[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 30, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67755-67760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33892]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 970829216-7305-02; I.D. 073097B]
RIN 0648-AK15
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Extension of
the Interim Groundfish Observer Program through 1998
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule to implement a regulatory amendment
to extend with some minor revisions the current groundfish observer
coverage requirements and implementing regulations for the North
Pacific Groundfish Observer Program (Observer Program) that are in
effect through December 31, 1997. This action is necessary to assure
uninterrupted observer coverage requirements through 1998. This action
also provides notice of changes to observer qualifications and observer
training/briefing requirements, which are non-codified elements of the
Observer Program.
This action is intended to accomplish the objectives of the Fishery
Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska and the Fishery
Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea and
Aleutian Islands Area (FMPs).
DATES: Effective January 1, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Regulatory Impact Review/Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (RIR/FRFA) prepared for this regulatory amendment
and the Environmental Assessment (EA)/RIR/FRFA prepared for the 1997
Interim Groundfish Observer Program, dated August 27, 1996, may be
obtained from the Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS,
P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802; telephone: 907-586-7228. Copies of
the non-codified
[[Page 67756]]
elements of the Observer Program may be obtained also from this
address. 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: Kim S. Rivera, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. groundfish fisheries of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) and the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area in the Exclusive
Economic Zone are managed by NMFS under the FMPs. The FMPs were
prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council)
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and are implemented by regulations for the U.S.
fisheries at 50 CFR part 679. General regulations that also pertain to
U.S. fisheries appear at subpart H of 50 CFR part 600.
In 1996, the Council adopted and NMFS implemented the Interim
Groundfish Observer Program. The Interim Groundfish Observer Program
superseded the North Pacific Fisheries Research Plan and extended the
1996 mandatory groundfish observer requirements through 1997, unless
superseded by a long-term program that addresses concerns about
observer data integrity, equitable distribution of observer coverage
costs, and observer compensation and working conditions. NMFS continues
to pursue a long-term solution to concerns about observer morale and
the quality of observer data. NMFS is jointly developing with the
Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC) an alternative
observer program joint project agreement (JPA) that would address
concerns about observer data integrity and observer compensation and
working conditions. At its June 1997 meeting, the Council supported the
concept of developing such a program. The Council is scheduled to take
final action on this JPA at its February 1998 meeting. Given that this
alternative could not be in place by January 1, 1998, the current
interim program must be extended to assure uninterrupted observer
coverage requirements.
At its June 1997 meeting, the Council unanimously requested NMFS to
extend through 1998 the current interim program, with minor revisions.
A proposed rule to implement the interim program was published in the
Federal Register on September 19, 1997 (62 FR 49198). Background
information on the Interim Groundfish Observer Program may be found in
the preamble to the proposed rule and in the RIR/FRFA prepared for this
action. Comments on the proposed rule were invited through October 20,
1997. Three letters of comments were received. The comments are
summarized and responded to in the Response to Comments section below.
Changes from the Proposed Rule
The following changes from the proposed rule are made in the final
rule.
(1) Proposed regulations at Sec. 679.50(i)(1)(i) exempt observer
contractors certified prior to January 1, 1997, from the requirement to
submit a certification application to NMFS. Comment received on the
proposed rule questioned the situation whereby an observer contractor
previously certified by NMFS but not actively providing observer
services be allowed to perform the duties of an observer contractor
without going through the NMFS certification process again. NMFS did
not intend for this situation to be allowed and revises this final rule
to specify that observer contractors certified prior to January 1,
1998, and providing observer services during 1997, are exempt from the
requirement to submit an application.
