Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off of Alaska; Observer Coverage Requirements for Small Catcher/Processors in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Groundfish Fisheries, 81262-81271 [2015-32742]
Download as PDF
81262
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
within 30 days, the permit is void as of
the 30th day after such change.
(l) Renewal. Persons must apply
annually for an IFTP issued under this
section. A renewal application must be
submitted via a Web site designated by
NMFS, at least 15 days before the permit
expiration date to avoid a lapse in
permitted status. NMFS will renew a
permit provided that: the application for
the requested permit renewal is
complete; all documentation and reports
required under this subpart and: the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, Atlantic Tuna
Conventions Act, the Tuna Conventions
Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act,
the Dolphin Consumer Protection
Information Act, and the Antarctic
Marine Living Resources Act have been
submitted, including those required
under §§ 216.24, 216.93, 300.114,
300.183, 300.185, 300.186, 300.187 and
635.5 of this title; and the applicant is
not subject to a permit sanction or
denial under paragraph (i) of this
section.
§ 300.323
Reporting requirements.
A person importing for consumption
or non-consumption, exporting, or reexporting fish or fish products regulated
under this subpart from any ocean area
must file all reports and documentation
required under the AMLR trade
program, HMS ITP, and TTVP, and
under other regulations that incorporate
by reference the requirements of this
subpart.
§ 300.324
Prohibitions.
In addition to the prohibitions
specified in §§ 300.4, 300.117, 300.189,
600.725 and 635.71 of this title, it is
unlawful for any person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States to:
(a) violate any provision of this
subpart, or any IFTP issued under this
subpart,
(b) Import fish or fish products
regulated under this subpart without a
valid IFTP or without submitting
complete and accurate information.
[FR Doc. 2015–32743 Filed 12–28–15; 8:45 am]
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No.:150904827–5827–01]
RIN 0648–BF36
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off of Alaska; Observer Coverage
Requirements for Small Catcher/
Processors in the Gulf of Alaska and
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Groundfish Fisheries
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS proposes regulations
that would implement Amendment 112
to the Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
(BSAI FMP) and Amendment 102 to the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA
FMP) and revise regulations for observer
coverage requirements for certain small
catcher/processors in the Gulf of Alaska
(GOA) and Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (BSAI). If
approved, this proposed rule would
modify the criteria for NMFS to place
small catcher/processors in the partial
observer coverage category under the
North Pacific Groundfish and Halibut
Observer Program (Observer Program).
Under this proposed rule, the owner of
a non-trawl catcher/processor could
choose to be in the partial observer
coverage category, on an annual basis, if
the vessel processed less than 79,000 lb
(35.8 mt) of groundfish on an average
weekly basis in a particular prior year,
as specified in this proposed rule. This
proposed rule would not alter observer
coverage requirements for a catcher/
processor using trawl gear or for a
catcher/processor when participating in
a catch share program; these catcher/
processors would continue to be
required to be in the full observer
coverage category. This proposed rule
would provide a relatively limited
exception to the general requirement
that all catcher/processors are in the full
observer coverage category, and
maintain the full observer coverage
requirement for all trawl catcher/
processors and catcher/processors
participating in a catch share program
that requires full coverage. The net
impact of this proposed rule on the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information available for fisheries
management is expected to be small
due, in part, to the small amount of
fishing activity that would be impacted.
This proposed rule is intended to
promote the goals of the BSAI and GOA
FMPs, and to promote the goals and
objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other
applicable laws.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
January 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2015–0114, by any of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20150114, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O.
Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter
‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish
to remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of Amendment 112
to the BSAI FMP and Amendment 102
to the GOA FMP, the Regulatory Impact
Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (Analysis), and the Categorical
Exclusion prepared for this action are
available from https://
www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS
Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this rule may
be submitted to NMFS at the above
address; by email to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov; or by fax to 202–395–
5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anne Marie Eich, 907–586–7228.
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for Action
NMFS manages the groundfish
fisheries of the GOA under the GOA
FMP. NMFS manages the groundfish
fisheries of the BSAI under the BSAI
FMP. The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council)
prepared the GOA FMP and the BSAI
FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens
Act (16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.).
Regulations implementing the GOA
FMP and BSAI FMP appear at 50 CFR
part 679.
The Council submitted Amendment
112 to the BSAI FMP and Amendment
102 to the GOA FMP (collectively
referred to as Amendment 112/102) for
review by the Secretary of Commerce,
and a notice of availability of
Amendment 112/102 was published in
the Federal Register on February 29,
2016, with comments invited through
February 29, 2016. Comments may
address Amendment 112/102 or this
proposed rule, but must be received by
February 29, 2016 to be considered in
the approval/disapproval decision on
Amendment 112/102. All comments
received by that time, whether
specifically directed to Amendment
112/102, or to this proposed rule, will
be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on Amendment
112/102.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Background
This proposed rule would modify the
criteria used by NMFS to place small
catcher/processors in the partial
observer coverage category in the
Observer Program. Under this proposed
rule, the owners of non-trawl catcher/
processors could choose to be in the
partial observer coverage category for
the upcoming fishing year if their
vessels processed less than 79,000 lb
(35.8 mt) of groundfish on an average
weekly basis in a particular prior year,
as specified in this rule. This proposed
rule does not alter observer coverage
requirements for a catcher/processor
using trawl gear or for a catcher/
processor when participating in a catch
share program; these catcher/processors
would continue to be required to be in
the full observer coverage category. The
terms ‘‘production’’ and ‘‘processing’’
are used synonymously in this proposed
rule. The following sections describe:
(1) The Observer Program, (2) the Need
for the Proposed Action, (3) the
Rationale for Major Provisions of the
Proposed Rule, and (4) the Proposed
Rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
The Observer Program
Regulations implementing the
Observer Program allow NMFS-certified
observers (observers) to obtain
information necessary for the
conservation and management of the
BSAI and GOA groundfish and halibut
fisheries. Observers collect biological
samples and fishery-dependent
information on total catch and fishing
vessel interactions with protected
species. Managers use data collected by
observers to monitor quotas, manage
groundfish catch and bycatch, and
document and reduce fishery
interactions with protected resources.
Scientists use observer-collected data
for stock assessments and marine
ecosystem research.
The Observer Program was
implemented in 1990 (55 FR 4839,
February 12, 1990). In 2012, NMFS
restructured the funding and
deployment systems of the Observer
Program (77 FR 70062, November 21,
2012). Since implementation of the
restructured Observer Program in 2013,
vessels, shoreside processors and
stationary floating processors
participating in the groundfish and
halibut fisheries off of Alaska are placed
in one of two observer coverage
categories: (1) Partial observer coverage
category, or (2) full observer coverage
category.
An observer must be on board a vessel
in the full observer coverage category
any time the vessel is harvesting,
receiving, or processing groundfish in a
federally managed or parallel
groundfish fishery, as specified at
§ 679.51(a)(2)(i). In the full observer
coverage category, vessel operators
obtain observers by contracting directly
with observer providers. Operators of
vessels in the full observer coverage
category pay the observer provider for
each day the observer is on board the
vessel, including days that the vessel is
travelling to or from the fishing grounds
but not fishing.
NMFS deploys observers on vessels in
the partial observer coverage category
according to a statistical sample design
based on an annual deployment plan
developed in consultation with the
Council. Vessels in the partial observer
coverage category are required to carry
observers on fishing trips selected at
random per the statistical sample
design. Instead of paying for each day
an observer is on board, NMFS assesses
a fee equal to 1.25 percent of the exvessel value of the retained groundfish
and halibut landed by vessels in the
partial observer coverage category.
NMFS uses these fees to establish a
Federal contract with an observer
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81263
service provider to deploy observers in
the partial observer coverage category.
Under this structure, observer coverage
funding is based on the number of days
a vessel operates (full observer coverage
category) or on the ex-vessel value of a
vessel’s retained catch regardless of the
amount of time the vessel is covered by
an observer (partial observer coverage
category).
Before the Observer Program was
restructured, most catcher/processors
were required to have one or two
observers on board at all times to
generate vessel-specific estimates of
retained and discarded catch needed to
manage catch share programs. Observer
coverage requirements on catcher/
processors that were not in a catch share
program were based on vessel length
and gear type and included coverage
levels equal to zero or no coverage, 30
percent of fishing trips, and 100 percent
of fishing trips or full observer coverage.
To monitor catch on unobserved
catcher/processors, NMFS used the
vessel-reported processed weight to
estimate retained catch and data from
observed vessels to estimate at-sea
discards, including PSC, for each vessel.
Under the restructured Observer
Program, almost all catcher/processors
were assigned to the full observer
coverage category to obtain independent
estimates of catch, at-sea discards, and
PSC to reduce the potential for
introducing error into NMFS’ catch
accounting system (as described in the
proposed rule: 77 FR 23326, April 18,
2012).
The restructured Observer Program
provided three limited exceptions for
catcher/processors to be placed in the
partial observer coverage category. The
restructured Observer Program provided
these exceptions in recognition that the
cost of full observer coverage would be
disproportionate to total revenues for
some small catcher/processors.
First, the restructured Observer
Program provided an exception
(specified at the current
§ 679.51(a)(2)(v)) that applies to a hybrid
vessel less than 60 feet length overall
(LOA) that acted as both a catcher vessel
and a catcher/processor in the same year
in any year from 2003 through 2009.
This exception to the full coverage
requirement applies only if the vessel
owner elected to participate in the
partial observer coverage category at
least 30 days prior to the vessel’s first
trip logged under Observer Declare and
Deploy System (ODDS). ODDS is the
system for assigning observers to trips
by vessels in the partial observer
coverage category (§ 679.51(a)(1)(ii)). All
but two of the vessels that were eligible
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
81264
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
for this exception elected to participate
in the partial coverage category.
Second, the restructured Observer
Program provided an exception from
full coverage (specified at the current
§ 679.5(a)(2)(v)) if a catcher/processor
had an average daily production of less
than 5,000 lb (2.3 mt) round weight
equivalent in its most recent full
calendar year of operation from 2003
through 2009. This exception applied
only if the owner of a catcher/processor
made a one-time election to be placed
in the partial observer coverage category
before the catcher/processor’s first
fishing trip logged under ODDS. All but
one of the vessels that were eligible for
this exception elected to be placed in
the partial observer coverage category.
Third, the restructured Observer
Program provided an exception from
full coverage (specified at
§ 679.5(a)(2)(iv)(B)) if a catcher/
processor did not process more than one
metric ton round weight of groundfish
on any day in the immediately
preceding year. This exception is based
on the catcher/processor’s production in
any year after implementation of the
restructured Observer Program (i.e., in
any year after 2012). Under this
exception, a catcher/processor is placed
in the partial observer coverage category
for one year based on its production in
the prior year, and this exception ends
the year after the year in which the
catcher/processor processes more than
one metric ton on any day of the year.
The first two exceptions are based on
a vessel’s activity between 2003 and
2009. A vessel that started processing
after 2009 could never qualify to be
placed in the partial observer coverage
category under either of these
exceptions. Also, the first two
exceptions permanently placed a vessel
in the partial observer coverage
category. These exceptions have no
provision to review the production of a
catcher/processor placed in the partial
observer coverage category on an
ongoing basis and remove them from the
partial observer coverage category if
their production increases. Out of
approximately seventy catcher/
processors in the Observer Program,
three catcher/processors have qualified
for, and elected to be assigned
permanently to, the partial observer
coverage category under these two
exceptions (Section 2.1.1 and Table 2 of
the Analysis).
The third exception, the one metric
ton exception, is theoretically open to
any catcher/processor that began
production after 2009. However, in
reviewing production data from 2008
through 2014 for this action, NMFS
found no active catcher/processor (i.e.,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
a catcher/processor which did any
processing in a year) that processed one
metric ton or less on every day during
a year (Section 2.1.1 of the Analysis).
Need for the Proposed Action
Beginning with comments on the
proposed rule for the restructured
Observer Program, industry participants
asked that the final rule for the
restructured Observer Program allow
NMFS to place catcher/processors with
limited production in the partial
observer coverage category. In response
to these comments, NMFS stated in the
final rule for the restructured Observer
Program (77 FR 70062, November 21,
2012) that neither the Council nor
NMFS had analyzed the situation of
small catcher/processors that began
production after 2009. NMFS explained
that if these industry participants
wished to be considered for placement
in the partial observer coverage
category, the Council and NMFS would
need to make these changes through a
separate rulemaking process.
