Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70589

TABLE 1.—PETITION FINDING FOR SEVEN FOREIGN SPECIES OF SWALLOWTAIL BUTTERFLIES (FAMILY: PAPILIONIDAE)—

Continued

[R=listing not warranted/removed; C=listing warranted but precluded] 

Status 

Scientific name Synonyms Common name Historic range 

Category Priority 

R ............. n/a .......... Papilio esperanza ............... Pterourus esperanza 

Heraclides esperanza.

Oaxacan swallowtail, La 

llamadora.

Mexico. 

C ............. 5 ............. Parides ascanius ................ n/a ....................................... Fluminese swallowtail, 

Ascanius swallowtail.

Brazil. 

C ............. 11 ........... Parides hahneli ................... n/a ....................................... Hahnel’s Amazonian swallowtail.Brazil. 

R ............. n/a .......... Ornithoptera meridionalis .... Troides meridionalis; 

Schoenbergia 

meridionalis.

Southern tailed birdwing ..... Indonesia, Papua New 

Guinea. 

C ............. 8 ............. Teinopalpus imperialis ........ n/a ....................................... Kaiser-I-Hind swallowtail, 

Emperor of India.

Bhutan, China, India, Laos, 

Myanmar, Nepal, Thailand, Vietnam. 

Dated: November 18, 2004. 

Marshall P. Jones, Jr., 

Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 04–26611 Filed 12–6–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 041117321–4321–01; I.D. 

110904D]

RIN 0648–AS37

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Aleutian Islands 

Subarea Directed Pollock Fishery

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule 

that would implement Amendment 82 

to the Fishery Management Plan for 

Groundfish of the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands Management Area 

(FMP). Amendment 82, if approved, 

would establish a framework for 

management of the Aleutian Islands 

subarea (AI) directed pollock fishery. 

This action is necessary to implement 

provisions of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2004 that require 

the AI directed pollock fishery to be 

allocated to the Aleut Corporation for 

the purpose of economic development 

of Adak, Alaska. This action is intended 

to promote the goals and objectives of 

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), the FMP, 

Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2004, and other applicable laws.

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by January 21, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 

Salveson, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: 

Lori Durall. Comments may be 

submitted by:

• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802.

• Hand delivery to the Federal 

Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 

420A, Juneau, AK.

• Fax: 907–586–7557.

• E-mail: BSA82–0648–

AS37@noaa.gov. Include in the subject 

line the following document identifier: 

AI pollock proposed rule. E-mail 

comments, with or without attachments, 

are limited to 5 megabytes.

• Webform at the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions at that site for submitting 

comments.

Copies of the Environmental 

Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review 

(EA/RIR) prepared for the proposed 

rule, the 2000 FMP level biological 

opinion, and the 2001 biological 

opinion and its June 2003 supplement 

for the Steller sea lion protection 

measures may be obtained from the 

addresses stated above or from the 

Alaska Region NMFS website at 

www.fakr.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, Alaska 

Region, and by e-mail to 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 

202–395–7285.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melanie Brown, 907–586–7228 or 

melanie.brown@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

groundfish fisheries in the exclusive 

economic zone of the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands management area 

(BSAI) are managed under the FMP. The 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) prepared the FMP 

under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq.

Regulations implementing the FMP 

appear at 50 CFR part 679. General 

regulations governing U.S. fisheries also 

appear at 50 CFR part 600.

The Council has submitted 

Amendment 82 for review by the 

Secretary of Commerce, and a Notice of 

Availability of the amendment was 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 16, 2004 (69 FR 67107), with 

comments on the amendment invited 

through January 18, 2005. Comments 

may address the FMP amendment, the 

proposed rule, or both, but must be 

received by January 18, 2005, to be 

considered in the approval/disapproval 

decision on the FMP amendment. All 

comments received by that time, 

whether specifically directed to the 

FMP amendment or to the proposed 

rule, will be considered in the approval/

disapproval decision on the FMP 

Amendment.

Background

The Consolidated Appropriations Act 

of 2004 (Public Law (Pub. L.) 108–199) 

was signed into law on January 23, 

2004. Section 803 of this law allocates 

the AI directed pollock fishery to the 

Aleut Corporation for economic 

development of Adak, Alaska. The 

statute permits the Aleut Corporation to 

authorize one or more agents for 

activities necessary for conducting the 

70590 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

AI directed pollock fishery. Throughout 

this preamble, the term ‘‘Aleut 

Corporation’’ will mean the Aleut 

Corporation or its authorized agent(s) 

for purposes of describing activities 

required for managing the AI directed 

pollock fishery.

Public Law 108–199 requires the 

Aleut Corporation’s selection of 

participants in the AI directed pollock 

fishery and limits participation to 

American Fisheries Act (AFA) (Pub. L. 

105–277, Title II of Division C) qualified 

entities and vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) or 

less in length overall (LOA) with certain 

endorsements. Section 803(b) of Pub. L. 

108–199 restricts the annual harvest of 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery by vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less to less than 25 percent of the 

annual allocation until 2009, and to less 

than 50 percent of the annual allocation 

prior to 2013. These vessels must 

receive 50 percent of the annual 

directed pollock fishery allocation 

starting in 2013 and beyond. A FMP 

amendment and associated regulatory 

amendments are needed to implement 

these and other measures necessary to 

manage this fishery pursuant to 

provisions specified in Pub. L. 108–199.

The Council adopted Amendment 82 

in June 2004 and clarified a portion of 

its June action in October 2004. If 

approved by the Secretary of Commerce, 

Amendment 82 would revise the FMP to 

establish the management framework for 

the AI directed pollock fishery. This 

proposed rule would implement the 

following management provisions for 

the AI directed pollock fishery:

1. Restrictions on the harvest 

specifications for the AI directed 

pollock fishery, including: limitations 

on the size of the annual AI pollock 

total allowable catch (TAC), limits on 

the A season harvest of TAC, allocation 

requirement for vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) 

LOA or less, and reallocation provisions 

for unharvested amounts of the AI 

pollock allocations;

2. Provisions for fishery monitoring, 

including: the Aleut Corporation’s 

selection and NMFS’s approval of 

vessels and processors participating in 

the AI directed pollock fishery, 

restrictions on having pollock from the 

AI and either the Bering Sea subarea 

(BS) or the Gulf of Alaska on a vessel 

at one time, observer and scale 

requirements, catch monitoring control 

plans for shoreside and stationary 

floating processors, and Aleut 

Corporation’s and participants’

responsibility for ensuring the harvest 

does not exceed the AI directed pollock 

fishery allocation;

3. Reporting requirements; and

4. A new AI Chinook salmon 

prohibited species catch limit that, 

when reached, would close the existing 

Chinook salmon savings areas in the AI.

Prior to Pub. L. 108–199, the AI 

directed pollock fishery was managed 

pursuant to the AFA. The AFA allocated 

the AI directed pollock fishery to 

specific harvesters and processors 

named in the AFA and specified in 

regulations at 50 CFR part 679. Public 

Law 108–199 supersedes portions of the 

AFA and allocates all the AI directed 

pollock fishery to the Aleut Corporation. 

The implementation of Pub. L. 108–199 

requires the amendment of AFA 

provisions in the FMP and in the 

regulations at 50 CFR part 679 to 

provide for the allocation of the AI 

directed pollock fishery to the Aleut 

Corporation and for the management of 

this fishery.

The allocation of pollock to the AFA 

directed pollock fisheries under section 

206(b) of the AFA now only pertains to 

the BS pollock TAC given that Pub. L. 

108–199 fully allocates the AI directed 

pollock fishery to the Aleut Corporation. 

Thus, AFA restrictions associated with 

the directed pollock fishery, including 

excessive harvesting and processing 

shares under section 210(e) of the AFA, 

now apply only to the AFA allocations 

of BS pollock.

Similarly, AFA groundfish sideboard 

provisions under section 211 of the AFA 

would not apply to AFA entities while 

those entities are participating in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. Groundfish 

species taken incidental to the AI 

directed pollock fishery would be 

deducted from the relevant TACs, and 

fisheries for those species would be 

managed by NMFS accordingly. 

Pending the nature and scope of 

incidental catch in the AI directed 

pollock fishery, the Council could 

consider separate groundfish sideboard 

provisions for this fishery in the future.

Proposed Regulatory Amendments

The following describes the proposed 

amendments to the regulations, by 

section, that would be required to 

implement the management provisions 

for the AI directed pollock fishery 

pursuant to Amendment 82 and Pub. L. 

108–199.

§ 679.1 Authority

The BSAI pollock fisheries are 

managed under the provisions of the 

AFA. Certain provisions of the AFA 

applicable to the AI directed pollock 

fishery are superseded by Pub. L. 108–

199. Because the BSAI pollock fisheries 

include the AI directed pollock fishery, 

this proposed rule would revise 

§ 679.1(k) to include the AI directed 

pollock fishery in the paragraph title 

and to include Pub. L. 108–199 in the 

list of statutes applicable to the BSAI 

pollock fisheries.

§ 679.2 Definitions

Several definitions would be revised 

and four definitions would be added by 

this proposed rule for the AI directed 

pollock fishery.

The ‘‘Aleut Corporation’’ is identified 

in Pub. L. 108–199 as a business 

incorporated pursuant to the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 

1601 et seq.). A definition of the Aleut 

Corporation would be added by this 

proposed rule to clarify the identity of 

the corporation that would receive the 

AI directed pollock fishery allocation.

A definition of the ‘‘AI directed 

pollock fishery’’ would be added to 

mean the directed fishery for pollock 

allocated to the Aleut Corporation. This 

term does not include directed fishing 

for pollock under the Western Alaska 

Community Development Quota (CDQ) 

Program that may occur in the AI.

A vessel or processor selected by the 

Aleut Corporation and approved by 

NMFS to harvest or process pollock in 

the AI directed pollock fishery during a 

fishing year (January 1 through 

December 31) would be defined as an 

‘‘Aleut Corporation entity.’’ Section 

679.2 would be revised to add a 

definition for ‘‘Aleut Corporation 

entity’’ to facilitate its reference in 

regulations.

The proposed rule would add a 

definition for a ‘‘designated contact for 

the Aleut Corporation.’’ This individual 

would be designated by the Aleut 

Corporation as the contact person for 

management of the AI directed pollock 

fishery, including, but not limited to, 

reporting of the selection of Aleut 

Corporation entities set forth in 

§ 679.4(m) of the proposed rule and 

fulfilling the proposed recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements for the 

fishery set forth under § 679.5.

The definitions in § 679.2 that refer to 

the AFA pollock fishery would be 

revised to remove references to the AI 

directed pollock fishery. Public Law 

108–199 allocates AI directed pollock 

fishery to the Aleut Corporation, and no 

longer to AFA cooperatives.

Under the proposed rule and Pub. L. 

