[Federal Register: September 24, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 186)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 54932-54942]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24se08-2]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 300
[Docket No. 080310411-8949-02]
RIN 0648-AU14
Pacific Halibut Fisheries; Subsistence Fishing
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule to amend the subsistence fishery
rules for Pacific halibut in waters in and off Alaska. These
regulations are necessary to address subsistence halibut management
concerns, particularly in densely populated areas. This action is
intended to support the conservation and management provisions of the
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982.
DATES: Effective October 24, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Categorical Exclusion (CE), Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR), and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) prepared
for this action, as well as the environmental assessment (EA) prepared
for the original subsistence halibut action (68 FR 18145; April 15,
2003) are available by mail from NMFS, Alaska Region, P. O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, Records Officer; in
person at NMFS, Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 420A, Juneau,
Alaska; or via the Internet at the NMFS Alaska Region website at http:/
/www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
final rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address and by e-mail
to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202-395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Carls, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Management of the Pacific halibut (hereafter
halibut) fishery in and off Alaska is based on an international
agreement between Canada and the United States. This agreement,
entitled the ``Convention between the United States of America and
Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern
Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea'' (Convention), was signed at Ottawa,
Canada, on March 2, 1953, and amended by the ``Protocol Amending the
Convention,'' signed at Washington, D.C., March 29, 1979. The
Convention, administered by the International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC), is given effect in the United States by the Northern
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act).
The IPHC promulgates regulations pursuant to the Convention. The
IPHC's regulations are subject to approval by the Secretary of State
with concurrence from the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). After
approval by the Secretary of State and the Secretary, the IPHC
regulations are published in the Federal Register as annual management
measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62. NMFS published the IPHC's current
annual management measures on March 7, 2008 (73 FR 12280).
The Halibut Act authorizes the North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) to develop halibut fishery regulations, including
limited access regulations, in its geographic area of concern that
would apply to nationals
[[Page 54933]]
or vessels of the United States (Halibut Act, section 773c (c)). Such
an action by the Council is limited to only those regulations that are
in addition to, and not in conflict with, IPHC regulations. Council-
developed regulations must be approved and implemented by the
Secretary. Any allocation of halibut fishing privileges must be fair
and equitable and consistent with other applicable Federal law.
The Council used its authority under the Halibut Act to recommend a
subsistence halibut program in October 2000 to recognize and manage the
subsistence fishery for halibut. The Secretary approved the Council's
recommended subsistence halibut program and published implementing
regulations on April 15, 2003 (68 FR 18145), and codified the program
in 50 CFR part 300-subpart E, authorizing a subsistence fishery for
halibut in Convention waters off Alaska. Like the original subsistence
halibut program and subsequent amendments to it, this action was
developed by the Council under the authority of the Halibut Act.
The Halibut Act at sections 773c (a) and (b) provides the Secretary
with the general responsibility to carry out the Convention with the
authority to, in consultation with the Secretary of the department in
which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating (currently the Secretary of
Homeland Security), adopt such regulations as may be necessary to carry
out the purposes and objectives of the Convention and the Halibut Act.
The Secretary has delegated authority to NMFS to implement the Halibut
Act.
Background and Need for Action
The background and need for this action were described in detail in
the preamble to the proposed rule for this action (73 FR 20008; April
14, 2008). The proposed rule is available via the Internet and from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). None of the actions are intended to change the
amount of halibut harvested for subsistence. Information on
alternatives considered and rejected may be found in the RIR and FRFA
prepared for this action (see ADDRESSES). The following provides a list
and brief review of the regulatory amendments to the management of the
subsistence halibut fishery and are the regulatory changes made by this
final rule.
This action implements regulations that will make six changes to
the subsistence halibut program that will:
Revise the subsistence gear restrictions in Chiniak Bay
off Kodiak Island and add seasonal gear and vessel limits in Sitka
Sound;
Add the village of Naukati to the list of eligible
subsistence halibut communities;
Implement a possession limit to enhance enforcement;
Revise the definition of charter vessel;
Revise regulations to allow cash reimbursement for
expenses related to the harvest of subsistence resources; and
Allow the use of special permits within non-subsistence
use areas by tribes eligible for the permits.
Additional administrative revisions to regulations include
converting the gear and harvest restrictions from text to table format
to further clarify any ambiguity and revising language to consistently
refer to Sitka Sound, rather than Sitka Local Area Management Plan
(LAMP), and its defined area.
Subsistence Halibut Gear Restrictions
This action increases subsistence halibut gear restrictions in
Chiniak Bay off Kodiak Island and in Sitka Sound to address localized
depletion concerns. This action reduces the allowable hook limit in
Chiniak Bay to no more than two times the per person limit of 30,
except that when fishing under a Ceremonial, Educational, or Community
Harvest Permit the limit will be 90 hooks per vessel. Under this
action, NMFS defines Chiniak Bay based on the State of Alaska's
definition of the Kodiak Road Zone. In Sitka Sound, this action reduces
the allowable gear from 30 hooks to 15 hooks per vessel and prohibits
power hauling during the summer months from June 1 through August 31.
From September 1 through May 31 gear restrictions will remain at 30
hooks per vessel and power hauling will be allowed.
The gear restrictions in this rule apply only to gear in use by
eligible subsistence fishermen. By applying the gear restrictions to
gear ``set or retrieved'' from a vessel, the gear restrictions apply
only to gear actively engaged in subsistence fishing for halibut. A
subsistence fisherman may possess any amount of gear onboard the vessel
as long as that amount of gear actively being used does not exceed the
prescribed limits.
Eligible Subsistence Halibut Communities
Persons eligible to conduct subsistence halibut fishing include (1)
residents of rural places with customary and traditional uses of
halibut, and (2) all identified members of federally recognized Alaska
Native tribes with a finding of customary and traditional uses of
halibut. The Council and Secretary retain exclusive authority to
recommend changes to the list of rural places at Sec. 300.65(g)(1). In
December 2004, the Council affirmed the Alaska State Board of
Fisheries' determination that Naukati is a rural community with
customary and traditional use of halibut and recommended adding Naukati
to the list of rural communities for subsistence halibut purposes. NMFS
agrees with this determination and, therefore, adopts the
recommendation of the Council and adds Naukati to the list of eligible
communities found at Sec. 300.65(g)(1).
