Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program; Amendment 111, 11895-11904 [2021-03859]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 38 (Monday, March 1, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11895-11904]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-03859]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 679 and 680

[Docket No. 2102190025]
RIN 0648-BJ73


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Central Gulf 
of Alaska Rockfish Program; Amendment 111

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement Amendment 111 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska Management 
Area (GOA FMP) and a regulatory amendment to reauthorize the Central 
Gulf of Alaska (CGOA) Rockfish Program. This final rule retains the 
conservation, management, safety, and economic gains realized under the 
Rockfish Program and makes minor revisions to improve administration of 
the Rockfish Program. This final rule is necessary to continue the 
conservation benefits, improve efficiency, and provide economic 
benefits of the Rockfish Program that would otherwise expire on 
December 31, 2021. This final rule is intended to promote the goals and 
objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act, the GOA FMP, and other applicable laws.

DATES: This rule is effective on March 31, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the Environmental Assessment and the 
Regulatory Impact Review (collectively referred to as the ``Analysis'') 
and the Finding of No Significant Impact prepared for this final rule 
may be obtained from https://www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS 
Alaska Region website at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/region/alaska.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
final rule may be submitted to NMFS Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, 
Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Glenn Merrill; in person at NMFS Alaska 
Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 401, Juneau, AK; and to 
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information 
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for 
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Warpinski, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS published the Notice of Availability 
for Amendment 111 in the Federal Register on July 27, 2020 (85 FR 
15367), with public comments invited through September 28, 2020. NMFS 
published the proposed rule to implement Amendment 111 in the Federal 
Register on September 4, 2020 (85 FR 55243) with public comments 
invited through October 5, 2020. The Secretary of Commerce approved 
Amendment 111 on October 22, 2020 after accounting for information from 
the public, and determining that Amendment 111 is consistent with the 
GOA FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws. The FMP 
amendment text includes two grammatical errors that were not found 
prior to the approval. These errors do not materially change the 
language in the FMP amendment nor are these errors reflected in the 
regulatory text that this final rule promulgates. The regulatory text 
accurately reflects the amendment's intent. NMFS received ten comment 
letters on the proposed Amendment 111 and the proposed rule. A summary 
of the comments and NMFS' responses are provided under the heading 
``Comments and Responses'' below.

Background

    The following background sections describe the Rockfish Program and 
the need for this final rule.

The Rockfish Program

    This section provides a brief overview of the existing Rockfish 
Program. A detailed description of the Rockfish Program and its 
development is provided in the preamble to the proposed rule and in 
Section 1.2 of the Analysis.
    The Rockfish Program is a type of limited access privilege program 
(LAPP) developed to enhance resource conservation and improve economic 
efficiency in the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The Rockfish Program as 
implemented under this final rule will continue the LAPP management 
structure, and will provide the same benefits established under the 
previous Rockfish Program implemented by Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP 
(76 FR 81247, December 27, 2011). For more information about the 
background and history of this program, see the preamble to the 
proposed rule (85 FR 55243, September 4, 2020) and the Analysis (See 
ADDRESSES).
    The Rockfish Program (1) assigns quota share (QS) and cooperative 
quota (CQ) to participants for primary and secondary species, (2) 
allows a participant holding an LLP license with rockfish QS to form a 
rockfish cooperative with other persons, (3) allows holders of catcher/
processor LLP licenses to opt-out of rockfish cooperatives for a given 
year, (4) establishes a limited access fishery for participants who do 
not participate in a fishery cooperative for a given year, (5) includes 
an entry level longline fishery for persons who do not hold rockfish 
QS, (6) establishes constraints, commonly known as sideboard limits, 
for other non-Rockfish Program fisheries that apply to vessels and LLP 
licenses eligible to participate in the Rockfish Program, and (7) 
includes monitoring and enforcement provisions.
    As summarized in Sections 2 and 3.5 of the Analysis (See 
ADDRESSES), the Rockfish Program provided greater security to 
harvesters through the formation of rockfish cooperatives. Fishing 
under cooperative management resulted in a slower-paced fishery that 
allows a harvester to choose when to fish. The Rockfish Program also 
provided greater stability for processors by spreading out production 
over a longer period. Overall, the Rockfish Program provides greater 
benefits to shoreside processors, catcher/processors, CGOA fishermen, 
and communities than were realized under the previous LLP management 
scheme.

Need for This Final Rule

    Under Amendment 88, the current Rockfish Program was given a 10-
year life span. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) 
recommended this action to prevent the Rockfish Program from expiring 
on December 31, 2021. This final rule maintains the conservation 
management, safety, and economic benefits of the Rockfish Program and 
improves efficiency by making minor revisions to existing regulations 
to improve administrative provisions of the Rockfish Program.

[[Page 11896]]

    Unless otherwise noted, the reauthorized Rockfish Program includes 
all regulatory provisions established under the Rockfish Program 
implemented by Amendment 88. These provisions include the existing 
allocation of QS among the fishery participants, the process and 
requirements to fish in a cooperative, sideboard limitations, and 
monitoring and reporting requirements. Section 1.7 of the Analysis 
describes the alternatives considered and Section 1.10.2 provides the 
rationale for the reauthorized Rockfish Program. The reader is referred 
to those sections of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES) for additional 
details.
    Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP and this final rule reauthorize the 
Rockfish Program and address a variety of administrative and management 
issues of the Rockfish Program. The specific regulatory changes 
recommended by the Council and included in this final rule are 
discussed in Section 1.6.2 of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES) and include:
     Removing the Rockfish Program sunset date of December 31, 
2021, with the effect of allowing the Rockfish Program to continue 
indefinitely;
     Specifying that only shoreside processors receiving 
Rockfish Program CQ must submit the Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value 
Report, rather than catcher/processors;
     Modifying cooperative check-in notice timing into the 
Rockfish Program from 48 to 24 hours;
     Removing requirements that an annual Rockfish Program 
cooperative report be submitted to NMFS. The Council requested that the 
Rockfish Program cooperatives continue to voluntarily provide annual 
reports to the Council;
     Removing requirements for a fishing plan to be submitted 
with a cooperative application for CQ;
     Requiring annual NMFS cost recovery reports in regulation;
     Allowing NMFS to reallocate unharvested Pacific cod 
allocated to Rockfish Program cooperatives to other non-Rockfish 
Program sectors after the Rockfish Program fisheries close on November 
15, consistent with existing inseason management regulatory 
authorities;
     Allowing NMFS to reallocate unused rockfish incidental 
catch allowances (ICA) to Rockfish Program cooperatives;
     Clarifying regulations regarding accounting for inseason 
use caps to specify that any transfer of unused rockfish ICAs or 
catcher/processor CQ to catcher vessel cooperatives does not apply to 
catcher vessel ownership, cooperative, harvester CQ, or shoreside 
processor CQ use caps;
     Exempting vessels from Crab Rationalization Program 
sideboard limits when fishing in the Rockfish Program;
     Removing catcher/processor rockfish program sideboard 
limits in the Western GOA rockfish fisheries;
     Removing the requirement for a trawl catcher vessel that 
has checked into and is participating in the Rockfish Program fishery 
to stand down for three days when transiting from the BSAI to the GOA 
while Pacific cod or pollock is open to directed fishing in the BSAI;
     Removing requirements for shoreside processors under the 
Rockfish Program to provide an observer work station and observer 
communication requirements; and
     Making minor technical corrections to clarify the season 
dates for directed fishing for Pacific cod under the Rockfish Program, 
and updating references to dusky rockfish (Sebastes variabilis) 
throughout regulations in 50 CFR part 679.
    The following section describes the regulatory changes in greater 
detail.

