Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Integrating Electronic Monitoring Into the North Pacific Observer Program, 14853-14864 [2017-05753]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14853-14864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05753]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 161219999-7250-01]
RIN 0648-BG54


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Integrating 
Electronic Monitoring Into the North Pacific Observer Program

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 114 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian 
Islands Management Area and Amendment 104 to the Fishery Management 
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA), (collectively referred 
to as the FMPs). If approved, Amendments 114/104 and this proposed rule 
would integrate electronic monitoring (EM) into the North Pacific 
Observer Program. The proposed rule would establish a process for 
owners or operators of vessels using nontrawl gear to request to 
participate in the EM selection pool and the requirements for vessel 
owners or operators while in the EM selection pool. This action is 
necessary to improve the collection of data needed for the 
conservation, management, and scientific understanding of managed 
fisheries. Amendments 114/104 are intended to promote the goals and 
objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the FMPs, and other applicable laws.

DATES: Comments must be received no later than May 22, 2017.
    Per section 313 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS will conduct 
public hearings to accept oral and written comments on the proposed 
rule in Oregon, Washington, and Alaska during the public comment 
period.
    The first public hearing will be held in conjunction with the April 
meeting of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council on April 6, 
2017, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., Alaska local time, at the Hilton Hotel, 500 W. 
3rd. Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501.
    The second public hearing will be on April 18, 2017, 10 a.m. to 12 
p.m., Pacific daylight time, at the International Pacific Halibut 
Commission Office, 2320 West Commodore Way, Suite 300, Seattle, WA 
98199.
    The third public hearing will be held on April 19, 2017, 1 p.m. to 
3 p.m., Pacific daylight time, at the Hatfield Marine Science Center, 
Lavern Weber Room, 2030 SE. Marine Science Drive, Newport, OR 97365.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by 
NOAA-NMFS-2016-0154 by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2016-0154, click the 
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or 
attach your comments.
     Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant 
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region 
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, 
AK 99802-1668.
     Submit oral or written comments to NMFS at the public 
hearings listed in this proposed rule under DATES.
    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, 
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on 
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, 
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender 
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter 
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
    Electronic copies of Amendments 114/104 and the Draft Environmental 
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review prepared for this action 
(collectively the ``Analysis'') may be obtained from 
www.regulations.gov.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
rule may be submitted by mail to NMFS at the above address; by email to 
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov; or by fax to 202-395-5806.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Harrington or Jennifer 
Watson, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the 
exclusive economic zone under the FMPs. The North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council (Council) prepared the FMPs under the authority of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations governing 
U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMPs appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 
679.
    Management of the Pacific halibut fisheries in and off Alaska is 
governed by an international agreement, the Convention Between the 
United States of America and Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut 
Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (Convention), 
which was signed in Ottawa, Canada, on March 2, 1953, and was amended 
by the Protocol Amending the Convention, signed in Washington, DC, on 
March 29, 1979. The Convention is implemented in the United States by 
the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982.
    This proposed rule would implement Amendments 114/104 to the FMPs. 
The Council has submitted Amendments 114/104 for review by the 
Secretary of Commerce, and a Notice of Availability (NOA) of these 
amendments was published in the Federal Register on March 10, 2017, 
with comments invited through May 9, 2017 (82 FR 13302).
    This proposed rule and Amendments 114/104 to the FMPs amend the 
Council's fisheries research plan prepared under the authority of 
section 313 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. NMFS published regulations

[[Page 14854]]

implementing the plan on November 21, 2012 (77 FR 70062). The Secretary 
implemented the fisheries research plan through the North Pacific 
Observer Program. Its purpose is to collect data necessary for the 
conservation, management, and scientific understanding of the 
groundfish and halibut fisheries off Alaska. Magnuson-Stevens Act 
section 313 requires NMFS to provide a 60-day public comment period on 
the proposed rule and conduct a public hearing in each state 
represented on the Council for the purpose of receiving public comment 
on the proposed regulations. The states represented on the Council are 
Alaska, Oregon, and Washington. NMFS will conduct a public hearing in 
each of these states (see DATES).
    People wanting to make an oral statement for the record at the 
public hearing are encouraged to provide a written copy of their 
statement and present it to NMFS at the hearing. If attendance at the 
public hearing is large, the time allotted for individual oral 
statements may be limited. Oral and written statements receive equal 
consideration. There are no limits on the length of written comments 
submitted to NMFS.
    Respondents do not need to submit the same comments on the NOA, 
this proposed rule, and at a public hearing. All relevant written and 
oral comments received by the end of the applicable comment period, 
whether specifically directed to the FMP amendments, this proposed 
rule, or both, will be considered by NMFS in the approval/disapproval 
decision for Amendments 114/104 and addressed in the response to 
comments in the final decision.

North Pacific Observer Program

    The North Pacific Observer Program (Observer Program) is an 
integral component in the management of North Pacific fisheries. The 
Observer Program was created with the implementation of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act in the mid-1970s and has evolved from primarily observing 
foreign fleets to observing domestic fleets. The Observer Program 
provides the regulatory framework for NMFS-certified observers 
(observers) to be deployed on board vessels to obtain information 
necessary for the conservation and management of the groundfish and 
halibut fisheries. The information collected by observers contributes 
to the best available scientific information used to manage the 
fisheries in furtherance of the purposes and national standards of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Observers collect biological samples and 
information on total catch, including bycatch, and interactions with 
protected species. Managers use data collected by observers to manage 
groundfish catch and bycatch limits established in regulation and to 
document fishery interactions with protected resources. Managers also 
use data collected by observers to inform the development of management 
measures that minimize bycatch and reduce fishery interactions with 
protected resources. Scientists use observer-collected data for stock 
assessments and marine ecosystem research.
    In 2013, the Council and NMFS restructured the Observer Program to 
address longstanding concerns about statistical bias of observer-
collected data and cost inequality among fishery participants with the 
funding and deployment structure under the previous Observer Program 
(77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). The restructured Observer Program 
established two observer coverage categories: Partial and full. All 
groundfish and halibut vessels and processors are included in one of 
these two categories. NMFS requires fishing sectors in the full 
coverage category to have all operations observed. The full coverage 
category includes most catcher/processors, all motherships, and those 
catcher vessels participating in a catch share program with a 
transferrable prohibited species catch (PSC) limit. Owners of vessels 
or processors in the full coverage category must arrange and pay for 
required observer coverage from a permitted observer provider. This 
proposed rule would not change the full coverage category.
    The partial coverage category includes fishing sectors (vessels and 
processors) that are not required to have an observer at all times. The 
partial coverage category includes catcher vessels, shoreside 
processors, and stationary floating processors when they are not 
participating in a catch share program with a transferrable PSC limit. 
Small catcher/processors that meet certain criteria are also in the 
partial coverage category.
    NMFS contracts with an observer provider and determines when and 
where observers are deployed, based on a scientific sampling design, in 
the partial coverage category. Each year, NMFS develops an annual 
deployment plan (ADP) that describes how NMFS plans to deploy observers 
to vessels and processors in the partial coverage category in the 
upcoming year.
    The ADP describes the scientific sampling design NMFS uses to 
generate unbiased estimates of total and retained catch, and catch 
composition in the groundfish and halibut fisheries. The ADP provides 
flexibility to improve deployment to meet scientifically based 
estimation needs while accommodating the realities of a dynamic fiscal 
environment. NMFS's goal is to achieve a representative sample of 
fishing events, and to do this without exceeding funds collected 
through the observer fee. This is accomplished by the random deployment 
of observers in the partial coverage category. NMFS adjusts the ADP 
each year after a scientific evaluation of data collected under the 
Observer Program to evaluate the impact of changes in observer 
deployment and to identify areas where improvements are needed to 
collect the data necessary to conserve and manage the groundfish and 
halibut fisheries.
    To summarize the ADP process, each year in October, NMFS develops a 
draft ADP that describes how NMFS plans to deploy observers to vessels 
in the partial coverage category in the upcoming year. The draft ADP 
describes the deployment methods NMFS plans to use to collect observer 
data on discarded and retained catch, including the information used to 
estimate catch composition and marine mammal and seabird interactions 
in the groundfish and halibut fisheries. The draft ADP also describes 
how NMFS will deploy observers to shoreside processing plants or 
stationary floating processors in the partial coverage category. The 
Council reviews the draft ADP and considers public comment when 
developing its recommendations about the draft ADP. The Council may 
recommend adjustments to observer deployment to prioritize data 
collection based on conservation and management needs. After NMFS 
conducts a scientific evaluation of the Council's recommendations, NMFS 
adjusts the draft ADP as appropriate and finalizes the ADP in December 
for release prior to the start of the fishing year. NMFS posts the ADP 
on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov).
    Each year, NMFS also develops an Annual Report that evaluates how 
well various aspects of the program are achieving program goals, 
identifies areas where improvements are needed, and includes 
preliminary recommendations regarding the upcoming ADP. The Council and 
its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) review the Annual Report 
in June. This timing allows NMFS and the Council to consider the 
results of past performance in developing the ADP for the following 
year. NMFS posts the Annual Report on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site 
(https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov).
    The Observer Declare and Deploy System (ODDS) is an Internet-based

