Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Program; Community Development Quota Program; Modifications to Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, 8028-8037 [2018-03548]
Download as PDF
8028
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
following rule section submitted July
18, 2017 (state effective July 13, 2017):
OAR 340–202–0090 Ozone. We note
that this update to OAR 340–202–0090
is not related to, nor is it necessary for
our infrastructure action. We are
including it in this action for efficiency.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, we are proposing to
include in a final rule regulatory text
that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are
proposing to incorporate by reference
the provisions described above in
Section VI. Proposed Action. The EPA
has made, and will continue to make,
these documents generally available
electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at the appropriate EPA office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for
more information).
VIII. Statutory and Executive Orders
Review
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
it does not involve technical standards;
and
• Does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 8, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2018–03675 Filed 2–22–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
[Docket No. 170626590–8143–01]
RIN 0648–BG94
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Halibut and
Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota
Program; Community Development
Quota Program; Modifications to
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
NMFS issues a proposed rule
that would modify regulations
governing the Halibut and Sablefish
Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program.
This proposed rule includes three
actions. The first action would allow
Western Alaska Community
Development Quota (CDQ) groups to
lease (to receive by transfer) halibut
individual fishing quota (IFQ) in IFQ
regulatory areas 4B, 4C, and 4D in years
of extremely low halibut commercial
catch limits. This proposed action is
necessary to provide additional harvest
opportunities to CDQ groups and
community residents, and provide IFQ
holders with the opportunity to receive
value for their IFQ when the halibut
commercial catch limits may not be
large enough to provide for an
economically viable fishery for IFQ
holders. The second action would
remove an obsolete reference in the IFQ
Program regulations. The third action
would clarify IFQ vessel use cap
regulations. This proposed rule is
intended to promote the goals and
objectives of the Northern Pacific
Halibut Act of 1982, the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area, and other applicable
laws.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
March 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by NOAA–NMFS–2017–0072,
by any of the following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20170072, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries
Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn:
Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O.
Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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 the Regulatory
Impact Review (referred to as the
‘‘Analysis’’) and the Categorical
Exclusion prepared for this proposed
rule may be obtained from https://
www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS
Alaska Region website at https://
alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the
burden-hour estimates or other aspects
of the collection-of-information
requirements contained in this proposed
rule may be submitted to NMFS at the
above address; by email to OIRA_
Submission@omb.eop.gov; or by fax to
(202) 395–5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Warpinski, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority for Action
The International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC) and NMFS manage
fishing for Pacific halibut through
regulations established under the
authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut
Act of 1982 (Halibut Act). The IPHC
promulgates regulations governing the
halibut fishery under the Convention
between the United States and Canada
for the Preservation of the Halibut
Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean
and Bering Sea (Convention). The
IPHC’s regulations are subject to
approval by the Secretary of State with
the concurrence of the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary). NMFS publishes
the IPHC’s regulations as annual
management measures pursuant to 50
CFR 300.62.
The Halibut Act, at sections 773c(a)
and (b), provides the Secretary with
general responsibility to carry out the
Convention and the Halibut Act. The
Halibut Act, at section 773c(c), also
provides the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) with
authority to develop regulations,
including limited access regulations,
that are in addition to, and not in
conflict with, approved IPHC
regulations. Regulations developed by
the Council may be implemented by
NMFS only after approval by the
Secretary.
The Council developed the Individual
Fishing Quota Program (IFQ Program)
for the commercial halibut and sablefish
fisheries. The IFQ Program for the
halibut fishery is implemented by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679
under the authority of the section 773 of
the Halibut Act. The IFQ Program for
the sablefish fishery is implemented by
the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
(BSAI) Fishery Management Plan (FMP)
and Federal regulations at 50 CFR part
679 under the authority of section
303(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act).
Background
The IFQ Program
The IFQ Program for the management
of the fixed gear (hook-and-line and pot
gear) halibut and sablefish fisheries off
Alaska was implemented by NMFS in
1995 (58 FR 59375; November 9, 1993).
The Council and NMFS designed the
IFQ Program to allocate harvest
privileges among participants in the
commercial halibut and sablefish
fisheries to reduce fishing capacity that
had led to an unsafe ‘‘race for fish’’ as
vessels raced to harvest their annual
catch limits as quickly as possible
before the annual limit was reached. A
central objective of the IFQ Program is
to support the social and economic
character of the fisheries and the coastal
fishing communities where many of
these fisheries are based.
Under the IFQ Program, access to the
fixed gear sablefish and halibut fisheries
is limited to those persons holding
quota share (QS). NMFS issued separate
QS for sablefish and halibut to qualified
applicants based on their historical
participation during a set of qualifying
years in the sablefish and halibut
fisheries. QS is an exclusive, revocable
privilege that allows the holder to
harvest a specific percentage of either
the total allowable catch (TAC) in the
sablefish fishery or the annual
commercial catch limit in the halibut
fishery. In addition to being specific to
sablefish or halibut, QS is designated for
specific geographic areas of harvest, a
specific vessel operation type (catcher
vessel or catcher/processor), and for a
specific range of vessel sizes that may be
used to harvest the sablefish or halibut
(vessel category). There are four vessel
categories of halibut QS: Category A
shares are designated for catcher/
processors, vessels that process their
catch at sea (i.e., freezer longline
vessels), and do not have a vessel length
restriction; Category B shares are
designated to be fished on catcher
vessels greater than 60 feet length
overall (LOA); Category C shares are
designated to be fished on catcher
vessels greater than 35 feet but less than
or equal to 60 feet LOA; and Category
D shares are designated to be fished on
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8029
catcher vessels less than or equal to 35
feet LOA.
NMFS annually issues IFQ permits to
each QS holder. An annual IFQ permit
authorizes the permit holder to harvest
a specified amount of the IFQ species in
a regulatory area from a specific
operation type and vessel category. IFQ
is expressed in pounds and is based on
the amount of QS held in relation to the
total QS pool for each regulatory area
with an assigned catch limit.
In addition to ending the race for fish,
other goals of the IFQ Program are to
prevent absentee ownership of QS and
promote an owner-operator fleet. To
meet these goals, the IFQ Program
includes restrictions on the ability of QS
holders to transfer their annual IFQ. The
Council and NMFS recognized that at
the time the IFQ Program was
implemented, some QS holders had
long-standing business arrangements
with hired masters who harvested IFQ
on behalf of the QS holder. Therefore,
the IFQ Program authorizes the use of
hired masters in certain instances. Since
the implementation of the IFQ Program,
the Council has recommended and
NMFS has approved further regulatory
amendments to limit the ability of QS
holders to designate a hired master to
discourage absentee ownership and
move towards an owner-operated
program (see Section 3.8.3.1 of the
Analysis).
The IFQ Program allows limited
transfers of IFQ under specific
conditions, including temporary
medical transfers, survivorship transfer
privileges, temporary military transfers,
transfers through the Community Quota
Entity Program, and transfers to the
guided angler fish program. When these
specific conditions are met, regulations
allow a QS holder to designate a hired
master to land the resulting IFQ derived
from that holder’s QS (see 50 CFR
679.41).
The Council and the public frequently
use the terms ‘‘IFQ lease’’ or ‘‘lease’’ to
refer to the transfer of IFQ without a
transfer of the underlying QS. However,
NMFS does not generally use the term
‘‘lease’’ in its IFQ Program regulations
governing the transfer of IFQ. For
consistency with the terminology used
in the existing regulations and for
clarity, this proposed rule uses the term
‘‘transfer of IFQ’’.
As described above, the halibut
fishery is managed in separate
geographic areas of harvest, as
determined by the IPHC. Accordingly,
NMFS issues halibut IFQ consistent
with the IPHC’s regulatory areas.
NMFS’s IFQ regulatory areas are
described in Figure 15 to part 679. This
proposed rule uses the term ‘‘Area’’ to
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
8030
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
refer to a specific IFQ regulatory area
(e.g., Area 4B). The first action in this
proposed rule only pertains to Areas 4B,
4C, 4D, and 4E. Area 4B includes waters
in the Central and Western Aleutian
Islands. Areas 4C, 4D, and 4E include
waters north of the Aleutian Islands, in
the Bering Sea, and around the Pribilof
Islands (see Section 1.3 of the Analysis).
The IPHC considers the halibut in Areas
4C, 4D, and 4E to be a single stock unit
for stock assessment and management
purposes, and often refers to them
combined as Areas 4CDE.
The commercial catch limits for Areas
4B, 4C, and 4D are allocated between
two distinct management programs, the
CDQ Program and the IFQ Program.
Throughout the duration of the IFQ
Program, the Area 4E commercial catch
limit has been exclusively allocated to
the CDQ Program; therefore, no Area 4E
QS or IFQ is allocated.
Overall, the halibut IFQ commercial
catch limits in Areas 4B and 4CDE have
trended downward over the past 15
years (see Section 3.6.1 of the Analysis).
The Area 4B commercial catch limit has
dropped substantially from 2001 to 2007
(about 3.9 million pounds in 2001 to
about 1.1 million pounds in 2007).
Although there was a slight increasing
trend between 2008 and 2011, the
commercial catch limit for IFQ trended
downward again from 2012 to 2015. In
2015, the Area 4B commercial catch
limit for IFQ (about 0.9 million pounds)
was less than a quarter of what it was
in 2001. The combined commercial
catch limit for IFQ in Areas 4C and 4D
has seen more fluctuation during this
period, but has still experienced an
overall downward trend since 2007. In
2007, the combined commercial catch
limit for IFQ in Areas 4C and 4D was
about 2.2 million pounds; in 2015, it
was about 0.7 million pounds.
The CDQ Program
The CDQ Program was implemented
in 1992, and in 1996, the MagnusonStevens Act was amended to include
provisions specific to the CDQ Program.
The purpose of the CDQ Program is: (1)
To provide eligible western Alaska
villages with the opportunity to
participate and invest in fisheries in the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
management area (BSAI); (2) to support
economic development in western
Alaska; (3) to alleviate poverty and
provide economic and social benefits for
residents of western Alaska; and (4) to
achieve sustainable and diversified local
economies in western Alaska (16 U.S.C.
1855(i)(1)(A)).
The CDQ Program consists of six
different non-profit managing
organizations (CDQ groups) representing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
different geographical regions in Alaska:
Aleutian Pribilof Island Community
Development Association (APICDA),
Bristol Bay Economic Development
Corporation (BBEDC), Central Bering
Sea Fishermen’s Association (CBSFA),
Coastal Villages Region Fund (CVRF),
Norton Sound Economic Development
Corporation (NSEDC), and Yukon Delta
Fisheries Development Association
(YDFDA). The CDQ Program receives
annual allocations of TAC for a variety
of commercially valuable species in the
BSAI groundfish, crab, and halibut
fisheries, which are in turn allocated
among the CDQ groups. CDQ groups use
their allocations of halibut to provide
opportunities for small vessel fishing by
residents of their member communities.
Among the species CDQ groups are
allocated for commercial fishing, Pacific
halibut is an important species for
community resident employment and
income. NMFS allocates halibut to CDQ
groups for commercial fisheries in four
Areas: 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E (see Section
3.5.1 of the Analysis). Allocations of
halibut CDQ are correlated with the
geographic area in which a CDQ group’s
member communities are located. For
example, 30 percent of the halibut
commercial catch limit in Area 4B is
allocated to the CDQ Program. The
entire allocation to the CDQ Program in
Area 4B is provided to APICDA, which
represents all of the CDQ communities
located within the geographic range of
Area 4B. Area 4C surrounds the Pribilof
Islands, and the portion of the halibut
commercial catch limit allocated to the
CDQ program is split between CBSFA
(which represents the CDQ community
of St. Paul) and APICDA (which
represents the CDQ community of St.
George). The CDQ allocation in Area 4D
is split among BBEDC, NSEDC, and
YDFDA. The CDQ allocation in Area 4E
is split between BBEDC and CVRF. A
CDQ group may transfer its halibut CDQ
to another CDQ group that has halibut
CDQ allocation in the same regulatory
area (50 CFR 679.31(c)).
The Council recommended and
NMFS approved amendments to the IFQ
Program to allow CDQ Program
participants to harvest allocations of
Area 4D halibut CDQ in Area 4E. This
provision allows residents in CDQ
communities along the Western Alaska
coast to have more near-shore
opportunities to harvest their group’s
halibut CDQ (68 FR 9902, March 3,
2003). Additionally, the Council
recommended and NMFS approved
amendments to the IFQ Program to
allow for the harvest of Area 4C halibut
IFQ and CDQ in Area 4D in response to
reports of localized depletion,
decreasing catch per unit effort, and
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
resultant limitations on the optimal
utilization of Area 4C halibut IFQ and
CDQ (70 FR 43328, July 27, 2005). See
Section 3.5.2 of the Analysis for
additional detail on the history of the
halibut CDQ fishery.
The resident halibut CDQ fleets and
criteria for participation in CDQ
fisheries vary among the CDQ groups.
Resource use is impacted by factors
such as the number of interested and
qualified residents, the location of the
halibut resource relative to nearshore
fishing grounds, other fishing
opportunities (such as salmon and crab),
other employment opportunities, and
the availability of processing operations.
Also, the resident halibut CDQ fleet is
impacted by internal economic
decisions made by the CDQ groups and
in the ways the CDQ groups choose to
promote economic development in their
communities. In general, many of the
small boat fishermen in CDQ
communities are dependent on the
halibut fishery (Section 3.5.3 of the
Analysis).