108–199, an Aleut Corporation entity 

must be selected by the Aleut 

Corporation and subsequently approved 

by NMFS before it could lawfully 

participate in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. Because AFA qualification 

alone would no longer allow 

participation in the AI directed pollock 

fishery, several AFA definitions would 

be revised by changing the terms ‘‘BSAI 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70591

pollock’’ to ‘‘BS pollock’’ and ‘‘BSAI 

directed pollock’’ to ‘‘BS directed 

pollock.’’ The definitions that would be 

revised are ‘‘AFA catcher/processor,’’

‘‘AFA catcher vessel,’’ ‘‘AFA crab 

processing facility,’’ ‘‘AFA entity,’’

‘‘AFA inshore processor,’’ ‘‘AFA 

mothership,’’ ‘‘designated primary 

processor,’’ ‘‘fishery cooperative or 

cooperatives,’’ ‘‘listed AFA catcher/

processor,’’ and ‘‘unlisted AFA catcher/

processor.’’ Removing references to the 

AI in these AFA definitions would 

clarify that meeting AFA qualifications 

does not also qualify a harvester or 

processor for participating in the AI 

directed pollock fishery.

The definition for ‘‘license limitation 

groundfish’’ in § 679.2 would be revised 

to add an exception for pollock 

harvested in the AI directed pollock 

fishery by vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less. Public Law 108–199 states that 

vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less that 

have a valid fishery endorsement may 

be eligible to participate in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The fishery 

endorsement is issued by the U. S. Coast 

Guard on the vessel’s U.S. Coast Guard 

documentation for participation in a U. 

S. fishery. Vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less would not need to demonstrate 

AI pollock harvest history and qualify 

for a license limitation permit (LLP) 

pursuant to § 679.4(k). This exception in 

the license limitation groundfish 

definition would reduce the licensing 

burden for participants in the AI 

directed pollock fishery, would allow 

vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less to 

enter the fishery without previous 

pollock fishing history or the necessity 

for owners to have an LLP that names 

that vessel, and would encourage 

economic development of Adak, Alaska, 

by facilitating the building of a fleet of 

vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less.

§ 679.4 Permits

Section 679.4 describes the permitting 

requirements for participation in the 

groundfish fisheries. Public Law 108–

199 requires harvesting and processing 

participants in the AI directed pollock 

fishery to be approved by the Aleut 

Corporation. Public Law 108–199 

specifies that vessels eligible to harvest 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery either must be AFA qualified or 

60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less. In June 

2004, the Council recommended that all 

catcher/processors and motherships, 

regardless of size, also be AFA qualified 

in order to participate in this fishery. 

Shoreside and stationary floating 

processors would not need to be AFA 

qualified to participate in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The proposed 

rule would establish criteria for the 

Aleut Corporation’s selection and 

NMFS’ approval of participants in this 

fishery beyond a participant’s 

qualification under the AFA.

This proposed rule would revise 

§ 679.4(l) to clarify that AFA permitting 

requirements would apply exclusively 

to the BS pollock fishery, to vessels 

greater than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA in the 

AI directed pollock fishery, and to all 

catcher/processors and motherships in 

the AI directed pollock fishery. 

Paragraphs that reference BSAI pollock 

harvest history would remain 

unchanged by this rule because the 

basis for establishing history for AFA 

participation was not changed by Pub. 

L. 108–199.

Revisions would be made to 

paragraphs (l)(1)(i) for applicability to 

the BSAI directed pollock fishery, 

(l)(5)(iii) for the single geographic 

location requirement for inshore 

processors, (l)(6)(ii)(B) for the delivery 

of BSAI pollock to designated 

cooperative processors, (l)(6)(ii)(C)(2) for 

cooperative contract information 

regarding BSAI pollock delivery, and 

(l)(6)(ii)(D)(2) for landing requirements 

for pollock harvested in the BSAI 

directed pollock fishery. The revision to 

paragraph (l)(6)(ii)(D)(1) for the LLP 

requirement would remove the 

reference to the AI cooperative 

allocation and would make the 

requirement applicable to vessels 

greater than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

harvesting pollock in the AI directed 

pollock fishery. Vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) 

LOA or less would not be required to 

have AFA or LLP permits. Paragraphs 

(l)(6)(ii)(D)(2)(i) and (ii) also would be 

revised to limit the landing 

requirements for qualified catcher 

vessels to pollock taken in the BS only.

Public Law 108–199 does not require 

vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less to 

comply with other Federal fisheries 

permitting requirements that may not be 

easily met and which could restrict the 

vessels’ participation. However, Federal 

fisheries permits (FFPs) pursuant to 

§ 679.4(b) would be required for all AI 

directed pollock fishery vessels to 

ensure Steller sea lion protection 

measures requiring vessel monitoring 

systems (§ 679.28) apply to vessels 

fishing in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. The FFP requirement applies to 

catcher vessels, catcher/processors, and 

motherships. The FFP requirement 

should not restrict participation in the 

AI directed pollock fishery considering 

the minimal requirements for obtaining 

the permit, and the FFPs are provided 

free of charge. No regulatory revisions 

are needed to implement the pollock 

fishery endorsement and FFP 

requirements for the AI directed pollock 

fishery participants.

A new paragraph (m) would be added 

to § 679.4 to establish the annual 

process for NMFS’ approval of 

participants in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. The participants selected by the 

Aleut Corporation for the AI directed 

pollock fishery must be approved by 

NMFS annually under criteria 

established under Pub. L. 108–199 and 

in this proposed rule. NMFS’ approval 

must be received by the Aleut 

Corporation before the participant 

would be authorized to fish in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The proposed 

rule would require the Aleut 

Corporation to provide NMFS the 

identity of selected harvesters and/or 

processors at least 14 days before the 

participant is scheduled to begin 

harvesting or processing pollock in the 

AI directed pollock fishery. NMFS 

would review each participant selected 

by the Aleut Corporation relative to 

approval criteria established in 

regulations. Upon approval, NMFS 

would provide the Aleut Corporation a 

letter showing NMFS’ approval of each 

participant and the date harvesting or 

processing by the participants in the AI 

directed pollock fishery may commence.

The Aleut Corporation would be 

required to provide a copy of NMFS’

approval letter to each participant in the 

AI directed pollock fishery before 

harvesting or processing by that 

participant commences during the 

fishing year. Vessels participating in the 

fishery would be required to carry a 

copy of NMFS’ approval letter on the 

vessel at all times while participating in 

the fishery. Processors would be 

required to provide documentation of 

approval during NMFS inspections. 

This process would allow for approval 

of participants before the fishery 

commences and would assist 

enforcement personnel to rapidly 

establish such approval during a 

boarding or inspection for compliance 

monitoring or enforcement purposes.

Participants may be added to the 

approval list at any time during the 

fishing year upon selection by the Aleut 

Corporation following the procedure set 

forth above 14 days before harvesting or 

processing would commence. Once a 

participant is approved by NMFS for 

harvesting or processing pollock taken 

in the AI directed pollock fishery during 

the fishing year, the participant would 

remain approved by NMFS for the 

duration of the fishing year, as long as 

the Federal fishing permit and any 

applicable endorsement remains 

current. Subsequent disapproval for 

participation in the AI directed pollock 

fishery by the Aleut Corporation, for 

70592 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

whatever reason, would be managed by 

the Aleut Corporation through private 

contractual agreements with the 

participant.

Paragraph (m) also would include the 

procedures for appeal of NMFS’

disapproval of the Aleut Corporation’s 

selection of a participant for the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The Regional 

Administrator would notify the Aleut 

Corporation and the participant of 

NMFS’ disapproval of the participant. 

The reason for the disapproval would be 

provided and the disapproved 

participant would have 30 days to 

provide additional evidence. After 30 

days, the Regional Administrator would 

issue an initial administrative 

determination (IAD) regarding the 

selection and reasons for the decision. A 

disapproved participant would be able 

to appeal the IAD under the appeals 

procedure at § 679.43 and would be 

permitted to participate in the AI 

directed pollock fishery while the IAD 

is under appeal. This revision would 

provide due process in the event of a 

dispute with NMFS’ disapproval.

§ 679.5 Recordkeeping and Reporting

This proposed action would add a 

new paragraph (q) to the recordkeeping 

and reporting regulations at § 679.5 to 

add requirements for the AI directed 

pollock fishery. The Aleut Corporation 

would be required to submit a weekly 

catch report to NMFS for all pollock 

caught by all vessels fishing on its 

behalf. The information required would 

include: the catcher vessel Alaska 

Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) 

identification number; FFP or Federal 

processor permit number; delivery date; 

the amount of pollock received in 

pounds plus the weight of at-sea pollock 

discards; and the ADF&G fish ticket 

number. The proposed rule also would 

require the Aleut Corporation to 

designate a contact for communications 

regarding reporting and recordkeeping. 

The designation of a contact and the 

information required in the report 

would ensure timely and complete 

harvest information from the Aleut 

Corporation is received to facilitate 

oversight of the AI directed pollock 

fishery.

The Council recommended that the 

Aleut Corporation be required to submit 

both an annual report and a one-time 

report about the use of its AI pollock 

allocation. The annual report would 

include: (1) information describing the 

use of the revenues generated from the 

AI directed pollock fishery by the Aleut 

Corporation for economic development 

in Adak, and (2) information about 

catch similar to that required to be 

provided by the AFA cooperatives 

under § 679.61(f). The Council 

requested that the Aleut Corporation 

submit a draft of the annual report to the 

Council by December 1 and a final 

report by February 1. The Council also 

requested a one-time report to be 

provided prior to the June 2006 Council 

meeting with information on how the 

revenue from the fishery was spent, 

harvest success, Chinook salmon 

bycatch, development of the small 

vessel fleet, and pollock processing 

capacity. The Council would consider 

this information in these reports to 

determine if the AI directed pollock 

fishery allocation should be adjusted.

Management of the AI directed 

pollock fishery would require revisions 

to logbooks and forms to ensure 

accurate data collection. The two 

catcher vessel daily fishing logbooks, 

two catcher/processor daily cumulative 

production logbooks (DCPLs), 

mothership DCPL, and shoreside 

processor DCPL would be revised by 

adding ‘‘AIP’’ to the management block 

of the logbooks to identify the Aleutian 

Islands directed pollock fishery in the 

reports. The two weekly production 

reports (WPRs), two check-in/check out 

reports, buying station report, and daily 

production report would be revised by 

adding ‘‘AIP’’ to the management block 

of the forms. The software for the 

shoreside processor electronic logbook 

report would be revised by adding 

‘‘AIP’’ to the management options 

onscreen.

§ 679.7 Prohibitions

The prohibitions specific to the AFA 

in § 679.7(k) would be revised by this 

proposed rule to apply only to the BS 

directed pollock fishery. Although many 

of the prohibitions in this paragraph 

continue to apply to the AI directed 

pollock fishery, several no longer apply 

under Pub. L. 108–199. In paragraphs 

(k)(3)(i) and (k)(4)(i), inshore processors 

and catcher vessels are prohibited from 

processing and harvesting BSAI pollock, 

respectively, without an AFA permit. 

Public Law 108–199 and Amendment 

82 would allow catcher vessels 60 feet 

(18.3 m) LOA or less to harvest pollock 

in the AI directed pollock fishery and 

would allow shoreside and stationary 

floating processors without AFA 

permits to process pollock taken in the 

AI directed pollock fishery. All catcher/

processors, motherships, and catcher 

vessels larger than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

must be AFA qualified vessels to 

participate in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. Paragraphs (k)(3)(i) and (k)(4)(i) 

would be revised to exclude AI pollock 

from the prohibition on harvesting 

pollock without an AFA permit. These 

revisions would require each inshore 

processor and catcher vessel in the BS 

directed pollock fishery and each 

catcher vessel greater than 60 feet (18.3 

m) LOA in the AI directed pollock 

fishery to have an AFA permit.