This Final Rule

    This section describes the changes to current regulations included 
in this final rule. This final rule will modify regulations at Sec.  
679.80(a)(2) to remove the expiration date of the Rockfish Program. The 
Rockfish Program had a 10-year authorization that required the Council 
to review the Rockfish Program and make any necessary changes to 
management based on that review, or allow the Rockfish Program to 
expire. This action responds to the Council's review.
    This final rule modifies Rockfish Program recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements to: (1) Amend regulations at Sec.  
679.5(r)(10)(i) to clearly state that only shoreside processors taking 
deliveries of species harvested using Rockfish Program CQ must submit 
the Rockfish Ex-Vessel Volume and Value Report; (2) modify cooperative 
check-in times from 48 to 24 hours at Sec.  679.5(r)(8)(i)(A)(1); (3) 
remove the requirement for an annual Rockfish Program cooperative 
report to be submitted to NMFS at Sec.  679.5(r)(6), and Sec.  
679.81(i)(3)(xxv) and (xxvi); (4) remove the requirement for rockfish 
cooperatives to submit a fishing plan with annual applications for CQ 
at Sec.  679.81(f)(4)(i)(D)(3); and (5) add a regulation at Sec.  
679.85(g) that states NMFS will annually publish a mandatory rather 
than voluntary Rockfish Program cost recovery report.
    Additional detail describing the impact of these recordkeeping and 
reporting changes is included in the preamble of the proposed rule and 
in Section 3.7 of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES).
    This final rule adds regulations at Sec.  679.81(j) to authorize 
NMFS to reallocate unharvested Pacific cod after directed fishing under 
the Rockfish Program closes on November 15, consistent with existing 
reallocation procedures for Pacific cod in the Gulf of Alaska. 
Regulations at Sec.  679.20(a)(12)(ii) allow NMFS to reallocate unused 
Rockfish Program Pacific cod. Under this provision, and taking into 
account the capability of a sector to harvest the reallocation, NMFS 
will allocate unused Rockfish Program Pacific cod first to catcher 
vessels, then to the combined catcher vessel and catcher/processor pot 
sector, and then to all other catcher/processor sectors.
    This final rule adds regulations at Sec.  679.81(j)(2), that 
authorize NMFS to reallocate unharvested rockfish species Incidental 
Catch Allowances (ICAs) to rockfish cooperatives. ICAs are set in the 
annual harvest specifications to account for incidental catch in other 
fisheries so that the TAC will not be exceeded. Section 3.7.10 of the 
Analysis and the preamble of the proposed rule details the process of 
determining reallocations of ICAs. If NMFS determines there is not 
sufficient ICA to reallocate, then no reallocation would occur.
    This final rule adds regulations at Sec.  679.82(a)(1)(vi) to 
clarify that any transfer of reallocated Rockfish Program ICAs or 
catcher/processor CQ to a catcher vessel cooperative does not apply 
when calculating catcher vessel use caps, including CV ownership, 
cooperative CQ, harvester QS, or shoreside processor caps. Use caps are 
established to limit consolidation. (Please see the preamble of the 
proposed rule and Section 3.7.11 of the Analysis for additional detail 
on use cap provisions.)
    This final rule makes several changes to regulations governing the 
sideboards and other tools designed to protect other Gulf of Alaska 
fishery participants outside of the Rockfish Program. Sideboards are 
limitations on the ability of harvesters to harvest in fisheries other 
than the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The changes include: (1) Exempting 
Rockfish Program vessels from sideboard limits implemented under the 
Crab Rationalization Program at Sec.  680.22(a)(1); (2) removing the 
Western GOA directed fishing prohibition and rockfish sideboard ratios 
at Sec.  679.82(e)(4) for Rockfish Program

[[Page 11897]]

catcher/processors; and (3) as further discussed below, removing the 
requirement at Sec.  679.23(h)(1) for a trawl catcher vessel checked 
into and participating in the Rockfish Program fishery to stand down 
for three days when transiting from the BSAI to the GOA while Pacific 
cod or pollock is open to directed fishing in the BSAI. In addition, 
NMFS also adds a clarifying technical revision to the remaining 
information at Sec.  679.82(e)(4) to remove the table and reorganize 
the West Yakutat District rockfish sideboard ratios.
    For this final rule, NMFS modifies Sec.  679.23(h)(1) to remove the 
3-day stand down requirement when a vessel moves from the BSAI to the 
GOA and is checked-in and participating in a Rockfish Program 
cooperative. This revision removes a regulatory limitation on vessels 
moving into the Rockfish Program but does not increase potential 
harvests in other non-Rockfish Program fisheries. Vessels that are not 
participating in the Rockfish Program must still comply with the 3-day 
stand down.
    This final rule modifies regulations at Sec.  679.84(f)(1) to 
remove unnecessary requirements for shoreside processors to maintain an 
observer workstation and communications equipment. These requirements 
were originally implemented under the Rockfish Pilot Program, which 
required that fisheries observers be stationed at shoreside processors 
participating in the Rockfish Pilot Program. Observer requirements for 
shoreside processors were removed with the implementation of the 
Rockfish Program in 2012, making these equipment requirements no longer 
necessary.
    This final rule includes two additional technical corrections to 
regulations that clarify the season dates for directed fishing for 
Pacific cod under the Rockfish Program and updates references to dusky 
rockfish throughout the regulations. This final rule clarifies the 
season dates for directed fishing for Pacific cod with trawl gear at 
Sec.  679.23(d)(3)(ii) by cross-referencing the Rockfish Program season 
dates in Sec.  679.84(g). Current Rockfish Program regulations at Sec.  
679.80(a)(3)(ii) specify that fishing by vessels participating in a 
Rockfish Program cooperative is authorized from 1200 hours, A.l.t., May 
1 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., November 15. To clarify this, NMFS 
modifies regulations at Sec.  679.23(d)(3)(ii) in this final rule to 
reference the specific season dates authorized under the Rockfish 
Program.
    This final rule changes references to ``pelagic shelf'' rockfish to 
``dusky'' rockfish throughout regulations in 50 CFR part 679 to update 
regulations consistent with changes that have occurred to species 
categories since 2012 and the implementation of the Rockfish Program. 
Revising the references from pelagic shelf rockfish to dusky rockfish 
within the regulations and FMP is consistent with existing protocols 
for the annual stock assessment and harvest specifications of dusky 
rockfish.
    This final rule clarifies at Sec.  679.82(e)(9)(iii) that a 
rockfish cooperative may not exceed any deep-water or shallow-water 
halibut PSC sideboard limit assigned to that cooperative. This 
clarification was meant to be included with the Rockfish Program 
implemented by Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81247, December 27, 
2011). If a cooperative uses halibut PSC fishing for rockfish in the 
WGOA or the West Yakutat District, any halibut PSC used will be debited 
from the deep-water complex halibut PSC limit assigned to that 
cooperative. Once a cooperative reaches its deep-water halibut PSC 
sideboard limit, it will be able to continue to fish for rockfish in 
the Western GOA or West Yakutat District. This is further explained in 
the response to comment 3 in the ``Comments and Responses'' section 
below as well as in the ``Changes from Proposed to Final Rule'' section 
below.

