[Federal Register: February 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 25)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 5654-5674]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07fe07-31]
[[Page 5654]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 061206324-6324-01; I.D. 112006I]
RIN 0648-AU48
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod
Allocations in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area
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 implement Amendment 85
to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) and that would implement recent
changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act). If approved, Amendment 85 would modify the
current allocations of Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area
(BSAI) Pacific cod total allowable catch (TAC) among various harvest
sectors and seasonal apportionments thereof. This action also would
establish a hierarchy for reallocating projected unharvested amounts of
Pacific cod from certain sectors to other sectors, revise catcher/
processor sector definitions, modify the management of Pacific cod
incidental catch that occurs in other groundfish fisheries, eliminate
the Pacific cod nonspecified reserve, adjust the seasonal allowances of
Pacific cod, subdivide among sectors the annual prohibited species
catch (PSC) limits currently apportioned to the Pacific cod trawl and
nontrawl fisheries, and modify the sideboard restrictions for American
Fisheries Act (AFA) catcher/processor (CP) vessels. In addition, this
proposed rule would increase the percentage of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC
apportioned to the Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program. Amendment
85 is necessary to reduce uncertainty about the availability of yearly
harvests within sectors caused by reallocations, and to maintain
stability among sectors in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. This would be
accomplished by establishing allocations that more closely reflect
historical use by sector than do current allocations while considering
socioeconomic and community factors, thus reducing the need for
reallocations during the fishing year (inseason). This proposed rule
also is necessary to partially implement recent changes to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act that require a total allocation of 10.7 percent of
the TAC of each directed fishery to the CDQ Program starting January 1,
2008. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and other applicable laws.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than March 26, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer. Comments may be submitted by:
Hand delivery: 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK;
E-mail: 0648-AU48-PR-AMD85@noaa.gov. Include in the
subject line the following document identifier: ``Pacific cod RIN 0648
AU48.'' E-mail comments, with or without attachments, are limited to 5
megabytes;
Fax: 907-586-7557;
Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668; or
Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions at that site for
submitting comments.
Copies of Amendment 85 and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory
Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA)
prepared for this action are available from NMFS at the above address
or from the NMFS Alaska Region website at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Carls, 907-586-7228 or
becky.carls@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the BSAI under the FMP. The North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMP appear at
50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
The Council has submitted Amendment 85 for review by the Secretary
of Commerce, and a notice of availability of the FMP amendment was
published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006, (71 FR 70943)
with comments on the FMP amendment invited through February 5, 2007.
Background and Need for Action
NMFS uses TACs to manage the harvest of groundfish species in the
BSAI as one management tool to ensure sustainable fisheries. The FMP
and its implementing regulations require NMFS, after consultation with
the Council, to annually specify the TAC for each target species and
for the ``other species'' category governed by the FMP. The Council
develops TAC recommendations based on the acceptable biological catch
(ABC) for each stock of fish and other socioeconomic factors. The ABC
is based on the status of the stock, environmental conditions, and
other ecological factors.
The FMP requires a TAC to be less than or equal to the ABC for each
fish stock. Between 1991 and 1994, between 1998 and 2001, and in 2005,
the Pacific cod TACs were set equal to their ABCs. Thus, typically all
the BSAI Pacific cod that is available for harvest in a particular
fishing year is completely allocated. The Pacific cod TAC allocations
and apportionments for 2006 and 2007 are listed in Table 5 of the
groundfish specifications published March 3, 2006 (71 FR 10900), and
may be changed as necessary during any fishing year pursuant to 50 CFR
679.20(a)(7)(ii) and 679.25(a). Final 2006 and 2007 harvest
specifications implemented a 2006 BSAI Pacific cod TAC of 194,000 mt,
which equaled the 2006 ABC for Pacific cod. Shortly after publication,
this TAC was adjusted downward to 188,180 mt (71 FR 13777, March 17,
2006) to accommodate a new Pacific cod fishery in State of Alaska
waters in the Aleutian Islands and to avoid exceeding the ABC.
The current regulations provide for the overall TAC of BSAI Pacific
cod, after subtraction of reserves, to be subdivided or allocated among
eight non-CDQ fishing industry sectors based on the type of fishing
gear used (50 CFR 679.20(a)(7)). Basically, these gear sectors include
trawl gear, fixed gear (hook-and-line and pot), and jig gear. These
basic allocations are further subdivided between catcher/processor
vessels (CPs) that process their catch and catcher vessels (CVs) that
catch fish but do not process it. Most allocations are further
apportioned between seasons. The purpose of these allocations and
apportionments is to prevent one industry sector from unfairly
affecting the harvesting opportunities of other sectors and to ensure
temporal dispersion of harvest to protect Steller sea lions (SSLs).
Currently, the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC is fully distributed
among the
[[Page 5655]]
following eight competing harvest sectors: jig, fixed gear (pot and
hook-and-line gear) CVs less than 60 ft (18.3 m) length overall
(hereafter, < 60 ft LOA), hook-and-line CVs greater than or equal to 60
ft LOA (hereafter, [gteqt]60 ft LOA), hook-and-line CPs, pot CVs
[gteqt]60 ft LOA, pot CPs, trawl CPs, and trawl CVs. Several FMP
amendments, implemented beginning in 1994, have allocated Pacific cod
among these sectors. The previous and current allocations, and those
proposed under Amendment 85, are summarized in Table 1. The amendments
are described in more detail below.
Table 1. Percent sector allocations by amendment and year implemented
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amend. 24 Amend. 46 Amend. 64 Amend. 77 2004 Proposed
Sector 1994 1997 2000 (Current) Amend. 85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft LOA 44.0 51.0 0.7 0.7 2.0
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA ............. ............. 0.2 0.2 0.2
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP ............. ............. 40.8 40.8 48.7
------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA ............. ............. 9.3 7.6 8.4
------------------------------------ --------------------------------
Pot CP ............. ............. ............ 1.7 1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 54.0 23.5 23.5 23.5 2.3
------------------------------------ ---------------
Non-AFA trawl CP ............. ............. ............ ............... 13.4
------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV ............. 23.5 23.5 23.5 22.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BSAI Pacific Cod Allocation History
In the early years of the fishery, BSAI Pacific cod was an open
access fishery prosecuted primarily by trawl gear. Under open access
management, Pacific cod was not allocated among competing fishermen. As
the market value of Pacific cod increased with the removal of foreign
and joint venture fisheries in 1990, the domestic fixed gear sector
(including pot and hook-and-line gear) began to increase its harvest of
the TAC. Hook-and-line CPs, in particular, contributed to the growth of
the fixed gear sector's use of Pacific cod TAC. Any consideration of
rationalizing the Pacific cod fishery during the 1990s through
individual fishing quotas (IFQs) or other market-based allocation
schemes was strongly opposed by the fixed gear sector as its share of
the Pacific cod TAC was growing. At this stage of the industry's
development, sector allocations emerged as a policy more acceptable to
the Pacific cod fleet than IFQs or similar rationalization policies.
A sector allocation is based on the principle that good fences make
good neighbors. The fence in this case is the division of the TAC among
competing harvesting sectors. Each sector is allocated its own portion
of the TAC that is protected from incursions by other sectors. Federal
regulations require a sector to stop conducting directed fishing for
Pacific cod when its allocation is exhausted, even if TAC allocated to
other sectors remains unharvested. Although sector allocations do not
prevent a race-for-fish by competing fishermen within a sector, they do
bring some short-term stability and certainty to fishermen within the
sectors as compared to having no sector allocations. This was the
policy rationale for the Council's first recommendation for sector
allocations of Pacific cod TAC in Amendment 24.
In 1994, NMFS began to allocate the Pacific cod TAC with the
implementation of BSAI Amendment 24 to the FMP (59 FR 4009, January 28,
1994). The allocations roughly represented the harvests of the trawl
and fixed gear sectors during 1991 through 1993. Although the 2.0
percent jig sector allocation exceeded the historical harvest by this
sector, it was intended to allow for growth in the sector. Competition
within the trawl and fixed gear sectors eventually led to the Council
recommending, in subsequent amendments, further subdivisions of the
allocations to these sectors to provide the desired stability within
the subdivided sectors.
Amendment 46, implemented in 1997 (61 FR 59029, November 20, 1996),
further split the trawl allocation equally between CVs and CPs. The
action also included specific authority for NMFS to annually reallocate
among the various sectors, if necessary, any portion of the Pacific cod
allocations that were projected to remain unused.
After Amendment 46 was implemented, members of the fishing industry
asked the Council to further allocate Pacific cod in the BSAI among the
various fixed gear sectors. The Council developed Amendment 64 which
further apportioned the 51 percent allocated to the fixed gear sector
into four new sectors (see Table 1). NMFS approved Amendment 64 and it
was implemented September 1, 2000 (65 FR 51553, August 24, 2000).
Because Amendment 64 was scheduled to expire at the end of 2003,
Amendment 77 was initiated to continue or modify the fixed gear
sectors' allocations beyond 2003.
The current allocations are those that were adopted by the Council
and approved by NMFS under Amendment 77 (68 FR 49416, August 18, 2003).
Amendment 77 continued the same overall fixed gear sector allocations
as under Amendment 64, except for a new apportionment between the pot
gear CV and CP sectors. Currently, hook-and-line and pot CVs < 60 ft LOA
are allowed to fish under the general hook-and-line CV allocation and
general pot CV allocation, respectively, when these fisheries are open.
When these fisheries are closed, the < 60 ft LOA sector harvest accrues
to the < 60 ft LOA hook-and-line and pot CV allocation.
The harvest on which the percentage allocations were based under
Amendments 64 and 77 in the fixed gear sectors excluded the harvest of
Pacific cod that was reallocated from other gear sectors. Except for
the pot gear sector split, the percentage allocations under Amendment
77 closely represented the harvests for fixed gear in this fishery
during 1995 through 1999, with an
[[Page 5656]]
additional allocation for CVs < 60 ft LOA, to allow for growth in the
small boat sector. The pot gear sector allocations were based on
harvests from 1998 through 2001.
While the Council was considering adjustments to the Pacific cod
allocations to the non-CDQ sectors under what became Amendment 64, the
Council adopted and NMFS approved Amendment 39 in 1998 (63 FR 8356,
February 19, 1998). Under Amendment 39, a percentage of various
groundfish species including Pacific cod was allocated to the CDQ
Program. From 1998 onward, 7.5 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC was
deducted for the CDQ reserve. The remainder of the TAC after the
deduction for the CDQ reserve is referred to as the non-CDQ TAC. When
the multispecies CDQ Program was implemented in 1998, the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC was allocated in accordance with the percentages
established by Amendment 46, and since then as further modified by
Amendments 64 and 77.
History of Pacific Cod Reallocations
Under the existing allocations, one or more sectors are typically
unable to harvest their annual allocation of the Pacific cod TAC.
Section 301(a)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, also known as National
Standard 1, states, ``Conservation and management measures shall
prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum
yield from each fishery for the United States fishing industry.'' Thus,
to provide an opportunity for the full harvest of the BSAI Pacific cod
non-CDQ TAC, existing allocations of Pacific cod that are projected to
be unharvested by some sectors are annually reallocated by NMFS to
other sectors. Current regulations governing the reallocation of BSAI
Pacific cod are found at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(ii).
Since BSAI Pacific cod sector allocations have been in effect, NMFS
has reallocated Pacific cod each year from the trawl and jig sectors to
fixed gear sectors. In 2002 and in 2004, reallocations also were made
from the pot gear sectors to the hook-and-line CP sector. Reallocations
within gear types (e.g., trawl CPs to trawl CVs, or hook-and-line CVs
to hook-and-line CPs) have occurred less frequently and in lower
amounts. As shown in Table 2, the majority of reallocations, in terms
of metric tons, have been from the trawl sectors to the hook-and-line
CPs between 2000 and 2004. The starting point for this table is the
year 2000 because that was the first year in which the fixed gear
allocation was split among the hook-and-line CP, hook-and-line CV, pot
gear, and < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sectors.
Table 2. Average BSAI Pacific cod reallocation by sector, 2000-2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reallocation as percent
Sector Initial allocation (mt) Reallocation (mt) of initial allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 3,715 -3,309 -89%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft LOA 1,312 309 24%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 283 120 42%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 75,006 16,861 22%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot gear 17,244 -739 -4%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CP 43,649 -8,483 -19%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 43,649 -4,760 -11%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused seasonal allowances specified for the jig sector are
reallocated during each of its three seasons. All other gear sector
reallocations usually occur in the fall because unused seasonal
allowances that remain unharvested earlier in the year are rolled over
to each sector's subsequent season. Typically, reallocations from trawl
to fixed gear sectors occur in October and November, and always during
the trawl C season (June 10 to November 1).
NMFS reallocates unused Pacific cod allocations for a variety of
reasons. Reallocations from the jig sector are primarily due to
insufficient effort in that sector in the BSAI. Several reasons are
commonly cited for trawl reallocations including closure of the
directed trawl fisheries due to reaching the halibut PSC allowance,
relatively high annual allocations in alternative trawl fisheries such
as pollock (for AFA vessels), and high value alternative trawl
fisheries such as yellowfin sole, rock sole, and flathead sole (for
non-AFA trawl CPs). Additionally, under SSL mitigation measures which
started in 2001, the creation of a 20 percent seasonal apportionment in
the C season for trawl gear led to trawl reallocations. The trawl
sectors' inability to harvest their total allocations resulted from the
increased difficulty in catching Pacific cod with trawl gear later in
the year when those fish are less aggregated (lower catch per unit
effort). Prior to the SSL mitigation measures, the trawl gear sectors
were allowed to harvest their total Pacific cod allocation earlier in
the year.
The increased difficulty in harvesting Pacific cod in the second
half of the year is not unique to the trawl sector. All gear sectors
have increased difficulty harvesting Pacific cod later in the year when
those fish are less aggregated. Also, weather is a significant factor
for the vessels in smaller CV sectors in the fall season. The hook-and-
line sectors are limited by halibut bycatch in the second half of the
year. These sectors do not have a halibut bycatch allowance from June
10 to August 15 under the annual harvest specifications which
effectively closes directed fishing for Pacific cod during this period.
The amount of Pacific cod the fixed gear sectors could harvest in the
first half of the year was reduced in 2001 as part of the SSL
protection measures. The hook-and-line sector would prefer to harvest
its Pacific cod allocation earlier in the year when its incidental take
of seabirds is lower.
