Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area; American Fisheries Act; Amendment 113, 84434-84458 [2016-28152]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84434
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
delivered the fish and the port sampler,
if one is present.
(C) After review, the receiver and the
vessel operator must sign a printed hard
copy of the electronic fish ticket or, if
the landing occurs outside of business
hours, the original dock ticket.
(D) Prior to submittal, three copies of
the signed electronic fish ticket must be
produced by the receiver and a copy
provided to each of the following:
(1) The vessel operator,
(2) The state of origin if required by
state regulations, and
(3) The first receiver.
(E) After review and signature, the
electronic fish ticket must be submitted
within 24 hours after the date of
landing, as specified in paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) of this section.
(iv) If electronic fish tickets will be
submitted after transport, follow these
process and submittal requirements:
(A) The vessel name and the
electronic fish ticket number must be
recorded on each dock ticket related to
that landing.
(C) Upon completion of the dock
ticket, but prior to transfer of the offload
to another location, the dock ticket
information that will be used to
complete the electronic fish ticket must
be reviewed by the vessel operator who
delivered the fish.
(D) After review, the first receiver and
the vessel operator must sign the
original copy of each dock ticket related
to that landing.
(E) Prior to submittal of the electronic
fish ticket, three copies of the signed
dock ticket must be produced by the
first receiver and a copy provided to
each of the following:
(1) The vessel operator,
(2) The state of origin if required by
state regulations, and
(3) The first receiver.
(F) Based on the information
contained in the signed dock ticket, the
electronic fish ticket must be completed
and submitted within 24 hours of the
date of landing, as specified in
paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section.
(G) Three copies of the electronic fish
ticket must be produced by the first
receiver and a copy provided to each of
the following:
(1) The vessel operator,
(2) The state of origin if required by
state regulations, and
(3) The first receiver.
(3) Revising a submission. In the event
that a data error is found, electronic fish
ticket submissions must be revised by
resubmitting the revised form
electronically. Electronic fish tickets are
to be used for the submission of final
data. Preliminary data, including
estimates of fish weights or species
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
composition, shall not be submitted on
electronic fish tickets.
(4) Waivers for submission. On a caseby-case basis, a temporary written
waiver of the requirement to submit
electronic fish tickets may be granted by
the Assistant Regional Administrator or
designee if he/she determines that
circumstances beyond the control of a
receiver would result in inadequate data
submissions using the electronic fish
ticket system. The duration of the
waiver will be determined on a case-bycase basis.
(5) Reporting requirements when a
temporary waiver has been granted.
Receivers that have been granted a
temporary waiver from the requirement
to submit electronic fish tickets must
submit on paper the same data as is
required on electronic fish tickets
within 24 hours of the date of landing
during the period that the waiver is in
effect. Paper fish tickets must be sent by
facsimile to NMFS, West Coast Region,
Sustainable Fisheries Division, 206–
526–6736 or by delivering it in person
to 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle,
WA 98115. The requirements for
submissions of paper tickets in this
paragraph are separate from, and in
addition to existing state requirements
for landing receipts or fish receiving
tickets.
[FR Doc. 2016–28153 Filed 11–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 151113999–6999–02]
RIN 0648–BF54
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area;
American Fisheries Act; Amendment
113
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues this final rule to
implement Amendment 113 to the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area
(FMP). This final rule modifies the
management of Bering Sea and Aleutian
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Islands (BSAI) Pacific cod fishery to set
aside a portion of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod total allowable catch for
harvest by vessels directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and
delivering their catch for processing to
a shoreside processor located on land
west of 170° W. longitude in the
Aleutian Islands (‘‘Aleutian Islands
shoreplant’’). The harvest set-aside
applies only if specific notification and
performance requirements are met, and
only during the first few months of the
fishing year. This harvest set-aside
provides the opportunity for vessels,
Aleutian Islands shoreplants, and the
communities where Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are located to receive
benefits from a portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery. The
notification and performance
requirements preserve an opportunity
for the complete harvest of the BSAI
Pacific cod resource if the set-aside is
not fully harvested. This final rule is
intended to promote the goals and
objectives of Amendment 113, the FMP,
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, and
other applicable laws.
DATES: Effective on November 23, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of
Amendment 113 to the FMP, the
Environmental Assessment (EA),
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA),
and Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) prepared for this action,
collectively ‘‘the Analysis,’’ and the
proposed rule may be obtained 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 Alaska Region,
P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–
1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records
Officer; in person at NMFS Alaska
Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room
420A, Juneau, AK; by email to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov; or by fax to
(202) 395–5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie
Scheurer, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
NMFS manages the groundfish and
Pacific cod fisheries in the Exclusive
Economic Zone of the BSAI under the
FMP. The North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council)
prepared, and the Secretary of
Commerce approved, the FMP pursuant
to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other
applicable laws. Regulations
implementing the FMP appear at 50
CFR part 679. General regulations that
pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at 50
CFR part 600.
NMFS published the Notice of
Availability of Amendment 113 on July
19, 2016 (81 FR 46883), with comments
invited through September 19, 2016.
NMFS published the proposed rule to
implement Amendment 113 on August
1, 2016 (81 FR 50444), with comments
invited through August 31, 2016. The
Secretary approved Amendment 113 on
October 17, 2016. NMFS received 35
unique comments on Amendment 113
and the proposed rule from 16 different
commenters. A summary of these
comments and the responses by NMFS
are provided under the heading
‘‘Responses to Comments’’ below. These
comments resulted in two minor
changes from the proposed rule. One
additional change to this final rule is
not in response to comments, but is an
administrative change that NMFS
deemed necessary for timely
implementation of this final rule.
A detailed review of the BSAI Pacific
cod fishery, provisions of Amendment
113, the proposed regulations to
implement Amendment 113, and the
rationale for these regulations is
provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule (81 FR 50444, August 1,
2016) and is not repeated here. The
preamble to this final rule briefly
reviews the regulatory changes made by
this final rule.
This final rule modifies the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery to set aside a portion
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod total
allowable catch (TAC) for harvest by
vessels directed fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod and delivering their
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing. The harvest set-aside
applies only if specific notification and
performance requirements are met, and
only during the first few months of the
fishing year.
Table 3 in the proposed rule preamble
(81 FR 50444, August 1, 2016) describes
the Overfishing Levels (OFLs), the
Acceptable Biological Catches (ABCs),
TACs, the Western Alaska Community
Development Quota (CDQ) and nonCDQ fishery sector allocations, and
seasonal apportionments of BSAI Pacific
cod in 2017, the first year of
implementation of this final rule. Each
of these terms is described in the
preamble to the proposed rule. Table 3
of the proposed rule preamble includes
data from Tables 2 and 9 in the 2016
and 2017 final harvest specifications for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
the BSAI groundfish fisheries (81 FR
14773, March 18, 2016).
Harvesting and Processing of Pacific
Cod in the Aleutian Islands
A variety of vessels using a variety of
gear types harvest the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC each year. Trawl
catcher vessels (CVs) and trawl catcher
processors (CPs) have been among the
most active participants in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery. Hook-andline CPs have consistently participated
in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Non-trawl CVs have harvested
only a very small portion of the Pacific
cod from the Aleutian Islands. The
proposed rule and Section 2.6.6 of the
Analysis provide additional detail on
the types of vessels harvesting Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands.
Trawl CVs deliver their catch of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to several
types of processors in the Aleutian
Islands: CPs acting as motherships
(vessels that process Pacific cod
delivered by trawl CVs); stationary
floating processors anchored in specific
locations that receive and process catch
on board but do not harvest and process
their own catch; and shoreside
processing facilities that are physically
located on land west of 170° W.
longitude in the Aleutian Islands
(defined as ‘‘Aleutian Islands
shoreplant’’ in this final rule).
Currently, Aleutian Islands
shoreplants that may be capable of
receiving Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
from CVs are located in the
communities of Adak and Atka.
Although the Atka shoreplant has not
received and processed Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod, the shoreplant in Adak has
received and processed relatively large
amounts of Pacific cod. The proposed
rule and Section 2.7.1 of the Analysis
have additional detail on the delivery
and processing of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod.
Since 2008, trawl CVs have primarily
delivered their catch of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to a small group of CPs that
operate as motherships. As deliveries of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest
from trawl CVs to CPs operating as
motherships have increased in recent
years, the amount of trawl CV harvest
delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants has decreased.
Additionally, CPs operating as
motherships have demonstrated the
capacity to process the entire TAC of
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands in
years when no Aleutian Islands
shoreplant is in operation. This final
rule is intended in part to mitigate the
risk that CVs, Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, and the communities in
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84435
which they are located will be
preempted from participating in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery by
CPs.
The proposed rule and Section 2.6 of
the Analysis provide additional
description of the factors that have
affected the harvesting and processing
of Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands.
Need for This Final Rule
A thorough description of the history
and need for this action is provided in
the proposed rule and the Analysis
prepared for this action and is not
repeated here. The Council adopted its
preferred alternative for Amendment
113 at its October 2015 meeting.
Since 2008, Aleutian Islands fishing
communities, and specifically the
community of Adak and its shoreplant,
have seen a decrease in the amount of
Pacific cod being harvested and
delivered. The amount of Pacific cod
delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants has been highly variable,
which is not conducive to stable
shoreside operations. Several factors
have contributed to this instability, and
therefore the need for this action,
including decreased Pacific cod biomass
in the Aleutian Islands subarea; the
establishment of separate OFLs, ABCs,
and TACs for Pacific cod in the Bering
Sea and the Aleutian Islands; changing
Steller sea lion protection measures; and
changing fishing practices in part
resulting from rationalization programs
that allocate catch to specific fishery
participants.
This rule establishes a harvest setaside in which a portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC will be
available for harvest by vessels directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and delivering their catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants for processing. This
harvest set-aside applies only if specific
notification and performance
requirements are met, and only during
the first few months of the fishing year.
The Council determined and NMFS
agrees that a harvest set-aside is needed
for several reasons: The TAC for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod has been
significantly lower than predicted so
that less Pacific cod is available for
harvest; the rationalization programs,
and particularly the Amendment 80
Program, have allowed an influx of
processing capacity into the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery; and the
Aleutian Islands communities and
shoreplants (Adak) have received almost
all of their total first wholesale gross
revenue from Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod.
This final rule strikes a balance
between providing protections for
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84436
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
fishing communities and ensuring that
the fishery sectors have a meaningful
opportunity to fully harvest their BSAI
Pacific cod allocations by including
several thresholds to prevent a portion
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC
from being unharvested. This final rule
will provide social and economic
benefits to, and promote stability in,
fishery-dependent fishing communities
in the Aleutian Islands and is
responsive to changes in management of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
such as rationalization programs,
decreasing biomass of Pacific cod, and
Steller sea lion protection measures that
necessitate putting protections in place
to protect other non-rationalized
fisheries.
This final rule does not modify
existing harvest allocations of BSAI
Pacific cod to participants in the CDQ
Program. This final rule does not modify
existing harvest allocations of BSAI
Pacific cod made to the nine non-CDQ
fishery sectors defined in
§ 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A). Although the nine
non-CDQ sectors will continue to
receive their existing harvest allocations
of BSAI Pacific cod, each sector’s ability
to harvest a portion of its BSAI Pacific
cod allocation in the Aleutian Islands
may be affected by this rule.
The Aleutian Islands shoreplants in
Adak and Atka currently are not
processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
However, the protection measures and
harvest set-aside in this final rule will
minimize the risk of exclusion from,
and maintain opportunities for
participation in, the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian Islands
harvesters, shoreplants, and
communities when those Aleutian
Islands communities are able to accept
deliveries of and process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod.
This final rule revises regulations to
provide additional opportunities for
harvesters to deliver Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants. Recent Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TACs have not been
sufficient to allow all sectors to
prosecute the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery at their historical levels.
Without protections, Aleutian Islands
harvesters, shoreplants, and fishing
communities may be preempted from
the fishery by harvests by CPs, or by
harvests from CVs delivering their catch
to CPs.
Because of their remote location and
limited economic alternatives, Aleutian
Islands communities rely on harvesting
and processing of the nearby fishery
resources to support and sustain the
social and economic welfare of their
communities. This final rule is intended
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
to be directly responsive to National
Standard 8 of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act that states conservation and
management measures shall take into
account the importance of fishery
resources to fishing communities in
order to provide for the sustained
participation of such communities, and
to the extent practicable, minimize
adverse economic impacts on such
communities (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(8)).
The following sections provide
further explanation of the regulatory
changes made by this rule. Additional
detail about the rationale for and effect
of the regulatory changes in this rule is
provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule and in the Analysis for
this action.
Overview of Measures Implemented by
This Rule
This final rule modifies several
aspects of the BSAI Pacific cod fishery.
This final rule sets aside a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
TAC for harvest by vessels directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and delivering their catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants. However, the
harvest set-aside applies only if specific
notification and performance
requirements are met, and only during
the first few months of the fishing year.
In order to implement Amendment
113, this final rule:
• Defines the term ‘‘Aleutian Islands
shoreplant’’ in regulation;
• Calculates and defines the amount
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC
that will be available as a directed
fishing allowance (DFA) and the amount
that will be available as an incidental
catch allowance (ICA);
• Limits the amount of early season
(from January 20 until April 1), also
known as A-season, Pacific cod that
may be harvested by the trawl CV sector
in the Bering Sea prior to March 21
(Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation);
• Sets aside some or all of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
DFA for harvest by vessels directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and delivering their catch for processing
by Aleutian Islands shoreplants from
January 1 to March 15 (Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside);
• Requires that either the City of
Adak or the City of Atka annually notify
NMFS of its intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod during the upcoming
fishing year in order for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation to be effective in the
upcoming fishing year; and
• Removes the Bering Sea Trawl CV
A-Season Sector Limitation and the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside if
less than 1,000 metric tons (mt) of the
harvest set-aside is delivered to (i.e.,
landed at) Aleutian Islands shoreplants
on or before February 28, or if the
harvest set-aside is fully taken before
March 15.
This final rule adds a definition to
§ 679.2 for ‘‘Aleutian Islands
shoreplant’’ to mean a processing
facility that is physically located on
land west of 170° W. longitude within
the State of Alaska (State). This
definition is needed because the
existing term ‘‘shoreside processor’’ in
§ 679.2 can include processing vessels
that are moored or otherwise fixed in a
location (i.e., stationary floating
processors), but not necessarily located
on land. This new definition provides a
clear and consistent term for referencing
the processors located on land within
the Aleutian Islands.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Summary of Regulatory Changes
Revisions to Definitions at § 679.2
Revisions to General Limitations at
§ 679.20
This final rule adds a new paragraph
(viii) to § 679.20(a)(7). This new
paragraph includes the primary
regulatory provisions of this final rule.
The preamble to the proposed rule
provides examples to aid the reader in
understanding how this final rule will
apply using 2017 harvest specifications
for BSAI Pacific cod (81 FR 14773,
March 18, 2016). For the remainder of
this preamble, unless otherwise
specified, all references to allocations
and apportionments of BSAI Pacific cod
refer to non-CDQ allocations and
apportionments of BSAI Pacific cod.
Calculation of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific Cod ICA and DFA
NMFS will annually specify an ICA
and a DFA derived from the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. Each
year, during the annual harvest
specifications process described at
§ 679.20(c), NMFS will specify an
amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
that NMFS estimates will be taken as
incidental catch when directed fishing
for non-CDQ groundfish other than
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands. This
amount will be the Aleutian Islands ICA
and will be deducted from the Aleutian
Islands non-CDQ TAC. The amount of
the Aleutian Islands non-CDQ TAC
remaining after subtraction of the
Aleutian Islands ICA will be the
Aleutian Islands DFA.
NMFS will specify the Aleutian
Islands ICA and DFA so that NMFS can
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
clearly establish the amount of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod that will be used to
determine the amount of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside described
in the following sections of this
preamble. The specification will also
provide the public with notification of
the amount of the Aleutian Islands nonCDQ TAC that is available for directed
fishing prior to the start of the fishing
season to aid in the planning of fishery
operations. The Aleutian Islands DFA is
the maximum amount of Pacific cod
available for directed fishing by all nonCDQ fishery sectors in all seasons in the
Aleutian Islands.
Although the amount of the Aleutian
Islands ICA may vary from year to year,
NMFS specifies an Aleutian Islands ICA
of 2,500 mt for 2017. NMFS determined
that this amount will be needed to
support incidental catch of Pacific cod
in other Aleutian Islands non-CDQ
directed groundfish fisheries. In future
years, NMFS will specify the Aleutian
Islands ICA in the annual harvest
specifications based on recent and
anticipated incidental catch of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in other Aleutian
Islands non-CDQ directed groundfish
fisheries.
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation
This final rule establishes the Bering
Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation to restrict the amount of the
trawl CV sector’s A-season allocation
that can be harvested in the Bering Sea
subarea prior to March 21. The Bering
Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation ensures that some of the
trawl CV sector’s A-season allocation
remains available for harvest in the
Aleutian Islands subarea by trawl
catcher vessels that deliver their catch
of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing. On March 21, the restriction
on Bering Sea harvest by the trawl CV
sector will be lifted and the remainder,
if any, of the BSAI trawl CV sector’s Aseason allocation can be harvested in
either the Bering Sea or the Aleutian
Islands (if still open to directed fishing
for Pacific cod) for delivery to any
eligible processor for processing.
The Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation will equal the lesser of
either the Aleutian Islands DFA or 5,000
mt. The Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation will be equivalent to
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside, as discussed in the following
section of the preamble. The amount of
the trawl CV sector’s A-season
allocation that may be harvested in the
Bering Sea prior to March 21 will be the
amount of Pacific cod that remains after
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
deducting the Bering Sea Trawl CV ASeason Sector Limitation from the BSAI
trawl CV sector A-season allocation
listed in the annual harvest
specifications (and as determined at
§ 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i)). NMFS will
annually specify in the annual harvest
specifications the Bering Sea Trawl CV
A-Season Sector Limitation and the
amount of the trawl CV sector’s Aseason allocation that may be harvested
in the Bering Sea prior to March 21.
The preamble to the proposed rule
provides additional background on the
factors that the Council and NMFS
considered when determining the
amount and timing of the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and is not repeated here.
Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest
Set-Aside
This final rule requires that some or
all of the Aleutian Islands DFA be set
aside for harvest by vessels directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and delivering their catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants for processing. This
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will be available for harvest by vessels
using any authorized gear type and that
deliver their directed catch of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing. NMFS will
account for harvest and processing of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod under the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
separate from, and in addition to, its
accounting of Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod catch by the nine non-CDQ fishery
sectors established in § 679.20(a)(7)(ii).
Because of this separate accounting, the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will not increase or decrease the amount
of BSAI Pacific cod allocated to any of
the non-CDQ fishery sectors. The
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will apply from January 1 until March
15 of each year if certain notification
and performance measures, described in
the following section of the preamble,
are satisfied.
The amount of the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside will be calculated
as described above for the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation. It
will be an amount equal to the lesser of
either the Aleutian Islands DFA or 5,000
mt. NMFS will notify the public of the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
through the annual harvest
specifications process.
When the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside is set equal to the
Aleutian Islands DFA and the set-aside
is in effect, directed fishing for Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands may only be
conducted by vessels that deliver their
catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84437
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing. Vessels that do not want to
deliver their directed catch of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing will be
prohibited from directed fishing for
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands when
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside is in effect. These vessels will be
permitted to conduct directed fishing
for groundfish other than Pacific cod in
the Aleutian Islands when the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is in
effect, and their incidental harvests of
Pacific cod will accrue toward the
Aleutian Islands ICA. CPs will be
permitted to conduct directed fishing
for Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands
when the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside side is in effect as long as they
act only as CVs and deliver their
directed catch of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing. CPs also will
be permitted to retain and process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that is
caught as incidental catch while
directed fishing for groundfish other
than Pacific cod, and those incidental
harvests of Pacific cod will accrue
toward the Aleutian Islands ICA.
When the Aleutian Islands DFA is
greater than 5,000 mt, and therefore the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
is set equal to 5,000 mt, the difference
between the DFA and the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will be
available for directed fishing by all nonCDQ fishery sectors with sufficient
A-season allocations and may be
processed by any eligible processor.
This difference is called the ‘‘Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery.’’ In years
when there is both an Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside and an Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery, vessels
may conduct directed fishing for Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands and deliver
their catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants or to any eligible processor
for processing as long as the Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery is open to
directed fishing. CPs will be permitted
to conduct directed fishing for Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands and process
that directed catch as long as the
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery is
open to directed fishing. NMFS will
determine whether the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery is sufficient to
support a directed fishery and will
notify the public through a notice in the
Federal Register.
While the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside is in effect, NMFS
will account for Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod caught by vessels against the
appropriate fishery sector allocation, the
ICA or the DFA, and the Aleutian
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
84438
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside. Examples
illustrating this accounting are provided
in the preamble of the proposed rule.
If certain notification and
performance measures are met, the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will be in effect from January 1 until
March 15 of each year. If the entire setaside is harvested and delivered prior to
March 15, NMFS will lift the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside as soon as possible. The Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will end at
noon on March 15 even if the entire setaside has not been harvested and
delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants.
When the set-aside ends, any
remaining Aleutian Islands DFA may be
harvested by any non-CDQ fishery
sector with remaining A-season
allocation, and the harvest may be
delivered to any eligible processor. If a
vessel has been directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, but has not
yet delivered that Pacific cod for
processing when the harvest set-aside is
lifted, that vessel may deliver its Pacific
cod to any eligible processor. If a vessel
has been directed fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod, but has not yet
delivered that Pacific cod for processing
when the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted
Fishery closes, but the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside is still in effect, it
will be required to deliver that Pacific
cod to an Aleutian Islands shoreplant
for processing or be in violation of the
directed fishing closure.
The preamble to the proposed rule
provides additional background on the
factors that the Council and NMFS
considered when determining the
amount and timing of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and is not
repeated here.
Measures To Prevent Stranding of
Aleutian Islands Non-CDQ Pacific Cod
TAC
Stranding is a term sometimes used to
describe TAC that remains unharvested
due to regulations. This final rule
includes performance measures
intended to prevent the stranding of
Aleutian Islands non-CDQ Pacific cod
TAC if the set-aside is not requested, if
limited processing occurs at Aleutian
Islands shoreplants, or if the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is taken
before March 15.
The first performance measure
requires that either the City Manager of
the City of Adak or the City
Administrator of the City of Atka notify
NMFS of the city’s intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in the
upcoming fishing year. If neither city
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
notifies NMFS in accordance with
regulatory requirements described
below, the Bering Sea Trawl CV
A-Season Sector Limitation and the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will not be in effect for the upcoming
fishing year.
This final rule requires annual
notification to NMFS in the form of a
letter or memorandum signed by the
City Manager of Adak or the City
Administrator of Atka stating the city’s
intent to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod in the upcoming fishing
year. This signed letter or memorandum
is the official notification of intent. The
official notification of intent must be
postmarked no later than December 8,
2016, and no later than October 31 for
each year after 2016. The official
notification of intent must be submitted
to the NMFS Alaska Regional
Administrator by certified mail through
the United States Postal Service. The
City Manager of Adak or City
Administrator of Atka must also submit
an electronic copy of the official
notification of intent and the certified
mail receipt with postmark via email to
NMFS (nmfs.akr.inseason@noaa.gov) no
later than December 8, 2016, and no
later than October 31 for each year after
2016. Email submission of electronic
copies of the official notification of
intent and the certified mail receipt
with postmark will provide NMFS with
the timely information it needs to
manage the upcoming fisheries. Email
notification is in addition to notification
via certified U.S. Mail and does not
replace the requirement for notification
through the U.S. Postal Service.
A city’s notification of intent to
process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
must contain the following information:
Date, name of city, a statement of intent
to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod,
statement of calendar year during which
the city intends to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod, and the signature of
and contact information for the City
Manager or City Administrator of the
city whose shoreplant is intending to
process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
On or shortly after December 8, 2016,
and November 1 for each year after
2016, the Regional Administrator will
send a signed and dated letter either
confirming receipt of the city’s
notification of their intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, or
informing the city that notification was
not received by the deadline.
While this final rule will make the
set-aside available for processing by any
shoreplant west of 170° W. longitude in
the Aleutian Islands, the notification
requirement is required from either
Adak or Atka and not another city that
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
might have an Aleutian Islands
shoreplant in the future. The Council
and NMFS’s rationale for this is
provided in the preamble of the
proposed rule.
The second performance measure
removes the Bering Sea Trawl CV ASeason Sector Limitation and the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
for the remainder of the A-season if less
than 1,000 mt of the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside is delivered to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants by
February 28. This performance measure
will lift the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside and make any remaining
amount of the set-aside available to all
participants if Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are unable to process Pacific
cod or if too few or no vessels decide
to participate in the set-aside fishery.
The third performance measure
suspends the Bering Sea Trawl CV
A-Season Sector Limitation for the
remainder of the year if the entire
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
(5,000 mt in 2017) is fully harvested and
delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants before March 15.
The preamble to the proposed rule
provides additional background on the
factors considered by the Council and
NMFS when establishing these
performance standards and is not
repeated here.
Harvest Specifications Process To
Announce BSAI A-Season Pacific Cod
Limits Implemented by Amendment 113
During the annual harvest
specifications process described in the
proposed rule, NMFS will publish in
the proposed harvest specifications the
amounts for the Aleutian Islands ICA,
DFA, CV Harvest Set-Aside, and
Unrestricted Fishery, as well as the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation, and the amount available for
harvest by trawl CVs in the Bering Sea
while the set-aside is in effect. These
amounts will be published in a separate
table to supplement the table in the
harvest specifications that describes the
final gear shares and allowances of the
BSAI Pacific cod TAC for the upcoming
year.
NMFS also will publish a notice in
the Federal Register shortly after
December 8, 2016, and November 1 for
each year after 2016, announcing
whether the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be
in effect for the upcoming fishing year,
and whether the harvest limits in the
supplemental table will apply. If
necessary, NMFS will publish in the
Federal Register an adjustment of the
BSAI A-season Pacific cod limits for the
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
upcoming year after the Council adopts
the harvest specifications in December.
Amendment of the 2017 Final Harvest
Specifications for the Groundfish
Fishery of the BSAI
With this final rule, NMFS amends
the 2017 final harvest specifications for
the groundfish fishery of the BSAI by
adding the following Table 8a, which
specifies the Aleutian Islands ICA, DFA,
CV Harvest Set-Aside, and Unrestricted
Fishery, as well as the Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation. If
NMFS receives timely notification of
84439
intent to process from either Adak or
Atka, the harvest limits in Table 8a will
be in effect in 2017.
TABLE 8A—2017 BSAI A-SEASON PACIFIC COD LIMITS IF ALEUTIAN ISLANDS SHOREPLANTS INTEND TO PROCESS PACIFIC
COD
Amount
(mt)
2017 Allocations under Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
AI non-CDQ TAC .................................................................................................................................................................................
AI ICA ..................................................................................................................................................................................................
AI DFA .................................................................................................................................................................................................
BS non-CDQ TAC ...............................................................................................................................................................................
BSAI Trawl CV A-Season Allocation ...................................................................................................................................................
BSAI Trawl CV A-Season Allocation minus Sector Limitation 1 ..........................................................................................................
BS Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation ...........................................................................................................................................
AI CV Harvest Set-Aside .....................................................................................................................................................................
AI Unrestricted Fishery ........................................................................................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
1 This
11,465
2,500
8,965
213,141
36,732
31,732
5,000
5,000
3,965
is the amount of the BSAI trawl CV A-season allocation that may be harvested in the Bering Sea prior to March 21.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
NMFS made three changes to the
regulatory text from the proposed rule.
Two of these changes are in response to
comments received on the proposed
rule, and one change is made to address
administration of this final rule in 2016.
First, this final rule modifies
§ 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) in response to
Comment 8. The words ‘‘prior to’’ are
changed to ‘‘on or before’’ to reflect the
Council’s intent. See the response to
Comment 8 for the complete
justification for this change.
Second, this final rule modifies
§ 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(D) and (E) to specify
that the City Manager of Adak and the
City Administrator of Atka are the
individuals responsible for notifying
NMFS of their city’s intent to process
Pacific cod in the upcoming year. See
the response to Comment 5 for the
complete justification for this change.
Third, this final rule modifies
§ 679.20(a)(7)(viii) to include a separate
notification deadline for 2016 for the
City Manager of Adak or the City
Administrator of Atka to notify NMFS of
the intent to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod in 2017. This final rule
requires that the official notification of
intent to process for 2017 be postmarked
and emailed no later than December 8,
2016. This final rule clarifies that for all
years after 2016, this annual notification
must be postmarked and emailed no
later than October 31.
This change is required to ensure that
NMFS provides an opportunity for the
City of Adak and the City of Atka to
notify NMFS of their intent to process
after this final rule has published.
Because this final rule will publish and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
become effective after October 31, 2016,
the City of Adak and the City of Atka
could not provide timely notification to
NMFS of their intent to process in 2017
without this change in the notification
deadline. This change enables the cities
of Adak and Atka, and vessels
delivering to Aleutian Island
shoreplants, to receive the benefits of
this final rule in 2017 that would
otherwise be foregone without this
change. NMFS is providing 15 days after
the publication of this rule for the City
of Adak or the City of Atka to notify
NMFS so that the cities have adequate
time after the publication of this final
rule to prepare and submit their official
notification of intent.
NMFS determined that this change
will not affect participants in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery in
ways not previously considered and
analyzed. The 2016 deadline for
submitting notification of intent to
process falls between the two dates
considered by the Council: Prior to
November 1 or prior to December 15. In
considering the effect these notification
deadlines, the Analysis focuses on the
ability of the industry to react if there
are no Aleutian Islands shoreplants
operating in the upcoming fishing year,
stating that selection of the earlier
deadline would provide more time for
the industry to make the necessary
arrangements to harvest and process the
non-CDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
DFA, and that in general, more
notification concerning processing of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in the
upcoming fishing year will help to
reduce the risk of unharvested non-CDQ
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC. Even
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
so, the Analysis concludes that both
date options would give fishery
participants sufficient time to plan and
prepare before the A-season begins and
that ideally notice of intent to process
would be provided to NMFS by a date
near the end of the December Council
meeting. NMFS continues to agree with
the Council that October 31 is the
preferred deadline of the two dates
considered, and this final rule
establishes October 31 as the deadline
for submission of notification of intent
for each fishing year after 2016.
However, NMFS has determined that
the notification deadline for 2016 will
allow Adak and Atka an opportunity to
submit notification prior to the start of
the 2017 fishing year, thus providing an
opportunity for the set-aside to be
effective in 2017, rather than having to
wait an additional year. Additionally,
the 2016 notification deadline will
provide fishery participants with
sufficient time to plan and prepare
before the A-season begins because
NMFS will be able to notify fishery
participants as to whether the set-aside
will be in effect for 2017 prior to
December 15 and prior to the end of the
December Council meeting. In addition,
this change is applicable only for the
first year of implementation of this final
rule, and will therefore have a limited
and temporary effect.
Responses to Comments
NMFS received 35 unique comments
on Amendment 113 and the proposed
rule in 18 comment letters from 16
different commenters. The 16
commenters consisted of 2 individuals;
7 companies representing CPs; the
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
84440
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Alaska Department of Fish and Game; 1
fish processing company; 1 CDQ group;
2 community development
corporations, 1 Aleutian Islands
municipal government; and 1 non-profit
conservation organization. Of the 16
commenters, 9 explicitly supported
adoption of the proposed harvest setaside. Opponents were companies
representing CPs whose vessels could be
restricted by this action.
In responding to these comments,
when NMFS refers to Amendment 113,
unless otherwise noted, NMFS means
Amendment 113 and this final rule
implementing Amendment 113.
General Comments
Comment 1: This action is
unnecessary. When Adak has an
operational plant, it received a
significant portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod catch without
delivery requirements.
Response 1: In February 2015, the
Council identified in a modified
problem statement the purpose and
need for protections for Aleutian Islands
communities as a result of the
implementation of rationalization
programs, the BSAI Pacific cod TAC
split, and relatively low Pacific cod
abundance in the Aleutian Islands,
among other factors (Section 2.2 of the
Analysis). The Council stated that these
factors have ‘‘. . . increased the risk
that the historical share of BSAI cod of
other industry participants and
communities that depend on shoreplant
processing in the region may be
diminished.’’ The Council’s rationale for
its preferred alternative stated that this
action ‘‘. . . would provide benefits and
stability to fishery dependent
communities in the Aleutian Islands
and is responsive to changes in
management regimes like rationalization
programs that necessitate putting
protections in place to protect other
non-rationalized fisheries’’ (Section
2.4.3 of the Analysis). The Council’s
purpose and need statement, the
proposed rule, and the Analysis
describe the range of factors that have
affected delivery patterns in the
Aleutian Islands that could limit
opportunities for Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, harvesters delivering to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants, and the
communities in the Aleutian Islands.