(2) At its June 1997 meeting, the Council recommended an adjustment
to the conflict-of-interest standard at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4) that
prohibits a person from serving as an observer if that person was
employed in a North Pacific fishery during the previous 12-month
period. The Council recommended a less restrictive standard that would
prohibit an observer from working on any vessel or at any shoreside
processor owned or operated by a person who previously employed the
observer. The proposed regulation at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4) is not
necessary, because that the existing regulation at
Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(3) meets the criteria recommended by the
Council. Through oversight, NMFS proposed to revise
Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4) when actually, it should have proposed
removing it. NMFS removes this regulation at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4)
and retains the conflict-of-interest standard at
Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(3) that states that observers may not serve as
observers on any vessel or at any shoreside facility owned or operated
by a person who previously employed the observers.
Regulatory Changes For The 1998 Interim Groundfish Observer Program
After considering the public comments received, NMFS is extending
with some minor revisions the current groundfish observer coverage
requirements and implementing regulations for the Observer Program.
Except for the two changes from the proposed rule noted above, the
other minor revisions were proposed in the proposed rule. The minor
revisions are described below.
1. Extend the effective period of 50 CFR 679.50 through December
31, 1998.
2. Revise the 30-percent observer coverage requirement at
Sec. 679.50(c)(1)(vi) and (vii) to clarify that required coverage is
specific to the gear type, meaning, for example, that observer coverage
obtained for a vessel using hook-and-line gear cannot be used to comply
with observer coverage requirements for the same vessel when it is used
to fish with pot gear.
3. Expand the prohibition at Sec. 679.7(g)(1) to include sexual
harassment and bribery as unlawful interferences with an observer.
4. Remove the conflict-of-interest regulation at
Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4). The existing conflict-of-interest
regulation at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(3) that states that observers may
not serve as an observer on any vessel or at any shoreside facility
owned or operated by a person who previously employed the observers,
fully implements the Council's recommendation at its June 1997 meeting
to implement a less restrictive standard than the one at
Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4).
5. Revise the regulation at Sec. 679.50(i)(1)(i) to indicate that
observer contractors certified prior to January 1, 1998, and that
provided observer services during 1997, are exempt from the requirement
to submit an application for certification.
6. Revise the regulation at Sec. 679.50(i)(2)(xiv)(G) to alleviate
confusion on what information observer contractors currently are
required to submit to NMFS. The revision clarifies that an observer
contractor must submit a completed and unaltered copy of each type of
signed and valid contract an observer contractor has with those
entities required to have observer services. Furthermore, upon NMFS's
request, an observer contractor must submit completed and unaltered
copies of signed and valid contracts that the contractor has with
specific entities. Required copies of contracts must be submitted by
mail or fax. Types of signed and valid contracts include the contracts
an observer contractor has
[[Page 67757]]
with: (a) Vessels required to have 30-percent observer coverage, (b)
vessels required to have 100-percent observer coverage, (c) shoreside
processors required to have 30-percent observer coverage, (d) shoreside
processors required to have 100-percent observer coverage, or (e)
observers (to include contracts for the various compensation or salary
levels of observers, the levels being based on observer experience).
7. Correct an erroneous cross-reference in the regulation at
Sec. 679.50(j)(7)(iv).
Changes to Non-codified Elements Of The Observer Program
Three elements of the 1997 Observer Program were not codified in
regulation: (1) Observer qualifications, (2) observer training/briefing
requirements, and (3) NMFS's selection criteria for observer
contractors. NMFS's selection criteria for observer contractors remain
unchanged. The observer contractor selection criteria were published in
the Federal Register (61 FR 40380, August 2, 1996) and are available
upon request (see ADDRESSES). Observer qualifications and observer
training/briefing requirements are revised with the minor changes that
were proposed in the preamble of the proposed rule. These non-codified
elements will remain in effect until amended or rescinded. Although
they will not be codified, they are viewed as a part of the rule and
NMFS will publish a notification in the Federal Register and provide an
opportunity for public comment prior to proposing future changes to
these elements. The NMFS observer qualifications are as follows:
A. Prospective observers must have a bachelor's degree or higher
from an accredited college or university with a major in one of the
natural sciences.