Members of industry subsequently
sought a change in the rules for
placement of catcher/processors in the
partial observer coverage category.
Members of industry stated that the cost
of full observer coverage for vessels that
began processing, or wished to begin
processing, relatively small amounts of
groundfish after 2009, was
disproportionate to the revenues they
could receive. The Council and NMFS
reviewed and developed a series of
analyses that resulted in this proposed
action. The history of this action is
described in detail in Section 1.2 of the
Analysis.
Data on past production identified a
small number of catcher/processors that
processed a small amount of groundfish
relative to the rest of the fleet. The
Council and NMFS concluded that these
vessels were paying, or would pay, a
disproportionate amount for full
observer coverage relative to the amount
these vessels had processed, or would
be likely to process. The Council and
NMFS concluded that the cost of full
observer coverage might be discouraging
beneficial activity, such as processing
sablefish in remote fishing grounds in
the Aleutian Islands or processing by
small jig gear vessels.
The Council and NMFS concluded
that the placement of catcher/processors
in the partial observer coverage category
should not be a closed category but
should be open to all catcher/processors
based on an ongoing measure of their
groundfish production in a year, except
for catcher/processors where
information needs compel full observer
coverage regardless of the amount of
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
production. Specifically, this proposed
rule would not revise observer coverage
requirements for trawl catcher/
processors or catcher/processors while
they are participating in a catch share
program (Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis),
even when these catcher/processors
meet the production requirement.
The objectives for this proposed rule
are to (1) refine the balance between
observer data quality from the fishery
and cost of observer coverage to catcher/
processors with limited groundfish
production relative to the rest of the
catcher/processor fleet by allowing
those catcher/processors with limited
production to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category based on
contemporary groundfish production
amounts; and (2) implement this
exception without altering the full
observer coverage requirements for all
trawl catcher/processors and catcher/
processors in a catch share program.
Rationale for Major Provisions of the
Proposed Rule
This discussion relies on the
description provided in Section 2 of the
Analysis.
1. The Production Threshold for
Placement in the Partial Observer
Coverage Category
This proposed rule would establish a
production threshold for placement in
the partial observer coverage category of
average weekly groundfish production
of 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or less in a
standard basis year or an alternate basis
year (as defined below). The Council
and NMFS considered five possible
measures of groundfish production that
could be used to establish the eligibility
for catcher/processors to be assigned to
the partial observer coverage category:
Average daily production; average
weekly production; maximum daily
production; maximum weekly
production; and overall annual
production. For each measure of
groundfish production, the Council and
NMFS examined a range of production
amounts and analyzed the effects of
those alternatives.
The Council and NMFS selected a
weekly production measure because it
would include catcher/processors that
engage in intense bursts of processing
activity during a year but may not
process throughout the whole year. A
weekly reporting period is the standard
measure of production for a trip by a
catcher/processor under the current
regulation (see definition of ‘‘Fishing
trip’’ in § 679.2). Using an average
weekly production measure is less
sensitive to variations in processing
activity that can occur by using an
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
average daily production measure.
Additionally, unlike a maximum
measure, an average measure of
production does not unduly weight a
single day or week of high production
(Section 2.2.1 and Section 4.9 of the
Analysis).
The Council and NMFS considered a
range of average weekly production
measures as a threshold for partial
coverage. The Council and NMFS
considered a lower average weekly
production threshold of 42,000 lb (19.1
mt) and a higher average weekly
production threshold of 79,000 lb (35.8
mt). The three catcher/processors that
are currently eligible for placement in
the partial observer coverage category
would still be eligible under the higher
production threshold considered, and
would generally be eligible for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category at the lower
production threshold (see Table 7,
Section 3.7.2 of the Analysis). The
Council and NMFS selected the higher
production standard to ensure that
catcher/processors that are currently
eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category would
continue to be eligible if these vessels
maintain their current levels of
production.
The Council and NMFS concluded
that this production threshold would
maintain a limited exception to the
general requirement that catcher/
processors are in the full observer
coverage category. Based on historical
production data, approximately 3
percent of non-trawl catcher/processors
have production that would allow them
to be eligible for placement in the
partial observer coverage category under
this proposed rule. Based on historical
production data, this would represent
less than 1 percent of the aggregate
groundfish production in the GOA and
the BSAI. The Council does not
anticipate that this action would impair
data quality because the overwhelming
amount of groundfish production would
remain subject to full observer coverage
(Section 3.6.7 of the Analysis). NMFS
expects that up to 11 vessels would be
eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category based on
estimated production data of all catcher/
processors (Table 17 in Section 3.7.12 of
the Analysis). The catcher/processors
eligible for partial coverage under this
proposed rule are engaged primarily in
the hook-and-line and Pacific cod and
sablefish fisheries (see Section 3.7.12 of
the Analysis).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
2. The Basis Year for Placing a Catcher/
Processor in the Partial Observer
Coverage Category
The Council and NMFS realize that it
would be impossible for NMFS to place
a catcher/processor in the partial
observer coverage category for a fishing
year beginning January 1 based on data
from the fishing year that had just ended
on December 31 (i.e., the fishing year
minus one year) because there is not
adequate time to compile and assess all
of the production data relative to the
production thresholds. Therefore, this
proposed rule would establish the
fishing year minus two years as the
standard basis year for determining
whether a catcher/processor was eligible
for placement in the partial observer
coverage category, as it is the most
recent year for which NMFS would have
full production data. As an example,
NMFS would assess production data
from 2015 to determine if a catcher/
processor would be eligible for partial
coverage in the fishing year that begins
on January 1, 2017, (i.e., the fishing year
minus two years).
If a catcher/processor had no
production in the standard basis year,
(i.e., two years before the current fishing
year), but that catcher/processor had
production before the standard basis
year, the Council and NMFS
recommended using the vessel’s most
recent year of production, but not earlier
than 2009 (referred to as the alternate
basis year) (Section 2.4 of the Analysis).
For example, if this proposed rule was
effective for the fishing year beginning
January 1, 2017, and the most recent
fishing year prior to 2015 a catcher/
processor had production was 2011, the
production from 2011 would be used to
assess whether that catcher/processor
met the threshold production amount to
be eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category. This
proposed rule would not consider
production data prior to 2009 because
that is the first year that NMFS collected
daily production reports (73 FR 76139),
permitting calculation of average daily
production (see Appendix D of the
Analysis).
3. A Catcher/Processor With No History
of Production
The Council and NMFS also
considered the initial type of observer
coverage (i.e., full or partial) that should
apply to a catcher/processor with no
production in either the standard basis
year or an alternate basis year, e.g., a
new catcher/processor. Three options
were considered: placing the catcher/
processor in the full observer coverage
category in its first year of operation;
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81265
placing the catcher/processor in the
partial observer coverage category in its
first year of operation; or placing any
trawl catcher/processors in the full
observer coverage category until it had
production history and placing any nontrawl catcher/processors in the partial
observer coverage category.
The Council and NMFS
recommended placing any new nontrawl catcher/processor without
production history in the partial
coverage category in its first year of
operation. The Council and NMFS
selected this option after analyzing the
potential impact on data quality and
costs of assigning new non-trawl
catcher/processors to both the full or
partial observer coverage categories. The
Council and NMFS realize that the costs
of full observer coverage could prevent
some non-trawl catcher/processors from
starting processing, particularly
processing of sablefish in remote fishing
grounds in the Aleutian Islands, and
processing of Pacific cod by catcher/
processors using jig gear. If non-trawl
catcher/processors had to operate for
their first two years in the full observer
coverage category, it might defeat one of
the objectives of this action, namely
encouraging beneficial activity that is
being prevented by the cost of full
observer coverage.
The Council and NMFS decided to
exclude all trawl catcher/processors,
regardless of their amount of
production, from eligibility to
participate in the partial observer
coverage category. The unchanged
observer requirements for trawl catcher/
processors and catcher/processors that
participate in a catch share program
section of this preamble provides
additional detail on trawl catcher/
processor observer coverage
requirements. Section 3.7.4 of the
Analysis contains additional detail on
the rationale for placing catcher/
processors with no production in their
appropriate observer coverage
categories.
4. Owner Choice by an Annual Deadline
The Council and NMFS considered
whether the owner of an eligible
catcher/processor should have the
option to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category for the
upcoming fishing year, or if NMFS
would automatically place the
qualifying vessel in the partial observer
coverage category for the upcoming
fishing year based on production data
without any action by the vessel owner.
The Council and NMFS decided that
providing the vessel owner with the
option to remain in the full observer
coverage category best met the purposes
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
81266
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
of this action. Therefore, under this
proposed rule, the owner of a qualifying
vessel could choose to be placed in the
partial observer coverage category by an
annual deadline. If the owner of a
qualifying vessel does not select to be
placed in the partial observer coverage
category by the annual deadline, that
catcher/processor would be placed in
the full observer coverage category for
the upcoming fishing year. This annual
selection process would be a new
requirement for the three catcher/
processors that are currently
permanently placed in the partial
observer coverage category.
This proposed rule would establish
two deadlines for a vessel owner to
choose placement in the partial observer
coverage category. First, NMFS
anticipated that this proposed rule
could be approved, be published, and
become effective in spring of 2016. To
achieve the benefits of this proposed
rule in a timely manner, NMFS would
establish a deadline in 2016 for a vessel
owner of an eligible catcher/processor to
request placement in the partial
observer coverage category within 15
days after the effective date of the final
rule, if approved. The effective date of
the final rule would be 30 days after its
publication in the Federal Register.
This deadline would provide a vessel
owner 45 days to consider and submit
a timely request for placement in the
partial coverage category after the date
of publication of the final rule. This
deadline would require this request to
be submitted in as timely a manner as
practicable after the effective date of the
final rule (i.e., within 15 days).
This proposed rule would also
establish a deadline applicable for the
2017 fishing year, and for all future
fishing years. In the Analysis, NMFS
stated that a July 1 deadline for
choosing to be placed in the partial
observer coverage would give vessel
owners adequate time to choose partial
observer coverage and would give
NMFS adequate time to incorporate that
information into its development of the
Observer Program annual deployment
plan for the upcoming fishing year
(Section 2.2.4 of the Analysis). For the
2017 fishing year, a vessel owner would
have to request placement in the partial
observer coverage category by July 1,
2016.
5. Unchanged Observer Requirements
for Trawl Catcher/Processors and
Catcher/Processors That Participate in a
Catch Share Program
While it is possible that a vessel may
meet the production threshold to
request to be in the partial observer
coverage category, this proposed rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
does not alter existing observer coverage
requirements for a catcher/processor
using trawl gear or a catcher/processor
when participating in a catch share
program; these catcher/processors
would continue to be required to be in
the full observer coverage category. The
rationale for each is described below.
During the development of this
proposed rule, the Council and NMFS
consistently stated that this proposed
rule would not supersede any
requirements for full observer coverage
when a catcher/processor is
participating in a catch share program
(Section 2.4 of the Analysis). The
requirements for full, or greater than
full, coverage in these programs show a
special need for verified individual
accounting of catch by the catcher/
processors in these programs.
Therefore, the proposed rule would
not provide exceptions for a catcher/
processor subject to additional observer
requirements specified in
§ 679.51(a)(2)(vi) to be placed in the
partial observer coverage category. The
existing additional observer
requirements would continue to apply
to catcher/processors participating in
the following catch share programs:
Community Development Quota (CDQ)
Program (except catcher/processors
sablefish CDQ fishing); American
Fisheries Act; Aleutian Islands directed
pollock fishery; Amendment 80 trawl
catcher/processors in the BSAI nonpollock fisheries; catcher/processors in
the Central GOA Rockfish Program; and
the longline catcher/processor
subsector. Section 2.2 of the Analysis
describes each of these catch share
programs and the catcher/processors
fishing under those programs in greater
detail.