Thorough descriptions of the factors
necessitating this action, and the
Council’s rationale are provided in the
‘‘Need for This Proposed Rule’’ section
of the proposed rule and the Analysis
and are not repeated here.
In years when the Adak shoreplant
was not operational, the offshore
processing sector (primarily CPs) was
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
able to process the entire Aleutian
Islands TAC (Section 2.7.1.2 of the
Analysis), demonstrating that the
offshore sector is capable of fully
harvesting available catch and
preempting the onshore sector’s access
to the fishery. Table 2–32 of the
Analysis shows that prior to 2008, the
majority of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod processed by the offshore sector
originated from CP harvest, but after
2008, CV deliveries of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to CPs played a more
prominent role in the offshore
processing of Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod. Although Aleutian Islands
shoreplants operating in Adak have
received Pacific cod without a harvest
set-aside in the past, NMFS and the
Council determined that this action is
necessary to minimize the risk of
diminished share of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
communities dependent on the fishery
and to provide additional stability to
promote and sustain Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, harvesters delivering to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants, and the
communities in the Aleutian Islands.
Comment 2: The proposed rule
assumes that the increase in offshore
processing since the implementation of
rationalization programs was a major
cause of instability in onshore
processing in the Aleutian Islands, but
this is not true. There have been longstanding challenges to the viability of
shore-based processing in the Aleutian
Islands such as ownership changes of
Aleutian Islands shoreplants, Steller sea
lion protection measures, plant
insolvency, energy costs, employment
challenges, market conditions, and
product transportation difficulties.
Response 2: As explained in the
‘‘Need for This Proposed Rule’’ section
of the preamble to the proposed rule
and in Section 2.2 of the Analysis, the
Council and NMFS recognize that
several factors have contributed to
instability in processing operations in
the Aleutian Islands, including
decreased Pacific cod biomass in the
Aleutian Islands subarea; the
establishment of separate OFLs, ABCs,
and TACs for Pacific cod in the Bering
Sea and the Aleutian Islands (referred to
as the ‘‘BSAI TAC split’’); changing
Steller sea lion protection measures;
historical volatility in the Aleutian
Islands shoreplant processing sector;
and changing fishing practices in part
resulting from rationalization programs.
The Council, NMFS and this rule do not
assume that rationalization programs are
the primary cause of this instability, but
rather, one of many contributing factors.
Comment 3: This is a wipe-out plan
for cod. It will wipe out cod just as this
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
agency did in Maine. Some other system
has to be set up for economic
sustainability for people in the area.
Stop this plan now.
Response 3: NMFS disagrees that
Amendment 113 will wipe out Pacific
cod. This action will not change the
TAC for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, or
conservation and management measures
that ensure that harvests of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod do not exceed
established OFL, ABC, or TAC limits.
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is managed
to a TAC that is set at or below the ABC
and the stock is neither overfished nor
approaching an overfished condition
(see Section 3.3 of the Analysis).
Comment 4: There is no provision in
the proposed rule to remove the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
from the FMP and Federal regulations if
no on-shore processing activity occurs
for a number of years. Does the set-aside
continue indefinitely? What would
prompt Council re-examination?
Response 4: The commenter is
correct; there is no provision in
Amendment 113 or this rule that would
end, or sunset, the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside if Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are not operational for a
specified number of years. However,
under the performance measures
established by this final rule, the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
is effective in a fishing year only if
timely and complete notification of
intent to process from the City of Adak
or the City of Atka is received by NMFS.
Presumably, if there is not likely to be
an operational Aleutian Islands
shoreplant in the upcoming fishing year,
these cities would not submit a
notification to NMFS. Also, in order for
the set-aside to continue to be effective
after February 28, a minimum of 1,000
mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod must
be delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants on or before February 28. If,
in the future, it appears that the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
is not being used, or Aleutian Islands
shoreplants cannot meet the demand,
the Council could consider and, if
warranted, initiate an action to revise or
remove the provisions of Amendment
113 and its implementing regulations.
Comment 5: The proposed rule grants
de facto fishery management authority
to municipal officials, by requiring them
to provide notice to NMFS of the
Aleutian Islands shoreplants intent to
process Pacific cod in the upcoming
year. NMFS is surrendering the
determination of whether a shore plant
is prepared to process Pacific cod to a
community representative who is not a
regulated participant in the fishery. This
is granting too much power to one
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
individual. The city manager could use
this authority to undermine certain
businesses or to grant favors.
Additionally, Atka does not have a city
manager.
Response 5: The Council specified
that the City of Adak or the City of Atka
should be the entity to provide official
notification to NMFS of the
community’s intent to process Pacific
cod, but it did not specify who from
Adak or Atka should provide such
notification (Section 2.7.2.4 of the
Analysis). The Analysis describes that if
the notification requirement is
implemented, NMFS could specify the
person representing the city who should
provide the notification.
The commenter notes that the City of
Atka does not have a city manager.
Technically, that is accurate: Atka has a
city administrator. Title 29 of the Alaska
Statutes explains the distinctions
between a city manager and a city
administrator. In the manager form of
municipality, the city manager is the
chief executive. In a strong-mayor form
of municipality, the mayor is the chief
executive and the city administrator can
exercise powers or duties only as
delegated by the mayor and city council.
In either case, the role of the manager
or administrator is to represent the
interests of the city, city council, and
mayor. The language in the final rule
has been changed to reflect that the city
administrator is the person responsible
for providing notification to NMFS for
Atka.
This type of designation is not
unprecedented. For example, in an
action to create Community Quota
Entities (CQE) for the Halibut and
Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota
Program (Amendment 66 to the Gulf of
Alaska FMP, 69 FR 23681, April 30,
2004), NMFS specified which governing
body would be responsible for
proposing a potential CQE to NMFS,
depending on the governance structure
of the particular community. For
communities incorporated as
municipalities, the governing body
identified was the city council. In
communities represented by tribal
governments, the governing body was
the non-profit entity. In similar fashion,
and as described in the proposed rule
for this action, NMFS determined that
the city manager or administrator would
be the appropriate person responsible
for submitting the required notification
to NMFS.
While ownership and management of
fish processing facilities may change, it
is likely that there will always be
someone performing the role of city
manager or administrator for Adak and
Atka. As elected or appointed officials,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
these representatives are bound by oath
of office to uphold the wishes of their
constituents. Currently, both the City of
Adak and the City of Atka execute, in
good faith, waivers for the delivery
requirement for Western Aleutian
Islands golden king crab when sufficient
processing capacity does not exist in
those communities. These cities issue
the waiver knowing that it is not in the
communities’ best interests to strand the
crab resource. The notification
requirement under Amendment 113 is
similar, and it is not clear how the
requirement to notify NMFS of the
communities’ intent to process Pacific
cod grants too much power to the city
manager or administrator. NMFS
expects that the city manager or
administrator will be in communication
with the shoreplant manager and local
fishing fleet prior to the notification
deadline to ensure that the shoreplant
will be able to accept deliveries of
Pacific cod once the set-aside goes into
effect. If, for some reason, the shoreplant
does not operate as anticipated, the
1,000 mt minimum processing
performance measure would not be met
by February 28 and the set-aside would
be lifted.
NMFS does not consider the
notification requirement to be a de facto
grant of fishery management authority
to the city manager or administrator.
The Council and NMFS have
established the fishery management
policy with regard to Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod. The intent of the Council
and NMFS with Amendment 113 and
this final rule is to have an Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside in place
for Aleutian Islands fishing
communities, and the harvesters and
shoreplants that are part of those
communities, to utilize. Recognizing
that there may be years when Aleutian
Islands shoreplants may not be
operational, the notification provision
was a fishery management decision by
the Council and NMFS to provide for an
orderly start to the fishing year and as
a way to prevent the set-aside from
becoming effective if neither city
intends to process in the upcoming
fishing year. The city manager or
administrator is the person from whom
NMFS will expect to receive notification
of the city’s intent to process Pacific cod
and to whom NMFS will confirm that
notification has been received. Under
this final rule, the city manager or
administrator is providing information
to NMFS on anticipated processing
activities based on knowledge gained
from Aleutian Islands shoreplants in
their communities. City managers and
administrators are not delegated any
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84441
authority to open or close fisheries,
assess catch amounts, or take other
actions provided in regulation.
Notification is not to be confused with
an active role in administering
regulations. NMFS is ultimately
responsible for taking any management
actions once a notification has been
received.
Comment 6: If this rule is
implemented, NMFS will notify Adak or
Atka city managers if they have not
received their notifications of intent to
process. This seems at odds with other
programs that have notification dates,
such as submission of annual
cooperative notifications to NMFS.
There is no regulatory language that
provides for NMFS to notify the entity
or person that it has not received
cooperative information regarding the
next year’s intent to process.
Response 6: The commenter is
referring to the regulatory language at
(a)(7)(viii)(D)(3) which explains how
NMFS will provide confirmation to the
City Manager of the City of Adak or the
City Administrator of the City of Atka if
their notification of intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod has been
received or not. This confirmation is to
let the city know that the set-aside will
or will not be in effect for the upcoming
year. Similarly, NMFS will publish a
notice in the Federal Register to inform
the public whether the set-aside will be
in effect. NMFS will not offer these
cities additional time to provide
notification if it was not received by the
deadline and according to the
requirements stated in regulations.
Comment 7: NMFS received 11
comment letters from 9 different entities
in support of Amendment 113 and its
implementing regulations. In general,
the comments emphasized that three
interacting issues have affected the
viability of shoreside operations in the
Aleutian Islands: the BSAI Pacific cod
biomass estimates and TAC split, Steller
sea lion protection measures, and
rationalization programs. The
commenters noted that fish processing
is the core economic driver for the
communities of Adak and Atka and that
these communities have been negatively
impacted by prior management actions.
They stressed that Aleutian Islands
communities, Adak and Atka in
particular, need the kind of protections
that the Council has provided to
communities in the Gulf of Alaska
(GOA) and Bering Sea for pollock, and
to GOA communities for Pacific cod by
limiting the amount that can be
delivered either inshore or offshore.
These commenters considered stable
access to at least 5,000 mt of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod from the Federal
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84442
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
fishery essential for maintaining viable
communities in Adak and Atka. These
commenters concluded that this final
rule provides community protections for
shorebased processing in the Aleutian
Islands management area that are
critical to the survival of Aleutian
Islands communities.
Response 7: NMFS acknowledges the
comments in support of Amendment
113. The Secretary, through her
designee, the Assistant Administrator
for Fisheries, approved Amendment 113
on October 17, 2016, and implements
Amendment 113 with this final rule.
The Secretary concluded that the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
in Amendment 113 is consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including
the National Standards, and other
applicable law.
Comment 8: The proposed regulatory
language for the minimum Aleutian
Islands shoreplant landing requirement
at § 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) states that ‘‘if
less than 1,000 mt of the Aleutian
Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest SetAside is landed at Aleutian Islands
shoreplants prior to February 28, then
paragraphs (a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) for the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-season Sector
Limitation and (2) for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will not
apply for the remainder of the fishing
year.’’ However, the preamble to the
proposed rule and the Council motion
clearly state that this performance
measure must be met ‘‘by’’ February 28.
This change in the proposed regulatory
language from the Council’s motion
would give Aleutian Islands shoreplants
one less day to fulfill the minimum
delivery requirements. This one-day
difference is not insignificant to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants. An
average of 178 mt of Pacific cod was
landed at Adak on February 28 from
2002 through 2009. Landings on
February 28 represent a substantial
portion of the proposed 1,000-mt
minimum landing requirement
performance measure. The commenters
request that the proposed regulatory
language at § 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) be
changed so that landings made ‘‘on or
before’’ February 28 will count toward
the performance measure threshold.
Response 8: NMFS agrees. The
Council motion, the preamble to the
proposed rule, the Analysis, the FMP
amendment text, and the notice of
availability for the FMP amendment all
state that 1,000 mt must be landed ‘‘by,’’
not ‘‘prior to,’’ February 28. The
proposed regulatory language was
inadvertently written in a way that
contradicts the Council’s intent for this
performance measure. Inclusion of
February 28 in the minimum landings
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
period is important and necessary. As
noted in Section 2.7.2.5 of the Analysis,
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod tend to
aggregate in late February to early
March, and these aggregations are
optimal for efficient trawl fishing.
NMFS has changed
§ 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) to clarify that
landings made ‘‘on or before’’ February
28, rather than ‘‘prior to’’ February 28,
will be used to determine whether the
minimum landings requirement has
been met.
Comment 9: As a longtime, small
boat, Aleutian Islands fisherman, it is
vital to my longline operation and to
other small and entry level vessel
owners to have a stable shoreside
processing facility in the Aleutian
Islands. Amendment 113 will create
numerous opportunities for small boats
and the community of Adak.
Response 9: NMFS acknowledges the
support for this action.
Comment 10: We support solutions
that optimize and create sustainable
social, economic, and conservation
outcomes. Amendment 113 and this
final rule will help the economic
sustainability of Adak and Atka and will
help the aspirations of the Aleut people
to repopulate some of the islands of the
western Aleutians. Amendment 113 and
this final rule may also improve the
conservation and ecosystem
sustainability of the area. Giving the
local inhabitants a larger financial stake
in the sustainability of the local
ecosystem is an important step in a long
process leading to better conservation.
We firmly believe that where local, and
particularly Alaska Natives, have more
control over resource extraction, the
conservation outcome is likely to be
better.
Response 10: NMFS acknowledges the
comment and the support for
Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Comment 11: Trawl vessels catch
large quantities of vulnerable deep sea
corals and sponges in the area. Shifting
to other gear types in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery may help
protect these vulnerable species.
Response 11: NMFS acknowledges the
comment but notes that this final rule
does not modify the areas or types of
gear that can be used to harvest fishery
resources in the Aleutian Islands.
Comment 12: There is an error in the
fourth row of Table 4 in the preamble
of the proposed rule. The fourth row in
Table 4 refers to the ‘‘BSAI non-CDQ
TAC.’’ This row should have read ‘‘BS
non-CDQ TAC.’’
Response 12: NMFS agrees that the
fourth row in Table 4 of the proposed
rule preamble should have read ‘‘BS
non-CDQ TAC.’’ The amount of Pacific
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cod proposed for the BS non-CDQ TAC
in the fourth row of Table 4 was
accurate. This final rule modifies the
final 2016 and 2017 harvest
specifications to add a supplemental
table, Table 8a, that provides the 2017
catch limits for Pacific cod under
Amendment 113 and this final rule.
NMFS will publish a notice in the
Federal Register in December 2016 if
there will be any changes to these
amounts. NMFS will also publish a
notice in the Federal Register to inform
the public if the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea Trawl
Catcher Vessel Sector Limitation will be
in effect in 2017. Table 8a displays the
correct name of the allocation and the
correct amount. No changes to the
regulatory text are necessary in response
to this comment.
Comment 13: The agency has not
followed the requisite process under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). In particular, an environmental
impact statement (EIS) should have
been completed. The action is clearly
controversial, as it has been under
consideration for over 8 years in the
Council process. A more thorough
review might have compelled NMFS to
reject this action.
Response 13: According to NEPA and
Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations at 40 CFR 1502.3, an
EIS is required when a fishery
management action may significantly
affect the quality of the human
environment. Determining whether an
action may significantly affect the
quality of the human environment
requires considerations of both context
and intensity, and regulations at 40 CFR
1508.27(b) list several factors that are to
be considered in evaluating the
intensity of an action. One of these
factors is the degree to which the effects
on the quality of the human
environment are likely to be highly
controversial (40 CFR 1508.27(b)(4)).
Before deciding whether to complete an
EIS, agencies may prepare an EA to
determine whether an EIS must be
prepared or a finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) can be made (40 CFR
1501.3 and 1508.9). If the EA results in
a FONSI, an EIS is not needed.
Courts have held that an action is
‘‘highly controversial’’ when there is a
substantial dispute about the size,
nature, or effect of the action, or when
substantial questions are raised as to
whether a proposed action may cause
significant degradation of some human
environmental factor. Courts have also
held that the existence of opposition to
an action does not raise the level of
controversy to the point that an EIS is
required. Additionally, as stated in 40
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
CFR 1508.14 and in Section 3 of the
Analysis, economic and social impacts
by themselves are not sufficient to
require the preparation of an EIS.
In accordance with NEPA and the
CEQ regulations, the Council and NMFS
appropriately prepared an EA for this
action, which analyzes the potential
effects of the action on individual
resource components, as well as the
potential cumulative effects. The EA
was prepared using the best available
scientific information. Using the
information and analysis in the EA, the
Council and NMFS reviewed the
potential impacts of this action on the
human environment as required under
NEPA. After reviewing the impacts of
this action, the Regional Administrator
prepared and signed a FONSI,
determining that the action will not
result in significant impacts to the
quality of the human environment, and
further analysis in an EIS is not needed.
NMFS determined that the action will
make relatively minor changes to the
timing and location of fishing for Pacific
cod by vessels in the BSAI and that no
significant changes in total harvests or
when, where, and how fishing occurs
are expected with the action.
The commenter implies that the
length of time it took the Council to
consider and take final action on
Aleutian Islands community protection
measures makes Amendment 113 and
the regulations inherently controversial
and therefore requires the preparation of
an EIS. NMFS disagrees that the mere
length of time this action was under
consideration by the Council is
indicative of a level of controversy that
requires the preparation of an EIS. The
implementation of several
rationalization programs, Steller sea lion
protection measures, the BSAI TAC
split, and decreasing biomass of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, all of
which occurred while the Council was
considering community protection
measures for the Aleutian Islands,
considerably changed the way in which
the BSAI Pacific cod fishery was
managed and conducted by participants.
The Council reasonably wanted to
examine and understand the effects
these changes would have on the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery before taking final
action. After examining the effects of
these changes on Aleutian Islands
communities, the Council determined
that the community protections that will
be implemented by Amendment 113
and this final rule are warranted and
necessary. The effects of this action on
the quality of the human environment
are not in dispute. To the extent that
there has been controversy over, or
opposition to, the action, the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
controversy or opposition has been
largely related to potential economic
and social impacts which do not require
the preparation of an EIS.
Comments Related to the MagnusonStevens Act and the National Standards
Comment 14: National Standard 4 of
the Magnuson-Steven Act states,
‘‘Conservation and management
measures shall not discriminate
between residents of different states. If
it becomes necessary to allocate or
assign fishing privileges among various
United States fishermen, such allocation
shall be (A) fair and equitable to all such
fishermen; (B) reasonably calculated to
promote conservation; and (C) carried
out in such manner that no particular
individual, corporation, or other entity
acquires an excessive share of such
privileges.’’ Amendment 113 and this
final rule violate National Standard 4. In
fact, a 2009 letter from Acting Regional
Administrator Mecum to North Pacific
Fishery Management Council Chair
Olson noted that the proposed set-aside
could violate National Standard 4’s
requirements that allocations be fair and
equitable and do not create excessive
shares. They are not fair and equitable,
do not promote conservation, and
would allocate an excessive share to a
particular entity. The plant in Atka has
never processed cod and has no
historical dependency on the Federal
non-CDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Adak is the sole entity that will
benefit from this action. Adak would
receive an excessive share, i.e., the
entire Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside, which is a de facto processor
share not authorized by the MagnusonStevens Act.
Response 14: NMFS has determined
that this action is consistent with
National Standard 4. Amendment 113
and this final rule do not include any
measures that discriminate between
residents of different states. While
Amendment 113 and this final rule
establish the set-aside for vessels that
deliver their catch of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing, any properly
permitted and licensed vessel, operated
by any resident of any community or
state, can participate in the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside.
Participation in the set-aside or in the
Unrestricted Fishery is not premised on
residency in a particular state.
Participation in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery is governed by regulations that
were determined to be consistent with
National Standard 4 and neither
Amendment 113 nor this final rule
change the permitting and licensing
requirements currently in place. This
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84443
final rule does not preclude residents of
any state from participation in any
fishery in the Aleutian Islands as either
a harvester or operator of an Aleutian
Islands shoreplant. Appropriately
licensed and endorsed vessels will still
have the opportunity to prosecute the
fishery, and any person wishing to
operate a processing facility with the
appropriate license in the area may still
do so.
Amendment 113 and this final rule
establish a set-aside that allocates the
Aleutian Islands non-CDQ Pacific cod
DFA during a portion of the A-season
among those harvesting vessels that
conduct directed fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod and deliver their
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing and those harvesting vessels
that conduct directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and deliver
their catch for processing to any eligible
processor other than Aleutian Islands
shoreplants. Therefore, this allocation
must be fair and equitable to all such
fishermen, reasonably calculated to
promote conservation, and carried out
in such manner that no particular
individual, corporation, or other entity
acquires an excessive share of such
privileges, consistent with National
Standard 4. For the reasons provided
below, NMFS has determined that
Amendment 113 and this final rule are
consistent with National Standard 4’s
requirements for allocations.
NMFS has determined that the setaside is fair and equitable to all
participants in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery. Vessels from all non-CDQ
sectors can participate in the set-aside
and each sector will continue to have
access to its entire BSAI Pacific cod
allocation. This action also addresses an
inequity that has occurred, in part, from
the establishment of rationalization
programs and minimizes the risk of
future inequities in the prosecution of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
The Council and NMFS determined that
the protections in Amendment 113 and
this final rule are necessary to mitigate
the effects of previous Council actions.
Offshore processing activity has taken
an increasing proportion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery in some
recent years due to a variety of factors
described in the preamble to the
proposed rule and in the Analysis. At
the same time, the historical share of the
BSAI Pacific cod fishery delivered to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants has
decreased.
The maximum cap of 5,000 mt for setaside is representative of the long-term
average annual amount of Pacific cod
processed by Aleutian Islands
shoreplants that includes years both
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84444
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
before and after significant changes in
the BSAI Pacific cod fishery occurred.
Establishing a maximum amount, rather
than a percentage, for the set-aside will
protect Aleutian Islands fishing
communities during years of relatively
low Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC,
will ensure the set-aside remains
representative of past participation
levels by Aleutian Islands fishing
communities, and will benefit those
who do not participate in the set-aside
fishery during years of relatively high
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC by
allowing the amount allocated to the
Unrestricted Fishery to increase with
increases in TAC.
This action is also fair and equitable
because the set-aside will be in effect
only when the Aleutian Islands fishing
communities it is intended to benefit are
prepared and actively engaged in
participation. When Aleutian Islands
communities are unable to accept
deliveries of Pacific cod for processing,
there are mechanisms built into the final
rule that will lift the set-aside and allow
others to have access to the remaining
harvest.
NMFS also has determined that the
set-aside is reasonably calculated to
promote conservation. Amendment 113
and this final rule do not modify the
process for specifying OFLs, ABCs, or
TACs for the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery, the
allocation of BSAI Pacific cod to CDQ
and non-CDQ fishery participants that is
established in existing regulations, or
the allocation of BSAI Pacific cod
among non-CDQ fishery participants.
NMFS will continue to manage the
fishery so that harvests stay within
specified and allocated amounts.
Additionally, Amendment 113 and this
final rule continue to promote and do
not undermine the conservation
measures established under the Steller
sea lion protection measures,
Amendment 85 allocations, and
Amendment 80 rationalization.
Finally, NMFS determined that the
set-aside will be carried out in such
manner that no particular individual,
corporation, or other entity acquires an
excessive share of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery. NOAA’s guidance
on National Standard 4 states that ‘‘only
those measures that result in direct
distributions of fishing privileges will
be judged against the allocation
requirements of Standard 4’’
(§ 600.325(c)(1)). This final rule
establishes a set-aside for any otherwise
eligible vessel that conducts directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and delivers its catch to any Aleutian
Islands shoreplant for processing. No
particular individual, corporation, or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
other entity participating in either the
set-aside or the Unrestricted Fishery
will be able to acquire an excessive
share of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery under Amendment 113 and this
final rule. All vessels will continue to
have catch attributed to their sector, and
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not create any new allocations to
particular individuals, corporations, or
other entities fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod. Additionally,
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not limit participation in the set-aside to
a discreet subset of vessels that meet
certain criteria. As explained earlier,
any properly permitted and licensed
vessel, operated by any resident of any
community or state, within any BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ sector can
participate in the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside.
The commenter asserts that Adak will
receive an excessive share in violation
of National Standard 4 because the
shoreplant in Adak is the only processor
in the Aleutian Islands that has
processed Pacific cod and it therefore
will receive the entire Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside. Section 2.6.8 of
the Analysis describes the two
shoreplants currently in the Aleutian
Islands—one in Adak and one in Atka.
Although Atka has not processed Pacific
cod and Adak has processed Pacific cod,
this final rule does not provide a
specific allocation of fishing privileges
to either of these Aleutian Islands
shoreplants. Amendment 113 does not
provide Adak or Atka with fishing
privileges in the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery.
The commenter also asserts that
Amendment 113 and this final rule
establish a processor share or exclusive
processing privilege for Adak which is
not authorized by the MagnusonStevens Act. This aspect of Comment 14
is also expressed in Comment 18. NMFS
refers the reader to its detailed response
to this comment in its response to
Comment 18.
Finally, the commenter refers to a
letter dated January 28, 2009, from
Robert D. Mecum, Acting Administrator,
Alaska Region, NMFS, to Eric Olsen,
then Chairman of the Council.
According to the commenter, NMFS
noted in this letter that the proposed
set-aside could violate National
Standard 4’s requirement that
allocations be fair and equitable and not
create excessive shares. While NMFS
acknowledges the letter, NMFS
disagrees that the letter provides
support for the claim that Amendment
113 and this final rule are inconsistent
with National Standard 4.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The action under consideration by the
Council when NMFS sent the letter was
not the set-aside action in Amendment
113 but a different action that would
have established processing sideboards
on processing vessels eligible under the
AFA, BSAI crab rationalization
program, and BSAI Amendment 80
program that received deliveries of
Pacific cod harvested in the Eastern and
Central Aleutian Islands (Areas 541 and
542). Under that action, CPs, floating
processors, and motherships in these
programs would have been limited in
the amount of CV deliveries they could
receive of Pacific cod harvested in Area
541 and/or 542 on an annual basis, or
prohibited from taking deliveries prior
to a specific date. The 2009 letter from
NMFS encourages the Council to pay
particular attention to National
Standard 4’s prohibition against
allocation of excessive shares of fishing
privileges and requirement that
allocation actions be reasonably
calculated to promote conservation.
NMFS advised the Council that if it
chose to proceed with the action under
consideration at that time, it would
need to provide a rationale that clearly
demonstrated that the action was
consistent with these aspects of
National Standard 4. However, NMFS
also stated, ‘‘Based on our discussions
with NOAA GC, these issues do not
appear to preclude the proposed
action . . . .’’
In developing Amendment 113, the
Council considered the advice provided
by NMFS and modified the action to
address inordinate control concerns by
conditioning the set-aside on the
achievement of certain performance
measures which, if not satisfied, will lift
the set-aside; by capping the maximum
amount of the set-aside at a level that
will provide the protections and
stability the Council wanted to create
for Aleutian Islands fishing
communities, particularly in times of
relatively low Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod TAC, and that will allow for the
continued participation of the offshore
sector; and by allowing any vessel and
any Aleutian Islands shoreplant to
participate in the set-aside. The Council
also designed Amendment 113 and this
final rule to promote conservation and
to prohibit acquisition of an excessive
share of fishing privileges as explained
earlier in this response.
Comment 15: This action was
reasonably calculated to promote
conservation as required under National
Standard 4 because it will reduce the
amount of halibut prohibited species
catch (PSC).
Response 15: NMFS acknowledges the
comment. NMFS believes that the
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
commenter is referring to data that
indicate that halibut PSC rates are much
lower in the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery than in the Bering Sea
Pacific cod fishery (Section 2.7.2.2 of
the Analysis). The commenter seems to
suggest that if more fishing occurs in the
Aleutian Islands relative to the Bering
Sea because of this final rule, overall
halibut PSC usage in the BSAI could
potentially decrease. NMFS cannot
predict how halibut PSC rates or overall
use may change in response to this final
rule, if at all. NMFS notes that this final
rule will not affect the total maximum
permissible amount of halibut PSC
established for BSAI groundfish
fisheries. As stated in the response to
Comment 14, Amendment 113 and this
final rule continue to promote and do
not undermine the conservation
measures established under existing
regulations.
Comment 16: The proposed rule will
result in TAC being ‘‘stranded’’ in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery and
it therefore violates National Standard 1
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act because it
does not promote achievement of
optimal yield. The proposed rule
suggests that performance measures,
such as the 1,000-mt minimum landings
requirement, would prevent the
stranding of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
because other sectors would have access
to the fishery once the harvest
restrictions and delivery requirements
are lifted. However, the fleet cannot
adjust in the time frames proposed. The
midseason announcements intended to
prevent stranding a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC cannot
possibly be effective, given that vessels
will be fishing at that time and will
likely need to interrupt that fishing to
prepare gear for the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery. These vessels would
then need to transit to the area from the
Bering Sea or Gulf of Alaska.
Additionally, delays between when
catch is landed and reported to NMFS,
and when NMFS can reopen the fishery
may further reduce the amount of time
available to harvest the remaining TAC
while the desirable aggregations of
Pacific cod are still available.
Response 16: The Council and NMFS
determined that Amendment 113 and
this final rule are consistent with
National Standard 1. Optimum yield, as
defined in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, is
that amount of fish which ‘‘will provide
the greatest overall benefit to the Nation,
particularly with respect to food
production and recreational
opportunities, and taking into account
the protection of marine ecosystems’’
and the amount of fish which ‘‘is
prescribed as such on the basis of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
maximum sustainable yield from the
fishery, as reduced by any relevant
economic, social, or ecological factor’’
(16 U.S.C. 1802(33)(A) and (B)).
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not change the optimum yield of the
BSAI groundfish fisheries, which is
specified in regulations as a range from
1.4 million to 2.0 million mt
(§ 679.20(a)(1)(i)(A)). NMFS notes that
optimum yield refers to a broad range of
harvest spanning all species within the
BSAI groundfish fisheries, not the TAC
for a given species and area in a year.
Even if the entire Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC were not harvested in
a year, optimum yield could still be
achieved, consistent with National
Standard 1.
The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod OFL,
ABC, and TAC, and the process by
which NMFS manages the fishery to
stay within those limits, will not change
as a result of this action. Specifically,
this final rule includes several
provisions to prevent stranded Pacific
cod TAC in the Aleutian Islands and
should ensure full harvest of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod DFA, thus
promoting the achievement of optimum
yield in the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands groundfish fisheries. As noted in
the response to Comment 14, this final
rule does not limit or constrain the
proportion of the TAC allocated to CDQ
or non-CDQ fishery participants.
NMFS expects that vessel operators
will adapt their fishing plans in a
variety of ways to accommodate the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside,
and expects that sufficient catch
monitoring already exists, and
notification requirements will be put
into effect with this final rule, for vessel
operators to predict when and if they
should gear up and transit to the
Aleutian Islands to fish for Pacific cod.
For example, if NMFS has not received
notification prior to November 1 of an
Aleutian Islands city’s intent to process
Pacific cod, the A-season Pacific cod
fishery will be available to all
participants and those participants will
have more than two months to prepare.
In years with sufficient TAC for an
Unrestricted Fishery to commence,
vessels may already be fishing in the
Aleutian Islands when the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is lifted.
In years when the Aleutian Islands TAC
is low and an Unrestricted Fishery will
not be available, vessel operators may
choose to only fish in the Bering Sea.
NMFS posts weekly landing reports by
fishery to help the agency and fishery
participants project when fisheries will
open and close.
NMFS disagrees that delays in catch
accounting will further shorten the time
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84445
available for the fleet to harvest the
remaining Aleutian Islands TAC if the
1,000-mt performance standard is not
met on or before February 28 or if the
full Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside is harvested allowing the fishery
to be opened to all participants. NMFS
tracks harvests and projects when catch
limits will be reached so that the
announcement can be prepared and the
fishery can be opened or closed, as
applicable, on the appropriate date.
NMFS expects to open the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery as soon as
necessary. For example, if Aleutian
Islands shoreplants have not met the
1,000-mt performance measure by
February 28, NMFS would have
anticipated that in advance and be
prepared to open the fishery to all
eligible participants promptly on March
1 (or February 29, if a leap year).
Likewise, NMFS would be prepared to
lift the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation if the full set-aside
were harvested prior to March 15. The
Council considered NMFS’ Catch
Accounting and Inseason Management
protocols when selecting dates for the
set-aside.
Comment 17: This final rule promotes
conservation and should be viewed as a
‘‘trailing amendment’’ to the actions to
establish separate Aleutian Islands and
Bering Sea Pacific cod OFLs, ABCs, and
TACs, and to implement new Steller sea
lion protection measures. Both of these
actions were implemented for
conservation purposes and the Council
chose to wait to enact community
protections until they could determine
what the effects of those actions on
Aleutian Islands communities would be.