Need for Action
The downward trend of halibut
commercial catch limits in Areas 4B and
4CDE over the past 15 years has been
dramatic, with current limits
significantly lower than in the recent
past years. The recent years of low
halibut abundance and the resulting low
commercial catch limits in Areas 4B and
4CDE have made it increasingly difficult
for most CDQ groups to create a viable
commercial halibut fishing opportunity
for their community residents. The
halibut resource is economically
significant for small vessel fishing
operations as well as culturally and
socially important for residents of
Western Alaska CDQ communities.
Correspondingly, low halibut
abundance and the resulting low
commercial catch limits in Areas 4B,
4C, and 4D have made it increasingly
difficult for IFQ holders to have an
economically viable fishery.
Under current regulations, CDQ
groups cannot receive by transfer any
IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS.
Current regulations also prohibit halibut
QS holders from transferring their IFQ
separate from the underlying QS except
in very narrow, specific situations, such
as temporary military transfers (see
Section 3.7 of the Analysis for more
information). These restrictions limit
the options for CDQ groups to
temporarily expand opportunities for
halibut fishing by community residents
in times of low halibut abundance (see
Section 3.7 of the Analysis).
To address these problems, this
proposed rule would create a voluntary
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
option for an IFQ holder in Areas 4B, 4C
and 4D to temporarily transfer his or her
halibut IFQ to a CDQ group in years of
extremely low halibut abundance. This
proposed flexibility would allow CDQ
groups to expand the fishing
opportunities for the small boat fleets
operating out of the CDQ group’s
communities and provide IFQ holders
with the opportunity to receive value for
their IFQ when extremely low halibut
commercial catch limits may not be
large enough to provide for an
economically viable fishery for IFQ
holders.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
This Proposed Rule and the Anticipated
Effects
This proposed rule includes three
actions. The primary action, Action 1,
would create a voluntary option for an
IFQ holder to temporarily transfer his or
her halibut IFQ to a CDQ group in years
of extremely low halibut abundance.
Actions 2 and 3 would make minor
regulatory adjustments to remove an
obsolete reference in the IFQ Program
regulations and to clarify IFQ vessel use
cap regulations, respectively. The
following paragraphs provide additional
detail on the proposed actions.
Action 1
This proposed rule would: (1) Define
the halibut commercial catch limits
under which CDQ groups could receive
IFQ by transfer; (2) establish limits on
the types and amounts of IFQ that can
be transferred; and (3) establish
reporting requirements for CDQ groups
receiving IFQ by transfer. This proposed
rule would not convert transferred IFQ
to CDQ. Allocations of halibut CDQ
would not change under this proposed
rule.
Under this proposed rule, CDQ groups
would be able to receive transfers of
halibut catcher vessel IFQ (Categories B,
C, and D IFQ) in Areas 4C and 4D when
the IPHC approves a halibut commercial
catch limit that is less than 1.5 million
pounds in Areas 4CDE. CDQ groups
would be able to receive transfers of
halibut catcher vessel IFQ (Categories B,
C, and D IFQ) in Area 4B when the IPHC
approves a halibut commercial catch
limit that is less than 1 million pounds
in Area 4B. IFQ holders would be able
to transfer both blocked and unblocked
IFQ to CDQ groups. This proposed rule
would not revise current regulations
that authorize an IFQ holder in Areas
4B, 4C and 4D to transfer his or her
Category A halibut IFQ to any qualified
person, including a CDQ group. This
proposed rule would provide additional
harvesting flexibility for Category A
halibut IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
in years of extremely low halibut
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
abundance, as described in more detail
below.
The Council recommended these
thresholds based on an analysis of
commercial catch limits between 2008
and 2017, a period of time representing
a range of different halibut commercial
catch limits and decreasing
opportunities for CDQ community
fishermen. The Council considered a
range of different commercial catch
limit thresholds for both Area 4B and
Areas 4CDE, before selecting these
thresholds. Section 3.8.5 of the Analysis
shows that from 2008 to 2016, the
halibut commercial catch limit in Area
4B was never below the proposed
threshold of 1 million pounds.
However, in Areas 4CDE, the halibut
commercial catch limit was below the
proposed threshold of 1.5 million
pounds in 2 years, 2014 and 2015.
Therefore, under halibut abundance
conditions over the last 8 years, had this
proposed rule been in effect it would
have allowed IFQ transfers to CDQ
groups to occur in only 2 years, and
only in Areas 4CDE.
In selecting these thresholds, the
Council sought to balance the goal of
providing additional halibut fishing
opportunities for CDQ residents when
the halibut CDQ allocation alone may
not be large enough to sustain small
vessel resident fisheries, with the need
to avoid potential adverse distributional
impacts on other halibut IFQ users that
could result if IFQ transfers were
permitted. The Council also indicated
that the flexibility to transfer halibut
IFQ in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D was to be
available only during worst case
scenarios for halibut commercial catch
limits in these Areas (Section 2.3 of the
Analysis). For Areas 4CDE, the Council
determined and NMFS agrees that a
halibut commercial catch limit below
1.5 million pounds, as was experienced
in 2014 and 2015, reflects a worst case
scenario for Areas 4CDE as it represents
an extremely low commercial catch
limit for these Areas. For Area 4B, the
Council determined and NMFS agrees
that a halibut commercial catch limit
below 1 million pounds, which has not
been experienced during the last 10
years, reflects a worst case scenario for
Area 4B as it represents an extremely
low commercial catch limit for this
Area. The Council selected a lower
threshold for Area 4B due to concerns
expressed by the public about
potentially adverse distributional
impacts on the community of Adak with
a threshold that was higher than 1
million pounds.
This proposed rule would establish
several limits on the catcher vessel IFQ
that can be transferred as well as some
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8031
flexibility with transferred catcher
vessel and catcher/processor IFQ. This
proposed rule includes five limits: (1) A
CDQ group would only be able to
receive catcher vessel IFQ by transfer for
an Area in which it also holds halibut
CDQ; (2) no vessel greater than 51 feet
in length overall (LOA) could be used to
harvest catcher vessel IFQ transferred to
a CDQ group; (3) catcher vessel IFQ
resulting from QS acquired after
December 14, 2015 could not be
transferred to a CDQ group until 3 years
after the QS was acquired (i.e., a cooling
off period); (4) an IFQ holder would not
be allowed to transfer catcher vessel
halibut IFQ to a CDQ group for more
than 2 consecutive years; and (5) in
Area 4B, only those QS holders who
hold less than 76,355 QS units specified
for Area 4B would be allowed to transfer
their catcher vessel IFQ to CDQ groups.
The first limit would prevent a CDQ
group from receiving catcher vessel
halibut IFQ by transfer for an Area in
which that CDQ group does not hold
halibut CDQ. The Council
recommended this provision so that any
catcher vessel IFQ transferred to a CDQ
group would be available for use in
conjunction with halibut CDQ that is
issued to a CDQ group. The Council
determined, and NMFS agrees, that
coupling catcher vessel IFQ received by
transfer to areas in which a CDQ group
hold halibut CDQ would ensure that the
benefits of the IFQ transfer manifest
with the intended recipients—the
resident halibut fleet in the CDQ group’s
communities adjacent to the Area. For
example, if a CDQ group is issued
halibut CDQ in Areas 4B and 4C, that
CDQ group could only receive catcher
vessel Area 4B and Area 4C IFQ by
transfer. Additionally, under this
proposed rule at § 679.42(a)(iii) and (iv),
CDQ groups that are eligible to receive
a transfer of Area 4D catcher vessel IFQ
would be able to harvest that IFQ, and
any Category A IFQ it holds, in Area 4E
(Section 3.5.2 of the Analysis). The
Council determined, and NMFS agrees,
that this additional flexibility would
improve the effectiveness of the
proposed action by enabling transferred
IFQ to be fished closer to shore so that
smaller vessels typically used by
residents in CDQ communities can more
easily participate in halibut fisheries.
This proposed flexibility also would be
consistent with section 11(8) of the
IPHC annual management measures,
which allows Area 4D halibut CDQ to be
harvested in Area 4E. However, the
IPHC would need to revise its annual
management measures to extend this
harvesting flexibility to catcher vessel
and catcher/processor IFQ held by a
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
8032
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
CDQ group before NMFS can approve it
(see section 3.8.6 of the Analysis). The
IPHC is scheduled to consider this
revision to the annual management
measures at its January 2018 annual
meeting. NMFS will take into account
the IPHC’s decision when developing
the final rule for this action.
The second limit would prohibit the
use of vessels greater than 51 feet LOA
to harvest catcher vessel IFQ that is
transferred to a CDQ group. The Council
recommended this vessel size limit
because this is the largest size vessel
owned by CDQ community residents
that has landed halibut CDQ during the
past 10 years, 2008 through 2017
(Section 3.5.3 of the Analysis). Because
this proposed rule is intended to
provide additional harvest opportunities
to CDQ community residents, the
Council determined and NMFS agrees
that allowing larger than 51 feel LOA to
harvest transferred catcher vessel IFQ
would be inconsistent with this
objective. Current regulations provide
sufficient flexibility to allow IFQ that
could be transferred to a CDQ group
under this proposed rule to be fished on
a vessel of any length up to 51 feet LOA
(see Section 2.4 of the Analysis).
This proposed rule would also clarify
that any Area 4D Category A IFQ that is
held by a CDQ group or transferred to
a CDQ group may be fished in Area 4E
by vessels less than or equal to 51 feet
LOA when the commercial catch limit
threshold in Area 4CDE is triggered. The
Council determined and NMFS agrees
that this provision would provide
additional harvest opportunities for
CDQ residents. The 51-foot LOA
restriction would help ensure additional
harvest opportunities would be
provided on the size class of vessels
used by CDQ community residents (see
Section 3.8.6 in the Analysis for
additional detail). This proposed rule
would not revise current regulations
that authorize Category A IFQ for Areas
4B, 4C, or 4D to be fished in the
corresponding Area on a vessel of any
length.
Under the third limit, IFQ resulting
from QS acquired after December 14,
2015 could not be transferred to a CDQ
group until 3 years after the QS was
acquired. This provision would
effectively create a ‘‘cooling off’’ period.
For example, if a person acquired Area
4C halibut QS on March 15, 2016, that
holder would not be eligible to transfer
the IFQ from that QS to a CDQ group
until March 14, 2019. The Council
determined and NMFS agrees that the
proposed cooling off period is necessary
to reduce the incentive to QS holders to
acquire QS with the intention of
transferring the resulting IFQ to CDQ
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
groups rather than fishing the IFQ.
Section 3.8.7 of the Analysis notes that
the Council considered a range of
cooling off periods from 3 to 5 years. In
selecting the proposed cooling off
period, the Council determined and
NMFS agrees that a 3-year period would
balance the objectives of reducing the
incentives for QS holders to acquire QS
with the intention of transferring it to
CDQ groups with the need to provide an
adequate market for CDQ groups to
receive IFQ by transfer. The Council
also recommended that QS acquired
after December 14, 2015, be subject to
the cooling off period. The Council
selected the December 14, 2015, date
because that is the date when the
Council first added the option of a
cooling off period to the suite of
alternatives and options under
consideration for the proposed action.
NMFS agrees that this proposed date is
reasonable as it would deter speculative
investment in anticipation of this
proposed rule, and selection of this
proposed date, versus the effective date
of this action if approved, accelerates
the time when QS acquired after
December 14, 2015, would be eligible
for transfer.
The fourth limit would prohibit an
IFQ holder from transferring catcher
vessel halibut IFQ for a specific IFQ
regulatory area to a CDQ group for more
than 2 consecutive years. This 2-year
limit would apply to calendar years and
would not apply only to years in which
the commercial catch limit is below the
threshold. Additionally, this limit
would apply to the transfer of any
halibut IFQ for a specific Area. If an IFQ
holder chooses to transfer some but not
all of his or her IFQ for a particular Area
during a year when the annual
commercial catch limit for that Area set
below the proposed threshold that
transfer would count towards the 2-year
limit. Transfers of IFQ for one Area
would not affect the ability to transfer
IFQ for another Area. The Council
determined and NMFS agrees that
limitations on how many consecutive
years an IFQ holder could transfer IFQ
to a CDQ group would limit the
potential for a specific IFQ holder to
continuously transfer IFQ to CDQ
groups rather than fishing that IFQ or
transferring the underlying QS to other
new entrants in the fishery. Section
3.8.8 of the Analysis explains that the
Council considered a range of
limitations on the number of years that
IFQ could be transferred (i.e., from 2 to
4 years), and that a less restrictive
limitation of 2 years may be appropriate
given the relatively low likelihood that
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the thresholds to allow leasing in Area
4B or Areas 4C and 4D will be met.
Under the fifth limit, only catcher
vessel QS holders that hold less than
76,355 QS units specified for Area 4B
would be allowed to transfer their
catcher vessel IFQ to CDQ groups.
NMFS would consider all categories of
Area 4B QS holdings regardless of
blocked or unblocked status. This
amount of QS units yielded
approximately 7,500 pounds of halibut
IFQ in 2016. The Council recommended
and NMFS proposes this limitation to
ensure that persons holding larger
amounts of QS units continue to be
active fishermen in the Area 4B halibut
fishery while providing an opportunity
for persons holding smaller amounts of
QS units to transfer catcher vessel IFQ
to CDQ groups if the 1 million pound
commercial catch limit threshold to
allow IFQ transfers is met. The Council
recommended and NMFS is proposing
this limitation only for Area 4B to
accommodate the specific nature of IFQ
operations in the remote Aleutian Island
communities in Area 4B, and after
considering a range of different limits
(from 2,000 to 7,500 pounds of halibut
IFQ, with the preferred option to
convert 7,500 pounds to 2016 QS units)
that are described in Section 3.8.9 of the
Analysis.