In developing Amendment 85, the Council determined that current
allocations do not correspond with actual dependence and use by the
existing sectors, as demonstrated by the need for annual reallocations.
Reallocations maintain a level of uncertainty for some sectors
regarding the amount of Pacific cod available for harvest. The Council
expects that
[[Page 5657]]
uncertainty to decrease due to the revisions to the Pacific cod non-CDQ
allocations under this proposed rule.
Amendment 85 History
Amendment 85 is the most recent action by the Council in a long
history of actions to allocate BSAI Pacific cod TAC among competing
sectors as described above and in Table 1. The development of Amendment
85 began in October 2002 when the Council initiated discussions
regarding the allocation of certain BSAI groundfish species to the non-
AFA trawl CP sector. In February 2003, the Council considered a vastly
expanded program for this sector, known as Amendment 80, to establish a
multispecies cooperative intended to facilitate greater retention
improvements, allocate PSC, and address a number of sector allocation
issues that would arise from a stand-alone allocation and cooperative
(for the non-AFA trawl CP sector). In April 2003, the Council further
expanded Amendment 80 to include allocations of non-pollock species and
PSC to ten sectors operating in the BSAI as a means to minimize
potential impacts on sectors that might arise from any direct
allocations and cooperatives provided to the non-AFA trawl CP sector
alone.
Growing demand for Pacific cod, a fully exploited fishery, and
other distributional concerns among sectors led the Council to consider
a separate action to revise allocations of Pacific cod among the many
BSAI groundfish sectors. After further consideration, public testimony,
and preliminary analyses, the Council simplified Amendment 80 in
October 2004 to provide allocations only to the non-AFA trawl CP sector
and removed allocation of Pacific cod from that proposed program. The
intent of the Council was to streamline Amendment 80 and shift it back
to its original intent, to provide the non-AFA trawl CP sector with a
tool to reduce groundfish and PSC discards and improve retention. The
Council then initiated a new plan amendment, which became Amendment 85,
to alter the current BSAI Pacific cod allocations.
In December 2004, the Council reviewed a discussion paper outlining
prior Council actions regarding BSAI Pacific cod allocations, the
relevant problem statements associated with these past actions, and
potential decision points related to structuring new alternatives and
options for analysis. Upon review of the discussion paper, the Council
approved a problem statement and a document outlining draft components
and options for the new amendment. The problem statement and suite of
alternatives and options have been revised several times since that
initial discussion. The Council's final problem statement focuses on
revising the BSAI Pacific cod allocations to all sectors (trawl, jig,
hook-and-line, pot, and CDQ):
The BSAI Pacific cod fishery is fully utilized and has been
allocated among gear groups and to sectors within gear groups. The
current allocations among trawl, jig, and fixed gear were
implemented in 1997 (Amendment 46) and the CDQ allocation was
implemented in 1998. These allocations are overdue for review.
Harvest patterns have varied significantly among the sectors
resulting in annual inseason reallocations of TAC. As a result, the
current allocations do not correspond with actual dependency and use
by sectors.
Participants in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery who have made
significant investments and have a long-term dependence on the
resource need stability in the allocations to the trawl, jig, fixed
gear, and CDQ sectors. To reduce uncertainty and provide stability,
allocations should be adjusted to better reflect historic use by
sector. The basis for determining sector allocations will be catch
history as well as consideration of socio-economic and community
factors.
As other fisheries in the BSAI and GOA are incrementally
rationalized, historical participants in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery may be put at a disadvantage. Each sector in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery currently has different degrees of license
requirements and levels of participation. Allocations to the sector
level are a necessary step on the path towards comprehensive
rationalization. Prompt action is needed to maintain stability in
the BSAI Pacific cod fisheries.
While the FMP does not have a sunset provision nor regulatory
requirement to review or modify the sector allocations, the Council's
motion on Amendment 46 included a provision to review the overall gear
sector allocations four years after implementation. That review,
originally intended at the end of 2000, occurred with Amendment 85.
Description of the Proposed Action
This amendment is intended by the Council to modify the sector
allocations currently in place to better reflect actual dependency and
use by sector, in part by basing the allocations on each sector's
historical retained catch. One of the fundamental issues identified in
the Council's problem statement is the need to revise the existing
allocations to better reflect actual historical catch by sector, thus
reducing the need for frequent and significant reallocations of quota
toward the end of the year from sectors that are unable or otherwise do
not intend to harvest their entire allocation. Thus, the catch history
on which the proposed allocations were partially based included Pacific
cod that was reallocated from one sector to another due to the first
sector's projected inability to harvest its entire allocation by the
end of the year. The intent of the Council under Amendment 85 is to
establish direct allocations for each specified sector in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery, in order to protect the relative historical catch
distribution among those sectors.
However, there are noted exceptions to basing the allocations
solely on catch history. The problem statement asserts that in addition
to catch history, socioeconomic and community concerns should be the
basis for determining sector allocations. Amendment 85 would establish
BSAI Pacific cod allocations to the jig sector, the < 60 ft LOA fixed
gear CV sector, and the CDQ sector that are based on identified
percentages of the TAC, and not actual catch history. This action would
establish allocations to both the jig sector and to the < 60 ft LOA
fixed gear CV sector that are greater than those sectors' average catch
histories. The allocations to the small boat sectors are intended by
the Council to expand entry-level, local opportunities in the BSAI
Pacific cod fishery. In general, however, the Council's proposed
allocations of Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC are intended to formally
institutionalize the historical pattern of utilization of this
resource.
The Council also considered more refined allocations to the BSAI
Pacific cod sectors, by evaluating the potential for establishing
separate and distinct allocations for the non-AFA trawl CP and AFA
trawl CP sector and the non-AFA trawl CV and AFA trawl CV sectors. The
trawl CP sectors currently have a combined BSAI Pacific cod allocation
of 23.5 percent of the non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC, as do the trawl CV
sectors. Thus, all trawl gear combined currently receives 47 percent of
the non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC.
The Council adopted Amendment 85 in April 2006. If approved by the
Secretary of Commerce, Amendment 85 would modify the following
provisions in the FMP: (a) sector allocations of BSAI Pacific cod TAC,
(b) TAC deductions for incidental catch allowances of Pacific cod in
other target fisheries, (c) the groundfish reserve for Pacific cod, (d)
the Pacific cod allocation to the CDQ Program, and (e) the appendices
of the FMP by adding a new appendix that summarizes applicable
provisions of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005 (Public Law
108-447). Because the Amendment 85 sector allocations cannot be
implemented mid-year, the
[[Page 5658]]
final rule implementing Amendment 85, if approved, would be effective
the following January 1st. Thus, the earliest effective date for the
rule implementing Amendment 85 would be January 1, 2008.
This proposed rule would make the following changes in regulations
for the management of the BSAI directed Pacific cod fishery:
Increase the percentage of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC
apportioned to the CDQ Program.
Revise the allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
among various gear sectors.
Modify the management of Pacific cod incidental catch that
occurs in other groundfish fisheries.
Eliminate the Pacific cod nonspecified reserve.
Establish a hierarchy for the reallocation of projected
unused sector allocations to other sectors.
Adjust the seasonal allowances of Pacific cod to various
sectors.
Subdivide among sectors the annual PSC limits apportioned
to the Pacific cod trawl and hook-and-line gear fisheries.
Modify the sideboard restrictions for Pacific cod that are
applied to the CP vessels listed as eligible under the AFA.
Revise the definition for AFA trawl catcher/processor and
add definitions for hook-and-line catcher/processor, non-AFA trawl
catcher/processor, and pot catcher/processor.
In developing Amendment 85, the Council considered dividing the
Pacific cod TAC in the BSAI between the Bering Sea (BS) and Aleutian
Islands (AI) subareas. At its April 2006 meeting, the Council voted to
remove this action from Amendment 85 and initiate a new analysis that
would examine additional alternative approaches to apportioning sector
allocations between the two subareas. If conservation of the Pacific
cod resource requires separate TACs for the BS and AI subareas before
the Council adopts and NMFS approves a different approach to
apportioning Pacific cod sector allocations between the two subareas,
NMFS would apply the same percentages of the sector allocations to each
subarea as in the overall BSAI allocations in existence at that time.
Recent Legislation Affecting the Proposed Rule
On December 8, 2004, the President signed into law the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-447)(Act). With respect to
fisheries off Alaska, the Act establishes catcher processor sector
definitions for participation in (1) the catcher processor subsectors
of the BSAI non-pollock groundfish fisheries, and (2) the BSAI Catcher
Processor Capacity Reduction Program. The following subsectors are
defined in section 219(a) of the Act: AFA trawl catcher processor; non-
AFA trawl catcher processor; longline catcher processor; and pot
catcher processor.
Section 219(a) of the Act also defines the ``non-pollock groundfish
fishery'' as target species of Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Pacific
cod, Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, turbot, or yellowfin sole
harvested in the BSAI. Thus, the Act provides the qualification
criteria that each participant in the CP subsectors must meet in order
to operate as a CP in the BSAI non-pollock groundfish fishery, or
participate in the BSAI Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction Program,
or both.
Because Amendment 85 would allocate Pacific cod (a non-pollock
groundfish fishery under the Act) to CPs operating in the BSAI, this
proposed rule includes new or revised definitions for AFA trawl CP,
hook-and-line CP, non-AFA trawl CP, and pot CP, consistent with the
provisions of the Act.
The Act includes numerous provisions that are not related to the
management of groundfish and crab fisheries off Alaska. Therefore, this
proposed rule includes in regulatory text only those portions of the
Act related to eligibility in catcher processor subsectors. The
portions of the Act authorizing and governing the development of the
BSAI Catcher Processor Capacity Reduction Program are not provided in
the proposed rule.
On July 11, 2006, the President signed into law the Coast Guard and
Maritime Transportation Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-241), that, among
other things, completely revised the CDQ Program statutory text at
section 305(i)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Specifically, section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) required that most of the allocations to the CDQ
Program, including Pacific cod, increase from 7.5 percent of the TAC to
a 10 percent directed fishing allocation upon the establishment of
certain types of fishery management programs, including sector
allocations in a fishery. Because Amendment 85, if approved, would
establish sector allocations in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery, the
proposed FMP amendment language and the proposed rule for Amendment 85
submitted to the Secretary by the Council included provisions
consistent with the requirements of section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). As
noted earlier, NMFS published the notice of availability for Amendment
85 in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006.
On January 12, 2007, the President signed into law the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006
(Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act) (Public Law 109-479) that, among
other things, amended section 305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). This section now
requires that most of the allocations to the CDQ Program, including
Pacific cod, increase to ``a total allocation (directed and nontarget
combined) of 10.7 percent effective January 1, 2008.'' Section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii) also states that the total allocations under section
305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) may not be exceeded.
Because of the changes to the CDQ Program allocations brought about
by the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act, NMFS determined that the
proposed rule for Amendment 85 as originally submitted by the Council
was no longer consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. On January 17,
2006, NMFS notified the Council in writing of the inconsistencies and
provided the Council with recommendations on revisions that would make
the proposed rule consistent with the new provisions of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act. The Council revised the proposed rule and submitted it to
NMFS for reevaluation on January 19, 2007. This proposed rule reflects
the revisions made by the Council in its January 19, 2007, submission.
Additional information on the proposed changes to the CDQ Program
follow.
Allocation of Pacific Cod to the CDQ Program
The Western Alaska CDQ Program was implemented in November 1992 as
part of the inshore/offshore allocations of pollock in the BSAI.
Originally, the CDQ Program established a CDQ reserve to which one half
of the non-specific reserve of 15 percent of the pollock TAC was
allocated. Hence, the original CDQ reserve was 7.5 percent of the BSAI
pollock TAC. The CDQ Program has since been amended several times and
now, in addition to pollock, the CDQ reserve includes allocations of
halibut, crab, and most of the remaining groundfish species in the
BSAI, including Pacific cod. The 7.5 percent allocation of BSAI Pacific
cod to the CDQ reserve was established when the multispecies CDQ
reserves were implemented in 1998. The current percentages of TAC
allocated to the CDQ reserves are as follows: 10 percent of pollock; 10
percent of crab species (with the exception of Norton Sound red king
crab at 7.5 percent); 20 percent of fixed gear sablefish; a range of 20
percent to 100 percent of halibut,
[[Page 5659]]
depending on the area; and 7.5 percent of most groundfish species and
species groups, including Pacific cod. Pro-rata shares of prohibited
species are also allocated to the prohibited species quota, or PSQ,
reserve. Under the adjusted March 2006 Pacific cod TAC, 14,114 mt of
Pacific cod, the equivalent of 7.5 percent of the Pacific cod TAC, was
allocated to the CDQ reserve.
Six non-profit corporations, known as CDQ groups, were formed by
the 65 communities eligible to participate in the CDQ Program to manage
and administer the CDQ allocations, investments, and economic
development projects. Each of the six CDQ groups is allocated an amount
of Pacific cod at the beginning of each year that equals its
proportional share of the amount of Pacific cod allocated to the CDQ
reserve. Currently, all catch of Pacific cod by any vessel fishing for
groundfish CDQ, and by any vessel [gteqt]60 ft LOA fishing for halibut
CDQ, accrues against a CDQ group's allocation of Pacific cod. The CDQ
groups are prohibited by regulations at Sec. 679.7(d)(5) from
exceeding any of their CDQ allocations. Therefore, reaching a CDQ
allocation for one species constrains the ability of a CDQ group to
continue to fish for other groundfish CDQ species, except for reaching
the CDQ allocation of pollock, because the CDQ incidental catch of
pollock is deducted from the general pollock incidental catch
allowance.
When Amendment 85 was adopted in April 2006, the Council
recommended that the Pacific cod CDQ reserve remain at 7.5 percent, but
recognized that proposed Congressional legislation could change this
percentage. As described above, the Magnuson-Stevens Act now requires
that 10.7 percent of the annual Pacific cod TAC be allocated to the CDQ
reserve for directed and nontarget fishing combined. The 10.7 percent
Pacific cod allocation to the CDQ reserve would be established annually
in the harvest specifications process required under Sec. 679.20(c).
Currently, the CDQ reserve is deducted from the Pacific cod TAC before
the remaining Pacific cod TAC is allocated to the other fishing
sectors. As intended by the Council, this would be continued under
Amendment 85.
