatory delivery of Class A IFQ
designated for another region could only occur with the consent of the
Class A IFQ holder, IPQ holder, and the representative of the affected
community in the region from which the compensatory delivery
originates. The RIR notes that to compensate a community or region with
deliveries of IFQ crab designated for another region would require that
the IFQ and IPQ holders have agreements with the regional
representative for the IFQ and IPQ used for compensation.
Administratively, these compensatory deliveries are part of the same
procedure as the original exempt delivery. Consequently,
representatives from both regions in a fishery would need to sign the
framework agreement, exemption contract, and corresponding forms to
allow for compensatory deliveries.
Comment 6: We respectfully request that Sec. 680.4(p)(5) be
revised to require that each Regional Delivery Exemption Report
identify all compensatory deliveries made during the crab fishing year
that is the subject of the Report, all outstanding compensatory
delivery obligations to be fulfilled in a future crab fishing year or
years, and the party or parties who are authorized to file the related
compensatory delivery exemption request(s) under the terms of the
related exemption contract(s). We believe this information would assist
NMFS with identifying compensatory landings as a subcomponent of
regional landing relief, and in determining who has the authority to
file compensatory landing exemption requests.
Response: NMFS agrees that the Regional Delivery Exemption Report
should include information on compensatory deliveries and has added a
requirement to the Regional Delivery Exemption Report at Sec.
680.4(p)(5)(i)(D). This final rule requires that the report include an
explanation of the arrangements for any compensatory deliveries,
including all compensatory deliveries made during the crab fishing year
and any outstanding compensatory delivery obligations for the following
crab fishing year. Note that NMFS is not requiring any of the parties
to file compensatory delivery exemption requests as suggested by the
comment. Compensatory deliveries would be made under the inseason
notice of exemption in which the compensatory deliveries were
specified, regardless of whether they occur in the same crab fishing
year or the following crab fishing year. Also, as explained in the
response to Comment 3, the final rule does not permit compensatory
deliveries for more than one crab fishing year after the year that NMFS
receives the notice of exemption.
Comment 7: The proposed rule, at Sec. 680.4(p)(5)(ii), requires
IFQ holders to submit a Regional Delivery Exemption Report to IPQ
holders and community representatives on or before June 15, and to
submit the Regional Delivery Exemption Report to NMFS on or before June
30. We note that the crab fishing year currently extends through June
30, and it is conceivable that IFQ crab delivered under an exemption
may not be landed until then. Therefore, we respectfully request that
the deadlines for submitting a Regional Exemption Delivery Report to
IPQ holders and community representatives be extended to July 15, and
the deadline for submitting the Report to NMFS be extended to July 30.
These extensions should provide IFQ holders with adequate time after
the crab fishing year
[[Page 28527]]
ends to prepare and submit the required Regional Delivery Exemption
Reports.
Response: NMFS agrees and has changed the deadline at Sec.
680.4(p)(5)(ii) to July 15 and the deadline at Sec. 680.4(p)(5)(iii)
to July 30.
Comment 8: One comment expressed a general concern with Federal
fisheries management.
Response: NMFS acknowledges that comment but determined that it
does not relate to the scope of this action.
Comment 9: One comment generally supported the Crab Rationalization
Program.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Summary of the Changes from Proposed to Final Rule
NMFS made changes from the proposed to final rule in response to
public comments. NMFS made four changes to allow for compensatory
deliveries in the following crab fishing year that are discussed in the
responses to Comments 3 and 6.
NMFS changed the proposed regulations for the preseason
application at Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(ii)(B) to add a new paragraph (6) that
requires the framework agreement to specify any arrangements for
compensatory deliveries in the crab fishing year or the following crab
fishing year.
NMFS changed the proposed regulations for the inseason
notice of exemption at Sec. 680.4(p)(4)(iii)(B) to add a new paragraph
(5) that requires the exemption contract to specify any arrangements
for compensatory deliveries in the crab fishing year or the following
crab fishing year.
NMFS changed the proposed regulations at Sec.
680.4(p)(4)(iii)(F) to extend the effective period for the exemption to
cover any specified compensatory deliveries in the following crab
fishing year.