B. Candidates must have a minimum of 30 semester hours or
equivalent in applicable biological sciences with extensive use of
dichotomous keys in at least one course. Candidates must also have
successfully completed at least one undergraduate course in mathematics
and one in statistics worth a combined total of at least 5 semester
hours. In addition, all applicants are required to have computer skills
that enable them to work competently with standard database software
and computer hardware.
C. Prospective observers are also required to complete successfully
any screening test(s) administered by NMFS. These tests would measure
basic mathematics, algebra, and computer skills as well as other
abilities necessary for successful job performance.
D. If a sufficient number of candidates meeting these educational
prerequisites is not available, the observer contractor may seek
approval from NMFS to substitute individuals with either a senior
standing in an acceptable major, or with an Associate of Arts (A.A.)
degree in fisheries, wildlife science, or an equivalent.
E. If a sufficient number of individuals meeting the above
qualifications is not available, the observer contractor may seek
approval from NMFS to hire individuals with other relevant experience
or training.
F. To qualify for certification, all prospective observers must
undergo safety and cold water survival training that requires the
prospective observers to demonstrate their ability to properly put on
an immersion suit in a specified time period, enter the water, travel
approximately 50 m to a ladder, and climb out of the water.
The additional mathematics, statistics, and computer skills
requirements reflect the increased responsibilities of observers and
are similar to the observer qualifications that would have been
required under the Research Plan, had it been fully implemented.
The NMFS observer training/briefing requirements are as follows:
A. Observers who have completed a deployment must be recertified
prior to another deployment. All observers are required to complete a
4-day briefing prior to their first deployment in any calendar year.
One-day briefings are required prior to subsequent deployments within a
calendar year. Certification following 1- or 4-day briefings will
expire after 1 month if deployment is delayed. Observers who have not
been deployed for 18 months are required to complete a 3-week training
course.
B. If an observer is not deployed within 1 month after completion
of training, the individual must complete a 1-day briefing. If the
observer is not deployed within 3 months after training, the individual
must complete a 4-day briefing. If the observer is not deployed within
6 months after training, the individual must retake the full training
course.
C. Observers may be required to attend an additional 4-day briefing
based upon an evaluation of data collected during their most recent
deployment.
Response to Comments
Comment 1. Previously certified observer contractors that have not
been actively providing observer services should not be allowed to
perform the duties of an observer contractor without going through the
NMFS certification process again.
Response. NMFS agrees. When NMFS promulgated regulations applying
to observer contractor certification (61 FR 56425; November 1, 1996),
the intent was that observer contractors already certified and
providing observer services need not submit certification applications
for 1997. NMFS clarifies this intent in this final rule and revises the
regulation at Sec. 679.50(i)(1)(i) to indicate that observer
contractors certified prior to January 1, 1998, and providing observer
services during 1997, are exempt from submitting an observer contractor
certification application. Observer contractors that were certified
prior to January 1, 1998, but did not provide observer services during
1997 must be recertified.
Comment 2. NMFS should require observer contractors to be
certified on an annual basis such that their performance in providing
observer services can be reviewed periodically. NMFS should also
consider limiting the number of certified observer contractors to the
suite of contractors supplying observers in 1997.
Response. At this time, NMFS declines making major changes to the
observer contractor certification process because they are outside the
scope of this rule. NMFS and the Pacific States Marine Fisheries
Commission (PSMFC) are jointly developing an alternative observer
program JPA that would better ensure the collection of quality observer
data by relying on a third party organization to provide procurement
services for required observer coverage. The observer contractor
certification process will be considered in this JPA between NMFS and
PSMFC as well as contractual arrangements between PSFMC and observer
companies. NMFS believes that an annual review of the performance of
observer contractor companies could be accommodated under this new
infrastructure. The JPA could also include a process to determine what
the optimum number of observer contractor companies may be. At this
time, action by NMFS to revise the certification process would be
premature.
Comment 3. The Association for Professional Observers (APO)
supports the proposed conflict-of-interest standard that states that
observers may not serve as an observer onboard a vessel or plant where
they were previously employed. The previous conflict-of-interest
standard [Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4)] was far stricter than any
conflict-of-interest standard in
[[Page 67758]]
the United States government or for any Council member.
