[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 23, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14016-14056]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6082]
[[Page 14015]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part IV
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 679
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Chinook Salmon
Bycatch Management in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 23, 2010 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 14016]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 090511911-91132-01]
RIN 0648-AX89
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Chinook
Salmon Bycatch Management in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 91 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (FMP). If approved, Amendment 91 would be a
novel approach to managing Chinook salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea
pollock fishery that combines a limit on the amount of Chinook salmon
that may be caught incidentally with an incentive plan agreement and
performance standard designed to minimize bycatch to the extent
practicable in all years and prevent bycatch from reaching the limit in
most years. This action is necessary to minimize Chinook salmon bycatch
in the Bering Sea pollock fishery to the extent practicable while
maximizing the potential for the full harvest of the pollock total
allowable catch within specified prohibited species catch limits.
Amendment 91 is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMP, and
other applicable laws.
DATES: Comments must be received no later than May 7, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-AX89, by any
one of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.
Fax: (907) 586-7557, Attn: Ellen Sebastian.
Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802.
Hand Delivery to the Federal Building: 709 West 9th
Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK.
Instructions: No comments will be posted for public viewing until
after the comment period has closed. All comments received are a part
of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying
Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by
the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential
Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.
NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required
fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to
electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF
file formats only.
Electronic copies of Amendment 91, the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), the Final Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared for this action
may be obtained from http://www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS Alaska
Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. Written comments
regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-
of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be
submitted to NMFS at the above address, e-mailed to [email protected], or faxed to 202-395-7285.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Harrington or Seanbob Kelly,
907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area (BSAI) under the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP). The North
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (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.
This proposed rule would implement Amendment 91 to the FMP. The
Council has submitted Amendment 91 for review by the Secretary of
Commerce, and a Notice of Availability (NOA) of this amendment was
published in the Federal Register on February 18, 2010 (75 FR 7228)
with comments invited through April 19, 2010. Respondents do not need
to submit the same comments on both the NOA and this proposed rule. All
relevant written comments received by the end of the applicable comment
period, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendment, this
proposed rule, or both, will be considered in the approval/disapproval
decision for Amendment 91 and addressed in the response to comments in
the final decision.
The Bering Sea Pollock Fishery
This proposed rule applies to owners and operators of catcher
vessels, catcher/processors, motherships, inshore processors, and the
six Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) Program groups
participating in the pollock (Theragra chalcogramma) fishery in the
Bering Sea (BS) subarea of the BSAI. A detailed physical description of
the BS subarea is contained in Section 1.3 of the EIS (see ADDRESSES).
The BS pollock fishery is the largest single species fishery, by
volume, in the United States. The first wholesale gross value of this
fishery was more than 1.4 billion dollars in 2008.
The BS pollock fishery is managed under the American Fisheries Act
(AFA) (16 U.S.C. 1851 note). Currently, pollock in the BSAI is managed
as three separate units: the BS subarea, the Aleutian Islands (AI)
subarea, and the Bogoslof District of the BS subarea. Separate
overfishing limits, acceptable biological catch limits, and total
allowable catch (TAC) limits are specified annually for BS pollock, AI
pollock, and Bogoslof pollock. In 2009, the BS pollock TAC was 815,000
metric tons (mt), the AI pollock TAC was 19,000 mt, and the Bogoslof
pollock TAC was 50 mt. Additional information about the pollock
fisheries is in Section 1.4 of the EIS, Section 2.1 of the RIR (see
ADDRESSES), and in the annual specifications for the BSAI groundfish
fisheries (74 FR 7359; February 17, 2009).
Ten percent of the AI pollock TAC is allocated to the CDQ Program
while the remaining 90 percent is divided between the Aleut Corporation
and the incidental catch allowance (70 FR 9856; March 1, 2005). Under
Sec. 679.22(a)(7)(i), directed fishing for pollock is not allowed in
the Bogoslof District and the entire TAC is allocated as an incidental
catch allowance for pollock harvested in other groundfish directed
fisheries that occur in this area. Amendment 91 would not affect the
management of pollock fisheries in the AI or the status of pollock
fishing in the Bogoslof District. This proposed rule applies only to
management of the pollock fishery in the BS. Therefore, in this
document, the word ``fishery'' refers only to the BS pollock fishery,
unless otherwise specified.
In October 1998, Congress enacted the AFA, which ``rationalized''
the BS
[[Page 14017]]
pollock fishery by identifying the vessels and processors eligible to
participate in the fishery and allocating pollock among those eligible
participants. Under the AFA, 10 percent of the BS pollock TAC is
allocated to the CDQ Program. After the CDQ Program allocation is
subtracted, an amount needed for the incidental catch of pollock in
other BS groundfish fisheries is subtracted from the TAC. In 2009, the
CDQ allocation was 81,500 mt of pollock and the incidental catch
allowance was 29,340 mt. The ``directed fishing allowance'' is the
remaining amount of pollock, after subtraction of the CDQ Program
allocation and the incidental catch allowance. The directed fishing
allowance is then allocated among the AFA inshore sector (50 percent),
the AFA catcher/processor sector (40 percent), and the AFA mothership
sector (10 percent). Pollock allocations to the CDQ Program and the
other three AFA sectors are further allocated annually between two
seasons--40 percent to the A season (January 20 to June 10) and 60
percent to the B season (June 10 to November 1).
The allocation of pollock to the CDQ Program is further allocated
among the six non-profit corporations (CDQ groups) that represent the
65 communities eligible for the CDQ Program under section 305(i)(1)(D)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The percentage allocations of pollock
among the six CDQ groups that currently are in effect were approved by
NMFS in 2005 based on recommendations from the State of Alaska (State).
These percentage allocations are now the required allocations of
pollock among the CDQ groups under section 305(i)(1)(B) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act. More information about the allocations of
pollock, other groundfish, crab, and prohibited species (including
Chinook salmon) among the six CDQ groups is provided in a Federal
Register notice that described the effect of the 2006 amendments to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act on CDQ Program allocations (71 FR 51804; August
31, 2006). The CDQ Program also is described in more detail in the
``Classification'' section of this proposed rule.
CDQ groups typically sell or lease their pollock allocations to
harvesting partners, including vessels owned, in part, by the CDQ
group. Although CDQ groups are not required to partner with AFA-
permitted vessels to harvest CDQ pollock, to date, the vessels
harvesting CDQ pollock have been AFA permitted vessels. The CDQ pollock
allocations have most often been harvested by catcher/processors or
catcher vessels delivering to a mothership. However, some pollock CDQ
has been delivered to inshore processing plants in past years.
The AFA allowed for the formation of fishery cooperatives within
the non-CDQ sectors. The purpose of these AFA cooperatives is to
further subdivide each sector's or inshore cooperative's pollock
allocation among participants in the sector or cooperative through
private contractual agreements. The cooperatives manage these
allocations to ensure that individual vessels and companies do not
harvest more than their agreed upon share. The cooperatives also
facilitate transfers of pollock among the cooperative members, enforce
contract provisions, and participate in the intercooperative agreement
to reduce salmon bycatch.
Each year, catcher vessels eligible to deliver pollock to the seven
eligible AFA inshore processors may form inshore cooperatives
associated with a particular inshore processor. NMFS permits the
inshore cooperatives, allocates pollock to them, and manages these
allocations through a regulatory prohibition against an inshore
cooperative exceeding its pollock allocation. The amount of pollock
allocated to each inshore cooperative is based on the member vessel's
pollock catch history from 1995 through 1997, as required under section
210(b) of the AFA (16 U.S.C. 1851 note). These catcher vessels are not
required to join an inshore cooperative. Those that do not join an
inshore cooperative are managed by NMFS under the ``inshore open access
fishery''. In recent years, all inshore catcher vessels have joined one
of seven inshore cooperatives. However, NMFS has been notified that in
2010 one inshore catcher vessel will not join an inshore cooperative
and will be fishing in the inshore open access fishery.
The AFA catcher/processor sector is made up of the catcher/
processors and catcher vessels eligible under the AFA to deliver to
catcher/processors. Owners of the catcher/processors that are listed by
name in the AFA and still active in the BS pollock fishery have formed
a cooperative called the Pollock Conservation Cooperative (PCC). The
remaining catcher/processor, the F/V Ocean Peace, is not listed by name
in the AFA, but is eligible to harvest up to 0.5 percent of the
allocation of BS pollock to the catcher/processor sector. This portion
of the catcher/processor sector's allocation of BS pollock is reserved
for ``unlisted'' catcher/processors that meet certain requirements,
which only the F/V Ocean Peace meets. Owners of the catcher vessels
eligible to deliver pollock to the catcher/processors have formed a
cooperative called the High Seas Catcher's Cooperative (HSCC).
The AFA mothership sector is made up of three motherships and the
catcher vessels eligible under the AFA to deliver pollock to these
motherships. These catcher vessels have formed a cooperative called the
Mothership Fleet Cooperative (MFC). The MFC does not include the owners
of the three motherships. The primary purpose of the cooperative is to
sub-allocate the mothership sector pollock allocation among the catcher
vessels authorized to harvest this pollock and to manage these
allocations.
NMFS does not manage the sub-allocations of pollock among members
of the PCC, HSCC, or MFC. The cooperatives control the harvest by their
member vessels so that the pollock allocation to the sector is not
exceeded. However, NMFS monitors pollock harvest by all members of the
catcher/processor sector and mothership sector. NMFS retains the
authority to close directed fishing for pollock by a sector if vessels
in that sector continue to fish once the sector's seasonal allocation
of pollock has been harvested.
Chinook Salmon Bycatch in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery
Pollock is harvested with fishing vessels using trawl gear, which
are large nets towed through the water by the vessel. Chinook salmon
and pollock occur in the same locations in the BS. Consequently,
Chinook salmon are accidently caught in the nets as fishermen target
pollock.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act defines bycatch as fish that are harvested
in a fishery, which are not sold or kept for personal use. Therefore,
Chinook salmon caught in the BS pollock fishery are considered bycatch
under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and NMFS regulations at 50 CFR
part 679. Bycatch of any species, including discard or other mortality
caused by fishing, is a concern of the Council and NMFS. National
Standard 9 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the Council to select,
and NMFS to implement, conservation and management measures that, to
the extent practicable, minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality.
The bycatch of culturally and economically valuable species like
Chinook salmon, which are fully allocated and, in some cases, facing
conservation concerns, are categorized as prohibited species under the
FMP and are the most regulated and closely managed category of bycatch.
Chinook salmon, all other species of salmon (a category called ``non-
Chinook salmon''),
[[Page 14018]]
steelhead trout, Pacific halibut, king crab, Tanner crab, and Pacific
herring are classified as prohibited species in the groundfish
fisheries off Alaska. As a prohibited species, fishermen must avoid
salmon bycatch and any salmon caught must either be donated to the
Prohibited Species Donation (PSD) Program under Sec. 679.26, or
returned to Federal waters as soon as is practicable, with a minimum of
injury, after an observer has determined the number of salmon and
collected any scientific data or biological samples.
The PSD Program was initiated to reduce the amount of edible
protein discarded under prohibited species catch (PSC) regulatory
requirements (Sec. 679.21). One reason for requiring the discard of
prohibited species is that some of the fish may live if they are
returned to the sea with a minimum of injury and delay. However, salmon
caught incidentally in trawl nets always die as a result of that
capture. The PSD Program allows enrolled seafood processors to retain
salmon bycatch for distribution to economically disadvantaged
individuals through tax-exempt hunger relief organizations.
The BS pollock fishery catches up to 95 percent of the Chinook
salmon taken incidentally as bycatch in the BSAI groundfish fisheries.
From 1992 through 2001, the average Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS
pollock fishery was 32,482. Bycatch increased substantially from 2002
through 2007, to an average of 74,067 Chinook salmon per year. A
historic high of approximately 122,000 Chinook salmon were taken in the
BS pollock fishery in 2007. However, Chinook salmon bycatch has
declined in recent years to 20,493 in 2008 and 12,410 in 2009. The
causes of the decline in Chinook salmon bycatch in 2008 and 2009 are
unknown. The decline is most likely due to a combination of factors,
including changes in abundance and distribution of Chinook salmon and
pollock, and changes in fleet behavior to avoid salmon bycatch.
Chinook salmon bycatch also varies seasonally and by sector. In
most years, the majority of Chinook salmon bycatch occurs during the A
season. Since 2002, catcher vessels in the inshore sector typically
have caught the highest number of Chinook salmon and had the highest
bycatch rates by sector in both the A and B seasons. Since 1999, under
the AFA, the inshore sector has been allocated about 45 percent of the
pollock TAC (the percentage changes slightly in some years because the
amount of pollock subtracted from the TAC for incidental catch varies).
However, the inshore sector has always caught more than 45 percent of
Chinook salmon bycatch. For example, in 2007, the inshore sector was
allocated 44 percent of the pollock TAC, but caught 63 percent of the
Chinook salmon bycatch, and in 2008 it was allocated 43 percent of the
TAC, but caught 55 percent of the Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS
pollock fishery. Over this same time period, the catcher/processor
sector has taken a smaller portion of the Chinook salmon bycatch
relative to their 35 percent allocation of pollock TAC (26 percent of
the Chinook salmon bycatch in 2007 and 18 percent in 2008). The
variation in bycatch rates among sectors and seasons is due, in part,
to the different fishing practices and patterns each sector uses to
fully harvest their pollock allocations in the A and B seasons.
In years of historically high Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS
pollock fishery (2003 through 2007), the rate of Chinook salmon bycatch
averaged 52 Chinook salmon per 1,000 tons of pollock harvested. With so
few salmon relative to the large amount of pollock harvested, Chinook
salmon encounters are difficult to predict or avoid. Development of
intercooperative agreements that require vessel-level cooperation to
share information about areas of high Chinook salmon encounter rates
probably are the best tool that the industry currently has to quickly
identify areas of high bycatch and to avoid fishing there. However, it
will continue to be difficult to predict when and where large amounts
of Chinook salmon bycatch will be encountered by the pollock fleet,
primarily because of the current lack of understanding of the
biological and oceanographic conditions that influence the distribution
and abundance of salmon in the areas where the pollock fishery occurs.
Status of Chinook Salmon Stocks and Fisheries in Western Alaska
Chinook salmon taken in the BS pollock fishery originate from
Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, Canada, and Asian countries along the
Pacific Rim. Estimates vary, but more than half of the Chinook salmon
bycatch in the BS pollock fishery may be destined for western Alaska.
Western Alaska includes the Bristol Bay, Kuskokwim, Yukon, and Norton
Sound areas. In general, western Alaska Chinook salmon stocks declined
sharply in 2007 and remained depressed in 2008 and 2009. Chapter 5 of
the EIS provides additional information about Chinook salmon biology,
distribution, and stock assessments by river system or region (see
ADDRESSES).
Chinook salmon support subsistence, commercial, personal use, and
sport fisheries in their regions of origin. The Alaska Board of
Fisheries adopts regulations through a public process to conserve
fisheries resources and to allocate fisheries resources to the various
users. The State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) manages
the salmon commercial, subsistence, sport, and personal use fisheries.
The first management priority is to meet spawning escapement goals to
sustain salmon resources for future generations. The next priority is
for subsistence use under both state and federal law. Chinook salmon
serves as a primary subsistence food in some areas. Subsistence
fisheries management includes coordination with U.S. federal agencies
where federal rules apply under the Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act.
In recent years of low Chinook salmon returns, the in-river harvest
of western Alaska Chinook salmon has been severely restricted and, in
some cases, river systems have not met escapement goals. Surplus fish
beyond escapement needs and subsistence use are made available for
other uses. Commercial fishing for Chinook salmon may provide the only
source of income for many people who live in remote villages. Chapter 3
of the RIR provides an overview of the importance of subsistence
harvests and commercial harvests (see ADDRESSES).
Yukon River salmon fisheries management includes obligations under
an international treaty with Canada. In 2007 and 2008, the United
States did not meet the Yukon River Chinook salmon escapement goals
established with Canada by the Yukon River Agreement to the Pacific
Salmon Treaty (PST) of 2002. As of October 29, 2009, the preliminary
estimate of escapement into Canada was approximately 68,400 Chinook
salmon, which exceeds the 2009 interim management escapement goal of
45,000 Chinook salmon and provides for harvest sharing under the Yukon
River Agreement to the PST.
Current Management of Chinook Salmon Bycatch in the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands
Over the past 15 years, the Council and NMFS have implemented
several management measures to limit Chinook salmon bycatch in the BSAI
trawl fisheries. In 1995, the Council adopted, and NMFS approved,
Amendment 21b to the FMP. Based on historic information regarding the
location and timing of Chinook salmon bycatch, Amendment 21b
established annual PSC limits for Chinook salmon and
[[Page 14019]]
specific seasonal no-trawling zones in the Chinook Salmon Savings Area
that would close when the limits were reached. These regulations
prohibited trawling in the Chinook Salmon Savings Area through April
15, once the PSC limit of 48,000 Chinook salmon was reached (60 FR
31215; November 29, 1995).
In 2000, the Council and NMFS implemented Amendment 58 to the FMP,
which reduced the Chinook Salmon Savings Area closure limit to 29,000
Chinook salmon, redefined the Chinook Salmon Savings Area as two non-
contiguous areas of the BSAI (Area 1 in the AI subarea and Area 2 in
the BS subarea), and established new closure periods (65 FR 60587;
October 12, 2000).
Chinook salmon bycatch management measures in the BSAI were most
recently revised under Amendments 82 and 84 to the FMP. In 2005,
Amendment 82 established the AI Chinook salmon PSC limit of 700 fish,
which, when reached, closes the directed pollock fishery in Area 1 (the
AI) of the Chinook Salmon Savings Area (70 FR 9856; March 1, 2005).
The Council adopted Amendment 84 in October 2005 to address
increases in Chinook and non-Chinook salmon bycatch that were occurring
despite PSC limits that triggered closure of the Chinook and Chum
Salmon Savings Areas. Amendment 84 established in Federal regulations
the salmon bycatch intercooperative agreement (ICA) which allows
vessels participating in the BS pollock fishery to use their internal
cooperative structure to reduce Chinook and non-Chinook salmon bycatch
using a method called the voluntary rolling hotspot system (VRHS).
Through the VRHS, industry members provide each other real-time salmon
bycatch information so that they can avoid areas of high Chinook or
non-Chinook salmon bycatch rates. The VRHS was implemented voluntarily
by the fleet in 2002. Amendment 84 exempts vessels participating in the
salmon bycatch reduction ICA from salmon savings area closures and
revised the Chum Salmon Savings Area closure to only apply to vessels
directed fishing for pollock, rather than to all vessels using trawl
gear. The exemptions to savings area closures for participants in the
VRHS ICA were implemented by NMFS in 2006 and 2007 through an exempted
fishing permit. Regulations implementing Amendment 84 were approved in
2007 (72 FR 61070; October 29, 2007), and a salmon bycatch reduction
ICA using the VRHS was approved by NMFS in January 2008. Amendment 84
requires that parties to the ICA be the AFA cooperatives or the CDQ
groups. All AFA cooperatives and CDQ groups participate in the VRHS
ICA.
Using a system specified in regulations, the VRHS ICA assigns
vessels in a cooperative to certain tiers, based on bycatch rates of
vessels in that cooperative relative to a base rate, and implements
large area closures for vessels in tiers associated with higher bycatch
rates. The VRHS ICA managers monitor salmon bycatch in the pollock
fisheries and announce area closures for areas with relatively high
salmon bycatch rates. Monitoring and enforcement are accomplished
through private contractual arrangements. The efficacy of voluntary
closures and bycatch reduction measures must be reported to the Council
annually.
Objectives of and Rationale for Amendment 91 and this Proposed Rule
While the annual reports suggest that the VRHS ICA has reduced
Chinook salmon bycatch rates compared to what they would have been
without the ICA, the highest historical Chinook salmon bycatch occurred
in 2007 when the ICA was in effect under an exempted fishing permit.
This high level of bycatch illustrated that, while the management
measures implemented under Amendment 84 provided the pollock fleet with
tools to reduce salmon bycatch, these measures contain no effective
upper limit on the amount of salmon bycatch that could occur in the BS
pollock fishery.
The principal objective of Chinook salmon bycatch management in the
BS pollock fishery is to minimize Chinook salmon bycatch to the extent
practicable, while achieving optimum yield. Minimizing Chinook salmon
bycatch while achieving optimum yield is necessary to maintain a
healthy marine ecosystem, ensure long-term conservation and abundance
of Chinook salmon, provide maximum benefit to fishermen and communities
that depend on Chinook salmon and pollock resources, and comply with
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable federal law.
In April 2009, the Council adopted Amendment 91 and recommended
that NMFS develop regulations to implement that action. In developing
Amendment 91, the Council considered consistency with the Magnuson-
Stevens Act's 10 National Standards. The Council designed its
recommended alternative to balance the competing demands of the
National Standards. Specifically, the Council recognized the need to
balance and be consistent with both National Standard 9 and National
Standard 1. National Standard 9 requires that conservation and
management measures shall, to the extent practicable, minimize bycatch.
National Standard 1 requires that conservation and management measures
shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the
optimum yield from each fishery for the U.S. fishing industry. The
ability to harvest the entire pollock TAC in any given year is not
determinative of whether the BSAI groundfish fishery achieves optimum
yield. Providing the opportunity for the fleet to harvest its TAC is
one aspect of achieving optimum yield in the long term.
Amendment 91 combines a limit on the amount of Chinook salmon that
may be caught incidentally with a novel approach designed to minimize
bycatch to the extent practicable in all years and prevent bycatch from
reaching the limit in most years. In developing this program, the
Council recognized that the number of Chinook salmon caught as bycatch
in the BS pollock fishery is highly variable from year to year, from
sector to sector, and even from vessel to vessel. Current information
about Chinook salmon is insufficient to determine the reasons for high
or low encounters of Chinook salmon in the pollock fishery or the
degree to which encounter rates are related to Chinook salmon abundance
or other conditions. The uncertainty and variability in Chinook salmon
bycatch led the Council to create a program with a combination of
management measures that together achieve its objective to minimize
bycatch to the extent practicable in all years while providing the
fleet the flexibility to harvest the pollock TAC.
Under Amendment 91, the PSC limit would be 60,000 Chinook salmon if
some or all of the pollock industry participates in an industry-
developed contractual arrangement, called an incentive plan agreement
(IPA), that establishes an incentive program to minimize bycatch at all
levels of Chinook salmon abundance. Participation in an IPA would be
voluntary; however, any vessel or CDQ group that chooses not to
participate in an IPA would be subject to a restrictive opt-out
allocation (also called a backstop cap).
To ensure participants develop effective IPAs, participants would
demonstrate to the Council through performance and annual reports that
the IPA is accomplishing the Council's intent that each vessel does its
best to avoid Chinook salmon at all times while fishing for pollock
and, that collectively, bycatch is minimized in each year. The Council
believed that the addition of an
[[Page 14020]]
IPA that could impose rewards for avoiding Chinook salmon bycatch,
penalties for failure to avoid Chinook salmon bycatch at the vessel
level, or both, would warrant setting the PSC limit at 60,000 Chinook
salmon. The Council recognized that while the IPA should minimize
bycatch in all years to a level below the limit, a limit of 60,000
Chinook salmon would provide the industry the flexibility to harvest
the pollock TAC in high-encounter years when bycatch was extremely
difficult to avoid.
A 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit would apply fleet-wide if
industry does not form any IPAs. This PSC limit of 47,591 Chinook
salmon is the approximate 10-year average of Chinook salmon bycatch
from 1997 to 2006. The Council determined that the 47,591 PSC limit was
an appropriate limit on Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS pollock
fishery if no other incentives were operating to minimize bycatch below
this level.
Both PSC limits would be divided between the A and B seasons and
allocated to AFA sectors, cooperatives, and CDQ groups as transferable
PSC allocations. Transferability is expected to mitigate the variation
in the encounter rates of salmon bycatch among sectors, CDQ groups, and
cooperatives in a given season by allowing eligible participants to
obtain a larger portion of the PSC allocation in order to harvest their
pollock allocation or to transfer surplus allocation to other entities.
When a transferable PSC allocation is reached, the affected sector,
inshore cooperative, or CDQ group would have to stop fishing for
pollock for the remainder of the season even if its pollock allocation
had not been fully harvested.
The Council also recommended a sector-level performance standard as
an additional tool to ensure that the IPA is effective and that sectors
do not fully harvest the Chinook salmon PSC allocations under the
60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit in most years. For a sector to continue
to receive Chinook salmon PSC allocations under the 60,000 Chinook
salmon PSC limit, that sector may not exceed its annual threshold
amount in any three years within seven consecutive years. If a sector
fails this performance standard, it will permanently be allocated a
portion of the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit. The Council believed
that the risk of bearing the potential economic impacts of a reduction
from the 60,000 PSC limit to the 47,591 PSC limit would create
incentives for fishery participants to cooperate in an effective IPA.
In selecting the appropriate Chinook salmon bycatch management
program, the Council considered a wide range of alternatives to assess
the impacts of minimizing Chinook salmon bycatch to the extent
practicable while maximizing the potential for the full harvest of the
pollock TAC. The Council considered the trade-offs between the
potential Chinook salmon saved and the forgone pollock catch. The EIS
and RIR contain a complete description of the alternatives and a
comparative analysis of the potential impacts of the alternatives (see
ADDRESSES).
The Council considered an alternative that would implement a single
PSC limit, with no additional measures. However, the Council determined
that a single PSC limit alone is not the optimum mechanism to minimize
Chinook salmon bycatch at all levels of Chinook salmon abundance and at
all rates of Chinook salmon encounters in the pollock fishery.
A relatively high PSC limit alone would not constrain the pollock
fishery in most years, so it would not achieve the Council's goal of
minimizing Chinook salmon bycatch to the extent practicable. A high PSC
limit in years of low Chinook salmon encounters would not provide
incentives for the pollock fleet to reduce bycatch at all, even if
lower bycatch could have been achieved at minimal expense. If low
encounters are due to low Chinook salmon abundance in one or more
stocks, a high PSC limit alone would not address biological concerns
about the potential impact of bycatch on Chinook salmon stocks.
A low PSC limit would reduce Chinook salmon bycatch below historic
high levels. However, it could limit the pollock fishery harvests below
the pollock TAC in many years because a low PSC limit would not
accommodate the high variability in Chinook salmon encounter rates
experienced in the BS pollock fishery, or the unpredictability of these
rates. While a low PSC limit alone would ensure bycatch does not exceed
that level, it would not provide any incentives or mechanism to further
reduce bycatch below that limit. As a result, if low encounters are due
to low Chinook salmon abundance in one or more stocks, even a low PSC
limit alone would not address biological concerns about the potential
impact of bycatch on Chinook salmon stocks. Additionally, if the low
PSC limit were allocated to sectors, cooperatives, and CDQ groups, it
could result in allocations so small that it could effectively preclude
pollock fishing by a vessel or group of vessels. On the other hand, not
allocating the PSC limit could result in a race to fish, which would
undermine the rationalized management of the AFA and the current
pollock fishery management.