Each CDQ group would decide how to manage its CDQ fisheries and how
to allocate its portion of the Pacific cod TAC among its vessels and
target fisheries. The CDQ groups must continue to manage their
fisheries within the seasonal allowances currently specified to comply
with SSL protection measures, as described in more detail under
``Seasonal Allowances.'' All catch of Pacific cod by any vessel
groundfish CDQ fishing, and by any vessel [gteqt]60 ft LOA halibut CDQ
fishing, will continue to accrue against the CDQ group's annual
allocation of Pacific cod and the CDQ groups will continue to be
prohibited from exceeding their annual allocations of Pacific cod.
Non-CDQ Sector Allocations
Under Amendment 85, the Council selected nine individual non-CDQ
sectors to receive separate BSAI Pacific cod allocations. The
allocations to the identified sectors were selected using catch history
from 1995 through 2003 and other socioeconomic and community
considerations. The Council concluded that the adopted allocations
better reflected actual dependency and use by each sector, with
specific consideration to allow for additional growth in the small
boat, entry-level sectors. The primary objective of the Council in
revising the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC allocations to each sector
was to reduce the level and frequency of annual reallocations, and thus
enhance stability so each sector may better plan its fishing year and
operate more efficiently.
This action proposes to allocate the BSAI TAC of Pacific cod among
the nine non-CDQ sectors, after subtraction of the CDQ reserve. The
current and proposed allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC
compared to average harvest share (average of each sector's percent of
the total harvest each year, including harvest of reallocated amounts
of Pacific cod) between 1995 and 2003 and between 2000 and 2003 are
presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Current and proposed allocations of BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ
TAC and average harvest share by sector (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Average
share of share of
retained retained
harvest harvest
Sectors Amend. 77 Amend. 85 1995- 2000-
(Current) (Proposed) 2003 2003
(average (recent
historic average
harvest) harvest)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 2.0 1.4 0.1 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft 0.7 2.0 0.4 0.7
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.3
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 40.8 48.7 49.1 49.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 7.6 8.4 8.6 9.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CP 1.7 1.5 2.1 1.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 23.5 2.3 2.2 1.5
------------------------------ -------------------------------
Non AFA trawl CP ......... 13.4 13.4 16.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 23.5 22.1 24.0 21.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average harvest shares from 1995 through 2003 shown in Table 3
were calculated using weekly production reports and Alaska Department
of Fish and Game fishtickets, and included Pacific cod retained for
fishmeal production. Table 4 shows average harvest share in 2004 to
2005 using data from the NMFS catch accounting database. The NMFS
accounting database, which uses observer estimates of retained catch,
included Pacific cod destined for fishmeal production on CPs [gteqt]125
feet (38.1 m) LOA with 100 percent observer coverage rather than weekly
production reports.
[[Page 5660]]
Table 4. Average share (percent) of retained harvest 2004-2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector Average share
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 0.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft LOA 1.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 0.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 50.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 6.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CP 1.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 2.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-AFA trawl CP 17.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 20.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the two data sets in Tables 3 and 4 are not exactly
comparable due to the different data sources, the data in Table 4
generally indicate that the overall BSAI harvest shares by sector in
2004 to 2005 are within the range of what occurred during 1995 to 2003,
with a few exceptions. The < 60 ft LOA fixed gear (pot and hook-and-line
gear) share of the BSAI Pacific cod harvest increased in the past two
years compared to the 1995 to 2003 average, likely due to additional
quota reallocated from the jig sector starting in 2004. Table 4 shows
that this sector harvested about 1.7 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod
harvest from 2004 to 2005, compared to an average retained harvest
share of 0.4 percent during 1995 to 2003.
Another notable exception is the non-AFA trawl CP sector. This
sector's average harvest share from 2004 to 2005 was 17.7 percent.
While the harvest share of this sector has not been less than 15.3
percent since 2000, its much lower harvest shares during 1995 to 1998
resulted in an overall harvest share during 1995 to 2003 of 13.4
percent.
The [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's share of Pacific cod harvest
decreased in the past two years compared to all but one year during
1995 [dash] 2003. The pot CP share, while greater in 2004 and 2005 (1.7
percent) than in 2002 and 2003 (1.0 percent), was still lower than the
average retained harvest share of 2.1 percent during 1995 to 2003.
All sectors, with the exception of the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear CV
sector and the non-AFA trawl CP sector, had harvests in 2004 and 2005
that fell within the range of their respective catch shares during 1995
to 2003. Thus, although the data in Table 4 are not truly comparable to
the retained harvest data in Table 3 due to the use of a different data
set, they provide a general view of the fishery in the two most recent
years.
The Council based the proposed allocations on historical catch as
adjusted by its decision to increase the harvest opportunities for the
fleets delivering shoreside, which include some of the small boat
sectors. Therefore, for the most part, proposed changes in allocations
represent changes in a sector's opportunity to harvest. Before
recommending this action, the Council heard extensive public testimony
from members of each sector, indicating their desire to maintain or
increase their allocations. In its allocation decision, the Council
considered all of the harvest data provided to it by Council staff and
comments received from the public.
For most sectors the allocations recommended by the Council under
Amendment 85 more closely represent a sector's average harvest share
over several years, as opposed to one or two recent years, than do the
current allocations, as shown in Table 3. The allocations recommended
by the Council were within the range of allocation options presented in
the EA/RIR/IRFA for Amendment 85 (see Table 8 below). The Council did
not select a specific series of years, but instead selected direct
allocation percentages.
The Council examined information on retained harvest history from
1995 to 2005, and information on total catch, which included Pacific
cod that was discarded. However, the Council chose from a range of
percentage allocations that were based on retained legal harvest of
Pacific cod, not total catch. Pacific cod is required to be retained
when the directed fishery is open. When the directed Pacific cod
fishery is closed, Pacific cod must be retained up to the maximum
retainable amount (MRA); the rest of the Pacific cod that is caught
must be discarded. For example, about 1.2 percent of the total Pacific
cod harvest was discarded in 2004. It was not the Council's intent to
``reward'' sectors that have high discards of Pacific cod when the
directed fishery for Pacific cod is closed.
The proposed allocation to jig vessels and the < 60 ft LOA fixed
gear CVs is greater than those sectors' catch histories due to
socioeconomic and community considerations. The proposed allocations to
these two small-boat sectors are intended by the Council to maintain
and expand entry-level, local opportunities in the BSAI Pacific cod
fishery. These fleets, primarily CVs, typically are comprised of
residents of small, coastal communities near the fishing grounds.
Public comments specifically supported allocations of 2.0 percent each
to the jig sector and to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector, which the
Council took into consideration in making the allocations to these two
sectors.
The following paragraphs provide additional information on the
Council's recommended allocation of Pacific cod to each non-CDQ sector.
Jig Gear Sector
The allocation to the jig sector of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ
TAC would be reduced from the current 2.0 percent to a proposed
allocation of 1.4 percent. The jig sector's average annual share of the
retained Pacific cod harvest from 1995 through 2003 (average historic
harvest) is only about 0.1 percent, which represents about 5 percent of
its current total allocation. The jig sector's more recent average
annual share of the retained Pacific cod harvest, from 2000 through
2003 (recent average harvest), also is about 0.1 percent. This same
trend continued in 2004 and 2005. As a result of this low harvest
percentage, the unused jig sector allocation has been reallocated to
other sectors, usually late in the fishing year. The Council determined
that, although the proposed allocation is lower than this sector's
current allocation, the proposed allocation would still allow for
growth in this entry-level sector, while reducing the amount of Pacific
cod that may need to be reallocated to other sectors. Any reallocations
that would occur would first consider the other small boat sector (< 60
ft LOA fixed gear CVs).
The Council's preferred alternative designated the jig sector as
``jig CV sector.'' The Council's intent, however, was that this sector
include all vessels using jig gear to harvest BSAI Pacific cod, whether
CVs or CPs, as is the case under current regulations. While the jig
sector is typically comprised only of CVs, one jig vessel has operated
as a CP in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery. All harvest by all jig vessels
was included in the jig sector harvest history considered under the
allocation determination. Further, the jig sector would continue to
include CVs and CPs given the small harvest, relative to their
allocation, of Pacific cod by vessels using jig gear and the absence of
competition for available Pacific cod between CVs and CPs.
Less Than 60 ft LOA Hook-and-line or Pot CV Sector
Under the proposed rule, the allocation to the < 60 ft LOA fixed
gear CV sector of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC would increase from
its current amount of 0.7 percent to a
[[Page 5661]]
proposed allocation of 2.0 percent. This sector's average historic
harvest is 0.4 percent, and its recent average harvest is 0.7 percent.
The < 60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector's percent share of the overall
Pacific cod harvest has grown steadily in recent years from 0.2 percent
in 2000 to about 1.7 percent in 2004 and in 2005. This sector has
harvested its entire allocation of 0.7 percent for several years, and
started receiving reallocations from the jig sector in 2004. The
Council chose to increase the allocation to this small-boat sector to
encourage its increased growth.
Currently, the < 60 ft LOA hook-and-line CVs also fish from the
general hook-and-line CV sector allocation of 0.2 percent, and the < 60
ft LOA pot CVs also fish from the general pot CV sector allocation of
8.4 percent until those fisheries close. Under Amendment 85, the < 60 ft
LOA fixed gear CV sector would fish only from its own proposed direct
allocation of 2.0 percent.
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA Hook-and-line CV Sector
The current allocation of 0.2 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-
CDQ TAC to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV sector would not
change under this proposed rule. The [gteqt]60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV
sector's average historic harvest is 0.1 percent, and its recent
average harvest is 0.3 percent. This sector harvested 0.01 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and in 2005. The majority of the
overall hook-and-line CV allocation typically has been harvested by the
< 60 ft LOA hook-and-line CVs. However, as stated above, the < 60 ft LOA
hook-and-line CV sector would no longer fish from the general hook-and-
line CV sector allocation, but would fish only from its proposed direct
allocation. The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to
represent the historical retained catch of Pacific cod by this sector.
The Council also considered socioeconomic and community factors, such
as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal communities by
CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs that provide a smaller
benefit to these coastal communities.
Hook-and-line CP Sector
The proposed allocation to the hook-and-line CP sector would
increase the current allocation from 40.8 percent to 48.7 percent of
the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's average historic
harvest is 49.1 percent, and its recent average harvest is 49.4
percent. This sector harvested an average of 50.6 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The Council chose to increase the
hook-and-line CP sector's allocation to more closely reflect the
sector's actual harvest including reallocations. This sector's average
retained catch has been nearly 50 percent of the total BSAI non-CDQ
Pacific cod harvest since 1995, due to its harvest of Pacific cod that
is reallocated from other gear sectors toward the end of the year. By
moving this reallocated amount into the sector's initial allocation,
the sector is expected to be able to plan its fishing year with more
certainty than is currently afforded, and harvest more of its Pacific
cod allocation earlier in the second half of the fishing year. The
Council also expects this sector to continue to benefit from
reallocations from other sectors, so their total yearly catch should be
close to their average historic harvest.
Greater Than or Equal to 60 ft LOA Pot CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector would
increase the current allocation from 7.6 percent to 8.4 percent of the
BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. The [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's
average historic harvest is 8.6 percent, and its recent average harvest
is 9.0 percent. This sector harvested an average of 6.0 percent of the
total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. In the past, less than 1.0
percent of the overall pot CV allocation has been harvested by the < 60
ft LOA pot CVs. However, as stated above, the < 60 ft LOA pot CV sector
would no longer fish from the general pot CV sector allocation, but
would fish only from its proposed direct allocation. The Council chose
to increase the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector's allocation to more
closely reflect the sector's average historic harvest of Pacific cod
including reallocations while considering socioeconomic and community
factors, such as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea coastal
communities by CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs that
provide a smaller benefit to these coastal communities. The Council
also considered public testimony that supported an increase in the
allocation to this pot sector because its catch has generally been
increasing and its bycatch rate is very low compared to some other
sectors.
Pot CP Sector
The pot CP sector is the only fixed gear sector that would receive
a reduction in its BSAI Pacific cod allocation, from the current level
of 1.7 percent to a proposed allocation of 1.5 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's average historic harvest is 2.1
percent, and its recent average harvest is 1.4 percent. This sector
harvested an average of 1.7 percent of the total retained harvest in
2004 and 2005. The number of vessels participating in this sector has
declined over the past several years, from 13 in 1999, to 10 in 2000, 5
in 2001 and 2002, 3 in 2003 and 2004, and 2 in 2005. Anecdotal evidence
and public testimony suggest that some vessels have focused their
efforts on the crab fisheries in recent years, and some vessels have
not found it economically viable to fish for Pacific cod. The Council
used this information in combination with the data on the historical
retained catch of Pacific cod by the pot CP sector in arriving at its
proposed allocation. The Council also considered socioeconomic and
community factors, such as the greater benefit brought to Bering Sea
coastal communities by CVs, which deliver shoreside, versus the CPs
that provide a smaller benefit to these coastal communities.
Trawl CP Sector
Under this proposed rule, the current single trawl CP sector would
be split into AFA and non-AFA trawl CP sectors. The combined trawl CP
sector currently has an allocation of 23.5 percent of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC, which would be reduced to a total of 15.7 percent for
the two trawl CP sectors. The intent of the Council in dividing the
allocation between the two sectors was that each trawl CP sector would
be better able to manage its own exclusive Pacific cod allocation under
the cooperative systems either in place (for the AFA CP sector) or
proposed (for the non-AFA trawl CP sector under Amendment 80 discussed
previously).
AFA trawl CP sector. The AFA trawl CP sector's proposed allocation
is 2.3 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC. This sector's
average historic harvest, including Pacific cod retained for fishmeal
production, is 2.2 percent. The AFA trawl CP sector's recent average
harvest is 1.5 percent, and it harvested an average of 2.2 percent of
the total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The AFA trawl CPs, unlike
the non-AFA trawl CPs, have meal plants onboard. Thus, Pacific cod meal
is a primary product for only this sector. The history of nine trawl
CPs was extinguished by section 209 of the AFA, and it was excluded by
the Council in determining the proposed allocation to the AFA trawl CP
sector. The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to represent
the historical retained catch of Pacific cod by the AFA trawl CP sector
while considering socioeconomic and community factors. Public testimony
[[Page 5662]]
concerning the directed fishery and bycatch needs of this sector was
also considered by the Council.