Response 17: NMFS acknowledges the
comment. As stated in the response to
Comment 14, Amendment 113 and this
final rule continue to promote and do
not undermine the conservation
measures established under existing
regulations, such as the BSAI TAC split
and Steller sea lion protection measures.
Comment 18: This action is a
violation of National Standard 8.
National Standard 8 does not constitute
a basis for allocating resources to a
specific fishing community nor for
providing preferential treatment based
on residence in a fishing community.
National Standard 8 applies to
allocation of fishing, not processing,
privileges.
Response 18: Because of their remote
location and limited economic
alternatives, Aleutian Islands
communities rely on harvesting and
processing of the nearby fishery
resources to support and sustain their
communities. National Standard 8
requires that conservation and
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84446
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
management measures take into account
the importance of fishery resources to
fishing communities by utilizing
economic and social data that meet the
requirements of National Standard 2 in
order to provide for the sustained
participation of such communities, and
to the extent practicable, minimize
adverse economic impacts on such
communities (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(8)).
National Standard 8 guidelines
recommend that ‘‘. . . where two
alternatives achieve similar
conservation goals, the alternative that
provides the greater potential for
sustained participation of such
communities and minimizes the adverse
economic impacts on such communities
would be the preferred alternative’’ (50
CFR 600.345(b)(1)). The guidelines
further state that ‘‘fishing community’’
means a community that is substantially
dependent on or substantially engaged
in the harvest or processing of fishery
resources to meet social and economic
needs, and includes fishing vessel
owners, operators, and crew, and fish
processors that are based in such
communities. A fishing community is a
social or economic group whose
members reside in a specific location
and share a common dependency on
commercial, recreational, or subsistence
fishing or on directly related fisheriesdependent services and industries (for
example, boatyards, ice suppliers, tackle
shops) (50 CFR 600.345(b)(3)). The
Council and NMFS considered the
importance of fishery resources to
Aleutian Islands fishing communities
such as Adak and Atka and determined
that community protections were
necessary to provide for the sustained
participation of these communities in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
The Council and NMFS determined that
Amendment 113 and this final rule are
therefore consistent with National
Standard 8.
As discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule and in the Analysis, this
final rule does not allocate processing
privileges. This final rule allocates
fishing privileges for Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod through the establishment of
a set-aside for a portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC available for
harvest by vessels directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and that
deliver their catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for a portion of the year and
only if specific notification and
performance requirements are met. This
final rule does not change any
percentage allocations of Pacific cod
established under Amendment 85 to the
FMP and existing regulations for the
CDQ or non-CDQ fishery sectors as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
described in § 679.20(a)(7). This final
rule does not allocate exclusive fishing
privileges to a specific harvester,
community, processor, or to residents of
a specific community.
Under this final rule, any properly
permitted and licensed vessel, operated
by any resident of any community or
state, can harvest the portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC in the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside.
Under this final rule, catch harvested
from the set-aside can be delivered to
any Aleutian Islands shoreplant in any
Aleutian Islands community, and no
exclusive opportunity to receive any
portion of the set-aside is provided to an
Aleutian Islands shoreplant or to a
person based on residency in an
Aleutian Islands community. As
explained in the response to Comments
14 and 19, Amendment 113 and this
final rule do not create a processing
privilege.
As described in the Analysis, the
preamble to the proposed rule, and in
public testimony provided at Council
meetings, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is
an important component of the
socioeconomic health of the community
of Adak, and may become a more
critical piece of the processing in Atka.
In Adak, the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery provides income to
harvesters, processors, and other
businesses providing support services.
Section 2.6.8 of the Analysis suggests
that without the set-aside, it is very
likely that the processing plant in Adak
will not be capable of sustained
participation in the future (see also
Comment 1). Although Atka has not
historically participated in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery, the Aleutian
Pribilof Islands Community
Development Association (APICDA) has
been working with investors to make
substantial infrastructure improvements
to their harbor to enhance the local
fishing fleet and to the shoreplant so it
may operate year-round. Comments
submitted by APICDA indicate that
harvesting and processing Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod are critical to the
success of these developments in this
remote community. Additional
information about Atka is provided in
Section 2.6.8 of the Analysis.
The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery is a pulse fishery that operates
for several weeks in late February and
March. This pulse is the most profitable
time of the season for Pacific cod in the
region. These few weeks of the Federalwaters Pacific cod fishery are a critical
part of these remote operations.
This action is consistent with the
management objectives in the FMP and
the Programmatic Supplemental
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Environmental Impact Statement
(available at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/node/33552).
Specifically, NMFS refers the reader to
objectives related to potential societal
benefits, such as providing socially and
economically viable fisheries for the
well-being of fishing communities and
balancing many competing uses of
marine resources and different social
and economic goals for sustainable
fishery management, including
protection of the long-term health of the
resource and the optimization of yield.
Comment 19: This action should have
been analyzed as a limited access
privilege program. The eligibility
requirements to grant limited access
privileges to communities under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act were not
followed.
Response 19: Amendment 113 and
this final rule do not create a limited
access privilege as defined in the
Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C.
1802(26)). The Magnuson-Stevens Act
defines ‘‘limited access privilege’’ as a
Federal permit, issued as part of a
limited access system under section
303A to harvest a quantity of fish
expressed by a unit or units
representing a portion of the total
allowable catch of the fishery that may
be received or held for exclusive use by
a person, and includes an individual
fishing quota, but does not include
community development quotas as
described in section 305(i). As stated in
responses to previous comments, this
final rule does not provide any person
a portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod TAC that may be received or held
for exclusive use. Amendment 113 and
this final rule do not assign the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside, in whole
or in part, to any one person, Aleutian
Islands shoreplant, or community for
harvesting or delivery. All harvesters
have access to the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside if they are willing to
deliver their catch to an Aleutian
Islands shoreplant. Any Aleutian
Islands shoreplant can accept deliveries
from the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside. While the practical effect of
Amendment 113 and this final rule may
be that harvesters in the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside may have
only one Aleutian Islands shoreplant to
deliver their catch (Adak), one or more
Aleutian Islands shoreplants could
become operational at any time and
accept deliveries from harvesters in the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside,
reducing the amount that Adak could
receive. Therefore, Adak is not provided
an exclusive processing privilege under
Amendment 113 or this final rule (see
also response to Comments 14 and 18).
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Amendment 113 and this final rule setaside a portion of the Aleutian Islands
DFA during the A-season for vessels
that conduct directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and deliver
their catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing. Because
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not establish a limited access privilege,
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not create a limited access privilege
program and the eligibility requirements
for limited access privilege programs in
the Magnuson-Stevens Act at section
303A (16 U.S.C. 1853a) do not apply to
Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Comment 20: National Standard 5
states that ‘‘Conservation and
management measures shall, where
practicable, consider efficiency in the
utilization of fishery resources; except
that no such measure shall have
economic allocation as its sole
purpose.’’ This action is inconsistent
with National Standard 5 because it
fosters inefficiency and has no purpose
other than economic allocation. The
Draft Analysis acknowledged that the
set-aside ‘‘could potentially lead to a
lower price for catch and reduce
efficient utilization,’’ and it is uncertain
that this action would benefit Aleutian
Islands communities. Adak serves as a
port of embarkation and provides goods
and services to the fleet. By reducing the
number of port visits by CPs during a
critical part of the year, this action may
actually result in lost economic activity
for Adak.
Response 20: Amendment 113 and
this final rule set aside a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery for
harvest by certain vessels. The primary
objective of this action is to provide
Aleutian Islands communities with
access to and sustained participation in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery,
and to minimize the adverse impacts of
a range of management actions on those
communities. This objective is
consistent with the goals of the FMP
and with National Standard 8 (see
response to Comment 18 for additional
explanation of consistency with
National Standard 8).
The Council and NMFS have
determined that Amendment 113 and
this final rule are also consistent with
National Standard 5. According to the
National Standard 5 guidelines, the term
‘‘utilization’’ encompasses harvesting,
processing, marketing, and nonconsumptive uses of the resource, since
management decisions affect all sectors
of the industry (§ 600.330(b)(1)).
National Standard 5 does not refer
exclusively to harvesting. While
rationalization programs increased
efficiency of harvesting the resource,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
they did so in part at the expense of
Aleutian Islands communities. The
Council and NMFS can, and must,
implement conservation and
management measures that are
consistent with all of the National
Standards.
Section 2.6.2.2 of the Analysis
examines some of the potential gains
and losses in efficiency that may result
from Amendment 113. The Analysis
acknowledges that there may be some
losses to communities resulting from
fewer port visits by CPs. On the other
hand, efficiencies may be gained by
having a local fishing fleet that can fish
closer to shore. Public comments
submitted in support for Amendment
113 and this final rule suggest that the
communities believe the benefits of this
action to Aleutian Islands outweigh any
potential losses (see Comment 7). While
the efficiency of utilizing shoreplant
processing in remote parts of the
Aleutian Islands can be debated, the
social and economic benefits the
shoreplants provide to the communities
in which they are located are tangible.
In this particular case, the Council
and NMFS have sought to balance the
objectives of efficiency under National
Standard 5 with the social and
economic considerations of Aleutian
Island communities under National
Standard 8. This type of balance is
contemplated in the National Standard
5 guidelines which note, ‘‘Unless the
use of inefficient techniques or the
creation of redundant fishing capacity
contributes to the attainment of other
social or biological objectives, an FMP
may not contain management measures
that impede the use of cost-effective
techniques of harvesting, processing, or
marketing, and should avoid creating
strong incentives for excessive
investment in private sector fishing
capital and labor’’ (§ 600.330(b)(2)(ii)).
In this case, the Council and NMFS
considered a range of social factors in
addition to efficiency, including
providing socially and economically
viable fisheries for the well-being of
Aleutian Islands fishing communities.
Consistent with the National Standard 5
guidelines, the Council and NMFS have
prepared an analysis and rulemaking
that justify these measures ‘‘in light of
the biological, ecological, and social
objectives of the FMP, as well as the
economic objectives’’ (§ 600.330(e)).
Comments on Economic Effects
Comment 21: Reduced competition
means lower prices for harvesters. By
creating an exclusive processing
privilege for Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, this action has the potential
to cause uncompetitive acts. Creating
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84447
and enforcing a single market for fish is
devastating for harvesters who are not
protected by any sort of price arbitration
structure. Having only a single plant
limits competition for landings and the
seller has limited negotiating leverage.
This drives down the prices paid to
fishermen. Additionally, having only a
single processor means that some CVs
could be excluded if the lone processor
does not want to do business with them.
Response 21: As explained in the
response to Comments 14, 18 and 19,
Amendment 113 and this final rule do
not create an exclusive processing
privilege for Aleutian Islands
shoreplants. As acknowledged in
Section 2.7.2.3 of the Analysis, under
Amendment 113, CVs may have less
ability to use processor competition for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod landings to
leverage higher prices. However, the
Analysis also acknowledges several
ways that CVs may retain leverage in
negotiating fair prices from Aleutian
Islands shoreplants. To remain solvent,
Aleutian Islands shoreplants will need
to offer harvesters competitive prices or
CVs could withhold delivery of catch to
that shoreplant. CVs could choose not to
participate in the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside, wait until the setaside has ended, or shift fishing
operations to the Bering Sea. If Aleutian
Islands shoreplants are not competitive,
they likely will not be able to operate,
and NMFS would not expect to receive
notification from the City of Adak or the
City of Atka by the annual deadline. If
less than 1,000 mt of Aleutians Island
Pacific cod have been delivered to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants on or
before February 28, the set-aside will be
lifted and the fishery will be opened to
all eligible participants for delivery to
any eligible processor. This performance
measure serves as an additional
incentive for Aleutian Islands
shoreplants to offer competitive prices
to all interested harvesters so that
harvesters do not wait until after
February 28 for the opportunity to
deliver to offshore processors. In
addition, this final rule does not provide
for only one Aleutian Islands shoreplant
or prevent multiple Aleutian Islands
shoreplants from operating at the same
time. Even when the set-aside is in
place, this final rule does not preclude
CPs or stationary floating processors
from receiving catch from CVs
harvesting from the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery in years when the
Aleutian Islands TAC is large enough
for the Unrestricted Fishery to occur, or
from operating after March 15. CPs and
stationary floating processors present in
the Aleutian Islands for the Unrestricted
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84448
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Fishery could be ready to accept
deliveries of Pacific cod if the set-aside
were lifted early.
Comment 22: The Analysis does not
consider the effects of the BSAI TAC
split, and assumes the loss of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod can be made up in
the Bering Sea, despite the fact that
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands cod are
different fisheries with unique products.
Response 22: Sections 2.2 and 2.6 of
the Analysis describe some of the effects
the BSAI TAC split has had on the
amount of Pacific cod available for
harvest in the Aleutian Islands.
Likewise, the ‘‘Need for This Proposed
Rule’’ section of the proposed rule
identifies the BSAI TAC split and
resulting relatively low TAC in the
Aleutian Islands as just one of several
factors prompting the need for the
community protections in this rule.
NMFS acknowledges that this action
may result in losses to some participants
in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Section 2.7.2 of the Analysis
and the response to Comment 23
discuss ways that shifting effort to the
Bering Sea may mitigate the effects of
Amendment 113 on participants.
Comment 23: The Analysis supposes
that the loss of Pacific cod harvest by
the hook-and-line CP sector in the
Aleutian Islands can be offset by
shifting effort to the eastern Bering Sea;
however, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
are typically larger and fetch a higher
price in international markets than
Bering Sea Pacific cod. Bering Sea
Pacific cod cannot be substituted for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
Response 23: The Council and NMFS
recognize that Pacific cod fisheries and
products differ between the Bering Sea
and the Aleutian Islands. The Analysis
does not suggest that the same product
harvested and processed in the Aleutian
Islands can be substituted by one
harvested and processed in the Bering
Sea and notes that harvesters generally
fetch higher prices for Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod because of their typically
larger size (Section 2.7.2.2 of the
Analysis). The Analysis further notes
that moving to the Bering Sea to fish for
Pacific cod may not be viable for all
vessels because they may participate in
other Aleutian Islands fisheries, or are
subject to harvest sideboards in other
fisheries as a result of their eligibility in
rationalization programs. Additionally,
vessels that formerly fished for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod that move to the
Bering Sea to fish for Pacific cod will
compete with vessels that have
historically fished in the Bering Sea.
The Council recognized these
limitations on recuperating losses that
may be incurred by some participants as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
a result of Amendment 113, but
determined that CPs are better able to
adapt to changing conditions in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
given their ability to move to different
locations to fish and process their catch,
than Aleutian Islands shoreplants and
the vessels that deliver to them, which
have less flexibility and adaptability.
The Council and NMFS recognized
that CP sectors will not be able to
participate in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery unless the set-aside
is not in effect for that year, some of the
set-aside remains available for harvest
after the set-aside ends, or there is
sufficient Aleutian Islands DFA for an
Unrestricted Fishery during the setaside period. The Council determined
that in years of low TAC, when an
Unrestricted Fishery will not occur, it
was important to protect Aleutian
Islands fishing communities that cannot
easily participate in other fisheries or
other areas to make up for lost revenue.
The Council and NMFS recognized
the participation of hook-and-line CPs
in the Aleutians Islands Pacific cod
fishery by capping the amount of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that goes to
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside and by providing mechanisms to
lift the set-aside if no Aleutian Islands
city will be processing in the upcoming
year or if deliveries do not meet
established thresholds by certain dates.
This final rule limits the amount of the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
to 5,000 mt, which will allow the
participation of all sectors in the
Unrestricted Fishery except during
years when the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod TAC is extremely low. The Council
wanted to provide the Unrestricted
Fishery so that vessels not participating
in the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside can participate to some extent in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
and get some of the benefits from it.
Additionally, because the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is for a
specific amount, rather than a
percentage of TAC, the set-aside will not
increase even if Aleutian Islands TAC
increases, which will provide for an
even greater amount in the Unrestricted
Fishery.
Comment 24: The proposed Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside period is
too long and would prevent others from
accessing the fishery altogether. If the
Adak plant is expected to be capable of
processing more than 400 mt of Pacific
cod per day, and the proposed Atka
plant has a planned capacity of 180 mt
per day, Aleutian Islands shoreplants
could process the entire proposed setaside in just 8 to 11 days.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Response 24: If both of the existing
Aleutian Islands shoreplants are
operational, they may have the
combined capacity to process 500 mt to
600 mt per day. However, if the Pacific
cod have not yet arrived and aggregated
on the fishing grounds, there would be
no deliveries for them to process. To be
effective, the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation need to
be in place long enough for the Pacific
cod to aggregate on the fishing grounds,
and for the fish to be harvested and
delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing. An earlier
end date might mean that the peak
fishery occurs after the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
have been lifted. Conversely, if the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
and Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation did not go into place
until later during the A-season, the
entire trawl CV allocation could be
taken in the Bering Sea before the
fishery begins in the Aleutian Islands.
As discussed in the preamble of the
proposed rule, the Council determined
and NMFS agrees that March 15 is the
preferred date for lifting the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside for several
reasons. March 15 represents the
average date of the peak of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery for CVs.
During the period analyzed (2003
through 2015), a significant portion of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod was not
delivered shoreside until mid-March
(see Table 2–37 of the Analysis).
Establishing a date much earlier than
March 15 to relieve the set-aside would
not meet the Council’s goals to provide
access to and to sustain participation in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
by Aleutian Islands communities
because the protections afforded by the
set-aside would be lifted before the
Pacific cod aggregated on the fishing
grounds.
The Council and NMFS considered
earlier dates by which to lift these
restrictions, but given historical
harvesting and delivery patterns for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, the longer
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside remains in effect during the Aseason each year, the greater the
opportunity for complete harvest and
delivery of the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside. The March 15 date
provides greater social and economic
stability for Aleutian Islands fishing
communities than earlier dates.
Limiting the duration of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to March
15 also would provide an opportunity
for CPs to harvest Pacific cod, and for
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
CVs to harvest and deliver Pacific cod
to CPs or stationary floating processors,
before the end of the A-season. The
proposed March 15 date balances the
opportunities for all participants.
Additional information is provided in
Section 2.7.2.4 of the Analysis.
Comment 25: The proposed threshold
of 5,000 mt for the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside exceeds the recent
historical average of deliveries made to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants. Excluding
the years of no processing by Aleutian
Islands shoreplants (2010, 2011, and
2015), the 2010 through 2015 average is
3,073 mt and the average proportion of
the Federal Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery processed at the Adak and Atka
shoreplants from 2003 through 2015 is
32 percent. Applying the historic
average to the projected 2017 DFA of
8,965 mt would result in a 2017 setaside of 2,869 mt. Therefore, a threshold
of 3,000 mt would more accurately
reflect the ‘‘historical place’’ of Aleutian
Islands shoreplants in the federal
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 25: As discussed in the
preamble to the proposed rule and in
Section 2.7.1.2 of the Analysis, the
Council examined harvest and landings
data from 2003 through July 2015 and
considered a range of options for the
amount of the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside (and equivalent
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation). The average amount of nonCDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
processed by Aleutian Islands
shoreplants during this period was
4,732 mt. The Council considered
amounts for the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside ranging from 3,000 to
7,000 mt. The Council determined and
NMFS agrees that a maximum of 5,000
mt is the appropriate amount because it
represents a large percentage of the total
amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
available to the non-CDQ fishery sectors
in recent years, and is in the range
necessary to provide benefits to
Aleutian Islands fishing communities,
including shoreplant operations, when
considered in combination with the
State guideline harvest level (State GHL)
A-season harvest. Additionally, the
Analysis shows that 5,000 mt is the
approximate long-term average of the
annual amount of Pacific cod processed
at Aleutian Islands shoreplants between
2003 and 2015, when Aleutian Islands
shoreplants were operational.
The Council considered an option
that would have reserved a percentage,
rather than a fixed amount, of the
Aleutian Islands TAC for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside (see
Section 2.7.2.5 of the Analysis). The
Council chose a fixed amount (5,000 mt)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
so that more of the DFA would be
available to Aleutian Islands fishing
communities in years of low TAC, and
so that more of the DFA would be
available to all participants in the
Unrestricted Fishery in years when the
Aleutian Islands TAC is high, providing
more opportunities for other
participants. Further explanation for the
Council’s choice of years to examine in
the Analysis is given in the response to
Comment 27.
Comment 26: The Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery is important for all
hook-and-line CPs. While Amendment
113 will have negative impacts on all
CPs with historical participation in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery, the
negative effects are more profound on
specific hook-and-line CP companies
with a higher dependence on the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 26: The Council and NMFS
examined participation in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery by all sectors
over a range of years that included years
before major changes in the fishery
occurred and years since those changes
occurred. The Council recognized that
to offer protections to Aleutian Islands
communities, there could be some
negative effects on other participants in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery,
including the hook-and-line CP sector.
In years when the TAC is low and the
set-aside is in effect, it is likely that CPs
will not have access to the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery at all or at
levels to which they are accustomed. To
minimize those negative effects, the
Council included several provisions that
lift the restrictions if minimum
performance measures are not met and
prevent the stranding of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod. For 2017, the hookand-line CP sector will have access to
3,965 mt through the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery. The annual
average targeted Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod catch by the hook-and-line CP
sector between 2003 and 2015 was 2,399
mt (Table 2–34 of the Analysis).
Excluding years that Aleutian Islands
shoreplants did not operate, the annual
average targeted Pacific cod catch by the
hook-and-line CP sector was 2,311 mt
(Table 2–34 of the Analysis). Even
under current management, there is no
guarantee that any sector will have
access to the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery because of the ability of one
sector to harvest Pacific cod up to the
Aleutian Islands TAC before other
sectors arrive.
NMFS and the Council acknowledge
that the hook-and-line CP sector may
have a higher dependence on the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery than
some other CP sectors; however, like
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84449
other offshore sectors, the hook-and-line
CP sector has the ability to react to
changes in the fishery. The hook-andline CP sector has formed a voluntary
cooperative, which provides many of
the benefits and flexibility of a
rationalized fishery. In contrast,
shoreside processors cannot move their
operations in response to changing
conditions or a low Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC. As discussed in the
response to Comment 14, each sector
continues to receive a percentage of the
combined BSAI Pacific cod allocation as
established in 2008 under Amendment
85, and can fish their allocations in
either the Bering Sea or Aleutian Islands
(and under this action shift effort to the
Bering Sea or access the Aleutian
Islands after a specified date). This
action does not change the allocation to
the hook-and-line CP sector.
This final rule may provide a benefit
to the hook-and-line CP sector in years
when the Aleutian Islands DFA is large
enough for the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery to occur. The Aseason for hook-and-line CPs and CVs
opens on January 1, whereas the Aseason for trawl CPs and CVs does not
open until January 20. The hook-andline CPs and CVs will have earlier
access to the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery between January 1
and January 20.
Comment 27: The historical
participation of the hook-and-line CP
sector in the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery is significantly larger and
longer than as stated in the proposed
rule. The hook-and-line CP sector has
historically harvested more than 95
percent of the non-trawl harvest of
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands. The
hook-and-line CP sector’s proportion of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest
was much higher before 2002, when
Steller sea lion protection measures
were first implemented.
Response 27: NMFS acknowledges
that the hook-and-line CP sector has
consistently participated in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery annually,
harvesting 14% of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod on an average annual basis
during 2003 through 2015 (Table 2–13
of the Analysis), and that the hook-andline CP sector participated in the fishery
prior to 2003. NMFS also acknowledges
that the hook-and-line CP sector
harvests a large percentage of the nontrawl harvest of Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod, but also notes that the overall nontrawl harvest is a small proportion of
the Aleutian Islands TAC. The Council
chose to use 2003 as a starting point for
the Analysis for this action for several
reasons. First, data from years prior to
2003 is not compatible with data from
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84450
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2003 to the present. NMFS implemented
its Catch Accounting System in 2003,
which significantly changed the
methodologies used to determine catch
estimates (Section 2.5 of the Analysis).
Second, data before 2003 represent
harvests made prior to the
implementation of Steller sea lion
protection measures, which
substantively changed the management
of, and the participation patterns in, the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. The
Council determined and NMFS agrees
that catch data prior to 2003 does not
reflect how the fishery has been
managed and prosecuted during the last
13 years (2003 through 2015) considered
by NMFS and Council in developing
Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Third, the Council determined and
NMFS agrees that it was important to
consider data from the largest set of
years both before and after the
implementation of Steller Sea Lion
measures, rationalization programs, and
the BSAI TAC split to understand the
effects of those actions on the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Comment 28: The proposed action
will further concentrate the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod harvest spatially and
temporally in the Aleutian Islands with
more harvest by the trawl sector. In the
proposed rule for the 2014 Steller sea
lion protection measures (available at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/sites/
default/files/79fr37486.pdf), NMFS
stated that, ‘‘Pacific cod hook-and-line
and pot gear harvests occur in much
smaller quantities and at slower rates for
these gears than trawl gear. This makes
it less likely that hook-and-line and pot
gear harvests would result in localized
depletion of Steller sea lion prey
resources.’’ The proposed action,
combined with the BSAI TAC split,
GHL fishery, and consequences of the
Steller sea lion protection measures will
further limit the hook-and-line CP
sector’s participation and increase trawl
harvests of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
Response 28: NMFS acknowledges
that the Analysis predicts some spatial
concentration of harvest because vessels
participating in the set-aside are
expected to be trawl CVs that will likely
fish closer to shore and nearer to Adak
and Atka, the Aleutian Islands
communities that are most likely to
receive Pacific cod deliveries under the
set-aside. The amount of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod harvest that might be
caught closer to shore under a
maximum set-aside amount of 5,000 mt
that is roughly equivalent to the average
annual amount of Pacific cod caught by
CVs and delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants between 2003 and 2015,
which reduces the potential for spatial
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
concentration (see Section 3.4 of the
Analysis). Fishing closer to shore may
increase efficiency in the fishery
(Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis) by
reducing transit times, allowing vessels
to make more frequent offloads, and not
having to coordinate fishing operations
with an offshore processor (Section
2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). Allowing other
participants to target the Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery when the
DFA is greater than 5,000 mt, and the
performance measures that remove the
set-aside if there is insufficient
shoreplant processing will also limit
spatial concentration. Finally, the
Council and NMFS will continue to use
the current harvest specifications
process for setting the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC and manage harvest
within these limits. Any potential
changes in harvest location as a result
of the set-aside are not expected to
impact Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
stock status (see Section 3.3.1 of the
Analysis), or have an impact on Steller
sea lions in a manner not previously
considered in previous consultations
(see Section 3.4 of the Analysis).
NMFS disagrees that Amendment 113
and this final rule will cause additional
temporal concentration of the fishery. In
the years since the BSAI TAC split, the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery has
closed on March 16, 2014, February 27,
2015, and June 8, 2016, so as not to
exceed the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
TAC. Setting aside a maximum of 5,000
mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod until
March 21 may actually prolong the
season for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
because CPs will not be able to harvest
Pacific cod from the set-aside (unless
they are delivering their catch to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing) or process any Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod remaining from the
set-aside until after the conclusion of
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside on March 15.
As examined in the FONSI (Section
3.6 of the Analysis), Amendment 113
and this final rule will not adversely
affect endangered or threatened species,
marine mammals, or critical habitat of
these species in any manner not
considered in prior consultations on the
BSAI groundfish fisheries. While this
action may increase the harvest of
Pacific cod nearshore in the Aleutian
Islands subarea, the harvest of Pacific
cod will continue to occur within the
limits established in the annual
groundfish harvest specifications by
vessels the same as or similar to those
currently fishing for Pacific cod in the
BSAI.
The vessels affected by this action
will continue to be required to comply
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
with all Steller sea lion protection
measures including no-transit areas,
closed areas, and the requirement to
carry vessel monitoring systems (50 CFR
part 679). Therefore, Amendment 113
and this rule will result in no
substantial change to the actions
analyzed in the biological opinion dated
April 2, 2014, in which NMFS found
that the groundfish fisheries in the BSAI
are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the western
distinct population segment of Steller
sea lions or destroy or adversely modify
its designated critical habitat (Section
3.4 of the Analysis).
Comment 29: The hook-and-line CP
sector’s proportion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod harvest has been
reduced since the establishment of the
State Pacific cod GHL fishery, which is
designed for harvest by CVs that deliver
to Aleutian Islands communities. The
State GHL fishery sets aside 28 percent
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC
for fishing in State waters, which is
essentially an allocation to shore-based
processors. The State GHL fishery
cannot be harvested by CPs and is not
prosecutable by the Federal offshore
sector. The State GHL fishery has
resulted in considerable stranded
Pacific cod. A large proportion of the
State GHL fishery has remained
unharvested and unavailable to the
Federal fisheries because there is no
rollover provision. Adak and Atka have
unique access to processing the State
GHL fishery, but have chosen not to
participate in this fishery in recent
years.
Response 29: The State GHL fishery
for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is
managed exclusively by the State within
State waters. This final rule does not
modify the State GHL fishery.
Management of the State GHL fishery is
outside of the scope of this final rule.
Absent preemption under section 306(b)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS
does not have authority to determine
catch amounts or the types of gear or
vessels used in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod State GHL fishery.
The State established two GHL
fisheries for Pacific cod in 2006; one in
the Bering Sea and one in the Aleutian
Islands. The Aleutian Islands State GHL
fishery is currently set at a harvest limit
equivalent to 27 percent of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod ABC, not 28 percent
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC
as stated by the commenter. The harvest
limit may be increased (or decreased) in
the following fishing year depending on
how much of the State GHL fishery is
harvested, and the harvest limit can
increase to a maximum of 39 percent of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC if
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the harvest limit continues to be fully
harvested each year. In addition, the
Aleutian Islands State GHL fishery is
capped at a maximum of 15 million
pounds (6,804 mt). Therefore, if 27
percent of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod ABC represents an amount that is
greater than 15 million pounds in some
future year, the State GHL fishery for
that year would be 15 million pounds.
The Aleutian Islands State GHL for 2016
is 4,752 mt.
The amount of the Aleutian Islands
State GHL fishery is deducted from the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC to
calculate the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod TAC. While the establishment of the
State GHL fishery in 2006 reduced the
Aleutian Islands TAC, it did not change
the hook-and-line CP sector’s allocation
of 48.7 percent of the combined BSAI
Pacific cod TAC. The reduction in the
Aleutian Islands TAC resulting from the
State GHL fishery is distributed
proportionately across all sectors, and is
not borne by the hook-and-line CP
sector alone.
NMFS assumes that the commenter is
concluding that setting aside an
additional amount of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod for Aleutian Islands
communities is not warranted because
these communities are not processing
the full amount of what has already
been allocated to them through the State
GHL fishery. The commenter is correct
that the full amount of the Aleutian
Islands State GHL fishery has not been
harvested every year; however, it is
incorrect to state that Adak has chosen
not to participate in the fishery in recent
years. As noted in Table 2–31 in the
Analysis, Aleutian Islands shoreplants
have processed over 4,000 mt of Pacific
cod from Federal and State GHL
fisheries each year from 2012 through
2014. On average, Aleutian Islands
shoreplants processed 2,046 mt of
Pacific cod from the State GHL fishery
annually since the inception of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod State GHL
fishery in 2006. The Council determined
that the State GHL fishery alone was
inadequate to sustain Aleutian Islands
communities and shoreplants. Based on
information received in public
testimony, the Council determined that
Aleutian Islands communities need
about 9,000 mt of Pacific cod annually
to support shoreplant operations. The
Council selected a set-aside amount that
in combination with the State GHL
fishery would give Aleutian Islands
communities access to at least 9,000 mt
of Pacific cod annually. See also the
response to Comment 25.
Comment 30: The data presented in
the Analysis do not reflect CP
participation and dependence in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Processing by the offshore sector has
also declined since rationalization
programs were implemented. This rule
will cause economic harm to CPs that
are invested and have historically
participated in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery. This rule also harms
CVs that cannot make onshore landings
and must deliver to CPs.
Response 30: NMFS and the Council
recognize, and the Analysis shows, that
CPs have a history of participation in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
(Sections 2.6.6.1 through 2.6.6.3 of the
Analysis), that the average annual
amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
processed by the offshore sector has
declined since 2011 (coinciding with
the BSAI TAC split, Table 2–31 of the
Analysis), and that this rule may cause
some economic losses to CPs. The
Council also recognized that the amount
of Pacific cod harvested by trawl CPs,
and the number of participating trawl
CPs, have declined since 2003 (Table 2–
10 in the Analysis). However, Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod represents only a
small portion of the total landings and
revenue by the trawl CP fleet (Table 2–
11 in the Analysis). The declining
biomass and BSAI TAC split have
resulted in reduced Pacific cod catches
in the Aleutian Islands for all
participants in both the onshore and
offshore sectors. The Council and NMFS
have chosen to set aside a portion of the
harvest for vessels delivering their catch
to Aleutian Islands shoreplants because
these Aleutian Islands fishing
communities do not have the flexibility
available to offshore sector participants
to redeploy into other BSAI or GOA
groundfish fisheries, move their
operations to the Bering Sea, or
participate in rationalization programs
that grant greater flexibility (Section
2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). The Council
and NMFS have determined that the
onshore sector had a greater dependence
on the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery than the offshore sector. Section
2.7.2.2 of the Analysis discusses some of
the ways trawl CPs, trawl CVs, and
hook-and-line CPs may respond to the
restrictions imposed by this rule.
