[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 239 (Friday, December 12, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65379-65382]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32492]
[[Page 65379]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 970806191-7279-02; I.D. 072297A]
RIN 0648-AJ71
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Improved
Retention/Improved Utilization
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule to implement Amendment 49 to the
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP).
This final rule requires all vessels fishing for groundfish in the Gulf
of Alaska (GOA) to retain all pollock and Pacific cod beginning January
1, 1998, and all shallow water flatfish beginning January 1, 2003. This
final rule also establishes a 15-percent minimum utilization standard
for all at-sea processors beginning January 1, 1998, for pollock and
Pacific cod and, beginning January 1, 2003, for shallow-water flatfish.
This action is necessary to respond to socioeconomic needs of the
fishing industry that have been identified by the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council (Council) and is intended to further the goals and
objectives of the FMP.
DATES: Effective January 12, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 49 and the Environmental Assessment/
Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/
FRFA) prepared for this action may be obtained from NMFS, P.O. Box
21668, Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori J. Gravel. Send comments regarding
burden estimates or any other aspect of the data requirements,
including suggestions for reducing the burdens, to NMFS and to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503, Attn: NOAA Desk Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent Lind, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The domestic groundfish fisheries in the
exclusive economic zone of the GOA are managed by NMFS under the FMP.
The FMP was prepared by the Council under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Regulations
governing the groundfish fisheries of the GOA appear at 50 CFR parts
600 and 679.
At its June 1997 meeting, the Council adopted Amendment 49 to the
FMP and recommended that NMFS initiate a rulemaking to implement the
amendment. A notice of availability of Amendment 49 was published in
the Federal Register on July 29, 1997 (62 FR 40497), and invited
comment on the amendment through September 29, 1997. No comments were
received by the end of the comment period on Amendment 49. A proposed
rule to implement Amendment 49 was published in the Federal Register on
August 18, 1997 (62 FR 43977). Comments on the proposed rule were
invited through October 2, 1997. No comments were received by the end
of the comment period on the proposed rule.
In September 1996, the Council adopted an Improved Retention/
Improved Utilization (IR/IU) program for the Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Management Area (BSAI) as Amendment 49 to the Fishery
Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Area. A final rule to implement Amendment 49 in the
BSAI was published on December 3, 1997 (62 FR 63880). During
development of the IR/IU program for the BSAI, the Council began to
consider a parallel IR/IU program for the GOA, also designated as
Amendment 49. Amendments 49 and 49 are the result of over 3 years of
analysis and debate by the Council of alternative solutions to the
problem of discards occurring in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska.
The management background and need for the IR/IU program in the GOA are
described in the proposed rule for the IR/IU program in the GOA (62 FR
43977).
Elements of the Final Rule
This final rule to implement Amendment 49 in the GOA expands the
geographical scope of the final rule published to implement Amendment
49 in the BSAI (62 FR 63880, December 3, 1997). Two changes are made to
the IR/IU program set out at Sec. 679.27 to extend the program to the
GOA. First, paragraph (a) Applicability, is amended to extend the IR/IU
program to the GOA, and second, paragraph (b) IR/IU species, which
lists species covered by the program, is revised to add the shallow-
water flatfish species complex for the GOA.
To assist the vessel owners and operators in compliance with IR/IU
requirements in the GOA, key elements of the IR/IU program are
summarized below.
Affected Vessels and Processors
The IR/IU program applies to all vessels fishing for groundfish in
the GOA and all at-sea processors processing groundfish harvested in
the GOA, regardless of vessel size, gear type, or target fishery.
Because the Magnuson-Stevens Act does not authorize NMFS to regulate
on-shore processing of fish, the requirements of this final rule do not
extend to shore-based processors.
The State of Alaska (State) is developing a parallel IR/IU program
for shore-based processors. The State anticipates that parallel IR/IU
regulations requiring retention and utilization of pollock by shoreside
processors will be in place by January 1, 1998, while parallel
regulations requiring retention and utilization of Pacific cod by
shoreside processors will be in place by mid-1998.