Trawl catcher/processors, regardless
of production level, would continue to
be placed in the full observer coverage
category. Trawl catcher/processors are
subject to multiple bycatch, or
prohibited species catch (PSC), limits
for salmon, halibut, crab and herring
(see § 679.21(d)(3), (e)(1), (f)(2), (h)(2),
and (i)(3)). Therefore, NMFS has
identified a heightened need for data
from these vessels best achieved under
full observer coverage. In addition,
Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis states that
most trawl catcher/processors are
currently operating under the provisions
of either the Amendment 80 or
American Fisheries Act catch share
programs and would be ineligible for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category because of the
requirements for additional observer
coverage under those catch share
programs. Finally, NMFS analyzed
production data from trawl catcher/
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
processors relative to the 79,000 lb (35.8
mt) average weekly production
threshold. No active trawl catcher/
processors met this threshold to be
eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category during the
years analyzed (2009 through 2014).
Given these factors, and even if a trawl
catcher/processor met the production
requirement in the future, this proposed
rule would not alter the existing
requirements that a catcher/processor
using trawl gear would continue to be
required to be in the full observer
coverage category.
The Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would revise
regulations at 50 CFR part 679 to modify
the criteria for NMFS to place small
catcher/processors in the partial
observer coverage category in the
Observer Program. The primary
provision of the proposed rule is to
establish a new paragraph in § 679.51,
namely § 679.51(a)(3), ‘‘Catcher/
processor placement in the partial
observer coverage category for a year.’’
At § 679.51(a)(3)(i), this proposed rule
would define the following terms for
purposes of the new § 679.51(a)(3): A
‘‘fishing year’’ as the year during which
a catcher/processor might be placed in
the partial observer coverage category;
the ‘‘standard basis year’’ as the fishing
year minus two years; and the ‘‘alternate
basis year’’ as the most recent year
before the standard basis year in which
a catcher/processor had any groundfish
production but not earlier than 2009.
The proposed rule at § 679.51(a)(3)(i)
also defines a vessel’s ‘‘average weekly
groundfish production,’’ as the annual
groundfish round weight production
estimate for a catcher/processor, divided
by the number of separate weeks during
which production occurred, as
determined by production reports, but
excluding any groundfish that was
caught with trawl gear. Thus, if a vessel
has groundfish production any day in a
week, excluding trawl production, that
would be considered as a week of
production.
The proposed rule would specify at
§ 679.51(a)(3)(ii) the annual deadline for
requesting placement in the partial
observer coverage category as 15 days
after the effective date of the final rule
in 2016, and July 1 of the year before the
year that the vessel owner would like to
be placed in the partial observer
coverage category, for 2017 and all
future years. NMFS will make a
determination within 30 days of receipt
of the request for placement in the
partial observer coverage category.
The proposed rule would specify at
§ 679.51(a)(3)(iii) the requirements for
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
NMFS to place a catcher/processor in
the partial observer coverage category,
namely if the vessel owner requests
placement by the annual deadline
specified and the vessel meets the
production threshold of 79,000 lb (35.8
mt) of average weekly groundfish
production (excluding groundfish
caught with trawl gear).
To determine eligibility for placement
in the partial observer coverage
category, NMFS will first examine the
catcher/processor’s production in the
standard basis year, namely two years
before the fishing year. If a catcher/
processor produced at or below the
production threshold (79,000 lb (35.8
mt) average weekly groundfish
production) in the standard basis year,
but more than zero pounds, the vessel
would meet the production threshold
for placement in the partial observer
coverage category in the upcoming
fishing year. If a catcher/processor
exceeded that production threshold, the
vessel would not be eligible for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category in the upcoming
fishing year.
If a catcher/processor had no
production in the standard basis year,
NMFS would examine the vessel’s
production in the alternative basis year,
namely the first year that the vessel had
any production before the standard
basis year not earlier than 2009. If a
catcher/processor had average
groundfish weekly production of 79,000
lb (35.8 mt) or less in the alternate basis
year, the vessel would meet the
production threshold requirement for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category for the upcoming
fishing year. If a catcher/processor
exceeded the production threshold in
the alternate basis year, the vessel
would not be eligible for placement in
the partial observer coverage category. If
a catcher/processor had no production
from 2009 through the standard basis
year or an alternate basis year, the vessel
would meet the production threshold
requirement for placement in the partial
observer coverage category.
If a catcher/processor meets the
production threshold requirement for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category and is not a vessel
using trawl gear or otherwise required to
have full observer coverage by
participation in a catch share program,
the catcher/processor would be placed
in partial observer coverage only if the
owner of the vessel makes the request
by the specified deadline. The proposed
rule specifies at § 679.51(a)(3)(iv) how
the vessel owner would request
placement in the partial observer
coverage category. A vessel owner
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
would need to submit a request form to
NMFS, which NMFS would make
available on the NMFS Alaska Region
Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
The proposed rule specifies at
§ 679.51(a)(3)(v) that NMFS will notify a
vessel owner in writing if NMFS has
placed the vessel in the partial observer
coverage category once a request form
has been submitted. Until NMFS
provides this notice, the catcher/
processor would remain in the full
observer coverage category.
The proposed rule specifies at
§ 679.51(a)(3)(vi) that if NMFS denies a
request for placement in the partial
observer coverage category, NMFS
would issue an Initial Administrative
Determination, which will explain in
writing the reasons for the denial. If the
vessel owner wishes to appeal the
denial, the proposed rule provides at
§ 679.51(a)(3)(vii) that the vessel owner
would be able to appeal to the National
Appeals Office according to the
procedures in 15 CFR part 906.
In addition to the proposed new
paragraph at § 679.51(a)(3), the
proposed rule has several additional
provisions. The proposed rule would
add regulations at § 679.51(a)(1)(i)(C) to
clarify that a catcher/processor placed
in the partial observer coverage category
under § 679.51(a)(3) is in the partial
observer coverage category. The
proposed rule would revise
§ 679.51(a)(2)(i)(A) to clarify that
catcher/processors are placed in the full
observer coverage category unless they
are placed the partial observer coverage
category using criteria specified at
§ 679.51(a)(3). The proposed rule also
removes the regulations detailing the
current exceptions to the full observer
coverage category for catcher/processors
at § 679.51(a)(2)(iv)(B).
The proposed rule would add a new
category to the definition of fishing trip
for purposes of the Observer Program in
§ 679.2. Section 679.2 currently defines
a fishing trip for a catcher vessel
delivering to a shoreside or stationary
floating processor and for a catcher
vessel delivering to a tender vessel. The
new definition would define a fishing
trip for a catcher/processor in the partial
observer coverage category, namely the
period of time that begins when the
vessel departs a port to harvest fish until
the vessel returns to port and offloads
all processed product. This definition
would be necessary because the current
definition of a fishing trip does not
accurately apply to a catcher/processor
in the partial coverage category.
This proposed rule would add a new
requirement at § 679.5(e)(13) for a
catcher/processor landing report. The
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81267
operator of a catcher/processor placed
in the partial observer coverage category
would be required to submit a catcher/
processor landing report by 2400 hours,
A.l.t., on the day after the end of the
fishing trip. This would be a new
reporting requirement created for this
program. The landing report would be
generated through eLandings or other
NMFS-approved software by
consolidating the daily production
reports for the period the vessel operator
defines as the fishing trip for purposes
of observer coverage. NMFS would use
information from the catcher/processor
landing report to link catch data with
observer data, to determine how to
appropriately assign at-sea discard rates
and PSC rates to unobserved catcher/
processors in the partial observer
coverage category, and to monitor
compliance with the requirement for
catcher/processors placed in the partial
observer coverage category to log all
fishing trips in ODDS.
The proposed rule would revise
§ 679.51(e)(1)(iii)(B) to remove
requirements from catcher/processors
placed in the partial observer coverage
category to provide equipment for the
purpose of observer data entry and
transmission. Currently, all catcher/
processors are required to provide an
observer with a computer, NMFSsupplied software, and the ability to
transmit data to NMFS using a point-topoint connection from the vessel.
Removing this requirement would
reduce the financial burden on small
catcher/processors placed in the partial
observer coverage category, especially
for vessels mentioned in Section 3.7.4 of
the Analysis that may begin to operate
as a catcher/processor (e.g., catcher/
processors using jig gear). Currently,
observers deployed in the partial
observer coverage category enter and
transmit data without equipment
provided by the industry. Maintaining
the current equipment requirements for
catcher/processors in partial coverage
may result in duplicative and
unnecessary equipment being available
on the vessel. NMFS typically receives
data from observers deployed in the
partial observer coverage category at the
end of each trip and that timeline would
be sufficient for catcher/processors in
partial coverage under this proposed
rule. NMFS notes that even with this
proposed change, more frequent data
transmission could be achieved on some
vessels if the observer is allowed to use
existing communication equipment.
The proposed rule would revise
§ 679.55(a) and (c) to clarify that all
catcher/processors named on a Federal
Fishing Permit (FFP) and not in the full
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
81268
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
observer coverage category are
responsible for paying the observer fee.
The proposed rule includes
corrections to fix two cross reference
errors in § 679.2 and replace language in
§ 679.5 that refer to old terminology of
‘‘100 percent observer coverage’’. That
terminology would be replaced with
‘‘full observer coverage’’; this is the
terminology used under the restructured
Observer Program.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Classification
Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) and
305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
NMFS Assistant Administrator has
determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with Amendments 112 and
102, other provisions of the MagnusonStevens Act, and other applicable law,
subject to further consideration after
public comment.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The objectives for this proposed rule
are to (1) refine the balance between
observer data quality from the fishery
and cost of observer coverage to catcher/
processors with limited production
relative to the rest of the catcher/
processor fleet by allowing those
catcher/processors with limited
production the opportunity to be placed
in the partial observer coverage category
based on contemporary groundfish
production amounts; and (2) maintain
the full observer coverage requirement
for all trawl catcher/processors and
catcher/processors in a catch share
program regardless whether these
catcher/processors meet the groundfish
production requirement for placement
in the partial observer coverage
category.
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as
required by section 603 of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The
IRFA describes the economic impact
this proposed rule, if adopted, would
have on small entities. The IRFA
describes the reasons why this action is
being proposed; the objectives and legal
basis for the proposed rule; the number
and description of small entities directly
regulated by the proposed action; any
projected reporting, recordkeeping, or
other compliance requirements of the
proposed rule; any overlapping,
duplicative, or conflicting Federal rules;
impacts of the action on small entities;
and any significant alternatives to the
proposed rule that would accomplish
the stated objectives of the MagnusonStevens Act, and any other applicable
statutes, and would minimize any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
significant adverse impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities.
Descriptions of the proposed action, its
purpose, and the legal basis are
contained earlier in this preamble and
are not repeated here. A summary of the
IRFA follows. A copy of the IRFA is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The RFA recognizes and defines three
kinds of small entities: (1) Small
businesses, (2) small non-profit
organizations, and (3) small government
jurisdictions. The proposed action
would directly regulate small
businesses.
The Small Business Administration
has established size standards for all
major industry sectors in the United
States. A business primarily involved in
finfish harvesting is classified as a small
business if it is independently owned
and operated, is not dominant in its
field of operation (including its
affiliates), and has combined annual
gross receipts not in excess of $20.5
million, for all its affiliated operations
worldwide.
Under the preferred alternative that
would be implemented by this proposed
rule, NMFS expects that up to 11 vessels
may qualify for placement in the partial
observer coverage category (See Section
3.4 and Section 4.6 of the Analysis for
additional detail). NMFS estimates that
these 11 vessels may be separated into
four groups of entities.
The first group of vessels consists of
three catcher/processors that currently
qualify for placement in the partial
observer coverage category under the
existing program rules. These were
discussed in detail in Section 3.7.2 of
the Analysis. These three vessels are
estimated to be small entities based on
estimates of their gross revenues, and of
their known affiliations.
The second group consists of three
catcher/processors that currently
operate as catcher/processors and are in
the full observer coverage category, but
that may be eligible to operate in the
partial observer coverage category as a
result of this proposed rule. These three
catcher/processors are described in
Section 3.7.3 of the Analysis. Two of
these vessels are estimated to be small
entities on the basis of estimates of their
gross revenues, and of their known
affiliations. One vessel is estimated to
be a large entity on the basis of its gross
revenue and its known affiliations.