Paragraphs (k)(3)(iii) and (iv) limit the 

amount of BSAI pollock to be processed 

by inshore processors and limit the 

number of geographic locations at 

which BSAI pollock could be processed 

in a year. These limitations apply to the 

AFA pollock fishery, but are not 

required in the AI directed pollock 

fishery by either Pub. L. 108–199 or 

Amendment 82. Consequently, this 

proposed rule would remove references 

to the AI pollock fishery from each of 

these paragraphs.

Paragraphs (k)(5), (k)(6), and (k)(7) 

prohibit inshore AFA fishery 

cooperatives from exceeding their 

annual allocations of BSAI pollock and 

prohibit AFA-qualified vessels and 

processors from harvesting or 

processing an excessive share of BSAI 

pollock. Because all of the AI directed 

pollock fishery is allocated to the Aleut 

Corporation, the prohibitions in these 

paragraphs are no longer appropriate for 

the AI directed pollock fishery. This 

proposed rule would revise these 

paragraphs to remove references to the 

AI directed pollock fishery and would 

ensure that these prohibitions continue 

to apply only to the AFA fisheries.

New paragraph (l) would add 

prohibitions specific to the AI directed 

pollock fishery. Harvesting and 

processing of pollock taken in the AI 

directed pollock fishery would be 

prohibited without selection by the 

Aleut Corporation and NMFS’ approval, 

as specified under § 679.4(m). NMFS 

would post a list of NMFS approved 

participants at www.fakr.noaa.gov that 

could be reviewed by the participant 

before harvesting or processing 

activities. This prohibition would 

ensure that only harvesters and 

processors selected by the Aleut 

Corporation and approved by NMFS 

could participate in the AI directed 

pollock fishery.

Paragraph (l) also would prohibit 

catcher vessels from having onboard at 

the same time pollock that was 

harvested from the AI and from either 

the BS or the GOA. A catcher vessel 

would be required to offload all pollock 

that was from the BS or the GOA before 

fishing in the AI directed pollock 

fishery and to offload all pollock taken 

in the AI directed pollock fishery before 

fishing in the BS or GOA. This 

prohibition would facilitate 

enforcement and the accurate 

accounting of pollock taken in the AI.

Because all catcher/processors and 

motherships participating in the AI 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70593

directed pollock fishery would be 

required to be AFA qualified, catcher/

processors and motherships would be 

prohibited from processing in the AI 

directed pollock fishery without 

complying with the AFA catch weighing 

and observer sampling requirements 

under paragraphs (k)(2)(iii) and 

(k)(2)(iv). This revision would ensure 

the quality of information collected 

regarding pollock processing.

Paragraph (l) also would prohibit 

harvesters from delivering pollock 

harvested in the AI directed pollock 

fishery to shoreside or stationary 

floating processors unless the processor 

has a catch monitoring control plan 

satisfying the requirements of 

§ 679.28(g) or to a processing vessel that 

is not AFA qualified and that is not 

selected by the Aleut Corporation and 

approved by NMFS for processing 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery.

To manage the harvest of the Aleut 

Corporation pollock allocation, 

paragraph (l) would impose prohibitions 

on the Aleut Corporation and its entities 

similar to prohibitions for AFA inshore 

cooperatives. The proposed rule would 

prohibit harvest in excess of the harvest 

specifications for the AI directed 

pollock fishery by participants and by 

the Aleut Corporation. This would 

ensure that both the participants and the 

Aleut Corporation would be responsible 

to maintain harvest amounts within the 

AI directed pollock fishery annual, 

seasonal, and vessel allocations 

established in the harvest specifications.

§ 679.20 General Limitations

Section 679.20(a)(5) establishes the 

provisions for the pollock harvest 

specifications in the BS, AI, Bogoslof 

District, and the GOA. The proposed 

rule would add a new paragraph (iii) for 

the provisions for the AI directed 

pollock fishery and to separate AI 

pollock from the BS pollock harvest 

specifications.

In June 2004, the Council 

recommended a method of funding the 

annual allocation for the AI directed 

pollock fishery in consideration of the 

optimum yield (OY), the CDQ pollock 

directed fishing allowance pursuant to 

the AFA and § 679.31(a), and the 

combined TACs for the BSAI groundfish 

fisheries. The Council’s recommended 

development of annual 

recommendations for the Bering Sea 

(BS) and AI TACs within the 2 million 

mt OY cap. The Council also 

recommended that the CDQ directed 

pollock fishery allowance not be 

reduced by the establishment of an AI 

pollock TAC. The proposed FMP text 

and proposed rule would implement 

these policy decisions.

Section 206(a) of the AFA requires 

that ‘‘10 percent of the total allowable 

catch of pollock in the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands management area be 

allocated as a directed fishing 

allowance’’ to the CDQ program. Public 

Law 108–199 does not prohibit a CDQ 

pollock directed fishing allowance in 

the AI. In October 2004, the Council 

clarified its intent that the CDQ directed 

fishing allowance should be deducted 

from the AI annual pollock TAC to 

create the initial pollock TAC in the 

same manner as the Bering Sea pollock 

allocations. The AI directed pollock 

fishery for the Aleut Corporation would 

be allocated from the initial pollock 

TAC after subtraction of the incidental 

catch amount. The Council did not 

recommend a change to the existing 

regulatory provisions that establish 

separate CDQ directed fishing 

allowances in the AI and the Bering Sea 

subareas. Thus, 10 percent of the TAC 

specified annually for each subarea 

would be allocated to the CDQ pollock 

directed fishing allowance, and the 

Aleut Corporation and AFA directed 

pollock fishery allocations would be 

reduced by corresponding amounts.

This approach maintains Council 

intent to not reduce the BSAI CDQ 

directed fishing allowance as a result of 

the Aleut Corporation allocation. The 

Aleut Corporation allocation would 

equal the AI pollock TAC minus the 10 

percent CDQ pollock directed fishing 

allowance and minus the incidental 

catch allowance (ICA).

In consideration of the harvesting and 

processing capacity for the AI directed 

pollock fishery, economic development 

needs for Adak, Alaska, and impacts on 

other BSAI groundfish fisheries, the 

Council recommended limits on the 

amount of annual harvest in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The proposed 

rule would establish these limits in a 

new paragraph § 679.20(a)(5)(iii). The 

annual AI pollock TAC would equal 

19,000 mt when the AI pollock ABC is 

equal to or more than 19,000 mt. When 

the AI pollock ABC is less than 19,000 

mt, the annual AI pollock TAC would 

be no more than the ABC. The Council 

determined that the 19,000 mt limit 

minus the CDQ directed pollock fishing 

allowance and the ICA would provide 

an adequate amount of pollock to the 

Aleut Corporation for economic 

development while not excessively 

impacting the other BSAI groundfish 

fisheries, as combined annual TACs 

may not exceed the 2 million mt OY 

cap.

The proposed rule includes a 

reallocation provision for unharvested 

AI pollock. The proposed rule would 

revise § 679.20(a)(5) to authorize the 

Regional Administrator to determine the 

amount of the AI directed pollock 

fishery allocation or CDQ directed 

fishing allowance that is not likely to be 

harvested and to reallocate the 

anticipated unused amounts to the BS 

directed pollock fishery or the BS CDQ 

pollock directed fishing allowance, 

respectively, as soon as practicable. The 

amount of reallocation would be limited 

by the BS pollock ABC and must be 

consistent with determinations resulting 

from any associated consultations 

conducted under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA). Based on the 

Council’s funding policy, this would 

ensure that a portion of the BS pollock 

fishery recommended TAC that was 

applied to the AI recommended TAC 

may be returned to the BS pollock 

fishery if it is not expected to be 

harvested in the AI.

The Steller sea lion protection 

measures require harvest of pollock to 

be within the annual TAC amounts to 

ensure harvest is appropriate to the 

amount of available pollock biomass 

and other considerations. Because of the 

current condition of the BS pollock 

stock and the 2 million mt OY 

maximum in the BSAI, the BS pollock 

TAC is set well below the BS pollock 

ABC. The maximum amount of 

reallocation that could occur from the 

AI subarea to the BS subarea is no more 

than 19,000 mt minus the ICA. The 

19,000 mt TAC limit is approximately 

1.3 percent of the 2005 proposed BS 

pollock TAC (1,474,450 mt). The 

proposed acceptable biological catch 

(ABC) for pollock in the BS subarea is 

2,363,000 mt. The 19,000 mt limit is 2 

percent of the difference between the BS 

pollock TAC and ABC. Even with a 

reallocation of 19,000 mt from the AI 

subarea, the amount of pollock available 

for harvest in the BS (1,493,450 mt) 

would be well below the ABC.

Based on the 19,000 mt annual TAC 

limit for AI pollock and on the current 

biomass size of the BS pollock stock, 

any reallocation of unharvested AI 

pollock TAC is not likely to result in a 

harvest in the BS that is excessive in 

relation to available pollock biomass. As 

long as the gap between the BS pollock 

ABC and the BS pollock TAC is wide, 

the reallocation of unharvested pollock 

from the AI to the BS is not likely to 

adversely affect Steller sea lions or their 

critical habitat. If the biomass of the BS 

pollock stock declines substantially in 

the future or if the gap between ABC 

and TAC is substantially reduced, 

reallocation of unharvested AI pollock 

may need to be restricted to protect 

Steller sea lions and their critical 

70594 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

habitat. The condition of the BS stock 

and the amount of AI pollock 

reallocation would need to be 

considered at that time to determine the 

likely effect on Steller sea lions and 

their critical habitat. No reallocation 

would occur if the action was likely to 

adversely affect Steller sea lions or their 

critical habitat.

The seasonal apportionment of 

pollock harvest in the AI directed 

pollock fishery would be revised by this 

proposed rule. Pollock is an important 

prey species for the endangered western 

distinct population segment of Steller 

sea lions. The protection measures for 

Steller sea lions include temporal 

dispersion of pollock harvest. To 

temporally disperse harvest of prey 

species, the Steller sea lion protection 

measures require apportioning 40 

percent of the BSAI pollock TAC to the 

A season and 60 percent to the B season. 

The regulations currently state that the 

seasonal apportionment applies to the 

BSAI pollock fishery. The proposed 

seasonal apportionment of AI directed 

pollock fishery would be established in 

a different manner than the seasonal 

apportionment of BS pollock. The 

proposed rule would remove references 

to AI pollock seasonal apportionment in 

§§ 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B) and (a)(5)(ii) and 

would add a new paragraph (iii) to 

describe the method of seasonal 

apportionment for the AI directed 

pollock fishery.