The Council received public
testimony indicating that Aleutian
Islands communities in Area 4B receive
substantial benefits from fishery
participation by persons holding
relatively large amounts of halibut QS
and IFQ in that area. The testifiers
expressed concern that allowing these
QS holders to transfer IFQ to a CDQ
group could substantially reduce these
benefits to the communities in years of
extremely low commercial catch limits.
In addition, persons holding less than
76,355 QS units would be allocated
relatively small amounts of IFQ that
may not be economically feasible to
harvest in years of extremely low
commercial halibut catch limits. The
Council determined and NMFS agrees
that limiting eligibility to transfer IFQ to
holders of less than 76,355 QS units in
Area 4B would allow the holders of
these relatively small amounts of QS to
lease the resulting IFQ in years of
extremely low commercial halibut catch
limits while maintaining the benefits of
the fishery to the Aleutian Island
communities from harvests of the larger
holdings of IFQ.
This proposed rule also establishes a
reporting requirement for CDQ groups
that receive IFQ by transfer. The
proposed report would be required only
for those years in which CDQ groups
received IFQ by transfer. CDQ groups
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
that receive IFQ by transfer would be
required to report the annual amount
and vessel category of Area 4 halibut
IFQ transferred to the CDQ group, the
criteria used to select IFQ holders to
transfer Area 4 halibut IFQ to the CDQ
group, and the criteria used to
determine the person(s) eligible to fish
Area 4 halibut IFQ received by transfer.
In recommending this proposed rule,
the Council stated its intent for catcher
vessel IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
to be fished by residents of that CDQ
community but did not recommend that
NMFS establish this requirement in
regulation. Section 2.3 of the Analysis
describes that CDQ groups have
different methods of defining residents
in their communities and different
techniques for determining who will
harvest their halibut CDQ. After
considering this information, the
Council specified that it did not intend
for NMFS to establish a regulatory
definition for CDQ community resident,
nor did it intend for NMFS to verify that
CDQ community residents were
receiving the benefits of transferred IFQ
under this proposed rule. The Council
recommended that NMFS implement
the requirement for CDQ groups to
report the persons who harvest the IFQ
received by transfer. This would allow
the Council and the public to monitor
the use of IFQ transferred to CDQ
groups and provide the Council with
information to determine whether the
use of transferred IFQ is consistent with
its intent for the action.
The Council recommended and
NMFS proposes a reporting requirement
to understand the criteria that a CDQ
group uses to receive transfers of IFQ
and provide harvest opportunities. This
information could be used to evaluate
the effectiveness of this proposed rule to
provide benefits to members of CDQ
communities. This proposed rule would
require the report to be submitted to
NMFS no later than January 31 of the
year after the IFQ was transferred to the
CDQ group. NMFS proposes this
deadline to be consistent with other
reports required under the IFQ Program,
and to ensure that NMFS has received
the report prior to the issuance of IFQ
that typically occurs in mid-February. If
a CDQ group is required to submit a
report and does not do so by the
deadline, the CDQ group would be
ineligible to receive transfers of catcher
vessel IFQ until the report is submitted.
Under this proposed rule, a CDQ
group that wished to receive halibut IFQ
by transfer would make an arrangement
with an IFQ holder to transfer his or her
IFQ. The CDQ group would need to
complete an Application for Temporary
Transfer of Halibut and Sablefish IFQ
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
and submit the application to NMFS for
approval. Once approved, NMFS would
issue the CDQ group an IFQ permit with
the pounds of halibut IFQ that would be
available to be fished. After determining
who would fish the halibut IFQ, the
CDQ group with the IFQ permit would
then need to apply for a hired master
permit for the vessel operator
designated to fish the halibut IFQ.
Current regulations authorize a vessel
operator to harvest halibut IFQ and CDQ
on the same fishing trip and a vessel
operator harvesting both halibut CDQ
and IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
would need to carry (1) a halibut CDQ
permit, (2) a CDQ hired master permit,
(3) a copy of the IFQ permit of the CDQ
group, and (4) an IFQ hired master
permit. Additionally, any vessels fishing
halibut IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
would be subject to the current IFQ
vessel use caps under § 679.42(h)(1). If
a vessel harvested both halibut IFQ and
CDQ, only the halibut IFQ would accrue
towards and be subject to the vessel use
cap.
Halibut that is landed by a vessel
operator harvesting CDQ and IFQ would
be debited off two separate catch limits.
Therefore, for purposes of catch
accounting, participants would need to
track what amount of halibut harvest is
associated with the group’s CDQ and
what amount is associated with the IFQ
permit held by the CDQ group. This
distinction would be recorded on the
fish ticket (Section 3.8.11.3 of the
Analysis). If this proposed rule is
approved, NMFS would need to make
changes to the database that monitors
transfers of IFQ between permit holders
and that is used to issue hired master
permits to allow for this new type of
transfer (see Section 3.8.11.4 of the
Analysis).
Under this proposed rule, CDQ groups
would be responsible for cost recovery
fees based on the IFQ pounds held on
the IFQ permit. Section 304(d)(2)(A) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act obligates
NMFS to recover the actual costs of
management, data collection, and
enforcement (direct program cost) of the
IFQ fisheries. Therefore, NMFS
implemented a cost recovery fee
program for the IFQ fisheries in 2000
(65 FR 14919, March 20, 2000). While
costs specific to the CDQ Program for
halibut are recoverable through a
separate cost recovery program (81 FR
150, January 5, 2016), this proposed rule
would require regulatory changes to the
IFQ transfer and hired master use
provisions and therefore constitute
changes in management of the IFQ
Program. CDQ group participants
receiving IFQ transfers would be
required to pay an IFQ cost recovery fee
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8033
as a portion of the ex-vessel value of
their landed halibut.
Section 7(2) of the IPHC annual
management measures (82 FR 12730,
March 7, 2017) authorizes a vessel
operator harvesting halibut CDQ in
Areas 4D or 4E to retain halibut that are
smaller than the size limit established
by the IPHC for personal use. Under the
status quo, a vessel operator harvesting
halibut IFQ held by a CDQ group along
with halibut CDQ may retain halibut
less than legal size for personal use.
Therefore, if this proposed action is
approved, vessel operators harvesting
both halibut CDQ and halibut IFQ
transferred to a CDQ group in Areas 4D
or 4E would be authorized to retain
halibut smaller than the size limit
established by the IPHC in length for
personal use as specified in section 7 of
the IPHC annual management measures.
The personal use allotment would apply
to all halibut IFQ transferred to a CDQ
group under this exemption. Section
7(3) of the IPHC annual management
measures requires a CDQ group to report
on all retained halibut for personal use
that are less than legal size and
harvested on behalf of a CDQ group.
Proposed Regulations to Implement
Action 1
This proposed rule would modify the
definition of ‘‘annual commercial catch
limit’’ at 50 CFR 300.61 to include
definitions for Areas 3B and 4A, and for
Areas 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E.
This proposed rule would modify
§ 679.41 to allow transfer of halibut IFQ
in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D in years of low
halibut catch limits in Areas 4B and
4CDE to CDQ groups along with the
specific conditions under which this
transfer activity could occur.
Additionally, a reporting requirement
would be added at § 679.5(l)(10) to
require a CDQ group to submit a report
on the criteria it used to select IFQ
holders from whom IFQ transfers would
be received, the criteria it used to
determine the persons who can harvest
transferred IFQ, and the amount and
type of IFQ transferred.
This proposed rule also includes a
provision which would be added under
§ 679.42 to allow Area 4D IFQ that is
transferred to a CDQ group to be
harvested in Area 4E.
Finally, NMFS is proposing to add
and reserve several paragraphs in this
proposed rule to account for another
rulemaking that proposes to modify the
same sections of Part 679 that would be
modified by this proposed rule.
Anticipated Effects of Action 1
The effects of Action 1 would depend
on first the halibut resource falling
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
8034
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
below the threshold of 1 million pounds
in Area 4B and 1.5 million pounds in
Area 4CDE and then IFQ holders
choosing to transfer their halibut IFQ to
a CDQ group. If, in the future these
conditions are met, then this proposed
rule would be expected to provide
benefits most directly to CDQ
community residents who have
traditionally been involved in the
halibut CDQ fishery by allowing for
continued employment and income in
years where commercial halibut catch
limits are at extremely low levels. This
opportunity may have a particularly
meaningful impact on these residents,
as there tends to be limited regional
economic diversity in these
communities, resulting in few substitute
employment options for residents
(Section 3.8.1 of the Analysis). This
proposed rule would provide IFQ
holders and CDQ groups with an
opportunity to alleviate the adverse
economic, social, and cultural impacts
of extremely low levels of commercial
halibut catch limits on Western Alaskan
communities.
The benefits that could be derived
from this proposed rule are different
among CDQ groups and would likely
even be distributional within a group.
Overall, this action would not
necessarily be expected to result in a
financial gain for a CDQ group that
chooses to receive halibut IFQ by
transfer. It is likely that some, or all, of
the fee an IFQ holder would incur to
transfer his or her IFQ would be paid by
the CDQ group. This proposed rule
could also provide distributional
benefits to some processing plants,
secondary service providers, and
communities as a whole (see Section 3.8
of the Analysis).
Allowing CDQ groups the flexibility
to harvest any IFQ received by transfer
for Area 4D in Area 4E would add to the
existing flexibility CDQ groups have to
move their halibut CDQ between IFQ
regulatory areas. The Council
determined and NMFS agrees that this
potential for change in locational fishing
intensity from this proposed action
would not be a threat to overall stock
conservation as long as the Area 4CDE
total catch limit is not exceeded, while
noting that there is a possibility of
localized impacts on fishing
opportunities if fishing effort patterns
were to change substantially.
Halibut QS holders in Areas 4B, 4C,
and 4D may also benefit from this
proposed rule. These QS holders may
feel constrained as their QS is
associated with diminishing pounds of
IFQ under the relatively low
commercial halibut catch limits in
recent years. In years of extremely low
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
halibut abundance, it may not be
economically viable for some QS
holders to harvest their small amounts
of IFQ, particularly in remote areas
covered by this proposed rule where
operating costs are higher relative to
other IFQ regulatory areas. Depending
on operating costs and catch limits, QS
holders that transfer their IFQ to CDQ
groups may be able to earn more
revenue from transferring their IFQ than
from harvesting it themselves or hiring
a master to harvest the IFQ (if the QS
holder is eligible). As the IFQ Program
strictly limits leasing (transfers), this
proposed rule would be the only
opportunity for many QS holders to
transfer their Area 4B, 4C, and 4D
halibut IFQ (see Section 3.8.1) in years
of extremely low commercial catch
limits.
This proposed rule may have adverse
indirect effects on some stakeholders of
the halibut IFQ fishery (see Section
3.8.2 of the Analysis). This action could
prompt some amount of temporary IFQ
consolidation, impacting the number of
trips taken or resulting in some vessels
not being used in the halibut fishery at
all in a season. This reduction in
participation could result in reduced
fishery revenues for affected
participants. Consolidation could also
result in a displacement of some captain
and crew jobs for the duration of time
that the halibut catch limits are low
enough to allow IFQ transfers. To the
extent that they are not the QS holder
making the decision to transfer their IFQ
to CDQ groups, this proposed rule may
also disadvantage vessel owners that use
their vessel to harvest halibut IFQ if QS
holders who historically fished their
IFQ on that vessel choose to lease the
IFQ and the vessel owner has reduced
revenues from the fishery. Section 3.8.2
of the Analysis notes that it is uncertain
how much IFQ may be transferred, from
whom, and how this would impact
current operations.
As discussed in Section 3.8.1 of the
Analysis, transferred IFQ received by a
CDQ group and harvested by its
community resident fleets would be
expected to follow landing patterns
similar to the current halibut CDQ
operations. However, if the locations of
port of origin and landings changes with
IFQ received by this transfer provision,
there is a potential some communities
may not receive revenues from raw fish
tax, business landing tax, and other
economic activity associated with
fishing, such as purchase of food and
fuel. These are distributional impacts;
therefore, they could represent losses to
some communities, while communities
with traditional halibut CDQ
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
participation may benefit due to the
increased activity from halibut IFQ.
Additionally, this proposed rule may
motivate some QS holders who may
otherwise consider selling, to hold onto
their Areas 4B, 4C, or 4D halibut QS.
For those individuals seeking entry into
the halibut QS market, the lack of QS
movement may not be a positive result.
However, to prevent speculative
purchases of QS with the intent of using
the transfer provision allowed under
this proposed rule, this proposed rule
includes a cooling off period that limits
the transfer of IFQ until 3 years after the
QS is acquired. Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D
already tend to have the lowest level of
QS transactions of any regulatory area
(although, this may also be because a
portion of the catch limit is designated
as CDQ, thus the QS pool is much
smaller) and the QS prices, similar to
other regulatory areas, appear to be
increasing (Section 3.8.4 of the
Analysis).