IR/IU Species
The IR/IU program for the GOA defines pollock, Pacific cod, and the
shallow-water flatfish species group as IR/IU species. In the FMP and
in the annual harvest specifications, the shallow-water flatfish
species group is defined as all flatfish species, other than deep-water
flatfish (Dover sole and Greenland turbot), flathead sole, rex sole,
and arrowtooth flounder. Retention and utilization requirements apply
to pollock and Pacific cod beginning January 1, 1998, and to shallow-
water flatfish beginning January 1, 2003. The purpose of the 5-year
delay for shallow-water flatfish is to provide industry with sufficient
time to develop more selective fishing techniques and/or markets for
these fish.
Minimum Retention Requirements
The IR/IU program establishes minimum retention requirements by
vessel type (catcher vessel, catcher/processor, and mothership) and by
the directed fishing status of the IR/IU species (open to directed
fishing, closed to directed fishing, and retention prohibited). In
general, vessel operators are required to retain 100 percent of their
catch of an IR/IU species unless a closure to directed fishing limits
retention of that species. When a closure to directed fishing limits
retention of an IR/IU species, the vessel operator is required to
retain all catch of that species up to the maximum retainable bycatch
(MRB) amount in effect for that species, and to discard catch in excess
of the MRB amount. The specific retention requirements by vessel type
[[Page 65380]]
and directed fishing status are set out at Sec. 679.27(c) and are
repeated below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
you must retain on board until lawful
If you own or operate a * * * and * * * transfer * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) catcher vessel............ (A) directed fishing for an IR/IU all fish of that species brought on board
species is open. the vessel.
(B) directed fishing for an IR/IU all fish of that species brought on board
species is prohibited. the vessel up to the MRB amount for that
species.
(C) retention of an IR/IU species is no fish of that species.
prohibited.
(ii) catcher/processor........ (A) directed fishing for an IR/IU a primary product from all fish of that
species is open. species brought on board the vessel.
(B) directed fishing for an IR/IU a primary product from all fish of that
species is prohibited. species brought on board the vessel up
to the point that the round-weight
equivalent of primary products on board
equals the MRB amount for that species.
(C) retention of an IR/IU species is no fish or product of that species.
prohibited.
(iii) mothership.............. (A) directed fishing for an IR/IU a primary product from all fish of that
species is open. species brought on board the vessel.
(B) directed fishing for an IR/IU a primary product from all fish of that
species is prohibited. species brought on board the vessel up
to the point that the round-weight
equivalent of primary products on board
equals the MRB amount for that species.
(C) retention of an IR/IU species is no fish or product of that species.
prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Retention Requirements
Bleeding Codends and Shaking Longline Gear
The minimum retention requirements set out at Sec. 679.27(c) apply
to all fish of each IR/IU species that are brought on board a vessel.
Any activity intended to cause the discarding of IR/IU species prior to
their being brought on board a vessel, such as bleeding codends or
shaking fish off longlines, is prohibited. NMFS recognizes that some
escapement of fish from fishing gear does occur in the course of
fishing operations. Therefore, incidental escapement of IR/IU species,
such as fish squeezing through mesh or dropping off longlines, will not
be considered a violation unless the escapement is intentionally caused
by action of the vessel operator or crew.
At-Sea Discard of Products
Any product from an IR/IU species may not be discarded at sea,
unless such discarding is necessary to meet other requirements of 50
CFR part 679.
Discard of Fish or Product Transferred From Other Vessels
The retention requirements of this final rule apply to all IR/IU
species brought on board a vessel, whether caught by that vessel or
transferred from another vessel. Discard of IR/IU species or products
that were transferred from another vessel is prohibited.