Comments and Responses

    NMFS received 10 comment letters on the NOA for Amendment 111 and 
the proposed rule. NMFS has summarized and responded to 18 unique 
comments below. One of the comment letters received was outside the 
scope of the proposed rule. The comments were from individuals, 
environmental groups, and Rockfish Program cooperative participants.

Comments on the Proposed Rule

    Comment 1: Several commenters expressed general support for the 
reauthorization of the Rockfish Program without a sunset date. 
Commenters support the reauthorization of the Rockfish Program and the 
benefits the Program has created for historical harvesters, processors 
and the community of Kodiak.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment.
    Comment 2: One commenter expressed support for the modification to 
Sec.  679.82(e)(4), which removes the definition of sideboard ratios 
for Rockfish Program catcher/processors in the WGOA. However, the 
commenter does not support the proposed change to Sec.  679.82(e)(2) 
that would remove the reference to the WGOA in this paragraph. This 
modification to Sec.  679.82(e)(2) would lift the existing prohibition 
on directed rockfish fishing in the WGOA for non-Amendment 80 catcher/
processors, which was not considered nor recommended by the Council.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the respondent's support for the change 
to sideboard ratios for the Western GOA at Sec.  679.82(e)(4). NMFS 
agrees that the proposed rule incorrectly proposed to modify 
regulations at Sec.  679.82(e)(2) by removing the words ``Western GOA'' 
in this paragraph. This error has been corrected in this final rule.
    Comment 3: A commenter requested that NMFS further clarify 
regulations implementing Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81248, 
December 27, 2011). In the response to comment 31 in the final rule 
implementing Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP, NMFS responded to three 
questions related to the application of the deep-water halibut complex 
halibut PSC sideboard. NMFS stated in the final rule that if a 
cooperative uses halibut PSC fishing for rockfish in the Western GOA or 
the West Yakutat District, any halibut PSC used will be debited from 
the deep-water complex halibut PSC limit assigned to that cooperative. 
Once a cooperative reaches its deep-water halibut PSC sideboard limit, 
it will be able to continue to fish for rockfish in the Western GOA or 
West Yakutat District. However, reaching the deep-water halibut PSC 
limit would not prohibit the harvester from fishing for rockfish in the 
Western GOA or West Yakutat region. Any halibut PSC used for fishing 
rockfish would be debited from the deep-water complex halibut PSC limit 
assigned to that cooperative. In the final rule implementing Amendment 
88 to the GOA FMP, NMFS clarified this by modifying regulations at 
Sec.  679.7(n)(6)(iv) however, the commenter requested that NMFS update 
regulations at Sec.  679.82(e)(9)(iii) to further clarify this point in 
this rule as intended in the final rule implementing Amendment 88 to 
the GOA FMP.
    Response: NMFS agrees that this clarification is needed and this 
change is included in this final rule. As further explained in the 
``Changes from Proposed to Final Rule'' section of this final rule, 
NMFS adds a clarification at Sec.  679.82(e)(9)(iii) that was meant to 
be added in at the implementation of the Rockfish Program through 
Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP. Once a halibut PSC limit is reached by a 
rockfish cooperative, that cooperative is prohibited from directed 
fishing in the

[[Page 11898]]

shallow-water or deep-water flatfish complex depending on which PSC 
halibut sideboard had been reached in in the Western GOA or the West 
Yakutat District.
    Comment 4: A commenter disagreed with the proposed changes to 
remove observer coverage requirements and observer workstations under 
the Rockfish Program because data collected by observers is necessary 
to investigate corruption in this fishery.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the commenter's support for observer 
data collected in the Rockfish Program fisheries. However, NMFS 
disagrees that the requirement for a shoreside processor to provide an 
observer workstation and communication equipment should not be removed. 
This final rule maintains existing observer coverage requirements for 
all participants for the purpose of monitoring the Rockfish Program 
fisheries as implemented under Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 
81248, December 27, 2011). However, as part of that 2011 action, 
observer coverage requirements for shoreside processors were removed 
but the observer workstation and communication equipment requirements 
inadvertently remained in place. Without a requirement for observer 
coverage at shoreside processors under the Rockfish Program the 
observer workstation and communications equipment are not necessary and 
therefore these requirements are removed from regulation in this final 
rule. These changes are further described in the preamble to the 
proposed rule and Section 3.7.9 of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES).
    Comment 5: A commenter stated that there is no such thing as 
``unused'' fish and asserts that NMFS should not be authorized to 
reallocate any unused fish or Pacific cod under this Program.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Each year, after consultation with the 
Council, NMFS publishes the final harvest specifications, to specify 
the total allowable catch (TAC) for each target groundfish species and 
apportionments thereof, Pacific halibut prohibited species catch (PSC) 
limits, and seasonal allowances of pollock and Pacific cod. ``Unused'' 
fish in this context means unharvested and refers to the amount of 
catch for a particular species has been specified for harvest up to the 
TAC or apportionment of the TAC but has not yet been fully harvested in 
the specified time period. Under the GOA FMP and its implementing 
regulations, NMFS has existing authority to reallocate unharvested 
species. This final rule authorizes NMFS to reallocate Pacific cod and 
rockfish ICA's that would otherwise remain unharvested without 
reallocation. These changes will contribute to achieving optimum yield 
under National Standard 1 and potentially reduce mandatory discards of 
these species in other fisheries. Additional information is included in 
the preamble to the proposed rule and Sections 1.9.2, 3.7.2, and 3.7.10 
in the Analysis (See ADDRESSES).
    Comment 6: A commenter stated that proposed changes to regulations 
implementing the Rockfish Program, including changes to recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements, appear to increase unsustainable 
overharvesting of the fisheries.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Changes to recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements are summarized in the classification section of this final 
rule and do not modify provisions of the Rockfish Program that would 
affect NMFS' ability to monitor fishery harvests under the Rockfish 
Program. These recordkeeping and reporting changes clarify existing 
provisions of the program and remove unnecessary reporting 
requirements. These changes are described in more detail in Section 3.7 
of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES).
    Comment 7: We support the proposed revisions to remove unnecessary 
reporting requirements. Removing the requirements to submit a fishing 
plan and to submit a cooperative report to NMFS will save industry 
unnecessary time as neither report is used in actively managing the 
fishery. Although the Cooperative Manager will still give a voluntary 
cooperative report/presentation to the Council once per year to inform 
the Council and the public on the program's and cooperative's 
performance, we estimate the time saved will be up to 25 hours per 
year. We also support reducing the submission time for a cooperative 
check-in report from at least 48 hours to at least 24 hours before the 
vessel begins a fishing trip to help improve fishing efficiency.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment.
    Comment 8: Two commenters suggest that NMFS should not use 
information submitted by commercial fishermen for fisheries management. 
The commenters suggested that the changes to reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements proposed by this action are inconsistent 
with the MSA and are likely to decrease the robustness of science-based 
components of the program and lead to increased accidental or 
intentional overfishing.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment. This final rule makes 
minor administrative changes to the Rockfish Program, none of which 
modify the types of information that NMFS relies on to make fishery 
management decisions. The Magnuson-Stevens Act and the GOA FMP require, 
among other things, that fishery management decisions be based on the 
best scientific information available. This final rule does not change 
the data sources used to monitor the harvest of species allocated under 
the Rockfish Program.
    Comment 9: NMFS received several comment letters addressing issues 
outside the scope of this action. Commenters did not support this 
action because of the effects of fishing on natural resources, 
including marine mammals, and suggested that NMFS cut all commercial 
fishing quota by 50 percent, ban trawling in the Gulf of Alaska, and 
stop fishing for Pacific cod entirely.
    Response: These comments address management issues that are beyond 
the scope of Amendment 111 and this regulatory action. This final rule 
does not change the process of allocating quota or establishing TACs or 
sideboard limits under the Rockfish Programs, nor does this final rule 
change specific management measures that govern the harvest of 
allocated species under the Rockfish Program, such as fishing location, 
timing, effort, or authorized gear types. This final rule removes the 
sunset date and makes minor changes to the regulations implementing the 
Rockfish Program. The Magnuson-Stevens Act and the GOA FMP require, 
among other things, that the Council and NMFS manage fisheries to 
prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum 
yield from each fishery and base management decisions on the best 
scientific information available. The commenter provided no information 
to support cutting commercial fishing quota by 50 percent off Alaska. 
Currently, commercial groundfish fisheries off Alaska are being 
responsibly managed with conservative harvest strategies and provide 
important economic benefits to Alaskan communities. Additionally, in 
Section 2 of the Analysis prepared for this action, NMFS considered 
impacts on endangered and threatened species and marine mammals (See 
ADDRESSES).
    Comment 10: One commenter questioned how the quality of goods would 
be affected by the slower fishing times and if the industry will have 
to deal with quality control declines as production slows, including 
training procedures for this scenario.