The Council considered the Steller 

sea lion protection measures in 

recommending the seasonal 

apportionment of the AI directed 

pollock fishery. The proposed rule 

would limit the A season apportionment 

to no more than the lesser of the annual 

initial TAC plus any CDQ fishery or 40 

percent of the annual ABC. The total 

harvest of pollock in the A season from 

the directed fishery (AI directed pollock 

fishery and any CDQ fishery) and ICA 

would not exceed 40 percent of the 

ABC. This method of limiting seasonal 

harvest based on ABC is a departure 

from the use of TAC for the basis of 

seasonal apportionments. Because the 

annual TAC is capped at 19,000 mt 

when the ABC is greater than 19,000 mt, 

the Council recommended providing for 

the annual initial TAC to be taken fully 

in the A season as long as the annual 

initial TAC plus any CDQ fishery does 

not exceed 40 percent of the ABC. This 

would allow the participants to 

maximize the revenue potential from 

the fishery by harvesting the more 

valuable products which are available 

early in the year and would keep the A 

season harvest within the intended 40 

percent seasonal limits of the Steller sea 

lion protection measures.

The B season apportionment to the AI 

directed pollock fishery would be the 

remainder of the annual initial TAC 

minus the A season apportionment, and 

minus the annual ICA. Unharvested A 

season pollock initial TAC may be 

reapportioned by the Regional 

Administrator to the B season, if it is 

determined that the B season 

apportionment and reallocation are 

likely to be harvested. Otherwise, the 

Regional Administrator may reallocate 

unharvested AI pollock initial TAC to 

the BS pollock fishery as long as the BS 

pollock ABC is not exceeded, as 

described above.

The CDQ fishery is not part of the 

Aleut Corporation’s directed pollock 

fishery in the AI. Any harvest of the 

CDQ pollock directed fishing allowance 

in the AI would continue to be 

conducted with the same seasonal 

apportionments as currently specified 

for the AI and BS subareas and CDQ 

components under § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B). 

The proposed rule would reorganize 

these provisions under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B) and continue to 

apportion 40 percent of the CDQ 

directed fishing allowance in the AI to 

the A season and 60 percent to the B 

season. The CDQ pollock directed 

fishing allowances specified for the AI 

and the BS subareas would be 

determined during the harvest 

specifications process.

Section 679.20(a)(5)(ii) currently 

requires that the allocation of pollock in 

both the AI and the Bogoslof District is 

to be done in the same manner as the 

AFA allocations in the BS subarea. 

Because Pub. L. 108–199 allocated the 

non-CDQ directed pollock fishery in the 

AI to the Aleut Corporation, this 

proposed rule would revise paragraph 

(a)(5)(ii) to apply to the Bogoslof District 

only. The establishment of an ICA when 

the directed pollock fishery in the AI is 

closed would be addressed in a new 

paragraph (iii) where harvest 

specifications and seasonal allocations 

would be specified.

Paragraph (a)(5)(iii) also would 

specify the further allocation of the 

Aleut Corporation’s allocation among 

vessels approved to participate in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. Public Law 

108–199 allows the allocation of a 

portion of the AI directed pollock 

fishery to vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less in increasing amounts through 

2013. In 2004 through 2008, up to 25 

percent of the allocation may be 

provided to vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less. In 2009 through 2012, up to 50 

percent of the allocation may be 

provided to vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA 

or less. For 2013 and beyond, 50 percent 

of the allocation must be provided to 

vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less. The 

first two allocation periods would 

establish a cap on how much of the 

allocation may go to small vessels. For 

2013 and beyond, the amount to go to 

the small vessels would be 50 percent 

of the allocation specified during the 

harvest specifications process.

§ 679.21 Prohibited Species Bycatch 

Management

The Council recommended a separate 

Chinook salmon prohibited species 

catch limit in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. Currently § 679.21(e)(1)(vii) 

establishes the BSAI Chinook salmon at 

29,000 fish. This limit applies to all 

Chinook salmon taken when directed 

fishing for pollock, including CDQ 

pollock fisheries in the BSAI. When this 

limit is reached in the BSAI pollock 

trawl fishery, the Chinook salmon 

savings areas are closed according to a 

schedule specified in 

§ 679.21(e)(7)(viii). The two Chinook 

salmon savings areas are shown in 

Figure 8 to 50 CFR part 679. One of 

these areas is in the AI (area 1), and the 

other area is in the BS (area 2). Area 2 

is considered an important area for 

pollock harvest in the BS. The pollock 

fishery in the BS subarea has had 

annual incidental catches of Chinook 

salmon well over 29,000 fish in 2002 

and 2003 and likely will exceed the 

29,000 limit in 2004, resulting in the 

closure of areas 1 and 2.

To reduce the potential impact of 

Chinook salmon bycatch taken in the AI 

directed pollock fishery on the BS 

pollock fishery, the Council 

recommended a separate AI Chinook 

salmon prohibited species catch (PSC) 

limit of 700 fish. The AI directed 

pollock fishery has been closed since 

1999, and little recent information exists 

on Chinook salmon bycatch in the AI 

pollock trawl fishery. The 700 fish limit 

is based on the highest rate of Chinook 

salmon bycatch observed in the AI 

pollock fishery between 1991 and 1998 

and a 19,000 mt AI pollock TAC. If the 

amount of Chinook salmon bycatch in 

the AI subarea were to exceed the 700 

fish limit, the proposed rule would 

require the closure of the AI portion of 

the Chinook salmon savings areas only 

(area 1 on Figure 8 to 50 CFR part 679). 

The proposed rule would revise 

§ 679.21(e)(1)(vii) by removing the AI 

pollock reference for the 29,000 

Chinook salmon PSC limit. A new 

paragraph (e)(1)(ix) would be added to 

establish the 700 Chinook salmon PSC 

limit for the AI directed pollock fishery.

Further, the proposed rule revisions 

to § 679.21(e)(7)(viii) would provide that 

reaching the BS pollock trawl Chinook 

salmon PSC limit of 29,000 would close 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70595

the Chinook salmon savings areas close 

both in the AI and in the BS. The 

Chinook salmon savings area in the AI 

is not expected to be an important 

location for pollock harvest, so closing 

this area based on obtaining the BS PSC 

limit for Chinook salmon would not be 

an excessive burden to the AI directed 

pollock fishery and would provide 

additional protection to Chinook 

salmon. The incidence of Chinook 

salmon bycatch would be reviewed 

during the harvest specifications 

process to determine if the limit in this 

proposed rule is appropriate based on 

recent catch information.

§ 679.23 Seasons

Section 679.23(e)(2) would be revised 

to include the AI directed pollock 

fishery in the list of fisheries to which 

seasonal apportionments apply. The 

Steller sea lion protection measures 

require the pollock harvest in the BSAI 

to be managed in two seasons to ensure 

temporal dispersion of harvest. This 

proposed action would establish the A 

season as 1200 hours, A.l.t., January 20 

through 1200 hours, A.l.t., June 10 and 

the B season as 1200 hours, A.l.t., June 

10 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., November 

1.

§ 679.28 Equipment and Operational 

Requirements

The Council recommended that 

pollock deliveries to a shoreside or 

stationary floating processor be 

prohibited unless the processor has a 

catch monitoring control plan (CMCP). 

The CMCP explains how a processor 

will meet the catch monitoring and 

control standards detailed in 

§ 679.28(g)(7). This proposed action 

would revise § 679.28(g)(2) to include 

the AI directed pollock fishery 

shoreside processors and stationary 

floating processors with the processors 

required to have a CMCP. The CMCP 

would ensure that pollock processed for 

the Aleut Corporation would be 

accurately monitored and reported to 

ensure effective management of the 

fishery. This proposed rule also would 

correct a typographical error in 

paragraph (g)(3) which references the 

CMCP standards by revising the 

reference in the paragraph from (g)(6), 

which applies to changing a CMCP, to 

(g)(7) which applies to the standards.

§ 679.50 Groundfish Observer Program

The Council recommended that 

catcher vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) 

LOA be required to accept a NMFS staff 

observer if one is designated by NMFS 

to observe on the vessel. An observer 

collects fishery information that can be 

used to manage harvest activities for a 

fishery. NMFS staff observers would be 

provided without charge to the vessel 

owner to collect this information. 

Current regulations do not require 

observers on catcher vessels less than 60 

feet (18.3 m) LOA in the AI directed 

pollock fishery. Revised paragraph (e)(1) 

would require the owner of a vessel less 

than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA in the AI 

directed pollock fishery to accept a 

NMFS staff observer and to comply with 

the safety requirements for carrying an 

observer at § 679.50(g)(1)(ii). 

Information gathered by the NMFS staff 

observers may be used in considering 

future observer requirements for vessels 

less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA in the AI 

directed pollock fishery.

Catcher vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) to less 

than 125 feet (38.1 m) LOA in the AI 

directed pollock fishery are required by 

§ 679.50(c)(1)(v) to have 30 percent 

observer coverage during a calendar 

quarter and for at least one complete 

fishing trip targeting pollock, as defined 

under paragraph (c)(2)(i). Proposed 

revisions to paragraph (c)(2)(i) would 

ensure the AI directed pollock fishery 

observer coverage is considered 

separately from BS or GOA pollock 

fishery observer coverage requirements. 

Catcher vessels in this size class 

participating in the AI directed pollock 

fishery would have at least one of their 

trips fully observed, ensuring NMFS 

receives sufficient information for 

monitoring activities in the AI directed 

pollock fishery by catcher vessels in this 

size class.

Revisions to paragraph (c)(5) also 

would add catcher/processor and 

mothership observer requirements for 

the AI directed pollock fishery 

equivalent to AFA requirements. The 

Council recommended that all catcher/

processors and motherships 

participating in the AI directed pollock 

fishery be required to meet the AFA 

monitoring requirements, including 

vessels less than 60 ft. (18.3 m) LOA. 

This requirement would ensure accurate 

information is available on which to 

base management decisions for the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The reference 

to observer workload restrictions also 

would be corrected from paragraph 

(c)(5)(iii) to paragraph (c)(5)(ii).

Subpart F American Fisheries Act 

Management Measures

The title to Subpart F would be 

revised to read ‘‘American Fisheries Act 

and Aleutian Islands Directed Pollock 

Fishery Management Measures.’’

Because a number of AFA provisions 

also apply to the AI directed pollock 

fishery, sections of this subpart would 

be revised to include the management 

measures for the AI directed pollock 

fishery.

§ 679.60 AFA Management Measures

The authority in the section would be 

revised to include Pub. L. 108–199 in 

the list of statutes applicable to the 

BSAI pollock fisheries.

§ 679.61 Formation and Operation of 

Fishery Cooperatives

This section describes the formation 

and operation of fishery cooperatives for 

the purposes of the AFA pollock fishery. 

Proposed revisions to §§ 679.61(b), 

(d)(3) and (g) would remove references 

to the AI directed pollock fishery. 