Subsistence Halibut Harvest Restrictions
Prior to this rule, enforcement officers had no means to verify the
amount of time spent on the water for subsistence halibut fishermen who
possess more than one daily bag limit, thereby hampering accurate
accounting of halibut removals. This rule implements a possession limit
to restrict potential abuses of the daily bag limit and enhance
enforcement of daily harvest limits. Because of increased fishing
effort due to higher population density, this action implements a
possession limit of one daily bag limit for Areas 3A, 3B, and 2C. The
possession limit within Sitka Sound, part of Area 2C, is 10 halibut per
day per vessel from September 1 to May 31 and 5 halibut per day per
vessel from June 1 through August 31. No possession limit is necessary
for Areas 4A and 4B because those areas are not experiencing
corresponding increases in fishing effort and population density. This
action has no effect in Areas 4C, 4D, or 4E because no daily bag limits
exist in those areas.
Charter Vessel Prohibition
Regulations in effect prior to this rule prohibited the retention
of subsistence halibut harvested using a charter vessel. The NOAA
Office for Law Enforcement expressed difficulty enforcing the
prohibition under the previous charter vessel definition, which was ``a
vessel used for hire in sport fishing for halibut, but not including a
vessel without a hired operator,'' because of problems associated with
determining whether a vessel operator is ``for hire.'' The Council
subsequently clarified that the prohibition was meant only to prohibit
subsistence fishers from hiring someone to take them subsistence
fishing, but not to prohibit the use of vessels registered as charter
vessels from being used for subsistence fishing.
This action uses the term ``sport fishing guide vessel'' in the
regulatory definition for a charter vessel to match the term used in
State of Alaska regulations at 05 AAC 75.077. This
[[Page 54934]]
action also allows a charter vessel to be used for subsistence halibut
fishing, but restricts such use to the owner of record on the State of
Alaska vessel registration, provided the owner is eligible to fish for
subsistence halibut, and the owner's immediate family. This action
prohibits the use of a charter vessel for subsistence halibut fishing
while charter clients are onboard the vessel and prohibits the transfer
of subsistence halibut to charter clients at all times. This precludes
the use of any gear not classified as sport fishing gear or retaining
any halibut in excess of the sport limits while charter clients are
onboard any vessel.
Cash Reimbursement for Expenses
The previous regulations at Sec. 300.66(j) specified that it is
unlawful for any person to retain or possess subsistence halibut for
commercial purposes; cause subsistence halibut to be sold, bartered, or
otherwise entered into commerce; or solicit the exchange of subsistence
halibut for commercial purposes, except that a qualified subsistence
fisherman may engage in the customary trade of subsistence halibut
through monetary exchange of no more than $400 per year.
In June 2003, the Council's Enforcement Committee reviewed issues
related to customary trade and determined that (1) despite the
Council's intent to avoid creation of a new commercial fishery, current
regulations essentially allow the sale of subsistence halibut up to the
$400 annual limit; (2) the $400 annual limit lacks enforceability
because enforcement officers cannot easily distinguish between sale and
customary and traditional exchange for cash; and (3) current
regulations do not clearly prohibit advertising and solicitation for
commercial sale.
This action eliminates the $400 monetary exchange limit and
restricts any monetary exchange for subsistence halibut specifically to
reimbursement of actual trip expenses directly related to the harvest
of subsistence halibut. Actual trip expenses are limited to ice, bait,
food, or fuel only. Under this action, persons qualified as rural
residents under Sec. 300.65(g)(1) and holding a subsistence halibut
registration certificate (SHARC) in their name under Sec. 300.65(i),
may be reimbursed only by residents of the same rural community listed
on their SHARC. However, under this action, persons qualified as Alaska
Native tribal members under Sec. 300.65(g)(2) and holding a SHARC in
their name under Sec. 300.65(i), are eligible for reimbursement only
from an Alaska Native tribe, or its members, or members of the same
rural community. Therefore, if the tribal member lives in a non-rural
Alaska community, they can participate in compensated exchanges only
with a member of an Alaska native tribe.
Special Permits in Non-subsistence Areas
Generally, eligible persons may harvest subsistence halibut in all
Convention waters in and off Alaska except in non-subsistence marine
waters areas. This action allows the use of Ceremonial Permits and
Educational Permits in non-subsistence marine waters areas by the 12
tribes whose traditional fishing grounds are located within Areas 2C
and 3A. Use of Ceremonial Permits and Educational Permits within non-
subsistence marine waters areas will remain subject to gear and harvest
restrictions for those permits consistent with the IPHC regulatory area
in which they are used. The use of Community Harvest Permits (CHPs)
will not be allowed in non-subsistence marine waters areas.
The twelve tribes include five in Area 2C and seven in Area 3A. The
tribes in Area 2C are as follows: Central Council of Tlingit/Haida
Indians, Douglas Indian Association, Aukquan Traditional Council,
Ketchikan Indian Corporation, and Organized Village of Saxman. In Area
3A the tribes are as follows: Native Village of Tatitlek, Kenaitze
Indian Tribe, Seldovia Village Tribe, Ninilchik Village, Native Village
of Port Graham, Native Village of Nanwalek, and Village of Salamatoff.
The RIR/FRFA mentions 13 tribes several times, because the table it
used lists the tribes by the four areas that currently are closed to
subsistence halibut fishing. However, one tribe has traditional fishing
grounds in both the Juneau and Ketchikan areas, so the correct total
number of tribes is 12.
Response to Comments
The proposed rule published in the Federal Register on April 14,
2008 (73 FR 20008). The 30-day comment period on the proposed rule
ended May 14, 2008. NMFS received a total of five letters on the
proposed rule that contained 15 unique comments. One letter was
received from a tribal organization, one letter was received from two
private individuals, and three letters were received from the fishing
industry. A summary of these comments and NMFS's responses follows.
Comment 1: The proposed changes regarding customary trade, and its
definition, effectively eliminates it from subsistence uses. Although
the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) did not
define this term, the need to narrow the definition of ``customary
trade'' by NMFS is not justified in light of the economic hardship and
needs of Alaska Native villages. Leave customary trade as an option for
those who have no alternative and do not place any monetary
restrictions on the trade amount.