About 44 percent of the Pacific cod harvested by the AFA trawl CP
sector is taken incidentally when these vessels are targeting BSAI
pollock. Only one AFA trawl CP vessel has targeted BSAI Pacific cod in
the recent past. All sectors are required to retain all catch of
Pacific cod when the directed fishery is open and up to the MRA when
the directed Pacific cod fishery is closed. To maximize the opportunity
for a directed Pacific cod fishery and to minimize the potential for an
increase in discards of Pacific cod if catch exceeds the MRA, the
Council determined that this sector should receive an allocation of
Pacific cod that closely represents its average historic harvest of
Pacific cod.
Non-AFA trawl CP sector. The non-AFA trawl CP sector would receive
an allocation of 13.4 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC under
the proposed rule, its average share of the historic harvest, which is
13.4 percent. This proposed allocation is less than its recent average
harvest share of 16.0 percent from 2000 through 2003, and less than its
average of 17.7 percent of the total retained harvest in 2004 and 2005.
The proposed allocation is intended by the Council to represent the
historical retained catch of Pacific cod by the non-AFA trawl CP sector
while considering socioeconomic and community factors.
About 46 percent of the Pacific cod harvested by the non-AFA trawl
CP sector is taken as incidental catch in non-Pacific cod target
fisheries, primarily the flatfish fisheries. Concern has been expressed
by this sector that its proposed allocation will be insufficient to
support its target fishery. NMFS agrees that this sector may be
constrained in its ability to conduct a directed fishery for Pacific
cod in order to have sufficient Pacific cod available for incidental
catch in its other fisheries.
Trawl CV Sector
The proposed allocation to the trawl CV sector of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC would decrease the current allocation of 23.5 percent
to 22.1 percent. This proposed allocation is less than this sector's
average historic harvest of 24.0 percent. However, the proposed
allocation is more than the trawl CV sector's recent average harvest of
21.6 percent, and more than its average of 20.0 percent of the total
retained harvest in 2004 and 2005. The proposed allocation is intended
by the Council to represent the historical retained catch of Pacific
cod by the trawl CV sector while considering socioeconomic and
community factors. In contrast to the trawl CP sectors, the trawl CVs
primarily harvest their Pacific cod in the directed fishery, with only
6.9 percent taken as incidental catch in other target fisheries.
The Council chose to maintain the AFA and non-AFA trawl CVs as one
sector. Public testimony before the Council advocated to not divide the
trawl CVs into AFA and non-AFA sectors, as is proposed for the trawl CP
sector. The Council considered this testimony in determining that
maintaining the combined trawl CV allocation would allow the AFA trawl
CV sector to continue to operate under its cooperative agreement and
coordinate prosecution of the Pacific cod fishery with non-AFA trawl CV
fishery participants. This approach is favored by AFA and non-AFA
participants until such time that more restrictive eligibility criteria
for participation in the fishery are implemented. The proposed rule
does not change the Pacific cod AFA trawl CV sideboards and exemptions
because the Council determined that they should remain to protect the
Pacific cod harvest share of the non-AFA trawl CVs and of the AFA trawl
CVs that are exempt from the Pacific cod sideboard limitations. Also,
some members of the trawl CV sector requested that the Council maintain
the AFA trawl CV sideboards to avoid the necessity of renegotiating
their inter-cooperative agreement.
Incidental Catch Allowances for Non-CDQ Sectors
Under existing regulations, NMFS sets aside an amount of Pacific
cod from some sectors' allocations as an incidental catch allowance.
The incidental catch allowance is used by those sectors when directed
fishing for groundfish other than Pacific cod. Under this proposed
rule, incidental catch allowances would continue to be based on an
estimated amount of Pacific cod that NMFS anticipates will be taken as
incidental catch in directed fisheries for groundfish other than
Pacific cod. As is the current practice, under the proposed rule, once
a sector has harvested an amount of Pacific cod equal to the sector's
directed fishing allowance, directed fishing for Pacific cod by vessels
in that sector would be closed by NMFS.
Under Amendment 85, incidental catch allowances would continue to
be set as they are currently for the fixed gear sectors. An incidental
catch allowance for the fixed gear sectors would be established
annually by the Regional Administrator during the annual harvest
specifications process, and typically has been 500 mt. This fixed gear
incidental catch allowance would be deducted from the aggregate portion
of Pacific cod TAC annually allocated to hook-and-line and pot gear
sectors before directed fishing allowances are made to each sector.
Under Amendment 85, an incidental catch allowance for each trawl
sector would be developed on an inseason basis and would not be listed
in the annual specifications. The trawl sectors currently do not have
an incidental catch allowance established at the beginning of the year,
as the fixed gear sectors do. NMFS currently has the regulatory
authority to set directed fishing allowances and incidental catch
allowances for Pacific cod within a particular sector during the
fishing year. This system allows NMFS to close the directed trawl
fishery for Pacific cod but allow other directed trawl fisheries to
continue fishing under the incidental catch allowance. NMFS typically
has not put the Pacific cod trawl fishery on bycatch status in the
recent past, because the trawl sectors are not currently constrained by
their Pacific cod allocations. Also, the seasonal apportionments to the
trawl sectors have ensured that a sufficient amount of Pacific cod is
left for incidental catch in groundfish trawl fisheries other than
Pacific cod later in the year. Because of the reductions in the Pacific
cod trawl sector allocations under Amendment 85, the Council proposed
that an incidental catch allowance be established on an inseason basis
for each trawl sector separately, rather than as a group, as the fixed
gear sectors are, so that no trawl sector can erode another sector's
total allocation, and to allow more flexibility to adjust incidental
catch needs for each sector as these trawl fisheries change in the
future.
Elimination of Pacific Cod Nonspecified Reserve
Currently, during the annual harvest specifications process, 15
percent of the BSAI TAC for each target species (except pollock and the
hook-and-line and pot gear allocation for sablefish) and for the other
species category is automatically placed in the nonspecified reserve as
required at Sec. 679.20(b)(1). Half of the nonspecified reserve (7.5
percent of TAC) for most species is then apportioned to the groundfish
CDQ reserve. Historically, the half remaining in the reserve for
Pacific cod, Atka mackerel, Pacific ocean perch, and several rockfish
species is apportioned by NMFS to the non-CDQ TAC for their respective
fisheries. This is done because the TAC for these fisheries is already
fully
[[Page 5663]]
harvested; that is, U.S. fishing vessels have demonstrated the capacity
to catch the full TAC allocations. NMFS uses the nonspecified reserve
inseason to supplement the non-CDQ TAC for some species so that fishing
operations can continue, or to account for catch in excess of allocated
amounts.
Under this proposed rule, Pacific cod would be exempt from having
15 percent of the TAC placed in the nonspecified reserve. This
deduction from Pacific cod TAC would no longer be needed under this
proposed rule because a direct allocation to the CDQ reserve is
specified. Additionally, the Pacific cod TAC is fully allocated among
CDQ and non-CDQ harvesting sectors, and is fully harvested.
Reallocations of Pacific Cod Among Non-CDQ Sectors
During the last fishing season of the year, NMFS considers whether
one or more non-CDQ sectors will be unlikely to use its remaining BSAI
Pacific cod allocation. To obtain optimum yield from the BSAI Pacific
cod fishery, NMFS reallocates these projected unused allocations to
other sectors. In the case of the jig sector, reallocations are made
seasonally. NMFS considers whether a particular sector is still
operating on the fishing grounds, and thus capable of harvesting any
quota that is reallocated from another sector, when making reallocation
decisions. Current regulations at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(ii) outline the
following system for reallocating projected unused allocations:
Projected unused portions of a jig sector seasonal
allowance are reallocated to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector.
Projected unused hook-and-line CV sector and <60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector allocations are reallocated to the hook-and-line CP
sector.
Projected unused trawl gear sector allocations are
considered for reallocation to the other trawl gear sector (e.g., trawl
CV to trawl CP) prior to being reallocated to another gear type (e.g.
trawl gear to fixed gear).
Remaining projected unused trawl allocations are
reallocated 95 percent to the hook-and-line CP sector; 4.1 percent to
the pot CV sector; and 0.9 percent to the pot CP sector.
Although the intent of the Council under Amendment 85 is to revise
sector allocations to better reflect actual catch history and thus
reduce the frequency and amount of inseason reallocations, the Council
and the public noted that some reallocations are likely to continue.
Under this proposed rule, if, during a fishing year, the Regional
Administrator determines that a sector would be unable to harvest the
entire amount of Pacific cod allocated to that sector, NMFS would
reallocate the projected unused amount of Pacific cod to other sectors.
Reallocation decisions would be based in part on the hierarchy
described below (in the sequence described), but also would take into
account the capability of a sector to harvest the reallocated amount of
Pacific cod. In general, under the proposed changes, projected unused
allocations in any sector delivering inshore, i.e., CV sectors, would
be reallocated primarily to other inshore sectors before being
reallocated to any offshore, i.e., CP, sector, and, secondarily, within
a gear type before being reallocated to another gear type.
Under this proposed rule, the Regional Administrator would
reallocate any projected unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC from
any CV sector, first to the jig sector or to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear
CV sector, or to both; then to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA fixed gear CV
sectors; and then to the trawl CV sector. Any jig, < 60 ft LOA fixed
gear, or [gteqt]60 ft LOA hook-and-line CV sector allocation that is
unlikely to be harvested through this hierarchy would be reallocated to
the hook-and-line CP sector. Any [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector
allocation that is unlikely to be harvested through this hierarchy will
be reallocated to the pot CP sector as described below. Any trawl CV
sector allocation that is unlikely to be harvested through this
hierarchy will be reallocated to the other trawl sectors as described
below.
For any trawl CP sector, the Regional Administrator would
reallocate any projected unharvested amounts of its Pacific cod TAC
allocation to the other trawl CP sector and/or the trawl CV sector
before unharvested amounts are reallocated to certain fixed gear
sectors. Any reallocation to fixed gear sectors would be proportional
to the proposed allocations for three fixed gear sectors as follows:
83.1 percent to the hook-and-line CP sector, 2.6 percent to the pot CP
sector, and 14.3 percent to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector.
Any projected unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC allocated to
the pot CP sector or to the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV sector would be
reallocated by the Regional Administrator to the other pot gear sector
before it would be reallocated to the hook-and-line CP sector. Current
Federal regulations do not explicitly mandate reallocation of Pacific
cod between pot gear sectors, but do allow NMFS to reallocate unused
pot CP or [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CV allocations to the other pot gear
sector before it is reallocated to other gear sectors. This action
proposes to make pot gear sector reallocations explicit in regulation.
This approach is consistent with the way the trawl sectors are
addressed by the Council in this proposed rule. That is, Pacific cod
would be reallocated within the same gear type before being reallocated
to a different gear type.
Two primary differences exist between the status quo and the
reallocation hierarchy proposed under Amendment 85. The first
difference is that NMFS would be required to consider reallocating
within the inshore sectors before reallocating projected unused Pacific
cod allocations from the inshore to the offshore sectors. This approach
is consistent with the Council's decision to increase the harvest
opportunities for the fleets delivering shoreside, which include some
of the small boat sectors. The second difference is the relative
reduction in the hook-and-line CP sector's share of the trawl
reallocations compared to the status quo. The status quo is based on
each of the specified fixed gear sector's share of the actual harvest
of trawl reallocations between 1996 and 1998. However, under Amendment
85, the Council chose to base the reallocations on each specified fixed
gear sector's share of the overall BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC.
Changing the reallocations to be proportional to the new fixed gear
allocations is consistent with the problem statement, which states that
allocations should be adjusted to better reflect historic use by
sector. Because the new fixed gear allocations are based on catch
history, with consideration for socioeconomic and community factors,
basing reallocations on the same relative allocation among the
specified fixed gear sectors is consistent with this objective.
Note that, like the status quo, the Council only intends that NMFS
consider the hierarchy proposed by this rule when making reallocation
decisions. NMFS would take into account the intent of the rollover
hierarchy, and the likelihood of a sector's capability to harvest
reallocated quota prior to making the reallocation. The Council noted
that it is important that NMFS retain this flexibility to determine how
to reallocate projected unused sector allocations in order to avoid
intermittent starting and stopping of the fishery and to reduce the
risk of foregone harvest.
Seasonal Allowances
Under existing regulations, Pacific cod allocations are further
apportioned by season for most gear sectors to
[[Page 5664]]
protect prey availability for Steller sea lions (SSLs). Appendix A of
the November 2001 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on SSL
protection measures included the biological opinion on the effects of
the pollock, Pacific cod, and Atka mackerel fisheries on SSLs and their
designated critical habitat (2001 Biological Opinion). The 2001
Biological Opinion requires temporal dispersion of harvest so that the
overall BSAI Pacific cod fishery is limited to seasonal percentages of
TAC of no more than 70 percent between January 1 and June 10, and 30
percent between June 10 and December 31.
Each sector's allocation is currently apportioned seasonally to
meet this requirement (Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A)). Currently, the
trawl sectors receive 37.6 percent of the non-CDQ TAC in the first half
of the year (28.2 percent in the A season and 9.4 percent in the B
season) which is 80 percent of their allocations; the fixed gear
sectors receive 30.2 percent of the non-CDQ TAC in the first half of
the year (60 percent of their allocations), and the jig sector receives
about 1.2 percent (about 60 percent of its allocation). In total, about
69 percent of the total non-CDQ BSAI Pacific cod TAC is allowed to be
harvested in the first half of the year. The < 60 ft LOA fixed gear
sector, which does not have its Pacific cod allocation apportioned by
season, is excluded from this limitation and this exclusion would be
maintained under Amendment 85 and this proposed rule.
Because this proposed rule modifies non-CDQ sector allocations to
decrease the amount of rollovers, if the same seasonal allowances were
maintained, the fixed gear sectors could potentially harvest more
Pacific cod in the first half of the year due to their overall
increased share of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC. Similarly, the trawl
sectors would have less of their Pacific cod allocation available in
the first half of the year. However, the intent of the Council is to
reflect the current fishery, to the extent possible, by maintaining
each sector's current percentage of the non-CDQ TAC allocated in the
first half of the year when fishing for Pacific cod is more
advantageous.
Therefore, to maintain the overall 70/30 seasonal split for all
gear types combined and to maintain to the extent possible the current
percentage of the Pacific cod TAC harvested in the first half of the
year by the non-CDQ sectors, the proposed rule adjusts the seasonal
allowances for each sector in response to the changes in sector
allocations. The Council intent for this approach is to mirror the
fishery as it is conducted today, and as it was evaluated in the 2001
Biological Opinion.