NMFS changed the proposed regulations for the Regional
Delivery Exemption Report at Sec. 680.4(p)(5)(i) to add a new
paragraph (D) that requires the Regional Delivery Exemption Report to
include an explanation of the arrangements for any compensatory
deliveries, including all compensatory deliveries made during the crab
fishing year and any outstanding compensatory delivery obligations for
the following crab fishing year.
Additionally, NMFS changed the deadline at Sec. 680.4(p)(5)(ii) to
July 15 and the deadline at Sec. 680.4(p)(5)(iii) to July 30, as
discussed in Comment 7.
OMB Revisions to Paperwork Reduction Act References in 15 CFR 902.1(b)
Section 3507(c)(B)(i) of the PRA requires that agencies inventory
and display a current control number assigned by the Director, OMB, for
each agency information collection. Section 902.1(b) identifies the
location of NOAA regulations for which OMB approval numbers have been
issued. Because this final rule revises and adds data elements within a
collection-of information for recordkeeping and reporting requirements,
15 CFR 902.1(b) is revised to reference correctly the sections
resulting from this final rule.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304(b) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, has determined that Amendment
41 and this final rule are necessary for the conservation and
management of the BSAI crab fisheries and that they are consistent with
the FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act, and other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
This final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) incorporates the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the
significant issues raised by the public comments in response to the
IRFA, NMFS' responses to those comments, and a summary of the analyses
completed to support the action.
NMFS published a proposed rule to implement Amendment 41 on January
30, 2013 (78 FR 6279). An IRFA was prepared and summarized in the
``Classification'' section of the preamble to the proposed rule. 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.
NMFS received eight letters of public comment containing nine
unique comments on Amendment 41 and the proposed rule. None of these
comments addressed the IRFA or the economic impacts of the rule
generally.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by the Action
This action creates a process whereby IFQ holders and IPQ holders
who enter an agreement with a community representative may apply for
and receive an exemption from regional delivery requirements. Estimates
of the number of small entities holding IFQ are based on estimates of
gross revenues. During the 2009-2010 fishing season, nine entities held
IFQ subject to regional delivery requirements; three of these IFQ
holders were small entities. In that same season, 14 of the 22 entities
that held IPQ subject to regional delivery requirements were small
entities. Six small community entities, including two CDQ entities, are
directly regulated by this action.
Description of Significant Alternatives to the Final Action That
Minimize Adverse Impacts on Small Entities
A FRFA must describe 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. ``Significant alternatives''
are those that achieve the stated objectives for the action, consistent
with prevailing law, with potentially lesser adverse economic impacts
on small entities, as a whole.
No significant alternatives were developed for this action. The
Council considered two alternatives; status quo and the proposed
action. The status quo is no exemption from the regional delivery
requirements. The proposed action is an exemption from the regional
delivery requirements. For the proposed action alternative, the Council
considered a number of options to improve the functioning of the
exemption and minimize adverse impacts on small entities. The Council
also considered and eliminated from further considerations several
alternatives that the Council determined would have limited the
effectiveness of the exemption in achieving its intended purpose.
The analysis shows that this action minimizes the economic impacts
of status quo on small entities by allowing participants to receive an
exemption from regional delivery requirements in situations where
events prevent participants from delivering crab harvested with North
Region IFQ in the North Region or South Region IFQ in the South Region.
Overall, this exemption process allows participants to receive an
exemption from regional delivery requirements in situations where
events prevent participants from delivering crab harvested with North
[[Page 28528]]
Region IFQ in the North Region or South Region IFQ in the South Region.
The Council considered a number of options to improve the
functioning of the exemption and minimize adverse impacts on small
entities. The Council considered options that would allow communities
benefiting from a ROFR to select a regional representative to act on
their behalf rather than the ECC entity. The Council did not choose
that option because of the potential difficulties that communities
could encounter in selecting the regional representative and because of
the additional administrative costs and burdens associated with this
option. In addition to providing an expedited administrative process,
the approach selected by the Council maintains the original intent of
CR Program community protection measures in that it preserves community
interests by providing not only a regional linkage for certain PQS, but
also a close linkage between certain PQS and the community of origin
for that PQS.
The Council also considered and eliminated from further
consideration several alternatives during the development of Amendment
41. These alternatives are described in detail in Section 2.2.1 of the
analysis for this action (see ADDRESSES). Generally, the Council
perceived these alternatives as limiting the effectiveness of the
exemption in achieving its intended purpose.