Response: The original subsistence halibut fishing regulations at
Sec. 300.61 defined customary trade as ``the non-commercial exchange
of subsistence halibut for anything other than items of significant
value'' and this definition remains unchanged by this rule. NMFS
disagrees that the proposed changes eliminate customary trade for
subsistence purposes. The new regulations specifically allow
subsistence fishers to conduct limited trade of subsistence halibut.
The regulations continue to prohibit subsistence halibut from being
sold or otherwise entered into commerce; however, an exception provides
for limited monetary exchange to reimburse qualified subsistence
fishers for the actual expenses for ice, bait, food, and fuel directly
related to subsistence fishing for halibut.
In recognizing the subsistence halibut fishery in regulations in
2003, NMFS did not intend to create an alternative commercial fishery.
The former regulation, however, allowed ``sales'' of subsistence
halibut of up to $400 per year as nominal reimbursement for harvesting
costs when subsistence halibut was shared. Previous regulations at
Sec. 300.66(j) allowed a ``customary trade of subsistence halibut
through monetary exchange of no more than $400 per year.'' Some
subsistence fishers regarded the monetary limit of $400 per year as a
monetary target that allowed the commercial sale of subsistence halibut
up to $400 per year per subsistence fisher. Thus, some subsistence
halibut were illegally entering the commercial market for halibut. The
new regulation clarifies that while the sale of subsistence halibut is
prohibited, subsistence halibut fishers may be reimbursed for certain
subsistence fishing expenses. This is consistent with customary trade
practices.
The previous customary trade allowance of $400 was never intended
to be used for commercial revenue producing purposes. The objective of
the customary trade allowance was to prevent commercial sale while
allowing reimbursement of subsistence halibut harvesting expenses by
those with whom the halibut was shared. In a careful review of the
subsistence halibut program, the Council and NMFS determined the
regulatory language implementing the objectives could be
[[Page 54935]]
confusing. Also, the NOAA Office for Law Enforcement found enforcement
of the $400 customary trade limit difficult because no reporting and
recordkeeping was required for customary trade transactions.
This rule continues to prohibit the commercial sale of subsistence
halibut. It does not prohibit customary trade, in terms of the economy
of rural communities and Alaska Native tribes.
Comment 2: Defraying expenses is not the same as customary trade.
Response: Subsistence halibut fishing was the original fishery for
halibut. Early Alaska Native fishers likely used the halibut resource
not only as a food source for themselves, but also in trade with other
Alaska and Canadian Natives living further inland. Over time, the
commercial and sport fisheries for halibut developed as more non-
natives populated the area. The Council and NMFS have been attempting
to balance these three uses of the halibut resource. Prohibiting the
sale of subsistence halibut protects commercial interests in the
resource. This rule does not purport to define the term ``customary
trade.'' Instead, it prohibits the commercial sale of subsistence
halibut while providing for the sharing of subsistence halibut with an
opportunity to reimburse the subsistence fisher for certain actual
subsistence fishing costs.
Comment 3: The rule does not provide for the subsistence needs of
tribal members and is detrimental to subsistence uses.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Nothing in this rule prevents subsistence
halibut fishing by qualified Alaska Natives. Moreover, the rule
provides for expanded Alaska Native subsistence halibut fishing inside
four non-subsistence areas currently closed to all subsistence fishing.
This rule implements a more liberal policy of allowing subsistence
halibut fishing under ceremonial permits and educational permits inside
the current non-subsistence areas by Alaska Native tribes whose
traditional fishing grounds fall within these areas.
Comment 4: Only enforcement problems are considered in the changes
to customary trade. There is no concern about the dire economic needs
of rural Alaska.
Response: NMFS disagrees. As explained above, the purpose of this
regulatory change is to make a clear distinction between the
subsistence and commercial fisheries and to continue to prohibit
halibut caught in the subsistence fishery from entering commercial
markets. The NOAA Office for Law Enforcement staff suggested that a
regulatory change that identified the specific expenses (i.e., ice,
bait, foot, and fuel) for which a cash exchange would be permitted,
would enhance public understanding of permissible compensation and
provide an enforcement tool for a cash limit.
Providing regulatory language that can be effectively enforced is a
concern in the development of all regulations by NMFS. The principal
concern in this case, however, is to ensure the regulatory language
clearly implements the policy that no subsistence halibut shall be sold
or entered into commerce. The Council and NMFS have not changed the
policy.
The potential benefits from revising the regulations include (1)
increased clarity within the regulations to better reflect the intent
of the Council, thus reducing (or eliminating) confusion among
subsistence users as to the bounds of authorized cash reimbursement;
(2) reduced competition for commercial users from subsistence-caught
halibut that would have entered the commercial marketplace; and (3)
continuation of social and cultural benefits by allowing subsistence
trade. The alternative that became the Council's preferred alternative
was selected because it balanced enforcement with customary practices.
This rule recognizes the social, cultural, educational, and community
benefits that derive from participating in the customary and
traditional practices of sharing subsistence halibut, and seeks to
accommodate these practices while attempting to provide additional
tools for enforcing the prohibition on the sale of subsistence halibut.
Comment 5: Rural residents should have a meaningful role in the
management of fisheries.
Response: The Council has authority under the Halibut Act to
develop halibut fishery regulations to achieve allocation goals. Under
the fishery management council process set forth in the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, everyone has the opportunity to have a meaningful role and
may participate in the decision-making process leading to new fishery
management policies and regulations. All members of the public are
invited to participate in the public process of the Council. Several
weeks before each meeting, a notice is published in the Federal
Register that announces when and where the meetings for the Council and
its advisory committees will be held and the agenda items that may be
discussed at the meeting. These meetings are open to the public. The
Council's proposed revisions to the subsistence program were discussed
at Council meetings held in October 2003, October 2004, and December
2004, and a discussion paper was reviewed in June 2004. The public is
specifically invited to speak at the Council and its advisory committee
meetings. Writing letters or e-mails to the Council expressing concerns
or joining or forming an association are other ways to become involved
in the fisheries management process.