The third group consists of catcher
vessels that may begin to operate as
catcher/processors if this action is
taken. As discussed in Section 3.7.4 of
the Analysis, NMFS could not identify
vessels in this group on the basis of
historical information. However, NMFS
noted that at least one jig vessel operator
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
has indicated that he may begin catcher/
processor operations using jig gear in
Federal waters if that vessel could be
eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category. NMFS
estimates that this one known jig vessel
would be estimated to be a small entity
on the basis of gross revenues and
affiliations of all known vessels
currently using jig gear.
Finally, the analysis determined that
fishing operations using sablefish ‘‘A’’
quota shares in the Aleutian Islands
may begin processing at-sea and
operating as catcher/processors in the
Aleutian Islands if those vessels are
eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category. Section
3.7.5 of the Analysis provides additional
detail on these vessels. NMFS identified
that up to four vessels could operate as
catcher/processors for sablefish. NMFS
estimates that, with one exception, these
vessels would be estimated to be small
entities on the basis of estimates of their
gross revenues, and of their known
affiliations. Collectively, NMFS
estimates that up to 9 of the 11 vessels
identified in these four groups would be
considered directly regulated small
entities.
The proposed action contains one
new reporting and recordkeeping
requirement that affects the small
entities. Vessel owners or operators
desiring to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category for a fishing
year will have to submit a simple form
expressing that choice by July 1 (except
for the 2016 fishing year, as described
previously). This information is needed
for preparation of the Observer Program
annual deployment plan.
This form will use production data
that will be available to the owner or
operator on the eLandings Web site.
Given the simplicity of the form, and
the accessibility of the data needed to
complete it, NMFS estimates that it will
take no more than 30 minutes to
complete and file the form. For
Paperwork Reduction Act estimation
purposes, NMFS values this type of
effort at $37 per hour. Approximately 9
small entities could be affected by this
requirement. Thus, the total public time
required to complete 9 forms a year x 30
minutes is 4.5 hours. At a cost of $37
per hour, the estimated cost would be
about $167.
The RFA requires identification of
any significant alternatives to the
proposed rule that accomplish the
stated objectives of the proposed action,
consistent with applicable statutes, and
that would minimize any significant
economic impact of the proposed rule
on small entities. As noted in the IRFA,
the proposed action is expected to
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
create a net benefit for the directly
regulated small entities. In other words,
the benefits of the proposed action are
expected to outweigh the reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance
costs described above.
The Council and NMFS adopted the
average weekly production threshold of
79,000 lb (35.8 mt) as its preferred
alternative. This production threshold
would allow a catcher/processor to
qualify for placement in the partial
observer coverage category for a year, if
its round weight equivalent of their
processed product, two years previous,
averaged less than 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) a
week. If the vessel had not operated two
years previously, NMFS would use its
production in the first year with
production since 2009, inclusive of
2009. If the vessel has not produced in
this period, NMFS would allow the
vessel to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category in the year in
which application is made, unless it is
a trawl vessel, in which case it would
be in the full observer coverage
category.
This action is meant to reduce the
relative burden on directly regulated
small catcher/processors in comparison
with the status quo. For vessels that
qualify, this action would allow them to
forego full observer coverage and
operate with less expensive partial
observer coverage, should they choose
to do so. There are three catcher/
processors that enjoy permanent
placement in the partial observer
coverage category under the status quo.
These vessels would, under the action
alternative, now have to qualify for
placement in the partial observer
coverage category each year. The
Council and NMFS chose the 79,000-lb
average weekly threshold, rather than an
alternative 42,000-lb average weekly
threshold, to maximize the potential for
these three vessels to qualify for the
option to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category in future
years. Moreover, one of the objectives of
this action was to end the permanent
placement in the partial observer
coverage category for catcher/processor
vessels and create a flexible system that
could respond if a vessel increased
production.
The Council and NMFS considered
multiple elements and options under
Alternative 2 that would qualify more
vessels or fewer vessels for placement in
the partial observer coverage category.
In addition to the two average weekly
production thresholds, a low and a high
average daily, maximum daily
production, maximum weekly, and
annual production measures were
considered.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
The production thresholds analyzed
under Element 1 Option 4B (high
maximum weekly production) and
Option 5B (high annual production)
could have qualified one more small
catcher/processor for partial observer
coverage than is expected to qualify
under the Council’s preferred
alternative (Option 2B: average weekly
production threshold of 79,000 lb). The
Council did not select Option 4B
because basing a threshold on maximum
weekly production could have excluded
some catcher/processors that had one
week of relatively high production, but
had relatively low average production
over the remainder of the year. The
Council did not select Option 5B
because it could allow catcher/
processors with relatively high
production levels over the course of
several weeks or months during the year
into the partial observer coverage
category. NMFS recommended that
catcher/processors with these high
intensity production periods during the
year should remain in the full observer
coverage category so that all of their
fishing activity is observed.
The average weekly measure was
chosen, because it provided a measure
of production intensity, which the
annual, maximum daily, and maximum
weekly measures, did not provide; it
was readily measurable; and it was less
prone to manipulation or unusually
high levels of production than the other
options considered. A week is also the
standard measure of production for a
catcher/processor trip in current
regulation (Section 2.2.1 and Section 4.9
of the Analysis).
No relevant Federal rules have been
identified that would duplicate or
overlap with the proposed action.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains
collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval.
The information collections are
presented by OMB control number.
OMB Control No. 0648–0318
Public reporting burden for Catcher/
Processor Observer Partial Coverage
Request is estimated to average 30
minutes per response.
OMB Control No. 0648–0515
Public reporting burden for Catcher/
Processor Landing Report through
eLandings is estimated to average one
minute per response.
OMB Control No. 0648–0711
Public reporting burden for submittal
of Observer Fee through eFISH is
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81269
estimated to average 1 minute per
response.
Public comment is sought regarding:
whether this proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the burden estimate;
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information,
including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology. Send comments
on these or any other aspects of the
collection of information to NMFS at the
ADDRESSES above, and email to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to
(202) 395–5806.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, and no person shall be
subject to 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.
All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be
viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/
services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 23, 2015.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR
part 679 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et
seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447; Pub. L.
111–281
2. In § 679.2, add paragraph (3)(iii) to
the definition of ‘‘Fishing trip’’ to read
as follows:
■
§ 679.2
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Fishing trip means: * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) For a catcher/processor in the
partial observer coverage category, the
period of time that begins when the
vessel departs a port to harvest fish until
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
81270
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
the vessel returns to port and offloads
all processed product.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 679.5, add paragraph (e)(13) to
read as follows:
§ 679.5
(R&R).
Recordkeeping and reporting
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(13) Catcher/processor landing report.
(i) The operator of a catcher/processor
placed in the partial observer coverage
category under § 679.51(a)(3) must use
eLandings or other NMFS-approved
software to submit a catcher/processor
landing report to NMFS for each fishing
trip conducted while that catcher/
processor is in the partial observer
coverage category.
(ii) The vessel operator must log into
eLandings or other NMFS-approved
software and provide the information
required on the computer screen.
Additional instructions for submitting a
catcher/processor landing report is on
the Alaska Region Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
(iii) For purposes of this landing
report requirement, the end of a fishing
trip is defined in § 679.2, paragraph
(3)(iii) of the definition of a fishing trip.
(iv) The vessel operator must submit
the catcher/processor landing report to
NMFS by 2400 hours, A.l.t., on the day
after the end of the fishing trip.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 679.51,
■ a. Revise paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B);
■ b. Add paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C);
■ c. Revise paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A);
■ d. Remove and reserve paragraphs
(a)(2)(iv)(B) and (a)(2)(v);
■ e. Add paragraph (a)(3); and
■ f. Revise paragraph (e)(1)(iii)(B)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 679.51 Observer requirements for
vessels and plants.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) A catcher vessel when fishing for
halibut with hook-and-line gear and
while carrying a person named on a
permit issued under § 679.4(d)(1)(i),
§ 679.4(d)(2)(i), or § 679.4(e)(2), or for
sablefish IFQ with hook-and-line or pot
gear and while carrying a person named
on a permit issued under § 679.4(d)(1)(i)
or § 679.4(d)(2)(i); or
(C) A catcher/processor placed in the
partial observer coverage category under
paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Catcher/processors, except a
catcher/processor placed in the partial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
observer coverage category under
paragraph (a)(3) of this section;
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Catcher/processor placement in
the partial observer coverage category
for a year—(i) Definitions. For purposes
of this paragraph (a)(3), these terms are
defined as follows:
(A) Average weekly groundfish
production means the annual
groundfish round weight production
estimate for a catcher/processor, divided
by the number of separate weeks during
which production occurred, as
determined by production reports,
excluding any groundfish caught using
trawl gear.
(B) Fishing year means the year
during which a catcher/processor might
be placed in partial observer coverage.
(C) Standard basis year means the
fishing year minus two years.
(D) Alternate basis year means the
most recent year before the standard
basis year in which a catcher/processor
had any groundfish production but not
earlier than 2009.
(ii) Deadline for requesting partial
observer coverage. For the 2016 fishing
year, the deadline for requesting partial
observer coverage is [DATE 15 DAYS
AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE
FINAL RULE]. For the 2017 fishing year
and every fishing year after 2017, the
deadline for requesting partial observer
coverage is July 1 of the year prior to the
fishing year.
(iii) Requirements for placing a
catcher/processor in the partial observer
coverage category. NMFS will place a
catcher/processor in the partial observer
coverage category for a fishing year if
the owner of the catcher/processor
requests placement in partial observer
coverage by the deadline for requesting
partial observer coverage for that fishing
year and the catcher/processor meets
the following requirements:
(A) An average weekly groundfish
production of:
(1) 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or less, but
more than zero lb, in the standard basis
year; or
(2) Zero lb in the standard basis year
and 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or less, but more
than zero lb, in the alternate basis year;
or
(3) Had no production from 2009
through the standard basis year; and
(B) Is not a catcher/processor using
trawl gear; and
(C) Is not subject to additional
observer coverage requirements in
paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of this section.
(iv) How to request placement of a
catcher/processor in partial observer
coverage. A vessel owner must submit a
request form to NMFS. The request form
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
must be completed with all required
fields accurately completed. The request
form is provided by NMFS and is
available on the NMFS Alaska Region
Web site (https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov). The submittal
methods are described on the form.
(v) Notification of placement in the
partial observer coverage category.
NMFS will notify the owner if the
catcher/processor has been placed in the
partial observer coverage category in
writing. Until NMFS provides
notification, the catcher/processor is in
the full observer coverage category for
that fishing year.
(vi) Initial Administrative
Determination (IAD). If NMFS denies a
request to place a catcher/processor in
the partial observer coverage category,
NMFS will provide an IAD, which will
explain the basis for the denial.
(vii) Appeal. If the owner of a catcher/
processor wishes to appeal NMFS’
denial of a request to place a catcher/
processor in the partial observer
coverage category, the owner may
appeal the determination under the
appeals procedure set out at 15 CFR part
906.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) Communication equipment
requirements. In the case of an operator
of a catcher/processor (except for a
catcher/processor placed in the partial
observer coverage category under
paragraph (a)(3) of this section), a
mothership, a catcher vessel 125 ft. LOA
or longer (except for a vessel fishing for
groundfish with pot gear), or a catcher
vessel participating in the Rockfish
Program:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 679.55, revise paragraphs (a)
and (c) to read as follows:
§ 679.55
Observer fees.
(a) Responsibility. The owner of a
shoreside processor or stationary
floating processor named on a Federal
Processing Permit (FPP), a catcher/
processor named on a Federal Fisheries
Permit (FFP), or a person named on a
Registered Buyer permit at the time of
the landing subject to the observer fee
as specified at § 679.55(c) must comply
with the requirements of this section.
Subsequent non-renewal of an FPP,
FFP, or a Registered Buyer permit does
not affect the permit holder’s liability
for noncompliance with this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Landings subject to the observer
fee. The observer fee is assessed on
landings by vessels not in the full
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 2015 / Proposed Rules
observer coverage category described at
81271
§ 679.51(a)(2) according to the following
table:
Is fish from the landing subject to the observer fee?