As proposed by the Council, the current percentage of the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC harvested in the A season by trawl gear and by fixed
gear would be maintained. The overall trawl allocation reduction would
be applied first to the trawl C season, and any remaining reductions
would be applied to the trawl B season. The increase in the overall
fixed gear allocation would be applied only to its B season.
Under this proposed rule, the jig sector seasonal allowance would
change from 40-20-40 to 60-20-20. The jig sector has not successfully
harvested its 40 percent allowance in the C season. Therefore, this
change would allow for more harvest in the first season. Additionally,
much of the jig sector's C season Pacific cod allocation is not
available for reallocation to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector because
this other small boat sector is no longer on the fishing grounds later
in the year. Public testimony from the jig sector and coastal community
representatives supported the proposed change in the jig gear seasonal
allowance to 60-20-20. The Council took this testimony into
consideration in making its decision to change the seasonal allowance
for the jig sector to 60-20-20. Additionally, with a 60 percent
seasonal allowance in the A season, the Council noted that any
reallocated amounts of Pacific cod from the jig sector would roll over
to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector when that small boat sector is
still on the fishing grounds. This reallocation from the jig sector is
also intended by the Council to help offset the proposed restriction
that would prohibit the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector from fishing off
the allocations for the [gteqt]60 ft LOA pot CVs and the [gteqt]60 ft
LOA hook-and-line CVs.
Currently, the Pacific cod CDQ reserve is not apportioned by gear
type. Therefore, the Pacific cod CDQ reserve cannot be apportioned
seasonally by gear type at the beginning of the fishing year, as is
done for the non-CDQ sectors. These seasonal allowances, currently
specified at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A), apply to both the CDQ and non-
CDQ sectors. The Council did not change the approach for managing the
seasonal catch of Pacific cod CDQ under Amendment 85 and the seasonal
allowances for the CDQ Program would remain unchanged from the current
percentages in this proposed rule (see Table 5). Because nearly all of
the Pacific cod CDQ allocation is harvested with hook-and-line gear,
the Council further assumed the seasonal apportionment of the Pacific
cod CDQ allocation would continue to be 60 percent in the A season and
40 percent in the B season. Additionally, the Magnuson-Stevens Act does
not address the issue of seasonal allowances for the CDQ Program.
Therefore, the proposed rule maintains the current seasonal allowances
under the CDQ Program.
Under this proposed rule, the CDQ groups must continue to manage
their fisheries to keep their catch of Pacific cod within the seasonal
allowances specified for the gear types they use to catch Pacific cod
to comply with SSL protection measures. The proposed rule also would
add a prohibition to Sec. 679.7(d) to clarify that the CDQ groups
would be prohibited from exceeding the seasonal allowances of Pacific
cod that are appropriate for the gear types that they use to catch
Pacific cod CDQ.
The proposed BSAI Pacific cod sector allowances for each sector,
including CDQ, by season, as those seasons are specified under Sec.
679.23(e)(5), are listed in Table 5.
Table 5. Seasonal Allowances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A season B season C season
------------------------------------------
Gear type A. A. A.
Current 85 Current 85 Current 85
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CDQ trawl 60% 60% 20% 20% 20% 20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-CDQ trawl CV 70% 74% 10% 11% 20% 15%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-CDQ trawl CP 50% 75% 30% 25% 20% 0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5665]]
CDQ hook-and-line processors, 60% 60% 40% 40% no C season
hook-and-line [gteqt]60 ft
LOA, pot gear vessels
[gteqt]60 ft LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-CDQ hook-and-line 60% 51% 40% 49% no C season
processors, hook-and-line
[gteqt]60 ft LOA, pot gear
vessels [gteqt]60 ft LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CDQ jig vessels 40% 40% 20% 20% 40% 40%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-CDQ jig vessels 40% 60% 20% 20% 40% 20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All other nontrawl vessels no seasonal
allowance
no seasonal
allowance
no seasonal
allowance
������������������������������������������������������������������������
Total non-CDQ current 1/1 - 6/10 = 69%
percentage
6/10 - 12/31 = 31%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total non-CDQ proposed 1/1 - 6/10 = 68%
percentage
6/10 - 12/31 = 32%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total CDQ and non-CDQ 1/1 - 6/10 = 67%
proposed percentage
6/10 - 12/31 = 33%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To calculate the new seasonal allowance in the A season for a non-
CDQ sector, a simple ratio is used. A sector's seasonal percentage of
the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC is calculated by multiplying the current
allocation (CA) by the current seasonal allowance (CSA). For a sector's
seasonal percentage of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC to remain the same
under Amendment 85, CA multiplied by CSA would equal the new allocation
(NA) multiplied by the new seasonal allowance (NSA) (CA x CSA = NA x
NSA). Solving the equation for NSA (which is unknown) yields NSA = (CA
x CSA)/NA.
The calculation of seasonal allowances for the trawl CP sectors is
the most complicated, and is provided as an example. The current
allocation for trawl CPs is 23.5 percent of the BSAI non-CDQ Pacific
cod TAC. Multiplying the current allocation by the current A season
allowance to the trawl CPs of 50 percent, equals 11.8 percent. Dividing
11.8 percent by the combined new allocation to the trawl CP sectors of
15.7 percent, yields a new A season allowance of 75 percent for the
trawl CP sectors. The current seasonal percentages for the trawl CP
sectors of the BSAI non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC is 11.8 percent in the A
season, 7.1 percent in the B season and 4.7 percent in the C season.
The overall allocation to the trawl CP sectors would decrease by 7.8
percent of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC under the proposed rule. As
proposed by the Council, these decreases would first be applied to the
C season, resulting in a zero percent allowance in the C season, and
then to the B season. This would result in the remaining 25 percent of
the overall allocation to the trawl CP sectors being assigned to the
trawl B season. The 7.8 percent decrease minus 4.7 percent from the C
season leaves 3.1 percent which is subtracted from the B season
allowance of 7.1 percent. The resulting 4.0 percent is divided by the
overall allocation of 15.7 percent which equals 25 percent.
Relative to current seasonal apportionments, less of the BSAI
Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC would be allowed to be harvested in the first
half of the year because of the proposed reductions in the trawl CP and
jig sector allocations. This was determined by multiplying the proposed
allocations by the seasonal allowances. The amount of the BSAI Pacific
cod non-CDQ TAC that would be allowed to be harvested in the first half
of the year (assuming the entire 2 percent allocation to the < 60 ft LOA
fixed gear sector is harvested in the first half of the year, to be the
most conservative) would be 68 percent, which is less than the total
current seasonal allowance of 69 percent of the TAC.
Using a CDQ reserve for Pacific cod equal to 10.7 percent of the
BSAI Pacific cod TAC, and using the current CDQ general seasonal
allowances of 60 and 40 percent in the A and B seasons, respectively,
the maximum A season harvest by all sectors (including the total
allocation to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector allocation in the first
half of the year) would be equal to about 67 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC. This level is still below the SSL seasonal harvest
limit of 70 percent of the TAC. Trawl gear is the only CDQ gear type
that does not have a 60/40 split. However, in 2005 the CDQ groups
harvested a total of 273 mt of Pacific cod with trawl gear, which
equals 0.1 percent of the BSAI Pacific cod TAC. Therefore, the
incidental catch of Pacific cod by CDQ trawl vessels is expected to
have a negligible impact on the harvest of Pacific cod by season under
this proposed rule.
Reallocation of Seasonal Allowances
Any unused portion of a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod from any
sector other than the jig sector, would continue to be reallocated to
that sector's remaining seasons during the current fishing year. The
Regional Administrator would continue to reallocate any projected
unused portion of a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod from the jig
sector to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector. Under this proposed rule, a
projected unused portion of the seasonal allowance for the jig sector C
season would be reallocated on or about September 1 of each year, if
possible. The intent of the Council under this provision is to provide
the last rollover from the jig sector when the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear
sector would still be on the fishing grounds.
Prohibited Species Catch
Prohibited species catch (PSC) regulations pertain to certain
species caught in the process of fishing for groundfish that must be
accounted for but cannot be retained, except for halibut and salmon
retained under the donation program at Sec. 679.26. Regulations at
Sec. 679.21 establish PSC limits for Pacific halibut, three species of
crab, salmon, and herring in the BSAI trawl groundfish fisheries, and a
separate Pacific halibut PSC limit for nontrawl gear. These regulations
also establish allocations of each PSC limit between the CDQ and non-
CDQ fisheries and a process for apportioning PSC among non-CDQ
fisheries. The halibut PSC limit is set in regulation
[[Page 5666]]
and is not tied to population assessment for the halibut resource. The
limits for the other PSC species are set to fluctuate as resource
abundance fluctuates. Crab PSC limits are tied to PSC limitation zones
for red king, bairdi (Chionoecetes bairdi), and opilio (C. opilio)
crab, whereas the PSC limits for the other species are for the entire
BSAI.
Initially, 7.5 percent of each PSC limit, with the exception of
herring, is set aside for the CDQ Program with the remainder of each
PSC limit apportioned among specified fisheries as PSC allowances
during the annual harvest specifications process. These PSC allowances
are intended to optimize total groundfish harvest under established PSC
limits, taking into consideration the anticipated amounts of incidental
catch of prohibited species in each fishery. Depending on the
prohibited species, reaching a PSC allowance results in closure of an
area or a groundfish directed fishery, even if some of the groundfish
TAC for that fishery remains unharvested.
Under this proposed action, the Council recommended that the
Pacific cod trawl fishery crab and halibut mortality PSC allowances be
further apportioned among the trawl sectors. Similarly, the Pacific cod
nontrawl halibut PSC allowances would be further apportioned between
two hook-and-line sectors. Pot and jig sectors currently are exempt
from halibut PSC limits due to very low bycatch rates in these sectors.
The proposed rule would not change the process for establishing the
annual PSC allowances to the CDQ Program and to the overall Pacific cod
trawl and hook-and-line sectors as part of the annual harvest
specifications.
Trawl Sector Halibut and Crab PSC Apportionments
Currently, the total amount of halibut PSC mortality for trawl gear
in the non-CDQ fisheries of 3,400 mt is apportioned in the annual
harvest specifications process among the four following fisheries: (1)
Pacific cod, (2) yellowfin sole, (3) rock sole/other flatfish/flathead
sole, and (4) pollock/Atka mackerel/other fisheries. The current
process to apportion the halibut PSC mortality for trawl gear among the
non-CDQ fisheries would continue under the proposed action. Generally,
about 1,400 mt of halibut PSC mortality is apportioned to the BSAI
Pacific cod trawl fishery, but this amount and actual use can vary
annually.
As stated previously, the crab PSC limits fluctuate as resource
abundance fluctuates, and limits are set by zone. The PSC limit
(expressed in numbers of crab) in 2006 for zone 1 red king crab is
182,225 crab for all trawl fisheries, with the Pacific cod trawl
fisheries being allocated 26,563 crab of that total. The PSC limit in
2006 for zone 1 bairdi crab is 906,500 crab for all BSAI trawl
fisheries, with the Pacific cod trawl fisheries being allocated 183,112
crab of that total. The 2006 PSC limit for zone 2 bairdi crab is
2,747,250 crab for all BSAI trawl fisheries, with the Pacific cod trawl
fisheries being allocated a relatively small proportion, 324,176 crab,
of that total. The current PSC limit for opilio within the C. opilio
bycatch limitation zone (COBLZ) is 4,494,569 crab for all BSAI trawl
fisheries, with the Pacific cod trawl fisheries being allocated a
relatively small proportion, 139,331 crab, of that total.
In recent years, the trawl CV and trawl CP sectors' directed
Pacific cod fisheries have closed most often due to reaching the
seasonal TAC, to avoid exceeding the specified halibut PSC mortality
limit, or because a fishing season has ended. Reaching a crab PSC limit
results in closure of a specific area to directed fishing. Crab PSC
typically does not limit the BSAI Pacific cod trawl fisheries, although
occasional crab PSC closures have occurred in the past.
The Council recommended that the amount of halibut and crab PSC
mortality that would be apportioned to each Pacific cod trawl sector
under this action be proportional to each sector's percentage of the
Pacific cod harvested in the Pacific cod target fishery from 1999
through 2003, including the Pacific cod retained for meal production.
Accordingly, the annual PSC allowance of halibut and crab specified for
the Pacific cod trawl fishery category would be divided among the trawl
sectors as follows: 70.7 percent for trawl CVs; 4.4 percent for AFA
trawl CPs; and 24.9 percent for non-AFA trawl CPs. Because the AFA and
non-AFA trawl CVs would share a Pacific cod allocation, the Council
decided that this sector also would receive combined PSC allowances of
halibut and crab mortality.
Halibut PSC mortality is attributed to a fishery based upon what
the target fishery is. A significant amount of Pacific cod is taken
incidentally in trawl fisheries for species other than Pacific cod.
However, the halibut PSC mortality associated with that incidental
Pacific cod harvest is attributed to a fishery other than the Pacific
cod trawl fishery.
The Council's intent for the proposed PSC apportionments among the
trawl gear sectors that target Pacific cod was to allow each sector to
better plan its operations by being able to manage its PSC use during
the fishing year without its PSC being eroded by another sector.
However, based on the directed Pacific cod trawl fishery's historical
halibut and crab PSC use, the proposed percentage of the total halibut
and crab PSC allowances to the Pacific cod trawl CV sector would
increase disproportionately relative to the trawl CP sectors as a
whole. This is because both trawl CP sectors caught a relatively high
percentage of their Pacific cod while targeting on species other than
Pacific cod. The trawl CV sector caught 6.9 percent of its Pacific cod
in other fisheries, while the non-AFA CP sector caught 45.9 percent of
its Pacific cod in other trawl fisheries, and the AFA CP sector caught
44.2 percent of its Pacific cod in other trawl fisheries. The Council
noted that the halibut and crab PSC allowances for the trawl fisheries
that harvest Pacific cod incidentally would be apportioned under other
trawl fishery categories based on the target groundfish species.
Table 6 projects the amount of halibut and crab PSC mortality that
would be apportioned to each trawl sector under Amendment 85 using the
2006 PSC apportionments. Table 7 shows each sector's average historical
use in the directed Pacific cod fishery from 1995-2003 for halibut and
from 1995-2002 for crab. Under the proposed rule, each sector would be
limited to using its PSC allowances in its directed Pacific cod
fishery.