In response to one of the management objectives in the Final Alaska
Groundfish Fisheries Programmatic Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (August 26, 2004), the Council reviewed a discussion paper in
February 2008 that proposed several approaches for increasing Alaska
Native and community participation and consultation in the fishery
management process. In June 2008, the Council reviewed a revised
discussion paper and initiated a small committee of Council members and
community and Alaska Native representatives to review the discussion
paper and recommend to the Council ways to create a policy to improve
outreach and participation. Further information on this issue and other
fisheries management issues is available at the Council website http://
www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/npfmc and information is available through
the mail by writing to the Council at 605 W. 4th, Suite 306, Anchorage,
AK 99501.
Comment 6: The analysis expresses concern that any exchange for
cash of subsistence harvested food may establish an ``undesirable
precedent,'' but states that ``[a] regulation restricting customary
trade to Alaska Native tribal members might prevent the development of
new subsistence harvest patterns for customary trade.'' Congress needs
to fulfill the policies and purposes of the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act (ANCSA) and must invoke its constitutional authority
over Native affairs under the property clause and the commerce clause
to protect and provide the opportunity for continued subsistence uses.
This distinguishes Alaska Natives from rural residents.
Response: NMFS cannot amend ANCSA with a regulatory amendment. It
is the role of Congress to amend ANCSA. This comment should, therefore,
be directed to Congress.
Comment 7: The Federal government should look to the tribes for a
solution to enforcement of customary trade and authorize the tribes to
enforce regulations on tribal members.
Response: NMFS is responsible for enforcing the regulations it
develops and promulgates. Changing the role of the tribes to include
enforcement of NMFS's subsistence regulations is beyond the scope of
this rule.
[[Page 54936]]
Comment 8: Where does it say in ANILCA that customary trade shall
not constitute a significant commercial enterprise? By what authority
is this further restriction of subsistence use being undertaken when it
is for enforcement and not conservation? If the subsistence use called
customary trade must be further restricted, what commensurate
restriction is applied to commercial and sport fishing? Where is the
priority or preference?
Response: According to the 9th Circuit Court, as stated in its
decision of United States v. Alexander, 938 F.2d 942, 948 (9th Cr.
1991) concerning customary and traditional trade, ``...trade must be
conducted in a manner consistent with a subsistence lifestyle; ANILCA
does not permit the establishment of significant commercial enterprises
under the guise of subsistence uses.'' Commercial fishing for halibut
is strictly regulated within an overall catch limit set by the IPHC and
with individual fishing quotas for each person. Sport fishing for
halibut is limited by prohibitions on the sale of halibut and by daily
catch limits. Subsistence fishing for halibut is afforded some
preference in that no annual catch limits, area catch limits, or
allocations apply to the subsistence harvest.
Comment 9: We support the recommendation to implement a possession
limit of one daily bag limit. We agree this will help enforcement
efforts regarding subsistence halibut and address IPHC's concerns about
accounting.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 10: We support the recommended definition of a charter
vessel. Subsistence caught halibut cannot be given, transferred, or fed
to charter clients. We also support not allowing charter vessels with
clients on board to set or retrieve gear, and we support not giving
halibut that was caught on subsistence gear to charter clients. This
section with the recommended clarifications will significantly help
with the NOAA Office for Law Enforcement's ability to determine whether
they are in violation or not.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 11: We believe the recommended changes to the monetary
exchange regulations are critical to prevent abuses of the Council's
intent from occurring. We believe that the recommendation is a good
balance of meeting NPFMC original intent while tightening up the
regulations to preventing abuse from occurring.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 12: We support the change in the format of the regulations
by using tables where appropriate.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 13: We urge approval and implementation of the proposed
regulatory amendments to further restrict gear and harvest of
subsistence halibut in Sitka Sound. Sitka residents discovered that
existing subsistence regulations for Sitka Sound allow an over-harvest
of halibut for subsistence purposes, resulting in localized depletion
and reduced subsistence opportunities for local residents. These
amendments are the result of a collaborative process by stakeholders in
Sitka. The proposed amendments will encourage larger and higher
capacity vessels to harvest subsistence halibut outside Sitka Sound
while allowing residents with small boats to subsistence fish
effectively in the protected waters of Sitka Sound. Reducing pressure
on locally depleted halibut will also relieve pressure on sensitive
rockfish and lingcod stocks.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 14: We support increasing gear restrictions in Chiniak Bay
and Sitka Sound. We appreciate the clarification that the allowable
gear is what is being ``set and retrieved'' and having spare gear on
board, such as a box of hooks, is not a violation.
Response: Comment noted.
Comment 15: We would like an additional consideration implemented
regarding the length of time that gear may remain in the water
unattended. We have received reports from fishermen who have witnessed
gear being set in Sitka Sound and left unattended for weeks at a time.
Response: This action is not intended to address the length of time
that gear may remain in the water. Concerns about the length of time
that subsistence halibut gear may remain in the water would need to be
addressed in a separate regulatory action developed through the Council
process.
Changes from the Proposed Rule
Eight changes were made in regulatory language from the proposed
rule to this final rule. The first change was to the charter vessel
definition. Concern was expressed by the NOAA Office for Law
Enforcement about the ability to prosecute a person who violates
Federal regulations but who was also in violation of State of Alaska
regulations by not registering a vessel used for charter fishing.
Therefore, to enable enforcement of Federal regulations, the definition
was revised to include vessels that should have been registered with
the State of Alaska as charter vessels. Additionally, the definition is
intended to apply only to Alaska halibut regulatory areas 2C through
4E, so the phrase ``for purposes of Sec. 300.65'' was added to the
definition.
The second regulatory change revises the table at Sec. 300.65(h)
to add the limitations concerning the use of Ceremonial and Educational
Permits in the non-subsistence marine waters areas of 2C and 3A.
The third regulatory change revises regulatory language at Sec.
300.65(j)(3)(i)(B). It was the intent of the Council to allow the use
of only Ceremonial Permits and Educational Permits and to not allow the
use of CHPs in non-subsistence marine waters areas. This restriction
was discussed in the RIR and in the preamble to the proposed rule but
not clearly reflected in the proposed regulatory text. This change
corrects that oversight and adds the Valdez and Anchorage-Matsu-Kenai
non-subsistence marine waters areas to the existing list of non-
subsistence marine waters areas in which the use of CHPs is prohibited.
The fourth regulatory change revises regulatory language at Sec.
300.65(k)(3) to specify the tribes that are qualified to use a
Ceremonial or Educational Permit in each non-subsistence marine waters
area in areas 3A and 2C.