Proposed Bering Sea Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management Measures
This proposed rule to implement the provisions of Amendment 91, as
recommended by the Council, includes two Chinook salmon PSC limits
(60,000 Chinook salmon and 47,591 Chinook salmon). For each PSC limit,
NMFS would issue Chinook salmon PSC allocations to the catcher/
processor sector, the mothership sector, the inshore cooperatives, and
the CDQ groups. Separate allocations would be issued for the A season
and the B season. Chinook salmon remaining from the A season could be
used in the B season (``rollover''). Entities could transfer PSC
allocations within a season and could also receive transfers of Chinook
salmon bycatch to cover overages (``post-delivery transfers'').
If NMFS approves an IPA, NMFS would issue transferable allocations
of the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit to those sectors that remain in
compliance with the performance standard. The performance standard
requires each sector to maintain its Chinook salmon bycatch within its
portion of 47,591 Chinook salmon in at least five out of every seven
consecutive years. Sector and cooperative allocations would be reduced
if members of the sector decided not to participate in an IPA. Vessels
and CDQ groups that do not participate in an IPA would fish under a
restricted opt-out allocation. If a whole sector does not participate
in an IPA, all members of that sector would fish under the opt-out
allocation.
NMFS would issue transferable allocations of the 47,591 Chinook
salmon PSC limit to all sectors, cooperatives, and CDQ groups if no IPA
is approved or to the sectors that exceed the performance standard.
Under Amendment 91, NMFS would remove from existing regulations the
29,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit in the BS, the Chinook Salmon Savings
Areas in the BS, exemption from Chinook Salmon Savings Area closures
for participants in the VRHS ICA, and Chinook salmon as a component of
the VRHS ICA. This proposed action would not change any regulations
affecting the management of Chinook salmon in the AI or non-Chinook
salmon in the BSAI. The Council is currently considering a separate
action to modify the non-Chinook salmon management measures to minimize
non-Chinook salmon bycatch.
[[Page 14021]]
Allocations of the 60,000 or the 47,591 Chinook Salmon Prohibited
Species Catch Limits
Both the 60,000 and the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limits would be
allocated among the catcher/processor sector, the mothership sector,
inshore sector, and CDQ Program using a method that recognizes that
sectors have different fishing patterns and needs for salmon bycatch in
order to harvest their AFA pollock allocation (Table 1). The percentage
allocations recommended by the Council are based on an adjusted five-
year (2002 to 2006) historical average proportion of the Chinook salmon
bycatch by sector and season, and are shown in Table 1. The basis for
these percentage allocations is explained in more detail in section
2.5.2 of the EIS (see ADDRESSES).
Table 1--Percentage Allocations and Amounts of the Chinook Salmon
Prohibited Species Catch Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PSC Limit (s of Chinook
Percentage allocations to each salmon)
sector -----------------------------------
60,000 47,591
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A season allocation: 70.0........... 42,000 33,314
CDQ Program--9.3................ 3,906 3,098
Inshore Sector--49.8............ 20,916 16,591
Mothership Sector--8.0.......... 3,360 2,665
Catcher/Processor Sector--32.9.. 13,818 10,960
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B season allocation: 30.0........... 18,000 14,277
CDQ Program--5.5................ 990 785
Inshore Sector--69.3............ 12,474 9,894
Mothership Sector--7.3.......... 1,314 1,042
Catcher/Processor Sector--17.9.. 3,222 2,556
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allocations of Chinook salmon PSC to the inshore sector would be
further allocated among the inshore cooperatives based on the
proportion of the inshore pollock allocation made to each inshore
cooperative under Sec. 679.62(a)(1). Pollock allocations to the
inshore cooperatives can change from year to year if membership in the
cooperatives changes because the cooperative's pollock allocation is
determined by the percentage of pollock assigned to each vessel in the
sector. Column D of proposed Table 47c to part 679 shows the percentage
of the inshore sector's pollock allocation assigned to each catcher
vessel. The amount of Chinook salmon PSC that would be allocated to
each inshore cooperative would be determined each year after the
inshore cooperative permit applications are received on December 1. If
the owner of an AFA catcher vessel eligible to deliver pollock to an
inshore processor does not join an inshore cooperative in a particular
year and fishes in the inshore open access fishery, the portion of
Chinook salmon associated with that vessel also would be allocated to
the inshore open access fishery.
The CDQ groups would continue to be allocated the same proportion
of the CDQ Program allocation of Chinook salmon bycatch that each group
has been allocated since 2005 (71 FR 51804; August 31, 2006). These
percentage allocations are described in more detail in the
``Classification'' section of this preamble and would be published in
proposed Table 47d to part 679.
Transferable and Non-transferable Allocations. Each year, NMFS
would send a letter to each entity receiving a transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocation, notifying them of the amount of the allocation
and identifying the vessels fishing under that allocation. Each entity
that receives a transferable allocation would be prohibited from
exceeding their allocation. Each entity would be required to manage its
pollock fishing so that neither its pollock allocation nor its
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation is exceeded. The Council
intended that both the A season allocation and the annual allocation
would not be exceeded. Therefore, the A season and B season allocations
would be managed separately. Overages for the A season would be
evaluated at the end of the A season and overages for the B season
would be evaluated the end of the year. NMFS would not close directed
fishing for pollock by the sectors, inshore cooperatives, or CDQ groups
receiving transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations when those
allocations are reached. Rather, penalties could be assessed against
the entity for an overage of its Chinook salmon PSC allocation.
If members of the catcher/processor or mothership sectors are
unable to form their respective sector-level entities to receive
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations, then these sectors would
fish under a non-transferable sector allocation. If some inshore
catcher vessels did not join an inshore cooperative, then they would
fish under a non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation assigned to
the inshore open-access fishery. Similarly, if some vessels or CDQ
groups did not participate in an IPA, then they would fish under the
non-transferable opt-out allocation. NMFS would manage each non-
transferable allocation with a directed fishery closure to prevent the
non-transferable allocation being exceeded. The directed fishery
closure would apply to all vessels fishing under that non-transferable
allocation.
Separate allocations would be made for the A season and the B
season for a total of up to 30 transferable PSC allocation accounts
(see Table 2). NMFS could establish up to eight non-transferable PSC
allocation accounts annually for the inshore open access fishery, the
opt-out fishery, and for the mothership sector and catcher/processor
sector.
[[Page 14022]]
Table 2--Potential Number of Transferable Chinook Salmon PSC Allocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entities that could receive transferable allocations
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catcher/ Mothership Total
processor sector sector Inshore co-ops CDQ transferable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Season...................................................... 1 1 7 6 15
B Season...................................................... 1 1 7 6 15
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual total.............................................. 2 2 14 12 30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Entities Eligible To Receive Transferable Chinook Salmon Prohibited
Species Catch Allocations. NMFS would issue transferable allocations to
eligible entities representing the catcher/processor sector, mothership
sector, inshore cooperatives, and CDQ groups. Each entity receiving a
transferable allocation of Chinook salmon PSC must identify a
``representative'' and an ``agent for service of process''. The
representative would represent all members of the entity with NMFS and
would be authorized to transfer all or a portion of the entity's
Chinook salmon PSC allocation to another entity or to receive a
transfer from another entity. The agent for service of process is the
person authorized and responsible to receive notices or other documents
on behalf of all members of the entity. The representative and the
agent for service of process could be the same person.
All members of an entity that receives transferable Chinook salmon
PSC allocations would be jointly and severally liable for any violation
of applicable regulations and for any penalties assessed against that
entity for any regulatory violation, including if the Chinook salmon
bycatch by the vessels fishing on behalf of that entity exceeded the
amount of Chinook salmon allocated to the entity.
NMFS would issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations to the
catcher/processor sector or the mothership sector if they form a
``sector-level entity'' that is authorized by NMFS to receive
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations. The sector-level entity
would be responsible for ensuring that the collective Chinook salmon
bycatch by its members does not exceed those allocations. The entity
representing the catcher/processor sector and the entity representing
the mothership sector would be required to identify their
representative and agent for service or process on their application to
NMFS to receive transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations.
The catcher/processor sector and the mothership sector currently
are not required to register as entities with NMFS to receive
allocations of BS pollock. Non-transferable allocations of pollock are
made to each of these two sectors by NMFS through the annual groundfish
harvest specifications process. NMFS issues permits to individual AFA
eligible vessels to harvest pollock under these sector allocations, but
the catcher/processor sector and mothership sector as a whole do not
need to be permitted by NMFS to receive such allocations. No more than
one entity may be authorized by NMFS to represent the catcher/processor
sector, and no more than one entity may be authorized to represent the
mothership sector. Existing contracts forming the PCC, the HSCC, and
the MFC could be modified to create the sector-level entities required
to receive transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations, or new entities
could be formed by the owners of these same vessels to address only
NMFS's requirements related to Chinook salmon PSC allocations.
The inshore cooperatives and the CDQ groups already are recognized
by NMFS as entities eligible to receive allocations on behalf of
others. The inshore cooperatives are permitted annually by NMFS under
Sec. 679.4(l)(6) and must submit copies of their cooperative contracts
to NMFS to be issued a permit. The representative and agent for service
of process for the inshore cooperatives would be the same person as
named on the cooperative's annual application for pollock allocations.
The CDQ groups are authorized under section 305(i)(1) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act to receive fishery allocations from NMFS. No additional
authorizations are needed for the inshore cooperatives or CDQ groups to
be eligible to receive transferable allocations of Chinook salmon PSC.
The representative and agent for service of process for a CDQ group
would be its chief executive officer. In either case, an inshore
cooperative or a CDQ group could notify NMFS in writing if its
representative or agent for service of process for purposes of Chinook
salmon PSC allocations is a different person.
Assigning Portions of the Chinook Salmon PSC Limit
The proposed rule includes a series of tables, proposed Tables 47a
through 47d to part 679, that show the percent of the pollock
allocation, the corresponding amounts of Chinook salmon PSC, and the
percent used to calculate the IPA minimum participation, that NMFS has
assigned to each vessel in each sector and to each CDQ group. See Table
3, below, for an outline of proposed Tables 47a through 47d to part
679. NMFS would use the numbers in these tables to (1) Calculate
adjustments to allocations of the 60,000 PSC limit for any vessels not
participating in an IPA, (2) establish the amount of the opt-out
allocation, (3) establish the annual threshold amount for the
performance standard, and (4) determine if minimum participation
requirements have been met for a proposed IPA. The methods NMFS would
use to assign a percent of each sector's pollock allocation to each
vessel or CDQ group are described below.
Table 3--Location in the Proposed Rule of the Tables That Show the
Percent of the Pollock Allocation, the Corresponding Amounts of the
Chinook Salmon, and Percent Used to Calculate the IPA Minimum
Participation Assigned to Each Vessel in Each Sector and to Each CDQ
Group
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location
in
Sector proposed
rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catcher/processor sector...................................... Table
47a to
part
679.
Percent of pollock allocation............................. Colum
n D.
Opt-out allocation........................................ Colum
n E
and
F.
Annual threshold amount................................... Colum
n G.
IPA minimum participation................................. Colum
n H.
Mothership sector............................................. Table
47b to
part
679.
Percent of pollock allocation............................. Colum
n D.
Opt-out allocation........................................ Colum
n E
and
F.
[[Page 14023]]
Annual threshold amount................................... Colum
n G.
IPA minimum participation................................. Colum
n H.
Inshore sector................................................ Table
47c to
part
679.
Percent of pollock allocation............................. Colum
n D.
Opt-out allocation........................................ Colum
n E
and
F.
Annual threshold amount................................... Colum
n G.
IPA minimum participation................................. Colum
n H.
CDQ Program................................................... Table
47d to
part
679.
Percent of pollock allocation............................. Colum
n B.
Opt-out allocation........................................ Colum
n C
and
D.
Annual threshold amount................................... Colum
n E.
IPA minimum participation................................. Colum
n F.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catcher/processor sector. To implement Amendment 91, proportions of
the catcher/processor sector's allocations of Chinook salmon must be
developed for each AFA eligible catcher/processor and each of the
catcher vessels eligible to deliver pollock to these catcher/
processors. All but one of the AFA catcher/processors are represented
by the PCC, and all catcher vessels are represented by the HSCC. The
PCC assigns each vessel a percent of the catcher/processor sector's
allocation of pollock. The Council recommended using each vessel's
percent of the catcher/processor sector's allocation of pollock as a
basis for assigning each vessel a percent of the sector's Chinook
salmon PSC allocation. This approach is reasonable because it relies on
already agreed upon proportions, so it eliminates the need for the
Council or NMFS to develop a different set of proportions that may have
unintended impacts on the sector members. In addition, the proportion
assigned to each vessel in a sector does not affect the incentives or
operation of the elements of Amendment 91 (the PSC limit, the IPA, and
the performance standard) that are important to achieve the Council's
overall objectives for Chinook salmon bycatch management.
The pollock allocated to the catcher/processor sector is further
allocated as follows: 0.5 percent to the F/V Ocean Peace under section
208(e)(21) of the AFA, 8.5 percent to catcher vessels eligible to
deliver pollock to AFA catcher/processors, and 91 percent to the
catcher/processors listed in section 208(e)(1) through (20) and
permitted under Sec. 679.4(l)(2)(i).
The seven catcher vessels that are members of the HSCC are
allocated 8.5 percent of the pollock allocated to the AFA catcher/
processor sector. Members of the HSCC further allocate this pollock
among the seven member vessels based on percentage allocations agreed
upon in their HSCC contract. These percentage allocations are used to
apportion the Chinook salmon bycatch associated with each of the seven
catcher vessels listed at the bottom of proposed Table 47a to part 679.
These proportions add up to 8.5 percent.
The 91 percent of the allocation of pollock to the catcher/
processor sector is further allocated among the companies owning the
AFA eligible catcher/processors that are members of the PCC. These
allocations are negotiated among the PCC members and do not stem from
any requirement of the AFA or NMFS regulation. The percentage
allocations to each company are listed in the annual cooperative report
submitted by PCC to the Council under requirements at Sec. 679.61(f).
The PCC recommended a method of apportioning Chinook salmon among the
catcher/processors based on the catch of pollock by each of these
vessels in 2006. This year was chosen as the basis for these
proportions because it was the last year that the F/V American Dynasty
fished in both the A and B seasons and, therefore, is the year that
best represents the relative catching capacity of vessels that are
currently members of the AFA catcher/processor sector.
AFA eligible catcher/processors that do not currently participate
in the BS pollock fishery are not likely to return to the fishery.
Therefore, the PCC board recommended that these vessels receive a
proportion of zero for purposes of Amendment 91. Although unlikely,
three of the four inactive vessels (F/V Katie Ann, F/V U.S. Enterprise,
and F/V American Enterprise) could return to fish for pollock in the BS
in the future. However, the owners of these vessels are members of the
PCC so its recommendation for a proportion of zero for these three
vessels is made at the recommendation and concurrence of the vessel
owners. The fourth vessel, F/V Endurance, is listed as eligible in the
AFA, but is permanently precluded from participation in the fishery
because it is now a foreign flagged vessel, and, therefore, cannot
receive endorsements to fish in the U.S. EEZ. In the unlikely event
that a vessel currently assigned a zero proportion would return to the
fishery and choose not to participate in an IPA, the portion and number
of Chinook salmon associated with that vessel would be assigned within
the sector based on revisions to the PCC contract that are made at the
time a vessel returns to active fishing, until proposed Table 47a to
part 679 could be revised to reflect the new proportions assigned to
each vessel.
Mothership sector. The proportion associated with each catcher
vessel in the mothership sector in proposed Table 47b to part 679 is
based on the allocations of pollock made under the MFC contract. The
proportions are published annually in the MFC's annual report to the
Council, which is available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/afa/). NMFS did not
adjust any of these proportions and has published them as agreed upon
by the members of the cooperative.
Inshore sector. NMFS calculated the proportions associated with
each catcher vessel in the inshore sector based on ADF&G fish tickets
submitted by the inshore processors for each delivery of pollock by a
catcher vessel from 1995 through 1997, adjusted by the procedures
described in Sec. 679.62(a). These proportions have been used since
2000 to determine the amount of pollock allocated to the inshore
cooperatives based on the catch history of the catcher vessels that are
members of each cooperative. NMFS is proposing to publish these
proportions in Table 47c to part 679 because they are needed for a
number of important calculations under this proposed rule. These
calculations must be made in a short period of time at the end of each
year, prior to the start of the next year's fishery. Having these
proportions available to the public as part of the regulations provides
an early opportunity for public comment on these proportions and
improves the transparency of how important annual calculations related
to the Chinook salmon PSC allocations would be made. Although these
proportions were based on ADF&G fish tickets and the information on the
fish tickets is confidential, the proportions of the total pollock
catch over this three-year period is not confidential because no
confidential information from the fish tickets about the amount,
location, or value of pollock catch for a specific
[[Page 14024]]
vessel can be determined from these proportions.
Community Development Quota Program. The proportion of Chinook
salmon associated with each CDQ group in Table 47d to part 679 of this
proposed rule are the percentage allocations of pollock and Chinook
salmon PSC that have been made to each group since 2005 (71 FR 51804;
August 31, 2006). These percentage allocations are described in more
detail in the Classification section of this proposed rule.
Replacement vessels. If an AFA permitted vessel listed in proposed
Tables 47a through 47c is no longer eligible to participate in the BS
pollock fishery or if a vessel replaces a currently eligible vessel,
the portion and number of Chinook salmon associated with that vessel in
Tables 47a through 47c would be assigned to the replacement vessel or
distributed among other eligible vessels in the sector based on the
procedures in the law, regulation, or private contract that
accomplishes the vessel removal or replacement action until, Tables 47a
through 47c to this part can be revised through subsequent proposed and
final rulemaking.
Opt-Out Allocation
If at least some members of a given sector are participating in an
approved IPA, and the sector has not exceeded its performance standard,
then the vessels in that sector whose owners do not participate in an
IPA, or vessels fishing on behalf of a CDQ group that does not
participate in an IPA, would fish for BS pollock under a seasonal opt-
out allocation. Vessel owners, inshore cooperatives, or CDQ groups not
participating in an IPA do not have to notify NMFS that they are not
participating in an IPA because NMFS would know the list of vessels and
CDQ groups participating in each approved IPA. NMFS would post on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov) whether
each AFA-permitted vessel is participating or not participating in an
IPA and the Chinook salmon PSC allocation under which each vessel would
be managed. Vessel owners would be expected to notify NMFS if a vessel
they own is incorrectly listed as fishing under the opt-out allocation.
The purpose of the opt-out allocation is to require those not
participating in an IPA to fish under a separate allocation that is
considerably more restrictive than the transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations issued to entities representing those who do participate in
an IPA. The Council intends the opt-out allocation to be low enough to
provide an incentive to participate in an IPA. The concept of the opt-
out allocation was originally developed as a component of the Council's
preliminary preferred alternative under which the higher PSC limit was
68,392 Chinook salmon and the maximum amount of the ``backstop cap''
was 32,482 Chinook salmon. The amount of the backstop cap under the
preliminary preferred alternative represented the 1992 through 2001 10-
year average Chinook salmon bycatch and is one of the lower and most
restrictive of the PSC limits considered by the Council (Alternative 2,
Sub-option vii in the EIS (see ADDRESSES)). For Amendment 91, the
Council reduced the maximum amount of the backstop cap (or opt-out
allocation) to 28,496, which is 47.5 percent of 60,000 Chinook salmon,
the same percentage that the 32,482 backstop cap is of the 68,392 PSC
limit under the Council's preliminary preferred alternative.
The annual opt-out allocation would be some number less than 28,496
Chinook salmon. Before each fishing year, NMFS would calculate the
amount of the opt-out allocation for each season based on the number of
vessels or CDQ groups that chose not to participate in an approved IPA.
NMFS would also reduce the allocation of the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC
limit for sectors or cooperatives with members that participate in the
opt-out fishery. To calculate the opt-out allocation for each season,
NMFS would take the sum of the number of Chinook salmon associated with
each vessel or CDQ group that opted out of an IPA, as shown in Columns
E and F in proposed Tables 47a through 47c to part 679, and Column C
and D in proposed Table 47d to part 679. NMFS would then subtract this
opt-out amount from the seasonal allocation of Chinook salmon PSC to
the sector or cooperative in which that vessel is a member or, for a
CDQ group, to the CDQ Program. This reduction in the allocations of the
60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit for vessels and CDQ groups that fish
under the opt-out allocation is necessary to ensure that total bycatch
does not exceed the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit.
For example, if all vessels in an inshore cooperative (called
cooperative A in this example) that collectively represents 31.145
percent of the inshore sector's allocation of pollock do not
participate in an IPA and if all of the other inshore cooperatives do
participate in an approved IPA, the adjustments that would be made to
the number of Chinook salmon allocated to the inshore cooperatives
participating in an IPA and the amount of Chinook salmon that would be
allocated to the opt-out allocation are explained below:
(1) The inshore sector's allocation of the 60,000 Chinook salmon
PSC limit is 20,916 in the A season and 12,474 in the B season.
(2) If cooperative A would have participated in an IPA, it would
have been allocated its portion of the inshore sector's allocation as a
transferable Chinook salmon allocation. This allocation would be 31.145
percent of the inshore sector's allocation; 6,514 Chinook salmon in the
A season (20,916 * .31145) and 3,885 Chinook salmon in the B season
(12,474 * .31145).
(3) The inshore sector's proportion of 28,496 Chinook salmon is
9,933 in the A season and 5,925 in the B season.
(4) The portion of 28,496 that is represented by cooperative A is
3,094 Chinook salmon in the A season (9,933 * .31145) and 1,845 Chinook
salmon in the B season (5,925 * .31145).
(5) This amount of Chinook salmon (3,094 in the A season and 1,845
in the B season) would be added to the opt-out allocation. All of the
vessels in cooperative A would fish as a group under this opt-out
allocation, along with any other vessels or CDQ groups not
participating in an IPA and the additional Chinook salmon allocated to
the opt-out allocation associated with those other vessels or CDQ
groups.
(6) Chinook salmon allocated to the opt-out allocation would not be
available to the remaining inshore cooperatives that are participating
in an approved IPA and fishing under their transferable allocations of
the inshore sector allocation.
(7) The difference between the amount of Chinook salmon that would
have been allocated to the inshore sector for cooperative A and the
amount allocated to the opt-out allocation is 3,420 in the A season
(6,514-3,094) and 2,040 in the B season (3,885-1,845). This amount of
Chinook salmon is forfeit by cooperative A.
(8) The amount of Chinook salmon forfeit by cooperative A would be
redistributed among the inshore cooperatives participating in an IPA in
proportion to each cooperative's annual pollock allocation. NMFS would
issue each inshore cooperative participating in an IPA a transferable
PSC allocation equal to its portion of the inshore sector Chinook
salmon PSC allocation plus its portion of Chinook salmon forfeit by the
inshore cooperative opting out of an IPA.
Additional examples of calculations of the reductions of sector
allocations and the amount added to the opt-out allocation for each AFA
sector are
[[Page 14025]]
provided in section 2.5.6 of the EIS (see ADDRESSES).
If some members of the catcher/processor sector or the mothership
sector opt out of an IPA, the proportion of 28,496 Chinook salmon
associated with these vessels would be subtracted from the amount of
Chinook salmon allocated to the sector under the 60,000 PSC limit and
this same amount would be added to the opt-out allocation. The
remaining Chinook salmon PSC allocated to the sector would be available
to all members of the sector participating in an IPA. Because the
catcher/processor and mothership sector receive a single allocation of
Chinook salmon, no redistribution by NMFS of the amount of Chinook
salmon ``forfeit'' by the members of these sectors opting out of an IPA
would be necessary. This redistribution would be done by private
contractual arrangement with the remaining members of the sector that
are participating in an IPA.
If an IPA is approved, but all members of a particular sector do
not participate in an IPA, then the difference between their sector
allocation of the 60,000 PSC limit and the amount of Chinook salmon
allocated to the opt-out allocation (their portion of 28,496) is not
redistributed among members of the other sectors. NMFS would
redistribute the ``forfeit'' Chinook salmon within the inshore and CDQ
sectors so that the process for allocating Chinook salmon PSC between
the sectors and the opt-out allocation is consistent among all sectors.
However, when an entire sector does not participate in an IPA, all
members have chosen to forfeit Chinook salmon and fish under the opt-
out allocation. This forfeited Chinook salmon would not be allocated
and would be a net savings of Chinook salmon bycatch under the 60,000
Chinook salmon PSC limit.
Each vessel fishing under the opt-out allocation would continue to
fish for pollock under the allocation of BS pollock that applies to the
vessel under current regulations. An inshore catcher vessel that is a
member of an inshore cooperative would fish under the inshore
cooperative's allocation of pollock. An inshore catcher vessel that is
not a member of an inshore cooperative would fish under the inshore
open-access fishery's pollock allocation. The catcher/processor sector,
the mothership sector, and the CDQ groups would continue to fish under
their seasonal allocations of pollock. Although unlikely, it is
possible that some vessels in the catcher/processor sector or
mothership sector, or some vessels in an inshore cooperative, would
participate in an IPA and other members of the sector or inshore
cooperative would not participate in an IPA. In this case, a group of
vessels would be fishing together under the same allocation of pollock,
but would be fishing under separate allocations of the Chinook salmon
PSC limit. Those participating in an IPA would be fishing under
transferable allocations of Chinook salmon PSC issued to the entity
that represents them and those not participating in an IPA would be
fishing under the opt-out allocation.
All vessels fishing under the opt-out allocation would be managed
by NMFS as a group for purposes of Chinook salmon PSC limits,
regardless of the sector, inshore cooperative, or CDQ group on whose
behalf they were fishing for purposes of their pollock allocations. All
Chinook salmon bycatch by these vessels fishing under the opt-out
allocation would accrue against the opt-out allocation. Chinook salmon
bycatch in the opt-out allocation would be non-transferable, because
the salmon are not being allocated to an entity. There would be no
rollover of unused Chinook salmon in the A season opt-out allocation to
the B season opt-out allocation because, under the 60,000 PSC limit,
this flexibility is offered only to those participating in an IPA. The
Council specifically intended that more restrictive management measures
would apply to the opt-out allocation to increase the incentive to
participate in an IPA.
NMFS would close directed fishing for pollock by all vessels
fishing under the opt-out allocation when NMFS determines that the
seasonal opt-out allocation will be reached. If some vessels in a
sector or inshore cooperative were fishing under the opt-out allocation
and others were fishing under transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations, and if the sector or inshore cooperative had not yet
reached its seasonal pollock allocation, those vessels fishing under
the transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations could continue to fish
for pollock while the vessels fishing under the opt-out allocation
would be required to stop fishing for pollock because the opt-out
allocation had been reached.