[[Page 11899]]

    Response: Sections 3.5.7 and 3.5.8 in the Analysis describes 
rockfish products, markets, and associated wholesale market values (See 
ADDRESSES). Section 4.1 of the Analysis goes into detail on how each 
National Standard is met (See ADDRESSES). The Rockfish Program 
establishes CQ allocations that allow stakeholders and groups of 
stakeholders to more efficiently utilize the CGOA resource relative to 
the limited access management that would go into place with no action. 
Efficiency is enhanced by allowing CQ holders to scale effort spatially 
and temporally to reduce costs and increase value.
    In addition, there is a downward trend for rockfish products; 
however, it is attributed to currency valuation and rising secondary 
processing costs, not slower fishing time. At this time, NMFS is not 
aware of reduced quality control under the Rockfish Program, either at 
this present time or at implementation of the Pilot Program, when the 
LAPP was established. As such, NMFS does not provide training 
procedures that address quality control in an established LAPP.
    Comment 11: One commenter questioned if this rule supports the 
common (or great) good and if this rule is against the rights of other 
businesses fishing in the area for their own productivity.
    Response: In recommending Amendment 111, the Council considered the 
10 National Standards as contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The 
National Standards are principles with which fishery management plans 
and their implementing regulations must be consistent, thereby ensuring 
sustainable and responsible fishery management. Section 4.1 of the 
Analysis goes into detail on how each National Standard is met (See 
ADDRESSES). This final rule promotes National Standards 5 and 6, 
specifically, in terms of community and economic considerations. This 
final rule maintains existing fish harvesting efficiencies under the 
Rockfish Program and modifies specific administrative provisions to 
improve operational efficiency of the Rockfish Program. The Rockfish 
Program takes into account the unique nature of the CGOA rockfish 
fishery in terms of its timing during the fishing year and value to the 
community of Kodiak. The Rockfish Program allows the fishery to be 
prosecuted during a longer period of time and avoid conflicts with the 
salmon fisheries that take place during July.
    Comment 12: In the preamble of the proposed rule, NMFS omitted 
mention of thornyhead rockfish (Sebastolobus alaskanus), which is a 
secondary species for both catcher vessel and catcher processor 
cooperatives.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the error in the preamble of the 
proposed rule. The secondary species rationalized under the Rockfish 
Program include Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker rockfish, 
sablefish, and thornyhead rockfish. The regulatory text correctly 
specifies Rockfish Program secondary species. In Section 2.2 of the 
Analysis, thornyhead rockfish are discussed in detail as a secondary 
species (See ADDRESSES).
    Comment 13: The proposed regulation will undermine both the 
environmental and economic protections Congress intended with the MSA 
by increasing the TACs while simultaneously removing the sensible 
reporting and monitoring of this commercial activity. The past 
disasters, both for rockfish and for the people who depend on them for 
their livelihood, show a clear need for sensible common sense 
restrictions on fishing and continued reporting mandates.
    Response: One of the goals of the Rockfish Program is to enhance 
resource conservation in the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The Rockfish 
Program, as implemented by this rule and Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP, 
continues the cooperative management structure that provides the fleet 
with tools to minimize bycatch to the extent practicable, reduce 
discards and improve utilization of groundfish species.
    Overfishing Limits (OFLs) and TACs are set each year with 
conservation in mind. The Rockfish Program's primary and secondary 
species are not subject to overfishing and are not overfished; TACs are 
set in a precautionary manner. The current harvest specifications 
process and authorities for in-season management prevent overfishing 
and provide for the Rockfish Program to achieve optimum yield on a 
continuing basis. As described in the proposed rule and Section 2.2 of 
the Analysis, and this final rule, harvest of Rockfish Program quota 
will continue to be established by the Council and NMFS through the 
annual harvest specifications (85 FR 13802, March 10, 2020) (See 
ADDRESSES). Amendment 111 and this final rule do not substantively 
change conservation and management of the species managed under the 
CGOA Rockfish Program.
    As described in the response to comment 8, this final rule makes 
minor administrative changes to the Rockfish Program, none of which 
modify the types of information that NMFS relies on to make fishery 
management decisions. This final rule does not change the data sources 
used to monitor the harvest of species allocated under the Rockfish 
Program.
    Comment 14: The MSA states that any conservation efforts in the 
area must take into account any potential effects it could have on 
surrounding fishing communities. Fishing communities are defined as ``a 
social or economic group whose members reside in a specific location 
and share a common dependency on commercial, recreational, or 
subsistence fishing.'' This would include many of the region's 
indigenous communities. Amendment 111 has not demonstrated sufficient 
concern towards the cultural and health impacts it will have on Alaska 
Native communities.
    Putting the area's rockfish population at risk of overharvesting 
would have direct negative impacts on Alaska Native communities who 
have long depended on rockfish for nutritional and cultural needs. Lack 
of precautions to assure sustainable catch of rockfish populations 
could have negative impacts on food insecurity. The ambition of 
industry should not curtail the cultural and subsistence use of wild 
fish stocks by Native Alaskans. We request that the agency review and 
weigh the impact that this rulemaking will have on Native Alaskan 
communities.
    Response: As explained in the response to comment 12, Amendment 111 
and this final rule do not substantively change conservation and 
management of the species managed in the CGOA Rockfish Program. Section 
2.2 of the Analysis and the response to comment 12 describe how the GOA 
rockfish population is not at risk of being overfished or subjected to 
overfishing (See ADDRESSES).
    This final rule and Amendment 111 are consistent with National 
Standard 8 and maintain the existing management structure of the 
Rockfish Program. As described in Section 3.5.6 of the Analysis and the 
Social Impact Assessment, no issues were identified for this final rule 
that would put the sustained participation of any fishing communities, 
including Alaska Native communities, at risk. Implementing this final 
rule would not change the community protection measures built into the 
Rockfish Program and previously found to be functioning as intended. 
The Rockfish Program is likely to have continued beneficial impacts on 
fishing communities. Patterns of community participation in the CGOA 
rockfish fisheries are unlikely to change with implementation of the 
final rule. Among communities