The fifth regulatory change clarifies proposed language at Sec.
300.66(i) but does not change the substance of the regulatory language.
Rather than requiring that a person ``abides by'' certain gear and
harvest restrictions, the revised regulations require that a person
``complies with'' those same restrictions.
The sixth regulatory change revises Sec. 300.66(j)(1) to indicate
that the person's rural community is listed on the application for a
SHARC. It is not listed on the SHARC itself.
The seventh regulatory change modifies the prohibitions at Sec.
300.66(j)(2) regarding who may reimburse an Alaska Native tribal member
for the expense of fishing for subsistence halibut. The proposed rule
would have prevented an Alaska Native tribal member from being
reimbursed by a non-native resident if they both lived within the same
rural community. However, on further consideration, NMFS realized that
proposal failed to recognize the dynamics within a rural Alaska
community that consists of native and non-native individuals wherein
subsistence halibut may be shared among them. Therefore, under the
Secretary's authority in the Halibut Act at 773c (a) and (b), the
regulations have been changed to allow Alaska Native tribal members
holding a SHARC
[[Page 54937]]
to be reimbursed for certain actual expenses by any Alaska Native
tribe, or its members, or residents of the same rural community listed
on the person's SHARC application.
The eighth regulatory change revises the sentence structure in
Sec. 300.66(j)(1) and (2), by more clearly stating the limitation on
what actual expenses may be reimbursed, but the substance of the
regulations is not changed.
Changes also were made in the instructions for the proposed
amendments to Sec. 300.66. A court order filed June 20, 2008, that
concerned Sec. 300.66(m), reversed a charter halibut final rule
published May 28, 2008 (73 FR 30504). The proposed redesignation of
paragraph (m) under this subsistence halibut rule could add confusion
to the court order. Therefore, paragraphs (j) through (m) will not be
redesignated. Rather than revising a newly redesignated paragraph (k)
as stated in the proposed rule, paragraph (j) will be revised, and
rather than adding a new paragraph (j), the new paragraph is designated
as (n).
Classification
Regulations governing the U.S. fisheries for Pacific halibut are
developed by the IPHC, the Pacific Fishery Management Council, the
Council, and the Secretary. Section 5 of the Halibut Act (16 U.S.C.
773c) allows the Regional Council having authority for a particular
geographical area to develop regulations governing the allocation and
catch of halibut in U.S. Convention waters as long as those regulations
do not conflict with IPHC regulations. The proposed action is
consistent with the Council's authority and the Secretary's authority
to allocate halibut catches among fishery participants in the waters in
and off Alaska.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This final rule also complies with
the Secretary's authority under the Halibut Act to implement management
measures for the halibut fisheries, and with the Secretary's other
responsibilities under the Convention and the Halibut Act.
A final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) was prepared. The
FRFA incorporates the initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), a
summary of the significant issues raised by the public comments in
response to the IRFA, NMFS's responses to those comments, and a summary
of the analyses completed to support the action. A copy of this
analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A description of this
action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action
are presented above in the preamble to this rule. A summary of the FRFA
follows.
This rule implements six actions to amend the subsistence halibut
regulations: (1) revise the subsistence gear restrictions in Chiniak
Bay off Kodiak Island and add seasonal gear and vessel limits in the
Sitka Sound area; (2) add the village of Naukati to the list of
eligible subsistence halibut communities; (3) implement a possession
limit equal to one daily bag limit to enhance enforcement; (4) revise
the definition of charter vessel; (5) revise regulations to allow cash
reimbursement for expenses related to the harvest of subsistence
resources; and (6) allow the use of special permits within non-
subsistence use areas by tribes eligible for the permits. Only actions
1 and 6 directly regulate ``small entities,'' as defined by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The remaining four actions are not
addressed because they affect individuals, rather than ``entities,'' as
defined by the RFA. All attributable impacts on directly regulated
small entities, accruing from either action, appear to be beneficial.
Actions 1 and 6 aim to enhance management of the subsistence
halibut fishery as it pertains to use by Alaska Native tribes for the
purpose of recognizing and appropriately accommodating subsistence
practices. These actions are taken under the authority of the Halibut
Act.
The principal decisions in the preferred alternatives for actions 1
and 6 address changes to gear limits and the use of CHPs by Alaska
Native tribes in Kodiak and Chiniak Bay, and seasonal gear and vessel
limits in Sitka Sound; and fishing in non-subsistence use areas. The
preferred alternatives to implement CHPs for Alaska Native tribes in
Kodiak and Chiniak Bay (CHPs are not allowed in Sitka Sound) under
action 1, and to allow Ceremonial and Educational Permits to be used by
Alaska Native tribes in non-subsistence use areas under action 6,
directly regulate small entities.
Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments on the IRFA
The proposed rule for the subsistence halibut amendments was
published in the Federal Register on April 14, 2008 (73 FR 20008). An
IRFA was prepared for the proposed rule, and described in the
classification section of the preamble to the rule. The public comment
period ended on May 14, 2008. NMFS received five letters of comment on
the proposed rule, including one with a comment on the IRFA. The
comment concerned the lack of information in the IRFA regarding action
5. Action 5 revises regulations regarding cash reimbursement for
expenses related to the harvest of subsistence resources. However,
action 5 applies only to individuals and not to small entities as
defined by the RFA, therefore, no changes were made to the FRFA based
on that comment. A detailed discussion of the effects of action 5 is
provided in section 6.0 of the RIR. Four additional comments were
received related to the possible economic effects of the proposed
regulations to allow cash reimbursement for certain subsistence harvest
related expenses, however these comments were not directed to the IRFA.
For a summary of the comments received, including those on action 5,
refer to the section of this final rule titled ``Response to
Comments.''
Description and Estimate of Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule
Will Apply
Action 1 directly regulates nine Alaska Native tribes, or
governmental entities in the absence of a tribe, that are eligible to
participate in the subsistence halibut program off Kodiak and Chiniak
Bay. Action 6 affects twelve Alaska Native tribes, but no governmental
entities.
Description of Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance
Requirements
No additional recordkeeping, reporting requirements, or other
compliance requirements are anticipated as a result of either action 1
or 6.
Description of Significant Alternatives and Steps Taken to Minimize the
Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities
Multiple alternatives were addressed for each action under the RFA.