[[Page 14855]]

interface that provides information about observer deployment on 
vessels in the partial coverage category and facilitates communication 
among the owner or operator of a vessel in the partial coverage 
category, NMFS, and NMFS' contracted observer provider. Owners and 
operators of vessels in the partial coverage category enter information 
about upcoming fishing trips into ODDS and receive information about 
whether a trip has been selected for observer coverage.
    The restructured Observer Program created a new system of fees to 
pay for the cost of implementing observer coverage in the partial 
coverage category. Vessels and processors included in the partial 
coverage category pay a fee of 1.25 percent of the ex-vessel value of 
fishery landings to NMFS to fund the deployment of observers in the 
partial coverage category. Under section 313 of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, the fees shall not exceed 2 percent of the fishery ex-vessel 
value.
    The restructured Observer Program expanded the vessels subject to 
observer coverage to include groundfish vessels less than 60 ft LOA and 
halibut vessels that had not been previously required to carry an 
observer. Expanding observer coverage to the approximately 950 
previously unobserved vessels improved NMFS' ability to estimate total 
catch in all Federal fisheries in the North Pacific.
    Even before implementing the restructured Observer Program, many 
vessel owners and operators new to the Observer Program were opposed to 
carrying an observer (77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). Vessel owners 
and operators explained that there is limited space on board for an 
additional person or limited space in the vessel's life raft.
    Some vessel owners, operators, and industry representatives 
advocated for the use of EM instead of having an observer on board 
their vessels (77 FR 70062, November 21, 2012). To address their 
concerns, the Council and NMFS have been actively engaged in developing 
EM as a tool to collect fishery data in the nontrawl fisheries. Over 
the past several years, NMFS and industry participants have undertaken 
cooperative research to test the applicability and reliability of EM 
systems. An EM system uses cameras, video storage devices, and 
associated sensors to record and monitor fishing activities.
    In 2013, NMFS developed, and the Council adopted, the Strategic 
Plan for Electronic Monitoring and Electronic Reporting in the North 
Pacific to guide integration of monitoring technologies into North 
Pacific fisheries management and provide goals and benchmarks to 
evaluate attainment of goals (available on the Alaska Fisheries Science 
Center Web site at https://www.afsc.noaa.gov/Publications/AFSC-TM/NOAA-TM-AFSC-276.pdf).
    In 2014, the Council appointed the EM Workgroup to develop an EM 
program to integrate into the Observer Program. The EM Workgroup 
provides a forum for stakeholders, including the commercial fishery 
participants, NMFS, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and EM service 
providers, to cooperatively and collaboratively design, test, and 
develop EM systems, and to identify key decision points related to 
operationalizing and integrating EM systems into the Observer Program 
in a strategic manner. The EM Workgroup developed a cooperative 
research program to inform evaluation of multiple EM program design 
options and consider various EM integration approaches to achieve 
management needs.
    The cooperative research includes analytical and fieldwork 
components to address the following four elements: Deployment of EM 
systems for operational testing, research and development of EM 
technologies, development of infrastructure to support EM 
implementation, and analyses to support EM implementation. This 
approach enabled the EM Workgroup to identify and resolve 
implementation issues associated with integrating EM into the Observer 
Program. Data and analysis produced on costs, data quality, risks, 
operational procedures, and vessel compatibility informed decisions on 
implementation phases, future investments in technology, and the tools 
that will best meet NMFS, Council, and stakeholder management 
objectives. The cooperative research program was implemented through 
research projects and pre-implementation plans in 2015, 2016, and 2017. 
The cooperative research to date has shown that data from EM systems 
can effectively identify almost all of the species or species groupings 
required for management, that the systems are sufficiently reliable, 
and that image quality is generally high. Additional information on the 
work of the EM Workgroup is provided in the Analysis (see ADDRESSES).
    Based on input received from the EM Workgroup, and through the 
Council process, the Council and NMFS developed this proposed action to 
provide an option for participants in the partial coverage category 
using nontrawl gear to choose to be in the EM selection pool instead of 
an observer selection pool. EM selection pool means the defined group 
of vessels from which NMFS will randomly select the vessels required to 
use an EM system.
    In recommending this action, the Council used the term ``fixed 
gear'' to describe vessels using pot or longline gear. The Council's 
use of this term is broader than the definition of fixed gear in 
Federal regulations at Sec.  679.2, which defines fixed gear as 
including only hook-and-line gear and pot gear in the halibut or 
sablefish fishery. The Council intended for EM to be an option 
available to vessels using any type of gear other than trawl gear, and 
not to limit the potential use of EM to only those vessels using hook-
and-line gear or pot gear in the halibut or sablefish fishery. To meet 
the intent of the Council, this proposed rule uses ``nontrawl gear'' 
except when quoting the Council in this preamble, or when specifically 
referring to fixed gear used in the halibut and sablefish fisheries. 
Federal regulations at Sec.  679.2 define nontrawl gear as pot and 
longline gear. Longline gear is defined at Sec.  679.2 as including 
hook-and-line, jig, troll, and handline or the taking of fish by means 
of such a device. The Council focused the cooperative research on hook-
and-line gear and pot gear. Additional cooperative research would be 
necessary to expand EM to other gear types, as explained in section 3.5 
of the Analysis (see ADDRESSES).

Objectives of and Rationale for Amendments 114/104 and This Proposed 
Rule

    In December 2016, the Council adopted Amendments 114/104. The 
Council and NMFS developed EM for data collection for the nontrawl gear 
fisheries to address their desire for an alternative way to collect 
fisheries data in consideration of the operating requirements in these 
fisheries. EM systems can collect at-sea data for NMFS to estimate 
discards of fish, including halibut, and mortality of seabirds. EM has 
the potential to reduce economic and operational costs associated with 
deploying human observers throughout coastal Alaska. EM has the 
potential to reduce monitoring costs relative to observer coverage 
because it does not require deploying a person on the vessel and 
eliminates the logistical and travel expenses that this deployment 
generates. Through the use of EM, it may be possible to cost 
effectively obtain at-sea data from a broader cross-section of the 
nontrawl gear fleet and increase NMFS' and the Council's flexibility to 
respond to the scientific and management needs of

[[Page 14856]]

these fisheries. The Council's statement of purpose and need follows:

    To carry out their responsibilities for conserving and managing 
groundfish resources, the Council and NMFS must have high quality, 
timely, and cost-effective data to support management and scientific 
information needs. In part, this information is collected through a 
comprehensive fishery monitoring program for the groundfish and 
halibut fisheries off Alaska, with the goals of verifying catch 
composition and quantity, including of those species discarded at 
sea, and collecting biological information on marine resources. 
While a large component of this monitoring program relies on the use 
of human observers, the Council and NMFS have been on the path of 
integrating technology into our fisheries monitoring systems for 
many years, with electronic reporting systems in place, and 
operational EM in a compliance capacity in some fisheries. More 
recently, research and development has focused on being able to use 
EM as a direct catch estimation tool in fixed gear fisheries.
    The fixed gear fisheries are diverse in their fishing practices 
and vessel and operational characteristics, and they operate over a 
large and frequently remote geographical distribution. The Council 
recognizes the benefit of having access to an assorted set of 
monitoring tools in order to be able to balance the need for high-
quality data with the costs of monitoring and the ability of fishery 
participants, particularly those on small vessels, to accommodate 
human observers on board. EM technology has the potential to allow 
discard estimation of fish, including halibut PSC and mortality of 
seabirds, onboard vessels that have difficulty carrying an observer 
or where deploying an observer is impracticable. EM technology may 
also reduce economic, operational and/or social costs associated 
with deploying human observers throughout coastal Alaska. Through 
the use of EM, it may be possible to affordably obtain at-sea data 
from a broader cross-section of the fixed gear groundfish and 
halibut fleet.
    The integration of EM into the Council's fisheries research plan 
is not intended to supplant the need for human observers. There is a 
continuing need for human observers as part of the monitoring suite, 
and there will continue to be human observer coverage at some level 
in the fixed gear fisheries, to provide data that cannot be 
collected via EM (e.g., biological samples).
    The Council and NMFS have considerable annual flexibility to 
provide observer coverage to respond to the scientific and 
management needs of the fisheries. By integrating EM as a tool in 
the fisheries monitoring suite, the Council seeks to preserve and 
increase this flexibility. Regulatory change is needed to specify 
vessel operator responsibilities for using EM technologies, after 
which the Council and NMFS will be able to deploy human observer and 
EM monitoring tools tailored to the needs of different fishery 
sectors through the Annual Deployment Plan.