Response. NMFS concurs in the APO's comment. The conflict-of-
interest standard at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(4) has been removed. The
less strict standard at Sec. 679.50(h)(2)(i)(A)(3) remains, providing
that observers may not serve as observers on any vessel or at any
shoreside facility owned or operated by a person who previously
employed the observers.
Comment 4. The APO supports the inclusion of sexual harassment and
bribery as unlawful interference with the observer.
Response. NMFS concurs and revises the regulation at
Sec. 679.7(g)(1) accordingly.
Comment 5. The observer coverage levels on vessels fishing with
certain types of gear, such as pots, that experience low bycatch is
unnecessary and costly. NMFS should not revise the 30 percent observer
coverage requirement by quarter and by gear type unless pot gear is
excluded.
Response. NMFS disagrees. The revisions to observer coverage
regulations at Sec. 679.50(c)(1)(vi) and (vii) serve only to clarify
the original intent that the coverage is gear-specific. NMFS
acknowledges that pot fisheries experience relatively low bycatch as
evidenced by the gear-specific observer coverage requirements for
catcher/processors and catcher vessels that are longer than 125 ft
(38.1 m) length overall (LOA). Vessels fishing with pot gear are only
required to have 30 percent observer coverage, while those using other
gear types must have 100 percent coverage [Sec. 679.50(c)(1)(iv)].
Comment 6. The APO understands why NMFS requires observer
contractors to submit specified information. APO does not understand
why certified contractors are allowed to withhold this information from
NMFS. If observers were to withhold required information, observers
have, and would be, decertified. How is it possible that NMFS has never
decertified or suspended an observer contractor in the past 7 years?
Response. NMFS does not allow observer contractors to withhold
required information. Some observer contractors have interpreted the
information submission regulations at Sec. 679.50(i)(2)(xiv)(G)
differently than NMFS intended. That was the impetus for NMFS to revise
the regulations in this final rule, thereby clarifying NMFS's intent.
NMFS acknowledges that the current regulations governing observer
contractor certification do not include a periodic review process to
evaluate the ability of an observer contractor to satisfactorily
perform their responsibilities and duties as required at
Sec. 679.50(i)(2). If NMFS became aware of evidence that an observer
contractor failed to perform the necessary responsibilities and duties,
NMFS would initiate an investigation under the suspension or
decertification procedures.
Comment 7. The proposed requirement that observers have taken at
least one course that used dichotomous keys extensively is ambiguous
and subjective. The current observer requirements are too rigid and
excessive given that observers are the most educated, yet lowest paid
members of the fishing community.
Response. NMFS disagrees. When NMFS reviews observer candidates'
transcripts, a course that used dichotomous keys extensively would be
evidenced by a course in biological taxonomy or in a course description
as provided with the transcript. NMFS observer training staff have
noted that observer candidates with coursework in dichotomous keys are
more successful in the portions of the observer training course where
fish dichotomous keys are used.
Comment 8. The proposed changes that would increase the number of
briefing days also increases the number of days that observers are not
paid for their work. Until observers are paid a decent wage, the number
of required briefing days should not be increased.
Response. NMFS disagrees. Although the proposed number of observer
briefing days required in a 12-month period would increase from 2 to 4
under this rule, the number of observer briefing days required for
subsequent deployments within a calendar year would decrease from 2 to
1. The total number of briefing days would be 4 for the first trip plus
1 for each subsequent deployment, compared to 2 briefing days for each
trip as is currently required. The net change in annual number of
observer briefing days is anticipated to be minimal. For instance, many
observers are deployed twice per year. Under this final rule, they
would be required to have 5 briefing days, as compared to 4 briefing
days under the previous requirements. If an observer is deployed three
times per year, the total number of briefing days would not change.