Under action 1, three alternatives were analyzed: (1) no action; (2)
change gear restrictions and annual limits in Kodiak, Prince William
Sound, Cook Inlet, and the Sitka LAMP; and (3) change gear restrictions
and annual limits only in Kodiak and the Sitka LAMP. Alternative 3 was
selected as the preferred alternative for action 1. For action 6, three
alternatives were analyzed: (1) no action; (2) allow the use of CHPs,
educational permits, and ceremonial permits in non-subsistence use
areas by tribes whose traditional fishing grounds are located within
IPHC Areas 2C and 3A, with the associated daily bag limit; and (3)
allow the use of educational permits and ceremonial permits, but not
[[Page 54938]]
CHPs, in non-subsistence use areas by tribes whose traditional fishing
grounds are located within IPHC Areas 2C and 3A, with the associated
daily bag limit. Alternative 3 was selected as the preferred
alternative for action 6.
Alternative 1 for action 1 was rejected because it did not address
the localized depletion concerns in the areas under consideration.
Alternative 2 for action 1 was rejected because it includes
restrictions in the Prince William Sound and Cook Inlet areas. Measures
for Prince William Sound and Cook Inlet were found to be unwarranted,
therefore, Alternative 2 would be more restrictive than the preferred
alternative.
Alternative 1 for action 6 was rejected because it would have
continued the prohibition on subsistence halibut fishing under all
circumstances in designated non-subsistence fishing areas and would not
provide social, cultural, educational, and ``communal'' benefits to the
12 affected tribes. Alternative 2 for action 6 was rejected because it
allows the use of CHPs in non-subsistence fishing areas, but the
preferred alternative prohibits such use. CHP use was rejected in non-
subsistence fishing areas because of potential unintended negative
consequences for groundfish stocks.
Based on the best available scientific data and information, the
FRFA (including the RIR) reveals that none of the significant
alternatives, other than the preferred alternatives, have the potential
to accomplish the objectives of the actions consistent with the Halibut
Act, the RFA, and other applicable statutes, and minimize the adverse
economic impacts of the rule on directly regulated small entities. That
is, in both actions considered here, the preferred alternative was the
least burdensome among all available alternatives, consistent with the
objectives of each respective action.
RFA Conclusion
``Small entities,'' as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
would be directly regulated only by action 1 and by action 6. All
attributable impacts on directly regulated small entities, accruing
from either action, appear to be ``beneficial.''
It is NMFS's policy to consider only ``adverse'' impacts, when
preparing a FRFA, consistent with Congress' direction to ``minimize
effects on small entities.'' Based upon the foregoing analysis, no such
adverse impacts appear to be associated with the proposed actions.
Nonetheless, detailed information and empirical data about the
operational structures, strategies, and fiscal conditions of the
various tribes, which are likely to be directly regulated by the
proposed actions, are not presently available to the analysts to
support preparation of a ``factual basis'' upon which to ``certify,''
under RFA provisions. Therefore, the FRFA was prepared to fulfill the
requirements of the RFA, despite the high probability that the actions
will not have a significant adverse effect on a substantial number of
small entities.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule,
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance
guides.'' In that guide, the agency shall explain the actions a small
entity is required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules.
NMFS will post a small entity compliance guide on the Internet at
http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ram/subsistence/halibut.htm. The guide
and this final rule will be available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
This final rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which have been
approved by OMB. These collections are listed by control number.
OMB Control Number 0648-0460
Public reporting burden is estimated to average ten minutes for a
subsistence halibut registration certificate (SHARC) for rural or
individual use and ten minutes for a SHARC for tribal use per response.
OMB Control Number 0648-0512
Public reporting burden for a Subsistence Halibut Special Permit
Application for ceremonial harvest, educational harvest, or community
harvest is estimated to average ten minutes per response.
These estimates include the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Send comments regarding these burden estimates, or any other aspect of
these data collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden,
to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or
fax to 202-395-7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB Control Number.
NMFS is not aware of any other Federal rules that would duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with these actions.
Executive Order 13175 of November 6, 2000 (25 U.S.C. 450 note), the
Executive Memorandum of April 29, 1994 (25 U.S.C. 450 note), and the
American Indian and Alaska Native Policy of the U.S. Department of
Commerce (March 30, 1995) outline the responsibilities of the National
Marine Fisheries Service in matters affecting tribal interests. Section
161 of Public Law 108-199 (118 Stat 452), as amended by section 518 of
Public Law 108-447 (118 Stat 3267), extends the consultation
requirements of Executive Order 13175 to Alaska Native corporations.
Consultations with the Alaska Native Subsistence Halibut Working
Group, under Executive Order 13175, resulted in recommendations to
allow the use of special permits in non-subsistence use areas. NMFS
contacted tribal governments and Alaska Native corporations which may
be affected by the action, provided them with a copy of the proposed
rule, and offered them an opportunity to consult. One request for a
tribal consultation was received. NMFS staff spoke via telephone with
members of the tribal organization and their associates to listen to
and address their specific questions and their specific needs. Many of
their specific questions also were raised in comments received during
the public comment period and are responded to in the Response to
Comments section of this final rule, except for two comments listed
below. NMFS staff clarified points in the proposed regulations,
described the role of the Alaska Native Subsistence Halibut Working
Group, and provided contact information for the working group.
Two comments raised during the tribal consultation were not
included in the Response to Comments section. The first comment is that
the specific items allowed for reimbursement do not encompass all costs
associated with harvest and trade of subsistence halibut and that only
enforcement concerns were considered. NMFS notes that not all costs
were expected to be encompassed in the amount that could be reimbursed.
As stated in the RIR:
Examples of costs that would not be allowed to be compensated
are the cost of the boat, repairs, or hydraulic gear that would be
[[Page 54939]]
used for a duration longer than the fishing trip that produced the
halibut that is being shared. Enforcement staff advised the Council
that this approach still would be extremely difficult to enforce.
Enforcement may occur through investigations, whereby receipts could
be examined to verify expenses. Staff reported that, while this
preferred alternative does not facilitate enforcement directly, it
facilitates public understanding of Council intent and may enhance
enforcement of egregious violations.
The Council determined that its preferred alternative best
recognized the social, cultural, educational, and communal benefits
that derive from sharing halibut, while providing additional tools for
enforcing the prohibition on commercial sale of subsistence halibut.