The Council considered and rejected alternatives in which NMFS
would fully administer regional exemptions by determining whether
specific conditions existed to qualify for an exemption from the
regional delivery requirement. The Council did not advance these
alternatives because the Council viewed them as overly expensive to
administer and likely to prevent the exemption process from fulfilling
its purpose as described in the Council's purpose and need statement
for this action. The Council and NMFS recognized that the necessary
fact finding to make such a determination (e.g., that a specific amount
of ice was prohibiting harvesting or delivery of crab in a specific
location) would not only delay decision making, but could also be
costly. Verification of conditions could be difficult or impracticable
due to the remoteness of the location and poor quality of data
available.
A factual finding would require NMFS to not only complete an
assessment of the event that arguably prevents a delivery, but also of
the potential availability of other processing facilities in the region
to overcome the barrier to the delivery. These findings would require
factual assessments of circumstances in remote areas. Such findings
typically require time, which may jeopardize safety in emergencies, and
information, which may not be available to NMFS. In addition, the need
for administrative review of these findings could result in additional
delays. Consequently, the Council elected to pursue alternatives that
would not rely on agency administrative discretion. Instead, the
affected parties would define the terms under which they would apply
for and receive an exemption. This approach also allows the parties
flexibility to develop mitigation and compensation requirements that
would, in turn, minimize the need for the exemption and, if an
exemption is necessary, ensure that the parties potentially harmed by
the exemption receive reasonable compensation.
The Council also considered an alternative that would have defined
specific exemption criteria in regulation; however, the Council
eliminated this alternative because NMFS and the Council recognized
that this approach might be overly restrictive and could not be adapted
as circumstances might require. The Council also elected not to
recommend an alternative that specifically defined compensation because
the Council deemed this alternative too prescriptive to effectively
balance the competing interests of parties, which are likely to change
with the circumstances surrounding the granting of an exemption.
Similarly, the Council chose not to advance alternatives that would
redesignate IFQ and IPQ to compensate for landings redirected under the
exemption because they would be administratively complex given the
inability to rollover IFQ from one year to the next.
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
No duplication, overlap, or conflict between this action and
existing Federal rules has been identified.
Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
The reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements
will be increased if parties enter into the agreements and contracts
required as part of a completed Application for Exemption from CR Crab
North or South Region Delivery Requirements. This action adds
recordkeeping and reporting requirements necessary to implement
Amendment 41, namely submission, prior to the start of the fishing
season, of an application and affidavit affirming that IFQ holders, IPQ
holders, and community representatives have entered into a framework
agreement. A second notice and affidavit affirming that those parties
have entered into an exemption contract is required if the parties
subject to the framework agreement wish to seek an exemption during the
fishing season.
Participation in an Application for Exemption from CR Crab North or
South Region Delivery Requirements is voluntary, but necessary to
deliver crab outside of a designated region when circumstances
necessitate an exemption from the regional delivery requirements.
The professional skills necessary to comply with reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for small entities impacted by this rule
include the ability to read, write, and understand English; the ability
to use a personal computer and the Internet; and the authority to take
actions on behalf of the designated signatory. Each of the small
entities must be capable of complying with the requirements of this
rule. Each small entity should have financial resources to obtain
additional legal or technical expertise that they might require to
advise them concerning the framework agreement or the exemption
contract.
IFQ holders that sign a preseason application must also prepare and
submit an annual Regional Delivery Exemption Report to NMFS by July 30.
By July 15, IFQ holders must submit a copy of the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report to IPQ holders and community representatives that also
signed the preseason application. In response to the Regional Delivery
Exemption Report, community representatives may voluntarily submit a
Community Impact Report and IPQ holders may voluntarily submit an IPQ
Holder Report.
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. As part of
this rulemaking process, NMFS has posted a small entity compliance
guide on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/crab/rat/
[[Page 28529]]
progfaq.htm. Contact NMFS to request a hard copy of the guide (see
ADDRESSES).
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which have been approved by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control No. 0648-0514.