The Council and NMFS recognize that
some trawl CVs that have historically
participated in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery lack the ability to
make onshore deliveries. These vessels
will likely experience a loss of
economic activity from this action
(Section 2.7.2.3 of the Analysis),
particularly in years of low Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC. The options for
mitigating losses incurred by this action
on trawl CVs are the same as for other
sectors that may be excluded from the
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84451
fishery during the set-aside: they may
fish in the Bering Sea, fish the Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery, or wait for
the set-aside to be lifted.
Comment 31: The F/V Katie Ann, a
trawl CP, is one of the earliest and most
consistent participants in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery. The F/V
Katie Ann is more dependent on the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery than
any other CP. Participation by the F/V
Katie Ann predates the American
Fisheries Act and the first entry of any
shorebased processor in the Aleutian
Islands. The intermittent entry into the
fishery by the Adak shoreplant has
harmed the ability of the F/V Katie Ann
to harvest and process its long-term
historical share of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery. Amendment 113, if
implemented, threatens to destroy one
of the only remaining viable fishing
operations for the F/V Katie Ann.
Response 31: The Council and NMFS
recognized the long history of
participation in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery by the F/V Katie Ann
as Amendment 113 was being
developed and considered. The Council
considered an option that would have
allowed CPs that had processed Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands management
area in at least 12 years between 2000
and 2014, such as the F/V Katie Ann, to
be exempt from restrictions on
processing for up to 2,000 mt of Pacific
cod. Ten CPs that harvested and
processed both targeted and incidental
catch of Pacific cod during that period
would have qualified for this
exemption. The F/V Katie Ann is the
only vessel that operated as a
mothership processing targeted Pacific
cod during this period.
The Council did not select this option
for an exemption for the F/V Katie Ann
or other qualified CPs. The 2,000-mt
exemption would have represented 40
percent of the 5,000-mt set-aside. The
Council determined, and NMFS agrees,
that this amount would have
substantially reduced the amount
available to vessels delivering to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants and could
have undermined the efficacy of
Amendment 113. The primary objective
of Amendment 113 and this final rule is
to provide access to and promote
sustained participation in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian
Islands fishing communities in this
remote area, especially at very low TAC
levels. At TACs larger than 5,000 mt,
CPs and motherships may participate in
the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted
Fishery. The Council considered
historical participation of the offshore
sector, including the F/V Katie Ann, but
determined that the fishery cannot
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84452
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
support historical levels of effort by all
sectors (Section 2.7.2.5 of the Analysis).
The Council selected a maximum level
of 5,000 mt for the set-aside to provide
continued access to the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery by the offshore sector
when the Aleutian Islands TAC is at a
level that can accommodate both the
needs of the inshore fishery and
Aleutian Islands fishing communities,
as well as offshore fishery participants.
See also the response to Comment 33.
Comment 32: In any fishery
management plan that awards fishing
privileges to one group and takes them
away from another, there are certain to
be winners and losers; however, the
benefits to the winners must be
balanced against the harm to the losers.
Amendment 113 fails to achieve the
required balance. There is little to no
evidence that the harm that will be
suffered by historical participants will
be offset by any net benefits to either
Adak or Atka. History has shown that it
may be impossible to operate a viable
shoreplant in Adak, and there is
currently no one committed to future
operations of the existing plant in Adak.
Response 32: Amendment 113 and
this final rule provide access to and
sustained participation in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian
Islands fishing communities, especially
during periods when the Pacific cod
TAC in the Aleutian Islands is relatively
low. This is an appropriate action for
the Council and NMFS to take, in
recognition of the dependence on the
Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian Islands
fishing communities, the lack of
protections for Aleutian Island
harvesters and communities seeking to
establish viable community-based
fishing operations under the status quo,
and the lack of opportunity for Aleutian
Islands shoreplants and CVs to expand
to other areas and fisheries.
While it is accurate that the Aleutian
Islands shoreplants in Adak or Atka did
not process Pacific cod during the 2015
or 2016 fishing years, comments
received during public testimony to the
Council and the public comment period
for the proposed rule state that investors
and processors are planning to process
Pacific cod in one or both communities
if this final rule is implemented. The
commenters believe that without the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside,
it is doubtful that any operator will have
a viable opportunity to process Pacific
cod in Adak or Atka, and the inshore
sector will continue to be preempted
from the fishery. Public comments in
favor of the action also state that there
will be considerable social and
economic benefits to Aleutian Islands
communities as a result of this action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
that offset the expected costs to other
participants.
The Council included provisions to
mitigate the costs of the set-aside on
other participants by providing access to
the fishery by other participants if the
Aleutian Islands shoreplants do not
submit a notification of their intent to
process Pacific cod in the upcoming
year or if those shoreplants do not meet
the minimum processing requirement of
1,000 mt on or before February 28.
Additionally, historical participants
who cannot participate in the set-aside
may participate in the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery, when available, or
fish in the Aleutian Islands for Pacific
cod when the set-aside is lifted (see also
the response to Comment 16).
Comment 33: This action would
significantly impact the revenue and
operations of Amendment 80 CPs that
also have a history of dependence on
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
These CPs take deliveries from CVs that
are unable to deliver to shore.
Response 33: Amendment 113 and
this rule do not prohibit Amendment 80
CPs and CVs delivering to Amendment
80 CPs from participating in the Aseason Pacific cod fishery in the
Aleutian Islands; those vessels may
participate in the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery, when available,
and may harvest any remaining BSAI
non-CDQ Pacific cod up to the Aleutian
Islands DFA after the set-aside is lifted.
In addition, if NMFS does not receive
timely notification from the City of
Adak or the City of Atka, there will be
no Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside, and no additional regulatory
harvesting or delivery limitations
imposed on these vessels.
When the Aleutian Islands DFA is
greater than 5,000 mt, the difference
between the DFA and the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is
available as the ‘‘Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery’’ for directed
fishing by all non-CDQ fishery sectors
with sufficient A-season allocation and
may be processed by any eligible
processor, including Amendment 80
CPs and CVs making deliveries to them.
The amount of the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery will be published
in the BSAI Harvest Specifications.
Given the current 2017 harvest
specifications for Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod, 3,965 mt of Pacific cod will
be available for the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery.
The Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside will only be in effect for a portion
of the A-season. The set-aside will be
lifted if the entire amount of the setaside has been delivered to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants, or on March 15,
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
whichever comes first. Additionally, if
Aleutian Islands shoreplants do not
meet certain performance requirements,
the harvest and delivery restrictions will
be lifted and the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod DFA can be harvested by
any eligible vessel for delivery to any
eligible processor. For example, if
Aleutian Islands shoreplants have not
processed at least 1,000 mt of Pacific
cod by February 28, the set-aside will be
lifted. Any amount of the set-aside
remaining after that date, plus the
remainder of the Aleutian Islands DFA,
will be available for harvest by any
eligible vessel for delivery to any
eligible processor. Likewise, if the entire
set-aside is harvested prior to March 15,
the harvest and delivery restrictions will
be lifted immediately. At the latest, the
harvest set-aside will be lifted on March
15, and any amount of the set-aside
remaining will be added to the
remaining Aleutian Islands DFA for
harvest by any eligible vessel for
delivery to any eligible processor.
Comment 34: Section 2.7.2 of the
Analysis states that the set-aside ‘‘would
preclude the future participation of
other participants that may benefit or
have historically benefitted from the
harvesting and processing of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod unless Aleutian
Islands shoreplants are unable to
process the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
received from catcher vessels.’’ The
justification for this is presented as the
Council having made inshore-offshore
allocations previously. This, however, is
not an inshore-offshore allocation; this
is pre-emption of the offshore sector to
the benefit of the onshore sector.
Response 34: The sentence that
follows the material quoted by the
commenter states, ‘‘The Council and
NMFS have allocated fishery resources
between inshore and offshore
participants in the past, consistent with
the purpose and need for the action, the
National Standards and other provisions
of the MSA [Magnuson-Stevens Act].’’
This sentence simply refers to past
actions taken by the Council and NMFS
that allocate fishery resources between
inshore and offshore participants and
does not represent the Council’s and
NMFS’ justification for recommending
and approving the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod harvest set-aside. The
justification and rationale for
establishing the set-aside is provided
generally in the administrative record
for Amendment 113, and specifically in
Section 2.4.3 of the Analysis, in the
preamble of the proposed rule, and in
the preamble of this final rule.
Although the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod set-aside is not identical to other
inshore-offshore allocation actions the
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Council and NMFS have implemented,
the set-aside does allocate Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod among an inshore
sector (those vessels that deliver their
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing) and an offshore sector (those
vessels that process their catch at sea or
that deliver their catch to offshore
processors for processing), making it a
type of inshore-offshore allocation.
Another type of inshore-offshore
allocation was the Gulf of Alaska (GOA)
pollock and Pacific cod inshore-offshore
allocations under Amendment 23 to the
Fishery Management Plan for
Groundfish of the GOA (GOA FMP).
Under Amendment 23, 100 percent of
the GOA pollock TAC was allocated to
vessels delivering their catch of pollock
to onshore processors. In the preamble
of the final rule implementing
Amendment 23, NMFS stated, ‘‘The
allocation of 100 percent of the GOA
pollock TAC to the inshore sector
proposed by the Council and approved
by the Secretary slightly exceeds the
harvest rates of the inshore sector in
recent years and results in a
redistribution of the pollock resource
from the offshore sector to the inshore
sector. The Secretary determined that
this redistribution was appropriate
based on the social and other benefits
that would be derived from
implementation of the allocation’’ (57
FR 23321, June 3, 1992). In contrast to
the inshore-offshore allocation of GOA
pollock under Amendment 23 to the
GOA FMP, the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod CV Harvest Set-aside will allow the
offshore sector to participate in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery in
years when the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod DFA provides for the Unrestricted
Fishery, and in years when no Aleutian
Islands shoreplant is processing Pacific
cod or participating vessels fail to
deliver 1,000 mt of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants by February 28.
Comment 35: This action would
create an exclusive processing privilege
for Adak under the assumption that
shore-based processors are entitled to an
allocated share of processing privileges.
The Council and NMFS have attempted
to disguise an exclusive processing
allocation to Adak by defining
qualifying participants as ‘‘Aleutian
Islands shoreplants’’ within a specified
geographic region. However, the
shoreplant in Atka has never processed
Pacific cod and has no historical
dependence on the fishery and it is
unlikely that competing processing will
be developed in the region in the
foreseeable future. Therefore, this action
is an exclusive allocation to Adak,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
whose shoreplant has a dubious track
record for paying fisherman and has had
numerous operational difficulties.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act does not
allow a fishery management council to
allocate fishery privileges to shore-based
processors. The express Federal
prohibition of creating such a privilege
was acknowledged by NOAA General
Counsel (GC) in a letter from Lisa
Lindeman to the Council Chair in 2009.
Section 303A of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act specifies that limited access
privilege programs authorized under
this act pertain to fish harvesting. Had
Congress intended to create an
individual processor quota, it could
have done so, as it did for the crab
fisheries in the BSAI. No such
congressional grant of authority applies
to shore-based processors operating in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 35: In a memorandum dated
September 30, 2009, from Lisa
Lindeman, Regional Counsel for the
Alaska Region of NOAA General
Counsel, to Eric Olsen (then Chairman)
and Chris Oliver (Executive Director) of
the Council, NOAA GC provided the
Council with legal advice in response to
four questions posed by the Council.
Questions 1, 2, and 4 of the 2009
memorandum are relevant in
responding to this comment. In
response to the first question, NOAA GC
advised that except for the authority
provided at section 313(j) for the Crab
Rationalization Program (16 U.S.C.
1862(j)), the Magnuson-Stevens Act
does not provide the Council or NMFS
with the authority to require fixed
linkages between harvesters and shorebased processors. In fixed linkages, a
harvester is required to deliver his or
her catch to a specific shore-based
processor. NOAA GC explained that
requiring fixed linkages between
harvesters and shore-based processors is
similar to issuing processor quota,
which is not authorized by the
Magnuson-Stevens Act except for the
Crab Rationalization Program.
Therefore, with the exception of the
Crab Rationalization Program, NMFS
acknowledges that the Council and
NMFS do not have authority under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act to require fixed
linkages between harvesters and
processors or to establish exclusive
processing privileges or processor quota.
In response to the second question,
NOAA GC advised that the MagnusonStevens Act does authorize allocation of
harvesting privileges to shore-based
processors if other requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act are met.
Therefore, NMFS generally disagrees
with the commenter’s assertion that the
Magnuson-Stevens Act does not allow a
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84453
fishery management council to allocate
fishery privileges to shore-based
processors. Finally, in response to the
fourth question, whether the MagnusonStevens Act authorizes the Council to
establish an exclusive class of shorebased processors that would be the
recipients of all, or a specific portion of
all, landings from a fishery, NOAA GC
advised that the answer is dependent on
the purpose of the action and the record
developed by the Council. NOAA GC
stated, ‘‘The Magnuson-Stevens Act
does not authorize placing a limit on the
number of shore-based processing sites
if the purpose is to allocate shore-based
processing privileges. . . . However, if
the Council developed an adequate
record demonstrating that an action,
which had the practical effect of
limiting the number of sites to which
deliveries could be made, was necessary
for legitimate management or
conservation objectives (e.g., . . .
protection of fishing communities that
depend on the fisheries) and not a
disguised limited entry program, then
there could be a legal basis for such an
action.’’
NMFS disagrees that this action
creates an exclusive processing privilege
for Adak or a disguised processing
allocation to Adak. No aspect of this
action establishes exclusivity. This final
rule does not provide a specific
allocation of processing privileges to
either Aleutian Islands shoreplant.
Nothing in Amendment 113 or this final
rule prevents the Atka shoreplant from
processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and reducing the amount of Pacific cod
that is delivered to Adak by vessels
participating in the set-aside, prevents
other Aleutian Islands shoreplants from
processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
in Adak or Atka, or prevents a
shoreplant in any other onshore location
west of 170° W. longitude from
processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
The fact that the set-aside will be lifted
if notification of intent to process is not
provided, or if less than 1,000 mt of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is
processed by February 28, is directly
contrary to exclusive privileges that
permit the holder of the privilege
exclusive access to the resource without
diminishment by other participants or
revocation without procedural due
process. As explained throughout this
final rule, the Council and NMFS have
articulated legitimate management and
conservation objectives for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to protect
Aleutian Islands fishing communities
that depend on access to and sustained
participation in the fisheries for the
socioeconomic benefits and stability
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
84454
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
provided by that access and
participation. Therefore, Amendment
113 and this final rule do not create an
exclusive processing privilege for Adak.
OMB Revisions to PRA References in 15
CFR 902.1(b)
Section 3507(c)(B)(i) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) requires that
agencies inventory and display a current
control number assigned by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), for each agency’s information
collection. Section 902.1(b) identifies
the location of NOAA regulations for
which OMB approval numbers have
been issued. Because this final rule
revises and adds data elements within a
collection-of-information for
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, 15 CFR 902.1(b) is revised
to reference correctly the sections
resulting from this final rule.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator,
Alaska Region, NMFS, determined that
Amendment 113 to the FMP and this
rule are necessary for the conservation
and management of the groundfish
fishery and that they are consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other
applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
Administrative Procedure Act
The NMFS Assistant Administrator
finds good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in
effectiveness for this final rule. This
finding is based on the need to provide
the City of Adak and the City of Atka
with sufficient time to submit a
notification of intent to process that
complies with the regulatory
requirements after the notification
requirements are effective; to provide
NMFS with sufficient time to notify the
general public and the affected industry
as to whether the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside will be in effect for
2017; and to provide the affected
industry with sufficient time to
adequately prepare for the start of the
2017 fishing year on January 1, 2017.
NMFS has determined that it must
give the City of Adak and the City of
Atka 15 days after the effective date of
the notification of intent to process
regulations to take all necessary steps to
prepare, sign, and submit a notification
of intent to process that complies with
the regulatory requirements at
§ 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(D). Because these
cities are aware of this action, have been
anticipating its approval, and support
its implementation in time for the 2017
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
fishing year, NMFS has determined that
15 days will provide the cities with
enough time to comply with the
notification requirements in 2016.
Without waiver of the 30-day delay in
effectiveness, the deadline for
submission of a notification of intent to
process would occur 45 days after
publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, which means the
deadline would occur very late in
December 2016 or in early January 2017.
A deadline in late December would not
provide NMFS with adequate time to
notify the industry as to whether the setaside will be in effect on January 1,
2017, or provide the affected industry
with sufficient time to prepare for the
fishery which begins on January 1 for
some participants in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery. Because
NMFS must receive a notification of
intent prior to the start of the fishing
year to provide for an orderly start to the
fishing year and to ensure the
appropriate specifications are in place
before fishing occurs on January 1, any
notification deadline for 2016 that
would occur after December 31, 2016,
renders the set-aside meaningless for the
2017 fishing year. For reasons set forth
in the Analysis and the preambles of the
proposed rule and this final rule, the
Council and NMFS have determined
that the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside will provide important
socioeconomic benefits and stability to
Aleutian Islands fishing communities
that intend to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod in the upcoming fishing
year. Waiving the 30-day delay in
effectiveness will provide Aleutian
Islands fishing communities with an
opportunity to realize those benefits
starting with the 2017 fishing year;
failure to waive the delay in
effectiveness will postpone that
opportunity for an entire fishing year
until 2018. One Aleutian Islands
shoreplant has already informally
notified NMFS that it intends to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in 2017.
Additionally, as explained earlier in
this final rule, the Analysis determined
that the affected fishing industry would
have sufficient time to prepare for the
upcoming fishing year if notification of
intent to process was received from
Adak or Atka prior to December 15.
Waiving the delay in effectiveness for
these regulations provides for a
submission deadline that will occur
before December 15, thus providing
NMFS with sufficient time to notify the
public and affected industry as to
whether the set-aside will be in effect,
and for the affected industry, including
vessels that deliver their catch to
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Aleutian Islands shoreplants and those
that deliver their catch to at-sea
processors, to prepare for the start of the
fishing year with that knowledge. As
explained above, failure to waive the
delay in effectiveness could result in a
notification deadline that occurs in late
December, which would not provide
NMFS or the affected industry with
sufficient time to prepare for the
upcoming fishery that starts on January
1, 2017.
For these reasons, the NMFS Assistant
Administrator finds good cause to waive
the 30-day delay in effectiveness for this
final rule.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 states that, for each rule or group
of related rules for which an agency is
required to prepare a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, the agency shall
publish one or more guides to assist
small entities in complying with the
rule, and shall designate such
publications as ‘‘small entity
compliance guides.’’ The preambles to
the proposed rule and this final rule
serve as the small entity compliance
guide. This action does not require any
additional compliance from small
entities that is not described in the
preambles. Copies of the proposed rule
and this final rule are available from the
NMFS Web site at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Section 604 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that,
when an agency promulgates a final rule
under section 553 of Title 5 of the U.S.
Code, after being required by that
section or any other law to publish a
general notice of proposed rulemaking,
the agency shall prepare a FRFA.
Section 604 describes the required
contents of a FRFA: (1) A statement of
the need for and objectives of the rule;
(2) a statement of the significant issues
raised by the public comments in
response to the initial regulatory
flexibility analysis, a statement of the
assessment of the agency of such issues,
and a statement of any changes made in
the proposed rule as a result of such
comments; (3) the response of the
agency to any comments filed by the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S.
Small Business Administration (SBA) in
response to the proposed rule, and a
detailed statement of any change made
to the proposed rule in the final rule as
a result of the comments; (4) a
description of and an estimate of the
number of small entities to which the
rule will apply or an explanation of why
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
no such estimate is available; (5) a
description of the projected reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance
requirements of the rule, including an
estimate of the classes of small entities
which will be subject to the requirement
and the type of professional skills
necessary for preparation of the report
or record; and (6) a description of the
steps the agency has taken to minimize
the significant economic impact on
small entities consistent with the stated
objectives of applicable statutes,
including a statement of the factual,
policy, and legal reasons for selecting
the alternative adopted in the final rule
and why each one of the other
significant alternatives to the rule
considered by the agency which affect
the impact on small entities was
rejected.
(1) Need for and Objectives of This Final
Rule
A statement of the need for and
objectives of this rule is contained
earlier in the preamble and is not
repeated here. This FRFA incorporates
the IRFA (see ADDRESSES) and the
summary of the IRFA in the proposed
rule (81 FR 50444, August 1, 2016), a
summary of the significant issues raised
by the public comments, NMFS’
responses to those comments, and a
summary of the analyses completed to
support the action.
(2) Summary of Significant Issues
Raised During Public Comment Period
No comments were received that
raised significant issues in response to
the IRFA specifically; therefore, no
changes were made to this rule as a
result of comments on the IRFA.
However, several comments were
received on the economic impacts of
Amendment 113 on the Amendment 80
trawl CP and hook-and-line CP sectors.
For a summary of the comments
received and NMFS’ responses, refer to
the section above titled ‘‘Responses to
Comments.’’
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
(3) Public and Chief Counsel for
Advocacy Comments on the IRFA
NMFS published the proposed rule on
August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50444), with
comments invited through August 31,
2016. An IRFA was prepared and
summarized in the ‘‘Classification’’
section of the preamble to the proposed
rule. NMFS received 18 letters of public
comment on the proposed rule and
Amendment 113 to the FMP. The Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA did
not file any comments on the proposed
rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
(4) Description and Number of Directly
Regulated Small Entities
This final rule directly regulates three
groups of entities. This final rule will
directly regulate trawl CVs harvesting
Pacific cod in the BSAI because it limits
how much Pacific cod those trawl CVs
may harvest in the Bering Sea, and it
may prohibit trawl CVs from
participating in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery if they do not deliver
their Pacific cod catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants. It also directly
regulates all non-trawl CVs who are
harvesting Pacific cod in the Aleutian
Islands because it will prohibit those
non-trawl CVs from participating in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery if
they do not deliver their Pacific cod
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants.
Finally, this final will directly regulate
all CPs harvesting Pacific cod in the
Aleutian Islands because it limits how
much Pacific cod those CPs can harvest
and process in the Aleutian Islands.
This rule does not directly regulate the
City of Adak or the City of Atka because
it does not impose a requirement on
those cities. This rule does not directly
regulate entities participating in the
harvesting and processing of Pacific cod
managed under State GHL fisheries in
State waters in the Bering Sea or
Aleutian Islands.
The SBA has established size
standards for all major industry sectors
in the United States. For RFA purposes
only, NMFS has established a small
business size standard for businesses,
including their affiliates, whose primary
industry is commercial fishing (see 50
CFR 200.2). A business primarily
engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS
code 114111) 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
receipts not in excess of $11 million for
all its affiliated operations worldwide.
Based on the best available and most
recent complete data from 2012 through
2014, between 10 and 16 CPs, and an
estimated 43 CVs (trawl and non-trawl)
will be directly regulated by this action
in the BSAI. Of these, no CP is
estimated to be a small entity, while 6
trawl CVs and 26 non-trawl CVs are
estimated to be small entities based on
the best available data on the gross
receipts from these entities and their
known affiliates. Therefore, a total of 32
vessels considered to be small entities
will be directly regulated by this action.
The IRFA assumes that each vessel is a
unique entity; therefore, the total
number of directly regulated entities
may be an overestimate because some
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84455
vessels are likely affiliated through
common ownership. These potential
affiliations are not known with the best
available data and cannot be predicted.
(5) Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other
Compliance Requirements
This final rule adds a recordkeeping
and reporting requirement to notify
NMFS of an Aleutian Islands
shoreplant’s intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in the upcoming
year; therefore, the recordkeeping,
reporting, and other compliance
requirements are increased slightly
under this final rule. This final rule
contains a new requirement for the City
of Adak or the City of Atka to notify
NMFS of its intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in the upcoming
fishing year in order for the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside to go into effect in the
upcoming fishing year. The City
Manager of Adak or the City
Administrator of Atka is required to
provide NMFS with an official
notification of intent prior to December
8, 2016, and no later than October 31 for
each year after 2016, for the harvest setaside to go into effect in the upcoming
year. The professional skills necessary
to provide this notice include writing,
sending email, and access to a U.S. Post
Office.
(6) Description of Significant
Alternatives Considered to the Final
Action That Minimize Adverse Impacts
on Small Entities
The RFA requires identification of
any significant alternatives to the final
rule that accomplish the stated
objectives of the final action, consistent
with applicable statutes, and that would
minimize any significant economic
impact of the final rule on small
entities. The Council considered a status
quo alternative and one action
alternative with several options and
suboptions. The combination of options
and suboptions under the action
alternative effectively provided a broad
range of potential alternative
approaches to status quo management.
Under the status quo, there would have
been a continued risk that fishing
communities in the Aleutian Islands
would not be able to sustainably
participate in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery. The action
alternative does not affect any non-CDQ
fishery sector’s Pacific cod allocation, or
the TAC of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
The action alternative accomplishes the
stated objectives of prioritizing a portion
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC
for harvest by vessels that deliver their
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84456
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing, while minimizing adverse
economic impacts on small entities and
the potential for stranding a portion of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC.
The Council considered a range of
dates, varying amounts of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod for the harvest setaside and Bering Sea sector limitation,
and a suite of mechanisms to relieve the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside under the action
alternative. The Council recommended
the final combination of dates, harvest
set-aside amounts, harvest limitations,
and provisions to relieve the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside that would give fishery
participants sufficient opportunity to
harvest and deliver Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to the benefit of Aleutian
Islands communities and shoreplants
without stranding the trawl CV sector
allocation or the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC. The Council
recommended and NMFS is
implementing selected options in the
action alternative such that if specific
notification or minimum harvest and
processing requirements are not met by
a specific date, the Bering Sea Trawl CV
A-Season Sector Limitation and the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will either not go into effect in the
upcoming year, or they will be lifted for
the remainder of the year.
The Council considered and rejected
two options under the action
alternative. One option would have
required that if less than 50 percent of
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside had been landed at an Aleutian
Islands shoreplant by a given date,
ranging from February 28 to March 15,
the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation and the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside would be
lifted. Instead, the Council selected an
option that requires a minimum weight
(1,000 mt) rather than a minimum
percentage of the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside that must be landed
at an Aleutian Islands shoreplant for
processing by a given date (February 28)
for the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation and the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to remain
in place.
The Council also considered and
rejected an option that would have
exempted certain processing vessels
with a history of processing Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in at least 12 out of
15 recent years from the final
restrictions on processing and would
have allowed them to process up to
2,000 mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
while the set-aside was in effect. This
option could have allowed up to 10
processing vessels to continue to
process Pacific cod during the A-season,
limiting the effectiveness of this final
rule to minimize the risk of a
diminished historical share of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod being delivered to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants and the
communities where those shoreplants
are located.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate,
Overlap, or Conflict With the Final
Action
NMFS has not identified any
duplication, overlap, or conflict
between this final action and existing
Federal rules.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This final rule contains a collectionof-information requirement subject to
the PRA and which has been approved
by OMB under control number 0648–
0743.
Public reporting burden for
Notification of Intent to Process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is estimated
to average 30 minutes per individual
response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information.
Send comments regarding this data
collection, or any other aspect of this
data collection, including suggestions
for reducing the burden, to NMFS
Alaska Region (see ADDRESSES), and by
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, nor shall any person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the PRA, unless
that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be
viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/
services_programs/prasubs.html.
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Fmt 4700
Title 15—Commerce and Foreign Trade
PART 902—NOAA INFORMATION
COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER
THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT:
OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
1. The authority citation for part 902
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
2. In § 902.1, in the table in paragraph
(b), under the entry ‘‘50 CFR’’, add an
entry for ‘‘679.20(a)(7)(viii)’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned
pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
*
*
*
(b) * * *
Sfmt 4700
*
*
CFR part or section where
the information collection
requirement is located
*
50 CFR:
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Current OMB
control number
(all numbers
begin with
0648–)
*
*
*
*
679.20(a)(7)(viii) ....................
*
*
*
–0743
*
*
*
Title 50—Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE
EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF
ALASKA
3. 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.
4. In § 679.2, add a definition for
‘‘Aleutian Islands shoreplant’’ in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
■
Definitions.
*
15 CFR Part 902
Frm 00068
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS amends 15 CFR part
902 and 50 CFR part 679 as follows:
§ 679.2
List of Subjects
PO 00000
Dated: November 14, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
*
*
*
*
Aleutian Islands shoreplant means a
processing facility that is physically
located on land west of 170° W.
longitude within the State of Alaska.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 679.20, add paragraph
(a)(7)(viii) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 679.20
General limitations.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(7) * * *
(viii) Aleutian Islands Pacific Cod
Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside
Program—(A) Calculation of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
ICA and DFA. Each year, during the
annual harvest specifications process set
forth at paragraph (c) of this section,
NMFS will specify the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental catch
allowance and directed fishing
allowance from the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC as follows.
Shortly after completion of the process
set forth in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of
this section, NMFS will announce
through notice in the Federal Register
whether the ICA and DFA will be in
effect for the upcoming fishing year.
(1) Aleutian Islands Pacific cod nonCDQ incidental catch allowance. Each
year, during the annual harvest
specifications process set forth at
paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will
specify an amount of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod that NMFS estimates will be
taken as incidental catch in non-CDQ
directed fisheries for groundfish other
than Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands.
This amount will be the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental
catch allowance and will be deducted
from the aggregate portion of Pacific cod
TAC annually allocated to the non-CDQ
sectors identified in paragraph
(a)(7)(ii)(A) of this section.
(2) Aleutian Islands Pacific cod nonCDQ directed fishing allowance. Each
year, during the annual harvest
specifications process set forth at
paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will
specify the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
non-CDQ directed fishing allowance.
The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod nonCDQ directed fishing allowance will be
the amount of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC remaining after
subtraction of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod CDQ reserve and the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
incidental catch allowance.
(B) Calculation of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery.
Each year, during the annual harvest
specifications process set forth at
paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will
specify the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside and the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery. The Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will be an
amount of Pacific cod equal to the lesser
of either the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod non-CDQ directed fishing allowance
as determined in paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section or 5,000
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
mt. The Aleutian Islands Unrestricted
Fishery will be the amount of Pacific
cod that remains after deducting the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
from the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
non-CDQ directed fishing allowance as
determined in paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section. Shortly
after completion of the process set forth
in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this
section, NMFS will announce through
notice in the Federal Register whether
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest SetAside and the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery will be in effect for
the upcoming fishing year.
(C) Calculation of the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation.
Each year, during the annual harvest
specifications process set forth at
paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will
specify the Bering Sea Trawl CV ASeason Sector Limitation and the
amount of the trawl CV sector’s Aseason allocation that could be
harvested in the Bering Sea subarea
prior to March 21. The Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be
an amount of Pacific cod equal to the
lesser of either the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing
allowance as determined in paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section or 5,000
mt. The amount of the trawl CV sector’s
A-season allocation that could be
harvested in the Bering Sea subarea
prior to March 21 will be the amount of
Pacific cod that remains after deducting
the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation from the amount of
BSAI Pacific cod allocated to the trawl
CV sector A-season as determined in
paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i) of this
section. Shortly after completion of the
process set forth in paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(D) of this section, NMFS will
announce through notice in the Federal
Register whether the Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be
in effect for the upcoming fishing year.
(D) Annual notification of intent to
process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod—
(1) Submission of notification. The
provisions of paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of
this section will apply if the either the
City Manager of the City of Adak or the
City Administrator of the City of Atka
submits to NMFS a timely and complete
notification of its intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod during the
upcoming fishing year. This notification
must be submitted annually to NMFS
using the methods described below.
(2) Submittal method. An official
notification of intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod during the upcoming
fishing year in the form of a letter or
memorandum signed by the City
Manager of the City of Adak or the City
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
84457
Administrator of the City of Atka must
be submitted by certified mail through
the United States Postal Service to:
NMFS Alaska Region, Attn: Regional
Administrator, P. O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802. The City Manager or City
Administrator must also submit an
electronic copy of the official
notification of intent and the certified
mail receipt with postmark via email to
nmfs.akr.inseason@noaa.gov. Email
submission is in addition to submission
via U.S. Postal Service; email
submission does not replace the
requirement to submit an official
notification of intent via U.S. Postal
Service.
(3) NMFS confirmation. On or shortly
after December 8, 2016, or November 1
for each year after 2016, the Regional
Administrator will send a signed and
dated letter to the City Manager of the
City of Adak or the City Administrator
of the City of Atka either confirming
NMFS’ receipt of its official notification
of intent to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod, or informing the city that
NMFS did not receive notification by
the deadline.