Integrating Electronic Monitoring Into the Observer Program

    This proposed rule would establish the process and structure for 
use of an EM system to monitor catch and bycatch on those vessels using 
nontrawl gear in the partial coverage category of the Observer Program 
that choose to be in the EM selection pool. An EM system uses cameras, 
video storage devices, and associated sensors to record and monitor 
fishing activities. To implement EM, NMFS would set up a contract or 
grant with one or multiple EM service providers to install and service 
EM equipment, and to collect and review EM data. The contract or grant 
would specify hardware and field service specifications, EM data review 
requirements, and data and archiving requirements. ``EM service 
provider'' means any person, including their employees or agents, that 
NMFS contracts with to provide EM services, or to review, interpret, or 
analyze EM data.
    EM data would supplement observer data from other nontrawl gear 
vessels. Some data necessary for catch estimation, fishery management, 
and stock assessment cannot be collected from EM systems. NMFS would 
obtain this data from observers on board other nontrawl gear vessels 
that are fishing in similar areas and at similar time periods. The 
Council and NMFS would make EM system and observer deployment decisions 
following the sampling design in the ADP, and subsequently analyze the 
deployment data in the Annual Report.
    NMFS and the Council would define the criteria in the ADP for 
vessels to be eligible to participate in EM. The criteria for being in 
the EM selection pool may include, but are not limited to, gear type, 
vessel length, area fished, number of trips or total catch, sector, 
target fishery, and home or landing port.
    Participation in the EM selection pool would be voluntary. Any 
owner or operator of a vessel that meets the EM selection pool criteria 
could annually request to be in the EM selection pool using the process 
established in this proposed rule if they are willing to comply with 
the provisions established under this proposed rule. While there are 
additional responsibilities for the owner or operator of a vessel in 
the EM selection pool to install and maintain the EM system, NMFS' 
intent is largely to allow the vessel to continue its normal fishing 
practice and allow the cameras to capture data observations that an EM 
service provider then extracts onshore through video review.
    NMFS intends to use discretionary appropriated funds from its 
budget for EM system deployment until observer fees are available to 
fund EM system deployment and NMFS issues a contract with one or more 
EM service providers. Once observer fee proceeds are available and the 
contract is issued, NMFS would use the observer fee proceeds collected 
from partial coverage category participants to pay for both EM system 
deployment and observer deployment in the partial coverage category. 
Section 313 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes the Council to use 
the fees collected under that section to pay for the cost of 
implementing the fisheries research plan, including stationing EM 
systems on vessels and for inputting collected data. The annual 
decision to apportion fees between observer deployment and EM system 
deployment would be made by the Council and NMFS during the ADP 
process.
    Through the ADP process, the Council and NMFS will consider how to 
optimize observer and EM system deployment for fisheries in the partial 
coverage category each year, based on an analysis of the costs, budget, 
monitoring goals, and fishing effort in the partial coverage category. 
The ADP process is explained above under North Pacific Observer 
Program. Work is ongoing to develop the necessary annual analysis for 
determining the criteria for the EM selection pool and balancing EM 
system deployment with deployment of observers within budget limits.
    The amount of fee revenues collected would determine the level of 
costs that NMFS could incur to deploy EM systems and to deploy 
observers. The Analysis provides a detailed discussion of the potential 
costs of EM system deployment (see ADDRESSES). Since the fee is based 
on the ex-vessel value of harvested fish, which fluctuates annually, 
the amount of funding available for deploying observers and EM systems 
will also fluctuate. NMFS would need to adjust observer coverage and EM 
coverage levels to align anticipated annual costs with available fee 
revenue. NMFS and the Council may also modify the criteria for 
participating in the EM selection pool to control costs. In 
consultation with the Council, NMFS would allocate funds between EM and 
observers to achieve the most precision for the least cost. The 
specific deployment decisions, including the eligibility criteria for 
vessels to participate in EM, could vary from year to year based on the 
analysis conducted through the ADP process. Through using this existing 
scientific process for EM system deployment, NMFS would gather reliable 
data necessary for the

[[Page 14857]]

conservation, management, and scientific understanding of the fisheries 
covered by the fisheries research plan.
    Because it is likely that NMFS would establish a contract for 
multiple years and some of the deployment decisions have a significant 
impact on EM service provider costs (for example, the number and 
location of primary service ports), NMFS and the Council may make some 
deployment decisions for the duration of the contract, rather than 
annually in the ADP. Similarly, NMFS anticipates that the EM system 
will change over time as technological improvements are made. These 
technological changes could be accommodated in the contract or grant.
    An important part of the ADP analysis will be identifying and 
understanding gaps in observer data when a portion of the partial 
coverage vessels participates in the EM selection pool. Appendix 1 of 
the Analysis (see ADDRESSES) provides an example of the type of 
analysis that would be conducted annually to ensure that sufficient 
observers are deployed to maintain representative data (such as 
biological samples and average weights) that cannot be collected with 
an EM system.

Proposed Regulations

    This proposed rule would implement the requirements described below 
to allow owners or operators of vessels using nontrawl gear to choose 
to use an EM system in place of an observer.

How would a vessel join the EM selection pool?

    This proposed rule would establish the process by which vessel 
owners or operators could join the EM selection pool (see proposed 
Sec.  679.51(f)(1)). Owners or operators of vessels that use nontrawl 
gear and are in the partial coverage category could request to be in 
the EM selection pool. Each year, vessel owners would have the 
opportunity to join or leave the EM selection pool through an 
application available through ODDS. Vessel owners that want to be in 
the EM selection pool would need to request in ODDS to participate in 
EM by November 1 to use EM in the following calendar year. NMFS would 
notify the vessel owner through ODDS whether that vessel has been 
approved or denied for the EM selection pool. NMFS would deny vessels 
if those vessels did not meet the EM selection pool criteria specified 
in the regulations and described in the ADP. Vessel owners would have 
the opportunity to appeal NMFS' decision denying the request to be in 
the EM selection pool (see proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(1)(vii)).
    The November 1 deadline would balance the interest of potential EM 
participants to have an opportunity to review the draft ADP available 
in October and its description of the EM selection pool before joining 
the EM selection pool with NMFS' interest in determining the number and 
types of vessels assigned to the EM selection pool before finalizing 
the ADP in December.
    NMFS would approve a request for placement in the EM selection pool 
based on criteria specified in the regulations and described in the 
ADP. Criteria may include, but are not limited to, availability of EM 
systems, vessel gear type, vessel length, area fished, number of trips 
or total catch, sector, target fishery, and home or landing port. NMFS, 
in consultation with the Council, will establish the EM selection pool 
criteria based on the scientific sampling design, budget and cost 
considerations, and data collection goals.
    Once NMFS has approved a vessel for participation in the EM 
selection pool, that vessel would be in the EM selection pool for the 
entire calendar year following the November 1 application deadline. The 
vessel would remain in the EM selection pool each subsequent year until 
the vessel owner or operator requests to leave or NMFS removes the 
vessel from the EM selection pool because it no longer meets the EM 
selection pool criteria or NMFS disapproves the vessel monitoring plan 
(VMP). A VMP is the document that describes how fishing operations on 
the vessel will be conducted and how the EM system and associated 
equipment will be configured to meet the data collection objectives and 
purpose.
    Vessels would either be in the EM selection pool or in an observer 
selection pool. Vessels would not be subject to both EM coverage and 
observer coverage.