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 20
hours for the Application for Exemption from CR Crab North or South
Region Delivery Requirements; 5 hours for CDQ Notification of
Representative; 20 hours to prepare the Regional Delivery Exemption
Report; and 2 hours to complete the Community Impact Report or IPQ
Holder Report.
Public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
Send comments regarding these burden estimates, 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
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 680
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 8, 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, NMFS amends 15 CFR part
902 and 50 CFR part 680 as follows:
Title 15--Commerce and Foreign Trade
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 902.1, in the table in paragraph (b), under the entry ``50
CFR'';
0
a. Remove entries for ``680.4(a), (b)(2), and (c) through (m)'';
``680.4(b)(1)''; and 680.4(b)(3) and (n)''; and ``680.5(e) and (f)'';
0
b. Add entries in alphanumeric order for ``680.4(a) through (p)'';
``680.5(f)''; and ``680.42(a) and (b).''
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current OMB
control number
CFR Part or section where the information collection (all numbers
requirement is located begin with
0648-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
50 CFR
* * * * *
680.4(a) through (p).................................... -0514
* * * * *
680.5(f)................................................ -570
* * * * *
680.42(a) and (b)....................................... -0514
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title 50--Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 680--SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
0
3. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 680 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109-241; Pub. L. 109-479.
0
4. In Sec. 680.4, add paragraph (p) to read as follows:
Sec. 680.4 Permits.
* * * * *
(p) Exemption from regional delivery requirements for the Bristol
Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow crab, St. Matthew blue king crab,
Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab, Western Aleutian Islands red
king crab, and Pribilof red king and blue king crab fisheries--(1)
Apply for an Exemption. Eligible applicants may submit an application
to exempt North Region IFQ and IPQ or South Region IFQ and IPQ from the
prohibitions at Sec. Sec. 680.7(a)(2) and (a)(4).
(2) Identification of eligible applicants. Eligible applicants are:
(i) IFQ holders. Any person holding regionally designated IFQ for
Bristol Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow crab, St. Matthew blue king
crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab, Western Aleutian
Islands red king crab, or Pribilof red king and blue king crab, or
their authorized representative.
(ii) IPQ holders. Any person holding regionally designated IPQ for
Bristol Bay red king crab, Bering Sea snow crab, St. Matthew blue king
crab, Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab, Western Aleutian
Islands red king crab, or Pribilof red king and blue king crab, or
their authorized representative.
(iii) Community representatives. (A) For communities that hold or
formerly held the ROFR pursuant to Sec. 679.41(l), the community
representative that signs the preseason application, the framework
agreement, the inseason notice, and the exemption contract is the ECC
entity, as defined at Sec. 680.2.
(B) For North Region St. Matthew blue king crab PQS and North
Region Bering Sea snow crab PQS that was issued without a ROFR, the
community representative that signs the preseason application, the
framework agreement, the inseason notice, and the exemption contract
for Saint Paul and Saint George shall be either:
(1) Both Aleutian Pribilof Islands Community Development
Association (APICDA) and the Central Bering Sea Fishermen's Association
(CBSFA), or
(2) the community representative that APICDA and CBSFA designate in
writing to NMFS by December 9, 2013.
(i) Either APICDA or CBSFA may revoke the designated community
representative by providing written notice to the other entity and to
NMFS.
(ii) If either APICDA or CBSFA revokes its designation of a
community representative after October 15 of a crab fishing year, the
revocation will not affect the validity of any action taken by the
designated community representative pursuant to paragraph (p) for that
crab fishing year, including signing the preseason application, the
framework agreement, the inseason notice, and the exemption contract.
(3) Required Applicants. Multiple parties may apply for an
exemption; however, a complete preseason application and a complete
inseason notice must be submitted by a minimum of one Class A IFQ
holder, one IPQ holder, and one community representative.
[[Page 28530]]
(4) Application for an Exemption from the CR Program Regional
Delivery Requirements--(i) Application Form. The application form
consists of two parts: a preseason application for exemption and an
inseason notice of exemption. The application form is available on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov) or from
NMFS at the address below. NMFS must receive both parts of the
application form by one of the following methods:
(A) Mail: NMFS Regional Administrator, c/o Restricted Access
Management Program, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668; or
(B) Fax: 907-586-7354; or
(C) Hand delivery or carrier: NMFS, Room 713, 709 West 9th Street,
Juneau, AK 99801.