Table 6. Projected Pacific cod trawl PSC allowances for each trawl sector under Amendment 85 using 2006 total
Pacific cod trawl fishery group PSC apportionments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Halibut PSC Red king crab Opilio PSC Zone 1 bairdi Zone 2 bairdi
allowance (mt PSC allowance allowance PSC allowance PSC allowance
Sector halibut ( of ( of ( of ( of
mortality) crab) crab) crab) crab)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA Trawl CP 63 1,169 6,131 8,057 14,264
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5667]]
Non-AFA Trawl CP 357 6,614 34,693 45,595 80,720
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 1,014 18,780 98,507 129,460 229,192
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 2006 PSC for Pacific cod 1,434 26,563 139,331 183,112 324,176
trawl fishery
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7. Pacific cod trawl PSC average annual mortality for each trawl sector from 1995-2003 for halibut and
from 1995-2002 for crab
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Red king crab Opilio (< greek- Zone 1 bairdi Zone 2 bairdi
Sector Halibut ( of i> of crab) ( of ( of
(mt) crab) crab) crab)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA Trawl CP 21 166 189 469 1,685
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-AFA Trawl CP 459 4,730 34,645 72,391 25,546
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trawl CV 737 1,114 6,768 59,810 19,376
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 1,216 6,010 41,602 132,670 46,607
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
During its deliberation on adoption of Amendment 85, the Council
understood and acknowledged that the potential impact of the percentage
of Zone 1 bairdi crab PSC mortality apportioned to the non-AFA trawl CP
sector could be constraining compared to historic use, but chose not to
modify its decision. The Council determined that the amount of Zone 1
bairdi crab that would be apportioned to the non-AFA trawl CP sector
would fall within the range of what this sector has caught
historically. NMFS is concerned that the Council's recommendation for
Amendment 85 would provide substantially less halibut and Zone 1 bairdi
crab PSC mortality to support the non-AFA trawl CP sector Pacific cod
fishery than this sector has used historically, and only about the
average amount of opilio crab PSC mortality. Thus, the proposed PSC
apportionments could limit this sector's directed fishery for Pacific
cod. The non-AFA trawl CP sector is concerned that it may already have
its directed fishery limited by its proposed Pacific cod allocation
under Amendment 85 which is less than its more recent history.
Similarly, NMFS is concerned that the trawl CV sector would have
greater PSC allowances than it has used historically and that such
increases in PSC would not be needed to support this sector's proposed
allocation of Pacific cod, which is less than its average historical
catch. NMFS also is concerned that setting individual PSC sector
percentage allowances in regulations is more constraining to the trawl
sector than the more flexible method used to distribute halibut PSC
mortality among the nontrawl gear sectors during the annual harvest
specifications process.
NMFS is seeking public comment regarding whether to continue with
the status quo method of distributing the PSC allowance among the
Pacific cod trawl sectors during the annual harvest specifications
process, or to set individual PSC allowances for each trawl sector as
proposed under Amendment 85 and this rule. NMFS notes that the Council
has developed a separate amendment to the FMP, Amendment 80, to further
restructure the trawl PSC apportionments among fishery categories.
Amendment 80 would allocate specified groundfish species and PSC to the
non-AFA trawl CP sector. That proposed action would supercede the trawl
PSC allocations under Amendment 85, but has yet to be forwarded to the
Secretary for review and approval.
Nontrawl Sector Halibut PSC Apportionment
The total amount of nontrawl halibut PSC for the non-CDQ fisheries
currently is 833 mt of mortality. This amount is typically apportioned
between the Pacific cod hook-and-line fishery and other nontrawl
fisheries during the annual harvest specifications process. Generally,
775 mt is apportioned to the hook-and-line Pacific cod fishery and 58
mt to other nontrawl groundfish fisheries (primarily the Greenland
turbot target fishery). Between 1995 and 2003, the halibut mortality in
the hook-and-line CP fishery averaged 684.9 mt per year, and the hook-
and-line CV averaged 5.9 mt per year, for a total of about 691 mt per
year. This proposed rule would not change the total amount of halibut
PSC mortality allocated to the hook-and-line Pacific cod sectors.
Currently, the annual Pacific cod hook-and-line halibut PSC
allowance is apportioned among three seasons: 320 mt (January 1 to June
10); 0 mt (June 10 to August 15); and 455 mt (August 15 to December
31). If a seasonal allowance of halibut PSC mortality is reached,
directed fishing for BSAI Pacific cod by all vessels using hook-and-
line gear is closed for the remainder of the season. A seasonal halibut
PSC allowance in the second season has not been specified in recent
years because halibut bycatch rates during that season are relatively
high. Thus, a hook-and-line directed fishery for Pacific cod has not
operated in the summer months.
The hook-and-line CP sector generally supports not providing a
halibut PSC limit in the second season, because fishing when the
halibut bycatch rates are high could risk closing the directed Pacific
cod fishery prior to the allocation being fully harvested. However, the
hook-and-line CV sector, which also is constrained by the same PSC
limit, is comprised of smaller vessels with slower catch rates and a
relatively small Pacific cod allocation compared to the hook-and-line
CP sector. While the PSC limit has not been
[[Page 5668]]
constraining to these sectors in the recent past, the Council is of the
opinion that the hook-and-line CV sector might benefit from a halibut
PSC limit separate from the hook-and-line CP sector, and potentially,
the ability to fish for Pacific cod in the summer months when the
weather is more favorable for smaller vessels. This would be consistent
with the Council's concept of establishing separate Pacific cod
allocations and separate PSC limits for each trawl and nontrawl sector,
such that no sector can impede another sector's Pacific cod fishery.
Therefore, this proposed rule would divide the halibut PSC
allowance annually specified for the hook-and-line Pacific cod fishery
between two fishery sectors: the hook-and-line CP sector and the hook-
and-line CV sector (CVs [gteqt]60 ft LOA and CVs < 60 ft LOA combined).
The nontrawl halibut PSC allowance apportioned to these fishery sectors
would be established annually during the harvest specifications
process. The apportionment would be based on each sector's proportional
share of the anticipated bycatch mortality of halibut during a fishing
year, and the need to optimize the amount of total groundfish harvested
under the nontrawl halibut PSC mortality limit.
The Council's recommendation was to not fix the amount of halibut
PSC apportioned to the hook-and-line BSAI Pacific cod fishery
categories in regulation, but to continue making that determination in
the annual harvest specifications process. The Council deliberations on
this issue indicated that a halibut PSC allowance of 10 mt to the
Pacific cod hook-and-line CV sector might be a starting point to guide
the specifications process in this determination. The Council's intent
was to allow NMFS flexibility to adjust these amounts if necessary in
the future, rather than fix the amounts in Federal regulations. Under
this action, NMFS could provide varying amounts of halibut PSC by
season to each sector, tailoring PSC limits to suit the needs and
timing of each sector.
Pacific Cod and PSC Sideboard Limits for AFA Sectors
Sideboards are harvesting and processing restrictions that were
placed on AFA CVs and AFA CPs operating in the BSAI pollock fishery.
The basis for the sideboard limits is described in detail in the final
rule implementing the AFA that was published December 30, 2002 (67 FR
79692). To protect the interests of other fishermen and processors that
did not benefit directly from the AFA, these sideboards restrict the
ability of AFA vessels to participate in directed fisheries for non-
pollock groundfish species. For Pacific cod, these sideboards are based
on the total amount of Pacific cod retained by the different AFA vessel
sectors as a percentage of the non-CDQ TAC in 1997. Currently, the AFA
trawl CP sector has a sideboard limit of 6.1 percent of the non-CDQ
Pacific cod TAC, and the non-exempt AFA trawl CV sector (see the AFA
final rule for an explanation of the non-exempt vessels) has a
sideboard limit of 20.2 percent of the non-CDQ Pacific cod TAC.
This action proposes to remove Sec. 679.64(a)(1)(ii) that
specifies the sideboard limits of BSAI Pacific cod for the AFA trawl
CPs. The establishment of a separate Pacific cod allocation to this
sector under Sec. 679.20(a)(7) negates the need for the BSAI Pacific
cod sideboard which protects the historic share of the non-AFA trawl CP
sector from being eroded by the AFA CP vessels. For the same reason,
BSAI Pacific cod would be added to the list of exceptions to the
groundfish species or species groups for which sideboard harvest limits
would be calculated for AFA listed CPs in the introductory text under
Sec. 679.64(a)(1).
The halibut and crab PSC sideboard limits for both AFA sectors
would be maintained as set out in Sec. 679.64(a) and (b). These PSC
sideboard limits would continue to be managed through directed fishing
closures in the groundfish fisheries for which the PSC sideboard limit
applies. The PSC sideboards for the AFA trawl CP sector would not be
increased by this proposed rule, but a portion of the PSC sideboards
would be set aside as an allocation for use in this sector's Pacific
cod directed fishery. To continue protection of the non-AFA CVs, the
Council proposed under Amendment 85 to continue the Pacific cod
sideboards and the halibut and crab PSC sideboards for AFA CVs.
Other Revisions
Four definitions for CPs would be modified or added to the
regulations in accordance with the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2005, as noted earlier. This proposed rule includes a revised
definition for AFA trawl CP and new definitions for hook-and-line CP,
non-AFA trawl CP, and pot CP, consistent with the provisions of the
Act. The proposed definition for hook-and-line CP is substantively
consistent with the Act's definition for longline CP subsector.
The definition for ``CDQ reserve'' would be revised to change and
update terms and to generalize the cross reference. Under current
regulations, ``CDQ reserve'' is defined ``as a percentage of each
groundfish TAC apportioned under Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii), a percentage
of a catch limit for halibut, or a percentage of a guideline harvest
level for crab that has been set aside for purposes of the CDQ
Program.'' The proposed definition would change the term
``percentage,'' where it appears, to ``amount'' to more accurately
reflect that the term ``CDQ reserve'' is used elsewhere in 50 CFR part
679 to refer to the annual amounts of the allocations to the CDQ
Program by weight for groundfish and halibut, and by numbers for crab.
The term ``guideline harvest level'' for crab would be replaced with
the term ``TAC'' to be consistent with the term used for annual crab
quotas in 50 CFR part 680. The cross reference would be generalized
because this is an overall definition of CDQ Program apportionments for
various species allocated to the program. Regulations at Sec.
679.20(b)(1)(iii) discuss the establishment of the CDQ reserve from the
nonspecified reserve. Amendment 85 would remove Pacific cod from this
process and direct that Pacific cod CDQ be allocated directly from the
Pacific cod TAC, similar to the way that pollock and sablefish are
allocated to the CDQ reserve. Thus, the paragraph cited is no longer an
applicable reference for the CDQ reserve for pollock, sablefish, or
Pacific cod. Stepping back the reference citation in the current
definition from ``Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii)'' to the more general level
of ``Sec. 679.20'' would include all the paragraphs that allocate
groundfish to the CDQ reserve.
The prohibition at Sec. 679.7(d)(5) would be revised to remove the
term ``crab PSQ.'' The red king, bairdi, and opilio crab PSQs are
managed with area closures under the prohibitions at Sec. 679.7(d)(6),
(d)(7), and (d)(8) and should not also have been included in the
prohibition at Sec. 679.7(d)(5).
The introductory text of Sec. 679.20 would be revised to clarify
that this section applies to vessels engaged in directed fishing for
groundfish in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) or the BSAI. Current text
ambiguously states ``GOA and BSAI,'' which could be interpreted as
meaning that the sections applies only to vessels that fish in both
areas. However, vessels directed fishing for groundfish in either ``the
GOA or the BSAI'' are affected by the regulations in this section.
The information in Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(ii), concerning
the reserves in the BSAI for the CDQ Program, would be moved to Sec.
679.21(e)(3)(i)(A) and (e)(4)(i)(A) respectively. This regulatory text
would be moved from the paragraphs allocating PSC by species, to the
more appropriate location under the
[[Page 5669]]
paragraphs making PSC apportionments to the various fishery categories.
The regulatory text from Sec. 679.21(e)(2)(i) would become the new
regulatory text for Sec. 679.21(e)(2).
This proposed rule would correct a typographical error in newly
redesignated Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i), which references red king crab, by
revising the reference from Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(iii), which applies to
tanner crab, to the newly redesignated Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i), which
applies to red king crab.
The proposed rule would revise the heading of the newly
redesignated paragraph at Sec. 679.21(e)(2)(vi) from ``Chinook
salmon'' to ``BS Chinook salmon.'' This revision would clarify that
only BS Chinook salmon is the subject of this paragraph and would
better correlate with the heading of the newly redesignated paragraph
at Sec. 679.21(e)(2)(viii) that is ``AI Chinook salmon.''
For purposes of apportioning the hook-and-line halibut PSC limit
among sectors, definitions would be added for the new Pacific cod hook-
and-line fishery categories at Sec. 679.21(e)(4)(ii)(A) and
(e)(4)(ii)(B). ``Nontrawl fishery categories'' would be revised to
replace ``Pacific cod hook-and-line fishery'' with ``Pacific cod hook-
and-line catcher vessel fishery'' and ``Pacific cod hook-and-line
catcher/processor fishery'' to complement the previously noted division
of this category. The regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(4)(ii)(C) through
(e)(4)(ii)(E) would be unchanged except for their redesignations due to
adding a category for the Pacific cod hook-and-line CP fishery. The
introductory text at Sec. 679.21(e)(4)(ii) would remain unchanged.
In Sec. 679.23, paragraphs (e)(6) and (e)(7), applicable through
December 31, 2002, would be removed because they are no longer in
effect.
This proposed rule would correct a typographical error at Sec.
679.32(b), which references the halibut PSC limit for vessels using pot
or jig gear, by revising the reference in the paragraph from Sec.
679.21(e)(5), which applies to seasonal apportionments of bycatch
allowances, to Sec. 679.21(e)(4), which applies to nontrawl halibut
PSC apportionment.
This proposed rule would correct a typographical error at Sec.
679.50(c)(1)(iii), which references the chum salmon savings area, by
revising the reference in the paragraph from Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(vi),
which applies to Pacific herring, to Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(vii), which
applies to chum salmon.