How would a vessel leave the EM selection pool?

    The vessel owner or operator would use ODDS to submit a request to 
leave the EM selection pool by November 1 for the following calendar 
year (see proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(1)(ix)).
    NMFS may also remove a vessel from the EM selection pool for the 
following calendar year. NMFS would remove a vessel if NMFS disapproves 
the vessel's VMP or if the vessel no longer meets the EM selection pool 
criteria. Vessels would not be able to leave the EM selection pool 
during a calendar year in order to maintain the sampling design used 
for that year.

How would a vessel owner or operator install the EM system?

    Once a vessel is approved for the EM selection pool, the vessel 
owner or operator would make the vessel available to the NMFS-
contracted EM service provider for installation of all required EM 
system components. During the installation, it would be the vessel 
owner's responsibility to assist the EM service provider with planning 
the best wiring routes and installing sensors that interface with the 
vessel's equipment, such as hydraulic oil pressure and engine oil 
pressure. The specifications for the EM components that would be 
installed would be defined in the contract between NMFS and the EM 
service provider. The EM service provider would install cameras in 
locations that meet the catch accounting objectives annually specified 
in the ADP.
    If a vessel already has an EM system, it could use that EM system 
or it could modify that EM system as necessary to meet the 
specifications in the VMP. That vessel owner or operator would need to 
work with the EM service provider to develop and submit a VMP to NMFS 
Alaska Region. For example, a vessel may have an existing EM system on 
board because that vessel participates in another federally managed 
fishery that has an EM program.

How would a vessel owner or operator develop a Vessel Monitoring Plan 
(VMP)?

    Once approved for the EM selection pool and prior to registering a 
fishing trip in ODDS, the vessel owner or operator must develop a VMP 
with the EM service provider and submit it to NMFS for approval (see 
proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(4)). A vessel in the EM selection pool would 
be required to have a copy of a valid NMFS-approved VMP on board before 
that vessel goes fishing. If NMFS does not approve the VMP, NMFS will 
issue an IAD to the vessel owner or operator that will explain the 
basis for the disapproval. The vessel owner or operator may file an 
administrative appeal under the administrative appeals procedures set 
out at 15 CFR part 906.
    The vessel owner or operator would work with the EM service 
provider to develop a VMP. The VMP would describe how fishing 
operations on the vessel are conducted, including how gear is set, how 
catch is brought on board, and where catch is retained and discarded. 
The VMP would also describe how the EM system and associated equipment 
would be

[[Page 14858]]

configured to meet the data collection objectives and purpose of the EM 
program, including camera locations to cover all fishing activities, 
any sensors to detect fishing activities, and any special catch 
handling requirements to ensure the data collection objectives can be 
met. The VMP would also include methods to troubleshoot the EM system 
and instructions for ensuring the EM system is functioning properly. 
These required components of the VMP would be detailed in the VMP 
template and in the contract between NMFS and the EM service provider.
    NMFS would provide a VMP template for guidance to the EM service 
provider and the vessel owner or operator on the elements NMFS would 
require in the final approved VMP. NMFS would make this VMP template 
available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/. This VMP template would be available 
annually prior to the November 1 deadline to participate in the EM 
selection pool to allow vessel owners and operators an opportunity to 
review the requirements for the upcoming year. For informational 
purposes, the 2017 pre-implementation VMP is available on the North 
Pacific Fishery Management Council Web site at https://npfmc.org/.
    Once the VMP is complete and the vessel owner or operator agrees to 
comply with the components of the VMP, the vessel owner or operator 
must sign and submit the VMP to NMFS via email or other electronic 
means. NMFS would review the VMP for completeness and may request 
additional clarification. If the VMP meets the requirements established 
in the VMP template, NMFS would approve the VMP for the calendar year. 
The vessel owner or operator would be required to keep a copy of the 
VMP aboard the vessel and make it available to NOAA Office of Law 
Enforcement (NOAA OLE) or other NMFS-authorized officer or personnel 
upon request.
    After reviewing the data from a fishing trip selected for EM 
coverage, NMFS may determine that the approved camera location(s) in 
the VMP or fishing activities conducted by the vessel crew outlined in 
the VMP do not allow for the data collection necessary for catch 
accounting. Additionally, the vessel operator may want to have a camera 
moved if it impedes his or her ability to fish, or the operator may 
reconfigure the vessel to change fishing activities during the season 
that would warrant changes to the VMP. Whether requested by the vessel 
owner or operator or by NMFS, the vessel owner or operator would be 
required to make any changes to the VMP with the assistance of the EM 
service provider. The NMFS contract with the EM service provider would 
describe the permissible changes. These permissible changes would 
likely be limited to actions that enhanced data collection or 
maintained the same quality of data in cases where camera locations 
impede the ability to fish or vessel reconfigurations occur. These 
amendments to the VMP would be signed and submitted to NMFS. The vessel 
would be allowed to begin another fishing trip, provided that NMFS has 
received the VMP amendments in writing. If the amended VMP did not meet 
the data collection needs, NMFS would inform the EM service provider 
and the vessel owner or operator that the VMP would need to be updated 
before another trip selected for EM coverage could begin.

How would NMFS select a vessel to use an EM system on a fishing trip?

    Once in the EM selection pool and after the vessel has an approved 
VMP, the vessel operator would register fishing trips in ODDS (see 
proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(2)). ODDS would notify the vessel operator 
when the vessel is selected to use the EM system and instructions would 
be provided in ODDS. The ADP would specify the EM selection rate--the 
portion of trips that are sampled--for each calendar year. NMFS and the 
Council may change the EM selection rate from one calendar year to the 
next to achieve efficiency, cost savings, and data collection goals. EM 
selection rates would not change during a calendar year.

What are a vessel owner's or operator's responsibilities?

    Vessel owners or operators would be required to maintain the EM 
system in working order, including ensuring the EM system is powered 
and functioning throughout the trip, keeping cameras clean and 
unobstructed, and ensuring the system is not tampered with (see 
proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(5)). The vessel owner or operator would also 
need to ensure that power is maintained to the EM system at all times 
when the vessel is underway or the engine is operating. The vessel 
operator would also be required to conduct a system function test 
before each trip to ensure the EM system is working properly before 
departing.
    Before each set is retrieved the vessel operator would need to 
verify that all components of the EM system are functioning. 
Instructions for completing this verification would be provided in the 
vessel's VMP.
    Vessel owners or operators would be prohibited from tampering with 
the EM system or harassing the EM service provider. Additional 
prohibitions exist to ensure the EM system functions and the data from 
the systems is usable for fisheries management (see proposed Sec.  
679.7(j)).

What happens if an EM system malfunctions?

    The VMP would list EM system malfunctions that are considered high 
priority to the data collection objectives and those malfunctions that 
are considered low priority to the data collection objectives. The VMP 
would also provide guidance about the procedures to follow if either of 
these types of malfunctions were detected. The proposed regulations 
describe the responsibilities of the vessel owner or operator in case 
an EM system malfunctions (see proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vi)).
    If a high priority malfunction were detected during the pre-
departure function test, the vessel would be required to remain in port 
for up to 72 hours to allow an EM service provider time to conduct 
repairs. Remaining in port for up to 72 hours would allow time for an 
EM service provider to travel to most remote ports in Alaska and give 
him or her the necessary time needed to conduct repairs. If the repairs 
could not be completed within this time frame, NMFS would release the 
vessel from EM coverage for that trip and the vessel operator would be 
allowed to depart. However, the vessel owner or operator would be 
required to repair the malfunction prior to departing on a subsequent 
fishing trip, and the vessel would automatically be selected for EM 
coverage for that fishing trip.
    If a low priority malfunction were detected during the pre-
departure function test, the vessel operator would be allowed to depart 
on the selected trip as long as the procedures for low priority 
malfunctions described in the vessel's VMP were followed. At the end of 
the trip the vessel operator would be required to work with the EM 
service provider to repair the malfunction. The vessel operator could 
not depart on another trip selected for EM coverage with this 
malfunction unless the vessel operator had contacted the EM service 
provider.
    If an EM system malfunction were to occur during a fishing trip 
selected for EM coverage, prior to retrieving the set the vessel 
operator would be required to attempt to correct the problem using the 
provisions described in the vessel's VMP. If the malfunction could not 
be repaired at sea, the vessel operator would be required to contact 
the EM service provider at the end of the trip.