[[Page 11900]]

substantially engaged in and/or substantially dependent on the CGOA 
rockfish fisheries managed under the Rockfish Program, Kodiak is the 
most centrally engaged in and dependent on the fishery as measured by 
multiple indices across multiple sectors of the fishery. Kodiak has 
experienced beneficial impacts across harvester, processor, and support 
services sectors because of the implementation of the Rockfish Program, 
relative to the pre-Rockfish Pilot Program conditions, and has 
specifically benefitted from several community protection measures 
built into the program. Although not all individual operations have 
benefitted equally from the change in qualifying years between the 
Rockfish Pilot Program and the Rockfish Program, no substantial adverse 
sector-level or community-level impacts resulting from the 
implementation of the Rockfish Program have been identified for the 
community of Kodiak.
    Comment 15: It is indicated within the EA that climate change is a 
reasonably foreseeable future action that may have an impact on primary 
and secondary species located within the action area. Given this 
explicit understanding of the looming detrimental impacts of climate 
change, even if the drastic increase in harvesting does not single 
handedly reduce the viability of the fish population, there is minimal 
room for natural phenomena to take place in combination with the 
harvesting increase while maintaining a viable fish stock that can 
support the industry. To ignore the risks of climate change and 
resulting El Ni[ntilde]o events on the rockfish population coupled with 
increasing harvest, and its potential to decimate this rockfish 
population as seen in the West Coast, suggest that the proposed rule 
should fully consider the risk of climate change and take more 
restrictive conservational measures.
    Response: Section 2.2.3 of the EA states that climate change is the 
only reasonably foreseeable future action (RFFA) identified as likely 
to have an impact on primary and secondary target species allocated 
within the action area and timeframe, the EA concludes that 
``considering the direct and indirect impacts of the proposed action 
when added to the impacts of past and present actions, previously 
analyzed in other documents incorporated by reference, and the impacts 
of the RFFAs listed above, the cumulative impacts of the proposed 
action are determined to be insignificant.'' Effects of the action and 
RFFAs on the target species are considered insignificant, because they 
are not expected to jeopardize the capacity of the stock to yield 
sustainable biomass on a continuing basis and are unlikely to affect 
the distribution of harvested stocks either spatially or temporally 
such that it has an effect on the ability of the stock to sustain 
itself.
    Although the net effect of climate change on fish resources is 
currently difficult to predict with accuracy, NMFS and the Council use 
the Ecosystem Status Reports (ESR) to track the status and trends of 
ecosystem components through a variety of indicators that are 
synthesized through a blend of data analysis and modeling to produce 
ecosystem assessments. The ESR may thus provide early warning signals 
of direct ecosystem impacts that may affect fish resources, including 
rockfish species that could warrant management intervention or evidence 
of the efficacy of previous management actions, as well as track 
performance in meeting the stated ecosystem-based management goals of 
the Council.
    NMFS reviews the RFFAs, including climate change, as described in 
the Harvest Specifications Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) each 
year to determine whether they occurred and, if they did occur, whether 
they would change the analysis in the Harvest Specifications EIS of the 
impacts of the harvest strategy on the human environment (See 
ADDRESSES). In addition, NMFS considers each year whether other actions 
not anticipated in the Harvest Specifications EIS occurred that would 
have a bearing on the harvest strategy or its impacts. Each year stock 
assessment authors review the previous year's ESR for factors that may 
impact stock/complex biomass and summarize those for the Plan Teams' 
review. Indicators of concern can be highlighted within each stock 
assessment and can be used by the Groundfish Plan Teams and the Council 
to justify modification of allowable biological catch (ABC) 
recommendations or time/space allocations of catch. NMFS anticipates 
that current monitoring of groundfish trends and environmental 
conditions through selected key indicators, reporting in the annual 
ESRs, and incorporation of this information into the annual stock 
assessments and the harvest specification process is currently 
sufficient to alert the Council and NMFS managers to changes to 
rockfish population trends and conditions.
Comments on the Information Collection Supporting Statements for OMB 
Control Numbers 0648-0678 and 0648-0545
    Comment 16: A commenter identified a couple changes to the 
supporting statement for the Rockfish Program collection of information 
(OMB Control Number 0648-0545). First, the commenter disagreed with the 
statement that ``the cooperative must form an association with the 
processor to which it historically delivered the most rockfish. The 
cooperative/processor associations are intended to ensure that a 
cooperative lands a substantial portion of its catch with its members' 
historic processor.'' This was the case during the Rockfish Pilot 
Program. However, with the current Rockfish Program a cooperative must 
form an association with a processor within the city limits of Kodiak 
but that processor need not be the member's ``historic'' processor. 
Second, the supporting statement notes that the Rockfish Program Vessel 
Check-In/Check-Out and Termination of Fishing Report and Application 
for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota (CQ) may be submitted to NMFS 
more often than quarterly. The commenter thinks the Agency meant that 
the Application for Inter-Cooperative Transfer of Rockfish Cooperative 
Quota and the Rockfish Program Vessel Check-In/Check-Out reports may be 
submitted more often than quarterly (these transfers and check ins/outs 
occur many times over the season). The Application for Rockfish 
Cooperative Fishing Quota is submitted only once per year and any 
Termination of Fishing Report would be submitted only once per year.
    Response: NMFS agrees with these changes, and they are reflected in 
the supporting statement for OMB Control Number 0648-0545 associated 
with this final rule.
    Comment 17: A commenter was heartened to read that NMFS Alaska 
Region is currently working on offering submission of the Application 
for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota application online through 
eFISH. The use of eFISH for vessel check-in and check-outs and CQ 
transfers greatly reduced the time and paperwork burden for the 
cooperatives so they look forward to being able to submit the annual 
cooperative applications online through eFISH.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment.
    Comment 18: Note that the fishery management council in Alaska is 
the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC), not ``Alaska 
Council.'' Note that the program is titled, ``Central Gulf of Alaska 
Rockfish Program,'' not ``Alaska Rockfish Program.''
    Response: In response to this comment, the title of the information 
collection for OMB Control Number 0648-0678 has been changed from 
Alaska Council Cooperative Annual