One of the more complicated scenarios that could occur under
Amendment 91 would be if a number of inshore catcher vessels did not
join an inshore cooperative, and some participated in an IPA but others
did not. If an inshore catcher vessel does not join a cooperative, it
fishes under an allocation of pollock to the inshore open-access
fishery. That pollock allocation is based on the pollock catch history
associated with each vessel not joining a cooperative. For this
example, assume that two inshore catcher vessels did not join a
cooperative and were fishing under seasonal allocations of pollock to
the inshore open access fishery. Regardless of which Chinook salmon PSC
allocation they were fishing under or the status of those PSC
allocations, both vessels would be required to stop fishing for pollock
when their combined catch of pollock reached the amount of pollock
allocated to the inshore open-access fishery. If one of these vessels
participated in an IPA but the other did not, the vessel participating
in an IPA would be fishing under an amount of Chinook salmon allocated
to the inshore limited access fishery based on that vessel's proportion
of pollock catch history shown in Column D of proposed Table 47c to
part 679. Even if pollock remained available to the two vessels fishing
in the inshore open-access fishery, once the allocation of Chinook
salmon to the inshore open-access fishery was reached, the operator of
the vessel participating in an IPA would be required to stop fishing
for pollock. The other vessel that did not participate in an IPA would
be fishing under the opt-out allocation. As long as Chinook salmon
remained available in the opt-out allocation and pollock remained
available in the inshore open-access allocation of pollock, this vessel
could continue to fish for pollock.
Predicting when a salmon PSC limit will be reached by a group of
vessels is difficult for NMFS under any circumstances because of the
variability and unpredictability of salmon bycatch. If only a few
vessels fished under the opt-out allocation, the amount of Chinook
salmon PSC in the opt-out allocation could be very small and it would
be difficult for NMFS to accurately project when the opt-out allocation
would be reached. If the closure date selected by NMFS resulted in more
Chinook salmon caught than the A season opt-out allocation, the amount
over the A season allocation would be deducted by NMFS from the B
season opt-out allocation. However, if the closure date selected by
NMFS in the B season resulted in more Chinook salmon caught in the year
than was allocated to the opt-out allocation, NMFS could not reduce the
amount of Chinook salmon PSC allocated to other entities or fisheries,
because these allocations would have already been made and could not be
withdrawn by NMFS due to bycatch by vessels fishing under the opt-out
allocation. Based on NMFS's experience with other programs that
allocate transferable amounts of groundfish, halibut, crab, or
prohibited species, even if one entity or fishery
[[Page 14026]]
exceeds its portion of an allocation, generally the overall allocation
is not exceeded because other entities do not harvest their full
allocations. With all of the restrictions that would be in place under
the 60,000 PSC limit, particularly the performance standard, even if
the opt-out allocation were exceeded or an entity receiving a
transferable allocation exceeded its allocation, it is unlikely that
the total amount of Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS pollock fishery
will reach even the lower limit of 47,591 in a year.
Chinook Salmon Bycatch Performance Standard for Sectors
The proposed rule includes a Chinook salmon bycatch performance
standard for each sector that has at least some members participating
in an IPA. In addition to participation by at least some members in an
IPA, for each sector to continue to receive its allocation of the
60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit, the total annual Chinook salmon
bycatch by all members of a sector participating in an IPA could not
exceed the sector's ``annual threshold amount'' in any three years
within a consecutive seven-year period. Although Chinook salmon PSC
allocations would be made to the inshore cooperatives and the CDQ
groups, the performance standard would apply to the sector, not to
individual inshore cooperatives or CDQ groups.
Before each fishing year, NMFS would calculate each sector's annual
threshold amount. If all members of a sector participate in an IPA that
year, a sector's annual threshold amount would be that sector's portion
of the 47,591 PSC limit, which is the annual total of the A and B
season allocations for that sector under the 47,591 PSC limit shown in
Table 1 of this preamble. For example, the mothership sector's annual
portion of 47,591 is 3,707 Chinook salmon (2,665 A season + 1,042 B
season). If all catcher vessels delivering to motherships participated
in an IPA that year, the mothership sector's annual threshold amount
for that year would be 3,707 Chinook salmon. If all catcher vessels in
the mothership sector participated in an IPA in each of seven
consecutive years, the mothership sector would maintain its allocation
of 4,674 Chinook salmon PSC under the 60,000 PSC limit as long as the
Chinook salmon bycatch by all vessels in the mothership sector was less
than or equal to 3,707 Chinook salmon in at least five of those seven
years.
If some, but not all, members of a sector participate in an IPA,
NMFS would reduce that sector's annual threshold amount by an amount
equal to the sum of each of the non-participating vessel's portion of
47,591. The amount of Chinook salmon associated with each vessel in
each sector is shown in Column G of proposed Tables 47a through 47c to
part 679 and for each CDQ group in Column E of proposed Table 47d to
part 679.
Continuing with the example of the mothership sector, and using the
information from Column G of proposed Table 47b to part 679, the annual
threshold amount for the mothership sector would be adjusted downward
from 3,707 Chinook salmon if any catcher vessels in the sector did not
participate in an IPA. For example, if all catcher vessels in the
mothership sector except the F/V American Beauty participated in an
IPA, the mothership sector's annual threshold amount would be 3,484
Chinook salmon. This amount is determined by subtracting 223, the
number of Chinook salmon that represents the F/V American Beauty'
portion of 47,591 from Column G of proposed Table 47b, from 3,707. The
F/V American Beauty would be fishing under the opt-out allocation and
its bycatch would not accrue against the mothership sector's annual
threshold amount for that year.
At the end of each fishing year, NMFS would evaluate each sector's
annual bycatch against that sector's annual threshold amount. Only the
bycatch of vessels or CDQ groups participating in an IPA would accrue
against a sector's annual threshold amount. If a sector's annual
bycatch exceeds its annual threshold amount in any three years within
seven consecutive years, NMFS would reduce that sector's Chinook salmon
PSC allocation to that sector's portion of 47,591 Chinook salmon for
all future years. A sector's annual threshold amount does not change
when vessels from other sectors or entire sectors opt-out of an IPA or
if another sector exceeds its performance standard.
If all members of a sector did not participate in an IPA, then the
annual threshold amount would be zero because the full amount of the
sector's portion of 47,591 would have been subtracted from the initial
amount of the annual threshold amount. For example, the mothership
sector's share of 47,591 is 3,707 Chinook salmon. If all catcher
vessels eligible to deliver to motherships did not participate in an
IPA, then the sum of the amount each vessel represented of 3,707 would
be subtracted from 3,707. This would leave an annual performance
threshold of zero for the mothership sector. However, only bycatch by
vessels participating in an IPA accrue against the annual threshold
amount, so when no members of a sector participate in an IPA, no
Chinook salmon bycatch accrues against the sector's annual threshold
amount and, as long as this continues throughout the seven consecutive
years, the sector would not exceed its performance standard and would
continue to fish under the opt-out allocation. This outcome is
consistent with the intent of the Council for the performance standard
because fishing under the opt-out allocation, which is a portion of
28,496 Chinook salmon, is more restrictive than fishing under the
47,591 PSC limit.
Transfers and Rollovers
Under this proposed rule, NMFS would issue transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocations under either the 60,000 or 47,591 Chinook salmon
PSC limits to eligible entities representing the catcher/processor
sector, the mothership sector, inshore cooperatives, and CDQ groups.
Transferable allocations would provide the pollock fleet the
flexibility to maximize the harvest of pollock while maintaining
Chinook salmon bycatch at or below the PSC limit. Transfers are
requests to NMFS from holders of Chinook salmon PSC allocations to move
a specific amount of a Chinook salmon PSC from a transferor's
(sender's) account to a transferee's (receiver's) account. NMFS's
approval is required for any transfer.
Eligible entities may transfer Chinook salmon PSC allocations to
and from any of the other entities representing sectors, cooperatives,
or CDQ groups, subject to the following restrictions: (1) Entities
receiving transferable allocations under the 60,000 limit would only be
allowed to transfer to and from other entities receiving transferable
allocations under the 60,000 limit, (2) entities receiving transferable
allocations under the 47,591 limit would only be allowed to transfer to
and from other entities receiving transferable allocations under the
47,591 limit, and (3) Chinook salmon may not be transferred between
seasons.
Under this proposed rule, requests for transfers may be submitted
either electronically or non-electronically through a form available on
the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/).
Computer programs would be designed to review the transferor's catch
account during a transfer request to ensure sufficient Chinook salmon
is available to transfer and, if it were, to make that transfer
effective immediately.
Post-delivery Transfers of Chinook Salmon Prohibited Species Catch
Allocations. This proposed rule contains a post-delivery transfer
provision similar to the allowances
[[Page 14027]]
implemented under Amendment 80 to the FMP and the Central Gulf of
Alaska Rockfish Program. If an entity's transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocation account balance falls below zero in a season, the entity
would be provided the opportunity to receive transfers of Chinook
salmon PSC to bring the entity's account balance back up to zero or
above. However, once an account balance falls below zero in each
season, vessels participating on behalf of the entity would be
prohibited from starting a new fishing trip for the remainder of the
season. This requirement would implement the Council's recommendation
that ``any recipient of a post-delivery transfer during a season may
not fish for the remainder of that season.''
A new component would be added to the definition of a fishing trip
in Sec. 679.2 to define a fishing trip for purposes of post-delivery
transfers of Chinook salmon PSC allocations as ``the period beginning
when a vessel operator commences harvesting any pollock that will
accrue against a directed fishing allowance for pollock in the BS or
against a pollock CDQ allocation harvested in the BS and ending when
the vessel operator offloads or transfers any processed or unprocessed
pollock from that vessel.'' This definition and the associated
prohibitions at Sec. 679.7(d)(8)(ii)(C)(2) and Sec. 679.7(k)(8)(iii)
related to overages would allow catcher vessels fishing for an entity
that had exceeded its Chinook salmon PSC allocation to continue to fish
for pollock until the end of the current trip even though additional
Chinook salmon caught before the end of that fishing trip would
increase the amount of the entity's overage. Similarly, any catcher/
processor fishing when the catcher/processor sector exceeded its
seasonal Chinook salmon PSC allocation could continue to fish for
pollock until pollock was next offloaded from the vessel, even if the
sector's overage would continue to increase as a result of a catcher/
processor completing its fishing trip.
Overages of Chinook salmon PSC would be evaluated on June 25 for
the A season and on December 1 for the B season. This would provide
entities 15 days after the end of the A season and 30 days after the
end of the B season to obtain post-delivery transfers to reduce or
eliminate any overages. NMFS proposes that 15 days after the A season
is an appropriate amount of time to provide for post-delivery transfers
because most A season pollock fishing is completed well before the end
of the season on June 10, and NMFS needs to resolve A season account
balances relatively quickly so that any necessary adjustments can be
made to the B season account balances before B season pollock fishing
begins. NMFS proposes to allow 30 days after the end of the B season
for post-delivery transfers because pollock fishing will cease for the
remainder of the year on November 1, and NMFS does not need to make
further adjustments to account balances within a specified period of
time at the end of the year. If, after allowing for post-delivery
transfers to cover an overage, an entity exceeded its Chinook salmon
PSC allocation, the entity could be subject to an enforcement action
for violating NMFS regulations.
Rollover of A Season Chinook Salmon Prohibited Species Catch
Allocations. NMFS would add, or ``rollover'', any Chinook salmon PSC
allocation remaining after the A season for an entity receiving a
transferable allocation or for vessels fishing under non-transferable
allocations, except the opt-out allocation, to the B season allocation
for that entity or sector. This action would be done by NMFS
automatically on June 26, after the deadline for post-delivery
transfers had passed. The combination of transferable Chinook salmon
PSC allocations from one entity to another entity in the A season, plus
the automatic rollover of unused A season allocations effectively
allows one entity to transfer Chinook salmon from its A season
allocation to another entity's B season allocation, as long as the
transfer was completed by June 25. This would be accomplished by one
entity transferring A season Chinook salmon to another entity during
the A season and that second entity not using that Chinook salmon in
the A season, but allowing it to roll over to its B season allocation.
Incentive Plan Agreement
An IPA is a private contract among vessel owners or CDQ groups that
establishes incentives for participants to reduce Chinook salmon
bycatch. The parties to an IPA, or the people who would sign the
contract, would be the owners of AFA-eligible catcher vessels, catcher/
processors, or motherships, or the representatives of CDQ groups. The
proposed rule would allow the representative of an AFA cooperative or a
sector-level entity formed under Amendment 91 to sign an IPA on behalf
of all vessel owners that are members of that inshore cooperative or
sector-level entity.
If NMFS approves at least one IPA, those participating in an IPA
would receive an allocation of the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit.
Those not participating in an IPA would be considered to be ``opting-
out'' of an IPA and would fish under the opt-out allocation.
Incentive Plan Agreement Components. The IPA concept includes (1)
the NMFS approved IPA that contains the elements of the incentive
program that all parties to the IPA (vessel owners, CDQ groups, or
both) agree to follow and (2) the annual report to the Council about
performance under the IPA in the previous year.
The deadline for an application for approval of a proposed IPA is
October 1 of the year prior to the year in which the IPA is proposed to
be effective. This deadline is necessary to allow enough time for NMFS
to review the proposed IPA and to issue a decision on its approval or
disapproval prior to the start of the next fishing year.
An IPA would be required to contain a written description of the
following:
(1) The incentive(s) that would be implemented under the IPA to
ensure that the operator of each vessel governed by the IPA will avoid
Chinook salmon bycatch at all times while directed fishing for pollock
in the BS;
(2) The rewards for avoiding Chinook salmon bycatch, penalties for
failure to avoid Chinook salmon bycatch at the vessel level, or both;
(3) How the incentive measures in the IPA are expected to promote
reductions in a vessel's bycatch rates relative to what would have
occurred in absence of the incentive program;
(4) How the incentive measures in the IPA promote Chinook salmon
bycatch savings in any condition of pollock abundance or Chinook salmon
abundance in a manner that is expected to influence operational
decisions by vessel operators to avoid Chinook salmon bycatch; and
(5) How the IPA ensures that the operator of each vessel governed
by the IPA will manage his or her bycatch to keep total bycatch below
the performance standard for the sector in which the vessel
participates.
An IPA would be required to identify the AFA vessels that are
participating in the IPA. However, the IPA would not be required to
list all of the vessels that a CDQ group plans to use to harvest its BS
pollock allocation. A CDQ group would participate in an IPA on behalf
of all vessels directed fishing for pollock for that CDQ group. If a
CDQ group representative signs an IPA, all vessels directed fishing for
pollock for that CDQ group would be required to participate in the IPA.
Information submitted to NMFS on industry observer reports are
sufficient for NMFS to identify vessels fishing for pollock CDQ on
behalf of a CDQ group.
[[Page 14028]]
Vessel and CDQ group participation in an IPA would be voluntary.
However, any vessel or CDQ group permitted to receive pollock
allocations under the AFA that wants to join an IPA must be allowed to
join subject to the terms that have been agreed upon by all parties to
that IPA. NMFS would post a copy of any proposed IPA on its website so
that the public is informed that a proposed IPA is under review by
NMFS. A participant who believed that they were involuntarily excluded
from the IPA could submit documentation of the violation with a
challenge to NMFS's approval of the proposed IPA. NMFS would have to
review this information and determine whether the assertion was valid.
If it were, NMFS would disapprove the proposed IPA. Further resolution
of the issue could then occur through NMFS's administrative appeal
process. However, an appeal on the issue of involuntary exclusion could
be difficult and time consuming to resolve, and an on-going appeal
would require all participants to fish under the PSC limit that would
apply if the IPA under appeal was not in effect.
Each IPA representative would be required to submit an annual
report to the Council by April 1 each year after the first full year of
operation of an IPA. If an IPA is approved for 2011, the Council would
receive the first annual report on this IPA by April 1, 2012.
The IPA annual report would be the primary tool through which the
Council would evaluate whether its goals for the IPAs are being met.
The IPA annual report would be required to contain: (1) A comprehensive
description of the incentive measures in effect in the previous year,
(2) a description of how these incentive measures affected individual
vessels, (3) an evaluation of whether incentive measures were effective
in achieving salmon savings beyond levels that would have been achieved
in the absence of the measures, and (4) a description of any amendments
to the terms of the IPA that were approved by NMFS since the last
annual report, and the reasons that the amendments to the IPA were
made.
Minimum Participation. To be approved by NMFS, the Council
recommended that an IPA must meet a minimum participation requirement
of vessel owners or CDQ groups that (1) ``represent not less than 9
percent of the pollock quota'' and (2) be composed of at least two
unaffiliated AFA companies or CDQ groups. The Council intended the
minimum participation requirement for the IPA to allow members of
different sectors to join together to form an IPA, but not force
members of different sectors to join with other sectors. They expressed
this intent through the minimum participation requirement related to
the ``percent of pollock quota''. This method is based on the
percentage allocations of pollock associated with each sector in the
AFA and not on the actual percent of the annual TAC that is allocated
to each sector. Ten percent of the pollock TAC is allocated to the CDQ
Program. After subtraction of the incidental catch allowance, the
remaining amount of pollock (the ``directed fishing allowance'') is
allocated among the catcher/processor, mothership, and inshore sectors.
In the proposed rule, the proportions for each sector (and for
vessels in each sector) that NMFS would use to determine minimum
participation are shown in Column H of proposed Table 47a to part 679
for the catcher/processor sector, proposed Table 47b to part 679 for
the mothership sector, and proposed Table 47c to part 679 for the
inshore sector. The 9 percent associated with the mothership sector for
purposes of the minimum participation requirements under this proposed
rule derives from multiplying 90 percent, which is 100 percent minus
the 10 percent associated with the CDQ Program allocation, by the
mothership sector's allocation of 10 percent of the pollock directed
fishing allowance. Similarly, the 36 percent associated with the
catcher/processor sector is 90 percent multiplied by catcher/processor
sector's 40 percent allocation of the directed fishing allowance, and
the 45 percent associated with the inshore sector is 90 percent
multiplied by the inshore sector's 50 percent allocation of the
directed fishing allowance. While these percentages do not represent
either the percent of the pollock TAC or the percent of the pollock
directed fishing allowance allocated to the non-CDQ sectors each year,
they represent a method of expressing the percent of the ``pollock
quota'' associated with each sector that can be used to specify minimum
participation requirements for the IPA, which would not change as the
incidental catch allowance changes.
If some, but not all, vessel owners in a sector participated in an
IPA, then the minimum participation requirements would be evaluated
based on the sum of the proportion of the amount of pollock available
for directed fishing that is associated with each vessel.
NMFS Approval of an IPA. Approval or disapproval of an IPA by NMFS
would be an administrative determination. NMFS would review a proposed
IPA by comparing the actual content of a proposed IPA with the
information requirements in regulations, and would decide whether the
proposed IPA provides the required information. Because the
requirements for an IPA are performance based (i.e., they address what
an IPA should accomplish), any number of different incentive plans
could meet these objectives. As long as a proposed IPA contains all of
the information required in NMFS regulations and it generally describes
an incentive program that is designed to accomplish the goals specified
in regulation, NMFS would approve the IPA. In reviewing the proposed
IPAs, NMFS would not judge the expected adequacy of the incentives
described. Judgments about the efficacy or outcomes of the proposed
incentive plans would be subjective and the regulations would not
provide a legal basis for NMFS to disapprove a proposed IPA because
NMFS does not believe that the proposed measures would succeed. Minor
errors or omissions in the proposed IPA could be resolved by NMFS
contacting the IPA representative, in writing, and requesting revisions
to the IPA. All approved IPAs would be made available for Council and
public review.
If NMFS approves an IPA, the IPA representative would be notified
in writing of the approval and a copy of the IPA and the list of
participants would be posted on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/). Once approved, an IPA would remain in
effect unless it contains an expiration date, until the IPA
representative notifies NMFS that the IPA is terminated, or until NMFS
approves an amendment to the IPA, except that an IPA could not be
terminated or expire mid-year. An existing IPA would not have to be re-
submitted each year. Representatives of inshore cooperatives or the
entities representing the catcher/processor or mothership sectors could
sign a proposed IPA on behalf of all members of the cooperative or
sector-level entity. Once party to an IPA, a vessel owner, sector-level
entity, inshore cooperative, or CDQ group could not withdraw from the
IPA or remove a vessel from the IPA until after the close of a fishing
year.
Amendments or revisions to the terms and conditions of an IPA could
be submitted to NMFS by the IPA representative at any time, except that
proposed amendments to change the participants in the IPA mid-year, or
to terminate or end an IPA, would not be approved. Mid-year revisions
to an incentive plan are not likely because of the cost associated with
getting all parties to agree to any changes and the time involved in
obtaining the
[[Page 14029]]
signatures needed for a contract revision. However, particularly in the
first few years of an IPA, the flexibility to adjust the incentive plan
mid-year may be necessary, and it is preferable to allow these
amendments rather than have necessary adjustments made outside of the
contract where they would not be apparent to the Council, the public,
or those evaluating the effectiveness of the IPAs. The proposed rule
includes a requirement that any amendments to an approved IPA (and the
reasons for these amendments) be described by the IPA representative in
the annual report to the Council. If an amendment is submitted, NMFS
would review whether the IPA, if amended, would continue to comply with
all applicable requirements. The original, approved IPA would be
effective until NMFS approved an amendment. If an amendment were
disapproved, the existing approved IPA would remain in effect.
If NMFS determines that the regulatory requirements for the IPA
were not met, it would issue an initial administrative determination
(IAD) explaining the reasons that the proposed IPA did not comply with
Federal regulations. Examples of reasons for disapproval are a complete
lack of information that responds in any way to one or more of the IPA
requirements, information that did not make sense in such an obvious
way as to be clearly not responsive to the requirements, a component of
an IPA that was specifically designed to exceed the performance
standard, or a description of a component of the IPA that was in
conflict with another regulation or law governing the BS pollock
fishery.
If NMFS issued an IAD disapproving a proposed IPA, the IPA
representative could either submit a revised IPA that addressed the
issues identified in the IAD or file an administrative appeal. While an
appeal is pending, participants in the proposed IPA may not receive
transferable Chinook salmon allocations under the 60,000 PSC limit. If
no other IPA were approved, all AFA participants would receive
transferable allocations under the 47,591 PSC limit. If an IPA were
approved for other participants in the BS pollock fishery, those
participating in the IPA under appeal would fish under the opt-out
allocation because, at the beginning of the fishing year, they would
not be participants in an approved IPA.
Final agency action on an administrative appeal to approve a
proposed IPA that occurred after January 19 of any year would be
effective in the year after the administrative appeal is resolved. Once
Chinook salmon PSC allocations are issued at the beginning of the year
and computer programs are established to accrue Chinook bycatch from
each vessel participating in the BS pollock fishery to the appropriate
Chinook salmon PSC allocation, NMFS could not reissue Chinook salmon
PSC allocations or reassign vessels or CDQ groups to another allocation
account.
Proposed Monitoring and Enforcement Requirements
This proposed rule would place constraints on the BS pollock
fishery that currently do not exist. The only regulatory measure that
currently prevents the full harvest of a pollock allocation is the end
of a fishing season, and no PSC limits currently prevent pollock
fishermen from full harvest of their allocations. Amendment 91 would
implement Chinook salmon PSC limits that, if reached, could prevent the
full harvest of a pollock allocation by a sector, inshore cooperative,
or CDQ group. Each entity receiving a transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocation would be prohibited from exceeding that allocation. Once a
Chinook salmon PSC allocation has been reached, the only way to prevent
further overages of that allocation is for all vessels fishing on
behalf of the entity with the overage to stop fishing for pollock.
The EIS explains why current methods of estimating Chinook salmon
bycatch in the BS pollock fishery are not adequate to support
monitoring and enforcement of the Chinook salmon PSC limits and must be
improved. See sections 2.5.8 and 3.1 of the EIS (see ADDRESSES). The
following sections describe NMFS's proposed regulatory amendments to
accomplish the improvements to Chinook salmon bycatch monitoring in the
BS pollock fishery necessary to support the Council's objectives under
Amendment 91.
With this proposed rule, NMFS would use the same method of
accounting for Chinook salmon bycatch for all AFA sectors. NMFS
believes that to accurately count salmon for Chinook salmon PSC
allocations, the following requirements must be implemented under this
proposed rule: (1) Observer coverage for all vessels and processing
plants, (2) retention requirements, (3) specific areas to store and
count all salmon, (4) video monitoring on at-sea processors, and (5)
electronic reporting of salmon by species by haul or delivery.
Prohibitions against the discard of salmon in the BS pollock fishery
would be added to prohibitions for the CDQ Program (at Sec.
679.7(d)(8)(ii)(A)) and for the AFA (Sec. 679.7(k)(8)(i)).
Catcher Vessels Delivering to Inshore Processors
Currently, the Chinook salmon bycatch rates from observed vessels
are used to estimate Chinook salmon bycatch by the unobserved vessels
delivering pollock to inshore processors. This method of accounting for
Chinook salmon bycatch would not be adequate for monitoring and
enforcement of transferable PSC allocations under Amendment 91.
Under this proposed rule, catcher vessels delivering pollock,
including pollock CDQ, to inshore processors would be required to
retain all salmon of any species caught while directed fishing for
pollock in the BS, and to deliver that salmon together with its pollock
catch to an inshore processor with an approved catch monitoring and
control plan (CMCP). Full retention of all salmon regardless of species
would be required because it is difficult to differentiate Chinook
salmon from other species of salmon without direct identification. NMFS
proposes that identification of and counting of salmon would occur at
the shoreside processing plant or on the floating processor where
conditions for identification and counting of salmon can be better
monitored and controlled.
In addition, catcher vessels delivering to inshore processors would
be required to carry an observer at all times while directed fishing
for pollock in the BS. Currently, observer coverage for these catcher
vessels is based on vessel length with one observer required at all
times for vessels greater than 125 feet length overall (LOA) and an
observer required for 30 percent of the fishing days for vessels
between 60 feet and 125 feet LOA (see Sec. 679.50(c)(1)(v)). An
observer would be required on every catcher vessel, primarily to
monitor compliance with the requirement to retain all salmon to ensure
that all salmon bycatch is counted at the processing plant. These
duties would not require an observer with prior experience or a ``level
2'' endorsement as defined at Sec. 679.50(j)(1)(v)(D).
The observer on a catcher vessel is responsible for identifying and
counting salmon, and collecting scientific data or biological samples
from a delivery. These duties must be completed as soon as possible
after the delivery so that information about salmon bycatch from each
delivery is available to NMFS, the vessel operator, and the entity
responsible for the Chinook salmon bycatch by this vessel. Therefore,
this proposed rule would prohibit the
[[Page 14030]]
operator of a catcher vessel from starting a new fishing trip for
pollock in the BS until the observer assigned to their vessel had
completed their duties in the processing plant. The vessel operator
could obtain a different observer if he or she needed to start a new
trip before the observer from the previous delivery was finished with
duties associated with the previous delivery.
Inshore Processors
Under current regulations, each inshore processor that receives AFA
pollock is required to develop and operate under a NMFS-approved CMCP.
The procedures established under the AFA for the CMCPs were designed to
monitor the weighing of pollock at the inshore processing plants.
Proper weighing of large volumes of a target species such as pollock
require different conditions than does the proper sorting,
identification, and counting of a more infrequently occurring bycatch
species such as salmon. Salmon can be difficult to see, identify, and
count amid the large volume of pollock. The factory areas of processing
plants are large and complex. Preventing observers from seeing salmon
that enter the factory area of the processing plant would not be
difficult. In addition, observers must examine each salmon to verify
the species identification. Therefore, NMFS proposes that the following
additions to requirements for the inshore processors are needed to
ensure that observers have access to all salmon bycatch prior to the
fish being conveyed into the processing area of the plant:
(1) Processors would be prohibited from allowing salmon to pass
from the area where catch is sorted and into the factory area of the
processing plant;
(2) The observer work station currently described in regulations at
Sec. 679.28(g) would be required to be located within the observation
area identified in the CMCP;
(3) A location must be designated within the observation area for
the storage of salmon; and
(4) All salmon of any species must be stored in the observation
area and within view of the observer at all times during the offload.