Classification
At this time, NMFS has not determined that the FMP amendment that
this rule would implement is consistent with the national standards of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making
that determination, will take into account the data, views, and
comments received during the comment period.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
An IRFA was prepared, as required by section 603 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes the economic impact this
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A description
of the action, the reasons why it is being considered, and a statement
of the objectives of, and the legal basis for, this action are
contained at the beginning of this section in the preamble and in the
SUMMARY section of the preamble. A summary of the analysis follows. A
copy of this analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
The directly regulated entities are the commercial fishing entities
operating vessels that participate in the BSAI Pacific cod directed
fisheries and the six CDQ groups. Of the 310 vessels participating in
2003, 169 vessels are estimated to be small entities directly regulated
by the proposed action, as detailed below.
For purposes of an IRFA, the Small Business Administration (SBA)
has established that a business involved in fish harvesting is a small
business if it is independently owned and operated and not dominant in
its field of operation (including its affiliates) and if it has
combined annual gross receipts not in excess of $4.0 million for all
its affiliated operations worldwide. A seafood processor is a small
business if it is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its
field of operation, and employs 500 or fewer persons on a full-time,
part-time, temporary, or other basis, at all its affiliated operations
worldwide.
Because the SBA does not have a size criterion for businesses that
are involved in both the harvesting and processing of seafood products,
NMFS has in the past applied and continues to apply SBA's fish
harvesting criterion for these businesses because CPs are first and
foremost fish harvesting businesses. Therefore, a business involved in
both the harvesting and processing of seafood products is a small
business if it meets the $4.0 million criterion for fish harvesting
operations. NMFS currently is reviewing its small entity size
classification for all CPs in the United States. However, until new
guidance is adopted, NMFS will continue to use the annual receipts
standard for CPs. NMFS plans to issue new guidance in the near future.
This IRFA used the most recent year of data available to conduct
this analysis (2003). As stated previously, the commercial entities
directly regulated by the proposed action are divided into nine sectors
for the purpose of (non-CDQ) BSAI Pacific cod allocations, and the CDQ
allocation is considered a separate sector. A description of the
participants in, and the eligibility requirements for, each non-CDQ
sector is provided in detail above, as is a description of the CDQ
sector.
Vessels that were considered large entities, for purposes of the
IRFA, were those with individual annual gross receipts greater than
$4.0 million, or those affiliated under owners of multiple vessels,
contractual relationships, and/or affiliated through fishing
cooperative membership (e.g., AFA) that, when combined with earnings
from all such affiliated operations, had aggregate annual gross
revenues greater than $4.0 million. Insufficient documentation of
multiple and joint-ownership structures, contractual affiliations,
interlocking agreements, etc., among vessels in the various fleets of
interest, herein, exist with which to confidently estimate the number
of directly regulated small (and large) entities. Recognizing this, the
IRFA is understood to likely overestimate the actual number of directly
regulated small entities subject to this action.
The majority of the CVs in all gear sectors can be considered small
entities under a conservative application of the existing threshold
criterion. In 2003, only the AFA trawl CVs were considered large
entities, as they are known to be party to a harvest cooperative
system. The remaining 138 CVs of all gear types appear to meet the
criterion for a small entity, as applied by evaluating the 2003 gross
revenue data on a per vessel basis. However, as just noted, little is
known about the ownership structure of the vessels in the fleets. Thus,
based on the best available data, the following vessels appear to meet
the application of the criterion above for a small entity in 2003: 25
hook-and-line and pot CVs < 60 ft LOA; 22 non-AFA trawl CVs; 15 jig CVs;
6 hook-and-line CVs [gteqt]60 ft LOA; and 70 pot CVs [gteqt]60 ft LOA.
In the CP sector, the available data indicate that fewer than half
meet the threshold for a small entity, as applied by evaluating the
2003 gross revenue on
[[Page 5670]]
a per vessel basis. Thirty-one of the 81 participating vessels in 2003
had gross receipts not in excess of $4.0 million. Again, because little
is known about the ownership structure of the vessels in the fleets, it
is likely that the IRFA overestimates the number of small entities.
Thus, based on the best available data, the following vessels meet the
application of the criterion above for a small entity in 2003: 24 hook-
and-line CPs; 4 non-AFA trawl CPs; and 3 pot CPs. In sum, of the 310
vessels participating in 2003, 169 vessels are estimated as small
entities directly regulated by the proposed action.
The six CDQ groups participating in the CDQ Program are not-for-
profit entities that are not dominant in the overall BSAI fishing
industry. Thus, the six CDQ groups directly regulated by the proposed
action would be considered small entities or ``small organizations''
under the RFA. Thus, under a conservative application of the SBA
criterion and the best available data, the total number of small
entities directly regulated by the proposed action is estimated as 175.
Within this universe of small entities impacts may accrue
differentially; i.e., some small entities could be negatively affected
and others positively affected. Therefore, the Council deliberately
sought to provide considerable accommodation for the smallest of the
small entities under this amendment. Thus, while the proposed action is
distributional in nature, the overall impact to the smallest of the
small entities is expected to be positive.
This regulation does not impose new record keeping or reporting
requirements on the directly regulated small entities.
This proposed action does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
other Federal rules.
The IRFA analyzed the ``no action'' alternative (Alternative 1) and
the proposed action (Alternative 2). Each of these alternatives was
comprised of the same set of eight components, or issues. Alternative 1
would continue the following: (1) the current overall gear allocations
in the BSAI Pacific cod fishery that were established under Amendment
46 in 1997; (2) the current CDQ allocation of 7.5 percent of the BSAI
Pacific cod TAC; and (3) the current apportionment of the fixed gear
portion of the BSAI Pacific cod non-CDQ TAC established under Amendment
77 in 2004. Alternative 1 also would continue shared halibut and crab
PSC allowances to the BSAI Pacific cod trawl fishery category, which
would mean that halibut and crab PSC harvest by each trawl sector would
accrue to the same PSC allowance. Similarly, Alternative 1 would
continue a shared halibut PSC allowance to the BSAI hook-and-line
Pacific cod fishery category.
Before the Council made its decisions for Amendment 85, thus
forming the proposed action, it considered several options under each
of the eight components. These many options are analyzed in the RIR.
The combination of these options resulted in the evaluation of a
multitude of potential alternatives. For example, Table 8 provides a
summary of the component concerning sector allocations, including the
range of potential allocations to each non-CDQ sector considered by the
Council, the current sector allocations, and the selections made under
the preferred alternative.
Table 8. Percent non-CDQ sector allocations by alternative
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range of allocations Proposed action
Sectors Current (alternative 1) Council considered (alternative 2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig 2.0 0.1 - 2.0 1.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft LOA 0.7 0.1 - 2.0 2.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft LOA 0.2 0.1 - 0.4 0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line CP 40.8 45.8 - 50.3 48.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m) LOA 7.6 7.3 - 9.2 8.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pot CP 1.7 1.4 - 2.3 1.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CP 23.5 (AFA CP sector 0.9 - 3.7 2.3
subject to 6.1%
sideboard)
------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------
Non AFA trawl CP ........................ 12.7 - 16.2 13.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA trawl CV 23.5 (non-exempt AFA CV 17.8 - 24.4 22.1
sector subject to 20.2%
sideboard)
------------------------------------ -------------------------
Non-AFA trawl CV ........................ 0.5 - 3.1 ........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment 85 is thus one derivation of many possible options,
reflecting an effort to balance the economic and social objectives for
the action against the potential burden placed on directly regulated
entities (especially those which are ``small''). One option was
selected under each of the eight components to comprise its final
preferred alternative. The preferred alternative is described in detail
in the RIR.
Several measures are included in the proposed rule that would
reduce impacts on small entities. A specific means to facilitate
economic opportunity and stability for small entities participating in
the Pacific cod fisheries would be to establish BSAI Pacific cod
allocations for the smallest of the small entities (jig vessels and the
< 60 ft LOA hook-and-line and pot CVs) that represent a net increase
over their actual catch history. This would provide for potential
growth in those sectors. On average during 1995 to 2003, the combined
harvest history by these sectors was about 0.5 percent of the retained
BSAI Pacific cod harvest. However, in recent years it appears that the
< 60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector has increased its participation in the
BSAI
[[Page 5671]]
Pacific cod fishery and could benefit from additional quota, if it were
made available. This specific accommodation for small entities is
included in the proposed rule.
The BSAI Pacific cod fisheries are currently managed through a
complex series of permits, gear and area endorsements, and licenses.
Many are predicated on historical participation and/or performance
thresholds (e.g., meeting or exceeding a specific threshold landing in
a specific series of seasons, etc.). Many of these requirements result
in extremely high entry costs and physical barriers for small vessels
and entry level operations. To relieve these burdens and obstacles to
participation, an important means of accommodating small entities can
be ``exemptions'' from, for example, requirements to acquire some
specific permits, and/or meeting historical catch and participation
thresholds, extended to particularly vulnerable or disproportionately
burdened classes of smaller vessels.
Recognizing the opportunity to facilitate and sustain small entity
participation, the Council incorporated a number of exemptions for
small entities in the action. The proposed rule would maintain the
current reallocation process whereby any unused jig quota is first
considered for reallocation to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear sector before
being reallocated to any other sector. The proposed rule also would
change the jig sector seasonal allowance such that 20 percent more of
the jig allocation is allowed to be harvested in the first half of the
year. Thus, more Pacific cod may potentially be harvested by the < 60 ft
LOA fixed gear sector earlier in the year, when the weather is
preferable for this small boat sector. The proposed rule also would
specify that the third trimester of the jig allocation, if it is to be
reallocated, should be available to the < 60 ft LOA fixed gear CV sector
on or about September 1. The intent of this provision is to reallocate
quota between the small boat CV sectors as early in the year as
possible, in order for these sectors to have an opportunity to harvest
the quota under better weather conditions.
The proposed action also would increase the BSAI Pacific cod
allocation to the CDQ Program. The proposed rule would increase the
Pacific cod CDQ allocation from 7.5 percent of the Pacific cod TAC to
10.7 percent, as mandated by the recent amendments to the Magnuson-
Stevens Act. Similar to the status quo, this allocation would fund all
of the directed and nontarget catch of Pacific cod taken in the CDQ
fisheries.
A tradeoff would exist in terms of impacts on the small entities in
the non-CDQ sectors whose allocations would be reduced (proportionally
by 3.2 percent) by the increase to the CDQ Program. However, the
proposed action represents a positive effect on the six small entities
that comprise the CDQ groups in terms of potential revenues resulting
from an increased allocation. This increase in royalty payments is
estimated as approximately $1.1 million. Nonetheless, efforts to
minimize the burden on the smallest of small entities, as discussed
above, by exempting them from the most onerous permit and recency
requirements, and by allocating Pacific cod TAC amounts in excess of
their recent Pacific cod harvest levels, reflects a sincere effort to
address the needs of these small entities.
In sum, many vessels in each sector directly regulated by the
proposed action are small entities. Because this action is principally
designed to reapportion access to the cod resource among current user
groups, by definition, it represents tradeoffs (i.e., some small
entities could be negatively affected, while others are positively
affected). In addition, the six CDQ groups would receive an increased
allocation under the proposed action.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Dated: February 1, 2007.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1540(f); 1801 et seq.; 1851
note; 3631 et seq.
2. In Sec. 679.2, remove the definition for ``AFA catcher/
processor'', revise the definition for ``CDQ reserve'', and add
definitions for ``AFA trawl catcher/processor'', ``Hook-and-line
catcher/processor'', ``Non-AFA trawl catcher/processor'', and ``Pot
catcher/processor'' in alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
AFA trawl catcher/processor means:
(1) For purposes of BS pollock and all BSAI groundfish fisheries
other than Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland turbot, Pacific cod,
Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, and yellowfin sole, a catcher/processor
that is permitted to harvest BS pollock under Sec. 679.4(l)(2).
(2) For purposes of BSAI Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland
turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, and yellowfin
sole, a catcher/processor that is permitted to harvest BS pollock and
that is listed under Sec. 679.4(l)(2)(i).
* * * * *
CDQ reserve means the amount of each groundfish TAC apportioned
under Sec. 679.20, the amount of each catch limit for halibut, or the
amount of TAC for crab that has been set aside for purposes of the CDQ
Program.
* * * * *
Hook-and-line catcher/processor means a catcher/processor vessel
that is named on a valid LLP license that is noninterim and
transferable, or that is interim and subsequently becomes noninterim
and transferable, and that is endorsed for Bering Sea or Aleutian
Islands catcher/processor fishing activity, catcher/processor, Pacific
cod, and hook-and-line gear.
* * * * *
Non-AFA trawl catcher/processor means, for purposes of BSAI Atka
mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean
perch, rock sole, and yellowfin sole, a catcher/processor vessel using
trawl gear and that:
(1) Is not an AFA trawl catcher/processor listed under Sec.
679.4(l)(2)(i);
(2) Is named on a valid LLP license that is endorsed for Bering Sea
or Aleutian Islands trawl catcher/processor fishing activity; and
(3) Was used to harvest with trawl gear in the BSAI and process not
less than a total of 150 mt of Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Greenland
turbot, Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch, rock sole, or yellowfin sole
between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2002.
* * * * *
Pot catcher/processor means a catcher/processor vessel that is
named on a valid LLP license that is noninterim and transferable, or
that is interim and subsequently becomes noninterim and transferable,
and that is endorsed for Bering Sea or Aleutian Islands catcher/
processor fishing activity, catcher/processor, Pacific cod, and pot
gear.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 679.7, revise paragraph (d)(5) and add paragraph
(d)(25) to read as follows:
[[Page 5672]]
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(5) For a CDQ group, exceed a CDQ or a halibut PSQ.
* * * * *
(25) For a CDQ group, exceed a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod
under Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(i)(B).
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 679.20, remove paragraph (b)(1)(iv) and revise the
section's introductory text and paragraph (a)(7) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.20 General limitations.
This section applies to vessels engaged in directed fishing for
groundfish in the GOA or the BSAI.
(a) * * *
(7) Pacific cod TAC, BSAI--(i) CDQ reserve and seasonal allowances.
(A) A total of 10.7 percent of the annual Pacific cod TAC will be
allocated to the CDQ Program in the annual harvest specifications
required under paragraph (c) of this section. The Pacific cod CDQ
allocation will be deducted from the annual Pacific cod TAC before
allocations to the non-CDQ sectors are made under paragraph (a)(7)(ii)
of this section.