[[Page 11901]]

Reports to North Pacific Fishery Management Council Cooperative Annual 
Reports to reflect the correct name of the regional fishery management 
council. The title of the information collection for OMB Control Number 
0648-0545 has been changed from Alaska Rockfish Program: Permits and 
Reports to Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program: Permits and Reports 
to refer to the correct name of the program.

Changes From Proposed to Final Rule

    There were two changes from the proposed to the final rule to 
correct an error in the proposed rule for this action and to correct an 
error included in the final rule implementing Amendment 88 to the GOA 
FMP (76 FR 81248, December 27, 2011).
    The proposed rule inadvertently proposed to remove the words 
``Western Gulf of Alaska'' in regulations at Sec.  679.82(e)(2). Based 
on public comment 2 above, the final rule does not remove the words 
``Western Gulf of Alaska'' at Sec.  679.82(e)(2). The proposed change 
to paragraph Sec.  679.82(e)(2) would have removed Western Gulf of 
Alaska sideboard limits applicable to vessels operating in fisheries 
outside the Rockfish Program. This proposed change to paragraph (e)(2) 
would have removed the Western Gulf of Alaska directed fishing 
prohibition applicable to vessels operating in fisheries outside the 
Rockfish Program. This is outside the scope of the action recommended 
by the Council and therefore this previously proposed change is not 
included in this final rule.
    The second change from proposed to final rule corrects an 
inadvertent omission in the final rule implementing Amendment 88 to the 
GOA FMP (76 FR 81248, December 27, 2011). Comment 3 in this final rule 
provides support for this change. As originally described by NMFS in 
the response to comment 31 (76 FR 81248, December 27, 2011), this 
change clarifies that catcher/processors are limited from expanding 
their harvests of deep-water flatfish beyond an amount that could be 
supported by the proportion of the halibut PSC historically used by a 
cooperative. NMFS adds a clarification at Sec.  679.82(e)(9)(iii) that 
was meant to be added in at the implementation of the Rockfish Program 
through Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81247, December 27, 2011). A 
rockfish cooperative may not exceed any deep-water or shallow-water 
halibut PSC sideboard limit assigned to that cooperative. If a 
cooperative uses halibut PSC while fishing for rockfish in the WGOA or 
the West Yakutat District, any halibut PSC used will be debited from 
the deep-water complex halibut PSC sideboard limit assigned to that 
cooperative. Once a cooperative reaches its deep-water halibut PSC 
sideboard limit, it could continue to fish for rockfish in the Western 
GOA or West Yakutat District because the Council intended to limit the 
ability of cooperatives to expand their harvests of deep-water flatfish 
with the halibut PSC sideboard limit beyond an amount that could be 
supported by the proportion of the halibut PSC historically used by a 
cooperative during 2000 through 2006. The Council did not intend to 
limit the rockfish fisheries, which were fully harvested during this 
period. NMFS is clarifying that once the deep-water halibut PSC 
sideboard limit it reached, cooperatives may not continue to fish for 
deep-water species, except rockfish that are open for directed fishing, 
in the Western GOA or West Yakutat District and this is in response to 
a comment received at the final rule stage. Any halibut PSC that 
continues to accrue in the rockfish fishery by the cooperative in the 
WGOA and West Yakutat District will continue to accrue to the overall 
deep-water species fishery halibut PSC limit for the GOA.

Classification

    Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that 
Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP and this final rule are necessary for the 
conservation and management of the CGOA Rockfish Program and are 
consistent with the GOA FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, and other applicable law.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Small Entity Compliance Guide

    Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for 
which an agency is required to prepare a final regulatory flexibility 
analysis (FRFA), the agency shall publish one or more guides to assist 
small entities in complying with the rule, and shall designate such 
publications as ``small entity compliance guides.'' The agency shall 
explain the actions a small entity is required to take to comply with a 
rule or group of rules. The preambles to the proposed rule and this 
final rule include a detailed description of the actions necessary to 
comply with this rule and as part of this rulemaking process. NMFS has 
published on its website a summary of compliance requirements that 
serves as the small entity compliance guide for the Rockfish Program: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/central-gulf-alaska-rockfish-program-informational-guide. This rule does not require any 
additional compliance from small entities that is not described in the 
preambles. Copies of this final rule are available from NMFS at the 
following website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/region/alaska.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)

    This FRFA incorporates the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA), a summary of the significant issues raised by the public 
comments in response to the IRFA, NMFS' responses to those comments, 
and a summary of the analyses completed to support the final rule.
    Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that, 
when an agency promulgates a final rule under section 553 of Title 5 of 
the U.S. Code (5 U.S.C. 553), after being required by that section or 
any other law to publish a general notice of final rulemaking, the 
agency shall prepare a FRFA (5 U.S.C. 604). Section 604 describes the 
required contents of a FRFA: (1) A statement of the need for and 
objectives of the rule; (2) a statement of the significant issues 
raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, a statement of 
the assessment of the agency of such issues, and a statement of any 
changes made to the proposed rule as a result of such comments; (3) the 
response of the agency to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) in response to the 
proposed rule, and a detailed statement of any change made to the 
proposed rule in the final rule as a result of the comments; (4) a 
description of and an estimate of the number of small entities to which 
the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate is 
available; (5) a description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, 
and other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of 
the classes of small entities that will be subject to the requirement 
and the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the 
report or record; and (6) a description of the steps the agency has 
taken to minimize the significant economic impact on small entities 
consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes including 
a statement of the factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the 
alternative adopted and why each

[[Page 11902]]

one of the other significant alternatives to the rule considered by the 
agency which affect the impact on small entities was rejected.
    A description of this final rule and the need for and objectives of 
this rule are contained in the preamble to the proposed rule (85 FR 
55243, September 4, 2020) and final rule and are not repeated here.

Public and Chief Counsel for Advocacy Comments on the IRFA

    An IRFA was prepared in the Classification section of the preamble 
to the proposed rule. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA did not 
file any comments on the proposed rule. NMFS received no comments 
specifically on the IRFA.

Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by This Final Rule

    This final rule will directly regulate the owners and operators of 
catcher vessels, catcher/processor vessels, and shoreside processors 
eligible to participate in the CGOA Rockfish Program. In 2019 (the most 
recent year of complete data), 54 vessel owners participated in the 
Rockfish Program, 19 of which are considered small entities based on 
the $11 million threshold. No catcher/processor vessels are classified 
as small entities because their combined gross income through 
affiliation with the Amendment 80 cooperative exceeds the $11 million 
first wholesale value threshold. In 2018 and 2019, six shore-based 
cooperatives were associated with a unique shoreside processor under 
the Rockfish Program. Reliable information is not available on 
ownership affiliations among individual processing operations or 
employment for the fish processors directly regulated by this final 
rule. Therefore, NMFS assumes that all of the processors directly 
regulated by this final rule could be small. Additional detail is 
included in Sections 3.5.5 and 3.9 in the Analysis prepared for this 
final rule (see ADDRESSES).
    In addition to the main program, this final rule also maintains the 
``entry level'' fishery for the longline sector. Since participation in 
that fishery is voluntary, the number of small entities participating 
in future years cannot be reliably predicted. From 2012 to 2019, an 
average of 4 vessels targeted CGOA rockfish in the entry level longline 
sector. Participation in this fishery has typically included vessels 
using jig gear and are considered small entities. Therefore, it is 
likely that a substantial portion of the entry level longline fishery 
participants will be small entities.

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements

    This final rule will modify recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements under the Rockfish Program to (1) clarify that only 
shoreside processors receiving Rockfish Program CQ must submit the 
Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report; (2) modify cooperative 
check-in times from 48 to 24 hours; (3) remove the requirement for an 
annual Rockfish Program cooperative report to be submitted to NMFS; (4) 
remove the requirement for rockfish cooperatives to submit a fishing 
plan with its annual application for cooperative quota; and (5) require 
NMFS to annually publish a Rockfish Program cost recovery report. These 
recordkeeping and reporting changes will clarify existing provisions of 
the program and remove unnecessary reporting requirements, slightly 
reducing the reporting burden for all directly regulated entities 
including small entities. The impacts of these changes are described in 
more detail in Section 3.7 of the Analysis prepared for this final rule 
(See ADDRESSES).

Description of Significant Alternatives Considered to the Final Action 
That Minimize Adverse Impacts on Small Entities

    The final rule builds upon the Rockfish Pilot Program and the 
previously implemented Rockfish Program. The Rockfish Pilot Program was 
originally enacted through congressional direction to address economic 
inefficiencies in the fishery that primarily affected small entities. 
In recommending this final rule, the Council considered two 
alternatives, as it evaluated the potential for the continued 
rationalization of the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The two alternatives 
are the ``no action'' alternative (Alternative 1) that allows the 
Rockfish Program to expire on December 31, 2021 and an action 
alternative (Alternative 2) reauthorizing the Rockfish Program with 
numerous alternative elements to address a suite of potential 
management revisions. The Council considered alternatives that would 
modify the duration of the Rockfish Program: (1) Remove the sunset 
date, or (2) implement a new sunset date of 10 to 20 years; and select 
from numerous alternative elements to revise administrative provisions 
of the Rockfish Program. The Council selected Alternative 2 with the 
suite of elements included in this final rule to remove the sunset date 
and modify specific provisions of the Rockfish Program.
    Based upon the best available scientific data, and in consideration 
of the Council's objectives of this action, it appears that there are 
no significant alternatives to the final rule that have the potential 
to accomplish the stated objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and any 
other applicable statutes and that have the potential to minimize any 
significant adverse economic impact of the proposed rule on small 
entities. After public process, the Council concluded that the proposed 
Rockfish Program will best accomplish the stated objectives articulated 
in the preamble for this final rule, and in applicable statutes, and 
will minimize to the extent practicable adverse economic impacts on the 
universe of directly regulated small entities.

Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules

    NMFS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict 
between this final rule and existing Federal rules.

Collection-of-Information Requirements

    This final 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). This rule changes the 
existing requirements for two collections of information--OMB Control 
Numbers 0648-0678 (Alaska Council Cooperative Annual Reports) and 0648-
0545 (Alaska Rockfish Program: Permits and Reports)--and requests 
extension of OMB Control Number 0648-0545.
OMB Control Number 0648-0678
    This rule revises the information collection requirements contained 
in OMB Control Number 0648-0678 to remove the requirement for an annual 
Rockfish Program cooperative report to be submitted to NMFS. This 
requirement is unnecessary, and removing it decreases the respondents' 
reporting costs. Another revision, which is not connected to this final 
rule, removes the AFA Catcher Vessel Intercooperative Agreement as a 
separate component of this collection because this is already included 
as an appendix to the AFA Annual Catcher Vessel Intercooperative 
Report, which is approved under OMB Control Number 0648-0678. The 
public reporting burden is estimated to average per individual response 
40 hours for the AFA Annual Catcher Vessel Intercooperative Report and 
25 to 40 hours for the annual Rockfish Program cooperative report 
submitted to the Council. The burden hours reported in the proposed 
rule

[[Page 11903]]

were erroneously reported in minutes instead of hours. This final rule 
includes the accurate estimate of burden hours. The estimated burden 
hours for the submission of cooperative reports to NMFS reduces the 
overall burden hour estimate for this collection by 45 hours.
OMB Control Number 0648-0545
    This final rule revise the information collection requirements 
contained in OMB Control Number 0648-0545, and NMFS has requested an 
extension of this collection for three years. This collection contains 
three applications and reports used by Rockfish Program cooperatives to 
apply for cooperative fishing permits, transfer cooperative quota, and 
manage cooperative fishing activity. This collection is necessary for 
NMFS to effectively administer and monitor compliance with the 
management provisions of the Rockfish Program.
    This rule removes the requirement for a rockfish cooperative to 
submit a fishing plan with its Application for Rockfish Cooperative 
Fishing Quota. No change is made to the estimated reporting burden or 
costs for this application as the estimate allows for differences in 
the time needed to complete and submit the application. This rule also 
reduces the time for a Rockfish Program catcher vessel to submit a 
cooperative check-in report from 48 hours to 24 hours before the start 
of a fishing trip. This does not change the estimated reporting burden 
or costs for this report. These changes are necessary to remove 
unnecessary reporting requirements.
    The respondents are the seven Rockfish Program cooperatives; the 
estimated total annual burden hours are 35 hours; and the estimated 
total annual cost to the public for recordkeeping and reporting costs 
is $35.
    Public reporting burden per individual response is estimated to 
average 2 hours for the Application for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing 
Quota; 10 minutes for the Application for Inter-Cooperative Transfer of 
Rockfish Cooperative Quota; and 10 minutes for the Rockfish Program 
Vessel Check-In/Check-Out and Termination of Fishing Report.
    The public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing 
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information.
    We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment 
on proposed and continuing information collections, which helps us 
assess the impact of our information collection requirements and 
minimize the public's reporting burden. Written comments and 
recommendations for this information collection should be submitted on 
the following website: www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find these 
particular information collections by using the search function and 
entering either the title of the collection or the OMB Control Number 
(0648-0678 or 0648-0545).
    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.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 680

    Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 19, 2021.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 679 and 680 
are amended as follows:

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

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

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


Sec.  679.2   [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  679.2, in paragraph (1) of the definition for ``Rockfish 
Program species'' and paragraph (1) of the definition for ``Rockfish 
sideboard limit'', remove the words ``pelagic shelf rockfish'' and add 
in their place the words ``dusky rockfish''.