(ii) Part I: Preseason Application. (A) A complete preseason
application must be signed by the required applicants specified in
paragraph (p)(3), contain the information specified on the form, have
all applicable fields accurately completed, and have all required
documentation attached.
(B) Each applicant must certify, through an affidavit, that the
applicant has entered into a framework agreement that--
(1) Specifies the CR crab fisheries that are the subject of the
framework agreement;
(2) Specifies the actions that the parties will take to reduce the
need for, and amount of, an exemption;
(3) Specifies the circumstances that could be an obstacle to
delivery or processing under which the parties would execute an
exemption contract and receive an exemption;
(4) Specifies the actions that the parties would take to mitigate
the effects of an exemption;
(5) Specifies the compensation, if any, that any party would
provide to any other party;
(6) Specifies any arrangements for compensatory deliveries in that
crab fishing year or the following crab fishing year and;
(7) Is signed by the holders of the IFQ and IPQ that are the
subject of the framework agreement and by the community representative
that is authorized to sign the framework agreement.
(C) Each applicant must sign and date the affidavit and affirm
that, under penalty of perjury, the information and the claims provided
on the application are true, correct, and complete.
(D) NMFS must receive the preseason application on or before
October 15 of the crab fishing year for which the applicants are
applying for an exemption.
(1) If a preseason application is submitted by mail, the date of
receipt of the preseason application by NMFS will be the postmark date
of the application;
(2) If an applicant disputes whether NMFS received a preseason
application on or before October 15, the applicant must provide written
documentation that was contemporaneous with NMFS' receipt of the
application demonstrating that NMFS received the application by October
15.
(E) If NMFS does not receive a timely and complete preseason
application on or before October 15 of a crab fishing year, NMFS will
deny the preseason application; those applicants will not be able to
receive an exemption for that crab fishing year.
(F) If a preseason application is timely and complete, NMFS will
approve the application. If NMFS approves a preseason application for
an exemption, the applicants will be able to receive an exemption
during the crab fishing year if the applicants comply with the
requirements for an inseason notice of exemption specified below at
paragraph (p)(4)(iii).
(G) If NMFS denies a preseason application for any reason, the
applicants may appeal the denial pursuant to 50 CFR 679.43.
(H) NMFS will notify all of the applicants whether NMFS has
approved or denied the preseason application.
(iii) Part II: Inseason Notice of Exemption. (A) A complete
inseason notice must:
(1) Identify the IFQ amount and IPQ amount, by CR crab fishery,
subject to the exemption;
(2) Contain the information specified on the form, have all
applicable fields accurately completed, and have all required
documentation attached; and
(3) Be signed by the required applicants specified in paragraph
(p)(3) of this section that also signed the preseason application.
(B) Each applicant must certify, through an affidavit, that the
applicants have entered into an exemption contract that--
(1) Identifies the IFQ amount and IPQ amount, by CR crab fishery,
that is subject to the exemption contract;
(2) Describes the circumstances under which the exemption is being
exercised;
(3) Specifies the action that the parties must take to mitigate the
effects of the exemption;
(4) Specifies the compensation, if any, that any party must make to
any other party;
(5) Specifies any arrangements for compensatory deliveries in that
crab fishing year or the following crab fishing year; and
(6) Is signed by the holders of the IFQ and IPQ that are the
subject of the exemption contract and by the community representative
that is authorized to sign the exemption contract.
(C) Each applicant must sign and date the affidavit and affirm
that, under penalty of perjury, the information and the claims provided
on the notice are true, correct, and complete.
(D) NMFS must receive the inseason notice at least one day prior to
the day on which the applicants want the exemption to take effect. If
an inseason notice is submitted by mail, the date that NMFS receives
the inseason notice is not the postmark date of the notice.
(E) The effective date of the exemption is the day after NMFS
receives a complete inseason notice. Any delivery of North Region IFQ
or South Region IFQ outside the designated region prior to the
effective date of the exemption is prohibited under Sec. 680.7(a)(2)
and (4). Any processing of North Region IPQ or South Region IPQ outside
the designated region prior to the effective date of the exemption is
prohibited under Sec. 680.7(a)(2) and (4).