Public Law 108–199 removes the AI 

directed pollock fishery from the AFA 

program. Paragraph (b) now states that 

fishery cooperatives formed for the 

purpose of cooperatively managing 

directed fishing in the BSAI directed 

pollock fishery must comply with 

§ 679.61. Fishery cooperatives no longer 

participate in the AI directed pollock 

fishery. Paragraph (d)(3), now states that 

inshore cooperatives that are applying 

for an allocation of BSAI pollock must 

file their contracts by the December 1 

deadline. Inshore cooperatives would 

no longer be able to apply for an AI 

pollock allocation pursuant to the 

proposed rule. Paragraph (g) now 

prohibits cooperative members from 

participating in the BSAI directed 

pollock fishery if any landing taxes for 

the cooperative are overdue. Because 

the cooperatives are no longer able to 

participate in the AI directed pollock 

fishery without the Aleut Corporation’s 

selection and NMFS’ approval, the 

prohibition on fishing in the AI directed 

pollock fishery is outside the scope of 

purpose for the formation of the 

cooperative and would be 

inappropriate. The reference to landing 

taxes in paragraph (g) would be 

corrected from paragraph (d)(1)(v) to 

paragraph (e)(1)(v).

§ 679.62 Inshore Sector Cooperative 

Allocation Program

Section 679.62 (a) now specifies that 

inshore cooperatives will receive a 

portion of the AI directed pollock 

fishery allocation if the AI is open to 

directed pollock fishing. Because Pub. 

L. 108–199 provides for all of the AI 

directed pollock fishery to be allocated 

to the Aleut Corporation, this proposed 

rule would remove the reference to the 

AI directed pollock fishery allocation to 

inshore cooperatives in the introductory 

paragraph to (a) and in paragraphs (a)(2) 

and (a)(3).

Paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) now refer 

to the harvest accrual against inshore 

cooperative quotas and the reporting of 

70596 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

inshore cooperative harvest, including 

the AI directed pollock fishery. Because 

the AI directed pollock fishery is 

allocated to the Aleut Corporation, the 

proposed rule would clarify the 

description of the inshore cooperative 

allocation and reporting requirements 

by removing references to the AI 

directed pollock fishery. The revision 

also would remove the additional text ‘‘

by a member vessel’’ in paragraph 

(b)(2)(i) to provide more concise text for 

this requirement.

§ 679.63 Catch Weighing Requirements 

for Vessels and Processors

Section 679.63(c) now requires 

groundfish landed by an AFA catcher 

vessel in the BSAI pollock fishery at a 

shoreside processor to be weighed and 

observed. In June 2004, the Council 

recommended that the shoreside and 

stationary floating processors receiving 

pollock from the AI directed pollock 

fishery be required to have a CMCP. The 

AFA weighing and observer 

requirements for inshore processors 

were not extended to the AI directed 

pollock fishery because the CMCP 

would provide the quality and quantity 

of information needed. The proposed 

rule would revise paragraph (c) to 

remove references to the AI pollock 

fishery.

§ 679.64 Harvesting Sideboard Limits in 

Other Fisheries

The introductory text to paragraphs 

(a) and (b) would be revised to clarify 

that the intent of the sideboards is to 

protect against adverse effects from 

fishery cooperative in the BS directed 

pollock fishery. Paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and 

(b)(3) would be revised to exempt AI 

pollock from AFA groundfish sideboard 

provisions. The citation in paragraphs 

(a)(2)(ii) would be corrected from 

(a)(1)(ii)(A) to (a)(2)(i). Paragraph (a)(4) 

would be revised to correct the citation 

‘‘(a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(iii)’’ to ‘‘(a)(1)(ii) 

through (a)(3).’’ The citation in 

paragraph (a)(4)(ii) also would be 

corrected from (a)(1)(iv) to (a)(4)(i).

§ 679.65 Crab Processing Sideboard 

Limits

Because the crab processing sideboard 

limits are applicable to AFA mothership 

and inshore processors that receive 

pollock from the BS directed pollock 

fishery, paragraphs (a) and (b) would be 

revised to specify the BS directed 

pollock fishery.

Classification

At this time, NMFS has not 

determined that the FMP amendment 

that this rule would implement is 

consistent with the national standards 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other 

applicable laws. NMFS, in making that 

determination, will take into account 

the data, views, and comments received 

during the comment period.

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866.

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

that this proposed rule, if adopted, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities.

Factual Basis for Certification

Description and estimate of the 

number of small entities to which the 

rule applies: Amendment 82 potentially 

affects the following classes of entities: 

(1) the Aleut Corporation, (2) fishing 

operations harvesting pollock in the AI 

with the permission of the Aleut 

Corporation, (3) processors processing 

AI pollock with permission of the Aleut 

Corporation, (4) AFA pollock vessels 

that may be affected by the Council’s 

policy on funding the AI allocation or 

which may be involved in fishing the AI 

allocation under the terms of the Pub. L. 

108–199, and (e) CDQ groups.

Section 803(a) of Pub. L. 108–199 

requires that effective January 1, 2004, 

and thereafter, the directed fishery for 

pollock in the AI subarea of the BSAI 

shall be allocated to the Aleut 

Corporation. Except with the permission 

of the Aleut Corporation or its 

authorized agent, the fishing or 

processing of any part of such allocation 

shall be prohibited by Section 307 of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act.

For the purposes of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA), the Aleut 

Corporation is best characterized as a 

holding company. A holding company 

is a company that usually confines its 

activities to owning stock in and 

supervising management of other 

companies. A holding company usually 

owns a controlling interest in the 

companies whose stock it holds. The 

Aleut Corporation carries out most of its 

significant activities through a variety of 

other companies whose stock it holds. 

These include the Aleut Enterprise 

Corporation, the Adak Reuse 

Corporation, SMI International 

Corporation, Tekstar, Inc., Akima 

Corporation, Aleut Real Estate L..L.C., 

and the Alaska Trust Company.

As a holding company, the Aleut 

Corporation is not a small entity under 

the SBA criteria. Aleut Corporation 

revenues ranged from about $72 million 

in 2001 to about $49 million in 2003. 

SBA small entity criteria at 13 CFR 

121.201 provide a small entity threshold 

for ‘‘Offices of Other Holding 

Companies’’ of $6 million.

The vessels used to harvest the Aleut 

Corporation’s pollock allocation are 

expected to ‘‘co-op’’ with the Aleut 

Corporation because the latter is 

responsible for dispersing the 

component shares of the annual AI 

pollock allocation to individual fishing 

operations. All those vessels allocated a 

working share of the Aleut 

Corporation’s directed pollock fishery 

are ‘‘affiliates’’ of the larger group and 

are not small entities for RFA purposes. 

As discussed in Appendix A.2 of the 

RIR (see ADDRESSES), small entities 

affiliated with large entities are 

considered large entities for the purpose 

of an SBA analysis. This means that 

entities which contract with the Aleut 

Corporation to harvest or process its 

allocation of AI pollock are large entities 

within the meaning of the RFA. Thus, 

the vessels 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA or less, 

the AFA vessels, and the processors that 

fish and process this allocation on 

behalf of the Aleut Corporation must be 

considered ‘‘affiliates,’’ and are not 

small entities within the meaning of the 

RFA.

The decisions related to allocation 

size, monitoring, harvest limits for 

vessels less than 60 feet (18.3 m) LOA, 

recordkeeping and reporting, and 

Chinook salmon bycatch limits and area 

closures are only expected to directly 

regulate entities which would harvest or 

process the Aleut Corporation allocation 

of AI pollock. Because, as noted above, 

these entities are affiliated with the 

Aleut Corporation, they are all 

considered large within the meaning of 

the RFA.

Amendment 82 would establish a 

policy under which the AI pollock 

allocation is ‘‘funded’’ in order that it be 

contained under the 2 million mt total 

BSAI groundfish OY. This action would 

not actually reapportion the various 

pollock allocations to fund AI pollock. 

It simply would establish the process by 

which subsequent action in the harvest 

specifications process would apportion 

the 2 million ton OY. If the sum of the 

TACs in the BSAI were less than the 2 

million mt OY, the funding of the AI 

pollock allocation would take place, to 

the maximum extent possible, from the 

difference between the sum of the TACs 

and the OY. In this situation, the 

funding would not come at the expense 

of other fleet segments. Alternatively, if 

the sum of the TACs were equal to the 

2 million mt OY, the funding would 

come from the BSAI pollock TAC. CDQ 

reserves would be taken from each TAC 

established from the AI and BS subarea 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70597

pollock fisheries, and therefore, would 

not contribute to the funding of the AI 

pollock TAC. The entire funding would 

come from a reduced TAC accruing to 

the AFA pollock fishing fleet in the BS.

The AI pollock proposed action 

establishes the process which would be 

followed by the Council and NMFS 

when setting the species/fishery TACs, 

at which time all attributable impacts to 

small entities will be assessed, as 

required by RFA. The potential direct 

effects on small entities attributable to 

funding the AI pollock allocation would 

be evaluated during the harvest 

specifications process, an action which 

always includes an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis. This is appropriate 

because it is not until the annual 

specifications are proposed that any 

impacts may actually be identified (i.e., 

OY allocated to TACs).

To illustrate the point, note that in 

any year the AI directed pollock fishery 

allocation may be set at zero, or any 

number above zero up to the TAC limit 

proposed under this action. If it is zero, 

no TAC would be reallocated from other 

fisheries, and clearly no significant 

effects on a substantial number of small 

entities would occur. If the AI directed 

pollock fishery allocation is very small 

(i.e., 100 mt), ‘‘no significant adverse 

impacts’’ would occur. This logic 

extends continuously until some, as yet 

undefined, point at which an amount of 

AI directed allocation is large enough to 

create a ‘‘significant adverse impact’’

(unless the funding source is BS 

pollock, wherein no small entities 

exist). However, it is the specification of 

all the annual TACs (AI pollock and its 

funding sources), and not the 

mechanism for specification, which will 

result in those impacts, and which may 

require an analysis which would 

identify the likely number, distribution, 

and attributes of the entities impacted.

Moreover, the allocation is funded 

from either an unallocated portion of 

the OY or from the allocation by a 

reduction in the TAC available for 

harvest by the AFA pollock fleet in the 

BS. The vessels in the AFA pollock fleet 

are either affiliated with processors or 

fishing cooperatives. In all instances, 

the affiliated entities have gross 

revenues exceeding the $3.5 million 

threshold separating small and large 

entities. Thus, the proposed action 

would only affect large entities.

Six CDQ groups harvest pollock in the 

BSAI. CDQ groups represent Western 

Alaska communities and are given 

allocations of the annual pollock TAC to 

use for the purpose of fisheries related 

economic development to benefit these 

communities. Under the terms of the 

AFA, these entities are entitled to 10 

percent of the pollock TAC in the BSAI. 

The CDQ groups are private, non-profit, 

entities, and are small entities within 

the meaning of the RFA. In June 2004, 

the Council explicitly excused the CDQ 

groups from contributing to the funding 

of the Aleut Corporation allocation. In 

October 2004, the Council clarified its 

intent that the Aleut Corporation, as one 

of the users of the BSAI pollock, was 

expected to contribute 10 percent of its 

AI allocation to the CDQ groups.

Consistent with the Council’s intent, 

the current regulations governing the 

allocation of pollock to CDQ groups 

would not be revised under this action. 