[[Page 14859]]

The malfunction would need to be repaired before the vessel could 
depart on another fishing trip selected for EM coverage (see proposed 
Sec.  679.51(f)(5)). This requirement mirrors the pre-departure 
function test requirements.

What happens when the fishing trip ends?

    At the end of the fishing trip selected for EM coverage, the vessel 
owner or operator would close the trip in ODDS and follow the 
instructions in ODDS. The vessel owner or operator would be required to 
submit the video data storage devices to NMFS within 2 business days of 
completing the fishing trip selected for EM coverage, using a method 
that requires a signature for delivery and provides notification of 
delivery. Additional documentation described in the vessel's VMP would 
need to be submitted along with the video data storage devices. 
Specific instructions for shipping video data storage devices would be 
included in the vessel's VMP (see proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vii)). 
The video storage devices would need to be submitted within 2 business 
days so that timely review of the data could occur and be provided for 
the management of the fishery.

How would a vessel use EM for fishing Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) or 
Community Development Quota (CDQ) under the exception in Proposed Sec.  
679.7(f)(4)?

    Currently, under Sec.  679.7(f)(4), unless a vessel has an observer 
aboard and maintains the applicable daily logbook, the vessel cannot 
retain halibut or sablefish in excess of the total amount of 
unharvested IFQ or CDQ applicable to that vessel for the IFQ regulatory 
area in which the vessel is operating and that is currently held by all 
IFQ or CDQ permit holders aboard the vessel. This proposed rule would 
expand the exception to a vessel in the EM selection pool. This 
proposed rule provides that the owner or operator of a vessel in the EM 
selection pool, that complies with the requirements of Sec.  
679.51(f)(6) and maintains the applicable daily logbook, could retain 
halibut or sablefish in excess of the total amount of unharvested IFQ 
or CDQ applicable to that vessel for the IFQ regulatory area in which 
the vessel is operating and that is currently held by all IFQ or CDQ 
permit holders aboard the vessel. If a vessel is not part of the EM 
selection pool and is not selected for observer coverage for that 
fishing trip, the vessel owner or operator would continue to be 
prohibited from retaining halibut or sablefish in excess of the total 
amount of unharvested IFQ or CDQ applicable to that vessel for the IFQ 
regulatory area in which the vessel is operating.
    Under proposed Sec.  679.51(f)(6), a vessel owner or operator in 
the EM selection pool would use ODDS to identify when he or she intends 
to fish in multiple areas and to commit to using a functioning EM 
system on the whole trip, even if the vessel was not selected for EM 
coverage. The vessel owner or operator would be required to meet all 
the same responsibilities as if the vessel's fishing trip had been 
selected for EM coverage in ODDS. These include having a copy of a 
valid NMFS-approved VMP on board before the vessel goes fishing, 
maintaining the EM system in working order, and submitting the required 
information at the end of the trip. All these requirements are 
described in more detail above.
    Because the EM system in this instance would be used as a 
compliance monitoring tool, some additional regulatory requirements 
would apply to the vessel owner and operator. The EM system would be 
required to be powered continuously during the entire fishing trip. The 
vessel owner or operator would need to describe in the VMP the 
alternative methods the vessel would use to show that the vessel had 
not moved or fished if the vessel owner or operator intends to power 
down the EM system during periods of non-fishing, such as at night when 
the vessel crew is sleeping. These alternative methods could include 
using VMS or installing a sensor that records when the engine is 
powered down.
    Additionally, if during a fishing trip an EM system malfunction 
occurred that did not allow recording of essential information about 
where the vessel was fishing and what amount of halibut or sablefish 
catch was coming aboard, the vessel operator would be required to cease 
fishing immediately and to contact NOAA OLE. This requirement is 
necessary because information about the location of fishing and the 
amount caught in each area is paramount to allowing vessels to fish in 
multiple areas using the EM system exception at Sec.  679.7(f)(4).

Other Regulatory Changes

    NMFS proposes to revise regulations for clarity and efficiency, as 
follows--
     Remove expired regulations at Sec. Sec.  679.7(j) and 
679.23(d)(5), and remove Sec.  679.23(d)(4), which was previously 
removed and reserved. Section 679.7(j) was only applicable through 
December 31, 2002 (67 FR 64315; October 18, 2002). Section 679.23(d)(5) 
was only applicable through July 17, 2001 (66 FR 31845; June 13, 2001). 
This proposed rule would revise Sec.  679.7(j) to list prohibitions to 
ensure the EM system functions and the data from the systems are usable 
for fisheries management.
     Correct regulation citations in Sec.  679.21(a)(2)(ii) and 
(a)(3) that cross reference paragraphs that NMFS moved in previous 
rulemaking.
     Remove the word ``observer'' from the phrase ``partial 
observer coverage category'' in Sec.  679.51(a)(1) because, with this 
proposed rule, the partial coverage category would include EM and 
observers.
     Revise Sec.  679.51(a)(1)(ii)(B) to remove reference to 
vessel and trip selection pools because, with this proposed rule, NMFS 
is adding the EM selection pool.
     Remove Sec.  679.51(a)(1)(iii)(D)(2) because this proposed 
rule would replace that EM provision.
     Remove the expired deadline for the Bering Sea and 
Aleutian Islands (BSAI) trawl catcher vessel placement in the full 
observer coverage category at Sec.  679.51(a)(4)(iii).

Classification

    Pursuant to sections 304(b) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 
the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule 
is consistent with the FMPs, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration of 
comments received during the public comment period.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
the purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)

    An RIR was prepared to assess all costs and benefits of available 
regulatory alternatives. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS 
(see ADDRESSES). The Council recommended Amendments 114/104 based on 
those measures that maximized net benefits to the Nation. Specific 
aspects of the economic analysis are discussed below in the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis section.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)

    This IRFA was prepared for this proposed rule, as required by 
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), to describe why 
this action is being proposed; the objectives and legal basis for the 
proposed rule; the number of small entities to which the proposed rule 
would apply; any projected reporting, recordkeeping, or other 
compliance requirements of the proposed rule; any overlapping, 
duplicative, or conflicting Federal rules;

[[Page 14860]]

and any significant alternatives to the proposed rule that would 
accomplish the stated objectives, consistent with applicable statutes, 
and that would minimize any significant adverse economic impacts of the 
proposed rule on small entities. Descriptions of the proposed action, 
its purpose, and the legal basis are contained earlier in this preamble 
and are not repeated here.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by the Proposed 
Action
    The entities directly regulated by this action are those entities 
that harvest groundfish and halibut using nontrawl gear and are subject 
to observer coverage in the partial coverage category of the Observer 
Program. These directly regulated entities include vessels that fished 
with nontrawl gear in State waters only if those vessels had an Federal 
Fisheries Permit (FFP), which makes them subject to Federal observer 
regulations. Since participation in the EM selection pool is voluntary, 
only those vessels that choose to participate in the EM selection pool 
would be directly regulated by this proposed rule.
    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 11411) 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.
    The estimated number of vessels that use nontrawl gear in the 
partial coverage category that are small entities might be overstated. 
Conversely, the number of non-small entities might be understated. The 
RFA requires a consideration of affiliations between entities for the 
purpose of assessing whether an entity is classified as small. The 
estimates below do not take into account all affiliations between 
entities. There is not a strict one-to-one correlation between vessels 
and entities; many persons and firms are known to have ownership 
interests in more than one vessel, and many of these vessels with 
different ownership are otherwise affiliated with each other. Vessels 
that have types of affiliation that are not tracked in available data 
(i.e., ownership of multiple vessels or affiliation with processors) 
may be misclassified as a small entity.
    In 2015, 981 vessels (i.e., harvesting entities) participated in 
the groundfish and halibut fisheries directly regulated by the proposed 
action. Those 981 catcher vessels include 255 vessels that only 
operated in State waters and possessed an FFP; all of those 255 vessels 
are classified as small entities. According to data provided by the 
Alaska Fisheries Information Network, the analysts estimate that 950 of 
the 981 harvesting entities are classified as small entities. All of 
the 31 vessels that are classified as non-small entities were members 
of harvesting cooperatives whose combined gross receipts were greater 
than $11.0 million in 2015, the most recent year for which complete 
revenue data is available. Each of the 31 vessels classified as non-
small entities is affiliated with a crab cooperative, six are 
affiliated with a Central GOA Rockfish Program cooperative, two are 
affiliated with an American Fisheries Act cooperative, and one is 
affiliated through ownership with the freezer longline cooperative 
(some entities are affiliated with more than one cooperative across 
different North Pacific fisheries).
    Table 1 provides a count of small and non-small entities (i.e., 
vessels). The first row shows all vessels with FFPs that fished with 
nontrawl gear in 2015. The second row is limited to vessels that fished 
in Federal waters. The bottom four rows shows the number of entities by 
gear type and area fished. Those rows should not be summed vertically 
because vessels that fished with both gear types or in both management 
areas would be double-counted. No vessel less than 40 ft LOA is 
classified as a non-small entity, and only one vessel less than 57.5 ft 
LOA is classified as a non-small entity.