Therefore, the Council rejected the most readily enforceable
alternative, which would have prohibited any cash exchange, in favor of
the preferred alternative based on the extensive administrative record.
The second comment is that the 30 hooks per vessel limit is a
hardship and should be increased to the 30 hooks per person and 90
hooks per vessel limit allowed in other areas; the limit of 20 fish per
vessel per day should be a sufficient limit. This change was initiated
in specific regulatory areas for the halibut fishery because of
increased fishing effort due to higher population density. NMFS
suggests that if a tribal organization wants its local area within the
larger halibut regulatory area to be exempt from this limit, the idea
could be further developed by the tribal organization. The tribal
organization could then bring the idea to the attention of the Alaska
Native Subsistence Halibut Working Group.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
50 CFR Part 300
Alaska, Alaska Natives, Fisheries, Pacific halibut fisheries,
Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Dated: September 18, 2008.
Samuel D. Rauch III
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 15 CFR chapter IX
and 50 CFR chapter III as follows:
TITLE 15--COMMERCE AND FOREIGN TRADE
CHAPTER IX--NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE
PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 902.1, in the table in paragraph (b), under the entry ``50
CFR'', add entries for ``300.65 introductory text; (h)(1)(ii) and
(iii); and (i)'', ``300.65(h)(1)(i)'', and ``300.65(j), (k), and (l)''
in alphanumeric order to read as follows:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
3. Table 2a to part 679 is revised to read as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current OMB control
CFR part or section where the information number (all numbers begin
collection requirement is located with 0648-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
300.65 introductory text; (h)(1)(ii) and -0460
(iii); and (i)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
300.65(h)(1)(i) -0460 and -0512
------------------------------------------------------------------------
300.65(j), (k), and (l) -0512
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TITLE 50--Wildlife and Fisheries
CHAPTER III--INTERNATIONAL FISHING AND RELATED ACTIVITIES
PART 300--INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart E--Pacific Halibut Fisheries
0
3. The authority citation for subpart E of part 300 continues to read
as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773-773k.
0
4. In Sec. 300.61, add definitions of ``Chiniak Bay'' and ``Power
hauling'' in alphabetical order and revise the definition of ``Charter
vessel'' to read as follows:
Sec. 300.61 Definitions.
* * * * *
Charter vessel, for purposes of Sec. 300.65, means a vessel that
is registered, or that should be registered, as a sport fishing guide
vessel with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.
Chiniak Bay means all waters bounded by the shoreline and straight
lines connecting the coordinates in the order listed:
(1) North from Cape Chiniak (57[deg]37.22' N. lat., 152[deg]9.36'
W. long.);
(2) To Buoy 1 at Williams Reef (57[deg]50.36' N. lat.,
152[deg]8.82' W. long.);
(3) To East Cape on Spruce Island (57[deg]54.89' N. lat.,
152[deg]19.45' W. long.);
(4) To Termination Point on Kodiak Island (57[deg]51.31' N. lat.,
152[deg]24.01' W. long.); and
(5) Connecting to a line running counterclockwise along the
shoreline of Kodiak Island to Cape Chiniak (57[deg]37.22' N. lat.,
152[deg]9.36' W. long.).
* * * * *
Power hauling means using electrically, hydraulically, or
mechanically powered devices or attachments or other assisting devises
or attachments to deploy and retrieve fishing gear. Power hauling does
not include the use of hand power, a hand powered crank, a fishing rod,
a downrigger, or a hand troll gurdy.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 300.65:
A. Revise paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) introductory text, (h)(1)(i),
(h)(2), (j) introductory text, (j)(1)(ii), (j)(1)(iii), (j)(3)(i)
introductory text, (j)(3)(i)(A), (j)(3)(i)(B), (k)(3)(i), and
(k)(3)(ii).
B. Add paragraph (e)(5).
C. In paragraph (g)(1) in the table entitled ``Halibut Regulatory
Area 2C'' an entry for ``Naukati'' is added in alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 300.65 Catch sharing plan and domestic management measures in
waters in and off Alaska.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) With respect to paragraphs (e)(3), (e)(4), and (e)(5) of this
section, that part of the Commission Regulatory Area 2C that is
enclosed on the north and east:
* * * * *
(5) Setline gear may not be used in a 4 nm radius extending south
from Low Island at 57[deg]00.70' N. lat., 135[deg]36.57' W. long.