Because these requirements would be effective for the 2011 fishing
year, inshore processors would have to modify their plants to meet
these requirements and have these modifications reflected in CMCPs
approved by NMFS prior to January 20, 2011.
Observers would identify the species of each salmon, count each
salmon, record the number of salmon by species on their data form, and
transmit that information electronically to NMFS. Data submitted by the
observer would be used by NMFS to accrue Chinook salmon bycatch against
an entity's allocation. The manager of the inshore processor would be
provided notice by the observer when he or she will be conducting the
salmon count and would be provided an opportunity to witness the count.
Information from the observer's salmon count would be made available to
the manager of the inshore processor for their use in submitting this
information to NMFS on electronic logbooks or landings reports.
Requirements to deliver pollock to inshore processors that have
approved CMCPs currently apply only to AFA catcher vessels delivering
non-CDQ pollock to inshore processors. These requirements do not apply
to catcher vessels directed fishing for pollock on behalf of a CDQ
group. With few exceptions, pollock allocated to the CDQ Program since
1992 has been processed at sea on catcher/processors or motherships.
Therefore, this requirement would not require any of the CDQ groups to
stop delivering pollock CDQ to a currently-contracted processing
partner. In the future, if they chose to have pollock CDQ delivered to
a shoreside processing plant, the catcher vessel used to harvest the
pollock CDQ would be required to comply with the retention and observer
coverage requirements described above and the pollock would have to be
delivered to a processor with an approved CMCP. This requirement is
necessary to ensure that salmon bycatch from the pollock CDQ fisheries
are properly counted and reported.
Catcher/Processors and Motherships
Current methods for estimating salmon bycatch by catcher/processors
and catcher vessels delivering to motherships rely on requirements for
two observers on each catcher/processor and mothership and using
observers' species composition sample data to estimate the number of
salmon in each haul. This method has been adequate to estimate Chinook
salmon bycatch for management of the current trigger cap that applies
to the BS pollock fishery as a whole.
However, in the proposed rule, NMFS proposes to use a census or a
full count of Chinook salmon bycatch in each haul by a catcher/
processor and delivery by a catcher vessel to a mothership or catcher/
processor as a basis for monitoring and enforcing the Chinook salmon
PSC allocations under Amendment 91. This would eliminate the
uncertainty associated with extrapolating from species composition
samples to estimates of the total number of salmon caught in each haul
and support the level of precision and reliability that both the vessel
owners and NMFS require to monitor and enforce Chinook salmon PSC
limits.
NMFS supports the use of a census on catcher/processors and
motherships, as long as conditions exist to properly monitor that all
of the salmon bycatch is retained and to provide the observer with the
tools needed to identify, count, and report salmon bycatch by haul or
delivery by catcher vessels. Current regulations require the retention
of salmon ``until the number of salmon has been determined by an
observer.'' Observers report the count of salmon for each haul in data
submitted to NMFS and vessel operators separately report the count of
salmon bycatch each day on their daily production reports.
To ensure accurate counts of salmon on catcher/processors and
motherships, NMFS proposes the following requirements:
(1) No salmon of any species would be allowed to pass from the
observer sample collection point and into the factory area of the
catcher/processor or mothership;
(2) All salmon bycatch of any species must be retained until it is
counted by an observer;
(3) Vessel crew must transport all salmon bycatch from each haul to
an approved storage location adjacent to the observer sampling station
so that the observer has free and unobstructed access to the salmon,
and the salmon must remain within view of the observer from the
observer sampling station at all times;
(4) The observer must be given the opportunity to count the salmon
and take biological samples, even if this requires the vessel crew to
stop sorting or processing catch until the counting and sampling is
complete;
(5) The vessel owner must install a video system with a monitor in
the observer sample station that provides views of all areas where
salmon could be sorted from the catch and the secure location where
salmon are stored; and
(6) The counts of salmon by species must be reported by the
operator of a catcher/processor for each haul, using an electronic
logbook that will be provided by NMFS as part of the current eLandings
software.
The operator of the catcher/processor or mothership would be
provided notice by the observer when he or she will be conducting the
count of salmon and would be provided an opportunity to witness the
count. Information from the observer's count of salmon would be made
available to the vessel operator for
[[Page 14031]]
their use in submitting this information to NMFS on electronic logbooks
or landings reports.
The video requirements would be similar to those currently in place
for monitoring fish bins on non-AFA trawl catcher/processors. An owner
of a catcher/processor would be required to provide and maintain
cameras, a monitor, and a digital video recording system for all areas
where sorting and storage of salmon, prior to being counted by an
observer, could occur. The video data must be maintained and made
available to NMFS upon request for 120-days after the date the video is
recorded. The video systems would also be subject to approval by NMFS
at the time of the observer sample station inspection. In order for the
video system to be effective and ensure the observer has access to all
salmon prior to entering the factory area, no salmon of any species
would be allowed to pass the last point where sorting could occur.
These requirements would be effective for the 2011 fishing year so
catcher/processors and motherships would have to modify their vessels
to meet these requirements and have these modifications approved by
NMFS prior to January 20, 2011.
On September 23, 2009, NMFS conducted a workshop on proposed
monitoring requirements for catcher/processors and motherships (74 FR
43678, August 27, 2009). At that workshop, participants asked NMFS two
main questions about the proposed video requirements.
First, participants asked for clarification about the ownership and
confidentiality status of video data recorded to monitor salmon bycatch
sorting and storage on catcher/processors and motherships. Video data
collected as a requirement of regulations belong to the vessel owner
and, under proposed regulations at Sec. 679.28(j)(1)(v), must be
retained onboard the vessel for at least 120 days after the date the
video is recorded. Similar to logbook requirements the observer may
request to view any of the recorded video data at any time, but such a
request to view a recording does not require the observer to take
custody of the hard drive on which the video data are recorded.
Therefore, video data remains in the custody of the vessel owner or
operator unless they are submitted to NMFS in response to a request
from NMFS under Sec. 679.28(j)(1)(v). When video data are in the
custody of the vessel operator, they are not subject to the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) and NMFS may not require the vessel operator to
provide video data to the public in response to a FOIA request. If
video data are submitted to NMFS, they would be covered by the
confidentiality laws and regulations that apply to any data or
information in NMFS's possession. These laws include the FOIA, the
Trade Secrets Act, and the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Under section 402(b)
of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, information submitted to NMFS pursuant to
a requirement under the Magnuson-Stevens Act is considered
confidential. Video data required to be submitted to NMFS under Sec.
679.28(j) are covered by these confidentiality provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act because the regulations in 50 CFR part 679 are
promulgated under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. In
addition, the FOIA or the Trade Secrets Act may prevent release of
certain commercial information, which may include these video data.
Finally, NMFS also must comply with regulatory guidelines in 50 CFR
600.415 et seq., which control collection, handling, and disclosure of
confidential fisheries information.
Second, participants asked what would happen if the video equipment
failed and could not be immediately repaired. Participants wanted to
know if NMFS has a contingency plan that would allow the vessel
operator to continue to sort and process catch from the BS pollock
fishery until the video equipment is repaired. The requirement to
record video of all areas in the factory where salmon are sorted from
the catch and where salmon are stored until they are counted by an
observer is an important component to monitoring compliance with
Chinook salmon bycatch management measures under Amendment 91.
Therefore, the requirements at Sec. 679.28(j) must be met when the
catcher/processor or mothership is sorting or processing catch from the
BS pollock fishery. The video systems that will comply with these
proposed regulations are relatively simple systems with many easily
replaceable components. The vessel operator should carry additional
video system components so that the systems may be repaired while at
sea with minimal lost time fishing. If some component of the video
system fails when this equipment is required to be operational, and if
the video system cannot be repaired at sea, the vessel operator should
inform the NOAA Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) about the video
failure.
Operators of catcher/processors participating in the BS pollock
fishery would be required to report the salmon bycatch counts by
species for each haul rather than the daily total currently required.
This count would be required to be submitted to NMFS using an
electronic logbook so that the data are readily available to NMFS in an
electronic format. Reporting the count of all salmon by species for
each haul would not change or increase the amount of information that
is required to be gathered by vessel operators because, to report the
number of salmon by species each day, as they currently are required to
do, vessel operators must obtain a count and identification of salmon
in each haul and sum that information to get the daily totals.
The electronic logbooks would replace the paper logbooks currently
required to be submitted by the operators of catcher/processors under
Sec. 679.5(c)(4). Current regulations require recording the following
information in paper logbooks: Vessel identifying information and
catch-by-haul information including haul number; date, time, and
location of gear deployment and retrieval; average sea depth and
average gear depth for each haul, target species of the haul, estimate
weight of the haul, and information about retention of certain species.
All of this information would now be submitted using the electronic
logbook.
The electronic logbooks would be an additional component to
``eLandings,'' the program through which the operators of catcher/
processors currently submit their daily production reports. The
requirement to maintain and submit daily logbook information
electronically instead of maintaining and submitting a paper logbook is
not expected to increase costs for the catcher/processors. The
electronic logbook software would be developed by NMFS and provided to
the vessel operator as part of the eLandings software that is updated
annually by NMFS. Data entry for the electronic logbooks would be done
on the same computer as already is required on the vessel to submit the
electronic daily production reports. The same communications hardware
and software currently used for eLandings could be used for the
electronic logbooks. The vessel operators would be required to print
out a copy of the electronic logbook and maintain it onboard the
vessel. The additional cost of data entry of information into the
electronic logbook should be offset by the reduction in cost associated
with maintaining the paper logbook.
AFA catcher/processors required to use an electronic logbook for
their participation in the BS pollock fisheries also would be required
to use this electronic logbook for the entire year for any other
fishery in which they participate. Use of the electronic
[[Page 14032]]
logbook all year for all fisheries is necessary to provide logbook
information from a vessel to NMFS in a consistent format throughout the
year for all fisheries in which that vessel participates. In 2008, 13
of the 17 catcher/processors that fished in the BS pollock fishery also
participated in other fisheries, primarily yellowfin sole and Pacific
cod. The days fishing in non-pollock fisheries represented 20 percent
of the total fishing days for these vessels in 2008.
Electronic logbooks would not be required for the AFA motherships
or catcher vessels. Motherships already are required under Sec.
679.5(e)(6) to submit daily an electronic landings report that includes
a report of the number of salmon by species in each delivery by a
catcher vessel. When NMFS develops the electronic logbook component of
eLandings for the AFA catcher/processors, it likely also will develop
an electronic logbook for the motherships, which could be used
voluntarily in place of the paper logbook. Electronic logbooks also
would not be required for catcher vessels delivering to inshore
processors because the counting and reporting of the number of salmon
by species in each delivery would be done at the processing plant and
reported in the inshore processor's electronic logbook.
Release of Information About Chinook Salmon Prohibited Species Catch
Allocations and Catch
Under this proposed rule, the NMFS Alaska Region would post on its
Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/) (1) The Chinook salmon PSC
allocations for each entity receiving a transferable allocation, (2)
each entity's Chinook salmon bycatch, and (3) the vessels fishing on
behalf of that entity for that year. NMFS would update the Web site to
reflect any transfers of Chinook salmon PSC allocations.
For non-transferable allocations, the NMFS Alaska Region would also
post on its Web site (1) the amount of each non-transferable
allocation, (2) the Chinook salmon bycatch that accrued towards that
non-transferable allocation, and (3) the vessels fishing under each
non-transferable allocation. NMFS would update the website to reflect
any changes to the B season non-transferable allocations from rollovers
or deductions for overages in the A season.
Information about Chinook salmon bycatch is based on data collected
by observers and data submitted by processors. Section 402(b)(2) of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act provides that any observer information is
confidential and shall not be disclosed. As a result of this
requirement, NMFS may not release information collected by observers
from vessels or processing plants unless it is provided to the public
in aggregate or summary form. However, section 210(a)(1)(B) of the AFA
requires NMFS ``to make available to the public in such manner as the
North Pacific Council and Secretary deem appropriate information about
the harvest by vessels under a fishery cooperative of all species
(including bycatch) in the directed pollock fishery on a vessel-by-
vessel basis.'' Public release of Chinook salmon bycatch information
for each entity and vessel fishing on behalf of that entity would
provide information valuable to the pollock industry and the public in
assessing the efficacy of Amendment 91. It would also reduce the amount
of time NMFS staff would need to spend responding to information
requests about Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS pollock fishery.
Removal of Salmon Bycatch Retention Requirements in the Bering Sea
Aleutian Islands Trawl Fisheries
NMFS proposes to revise the requirements at Sec. 679.21(c), which
currently require the operators of all vessels using trawl gear in the
BSAI groundfish fisheries, and all processors taking deliveries from
these vessels, to retain all salmon until the salmon have been counted
by an observer and the observer has collected biological samples. This
allows discard of salmon from a vessel with an observer onboard, after
the observer has counted and sampled the salmon. It also requires
retention of salmon by vessels without an observer onboard until those
salmon are delivered to a processing plant, where an observer is
provided the opportunity to count and sample the salmon. Once salmon
are counted and sampled at the processing plant, they may either be
donated to the PSD Program or they must be put back onboard a catcher
vessel and discarded at sea. This proposed rule would apply these
regulations only to catcher vessels and processors participating in the
BS pollock fishery, because these requirements are needed to obtain an
accurate count of all salmon bycatch for Chinook salmon PSC
allocations.
NMFS is proposing to remove the retention requirements in Sec.
679.21(c) from participants in other BSAI trawl fisheries and the AI
pollock fishery because it is not necessary to count each salmon in
these other fisheries. Estimates of salmon bycatch for the other BSAI
trawl fisheries, including the AI pollock fishery, would continue to be
based on data collected by observers and extrapolation of bycatch rates
derived from observer data to unobserved vessels. Moreover, all vessels
and processors would continue to be required to report the number of
discarded salmon by species in their landings or production reports.
Current methods are adequate to estimate salmon bycatch in these other
BSAI fisheries because, under current regulations, the salmon caught in
these other fisheries (except AI pollock) does not accrue against the
Chinook or non-Chinook PSC limits. Chinook salmon bycatch in the AI
pollock fishery would continue to be managed with a trigger cap that
closes the AI Chinook Salmon Savings Area. Current methods of
estimating Chinook salmon bycatch are adequate to manage this area
closure, if it is triggered during any AI pollock fishery in the
future. Because the retention requirement would be removed from Sec.
697.21(c), this proposed rule would also remove the prohibition at
Sec. 679.7(c)(1) that prohibits the discard of any salmon taken with
trawl gear in a BSAI groundfish fishery.
The proposed rule also would standardize language related to the
discard of salmon. Current regulations at Sec. 679.21(b) require that,
with several exceptions, prohibited species be returned to the sea
immediately, with a minimum of injury, regardless of condition. A
similar regulation at Sec. 679.21(c)(5) requires that salmon bycatch,
with the exception of those donated to the PSD program, be returned to
Federal waters (Federal waters are defined in Sec. 679.2 as waters
within the EEZ off Alaska). The requirements for discard of salmon
bycatch in Federal waters were implemented under the final rule for
Amendment 25 to the FMP (59 FR 9492; April 20, 1994). Neither the
proposed nor the final rule provided an explanation about why the term
``to Federal waters'' was applied to the discard of salmon and NMFS
cannot identify a reason to have this different language for PSC in
general versus salmon bycatch. NMFS proposes to standardize the
language so that salmon not required to be retained by other
regulations would be required to be returned to the sea and to remove
reference to requiring discard of salmon specifically in Federal
waters.
Other Proposed Regulatory Amendments
Revisions to Current Salmon Bycatch Management Measures
This proposed rule would remove regulations at Sec.
679.21(e)(1)(vi) for the 29,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit that
[[Page 14033]]
triggers closure of the Chinook Salmon Savings Area in the BS. It also
would revise Figure 8 to part 679 to remove the Chinook Salmon Savings
Areas in the BS and rename the figure ``the Aleutian Islands Chinook
Salmon Savings Area.''
This proposed rule would revise regulations at Sec. 679.21(g) to
remove Chinook salmon in the salmon bycatch reduction ICA implemented
under Amendment 84 to the FMP. The current ICA regulations apply to
Chinook and non-Chinook salmon. Under Amendment 91, all of the
regulations for the current ICA that apply to the bycatch of Chinook
salmon would be removed from Sec. 679.21(g). The section heading would
read ``Bering Sea Non-Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management.'' Regulations
that require the ICA to include VRHS components for Chinook salmon,
including the base rates, specification of Chinook Salmon Savings Area
closures and notices, and assignment of vessels in cooperatives to
tiers based on the cooperative's Chinook salmon bycatch, would be
removed.
One correction would be made to regulations currently at Sec.
679.21(g)(5)(i) that identifies the ``parties'' to the ICA as ``the AFA
cooperatives, CDQ groups, and third party groups''. The ``parties'' to
an ICA are the cooperatives and CDQ groups who have a representative
sign the ICA and agree to abide by the provisions of the ICA. The
``third party groups'' are organizations representing western Alaskans
who depend on salmon and have an interest in salmon bycatch reduction,
but do not directly fish in a groundfish fishery. These groups were
consulted in the development of the currently approved ICA and are
provided information about activities conducted under the ICA, but
representatives of these organizations do not sign the ICA. Therefore,
they are not considered ``parties'' to the ICA.
The proposed rule also would remove the exemptions from the Chinook
Salmon Savings Area closures for vessel operators and CDQ groups that
participate in the ICA. Although NMFS regulations would no longer
require that the ICA include Chinook salmon in a VRHS system, the
industry could continue to include Chinook salmon in their program on a
voluntary basis.
Revisions to Current AFA Annual Reporting Requirements
This proposed rule would require that the pollock industry submit
three different annual reports to the Council by April 1 of each year.
(1) The AFA cooperative annual reports that have been required
since 2002 (Sec. 679.61(f)); the proposed rule would revise this
report by moving two requirements to a new non-Chinook salmon ICA
annual report.
(2) The ICA Annual Report; this proposed rule would add a new
report at Sec. 679.21(g)(4) for the non-Chinook salmon ICA that
includes two components that are currently required to be submitted in
the AFA cooperative annual reports.
(3) The Chinook salmon IPA annual report; this proposed rule would
add a new report at Sec. 679.21(f)(12)(vii) that would contain the
requirements recommended by the Council under Amendment 91 and
described earlier in the preamble to this proposed rule.
Under regulations implementing the AFA (67 FR 79692; December 30,
2002), the AFA cooperatives are required to submit to the Council each
year a preliminary and a final report describing their pollock fishing
(see Sec. 679.61(f)). The AFA cooperative annual reports are required
to provide information about how the cooperative allocated pollock,
other groundfish species, and prohibited species among the vessels in
the cooperative; the catch of these species by area by each vessel in
the cooperative; information about how the cooperative monitored
fishing by its members; and a description of any actions taken by the
cooperative to penalize vessels that exceeded the catch and PSC
allocations made to the vessel by the cooperative. The preliminary AFA
cooperative reports are due to the Council by December 1 of the year in
which the pollock fishing occurred. The final AFA cooperative reports
are due by February 1 of the following year.
Additional information requirements about salmon bycatch were added
to the annual AFA cooperative reports under Amendment 84 (72 FR 61070;
October 29, 2007). Under that final rule, the AFA cooperatives are
required to (1) Report the number of salmon taken by species and
season, (2) estimate the number of salmon avoided as demonstrated by
the movement of fishing effort away from the salmon savings area, (3)
include the results of the compliance audit, and (4) list each vessel's
number of appearances on the weekly ``dirty 20'' lists for both salmon
species.
Since implementation of these requirements in 2007, NMFS has
realized that while some of the information required in the annual
report is appropriate for the AFA cooperatives to include in their
annual reports, some of the information is more appropriately reported
in a separate report from the non-Chinook salmon ICA representative.
These requirements are to ``estimate the number of salmon avoided as
demonstrated by the movement of fishing effort away from the salmon
savings area'', and to ``include the results of the compliance audit.''
These data elements provide information about the performance of the
non-Chinook salmon ICA as a whole. The estimated number of all salmon
avoided by actions taken under the non-Chinook salmon ICA is
information provided by all participants and not for individual vessels
or cooperatives. Similarly, the compliance audit is an evaluation of
the non-Chinook salmon ICA as a whole. Therefore, the annual report of
this information is more appropriately contained in a single report to
the Council by the ICA representative for all ICA participants as a
whole.
Two components added to the AFA cooperative annual report
requirements under Amendment 84 would continue to be required to be
submitted in the cooperative annual reports; report the number of
salmon taken by species and season, and list each vessel's number of
appearances on the weekly ``dirty 20'' lists. The requirement for
information about each vessel's number of appearances on the weekly
``dirty 20'' list would be revised to apply this only to non-Chinook
salmon because the requirement is related to performance under what
would be the non-Chinook salmon ICAs in the future.
The revision to the annual reporting requirements would reduce the
information collection burden on the AFA cooperatives and would not
increase the information collection burden on the ICA, because, in
2009, the ICA representative prepared a single annual report about
these two elements of the ICA (salmon saved and the compliance audit),
and the AFA cooperatives referenced this separate report in their
individual annual reports.
This proposed rule would change the deadline for the AFA
cooperative annual report from February 1 to April 1. It also would
establish the deadline for the receipt of the annual report by the
Council for the representative of the non-Chinook salmon ICA as April 1
of the year following the year in which the fishing activity occurred.
These deadlines would coincide with the April 1 deadline in this
proposed rule for the new annual report that would be submitted to the
Council about the Chinook salmon IPAs. Having the same deadline for all
three of these reports would allow the Council to discuss any of these
annual reports at one time at its April Council meeting.
Revisions to Definitions at 50 CFR 679.2
This proposed rule would revise the definitions for a ``Fishing
trip'' and
[[Page 14034]]
``Observed or observed data'' and remove definitions for ``Bycatch
rate'' and ``Fishing month.''
Proposed revisions to the definition of ``Fishing trip'' in Sec.
679.2 would allow for post-delivery transfers of Chinook salmon PSC
allocations. In addition to these revisions, NMFS proposes to revise
the heading of the first definition of a fishing trip to more
accurately describe the circumstances in part 679 under which this
definition of a fishing trip applies. Currently, the first definition
of a fishing trip applies to retention requirements including maximum
retainable amounts, improved retention/improved utilization, and
pollock roe stripping. However, this definition of a fishing trip also
applies to its use in the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in
Sec. 679.5. Under this proposed rule, the heading for the first
definition of a fishing trip would be revised to add ``R&R requirements
under Sec. 679.5'' to reflect the full scope of the current
application of this definition in part 679.
Paragraph Sec. 679.21(f) has been reserved since regulations
implementing the vessel incentive program (VIP) were repealed (73 FR
12898; March 11, 2008); however, there are three definitions in Sec.
679.2 that refer to Sec. 679.21(f): ``Bycatch rate''; ``Observed or
observed data''; and ``Fishing month''. Although these references do
not conflict with any programs at this time, these definitions would
not be consistent with the proposed regulations implementing Amendment
91 at Sec. 679.21(f).
NMFS proposes revising the definition of ``Observed or observed
data'' in Sec. 679.2 because the definition includes two references to
the repealed VIP. First, NMFS would remove the reference to Sec.
679.21(f). Second, NMFS would remove from the paragraph the phrase
``observed data'', which refers to components of the VIP and does not
appear elsewhere in 50 CFR part 679. This proposed rule would revise
the definition for ``observed'' to more accurately define the term as
used in regulations to describe the observations of observers in regard
to subpart E of 50 CFR part 679.
This proposed rule would also remove two definitions that were
implemented in support of the VIP. The term bycatch rate is used
extensively in regulation: Sec. 679.21 (existing), Sec. 679.21
(proposed), and Sec. 679.25; however, the two usages of bycatch rate
defined in Sec. 679.2 were specific to the repealed VIP. Likewise, the
definition for ``Fishing month'' would be removed because it was
specific to the VIP and does not appear elsewhere in 50 CFR part 679.
Classification
Pursuant to sections 304(b) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act,
the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule
is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration of
comments received during the public comment period.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)
A final EIS and RIR were prepared to serve as the central decision-
making documents for the Secretary of Commerce to approve, disapprove,
or partially approve Amendment 91, and for NMFS to implement Amendment
91 through Federal regulations. The EIS was prepared to disclose the
expected impacts of this action and its alternatives on the human
environment. The RIR for this action was prepared to assess the costs
and benefits of available regulatory alternatives.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
An IRFA was prepared for this action, as required by section 603 of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA for this proposed action
describes the reasons why this action is being proposed; the objectives
and legal basis for the proposed rule; the number of small entities to
which the proposed rule would apply; any projected reporting,
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements of the proposed rule;
any overlapping, duplicative, or conflicting Federal rules; and any
significant alternatives to the proposed rule that would accomplish the
stated objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and any other applicable
statutes, and would minimize any significant adverse economic impacts
of the proposed rule on small entities. Descriptions of the proposed
action, its purpose, and the legal basis are contained earlier in this
preamble and are not repeated here. A summary of the IRFA follows. A
copy of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by the Proposed
Action. The proposed action applies only to those entities that
participate in the directed pollock trawl fishery in the BS. These
entities include the AFA-affiliated pollock fleet and the six CDQ
groups that receive allocations of BS pollock.
Table 4--Summary of Small and Large Entities for Regulatory Flexibility Act Purposes and Number of Vessels,
Inshore Processors, and CDQ Groups
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Directly
Entity class Units regulated by Small Non-small
action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catcher/processors.................... Vessels................. Yes 0 16
Motherships........................... Vessels................. Yes 0 3
Catcher vessels....................... Vessels................. Yes 0 90
Inshore processors.................... Plants (including fixed Yes 0 7
floating platforms).
CDQ groups............................ Non-profit organizations Yes 6 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RFA requires a consideration of affiliations among entities for
the purpose of assessing if an entity is small. The AFA pollock
cooperatives are a type of affiliation. All of the non-CDQ entities
directly regulated by the proposed action were members of AFA
cooperatives in 2008 and, therefore, NMFS considers them ``affiliated''
large (non-small) entities for RFA purposes.
Due to their status as non-profit corporations, the six CDQ groups
are identified as ``small'' entities. This proposed action directly
regulates the six CDQ groups and NMFS considers the CDQ groups to be
small entities for RFA purposes. As described in regulations
implementing the RFA (13 CFR 121.103) the CDQ groups' affiliations with
other large entities do not define them as large entities. Revenue
derived from groundfish allocations and investments in BSAI fisheries
enable these non-profit corporations to better comply with the burdens
of this action, when compared
[[Page 14035]]
to many of the large AFA-affiliated entities. Nevertheless, the only
small entities that are directly regulated by this action are the six
CDQ groups.