0
3. In Sec.  679.5, remove and reserve paragraph (r)(6) and revise 
paragraph (r)(8)(i)(A)(1) and (r)(10)(i).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  679.5   Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).

* * * * *
    (r) * * *
    (8) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (1) At least 24 hours prior to the time the catcher vessel begins a 
fishing trip to fish under a CQ permit; or
* * * * *
    (10) * * *
    (i) Applicability. A rockfish processor (as defined at Sec.  679.2) 
that receives and purchases landings of rockfish CQ groundfish must 
submit annually to NMFS a complete Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value 
Report, as described in this paragraph (r)(10), for each reporting 
period for which the rockfish processor receives rockfish CQ 
groundfish.
* * * * *


Sec.  679.20   [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  679.20, in paragraph (d)(1)(vi)(C)(1), remove the words 
``pelagic shelf rockfish'' and add in their place the words ``dusky 
rockfish''.

0
5. In Sec.  679.23, revise paragraphs (d)(3)(ii) introductory text and 
(h)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.23   Seasons.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Trawl gear. Subject to other provisions of this part, directed 
fishing for Pacific cod with trawl gear in the Western and Central 
Regulatory Areas is authorized only during the following two seasons 
except as authorized in Subpart G of this Section under the Rockfish 
Program:
* * * * *
    (h) * * *

[[Page 11904]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     You are
    If you own or operate a      prohibited from
  catcher vessel and fish for      subsequently          Until ***
 groundfish with trawl gear in   deploying trawl
            the ***              gear in the ***
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) BSAI while pollock or       Western and        1200 hours A.l.t. on
 Pacific cod is open to          Central GOA        the third day after
 directed fishing in the BSAI.   regulatory areas.  the date of landing
                                                    or transfer of all
                                                    groundfish on board
                                                    the vessel harvested
                                                    in the BSAI, unless
                                                    you are engaged in
                                                    directed fishing for
                                                    Pacific cod in the
                                                    GOA for processing
                                                    by the offshore
                                                    component or if
                                                    checked-in and
                                                    participating in a
                                                    CGOA Rockfish
                                                    Program cooperative.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
6. In Sec.  679.80 revise the paragraph (a) subject heading and remove 
and reserve paragraph (a)(2).
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  679.80   Allocation and transfer of rockfish QS.

* * * * *
    (a) Applicable areas and seasons--
* * * * *

0
7. In Sec.  679.81, remove and reserve paragraph (f)(4)(i)(D)(3), 
remove paragraphs (i)(3)(xxv) and (xxvi), and add paragraph (j).
    The addition reads as follows:


Sec.  679.81   Rockfish Program annual harvester privileges.

* * * * *
    (j) Reallocations--Annual reallocation of Central Gulf of Alaska 
rockfish species--
    (1) Pacific cod. After the Rockfish Program fisheries close on 
November 15, the Regional Administrator may reallocate any unused 
amount of Pacific cod from the Rockfish Program to other sectors 
through notification in the Federal Register consistent with 
regulations at Sec.  679.20(a)(12)(ii).
    (2) Rockfish ICAs--(i) General. The Regional Administrator may 
reallocate a portion of a Central GOA rockfish ICAs to rockfish 
cooperatives if the amounts assigned to the Central GOA rockfish ICAs 
are projected not to be harvested or used. The timing of a reallocation 
will be at the discretion of the Regional Administrator.
    (ii) Reallocation of Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish ICA species. 
If, during a fishing year, the Regional Administrator determines that a 
reallocation of a portion of the ICAs of Central Gulf of Alaska 
rockfish species to rockfish cooperatives is appropriate, the Regional 
Administrator will issue a revised CQ permit to reallocate that amount 
of Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish species to rockfish cooperatives 
according to the following:
    (A) Catcher vessel rockfish cooperatives will be given priority for 
reallocation; and
    (B) The amount of additional CQ issued to each rockfish cooperative 
= Amount of Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish species available for 
reallocation to rockfish cooperatives x (Amount of CQ for that Central 
Gulf of Alaska rockfish species initially assigned to that rockfish 
cooperative/[Sigma] CQ for that Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish species 
initially assigned to all rockfish cooperatives in the respective 
sector).

0
8. In Sec.  679.82:
0
a. Add paragraph (a)(1)(vi);
0
b. In paragraphs (d)(3) and (e)(2), remove the words ``pelagic shelf 
rockfish'' and add in their place the words ``dusky rockfish''; and
0
c. Revise paragraphs (e)(4) and (e)(9)(iii).
    The addition and revisions read as follows:


Sec.  679.82   Rockfish Program use caps and sideboard limits.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (vi) Any transfer of reallocated rockfish ICA (as authorized under 
Sec.  679.81(j)(2)) or catcher/processor CQ to a catcher vessel 
cooperative does not apply to catcher vessel ownership, cooperative, 
harvester CQ, or shoreside processor CQ use caps.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (4) West Yakutat District rockfish sideboard ratios. The rockfish 
sideboard ratio for each rockfish fishery in the West Yakutat District 
is an established percentage of the TAC for catcher/processors in the 
directed fishery for dusky rockfish and Pacific ocean perch. These 
percentages are confidential.
* * * * *
    (9) * * *
    (iii) A rockfish cooperative may not exceed any deep-water or 
shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limits assigned to that cooperative 
when directed fishing for species other than rockfish.
* * * * *

0
9. In Sec.  679.84, revise paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.84   Rockfish Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring, and 
catch accounting.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) Catch monitoring and control plan (CMCP). The owner or operator 
of a shoreside processor receiving deliveries from a catcher vessel 
described in Sec.  679.51(a)(2) must ensure the shoreside processor 
complies with the CMCP requirements described in Sec.  679.28(g) except 
the requirements for an observer workstation and communication with 
observer as specified in Sec.  679.28(g)(7)(vii) and (viii).
* * * * *

0
10. In Sec.  679.85, add paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.85   Cost recovery.

* * * * *
    (g) Annual report. Each year, NMFS will publish a report describing 
the rockfish program cost recovery fee program.

PART 680--SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 
ALASKA

0
11. The authority citation for part 680 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109-241; Pub. L. 109-479.


0
12. In Sec.  680.22, revise paragraph (a)(1) introductory text to read 
as follows:


Sec.  680.22   Sideboard protections for GOA groundfish fisheries.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) Vessels subject to GOA groundfish sideboard directed fishing 
closures. Any vessel that NMFS has determined meets one or both of the 
following criteria is subject to GOA groundfish sideboard directed 
fishing closures issued under paragraph (e) of this section except when 
participating in the Rockfish Program authorized under part 679, 
subpart G, of this chapter.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-03859 Filed 2-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P