Additionally, this proposed rule
would support one of the other goals of
the IFQ Program, which is to increase
the ability of the rural coastal
communities adjacent to the BSAI to
share in the wealth generated by the IFQ
Program by providing community
residents with the opportunity to benefit
from fishing for additional halibut IFQ
in years of extremely low commercial
catch limits (see Section 3.8.3.1 of the
Analysis).
Action 2
This proposed rule would remove an
obsolete reference in the regulations at
§ 679.42(a)(2)(i). Currently, this
regulation provides an exception in the
wording. However, the paragraph (k)
referred to in § 679.42(a)(2)(i) was
modified by the final rule to revise
regulations governing the use of
commercial halibut QS and the
processing of non-IFQ species when
processed halibut is onboard a vessel
(73 FR 8822; February 15, 2008). That
final rule removed paragraph (k) and redesignated paragraph (l) as paragraph
(k). NMFS inadvertently neglected to
remove the cross-reference to paragraph
(k) in § 679.42(a)(2)(i). Therefore, with
this proposed rule, NMFS proposes
removing the cross-reference to
paragraph (k) to clarify that persons
possessing unused Category B, C, or D
halibut QS may be on board a catcher/
processor vessel when that vessel is
harvesting and processing Category A
halibut or sablefish IFQ or is harvesting
and processing non-IFQ species. The
effects of this action are expected to be
minor and beneficial by improving the
clarity of the regulations.
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Action 3
This proposed rule would clarify
existing regulations pertaining to the
IFQ vessel limitations, also referred to
as the vessel use caps. NMFS proposes
to add language to § 679.42(h)(1) and
(h)(2) to clarify that the vessel use caps
only apply to halibut and sablefish IFQ
and not to halibut and sablefish CDQ.
This action would improve the clarity of
the regulations and help IFQ and CDQ
participants understand what
regulations to which they are subject.
The effects of this action are expected to
be minor and beneficial by improving
the clarity of the regulations.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Classification
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS
Assistant Administrator has determined
that this proposed rule is consistent
with the BSAI FMP, other provisions of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other
applicable law, subject to further
consideration after public comment.
Regulations governing the U.S.
fisheries for Pacific halibut are
developed by the International Pacific
Halibut Commission (IPHC), the Pacific
Fishery Management Council, the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council), and the Secretary of
Commerce. Section 5 of the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act,
16 U.S.C. 773c) allows the Regional
Council having authority for a particular
geographical area to develop regulations
governing the allocation and catch of
halibut in U.S. Convention waters
which are in addition to, and not in
conflict with, IPHC regulations. This
proposed rule is consistent with the
Council’s authority to allocate halibut
catches among fishery participants in
the waters in and off Alaska. The
Halibut Act, at sections 773c(a) and (b),
provides the Secretary of Commerce
with the general responsibility to carry
out the Convention with the authority
to, in consultation with the Secretary of
the department in which the U.S. Coast
Guard is operating, adopt such
regulations as may be necessary to carry
out the purposes and objectives of the
Convention and the Halibut Act. This
proposed rule is consistent with the
Halibut Act and other applicable laws.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for the
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration that this
proposed rule, if adopted, would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
This proposed rule would revise IFQ
Program regulations to authorize CDQ
groups to receive halibut IFQ transfers
in certain areas when catch limits are
below the established thresholds,
subject to specific limitations. The
directly regulated entities (118 small
entities in 2015) are persons that hold
Areas 4B, 4C, or 4D halibut QS, CDQ
groups, and harvesters, including CDQ
community residents, who have
traditionally harvested halibut CDQ and
may have an opportunity to harvest
halibut IFQ received by transfer. Almost
all of the directly regulated entities are
considered small entities. As described
in the Analysis, the 118 directly
regulated entities would only be
impacted to the extent that they choose
to (and are able to) participate in
receiving halibut IFQ transfers as a
result of the proposed regulatory
changes.
Direct impacts would be expected to
be positive for both CDQ community
resident halibut fishery participants and
QS holders that choose to utilize the
IFQ transfer provision because the
opportunity for this additional
flexibility in years of low halibut
abundance would be voluntary for both
user groups and would only be
undertaken if it would benefit the
parties to the transfer. Direct impacts
would be expected to be positive for
CDQ community resident harvesters
who have traditionally harvested
halibut CDQ and may have an
opportunity to harvest additional
transfers of halibut IFQ under this
proposed rule because it would provide
an opportunity to continue to receive
economic benefits from fishery
participation in times of low abundance.
This proposed rule therefore is not
expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities regulated by this proposed rule.
As a result, an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required and
none has been prepared.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains
collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA). NMFS has submitted these
requirements to OMB for approval
under Control Number 0648–0272 and
Control Number 0648–0711. Public
reporting burden is estimated to average
per response: 2 hours for Application
for Temporary Transfer of Halibut and
Sablefish IFQ, 40 hours for the report,
and 1 minute for electronic submission
of cost recovery fees or 30 minutes for
non-electronic fee submission. These
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8035
estimates include the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection information.
Public comment is sought regarding
whether these proposed collections of
information are necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the burden estimate;
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the
burden of the collections 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
collections of information to NMFS (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 penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject
to the requirement 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
50 CFR Part 300
Administrative practice and
procedure, Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 15, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR parts 300 and 679 as follows:
PART 300—INTERNATIONAL
FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart E—Pacific Halibut Fisheries
1. The authority for 50 CFR part 300,
subpart E, continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773–773k.
2. In § 300.61, revise the definition of
‘‘Annual commercial catch limit’’ to
read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
8036
§ 300.61
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Annual commercial catch limit, for
purposes of commercial fishing in:
(1) Commission regulatory areas 2C
and 3A, means the annual commercial
allocation minus an area-specific
estimate of commercial halibut wastage.
(2) Commission regulatory areas 3B
and 4A, means the annual total
allowable halibut removals by persons
fishing IFQ.
(3) Commission regulatory areas 4B,
4C, 4D, and 4E, means the annual total
allowable halibut removals by persons
fishing IFQ and CDQ.
*
*
*
*
*
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 § 679.5:
a. Add and reserve paragraph (l)(9);
b. Add paragraph (l)(10);
c. Add and reserve paragraph (v); and
d. Add paragraph (w) to read as
follows:
■
■
■
■
■
§ 679.5
Recordkeeping and reporting.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(l) * * *
(9) [Reserved]
(10) A report on annual IFQ
regulatory areas 4B, 4C, and 4D Halibut
IFQ transfer activities must be
submitted to NMFS by a CDQ group as
required at § 679.5(w).
*
*
*
*
*
(v) [Reserved]
(w) Report on Area 4 halibut IFQ
transfers to CDQ groups—(1)
Applicability. A CDQ group that
receives IFQ regulatory area 4 halibut
IFQ by transfer must submit a timely
and complete report on the CDQ group’s
annual halibut IFQ transfer activities for
each calendar year that it receives IFQ
regulatory area 4 halibut IFQ by transfer.
A CDQ group is not required to submit
a report for any calendar year in which
it did not receive any IFQ regulatory
area 4 halibut IFQ by transfer.
(2) Time limits and submittal. A CDQ
group must submit a complete report by
January 31 of the year following a
fishing year during which the CDQ
group receives IFQ regulatory area 4B,
4C, or 4D halibut IFQ by transfer. The
complete report must be submitted to
the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council, 605 West 4th Ave., Suite 306,
Anchorage, AK 99501–2252, and to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
NMFS-Alaska Regional Administrator,
P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK, 99802–
1668.
(3) Complete report. A complete
report contains all report requirements
described in paragraphs (w)(4)(i)
through (w)(4)(iii) of this section.
(4) Report requirements. A CDQ group
must report the following information:
(i) The annual amount, IFQ regulatory
area and vessel category of IFQ
regulatory area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut
IFQ transferred to the CDQ group;
(ii) The criteria used to select IFQ
holders to transfer IFQ regulatory area
4B, 4C, and 4D halibut IFQ to the CDQ
group; and
(iii) The criteria used to determine the
person(s) eligible to harvest IFQ
regulatory area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut
IFQ received by transfer.
■ 5. In § 679.41:
■ a. Add and reserve paragraph (c)(12);
■ b. Add paragraph (c)(13);
■ c. Revise paragraphs (d)(1), (g)(1), and
(h)(2);
■ d. Add and reserve paragraph (n); and
■ e. Add paragraph (o) to read as
follows:
§ 679.41
Transfer of quota shares and IFQ.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(12) [Reserved]
(13) If the person applying to receive
halibut IFQ assigned to vessel categories
B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory areas 4B,
4C, or 4D is a CDQ group, the following
determinations are required:
(i) The CDQ group applying to receive
halibut IFQ for an IFQ regulatory area
receives an annual allocation of halibut
CDQ for that IFQ regulatory area
pursuant to § 679.31(b)(1);
(ii) The QS holder applying to transfer
halibut IFQ to a CDQ group has not
transferred any halibut IFQ assigned to
vessel categories B, C, or D for that IFQ
regulatory area to a CDQ group during
the last two consecutive fishing years;
(iii) If the IFQ to be transferred to a
CDQ group results from QS that was
transferred to the QS holder after
December 14, 2015, the QS holder
applying to transfer halibut IFQ to a
CDQ group has held the underlying QS
for that IFQ for a minimum of 3 years
from the date NMFS approved the
transfer;
(iv) If the IFQ to be transferred to a
CDQ group is assigned to vessel
categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory
area 4B, the QS holder applying to
transfer that halibut IFQ to a CDQ group
holds fewer than 76,355 halibut QS
units in IFQ regulatory area 4B; and
(v) The CDQ group applying to
receive halibut IFQ has submitted a
complete report if required to do so by
§ 679.5(w).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(d) * * *
(1) Application for Eligibility. All
persons, except as provided in
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) of this
section, applying to receive QS or IFQ
must submit an Application for
Eligibility to Receive QS/IFQ
(Application for Eligibility) containing
accurate information to the Regional
Administrator. The Regional
Administrator will not approve a
transfer of IFQ or QS to a person until
the Application for Eligibility for that
person is approved by the Regional
Administrator. The Regional
Administrator shall provide an
Application for Eligibility form to any
person on request.
(i) An Application for Eligibility is not
required for a CQE if a complete
application to become a CQE, as
described in paragraph (l)(3) of this
section, has been approved by the
Regional Administrator on behalf of an
eligible community.
(ii) An Application for Eligibility is
not required for a CDQ group.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(f), paragraph (g)(2), paragraph (l),
paragraph (n) or paragraph (o) of this
section, only persons who are IFQ crew
members, or who were initially issued
QS assigned to vessel categories B, C, or
D, and meet the eligibility requirements
in this section, may receive by transfer
QS assigned to vessel categories B, C, or
D, or the IFQ resulting from it.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(2) IFQ resulting from categories B, C,
or D QS may not be transferred
separately from its originating QS,
except as provided in paragraph (d),
paragraph (f), paragraph (k), paragraph
(l), paragraph (m), or paragraph (o) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) [Reserved]
(o) Transfer of IFQ to CDQ groups. (1)
A QS holder who holds fewer than
76,355 units of halibut QS in IFQ
regulatory area 4B may transfer halibut
IFQ assigned to vessel categories B, C,
or D in IFQ regulatory area 4B to a CDQ
group that receives an allocation of IFQ
regulatory area 4B halibut CDQ if the
annual commercial halibut catch limit,
as defined in § 300.61 of this title, for
Area 4B is less than 1 million pounds
in that calendar year.
(2) A QS holder in IFQ regulatory
areas 4C or 4D may transfer halibut IFQ
assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D
in IFQ regulatory areas 4C or 4D to a
CDQ group that receives an allocation of
halibut CDQ in that IFQ regulatory area
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
if the annual commercial halibut catch
limit, as defined in § 300.61 of this title,
for Area 4CDE is less than 1.5 million
pounds in that calendar year.
(3) A QS holder must meet the
requirements in paragraph (c)(13) of this
section to transfer halibut IFQ assigned
to vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ
regulatory areas 4B, 4C, or 4D to a CDQ
group.
(4) A CDQ group that receives halibut
IFQ by transfer may not transfer that
halibut IFQ to any other person.
■ 6. In § 679.42:
■ a. Revise paragraph (a)(1);
■ b. Remove paragraph (a)(2)(i);
■ c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)
through (iv) as paragraphs (a)(2)(i)
through (iii);
■ d. Add paragraph (a)(2)(iv); and
■ e. Revise paragraphs (h)(1)
introductory text and (h)(2) introductory
text to read as follows:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 679.42
Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.
(a) * * *
(1) The QS or IFQ specified for one
IFQ regulatory area must not be used in
a different IFQ regulatory area, except
for the following:
(i) All or part of the QS and IFQ
specified for regulatory area 4C may be
harvested in either Area 4C or Area 4D.
(ii) All or part of the halibut CDQ
specified for regulatory area 4D may be
harvested in either Area 4D or Area 4E.
(iii) If a CDQ group is authorized to
receive a transfer of halibut IFQ
assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D
in IFQ regulatory area 4D as specified in
§ 679.41(o) of this part, all or part of the
halibut IFQ specified for regulatory area
4D that is held by or transferred to a
CDQ group may be harvested in either
Area 4D or Area 4E.