(4) Deadline. The official notification
of intent to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod for the upcoming fishing
year must be postmarked no later than
December 8, 2016, or October 31 for
each year after 2016, in order for the
provisions of paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of
this section to apply during the
upcoming fishing year. Notifications of
intent postmarked on or after December
9, 2016, or November 1 for each year
after 2016, will not be accepted by the
Regional Administrator. The electronic
copy of the official notification of intent
and certified mail receipt with postmark
must be submitted to NMFS via email
dated no later than December 8, 2016,
or no later than October 31 for each year
after 2016, in order for the provisions of
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of this section to
apply during the upcoming fishing year.
(5) Contents of notification. A
notification of intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod for the upcoming
fishing year must contain the following
information:
(i) Date,
(ii) Name of city,
(iii) Statement of intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod,
(iv) Identification of the fishing year
during which the city intends to process
Aleutian Island Pacific cod, and
(v) Signature of and contact
information for the City Manager or City
Administrator of the city intending to
process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
(E) Aleutian Islands community
protections for Pacific cod. If the City
Manager of the City of Adak or the City
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
84458
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 23, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Administrator of the City of Atka
submits a timely and complete
notification in accordance with
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this section,
then the following provisions will apply
for the fishing year following the
submission of the timely and complete
notification:
(1) Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation. Prior to March 21, the
harvest of Pacific cod by the trawl CV
sector in the Bering Sea subarea is
limited to an amount equal to the trawl
CV sector A-season allocation as
determined in paragraph
(a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i) of this section minus
the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation as determined in
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(C) of this section.
If, after the start of the fishing year, the
provisions of paragraphs
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) or (5) of this section are
met, this paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) will
not apply for the remainder of the
fishing year.
(2) Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel
Harvest Set-Aside. Prior to March 15,
only catcher vessels that deliver their
catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing may directed fish for that
portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod non-CDQ directed fishing allowance
that is specified as the Aleutian Islands
Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside in
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(B) of this section.
If, after the start of the fishing year, the
provisions of paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E)(4)
of this section are met, this paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(2) will not apply for the
remainder of the fishing year.
(3) Aleutian Islands Unrestricted
Fishery. Prior to March 15, vessels
otherwise authorized to directed fish for
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands may
directed fish for that portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
directed fishing allowance that is
specified as the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery as determined in
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(B) of this section
and may deliver their catch to any
eligible processor.
(4) Minimum Aleutian Islands
shoreplant landing requirement. If less
than 1,000 mt of the Aleutian Islands
Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside is
landed at Aleutian Islands shoreplants
on or before February 28, then
paragraphs (a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) and (2) of
this section will not apply for the
remainder of the fishing year.
(5) Harvest of Aleutian Islands
Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside. If the
Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest
Set-Aside is fully harvested prior to
March 15, then paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) of this section will not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:26 Nov 22, 2016
Jkt 241001
apply for the remainder of the fishing
year.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–28152 Filed 11–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Merchandise Branch, Regulations and
Rulings, Office of Trade, (202) 325–
0215. For operational aspects, William
R. Scopa, Branch Chief, Partner
Government Agency Branch, Trade
Policy and Programs, Office of Trade,
(202) 863–6554, William.R.Scopa@
cbp.dhs.gov.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Background
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
19 CFR Part 12
[CBP Dec. 16–21]
RIN 1515–AE18
Extension of Import Restrictions
Imposed on Certain Archaeological
and Ethnological Material From Greece
Customs and Border Protection,
Department of Homeland Security;
Department of the Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This document amends the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) regulations to reflect the
extension of import restrictions on
certain archaeological and ethnological
material from the Hellenic Republic
(Greece). The restrictions, which were
originally imposed by CBP Decision
(CBP Dec.) 11–25, are due to expire on
November 21, 2016. The Assistant
Secretary for Educational and Cultural
Affairs, United States Department of
State, has determined that factors
continue to warrant the imposition of
import restrictions and no cause for
suspension exists. Accordingly, these
import restrictions will remain in effect
for an additional five years, and the CBP
regulations are being amended to reflect
this extension until November 21, 2021.
These restrictions are being extended
pursuant to determinations of the
United States Department of State made
under the terms of the Convention on
Cultural Property Implementation Act
that implemented the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) Convention on
the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing
the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of
Ownership of Cultural Property. CBP
Dec. 11–25 contains the Designated List
of archaeological and ecclesiastical
ethnological material from Greece, to
which the restrictions apply.
DATES: Effective Date: November 21,
2016.
SUMMARY:
For
legal aspects, Lisa L. Burley, Chief,
Cargo Security, Carriers and Restricted
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Pursuant to the provisions of the 1970
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
Convention, implemented by the
Convention on Cultural Property
Implementation Act (Pub. L. 97–446, 19
U.S.C. 2601 et seq.), the United States
made a bilateral agreement with Greece,
which entered into force on November
21, 2011, concerning the imposition of
import restrictions on archaeological
materials representing Greece’s cultural
heritage from the Upper Paleolithic
(beginning approximately 20,000 B.C.)
through the 15th century A.D., and
ecclesiastical ethnological material
representing Greece’s Byzantine culture
(approximately the 4th century through
the 15th century A.D.). On December 1,
2011, CBP published CBP Dec. 11–25 in
the Federal Register (76 FR 74691),
which amended 19 CFR 12.104g(a) to
indicate the imposition of these
restrictions and included a list
designating the types of archaeological
and ecclesiastical ethnological material
covered by the restrictions.
Import restrictions listed in 19 CFR
12.104g(a) are effective for no more than
five years beginning on the date on
which the agreement enters into force
with respect to the United States. This
period can be extended for additional
periods not to exceed five years if it is
determined that the factors which
justified the initial agreement still
pertain and no cause for suspension of
the agreement exists (19 CFR
12.104g(a)).
On February 5, 2016, the Department
of State received a request by the
Government of the Hellenic Republic to
extend the Agreement. Subsequently,
the Department of State proposed to
extend the Agreement. After considering
the views and recommendation of the
Cultural Property Advisory Committee,
the Assistant Secretary for Educational
and Cultural Affairs, United States
Department of State, determined that
the cultural heritage of Greece continues
to be in jeopardy from pillage of
archaeological materials representing
Greece’s cultural heritage from the
Upper Paleolithic (beginning
approximately 20,000 B.C.) through the
15th century A.D., and ecclesiastical
E:\FR\FM\23NOR1.SGM
23NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 226 (Wednesday, November 23, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 84434-84458]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28152]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 151113999-6999-02]
RIN 0648-BF54
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea
and Aleutian Islands Management Area; American Fisheries Act; Amendment
113
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement Amendment 113 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (FMP). This final rule modifies the management
of Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Pacific cod fishery to set
aside a portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod total allowable
catch for harvest by vessels directed fishing for Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod and delivering their catch for processing to a shoreside
processor located on land west of 170[deg] W. longitude in the Aleutian
Islands (``Aleutian Islands shoreplant''). The harvest set-aside
applies only if specific notification and performance requirements are
met, and only during the first few months of the fishing year. This
harvest set-aside provides the opportunity for vessels, Aleutian
Islands shoreplants, and the communities where Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are located to receive benefits from a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. The notification and performance
requirements preserve an opportunity for the complete harvest of the
BSAI Pacific cod resource if the set-aside is not fully harvested. This
final rule is intended to promote the goals and objectives of Amendment
113, the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Effective on November 23, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of Amendment 113 to the FMP, the
Environmental Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) prepared for this action, collectively ``the Analysis,''
and the proposed rule may be obtained 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 Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802-1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer; in person at NMFS
Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK; by email to
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov; or by fax to (202) 395-5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Scheurer, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
NMFS manages the groundfish and Pacific cod fisheries in the
Exclusive Economic Zone of the BSAI under the FMP. The North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared, and the Secretary of
Commerce approved, the FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
[[Page 84435]]
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) and other
applicable laws. Regulations implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR part
679. General regulations that pertain to U.S. fisheries appear at 50
CFR part 600.
NMFS published the Notice of Availability of Amendment 113 on July
19, 2016 (81 FR 46883), with comments invited through September 19,
2016. NMFS published the proposed rule to implement Amendment 113 on
August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50444), with comments invited through August 31,
2016. The Secretary approved Amendment 113 on October 17, 2016. NMFS
received 35 unique comments on Amendment 113 and the proposed rule from
16 different commenters. A summary of these comments and the responses
by NMFS are provided under the heading ``Responses to Comments'' below.
These comments resulted in two minor changes from the proposed rule.
One additional change to this final rule is not in response to
comments, but is an administrative change that NMFS deemed necessary
for timely implementation of this final rule.
A detailed review of the BSAI Pacific cod fishery, provisions of
Amendment 113, the proposed regulations to implement Amendment 113, and
the rationale for these regulations is provided in the preamble to the
proposed rule (81 FR 50444, August 1, 2016) and is not repeated here.
The preamble to this final rule briefly reviews the regulatory changes
made by this final rule.
This final rule modifies the BSAI Pacific cod fishery to set aside
a portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod total allowable catch
(TAC) for harvest by vessels directed fishing for Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod and delivering their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants
for processing. The harvest set-aside applies only if specific
notification and performance requirements are met, and only during the
first few months of the fishing year.
Table 3 in the proposed rule preamble (81 FR 50444, August 1, 2016)
describes the Overfishing Levels (OFLs), the Acceptable Biological
Catches (ABCs), TACs, the Western Alaska Community Development Quota
(CDQ) and non-CDQ fishery sector allocations, and seasonal
apportionments of BSAI Pacific cod in 2017, the first year of
implementation of this final rule. Each of these terms is described in
the preamble to the proposed rule. Table 3 of the proposed rule
preamble includes data from Tables 2 and 9 in the 2016 and 2017 final
harvest specifications for the BSAI groundfish fisheries (81 FR 14773,
March 18, 2016).
Harvesting and Processing of Pacific Cod in the Aleutian Islands
A variety of vessels using a variety of gear types harvest the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC each year. Trawl catcher vessels (CVs)
and trawl catcher processors (CPs) have been among the most active
participants in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. Hook-and-line
CPs have consistently participated in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Non-trawl CVs have harvested only a very small portion of the
Pacific cod from the Aleutian Islands. The proposed rule and Section
2.6.6 of the Analysis provide additional detail on the types of vessels
harvesting Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands.
Trawl CVs deliver their catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
several types of processors in the Aleutian Islands: CPs acting as
motherships (vessels that process Pacific cod delivered by trawl CVs);
stationary floating processors anchored in specific locations that
receive and process catch on board but do not harvest and process their
own catch; and shoreside processing facilities that are physically
located on land west of 170[deg] W. longitude in the Aleutian Islands
(defined as ``Aleutian Islands shoreplant'' in this final rule).
Currently, Aleutian Islands shoreplants that may be capable of
receiving Aleutian Islands Pacific cod from CVs are located in the
communities of Adak and Atka. Although the Atka shoreplant has not
received and processed Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, the shoreplant in
Adak has received and processed relatively large amounts of Pacific
cod. The proposed rule and Section 2.7.1 of the Analysis have
additional detail on the delivery and processing of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod.
Since 2008, trawl CVs have primarily delivered their catch of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to a small group of CPs that operate as
motherships. As deliveries of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest from
trawl CVs to CPs operating as motherships have increased in recent
years, the amount of trawl CV harvest delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants has decreased. Additionally, CPs operating as motherships
have demonstrated the capacity to process the entire TAC of Pacific cod
in the Aleutian Islands in years when no Aleutian Islands shoreplant is
in operation. This final rule is intended in part to mitigate the risk
that CVs, Aleutian Islands shoreplants, and the communities in which
they are located will be preempted from participating in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery by CPs.
The proposed rule and Section 2.6 of the Analysis provide
additional description of the factors that have affected the harvesting
and processing of Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands.
Need for This Final Rule
A thorough description of the history and need for this action is
provided in the proposed rule and the Analysis prepared for this action
and is not repeated here. The Council adopted its preferred alternative
for Amendment 113 at its October 2015 meeting.
Since 2008, Aleutian Islands fishing communities, and specifically
the community of Adak and its shoreplant, have seen a decrease in the
amount of Pacific cod being harvested and delivered. The amount of
Pacific cod delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants has been highly
variable, which is not conducive to stable shoreside operations.
Several factors have contributed to this instability, and therefore the
need for this action, including decreased Pacific cod biomass in the
Aleutian Islands subarea; the establishment of separate OFLs, ABCs, and
TACs for Pacific cod in the Bering Sea and the Aleutian Islands;
changing Steller sea lion protection measures; and changing fishing
practices in part resulting from rationalization programs that allocate
catch to specific fishery participants.
This rule establishes a harvest set-aside in which a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC will be available for harvest by
vessels directed fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and
delivering their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing.
This harvest set-aside applies only if specific notification and
performance requirements are met, and only during the first few months
of the fishing year.
The Council determined and NMFS agrees that a harvest set-aside is
needed for several reasons: The TAC for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
has been significantly lower than predicted so that less Pacific cod is
available for harvest; the rationalization programs, and particularly
the Amendment 80 Program, have allowed an influx of processing capacity
into the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery; and the Aleutian Islands
communities and shoreplants (Adak) have received almost all of their
total first wholesale gross revenue from Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
This final rule strikes a balance between providing protections for
[[Page 84436]]
fishing communities and ensuring that the fishery sectors have a
meaningful opportunity to fully harvest their BSAI Pacific cod
allocations by including several thresholds to prevent a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC from being unharvested. This final
rule will provide social and economic benefits to, and promote
stability in, fishery-dependent fishing communities in the Aleutian
Islands and is responsive to changes in management of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery such as rationalization programs,
decreasing biomass of Pacific cod, and Steller sea lion protection
measures that necessitate putting protections in place to protect other
non-rationalized fisheries.
This final rule does not modify existing harvest allocations of
BSAI Pacific cod to participants in the CDQ Program. This final rule
does not modify existing harvest allocations of BSAI Pacific cod made
to the nine non-CDQ fishery sectors defined in Sec.
679.20(a)(7)(ii)(A). Although the nine non-CDQ sectors will continue to
receive their existing harvest allocations of BSAI Pacific cod, each
sector's ability to harvest a portion of its BSAI Pacific cod
allocation in the Aleutian Islands may be affected by this rule.
The Aleutian Islands shoreplants in Adak and Atka currently are not
processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. However, the protection
measures and harvest set-aside in this final rule will minimize the
risk of exclusion from, and maintain opportunities for participation
in, the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian Islands
harvesters, shoreplants, and communities when those Aleutian Islands
communities are able to accept deliveries of and process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod.
This final rule revises regulations to provide additional
opportunities for harvesters to deliver Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants. Recent Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TACs
have not been sufficient to allow all sectors to prosecute the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery at their historical levels. Without
protections, Aleutian Islands harvesters, shoreplants, and fishing
communities may be preempted from the fishery by harvests by CPs, or by
harvests from CVs delivering their catch to CPs.
Because of their remote location and limited economic alternatives,
Aleutian Islands communities rely on harvesting and processing of the
nearby fishery resources to support and sustain the social and economic
welfare of their communities. This final rule is intended to be
directly responsive to National Standard 8 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act
that states conservation and management measures shall take into
account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities in
order to provide for the sustained participation of such communities,
and to the extent practicable, minimize adverse economic impacts on
such communities (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(8)).
Overview of Measures Implemented by This Rule
This final rule modifies several aspects of the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery. This final rule sets aside a portion of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC for harvest by vessels directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and delivering their catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants. However, the harvest set-aside applies only if
specific notification and performance requirements are met, and only
during the first few months of the fishing year.
In order to implement Amendment 113, this final rule:
Defines the term ``Aleutian Islands shoreplant'' in
regulation;
Calculates and defines the amount of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC that will be available as a directed fishing allowance
(DFA) and the amount that will be available as an incidental catch
allowance (ICA);
Limits the amount of early season (from January 20 until
April 1), also known as A-season, Pacific cod that may be harvested by
the trawl CV sector in the Bering Sea prior to March 21 (Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation);
Sets aside some or all of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
non-CDQ DFA for harvest by vessels directed fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod and delivering their catch for processing by
Aleutian Islands shoreplants from January 1 to March 15 (Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside);
Requires that either the City of Adak or the City of Atka
annually notify NMFS of its intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod during the upcoming fishing year in order for the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside and the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation to be effective in the upcoming fishing year; and
Removes the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside if less than 1,000 metric
tons (mt) of the harvest set-aside is delivered to (i.e., landed at)
Aleutian Islands shoreplants on or before February 28, or if the
harvest set-aside is fully taken before March 15.
The following sections provide further explanation of the
regulatory changes made by this rule. Additional detail about the
rationale for and effect of the regulatory changes in this rule is
provided in the preamble to the proposed rule and in the Analysis for
this action.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
Revisions to Definitions at Sec. 679.2
This final rule adds a definition to Sec. 679.2 for ``Aleutian
Islands shoreplant'' to mean a processing facility that is physically
located on land west of 170[deg] W. longitude within the State of
Alaska (State). This definition is needed because the existing term
``shoreside processor'' in Sec. 679.2 can include processing vessels
that are moored or otherwise fixed in a location (i.e., stationary
floating processors), but not necessarily located on land. This new
definition provides a clear and consistent term for referencing the
processors located on land within the Aleutian Islands.
Revisions to General Limitations at Sec. 679.20
This final rule adds a new paragraph (viii) to Sec. 679.20(a)(7).
This new paragraph includes the primary regulatory provisions of this
final rule. The preamble to the proposed rule provides examples to aid
the reader in understanding how this final rule will apply using 2017
harvest specifications for BSAI Pacific cod (81 FR 14773, March 18,
2016). For the remainder of this preamble, unless otherwise specified,
all references to allocations and apportionments of BSAI Pacific cod
refer to non-CDQ allocations and apportionments of BSAI Pacific cod.
Calculation of the Aleutian Islands Pacific Cod ICA and DFA
NMFS will annually specify an ICA and a DFA derived from the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. Each year, during the annual
harvest specifications process described at Sec. 679.20(c), NMFS will
specify an amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that NMFS estimates
will be taken as incidental catch when directed fishing for non-CDQ
groundfish other than Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands. This amount
will be the Aleutian Islands ICA and will be deducted from the Aleutian
Islands non-CDQ TAC. The amount of the Aleutian Islands non-CDQ TAC
remaining after subtraction of the Aleutian Islands ICA will be the
Aleutian Islands DFA.
NMFS will specify the Aleutian Islands ICA and DFA so that NMFS can
[[Page 84437]]
clearly establish the amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that will
be used to determine the amount of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside described in the following sections of this preamble. The
specification will also provide the public with notification of the
amount of the Aleutian Islands non-CDQ TAC that is available for
directed fishing prior to the start of the fishing season to aid in the
planning of fishery operations. The Aleutian Islands DFA is the maximum
amount of Pacific cod available for directed fishing by all non-CDQ
fishery sectors in all seasons in the Aleutian Islands.
Although the amount of the Aleutian Islands ICA may vary from year
to year, NMFS specifies an Aleutian Islands ICA of 2,500 mt for 2017.
NMFS determined that this amount will be needed to support incidental
catch of Pacific cod in other Aleutian Islands non-CDQ directed
groundfish fisheries. In future years, NMFS will specify the Aleutian
Islands ICA in the annual harvest specifications based on recent and
anticipated incidental catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in other
Aleutian Islands non-CDQ directed groundfish fisheries.
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
This final rule establishes the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation to restrict the amount of the trawl CV sector's A-season
allocation that can be harvested in the Bering Sea subarea prior to
March 21. The Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation ensures
that some of the trawl CV sector's A-season allocation remains
available for harvest in the Aleutian Islands subarea by trawl catcher
vessels that deliver their catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing. On March 21, the
restriction on Bering Sea harvest by the trawl CV sector will be lifted
and the remainder, if any, of the BSAI trawl CV sector's A-season
allocation can be harvested in either the Bering Sea or the Aleutian
Islands (if still open to directed fishing for Pacific cod) for
delivery to any eligible processor for processing.
The Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation will equal the
lesser of either the Aleutian Islands DFA or 5,000 mt. The Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be equivalent to the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside, as discussed in the following section of
the preamble. The amount of the trawl CV sector's A-season allocation
that may be harvested in the Bering Sea prior to March 21 will be the
amount of Pacific cod that remains after deducting the Bering Sea Trawl
CV A-Season Sector Limitation from the BSAI trawl CV sector A-season
allocation listed in the annual harvest specifications (and as
determined at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i)). NMFS will annually
specify in the annual harvest specifications the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation and the amount of the trawl CV sector's A-
season allocation that may be harvested in the Bering Sea prior to
March 21.
The preamble to the proposed rule provides additional background on
the factors that the Council and NMFS considered when determining the
amount and timing of the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation
and is not repeated here.
Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside
This final rule requires that some or all of the Aleutian Islands
DFA be set aside for harvest by vessels directed fishing for Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod and delivering their catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants for processing. This Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will be available for harvest by vessels using any authorized gear type
and that deliver their directed catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing. NMFS will account for
harvest and processing of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod under the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside separate from, and in addition
to, its accounting of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod catch by the nine
non-CDQ fishery sectors established in Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(ii). Because
of this separate accounting, the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
will not increase or decrease the amount of BSAI Pacific cod allocated
to any of the non-CDQ fishery sectors. The Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside will apply from January 1 until March 15 of each year if
certain notification and performance measures, described in the
following section of the preamble, are satisfied.
The amount of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will be
calculated as described above for the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation. It will be an amount equal to the lesser of either
the Aleutian Islands DFA or 5,000 mt. NMFS will notify the public of
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside through the annual harvest
specifications process.
When the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is set equal to the
Aleutian Islands DFA and the set-aside is in effect, directed fishing
for Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands may only be conducted by
vessels that deliver their catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing. Vessels that do not want
to deliver their directed catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing will be prohibited from
directed fishing for Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands when the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is in effect. These vessels will
be permitted to conduct directed fishing for groundfish other than
Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands when the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside is in effect, and their incidental harvests of
Pacific cod will accrue toward the Aleutian Islands ICA. CPs will be
permitted to conduct directed fishing for Pacific cod in the Aleutian
Islands when the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside side is in
effect as long as they act only as CVs and deliver their directed catch
of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for
processing. CPs also will be permitted to retain and process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod that is caught as incidental catch while directed
fishing for groundfish other than Pacific cod, and those incidental
harvests of Pacific cod will accrue toward the Aleutian Islands ICA.
When the Aleutian Islands DFA is greater than 5,000 mt, and
therefore the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is set equal to
5,000 mt, the difference between the DFA and the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside will be available for directed fishing by all non-CDQ
fishery sectors with sufficient A-season allocations and may be
processed by any eligible processor. This difference is called the
``Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery.'' In years when there is both
an Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and an Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery, vessels may conduct directed fishing for Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands and deliver their catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants or to any eligible processor for processing as long as the
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery is open to directed fishing. CPs
will be permitted to conduct directed fishing for Pacific cod in the
Aleutian Islands and process that directed catch as long as the
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery is open to directed fishing. NMFS
will determine whether the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery is
sufficient to support a directed fishery and will notify the public
through a notice in the Federal Register.
While the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is in effect, NMFS
will account for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod caught by vessels against
the appropriate fishery sector allocation, the ICA or the DFA, and the
Aleutian
[[Page 84438]]
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside. Examples illustrating this accounting are
provided in the preamble of the proposed rule.
If certain notification and performance measures are met, the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will be in effect from January 1
until March 15 of each year. If the entire set-aside is harvested and
delivered prior to March 15, NMFS will lift the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation and Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside as
soon as possible. The Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will end at
noon on March 15 even if the entire set-aside has not been harvested
and delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants.
When the set-aside ends, any remaining Aleutian Islands DFA may be
harvested by any non-CDQ fishery sector with remaining A-season
allocation, and the harvest may be delivered to any eligible processor.
If a vessel has been directed fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod,
but has not yet delivered that Pacific cod for processing when the
harvest set-aside is lifted, that vessel may deliver its Pacific cod to
any eligible processor. If a vessel has been directed fishing for
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, but has not yet delivered that Pacific
cod for processing when the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery
closes, but the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is still in
effect, it will be required to deliver that Pacific cod to an Aleutian
Islands shoreplant for processing or be in violation of the directed
fishing closure.
The preamble to the proposed rule provides additional background on
the factors that the Council and NMFS considered when determining the
amount and timing of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and is
not repeated here.
Measures To Prevent Stranding of Aleutian Islands Non-CDQ Pacific Cod
TAC
Stranding is a term sometimes used to describe TAC that remains
unharvested due to regulations. This final rule includes performance
measures intended to prevent the stranding of Aleutian Islands non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC if the set-aside is not requested, if limited
processing occurs at Aleutian Islands shoreplants, or if the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is taken before March 15.
The first performance measure requires that either the City Manager
of the City of Adak or the City Administrator of the City of Atka
notify NMFS of the city's intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod in the upcoming fishing year. If neither city notifies NMFS in
accordance with regulatory requirements described below, the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside will not be in effect for the upcoming fishing year.
This final rule requires annual notification to NMFS in the form of
a letter or memorandum signed by the City Manager of Adak or the City
Administrator of Atka stating the city's intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in the upcoming fishing year. This signed letter or
memorandum is the official notification of intent. The official
notification of intent must be postmarked no later than December 8,
2016, and no later than October 31 for each year after 2016. The
official notification of intent must be submitted to the NMFS Alaska
Regional Administrator by certified mail through the United States
Postal Service. The City Manager of Adak or City Administrator of Atka
must also submit an electronic copy of the official notification of
intent and the certified mail receipt with postmark via email to NMFS
(nmfs.akr.inseason@noaa.gov) no later than December 8, 2016, and no
later than October 31 for each year after 2016. Email submission of
electronic copies of the official notification of intent and the
certified mail receipt with postmark will provide NMFS with the timely
information it needs to manage the upcoming fisheries. Email
notification is in addition to notification via certified U.S. Mail and
does not replace the requirement for notification through the U.S.
Postal Service.
A city's notification of intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod must contain the following information: Date, name of city, a
statement of intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, statement
of calendar year during which the city intends to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod, and the signature of and contact information for
the City Manager or City Administrator of the city whose shoreplant is
intending to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
On or shortly after December 8, 2016, and November 1 for each year
after 2016, the Regional Administrator will send a signed and dated
letter either confirming receipt of the city's notification of their
intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, or informing the city
that notification was not received by the deadline.
While this final rule will make the set-aside available for
processing by any shoreplant west of 170[deg] W. longitude in the
Aleutian Islands, the notification requirement is required from either
Adak or Atka and not another city that might have an Aleutian Islands
shoreplant in the future. The Council and NMFS's rationale for this is
provided in the preamble of the proposed rule.
The second performance measure removes the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
for the remainder of the A-season if less than 1,000 mt of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants by February 28. This performance measure will lift the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and make any remaining amount of
the set-aside available to all participants if Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are unable to process Pacific cod or if too few or no
vessels decide to participate in the set-aside fishery.
The third performance measure suspends the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation for the remainder of the year if the entire
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside (5,000 mt in 2017) is fully
harvested and delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants before March
15.
The preamble to the proposed rule provides additional background on
the factors considered by the Council and NMFS when establishing these
performance standards and is not repeated here.
Harvest Specifications Process To Announce BSAI A-Season Pacific Cod
Limits Implemented by Amendment 113
During the annual harvest specifications process described in the
proposed rule, NMFS will publish in the proposed harvest specifications
the amounts for the Aleutian Islands ICA, DFA, CV Harvest Set-Aside,
and Unrestricted Fishery, as well as the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation, and the amount available for harvest by trawl CVs in
the Bering Sea while the set-aside is in effect. These amounts will be
published in a separate table to supplement the table in the harvest
specifications that describes the final gear shares and allowances of
the BSAI Pacific cod TAC for the upcoming year.
NMFS also will publish a notice in the Federal Register shortly
after December 8, 2016, and November 1 for each year after 2016,
announcing whether the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and Bering
Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be in effect for the
upcoming fishing year, and whether the harvest limits in the
supplemental table will apply. If necessary, NMFS will publish in the
Federal Register an adjustment of the BSAI A-season Pacific cod limits
for the
[[Page 84439]]
upcoming year after the Council adopts the harvest specifications in
December.
Amendment of the 2017 Final Harvest Specifications for the Groundfish
Fishery of the BSAI
With this final rule, NMFS amends the 2017 final harvest
specifications for the groundfish fishery of the BSAI by adding the
following Table 8a, which specifies the Aleutian Islands ICA, DFA, CV
Harvest Set-Aside, and Unrestricted Fishery, as well as the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation. If NMFS receives timely
notification of intent to process from either Adak or Atka, the harvest
limits in Table 8a will be in effect in 2017.
Table 8a--2017 BSAI A-Season Pacific Cod Limits if Aleutian Islands
Shoreplants Intend To Process Pacific Cod
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 Allocations under Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside Amount (mt)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AI non-CDQ TAC.......................................... 11,465
AI ICA.................................................. 2,500
AI DFA.................................................. 8,965
BS non-CDQ TAC.......................................... 213,141
BSAI Trawl CV A-Season Allocation....................... 36,732
BSAI Trawl CV A-Season Allocation minus Sector 31,732
Limitation \1\.........................................
BS Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation.................. 5,000
AI CV Harvest Set-Aside................................. 5,000
AI Unrestricted Fishery................................. 3,965
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This is the amount of the BSAI trawl CV A-season allocation that may
be harvested in the Bering Sea prior to March 21.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
NMFS made three changes to the regulatory text from the proposed
rule. Two of these changes are in response to comments received on the
proposed rule, and one change is made to address administration of this
final rule in 2016.
First, this final rule modifies Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) in
response to Comment 8. The words ``prior to'' are changed to ``on or
before'' to reflect the Council's intent. See the response to Comment 8
for the complete justification for this change.
Second, this final rule modifies Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(D) and
(E) to specify that the City Manager of Adak and the City Administrator
of Atka are the individuals responsible for notifying NMFS of their
city's intent to process Pacific cod in the upcoming year. See the
response to Comment 5 for the complete justification for this change.
Third, this final rule modifies Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(viii) to include
a separate notification deadline for 2016 for the City Manager of Adak
or the City Administrator of Atka to notify NMFS of the intent to
process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in 2017. This final rule requires
that the official notification of intent to process for 2017 be
postmarked and emailed no later than December 8, 2016. This final rule
clarifies that for all years after 2016, this annual notification must
be postmarked and emailed no later than October 31.
This change is required to ensure that NMFS provides an opportunity
for the City of Adak and the City of Atka to notify NMFS of their
intent to process after this final rule has published. Because this
final rule will publish and become effective after October 31, 2016,
the City of Adak and the City of Atka could not provide timely
notification to NMFS of their intent to process in 2017 without this
change in the notification deadline. This change enables the cities of
Adak and Atka, and vessels delivering to Aleutian Island shoreplants,
to receive the benefits of this final rule in 2017 that would otherwise
be foregone without this change. NMFS is providing 15 days after the
publication of this rule for the City of Adak or the City of Atka to
notify NMFS so that the cities have adequate time after the publication
of this final rule to prepare and submit their official notification of
intent.
NMFS determined that this change will not affect participants in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery in ways not previously
considered and analyzed. The 2016 deadline for submitting notification
of intent to process falls between the two dates considered by the
Council: Prior to November 1 or prior to December 15. In considering
the effect these notification deadlines, the Analysis focuses on the
ability of the industry to react if there are no Aleutian Islands
shoreplants operating in the upcoming fishing year, stating that
selection of the earlier deadline would provide more time for the
industry to make the necessary arrangements to harvest and process the
non-CDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod DFA, and that in general, more
notification concerning processing of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in
the upcoming fishing year will help to reduce the risk of unharvested
non-CDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC. Even so, the Analysis
concludes that both date options would give fishery participants
sufficient time to plan and prepare before the A-season begins and that
ideally notice of intent to process would be provided to NMFS by a date
near the end of the December Council meeting. NMFS continues to agree
with the Council that October 31 is the preferred deadline of the two
dates considered, and this final rule establishes October 31 as the
deadline for submission of notification of intent for each fishing year
after 2016. However, NMFS has determined that the notification deadline
for 2016 will allow Adak and Atka an opportunity to submit notification
prior to the start of the 2017 fishing year, thus providing an
opportunity for the set-aside to be effective in 2017, rather than
having to wait an additional year. Additionally, the 2016 notification
deadline will provide fishery participants with sufficient time to plan
and prepare before the A-season begins because NMFS will be able to
notify fishery participants as to whether the set-aside will be in
effect for 2017 prior to December 15 and prior to the end of the
December Council meeting. In addition, this change is applicable only
for the first year of implementation of this final rule, and will
therefore have a limited and temporary effect.