      Table 1--Count of Small and Non-Small Entities in the Universe of Directly Regulated Vessels in 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Non-Small
                                                                   Small Entity       Entity           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nontrawl catcher vessels (Federal and State waters).............             950              31             981
Nontrawl catcher vessels (Federal waters only)..................             695              31             726
Hook-and-line catcher vessels in Federal waters in the GOA......             584               7             591
Hook-and-line catcher vessels in Federal waters in the BSAI.....             114               7             121
Pot catcher vessels in Federal waters in the GOA................              86               4              90
Pot catcher vessels in Federal waters in the BSAI...............              22              21              43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
    This proposed rule adds additional reporting, recordkeeping, and 
other compliance requirements for vessels that choose to participate in 
the EM selection pool and vessels that choose to use the exemption in 
Sec.  679.7(f)(4) to harvest IFQ or CDQ halibut and sablefish. No small 
entity is subject to reporting requirements that are in addition to or 
different from the requirements that apply to all directly regulated 
entities.
    No unique professional skills are needed for the vessel owners or 
operators to comply with the reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
associated with this proposed rule. Vessel owners or operators would 
request to be placed in the EM selection pool using ODDS, a tool 
already used by directly regulated small entities. If they choose to 
participate in the EM selection pool, vessel owners and operators would 
be required to assist with the installation of the EM system and 
conduct basic maintenance to ensure the EM equipment remains 
functional. Vessel operators would meet with an EM service technician 
to develop a VMP for their vessel, in which the operator's 
responsibilities will be clearly defined. These responsibilities can 
generally be fulfilled by a crewmember of the vessel who already is 
fulfilling similar functions during fishing activity. The vessel owner 
or operator would be required to submit the VMP to NMFS for approval.
    Vessel owners or operators in the EM selection pool that choose to 
use the proposed exemption in Sec.  679.7(f)(4) would need to notify 
NMFS using ODDS when they intend to fish in multiple areas and commit 
to using a functioning EM system on the whole trip, even if the vessel 
was not selected for EM coverage. The vessel owner or operator would be 
required to meet all

[[Page 14861]]

of the same responsibilities as if the vessel had been selected for EM 
system coverage for that trip in ODDS. Because the EM system in this 
instance would be used as a compliance monitoring tool, some additional 
requirements would apply. If an EM system malfunction occurs during a 
fishing trip in a manner that does not allow essential information 
about where the vessel was fishing and what amount of IFQ or CDQ catch 
was coming aboard to be recorded, the vessel operator would be required 
to cease fishing immediately and to contact NOAA OLE. Information about 
the locations fished and the amount caught in each area is paramount to 
allowing vessels to fish in multiple areas using this exception; 
therefore, such a requirement is necessary.
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
    No duplication, overlap, or conflict between this proposed action 
and existing Federal rules has been identified.
Description of Significant Alternatives That Minimize Adverse Impacts 
on Small Entities
    No significant alternatives were identified that would accomplish 
the stated objectives, are consistent with applicable statutes, and 
that would minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed 
rule on small entities. The Council and NMFS considered three 
alternatives. Alternative 1, the no action alternative, would not allow 
vessels to use an EM system instead of an observer. Alternative 2 would 
allow the use of EM for catch estimation on vessels in the EM selection 
pool and allow EM as a monitoring tool when fishing IFQ in multiple 
areas. Alternative 3 would allow the use of EM for compliance 
monitoring of vessel operator logbooks used for catch estimation.
    The preferred alternative, Alternative 2, was designed to minimize 
the impacts to small entities from the status quo requirement to carry 
an observer when selected under the partial coverage category. 
Alternative 2 provides vessels that meet specific criteria the choice 
to join the EM selection pool instead of observer selection. Vessels in 
the EM selection pool would be required to use EM when randomly 
selected. Relative to Alternative 1 (no action), Alternative 2 provides 
nontrawl gear catcher vessel operators with the opportunity to 
participate in fishery monitoring and comply with the Observer Program 
regulations without carrying a human observer. Alternative 2 could also 
open new avenues to improve fishery data by collecting at-sea discard 
information from vessels less than 40 ft LOA, which is not currently 
gathered.
    This proposed rule would not increase the fees that NMFS collects 
from directly regulated entities. The Analysis prepared for this action 
identifies the operational costs of participating in the EM program 
(see ADDRESSES). Directly regulated small entities that individually 
judge the operational costs of participating in the EM program to be 
burdensome could continue fishing under the existing human observer 
selection protocols, with no change in the amount of fees that they 
would be assessed.
    Relative to Alternative 2, Alternative 3 would increase 
recordkeeping burdens on small entities by requiring skippers to fill 
out catch logbooks while operating their vessels and could also 
necessitate expanded dockside monitoring to verify logbooks, which 
could slow down shoreside operations and potentially increase overall 
costs at the programmatic level.

Collection-of-Information Requirements

    This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements 
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act. These requirements have been 
submitted to OMB for approval under OMB control number 0648-0318 (North 
Pacific Observer Program). The public reporting burden for the 
collection-of-information requirements in this proposed rule includes 
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing 
the collection of information.
    The proposed rule would allow vessel owners or operators to use the 
existing ODDS to submit a request to be placed in the EM selection 
pool. In addition, the proposed rule would allow vessel owners or 
operators in the EM selection pool to submit a request to be removed 
from the EM selection pool. Public reporting burden per response for 
these new options in ODDS is estimated to average 5 minutes. If NMFS 
denies a request to place a vessel in the EM selection pool, the vessel 
owner may submit an administrative appeal to NMFS. Public reporting 
burden per response for an administrative appeal is estimated to 
average 4 hours.
    The proposed rule would require all vessel owners and operators in 
the EM selection pool to register a fishing trip in ODDS. Public 
reporting burden per response to register a fishing trip in ODDS if a 
vessel is assigned to the EM selection pool is estimated to average 15 
minutes.
    The proposed rule would require vessels owners who request to be 
placed in the EM selection pool to submit a VMP to NMFS. Public 
reporting burden per response for the VMP is estimated to average 48 
hours.
    The proposed rule would require all vessel owners and operators in 
the EM selection pool to close the fishing trip in ODDS. Public 
reporting burden per response to close a fishing trip in ODDS is 
estimated to average 5 minutes.
    The proposed rule also would require vessel owners selected to 
carry EM to submit video data storage devices and associated 
documentation to the EM data reviewer within 2 business days of the end 
of the fishing trip. Public reporting burden per response is estimated 
to average 1 hour.
    Vessel owners or operators wanting to use EM to fish under the 
proposed exception in Sec.  679.7(f)(4) would be required to notify 
NMFS through ODDS. Public reporting burden per response to register a 
fishing trip in ODDS is estimated to average 15 minutes. The addition 
of the option to indicate that the vessel will to use EM to fish under 
the exception in Sec.  679.7(f)(4) during an upcoming fishing trip is 
not expected to increase the average response time to register a trip 
in ODDS.
    Public comment is sought regarding (1) whether this proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall 
have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the burden estimate; (3) 
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of 
information, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on 
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS 
Alaska Region at the ADDRESSES above, email to 
OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395-5806.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

    Dated: March 17, 2017.
Alan D. Risenhoover,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

[[Page 14862]]

PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.; 
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.