(F) An exemption is effective for the remainder of the crab fishing
year, unless the inseason notice of exemption specifies that
compensatory deliveries will occur in the following crab fishing year
and then the exemption will remain in effect for the IFQ and IPQ
specified for compensatory delivery in the following crab fishing year.
(5) Regional Delivery Exemption Report. (i) Each IFQ holder that
signs a preseason application, described in paragraph (p)(4)(ii) of
this section, must submit a Regional Delivery Exemption Report to NMFS
that includes an explanation of--
(A) The amount of IFQ, if any, set aside to reduce the need for,
and the amount of, an exemption;
(B) The mitigation measures employed before submitting an inseason
notice;
(C) The number of times an exemption was requested and used;
(D) The arrangements for any compensatory deliveries, including all
compensatory deliveries made during the crab fishing year and any
outstanding compensatory delivery obligations for the following crab
fishing year;
(E) Whether the exemption was necessary; and
(F) Any impacts resulting from the exemption on the fishery
participants
[[Page 28531]]
and communities that signed the preseason application.
(ii) On or before July 15, IFQ holders must submit a copy of the
Regional Delivery Exemption Report to the IPQ holders and community
representatives that also signed the preseason application.
(iii) On or before July 30, IFQ holders must submit the Regional
Delivery Exemption Report to NMFS at the address in paragraph (p)(4)(i)
of this section.
(6) Public Notice of the Exemption. NMFS will post the effective
date of an exemption and the Regional Delivery Exemption Reports on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov).
0
5. In Sec. 680.7, revise paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(4), (a)(7), (a)(8),
and (a)(9) to read as follows:
Sec. 680.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(2) Receive CR crab harvested under an IFQ permit in any region
other than the region for which the IFQ permit is designated, unless:
(i) Western Aleutian Islands golden king crab are received
following the effective date of a NMFS-approved exemption pursuant to
Sec. 680.4(o), or
(ii) The IFQ permit and IFQ amount are subject to an exemption
pursuant to Sec. 680.4(p).
* * * * *
(4) Use IPQ in any region other than the region for which the IPQ
permit is designated, unless:
(i) Western Aleutian Islands golden king crab IPQ is used following
the effective date of a NMFS-approved exemption pursuant to Sec.
680.4(o), or
(ii) The IPQ permit and IPQ amount are subject to an exemption
pursuant to Sec. 680.4(p).
* * * * *
(7) For an IPQ holder to use more IPQ than the maximum amount of
IPQ that may be held by that person. Use of IPQ includes all IPQ held
by that person, and all IPQ crab that are received by any RCR at any
shoreside crab processor or stationary floating crab processor in which
that IPQ holder has a 10 percent or greater direct or indirect
ownership interest, unless that IPQ crab meets the requirements in
Sec. 680.42(b)(7) or Sec. 680.42(b)(8).
(8) For a shoreside crab processor or stationary floating crab
processor, that does not have at least one owner with a 10 percent or
greater direct or indirect ownership interest who also holds IPQ in
that crab QS fishery, to receive in excess of 30 percent of the IPQ
issued for that crab fishery, unless that IPQ meets the requirements
described in Sec. 680.42(b)(7) or Sec. 680.42(b)(8).
(9) For any shoreside crab processor or stationary floating crab
processor east of 174 degrees west longitude to use more than 60
percent of the IPQ issued in the EAG or WAI crab QS fisheries, unless
that IPQ meets the requirements described in Sec. 680.42(b)(8).
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 680.42, revise paragraph (b)(1)(ii) and add paragraph
(b)(8) to read as follows:
Sec. 680.42 Limitations on use of QS, PQS, IFQ, and IPQ.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Use IPQ in excess of the amount of IPQ that results from the
PQS caps in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, unless that IPQ is:
(A) Derived from PQS that was received by that person in the
initial allocation of PQS for that crab QS fishery, or
(B) Subject to an exemption for that IPQ pursuant to Sec.
680.4(p).
* * * * *
(8) Any IPQ crab that is received by an RCR will not be considered
use of IPQ by an IPQ holder for the purposes of paragraphs (b)(1) and
(b)(2) of this section, if the IPQ is subject to an exemption pursuant
to Sec. 680.4(p).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-11571 Filed 5-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P