(2) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) Halibut IFQ assigned to vessel
category B, C, or D held by a CDQ group
may not be used on a vessel over 51 feet
LOA, irrespective of the vessel category
assigned to the IFQ.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(1) Halibut. No vessel may be used,
during any fishing year, to harvest more
halibut IFQ than one-half percent of the
combined total catch limits of halibut
for IFQ regulatory areas 2C, 3A, 3B, 4A,
4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E, except that:
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Sablefish. No vessel may be used,
during any fishing year, to harvest more
sablefish IFQ than one percent of the
combined fixed gear TAC of sablefish
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:44 Feb 22, 2018
Jkt 244001
for the GOA and BSAI IFQ regulatory
areas, except that:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2018–03548 Filed 2–22–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 635
[Docket No. 170703617–8097–01]
RIN 0648–BG97
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species;
Proposed Rule To Revise Atlantic
Shark Fishery Closure Regulations
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
NMFS is proposing to revise
the current closure regulations for
commercial shark fisheries. These
changes would affect commercial shark
fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean
including the Gulf of Mexico and
Caribbean. Proposed revisions include
changes to the landings threshold that
prompts a closure and the minimum
time between filing of the closure with
the Federal Register and the closure
becoming effective. This action is
necessary to allow more flexibility when
closing shark fisheries and to facilitate
the use of available quota while still
preventing overharvests.
DATES: Written comments must be
received March 26, 2018, NMFS will
hold an operator-assisted public hearing
via conference call and webinar for this
proposed rule on March 2, 2018, from
10 a.m. to 12 p.m. For specific locations,
dates and times, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on this document, identified by NOAA–
NMFS–2017–0070, 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-2017-0070, click the
‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the
required fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
• Mail: Submit written comments to
Margo Schulze-Haugen, Chief, Atlantic
HMS Management Division at 1315
East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
8037
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 generally will be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
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).
NMFS will hold one public hearing
via conference call on this proposed
rule. For specific locations, dates and
times, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Copies of the supporting documents,
including the draft Environmental
Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR), Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), and the
2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly
Migratory Species (HMS) Fishery
Management Plan (FMP) and
amendments are available from the
HMS website at https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/hms/ or by
contacting Lauren Latchford at 301–
427–8503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
Lauren Latchford, Guy DuBeck, Gray
Redding, or Karyl Brewster-Geisz by
phone at 301–427–8503 or Delisse Ortiz
at 240–681–9037.
Atlantic
sharks are directly managed under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). NMFS
published in the Federal Register (71
FR 59058, October 2, 2006) final
regulations, effective November 1, 2006,
implementing the 2006 Consolidated
HMS FMP, which details management
measures for Atlantic HMS fisheries.
The implementing regulations for the
2006 Consolidated HMS FMP and its
amendments are at 50 CFR part 635.
This proposed rule considers modifying
the current regulations related to
closures for commercial shark fisheries.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
A brief summary of the background of
this proposed action is provided below.
Additional information regarding
Atlantic HMS management, specifically
the commercial fisheries season
structure, can be found in the Draft EA
for this proposed action and the 2006
Consolidated HMS FMP and its
E:\FR\FM\23FEP1.SGM
23FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 37 (Friday, February 23, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8028-8037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03548]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
[Docket No. 170626590-8143-01]
RIN 0648-BG94
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific
Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota Program; Community
Development Quota Program; Modifications to Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule that would modify regulations
governing the Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ)
Program. This proposed rule includes three actions. The first action
would allow Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) groups to
lease (to receive by transfer) halibut individual fishing quota (IFQ)
in IFQ regulatory areas 4B, 4C, and 4D in years of extremely low
halibut commercial catch limits. This proposed action is necessary to
provide additional harvest opportunities to CDQ groups and community
residents, and provide IFQ holders with the opportunity to receive
value for their IFQ when the halibut commercial catch limits may not be
large enough to provide for an economically viable fishery for IFQ
holders. The second action would remove an obsolete reference in the
IFQ Program regulations. The third action would clarify IFQ vessel use
cap regulations. This proposed rule is intended to promote the goals
and objectives of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Submit comments on or before March 26, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0072,
by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0072, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802-1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
[[Page 8029]]
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 the Regulatory Impact Review (referred to as
the ``Analysis'') and the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this
proposed rule may be obtained from https://www.regulations.gov or from
the NMFS Alaska Region website at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address; by email
to [email protected]; or by fax to (202) 395-5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Warpinski, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for Action
The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) and NMFS manage
fishing for Pacific halibut through regulations established under the
authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act).
The IPHC promulgates regulations governing the halibut fishery under
the Convention between the United States and Canada for the
Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and
Bering Sea (Convention). The IPHC's regulations are subject to approval
by the Secretary of State with the concurrence of the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary). NMFS publishes the IPHC's regulations as annual
management measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
The Halibut Act, at sections 773c(a) and (b), provides the
Secretary with general responsibility to carry out the Convention and
the Halibut Act. The Halibut Act, at section 773c(c), also provides the
North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) with authority to
develop regulations, including limited access regulations, that are in
addition to, and not in conflict with, approved IPHC regulations.
Regulations developed by the Council may be implemented by NMFS only
after approval by the Secretary.
The Council developed the Individual Fishing Quota Program (IFQ
Program) for the commercial halibut and sablefish fisheries. The IFQ
Program for the halibut fishery is implemented by Federal regulations
at 50 CFR part 679 under the authority of the section 773 of the
Halibut Act. The IFQ Program for the sablefish fishery is implemented
by the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) Fishery Management Plan
(FMP) and Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679 under the authority of
section 303(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
Background
The IFQ Program
The IFQ Program for the management of the fixed gear (hook-and-line
and pot gear) halibut and sablefish fisheries off Alaska was
implemented by NMFS in 1995 (58 FR 59375; November 9, 1993). The
Council and NMFS designed the IFQ Program to allocate harvest
privileges among participants in the commercial halibut and sablefish
fisheries to reduce fishing capacity that had led to an unsafe ``race
for fish'' as vessels raced to harvest their annual catch limits as
quickly as possible before the annual limit was reached. A central
objective of the IFQ Program is to support the social and economic
character of the fisheries and the coastal fishing communities where
many of these fisheries are based.
Under the IFQ Program, access to the fixed gear sablefish and
halibut fisheries is limited to those persons holding quota share (QS).
NMFS issued separate QS for sablefish and halibut to qualified
applicants based on their historical participation during a set of
qualifying years in the sablefish and halibut fisheries. QS is an
exclusive, revocable privilege that allows the holder to harvest a
specific percentage of either the total allowable catch (TAC) in the
sablefish fishery or the annual commercial catch limit in the halibut
fishery. In addition to being specific to sablefish or halibut, QS is
designated for specific geographic areas of harvest, a specific vessel
operation type (catcher vessel or catcher/processor), and for a
specific range of vessel sizes that may be used to harvest the
sablefish or halibut (vessel category). There are four vessel
categories of halibut QS: Category A shares are designated for catcher/
processors, vessels that process their catch at sea (i.e., freezer
longline vessels), and do not have a vessel length restriction;
Category B shares are designated to be fished on catcher vessels
greater than 60 feet length overall (LOA); Category C shares are
designated to be fished on catcher vessels greater than 35 feet but
less than or equal to 60 feet LOA; and Category D shares are designated
to be fished on catcher vessels less than or equal to 35 feet LOA.
NMFS annually issues IFQ permits to each QS holder. An annual IFQ
permit authorizes the permit holder to harvest a specified amount of
the IFQ species in a regulatory area from a specific operation type and
vessel category. IFQ is expressed in pounds and is based on the amount
of QS held in relation to the total QS pool for each regulatory area
with an assigned catch limit.
In addition to ending the race for fish, other goals of the IFQ
Program are to prevent absentee ownership of QS and promote an owner-
operator fleet. To meet these goals, the IFQ Program includes
restrictions on the ability of QS holders to transfer their annual IFQ.
The Council and NMFS recognized that at the time the IFQ Program was
implemented, some QS holders had long-standing business arrangements
with hired masters who harvested IFQ on behalf of the QS holder.
Therefore, the IFQ Program authorizes the use of hired masters in
certain instances. Since the implementation of the IFQ Program, the
Council has recommended and NMFS has approved further regulatory
amendments to limit the ability of QS holders to designate a hired
master to discourage absentee ownership and move towards an owner-
operated program (see Section 3.8.3.1 of the Analysis).
The IFQ Program allows limited transfers of IFQ under specific
conditions, including temporary medical transfers, survivorship
transfer privileges, temporary military transfers, transfers through
the Community Quota Entity Program, and transfers to the guided angler
fish program. When these specific conditions are met, regulations allow
a QS holder to designate a hired master to land the resulting IFQ
derived from that holder's QS (see 50 CFR 679.41).
The Council and the public frequently use the terms ``IFQ lease''
or ``lease'' to refer to the transfer of IFQ without a transfer of the
underlying QS. However, NMFS does not generally use the term ``lease''
in its IFQ Program regulations governing the transfer of IFQ. For
consistency with the terminology used in the existing regulations and
for clarity, this proposed rule uses the term ``transfer of IFQ''.
As described above, the halibut fishery is managed in separate
geographic areas of harvest, as determined by the IPHC. Accordingly,
NMFS issues halibut IFQ consistent with the IPHC's regulatory areas.
NMFS's IFQ regulatory areas are described in Figure 15 to part 679.
This proposed rule uses the term ``Area'' to
[[Page 8030]]
refer to a specific IFQ regulatory area (e.g., Area 4B). The first
action in this proposed rule only pertains to Areas 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E.
Area 4B includes waters in the Central and Western Aleutian Islands.
Areas 4C, 4D, and 4E include waters north of the Aleutian Islands, in
the Bering Sea, and around the Pribilof Islands (see Section 1.3 of the
Analysis). The IPHC considers the halibut in Areas 4C, 4D, and 4E to be
a single stock unit for stock assessment and management purposes, and
often refers to them combined as Areas 4CDE.
The commercial catch limits for Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D are allocated
between two distinct management programs, the CDQ Program and the IFQ
Program. Throughout the duration of the IFQ Program, the Area 4E
commercial catch limit has been exclusively allocated to the CDQ
Program; therefore, no Area 4E QS or IFQ is allocated.
Overall, the halibut IFQ commercial catch limits in Areas 4B and
4CDE have trended downward over the past 15 years (see Section 3.6.1 of
the Analysis). The Area 4B commercial catch limit has dropped
substantially from 2001 to 2007 (about 3.9 million pounds in 2001 to
about 1.1 million pounds in 2007). Although there was a slight
increasing trend between 2008 and 2011, the commercial catch limit for
IFQ trended downward again from 2012 to 2015. In 2015, the Area 4B
commercial catch limit for IFQ (about 0.9 million pounds) was less than
a quarter of what it was in 2001. The combined commercial catch limit
for IFQ in Areas 4C and 4D has seen more fluctuation during this
period, but has still experienced an overall downward trend since 2007.
In 2007, the combined commercial catch limit for IFQ in Areas 4C and 4D
was about 2.2 million pounds; in 2015, it was about 0.7 million pounds.
The CDQ Program
The CDQ Program was implemented in 1992, and in 1996, the Magnuson-
Stevens Act was amended to include provisions specific to the CDQ
Program. The purpose of the CDQ Program is: (1) To provide eligible
western Alaska villages with the opportunity to participate and invest
in fisheries in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area
(BSAI); (2) to support economic development in western Alaska; (3) to
alleviate poverty and provide economic and social benefits for
residents of western Alaska; and (4) to achieve sustainable and
diversified local economies in western Alaska (16 U.S.C.
1855(i)(1)(A)).
The CDQ Program consists of six different non-profit managing
organizations (CDQ groups) representing different geographical regions
in Alaska: Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association
(APICDA), Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation (BBEDC), Central
Bering Sea Fishermen's Association (CBSFA), Coastal Villages Region
Fund (CVRF), Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation (NSEDC), and
Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association (YDFDA). The CDQ Program
receives annual allocations of TAC for a variety of commercially
valuable species in the BSAI groundfish, crab, and halibut fisheries,
which are in turn allocated among the CDQ groups. CDQ groups use their
allocations of halibut to provide opportunities for small vessel
fishing by residents of their member communities.
Among the species CDQ groups are allocated for commercial fishing,
Pacific halibut is an important species for community resident
employment and income. NMFS allocates halibut to CDQ groups for
commercial fisheries in four Areas: 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E (see Section
3.5.1 of the Analysis). Allocations of halibut CDQ are correlated with
the geographic area in which a CDQ group's member communities are
located. For example, 30 percent of the halibut commercial catch limit
in Area 4B is allocated to the CDQ Program. The entire allocation to
the CDQ Program in Area 4B is provided to APICDA, which represents all
of the CDQ communities located within the geographic range of Area 4B.
Area 4C surrounds the Pribilof Islands, and the portion of the halibut
commercial catch limit allocated to the CDQ program is split between
CBSFA (which represents the CDQ community of St. Paul) and APICDA
(which represents the CDQ community of St. George). The CDQ allocation
in Area 4D is split among BBEDC, NSEDC, and YDFDA. The CDQ allocation
in Area 4E is split between BBEDC and CVRF. A CDQ group may transfer
its halibut CDQ to another CDQ group that has halibut CDQ allocation in
the same regulatory area (50 CFR 679.31(c)).