Under current regulations, the CDQ 

groups receive 10 percent of any TAC 

specified in the AI and must fish their 

allocation there unless the Regional 

Administrator reallocates the unused 

portion to the BS CDQ pollock directed 

fishing allowance. The CDQ groups 

would have been required to fish their 

AI pollock directed fishing allowance in 

the AI if the Council had chosen, as it 

could have, to establish a directed 

fishery in the AI in 2003 and 2004. This 

would be the case if Section 803 had not 

been included in Pub. L. 108–199 and 

the Council had chosen to create a 

pollock TAC in the AI in 2005 or in a 

future year. CDQ groups will receive a 

part of their CDQ allocation in the AI 

and their BS CDQ allocation will be 

reduced by a corresponding amount. 

The potential advantages and 

disadvantages of this to the CDQ groups 

were described in the RIR (Section 7.7) 

(see ADDRESSES).

The CDQ groups will not be directly 

regulated by the Amendment 82 or by 

the changes in the regulations 

associated with it. The CDQ groups may 

be affected by the Council’s decisions 

relating to TACs. These impacts will be 

described in the IRFA that is prepared 

each year to accompany the annual 

harvest specifications.

Because this proposed rule has no 

significant economic impacts on a 

substantial number of small entities, an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required and none has been 

prepared.

This proposed rule contains 

collection-of-information requirements 

subject to review and approval by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA). These requirements and 

estimated reporting burdens have been 

submitted to OMB for approval: list of 

participating harvesters and processors 

in the AI pollock fishery, 16 hours; 

appeals of NMFS’ disapproval as 

participating harvester or processor, 8 

hours, and AI directed pollock fishery 

catch reporting, 4 hours.

This proposed rule contains 

collection-of-information requirements 

subject to the PRA and which has been 

approved by OMB. Public reporting 

burden for these requirements are listed 

by OMB control number.

OMB control No. 0648–0206

Federal fisheries permit application, 

21 minutes; Federal processor permit 

application, 21 minutes.

OMB control No. 0648–0213

Weekly production reports, 17 

minutes; check-in/check-out report, 

shoreside processor, 8 minutes; checkin/check-out report, mothership or 

catcher/processor, 7 minutes; daily 

production report, 11 minutes; buying 

station report, 23 minutes; catcher 

vessel trawl gear daily fishing logbook 

(DFL), 18 minutes; catcher vessel 

longline or pot gear DFL, 28 minutes; 

shoreside processor daily cumulative 

production logbook (DCPL), 31 minutes; 

mothership DCPL, 31 minutes; catcher/

processor longline and pot gear DCPL, 

41 minutes; and catcher/processor trawl 

gear DCPL, 30 minutes.

OMB control No. 0648–0330

Inshore processor catch monitoring 

and control plan, 40 hours.

OMB control No. 0648–0334

LLP permit, 1 hour.

OMB control No. 0648–0393

AFA inshore processor permit 

application, 2 hours; AFA catcher vessel 

permit application, 2 hours; AFA 

mothership, 2 hours; and AFA catcher/

processor permit application, 0 hours.

OMB control No. 0648–0401

Catcher vessel cooperative pollock 

catch report, 5 minutes; shoreside 

processor electronic logbook report, 35 

minutes.

Response times include 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-ofinformation 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 

70598 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

on these or any other aspects of the 

collection-of-information to NMFS 

Alaska Region (see ADDRESSES), and email to DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov, 

or fax to 202- 395–7285.

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, and no person shall be 

subject to 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 Control Number.

Informal consultation under the ESA 

was concluded for Amendment 82 on 

October 22, 2004. As a result of the 

informal consultation, the Regional 

Administrator determined that fishing 

activities under this rule are not likely 

to adversely affect endangered or 

threatened species or their critical 

habitat. Pollock is an important prey 

species for the endangered and 

threatened Steller sea lion populations. 

The Steller sea lion protection measures 

evaluated in the 2000 and 2001 

Biological Opinions (see ADDRESSES) 

were considered in the development of 

the management provisions of 

Amendment 82. The protection 

measures for Steller sea lions include 

spatial and temporal dispersion of 

pollock harvest. The pollock fishing 

closure areas in the AI would remain 

unchanged under Amendment 82 to 

ensure spatial dispersion of fishing 

effort. To temporally disperse harvest of 

prey species, the Steller sea lion 

protection measures apportion 40 

percent of pollock harvest in the BSAI 

to the A season and 60 percent to the 

B season. Amendment 82 would 

continue to temporally disperse pollock 

harvest with no more than 40 percent of 

the ABC permitted to be harvested in 

the A season. The total harvest of 

pollock in the Bering Sea subarea, 

including any reallocation of 

unharvested AI pollock, also would 

remain well below the ABC so that 

overall harvest would be in proportion 

to biomass and less likely to compete 

with Steller sea lions for prey. Both of 

these harvest provisions satisfy the 

intent of the Steller sea lion protection 

measures.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements.

Dated: December 1, 2004.

William T. Hogarth,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For reasons set out in the preamble, 

50 CFR part 679 is proposed to be 

amended as follows:

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA

1. The authority citation for part 679 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et 

seq., and 3631 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1540(f); Pub. 

L. 105–277, Title II of Division C; Pub L. 106–

31, Sec. 3027; Pub. L.106–554, Sec. 209; and 

Pub. L. 108–199, Sec. 803.

2. In § 679.1, paragraph (k) is revised 

to read as follows:

§ 679.1 Purpose and scope.

* * * * *

(k) American Fisheries Act and AI 

directed pollock fishery measures.

Regulations in this part were developed 

by NMFS and the Council under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the American 

Fisheries Act (AFA), and Pub. L. 108–

199 to govern commercial fishing for 

BSAI pollock according to the 

requirements of the AFA and Pub. L. 

108–199. This part also governs 

payment and collection of the loan, 

under the AFA, the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, and Title XI of the Merchant 

Marine Act, 1936, made to all those 

persons who harvest pollock from the 

directed fishing allowance allocated to 

the inshore component under section 

206(b)(1) of the AFA.

3. In § 679.2, the definitions for ‘‘AFA 

catcher/processor,’’ ‘‘AFA catcher 

vessel,’’ ‘‘AFA crab processing facility,’’

‘‘AFA entity,’’ ‘‘AFA inshore 

processor,’’ ‘‘AFA mothership,’’

‘‘designated primary processor,’’

‘‘fishery cooperatives or cooperatives,’’

‘‘license limitation groundfish,’’ ‘‘listed 

AFA catcher/processor,’’ and ‘‘unlisted 

AFA catcher/processor,’’ are revised, 

and the definitions for ‘‘AI directed 

pollock fishery,’’ ‘‘Aleut Corporation,’’

‘‘Aleut Corporation entity,’’ and 

‘‘designated contact for the Aleut 

Corporation’’ are added in alphabetical 

order to read as follows:

§ 679.2 Definitions.

* * * * *

AFA catcher/processor means a 

catcher/processor permitted to harvest 

BS pollock under § 679.4(l)(2).

AFA catcher vessel means a catcher 

vessel permitted to harvest BS pollock 

under § 679.4(l)(3).

AFA crab processing facility means a 

processing plant, catcher/ processor, 

mothership, floating processor or any 

other operation that processes any FMP 

species of BSAI crab, and that is 

affiliated with an AFA entity that 

processes pollock harvested by a catcher 

vessel cooperative operating in the 

inshore or mothership sectors of the BS 

pollock fishery.

AFA entity means a group of affiliated 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns that harvest or 

process pollock in the BS directed 

pollock fishery.

AFA inshore processor means a 

shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor permitted to process 

BS pollock under § 679.4(l)(5).

AFA mothership means a mothership 

permitted to process BS pollock under 

§ 679.4(l)(5).

* * * * *

AI directed pollock fishery means 

directed fishing for pollock in the AI 

under the allocation to the Aleut 

Corporation authorized at 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(iii).

* * * * *

Aleut Corporation means the Aleut 

Corporation incorporated pursuant to 

the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 

(43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.).

Aleut Corporation entity means a 

harvester or processor selected by the 

Aleut Corporation and approved by 

NMFS to harvest or process pollock in 

the AI directed pollock fishery.

* * * * *

Designated contact for the Aleut 

Corporation means an individual who is 

designated by the Aleut Corporation for 

the purpose of communication with 

NMFS regarding the identity of selected 

AI directed pollock fishery participants 

and weekly reports required by § 679.5.

* * * * *

Designated primary processor means 

an AFA inshore processor that is 

designated by an inshore pollock 

cooperative as the AFA inshore 

processor to which the cooperative will 

deliver at least 90 percent of its BS 

pollock allocation during the year in 

which the AFA inshore cooperative 

fishing permit is in effect.

* * * * *

Fishery cooperative or cooperatives

means any entity cooperatively 

managing directed fishing for BS 

pollock and formed under section 1 of 

the Fisherman’s Collective Marketing 

Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 521). In and of 

itself, a cooperative is not an AFA entity 

subject to excessive harvest share 

limitations, unless a single person, 

corporation or other business entity 

controls the cooperative and the 

cooperative has the power to control the 

fishing activity of its member vessels.

* * * * *

License limitation groundfish means 

target species and the ‘‘other species’’

category, specified annually pursuant to 

§ 679.20(a)(2), except that demersal 

shelf rockfish east of 140§ W. longitude, 

sablefish managed under the IFQ 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70599

program, and pollock allocated to the 

Aleutian Islands directed pollock 

fishery and harvested by vessels 60 feet 

(18.3 m) LOA or less, are not considered 

license limitation groundfish.

* * * * *

Listed AFA catcher/processor means 

an AFA catcher/processor permitted to 

harvest BS pollock under § 679.4(l)(2)(i).

* * * * *

Unlisted AFA catcher/processor

means an AFA catcher/processor 

permitted to harvest BS pollock under 

§ 679.4(l)(2)(ii).

* * * * *

4. In § 679.4, paragraphs (l)(1)(i), 

(l)(5)(iii), (l)(6)(ii)(B), (l)(6)(ii)(C)(2), 

(l)(6)(ii)(D)(1)(ii), (l)(6)(ii)(D)(2)(i) and 

(l)(6)(ii)(D)(2)(ii) are revised and 

paragraph (m) is added to read as 

follows:

§ 679.4 Permits.

* * * * *

(l) * * *

(1) * * *

(i) Applicability. In addition to any 

other permit and licensing requirements 

set out in this part, any vessel used to 

engage in directed fishing for a nonCDQ allocation of pollock in the BS and 

any shoreside processor, stationary 

floating processor, or mothership that 

receives pollock harvested in a nonCDQ directed pollock fishery in the BS 

must have a valid AFA permit onboard 

the vessel or at the facility location at all 

times while non-CDQ pollock is being 

harvested or processed. In addition, the 

owner of any vessel that is a member of 

a pollock cooperative in the BS must 

also have a valid AFA permit for every 

vessel that is a member of the 

cooperative, regardless of whether or 

not the vessel actually engages in 

directed fishing for pollock in the BS. 

Finally, an AFA permit does not exempt 

a vessel operator, vessel, or processor 

from any other applicable permit or 

licensing requirement required under 

this part or in other state or Federal 

regulations.