IR/IU Species Used as Bait
IR/IU species may be used as bait provided the bait is physically
attached to authorized fishing gear when deployed. Dumping IR/IU
species as loose bait (i.e., chumming) is prohibited.
Minimum Utilization Requirements
Beginning January 1, 1998, all catcher/processors and motherships
are required to maintain a 15-percent utilization rate for each IR/IU
species. Calculation of a vessel's utilization rate depends on the
directed fishing status of the IR/IU species in question. The minimum
utilization requirements are set out at Sec. 679.27(i) and in the
following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
your total weight of retained or lawfully transferred products
If * * * produced from your catch or receipt of that IR/IU species during a
fishing trip must * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) directed fishing for an IR/IU species is equal or exceed 15 percent of the round-weight catch or round-
open. weight delivery of that species during the fishing trip.
(2) directed fishing for an IR/IU species is equal or exceed 15 percent of the round-weight catch or round-
prohibited. weight delivery of that species during the fishing trip or 15
percent of the MRB amount for that species, whichever is lower.
(3) retention of an IR/IU species is equal zero.
prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recordkeeping Requirements
The IR/IU program for the BSAI contained changes to existing
recordkeeping requirements to aid the monitoring and enforcement of the
IR/IU program. Because NMFS uses the same logbooks for both the BSAI
and GOA, the recordkeeping requirements for the GOA were included in
the collection-of-information request approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for the BSAI IR/IU program (OMB control
number 0648-0213). The IR/IU-related recordkeeping requirements are as
follows: Beginning January 1, 1998, all catcher vessels and catcher/
processors that are currently required to maintain NMFS logbooks are
required to log the round weight catch of pollock and Pacific cod in
the NMFS catcher vessel daily fishing logbook or daily catcher/
processor logbook (DCPL) on a haul-by-haul or set-by-set basis.
Motherships are required to log the receipt of round weight of pollock
and Pacific cod in the mothership DCPL on a delivery-by-delivery basis.
Beginning January 1, 2003, this requirement extends to rock sole and
yellowfin sole in the BSAI and the shallow-water flatfish complex in
the GOA. These changes are necessary to provide vessel operators and
enforcement agents with round weight information for each IR/IU species
in order to monitor compliance with the IR/IU program.
Classification
The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, determined that Amendment
49 is necessary for the conservation and management of the groundfish
fishery of
[[Page 65381]]
the GOA and that it is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
other applicable laws.
An RIR was prepared for this final rule that describes the
management background, the purpose and need for action, the management
action alternatives, and the social impacts of the alternatives. The
RIR also estimates the total number of small entities affected by this
action and analyzes the economic impact on those small entities.
An FRFA was prepared that describes the impact this action will
have on small entities. In 1996, of the 444 vessels that participated
in the GOA trawl fishery, 404 were determined to be small entities. The
analysis concluded that the economic effects on longline, pot, and jig
gear vessels would not be significant. The economic effects on trawl
vessels participating in the pollock, sablefish, deep-water flatfish,
shallow-water flatfish, rockfish, and Atka mackerel fisheries also
would not be significant. The analysis concluded that the economic
effects on some trawl vessels participating in the Pacific cod,
arrowtooth flounder, and rex sole fisheries could be significant.
Finally, the analysis concluded that the overall economic effects on
vessels participating in the flathead sole fishery would be
significant. This action will have a significant economic impact on an
estimated 96 trawl vessels (24 percent of the GOA trawl fleet
determined to be small entities).
The analysis also concluded that for fish for which markets are
limited or undeveloped (e.g., small Pacific cod, and some flatfish
species) 100-percent retention requirements will impose direct
operational costs that probably cannot be offset (in whole or in part)
by expected revenues generated by the sale of the additional catch. No
quantitative estimate can be made of these costs at present. In
general, the impacts on any operation will vary inversely with the size
and configuration of the vessel, hold capacity, processing capability,
markets, and market access, as well as the specific composition and
share of the total catch of pollock, Pacific cod, and shallow-water
flatfish. The burden will tend to fall most heavily upon the smallest,
least diversified operations, especially smaller catcher/processors.