Description of the CDQ Groups. The CDQ Program was designed to
improve the social and economic conditions in western Alaska
communities by facilitating their economic participation in the BSAI
fisheries. In aggregate, CDQ groups share a 10 percent allocation of
the BSAI pollock TAC. The CDQ Program also receives allocations of
other groundfish TAC that range from 10.7 percent for Amendment 80
species, to 7.5 percent for most other species; however, these
allocated amounts are not affected by this action. These allocations,
in turn, provide an opportunity for residents of these communities to
participate in and benefit from the BSAI fisheries through their
association with one of the CDQ groups. The 65 communities, with
approximately 27,000 total residents, benefit from participation in the
CDQ Program, but are not directly regulated by this action. The six
non-profit corporations (CDQ groups), formed to manage and administer
the CDQ allocations, investments, and economic development projects are
the Aleutian Pribilof Island Community Development Association
(APICDA), the Bristol Bay Economic Development Corporation (BBEDC), the
Central Bering Sea Fishermen's Association (CBSFA), the Coastal
Villages Region Fund (CVRF), the Norton Sound Economic Development
Corporation (NSEDC), and the Yukon Delta Fisheries Development
Association (YDFDA).
The pollock fishery harvest provides millions of dollars in revenue
to western Alaska CDQ communities through various channels, including
the direct catch and sale or leasing of quota to various harvesting
partners. The vessels harvesting CDQ pollock are the same vessels
conducting AFA non-CDQ pollock harvesting. In addition to pollock
allocations, CDQ groups have made significant investments in the at-sea
pollock fleet. In 2007, the six CDQ groups held approximately $543
million in assets and had invested more than $140 million in fishery-
related projects, including, but not limited to, the pollock industry.
Complete descriptions of the CDQ groups, and the impacts of this
action, are located in sections 2.5 and 6.10.3 of the RIR (see
ADDRESSES).
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules. No
duplication, overlap, or conflict between this proposed action and
existing federal rules has been identified.
Description of Significant Alternatives that Minimize Adverse
Impacts on Small Entities. The Council considered an extensive and
elaborate series of alternatives, options, and suboptions as it
designed and evaluated ways to minimize Chinook salmon bycatch in the
BS pollock fishery. The EIS presents the five alternative management
actions, including combinations of various alternatives and options
that emerged from this vetting process: Alternative 1: Status quo (no
action); Alternative 2: hard cap; Alternative 3: triggered closures;
Alternative 4: hard caps with an intercooperative agreement; and
Alternative 5: the preferred alternative of PSC limits with an
incentive plan agreement and performance standard.
As the preferred alternative, Alternative 5 constitutes the
``proposed action''. The remaining four alternatives (in various
combinations of options and suboptions) constitute the suite of
significant alternatives, under the proposed action, for RFA purposes.
Each is addressed below. For more detail, please refer to section 2.5
of the EIS (see ADDRESSES) where the accompanying components are
presented with the corresponding impact analyses. Data on cost and
operating structure within the CDQ sector are unavailable, so a wholly
quantitative evaluation of the size and distribution of burdens cannot
be provided. The following is a summary of the contents of those more
extensive analyses, specifically focusing on the aspects which pertain
to small entities.
Under the status quo alternative (Alternative 1), the Chinook
Salmon Savings Areas creates separate non-CDQ and CDQ Chinook salmon
PSC limits in the BS. The Chinook Salmon Savings Area triggered
closures occur upon attainment of Chinook salmon PSC limits. The CDQ
Program receives allocations of 7.5 percent of the Chinook salmon PSC
limit (or 2,175 Chinook salmon), as prohibited species quota (PSQ)
reserve. NMFS further allocates PSQ reserves among the six CDQ groups,
based on a recommendation by the State of Alaska in 2005. The State of
Alaska recommended that the percentage allocation of Chinook salmon PSC
and non-Chinook salmon PSC among the CDQ groups be the same as the CDQ
groups' percentage allocations of pollock. The percentage allocation of
Chinook salmon PSC by CDQ group is as follows: APICDA (14 percent),
BBEDC (21 percent), CBSFA (5 percent), CVRF (24 percent), NSEDC (22
percent), and YDFDC (14 percent). Allocations of Salmon PSQ to the CDQ
groups are made to the specific entities, but are transferable among
entities within the CDQ Program. In 2008 and 2009, all CDQ groups were
voluntarily participating in an ICA, so they were exempt from the
closure of the Chinook Salmon Savings Area.
Alternative 1 would likely impose the least burden on the CDQ
groups, because it does not impose a Chinook salmon PSC limit that
could prevent the full harvest of their respective pollock allocations.
However, the Council found that the conservation objective that was the
basis for approving Amendment 84 had not been achieved, and the Council
remains concerned that the status quo management has the potential for
high amounts of Chinook salmon bycatch as experienced in 2007.
The hard cap alternative (Alternative 2) would establish an upper
limit to Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS pollock fishery. A range of
suboption caps, from 29,323 to 87,500 Chinook salmon, were considered,
based on various averages of Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS pollock
trawl fishery over a range of historical year combinations from 1997
through 2006. All Chinook salmon caught by vessels participating in the
directed pollock fishery would accrue toward the cap. Under this
alternative, upon reaching a Chinook salmon PSC limit, all directed
pollock fishing must stop, regardless of potential forgone pollock
harvests.
As described in the EIS section 2.2 (see ADDRESSES), this hard cap
alternative includes several different options for management of a PSC
limit, including separate PSC limits for the CDQ Program and the
remaining AFA sectors and hard caps divided by season, by sector, or a
combination of both. In addition, the Council included an option to
allow small entities (i.e., CDQ groups) and non-CDQ groups to transfer
Chinook PSC allocations among sectors, between the A and B seasons, or
a combination of both, that would allow small entities more flexibility
to harvest the full TAC in high Chinook salmon encounter years.
Regardless of the hard cap level or allocation option chosen, the
establishment of an upper limit on the amount of Chinook salmon bycatch
in the BS pollock fishery, this prohibition would require participants
in the CDQ Program to stop directed fishing for pollock, if a hard cap
was reached, because further directed fishing for pollock would likely
result in exceeding the Chinook salmon cap. As section 6.10 of the
analysis in the RIR demonstrates (see ADDRESSES), the lower the hard
cap selected, the higher the probability of a fishery closure, and the
greater the potential for forgone pollock revenues.
Although this alternative would have established an upper limit to
Chinook salmon bycatch, the hard cap alternative
[[Page 14036]]
alone would fail to promote Chinook salmon avoidance during years of
low salmon encounter rates and could result in a loss of revenues to
CDQ groups, due to the closure of the fishery before the TAC has been
harvested. Additionally, this alternative could create a race for
Chinook salmon bycatch, similar to a race for fish in an open-access
fishery, which could increase the likelihood of wasteful fishing
practices, a truncated directed fishing season, forgone pollock
harvest, and of not achieving optimum yield. This proposed rule
includes components of Alternative 2 that would limit the burden on
these smaller entities and further increases flexibility for small
entities through an IPA to minimize Chinook bycatch at all levels of
salmon or pollock abundance, while establishing an upper limit on
Chinook salmon bycatch.
During public comment, the Council received varying perspectives
from CDQ participants on the costs and benefits of the range of PSC
limits under consideration. NMFS received written comments from three
of the six CDQ groups. While two CDQ groups (BBEDC and YDFDA) argued
for a lower cap than this proposed rule provides, it was asserted by
some, (including members of CVRF communities) that a hard cap higher
than 68,000 Chinook salmon would increase the possibility that they
could both harvest their full pollock allocation, under AFA, and
receive full royalty and profit-sharing payments from those
allocations. The importance of the pollock resource, as a source of
revenue for these small entities, indicates that any loss of pollock
catch represents an increased economic burden on the CDQ groups (small
entities). Public comment from CDQ members revealed the complexity of
the issue for CDQ groups and communities. Although CDQ communities
derive revenue from pollock and other BSAI fisheries, many of these CDQ
stakeholders also depend on sustainable Chinook salmon runs for
subsistence, cultural, and spiritual practices; therefore, this issue
is not strictly a matter of finances. The Council ultimately rejected
Alternative 2 in recognition that a hard cap alone would not achieve
the Council's objectives for this action.
The modified area triggered closure alternative (Alternative 3) is
similar to the status quo in that regulatory time and area closures
would be invoked when specified Chinook salmon PSC limits are reached,
although NMFS would remove the VRHS ICA exemptions to the closed areas.
This alternative would incorporate new cap levels for triggered
closures, sector allocations, and transfer provisions and could impose
a lower burden on the CDQ groups than the preferred alternative. If
triggered, NMFS would only close the seasonal areas to directed pollock
fishing. This alternative would not necessarily prevent small entities
from the full harvest of their pollock TAC, because fishing effort
outside of the closed areas could continue until the fishing season
ended.
While Alternative 3 appears to reduce the economic impacts of
forgone pollock revenue on small entities, when compared to the hard
cap alternative, it does not provide any incentive to minimize Chinook
salmon bycatch below the trigger amount. This alternative would not
achieve the Council's objective for the proposed action because it
shifts the fleets fishing effort to areas that may (or, as experienced
in recent seasons, may not) have a lower risk of Chinook salmon
encounters, but does not promote Chinook salmon avoidance at the vessel
level, establish an upper limit to Chinook salmon bycatch in the BS
pollock fishery, or hold the industry accountable for minimizing
Chinook salmon bycatch. Therefore, the Council found that Alternative 3
is inferior to the proposed action.
At its June 2008 meeting, the Council developed a preliminary
preferred alternative (Alternative 4) that contains components of
Alternatives 1 through 3. Alternative 4 would set a PSC limit for all
vessels participating in the BS pollock fisheries and includes
provisions for a voluntary ICA that must encourage Chinook salmon
avoidance, at all levels of pollock and Chinook salmon abundance and
encounter rates. This alternative would minimize the burden on small
entities by setting a relatively high PSC limit (68,392 Chinook
salmon), allowing participants in an ICA to share the burden of
reducing Chinook bycatch, and allowing PSC allocation transfers.
PSC allocations under Alternative 4 would have limited the burden
on the small entities by increasing their annual allocation of the
Chinook salmon PSC limit. Under component 2 of this alternative, a
sector's allocation of Chinook salmon bycatch would be calculated at 75
percent historical bycatch and 25 percent AFA pollock quota, with
allowances for the CDQ sector. Estimates of historic bycatch in the CDQ
sector were based on lower bycatch hauls when compared to non-CDQ
sectors, due in part to agreement with the catcher/processor fleet
contracted to harvest pollock on behalf of the CDQ sector. These biased
historical bycatch estimates would have resulted in a lower initial
allocation of Chinook salmon to CDQ groups, potentially increasing
forgone revenue loss for small entities. Therefore, component 2
estimates the historic CDQ bycatch rates by blending CDQ bycatch rates
with those of sectors harvesting pollock on behalf of the CDQ groups.
The resulting higher PSC allocations would decrease the probability of
forgone pollock revenue and the financial burden of this action on the
CDQ groups. NMFS provides a further description of the sector
allocation in section 2.4 of the EIS (see ADDRESSES).
During public comment on the Draft EIS, a different sector
allocation was proposed to Alternative 4 component 2. The suggested
allocation would further reduce the burden on the small entities by
allocating Chinook salmon based on 25 percent history and 75 percent
AFA pollock allocation. Such an allocation would further benefit CDQ
groups by increasing the Chinook salmon PSC allocations to the CDQ
groups above the amount provided under component 2 of Alternative 4.
The Council considered and rejected this suggestion because such an
allocation would not adequately represent the different fishing
practices and patterns each sector uses to fully harvest their pollock
allocations.
Despite the advantages of Alternative 4, the Council did not
recommend this alternative, noting that it failed to meet the Chinook
salmon conservation objective of this action, by setting too high of a
PSC limit and by not establishing a performance standard to promote and
ensure that the pollock fishery minimized Chinook salmon bycatch.
However, the preferred alternative retained component 2 from
Alternative 4, which is designed to reduce the economic burden on the
CDQ groups.
No additional alternatives were identified to those analyzed in the
EIS, RIR, and IRFA that had the potential to further reduce the
economic burden on small entities, while achieving the objectives of
this action. The EIS contains a detailed discussion of alternatives
considered and eliminated from further analysis (see ADDRESSES).
This proposed rule includes performance, rather than design
standards, to minimize Chinook salmon bycatch, while limiting the
burden on CDQ groups. A system of transferable PSC allocations and a
performance standard would allow CDQ groups to decide how best to
comply with the requirements of this action, given the other
constraints imposed on the pollock fishery (e.g., pollock TAC, market
conditions, area closures associated with other rules, gear
[[Page 14037]]
restrictions, climate and oceanographic change).
Recordkeeping and reporting requirements. In addition to revising
some existing requirements, this rule would add recordkeeping and
reporting requirements needed to implement the preferred alternative
including those related to--
Reporting Chinook salmon bycatch by vessels directed
fishing for pollock in the BS;
Applications to receive transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations;
Applications to transfer Chinook salmon PSC allocations to
another eligible entity;
Development and submission of proposed IPAs and amendments
to approved IPAs; and
An annual report from the participants in each IPA,
documenting information and data relevant to the BS Chinook salmon
bycatch management program.
The CDQ groups enter contracts with partner vessels to harvest
their pollock allocations. Many of these vessels are at least partially
owned by the CDQ groups. Although the accounting of Chinook salmon
bycatch by partner vessels fishing under CDQ allocations would accrue
against each respective CDQ group's seasonal PSC limit, most of the
recordkeeping, reporting, and compliance requirements necessary to
implement the preferred alternative would apply to the vessels
harvesting pollock, and to the processors processing pollock delivered
by catcher vessels. For example, landings and production reports that
include information about Chinook salmon bycatch are required to be
submitted by processors, under existing requirements at Sec. 679.5.
The CDQ groups already receive transferable Chinook and non-Chinook
salmon PSC allocations and have received such allocations under the CDQ
Program since 1999. Therefore, NMFS would not require CDQ groups to
apply for recognition as entities eligible to receive transferable PSC
allocations of Chinook salmon. The CDQ groups are already authorized to
transfer their salmon PSC allocations to and from other CDQ groups,
using existing transfer applications submitted to NMFS.
New under this proposed action is the authorization for the CDQ
groups to transfer Chinook salmon PSC allocations to and from AFA
entities, outside of the CDQ Program, including the AFA inshore
cooperatives and the entities representing the AFA catcher/processor
sector and the AFA mothership sector. Because of this new feature, CDQ
groups would use a new, different application to transfer Chinook PSC;
all other transfers by CDQ groups would continue to be accomplished
using the CDQ or PSQ Transfer Application. The existing application
would be revised to provide this instruction.
Participation in an IPA to reduce Chinook salmon bycatch is
voluntary, but it is necessary to receive transferable allocations of a
portion of the higher Chinook salmon PSC limit of 60,000. Therefore, it
is likely that the CDQ groups would participate in an IPA. They may
participate in an IPA together with members of the other AFA sectors or
they may develop an IPA that applies only to vessels while they are
fishing on behalf of a CDQ group. In either case, submission and
approval of a proposed IPA is necessary. In addition, filing of an
annual report by the participants of each IPA also would be necessary.
If the CDQ groups participate in an IPA together with members of other
sectors, the CDQ groups would share in the costs of developing the IPA.
However, the time and cost involved in developing and submitting a
proposed IPA, amendments to the IPA, and the annual report would be
less per CDQ group than it would be if the CDQ groups developed an IPA
that just applied to the CDQ groups.
The professional skills necessary to prepare the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements that would apply to the CDQ groups under
this proposed rule include the ability to read, write, and understand
English; the ability to use a computer and the Internet to submit
electronic transfer request applications; and the authority to take
actions on behalf of the CDQ group. Each of the six CDQ groups has
executive and administrative staff capable of complying with the
reporting and recordkeeping requirements of this proposed rule and the
financial resources to contract for any additional legal or technical
expertise that they require to advise them.
Tribal Summary Impact Statement (E.O. 13175)
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 NMFS in
matters affecting tribal interests. Section 161 of Public Law No. 108-
199 (188 Stat. 452), as amended by section 518 of Public Law No. 109-
447 (118 Stat. 3267), extends the consultation requirements of
Executive Order 13175 to Alaska Native corporations.
NMFS is obligated to consult and coordinate with federally
recognized tribal governments and Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
regional and village corporations on a government-to-government basis
pursuant to Executive Order 13175 which establishes several
requirements for NMFS, including: (1) Regular and meaningful
consultation and collaboration with Indian tribal governments and
Alaska Native corporations in the development of federal regulatory
practices that significantly or uniquely affect their communities; (2)
to reduce the imposition of unfunded mandates on Indian tribal
governments; (3) and to streamline the applications process for and
increase the availability of waivers to Indian tribal governments. This
Executive Order requires federal agencies to have an effective process
to involve and consult with representatives of Indian tribal
governments in developing regulatory policies and prohibits regulations
that impose substantial, direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
communities.
Section 5(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13175 requires NMFS to
prepare a tribal summary impact statement as part of the final rule.
This statement must contain (1) A description of the extent of the
agency's prior consultation with tribal officials, (2) a summary of the
nature of their concerns, (3) the agency's position supporting the need
to issue the regulation, and (4) a statement of the extent to which the
concerns of tribal officials have been met. If the Secretary of
Commerce approves Amendment 91, a tribal impact summary statement that
summarizes and responds to issues raised in all tribal consultations on
the proposed action and describes the extent to which the concerns of
tribal officials have been met will be included in the final rule for
Amendment 91.
To start the consultation process for this action, NMFS mailed
letters to Alaska tribal governments, Alaska Native corporations, and
related organizations (``Alaska Native representatives'') on December
28, 2007, when NMFS started the EIS scoping process. The letter
provided information about the proposed action, the EIS process, and
solicited consultation and coordination with Alaska Native
representatives. NMFS received 12 letters providing scoping comments
from representatives of tribal governments and Alaska Native
Corporations, which were summarized and included in the scoping report
that can be found on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (see ADDRESSES).
[[Page 14038]]
Additionally, a number of tribal representatives and tribal
organizations provided written public comments and oral public
testimony to the Council during Council outreach meetings on Amendment
91 and at the numerous Council meetings at which Amendment 91 was
discussed.
Once the Draft EIS was released on December 5, 2008, NMFS sent
another letter to Alaska Native representatives to announce the release
of the document and to solicit comments concerning the scope and
content of the Draft EIS. The letter included a copy of the executive
summary and provided information on how to obtain a printed or
electronic copy of the Draft EIS. NMFS also mailed 23 copies of the
Draft EIS to the Alaska Native representatives who had requested a copy
or provided written comments to NMFS during scoping. NMFS received 14
letters of comment on the Draft EIS from representatives of tribal
governments, tribal organizations, or Alaska Native corporations. These
comments are summarized and responded to in the Comment Analysis Report
(CAR) in Chapter 9 of the EIS and the comment letters are posted on the
NMFS Alaska Region Web site (see ADDRESSES).
NMFS received requests for tribal consultation on Amendment 91 from
representatives of the following eight Federally recognized tribes: the
Nome Eskimo Community, Chinik Eskimo Community (representing the
village of Golovin), the Stebbins Community Association, the Native
Village of Unalakleet, the Native Village of Kwigillingok, the Native
Village of Kipnuk, the Alakanuk Tribal Council, and the Emmonak Tribal
Council. The Alaska tribal representatives' concerns raised during
these consultations were summarized and responded to in the EIS (see
ADDRESSES).
NMFS held a tribal consultation in Nome, AK, on January 22, 2009,
in conjunction with a Council outreach meeting on Chinook salmon
bycatch. Consulting in person with NMFS in Nome were representatives of
the Nome Eskimo Community, the Chinik Eskimo Community, and the Native
Village of Elim. Consulting by telephone were representatives of the
Stebbins Community Association and the Native Village of Unalakleet.
Council staff provided information on the Draft EIS, the alternatives,
and the schedule for Council action. As part of the consultation, NMFS
staff provided additional information and then listened to the concerns
and issues raised by the tribal representatives. The Nome Eskimo
Community submitted a letter to NMFS with its comments on the Draft EIS
during the tribal consultation.
NMFS also held a tribal consultation teleconference on March 17,
2009, with the Native Village of Kwigillingok and the Bering Sea Elders
Advisory Group. The Regional Administrator provided information about
the upcoming final action by the Council and the Draft EIS comment
period. On October 19, 2009, NMFS held a tribal consultation via
teleconference with the Alakanuk Tribal Council and the Native Village
of Kipnuk. The Regional Administrator provided information on the
Chinook and chum salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea in 2009 and listened
to the concerns and issues raised by the tribal representatives. NMFS
is continuing to engage the Emmonak Tribal Council and anticipates a
consultation early in 2010.
Following the releases of the final EIS and RIR on December 7,
2009, NMFS sent another letter to Alaska Native representatives to
announce the release of the EIS and provide information on
participating in the rulemaking process. The letter included a copy of
the EIS and RIR executive summary and provided information on how to
obtain a printed or electronic copy of the EIS and RIR. NMFS also
mailed 28 copies of the EIS and RIR to the Alaska Native
representatives who requested a copy or who had provided written
comments to NMFS on the EIS.
NMFS will continue the consultation process by sending another
letter to all Alaska Native representatives when the NOA for Amendment
91 and this proposed rule are published in the Federal Register
notifying them of the opportunity to comment.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA). These requirements have been submitted to OMB for approval. The
collections are listed below by OMB control number.
OMB Control No. NEW
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 40
hours for AFA Catch Monitoring and Control Plan (CMCP); 5 minutes for
Inspection Request for Inshore CMCP; 8 hours for CMCP Addendum; 1 hour
for Electronic Monitoring System; 2 hours for Inspection Request for
Electronic Monitoring System.
OMB Control No. NEW
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 30
minutes for CDQ Groundfish or Non-Chinook PSQ Transfer Request; and 30
minutes for CDQ Chinook Salmon PSQ Transfer Request.
OMB Control No. 0393
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 8
hours for Application for Approval As An Entity to Receive Transferable
Chinook Salmon PSC Allocation and 15 minutes for Application for
Transfer of Chinook Salmon PSC Allocations.
OMB Control No. NEW
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 40
hours for Application for Proposed (Chinook) Incentive Plan Agreement
(IPA), 8 hours for (Chinook) IPA annual report, 40 hours for initial
(non-Chinook) Inter-Cooperative Agreement (ICA), 8 hours for (non-
Chinook) ICA annual report, 12 hours annual AFA cooperative report, 5
minutes for IPA agent of service (this item will be removed because it
is part of the ICA), 5 minutes for ICA agent of service (this item will
be removed because it is part of the IPA).
OMB Control No. 0515
Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 30
minutes for eLandings Catcher/Processor Trawl Gear Electronic Logbook
and 31 minutes for eLandings Mothership Electronic Logbook.
Public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to (NMFS
Alaska Region) at the ADDRESSES above, and e-mail to [email protected], or fax to 202-395-7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless
[[Page 14039]]
that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control
Number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Dated: March 15, 2010.
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 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447.
2. In Sec. 679.2,
A. Remove the definitions for ``Bycatch rate'', ``Chinook Salmon
Savings Area of the BSAI'', ``Fishing month'', ``Observed or observed
data'', and ``Salmon bycatch reduction intercooperative agreement
(ICA)'';
B. In the definition for ``Fishing trip'' revise paragraph (1)
introductory text, paragraph (1)(i) introductory text, and paragraph
1(ii), and add new paragraph (6);
C. Add new definitions for ``Agent for service of process'',
``Chinook salmon bycatch incentive plan agreement (IPA)'', ``Non-
Chinook salmon bycatch reduction intercooperative agreement (ICA)'',
and ``Observed''.
The addition and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Agent for service of process means, for purposes of Sec.
679.21(f), a person appointed by the members of an AFA inshore
cooperative, a CDQ group, or an entity representing the AFA catcher/
processor sector or the AFA mothership sector, who is authorized to
receive and respond to any legal process issued in the United States
with respect to all owners and operators of vessels that are members of
the inshore cooperative, the entity representing the catcher/processor
sector, the entity representing the mothership sector, or the entity
representing the cooperative or a CDQ group and owners of all vessels
directed fishing for pollock CDQ on behalf of that CDQ group.
* * * * *
Chinook salmon bycatch incentive plan agreement (IPA) is a
voluntary private contract, approved by NMFS under Sec. 679.21(f)(12),
that establishes incentives for participants to avoid Chinook salmon
bycatch while directed fishing for pollock in the Bering Sea subarea.
* * * * *
Fishing trip means:
(1) Retention requirements (MRA, IR/IU, and pollock roe stripping)
and R&R requirements under Sec. 679.5.
(i) Catcher/processors and motherships. An operator of a catcher/
processor or mothership processor vessel is engaged in a fishing trip
from the time the harvesting, receiving, or processing of groundfish is
begun or resumed in an area until any of the following events occur:
* * * * *
(ii) Catcher vessels. An operator of a catcher vessel is engaged in
a fishing trip from the time the harvesting of groundfish is begun
until the offload or transfer of all fish or fish product from that
vessel.
* * * * *
(6) For purposes of Sec. 679.7(d)(9) for CDQ groups and Sec.
679.7(k)(8)(ii) for AFA entities, the period beginning when a vessel
operator commences harvesting any pollock that will accrue against a
directed fishing allowance for pollock in the BS or against a pollock
CDQ allocation harvested in the BS and ending when the vessel operator
offloads or transfers any processed or unprocessed pollock from that
vessel.
* * * * *
Non-Chinook salmon bycatch reduction intercooperative agreement
(ICA) is a voluntary non-Chinook salmon bycatch avoidance agreement, as
described at Sec. 679.21(g) and approved by NMFS, for directed pollock
fisheries in the Bering Sea subarea.
* * * * *
Observed means observed by one or more observers (see subpart E of
this part).
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 679.5,
A. Revise paragraphs (e)(10)(iii)(M), (f)(1)(iv), (f)(7)
introductory text, and paragraph (f)(7)(i); and
B. Add paragraph (f)(1)(vii).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(10) * * *
(iii) * * *
(M) PSC numbers--(1) Non-AFA catcher/processors and all
motherships. Daily number of PSC animals (Pacific salmon, steelhead
trout, Pacific halibut, king crabs, and Tanner crabs) by species codes
and discard and disposition codes.
(2) AFA and CDQ catcher/processors. The operator of an AFA catcher/
processor or any catcher/processor harvesting pollock CDQ must enter
daily the number of non-salmon PSC animals (Pacific halibut, king
crabs, and Tanner crabs) by species codes and discard and disposition
codes. Salmon PSC animals are entered into the electronic logbook as
described in paragraphs (f)(1)(iv) and (v) of this section.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(iv) Catcher/processor trawl gear ELB. Except as described in
paragraph (f)(1)(vii) of this section, the operator of a catcher/
processor using trawl gear may use a combination of a NMFS-approved
catcher/processor trawl gear ELB and eLandings to record and report
groundfish information. In the ELB, the operator may enter daily
processor identification information and catch-by-haul information. In
eLandings, the operator must enter daily processor identification,
groundfish production data, and groundfish and prohibited species
discard or disposition data.