0
2. In Sec.  679.2:
0
a. In the definition of ``Fishing trip,'' revise paragraph (3) heading 
and add paragraph (3)(iv); and
0
b. Add the definitions for ``Electronic Monitoring system or EM 
system,'' ``EM selection pool'', ``EM service provider,'' and ``Vessel 
Monitoring Plan (VMP)'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  679.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Electronic Monitoring system or EM system means a network of 
equipment that uses a software operating system connected to one or 
more technology components, including, but not limited to, cameras and 
recording devices to collect data on catch and vessel operations.
    EM selection pool means the defined group of vessels from which 
NMFS will randomly select the vessels required to use an EM system 
under Sec.  679.51(f).
    EM service provider means any person, including their employees or 
agents, that NMFS contracts with to provide EM services, or to review, 
interpret, or analyze EM data, as required under Sec.  679.51(f).
* * * * *
    Fishing trip means: * * *
* * * * *
    (3) North Pacific Observer Program.
* * * * *
    (iv) For a vessel in the EM selection pool of the partial coverage 
category, the period of time that begins when the vessel leaves a 
shore-based port with an empty hold until the vessel returns to a 
shore-based port, regardless of when or where caught fish were 
offloaded.
* * * * *
    Vessel Monitoring Plan (VMP) means the document that describes how 
fishing operations on the vessel will be conducted and how the EM 
system and associated equipment will be configured to meet the data 
collection objectives and purpose of the EM program. VMPs are required 
under Sec.  679.51(f).
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec.  679.7, revise paragraphs (f)(4), (g) heading, and (j) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  679.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (4) Except as provided in Sec.  679.40(d), retain IFQ or CDQ 
halibut or IFQ or CDQ sablefish on a vessel in excess of the total 
amount of unharvested IFQ or CDQ, applicable to the vessel category and 
IFQ or CDQ regulatory area(s) in which the vessel is deploying fixed 
gear, and that is currently held by all IFQ or CDQ permit holders 
aboard the vessel, unless the vessel has an observer aboard under 
subpart E of this part or the vessel participates in the EM selection 
pool and complies with the requirements at Sec.  679.51(f), and 
maintains the applicable daily fishing log prescribed in the annual 
management measures published in the Federal Register pursuant to Sec.  
300.62 of this title and Sec.  679.5.
* * * * *
    (g) North Pacific Observer Program--Observers. * * *
* * * * *
    (j) North Pacific Observer Program--EM Systems. (1) Fish without an 
EM system when a vessel is required to carry an EM system under Sec.  
679.51(f).
    (2) Fish with an EM system without a copy of a valid NMFS-approved 
VMP on board.
    (3) Fail to comply with a NMFS-approved VMP.
    (4) Fail to conduct a function test prior to departing port on a 
fishing trip as required at Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vi)(A).
    (5) Depart on a fishing trip selected for EM coverage without a 
functional EM system, unless procedures at Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vi)(A)(1) 
and Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vi)(A)(2) have been followed.
    (6) Fail to follow procedures at Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vi)(B) prior to 
each set on a fishing trip selected for EM coverage.
    (7) Fail to make the EM system, associated equipment, logbooks and 
other records available for inspection upon request by NMFS, OLE, or 
other NMFS-authorized officer.
    (8) Fail to submit a video data storage device as specified under 
Sec.  679.51(f)(5)(vii).
    (9) Tamper with, bias, disconnect, damage, destroy, alter, or in 
any other way distort, render useless, inoperative, ineffective, or 
inaccurate any component of the EM system, associated equipment, or 
data recorded by the EM system.
    (10) Assault, impede, intimidate, harass, sexually harass, bribe, 
or interfere with an EM service provider.
    (11) Interfere or bias the sampling procedure employed in the EM 
selection pool including either mechanically or manually sorting or 
discarding catch outside of the camera view or inconsistent with the 
NMFS-approved VMP.
    (12) Fail to meet vessel owner and operator responsibilities 
specified at Sec.  679.51 (f)(5).
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec.  679.21, revise paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (a)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  679.21  Prohibited species bycatch management.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) After allowing for sampling by an observer, if an observer is 
aboard, sort its catch immediately after retrieval of the gear and, 
except for salmon prohibited species catch in the BS pollock fisheries 
and GOA groundfish fisheries under paragraph (f) or (h) of this 
section, or any prohibited species catch as provided (in permits 
issued) under the PSD program at Sec.  679.26, return all prohibited 
species, or parts thereof, to the sea immediately, with a minimum of 
injury, regardless of its condition.
    (3) Rebuttable presumption. Except as provided under paragraphs (f) 
and (h) of this section and Sec.  679.26, there will be a rebuttable 
presumption that any prohibited species retained on board a fishing 
vessel regulated under this part was caught and retained in violation 
of this section.
* * * * *


Sec.  679.23   [Amended]

0
5. In Sec.  679.23 remove paragraphs (d)(4) and (d)(5).
0
6. In Sec.  679.51:
0
a. Revise section heading and paragraphs (a)(1) heading, (a)(1)(i) 
introductory text, (a)(1)(i)(C), (a)(1)(ii) introductory text, 
(a)(1)(ii)(B), (a)(1)(ii)(D), and (a)(4)(iii); and
0
b. Add paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.51  Observer and Electronic Monitoring System requirements 
for vessels and plants.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Groundfish and halibut fishery partial coverage category--(i) 
Vessel classes in partial coverage category. Unless otherwise specified 
in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the following catcher vessels and 
catcher/processors are in the partial coverage category when fishing 
for halibut with hook-and-line gear or when directed fishing for 
groundfish in a federally managed or parallel groundfish fishery, as 
defined at Sec.  679.2:
* * * * *
    (C) A catcher/processor placed in the partial coverage category 
under paragraph (a)(3) of this section; or
* * * * *

[[Page 14863]]