The ability of smaller catcher/processors to adapt to the proposed IR/
IU program will be further limited due to such programs such as the
vessel moratorium, license limitation, and Coast Guard load-line
requirements that place severe limits on reconstruction to increase
vessel size and/or processing capacity.
The economic impacts imposed by this rule would not be alleviated
by modifying reporting requirements for small entities. Where relevant,
this final rule employs performance standards rather than design
standards and allows maximum flexibility in meeting its requirements.
The Council considered and rejected the following alternatives that
might have mitigated impacts on small entities: (1) An alternative that
would have allowed exemptions or modified phase-in periods based on
vessel size was rejected because it would have diluted the reductions
in bycatch and discards and would have provided an unfair advantage to
a certain sector of the industry; (2) a ``harvest priority program''
that would have rewarded vessels demonstrating low bycatch was rejected
because it would not reduce discard rates expeditiously enough; and (3)
a voluntary bycatch and discard reduction program was rejected because
it would not have met statutory requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. In selecting its preferred alternative for Amendment 49, the
Council minimized the economic impact of the IR/IU program on small
entities in a variety of ways. First, the Council adopted a 5-year
delay in the effective date for rock sole and yellowfin sole to provide
industry with sufficient time to develop more selective fishing
techniques and/or markets for fish that are currently being discarded.
Second, the Council rejected utilization alternatives that would have
limited product forms or placed limits on fishmeal production, in order
to allow industry more flexibility in complying with the utilization
requirements of the IR/IU program. Finally, the Council rejected
monitoring alternatives that would have imposed substantial costs in
the form of increased observer coverage requirements or required a full
time compliance monitor aboard all vessels. A copy of this analysis is
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
of the Paperwork Reduction Act. The collection of this information has
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget, OMB Control
Number 0648-0213.
Under this revision to the collection-of-information requirement,
vessel operators would be required to log the round weight of each IR/
IU species on a haul-by-haul basis for catcher vessels and catcher/
processors and on a delivery-by-delivery basis for motherships. The
estimated current and new public reporting burdens for these
collections of information are as follows: For catcher vessels using
fixed gear, the estimated burden would increase from 20 minutes to 23
minutes; for catcher vessels using trawl gear, the estimated burden
would increase from 17 minutes to 22 minutes; for catcher/processors
using fixed gear, the estimated burden would increase from 32 minutes
to 35 minutes; for catcher/processors using trawl gear, the estimated
burden would increase from 29 minutes to 34 minutes; for motherships,
the estimated burden would increase from 28 to 33 minutes.
Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information has 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 on any other aspect
of the collection of information, to NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES).
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 that collection-of-information displays
a currently valid OMB number.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the
purposes of E.O. 12866.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 8, 1997.
Rolland A. Schmitten,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is 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., and 3631 et seq.
2. Section 679.27 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to
read as follows:
Sec. 679.27 Improved Retention/Improved Utilization Program.
(a) Applicability. The owner or operator of a vessel that is
required to
[[Page 65382]]
obtain a Federal fisheries or processor permit under Sec. 679.4 must
comply with the IR/IU program set out in this section while fishing for
groundfish in the GOA or BSAI, fishing for groundfish in waters of the
State of Alaska that are shoreward of the GOA or BSAI, or when
processing groundfish harvested in the GOA or BSAI.
(b) IR/IU species. The following species are defined as ``IR/IU
species'' for the purposes of this section:
(1) Pollock.
(2) Pacific cod.
(3) Rock sole in the BSAI (beginning January 1, 2003).
(4) Yellowfin sole in the BSAI (beginning January 1, 2003).
(5) Shallow-water flatfish species complex in the GOA as defined in
the annual harvest specifications for the GOA (beginning January 1,
2003).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-32492 Filed 12-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