Responses to Comments
NMFS received 35 unique comments on Amendment 113 and the proposed
rule in 18 comment letters from 16 different commenters. The 16
commenters consisted of 2 individuals; 7 companies representing CPs;
the
[[Page 84440]]
Alaska Department of Fish and Game; 1 fish processing company; 1 CDQ
group; 2 community development corporations, 1 Aleutian Islands
municipal government; and 1 non-profit conservation organization. Of
the 16 commenters, 9 explicitly supported adoption of the proposed
harvest set-aside. Opponents were companies representing CPs whose
vessels could be restricted by this action.
In responding to these comments, when NMFS refers to Amendment 113,
unless otherwise noted, NMFS means Amendment 113 and this final rule
implementing Amendment 113.
General Comments
Comment 1: This action is unnecessary. When Adak has an operational
plant, it received a significant portion of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod catch without delivery requirements.
Response 1: In February 2015, the Council identified in a modified
problem statement the purpose and need for protections for Aleutian
Islands communities as a result of the implementation of
rationalization programs, the BSAI Pacific cod TAC split, and
relatively low Pacific cod abundance in the Aleutian Islands, among
other factors (Section 2.2 of the Analysis). The Council stated that
these factors have ``. . . increased the risk that the historical share
of BSAI cod of other industry participants and communities that depend
on shoreplant processing in the region may be diminished.'' The
Council's rationale for its preferred alternative stated that this
action ``. . . would provide benefits and stability to fishery
dependent communities in the Aleutian Islands and is responsive to
changes in management regimes like rationalization programs that
necessitate putting protections in place to protect other non-
rationalized fisheries'' (Section 2.4.3 of the Analysis). The Council's
purpose and need statement, the proposed rule, and the Analysis
describe the range of factors that have affected delivery patterns in
the Aleutian Islands that could limit opportunities for Aleutian
Islands shoreplants, harvesters delivering to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, and the communities in the Aleutian Islands. Thorough
descriptions of the factors necessitating this action, and the
Council's rationale are provided in the ``Need for This Proposed Rule''
section of the proposed rule and the Analysis and are not repeated
here.
In years when the Adak shoreplant was not operational, the offshore
processing sector (primarily CPs) was able to process the entire
Aleutian Islands TAC (Section 2.7.1.2 of the Analysis), demonstrating
that the offshore sector is capable of fully harvesting available catch
and preempting the onshore sector's access to the fishery. Table 2-32
of the Analysis shows that prior to 2008, the majority of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod processed by the offshore sector originated from CP
harvest, but after 2008, CV deliveries of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
to CPs played a more prominent role in the offshore processing of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. Although Aleutian Islands shoreplants
operating in Adak have received Pacific cod without a harvest set-aside
in the past, NMFS and the Council determined that this action is
necessary to minimize the risk of diminished share of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands communities dependent on the fishery
and to provide additional stability to promote and sustain Aleutian
Islands shoreplants, harvesters delivering to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, and the communities in the Aleutian Islands.
Comment 2: The proposed rule assumes that the increase in offshore
processing since the implementation of rationalization programs was a
major cause of instability in onshore processing in the Aleutian
Islands, but this is not true. There have been long-standing challenges
to the viability of shore-based processing in the Aleutian Islands such
as ownership changes of Aleutian Islands shoreplants, Steller sea lion
protection measures, plant insolvency, energy costs, employment
challenges, market conditions, and product transportation difficulties.
Response 2: As explained in the ``Need for This Proposed Rule''
section of the preamble to the proposed rule and in Section 2.2 of the
Analysis, the Council and NMFS recognize that several factors have
contributed to instability in processing operations in the Aleutian
Islands, including decreased Pacific cod biomass in the Aleutian
Islands subarea; the establishment of separate OFLs, ABCs, and TACs for
Pacific cod in the Bering Sea and the Aleutian Islands (referred to as
the ``BSAI TAC split''); changing Steller sea lion protection measures;
historical volatility in the Aleutian Islands shoreplant processing
sector; and changing fishing practices in part resulting from
rationalization programs. The Council, NMFS and this rule do not assume
that rationalization programs are the primary cause of this
instability, but rather, one of many contributing factors.
Comment 3: This is a wipe-out plan for cod. It will wipe out cod
just as this agency did in Maine. Some other system has to be set up
for economic sustainability for people in the area. Stop this plan now.
Response 3: NMFS disagrees that Amendment 113 will wipe out Pacific
cod. This action will not change the TAC for Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod, or conservation and management measures that ensure that harvests
of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod do not exceed established OFL, ABC, or
TAC limits. Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is managed to a TAC that is
set at or below the ABC and the stock is neither overfished nor
approaching an overfished condition (see Section 3.3 of the Analysis).
Comment 4: There is no provision in the proposed rule to remove the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside from the FMP and Federal
regulations if no on-shore processing activity occurs for a number of
years. Does the set-aside continue indefinitely? What would prompt
Council re-examination?
Response 4: The commenter is correct; there is no provision in
Amendment 113 or this rule that would end, or sunset, the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside if Aleutian Islands shoreplants are not
operational for a specified number of years. However, under the
performance measures established by this final rule, the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is effective in a fishing year only if
timely and complete notification of intent to process from the City of
Adak or the City of Atka is received by NMFS. Presumably, if there is
not likely to be an operational Aleutian Islands shoreplant in the
upcoming fishing year, these cities would not submit a notification to
NMFS. Also, in order for the set-aside to continue to be effective
after February 28, a minimum of 1,000 mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod must be delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants on or before
February 28. If, in the future, it appears that the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside is not being used, or Aleutian Islands shoreplants
cannot meet the demand, the Council could consider and, if warranted,
initiate an action to revise or remove the provisions of Amendment 113
and its implementing regulations.
Comment 5: The proposed rule grants de facto fishery management
authority to municipal officials, by requiring them to provide notice
to NMFS of the Aleutian Islands shoreplants intent to process Pacific
cod in the upcoming year. NMFS is surrendering the determination of
whether a shore plant is prepared to process Pacific cod to a community
representative who is not a regulated participant in the fishery. This
is granting too much power to one
[[Page 84441]]
individual. The city manager could use this authority to undermine
certain businesses or to grant favors. Additionally, Atka does not have
a city manager.
Response 5: The Council specified that the City of Adak or the City
of Atka should be the entity to provide official notification to NMFS
of the community's intent to process Pacific cod, but it did not
specify who from Adak or Atka should provide such notification (Section
2.7.2.4 of the Analysis). The Analysis describes that if the
notification requirement is implemented, NMFS could specify the person
representing the city who should provide the notification.
The commenter notes that the City of Atka does not have a city
manager. Technically, that is accurate: Atka has a city administrator.
Title 29 of the Alaska Statutes explains the distinctions between a
city manager and a city administrator. In the manager form of
municipality, the city manager is the chief executive. In a strong-
mayor form of municipality, the mayor is the chief executive and the
city administrator can exercise powers or duties only as delegated by
the mayor and city council. In either case, the role of the manager or
administrator is to represent the interests of the city, city council,
and mayor. The language in the final rule has been changed to reflect
that the city administrator is the person responsible for providing
notification to NMFS for Atka.
This type of designation is not unprecedented. For example, in an
action to create Community Quota Entities (CQE) for the Halibut and
Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Program (Amendment 66 to the Gulf of
Alaska FMP, 69 FR 23681, April 30, 2004), NMFS specified which
governing body would be responsible for proposing a potential CQE to
NMFS, depending on the governance structure of the particular
community. For communities incorporated as municipalities, the
governing body identified was the city council. In communities
represented by tribal governments, the governing body was the non-
profit entity. In similar fashion, and as described in the proposed
rule for this action, NMFS determined that the city manager or
administrator would be the appropriate person responsible for
submitting the required notification to NMFS.
While ownership and management of fish processing facilities may
change, it is likely that there will always be someone performing the
role of city manager or administrator for Adak and Atka. As elected or
appointed officials, these representatives are bound by oath of office
to uphold the wishes of their constituents. Currently, both the City of
Adak and the City of Atka execute, in good faith, waivers for the
delivery requirement for Western Aleutian Islands golden king crab when
sufficient processing capacity does not exist in those communities.
These cities issue the waiver knowing that it is not in the
communities' best interests to strand the crab resource. The
notification requirement under Amendment 113 is similar, and it is not
clear how the requirement to notify NMFS of the communities' intent to
process Pacific cod grants too much power to the city manager or
administrator. NMFS expects that the city manager or administrator will
be in communication with the shoreplant manager and local fishing fleet
prior to the notification deadline to ensure that the shoreplant will
be able to accept deliveries of Pacific cod once the set-aside goes
into effect. If, for some reason, the shoreplant does not operate as
anticipated, the 1,000 mt minimum processing performance measure would
not be met by February 28 and the set-aside would be lifted.
NMFS does not consider the notification requirement to be a de
facto grant of fishery management authority to the city manager or
administrator. The Council and NMFS have established the fishery
management policy with regard to Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. The
intent of the Council and NMFS with Amendment 113 and this final rule
is to have an Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside in place for
Aleutian Islands fishing communities, and the harvesters and
shoreplants that are part of those communities, to utilize. Recognizing
that there may be years when Aleutian Islands shoreplants may not be
operational, the notification provision was a fishery management
decision by the Council and NMFS to provide for an orderly start to the
fishing year and as a way to prevent the set-aside from becoming
effective if neither city intends to process in the upcoming fishing
year. The city manager or administrator is the person from whom NMFS
will expect to receive notification of the city's intent to process
Pacific cod and to whom NMFS will confirm that notification has been
received. Under this final rule, the city manager or administrator is
providing information to NMFS on anticipated processing activities
based on knowledge gained from Aleutian Islands shoreplants in their
communities. City managers and administrators are not delegated any
authority to open or close fisheries, assess catch amounts, or take
other actions provided in regulation. Notification is not to be
confused with an active role in administering regulations. NMFS is
ultimately responsible for taking any management actions once a
notification has been received.
Comment 6: If this rule is implemented, NMFS will notify Adak or
Atka city managers if they have not received their notifications of
intent to process. This seems at odds with other programs that have
notification dates, such as submission of annual cooperative
notifications to NMFS. There is no regulatory language that provides
for NMFS to notify the entity or person that it has not received
cooperative information regarding the next year's intent to process.
Response 6: The commenter is referring to the regulatory language
at (a)(7)(viii)(D)(3) which explains how NMFS will provide confirmation
to the City Manager of the City of Adak or the City Administrator of
the City of Atka if their notification of intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod has been received or not. This confirmation is to
let the city know that the set-aside will or will not be in effect for
the upcoming year. Similarly, NMFS will publish a notice in the Federal
Register to inform the public whether the set-aside will be in effect.
NMFS will not offer these cities additional time to provide
notification if it was not received by the deadline and according to
the requirements stated in regulations.
Comment 7: NMFS received 11 comment letters from 9 different
entities in support of Amendment 113 and its implementing regulations.
In general, the comments emphasized that three interacting issues have
affected the viability of shoreside operations in the Aleutian Islands:
the BSAI Pacific cod biomass estimates and TAC split, Steller sea lion
protection measures, and rationalization programs. The commenters noted
that fish processing is the core economic driver for the communities of
Adak and Atka and that these communities have been negatively impacted
by prior management actions. They stressed that Aleutian Islands
communities, Adak and Atka in particular, need the kind of protections
that the Council has provided to communities in the Gulf of Alaska
(GOA) and Bering Sea for pollock, and to GOA communities for Pacific
cod by limiting the amount that can be delivered either inshore or
offshore. These commenters considered stable access to at least 5,000
mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod from the Federal
[[Page 84442]]
fishery essential for maintaining viable communities in Adak and Atka.
These commenters concluded that this final rule provides community
protections for shorebased processing in the Aleutian Islands
management area that are critical to the survival of Aleutian Islands
communities.
Response 7: NMFS acknowledges the comments in support of Amendment
113. The Secretary, through her designee, the Assistant Administrator
for Fisheries, approved Amendment 113 on October 17, 2016, and
implements Amendment 113 with this final rule. The Secretary concluded
that the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside in Amendment 113 is
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including the National
Standards, and other applicable law.
Comment 8: The proposed regulatory language for the minimum
Aleutian Islands shoreplant landing requirement at Sec.
679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) states that ``if less than 1,000 mt of the
Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside is landed at Aleutian
Islands shoreplants prior to February 28, then paragraphs
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) for the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-season Sector
Limitation and (2) for the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will
not apply for the remainder of the fishing year.'' However, the
preamble to the proposed rule and the Council motion clearly state that
this performance measure must be met ``by'' February 28. This change in
the proposed regulatory language from the Council's motion would give
Aleutian Islands shoreplants one less day to fulfill the minimum
delivery requirements. This one-day difference is not insignificant to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants. An average of 178 mt of Pacific cod was
landed at Adak on February 28 from 2002 through 2009. Landings on
February 28 represent a substantial portion of the proposed 1,000-mt
minimum landing requirement performance measure. The commenters request
that the proposed regulatory language at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4)
be changed so that landings made ``on or before'' February 28 will
count toward the performance measure threshold.
Response 8: NMFS agrees. The Council motion, the preamble to the
proposed rule, the Analysis, the FMP amendment text, and the notice of
availability for the FMP amendment all state that 1,000 mt must be
landed ``by,'' not ``prior to,'' February 28. The proposed regulatory
language was inadvertently written in a way that contradicts the
Council's intent for this performance measure. Inclusion of February 28
in the minimum landings period is important and necessary. As noted in
Section 2.7.2.5 of the Analysis, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod tend to
aggregate in late February to early March, and these aggregations are
optimal for efficient trawl fishing. NMFS has changed Sec.
679.20(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) to clarify that landings made ``on or before''
February 28, rather than ``prior to'' February 28, will be used to
determine whether the minimum landings requirement has been met.
Comment 9: As a longtime, small boat, Aleutian Islands fisherman,
it is vital to my longline operation and to other small and entry level
vessel owners to have a stable shoreside processing facility in the
Aleutian Islands. Amendment 113 will create numerous opportunities for
small boats and the community of Adak.
Response 9: NMFS acknowledges the support for this action.
Comment 10: We support solutions that optimize and create
sustainable social, economic, and conservation outcomes. Amendment 113
and this final rule will help the economic sustainability of Adak and
Atka and will help the aspirations of the Aleut people to repopulate
some of the islands of the western Aleutians. Amendment 113 and this
final rule may also improve the conservation and ecosystem
sustainability of the area. Giving the local inhabitants a larger
financial stake in the sustainability of the local ecosystem is an
important step in a long process leading to better conservation. We
firmly believe that where local, and particularly Alaska Natives, have
more control over resource extraction, the conservation outcome is
likely to be better.
Response 10: NMFS acknowledges the comment and the support for
Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Comment 11: Trawl vessels catch large quantities of vulnerable deep
sea corals and sponges in the area. Shifting to other gear types in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery may help protect these vulnerable
species.
Response 11: NMFS acknowledges the comment but notes that this
final rule does not modify the areas or types of gear that can be used
to harvest fishery resources in the Aleutian Islands.
Comment 12: There is an error in the fourth row of Table 4 in the
preamble of the proposed rule. The fourth row in Table 4 refers to the
``BSAI non-CDQ TAC.'' This row should have read ``BS non-CDQ TAC.''
Response 12: NMFS agrees that the fourth row in Table 4 of the
proposed rule preamble should have read ``BS non-CDQ TAC.'' The amount
of Pacific cod proposed for the BS non-CDQ TAC in the fourth row of
Table 4 was accurate. This final rule modifies the final 2016 and 2017
harvest specifications to add a supplemental table, Table 8a, that
provides the 2017 catch limits for Pacific cod under Amendment 113 and
this final rule. NMFS will publish a notice in the Federal Register in
December 2016 if there will be any changes to these amounts. NMFS will
also publish a notice in the Federal Register to inform the public if
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea Trawl Catcher
Vessel Sector Limitation will be in effect in 2017. Table 8a displays
the correct name of the allocation and the correct amount. No changes
to the regulatory text are necessary in response to this comment.
Comment 13: The agency has not followed the requisite process under
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In particular, an
environmental impact statement (EIS) should have been completed. The
action is clearly controversial, as it has been under consideration for
over 8 years in the Council process. A more thorough review might have
compelled NMFS to reject this action.
Response 13: According to NEPA and Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) regulations at 40 CFR 1502.3, an EIS is required when a fishery
management action may significantly affect the quality of the human
environment. Determining whether an action may significantly affect the
quality of the human environment requires considerations of both
context and intensity, and regulations at 40 CFR 1508.27(b) list
several factors that are to be considered in evaluating the intensity
of an action. One of these factors is the degree to which the effects
on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly
controversial (40 CFR 1508.27(b)(4)). Before deciding whether to
complete an EIS, agencies may prepare an EA to determine whether an EIS
must be prepared or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) can be
made (40 CFR 1501.3 and 1508.9). If the EA results in a FONSI, an EIS
is not needed.
Courts have held that an action is ``highly controversial'' when
there is a substantial dispute about the size, nature, or effect of the
action, or when substantial questions are raised as to whether a
proposed action may cause significant degradation of some human
environmental factor. Courts have also held that the existence of
opposition to an action does not raise the level of controversy to the
point that an EIS is required. Additionally, as stated in 40
[[Page 84443]]
CFR 1508.14 and in Section 3 of the Analysis, economic and social
impacts by themselves are not sufficient to require the preparation of
an EIS.
In accordance with NEPA and the CEQ regulations, the Council and
NMFS appropriately prepared an EA for this action, which analyzes the
potential effects of the action on individual resource components, as
well as the potential cumulative effects. The EA was prepared using the
best available scientific information. Using the information and
analysis in the EA, the Council and NMFS reviewed the potential impacts
of this action on the human environment as required under NEPA. After
reviewing the impacts of this action, the Regional Administrator
prepared and signed a FONSI, determining that the action will not
result in significant impacts to the quality of the human environment,
and further analysis in an EIS is not needed. NMFS determined that the
action will make relatively minor changes to the timing and location of
fishing for Pacific cod by vessels in the BSAI and that no significant
changes in total harvests or when, where, and how fishing occurs are
expected with the action.
The commenter implies that the length of time it took the Council
to consider and take final action on Aleutian Islands community
protection measures makes Amendment 113 and the regulations inherently
controversial and therefore requires the preparation of an EIS. NMFS
disagrees that the mere length of time this action was under
consideration by the Council is indicative of a level of controversy
that requires the preparation of an EIS. The implementation of several
rationalization programs, Steller sea lion protection measures, the
BSAI TAC split, and decreasing biomass of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod,
all of which occurred while the Council was considering community
protection measures for the Aleutian Islands, considerably changed the
way in which the BSAI Pacific cod fishery was managed and conducted by
participants. The Council reasonably wanted to examine and understand
the effects these changes would have on the BSAI Pacific cod fishery
before taking final action. After examining the effects of these
changes on Aleutian Islands communities, the Council determined that
the community protections that will be implemented by Amendment 113 and
this final rule are warranted and necessary. The effects of this action
on the quality of the human environment are not in dispute. To the
extent that there has been controversy over, or opposition to, the
action, the controversy or opposition has been largely related to
potential economic and social impacts which do not require the
preparation of an EIS.
Comments Related to the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Standards
Comment 14: National Standard 4 of the Magnuson-Steven Act states,
``Conservation and management measures shall not discriminate between
residents of different states. If it becomes necessary to allocate or
assign fishing privileges among various United States fishermen, such
allocation shall be (A) fair and equitable to all such fishermen; (B)
reasonably calculated to promote conservation; and (C) carried out in
such manner that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity
acquires an excessive share of such privileges.'' Amendment 113 and
this final rule violate National Standard 4. In fact, a 2009 letter
from Acting Regional Administrator Mecum to North Pacific Fishery
Management Council Chair Olson noted that the proposed set-aside could
violate National Standard 4's requirements that allocations be fair and
equitable and do not create excessive shares. They are not fair and
equitable, do not promote conservation, and would allocate an excessive
share to a particular entity. The plant in Atka has never processed cod
and has no historical dependency on the Federal non-CDQ Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery. Adak is the sole entity that will benefit
from this action. Adak would receive an excessive share, i.e., the
entire Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside, which is a de facto
processor share not authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Response 14: NMFS has determined that this action is consistent
with National Standard 4. Amendment 113 and this final rule do not
include any measures that discriminate between residents of different
states. While Amendment 113 and this final rule establish the set-aside
for vessels that deliver their catch of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing, any properly permitted and
licensed vessel, operated by any resident of any community or state,
can participate in the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside.
Participation in the set-aside or in the Unrestricted Fishery is not
premised on residency in a particular state. Participation in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery is governed by regulations that were determined to
be consistent with National Standard 4 and neither Amendment 113 nor
this final rule change the permitting and licensing requirements
currently in place. This final rule does not preclude residents of any
state from participation in any fishery in the Aleutian Islands as
either a harvester or operator of an Aleutian Islands shoreplant.
Appropriately licensed and endorsed vessels will still have the
opportunity to prosecute the fishery, and any person wishing to operate
a processing facility with the appropriate license in the area may
still do so.
Amendment 113 and this final rule establish a set-aside that
allocates the Aleutian Islands non-CDQ Pacific cod DFA during a portion
of the A-season among those harvesting vessels that conduct directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and deliver their catch to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing and those harvesting
vessels that conduct directed fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
and deliver their catch for processing to any eligible processor other
than Aleutian Islands shoreplants. Therefore, this allocation must be
fair and equitable to all such fishermen, reasonably calculated to
promote conservation, and carried out in such manner that no particular
individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an excessive share of
such privileges, consistent with National Standard 4. For the reasons
provided below, NMFS has determined that Amendment 113 and this final
rule are consistent with National Standard 4's requirements for
allocations.
NMFS has determined that the set-aside is fair and equitable to all
participants in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. Vessels from all non-CDQ
sectors can participate in the set-aside and each sector will continue
to have access to its entire BSAI Pacific cod allocation. This action
also addresses an inequity that has occurred, in part, from the
establishment of rationalization programs and minimizes the risk of
future inequities in the prosecution of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery. The Council and NMFS determined that the protections in
Amendment 113 and this final rule are necessary to mitigate the effects
of previous Council actions. Offshore processing activity has taken an
increasing proportion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery in
some recent years due to a variety of factors described in the preamble
to the proposed rule and in the Analysis. At the same time, the
historical share of the BSAI Pacific cod fishery delivered to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants has decreased.
The maximum cap of 5,000 mt for set-aside is representative of the
long-term average annual amount of Pacific cod processed by Aleutian
Islands shoreplants that includes years both
[[Page 84444]]
before and after significant changes in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery
occurred. Establishing a maximum amount, rather than a percentage, for
the set-aside will protect Aleutian Islands fishing communities during
years of relatively low Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC, will ensure
the set-aside remains representative of past participation levels by
Aleutian Islands fishing communities, and will benefit those who do not
participate in the set-aside fishery during years of relatively high
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC by allowing the amount allocated to
the Unrestricted Fishery to increase with increases in TAC.
This action is also fair and equitable because the set-aside will
be in effect only when the Aleutian Islands fishing communities it is
intended to benefit are prepared and actively engaged in participation.
When Aleutian Islands communities are unable to accept deliveries of
Pacific cod for processing, there are mechanisms built into the final
rule that will lift the set-aside and allow others to have access to
the remaining harvest.
NMFS also has determined that the set-aside is reasonably
calculated to promote conservation. Amendment 113 and this final rule
do not modify the process for specifying OFLs, ABCs, or TACs for the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery, the allocation of
BSAI Pacific cod to CDQ and non-CDQ fishery participants that is
established in existing regulations, or the allocation of BSAI Pacific
cod among non-CDQ fishery participants. NMFS will continue to manage
the fishery so that harvests stay within specified and allocated
amounts. Additionally, Amendment 113 and this final rule continue to
promote and do not undermine the conservation measures established
under the Steller sea lion protection measures, Amendment 85
allocations, and Amendment 80 rationalization.
Finally, NMFS determined that the set-aside will be carried out in
such manner that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity
acquires an excessive share of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. NOAA's guidance on National Standard 4 states that ``only
those measures that result in direct distributions of fishing
privileges will be judged against the allocation requirements of
Standard 4'' (Sec. 600.325(c)(1)). This final rule establishes a set-
aside for any otherwise eligible vessel that conducts directed fishing
for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and delivers its catch to any Aleutian
Islands shoreplant for processing. No particular individual,
corporation, or other entity participating in either the set-aside or
the Unrestricted Fishery will be able to acquire an excessive share of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery under Amendment 113 and this
final rule. All vessels will continue to have catch attributed to their
sector, and Amendment 113 and this final rule do not create any new
allocations to particular individuals, corporations, or other entities
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. Additionally, Amendment 113
and this final rule do not limit participation in the set-aside to a
discreet subset of vessels that meet certain criteria. As explained
earlier, any properly permitted and licensed vessel, operated by any
resident of any community or state, within any BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ
sector can participate in the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside.
The commenter asserts that Adak will receive an excessive share in
violation of National Standard 4 because the shoreplant in Adak is the
only processor in the Aleutian Islands that has processed Pacific cod
and it therefore will receive the entire Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside. Section 2.6.8 of the Analysis describes the two shoreplants
currently in the Aleutian Islands--one in Adak and one in Atka.
Although Atka has not processed Pacific cod and Adak has processed
Pacific cod, this final rule does not provide a specific allocation of
fishing privileges to either of these Aleutian Islands shoreplants.
Amendment 113 does not provide Adak or Atka with fishing privileges in
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
The commenter also asserts that Amendment 113 and this final rule
establish a processor share or exclusive processing privilege for Adak
which is not authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This aspect of
Comment 14 is also expressed in Comment 18. NMFS refers the reader to
its detailed response to this comment in its response to Comment 18.
Finally, the commenter refers to a letter dated January 28, 2009,
from Robert D. Mecum, Acting Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, to
Eric Olsen, then Chairman of the Council. According to the commenter,
NMFS noted in this letter that the proposed set-aside could violate
National Standard 4's requirement that allocations be fair and
equitable and not create excessive shares. While NMFS acknowledges the
letter, NMFS disagrees that the letter provides support for the claim
that Amendment 113 and this final rule are inconsistent with National
Standard 4.
The action under consideration by the Council when NMFS sent the
letter was not the set-aside action in Amendment 113 but a different
action that would have established processing sideboards on processing
vessels eligible under the AFA, BSAI crab rationalization program, and
BSAI Amendment 80 program that received deliveries of Pacific cod
harvested in the Eastern and Central Aleutian Islands (Areas 541 and
542). Under that action, CPs, floating processors, and motherships in
these programs would have been limited in the amount of CV deliveries
they could receive of Pacific cod harvested in Area 541 and/or 542 on
an annual basis, or prohibited from taking deliveries prior to a
specific date. The 2009 letter from NMFS encourages the Council to pay
particular attention to National Standard 4's prohibition against
allocation of excessive shares of fishing privileges and requirement
that allocation actions be reasonably calculated to promote
conservation. NMFS advised the Council that if it chose to proceed with
the action under consideration at that time, it would need to provide a
rationale that clearly demonstrated that the action was consistent with
these aspects of National Standard 4. However, NMFS also stated,
``Based on our discussions with NOAA GC, these issues do not appear to
preclude the proposed action . . . .''
In developing Amendment 113, the Council considered the advice
provided by NMFS and modified the action to address inordinate control
concerns by conditioning the set-aside on the achievement of certain
performance measures which, if not satisfied, will lift the set-aside;
by capping the maximum amount of the set-aside at a level that will
provide the protections and stability the Council wanted to create for
Aleutian Islands fishing communities, particularly in times of
relatively low Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC, and that will allow
for the continued participation of the offshore sector; and by allowing
any vessel and any Aleutian Islands shoreplant to participate in the
set-aside. The Council also designed Amendment 113 and this final rule
to promote conservation and to prohibit acquisition of an excessive
share of fishing privileges as explained earlier in this response.
Comment 15: This action was reasonably calculated to promote
conservation as required under National Standard 4 because it will
reduce the amount of halibut prohibited species catch (PSC).
Response 15: NMFS acknowledges the comment. NMFS believes that the
[[Page 84445]]
commenter is referring to data that indicate that halibut PSC rates are
much lower in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery than in the
Bering Sea Pacific cod fishery (Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). The
commenter seems to suggest that if more fishing occurs in the Aleutian
Islands relative to the Bering Sea because of this final rule, overall
halibut PSC usage in the BSAI could potentially decrease. NMFS cannot
predict how halibut PSC rates or overall use may change in response to
this final rule, if at all. NMFS notes that this final rule will not
affect the total maximum permissible amount of halibut PSC established
for BSAI groundfish fisheries. As stated in the response to Comment 14,
Amendment 113 and this final rule continue to promote and do not
undermine the conservation measures established under existing
regulations.
Comment 16: The proposed rule will result in TAC being ``stranded''
in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery and it therefore violates
National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act because it does not
promote achievement of optimal yield. The proposed rule suggests that
performance measures, such as the 1,000-mt minimum landings
requirement, would prevent the stranding of Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod because other sectors would have access to the fishery once the
harvest restrictions and delivery requirements are lifted. However, the
fleet cannot adjust in the time frames proposed. The midseason
announcements intended to prevent stranding a portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC cannot possibly be effective, given that
vessels will be fishing at that time and will likely need to interrupt
that fishing to prepare gear for the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. These vessels would then need to transit to the area from the
Bering Sea or Gulf of Alaska. Additionally, delays between when catch
is landed and reported to NMFS, and when NMFS can reopen the fishery
may further reduce the amount of time available to harvest the
remaining TAC while the desirable aggregations of Pacific cod are still
available.
Response 16: The Council and NMFS determined that Amendment 113 and
this final rule are consistent with National Standard 1. Optimum yield,
as defined in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, is that amount of fish which
``will provide the greatest overall benefit to the Nation, particularly
with respect to food production and recreational opportunities, and
taking into account the protection of marine ecosystems'' and the
amount of fish which ``is prescribed as such on the basis of the
maximum sustainable yield from the fishery, as reduced by any relevant
economic, social, or ecological factor'' (16 U.S.C. 1802(33)(A) and
(B)). Amendment 113 and this final rule do not change the optimum yield
of the BSAI groundfish fisheries, which is specified in regulations as
a range from 1.4 million to 2.0 million mt (Sec. 679.20(a)(1)(i)(A)).
NMFS notes that optimum yield refers to a broad range of harvest
spanning all species within the BSAI groundfish fisheries, not the TAC
for a given species and area in a year. Even if the entire Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC were not harvested in a year, optimum yield
could still be achieved, consistent with National Standard 1.
The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod OFL, ABC, and TAC, and the process
by which NMFS manages the fishery to stay within those limits, will not
change as a result of this action. Specifically, this final rule
includes several provisions to prevent stranded Pacific cod TAC in the
Aleutian Islands and should ensure full harvest of the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod DFA, thus promoting the achievement of optimum yield in the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands groundfish fisheries. As noted in the
response to Comment 14, this final rule does not limit or constrain the
proportion of the TAC allocated to CDQ or non-CDQ fishery participants.
NMFS expects that vessel operators will adapt their fishing plans
in a variety of ways to accommodate the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside, and expects that sufficient catch monitoring already exists,
and notification requirements will be put into effect with this final
rule, for vessel operators to predict when and if they should gear up
and transit to the Aleutian Islands to fish for Pacific cod. For
example, if NMFS has not received notification prior to November 1 of
an Aleutian Islands city's intent to process Pacific cod, the A-season
Pacific cod fishery will be available to all participants and those
participants will have more than two months to prepare. In years with
sufficient TAC for an Unrestricted Fishery to commence, vessels may
already be fishing in the Aleutian Islands when the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside is lifted. In years when the Aleutian Islands TAC is
low and an Unrestricted Fishery will not be available, vessel operators
may choose to only fish in the Bering Sea. NMFS posts weekly landing
reports by fishery to help the agency and fishery participants project
when fisheries will open and close.
NMFS disagrees that delays in catch accounting will further shorten
the time available for the fleet to harvest the remaining Aleutian
Islands TAC if the 1,000-mt performance standard is not met on or
before February 28 or if the full Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
is harvested allowing the fishery to be opened to all participants.
NMFS tracks harvests and projects when catch limits will be reached so
that the announcement can be prepared and the fishery can be opened or
closed, as applicable, on the appropriate date. NMFS expects to open
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery as soon as necessary. For
example, if Aleutian Islands shoreplants have not met the 1,000-mt
performance measure by February 28, NMFS would have anticipated that in
advance and be prepared to open the fishery to all eligible
participants promptly on March 1 (or February 29, if a leap year).
Likewise, NMFS would be prepared to lift the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation if the full set-aside were harvested prior to
March 15. The Council considered NMFS' Catch Accounting and Inseason
Management protocols when selecting dates for the set-aside.
Comment 17: This final rule promotes conservation and should be
viewed as a ``trailing amendment'' to the actions to establish separate
Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea Pacific cod OFLs, ABCs, and TACs, and
to implement new Steller sea lion protection measures. Both of these
actions were implemented for conservation purposes and the Council
chose to wait to enact community protections until they could determine
what the effects of those actions on Aleutian Islands communities would
be.