If fish in the landing by a catcher vessel or production by a
catcher/processor is from the following fishery or species:
If the vessel is not designated on an
FFP or required to be designated on
an FFP:
If the vessel is designated on an FFP
or required to be designated on an
FFP:
(1) Groundfish listed in Table 2a to this part that are harvested
in the EEZ and subtracted from a total allowable catch limit
specified under § 679.20(a).
(2) Groundfish listed in Table 2a to this part that are harvested
in Alaska State waters, including in a parallel groundfish fishery, and subtracted from a total allowable catch limit specified
under § 679.20(a).
(3) Sablefish IFQ, regardless of where harvested .......................
(4) Halibut IFQ or halibut CDQ, regardless of where harvested
(5) Groundfish listed in Table 2a to this part that are harvested
in Alaska State waters, but is not subtracted from a total allowable catch limit under § 679.20(a).
(6) Any groundfish or other species not listed in Table 2a to
part 679, except halibut IFQ or CDQ halibut, regardless of
where harvested.
Not applicable, an FFP is required to
harvest these groundfish in the
EEZ.
No .......................................................
Yes.
Yes.
Yes ......................................................
Yes ......................................................
No .......................................................
Yes.
Yes.
No.
No .......................................................
No.
*
*
*
*
§§ 679.2 and 679.5
*
[Amended]
6. At each of the locations shown in
the ‘‘Location’’ column, remove the
phrase indicated in the ‘‘Remove’’
■
column and replace it with the phrase
indicated in the ‘‘Add’’ column for the
number of times indicated in the
‘‘Frequency’’ column.
Location
Remove
Add
§ 679.2 Definition of ‘‘Suspension’’ ..........
§ 679.2 Definition of ‘‘Suspension’’ ..........
§ 679.5(e)(10)(iv)(B) .................................
§ 679.50 ...................................................
§ 679.50(j) ................................................
required to have 100 percent observer
coverage or more,.
§ 679.53 ...................................................
§ 679.53(c) ...............................................
in the groundfish and halibut fishery full
observer coverage category described
at § 679.51(a)(2),.
[FR Doc. 2015–32742 Filed 12–28–15; 8:45 am]
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:26 Dec 28, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
Frequency
1
1
1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 29, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81262-81271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-32742]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No.:150904827-5827-01]
RIN 0648-BF36
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off of Alaska; Observer
Coverage Requirements for Small Catcher/Processors in the Gulf of
Alaska and Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Groundfish Fisheries
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations that would implement Amendment 112
to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP) and Amendment 102 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA FMP)
and revise regulations for observer coverage requirements for certain
small catcher/processors in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) and Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI). If approved, this proposed
rule would modify the criteria for NMFS to place small catcher/
processors in the partial observer coverage category under the North
Pacific Groundfish and Halibut Observer Program (Observer Program).
Under this proposed rule, the owner of a non-trawl catcher/processor
could choose to be in the partial observer coverage category, on an
annual basis, if the vessel processed less than 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) of
groundfish on an average weekly basis in a particular prior year, as
specified in this proposed rule. This proposed rule would not alter
observer coverage requirements for a catcher/processor using trawl gear
or for a catcher/processor when participating in a catch share program;
these catcher/processors would continue to be required to be in the
full observer coverage category. This proposed rule would provide a
relatively limited exception to the general requirement that all
catcher/processors are in the full observer coverage category, and
maintain the full observer coverage requirement for all trawl catcher/
processors and catcher/processors participating in a catch share
program that requires full coverage. The net impact of this proposed
rule on the information available for fisheries management is expected
to be small due, in part, to the small amount of fishing activity that
would be impacted. This proposed rule is intended to promote the goals
of the BSAI and GOA FMPs, and to promote the goals and objectives of
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act) and other applicable laws.
DATES: Submit comments on or before January 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by
NOAA-NMFS-2015-0114, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0114, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802-1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information,
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of Amendment 112 to the BSAI FMP and Amendment
102 to the GOA FMP, the Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (Analysis), and the Categorical Exclusion prepared
for this action are available from https://www.regulations.gov or from
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address; by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov; or by fax to 202-395-5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Marie Eich, 907-586-7228.
[[Page 81263]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for Action
NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries of the GOA under the GOA FMP.
NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI under the BSAI FMP.
The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the GOA
FMP and the BSAI FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C.
1801, et seq.). Regulations implementing the GOA FMP and BSAI FMP
appear at 50 CFR part 679.
The Council submitted Amendment 112 to the BSAI FMP and Amendment
102 to the GOA FMP (collectively referred to as Amendment 112/102) for
review by the Secretary of Commerce, and a notice of availability of
Amendment 112/102 was published in the Federal Register on February 29,
2016, with comments invited through February 29, 2016. Comments may
address Amendment 112/102 or this proposed rule, but must be received
by February 29, 2016 to be considered in the approval/disapproval
decision on Amendment 112/102. All comments received by that time,
whether specifically directed to Amendment 112/102, or to this proposed
rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on
Amendment 112/102.
Background
This proposed rule would modify the criteria used by NMFS to place
small catcher/processors in the partial observer coverage category in
the Observer Program. Under this proposed rule, the owners of non-trawl
catcher/processors could choose to be in the partial observer coverage
category for the upcoming fishing year if their vessels processed less
than 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) of groundfish on an average weekly basis in a
particular prior year, as specified in this rule. This proposed rule
does not alter observer coverage requirements for a catcher/processor
using trawl gear or for a catcher/processor when participating in a
catch share program; these catcher/processors would continue to be
required to be in the full observer coverage category. The terms
``production'' and ``processing'' are used synonymously in this
proposed rule. The following sections describe: (1) The Observer
Program, (2) the Need for the Proposed Action, (3) the Rationale for
Major Provisions of the Proposed Rule, and (4) the Proposed Rule.
The Observer Program
Regulations implementing the Observer Program allow NMFS-certified
observers (observers) to obtain information necessary for the
conservation and management of the BSAI and GOA groundfish and halibut
fisheries. Observers collect biological samples and fishery-dependent
information on total catch and fishing vessel interactions with
protected species. Managers use data collected by observers to monitor
quotas, manage groundfish catch and bycatch, and document and reduce
fishery interactions with protected resources. Scientists use observer-
collected data for stock assessments and marine ecosystem research.
The Observer Program was implemented in 1990 (55 FR 4839, February
12, 1990). In 2012, NMFS restructured the funding and deployment
systems of the Observer Program (77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). Since
implementation of the restructured Observer Program in 2013, vessels,
shoreside processors and stationary floating processors participating
in the groundfish and halibut fisheries off of Alaska are placed in one
of two observer coverage categories: (1) Partial observer coverage
category, or (2) full observer coverage category.
An observer must be on board a vessel in the full observer coverage
category any time the vessel is harvesting, receiving, or processing
groundfish in a federally managed or parallel groundfish fishery, as
specified at Sec. 679.51(a)(2)(i). In the full observer coverage
category, vessel operators obtain observers by contracting directly
with observer providers. Operators of vessels in the full observer
coverage category pay the observer provider for each day the observer
is on board the vessel, including days that the vessel is travelling to
or from the fishing grounds but not fishing.
NMFS deploys observers on vessels in the partial observer coverage
category according to a statistical sample design based on an annual
deployment plan developed in consultation with the Council. Vessels in
the partial observer coverage category are required to carry observers
on fishing trips selected at random per the statistical sample design.
Instead of paying for each day an observer is on board, NMFS assesses a
fee equal to 1.25 percent of the ex-vessel value of the retained
groundfish and halibut landed by vessels in the partial observer
coverage category. NMFS uses these fees to establish a Federal contract
with an observer service provider to deploy observers in the partial
observer coverage category. Under this structure, observer coverage
funding is based on the number of days a vessel operates (full observer
coverage category) or on the ex-vessel value of a vessel's retained
catch regardless of the amount of time the vessel is covered by an
observer (partial observer coverage category).
Before the Observer Program was restructured, most catcher/
processors were required to have one or two observers on board at all
times to generate vessel-specific estimates of retained and discarded
catch needed to manage catch share programs. Observer coverage
requirements on catcher/processors that were not in a catch share
program were based on vessel length and gear type and included coverage
levels equal to zero or no coverage, 30 percent of fishing trips, and
100 percent of fishing trips or full observer coverage. To monitor
catch on unobserved catcher/processors, NMFS used the vessel-reported
processed weight to estimate retained catch and data from observed
vessels to estimate at-sea discards, including PSC, for each vessel.
Under the restructured Observer Program, almost all catcher/processors
were assigned to the full observer coverage category to obtain
independent estimates of catch, at-sea discards, and PSC to reduce the
potential for introducing error into NMFS' catch accounting system (as
described in the proposed rule: 77 FR 23326, April 18, 2012).
The restructured Observer Program provided three limited exceptions
for catcher/processors to be placed in the partial observer coverage
category. The restructured Observer Program provided these exceptions
in recognition that the cost of full observer coverage would be
disproportionate to total revenues for some small catcher/processors.
First, the restructured Observer Program provided an exception
(specified at the current Sec. 679.51(a)(2)(v)) that applies to a
hybrid vessel less than 60 feet length overall (LOA) that acted as both
a catcher vessel and a catcher/processor in the same year in any year
from 2003 through 2009. This exception to the full coverage requirement
applies only if the vessel owner elected to participate in the partial
observer coverage category at least 30 days prior to the vessel's first
trip logged under Observer Declare and Deploy System (ODDS). ODDS is
the system for assigning observers to trips by vessels in the partial
observer coverage category (Sec. 679.51(a)(1)(ii)). All but two of the
vessels that were eligible
[[Page 81264]]
for this exception elected to participate in the partial coverage
category.
Second, the restructured Observer Program provided an exception
from full coverage (specified at the current Sec. 679.5(a)(2)(v)) if a
catcher/processor had an average daily production of less than 5,000 lb
(2.3 mt) round weight equivalent in its most recent full calendar year
of operation from 2003 through 2009. This exception applied only if the
owner of a catcher/processor made a one-time election to be placed in
the partial observer coverage category before the catcher/processor's
first fishing trip logged under ODDS. All but one of the vessels that
were eligible for this exception elected to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category.
Third, the restructured Observer Program provided an exception from
full coverage (specified at Sec. 679.5(a)(2)(iv)(B)) if a catcher/
processor did not process more than one metric ton round weight of
groundfish on any day in the immediately preceding year. This exception
is based on the catcher/processor's production in any year after
implementation of the restructured Observer Program (i.e., in any year
after 2012). Under this exception, a catcher/processor is placed in the
partial observer coverage category for one year based on its production
in the prior year, and this exception ends the year after the year in
which the catcher/processor processes more than one metric ton on any
day of the year.
The first two exceptions are based on a vessel's activity between
2003 and 2009. A vessel that started processing after 2009 could never
qualify to be placed in the partial observer coverage category under
either of these exceptions. Also, the first two exceptions permanently
placed a vessel in the partial observer coverage category. These
exceptions have no provision to review the production of a catcher/
processor placed in the partial observer coverage category on an
ongoing basis and remove them from the partial observer coverage
category if their production increases. Out of approximately seventy
catcher/processors in the Observer Program, three catcher/processors
have qualified for, and elected to be assigned permanently to, the
partial observer coverage category under these two exceptions (Section
2.1.1 and Table 2 of the Analysis).
The third exception, the one metric ton exception, is theoretically
open to any catcher/processor that began production after 2009.
However, in reviewing production data from 2008 through 2014 for this
action, NMFS found no active catcher/processor (i.e., a catcher/
processor which did any processing in a year) that processed one metric
ton or less on every day during a year (Section 2.1.1 of the Analysis).
Need for the Proposed Action
Beginning with comments on the proposed rule for the restructured
Observer Program, industry participants asked that the final rule for
the restructured Observer Program allow NMFS to place catcher/
processors with limited production in the partial observer coverage
category. In response to these comments, NMFS stated in the final rule
for the restructured Observer Program (77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012)
that neither the Council nor NMFS had analyzed the situation of small
catcher/processors that began production after 2009. NMFS explained
that if these industry participants wished to be considered for
placement in the partial observer coverage category, the Council and
NMFS would need to make these changes through a separate rulemaking
process.