NMFS believes any additional briefing days and the associated cost are
warranted given the changes to observer sampling requirements and
procedures that necessitate additional observer briefing time. NMFS
does not anticipate that the training base for observers will change
significantly in the near future such that the additional briefing days
would not be necessary. The majority of the current observer contractor
companies do compensate observers to some extent for briefing days.
Comment 9. Currently, if observers have not been deployed for a 2-
year period, they must repeat the complete 3-week training course prior
to being deployed. NMFS has proposed that this time period be reduced
to 18 months. The APO opposes this revised requirement and believes
that the 4-day briefing requirement for an observer who has not worked
recently as an observer is sufficient. APO opposes any increased
provisions affecting the observer until NMFS overhauls the structure of
the observer program. If observers are required to go through training
after 18 months of not observing, this amounts to more volunteer work
on the part of the observer as most companies do not compensate the
observer during training.
Response. NMFS disagrees. New and future programs (e.g., observer
electronic reporting and multispecies CDQ, respectively) will continue
to create additional training requirements for observers, therefore
necessitating additional training time. Given these circumstances, NMFS
can no longer assure the best quality observer data possible if some
observers are not adequately trained in new sampling techniques and
procedures. NMFS believes this change in requirements will affect only
a relatively low number of observers. The best available information
indicates that approximately 5 percent of observers trained and briefed
in 1996 and 1997 had not been deployed during the prior 18-month
period. The majority of the current observer contractor companies do
compensate observers to some extent for training days. Nonetheless,
NMFS believes modified training and briefing requirements are necessary
to address data quality concerns.
Classification
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
The changes occurring through this regulatory action are largely
within the scope of issues thoroughly analyzed in the EA/RIR/FRFA for
the 1997 Interim Groundfish Observer Program (61 FR 56425, November 1,
1996). A copy is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). That EA/RIR/FRFA
supplements the EA/RIR/FRFA prepared for this action.
NMFS prepared an FRFA, which consists of the EA/RIR/FRFA and the
preambles to the proposed and final rule
[[Page 67759]]
implementing this action. Based on the analysis, it was determined that
this rule could have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. A copy of this analysis is available from
NMFS (see ADDRESSES). Observer costs borne by vessels and processors
are based on whether an observer is aboard a vessel and on overall
coverage needs. Higher costs are borne by those vessels and shoreside
processors that require higher levels of coverage. Most of the catcher
vessels participating in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska and
required to carry observers (i.e., vessels 60 ft (18.3 mt) LOA and
longer) meet the definition of a small entity under the Regulatory
Flexibilility Act. In 1995, about 270 catcher vessels carried
observers. The FRFA prepared for the 1997 Interim Groundfish Observer
Program describes the degree to which these catcher vessels would be
economically impacted by observer coverage levels. Because this rule
would not implement any changes in required observer coverage levels
and the underlying socioeconomic status of the fishery has remained
stable, the basic observer coverage requirements are not expected to
result in any economic impacts beyond those already analyzed.
Several minor changes are implemented for 1998 under this rule.
First, an observer conflict-of-interest regulation would be removed,
thereby potentially creating increased employment opportunities for
observers. Five observer contractors are likely to be affected by this
rule. All are considered small entities, and none are likely to
experience significant economic impacts. Given that observers are
employees of observer contractors, this change could increase the
economic benefits realized by observer contractors.
Second, although the number of observer briefing days required in a
12-month period would increase from 2 to 4, the number of observer
briefing days required for subsequent deployments within a calendar
year would decrease from 2 to 1. The net change in number of observer
briefing days is anticipated to be minimal. The briefing day costs
(lodging, per diem) are approximately $135-200 per day and are
dependent on the briefing location (Alaska or Washington). The cost is
borne by either the observer or the observer contractor and is
dependent upon the specific employment arrangements between these
entities. The briefing day costs are typically passed on from the
observer or the observer contractor to the vessel or processor that is
required to have the observer coverage. In 1996, 384 observers
(employed by five observer contractors) were briefed for the North
Pacific groundfish fisheries.