* * * * *
(vii) AFA and CDQ trawl catcher/processors. The operator of an AFA
catcher/processor or any catcher/processor harvesting pollock CDQ must
use a combination of NMFS-approved catcher/processor trawl gear ELB and
eLandings to record and report groundfish and PSC information. In the
ELB, the operator must enter processor identification information,
catch-by-haul information, and prohibited species discard or
disposition data for all salmon species in each haul. In eLandings, the
operator must enter daily processor identification, groundfish
production data, and groundfish and daily prohibited species discard or
disposition data for all prohibited species except salmon.
* * * * *
(7) ELB data submission. The operator must transmit ELB data to
NMFS at the specified e-mail address in the following manner:
(i) Catcher/processor. Directly to NMFS as an e-mail attachment or
other NMFS-approved data transmission mechanism, by midnight each day
to record the previous day's hauls.
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 679.7,
A. Remove and reserve paragraph (c)(1);
[[Page 14040]]
B. Remove paragraphs (d)(6) and (d)(9) through (d)(23);
C. Redesignate paragraph (d)(24) as (d)(6) and paragraph (d)(25) as
(d)(9);
D. Revise paragraphs (d)(7), (d)(8);
E. Revise paragraph (k)(3)(vi); and
F. Add paragraph (k)(8).
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) Catch Accounting--(i) General--(A) For the operator of a
catcher/processor using trawl gear or a mothership, to harvest or take
deliveries of CDQ or PSQ species without a valid scale inspection
report signed by an authorized scale inspector under Sec. 679.28(b)(2)
on board the vessel.
(B) For the operator of a vessel required to have an observer
sampling station described at Sec. 679.28(d), to harvest or take
deliveries of CDQ or PSQ species without a valid observer sampling
station inspection report issued by NMFS under Sec. 679.28(d)(8) on
board the vessel.
(C) For the manager of a shoreside processor or stationary floating
processor, or the manager or operator of a buying station that is
required elsewhere in this part to weigh catch on a scale approved by
the State of Alaska under Sec. 679.28(c), to fail to weigh catch on a
scale that meets the requirements of Sec. 679.28(c).
(D) For the operator of a catcher/processor or a catcher vessel
required to carry a level 2 observer, to combine catch from two or more
CDQ groups in the same haul or set.
(E) For the operator of a catcher vessel using trawl gear or any
vessel less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA that is groundfish CDQ fishing as
defined at Sec. 679.2, to discard any groundfish CDQ species or salmon
PSQ before it is delivered to a processor unless discard of the
groundfish CDQ is required under other provisions or, in waters within
the State of Alaska, discard is required by laws of the State of
Alaska.
(F) For the operator of a vessel using trawl gear, to release CDQ
catch from the codend before it is brought on board the vessel and
weighed on a scale approved by NMFS under Sec. 679.28(b) or delivered
to a processor. This includes, but is not limited to, ``codend
dumping'' and ``codend bleeding.''
(G) For the operator of a catcher/processor using trawl gear or a
mothership, to sort, process, or discard CDQ or PSQ species before the
total catch is weighed on a scale that meets the requirements of Sec.
679.28(b), including the daily test requirements described at Sec.
679.28(b)(3).
(H) For a CDQ representative, to use methods other than those
approved by NMFS to determine the catch of CDQ and PSQ reported to NMFS
on the CDQ catch report.
(ii) Fixed gear sablefish--(A) For a CDQ group, to report catch of
sablefish CDQ for accrual against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve
if that sablefish CDQ was caught with fishing gear other than fixed
gear.
(B) For any person on a vessel using fixed gear that is fishing for
a CDQ group with an allocation of fixed gear sablefish CDQ, to discard
sablefish harvested with fixed gear unless retention of sablefish is
not authorized under Sec. 679.23(e)(4)(ii) or, in waters within the
State of Alaska, discard is required by laws of the State of Alaska.
(8) Prohibited species catch--(i) Crab--(A) Zone 1. For the
operator of an eligible vessel, to use trawl gear to harvest groundfish
CDQ in Zone 1 after the CDQ group's red king crab PSQ or C. bairdi
Tanner crab PSQ in Zone 1 is attained.
(B) Zone 2. For the operator of an eligible vessel, to use trawl
gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in Zone 2 after the CDQ group's PSQ for
C. bairdi Tanner crab in Zone 2 is attained.
(C) COBLZ. For the operator of an eligible vessel, to use trawl
gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in the C. opilio Bycatch Limitation Zone
after the CDQ group's PSQ for C. opilio Tanner crab is attained.
(ii) Salmon--(A) Discard of salmon. For any person, to discard
salmon from a catcher vessel, catcher/processor, mothership, shoreside
processor, or SFP or transfer or process any salmon under the PSD
Program at Sec. 679.26, if the salmon were taken incidental to a
directed fishery for pollock CDQ in the Bering Sea, until the number of
salmon has been determined by an observer and the collection of
scientific data or biological samples from the salmon has been
completed.
(B) Non-Chinook salmon. For the operator of an eligible vessel, to
use trawl gear to harvest pollock CDQ in the Chum Salmon Savings Area
between September 1 and October 14 after the CDQ group's non-Chinook
salmon PSQ is attained, unless the vessel is participating in a non-
Chinook salmon bycatch reduction ICA under Sec. 679.21(g).
(C) Chinook salmon--(1) Overages of Chinook salmon PSC allocations.
For a CDQ group, to exceed a Chinook salmon PSC allocation issued under
Sec. 679.21(f) as of June 25 for the A season allocation and as of
December 1 for the B season allocation.
(2) For the operator of a catcher vessel or catcher/processor, to
start a new fishing trip for pollock CDQ in the BS in the A season or
in the B season, if the CDQ group for which the vessel is fishing has
exceeded its Chinook salmon PSC allocation issued under Sec. 679.21(f)
for that season.
(3) For the operator of a catcher/processor or mothership, to catch
or process pollock CDQ in the BS without complying with the applicable
requirements of Sec. 679.28(j).
(4) For the operator of a catcher/processor or a mothership, to
begin sorting catch from a haul from a directed fishery for pollock CDQ
in the BS, until the observer has completed counting the salmon and
collecting scientific data or biological samples from the previous
haul.
(5) For the operator of a catcher vessel, to deliver pollock CDQ to
a shoreside processor or stationary floating processor that does not
have a catch monitoring and control plan approved under Sec.
679.28(g).
(6) For the operator of a catcher vessel, to start a new fishing
trip for pollock CDQ in the BS if the observer assigned to the catcher
vessel for the next fishing trip has not completed counting the salmon
and collecting scientific data or biological samples from the previous
delivery by that vessel.
* * * * *
(k) * * *
(3) * * *
(vi) Catch monitoring and control plan (CMCP)--(A) Take deliveries
or process groundfish delivered by a vessel engaged in directed fishing
for BSAI pollock without following an approved CMCP as described at
Sec. 679.28(g). A copy of the CMCP must be maintained on the premises
and made available to authorized officers or NMFS-authorized personnel
upon request.
(B) Allow sorting of fish at any location in the processing plant
other than those identified in the CMCP under Sec. 678.28(g)(7).
(C) Allow salmon of any species to pass beyond the last point where
sorting of fish occurs, as identified in the scale drawing of the
processing plant in the approved CMCP.
* * * * *
(8) Salmon bycatch--(i) Discard of salmon. For any person, to
discard any salmon from a catcher vessel, catcher/processor,
mothership, or inshore processor or transfer or process any salmon
under the PSD Program at
[[Page 14041]]
Sec. 679.26, if the salmon were taken incidental to a directed fishery
for pollock in the BS, until the number of salmon has been determined
by an observer and the collection of scientific data or biological
samples from the salmon has been completed.
(ii) Catcher/processors and motherships. For the operator of a
catcher/processor or a mothership, to begin sorting catch from a haul
from a directed fishery for pollock in the BS, until the observer has
completed counting the salmon and collecting scientific data or
biological samples from the previous haul.
(iii) Catcher vessels delivering to inshore processors. For the
operator of a catcher vessel, to start a new fishing trip for pollock
in the BS if the observer assigned to the catcher vessel for the next
fishing trip has not completed counting the salmon and collecting
scientific data or biological samples from the previous delivery by
that vessel.
(iv) Overages of Chinook salmon PSC allocations--(A) For an inshore
cooperative, the entity representing the AFA catcher/processor sector,
or the entity representing the AFA mothership sector, to exceed a
Chinook salmon PSC allocation issued under Sec. 679.21(f) as of June
25 for the A season allocation and as of December 1 for the B season
allocation.
(B) For a catcher vessel or catcher/processor, to start a fishing
trip for pollock in the BS in the A season or in the B season if the
vessel is fishing under a transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation
issued to an inshore cooperative, the entity representing the AFA
catcher/processor sector, or the entity representing the AFA mothership
sector under Sec. 679.21(f) and the inshore cooperative or entity has
exceeded its Chinook salmon PSC allocation for that season.
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 679.21,
A. Remove and reserve paragraph (a);
B. Add paragraphs (b)(6) and (f); and
C. Revise paragraphs (b)(2)(ii), (b)(3), (c), (e)(1)(vi),
(e)(3)(i)(A)(3)(i), (e)(7)(viii), (e)(7)(ix), and (g).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 679.21 Prohibited Species Bycatch Management
(a) [Reserved]
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) After allowing for sampling by an observer, if an observer is
aboard, sort its catch immediately after retrieval of the gear and,
except for salmon prohibited species catch in the BS pollock fisheries
under paragraph (c) of this section and Sec. 679.26, return all
prohibited species, or parts thereof, to the sea immediately, with a
minimum of injury, regardless of its condition.
(3) Rebuttable presumption. Except as provided under paragraph (c)
of this section and Sec. 679.26, there will be a rebuttable
presumption that any prohibited species retained on board a fishing
vessel regulated under this part was caught and retained in violation
of this section.
* * * * *
(6) Addresses. Unless otherwise specified, submit information
required under this section to NMFS as follows: by mail to the Regional
Administrator, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802; by courier to
the Office of the Regional Administrator, 709 West 9th St., Juneau, AK
99801; or by fax to 907-586-7465. Forms are available on the NMFS
Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/).
(c) Salmon taken in the BS pollock fisheries. Regulations in this
paragraph apply to vessels directed fishing for pollock in the BS,
including pollock CDQ, and processors taking deliveries from these
vessels.
(1) Salmon discard. The operator of a vessel and the manager of a
shoreside processor or SFP must not discard any salmon or transfer or
process any salmon under the PSD Program at Sec. 679.26, if the salmon
were taken incidental to a directed fishery for pollock in the BS,
until the number of salmon has been determined by the observer and the
observer's collection of any scientific data or biological samples from
the salmon has been completed.
(2) Salmon retention and storage--(i) Operators of catcher/
processors or motherships must:
(A) Sort and transport all salmon bycatch from each haul to an
approved storage location adjacent to the observer sampling station
that allows an observer free and unobstructed access to the salmon (see
Sec. 679.28(d)(2)(i) and (d)(7)). The salmon storage location must
remain in view of the observer from the observer sampling station at
all times during the sorting of the haul.
(B) If, at any point during sorting of the haul or delivery for
salmon, the salmon are too numerous to be contained in the salmon
storage location, all sorting must cease and the observer must be given
the opportunity to count the salmon in the storage location and collect
scientific data or biological samples. Once the observer has completed
all counting and sampling duties for the counted salmon, the salmon
must be removed by vessel personnel from the approved storage location,
in the presence of the observer.
(C) Before sorting of the next haul may begin, the observer must be
given the opportunity to complete the count of salmon and the
collection of scientific data or biological samples from the previous
haul.
(D) Ensure no salmon of any species pass the observer sample
collection point, as identified in the scale drawing of the observer
sample station.
(ii) Operators of vessels delivering to shoreside processors or
stationary floating processors must:
(A) Store in a refrigerated saltwater tank all salmon taken as
bycatch in trawl operations.
(B) Deliver all salmon to the processor receiving the vessel's BS
pollock catch.
(C) Before the vessel can begin a new fishing trip, the observer
assigned to that vessel for the next fishing trip must be given the
opportunity to complete the count of salmon and the collection of
scientific data or biological samples from the previous delivery.
(iii) Shoreside processors or stationary floating processors must:
(A) Comply with the requirements in Sec. 679.28(g)(7)(vii) for the
receipt, sorting, and storage of salmon from deliveries of catch from
the BS pollock fishery.
(B) Ensure no salmon of any species pass beyond the last point
where sorting of fish occurs, as identified in the scale drawing of the
plant in the CMCP.
(C) Sort and transport all salmon of any species to the observation
area by plant personnel and the salmon must remain in that observation
area and within the view of the observer at all times during the
offload.
(D) If, at any point during the offload, salmon are too numerous to
be contained in the observation area, the offload and all sorting must
cease and the observer must be given the opportunity to count the
salmon in the observation area and collect scientific data or
biological samples. The counted salmon then must be removed from the
area by plant personnel in the presence of the observer.
(E) At the completion of the offload, the observer must be given
the opportunity to count the salmon in the observation area and collect
scientific data or biological samples.
(3) Assignment of crew to assist observer. Operators of vessels and
managers of shoreside processors and SFPs that are required to retain
salmon under paragraph (c)(1) of this section must designate and
identify to the observer aboard the vessel, or at the shoreside
processor or SFP, a crew person or employee responsible for
[[Page 14042]]
ensuring all sorting, retention, and storage of salmon occurs according
to the requirements of (c)(2) of this section.
(4) Discard of salmon. Except for salmon under the PSD Program at
Sec. 679.26, all salmon must be returned to the sea as soon as is
practicable, following notification by an observer that the number of
salmon has been determined and the collection of scientific data or
biological samples has been completed.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(vi) BS Chinook salmon. See paragraph (f) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Chinook salmon. See paragraph (f) of this section for BS
Chinook salmon or paragraph (e)(1)(viii) of this section for AI Chinook
salmon.
* * * * *
(7) * * *
(viii) AI Chinook salmon. If, during the fishing year, the Regional
Administrator determines that catch of Chinook salmon, by vessels using
trawl gear while directed fishing for pollock in the AI, will reach the
annual limit of 700 Chinook salmon, as identified in paragraph
(e)(1)(viii) of this section, NMFS, by notification in the Federal
Register will close the AI Chinook Salmon Savings Area, as defined in
Figure 8 to this part, to directed fishing for pollock with trawl gear
on the following dates:
(A) From the effective date of the closure until April 15, and from
September 1 through December 31, if the Regional Administrator
determines that the annual limit of AI Chinook salmon will be attained
before April 15.
(B) From September 1 through December 31, if the Regional
Administrator determines that the annual limit of AI Chinook salmon
will be attained after April 15.
(ix) Exemptions. Trawl vessels participating in directed fishing
for pollock and operating under a non-Chinook salmon bycatch reduction
ICA approved by NMFS under paragraph (g) of this section are exempt
from closures in the Chum Salmon Savings Area described at paragraph
(e)(7)(vii) of this section. See also Sec. 679.22(a)(10) and Figure 9
to part 679.
* * * * *
(f) BS Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management--(1) Applicability. This
paragraph contains regulations governing the bycatch of Chinook salmon
in the BS pollock fishery.
(2) BS Chinook salmon prohibited species catch (PSC) limit. Each
year, NMFS will allocate to AFA sectors, listed in paragraph (f)(3)(ii)
of this section, a portion of either the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC
limit or the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit.
(i) An AFA sector will receive a portion of the 47,591 Chinook
salmon PSC limit if:
(A) No Chinook salmon bycatch incentive plan agreement (IPA) is
approved by NMFS under paragraph (f)(12) of this section; or
(B) That AFA sector has exceeded its performance standard under
paragraph (f)(6) of this section.
(ii) An AFA sector will receive a portion of the 60,000 Chinook
salmon PSC limit if:
(A) At least one IPA is approved by NMFS under paragraph (f)(12) of
this section; and
(B) That AFA sector has not exceeded its performance standard under
paragraph (f)(6) of this section.
(3) Allocations of the BS Chinook salmon PSC limits--(i) Seasonal
apportionment. NMFS will apportion the BS Chinook salmon PSC limits
annually 70 percent to the A season and 30 percent to the B season,
which are described in Sec. 679.23(e)(2)(i) and (ii).
(ii) AFA sectors. Each year, NMFS will make allocations of the
applicable BS Chinook salmon PSC limit to the following four AFA
sectors:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA sector: Eligible participants are:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Catcher/processor (C/P).. AFA catcher/processors and AFA catcher
vessels delivering to AFA catcher/
processors, all of which are permitted
under Sec. 679.4(l)(2) and Sec.
679.4(l)(3)(i)(A), respectively.
(B) Mothership............... AFA catcher vessels harvesting pollock
for processing by AFA motherships, all
of which are permitted under Sec.
679.4(l)(3)(i)(B) and Sec.
679.4(l)(4), respectively.
(C) Inshore.................. AFA catcher vessels harvesting pollock
for processing by AFA inshore
processors, all of which are permitted
under Sec. 679.4(l)(3)(i)(C).
(D) CDQ Program.............. The six CDQ groups authorized under
section 305(i)(1)(D) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act to participate in the CDQ
Program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Allocations to each AFA sector. NMFS will allocate the BS
Chinook salmon PSC limits to each AFA sector as follows:
(A) If a sector is managed under the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC
limit, the maximum amount of Chinook salmon PSC allocated to each
sector in each season and annually is:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A season B season Annual total
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA sector of of of
% Allocation Chinook % Allocation Chinook % Allocation Chinook
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) C/P................................................. 32.9 13,818 17.9 3,222 28.4 17,040
(2) Mothership.......................................... 8.0 3,360 7.3 1,314 7.8 4,674
(3) Inshore............................................. 49.8 20,916 69.3 12,474 55.6 33,390
(4) CDQ Program......................................... 9.3 3,906 5.5 990 8.2 4,896
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) If the sector is managed under the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC
limit, the sector will be allocated the following amount of Chinook
salmon PSC in each season and annually:
[[Page 14043]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A season B season Annual total
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA sector of of of
% Allocation Chinook % Allocation Chinook % Allocation Chinook
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) C/P................................................. 32.9 10,960 17.9 2,556 28.4 13,516
(2) Mothership.......................................... 8.0 2,665 7.3 1,042 7.8 3,707
(3) Inshore............................................. 49.8 16,591 69.3 9,894 55.6 26,485
(4) CDQ Program......................................... 9.3 3,098 5.5 785 8.2 3,883
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iv) Allocations to the AFA catcher/processor and mothership
sectors--(A) NMFS will issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations under paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(A) or (B) of this section to
entities representing the AFA catcher/processor sector and the AFA
mothership sector if these sectors meet the requirements of paragraph
(f)(8) of this section.
(B) If no entity is approved by NMFS to represent the AFA catcher/
processor sector or the AFA mothership sector, then NMFS will manage
that sector under a non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation
under paragraph (f)(10) of this section.
(v) Allocations to inshore cooperatives and the AFA inshore open
access fishery. NMFS will further allocate the inshore sector's Chinook
salmon PSC allocation under paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(A)(3) or (B)(3) of
this section among the inshore cooperatives and the inshore open access
fishery based on the percentage allocations of pollock to each inshore
cooperative under Sec. 679.62(a). NMFS will issue transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocations to inshore cooperatives. Any Chinook salmon PSC
allocated to the inshore open access fishery will be as a non-
transferable allocation managed by NMFS under the requirements of
paragraph (f)(10) of this section.
(vi) Allocations to the CDQ Program. NMFS will further allocate the
Chinook salmon PSC allocation to the CDQ Program under paragraph
(f)(3)(iii)(A)(4) or (B)(4) of this section among the six CDQ groups
based on each CDQ group's percentage of the CDQ Program pollock
allocation in Column B of Table 47d to this part. NMFS will issue
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations to CDQ groups.
(vii) Accrual of Chinook salmon bycatch to specific PSC
allocations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then all Chinook salmon
If a Chinook salmon PSC allocation is: bycatch:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) A transferable allocation to a by any vessel fishing under a
sector-level entity, inshore transferable allocation will
cooperative, or CDQ group under accrue against the allocation
paragraph (f)(8) of this section. to the entity representing
that vessel.
(B) A non-transferable allocation to a by any vessel fishing under a
sector or the inshore open access non-transferable allocation
fishery under paragraph (f)(10) of will accrue against the
this section. allocation established for the
sector or inshore open access
fishery, whichever is
applicable.
(C) The opt-out allocation under by any vessel fishing under the
paragraph (f)(5) of this section. opt-out allocation will accrue
against the opt-out
allocation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(viii) Public release of Chinook salmon PSC information. For each
year, NMFS will release to the public and publish on the NMFS Alaska
Region website (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/):
(A) The Chinook salmon PSC allocations for each entity receiving a
transferable allocation;
(B) The non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations;
(C) The vessels fishing under each transferable or non-transferable
allocation;
(D) The amount of Chinook salmon bycatch that accrues towards each
transferable or non-transferable allocation; and
(E) Any changes to these allocations due to transfers under
paragraph (f)(9) of this section, rollovers under paragraph (f)(11) of
this section, and deductions from the B season non-transferable
allocations under paragraphs (f)(5)(v) or (f)(10)(iii) of this section.
(4) Reduction in allocations of the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC
limit--(i) Reduction in sector allocations. NMFS will reduce the
seasonal allocation of the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit to the
catcher/processor sector, the mothership sector, the inshore sector, or
the CDQ Program under paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(A) of this section, if the
owner of any permitted AFA vessel in that sector, or any CDQ group,
does not participate in an approved IPA under paragraph (f)(12) of this
section. The amount of Chinook salmon subtracted from each sector's
allocation for those not participating in an approved IPA is calculated
as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduce the A season ... Reduce the B season ... ........................
allocation by the sum ... allocation by the sum ... ........................
of the amount of ... of the amount of ... ........................
For each sector: Chinock salmon ... Chinook salmon ... ........................
associated with each ... associated with each ... ........................
vessel or CDQ group not ... vessel or CDQ group not ... The annual amount of
(A) Catcher/processor participating in an + participating in an = Chinook salmon
IPA: IPA: subtracted from each
(B) Mothership From Column E in Table From Column F in Table sector's Chinook salmon
47a to this part 47a to this part PSC allocation listed
(C) Inshore From column E in Table From Column F in Table at paragraph
47b to this part 47b to this part (f)(3)(iii)(A) of this
(D) CDQ Program From column E in Table From Column F in Table section.
47c to this part 47c to this part
From Column C in Table From Column D in Table
47d to this part 43d to this part
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14044]]
(ii) Adjustments to the inshore sector and inshore cooperative
allocations--(A) If some members of an inshore cooperative do not
participate in an approved IPA, NMFS will only reduce the allocation to
the cooperative to which those vessels belong, or the inshore open
access fishery.
(B) If all members of an inshore cooperative do not participate in
an approved IPA, the amount of Chinook salmon that remains in the
inshore sector's allocation, after subtracting the amount in paragraph
(f)(4)(i)(C) of this section for the non-participating inshore
cooperative, will be reallocated among the inshore cooperatives
participating in an approved IPA based on the proportion each
participating cooperative represents of the Chinook salmon PSC
initially allocated among the participating inshore cooperatives that
year.
(iii) Adjustment to CDQ group allocations. If a CDQ group does not
participate in an approved IPA, the amount of Chinook salmon that
remains in the CDQ Program's allocation, after subtracting the amount
in paragraph (f)(4)(i)(D) of this section for the non-participating CDQ
group, will be reallocated among the CDQ groups participating in an
approved IPA based on the proportion each participating CDQ group
represents of the Chinook salmon PSC initially allocated among the
participating CDQ groups that year.
(iv) All members of a sector do not participate in an approved IPA.
If all members of a sector do not participate in an approved IPA, the
amount of Chinook salmon that remains after subtracting the amount in
paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section for the non-participating sector
will not be reallocated among the sectors that do have members
participating in an approved IPA. This portion of the 60,000 PSC limit
will remain unallocated for that year.
(5) Chinook salmon PSC opt-out allocation. The following table
describes requirements for the opt-out allocation:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) What is the amount of Chinook The opt-out allocation will equal
salmon PSC that will be allocated the sum of the Chinook salmon PSC
to the opt-out allocation in the deducted under paragraph (f)(4)(i)
A season and the B season? of this section from the seasonal
allocations of each sector with
members not participating in an
approved IPA.
(ii) Which participants will be Any AFA permitted vessel or any CDQ
managed under the opt-out group that is a member of a sector
allocation? eligible under paragraph (f)(2)(ii)
of this section to receive
allocations of the 60,000 PSC
limit, but that is not
participating in an approved IPA.
(iii) What Chinook salmon bycatch All Chinook salmon bycatch by
will accrue against the opt-out participants under paragraph
allocation? (f)(2)(ii) of this section.
(iv) How will the opt-out All participants under paragraph
allocation be managed? (f)(2)(ii) of this section will be
managed as a group under the
seasonal opt-out allocations. If
the Regional Administrator
determines that the seasonal opt-
out allocation will be reached,
NMFS will publish a notice in the
Federal Register closing directed
fishing for pollock in the BS, for
the remainder of the season, for
all vessels fishing under the opt-
out allocation.
(v) What will happen if Chinook NMFS will deduct from the B season
salmon bycatch by vessels fishing opt-out allocation any Chinook
under the opt-out allocation salmon bycatch in the A season that
exceeds the amount allocated to exceeds the A season opt-out
the A season opt-out allocation? allocation.
(vi) What will happen if Chinook If Chinook salmon bycatch by vessels
salmon bycatch by vessels fishing fishing under the opt-out
under the opt-out allocation is allocation in the A season is less
less than the amount allocated to than the amount allocated to the
the A season opt-out allocation? opt-out allocation in the A season,
this amount of Chinook salmon will
not be added to the B season opt-
out allocation.
(vii) Is Chinook salmon PSC No. Chinook salmon PSC allocated to
allocated to the opt-out the opt-out allocation is not
allocation transferable? transferable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Chinook salmon bycatch performance standard. If the total
annual Chinook salmon bycatch by the members of a sector participating
in an approved IPA is greater than that sector's annual threshold
amount of Chinook salmon in any three of seven consecutive years, that
sector will receive an allocation of Chinook salmon under the 47,591
PSC limit in all future years.
(i) Annual threshold amount. Prior to each fishing year, NMFS will
calculate each sector's annual threshold amount. NMFS will post the
annual threshold amount for each sector on the NMFS Alaska Region Web
site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/). At the end of each fishing
year, NMFS will evaluate the Chinook salmon bycatch by all IPA
participants in each sector against that sector's annual threshold
amount.