Members of industry subsequently sought a change in the rules for
placement of catcher/processors in the partial observer coverage
category. Members of industry stated that the cost of full observer
coverage for vessels that began processing, or wished to begin
processing, relatively small amounts of groundfish after 2009, was
disproportionate to the revenues they could receive. The Council and
NMFS reviewed and developed a series of analyses that resulted in this
proposed action. The history of this action is described in detail in
Section 1.2 of the Analysis.
Data on past production identified a small number of catcher/
processors that processed a small amount of groundfish relative to the
rest of the fleet. The Council and NMFS concluded that these vessels
were paying, or would pay, a disproportionate amount for full observer
coverage relative to the amount these vessels had processed, or would
be likely to process. The Council and NMFS concluded that the cost of
full observer coverage might be discouraging beneficial activity, such
as processing sablefish in remote fishing grounds in the Aleutian
Islands or processing by small jig gear vessels.
The Council and NMFS concluded that the placement of catcher/
processors in the partial observer coverage category should not be a
closed category but should be open to all catcher/processors based on
an ongoing measure of their groundfish production in a year, except for
catcher/processors where information needs compel full observer
coverage regardless of the amount of production. Specifically, this
proposed rule would not revise observer coverage requirements for trawl
catcher/processors or catcher/processors while they are participating
in a catch share program (Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis), even when
these catcher/processors meet the production requirement.
The objectives for this proposed rule are to (1) refine the balance
between observer data quality from the fishery and cost of observer
coverage to catcher/processors with limited groundfish production
relative to the rest of the catcher/processor fleet by allowing those
catcher/processors with limited production to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category based on contemporary groundfish production
amounts; and (2) implement this exception without altering the full
observer coverage requirements for all trawl catcher/processors and
catcher/processors in a catch share program.
Rationale for Major Provisions of the Proposed Rule
This discussion relies on the description provided in Section 2 of
the Analysis.
1. The Production Threshold for Placement in the Partial Observer
Coverage Category
This proposed rule would establish a production threshold for
placement in the partial observer coverage category of average weekly
groundfish production of 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or less in a standard
basis year or an alternate basis year (as defined below). The Council
and NMFS considered five possible measures of groundfish production
that could be used to establish the eligibility for catcher/processors
to be assigned to the partial observer coverage category: Average daily
production; average weekly production; maximum daily production;
maximum weekly production; and overall annual production. For each
measure of groundfish production, the Council and NMFS examined a range
of production amounts and analyzed the effects of those alternatives.
The Council and NMFS selected a weekly production measure because
it would include catcher/processors that engage in intense bursts of
processing activity during a year but may not process throughout the
whole year. A weekly reporting period is the standard measure of
production for a trip by a catcher/processor under the current
regulation (see definition of ``Fishing trip'' in Sec. 679.2). Using
an average weekly production measure is less sensitive to variations in
processing activity that can occur by using an
[[Page 81265]]
average daily production measure. Additionally, unlike a maximum
measure, an average measure of production does not unduly weight a
single day or week of high production (Section 2.2.1 and Section 4.9 of
the Analysis).
The Council and NMFS considered a range of average weekly
production measures as a threshold for partial coverage. The Council
and NMFS considered a lower average weekly production threshold of
42,000 lb (19.1 mt) and a higher average weekly production threshold of
79,000 lb (35.8 mt). The three catcher/processors that are currently
eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage category would
still be eligible under the higher production threshold considered, and
would generally be eligible for placement in the partial observer
coverage category at the lower production threshold (see Table 7,
Section 3.7.2 of the Analysis). The Council and NMFS selected the
higher production standard to ensure that catcher/processors that are
currently eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage
category would continue to be eligible if these vessels maintain their
current levels of production.
The Council and NMFS concluded that this production threshold would
maintain a limited exception to the general requirement that catcher/
processors are in the full observer coverage category. Based on
historical production data, approximately 3 percent of non-trawl
catcher/processors have production that would allow them to be eligible
for placement in the partial observer coverage category under this
proposed rule. Based on historical production data, this would
represent less than 1 percent of the aggregate groundfish production in
the GOA and the BSAI. The Council does not anticipate that this action
would impair data quality because the overwhelming amount of groundfish
production would remain subject to full observer coverage (Section
3.6.7 of the Analysis). NMFS expects that up to 11 vessels would be
eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage category based
on estimated production data of all catcher/processors (Table 17 in
Section 3.7.12 of the Analysis). The catcher/processors eligible for
partial coverage under this proposed rule are engaged primarily in the
hook-and-line and Pacific cod and sablefish fisheries (see Section
3.7.12 of the Analysis).
2. The Basis Year for Placing a Catcher/Processor in the Partial
Observer Coverage Category
The Council and NMFS realize that it would be impossible for NMFS
to place a catcher/processor in the partial observer coverage category
for a fishing year beginning January 1 based on data from the fishing
year that had just ended on December 31 (i.e., the fishing year minus
one year) because there is not adequate time to compile and assess all
of the production data relative to the production thresholds.
Therefore, this proposed rule would establish the fishing year minus
two years as the standard basis year for determining whether a catcher/
processor was eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage
category, as it is the most recent year for which NMFS would have full
production data. As an example, NMFS would assess production data from
2015 to determine if a catcher/processor would be eligible for partial
coverage in the fishing year that begins on January 1, 2017, (i.e., the
fishing year minus two years).
If a catcher/processor had no production in the standard basis
year, (i.e., two years before the current fishing year), but that
catcher/processor had production before the standard basis year, the
Council and NMFS recommended using the vessel's most recent year of
production, but not earlier than 2009 (referred to as the alternate
basis year) (Section 2.4 of the Analysis). For example, if this
proposed rule was effective for the fishing year beginning January 1,
2017, and the most recent fishing year prior to 2015 a catcher/
processor had production was 2011, the production from 2011 would be
used to assess whether that catcher/processor met the threshold
production amount to be eligible for placement in the partial observer
coverage category. This proposed rule would not consider production
data prior to 2009 because that is the first year that NMFS collected
daily production reports (73 FR 76139), permitting calculation of
average daily production (see Appendix D of the Analysis).
3. A Catcher/Processor With No History of Production
The Council and NMFS also considered the initial type of observer
coverage (i.e., full or partial) that should apply to a catcher/
processor with no production in either the standard basis year or an
alternate basis year, e.g., a new catcher/processor. Three options were
considered: placing the catcher/processor in the full observer coverage
category in its first year of operation; placing the catcher/processor
in the partial observer coverage category in its first year of
operation; or placing any trawl catcher/processors in the full observer
coverage category until it had production history and placing any non-
trawl catcher/processors in the partial observer coverage category.
The Council and NMFS recommended placing any new non-trawl catcher/
processor without production history in the partial coverage category
in its first year of operation. The Council and NMFS selected this
option after analyzing the potential impact on data quality and costs
of assigning new non-trawl catcher/processors to both the full or
partial observer coverage categories. The Council and NMFS realize that
the costs of full observer coverage could prevent some non-trawl
catcher/processors from starting processing, particularly processing of
sablefish in remote fishing grounds in the Aleutian Islands, and
processing of Pacific cod by catcher/processors using jig gear. If non-
trawl catcher/processors had to operate for their first two years in
the full observer coverage category, it might defeat one of the
objectives of this action, namely encouraging beneficial activity that
is being prevented by the cost of full observer coverage.
The Council and NMFS decided to exclude all trawl catcher/
processors, regardless of their amount of production, from eligibility
to participate in the partial observer coverage category. The unchanged
observer requirements for trawl catcher/processors and catcher/
processors that participate in a catch share program section of this
preamble provides additional detail on trawl catcher/processor observer
coverage requirements. Section 3.7.4 of the Analysis contains
additional detail on the rationale for placing catcher/processors with
no production in their appropriate observer coverage categories.
4. Owner Choice by an Annual Deadline
The Council and NMFS considered whether the owner of an eligible
catcher/processor should have the option to be placed in the partial
observer coverage category for the upcoming fishing year, or if NMFS
would automatically place the qualifying vessel in the partial observer
coverage category for the upcoming fishing year based on production
data without any action by the vessel owner. The Council and NMFS
decided that providing the vessel owner with the option to remain in
the full observer coverage category best met the purposes
[[Page 81266]]
of this action. Therefore, under this proposed rule, the owner of a
qualifying vessel could choose to be placed in the partial observer
coverage category by an annual deadline. If the owner of a qualifying
vessel does not select to be placed in the partial observer coverage
category by the annual deadline, that catcher/processor would be placed
in the full observer coverage category for the upcoming fishing year.
This annual selection process would be a new requirement for the three
catcher/processors that are currently permanently placed in the partial
observer coverage category.
This proposed rule would establish two deadlines for a vessel owner
to choose placement in the partial observer coverage category. First,
NMFS anticipated that this proposed rule could be approved, be
published, and become effective in spring of 2016. To achieve the
benefits of this proposed rule in a timely manner, NMFS would establish
a deadline in 2016 for a vessel owner of an eligible catcher/processor
to request placement in the partial observer coverage category within
15 days after the effective date of the final rule, if approved. The
effective date of the final rule would be 30 days after its publication
in the Federal Register. This deadline would provide a vessel owner 45
days to consider and submit a timely request for placement in the
partial coverage category after the date of publication of the final
rule. This deadline would require this request to be submitted in as
timely a manner as practicable after the effective date of the final
rule (i.e., within 15 days).
This proposed rule would also establish a deadline applicable for
the 2017 fishing year, and for all future fishing years. In the
Analysis, NMFS stated that a July 1 deadline for choosing to be placed
in the partial observer coverage would give vessel owners adequate time
to choose partial observer coverage and would give NMFS adequate time
to incorporate that information into its development of the Observer
Program annual deployment plan for the upcoming fishing year (Section
2.2.4 of the Analysis). For the 2017 fishing year, a vessel owner would
have to request placement in the partial observer coverage category by
July 1, 2016.
5. Unchanged Observer Requirements for Trawl Catcher/Processors and
Catcher/Processors That Participate in a Catch Share Program
While it is possible that a vessel may meet the production
threshold to request to be in the partial observer coverage category,
this proposed rule does not alter existing observer coverage
requirements for a catcher/processor using trawl gear or a catcher/
processor when participating in a catch share program; these catcher/
processors would continue to be required to be in the full observer
coverage category. The rationale for each is described below.
During the development of this proposed rule, the Council and NMFS
consistently stated that this proposed rule would not supersede any
requirements for full observer coverage when a catcher/processor is
participating in a catch share program (Section 2.4 of the Analysis).
The requirements for full, or greater than full, coverage in these
programs show a special need for verified individual accounting of
catch by the catcher/processors in these programs.
Therefore, the proposed rule would not provide exceptions for a
catcher/processor subject to additional observer requirements specified
in Sec. 679.51(a)(2)(vi) to be placed in the partial observer coverage
category. The existing additional observer requirements would continue
to apply to catcher/processors participating in the following catch
share programs: Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program (except
catcher/processors sablefish CDQ fishing); American Fisheries Act;
Aleutian Islands directed pollock fishery; Amendment 80 trawl catcher/
processors in the BSAI non-pollock fisheries; catcher/processors in the
Central GOA Rockfish Program; and the longline catcher/processor
subsector. Section 2.2 of the Analysis describes each of these catch
share programs and the catcher/processors fishing under those programs
in greater detail.
Trawl catcher/processors, regardless of production level, would
continue to be placed in the full observer coverage category. Trawl
catcher/processors are subject to multiple bycatch, or prohibited
species catch (PSC), limits for salmon, halibut, crab and herring (see
Sec. 679.21(d)(3), (e)(1), (f)(2), (h)(2), and (i)(3)). Therefore,
NMFS has identified a heightened need for data from these vessels best
achieved under full observer coverage. In addition, Section 2.4.1 of
the Analysis states that most trawl catcher/processors are currently
operating under the provisions of either the Amendment 80 or American
Fisheries Act catch share programs and would be ineligible for
placement in the partial observer coverage category because of the
requirements for additional observer coverage under those catch share
programs. Finally, NMFS analyzed production data from trawl catcher/
processors relative to the 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) average weekly
production threshold. No active trawl catcher/processors met this
threshold to be eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage
category during the years analyzed (2009 through 2014). Given these
factors, and even if a trawl catcher/processor met the production
requirement in the future, this proposed rule would not alter the
existing requirements that a catcher/processor using trawl gear would
continue to be required to be in the full observer coverage category.