Response 17: NMFS acknowledges the comment. As stated in the
response to Comment 14, Amendment 113 and this final rule continue to
promote and do not undermine the conservation measures established
under existing regulations, such as the BSAI TAC split and Steller sea
lion protection measures.
Comment 18: This action is a violation of National Standard 8.
National Standard 8 does not constitute a basis for allocating
resources to a specific fishing community nor for providing
preferential treatment based on residence in a fishing community.
National Standard 8 applies to allocation of fishing, not processing,
privileges.
Response 18: Because of their remote location and limited economic
alternatives, Aleutian Islands communities rely on harvesting and
processing of the nearby fishery resources to support and sustain their
communities. National Standard 8 requires that conservation and
[[Page 84446]]
management measures take into account the importance of fishery
resources to fishing communities by utilizing economic and social data
that meet the requirements of National Standard 2 in order to provide
for the sustained participation of such communities, and to the extent
practicable, minimize adverse economic impacts on such communities (16
U.S.C. 1851(a)(8)). National Standard 8 guidelines recommend that ``. .
. where two alternatives achieve similar conservation goals, the
alternative that provides the greater potential for sustained
participation of such communities and minimizes the adverse economic
impacts on such communities would be the preferred alternative'' (50
CFR 600.345(b)(1)). The guidelines further state that ``fishing
community'' means a community that is substantially dependent on or
substantially engaged in the harvest or processing of fishery resources
to meet social and economic needs, and includes fishing vessel owners,
operators, and crew, and fish processors that are based in such
communities. A fishing community is a social or economic group whose
members reside in a specific location and share a common dependency on
commercial, recreational, or subsistence fishing or on directly related
fisheries-dependent services and industries (for example, boatyards,
ice suppliers, tackle shops) (50 CFR 600.345(b)(3)). The Council and
NMFS considered the importance of fishery resources to Aleutian Islands
fishing communities such as Adak and Atka and determined that community
protections were necessary to provide for the sustained participation
of these communities in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. The
Council and NMFS determined that Amendment 113 and this final rule are
therefore consistent with National Standard 8.
As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule and in the
Analysis, this final rule does not allocate processing privileges. This
final rule allocates fishing privileges for Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod through the establishment of a set-aside for a portion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC available for harvest by vessels
directed fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and that deliver
their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for a portion of the year
and only if specific notification and performance requirements are met.
This final rule does not change any percentage allocations of Pacific
cod established under Amendment 85 to the FMP and existing regulations
for the CDQ or non-CDQ fishery sectors as described in Sec.
679.20(a)(7). This final rule does not allocate exclusive fishing
privileges to a specific harvester, community, processor, or to
residents of a specific community.
Under this final rule, any properly permitted and licensed vessel,
operated by any resident of any community or state, can harvest the
portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC in the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside. Under this final rule, catch harvested from the
set-aside can be delivered to any Aleutian Islands shoreplant in any
Aleutian Islands community, and no exclusive opportunity to receive any
portion of the set-aside is provided to an Aleutian Islands shoreplant
or to a person based on residency in an Aleutian Islands community. As
explained in the response to Comments 14 and 19, Amendment 113 and this
final rule do not create a processing privilege.
As described in the Analysis, the preamble to the proposed rule,
and in public testimony provided at Council meetings, Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod is an important component of the socioeconomic health of
the community of Adak, and may become a more critical piece of the
processing in Atka. In Adak, the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
provides income to harvesters, processors, and other businesses
providing support services. Section 2.6.8 of the Analysis suggests that
without the set-aside, it is very likely that the processing plant in
Adak will not be capable of sustained participation in the future (see
also Comment 1). Although Atka has not historically participated in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery, the Aleutian Pribilof Islands
Community Development Association (APICDA) has been working with
investors to make substantial infrastructure improvements to their
harbor to enhance the local fishing fleet and to the shoreplant so it
may operate year-round. Comments submitted by APICDA indicate that
harvesting and processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod are critical to
the success of these developments in this remote community. Additional
information about Atka is provided in Section 2.6.8 of the Analysis.
The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery is a pulse fishery that
operates for several weeks in late February and March. This pulse is
the most profitable time of the season for Pacific cod in the region.
These few weeks of the Federal-waters Pacific cod fishery are a
critical part of these remote operations.
This action is consistent with the management objectives in the FMP
and the Programmatic Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(available at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/node/33552).
Specifically, NMFS refers the reader to objectives related to potential
societal benefits, such as providing socially and economically viable
fisheries for the well-being of fishing communities and balancing many
competing uses of marine resources and different social and economic
goals for sustainable fishery management, including protection of the
long-term health of the resource and the optimization of yield.
Comment 19: This action should have been analyzed as a limited
access privilege program. The eligibility requirements to grant limited
access privileges to communities under the Magnuson-Stevens Act were
not followed.
Response 19: Amendment 113 and this final rule do not create a
limited access privilege as defined in the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16
U.S.C. 1802(26)). The Magnuson-Stevens Act defines ``limited access
privilege'' as a Federal permit, issued as part of a limited access
system under section 303A to harvest a quantity of fish expressed by a
unit or units representing a portion of the total allowable catch of
the fishery that may be received or held for exclusive use by a person,
and includes an individual fishing quota, but does not include
community development quotas as described in section 305(i). As stated
in responses to previous comments, this final rule does not provide any
person a portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC that may be
received or held for exclusive use. Amendment 113 and this final rule
do not assign the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside, in whole or in
part, to any one person, Aleutian Islands shoreplant, or community for
harvesting or delivery. All harvesters have access to the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside if they are willing to deliver their catch
to an Aleutian Islands shoreplant. Any Aleutian Islands shoreplant can
accept deliveries from the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside. While
the practical effect of Amendment 113 and this final rule may be that
harvesters in the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside may have only
one Aleutian Islands shoreplant to deliver their catch (Adak), one or
more Aleutian Islands shoreplants could become operational at any time
and accept deliveries from harvesters in the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside, reducing the amount that Adak could receive.
Therefore, Adak is not provided an exclusive processing privilege under
Amendment 113 or this final rule (see also response to Comments 14 and
18).
[[Page 84447]]
Amendment 113 and this final rule set-aside a portion of the Aleutian
Islands DFA during the A-season for vessels that conduct directed
fishing for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod and deliver their catch to
Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing. Because Amendment 113 and
this final rule do not establish a limited access privilege, Amendment
113 and this final rule do not create a limited access privilege
program and the eligibility requirements for limited access privilege
programs in the Magnuson-Stevens Act at section 303A (16 U.S.C. 1853a)
do not apply to Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Comment 20: National Standard 5 states that ``Conservation and
management measures shall, where practicable, consider efficiency in
the utilization of fishery resources; except that no such measure shall
have economic allocation as its sole purpose.'' This action is
inconsistent with National Standard 5 because it fosters inefficiency
and has no purpose other than economic allocation. The Draft Analysis
acknowledged that the set-aside ``could potentially lead to a lower
price for catch and reduce efficient utilization,'' and it is uncertain
that this action would benefit Aleutian Islands communities. Adak
serves as a port of embarkation and provides goods and services to the
fleet. By reducing the number of port visits by CPs during a critical
part of the year, this action may actually result in lost economic
activity for Adak.
Response 20: Amendment 113 and this final rule set aside a portion
of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery for harvest by certain
vessels. The primary objective of this action is to provide Aleutian
Islands communities with access to and sustained participation in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery, and to minimize the adverse
impacts of a range of management actions on those communities. This
objective is consistent with the goals of the FMP and with National
Standard 8 (see response to Comment 18 for additional explanation of
consistency with National Standard 8).
The Council and NMFS have determined that Amendment 113 and this
final rule are also consistent with National Standard 5. According to
the National Standard 5 guidelines, the term ``utilization''
encompasses harvesting, processing, marketing, and non-consumptive uses
of the resource, since management decisions affect all sectors of the
industry (Sec. 600.330(b)(1)). National Standard 5 does not refer
exclusively to harvesting. While rationalization programs increased
efficiency of harvesting the resource, they did so in part at the
expense of Aleutian Islands communities. The Council and NMFS can, and
must, implement conservation and management measures that are
consistent with all of the National Standards.
Section 2.6.2.2 of the Analysis examines some of the potential
gains and losses in efficiency that may result from Amendment 113. The
Analysis acknowledges that there may be some losses to communities
resulting from fewer port visits by CPs. On the other hand,
efficiencies may be gained by having a local fishing fleet that can
fish closer to shore. Public comments submitted in support for
Amendment 113 and this final rule suggest that the communities believe
the benefits of this action to Aleutian Islands outweigh any potential
losses (see Comment 7). While the efficiency of utilizing shoreplant
processing in remote parts of the Aleutian Islands can be debated, the
social and economic benefits the shoreplants provide to the communities
in which they are located are tangible.
In this particular case, the Council and NMFS have sought to
balance the objectives of efficiency under National Standard 5 with the
social and economic considerations of Aleutian Island communities under
National Standard 8. This type of balance is contemplated in the
National Standard 5 guidelines which note, ``Unless the use of
inefficient techniques or the creation of redundant fishing capacity
contributes to the attainment of other social or biological objectives,
an FMP may not contain management measures that impede the use of cost-
effective techniques of harvesting, processing, or marketing, and
should avoid creating strong incentives for excessive investment in
private sector fishing capital and labor'' (Sec. 600.330(b)(2)(ii)).
In this case, the Council and NMFS considered a range of social factors
in addition to efficiency, including providing socially and
economically viable fisheries for the well-being of Aleutian Islands
fishing communities. Consistent with the National Standard 5
guidelines, the Council and NMFS have prepared an analysis and
rulemaking that justify these measures ``in light of the biological,
ecological, and social objectives of the FMP, as well as the economic
objectives'' (Sec. 600.330(e)).
Comments on Economic Effects
Comment 21: Reduced competition means lower prices for harvesters.
By creating an exclusive processing privilege for Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, this action has the potential to cause uncompetitive acts.
Creating and enforcing a single market for fish is devastating for
harvesters who are not protected by any sort of price arbitration
structure. Having only a single plant limits competition for landings
and the seller has limited negotiating leverage. This drives down the
prices paid to fishermen. Additionally, having only a single processor
means that some CVs could be excluded if the lone processor does not
want to do business with them.
Response 21: As explained in the response to Comments 14, 18 and
19, Amendment 113 and this final rule do not create an exclusive
processing privilege for Aleutian Islands shoreplants. As acknowledged
in Section 2.7.2.3 of the Analysis, under Amendment 113, CVs may have
less ability to use processor competition for Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod landings to leverage higher prices. However, the Analysis also
acknowledges several ways that CVs may retain leverage in negotiating
fair prices from Aleutian Islands shoreplants. To remain solvent,
Aleutian Islands shoreplants will need to offer harvesters competitive
prices or CVs could withhold delivery of catch to that shoreplant. CVs
could choose not to participate in the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside, wait until the set-aside has ended, or shift fishing operations
to the Bering Sea. If Aleutian Islands shoreplants are not competitive,
they likely will not be able to operate, and NMFS would not expect to
receive notification from the City of Adak or the City of Atka by the
annual deadline. If less than 1,000 mt of Aleutians Island Pacific cod
have been delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants on or before
February 28, the set-aside will be lifted and the fishery will be
opened to all eligible participants for delivery to any eligible
processor. This performance measure serves as an additional incentive
for Aleutian Islands shoreplants to offer competitive prices to all
interested harvesters so that harvesters do not wait until after
February 28 for the opportunity to deliver to offshore processors. In
addition, this final rule does not provide for only one Aleutian
Islands shoreplant or prevent multiple Aleutian Islands shoreplants
from operating at the same time. Even when the set-aside is in place,
this final rule does not preclude CPs or stationary floating processors
from receiving catch from CVs harvesting from the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery in years when the Aleutian Islands TAC is large
enough for the Unrestricted Fishery to occur, or from operating after
March 15. CPs and stationary floating processors present in the
Aleutian Islands for the Unrestricted
[[Page 84448]]
Fishery could be ready to accept deliveries of Pacific cod if the set-
aside were lifted early.
Comment 22: The Analysis does not consider the effects of the BSAI
TAC split, and assumes the loss of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod can be
made up in the Bering Sea, despite the fact that Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands cod are different fisheries with unique products.
Response 22: Sections 2.2 and 2.6 of the Analysis describe some of
the effects the BSAI TAC split has had on the amount of Pacific cod
available for harvest in the Aleutian Islands. Likewise, the ``Need for
This Proposed Rule'' section of the proposed rule identifies the BSAI
TAC split and resulting relatively low TAC in the Aleutian Islands as
just one of several factors prompting the need for the community
protections in this rule. NMFS acknowledges that this action may result
in losses to some participants in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Section 2.7.2 of the Analysis and the response to Comment 23
discuss ways that shifting effort to the Bering Sea may mitigate the
effects of Amendment 113 on participants.
Comment 23: The Analysis supposes that the loss of Pacific cod
harvest by the hook-and-line CP sector in the Aleutian Islands can be
offset by shifting effort to the eastern Bering Sea; however, Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod are typically larger and fetch a higher price in
international markets than Bering Sea Pacific cod. Bering Sea Pacific
cod cannot be substituted for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
Response 23: The Council and NMFS recognize that Pacific cod
fisheries and products differ between the Bering Sea and the Aleutian
Islands. The Analysis does not suggest that the same product harvested
and processed in the Aleutian Islands can be substituted by one
harvested and processed in the Bering Sea and notes that harvesters
generally fetch higher prices for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod because
of their typically larger size (Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). The
Analysis further notes that moving to the Bering Sea to fish for
Pacific cod may not be viable for all vessels because they may
participate in other Aleutian Islands fisheries, or are subject to
harvest sideboards in other fisheries as a result of their eligibility
in rationalization programs. Additionally, vessels that formerly fished
for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that move to the Bering Sea to fish
for Pacific cod will compete with vessels that have historically fished
in the Bering Sea. The Council recognized these limitations on
recuperating losses that may be incurred by some participants as a
result of Amendment 113, but determined that CPs are better able to
adapt to changing conditions in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery given their ability to move to different locations to fish and
process their catch, than Aleutian Islands shoreplants and the vessels
that deliver to them, which have less flexibility and adaptability.
The Council and NMFS recognized that CP sectors will not be able to
participate in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery unless the set-
aside is not in effect for that year, some of the set-aside remains
available for harvest after the set-aside ends, or there is sufficient
Aleutian Islands DFA for an Unrestricted Fishery during the set-aside
period. The Council determined that in years of low TAC, when an
Unrestricted Fishery will not occur, it was important to protect
Aleutian Islands fishing communities that cannot easily participate in
other fisheries or other areas to make up for lost revenue.
The Council and NMFS recognized the participation of hook-and-line
CPs in the Aleutians Islands Pacific cod fishery by capping the amount
of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that goes to the Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside and by providing mechanisms to lift the set-aside if
no Aleutian Islands city will be processing in the upcoming year or if
deliveries do not meet established thresholds by certain dates. This
final rule limits the amount of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside to 5,000 mt, which will allow the participation of all sectors in
the Unrestricted Fishery except during years when the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC is extremely low. The Council wanted to provide the
Unrestricted Fishery so that vessels not participating in the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside can participate to some extent in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery and get some of the benefits from
it. Additionally, because the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside is
for a specific amount, rather than a percentage of TAC, the set-aside
will not increase even if Aleutian Islands TAC increases, which will
provide for an even greater amount in the Unrestricted Fishery.
Comment 24: The proposed Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
period is too long and would prevent others from accessing the fishery
altogether. If the Adak plant is expected to be capable of processing
more than 400 mt of Pacific cod per day, and the proposed Atka plant
has a planned capacity of 180 mt per day, Aleutian Islands shoreplants
could process the entire proposed set-aside in just 8 to 11 days.
Response 24: If both of the existing Aleutian Islands shoreplants
are operational, they may have the combined capacity to process 500 mt
to 600 mt per day. However, if the Pacific cod have not yet arrived and
aggregated on the fishing grounds, there would be no deliveries for
them to process. To be effective, the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside and Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation need to be in
place long enough for the Pacific cod to aggregate on the fishing
grounds, and for the fish to be harvested and delivered to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants for processing. An earlier end date might mean that
the peak fishery occurs after the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
and Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation have been lifted.
Conversely, if the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation did not go into place until later
during the A-season, the entire trawl CV allocation could be taken in
the Bering Sea before the fishery begins in the Aleutian Islands.
As discussed in the preamble of the proposed rule, the Council
determined and NMFS agrees that March 15 is the preferred date for
lifting the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside for several reasons.
March 15 represents the average date of the peak of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery for CVs. During the period analyzed (2003
through 2015), a significant portion of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
was not delivered shoreside until mid-March (see Table 2-37 of the
Analysis). Establishing a date much earlier than March 15 to relieve
the set-aside would not meet the Council's goals to provide access to
and to sustain participation in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery by Aleutian Islands communities because the protections
afforded by the set-aside would be lifted before the Pacific cod
aggregated on the fishing grounds.
The Council and NMFS considered earlier dates by which to lift
these restrictions, but given historical harvesting and delivery
patterns for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, the longer the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside remains in effect during the A-season each
year, the greater the opportunity for complete harvest and delivery of
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside. The March 15 date provides
greater social and economic stability for Aleutian Islands fishing
communities than earlier dates. Limiting the duration of the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to March 15 also would provide an
opportunity for CPs to harvest Pacific cod, and for
[[Page 84449]]
CVs to harvest and deliver Pacific cod to CPs or stationary floating
processors, before the end of the A-season. The proposed March 15 date
balances the opportunities for all participants. Additional information
is provided in Section 2.7.2.4 of the Analysis.
Comment 25: The proposed threshold of 5,000 mt for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside exceeds the recent historical average of
deliveries made to Aleutian Islands shoreplants. Excluding the years of
no processing by Aleutian Islands shoreplants (2010, 2011, and 2015),
the 2010 through 2015 average is 3,073 mt and the average proportion of
the Federal Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery processed at the Adak
and Atka shoreplants from 2003 through 2015 is 32 percent. Applying the
historic average to the projected 2017 DFA of 8,965 mt would result in
a 2017 set-aside of 2,869 mt. Therefore, a threshold of 3,000 mt would
more accurately reflect the ``historical place'' of Aleutian Islands
shoreplants in the federal Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 25: As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule and
in Section 2.7.1.2 of the Analysis, the Council examined harvest and
landings data from 2003 through July 2015 and considered a range of
options for the amount of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
(and equivalent Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation). The
average amount of non-CDQ Aleutian Islands Pacific cod processed by
Aleutian Islands shoreplants during this period was 4,732 mt. The
Council considered amounts for the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside ranging from 3,000 to 7,000 mt. The Council determined and NMFS
agrees that a maximum of 5,000 mt is the appropriate amount because it
represents a large percentage of the total amount of Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod available to the non-CDQ fishery sectors in recent years,
and is in the range necessary to provide benefits to Aleutian Islands
fishing communities, including shoreplant operations, when considered
in combination with the State guideline harvest level (State GHL) A-
season harvest. Additionally, the Analysis shows that 5,000 mt is the
approximate long-term average of the annual amount of Pacific cod
processed at Aleutian Islands shoreplants between 2003 and 2015, when
Aleutian Islands shoreplants were operational.
The Council considered an option that would have reserved a
percentage, rather than a fixed amount, of the Aleutian Islands TAC for
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside (see Section 2.7.2.5 of the
Analysis). The Council chose a fixed amount (5,000 mt) so that more of
the DFA would be available to Aleutian Islands fishing communities in
years of low TAC, and so that more of the DFA would be available to all
participants in the Unrestricted Fishery in years when the Aleutian
Islands TAC is high, providing more opportunities for other
participants. Further explanation for the Council's choice of years to
examine in the Analysis is given in the response to Comment 27.
Comment 26: The Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery is important
for all hook-and-line CPs. While Amendment 113 will have negative
impacts on all CPs with historical participation in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery, the negative effects are more profound on
specific hook-and-line CP companies with a higher dependence on the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 26: The Council and NMFS examined participation in the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery by all sectors over a range of
years that included years before major changes in the fishery occurred
and years since those changes occurred. The Council recognized that to
offer protections to Aleutian Islands communities, there could be some
negative effects on other participants in the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery, including the hook-and-line CP sector. In years when the
TAC is low and the set-aside is in effect, it is likely that CPs will
not have access to the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery at all or
at levels to which they are accustomed. To minimize those negative
effects, the Council included several provisions that lift the
restrictions if minimum performance measures are not met and prevent
the stranding of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. For 2017, the hook-and-
line CP sector will have access to 3,965 mt through the Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery. The annual average targeted Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod catch by the hook-and-line CP sector between 2003
and 2015 was 2,399 mt (Table 2-34 of the Analysis). Excluding years
that Aleutian Islands shoreplants did not operate, the annual average
targeted Pacific cod catch by the hook-and-line CP sector was 2,311 mt
(Table 2-34 of the Analysis). Even under current management, there is
no guarantee that any sector will have access to the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery because of the ability of one sector to harvest
Pacific cod up to the Aleutian Islands TAC before other sectors arrive.
NMFS and the Council acknowledge that the hook-and-line CP sector
may have a higher dependence on the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery than some other CP sectors; however, like other offshore
sectors, the hook-and-line CP sector has the ability to react to
changes in the fishery. The hook-and-line CP sector has formed a
voluntary cooperative, which provides many of the benefits and
flexibility of a rationalized fishery. In contrast, shoreside
processors cannot move their operations in response to changing
conditions or a low Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC. As discussed in
the response to Comment 14, each sector continues to receive a
percentage of the combined BSAI Pacific cod allocation as established
in 2008 under Amendment 85, and can fish their allocations in either
the Bering Sea or Aleutian Islands (and under this action shift effort
to the Bering Sea or access the Aleutian Islands after a specified
date). This action does not change the allocation to the hook-and-line
CP sector.
This final rule may provide a benefit to the hook-and-line CP
sector in years when the Aleutian Islands DFA is large enough for the
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery to occur. The A-season for hook-
and-line CPs and CVs opens on January 1, whereas the A-season for trawl
CPs and CVs does not open until January 20. The hook-and-line CPs and
CVs will have earlier access to the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted
Fishery between January 1 and January 20.
Comment 27: The historical participation of the hook-and-line CP
sector in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery is significantly
larger and longer than as stated in the proposed rule. The hook-and-
line CP sector has historically harvested more than 95 percent of the
non-trawl harvest of Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands. The hook-and-
line CP sector's proportion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest
was much higher before 2002, when Steller sea lion protection measures
were first implemented.
Response 27: NMFS acknowledges that the hook-and-line CP sector has
consistently participated in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
annually, harvesting 14% of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod on an
average annual basis during 2003 through 2015 (Table 2-13 of the
Analysis), and that the hook-and-line CP sector participated in the
fishery prior to 2003. NMFS also acknowledges that the hook-and-line CP
sector harvests a large percentage of the non-trawl harvest of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod, but also notes that the overall non-trawl harvest
is a small proportion of the Aleutian Islands TAC. The Council chose to
use 2003 as a starting point for the Analysis for this action for
several reasons. First, data from years prior to 2003 is not compatible
with data from
[[Page 84450]]
2003 to the present. NMFS implemented its Catch Accounting System in
2003, which significantly changed the methodologies used to determine
catch estimates (Section 2.5 of the Analysis). Second, data before 2003
represent harvests made prior to the implementation of Steller sea lion
protection measures, which substantively changed the management of, and
the participation patterns in, the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. The Council determined and NMFS agrees that catch data prior
to 2003 does not reflect how the fishery has been managed and
prosecuted during the last 13 years (2003 through 2015) considered by
NMFS and Council in developing Amendment 113 and this final rule.
Third, the Council determined and NMFS agrees that it was important to
consider data from the largest set of years both before and after the
implementation of Steller Sea Lion measures, rationalization programs,
and the BSAI TAC split to understand the effects of those actions on
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Comment 28: The proposed action will further concentrate the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest spatially and temporally in the
Aleutian Islands with more harvest by the trawl sector. In the proposed
rule for the 2014 Steller sea lion protection measures (available at
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/79fr37486.pdf),
NMFS stated that, ``Pacific cod hook-and-line and pot gear harvests
occur in much smaller quantities and at slower rates for these gears
than trawl gear. This makes it less likely that hook-and-line and pot
gear harvests would result in localized depletion of Steller sea lion
prey resources.'' The proposed action, combined with the BSAI TAC
split, GHL fishery, and consequences of the Steller sea lion protection
measures will further limit the hook-and-line CP sector's participation
and increase trawl harvests of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod.
Response 28: NMFS acknowledges that the Analysis predicts some
spatial concentration of harvest because vessels participating in the
set-aside are expected to be trawl CVs that will likely fish closer to
shore and nearer to Adak and Atka, the Aleutian Islands communities
that are most likely to receive Pacific cod deliveries under the set-
aside. The amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest that might be
caught closer to shore under a maximum set-aside amount of 5,000 mt
that is roughly equivalent to the average annual amount of Pacific cod
caught by CVs and delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants between
2003 and 2015, which reduces the potential for spatial concentration
(see Section 3.4 of the Analysis). Fishing closer to shore may increase
efficiency in the fishery (Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis) by reducing
transit times, allowing vessels to make more frequent offloads, and not
having to coordinate fishing operations with an offshore processor
(Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). Allowing other participants to
target the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery when the DFA is
greater than 5,000 mt, and the performance measures that remove the
set-aside if there is insufficient shoreplant processing will also
limit spatial concentration. Finally, the Council and NMFS will
continue to use the current harvest specifications process for setting
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC and manage harvest within these
limits. Any potential changes in harvest location as a result of the
set-aside are not expected to impact Aleutian Islands Pacific cod stock
status (see Section 3.3.1 of the Analysis), or have an impact on
Steller sea lions in a manner not previously considered in previous
consultations (see Section 3.4 of the Analysis).
NMFS disagrees that Amendment 113 and this final rule will cause
additional temporal concentration of the fishery. In the years since
the BSAI TAC split, the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery has closed
on March 16, 2014, February 27, 2015, and June 8, 2016, so as not to
exceed the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC. Setting aside a maximum of
5,000 mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod until March 21 may actually
prolong the season for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod because CPs will
not be able to harvest Pacific cod from the set-aside (unless they are
delivering their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing)
or process any Aleutian Islands Pacific cod remaining from the set-
aside until after the conclusion of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside on March 15.
As examined in the FONSI (Section 3.6 of the Analysis), Amendment
113 and this final rule will not adversely affect endangered or
threatened species, marine mammals, or critical habitat of these
species in any manner not considered in prior consultations on the BSAI
groundfish fisheries. While this action may increase the harvest of
Pacific cod nearshore in the Aleutian Islands subarea, the harvest of
Pacific cod will continue to occur within the limits established in the
annual groundfish harvest specifications by vessels the same as or
similar to those currently fishing for Pacific cod in the BSAI.
The vessels affected by this action will continue to be required to
comply with all Steller sea lion protection measures including no-
transit areas, closed areas, and the requirement to carry vessel
monitoring systems (50 CFR part 679). Therefore, Amendment 113 and this
rule will result in no substantial change to the actions analyzed in
the biological opinion dated April 2, 2014, in which NMFS found that
the groundfish fisheries in the BSAI are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the western distinct population segment of
Steller sea lions or destroy or adversely modify its designated
critical habitat (Section 3.4 of the Analysis).
Comment 29: The hook-and-line CP sector's proportion of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod harvest has been reduced since the
establishment of the State Pacific cod GHL fishery, which is designed
for harvest by CVs that deliver to Aleutian Islands communities. The
State GHL fishery sets aside 28 percent of the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod TAC for fishing in State waters, which is essentially an allocation
to shore-based processors. The State GHL fishery cannot be harvested by
CPs and is not prosecutable by the Federal offshore sector. The State
GHL fishery has resulted in considerable stranded Pacific cod. A large
proportion of the State GHL fishery has remained unharvested and
unavailable to the Federal fisheries because there is no rollover
provision. Adak and Atka have unique access to processing the State GHL
fishery, but have chosen not to participate in this fishery in recent
years.
Response 29: The State GHL fishery for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
is managed exclusively by the State within State waters. This final
rule does not modify the State GHL fishery. Management of the State GHL
fishery is outside of the scope of this final rule. Absent preemption
under section 306(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS does not have
authority to determine catch amounts or the types of gear or vessels
used in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod State GHL fishery.
The State established two GHL fisheries for Pacific cod in 2006;
one in the Bering Sea and one in the Aleutian Islands. The Aleutian
Islands State GHL fishery is currently set at a harvest limit
equivalent to 27 percent of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC, not
28 percent of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC as stated by the
commenter. The harvest limit may be increased (or decreased) in the
following fishing year depending on how much of the State GHL fishery
is harvested, and the harvest limit can increase to a maximum of 39
percent of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC if
[[Page 84451]]
the harvest limit continues to be fully harvested each year. In
addition, the Aleutian Islands State GHL fishery is capped at a maximum
of 15 million pounds (6,804 mt). Therefore, if 27 percent of the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC represents an amount that is greater
than 15 million pounds in some future year, the State GHL fishery for
that year would be 15 million pounds. The Aleutian Islands State GHL
for 2016 is 4,752 mt.
The amount of the Aleutian Islands State GHL fishery is deducted
from the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod ABC to calculate the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod TAC. While the establishment of the State GHL
fishery in 2006 reduced the Aleutian Islands TAC, it did not change the
hook-and-line CP sector's allocation of 48.7 percent of the combined
BSAI Pacific cod TAC. The reduction in the Aleutian Islands TAC
resulting from the State GHL fishery is distributed proportionately
across all sectors, and is not borne by the hook-and-line CP sector
alone.
NMFS assumes that the commenter is concluding that setting aside an
additional amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod for Aleutian Islands
communities is not warranted because these communities are not
processing the full amount of what has already been allocated to them
through the State GHL fishery. The commenter is correct that the full
amount of the Aleutian Islands State GHL fishery has not been harvested
every year; however, it is incorrect to state that Adak has chosen not
to participate in the fishery in recent years. As noted in Table 2-31
in the Analysis, Aleutian Islands shoreplants have processed over 4,000
mt of Pacific cod from Federal and State GHL fisheries each year from
2012 through 2014. On average, Aleutian Islands shoreplants processed
2,046 mt of Pacific cod from the State GHL fishery annually since the
inception of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod State GHL fishery in
2006. The Council determined that the State GHL fishery alone was
inadequate to sustain Aleutian Islands communities and shoreplants.
Based on information received in public testimony, the Council
determined that Aleutian Islands communities need about 9,000 mt of
Pacific cod annually to support shoreplant operations. The Council
selected a set-aside amount that in combination with the State GHL
fishery would give Aleutian Islands communities access to at least
9,000 mt of Pacific cod annually. See also the response to Comment 25.
Comment 30: The data presented in the Analysis do not reflect CP
participation and dependence in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. Processing by the offshore sector has also declined since
rationalization programs were implemented. This rule will cause
economic harm to CPs that are invested and have historically
participated in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. This rule
also harms CVs that cannot make onshore landings and must deliver to
CPs.
Response 30: NMFS and the Council recognize, and the Analysis
shows, that CPs have a history of participation in the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery (Sections 2.6.6.1 through 2.6.6.3 of the Analysis),
that the average annual amount of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
processed by the offshore sector has declined since 2011 (coinciding
with the BSAI TAC split, Table 2-31 of the Analysis), and that this
rule may cause some economic losses to CPs. The Council also recognized
that the amount of Pacific cod harvested by trawl CPs, and the number
of participating trawl CPs, have declined since 2003 (Table 2-10 in the
Analysis). However, Aleutian Islands Pacific cod represents only a
small portion of the total landings and revenue by the trawl CP fleet
(Table 2-11 in the Analysis). The declining biomass and BSAI TAC split
have resulted in reduced Pacific cod catches in the Aleutian Islands
for all participants in both the onshore and offshore sectors. The
Council and NMFS have chosen to set aside a portion of the harvest for
vessels delivering their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants because
these Aleutian Islands fishing communities do not have the flexibility
available to offshore sector participants to redeploy into other BSAI
or GOA groundfish fisheries, move their operations to the Bering Sea,
or participate in rationalization programs that grant greater
flexibility (Section 2.7.2.2 of the Analysis). The Council and NMFS
have determined that the onshore sector had a greater dependence on the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery than the offshore sector. Section
2.7.2.2 of the Analysis discusses some of the ways trawl CPs, trawl
CVs, and hook-and-line CPs may respond to the restrictions imposed by
this rule.
The Council and NMFS recognize that some trawl CVs that have
historically participated in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
lack the ability to make onshore deliveries. These vessels will likely
experience a loss of economic activity from this action (Section
2.7.2.3 of the Analysis), particularly in years of low Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod TAC. The options for mitigating losses incurred by this
action on trawl CVs are the same as for other sectors that may be
excluded from the fishery during the set-aside: they may fish in the
Bering Sea, fish the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery, or wait for
the set-aside to be lifted.