Third, additional training days will be required of observers that
have not been deployed for 18 months. Previously, these observers were
required to attend a 4-day briefing. This rule will require they attend
a 3-week training course (15 working days). NMFS believes this change
in requirements will affect only a relatively low number of observers.
The best available information, through October 1997, indicates that
approximately 5 percent of observers trained or briefed in 1996 and
1997 had not been deployed during the past 18-month period. From
January 1996 through October 1997, 1,010 observers were trained or
briefed. The majority of the current observer contractor companies do
compensate observers to some extent for briefing/training days.
Alternatives that addressed modifying reporting requirements for
small entities or the use of performance rather than design standards
for small entities were not considered by the Council or in this
analysis. Such alternatives are not relevant to this action and would
not mitigate the impacts on small entities. Allowing exemptions for
small entities from this proposed action would not be appropriate
because the objective to assure uninterrupted and comprehensive
observer coverage requirements through 1998 could not be achieved if
small entities were exempted.
However, this action does include measures that will minimize the
significant economic impacts of observer coverage requirements on at
lease some small entities. Vessels less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA are not
required to carry an observer while fishing for groundfish. Similarly,
vessels between 60 ft (18.3 m) and 125 ft (38.1 m) LOA have lower
levels of observer coverage than those for vessels over 125 ft (38.1 m)
LOA. These measures, which have been incorporated into the requirements
of the North Pacific Groundfish Observer Program since its inception in
1989, effectively mitigate the economic impacts on some small entities
without adversely affecting implementation of the conservation and
management responsibilities imposed by the FMPs and the Magnuson-
Stevens Act.
The EA/RIR/FRFA prepared for the 1997 Interim Groundfish Observer
Program (61 FR 56425, November 1, 1996) included the North Pacific
Fisheries Research Plan (Research Plan) as an alternative. However, the
Research Plan is no longer a viable alternative to the proposed interim
observer program. The political and economic concerns that led the
Council to repeal the Research Plan still exist. Furthermore, fees
collected in 1995 were refunded in early 1996 and, if the Research Plan
were pursued as the preferred alternative, start-up funding would have
to be collected again. Regulations implementing the existing observer
program will expire at the end of 1997. It is not feasible to implement
a fee-based observer program by the end of this year, which would be
necessary to provide observer coverage for the 1998 groundfish
fisheries. The preferred alternative for an interim observer program is
the only option that could be implemented by 1998 so that the
groundfish fisheries could commence without interruption. Since the
repeal of the Research Plan and at the direction of the Council, NMFS
has been developing a long-term alternative program structure to
address the problems identified with the current observer program
structure. The Council is scheduled to take final action at its
February 1998 meeting.
The proposed rule to implement regulatory changes to the Interim
Groundfish Observer Program was published in the Federal Register on
September 19, 1997 (62 FR 49198) and comments were invited on the IFRA.
No comments were received on the IRFA.
This rule contains a revised collection-of-information requirement
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This collection-of-
information requirement has been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under OMB Control Number 0648-0318. The estimated
current burden for submission of observer contractor information is 15
minutes. The proposed rule requested public comment on this revised
collection-of-information requirement. No comments were received from
OMB or the public.
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. (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
[[Page 67760]]
that collection- of-information displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Observer coverage provides quality data to monitor the fisheries,
support resource management, and monitor compliance by vessels and
shoreside processors with Federal fisheries regulations. Therefore,
continuation of uninterrupted observer coverage requirements as
intended by NMFS and the Council is essential to the conservation and
management of the fisheries. In addition, insofar as the requirements
of this observer program remain largely unchanged from those in effect
during 1997, the affected public should be familiar with these
requirements and should not need additional time to prepare for their
renewed effectiveness at the beginning of the 1998 fisheries.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, the Assistant
Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA finds for good cause namely, it is
unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to delay the
effectiveness of this rule for 30 days. In order to have no lapse in
coverage, this rule is effective on January 1, 1998.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 22, 1997.