The Proposed Rule
The proposed rule would revise regulations at 50 CFR part 679 to
modify the criteria for NMFS to place small catcher/processors in the
partial observer coverage category in the Observer Program. The primary
provision of the proposed rule is to establish a new paragraph in Sec.
679.51, namely Sec. 679.51(a)(3), ``Catcher/processor placement in the
partial observer coverage category for a year.''
At Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(i), this proposed rule would define the
following terms for purposes of the new Sec. 679.51(a)(3): A ``fishing
year'' as the year during which a catcher/processor might be placed in
the partial observer coverage category; the ``standard basis year'' as
the fishing year minus two years; and the ``alternate basis year'' as
the most recent year before the standard basis year in which a catcher/
processor had any groundfish production but not earlier than 2009.
The proposed rule at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(i) also defines a vessel's
``average weekly groundfish production,'' as the annual groundfish
round weight production estimate for a catcher/processor, divided by
the number of separate weeks during which production occurred, as
determined by production reports, but excluding any groundfish that was
caught with trawl gear. Thus, if a vessel has groundfish production any
day in a week, excluding trawl production, that would be considered as
a week of production.
The proposed rule would specify at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(ii) the
annual deadline for requesting placement in the partial observer
coverage category as 15 days after the effective date of the final rule
in 2016, and July 1 of the year before the year that the vessel owner
would like to be placed in the partial observer coverage category, for
2017 and all future years. NMFS will make a determination within 30
days of receipt of the request for placement in the partial observer
coverage category.
The proposed rule would specify at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(iii) the
requirements for
[[Page 81267]]
NMFS to place a catcher/processor in the partial observer coverage
category, namely if the vessel owner requests placement by the annual
deadline specified and the vessel meets the production threshold of
79,000 lb (35.8 mt) of average weekly groundfish production (excluding
groundfish caught with trawl gear).
To determine eligibility for placement in the partial observer
coverage category, NMFS will first examine the catcher/processor's
production in the standard basis year, namely two years before the
fishing year. If a catcher/processor produced at or below the
production threshold (79,000 lb (35.8 mt) average weekly groundfish
production) in the standard basis year, but more than zero pounds, the
vessel would meet the production threshold for placement in the partial
observer coverage category in the upcoming fishing year. If a catcher/
processor exceeded that production threshold, the vessel would not be
eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage category in the
upcoming fishing year.
If a catcher/processor had no production in the standard basis
year, NMFS would examine the vessel's production in the alternative
basis year, namely the first year that the vessel had any production
before the standard basis year not earlier than 2009. If a catcher/
processor had average groundfish weekly production of 79,000 lb (35.8
mt) or less in the alternate basis year, the vessel would meet the
production threshold requirement for placement in the partial observer
coverage category for the upcoming fishing year. If a catcher/processor
exceeded the production threshold in the alternate basis year, the
vessel would not be eligible for placement in the partial observer
coverage category. If a catcher/processor had no production from 2009
through the standard basis year or an alternate basis year, the vessel
would meet the production threshold requirement for placement in the
partial observer coverage category.
If a catcher/processor meets the production threshold requirement
for placement in the partial observer coverage category and is not a
vessel using trawl gear or otherwise required to have full observer
coverage by participation in a catch share program, the catcher/
processor would be placed in partial observer coverage only if the
owner of the vessel makes the request by the specified deadline. The
proposed rule specifies at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(iv) how the vessel owner
would request placement in the partial observer coverage category. A
vessel owner would need to submit a request form to NMFS, which NMFS
would make available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
The proposed rule specifies at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(v) that NMFS will
notify a vessel owner in writing if NMFS has placed the vessel in the
partial observer coverage category once a request form has been
submitted. Until NMFS provides this notice, the catcher/processor would
remain in the full observer coverage category.
The proposed rule specifies at Sec. 679.51(a)(3)(vi) that if NMFS
denies a request for placement in the partial observer coverage
category, NMFS would issue an Initial Administrative Determination,
which will explain in writing the reasons for the denial. If the vessel
owner wishes to appeal the denial, the proposed rule provides at Sec.
679.51(a)(3)(vii) that the vessel owner would be able to appeal to the
National Appeals Office according to the procedures in 15 CFR part 906.
In addition to the proposed new paragraph at Sec. 679.51(a)(3),
the proposed rule has several additional provisions. The proposed rule
would add regulations at Sec. 679.51(a)(1)(i)(C) to clarify that a
catcher/processor placed in the partial observer coverage category
under Sec. 679.51(a)(3) is in the partial observer coverage category.
The proposed rule would revise Sec. 679.51(a)(2)(i)(A) to clarify that
catcher/processors are placed in the full observer coverage category
unless they are placed the partial observer coverage category using
criteria specified at Sec. 679.51(a)(3). The proposed rule also
removes the regulations detailing the current exceptions to the full
observer coverage category for catcher/processors at Sec.
679.51(a)(2)(iv)(B).
The proposed rule would add a new category to the definition of
fishing trip for purposes of the Observer Program in Sec. 679.2.
Section 679.2 currently defines a fishing trip for a catcher vessel
delivering to a shoreside or stationary floating processor and for a
catcher vessel delivering to a tender vessel. The new definition would
define a fishing trip for a catcher/processor in the partial observer
coverage category, namely the period of time that begins when the
vessel departs a port to harvest fish until the vessel returns to port
and offloads all processed product. This definition would be necessary
because the current definition of a fishing trip does not accurately
apply to a catcher/processor in the partial coverage category.
This proposed rule would add a new requirement at Sec.
679.5(e)(13) for a catcher/processor landing report. The operator of a
catcher/processor placed in the partial observer coverage category
would be required to submit a catcher/processor landing report by 2400
hours, A.l.t., on the day after the end of the fishing trip. This would
be a new reporting requirement created for this program. The landing
report would be generated through eLandings or other NMFS-approved
software by consolidating the daily production reports for the period
the vessel operator defines as the fishing trip for purposes of
observer coverage. NMFS would use information from the catcher/
processor landing report to link catch data with observer data, to
determine how to appropriately assign at-sea discard rates and PSC
rates to unobserved catcher/processors in the partial observer coverage
category, and to monitor compliance with the requirement for catcher/
processors placed in the partial observer coverage category to log all
fishing trips in ODDS.
The proposed rule would revise Sec. 679.51(e)(1)(iii)(B) to remove
requirements from catcher/processors placed in the partial observer
coverage category to provide equipment for the purpose of observer data
entry and transmission. Currently, all catcher/processors are required
to provide an observer with a computer, NMFS-supplied software, and the
ability to transmit data to NMFS using a point-to-point connection from
the vessel. Removing this requirement would reduce the financial burden
on small catcher/processors placed in the partial observer coverage
category, especially for vessels mentioned in Section 3.7.4 of the
Analysis that may begin to operate as a catcher/processor (e.g.,
catcher/processors using jig gear). Currently, observers deployed in
the partial observer coverage category enter and transmit data without
equipment provided by the industry. Maintaining the current equipment
requirements for catcher/processors in partial coverage may result in
duplicative and unnecessary equipment being available on the vessel.
NMFS typically receives data from observers deployed in the partial
observer coverage category at the end of each trip and that timeline
would be sufficient for catcher/processors in partial coverage under
this proposed rule. NMFS notes that even with this proposed change,
more frequent data transmission could be achieved on some vessels if
the observer is allowed to use existing communication equipment.
The proposed rule would revise Sec. 679.55(a) and (c) to clarify
that all catcher/processors named on a Federal Fishing Permit (FFP) and
not in the full
[[Page 81268]]
observer coverage category are responsible for paying the observer fee.
The proposed rule includes corrections to fix two cross reference
errors in Sec. 679.2 and replace language in Sec. 679.5 that refer to
old terminology of ``100 percent observer coverage''. That terminology
would be replaced with ``full observer coverage''; this is the
terminology used under the restructured Observer Program.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with Amendments 112 and 102, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law,
subject to further consideration after public comment.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The objectives for this proposed rule are to (1) refine the balance
between observer data quality from the fishery and cost of observer
coverage to catcher/processors with limited production relative to the
rest of the catcher/processor fleet by allowing those catcher/
processors with limited production the opportunity to be placed in the
partial observer coverage category based on contemporary groundfish
production amounts; and (2) maintain the full observer coverage
requirement for all trawl catcher/processors and catcher/processors in
a catch share program regardless whether these catcher/processors meet
the groundfish production requirement for placement in the partial
observer coverage category.
An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as
required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The
IRFA describes the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted,
would have on small entities. The IRFA describes the reasons why this
action is being proposed; the objectives and legal basis for the
proposed rule; the number and description of small entities directly
regulated by the proposed action; any projected reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements of the proposed rule;
any overlapping, duplicative, or conflicting Federal rules; impacts of
the action on small entities; and any significant alternatives to the
proposed rule that would accomplish the stated objectives of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and any other applicable statutes, and would
minimize any significant adverse impacts of the proposed rule on small
entities. Descriptions of the proposed action, its purpose, and the
legal basis are contained earlier in this preamble and are not repeated
here. A summary of the IRFA follows. A copy of the IRFA is available
from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The RFA recognizes and defines three kinds of small entities: (1)
Small businesses, (2) small non-profit organizations, and (3) small
government jurisdictions. The proposed action would directly regulate
small businesses.
The Small Business Administration has established size standards
for all major industry sectors in the United States. A business
primarily involved in finfish harvesting is classified as a small
business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in
its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined
annual gross receipts not in excess of $20.5 million, for all its
affiliated operations worldwide.
Under the preferred alternative that would be implemented by this
proposed rule, NMFS expects that up to 11 vessels may qualify for
placement in the partial observer coverage category (See Section 3.4
and Section 4.6 of the Analysis for additional detail). NMFS estimates
that these 11 vessels may be separated into four groups of entities.
The first group of vessels consists of three catcher/processors
that currently qualify for placement in the partial observer coverage
category under the existing program rules. These were discussed in
detail in Section 3.7.2 of the Analysis. These three vessels are
estimated to be small entities based on estimates of their gross
revenues, and of their known affiliations.
The second group consists of three catcher/processors that
currently operate as catcher/processors and are in the full observer
coverage category, but that may be eligible to operate in the partial
observer coverage category as a result of this proposed rule. These
three catcher/processors are described in Section 3.7.3 of the
Analysis. Two of these vessels are estimated to be small entities on
the basis of estimates of their gross revenues, and of their known
affiliations. One vessel is estimated to be a large entity on the basis
of its gross revenue and its known affiliations.
The third group consists of catcher vessels that may begin to
operate as catcher/processors if this action is taken. As discussed in
Section 3.7.4 of the Analysis, NMFS could not identify vessels in this
group on the basis of historical information. However, NMFS noted that
at least one jig vessel operator has indicated that he may begin
catcher/processor operations using jig gear in Federal waters if that
vessel could be eligible for placement in the partial observer coverage
category. NMFS estimates that this one known jig vessel would be
estimated to be a small entity on the basis of gross revenues and
affiliations of all known vessels currently using jig gear.
Finally, the analysis determined that fishing operations using
sablefish ``A'' quota shares in the Aleutian Islands may begin
processing at-sea and operating as catcher/processors in the Aleutian
Islands if those vessels are eligible for placement in the partial
observer coverage category. Section 3.7.5 of the Analysis provides
additional detail on these vessels. NMFS identified that up to four
vessels could operate as catcher/processors for sablefish. NMFS
estimates that, with one exception, these vessels would be estimated to
be small entities on the basis of estimates of their gross revenues,
and of their known affiliations. Collectively, NMFS estimates that up
to 9 of the 11 vessels identified in these four groups would be
considered directly regulated small entities.
The proposed action contains one new reporting and recordkeeping
requirement that affects the small entities. Vessel owners or operators
desiring to be placed in the partial observer coverage category for a
fishing year will have to submit a simple form expressing that choice
by July 1 (except for the 2016 fishing year, as described previously).