* * * * *

(5) * * *

(iii) Single geographic location 

requirement. An AFA inshore processor 

permit authorizes the processing of 

pollock harvested in the BS directed 

pollock fishery only in a single 

geographic location during a fishing 

year. For the purpose of this paragraph, 

single geographic location means:

(A) Shoreside processors. The 

physical location at which the landbased shoreside processor first 

processed pollock harvested from the 

BS subarea directed pollock fishery 

during a fishing year.

(B) Stationary floating processors. A 

location within Alaska state waters that 

is within 5 nm of the position in which 

the stationary floating processor first 

processed pollock harvested in the BS 

subarea directed pollock fishery during 

a fishing year.

* * * * *

(6) * * *

(ii) * * *

(B) Designated cooperative processor.

The name and physical location of an 

AFA inshore processor that is 

designated in the cooperative contract 

as the processor to whom the 

cooperative has agreed to deliver at least 

90 percent of its BS pollock catch;

(C) * * *

(2) The cooperative contract requires 

that the cooperative deliver at least 90 

percent of its BS pollock catch to its 

designated AFA processor; and

* * * * *

(D) * * *

(1) * * *

(ii) LLP permit. The vessel must be 

named on a valid LLP permit 

authorizing the vessel to engage in 

trawling for pollock in the Bering Sea 

subarea. If the vessel is more than 60 

feet (18.3 m) LOA, the vessel must be 

named on a valid LLP permit to engage 

in trawling for pollock in the AI; and

* * * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Active vessels. The vessel delivered 

more pollock harvested in the BS 

inshore directed pollock fishery to the 

AFA inshore processor designated 

under paragraph (l)(6)(ii)(B) of this 

section than to any other shoreside 

processor or stationary floating 

processor during the year prior to the 

year in which the cooperative fishing 

permit will be in effect; or

(ii) Inactive vessels. The vessel 

delivered more pollock harvested in the 

BS inshore directed pollock fishery to 

the AFA inshore processor designated 

under paragraph (l)(6)(ii)(B) of this 

section than to any other shoreside 

processor or stationary floating 

processor during the last year in which 

the vessel delivered BS pollock 

harvested in the BS directed pollock 

fishery to an AFA inshore processor.

* * * * *

(m) Participation in the AI Directed 

Pollock Fishery—(1) Applicability.

Harvesting pollock in the AI directed 

pollock fishery and processing pollock 

taken in the AI directed pollock fishery 

is authorized only for those harvesters 

and processors that are selected by the 

Aleut Corporation and approved by the 

Regional Administrator to harvest 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery or to process pollock taken in 

the AI directed pollock fishery.

(2) Annual Selection of participants 

by the Aleut Corporation. Each year and 

at least 14 days before harvesting 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery or processing pollock harvested 

in the AI directed pollock fishery, a 

participant must be selected by the 

Aleut Corporation and the following 

information for each participant must be 

submitted by the designated contact to 

the Regional Administrator:

(i) Vessel or processor name;

(ii) Federal fisheries permits number 

issued under § 679.4(b) or Federal 

processor permit issued under 

§ 679.4(f);

(iii) an approved catch monitoring 

control plan for shoreside and stationary 

floating processors, as required by 

679.28(g)(2); and

(iv) the fishing year which 

participation approval is requested.

(3) Participant Approval. (i) 

Participants must have:

(A) a valid Federal fisheries permit or 

Federal processing permit, pursuant to 

paragraphs (b) and (f) of this section, 

respectively;

(B) a valid fishery endorsement on the 

vessel’s U.S. Coast Guard 

documentation for the vessel’s 

participation in the U. S. fishery; and

(C) a valid AFA permit under 

§ 679.4(l)(2) for all catcher/processors, 

(l)(3) for all catcher vessels greater than 

60 ft (18.3 m) LOA, or (l)(4) for all 

motherships.

(ii) Each participant selected by the 

Aleut Corporation and that meets the 

conditions under paragraph (m)(3)(i) of 

this section will be approved by the 

Regional Administrator for participation 

in the AI directed pollock fishery.

(iii) The Regional Administrator will 

provide to the designated contact for the 

Aleut Corporation the identity of each 

approved participant and the date upon 

which participation in the AI directed 

pollock fishery may commence. The 

Aleut Corporation shall forward to the 

approved participants a copy of NMFS’s 

approval letter before harvesting or 

processing occurs.

(iv) A copy of NMFS’ approval letter 

for participating in the AI directed 

pollock fishery during the fishing year 

must be on site at the shoreside 

processor or stationary floating 

processor, or on board the vessel at all 

times and must be presented for 

inspection upon the request of any 

authorized officer.

(4) Participant Disapproval—(i) 

Notification. The Regional 

Administrator shall disapprove any 

participant that does not meet the 

conditions under paragraph (m)(3)(i) of 

70600 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

this section. The Regional Administrator 

will notify in writing the Aleut 

Corporation and the selected participant 

of the disapproval. The selected 

participant will have 30 days in which 

to submit proof of meeting the 

requirements to participate in the AI 

directed pollock fishery.

(ii) Initial administrative 

determinations (IAD). The Regional 

Administrator will prepare and send an 

IAD to the selected participant 

following the expiration of the 30-day 

evidentiary period if the Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

information or evidence provided by the 

selected participant fails to support the 

participant’s claims and is insufficient 

to rebut the presumption that the 

disapproval for participation in the AI 

directed pollock fishery is correct or if 

the additional information or evidence 

is not provided within the time period 

specified in the letter that notifies the 

applicant of his or her 30-day 

evidentiary period. The IAD will 

indicate the deficiencies in the 

information required, including the 

evidence submitted in support of the 

information. The IAD also will indicate 

which claims cannot be approved based 

on the available information or 

evidence. A participant who receives an 

IAD may appeal under the appeals 

procedures set out at § 679.43. A 

participant who avails himself or herself 

of the opportunity to appeal an IAD will 

receive an interim approval from NMFS 

authorizing participation in the AI 

directed pollock fishery. An interim 

approval based on claims contrary to the 

final determination will expire upon 

final agency determination.

5. In § 679.5, paragraphs (a)(7)(xv)(F), 

(h)(1)(i), (h)(1)(ii)(I), and (q) are added to 

read as follows:

§ 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting 

(R&R).

(a) * * *

(7) * * *

(xv) * * *

If harvest 

made 

under 

... program 

Indicate yes and 

record the ... Reference 

* * * * *

(F) AIP n/a Subpart F to 

part 679

* * * * *

(h) * * *

(1) * * *

(i) Check-in report (BEGIN message).

Except as indicated in paragraph 

(h)(1)(iii) of this section, the operator or 

manager must submit a check-in report 

according to the following table:

Submit a separate 

BEGIN message for ... If you are a ... Within this time limit 

(A) Each reporting area 

of groundfish harvest, 

except 300, 400, 550, or 

690

(1) C/P using trawl gear Before gear deployment

(2) C/P using longline or pot 

gear

Before gear deployment. May be checked in to more than one area simultaneously.

(3) MS, SS, SFP Before receiving groundfish. May be checked in to more than one area simultaneously.

(4) MS Must check-in to reporting area(s) where groundfish were harvested.

(B) COBLZ or RKCSA (1) C/P using trawl gear Prior to fishing. Submit one check-in for the COBLZ or RKCSA and another 

check-in for the area outside the COBLZ or RKCSA.

(2) MS, SS, SFP Before receiving groundfish harvested with trawl gear, submit one check-in for 

the COBLZ or RKCSA and another check-in for the area outside the COBLZ or 

RKCSA.

(C) Gear Type (1) C/P If in the same reporting area but using more than one gear type, prior to fishing 

submit a separate check-in for each gear type.

(2) MS, SS, SFP If harvested in the same reporting area but using more than one gear type, prior 

to receiving groundfish submit a separate check-in for each gear type.

(D) CDQ (1) C/P Prior to groundfish CDQ fishing under each CDQ program.

(2) MS, SS, SFP Prior to receiving groundfish CDQ. If receiving groundfish under more than one 

CDQ number, use a separate check-in for each number.

(E) Exempted or Research Fishery(1) C/P If in an exempted or research fishery, prior to fishing submit a separate check-in 

for each type.

(2) MS, SS, SFP If receiving groundfish from an exempted or research fishery, prior to receiving 

submit a separate check-in for each type.

(F) Processor Type C/P, MS If a catcher/processor and functioning simultaneously as a mothership in the 

same reporting area, before functioning as either processor type.

(G) Change of fishing 

year

C/P, MS, SS, SFP If continually active through the end of one fishing year and at the beginning of a 

second fishing year, submit a check-in for each reporting area to start the year 

on January 1.

(H) AIP (1) C/P Prior to AI pollock fishing.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70601

Submit a separate 

BEGIN message for ... If you are a ... Within this time limit 

(2) MS, SS, SFP Before receiving AI pollock

(ii) * * *

Submit 

a separate 

CEASE 

message 

for . . . 

If you are a 

... 

Within this time 

limit 

* * * * *

(I) AIP (1) C/P Within 24 hours 

after completion of 

gear retrieval for 

AI pollock.

(2) SS, SFP Within 48 hours 

after the end of 

the applicable 

weekly reporting 

period that a 

shoreside processor or SFP 

ceases to receive 

or process AI pollock for the fishing 

year.

(3) MS Within 24 hours 

after receipt of AIP 

pollock has 

ceased.

* * * * *

(q) AI directed pollock fishery catch 

reports—(1) Applicability. The Aleut 

Corporation shall provide NMFS the 

identity of its designated contact for the 

Aleut Corporation. The Aleut 

Corporation shall submit to the Regional 

Administrator a pollock catch report 

containing information required by 

paragraph (q)(3) of this section.

(2) Time limits and submittal. (i) The 

Aleut Corporation must submit its AI 

directed pollock fishery catch reports by 

one of the following methods:

(A) An electronic data file in a format 

approved by NMFS; or

(B) By Fax.

(ii) The AI directed pollock fishery 

catch reports must be received by the 

Regional Administrator by 1200 hours, 

A.l.t. on Tuesday following the end of 

the applicable weekly reporting period, 

as defined at § 679.2.

(3) Information required. The AI 

directed pollock fishery catch report 

must contain the following information:

(i) Catcher vessel ADF&G number;

(ii) Federal fisheries or Federal 

processor permit number;

(iii) Delivery date;

(iv) Pollock harvested:

(A) For shoreside and stationary 

floating processors and motherships: 

amount of pollock (in lb for shoreside 

and stationary floating processors and in 

mt for motherships) delivered, 

including the weight of at-sea pollock 

discards; and

(B) For catcher/processors, the 

amount of pollock (in mt) harvested and 

processed, including the weight of atsea pollock discards; and

(v) ADF&G fish ticket number.

6. In § 679.7, paragraphs (k)(3)(i), 

(k)(3)(iii), (k)(3)(iv), (k)(4)(i), (k)(5), 

(k)(6), and (k)(7) are revised, and 

paragraph (l) is added to read as follows:

§ 679.7 Prohibitions.

* * * * *

(k) * * *

(3) * * *

(i) Permit requirement. Use a 

shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor to process pollock 

harvested in a non-CDQ directed fishery 

for pollock in the BS without a valid 

AFA inshore processor permit at the 

facility or on board vessel.