The Council recommended and NMFS approved amendments to the IFQ
Program to allow CDQ Program participants to harvest allocations of
Area 4D halibut CDQ in Area 4E. This provision allows residents in CDQ
communities along the Western Alaska coast to have more near-shore
opportunities to harvest their group's halibut CDQ (68 FR 9902, March
3, 2003). Additionally, the Council recommended and NMFS approved
amendments to the IFQ Program to allow for the harvest of Area 4C
halibut IFQ and CDQ in Area 4D in response to reports of localized
depletion, decreasing catch per unit effort, and resultant limitations
on the optimal utilization of Area 4C halibut IFQ and CDQ (70 FR 43328,
July 27, 2005). See Section 3.5.2 of the Analysis for additional detail
on the history of the halibut CDQ fishery.
The resident halibut CDQ fleets and criteria for participation in
CDQ fisheries vary among the CDQ groups. Resource use is impacted by
factors such as the number of interested and qualified residents, the
location of the halibut resource relative to nearshore fishing grounds,
other fishing opportunities (such as salmon and crab), other employment
opportunities, and the availability of processing operations. Also, the
resident halibut CDQ fleet is impacted by internal economic decisions
made by the CDQ groups and in the ways the CDQ groups choose to promote
economic development in their communities. In general, many of the
small boat fishermen in CDQ communities are dependent on the halibut
fishery (Section 3.5.3 of the Analysis).
Need for Action
The downward trend of halibut commercial catch limits in Areas 4B
and 4CDE over the past 15 years has been dramatic, with current limits
significantly lower than in the recent past years. The recent years of
low halibut abundance and the resulting low commercial catch limits in
Areas 4B and 4CDE have made it increasingly difficult for most CDQ
groups to create a viable commercial halibut fishing opportunity for
their community residents. The halibut resource is economically
significant for small vessel fishing operations as well as culturally
and socially important for residents of Western Alaska CDQ communities.
Correspondingly, low halibut abundance and the resulting low commercial
catch limits in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D have made it increasingly
difficult for IFQ holders to have an economically viable fishery.
Under current regulations, CDQ groups cannot receive by transfer
any IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS. Current regulations also
prohibit halibut QS holders from transferring their IFQ separate from
the underlying QS except in very narrow, specific situations, such as
temporary military transfers (see Section 3.7 of the Analysis for more
information). These restrictions limit the options for CDQ groups to
temporarily expand opportunities for halibut fishing by community
residents in times of low halibut abundance (see Section 3.7 of the
Analysis).
To address these problems, this proposed rule would create a
voluntary
[[Page 8031]]
option for an IFQ holder in Areas 4B, 4C and 4D to temporarily transfer
his or her halibut IFQ to a CDQ group in years of extremely low halibut
abundance. This proposed flexibility would allow CDQ groups to expand
the fishing opportunities for the small boat fleets operating out of
the CDQ group's communities and provide IFQ holders with the
opportunity to receive value for their IFQ when extremely low halibut
commercial catch limits may not be large enough to provide for an
economically viable fishery for IFQ holders.
This Proposed Rule and the Anticipated Effects
This proposed rule includes three actions. The primary action,
Action 1, would create a voluntary option for an IFQ holder to
temporarily transfer his or her halibut IFQ to a CDQ group in years of
extremely low halibut abundance. Actions 2 and 3 would make minor
regulatory adjustments to remove an obsolete reference in the IFQ
Program regulations and to clarify IFQ vessel use cap regulations,
respectively. The following paragraphs provide additional detail on the
proposed actions.
Action 1
This proposed rule would: (1) Define the halibut commercial catch
limits under which CDQ groups could receive IFQ by transfer; (2)
establish limits on the types and amounts of IFQ that can be
transferred; and (3) establish reporting requirements for CDQ groups
receiving IFQ by transfer. This proposed rule would not convert
transferred IFQ to CDQ. Allocations of halibut CDQ would not change
under this proposed rule.
Under this proposed rule, CDQ groups would be able to receive
transfers of halibut catcher vessel IFQ (Categories B, C, and D IFQ) in
Areas 4C and 4D when the IPHC approves a halibut commercial catch limit
that is less than 1.5 million pounds in Areas 4CDE. CDQ groups would be
able to receive transfers of halibut catcher vessel IFQ (Categories B,
C, and D IFQ) in Area 4B when the IPHC approves a halibut commercial
catch limit that is less than 1 million pounds in Area 4B. IFQ holders
would be able to transfer both blocked and unblocked IFQ to CDQ groups.
This proposed rule would not revise current regulations that authorize
an IFQ holder in Areas 4B, 4C and 4D to transfer his or her Category A
halibut IFQ to any qualified person, including a CDQ group. This
proposed rule would provide additional harvesting flexibility for
Category A halibut IFQ transferred to a CDQ group in years of extremely
low halibut abundance, as described in more detail below.
The Council recommended these thresholds based on an analysis of
commercial catch limits between 2008 and 2017, a period of time
representing a range of different halibut commercial catch limits and
decreasing opportunities for CDQ community fishermen. The Council
considered a range of different commercial catch limit thresholds for
both Area 4B and Areas 4CDE, before selecting these thresholds. Section
3.8.5 of the Analysis shows that from 2008 to 2016, the halibut
commercial catch limit in Area 4B was never below the proposed
threshold of 1 million pounds. However, in Areas 4CDE, the halibut
commercial catch limit was below the proposed threshold of 1.5 million
pounds in 2 years, 2014 and 2015. Therefore, under halibut abundance
conditions over the last 8 years, had this proposed rule been in effect
it would have allowed IFQ transfers to CDQ groups to occur in only 2
years, and only in Areas 4CDE.
In selecting these thresholds, the Council sought to balance the
goal of providing additional halibut fishing opportunities for CDQ
residents when the halibut CDQ allocation alone may not be large enough
to sustain small vessel resident fisheries, with the need to avoid
potential adverse distributional impacts on other halibut IFQ users
that could result if IFQ transfers were permitted. The Council also
indicated that the flexibility to transfer halibut IFQ in Areas 4B, 4C,
and 4D was to be available only during worst case scenarios for halibut
commercial catch limits in these Areas (Section 2.3 of the Analysis).
For Areas 4CDE, the Council determined and NMFS agrees that a halibut
commercial catch limit below 1.5 million pounds, as was experienced in
2014 and 2015, reflects a worst case scenario for Areas 4CDE as it
represents an extremely low commercial catch limit for these Areas. For
Area 4B, the Council determined and NMFS agrees that a halibut
commercial catch limit below 1 million pounds, which has not been
experienced during the last 10 years, reflects a worst case scenario
for Area 4B as it represents an extremely low commercial catch limit
for this Area. The Council selected a lower threshold for Area 4B due
to concerns expressed by the public about potentially adverse
distributional impacts on the community of Adak with a threshold that
was higher than 1 million pounds.
This proposed rule would establish several limits on the catcher
vessel IFQ that can be transferred as well as some flexibility with
transferred catcher vessel and catcher/processor IFQ. This proposed
rule includes five limits: (1) A CDQ group would only be able to
receive catcher vessel IFQ by transfer for an Area in which it also
holds halibut CDQ; (2) no vessel greater than 51 feet in length overall
(LOA) could be used to harvest catcher vessel IFQ transferred to a CDQ
group; (3) catcher vessel IFQ resulting from QS acquired after December
14, 2015 could not be transferred to a CDQ group until 3 years after
the QS was acquired (i.e., a cooling off period); (4) an IFQ holder
would not be allowed to transfer catcher vessel halibut IFQ to a CDQ
group for more than 2 consecutive years; and (5) in Area 4B, only those
QS holders who hold less than 76,355 QS units specified for Area 4B
would be allowed to transfer their catcher vessel IFQ to CDQ groups.
The first limit would prevent a CDQ group from receiving catcher
vessel halibut IFQ by transfer for an Area in which that CDQ group does
not hold halibut CDQ. The Council recommended this provision so that
any catcher vessel IFQ transferred to a CDQ group would be available
for use in conjunction with halibut CDQ that is issued to a CDQ group.
The Council determined, and NMFS agrees, that coupling catcher vessel
IFQ received by transfer to areas in which a CDQ group hold halibut CDQ
would ensure that the benefits of the IFQ transfer manifest with the
intended recipients--the resident halibut fleet in the CDQ group's
communities adjacent to the Area. For example, if a CDQ group is issued
halibut CDQ in Areas 4B and 4C, that CDQ group could only receive
catcher vessel Area 4B and Area 4C IFQ by transfer. Additionally, under
this proposed rule at Sec. 679.42(a)(iii) and (iv), CDQ groups that
are eligible to receive a transfer of Area 4D catcher vessel IFQ would
be able to harvest that IFQ, and any Category A IFQ it holds, in Area
4E (Section 3.5.2 of the Analysis). The Council determined, and NMFS
agrees, that this additional flexibility would improve the
effectiveness of the proposed action by enabling transferred IFQ to be
fished closer to shore so that smaller vessels typically used by
residents in CDQ communities can more easily participate in halibut
fisheries. This proposed flexibility also would be consistent with
section 11(8) of the IPHC annual management measures, which allows Area
4D halibut CDQ to be harvested in Area 4E. However, the IPHC would need
to revise its annual management measures to extend this harvesting
flexibility to catcher vessel and catcher/processor IFQ held by a
[[Page 8032]]
CDQ group before NMFS can approve it (see section 3.8.6 of the
Analysis). The IPHC is scheduled to consider this revision to the
annual management measures at its January 2018 annual meeting. NMFS
will take into account the IPHC's decision when developing the final
rule for this action.
The second limit would prohibit the use of vessels greater than 51
feet LOA to harvest catcher vessel IFQ that is transferred to a CDQ
group. The Council recommended this vessel size limit because this is
the largest size vessel owned by CDQ community residents that has
landed halibut CDQ during the past 10 years, 2008 through 2017 (Section
3.5.3 of the Analysis). Because this proposed rule is intended to
provide additional harvest opportunities to CDQ community residents,
the Council determined and NMFS agrees that allowing larger than 51
feel LOA to harvest transferred catcher vessel IFQ would be
inconsistent with this objective. Current regulations provide
sufficient flexibility to allow IFQ that could be transferred to a CDQ
group under this proposed rule to be fished on a vessel of any length
up to 51 feet LOA (see Section 2.4 of the Analysis).
This proposed rule would also clarify that any Area 4D Category A
IFQ that is held by a CDQ group or transferred to a CDQ group may be
fished in Area 4E by vessels less than or equal to 51 feet LOA when the
commercial catch limit threshold in Area 4CDE is triggered. The Council
determined and NMFS agrees that this provision would provide additional
harvest opportunities for CDQ residents. The 51-foot LOA restriction
would help ensure additional harvest opportunities would be provided on
the size class of vessels used by CDQ community residents (see Section
3.8.6 in the Analysis for additional detail). This proposed rule would
not revise current regulations that authorize Category A IFQ for Areas
4B, 4C, or 4D to be fished in the corresponding Area on a vessel of any
length.
Under the third limit, IFQ resulting from QS acquired after
December 14, 2015 could not be transferred to a CDQ group until 3 years
after the QS was acquired. This provision would effectively create a
``cooling off'' period. For example, if a person acquired Area 4C
halibut QS on March 15, 2016, that holder would not be eligible to
transfer the IFQ from that QS to a CDQ group until March 14, 2019. The
Council determined and NMFS agrees that the proposed cooling off period
is necessary to reduce the incentive to QS holders to acquire QS with
the intention of transferring the resulting IFQ to CDQ groups rather
than fishing the IFQ. Section 3.8.7 of the Analysis notes that the
Council considered a range of cooling off periods from 3 to 5 years. In
selecting the proposed cooling off period, the Council determined and
NMFS agrees that a 3-year period would balance the objectives of
reducing the incentives for QS holders to acquire QS with the intention
of transferring it to CDQ groups with the need to provide an adequate
market for CDQ groups to receive IFQ by transfer. The Council also
recommended that QS acquired after December 14, 2015, be subject to the
cooling off period. The Council selected the December 14, 2015, date
because that is the date when the Council first added the option of a
cooling off period to the suite of alternatives and options under
consideration for the proposed action. NMFS agrees that this proposed
date is reasonable as it would deter speculative investment in
anticipation of this proposed rule, and selection of this proposed
date, versus the effective date of this action if approved, accelerates
the time when QS acquired after December 14, 2015, would be eligible
for transfer.
The fourth limit would prohibit an IFQ holder from transferring
catcher vessel halibut IFQ for a specific IFQ regulatory area to a CDQ
group for more than 2 consecutive years. This 2-year limit would apply
to calendar years and would not apply only to years in which the
commercial catch limit is below the threshold. Additionally, this limit
would apply to the transfer of any halibut IFQ for a specific Area. If
an IFQ holder chooses to transfer some but not all of his or her IFQ
for a particular Area during a year when the annual commercial catch
limit for that Area set below the proposed threshold that transfer
would count towards the 2-year limit. Transfers of IFQ for one Area
would not affect the ability to transfer IFQ for another Area. The
Council determined and NMFS agrees that limitations on how many
consecutive years an IFQ holder could transfer IFQ to a CDQ group would
limit the potential for a specific IFQ holder to continuously transfer
IFQ to CDQ groups rather than fishing that IFQ or transferring the
underlying QS to other new entrants in the fishery. Section 3.8.8 of
the Analysis explains that the Council considered a range of
limitations on the number of years that IFQ could be transferred (i.e.,
from 2 to 4 years), and that a less restrictive limitation of 2 years
may be appropriate given the relatively low likelihood that the
thresholds to allow leasing in Area 4B or Areas 4C and 4D will be met.