(ii) Calculation of the annual threshold amount. A sector's annual
threshold amount is the annual number of Chinook salmon that would be
allocated to that sector under the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit, as
shown in the table in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(B) of this section. If any
vessels in a sector do not participate in an approved IPA, NMFS will
reduce that sector's annual threshold amount by the number of Chinook
salmon associated with each vessel not participating in an approved
IPA. If any CDQ groups do not participate in an approved IPA, NMFS will
reduce the CDQ Program's annual threshold amount by the number of
Chinook salmon associated with each CDQ group not participating in an
approved IPA. NMFS will subtract the following numbers of Chinook
salmon from each sector's annual threshold amount for vessels or CDQ
groups not participating in an approved IPA:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The amount of Chinook salmon associated with each vessel or CDQ group
For each sector: not participating in an IPA:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Catcher/processor.................. From Column G of Table 47a to this part;
(B) Mothership......................... From Column G of Table 47b to this part;
(C) Inshore............................ From Column G of Table 47c to this part;
(D) CDQ Program........................ From Column E of Table 47d to this part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14045]]
(iii) If NMFS determines that a sector has exceeded its
performance standard by exceeding its annual threshold amount in any
three of seven consecutive years, NMFS will issue a notification in the
Federal Register that the sector has exceeded its performance standard
and that NMFS will allocate to that sector the amount of Chinook salmon
in the table in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(B) of this section in all
subsequent years. All members of the affected sector will fish under
this lower allocation regardless of whether a vessel or CDQ group
within that sector participates in an approved IPA.
(7) Replacement vessels. If an AFA permitted vessel listed in
Tables 47a through 47c to this part is no longer eligible to
participate in the BS pollock fishery or if a vessel replaces a
currently eligible vessel, the portion and number of Chinook salmon
associated with that vessel in Tables 47a through 47c to this part will
be assigned to the replacement vessel or distributed among other
eligible vessels in the sector based on the procedures in the law,
regulation, or private contract that accomplishes the vessel removal or
replacement action until Tables 47a through 47c to this part can be
revised as necessary.
(8) Entities eligible to receive transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations--(i) NMFS will issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations to the following entities, if these entities meet all of
the applicable requirements of this part.
(A) Inshore cooperatives. NMFS will issue transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocations to the inshore cooperatives permitted annually
under Sec. 679.4(l)(6). The representative and agent for service of
process (see definition at Sec. 679.2) for an inshore cooperative is
the cooperative representative identified in the application for an
inshore cooperative fishing permit issued under Sec. 679.4(l)(6),
unless the inshore cooperative representative notifies NMFS in writing
that a different person will act as its agent for service of process
for purposes of this paragraph (f). An inshore cooperative is not
required to submit an application under paragraph (f)(8)(ii) of this
section to receive a transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation.
(B) CDQ groups. NMFS will issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations to the CDQ groups. The representative and agent for service
of process for a CDQ group is the chief executive officer of the CDQ
group, unless the chief executive officer notifies NMFS in writing that
a different person will act as its agent for service of process. A CDQ
group is not required to submit an application under paragraph
(f)(8)(ii) of this section to receive a transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocation.
(C) Entity representing the catcher/processor sector. NMFS will
issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations to an entity
representing the AFA catcher/processor sector if some or all of the
owners of AFA permitted vessels in this sector form a single entity to
represent all catcher/processors eligible to fish under transferable
Chinook salmon PSC allocations. No more than one entity will be
authorized by NMFS to represent the catcher/processor sector for
purposes of receiving and managing transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations on behalf of the catcher/processor sector.
(D) Entity representing the mothership sector. NMFS will issue
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations to an entity representing
the AFA mothership sector if some or all of the owners of AFA permitted
catcher vessels in this sector form a single entity to represent all
catcher vessels in this sector eligible to fish under transferable
Chinook salmon PSC allocations. No more than one entity will be
authorized by NMFS to represent the mothership sector for purposes of
receiving and managing transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations on
behalf of the mothership sector.
(ii) Request for approval as an entity eligible to receive
transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations. A representative of an
entity representing the catcher/processor sector or the mothership
sector may request approval by NMFS to receive transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocations on behalf of the members of the sector. The
application must be submitted to NMFS at the address in paragraph
(b)(6) of this section. A completed application consists of the
application form and a contract, described below.
(A) Application form. The applicant must submit a paper copy of the
application form with all information fields accurately filled in. The
application form is available on the NMFS Alaska Region website (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/) or from NMFS at the address or phone number
in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
(B) Contract. A contract containing the following information must
be attached to the completed application form:
(1) Information that documents that all parties to the contract
agree that the entity, the entity's representative, and the entity's
agent for service of process named in the application form represent
them for purposes of receiving transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocations.
(2) A statement that the entity's representative and agent for
service of process are authorized to act on behalf of the parties to
the contract.
(3) Certification of applicant. Signatures, printed names, and date
of signature for the owners of each AFA permitted vessel identified in
the application.
(C) Contract duration. Once submitted, the contract attached to the
application is valid until amended or terminated by the parties to the
contract. Additions or deletions to the vessels represented by the
entity may be done one time per year for subsequent years by submitting
an amended contract and revised vessel information by the deadline,
unless additions or deletions are as a result of a replacement vessel
under paragraph (f)(7) of this section. An amendment to the contract
related to a replacement vessel may be made at any time upon submission
of an amended application and a copy of the AFA permit issued under
Sec. 679.4 for the replacement vessel.
(D) Deadline. An initial or amended application and contract must
be received by NMFS no later than 1700 hours A.l.t. on November 1 of
the year prior to the fishing year for which the Chinook salmon PSC
allocations are effective.
(iii) Responsibility.--(A) Entity--(1) Each inshore cooperative and
it members are jointly and severally liable for any violation of
applicable regulations in this part by a member of the cooperative.
(2) The entity representing the catcher/processor sector and its
members are jointly and severally liable for any violation of
applicable regulations in this part by a member of the sector.
(3) The entity representing the mothership sector and its members
are jointly and severally liable for any violation of applicable
regulations in this part by a member of the sector.
(4) The owners of all vessels that are members of an inshore
cooperative or members of the entity that represents the catcher/
processor sector or the mothership sector may authorize the entity
representative to sign a proposed IPA submitted to NMFS under paragraph
(f)(12) of this section on their behalf. This authorization must be
included in the contract submitted to NMFS under paragraph
(f)(8)(ii)(B) of this section for the sector-level entities and in the
contract submitted annually to NMFS by inshore cooperatives under Sec.
679.61(d).
[[Page 14046]]
(B) Entity Representative. The entity's representative must--
(1) Act as the primary contact person for NMFS on issues relating
to the operation of the entity;
(2) Submit on behalf of the entity any applications required for
the entity to receive a transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation and
to transfer some or all of that allocation to and from other entities
eligible to receive transfers of Chinook salmon PSC allocations;
(3) Ensure that an agent for service of process is designated by
the entity; and
(4) Ensure that NMFS is notified if a substitute agent for service
of process is designated. Notification must include the name, address,
and telephone number of the substitute agent in the event the
previously designated agent is no longer capable of accepting service
on behalf of the entity or its members within the 5-year period from
the time the agent is identified in the application to NMFS under
paragraph (f)(8)(ii)(B) of this section.
(C) Agent for service of process. The entity's agent for service of
process must--
(1) Be authorized to receive and respond to any legal process
issued in the United States with respect to all owners and operators of
vessels that are members of an entity receiving a transferable
allocation of Chinook salmon PSC or with respect to a CDQ group.
Service on or notice to the entity's appointed agent constitutes
service on or notice to all members of the entity.
(2) Be capable of accepting service on behalf of the entity until
December 31 of the year five years after the calendar year for which
the entity notified the Regional Administrator of the identity of the
agent.
(D) Absent a catcher/processor sector or mothership sector entity.
If the catcher/processor sector or the mothership sector does not form
an entity to receive a transferable allocation of Chinook salmon PSC,
the sector will receive non-transferable allocations of Chinook salmon
PSC that will be managed by NMFS under paragraph (f)(10) of this
section.
(9) Transfers of Chinook salmon PSC--(i) A Chinook salmon PSC
allocation issued to eligible entities under paragraph (f)(8)(i) of
this section may be transferred to any other entity receiving a
transferable allocation of Chinook salmon PSC by submitting to NMFS an
application for transfer described in paragraph (f)(9)(iii) of this
section. Transfers of Chinook salmon PSC allocations among eligible
entities are subject to the following restrictions:
(A) Entities receiving transferable allocations under the 60,000
PSC limit may only transfer to and from other entities receiving
allocations under the 60,000 PSC limit.
(B) Entities receiving transferable allocations under the 47,591
PSC limit may only transfer to and from other entities receiving
allocations under the 47,591 PSC limit.
(C) Chinook salmon PSC allocations may not be transferred between
seasons.
(ii) Post-delivery transfers. If the Chinook salmon bycatch by an
entity exceeds its seasonal allocation, the entity may receive
transfers of Chinook salmon PSC to cover overages for that season. An
entity may conduct transfers to cover an overage that results from
Chinook salmon bycatch from any fishing trip by a vessel fishing on
behalf of that entity that was completed or is in progress at the time
the entity's allocation is first exceeded. Under Sec.
679.7(d)(8)(ii)(C)(2) and (k)(8)(v), vessels fishing on behalf of an
entity that has exceeded its Chinook salmon PSC allocation for a season
may not start a new fishing trip for pollock in the BS for the
remainder of that season once that overage has occurred.
(iii) Application for transfer of Chinook salmon PSC allocations--
(A) Completed application. NMFS will process a request for transfer of
Chinook salmon PSC provided that a paper or electronic application is
completed, with all information fields accurately filled in.
Application forms are available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site
(http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov) or from NMFS at the address or phone
number in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
(B) Certification of transferor--(1) Non-electronic submittal. The
transferor's designated representative must sign and date the
application certifying that all information is true, correct, and
complete. The transferor's designated representative must submit the
paper application as indicated on the application.
(2) Electronic submittal. The transferor's designated entity
representative must log into NMFS online services system and create a
transfer request as indicated on the computer screen. By using the
transferor's NMFS ID, password, and Transfer Key, and submitting the
transfer request, the designated representative certifies that all
information is true, correct, and complete.
(C) Certification of transferee--(1) Non-electronic submittal. The
transferee's designated representative must sign and date the
application certifying that all information is true, correct, and
complete.
(2) Electronic submittal. The transferee's designated
representative must log into the NMFS online services system and accept
the transfer request as indicated on the computer screen. By using the
transferee's NMFS ID, password, and Transfer Key, the designated
representative certifies that all information is true, correct, and
complete.
(D) Deadline. NMFS will not approve an application for transfer of
Chinook salmon PSC after June 25 for the A season and after December 1
for the B season.
(10) Non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocations--(i) All
vessels belonging to a sector that is ineligible to receive
transferable allocations under paragraph (f)(8) of this section, any
catcher vessels participating in an inshore open access fishery, and
all vessels fishing under the opt-out allocation under paragraph (f)(5)
of this section will fish under specific non-transferable Chinook
salmon PSC allocations.
(ii) All vessels fishing under a non-transferable Chinook salmon
PSC allocation, including vessels fishing on behalf of a CDQ group,
will be managed together by NMFS under that non-transferable
allocation. If, during the fishing year, the Regional Administrator
determines that a seasonal non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC
allocation will be reached, NMFS will publish a notice in the Federal
Register closing the BS to directed fishing for pollock by those
vessels fishing under that non-transferable allocation for the
remainder of the season or for the remainder of the year.
(iii) For each non-transferable Chinook salmon PSC allocation, NMFS
will deduct from the B season allocation any amount of Chinook salmon
bycatch in the A season that exceeds the amount available under the A
season allocation.
(11) Rollover of unused A season allocation--(i) Rollovers of
transferable allocations. NMFS will add any Chinook salmon PSC
allocation remaining at the end of the A season, after any transfers
under paragraph (f)(9)(ii) of this section, to an entity's B season
allocation.
(ii) Rollover of non-transferable allocations. For a non-
transferable allocation for the mothership sector, catcher/processor
sector, or an inshore open access fishery, NMFS will add any Chinook
salmon PSC remaining in that non-transferable allocation at the end of
the A season to that B season non-transferable allocation.
[[Page 14047]]
(12) Chinook salmon bycatch incentive plan agreements (IPAs)--(i)
Minimum participation requirements. More than one IPA may be approved
by NMFS. Each IPA must have participants that represent the following:
(A) Minimum percent pollock. Participation by the owners of AFA
permitted vessels or CDQ groups that combined represent at least 9
percent of the amount of BS pollock attributed to the sector, inshore
cooperative, CDQ group, or individual vessel is required for purposes
of this paragraph (f)(12)(i). The percentage of pollock attributed to
each sector, vessel, or CDQ group is as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The percent
For each sector: attributed to Percent used to calculate IPA minimum participation is
each sector: the value in:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Catcher/processor.............. 36 Column H in Table 47a to this part.
(2) Mothership..................... 9 Column H in Table 47b to this part.
(3) Inshore........................ 45 Column H in Table 47c to this part.
(4) CDQ Program.................... 10 Column F in Table 47d to this part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(B) Minimum number of unaffiliated AFA entities. The parties to an
IPA must represent any combination of two or more CDQ groups or
corporations, partnerships, or individuals who own AFA permitted
vessels and are not affiliated as affiliation is defined for purposes
of AFA entities in Sec. 679.2.
(ii) Membership in an IPA is voluntary. No vessel owner or CDQ
group may be required to join an IPA. Upon receipt of written
notification that a person wants to join an IPA, the IPA representative
must allow that vessel owner or CDQ group to join subject to the terms
and conditions that have been agreed upon by all other parties to the
proposed IPA.
(iii) Request for approval of a proposed IPA. The IPA
representative must submit an application for approval of a proposed
IPA to NMFS at the address in paragraph (b)(6) of this section. A
completed application consists of the application form and the proposed
IPA, described below.
(A) Application form. The applicant must submit a paper copy of the
application form with all information fields accurately filled in. The
application form is available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site
(http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/) or from NMFS at the address or phone
number in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
(B) Proposed IPA. The proposed IPA must contain the following
information:
(1) Name of the IPA. The same IPA name submitted on the application
form.
(2) Representative. The name, telephone number, and e-mail address
of the IPA representative who submits the proposed IPA on behalf of the
parties and who is responsible for submitting proposed amendments to
the IPA and the annual report required under paragraph (f)(12)(vii) of
this section.
(3) Description of the incentive plan. The IPA must contain a
written description of the following:
(i) The incentive(s) that will be implemented under the IPA to
ensure that the operator of each vessel participating in the IPA will
avoid Chinook salmon at all times while directed fishing for pollock;
(ii) The rewards for avoiding Chinook salmon, penalties for failure
to avoid Chinook salmon at the vessel level, or both;
(iii) How the incentive measures in the IPA are expected to promote
reductions in a vessel's Chinook salmon bycatch rates relative to what
would have occurred in absence of the incentive program;
(iv) How the incentive measures in the IPA promote Chinook salmon
savings in any condition of pollock abundance or Chinook salmon
abundance in a manner that is expected to influence operational
decisions by vessel operators to avoid Chinook salmon; and
(v) How the IPA ensures that the operator of each vessel governed
by the IPA will manage his or her Chinook salmon bycatch to keep total
bycatch below the performance standard described in paragraph (f)(6) of
this section for the sector in which the vessel participates.
(4) Compliance agreement. The IPA must include a written statement
that all parties to the IPA agree to comply with all provisions of the
IPA.
(5) Signatures. The names and signatures of the owner or
representative for each vessel and CDQ group that is a party to the
IPA. The representative of an inshore cooperative, or the
representative of the entity formed to represent the AFA catcher/
processor sector or the AFA mothership sector under paragraph (f)(8) of
this section may sign a proposed IPA on behalf of all vessels that are
members of that inshore cooperative or sector level entity.
(iv) Deadline and duration--(A) Deadline for proposed IPA. An
initial or amended application must be received by NMFS no later than
1700 hours A.l.t. on October 1 of the year prior to the fishing year
for which the Chinook salmon PSC allocations are proposed to be
effective.
(B) Duration. Once approved, an IPA is effective starting January 1
of the year following the year in which NMFS approves the IPA, unless
the IPA is approved between January 1 and January 19, in which case the
IPA is effective starting in the year in which it is approved. Once
approved, an IPA is effective until December 31 of the first year in
which it is effective or until December 31 of the year in which the IPA
representative notifies NMFS in writing that the IPA is no longer in
effect, whichever is later. An IPA may not expire mid-year. No party
may join or leave an IPA once it is approved, except as allowed under
paragraph (f)(12)(v)(C) of this section.
(v) NMFS review of a proposed IPA--(A) Approval. An IPA will be
approved by NMFS if it meets the following requirements:
(1) Meets the minimum participation requirements in paragraph
(f)(12)(i) of this section;
(2) Is submitted in compliance with the requirements of paragraph
(f)(12)(ii) and (iv) of this section; and
(3) Contains the information required in paragraph (f)(12)(iii) of
this section.
(B) IPA identification number. If approved, NMFS will assign an IPA
number to the approved IPA. This number must be used by the IPA
representative in amendments to the IPA.
(C) Amendments to an IPA. Amendments to an approved IPA may be
submitted to NMFS and will be reviewed under the requirements of this
paragraph (f)(12).
(1) An amendment to an approved IPA with no change in the
participants in the IPA may be submitted to NMFS at any time and is
effective upon written notification of approval by NMFS to the IPA
representative.
[[Page 14048]]
(2) Amendments to the list of participants in an IPA, with or
without changes to an approved IPA, must be received by NMFS no later
than 1700 hours A.l.t. on November 1 of the year prior to the year in
which the participants will join or leave the IPA, unless amendments to
the list of participants are the result of a replacement vessel under
paragraph (f)(7) of this section. The IPA representative must submit an
application for approval of a proposed IPA (amended) that includes all
of the information required in paragraph (f)(12)(iii) of this section.
In addition, for an amendment related to a replacement vessel, the
application for approval of an amendment must also include a copy of
the AFA permit issued under Sec. 679.4 for the replacement vessel.
(D) Disapproval--(1) NMFS will disapprove a proposed IPA or a
proposed amendment to an IPA for either of the following reasons;
(i) If the proposed IPA fails to meet any of the requirements of
paragraphs (f)(12)(i) through (iii) of this section, or
(ii) If a proposed amendment to an IPA would cause the IPA to no
longer be consistent with the requirements of paragraphs (f)(12)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(2) Initial Administrative Determination (IAD). If, in NMFS's
review of the proposed IPA, NMFS identifies deficiencies in the
proposed IPA that require disapproval of the proposed IPA, NMFS will
notify the applicant in writing. The applicant will be provided 30 days
to address, in writing, the deficiencies identified by NMFS. An
applicant will be limited to one 30-day period to address any
deficiencies identified by NMFS. Additional information or a revised
IPA received after the 30-day period specified by NMFS has expired will
not be considered for purposes of the review of the proposed IPA. NMFS
will evaluate any additional information submitted by the applicant
within the 30-day period. If the Regional Administrator determines that
the additional information addresses deficiencies in the proposed IPA,
the Regional Administrator will approve the proposed IPA under
paragraphs (f)(12)(iv)(B) and (f)(12)(v)(A) of this section. However,
if, after consideration of the original proposed IPA and any additional
information submitted during the 30-day period, NMFS determines that
the proposed IPA does not comply with the requirements of paragraph
(f)(12) of this section, NMFS will issue an initial administrative
determination (IAD) providing the reasons for disapproving the proposed
IPA.
(3) Administrative Appeals. An applicant who receives an IAD
disapproving a proposed IPA may appeal under the procedures set forth
at Sec. 679.43. If the applicant fails to file an appeal of the IAD
pursuant to Sec. 679.43, the IAD will become the final agency action.
If the IAD is appealed and the final agency action is a determination
to approve the proposed IPA, then the IPA will be effective as
described in paragraph (f)(12)(iv)(B) of this section.
(4) While appeal of an IAD disapproving a proposed IPA is pending,
proposed members of the IPA subject to the IAD that are not currently
members of an approved IPA would fish under the opt-out allocation
under paragraph (f)(5) of this section. If no other IPA has been
approved by NMFS, NMFS will issue all sectors allocations of the 47,591
Chinook salmon PSC limit as described in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(B) of
this section.
(vi) Public release of an IPA. NMFS will make all proposed IPAs and
all approved IPAs and the list of participants in each approved IPA
available to the public on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/).
(vii) IPA Annual Report. The representative of each approved IPA
must submit a written annual report to the Council at the address
specified in Sec. 679.61(f). The Council will make the annual report
available to the public.
(A) Submission deadline. The annual report must be postmarked or
received by the Council no later than April 1 of each year following
the year in which the IPA is first effective.
(B) Information requirements. The annual report must contain the
following information:
(1) A comprehensive description of the incentive measures in effect
in the previous year;
(2) A description of how these incentive measures affected
individual vessels;
(3) An evaluation of whether incentive measures were effective in
achieving salmon savings beyond levels that would have been achieved in
absence of the measures; and
(4) A description of any amendments to the terms of the IPA that
were approved by NMFS since the last annual report and the reasons that
the amendments to the IPA were made.
(g) BS Non-Chinook Salmon Bycatch Management--(1) Requirements for
the non-Chinook salmon bycatch reduction intercooperative agreement
(ICA)--(i) Application. The ICA representative identified in paragraph
(g)(2)(i)(B) of this section must submit a signed copy of the proposed
non-Chinook salmon bycatch reduction ICA, or any proposed amendments to
the ICA, to NMFS at the address in paragraph (b)(6) of this section.
(ii) Deadline. For any ICA participant to be exempt from closure of
the Chum Salmon Savings Area as described at paragraph (e)(7)(ix) of
this section and at Sec. 679.22(a)(10), the ICA must be filed in
compliance with the requirements of this section, and approved by NMFS.
The proposed non-Chinook salmon bycatch reduction ICA or any amendments
to an approved ICA must be postmarked or received by NMFS by December 1
of the year before the year in which the ICA is proposed to be
effective. Exemptions from closure of the Chum Salmon Savings Area will
expire upon termination of the initial ICA, expiration of the initial
ICA, or if superseded by a NMFS-approved amended ICA.
(2) Information requirements. The ICA must include the following
provisions:
(i) Participants--(A) The names of the AFA cooperatives and CDQ
groups participating in the ICA. Collectively, these groups are known
as parties to the ICA. Parties to the ICA must agree to comply with all
provisions of the ICA.
(B) The name, business mailing address, business telephone number,
business fax number, and business e-mail address of the ICA
representative.
(C) The ICA also must identify one entity retained to facilitate
vessel bycatch avoidance behavior and information sharing.
(D) The ICA must identify at least one third party group. Third
party groups include any organizations representing western Alaskans
who depend on non-Chinook salmon and have an interest in non-Chinook
salmon bycatch reduction but do not directly fish in a groundfish
fishery.
(ii) The names, Federal fisheries permit numbers, and USCG
documentation numbers of vessels subject to the ICA.
(iii) Provisions that dictate non-Chinook salmon bycatch avoidance
behaviors for vessel operators subject to the ICA, including:
(A) Initial base rate. The initial B season non-Chinook salmon base
rate shall be 0.19 non-Chinook salmon per metric ton of pollock.
(B) Inseason adjustments to the non-Chinook base rate calculation.
Beginning July 1 of each fishing year and on each Thursday during the B
season, the B season non-Chinook base rate shall be recalculated. The
recalculated non-Chinook base rate shall be the three week rolling
average of the B season non-Chinook bycatch rate for the current year.
The recalculated base
[[Page 14049]]
rate shall be used to determine bycatch avoidance areas.
(C) ICA Chum Salmon Savings Area notices. On each Thursday and
Monday after June 10 of each year for the duration of the pollock ``B''
season, the entity identified under paragraph (g)(2)(i)(C) of this
section must provide notice to the parties to the salmon bycatch
reduction ICA and NMFS identifying one or more areas designated ``ICA
Chum Savings Areas'' by a series of latitude and longitude coordinates.
The Thursday notice must be effective from 6:00 p.m. A.l.t. the
following Friday through 6:00 p.m. A.l.t. the following Tuesday. The
Monday notice must be effective from 6:00 p.m. A.l.t. the following
Tuesday through 6:00 p.m. A.l.t. the following Friday. For any ICA
Salmon Savings Area notice, the maximum total area closed must be at
least 3,000 square miles for ICA Chum Savings Area closures.
(D) Fishing restrictions for vessels assigned to tiers. For vessels
in a cooperative assigned to Tier 3, the ICA Chum Salmon Savings Area
closures announced on Thursdays must be closed to directed fishing for
pollock, including pollock CDQ, for seven days. For vessels in a
cooperative assigned to Tier 2, the ICA Chum Salmon Savings Area
closures announced on Thursdays must be closed through 6 p.m. Alaska
local time on the following Tuesday. Vessels in a cooperative assigned
to Tier 1 may operate in any area designated as an ICA Chum Salmon
Savings Area.
(E) Cooperative tier assignments. Initial and subsequent base rate
calculations must be based on each cooperative's pollock catch for the
prior two weeks and the associated bycatch of non-Chinook salmon taken
by its members. Base rate calculations shall include non-Chinook salmon
bycatch and pollock caught in both the CDQ and non-CDQ pollock directed
fisheries. Cooperatives with non-Chinook salmon bycatch rates of less
than 75 percent of the base rate shall be assigned to Tier 1.
Cooperatives with non-Chinook salmon bycatch rates of equal to or
greater than 75 percent, but less than or equal to 125 percent of the
base rate shall be assigned to Tier 2. Cooperatives with non-Chinook
salmon bycatch rates of greater than 125 percent of the base rate shall
be assigned to Tier 3. Bycatch rates for Chinook salmon must be
calculated separately from non-Chinook salmon, and cooperatives must be
assigned to tiers based on non-Chinook salmon bycatch.
(iv) Internal monitoring and enforcement provisions to ensure
compliance of fishing activities with the provisions of the ICA. The
ICA must include provisions allowing any party of the ICA to bring
civil suit or initiate a binding arbitration action against another
party for breach of the ICA. The ICA must include minimum annual
uniform assessments for any violation of savings area closures of
$10,000 for the first offense, $15,000 for the second offense, and
$20,000 for each offense thereafter.
(v) Provisions requiring the parties to conduct an annual
compliance audit, and to cooperate fully in such audit, including
providing information required by the auditor. The compliance audit
must be conducted by a non-party entity, and each party must have an
opportunity to participate in selecting the non-party entity. If the
non-party entity hired to conduct a compliance audit discovers a
previously undiscovered failure to comply with the terms of the ICA,
the non-party entity must notify all parties to the ICA of the failure
to comply and must simultaneously distribute to all parties of the ICA
the information used to determine the failure to comply occurred and
must include such notice(s) in the compliance report.
(vi) Provisions requiring data dissemination in certain
circumstances. If the entity retained to facilitate vessel bycatch
avoidance behavior and information sharing under paragraph (g)(2)(i)(C)
of this section determines that an apparent violation of an ICA Chum
Salmon Savings Area closure has occurred, that entity must promptly
notify the Board of Directors of the cooperative to which the vessel
involved belongs. If this Board of Directors fails to assess a minimum
uniform assessment within 180 days of receiving the notice, the
information used by the entity to determine if an apparent violation
was committed must be disseminated to all parties to the ICA.
(3) NMFS review of the proposed ICA and amendments. NMFS will
approve the initial or an amended ICA if it meets all the requirements
specified in paragraph (g) of this section. If NMFS disapproves a
proposed ICA, the ICA representative may resubmit a revised ICA or file
an administrative appeal as set forth under the administrative appeals
procedures described at Sec. 679.43.