Comment 31: The F/V Katie Ann, a trawl CP, is one of the earliest
and most consistent participants in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
fishery. The F/V Katie Ann is more dependent on the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod fishery than any other CP. Participation by the F/V Katie
Ann predates the American Fisheries Act and the first entry of any
shorebased processor in the Aleutian Islands. The intermittent entry
into the fishery by the Adak shoreplant has harmed the ability of the
F/V Katie Ann to harvest and process its long-term historical share of
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. Amendment 113, if
implemented, threatens to destroy one of the only remaining viable
fishing operations for the F/V Katie Ann.
Response 31: The Council and NMFS recognized the long history of
participation in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery by the F/V
Katie Ann as Amendment 113 was being developed and considered. The
Council considered an option that would have allowed CPs that had
processed Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands management area in at
least 12 years between 2000 and 2014, such as the F/V Katie Ann, to be
exempt from restrictions on processing for up to 2,000 mt of Pacific
cod. Ten CPs that harvested and processed both targeted and incidental
catch of Pacific cod during that period would have qualified for this
exemption. The F/V Katie Ann is the only vessel that operated as a
mothership processing targeted Pacific cod during this period.
The Council did not select this option for an exemption for the F/V
Katie Ann or other qualified CPs. The 2,000-mt exemption would have
represented 40 percent of the 5,000-mt set-aside. The Council
determined, and NMFS agrees, that this amount would have substantially
reduced the amount available to vessels delivering to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants and could have undermined the efficacy of Amendment 113.
The primary objective of Amendment 113 and this final rule is to
provide access to and promote sustained participation in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian Islands fishing communities in
this remote area, especially at very low TAC levels. At TACs larger
than 5,000 mt, CPs and motherships may participate in the Aleutian
Islands Unrestricted Fishery. The Council considered historical
participation of the offshore sector, including the F/V Katie Ann, but
determined that the fishery cannot
[[Page 84452]]
support historical levels of effort by all sectors (Section 2.7.2.5 of
the Analysis). The Council selected a maximum level of 5,000 mt for the
set-aside to provide continued access to the Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod fishery by the offshore sector when the Aleutian Islands TAC is at
a level that can accommodate both the needs of the inshore fishery and
Aleutian Islands fishing communities, as well as offshore fishery
participants. See also the response to Comment 33.
Comment 32: In any fishery management plan that awards fishing
privileges to one group and takes them away from another, there are
certain to be winners and losers; however, the benefits to the winners
must be balanced against the harm to the losers. Amendment 113 fails to
achieve the required balance. There is little to no evidence that the
harm that will be suffered by historical participants will be offset by
any net benefits to either Adak or Atka. History has shown that it may
be impossible to operate a viable shoreplant in Adak, and there is
currently no one committed to future operations of the existing plant
in Adak.
Response 32: Amendment 113 and this final rule provide access to
and sustained participation in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery
by Aleutian Islands fishing communities, especially during periods when
the Pacific cod TAC in the Aleutian Islands is relatively low. This is
an appropriate action for the Council and NMFS to take, in recognition
of the dependence on the Pacific cod fishery by Aleutian Islands
fishing communities, the lack of protections for Aleutian Island
harvesters and communities seeking to establish viable community-based
fishing operations under the status quo, and the lack of opportunity
for Aleutian Islands shoreplants and CVs to expand to other areas and
fisheries.
While it is accurate that the Aleutian Islands shoreplants in Adak
or Atka did not process Pacific cod during the 2015 or 2016 fishing
years, comments received during public testimony to the Council and the
public comment period for the proposed rule state that investors and
processors are planning to process Pacific cod in one or both
communities if this final rule is implemented. The commenters believe
that without the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside, it is doubtful
that any operator will have a viable opportunity to process Pacific cod
in Adak or Atka, and the inshore sector will continue to be preempted
from the fishery. Public comments in favor of the action also state
that there will be considerable social and economic benefits to
Aleutian Islands communities as a result of this action that offset the
expected costs to other participants.
The Council included provisions to mitigate the costs of the set-
aside on other participants by providing access to the fishery by other
participants if the Aleutian Islands shoreplants do not submit a
notification of their intent to process Pacific cod in the upcoming
year or if those shoreplants do not meet the minimum processing
requirement of 1,000 mt on or before February 28. Additionally,
historical participants who cannot participate in the set-aside may
participate in the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery, when
available, or fish in the Aleutian Islands for Pacific cod when the
set-aside is lifted (see also the response to Comment 16).
Comment 33: This action would significantly impact the revenue and
operations of Amendment 80 CPs that also have a history of dependence
on the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. These CPs take deliveries
from CVs that are unable to deliver to shore.
Response 33: Amendment 113 and this rule do not prohibit Amendment
80 CPs and CVs delivering to Amendment 80 CPs from participating in the
A-season Pacific cod fishery in the Aleutian Islands; those vessels may
participate in the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery, when
available, and may harvest any remaining BSAI non-CDQ Pacific cod up to
the Aleutian Islands DFA after the set-aside is lifted. In addition, if
NMFS does not receive timely notification from the City of Adak or the
City of Atka, there will be no Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside,
and no additional regulatory harvesting or delivery limitations imposed
on these vessels.
When the Aleutian Islands DFA is greater than 5,000 mt, the
difference between the DFA and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-
Aside is available as the ``Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery'' for
directed fishing by all non-CDQ fishery sectors with sufficient A-
season allocation and may be processed by any eligible processor,
including Amendment 80 CPs and CVs making deliveries to them. The
amount of the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery will be published
in the BSAI Harvest Specifications. Given the current 2017 harvest
specifications for Aleutian Islands Pacific cod, 3,965 mt of Pacific
cod will be available for the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery.
The Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will only be in effect
for a portion of the A-season. The set-aside will be lifted if the
entire amount of the set-aside has been delivered to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants, or on March 15, whichever comes first. Additionally, if
Aleutian Islands shoreplants do not meet certain performance
requirements, the harvest and delivery restrictions will be lifted and
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod DFA can be harvested by any eligible
vessel for delivery to any eligible processor. For example, if Aleutian
Islands shoreplants have not processed at least 1,000 mt of Pacific cod
by February 28, the set-aside will be lifted. Any amount of the set-
aside remaining after that date, plus the remainder of the Aleutian
Islands DFA, will be available for harvest by any eligible vessel for
delivery to any eligible processor. Likewise, if the entire set-aside
is harvested prior to March 15, the harvest and delivery restrictions
will be lifted immediately. At the latest, the harvest set-aside will
be lifted on March 15, and any amount of the set-aside remaining will
be added to the remaining Aleutian Islands DFA for harvest by any
eligible vessel for delivery to any eligible processor.
Comment 34: Section 2.7.2 of the Analysis states that the set-aside
``would preclude the future participation of other participants that
may benefit or have historically benefitted from the harvesting and
processing of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod unless Aleutian Islands
shoreplants are unable to process the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
received from catcher vessels.'' The justification for this is
presented as the Council having made inshore-offshore allocations
previously. This, however, is not an inshore-offshore allocation; this
is pre-emption of the offshore sector to the benefit of the onshore
sector.
Response 34: The sentence that follows the material quoted by the
commenter states, ``The Council and NMFS have allocated fishery
resources between inshore and offshore participants in the past,
consistent with the purpose and need for the action, the National
Standards and other provisions of the MSA [Magnuson-Stevens Act].''
This sentence simply refers to past actions taken by the Council and
NMFS that allocate fishery resources between inshore and offshore
participants and does not represent the Council's and NMFS'
justification for recommending and approving the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod harvest set-aside. The justification and rationale for
establishing the set-aside is provided generally in the administrative
record for Amendment 113, and specifically in Section 2.4.3 of the
Analysis, in the preamble of the proposed rule, and in the preamble of
this final rule.
Although the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod set-aside is not
identical to other inshore-offshore allocation actions the
[[Page 84453]]
Council and NMFS have implemented, the set-aside does allocate Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod among an inshore sector (those vessels that deliver
their catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing) and an
offshore sector (those vessels that process their catch at sea or that
deliver their catch to offshore processors for processing), making it a
type of inshore-offshore allocation. Another type of inshore-offshore
allocation was the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) pollock and Pacific cod
inshore-offshore allocations under Amendment 23 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the GOA (GOA FMP). Under Amendment
23, 100 percent of the GOA pollock TAC was allocated to vessels
delivering their catch of pollock to onshore processors. In the
preamble of the final rule implementing Amendment 23, NMFS stated,
``The allocation of 100 percent of the GOA pollock TAC to the inshore
sector proposed by the Council and approved by the Secretary slightly
exceeds the harvest rates of the inshore sector in recent years and
results in a redistribution of the pollock resource from the offshore
sector to the inshore sector. The Secretary determined that this
redistribution was appropriate based on the social and other benefits
that would be derived from implementation of the allocation'' (57 FR
23321, June 3, 1992). In contrast to the inshore-offshore allocation of
GOA pollock under Amendment 23 to the GOA FMP, the Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod CV Harvest Set-aside will allow the offshore sector to
participate in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery in years when
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod DFA provides for the Unrestricted
Fishery, and in years when no Aleutian Islands shoreplant is processing
Pacific cod or participating vessels fail to deliver 1,000 mt of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands shoreplants by
February 28.
Comment 35: This action would create an exclusive processing
privilege for Adak under the assumption that shore-based processors are
entitled to an allocated share of processing privileges. The Council
and NMFS have attempted to disguise an exclusive processing allocation
to Adak by defining qualifying participants as ``Aleutian Islands
shoreplants'' within a specified geographic region. However, the
shoreplant in Atka has never processed Pacific cod and has no
historical dependence on the fishery and it is unlikely that competing
processing will be developed in the region in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, this action is an exclusive allocation to Adak, whose
shoreplant has a dubious track record for paying fisherman and has had
numerous operational difficulties.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act does not allow a fishery management
council to allocate fishery privileges to shore-based processors. The
express Federal prohibition of creating such a privilege was
acknowledged by NOAA General Counsel (GC) in a letter from Lisa
Lindeman to the Council Chair in 2009. Section 303A of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act specifies that limited access privilege programs authorized
under this act pertain to fish harvesting. Had Congress intended to
create an individual processor quota, it could have done so, as it did
for the crab fisheries in the BSAI. No such congressional grant of
authority applies to shore-based processors operating in the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod fishery.
Response 35: In a memorandum dated September 30, 2009, from Lisa
Lindeman, Regional Counsel for the Alaska Region of NOAA General
Counsel, to Eric Olsen (then Chairman) and Chris Oliver (Executive
Director) of the Council, NOAA GC provided the Council with legal
advice in response to four questions posed by the Council. Questions 1,
2, and 4 of the 2009 memorandum are relevant in responding to this
comment. In response to the first question, NOAA GC advised that except
for the authority provided at section 313(j) for the Crab
Rationalization Program (16 U.S.C. 1862(j)), the Magnuson-Stevens Act
does not provide the Council or NMFS with the authority to require
fixed linkages between harvesters and shore-based processors. In fixed
linkages, a harvester is required to deliver his or her catch to a
specific shore-based processor. NOAA GC explained that requiring fixed
linkages between harvesters and shore-based processors is similar to
issuing processor quota, which is not authorized by the Magnuson-
Stevens Act except for the Crab Rationalization Program. Therefore,
with the exception of the Crab Rationalization Program, NMFS
acknowledges that the Council and NMFS do not have authority under the
Magnuson-Stevens Act to require fixed linkages between harvesters and
processors or to establish exclusive processing privileges or processor
quota.
In response to the second question, NOAA GC advised that the
Magnuson-Stevens Act does authorize allocation of harvesting privileges
to shore-based processors if other requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act are met. Therefore, NMFS generally disagrees with the commenter's
assertion that the Magnuson-Stevens Act does not allow a fishery
management council to allocate fishery privileges to shore-based
processors. Finally, in response to the fourth question, whether the
Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes the Council to establish an exclusive
class of shore-based processors that would be the recipients of all, or
a specific portion of all, landings from a fishery, NOAA GC advised
that the answer is dependent on the purpose of the action and the
record developed by the Council. NOAA GC stated, ``The Magnuson-Stevens
Act does not authorize placing a limit on the number of shore-based
processing sites if the purpose is to allocate shore-based processing
privileges. . . . However, if the Council developed an adequate record
demonstrating that an action, which had the practical effect of
limiting the number of sites to which deliveries could be made, was
necessary for legitimate management or conservation objectives (e.g., .
. . protection of fishing communities that depend on the fisheries) and
not a disguised limited entry program, then there could be a legal
basis for such an action.''
NMFS disagrees that this action creates an exclusive processing
privilege for Adak or a disguised processing allocation to Adak. No
aspect of this action establishes exclusivity. This final rule does not
provide a specific allocation of processing privileges to either
Aleutian Islands shoreplant. Nothing in Amendment 113 or this final
rule prevents the Atka shoreplant from processing Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod and reducing the amount of Pacific cod that is delivered to
Adak by vessels participating in the set-aside, prevents other Aleutian
Islands shoreplants from processing Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in
Adak or Atka, or prevents a shoreplant in any other onshore location
west of 170[deg] W. longitude from processing Aleutian Islands Pacific
cod. The fact that the set-aside will be lifted if notification of
intent to process is not provided, or if less than 1,000 mt of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod is processed by February 28, is directly contrary
to exclusive privileges that permit the holder of the privilege
exclusive access to the resource without diminishment by other
participants or revocation without procedural due process. As explained
throughout this final rule, the Council and NMFS have articulated
legitimate management and conservation objectives for the Aleutian
Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to protect Aleutian Islands fishing
communities that depend on access to and sustained participation in the
fisheries for the socioeconomic benefits and stability
[[Page 84454]]
provided by that access and participation. Therefore, Amendment 113 and
this final rule do not create an exclusive processing privilege for
Adak.
OMB Revisions to PRA References in 15 CFR 902.1(b)
Section 3507(c)(B)(i) of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requires
that agencies inventory and display a current control number assigned
by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), for each
agency's information collection. Section 902.1(b) identifies the
location of NOAA regulations for which OMB approval numbers have been
issued. Because this final rule revises and adds data elements within a
collection-of-information for recordkeeping and reporting requirements,
15 CFR 902.1(b) is revised to reference correctly the sections
resulting from this final rule.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, determined
that Amendment 113 to the FMP and this rule are necessary for the
conservation and management of the groundfish fishery and that they are
consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Administrative Procedure Act
The NMFS Assistant Administrator finds good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3) to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness for this final
rule. This finding is based on the need to provide the City of Adak and
the City of Atka with sufficient time to submit a notification of
intent to process that complies with the regulatory requirements after
the notification requirements are effective; to provide NMFS with
sufficient time to notify the general public and the affected industry
as to whether the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will be in
effect for 2017; and to provide the affected industry with sufficient
time to adequately prepare for the start of the 2017 fishing year on
January 1, 2017.
NMFS has determined that it must give the City of Adak and the City
of Atka 15 days after the effective date of the notification of intent
to process regulations to take all necessary steps to prepare, sign,
and submit a notification of intent to process that complies with the
regulatory requirements at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(viii)(D). Because these
cities are aware of this action, have been anticipating its approval,
and support its implementation in time for the 2017 fishing year, NMFS
has determined that 15 days will provide the cities with enough time to
comply with the notification requirements in 2016. Without waiver of
the 30-day delay in effectiveness, the deadline for submission of a
notification of intent to process would occur 45 days after publication
of the final rule in the Federal Register, which means the deadline
would occur very late in December 2016 or in early January 2017. A
deadline in late December would not provide NMFS with adequate time to
notify the industry as to whether the set-aside will be in effect on
January 1, 2017, or provide the affected industry with sufficient time
to prepare for the fishery which begins on January 1 for some
participants in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery. Because NMFS
must receive a notification of intent prior to the start of the fishing
year to provide for an orderly start to the fishing year and to ensure
the appropriate specifications are in place before fishing occurs on
January 1, any notification deadline for 2016 that would occur after
December 31, 2016, renders the set-aside meaningless for the 2017
fishing year. For reasons set forth in the Analysis and the preambles
of the proposed rule and this final rule, the Council and NMFS have
determined that the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside will provide
important socioeconomic benefits and stability to Aleutian Islands
fishing communities that intend to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod
in the upcoming fishing year. Waiving the 30-day delay in effectiveness
will provide Aleutian Islands fishing communities with an opportunity
to realize those benefits starting with the 2017 fishing year; failure
to waive the delay in effectiveness will postpone that opportunity for
an entire fishing year until 2018. One Aleutian Islands shoreplant has
already informally notified NMFS that it intends to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod in 2017.
Additionally, as explained earlier in this final rule, the Analysis
determined that the affected fishing industry would have sufficient
time to prepare for the upcoming fishing year if notification of intent
to process was received from Adak or Atka prior to December 15. Waiving
the delay in effectiveness for these regulations provides for a
submission deadline that will occur before December 15, thus providing
NMFS with sufficient time to notify the public and affected industry as
to whether the set-aside will be in effect, and for the affected
industry, including vessels that deliver their catch to Aleutian
Islands shoreplants and those that deliver their catch to at-sea
processors, to prepare for the start of the fishing year with that
knowledge. As explained above, failure to waive the delay in
effectiveness could result in a notification deadline that occurs in
late December, which would not provide NMFS or the affected industry
with sufficient time to prepare for the upcoming fishery that starts on
January 1, 2017.
For these reasons, the NMFS Assistant Administrator finds good
cause to waive the 30-day delay in effectiveness for this final rule.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist small
entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such
publications as ``small entity compliance guides.'' The preambles to
the proposed rule and this final rule serve as the small entity
compliance guide. This action does not require any additional
compliance from small entities that is not described in the preambles.
Copies of the proposed rule and this final rule are available from the
NMFS Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that,
when an agency promulgates a final rule under section 553 of Title 5 of
the U.S. Code, after being required by that section or any other law to
publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking, the agency shall
prepare a FRFA. Section 604 describes the required contents of a FRFA:
(1) A statement of the need for and objectives of the rule; (2) a
statement of the significant issues raised by the public comments in
response to the initial regulatory flexibility analysis, a statement of
the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any
changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments; (3) the
response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) in response to
the proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the
proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments; (4) a
description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which
the rule will apply or an explanation of why
[[Page 84455]]
no such estimate is available; (5) a description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements of the
rule, including an estimate of the classes of small entities which will
be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills
necessary for preparation of the report or record; and (6) a
description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
(1) Need for and Objectives of This Final Rule
A statement of the need for and objectives of this rule is
contained earlier in the preamble and is not repeated here. This FRFA
incorporates the IRFA (see ADDRESSES) and the summary of the IRFA in
the proposed rule (81 FR 50444, August 1, 2016), a summary of the
significant issues raised by the public comments, NMFS' responses to
those comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to support the
action.
(2) Summary of Significant Issues Raised During Public Comment Period
No comments were received that raised significant issues in
response to the IRFA specifically; therefore, no changes were made to
this rule as a result of comments on the IRFA. However, several
comments were received on the economic impacts of Amendment 113 on the
Amendment 80 trawl CP and hook-and-line CP sectors. For a summary of
the comments received and NMFS' responses, refer to the section above
titled ``Responses to Comments.''
(3) Public and Chief Counsel for Advocacy Comments on the IRFA
NMFS published the proposed rule on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50444),
with comments invited through August 31, 2016. An IRFA was prepared and
summarized in the ``Classification'' section of the preamble to the
proposed rule. NMFS received 18 letters of public comment on the
proposed rule and Amendment 113 to the FMP. The Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the SBA did not file any comments on the proposed rule.
(4) Description and Number of Directly Regulated Small Entities
This final rule directly regulates three groups of entities. This
final rule will directly regulate trawl CVs harvesting Pacific cod in
the BSAI because it limits how much Pacific cod those trawl CVs may
harvest in the Bering Sea, and it may prohibit trawl CVs from
participating in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery if they do
not deliver their Pacific cod catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants. It
also directly regulates all non-trawl CVs who are harvesting Pacific
cod in the Aleutian Islands because it will prohibit those non-trawl
CVs from participating in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery if
they do not deliver their Pacific cod catch to Aleutian Islands
shoreplants. Finally, this final will directly regulate all CPs
harvesting Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands because it limits how
much Pacific cod those CPs can harvest and process in the Aleutian
Islands. This rule does not directly regulate the City of Adak or the
City of Atka because it does not impose a requirement on those cities.
This rule does not directly regulate entities participating in the
harvesting and processing of Pacific cod managed under State GHL
fisheries in State waters in the Bering Sea or Aleutian Islands.
The SBA has established size standards for all major industry
sectors in the United States. For RFA purposes only, NMFS has
established a small business size standard for businesses, including
their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (see 50
CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS
code 114111) 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 receipts not in
excess of $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide.
Based on the best available and most recent complete data from 2012
through 2014, between 10 and 16 CPs, and an estimated 43 CVs (trawl and
non-trawl) will be directly regulated by this action in the BSAI. Of
these, no CP is estimated to be a small entity, while 6 trawl CVs and
26 non-trawl CVs are estimated to be small entities based on the best
available data on the gross receipts from these entities and their
known affiliates. Therefore, a total of 32 vessels considered to be
small entities will be directly regulated by this action. The IRFA
assumes that each vessel is a unique entity; therefore, the total
number of directly regulated entities may be an overestimate because
some vessels are likely affiliated through common ownership. These
potential affiliations are not known with the best available data and
cannot be predicted.
(5) Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
This final rule adds a recordkeeping and reporting requirement to
notify NMFS of an Aleutian Islands shoreplant's intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in the upcoming year; therefore, the
recordkeeping, reporting, and other compliance requirements are
increased slightly under this final rule. This final rule contains a
new requirement for the City of Adak or the City of Atka to notify NMFS
of its intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in the upcoming
fishing year in order for the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside to go into
effect in the upcoming fishing year. The City Manager of Adak or the
City Administrator of Atka is required to provide NMFS with an official
notification of intent prior to December 8, 2016, and no later than
October 31 for each year after 2016, for the harvest set-aside to go
into effect in the upcoming year. The professional skills necessary to
provide this notice include writing, sending email, and access to a
U.S. Post Office.
(6) Description of Significant Alternatives Considered to the Final
Action That Minimize Adverse Impacts on Small Entities
The RFA requires identification of any significant alternatives to
the final rule that accomplish the stated objectives of the final
action, consistent with applicable statutes, and that would minimize
any significant economic impact of the final rule on small entities.
The Council considered a status quo alternative and one action
alternative with several options and suboptions. The combination of
options and suboptions under the action alternative effectively
provided a broad range of potential alternative approaches to status
quo management. Under the status quo, there would have been a continued
risk that fishing communities in the Aleutian Islands would not be able
to sustainably participate in the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod fishery.
The action alternative does not affect any non-CDQ fishery sector's
Pacific cod allocation, or the TAC of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod. The
action alternative accomplishes the stated objectives of prioritizing a
portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC for harvest by vessels
that deliver their
[[Page 84456]]
catch to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing, while minimizing
adverse economic impacts on small entities and the potential for
stranding a portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC.
The Council considered a range of dates, varying amounts of
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod for the harvest set-aside and Bering Sea
sector limitation, and a suite of mechanisms to relieve the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside under the action alternative. The Council recommended the
final combination of dates, harvest set-aside amounts, harvest
limitations, and provisions to relieve the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside that
would give fishery participants sufficient opportunity to harvest and
deliver Aleutian Islands Pacific cod to the benefit of Aleutian Islands
communities and shoreplants without stranding the trawl CV sector
allocation or the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC. The Council
recommended and NMFS is implementing selected options in the action
alternative such that if specific notification or minimum harvest and
processing requirements are not met by a specific date, the Bering Sea
Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside will either not go into effect in the upcoming year, or they
will be lifted for the remainder of the year.
The Council considered and rejected two options under the action
alternative. One option would have required that if less than 50
percent of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside had been landed at
an Aleutian Islands shoreplant by a given date, ranging from February
28 to March 15, the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation and
the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside would be lifted. Instead, the
Council selected an option that requires a minimum weight (1,000 mt)
rather than a minimum percentage of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest
Set-Aside that must be landed at an Aleutian Islands shoreplant for
processing by a given date (February 28) for the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-
Season Sector Limitation and the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
to remain in place.
The Council also considered and rejected an option that would have
exempted certain processing vessels with a history of processing
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod in at least 12 out of 15 recent years from
the final restrictions on processing and would have allowed them to
process up to 2,000 mt of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod while the set-
aside was in effect. This option could have allowed up to 10 processing
vessels to continue to process Pacific cod during the A-season,
limiting the effectiveness of this final rule to minimize the risk of a
diminished historical share of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod being
delivered to Aleutian Islands shoreplants and the communities where
those shoreplants are located.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Final
Action
NMFS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict
between this final action and existing Federal rules.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This final rule contains a collection-of-information requirement
subject to the PRA and which has been approved by OMB under control
number 0648-0743.
Public reporting burden for Notification of Intent to Process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod is estimated to average 30 minutes per
individual response, including the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding this data collection, or any other aspect
of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden,
to NMFS Alaska Region (see ADDRESSES), and by 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, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 14, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 15 CFR part
902 and 50 CFR part 679 as follows:
Title 15--Commerce and Foreign Trade
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 902.1, in the table in paragraph (b), under the entry ``50
CFR'', add an entry for ``679.20(a)(7)(viii)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current OMB
control number
CFR part or section where the information collection (all numbers
requirement is located begin with
0648-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
50 CFR:
* * * * *
679.20(a)(7)(viii)...................................... -0743
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Title 50--Wildlife and Fisheries
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
3. 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
4. In Sec. 679.2, add a definition for ``Aleutian Islands shoreplant''
in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Aleutian Islands shoreplant means a processing facility that is
physically located on land west of 170[deg] W. longitude within the
State of Alaska.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 679.20, add paragraph (a)(7)(viii) to read as follows:
[[Page 84457]]
Sec. 679.20 General limitations.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(7) * * *
(viii) Aleutian Islands Pacific Cod Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-
Aside Program--(A) Calculation of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-
CDQ ICA and DFA. Each year, during the annual harvest specifications
process set forth at paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will specify
the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental catch allowance and
directed fishing allowance from the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-
CDQ TAC as follows. Shortly after completion of the process set forth
in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this section, NMFS will announce
through notice in the Federal Register whether the ICA and DFA will be
in effect for the upcoming fishing year.
(1) Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental catch
allowance. Each year, during the annual harvest specifications process
set forth at paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will specify an amount
of Aleutian Islands Pacific cod that NMFS estimates will be taken as
incidental catch in non-CDQ directed fisheries for groundfish other
than Pacific cod in the Aleutian Islands. This amount will be the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental catch allowance and
will be deducted from the aggregate portion of Pacific cod TAC annually
allocated to the non-CDQ sectors identified in paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(A)
of this section.
(2) Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing
allowance. Each year, during the annual harvest specifications process
set forth at paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will specify the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing allowance. The
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing allowance will be
the amount of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod TAC remaining after
subtraction of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod CDQ reserve and the
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ incidental catch allowance.
(B) Calculation of the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and
Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery. Each year, during the annual
harvest specifications process set forth at paragraph (c) of this
section, NMFS will specify the Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside
and the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery. The Aleutian Islands CV
Harvest Set-Aside will be an amount of Pacific cod equal to the lesser
of either the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing
allowance as determined in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section
or 5,000 mt. The Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery will be the
amount of Pacific cod that remains after deducting the Aleutian Islands
CV Harvest Set-Aside from the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ
directed fishing allowance as determined in paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section. Shortly after completion of the
process set forth in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this section, NMFS
will announce through notice in the Federal Register whether the
Aleutian Islands CV Harvest Set-Aside and the Aleutian Islands
Unrestricted Fishery will be in effect for the upcoming fishing year.
(C) Calculation of the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector
Limitation. Each year, during the annual harvest specifications process
set forth at paragraph (c) of this section, NMFS will specify the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation and the amount of the
trawl CV sector's A-season allocation that could be harvested in the
Bering Sea subarea prior to March 21. The Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season
Sector Limitation will be an amount of Pacific cod equal to the lesser
of either the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing
allowance as determined in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(A)(2) of this section
or 5,000 mt. The amount of the trawl CV sector's A-season allocation
that could be harvested in the Bering Sea subarea prior to March 21
will be the amount of Pacific cod that remains after deducting the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation from the amount of BSAI
Pacific cod allocated to the trawl CV sector A-season as determined in
paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i) of this section. Shortly after completion
of the process set forth in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this section,
NMFS will announce through notice in the Federal Register whether the
Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation will be in effect for
the upcoming fishing year.
(D) Annual notification of intent to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod--(1) Submission of notification. The provisions of
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of this section will apply if the either the
City Manager of the City of Adak or the City Administrator of the City
of Atka submits to NMFS a timely and complete notification of its
intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod during the upcoming
fishing year. This notification must be submitted annually to NMFS
using the methods described below.
(2) Submittal method. An official notification of intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod during the upcoming fishing year in the
form of a letter or memorandum signed by the City Manager of the City
of Adak or the City Administrator of the City of Atka must be submitted
by certified mail through the United States Postal Service to: NMFS
Alaska Region, Attn: Regional Administrator, P. O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802. The City Manager or City Administrator must also submit an
electronic copy of the official notification of intent and the
certified mail receipt with postmark via email to
nmfs.akr.inseason@noaa.gov. Email submission is in addition to
submission via U.S. Postal Service; email submission does not replace
the requirement to submit an official notification of intent via U.S.
Postal Service.
(3) NMFS confirmation. On or shortly after December 8, 2016, or
November 1 for each year after 2016, the Regional Administrator will
send a signed and dated letter to the City Manager of the City of Adak
or the City Administrator of the City of Atka either confirming NMFS'
receipt of its official notification of intent to process Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod, or informing the city that NMFS did not receive
notification by the deadline.
(4) Deadline. The official notification of intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod for the upcoming fishing year must be
postmarked no later than December 8, 2016, or October 31 for each year
after 2016, in order for the provisions of paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of
this section to apply during the upcoming fishing year. Notifications
of intent postmarked on or after December 9, 2016, or November 1 for
each year after 2016, will not be accepted by the Regional
Administrator. The electronic copy of the official notification of
intent and certified mail receipt with postmark must be submitted to
NMFS via email dated no later than December 8, 2016, or no later than
October 31 for each year after 2016, in order for the provisions of
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E) of this section to apply during the upcoming
fishing year.
(5) Contents of notification. A notification of intent to process
Aleutian Islands Pacific cod for the upcoming fishing year must contain
the following information:
(i) Date,
(ii) Name of city,
(iii) Statement of intent to process Aleutian Islands Pacific cod,
(iv) Identification of the fishing year during which the city
intends to process Aleutian Island Pacific cod, and
(v) Signature of and contact information for the City Manager or
City Administrator of the city intending to process Aleutian Islands
Pacific cod.
(E) Aleutian Islands community protections for Pacific cod. If the
City Manager of the City of Adak or the City
[[Page 84458]]
Administrator of the City of Atka submits a timely and complete
notification in accordance with paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(D) of this
section, then the following provisions will apply for the fishing year
following the submission of the timely and complete notification:
(1) Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation. Prior to March
21, the harvest of Pacific cod by the trawl CV sector in the Bering Sea
subarea is limited to an amount equal to the trawl CV sector A-season
allocation as determined in paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(A)(1)(i) of this
section minus the Bering Sea Trawl CV A-Season Sector Limitation as
determined in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(C) of this section. If, after the
start of the fishing year, the provisions of paragraphs
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) or (5) of this section are met, this paragraph
(a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) will not apply for the remainder of the fishing
year.
(2) Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside. Prior to
March 15, only catcher vessels that deliver their catch of Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod to Aleutian Islands shoreplants for processing may
directed fish for that portion of the Aleutian Islands Pacific cod non-
CDQ directed fishing allowance that is specified as the Aleutian
Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside in paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(B)
of this section. If, after the start of the fishing year, the
provisions of paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E)(4) of this section are met,
this paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E)(2) will not apply for the remainder of
the fishing year.
(3) Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery. Prior to March 15,
vessels otherwise authorized to directed fish for Pacific cod in the
Aleutian Islands may directed fish for that portion of the Aleutian
Islands Pacific cod non-CDQ directed fishing allowance that is
specified as the Aleutian Islands Unrestricted Fishery as determined in
paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(B) of this section and may deliver their catch
to any eligible processor.
(4) Minimum Aleutian Islands shoreplant landing requirement. If
less than 1,000 mt of the Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-
Aside is landed at Aleutian Islands shoreplants on or before February
28, then paragraphs (a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) and (2) of this section will not
apply for the remainder of the fishing year.
(5) Harvest of Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside.
If the Aleutian Islands Catcher Vessel Harvest Set-Aside is fully
harvested prior to March 15, then paragraph (a)(7)(viii)(E)(1) of this
section will not apply for the remainder of the fishing year.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-28152 Filed 11-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P