    (ii) Registration and notification of observer deployment. The 
Observer Declare and Deploy System (ODDS) is the communication platform 
for the partial coverage category by which NMFS receives information 
about fishing plans subject to randomized observer deployment. Vessel 
operators provide fishing plan and contact information to NMFS and 
receive instructions through ODDS for coordinating with an observer 
provider for any required observer coverage. Access to ODDS is 
available through the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
* * * * *
    (B) Notification. Upon entry into ODDS, NMFS will notify the owner 
or operator of his or her vessel's selection pool. Owners and operators 
must comply with all further instructions set forth by ODDS.
* * * * *
    (D) Vessel selection pool. A vessel selected for observer coverage 
is required to have an observer on board for all groundfish and halibut 
fishing trips specified at paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section for the 
time period indicated by ODDS.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) Deadline to request full observer coverage. A full observer 
coverage request must be submitted by October 15 of the year prior to 
the calendar year in which the catcher vessel would be placed in the 
full observer coverage category.
* * * * *
    (f) Electronic monitoring system requirements for vessels that use 
nontrawl gear--Vessels that use nontrawl gear in the partial coverage 
category in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section may be eligible for EM 
coverage instead of observer coverage.
    (1) Vessel placement in the EM selection pool--(i) Applicability. 
The owner or operator of a vessel that uses nontrawl gear in the 
partial coverage category under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section may 
request to be placed in the EM selection pool.
    (ii) How to request placement in the EM selection pool. A vessel 
owner or operator must complete an EM request and submit it to NMFS 
using ODDS. Access to ODDS is available through the NMFS Alaska Region 
Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. ODDS is described in 
paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (iii) Deadline to submit an EM request. A vessel owner or operator 
must submit an EM request in ODDS by November 1 of the year prior to 
the calendar year in which the catcher vessel would be placed in the EM 
selection pool.
    (iv) Approval for placement in the EM selection pool. NMFS will 
approve a nontrawl gear vessel for placement in the EM selection pool 
based on criteria specified in NMFS' Annual Deployment Plan, available 
through the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. Criteria may include, but are not limited to, 
availability of EM systems, vessel gear type, vessel length, area 
fished, number of trips or total catch, sector, target fishery, and 
home or landing port.
    (v) Notification of approval for placement in the EM selection 
pool--(A) NMFS will notify the vessel owner or operator through ODDS of 
approval for the EM selection pool for the next calendar year. The 
vessel remains subject to observer coverage under paragraph (a)(1)(i) 
of this section unless NMFS approves the request for placement of the 
vessel in the EM selection pool.
    (B) Once the vessel owner or operator receives notification of 
approval from NMFS, the vessel owner or operator must comply with the 
vessel owner or operator responsibilities in paragraphs (f)(4) and 
(f)(5) of this section and all further instructions set forth by ODDS.
    (vi) Initial Administrative Determination (IAD). If NMFS denies a 
request to place a vessel in the EM selection pool, NMFS will provide 
an IAD to the vessel owner, which will explain the basis for the 
denial.
    (vii) Appeal. If the vessel owner wishes to appeal NMFS' denial of 
a request to place the vessel in the EM selection pool, the owner may 
appeal the determination under the appeals procedure set out at 15 CFR 
part 906.
    (viii) Duration. Once NMFS approves a vessel for the EM selection 
pool, that vessel will remain in the EM selection pool until--
    (A) NMFS disapproves the VMP under paragraph (f)(4) of this 
section;
    (B) The vessel owner or operator notifies NMFS that the vessel 
intends to leave the EM selection pool in the following fishing year 
under paragraph (f)(1)(ix) of this section; or
    (C) The vessel no longer meets the EM selection pool criteria 
specified by NMFS.
    (ix) How to leave the EM selection pool. A vessel owner must 
complete a request to leave the EM selection pool and submit it to NMFS 
using ODDS. ODDS is described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (x) Deadline to submit a request to leave the EM selection pool. A 
vessel owner or operator must submit a request to leave the EM 
selection pool by November 1 of the year prior to the calendar year in 
which the vessel would be placed in observer coverage.
    (2) Notification of EM selection--(i) A minimum of 72 hours prior 
to embarking on each fishing trip, the operator of a vessel in the EM 
selection pool with a NMFS-approved VMP must register the anticipated 
trip with ODDS.
    (ii) ODDS will notify the vessel operator whether the trip is 
selected for EM coverage and provide a receipt number corresponding to 
this notification. Trip registration is complete when the vessel 
operator receives the receipt number.
    (iii) An operator may embark on a fishing trip registered with 
ODDS:
    (A) Not selected trip. At any time if ODDS indicates that the 
fishing trip is not selected for EM coverage.
    (B) Selected trip. After the vessel operator follows the 
instructions in ODDS and complies with the responsibilities under 
paragraphs (f)(4) and (f)(5) of this section, if ODDS indicates that 
the fishing trip is selected for EM coverage.
    (3) EM coverage duration. If selected, a vessel is required to use 
the EM system for the entire fishing trip.
    (i) A fishing trip selected for EM coverage may not begin until all 
previously harvested fish have been offloaded.
    (ii) Within 24 hours of the end of the fishing trip selected for EM 
coverage, the vessel operator must use ODDS to close the fishing trip 
and follow the instructions in ODDS for submitting the video data 
storage devices and associated documentation as outlined in paragraph 
(5)(vii) of this section.
    (4) Vessel Monitoring Plan (VMP). Once approved for the EM 
selection pool and prior to registering a fishing trip in ODDS under 
paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the vessel owner or operator must 
develop a VMP with the EM service provider following the VMP template 
available through the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/.
    (i) The vessel owner or operator must sign and submit the VMP to 
NMFS each calendar year.
    (ii) NMFS will approve the VMP for the calendar year if it meets 
all the requirements specified in the VMP template available through 
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/.
    (iii) If the VMP does not meet all the requirements specified in 
the VMP template, NMFS will provide the vessel owner or operator the 
opportunity to submit a revised VMP that meets all the

[[Page 14864]]

requirements specified in the VMP template.
    (iv) If NMFS does not approve the revised VMP, NMFS will issue an 
IAD to the vessel owner or operator that will explain the basis for the 
disapproval. The vessel owner or operator may file an administrative 
appeal under the administrative appeals procedures set out at 15 CFR 
part 906.
    (v) If changes are required to the VMP to improve the data 
collection of the EM system or address fishing operation changes, the 
vessel owner or operator must work with NMFS and the EM service 
provider to alter the VMP. The vessel owner or operator must sign the 
updated VMP and submit these changes to the VMP to NMFS prior to 
departing on the next fishing trip selected for EM coverage.
    (5) Vessel owner or operator responsibilities. To use an EM system 
under this section, the vessel owner or operator must:
    (i) Make the vessel available for the installation of EM equipment 
by an EM service provider.
    (ii) Provide access to the vessel's systems and reasonable 
assistance to the EM service provider.
    (iii) Maintain a copy of a NMFS-approved VMP aboard the vessel at 
all times when the vessel is fishing.
    (iv) Comply with all elements of the VMP when selected for EM 
coverage in ODDS.
    (v) Maintain the EM system, including the following:
    (A) Ensure power is maintained to the EM system at all times when 
the vessel is underway.
    (B) Ensure the system is functioning for the entire fishing trip 
and that camera views are unobstructed and clear in quality and catch 
and discards may be completely viewed, identified, and quantified.
    (C) Ensure EM system components are not tampered with, disabled, 
destroyed, or operated or maintained improperly.
    (vi) Complete pre-departure function test and daily verification of 
EM system.
    (A) Prior to departing port, the vessel operator must conduct a 
system function test following the instructions from the EM service 
provider. The vessel operator must verify that the EM system has 
adequate memory to record the entire fishing trip.
    (1) If the EM system function test detects a malfunction identified 
as a high priority in the vessel's VMP or does not allow the data 
collection objectives to be achieved, the vessel must remain in port 
for up to 72 hours to allow an EM service provider time to conduct 
repairs. If the repairs cannot be completed within the 72-hour time 
frame, the vessel is released from EM coverage for that fishing trip 
and may depart on the scheduled fishing trip. A malfunction must be 
repaired prior to departing on a subsequent fishing trip. The vessel 
will automatically be selected for EM coverage for the subsequent 
fishing trip after the malfunction has been repaired.
    (2) If the EM system function test detects a malfunction identified 
as a low priority in the vessel's VMP, the vessel operator may depart 
on the scheduled fishing trip following the procedures for low priority 
malfunctions described in the vessel's VMP. At the end of the trip the 
vessel operator must work with the EM service provider to repair the 
malfunction. The vessel operator may not depart on another fishing trip 
selected for EM coverage with this system malfunction unless the vessel 
operator has contacted the EM service provider.
    (B) During a fishing trip selected for EM coverage, before each set 
is retrieved the vessel operator must verify all cameras are recording 
and all sensors and other required EM system components are functioning 
as instructed in the vessel's VMP.
    (1) If a malfunction is detected, prior to retrieving the set the 
vessel operator must attempt to correct the problem using the 
instructions in the vessel's VMP.
    (2) If the malfunction cannot be repaired at sea, the vessel 
operator must notify the EM service provider of the malfunction at the 
end of the fishing trip. The malfunction must be repaired prior to 
departing on a subsequent fishing trip selected for EM coverage.
    (vii) When instructed by ODDS after closing a fishing trip selected 
for EM coverage, the vessel operator must submit video data storage 
devices and associated documentation identified in the vessel's VMP to 
NMFS using a method that requires a signature for delivery and provides 
a return receipt or delivery notification to the sender. The video data 
storage devices and associated documentation described in the vessel's 
VMP must be postmarked no later than 2 business days after the end of 
the fishing trip.
    (viii) Make the EM system and associated equipment available for 
inspection upon request by OLE, a NMFS-authorized officer, or other 
NMFS-authorized personnel.
    (6) EM for fishing in multiple regulatory areas. If a vessel owner 
or operator intends to fish in multiple regulatory areas using an EM 
system under the exception provided at Sec.  679.7(f)(4), the vessel 
owner or operator must:
    (i) Meet the requirements described in paragraph (f) of this 
section.
    (ii) Register in ODDS that he or she intends to fish in multiple 
regulatory areas using the exception in Sec.  679.7(f)(4).
    (iii) Ensure the EM system is powered continuously during the 
fishing trip. If the EM system is powered down during periods of non-
fishing, the VMP must describe alternate methods to ensure location 
information about the vessel is available for the entire fishing trip, 
as specified in the VMP template available through the NMFS Alaska 
Region Web site https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/.
    (iv) If an EM system malfunction occurs during a fishing trip that 
does not allow the recording of retrieval location information and 
imagery of catch as described in the vessel's VMP, the vessel operator 
must cease fishing and contact OLE immediately.

[FR Doc. 2017-05753 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P