David L. Evans,
Deputy 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. In Sec. 679.7, paragraph (g)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) Forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, intimidate, sexually
harass, bribe, or interfere with an observer.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 679.50, paragraph (h)(2)(i)(A)(4) is removed, paragraph
(h)(2)(i)(A)(5) is redesignated as paragraph (h)(2)(i)(A)(4) and the
section heading, paragraphs (c)(1)(vi) and (vii), (i)(1)(i) and (iii),
introductory text of (i)(2)(xiv), (i)(2)(xiv)(G), and (j)(7)(iv) are
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 679.50 Groundfish Observer Program applicable through December
31, 1998.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(vi) A catcher/processor or catcher vessel fishing with hook-and-
line gear that is required to carry an observer under paragraph
(c)(1)(v) of this section must carry an observer during at least one
entire fishing trip using hook-and-line gear in the Eastern Regulatory
Area of the GOA during each calendar quarter in which the vessel
participates in a directed fishery for groundfish in the Eastern
Regulatory Area using hook-and-line gear.
(vii) A catcher/processor or catcher vessel equal to or greater
than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA fishing with pot gear that participates for
more than 3 fishing days in a directed fishery for groundfish in a
calendar quarter must carry an observer during at least 30 percent of
its fishing days while using pot gear in that calendar quarter and
during at least one entire fishing trip using pot gear in a calendar
quarter for each of the groundfish fishery categories defined under
paragraph (c)(2) of this section in which the vessel participates.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Application. An applicant seeking to become an observer
contractor must submit an application to the Regional Administrator
describing the applicant's ability to carry out the responsibilities
and duties of an observer contractor as set out in paragraph (i)(2) of
this section and the arrangements and methods to be used. Observer
contractors certified prior to January 1, 1998, and that have provided
observer services during 1997, are exempt from this requirement to
submit an application and are certified for the term specified in
paragraph (i)(1)(iii) of this section.
(ii) * * *
(iii) Term. Observer contractors will be certified through December
31, 1998. Observer contractors can be decertified or suspended by NMFS
under paragraph (j) of this section.
(2) * * *
(xiv) Providing the following information to the Observer Program
Office by electronic transmission (e-mail), fax, or other method
specified by NMFS.
* * * * *
(G) A completed and unaltered copy of each type of signed and valid
contract (including all attachments, appendices, addendums, and
exhibits incorporated into the contract) an observer contractor has
with those entities requiring observer services under paragraphs (c)
and (d) of this section and with observers. Completed and unaltered
copies of signed and valid contracts with specific entities requiring
observer services or with specific observers must be submitted to the
Observer Program Office upon request. Types of signed and valid
contracts include the contracts an observer contractor has with:
(1) Vessels required to have observer coverage as specified at
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (iv) of this section,
(2) Vessels required to have observer coverage as specified at
paragraphs (c)(1)(ii), (v), and (vii) of this section,
(3) Shoreside processors required to have observer coverage as
specified at paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section,
(4) Shoreside processors required to have observer coverage as
specified at paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section,
(5) Observers (to include contracts for the various compensation or
salary levels of observers, the levels being based on observer
experience).
(6) Required copies of contracts must be submitted by mail or faxed
to: NMFS Observer Program Office, 7600 Sandpoint Way Northeast,
Seattle, WA 98115-0070; fax number 206-526-4066.
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(7) * * *
(iv) If the appeals officer grants review based on the written
petition, he or she may request further written explanation from
observers, observer contractors, or the decertifying officer or
suspending officer. The appeals officer will then render a written
decision to affirm, modify, or terminate the suspension or
decertification or return the matter to the suspending or decertifying
official for further findings. The appeals officer must base the
decision on the administrative records compiled under paragraphs (j)(5)
or (j)(6) of this section, as appropriate. The appeals officer will
serve the decision on observers or observer contractors and any
affiliates involved, personally or by certified mail, return receipt
requested, at the last known residence or place of business.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-33892 Filed 12-29-97; 8:45 AM]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