Under the fifth limit, only catcher vessel QS holders that hold
less than 76,355 QS units specified for Area 4B would be allowed to
transfer their catcher vessel IFQ to CDQ groups. NMFS would consider
all categories of Area 4B QS holdings regardless of blocked or
unblocked status. This amount of QS units yielded approximately 7,500
pounds of halibut IFQ in 2016. The Council recommended and NMFS
proposes this limitation to ensure that persons holding larger amounts
of QS units continue to be active fishermen in the Area 4B halibut
fishery while providing an opportunity for persons holding smaller
amounts of QS units to transfer catcher vessel IFQ to CDQ groups if the
1 million pound commercial catch limit threshold to allow IFQ transfers
is met. The Council recommended and NMFS is proposing this limitation
only for Area 4B to accommodate the specific nature of IFQ operations
in the remote Aleutian Island communities in Area 4B, and after
considering a range of different limits (from 2,000 to 7,500 pounds of
halibut IFQ, with the preferred option to convert 7,500 pounds to 2016
QS units) that are described in Section 3.8.9 of the Analysis.
The Council received public testimony indicating that Aleutian
Islands communities in Area 4B receive substantial benefits from
fishery participation by persons holding relatively large amounts of
halibut QS and IFQ in that area. The testifiers expressed concern that
allowing these QS holders to transfer IFQ to a CDQ group could
substantially reduce these benefits to the communities in years of
extremely low commercial catch limits. In addition, persons holding
less than 76,355 QS units would be allocated relatively small amounts
of IFQ that may not be economically feasible to harvest in years of
extremely low commercial halibut catch limits. The Council determined
and NMFS agrees that limiting eligibility to transfer IFQ to holders of
less than 76,355 QS units in Area 4B would allow the holders of these
relatively small amounts of QS to lease the resulting IFQ in years of
extremely low commercial halibut catch limits while maintaining the
benefits of the fishery to the Aleutian Island communities from
harvests of the larger holdings of IFQ.
This proposed rule also establishes a reporting requirement for CDQ
groups that receive IFQ by transfer. The proposed report would be
required only for those years in which CDQ groups received IFQ by
transfer. CDQ groups
[[Page 8033]]
that receive IFQ by transfer would be required to report the annual
amount and vessel category of Area 4 halibut IFQ transferred to the CDQ
group, the criteria used to select IFQ holders to transfer Area 4
halibut IFQ to the CDQ group, and the criteria used to determine the
person(s) eligible to fish Area 4 halibut IFQ received by transfer.
In recommending this proposed rule, the Council stated its intent
for catcher vessel IFQ transferred to a CDQ group to be fished by
residents of that CDQ community but did not recommend that NMFS
establish this requirement in regulation. Section 2.3 of the Analysis
describes that CDQ groups have different methods of defining residents
in their communities and different techniques for determining who will
harvest their halibut CDQ. After considering this information, the
Council specified that it did not intend for NMFS to establish a
regulatory definition for CDQ community resident, nor did it intend for
NMFS to verify that CDQ community residents were receiving the benefits
of transferred IFQ under this proposed rule. The Council recommended
that NMFS implement the requirement for CDQ groups to report the
persons who harvest the IFQ received by transfer. This would allow the
Council and the public to monitor the use of IFQ transferred to CDQ
groups and provide the Council with information to determine whether
the use of transferred IFQ is consistent with its intent for the
action.
The Council recommended and NMFS proposes a reporting requirement
to understand the criteria that a CDQ group uses to receive transfers
of IFQ and provide harvest opportunities. This information could be
used to evaluate the effectiveness of this proposed rule to provide
benefits to members of CDQ communities. This proposed rule would
require the report to be submitted to NMFS no later than January 31 of
the year after the IFQ was transferred to the CDQ group. NMFS proposes
this deadline to be consistent with other reports required under the
IFQ Program, and to ensure that NMFS has received the report prior to
the issuance of IFQ that typically occurs in mid-February. If a CDQ
group is required to submit a report and does not do so by the
deadline, the CDQ group would be ineligible to receive transfers of
catcher vessel IFQ until the report is submitted.
Under this proposed rule, a CDQ group that wished to receive
halibut IFQ by transfer would make an arrangement with an IFQ holder to
transfer his or her IFQ. The CDQ group would need to complete an
Application for Temporary Transfer of Halibut and Sablefish IFQ and
submit the application to NMFS for approval. Once approved, NMFS would
issue the CDQ group an IFQ permit with the pounds of halibut IFQ that
would be available to be fished. After determining who would fish the
halibut IFQ, the CDQ group with the IFQ permit would then need to apply
for a hired master permit for the vessel operator designated to fish
the halibut IFQ. Current regulations authorize a vessel operator to
harvest halibut IFQ and CDQ on the same fishing trip and a vessel
operator harvesting both halibut CDQ and IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
would need to carry (1) a halibut CDQ permit, (2) a CDQ hired master
permit, (3) a copy of the IFQ permit of the CDQ group, and (4) an IFQ
hired master permit. Additionally, any vessels fishing halibut IFQ
transferred to a CDQ group would be subject to the current IFQ vessel
use caps under Sec. 679.42(h)(1). If a vessel harvested both halibut
IFQ and CDQ, only the halibut IFQ would accrue towards and be subject
to the vessel use cap.
Halibut that is landed by a vessel operator harvesting CDQ and IFQ
would be debited off two separate catch limits. Therefore, for purposes
of catch accounting, participants would need to track what amount of
halibut harvest is associated with the group's CDQ and what amount is
associated with the IFQ permit held by the CDQ group. This distinction
would be recorded on the fish ticket (Section 3.8.11.3 of the
Analysis). If this proposed rule is approved, NMFS would need to make
changes to the database that monitors transfers of IFQ between permit
holders and that is used to issue hired master permits to allow for
this new type of transfer (see Section 3.8.11.4 of the Analysis).
Under this proposed rule, CDQ groups would be responsible for cost
recovery fees based on the IFQ pounds held on the IFQ permit. Section
304(d)(2)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act obligates NMFS to recover the
actual costs of management, data collection, and enforcement (direct
program cost) of the IFQ fisheries. Therefore, NMFS implemented a cost
recovery fee program for the IFQ fisheries in 2000 (65 FR 14919, March
20, 2000). While costs specific to the CDQ Program for halibut are
recoverable through a separate cost recovery program (81 FR 150,
January 5, 2016), this proposed rule would require regulatory changes
to the IFQ transfer and hired master use provisions and therefore
constitute changes in management of the IFQ Program. CDQ group
participants receiving IFQ transfers would be required to pay an IFQ
cost recovery fee as a portion of the ex-vessel value of their landed
halibut.
Section 7(2) of the IPHC annual management measures (82 FR 12730,
March 7, 2017) authorizes a vessel operator harvesting halibut CDQ in
Areas 4D or 4E to retain halibut that are smaller than the size limit
established by the IPHC for personal use. Under the status quo, a
vessel operator harvesting halibut IFQ held by a CDQ group along with
halibut CDQ may retain halibut less than legal size for personal use.
Therefore, if this proposed action is approved, vessel operators
harvesting both halibut CDQ and halibut IFQ transferred to a CDQ group
in Areas 4D or 4E would be authorized to retain halibut smaller than
the size limit established by the IPHC in length for personal use as
specified in section 7 of the IPHC annual management measures. The
personal use allotment would apply to all halibut IFQ transferred to a
CDQ group under this exemption. Section 7(3) of the IPHC annual
management measures requires a CDQ group to report on all retained
halibut for personal use that are less than legal size and harvested on
behalf of a CDQ group.
Proposed Regulations to Implement Action 1
This proposed rule would modify the definition of ``annual
commercial catch limit'' at 50 CFR 300.61 to include definitions for
Areas 3B and 4A, and for Areas 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E.
This proposed rule would modify Sec. 679.41 to allow transfer of
halibut IFQ in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D in years of low halibut catch
limits in Areas 4B and 4CDE to CDQ groups along with the specific
conditions under which this transfer activity could occur.
Additionally, a reporting requirement would be added at Sec.
679.5(l)(10) to require a CDQ group to submit a report on the criteria
it used to select IFQ holders from whom IFQ transfers would be
received, the criteria it used to determine the persons who can harvest
transferred IFQ, and the amount and type of IFQ transferred.
This proposed rule also includes a provision which would be added
under Sec. 679.42 to allow Area 4D IFQ that is transferred to a CDQ
group to be harvested in Area 4E.
Finally, NMFS is proposing to add and reserve several paragraphs in
this proposed rule to account for another rulemaking that proposes to
modify the same sections of Part 679 that would be modified by this
proposed rule.
Anticipated Effects of Action 1
The effects of Action 1 would depend on first the halibut resource
falling
[[Page 8034]]
below the threshold of 1 million pounds in Area 4B and 1.5 million
pounds in Area 4CDE and then IFQ holders choosing to transfer their
halibut IFQ to a CDQ group. If, in the future these conditions are met,
then this proposed rule would be expected to provide benefits most
directly to CDQ community residents who have traditionally been
involved in the halibut CDQ fishery by allowing for continued
employment and income in years where commercial halibut catch limits
are at extremely low levels. This opportunity may have a particularly
meaningful impact on these residents, as there tends to be limited
regional economic diversity in these communities, resulting in few
substitute employment options for residents (Section 3.8.1 of the
Analysis). This proposed rule would provide IFQ holders and CDQ groups
with an opportunity to alleviate the adverse economic, social, and
cultural impacts of extremely low levels of commercial halibut catch
limits on Western Alaskan communities.
The benefits that could be derived from this proposed rule are
different among CDQ groups and would likely even be distributional
within a group. Overall, this action would not necessarily be expected
to result in a financial gain for a CDQ group that chooses to receive
halibut IFQ by transfer. It is likely that some, or all, of the fee an
IFQ holder would incur to transfer his or her IFQ would be paid by the
CDQ group. This proposed rule could also provide distributional
benefits to some processing plants, secondary service providers, and
communities as a whole (see Section 3.8 of the Analysis).
Allowing CDQ groups the flexibility to harvest any IFQ received by
transfer for Area 4D in Area 4E would add to the existing flexibility
CDQ groups have to move their halibut CDQ between IFQ regulatory areas.
The Council determined and NMFS agrees that this potential for change
in locational fishing intensity from this proposed action would not be
a threat to overall stock conservation as long as the Area 4CDE total
catch limit is not exceeded, while noting that there is a possibility
of localized impacts on fishing opportunities if fishing effort
patterns were to change substantially.
Halibut QS holders in Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D may also benefit from
this proposed rule. These QS holders may feel constrained as their QS
is associated with diminishing pounds of IFQ under the relatively low
commercial halibut catch limits in recent years. In years of extremely
low halibut abundance, it may not be economically viable for some QS
holders to harvest their small amounts of IFQ, particularly in remote
areas covered by this proposed rule where operating costs are higher
relative to other IFQ regulatory areas. Depending on operating costs
and catch limits, QS holders that transfer their IFQ to CDQ groups may
be able to earn more revenue from transferring their IFQ than from
harvesting it themselves or hiring a master to harvest the IFQ (if the
QS holder is eligible). As the IFQ Program strictly limits leasing
(transfers), this proposed rule would be the only opportunity for many
QS holders to transfer their Area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut IFQ (see
Section 3.8.1) in years of extremely low commercial catch limits.
This proposed rule may have adverse indirect effects on some
stakeholders of the halibut IFQ fishery (see Section 3.8.2 of the
Analysis). This action could prompt some amount of temporary IFQ
consolidation, impacting the number of trips taken or resulting in some
vessels not being used in the halibut fishery at all in a season. This
reduction in participation could result in reduced fishery revenues for
affected participants. Consolidation could also result in a
displacement of some captain and crew jobs for the duration of time
that the halibut catch limits are low enough to allow IFQ transfers. To
the extent that they are not the QS holder making the decision to
transfer their IFQ to CDQ groups, this proposed rule may also
disadvantage vessel owners that use their vessel to harvest halibut IFQ
if QS holders who historically fished their IFQ on that vessel choose
to lease the IFQ and the vessel owner has reduced revenues from the
fishery. Section 3.8.2 of the Analysis notes that it is uncertain how
much IFQ may be transferred, from whom, and how this would impact
current operations.
As discussed in Section 3.8.1 of the Analysis, transferred IFQ
received by a CDQ group and harvested by its community resident fleets
would be expected to follow landing patterns similar to the current
halibut CDQ operations. However, if the locations of port of origin and
landings changes with IFQ received by this transfer provision, there is
a potential some communities may not receive revenues from raw fish
tax, business landing tax, and other economic activity associated with
fishing, such as purchase of food and fuel. These are distributional
impacts; therefore, they could represent losses to some communities,
while communities with traditional halibut CDQ participation may
benefit due to the increased activity from halibut IFQ.
Additionally, this proposed rule may motivate some QS holders who
may otherwise consider selling, to hold onto their Areas 4B, 4C, or 4D
halibut QS. For those individuals seeking entry into the halibut QS
market, the lack of QS movement may not be a positive result. However,
to prevent speculative purchases of QS with the intent of using the
transfer provision allowed under this proposed rule, this proposed rule
includes a cooling off period that limits the transfer of IFQ until 3
years after the QS is acquired. Areas 4B, 4C, and 4D already tend to
have the lowest level of QS transactions of any regulatory area
(although, this may also be because a portion of the catch limit is
designated as CDQ, thus the QS pool is much smaller) and the QS prices,
similar to other regulatory areas, appear to be increasing (Section
3.8.4 of the Analysis).