(4) ICA Annual Report. The ICA representative must submit a written
annual report to the Council at the address specified in Sec.
679.61(f). The Council will make the annual report available to the
public.
(i) Submission deadline. The ICA annual report must be postmarked
or received by the Council by April 1 of each year following the year
in which the ICA is first effective.
(ii) Information requirements. The ICA annual report must contain
the following information:
(A) An estimate of the number of non-Chinook salmon avoided as
demonstrated by the movement of fishing effort away from Chum Salmon
Savings Areas, and
(B) The results of the compliance audit required at Sec.
679.21(g)(2)(v).
6. In Sec. 679.22, revise paragraph (a)(10) and (h) to read as
follows:
Sec. 679.22 Closures.
(a) * * *
(10) Chum Salmon Savings Area. Directed fishing for pollock by
vessels using trawl gear is prohibited from August 1 through August 31
in the Chum Salmon Savings Area defined at Figure 9 to this part (see
also Sec. 679.21(e)(7)(vii)). Vessels directed fishing for pollock in
the BS, including pollock CDQ, and operating under a non-Chinook salmon
bycatch reduction ICA approved under Sec. 679.21(g) are exempt from
closures in the Chum Salmon Savings Area.
* * * * *
(h) CDQ fisheries closures. See Sec. 679.7(d)(8) for time and area
closures that apply to the CDQ fisheries once the non-Chinook salmon
PSQ and the crab PSQs have been reached.
* * * * *
7. In Sec. 679.26,
Revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.26 Prohibited Species Donation Program.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) A vessel or processor retaining prohibited species under the
PSD program must comply with all applicable recordkeeping and reporting
requirements. A vessel or processor participating in the BS pollock
fishery and PSD program must comply with applicable regulations at
Sec. Sec. 679.7(d) and (k), 679.21(c), and 679.28, including allowing
the collection of data and biological sampling by an observer prior to
processing any fish under the PSD program.
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 679.28,
A. Redesignate paragraphs (d)(7) and (d)(8) as paragraphs (d)(8)
and (d)(9), respectively;
B. Add paragraphs (d)(7), (g)(7)(vii)(F), and (g)(7)(x)(F);
C. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (d)(9)(i)(H) and paragraphs
(g)(2)(i), (g)(7)(vii)(C), (g)(7)(ix)(A), and (g)(7)(x)(D) and (E);
[[Page 14050]]
D. Add paragraph (j); and
E. Redesignate paragraphs (i)(1)(iii), (iv), and (v) as paragraphs
(i)(1)(ii), (iii), and (iv), respectively.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 679.28 Equipment and operational requirements.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) Catcher/processors and motherships in the BS pollock fishery,
including pollock CDQ. Catcher/processors directed fishing for pollock
in the BS or motherships taking deliveries from vessels directed
fishing for pollock in the BS also must meet the following
requirements:
(i) A container to store salmon must be located adjacent to the
observer sampling station;
(ii) All salmon stored in the container must remain in view of the
observer at the observer sampling station at all times during the
sorting of each haul; and
(iii) The container to store salmon must be at least 1.5 cubic
meters.
* * * * *
(9) * * *
(i) * * *
(H) For catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships, a
diagram drawn to scale showing the location(s) where all catch will be
weighed, the location where observers will sample unsorted catch, and
the location of the observer sampling station including the observer
sampling scale. For catcher/processors directed fishing for pollock in
the BS or motherships taking deliveries from catcher vessels directed
fishing for pollock in the BS, including pollock CDQ, the diagram also
must include the location of the last point of sorting in the factory
and the location of the salmon storage container required under
paragraph (d)(7) of this section.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) AFA and CDQ pollock,
* * * * *
(7) * * *
(vii) * * *
(C) * * *
(1) With the exception of paragraph (g)(7)(vii)(C)(2) of this
section, the observer area must be located near the observer work
station. The plant liaison must be able to walk between the work
station and the observation area in less than 20 seconds without
encountering safety hazards.
(2) For shoreside processors or stationary floating processors
taking deliveries from vessels directed fishing for pollock in the BS,
including vessels directed fishing for pollock CDQ in the BS, the
observer work station must be located within the observation area.
* * * * *
(F) For shoreside processors or stationary floating processors
taking deliveries from vessels directed fishing for pollock in the BS,
including vessels directed fishing for pollock CDQ in the BS, the
observation area also must include an area designated to store salmon.
* * * * *
(ix) * * *
(A) Orienting new observers to the plant and providing a copy of
the approved CMCP;
* * * * *
(x) * * *
(D) The location of each scale used to weigh catch;
(E) Each location where catch is sorted including the last location
where sorting could occur; and
(F) Location of salmon storage container.
* * * * *
(j) Electronic monitoring on catcher/processors and motherships in
the BS pollock fishery, including pollock CDQ. The owner or operator of
a catcher/processor or a mothership must provide and maintain an
electronic monitoring system that includes cameras, a monitor, and a
digital video recording system for all areas where sorting of salmon of
any species takes place and the location of the salmon storage
container described at paragraph (d)(7) of this section. These
electronic monitoring system requirements must be met when the catcher/
processor is directed fishing for pollock in the BS, including pollock
CDQ, and when the mothership is taking deliveries from catcher vessels
directed fishing for pollock in the BS, including pollock CDQ.
(1) What requirements must a vessel owner or operator comply with
for an electronic monitoring system? (i) The system must have
sufficient data storage capacity to store all video data from an entire
trip. Each frame of stored video data must record a time/date stamp in
Alaska local time (A.l.t.). At a minimum, all periods of time when fish
are flowing past the sorting area or salmon are in the storage
container must be recorded and stored.
(ii) The system must include at least one external USB (1.1 or 2.0)
port or other removable storage device approved by NMFS.
(iii) The system must use commercially available software.
(iv) Color cameras must have at a minimum 470 TV lines of
resolution, auto-iris capabilities, and output color video to the
recording device with the ability to revert to black and white video
output when light levels become too low for color recognition.
(v) The video data must be maintained and made available to NMFS
staff, or any individual authorized by NMFS, upon request. These data
must be retained onboard the vessel for no less than 120 days after the
date the video is recorded, unless NMFS has notified the vessel
operator that the video data may be retained for less than this 120-day
period.
(vi) The system must provide sufficient resolution and field of
view to observe all areas where salmon could be sorted from the catch,
all crew actions in these areas, and discern individual fish in the
salmon storage container.
(vii) The system must record at a speed of no less than 5 frames
per second at all times when fish are being sorted or when salmon are
stored in the salmon storage location.
(viii) A 16-bit or better color monitor, for viewing activities
within the tank in real time, must be provided within the observer
sampling station. The monitor must--
(A) Have the capacity to display all cameras simultaneously;
(B) Be operating at all times when fish are flowing past the
sorting area and salmon are in the storage container; and
(C) Be securely mounted at or near eye level.
(ix) The observer must be able to view any earlier footage from any
point in the trip and be assisted by crew knowledgeable in the
operation of the system.
(x) A vessel owner or operator must arrange for NMFS to inspect the
electronic monitoring system and maintain a current NMFS-issued
electronic monitoring system inspection report onboard the vessel at
all times the vessel is required to provide an approved electronic
monitoring system.
(2) How does a vessel owner arrange for NMFS to conduct an
electronic monitoring system inspection? The owner or operator must
submit an Inspection Request for an Electronic Monitoring System to
NMFS by fax (206-526-4066) or e-mail ([email protected]).
The request form is available on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site
(http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/) or from NMFS at the address or phone
number in paragraph (b)(6) of this section. NMFS will coordinate with
the vessel owner to schedule the inspection no
[[Page 14051]]
later than 10 working days after NMFS receives a complete request form.
(3) What additional information is required for an electronic
monitoring system inspection? (i) A diagram drawn to scale showing all
locations where salmon will be sorted, the location of the salmon
storage container, the location of each camera and its coverage area,
and the location of any additional video equipment must be submitted
with the request form.
(ii) Any additional information requested by the Regional
Administrator.
(4) How does a vessel owner make a change to the electronic
monitoring system? Any change to the electronic monitoring system that
would affect the system's functionality must be submitted to, and
approved by, the Regional Administrator in writing before that change
is made.
(5) Where will NMFS conduct electronic monitoring system
inspections? Inspections will be conducted on vessels tied to docks at
Dutch Harbor, Alaska; Kodiak, Alaska; and in the Puget Sound area of
Washington State.
(6) What is an electronic monitoring system inspection report?
After an inspection, NMFS will issue an electronic monitoring system
inspection report to the vessel owner, if the electronic monitoring
system meets the requirements of paragraph (j)(1) of this section. The
electronic monitoring system report is valid for 12 months from the
date it is issued by NMFS. The electronic monitoring system inspection
report must be made available to the observer, NMFS personnel, or to an
authorized officer upon request.
9. In Sec. 679.50,
A. Revise paragraph (c)(1) introductory text, paragraph (c)(4)(iv),
and (c)(5) heading; and
B. Add a new paragraph (c)(5)(i)(D).
The addition and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 679.50 Groundfish Observer Program.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Unless otherwise specified in paragraphs (c)(4) through (7) of
this section, observer coverage is required as follows:
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(iv) Catcher vessel using trawl gear--(A) Groundfish CDQ fishing. A
catcher vessel equal to or greater than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA using trawl
gear, except a catcher vessel that delivers only unsorted codends to a
processor or another vessel or a catcher vessel directed fishing for
pollock CDQ in the BS, must have at least one level 2 observer as
described at paragraph (j)(1)(v)(D) of this section aboard the vessel
at all times while it is groundfish CDQ fishing.
(B) BS pollock CDQ fishery. A catcher vessel using trawl gear,
except a catcher vessel that delivers only unsorted codends to a
processor or another vessel, must have at least one observer aboard the
vessel at all times while it is directed fishing for pollock CDQ in the
BS.
* * * * *
(5) AFA and AI directed pollock fishery.
(i) * * *
(D) AFA catcher vessels in the BS pollock fishery. A catcher vessel
using trawl gear, except a catcher vessel that delivers only unsorted
codends to a processor or another vessel, must have at least one
observer aboard the vessel at all times while it is directed fishing
for pollock in the BS.
* * * * *
10. In Sec. 679.61, revise paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2) introductory
text, and (f)(2)(vi) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.61 Formation and operation of fishery cooperatives.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) What are the submission deadlines? The fishery cooperative must
submit the final report by April 1 of the following year. Annual
reports must be postmarked or received by the submission deadline.
(2) What information must be included? The annual report must
contain, at a minimum:
* * * * *
(vi) The number of salmon taken by species and season, and list
each vessel's number of appearances on the weekly ``dirty 20'' lists
for non-Chinook salmon.
* * * * *
Sec. Sec. 679.2, 679.5, 679.7, 679.20, 679.21, 679.26, 679.27, 679.28,
and 679.32 [Amended]
11. At each of the locations shown in the ``Location'' column of
the following table, remove the phrase indicated in the ``Remove''
column and add in its place the phrase indicated in the ``Add'' column
for the number of times indicated in the ``Frequency'' column.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Remove Add Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 679.2 Definition ``AFA trawl AFA trawl catcher/ AFA catcher/processor..... 1
catcher/processor''. processor.
Sec. 679.2 Definition for ``Amendment AFA trawl catcher/ AFA catcher/processor..... 1
80 vessel'' paragraph (2)(i). processor.
Sec. 679.5(c)(3)(v)(F) and certified observer(s)..... observer(s)............... 2
(c)(4)(v)(G).
Sec. 679.5(c)(6)(v)(E)................ certified observer(s)..... observer(s)............... 1
Sec. 679.7(d)(18)..................... Sec. 679.28(d)(8)....... Sec. 679.28(d)(9)....... 1
Sec. 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(3)(i)......... Sec. 679.62(e).......... Sec. 679.62(a).......... 1
Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(B)............. AFA trawl catcher/ AFA catcher/processor..... 1
processor.
Sec. 679.21(e)(3)(v).................. AFA trawl catcher/ AFA catcher/processor..... 2
processor.
Sec. 679.26(c)(1)..................... Sec. 679.7(c)(1)........ Sec. 679.7(c)(2)........ 1
Sec. 679.27(j)(5)(iii)................ Sec. 679.28(d)(7)(i).... Sec. 679.28(d)(8)(i).... 1
Sec. 679.28(d)(2)(ii)................. Sec. 679.28(d)(7)(ii)(A) paragraph (d)(8)(ii)(A) of 1
this section.
Sec. 679.28(d)(2)(ii)................. Sec. 679.28(d)(7)(ii)(B) paragraph (d)(8)(ii)(B) of 1
this section.
Sec. 679.32(b)........................ Sec. 679.7(d)(7) through Sec. 679.7(d)(8)........ 1
(10).
Sec. 679.32(d)(2)(ii)(B)(1)........... Sec. 679.28(d)(8)....... Sec. 679.28(d)(9)....... 1
Sec. 679.32(d)(4)(ii)................. Sec. 679.28(d)(8)....... Sec. 679.28(d)(9)....... 1
Sec. 679.93(c)(9)..................... Sec. 679.28(i).......... Sec. 679.28(i)(1)....... 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14052]]
12. The title, map, and legend for Figure 8 to part 679 are revised
to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP23MR10.004
14. Tables 47a through 47d to part 679 are added to read as
follows:
Table--47a to Part 679
[Percent of the AFA catcher/processor sector's pollock allocation, numbers of Chinook salmon used to calculate the opt-out allocation and annual
threshold amount, and percent used to calculate IPA minimum participation assigned to each catcher/processor under Sec. 679.21(f).]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Number of Chinook salmon Number of Percent used
C/P sector for the opt-out Chinook salmon to calculate
pollock allocation (8,093) for the annual IPA minimum
USCG vessel --------------------------------------- performance participation
Vessel name documentation AFA permit threshold ---------------
No. No. amount
Percent A season B season (13,516)
---------------- Percent
Annual
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column F Column G Column H
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Dynasty..................................... 951307 3681 4.93 324 76 667 1.78
American Triumph..................................... 646737 4055 7.25 475 111 979 2.61
Northern Eagle....................................... 506694 3261 6.07 398 93 820 2.19
Northern Hawk........................................ 643771 4063 8.45 554 129 1,142 3.04
Northern Jaeger...................................... 521069 3896 7.38 485 113 998 2.66
Ocean Rover.......................................... 552100 3442 6.39 420 98 864 2.30
Alaska Ocean......................................... 637856 3794 7.30 479 112 985 2.63
Island Enterprise.................................... 610290 3870 5.60 367 86 756 2.01
[[Page 14053]]
Kodiak Enterprise.................................... 579450 3671 5.90 387 90 798 2.13
Seattle Enterprise................................... 904767 3245 5.48 359 84 740 1.97
Arctic Storm......................................... 903511 2943 4.58 301 70 619 1.65
Arctic Fjord......................................... 940866 3396 4.46 293 68 603 1.60
Northern Glacier..................................... 663457 661 3.12 205 48 422 1.12
Pacific Glacier...................................... 933627 3357 5.06 332 77 684 1.82
Highland Light....................................... 577044 3348 5.14 337 79 694 1.85
Starbound............................................ 944658 3414 3.94 259 60 533 1.42
Ocean Peace.......................................... 677399 2134 0.50 33 8 68 0.18
Katie Ann............................................ 518441 1996 0.00 0 0 0 0.00
U.S. Enterprise...................................... 921112 3004 0.00 0 0 0 0.00
American Enterprise.................................. 594803 2760 0.00 0 0 0 0.00
Endurance............................................ 592206 3360 0.00 0 0 0 0.00
American Challenger.................................. 633219 4120 0.78 51 12 106 0.28
Forum Star........................................... 925863 4245 0.61 40 9 82 0.22
Muir Milach.......................................... 611524 480 1.13 74 17 153 0.41
Neahkahnie........................................... 599534 424 1.66 109 25 225 0.60
Ocean Harvester...................................... 549892 5130 1.08 71 16 145 0.39
Sea Storm............................................ 628959 420 2.05 134 31 276 0.74
Tracy Anne........................................... 904859 2823 1.16 76 18 157 0.42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ ............. ........... 100.00 6,563 1,530 13,516 36.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 47b--to Part 679
[Percent of the AFA mothership sector's pollock allocation, numbers of Chinook salmon used to calculate the opt-out allocation and annual threshold
amount, and percent used to calculate IPA minimum participation assigned to each mothership under Sec. 679.21(f).]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Number of Chinook salmon Number of Percent used
MS sector for the opt-out Chinook salmon to calculate
USCG vessel pollock allocation (2,220) for the annual IPA minimum
Vessel name documentation AFA permit --------------------------------------- threshold participation
No. No. amount (3,707) ---------------
Percent A season B season ----------------
Annual Percent
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column F Column G Column H
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Beauty...................................... 613847 1688 6.000 96 37 223 0.54
Pacific Challenger................................... 518937 657 9.671 154 60 359 0.87
Nordic Fury.......................................... 542651 1094 6.177 99 39 229 0.55
Pacific Fury......................................... 561934 421 5.889 94 37 218 0.53
Margaret Lyn......................................... 615563 723 5.643 90 35 209 0.51
Misty Dawn........................................... 926647 5946 3.569 57 22 132 0.32
Vanguard............................................. 617802 519 5.350 85 33 199 0.48
California Horizon................................... 590758 412 3.786 61 24 140 0.34
Oceanic.............................................. 602279 1667 7.038 112 44 261 0.63
Mar-Gun.............................................. 525608 524 6.251 100 39 231 0.56
Mark 1............................................... 509552 1242 6.251 100 39 231 0.56
Aleutian Challenger.................................. 603820 1687 4.926 79 31 182 0.44
Ocean Leader......................................... 561518 1229 6.000 96 37 223 0.54
Papado II............................................ 536161 2087 2.953 47 18 110 0.27
Morning Star......................................... 618797 7270 3.601 57 23 134 0.32
Traveler............................................. 929356 3404 4.272 68 27 158 0.38
Vesteraalen.......................................... 611642 517 6.201 99 39 230 0.56
Alyeska.............................................. 560237 395 2.272 36 14 84 0.20
Western Dawn......................................... 524423 134 4.150 66 26 154 0.37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ ............. ........... 100.000 1,596 624 3,707 9.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14054]]
Table--47c to Part 679
[Percent of the AFA inshore sector's pollock allocation, numbers of Chinook salmon used to calculate the opt-out allocation and annual threshold amount,
and percent used to calculate IPA minimum participation assigned to each catcher vessel under Sec. 679.21(f).]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Number of Chinook salmon Number of Percent used
sector for the opt-out Chinook salmon to calculate
pollock allocation (15,858) for the annual IPA minimum
USCG vessel AFA permit --------------------------------------- threshold participation
Vessel name documentation No. amount ---------------
No. (26,485)
Percent A season B season ---------------- Percent
Annual
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column F Column G Column H
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AJ................................................... 599164 3405 0.70 69 41 185 0.31
Alaska Rose.......................................... 610984 515 1.68 167 100 446 0.76
Alaskan Command...................................... 599383 3391 0.37 37 22 99 0.17
Aldebaran............................................ 664363 901 1.47 146 87 388 0.66
Alsea................................................ 626517 2811 1.66 165 99 441 0.75
Alyeska.............................................. 560237 395 1.22 121 72 323 0.55
American Beauty...................................... 613847 1688 0.04 4 2 11 0.02
American Eagle....................................... 558605 434 1.07 106 63 283 0.48
Anita J.............................................. 560532 1913 0.50 50 30 132 0.22
Arctic Explorer...................................... 936302 3388 1.62 161 96 430 0.73
Arctic Wind.......................................... 608216 5137 1.10 110 65 292 0.50
Arcturus............................................. 655328 533 1.54 153 91 409 0.70
Argosy............................................... 611365 2810 1.63 162 97 433 0.73
Auriga............................................... 639547 2889 3.10 308 184 820 1.39
Aurora............................................... 636919 2888 3.10 308 184 821 1.39
Bering Rose.......................................... 624325 516 1.72 171 102 457 0.78
Blue Fox............................................. 979437 4611 0.31 31 19 83 0.14
Bristol Explorer..................................... 647985 3007 1.54 153 91 408 0.69
Caitlin Ann.......................................... 960836 3800 0.94 93 55 248 0.42
Cape Kiwanda......................................... 618158 1235 0.23 23 13 61 0.10
Chelsea K............................................ 976753 4620 4.65 462 275 1231 2.09
Collier Brothers..................................... 593809 2791 0.15 15 9 41 0.07
Columbia............................................. 615729 1228 1.44 143 85 382 0.65
Commodore............................................ 914214 2657 1.26 125 75 334 0.57
Defender............................................. 554030 3257 3.48 346 206 923 1.57
Destination.......................................... 571879 3988 2.15 214 128 570 0.97
Dominator............................................ 602309 411 1.75 174 104 463 0.79
Dona Martita......................................... 651751 2047 2.10 209 125 557 0.95
Elizabeth F.......................................... 526037 823 0.38 38 23 102 0.17
Excalibur II......................................... 636602 410 0.52 52 31 137 0.23
Exodus Explorer...................................... 598666 1249 0.30 30 18 80 0.13
Fierce Allegiance.................................... 588849 4133 0.94 93 56 249 0.42
Flying Cloud......................................... 598380 1318 1.64 163 97 434 0.74
Gold Rush............................................ 521106 1868 0.41 40 24 107 0.18
Golden Dawn.......................................... 604315 1292 1.75 174 104 464 0.79
Golden Pisces........................................ 599585 586 0.27 27 16 72 0.12
Great Pacific........................................ 608458 511 1.24 123 73 327 0.56
Gun-Mar.............................................. 640130 425 2.22 221 132 588 1.00
Half Moon Bay........................................ 615796 249 0.59 58 35 155 0.26
Hazel Lorraine....................................... 592211 523 0.38 38 23 102 0.17
Hickory Wind......................................... 594154 993 0.31 30 18 81 0.14
Intrepid Explorer.................................... 988598 4993 1.15 114 68 303 0.52
Leslie Lee........................................... 584873 1234 0.55 54 32 145 0.25
Lisa Melinda......................................... 584360 4506 0.22 22 13 58 0.10
Majesty.............................................. 962718 3996 1.00 99 59 263 0.45
Marcy J.............................................. 517024 2142 0.18 18 11 48 0.08
Margaret Lyn......................................... 615563 723 0.03 3 2 9 0.02
Mar-Gun.............................................. 525608 524 0.10 10 6 27 0.05
Mark I............................................... 509552 1242 0.05 4 3 12 0.02
Messiah.............................................. 610150 6081 0.23 23 14 61 0.10
Miss Berdie.......................................... 913277 3679 0.61 61 36 161 0.27
Morning Star......................................... 610393 208 1.70 169 101 450 0.76
Ms Amy............................................... 920936 2904 0.49 48 29 129 0.22
Nordic Explorer...................................... 678234 3009 1.10 110 65 292 0.50
Nordic Fury.......................................... 542651 1094 0.02 2 1 5 0.01
Nordic Star.......................................... 584684 428 1.01 100 60 268 0.45
Northern Patriot..................................... 637744 2769 2.41 240 143 639 1.09
Northwest Explorer................................... 609384 3002 0.24 24 14 64 0.11
Ocean Explorer....................................... 678236 3011 1.37 137 81 364 0.62
Morning Star......................................... 652395 1640 0.53 53 31 140 0.24
Ocean Hope 3......................................... 652397 1623 0.42 41 25 110 0.19
Ocean Leader......................................... 561518 1229 0.05 5 3 14 0.02
[[Page 14055]]
Oceanic.............................................. 602279 1667 0.13 13 8 35 0.06
Pacific Challenger................................... 518937 657 0.17 17 10 44 0.08
Pacific Explorer..................................... 678237 3010 1.29 128 76 342 0.58
Pacific Fury......................................... 561934 421 0.01 1 1 3 0.01
Pacific Knight....................................... 561771 2783 2.18 217 129 578 0.98
Pacific Monarch...................................... 557467 2785 1.60 159 95 423 0.72
Pacific Prince....................................... 697280 4194 2.41 239 143 638 1.08
Pacific Ram.......................................... 589115 4305 0.20 20 12 54 0.09
Pacific Viking....................................... 555058 422 1.09 108 65 289 0.49
Pegasus.............................................. 565120 1265 0.69 69 41 184 0.31
Peggy Jo............................................. 502779 979 0.33 33 20 88 0.15
Perseverance......................................... 536873 2837 0.30 29 17 78 0.13
Poseidon............................................. 610436 1164 1.24 123 73 329 0.56
Predator............................................. 547390 1275 0.20 20 12 52 0.09
Progress............................................. 565349 512 1.01 100 60 268 0.46
Providian............................................ 1062183 6308 0.38 38 23 101 0.17
Raven................................................ 629499 1236 0.71 71 42 188 0.32
Royal American....................................... 624371 543 0.97 96 57 257 0.44
Royal Atlantic....................................... 559271 236 1.31 130 78 347 0.59
Sea Wolf............................................. 609823 1652 1.52 151 90 402 0.68
Seadawn.............................................. 548685 2059 1.41 140 84 374 0.63
Seeker............................................... 924585 2849 0.37 37 22 98 0.17
Sovereignty.......................................... 651752 2770 2.35 234 139 623 1.06
Star Fish............................................ 561651 1167 1.51 150 90 400 0.68
Starlite............................................. 597065 1998 1.23 122 73 324 0.55
Starward............................................. 617807 417 1.26 125 75 334 0.57
Storm Petrel......................................... 620769 1641 1.23 123 73 327 0.56
Sunset Bay........................................... 598484 251 0.56 56 33 148 0.25
Topaz................................................ 575428 405 0.08 8 5 22 0.04
Traveler............................................. 929356 3404 0.04 4 2 11 0.02
Vanguard............................................. 617802 519 0.06 6 3 15 0.03
Viking............................................... 565017 1222 1.66 165 98 439 0.75
Viking Explorer...................................... 605228 1116 1.19 118 70 315 0.53
Walter N............................................. 257365 825 0.40 40 24 107 0.18
Western Dawn......................................... 524423 134 0.40 39 23 105 0.18
Westward I........................................... 615165 1650 1.55 154 92 412 0.70
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................ ............. ........... 100.00 9,933 5,925 26,485 45.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14056]]
Table--47d to Part 679
[Percent of the CDQ Program's pollock allocation, numbers of Chinook salmon used to calculate the opt-out
allocation and annual threshold amount, and percent used to calculate IPA minimum participation assigned to each
CDQ group under Sec. 679.21(f).]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column F
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of Number of Percent used
CDQ Program Chinook salmon to calculate
pollock Number of Chinook salmon for the annual IPA minimum
for the opt-out threshold partici-
allocation (2,325) amount (3,883) pation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CDQ group Percent A season B season Annual Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APICDA................................... 14.00 260 66 544 1.40
BBEDC.................................... 21.00 389 99 816 2.10
CBSFA.................................... 5.00 93 23 194 0.50
CVRF..................................... 24.00 445 113 931 2.40
NSEDC.................................... 22.00 408 103 854 2.20
YDFDA.................................... 14.00 260 66 544 1.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL................................ 100.00 1,855 470 3,883 10.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2010-6082 Filed 3-22-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P