(B) The BSAI Pacific cod CDQ gear allowances by season, as those
seasons are specified under Sec. 679.23(e)(5), are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gear Type A season B season C season
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Trawl 60% 20% 20%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Hook-and-line CP and 60% 40% no C season
hook-and-line CV
[gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Jig 40% 20% 40%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) All other non-trawl no seasonal no seasonal no seasonal
gear allowance allowance allowance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Non-CDQ allocations--(A) Sector allocations. The remainder of
the BSAI Pacific cod TAC after subtraction of the CDQ reserve for
Pacific cod will be allocated to non-CDQ sectors as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector % Allocation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Jig vessels 1.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Hook-and-line/pot CV < 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Hook-and-line CV [gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m) 0.2
LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Hook-and-line CP 48.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Pot CV [gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m) LOA 8.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Pot CP 1.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) AFA trawl CP 2.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(8) Non-AFA trawl CP 13.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(9) Trawl CV 22.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Incidental catch allowance. During the annual harvest
specifications process set forth at paragraph (c) of this section, the
Regional Administrator will specify an amount of Pacific cod that NMFS
estimates will be taken as incidental catch in directed fisheries for
groundfish other than Pacific cod by the hook-and-line and pot gear
sectors. This amount will be the incidental catch allowance and will be
deducted from the aggregate portion of Pacific cod TAC annually
allocated to the hook-and-line and pot gear sectors before the
allocations under paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(A) of this section are made to
these sectors.
(iii) Reallocation among non-CDQ sectors. If, during a fishing
year, the Regional Administrator determines that a non-CDQ sector will
be unable to harvest the entire amount of Pacific cod allocated to that
sector under paragraph (a)(7)(ii)(A) of this section, the Regional
Administrator will reallocate the projected unused amount of Pacific
cod to other sectors through notification in the Federal Register. Any
reallocation decision by the Regional Administrator will take into
account the capability of a sector to harvest the reallocated amount of
Pacific cod, and the following reallocation hierarchy:
(A) Catcher vessel sectors. The Regional Administrator will
reallocate projected unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC from a
catcher vessel sector as follows: first to the jig sector, or to the
less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line or pot catcher vessel
sector, or to both of these sectors; second, to the greater than or
equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line or to the greater than or
equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA pot catcher vessel sectors; and third to
the trawl catcher vessel sector. If the Regional Administrator
determines that a projected unharvested amount from the jig sector
allocation, the less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line or pot
catcher vessel sector allocation, or the greater than or equal to 60 ft
(18.3 m) LOA hook-and-line catcher vessel sector allocation is unlikely
to be harvested through this hierarchy, the Regional Administrator will
reallocate that amount to the hook-and-line catcher/processor sector.
If the Regional Administrator determines that a projected unharvested
amount from a greater than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA pot catcher
vessel sector allocation is unlikely to be harvested through this
hierarchy, the Regional Administrator will reallocate that amount to
the pot catcher/processor sector in accordance with the hierarchy set
forth in paragraph (a)(7)(iii)(C) of this section. If the Regional
Administrator determines that a projected unharvested amount from a
trawl catcher vessel sector allocation is unlikely to be harvested
through this hierarchy, the Regional Administrator will reallocate that
amount to the other trawl sectors in accordance with the hierarchy set
forth in paragraph (a)(7)(iii)(B) of this section.
(B) Trawl catcher/processor sectors. The Regional Administrator
will reallocate any projected unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC
from a trawl sector (trawl catcher vessel, AFA trawl catcher/processor,
and non-AFA trawl catcher/processor sectors) to other trawl sectors
before unharvested amounts are reallocated and apportioned to specified
gear sectors as follows:
(1) 83.1 percent to the hook-and-line catcher/processor sector,
(2) 2.6 percent to the pot catcher/processor sector, and
(3) 14.3 percent to the greater than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA
pot catcher vessel sector.
(C) Pot gear sectors. The Regional Administrator will reallocate
any projected unharvested amounts of Pacific cod TAC from the pot
catcher/processor sector to the greater than or equal to 60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA pot catcher vessel sector, and from the greater than or equal to 60
ft (18.3 m) LOA pot catcher vessel sector to the pot catcher/processor
sector before reallocating it to the hook-and-line catcher/processor
sector.
(iv) Non-CDQ seasonal allowances--(A) Seasonal allowances by
sector. The BSAI Pacific cod sector allowances are apportioned by
season, as those seasons are specified at Sec. 679.23(e)(5), as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seasonal Allowances
Sector --------------------------------------
A season B season C season
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Trawl ........... ........... ...........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 5673]]
(i) Trawl CV 74 % 11 % 15 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Trawl CP 75 % 25 % 0 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Hook-and-line CP, hook-and- 51 % 49 % no C season
line CV [gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m)
LOA, and pot gear vessels
[gteqt]60 ft (18.3 m) LOA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Jig vessels 60 % 20 % 20 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) All other nontrawl vessels no seasonal no seasonal no seasonal
allowance allowance allowance
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Unused seasonal allowances. Any unused portion of a seasonal
allowance of Pacific cod from any sector except the jig sector will be
reallocated to that sector's next season during the current fishing
year unless the Regional Administrator makes a determination under
paragraph (a)(7)(iii) of this section that the sector will be unable to
harvest its allocation.
(C) Jig sector. The Regional Administrator will reallocate any
projected unused portion of a seasonal allowance of Pacific cod for the
jig sector under this section to the less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA hook-
and-line or pot catcher vessel sector. The Regional Administrator will
reallocate the projected unused portion of the jig sector's C season
allowance on or about September 1 of each year.
* * * * *
5. Section 679.21 is amended by:
A. Removing paragraph (e)(1)(i).
B. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) through (e)(1)(ix) as
(e)(1)(i) through (e)(1)(viii), respectively.
C. Adding paragraph (e)(3)(vi).
D. Revising paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(v), and (e)(4).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 679.21 Prohibited species bycatch management.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) Nontrawl gear, halibut. The PSC limit of halibut caught while
conducting any nontrawl fishery for groundfish in the BSAI during any
fishing year is the amount of halibut equivalent to 900 mt of halibut
mortality.
(3) * * *
(i) General. (A) An amount equivalent to 7.5 percent of each PSC
limit set forth in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (iv) and paragraphs
(e)(1)(vi) through (e)(1)(viii) of this section is allocated to the
groundfish CDQ Program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ reserve is not
apportioned by gear or fishery.
(B) NMFS, after consultation with the Council and after subtraction
of the PSQ reserve, will apportion each PSC limit set forth in
paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section into bycatch
allowances for the fishery categories defined in paragraph (e)(3)(iv)
of this section, based on each category's proportional share of the
anticipated incidental catch during a fishing year of prohibited
species for which a PSC limit is specified and the need to optimize the
amount of total groundfish harvested under established PSC limits.
* * * * *
(v) PSC apportionment to Pacific cod trawl fisheries. The
apportionment of the PSC allowance of halibut and crab to the Pacific
cod trawl fishery category under paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this section
will be divided among the trawl sectors established at Sec.
679.20(a)(7)(ii), as follows: 70.7 percent for the trawl catcher vessel
sector; 4.4 percent for the AFA trawl catcher/processor sector; and
24.9 percent for the non-AFA trawl catcher/processor sector.
(vi) AFA prohibited species catch limitations. Halibut and crab PSC
limits for the AFA trawl catcher/processor sector and the AFA trawl
catcher vessel sector will be established according to the procedures
and formulas set out in paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section and in
Sec. 679.64(a) and (b) and managed through directed fishing closures
for the AFA trawl catcher/processor sector and the AFA trawl catcher
vessel sector in the groundfish fisheries for which the PSC limit
applies.
(4) Halibut apportionment to nontrawl fishery categories--(i)
General. (A) An amount equivalent to 7.5 percent of the nontrawl gear
halibut PSC limit set forth in paragraph (e)(2) of this section is
allocated to the groundfish CDQ Program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ reserve
is not apportioned by gear or fishery.
(B) NMFS, after consultation with the Council and after subtraction
of the PSQ reserve, will apportion the halibut PSC limit for nontrawl
gear set forth under paragraph (e)(2) of this section into bycatch
allowances for the nontrawl fishery categories defined under paragraph
(e)(4)(ii) of this section.
(C) Apportionment of the nontrawl halibut PSC limit among the
nontrawl fishery categories will be based on each category's
proportional share of the anticipated bycatch mortality of halibut
during a fishing year and the need to optimize the amount of total
groundfish harvested under the nontrawl halibut PSC limit.
(D) The sum of all bycatch allowances of any prohibited species
will equal its PSC limit.
(ii) Nontrawl fishery categories. For purposes of apportioning the
nontrawl halibut PSC limit among fisheries, the following fishery
categories are specified and defined in terms of round-weight
equivalents of those BSAI groundfish species for which a TAC has been
specified under Sec. 679.20.
(A) Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher vessel fishery. Catcher
vessels fishing with hook-and-line gear during any weekly reporting
period that results in a retained catch of Pacific cod that is greater
than the retained amount of any other groundfish species.
(B) Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher/processor fishery. Catcher/
processors fishing with hook-and-line gear during any weekly reporting
period that results in a retained catch of Pacific cod that is greater
than the retained amount of any other groundfish species.
(C) Sablefish hook-and-line fishery. Fishing with hook-and-line
gear during any weekly reporting period that results in a retained
catch of sablefish that is greater than the retained amount of any
other groundfish species.
(D) Groundfish jig gear fishery. Fishing with jig gear during any
weekly reporting period that results in a retained catch of groundfish.
(E) Groundfish pot gear fishery. Fishing with pot gear under
restrictions set forth in Sec. 679.24(b) during any weekly reporting
period that results in a retained catch of groundfish.
(F) Other nontrawl fisheries. Fishing for groundfish with nontrawl
gear during any weekly reporting period that results in a retained
catch of groundfish and does not qualify as a Pacific cod hook-and-line
catcher vessel fishery, a Pacific cod hook-and-line catcher/processor
fishery, a sablefish hook-and-line fishery, a jig gear fishery, or a
groundfish pot gear fishery as defined under this paragraph (e)(4)(ii).
* * * * *
Sec. 679.23 [Amended]
6. In Sec. 679.23, remove paragraphs (e)(6) and (e)(7).
7. Section 679.64 is amended by:
A. Removing paragraph (a)(1) introductory text.
B. Redesignating paragraph (a)(1)(i) as paragraph (a)(1)
introductory text.
C. Redesignating paragraph (a)(2) introductory text as paragraph
(a)(1)(i).
[[Page 5674]]
D. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) as paragraphs
(a)(1)(i)(A) and(B), respectively.
E. Redesignating paragraph (a)(3) introductory text as paragraph
(a)(1)(ii).
F. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (iii) as paragraphs
(a)(1)(ii)(A) through (C), respectively.
G. Redesignating paragraph (a)(4) introductory text as paragraph
(a)(1)(iii).
H. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (ii) as paragraphs
(a)(1)(iii)(A) and (B), respectively.
I. Redesignating paragraph (a)(5) as paragraph (a)(2).
J. Redesignating paragraph (a)(6) as paragraph (a)(3).
K. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text
and (a)(3).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 679.64 Harvesting sideboards limits in other fisheries.
(a) * * *
(1) How will groundfish sideboard limits for AFA listed catcher/
processors be calculated? Except for Aleutian Islands pollock and BSAI
Pacific cod, the Regional Administrator will establish annual AFA
catcher/processor harvest limits for each groundfish species or species
group in which a TAC is specified for an area or subarea of the BSAI as
follows:
* * * * *
(3) How will AFA catcher/processor sideboard limits be managed? The
Regional Administrator will manage groundfish harvest limits and PSC
bycatch limits for AFA catcher/processors through directed fishing
closures in fisheries established under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section in accordance with the procedures set out in Sec. Sec.
679.20(d)(1)(iv) and 679.21(e)(3)(vi).
* * * * *
Sec. Sec. 679.20, 679.21, 679.31, 679.32, 679.50, and
679.64 [Amended]
8. In the table below, for each of the paragraphs shown under the
``Paragraph'' column, remove the phrase indicated under the ``Remove''
column and replace it with the phrase indicated under the ``Add''
column for the number of times indicated in the ``Frequency'' column.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph(s) Remove Add Frequency
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(i) except pollock except 2
and the pollock,
Pacific cod,
and the
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly redesignated Sec. paragraphs paragraphs 1
679.21(e)(1)(i) introductory (e)(1)(iii)(A (e)(1)(i)(A)
text ) through through
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly redesignated Sec. paragraphs paragraphs 1
679.21(e)(1)(ii) (e)(1)(iii)(A (e)(1)(ii)(A)
introductory text ) and and
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paragraph heading of newly Chinook salmon BS Chinook 1
redesignated Sec. salmon
679.21(e)(1)(vi)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B)(2) paragraph paragraph 1
(e)(1)(ii) of (e)(1)(i) of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(viii) paragraphs paragraphs 1
introductory text (e)(1)(vii) (e)(1)(vi)
and and
(e)(1)(ix) of (e)(1)(viii)
of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(viii)(A) paragraph paragraph 1
introductory text (e)(1)(vii) (e)(1)(vi) of
of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(viii)(B) paragraph paragraph 1
introductory text (e)(1)(ix) of (e)(1)(viii)
of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.31(c) (See Sec. (See Sec. 1
679.20(b)(1)( 679.20(a)(7)(
iii)) i) and
(b)(1)(iii))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.31(e) (See Sec. (See Sec. 1
679.21(e)(1)( 679.21(e)(3)(
i) and i)(A) and
(e)(2)(ii)). (e)(4)(i)(A).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.32(b) under Sec. under Sec. 1
679.21(e)(5) 679.21(e)(4)
in in
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.50(c)(1)(iii) under Sec. under Sec. 1
679.21(e)(7)( 679.21(e)(7)(
vi), or vii), or
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly redesignated Sec. paragraph paragraph 1
679.64(a)(1)(i)(B) (a)(2)(i) of (a)(1)(i)(A)
of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly redesignated Sec. paragraphs paragraphs 1
679.64(a)(1)(iii)(A) (a)(1)(ii) (a)(1)(i)
through through
(a)(3) of (a)(1)(ii) of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newly redesignated Sec. paragraph paragraph 1
679.64(a)(1)(iii)(B) (a)(4)(i) of (a)(1)(iii)(A
) of
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.64(b)(5) and (e)(3)(v). and 1
(e)(3)(vi).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 07-538 Filed 2-2-07; 2:22 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S