Additionally, this proposed rule would support one of the other
goals of the IFQ Program, which is to increase the ability of the rural
coastal communities adjacent to the BSAI to share in the wealth
generated by the IFQ Program by providing community residents with the
opportunity to benefit from fishing for additional halibut IFQ in years
of extremely low commercial catch limits (see Section 3.8.3.1 of the
Analysis).
Action 2
This proposed rule would remove an obsolete reference in the
regulations at Sec. 679.42(a)(2)(i). Currently, this regulation
provides an exception in the wording. However, the paragraph (k)
referred to in Sec. 679.42(a)(2)(i) was modified by the final rule to
revise regulations governing the use of commercial halibut QS and the
processing of non-IFQ species when processed halibut is onboard a
vessel (73 FR 8822; February 15, 2008). That final rule removed
paragraph (k) and re-designated paragraph (l) as paragraph (k). NMFS
inadvertently neglected to remove the cross-reference to paragraph (k)
in Sec. 679.42(a)(2)(i). Therefore, with this proposed rule, NMFS
proposes removing the cross-reference to paragraph (k) to clarify that
persons possessing unused Category B, C, or D halibut QS may be on
board a catcher/processor vessel when that vessel is harvesting and
processing Category A halibut or sablefish IFQ or is harvesting and
processing non-IFQ species. The effects of this action are expected to
be minor and beneficial by improving the clarity of the regulations.
[[Page 8035]]
Action 3
This proposed rule would clarify existing regulations pertaining to
the IFQ vessel limitations, also referred to as the vessel use caps.
NMFS proposes to add language to Sec. 679.42(h)(1) and (h)(2) to
clarify that the vessel use caps only apply to halibut and sablefish
IFQ and not to halibut and sablefish CDQ. This action would improve the
clarity of the regulations and help IFQ and CDQ participants understand
what regulations to which they are subject. The effects of this action
are expected to be minor and beneficial by improving the clarity of the
regulations.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the
NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the BSAI FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after
public comment.
Regulations governing the U.S. fisheries for Pacific halibut are
developed by the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), the
Pacific Fishery Management Council, the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council), and the Secretary of Commerce. Section 5
of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act, 16 U.S.C.
773c) allows the Regional Council having authority for a particular
geographical area to develop regulations governing the allocation and
catch of halibut in U.S. Convention waters which are in addition to,
and not in conflict with, IPHC regulations. This proposed rule is
consistent with the Council's authority to allocate halibut catches
among fishery participants in the waters in and off Alaska. The Halibut
Act, at sections 773c(a) and (b), provides the Secretary of Commerce
with the general responsibility to carry out the Convention with the
authority to, in consultation with the Secretary of the department in
which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating, adopt such regulations as may
be necessary to carry out the purposes and objectives of the Convention
and the Halibut Act. This proposed rule is consistent with the Halibut
Act and other applicable laws.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule would revise IFQ Program regulations to
authorize CDQ groups to receive halibut IFQ transfers in certain areas
when catch limits are below the established thresholds, subject to
specific limitations. The directly regulated entities (118 small
entities in 2015) are persons that hold Areas 4B, 4C, or 4D halibut QS,
CDQ groups, and harvesters, including CDQ community residents, who have
traditionally harvested halibut CDQ and may have an opportunity to
harvest halibut IFQ received by transfer. Almost all of the directly
regulated entities are considered small entities. As described in the
Analysis, the 118 directly regulated entities would only be impacted to
the extent that they choose to (and are able to) participate in
receiving halibut IFQ transfers as a result of the proposed regulatory
changes.
Direct impacts would be expected to be positive for both CDQ
community resident halibut fishery participants and QS holders that
choose to utilize the IFQ transfer provision because the opportunity
for this additional flexibility in years of low halibut abundance would
be voluntary for both user groups and would only be undertaken if it
would benefit the parties to the transfer. Direct impacts would be
expected to be positive for CDQ community resident harvesters who have
traditionally harvested halibut CDQ and may have an opportunity to
harvest additional transfers of halibut IFQ under this proposed rule
because it would provide an opportunity to continue to receive economic
benefits from fishery participation in times of low abundance. This
proposed rule therefore is not expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities regulated by this
proposed rule.
As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required and none has been prepared.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). NMFS has submitted these
requirements to OMB for approval under Control Number 0648-0272 and
Control Number 0648-0711. Public reporting burden is estimated to
average per response: 2 hours for Application for Temporary Transfer of
Halibut and Sablefish IFQ, 40 hours for the report, and 1 minute for
electronic submission of cost recovery fees or 30 minutes for non-
electronic fee submission. These estimates include the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection information.
Public comment is sought regarding whether these proposed
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collections 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 collections of information to NMFS
(see ADDRESSES), and by email to [email protected] 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 penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirement 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
50 CFR Part 300
Administrative practice and procedure, Fisheries, Fishing,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 15, 2018.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50
CFR parts 300 and 679 as follows:
PART 300--INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart E--Pacific Halibut Fisheries
0
1. The authority for 50 CFR part 300, subpart E, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773-773k.
0
2. In Sec. 300.61, revise the definition of ``Annual commercial catch
limit'' to read as follows:
[[Page 8036]]
Sec. 300.61 Definitions.
* * * * *
Annual commercial catch limit, for purposes of commercial fishing
in:
(1) Commission regulatory areas 2C and 3A, means the annual
commercial allocation minus an area-specific estimate of commercial
halibut wastage.
(2) Commission regulatory areas 3B and 4A, means the annual total
allowable halibut removals by persons fishing IFQ.
(3) Commission regulatory areas 4B, 4C, 4D, and 4E, means the
annual total allowable halibut removals by persons fishing IFQ and CDQ.
* * * * *
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. 679.5:
0
a. Add and reserve paragraph (l)(9);
0
b. Add paragraph (l)(10);
0
c. Add and reserve paragraph (v); and
0
d. Add paragraph (w) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting.
* * * * *
(l) * * *
(9) [Reserved]
(10) A report on annual IFQ regulatory areas 4B, 4C, and 4D Halibut
IFQ transfer activities must be submitted to NMFS by a CDQ group as
required at Sec. 679.5(w).
* * * * *
(v) [Reserved]
(w) Report on Area 4 halibut IFQ transfers to CDQ groups--(1)
Applicability. A CDQ group that receives IFQ regulatory area 4 halibut
IFQ by transfer must submit a timely and complete report on the CDQ
group's annual halibut IFQ transfer activities for each calendar year
that it receives IFQ regulatory area 4 halibut IFQ by transfer. A CDQ
group is not required to submit a report for any calendar year in which
it did not receive any IFQ regulatory area 4 halibut IFQ by transfer.
(2) Time limits and submittal. A CDQ group must submit a complete
report by January 31 of the year following a fishing year during which
the CDQ group receives IFQ regulatory area 4B, 4C, or 4D halibut IFQ by
transfer. The complete report must be submitted to the North Pacific
Fishery Management Council, 605 West 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK
99501-2252, and to NMFS-Alaska Regional Administrator, P.O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK, 99802-1668.
(3) Complete report. A complete report contains all report
requirements described in paragraphs (w)(4)(i) through (w)(4)(iii) of
this section.
(4) Report requirements. A CDQ group must report the following
information:
(i) The annual amount, IFQ regulatory area and vessel category of
IFQ regulatory area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut IFQ transferred to the CDQ
group;
(ii) The criteria used to select IFQ holders to transfer IFQ
regulatory area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut IFQ to the CDQ group; and
(iii) The criteria used to determine the person(s) eligible to
harvest IFQ regulatory area 4B, 4C, and 4D halibut IFQ received by
transfer.
0
5. In Sec. 679.41:
0
a. Add and reserve paragraph (c)(12);
0
b. Add paragraph (c)(13);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (d)(1), (g)(1), and (h)(2);
0
d. Add and reserve paragraph (n); and
0
e. Add paragraph (o) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.41 Transfer of quota shares and IFQ.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(12) [Reserved]
(13) If the person applying to receive halibut IFQ assigned to
vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory areas 4B, 4C, or 4D is a
CDQ group, the following determinations are required:
(i) The CDQ group applying to receive halibut IFQ for an IFQ
regulatory area receives an annual allocation of halibut CDQ for that
IFQ regulatory area pursuant to Sec. 679.31(b)(1);
(ii) The QS holder applying to transfer halibut IFQ to a CDQ group
has not transferred any halibut IFQ assigned to vessel categories B, C,
or D for that IFQ regulatory area to a CDQ group during the last two
consecutive fishing years;
(iii) If the IFQ to be transferred to a CDQ group results from QS
that was transferred to the QS holder after December 14, 2015, the QS
holder applying to transfer halibut IFQ to a CDQ group has held the
underlying QS for that IFQ for a minimum of 3 years from the date NMFS
approved the transfer;
(iv) If the IFQ to be transferred to a CDQ group is assigned to
vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory area 4B, the QS holder
applying to transfer that halibut IFQ to a CDQ group holds fewer than
76,355 halibut QS units in IFQ regulatory area 4B; and
(v) The CDQ group applying to receive halibut IFQ has submitted a
complete report if required to do so by Sec. 679.5(w).
(d) * * *
(1) Application for Eligibility. All persons, except as provided in
paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) of this section, applying to
receive QS or IFQ must submit an Application for Eligibility to Receive
QS/IFQ (Application for Eligibility) containing accurate information to
the Regional Administrator. The Regional Administrator will not approve
a transfer of IFQ or QS to a person until the Application for
Eligibility for that person is approved by the Regional Administrator.
The Regional Administrator shall provide an Application for Eligibility
form to any person on request.
(i) An Application for Eligibility is not required for a CQE if a
complete application to become a CQE, as described in paragraph (l)(3)
of this section, has been approved by the Regional Administrator on
behalf of an eligible community.
(ii) An Application for Eligibility is not required for a CDQ
group.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (f), paragraph (g)(2),
paragraph (l), paragraph (n) or paragraph (o) of this section, only
persons who are IFQ crew members, or who were initially issued QS
assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D, and meet the eligibility
requirements in this section, may receive by transfer QS assigned to
vessel categories B, C, or D, or the IFQ resulting from it.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(2) IFQ resulting from categories B, C, or D QS may not be
transferred separately from its originating QS, except as provided in
paragraph (d), paragraph (f), paragraph (k), paragraph (l), paragraph
(m), or paragraph (o) of this section.
* * * * *
(n) [Reserved]
(o) Transfer of IFQ to CDQ groups. (1) A QS holder who holds fewer
than 76,355 units of halibut QS in IFQ regulatory area 4B may transfer
halibut IFQ assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory
area 4B to a CDQ group that receives an allocation of IFQ regulatory
area 4B halibut CDQ if the annual commercial halibut catch limit, as
defined in Sec. 300.61 of this title, for Area 4B is less than 1
million pounds in that calendar year.
(2) A QS holder in IFQ regulatory areas 4C or 4D may transfer
halibut IFQ assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory
areas 4C or 4D to a CDQ group that receives an allocation of halibut
CDQ in that IFQ regulatory area
[[Page 8037]]
if the annual commercial halibut catch limit, as defined in Sec.
300.61 of this title, for Area 4CDE is less than 1.5 million pounds in
that calendar year.
(3) A QS holder must meet the requirements in paragraph (c)(13) of
this section to transfer halibut IFQ assigned to vessel categories B,
C, or D in IFQ regulatory areas 4B, 4C, or 4D to a CDQ group.
(4) A CDQ group that receives halibut IFQ by transfer may not
transfer that halibut IFQ to any other person.
0
6. In Sec. 679.42:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a)(1);
0
b. Remove paragraph (a)(2)(i);
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) through (iv) as paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) through (iii);
0
d. Add paragraph (a)(2)(iv); and
0
e. Revise paragraphs (h)(1) introductory text and (h)(2) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 679.42 Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.
(a) * * *
(1) The QS or IFQ specified for one IFQ regulatory area must not be
used in a different IFQ regulatory area, except for the following:
(i) All or part of the QS and IFQ specified for regulatory area 4C
may be harvested in either Area 4C or Area 4D.
(ii) All or part of the halibut CDQ specified for regulatory area
4D may be harvested in either Area 4D or Area 4E.
(iii) If a CDQ group is authorized to receive a transfer of halibut
IFQ assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D in IFQ regulatory area 4D
as specified in Sec. 679.41(o) of this part, all or part of the
halibut IFQ specified for regulatory area 4D that is held by or
transferred to a CDQ group may be harvested in either Area 4D or Area
4E.
(2) * * *
* * * * *
(iv) Halibut IFQ assigned to vessel category B, C, or D held by a
CDQ group may not be used on a vessel over 51 feet LOA, irrespective of
the vessel category assigned to the IFQ.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) Halibut. No vessel may be used, during any fishing year, to
harvest more halibut IFQ than one-half percent of the combined total
catch limits of halibut for IFQ regulatory areas 2C, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B,
4C, 4D, and 4E, except that:
* * * * *
(2) Sablefish. No vessel may be used, during any fishing year, to
harvest more sablefish IFQ than one percent of the combined fixed gear
TAC of sablefish for the GOA and BSAI IFQ regulatory areas, except
that:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-03548 Filed 2-22-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P