This information is needed for preparation of the Observer Program
annual deployment plan.
This form will use production data that will be available to the
owner or operator on the eLandings Web site. Given the simplicity of
the form, and the accessibility of the data needed to complete it, NMFS
estimates that it will take no more than 30 minutes to complete and
file the form. For Paperwork Reduction Act estimation purposes, NMFS
values this type of effort at $37 per hour. Approximately 9 small
entities could be affected by this requirement. Thus, the total public
time required to complete 9 forms a year x 30 minutes is 4.5 hours. At
a cost of $37 per hour, the estimated cost would be about $167.
The RFA requires identification of any significant alternatives to
the proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives of the proposed
action, consistent with applicable statutes, and that would minimize
any significant economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.
As noted in the IRFA, the proposed action is expected to
[[Page 81269]]
create a net benefit for the directly regulated small entities. In
other words, the benefits of the proposed action are expected to
outweigh the reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance costs
described above.
The Council and NMFS adopted the average weekly production
threshold of 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) as its preferred alternative. This
production threshold would allow a catcher/processor to qualify for
placement in the partial observer coverage category for a year, if its
round weight equivalent of their processed product, two years previous,
averaged less than 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) a week. If the vessel had not
operated two years previously, NMFS would use its production in the
first year with production since 2009, inclusive of 2009. If the vessel
has not produced in this period, NMFS would allow the vessel to be
placed in the partial observer coverage category in the year in which
application is made, unless it is a trawl vessel, in which case it
would be in the full observer coverage category.
This action is meant to reduce the relative burden on directly
regulated small catcher/processors in comparison with the status quo.
For vessels that qualify, this action would allow them to forego full
observer coverage and operate with less expensive partial observer
coverage, should they choose to do so. There are three catcher/
processors that enjoy permanent placement in the partial observer
coverage category under the status quo. These vessels would, under the
action alternative, now have to qualify for placement in the partial
observer coverage category each year. The Council and NMFS chose the
79,000-lb average weekly threshold, rather than an alternative 42,000-
lb average weekly threshold, to maximize the potential for these three
vessels to qualify for the option to be placed in the partial observer
coverage category in future years. Moreover, one of the objectives of
this action was to end the permanent placement in the partial observer
coverage category for catcher/processor vessels and create a flexible
system that could respond if a vessel increased production.
The Council and NMFS considered multiple elements and options under
Alternative 2 that would qualify more vessels or fewer vessels for
placement in the partial observer coverage category. In addition to the
two average weekly production thresholds, a low and a high average
daily, maximum daily production, maximum weekly, and annual production
measures were considered.
The production thresholds analyzed under Element 1 Option 4B (high
maximum weekly production) and Option 5B (high annual production) could
have qualified one more small catcher/processor for partial observer
coverage than is expected to qualify under the Council's preferred
alternative (Option 2B: average weekly production threshold of 79,000
lb). The Council did not select Option 4B because basing a threshold on
maximum weekly production could have excluded some catcher/processors
that had one week of relatively high production, but had relatively low
average production over the remainder of the year. The Council did not
select Option 5B because it could allow catcher/processors with
relatively high production levels over the course of several weeks or
months during the year into the partial observer coverage category.
NMFS recommended that catcher/processors with these high intensity
production periods during the year should remain in the full observer
coverage category so that all of their fishing activity is observed.
The average weekly measure was chosen, because it provided a
measure of production intensity, which the annual, maximum daily, and
maximum weekly measures, did not provide; it was readily measurable;
and it was less prone to manipulation or unusually high levels of
production than the other options considered. A week is also the
standard measure of production for a catcher/processor trip in current
regulation (Section 2.2.1 and Section 4.9 of the Analysis).
No relevant Federal rules have been identified that would duplicate
or overlap with the proposed action.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval. The information collections are
presented by OMB control number.
OMB Control No. 0648-0318
Public reporting burden for Catcher/Processor Observer Partial
Coverage Request is estimated to average 30 minutes per response.
OMB Control No. 0648-0515
Public reporting burden for Catcher/Processor Landing Report
through eLandings is estimated to average one minute per response.
OMB Control No. 0648-0711
Public reporting burden for submittal of Observer Fee through eFISH
is estimated to average 1 minute per response.
Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS at
the ADDRESSES above, and email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax
to (202) 395-5806.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to 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. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 23, 2015.
Eileen Sobeck,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281
0
2. In Sec. 679.2, add paragraph (3)(iii) to the definition of
``Fishing trip'' to read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Fishing trip means: * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) For a catcher/processor in the partial observer coverage
category, the period of time that begins when the vessel departs a port
to harvest fish until
[[Page 81270]]
the vessel returns to port and offloads all processed product.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 679.5, add paragraph (e)(13) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(13) Catcher/processor landing report. (i) The operator of a
catcher/processor placed in the partial observer coverage category
under Sec. 679.51(a)(3) must use eLandings or other NMFS-approved
software to submit a catcher/processor landing report to NMFS for each
fishing trip conducted while that catcher/processor is in the partial
observer coverage category.
(ii) The vessel operator must log into eLandings or other NMFS-
approved software and provide the information required on the computer
screen. Additional instructions for submitting a catcher/processor
landing report is on the Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
(iii) For purposes of this landing report requirement, the end of a
fishing trip is defined in Sec. 679.2, paragraph (3)(iii) of the
definition of a fishing trip.
(iv) The vessel operator must submit the catcher/processor landing
report to NMFS by 2400 hours, A.l.t., on the day after the end of the
fishing trip.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 679.51,
0
a. Revise paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B);
0
b. Add paragraph (a)(1)(i)(C);
0
c. Revise paragraph (a)(2)(i)(A);
0
d. Remove and reserve paragraphs (a)(2)(iv)(B) and (a)(2)(v);
0
e. Add paragraph (a)(3); and
0
f. Revise paragraph (e)(1)(iii)(B) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 679.51 Observer requirements for vessels and plants.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) A catcher vessel when fishing for halibut with hook-and-line
gear and while carrying a person named on a permit issued under Sec.
679.4(d)(1)(i), Sec. 679.4(d)(2)(i), or Sec. 679.4(e)(2), or for
sablefish IFQ with hook-and-line or pot gear and while carrying a
person named on a permit issued under Sec. 679.4(d)(1)(i) or Sec.
679.4(d)(2)(i); or
(C) A catcher/processor placed in the partial observer coverage
category under paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Catcher/processors, except a catcher/processor placed in the
partial observer coverage category under paragraph (a)(3) of this
section;
* * * * *
(3) Catcher/processor placement in the partial observer coverage
category for a year--(i) Definitions. For purposes of this paragraph
(a)(3), these terms are defined as follows:
(A) Average weekly groundfish production means the annual
groundfish round weight production estimate for a catcher/processor,
divided by the number of separate weeks during which production
occurred, as determined by production reports, excluding any groundfish
caught using trawl gear.
(B) Fishing year means the year during which a catcher/processor
might be placed in partial observer coverage.
(C) Standard basis year means the fishing year minus two years.
(D) Alternate basis year means the most recent year before the
standard basis year in which a catcher/processor had any groundfish
production but not earlier than 2009.
(ii) Deadline for requesting partial observer coverage. For the
2016 fishing year, the deadline for requesting partial observer
coverage is [DATE 15 DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE].
For the 2017 fishing year and every fishing year after 2017, the
deadline for requesting partial observer coverage is July 1 of the year
prior to the fishing year.
(iii) Requirements for placing a catcher/processor in the partial
observer coverage category. NMFS will place a catcher/processor in the
partial observer coverage category for a fishing year if the owner of
the catcher/processor requests placement in partial observer coverage
by the deadline for requesting partial observer coverage for that
fishing year and the catcher/processor meets the following
requirements:
(A) An average weekly groundfish production of:
(1) 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or less, but more than zero lb, in the
standard basis year; or
(2) Zero lb in the standard basis year and 79,000 lb (35.8 mt) or
less, but more than zero lb, in the alternate basis year; or
(3) Had no production from 2009 through the standard basis year;
and
(B) Is not a catcher/processor using trawl gear; and
(C) Is not subject to additional observer coverage requirements in
paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of this section.
(iv) How to request placement of a catcher/processor in partial
observer coverage. A vessel owner must submit a request form to NMFS.
The request form must be completed with all required fields accurately
completed. The request form is provided by NMFS and is available on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov). The
submittal methods are described on the form.
(v) Notification of placement in the partial observer coverage
category. NMFS will notify the owner if the catcher/processor has been
placed in the partial observer coverage category in writing. Until NMFS
provides notification, the catcher/processor is in the full observer
coverage category for that fishing year.
(vi) Initial Administrative Determination (IAD). If NMFS denies a
request to place a catcher/processor in the partial observer coverage
category, NMFS will provide an IAD, which will explain the basis for
the denial.
(vii) Appeal. If the owner of a catcher/processor wishes to appeal
NMFS' denial of a request to place a catcher/processor in the partial
observer coverage category, the owner may appeal the determination
under the appeals procedure set out at 15 CFR part 906.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) * * *
(B) Communication equipment requirements. In the case of an
operator of a catcher/processor (except for a catcher/processor placed
in the partial observer coverage category under paragraph (a)(3) of
this section), a mothership, a catcher vessel 125 ft. LOA or longer
(except for a vessel fishing for groundfish with pot gear), or a
catcher vessel participating in the Rockfish Program:
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 679.55, revise paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.55 Observer fees.
(a) Responsibility. The owner of a shoreside processor or
stationary floating processor named on a Federal Processing Permit
(FPP), a catcher/processor named on a Federal Fisheries Permit (FFP),
or a person named on a Registered Buyer permit at the time of the
landing subject to the observer fee as specified at Sec. 679.55(c)
must comply with the requirements of this section. Subsequent non-
renewal of an FPP, FFP, or a Registered Buyer permit does not affect
the permit holder's liability for noncompliance with this section.
* * * * *
(c) Landings subject to the observer fee. The observer fee is
assessed on landings by vessels not in the full
[[Page 81271]]
observer coverage category described at Sec. 679.51(a)(2) according to
the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is fish from the landing subject to
the observer fee?
If fish in the landing by a ---------------------------------------
catcher vessel or production by If the vessel is If the vessel is
a catcher/processor is from the not designated on designated on an
following fishery or species: an FFP or required FFP or required to
to be designated be designated on
on an FFP: an FFP:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Groundfish listed in Table Not applicable, an Yes.
2a to this part that are FFP is required
harvested in the EEZ and to harvest these
subtracted from a total groundfish in the
allowable catch limit specified EEZ.
under Sec. 679.20(a).
(2) Groundfish listed in Table No................ Yes.
2a to this part that are
harvested in Alaska State
waters, including in a parallel
groundfish fishery, and
subtracted from a total
allowable catch limit specified
under Sec. 679.20(a).
(3) Sablefish IFQ, regardless of Yes............... Yes.
where harvested.
(4) Halibut IFQ or halibut CDQ, Yes............... Yes.
regardless of where harvested.
(5) Groundfish listed in Table No................ No.
2a to this part that are
harvested in Alaska State
waters, but is not subtracted
from a total allowable catch
limit under Sec. 679.20(a).
(6) Any groundfish or other No................ No.
species not listed in Table 2a
to part 679, except halibut IFQ
or CDQ halibut, regardless of
where harvested.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. Sec. 679.2 and 679.5 [Amended]
0
6. At each of the locations shown in the ``Location'' column, remove
the phrase indicated in the ``Remove'' column and replace it with the
phrase indicated in the ``Add'' column for the number of times
indicated in the ``Frequency'' column.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Remove Add Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.2 Definition of Sec. 679.50............. Sec. 679.53............. 1
``Suspension''.
Sec. 679.2 Definition of Sec. 679.50(j).......... Sec. 679.53(c).......... 1
``Suspension''.
Sec. 679.5(e)(10)(iv)(B).............. required to have 100 in the groundfish and 1
percent observer coverage halibut fishery full
or more,. observer coverage
category described at
Sec. 679.51(a)(2),.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2015-32742 Filed 12-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P