within Sitka Sound, as defined in paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this section,
from June 1 through August 31.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) * * *
[[Page 54940]]
Halibut Regulatory Area 2C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rural Community Organized Entity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Naukati Municipality
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * * .........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Subsistence fishing gear set or retrieved from a vessel while
engaged in subsistence fishing for halibut must not have more than the
allowable number of hooks per vessel, or per person registered in
accordance with paragraph (i) of this section and aboard the vessel,
whichever is less, according to the regulatory area and permit type
indicated in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Area Permit Type Retention Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Except Sitka Sound, SHARC 30 hooks per vessel
and Ketchikan and
Juneau non-subsistence
marine waters areas
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 30 hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest 30 hooks per person
Permit onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Sitka Sound SHARC September 1 through
May 31: 30 hooks per
vessel
-----------------------
....................... June 1 through August
31: 15 hooks per
vessel; no power
hauling
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit September 1 through
May 31: 30 hooks per
vessel
-----------------------
....................... June 1 through August
31: fishing under
Ceremonial Permit not
allowed
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Ketchikan and SHARC general subsistence
Juneau non-subsistence halibut fishing not
marine waters areas allowed
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 30 hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A--Except Chiniak Bay, SHARC 30 hooks per person
and Anchorage-Matsu- onboard up to 90
Kenai and Valdez non- hooks per vessel
subsistence marine
waters areas
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest 30 hooks per person
Permit onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A--Chiniak Bay SHARC 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 60
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest 30 hooks per person
Permit onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A--Anchorage-Matsu- SHARC general subsistence
Kenai and Valdez non- halibut fishing not
subsistence marine allowed
waters areas
------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54941]]
Ceremonial Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B SHARC 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4A and 4B SHARC 30 hooks per person
onboard up to 90
hooks per vessel
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C, 4D, and 4E SHARC no hook limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(2) The retention of subsistence halibut is limited per person
eligible to conduct subsistence fishing for halibut and onboard the
vessel according to the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulatory Area Permit Type Gear Restrictions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Except Sitka Sound, SHARC 20 halibut per day per
and Ketchikan and vessel and in
Juneau non-subsistence possession
marine waters areas
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest no daily or possession
Permit limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Sitka Sound SHARC September 1 through
May 31: 10 halibut
per day per vessel
and in possession
-----------------------
....................... June 1 through August
31: 5 halibut per day
per vessel and in
possession
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit September 1 through
May 31: 25 halibut
per permit
-----------------------
....................... June 1 through August
31: fishing under
Ceremonial Permit not
allowed
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2C--Ketchikan and SHARC general subsistence
Juneau non-subsistence halibut fishing not
marine waters areas allowed
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A--Including Chiniak SHARC 20 halibut per person
Bay, but excluding per day and in
Anchorage-Matsu-Kenai possession
and Valdez non-
subsistence marine
waters areas
------------------------------------------------
Ceremonial Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest no daily or possession
Permit limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A--Anchorage-Matsu- SHARC general subsistence
Kenai and Valdez non- halibut fishing not
subsistence marine allowed
waters areas
------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54942]]
Ceremonial Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Educational Permit 25 halibut per permit
------------------------------------------------
Community Harvest fishing under
Permit Community Harvest
Permit not allowed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B SHARC 20 halibut per person
per day and in
possession
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4A and 4B SHARC 20 halibut per person
per day; no
possession limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C, 4D, and 4E SHARC no daily or possession
limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(j) Community Harvest Permit (CHP). An Area 2C or Area 3A community
or Alaska Native tribe listed in paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this
section may apply for a CHP, which allows a community or Alaska Native
tribe to appoint one or more individuals from its respective community
or Alaska Native tribe to harvest subsistence halibut from a single
vessel under reduced gear and harvest restrictions. The CHP consists of
a harvest log and up to five laminated permit cards. A CHP is a permit
subject to regulation under Sec. 679.4(a) of this title.
(1) * * *
(ii) NMFS will issue a CHP to a community in Area 2C or Area 3A
only if:
(A) The applying community is listed as eligible in Area 2C or Area
3A according to paragraph (g)(1) of this section; and
(B) No Alaska Native tribe listed in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section exists in that community.
(iii) NMFS will issue a CHP to an Alaska Native tribe in Area 2C or
Area 3A only if the applying tribe is listed as eligible in Area 2C or
Area 3A according to paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) In Area 2C or Area 3A, except that a CHP may not be used:
(A) Within Sitka Sound as defined in paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this
section (see Figure 1 to this subpart E); or
(B) Within the Ketchikan, Juneau, Anchorage-Matsu-Kenai, and Valdez
non-subsistence marine waters areas as defined in paragraph (h)(3) of
this section (see Figures 2, 3, 4, and 5 to this subpart E).
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) In Area 3A, except:
(A) In the Anchorage-Matsu-Kenai non-subsistence marine waters area
defined in paragraph (h)(3) of this section (see figure 4 to this
subpart E), only the following tribes may use a Ceremonial or
Educational permit:
(1) Kenaitze Indian Tribe;
(2) Seldovia Village Tribe;
(3) Ninilchik Village;
(4) Native Village of Port Graham;
(5) Native Village of Nanwalek; and
(6) Village of Salamatoff.
(B) In the Valdez non-subsistence marine waters area defined in
paragraph (h)(3) of this section (see figure 5 to this subpart E), only
the Native Village of Tatitlek may use a Ceremonial or Educational
permit.
(ii) In Area 2C, except:
(A) In the Ketchikan non-subsistence marine waters area defined in
paragraph (h)(3) of this section (see figure 2 to this subpart E), only
the following tribes may use a Ceremonial or Educational permit:
(1) Central Council of Tlingit/Haida Indians;
(2) Ketchikan Indian Corporation; and
(3) Organized Village of Saxman;
(B) In the Juneau non-subsistence marine waters area defined in
paragraph (h)(3) of this section (see figure 3 to this subpart E), only
the following tribes may use a Ceremonial or Educational permit:
(1) Central Council of Tlingit/Haida Indians;
(2) Douglas Indian Association; and
(3) Aukquan Traditional Council.
(C) A Ceremonial Permit may not be used within Sitka Sound from
June 1 through August 31;
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 300.66, revise paragraphs (i) and (j), and add paragraph
(n) to read as follows:
Sec. 300.66 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(i) Fish for subsistence halibut from a charter vessel or retain
subsistence halibut onboard a charter vessel if anyone other than the
owner of record, as indicated on the State of Alaska vessel
registration, or the owner's immediate family is aboard the charter
vessel and unless each person engaging in subsistence fishing onboard
the charter vessel holds a subsistence halibut registration certificate
in the person's name pursuant to Sec. 300.65(i) and complies with the
gear and harvest restrictions found at Sec. 300.65(h).
(j) Retain or possess subsistence halibut for commercial purposes;
cause subsistence halibut to be sold, bartered, or otherwise entered
into commerce; or solicit exchange of subsistence halibut for
commercial purposes, except that a person who qualified to conduct
subsistence fishing for halibut under Sec. 300.65(g), and who holds a
subsistence halibut registration certificate in the person's name under
Sec. 300.65(i), may be reimbursed for the expense of fishing for
subsistence halibut under the following conditions:
(1) Persons who qualify as rural residents under Sec. 300.65(g)(1)
and hold a subsistence halibut registration certificate in the
persons's name under Sec. 300.65(i) may be reimbursed for actual
expenses for ice, bait, food, and fuel directly related to subsistence
fishing for halibut, by residents of the same rural community listed on
the person's subsistence halibut registration application; or
(2) Persons who qualify as Alaska Native tribal members under Sec.
300.65(g)(2) and hold a subsistence halibut registration certificate in
the person's name under Sec. 300.65(i) may be reimbursed for ice,
bait, food, and fuel directly related to subsistence fishing for
halibut, by any Alaska Native tribe, or its members, or residents of
the same rural community listed on the person's subsistence halibut
registration application.
* * * * *
(n) Transfer subsistence halibut to charter vessel anglers.
[FR Doc. E8-22411 Filed 9-23-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S