* * * * *

(iii) Restricted AFA inshore 

processors. Use an AFA inshore 

processor holding a restricted AFA 

inshore processor permit to process 

more than 2,000 mt round weight of 

non-CDQ pollock harvested in the BS 

directed pollock fishery in any one 

calendar year.

(iv) Single geographic location 

requirement. Use an AFA inshore 

processor to process pollock harvested 

in the BS directed pollock fishery at a 

location other than the single 

geographic location defined as follows:

(A) Shoreside processors. The 

physical location at which the landbased shoreside processor first 

processed BS pollock harvested in the 

BS directed pollock fishery during a 

fishing year.

(B) Stationary floating processors. A 

location within Alaska State waters that 

is within 5 nm of the position in which 

the stationary floating processor first 

processed BS pollock harvested in the 

BS directed pollock fishery during a 

fishing year.

* * * * *

(4) * * *

(i) Permit requirement. Use a catcher 

vessel to engage in directed fishing for 

non-CDQ BS pollock for delivery to any 

AFA processing sector (catcher/

processor, mothership, or inshore) 

unless the vessel has a valid AFA 

catcher vessel permit on board that 

includes an endorsement for the sector 

of the BS pollock fishery in which the 

vessel is participating.

* * * * *

(5) AFA inshore fishery 

cooperatives—(i) Overages by vessel.

Use an AFA catcher vessel listed on an 

AFA inshore cooperative fishing permit, 

or under contract to a fishery 

cooperative under § 679.62(c), to harvest 

non-CDQ BS pollock in excess of the 

fishery cooperative’s annual allocation 

of pollock specified under § 679.62.

(ii) Overages by fishery cooperative.

An inshore pollock fishery cooperative 

is prohibited from exceeding its annual 

allocation of BS pollock TAC.

(6) Excessive harvesting shares. It is 

unlawful for an AFA entity to harvest, 

through a fishery cooperative or 

otherwise, an amount of BS pollock that 

exceeds the 17.5–percent excessive 

share limit specified under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). The owners and 

operators of the individual vessels 

comprising the AFA entity that harvests 

BS pollock will be held jointly and 

severally liable for exceeding the 

excessive harvesting share limit.

(7) Excessive processing shares. It is 

unlawful for an AFA entity to process 

an amount of BS pollock that exceeds 

the 30–percent excessive share limit 

specified under § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7). 

The owners and operators of the 

individual processors comprising the 

AFA entity that processes BS pollock 

will be held jointly and severally liable 

for exceeding the excessive processing 

share limit.

* * * * *

(l) Prohibitions specific to the AI 

directed pollock fishery—(1) Catcher/

Processors. (i) Use a catcher/processor 

vessel to harvest pollock in the AI 

directed pollock fishery or process 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery without a copy of 

NMFS’ approval letter pursuant to 

§ 679.4(m).

(ii) Process any pollock harvested in 

the AI directed pollock fishery without 

complying with catch weighing and 

observer sampling station requirements 

set forth at paragraphs (k)(1)(vi) and 

(k)(1)(vii) of this section, respectively.

(iii) Use a catcher/processor to harvest 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery or process pollock harvested in 

the AI directed pollock fishery without 

70602 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

a valid AFA catcher/processor permit 

on board the vessel.

(2) Motherships. (i) Use a mothership 

to process pollock harvested in the AI 

directed pollock fishery without a copy 

of NMFS’ approval letter pursuant to 

§ 679.4(m).

(ii) Process any pollock harvested in 

the AI directed pollock fishery without 

complying with catch weighing and 

observer sampling station requirements 

set forth at paragraphs (k)(2)(iii) and 

(k)(2)(iv) of this section, respectively.

(iii) Use a mothership to process 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery without a valid AFA 

mothership permit on board the vessel.

(3) Shoreside and stationary floating 

processors. (i) Use a shoreside processor 

or stationary floating processor to 

process pollock harvested in the in AI 

directed pollock fishery without a copy 

of NMFS’ approval letter pursuant to 

§ 679.4(m).

(ii) Process any pollock harvested in 

the AI directed pollock fishery without 

complying with catch weighing 

requirements set forth at paragraph 

(k)(3)(v) of this section.

(iii) Take deliveries of pollock 

harvested in the AI directed pollock 

fishery or process pollock harvested in 

the AI pollock fishery without following 

an approved CMCP as described in 

§ 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.

(4) Catcher vessels. (i) Use a catcher 

vessel to harvest pollock in the AI 

directed pollock fishery without a copy 

of NMFS’ approval letter pursuant to 

§ 679.4(m).

(ii) Have on board at any one time 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery and pollock harvested 

from either the Bering Sea subarea or 

the Gulf of Alaska.

(iii) Use a catcher vessel to deliver 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery:

(A) To a shoreside or stationary 

floating processor that does not have an 

approved CMCP pursuant to § 679.28(g) 

and is not approved by NMFS to process 

pollock harvested in the AI directed 

pollock fishery, or

(B) To a catcher/processor or 

mothership that is not approved by 

NMFS to process pollock harvested in 

the AI directed pollock fishery.

(vi) Use a catcher vessel greater than 

60 ft (18.3 m) LOA to harvest pollock in 

the AI directed pollock fishery unless 

the vessel has a valid AFA catcher 

vessel permit on board.

(5) AI directed pollock fishery 

overages—(i) Overages by vessel. Use a 

catcher vessel selected by the Aleut 

Corporation and approved by NMFS to 

participate in the AI directed pollock 

fishery under § 679.4(m) to harvest 

pollock in the AI directed pollock 

fishery in excess of the Aleut 

Corporation’s annual or seasonal 

allocations of pollock or in excess of the 

vessel allocation specified under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(iii).

(ii) Overages by the Aleut 

Corporation. The Aleut Corporation is 

prohibited from exceeding its annual 

and seasonal allocations of AI pollock 

TAC or from exceeding the allocation to 

vessels, as specified in 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(iii).

7. In § 679.20, paragraph (a)(5)(iii) is 

redesignated as paragraph (a)(5)(iv), 

paragraphs (a)(5)(i)(B)(1), (a)(5)(ii), 

newly redesignated paragraph 

(a)(5)(iv)(B) introductory text, and 

paragraph (a)(6)(i) are revised, and 

paragraph (a)(5)(iii) is added to read as 

follows:

§ 679.20 General limitations.

(a) * * *

(5) * * *

(i) * * *

(B) BSAI seasonal allowances for AFA 

and CDQ—(1) Inshore, catcher/

processor, mothership, and CDQ 

components. The portions of the BS 

subarea pollock directed fishing 

allowances allocated to each component 

under sections 206(a) and 206(b) of the 

AFA and the CDQ allowance in the 

BSAI will be divided into two seasonal 

allowances corresponding to the two 

fishing seasons set out at § 679.23(e)(2), 

as follows: A season, 40 percent; and B 

season, 60 percent.

* * * * *

(ii) Bogoslof District. If the Bogoslof 

District is open to directed fishing for 

pollock by regulation, then the pollock 

TAC for this district will be allocated 

according to the same procedure 

established for the Bering Sea subarea at 

paragraph (a)(5)(i) of this section. If the 

Bogoslof District is closed to directed 

fishing for pollock by regulation, then 

the entire TAC for this district will be 

allocated as an incidental catch 

allowance.

(iii) AI. (A) If a directed fishery for 

pollock in the AI is not specified under 

paragraph (c) of this section, then the 

entire TAC for this subarea will be 

allocated as an incidental catch 

allowance.

(B) If the AI is open to directed fishing 

for pollock under paragraph (c) of this 

section, then the pollock TAC for this 

subarea will be specified, allocated, 

seasonally apportioned, and reallocated 

as follows:

(1) AI annual TAC limitations. When 

the AI pollock ABC is less than 19,000 

mt, the annual TAC will be no greater 

than the ABC. When the AI pollock ABC 

equals or exceeds 19,000 mt, the annual 

TAC will be equal to 19,000 mt.

(2) Allocations—(i) CDQ Directed 

fishing allowance. 10 percent of the 

annual TAC will be allocated to the 

CDQ pollock reserve established under 

§ 679.31(a)(2).

(ii) Incidental catch allowance. The 

Regional Administrator will determine 

the amount of the pollock incidental 

catch necessary to support an incidental 

catch allowance in the AI during the 

fishing year. This amount of pollock 

will be deducted from the annual TAC.

(iii) Directed Pollock Fishery. The 

amount of the TAC remaining after 

subtraction of the CDQ directed fishing 

allowance and the incidental catch 

allowance will be allocated to the Aleut 

Corporation as a directed pollock 

fishery allocation.

(3) Seasonal apportionment. The 

seasonal harvest of pollock in the AI 

directed pollock fishery shall be:

(i) A season. No greater than the lesser 

of the annual initial TAC plus any A 

season CDQ pollock directed fishery 

allowance or 40 percent of the AI 

pollock ABC. The total A season 

apportionment, including the AI 

directed pollock fishery allocation, the 

CDQ pollock directed fishery seasonal 

allowance, and the incidental catch 

amount, shall not exceed 40 percent of 

the ABC.

(ii) B season. The B season 

apportionment of the AI directed 

pollock fishery shall equal the annual 

initial TAC minus the A season directed 

pollock fishery apportionment under 

paragraph (a)(5)(iii)(B)(3)(i) of this 

section and minus the incidental catch 

amount under this paragraph.

(iii) Inseason adjustments. During any 

fishing year, the Regional Administrator 

may add any under harvest of the A 

season directed pollock fishery 

apportionment to the B season directed 

pollock fishery apportionment by 

publication in the Federal Register if 

the Regional Administrator determines 

that the harvest capacity in the B season 

is sufficient to harvest the adjusted B 

season apportionment.

(4) Reallocation of the annual AI 

directed pollock fishery and AI CDQ 

allocations. As soon as practicable, if 

the Regional Administrator determines 

that vessels participating in either the 

AI directed pollock fishery or the AI 

CDQ directed pollock fishery likely will 

not harvest the entire AI directed 

pollock fishery or CDQ pollock directed 

fishing allowance, the Regional 

Administrator may reallocate some or 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70603

all of the projected unused directed 

pollock fishery allocation to the Bering 

Sea subarea directed pollock fishery or 

AI CDQ pollock directed fishing 

allowance to the Bering Sea subarea 

CDQ pollock directed fishing allowance 

by publication in the Federal Register.

(5) Allocations to small vessels. The 

annual allocation for vessels 60 feet 

(18.3 m) LOA or less participating in the 

AI directed pollock fishery will be:

(i) No more than 25 percent of the AI 

directed pollock fishery allocation 

through 2008;

(ii) No more than 50 percent of the AI 

directed pollock fishery allocation from 

2009 through 2012; and

(iii) 50 percent of the AI directed 

pollock fishery allocation in 2013 and 

beyond.

(iv) * * *

(B) GOA Western and Central 

Regulatory Areas seasonal 

apportionments. Each apportionment 

established under paragraph 

(a)(5)(iv)(A) of this section will be 

divided into four seasonal 

apportionments corresponding to the 

four fishing seasons specified in 

§ 679.23(d)(2) as follows: * * *

(6) * * *

(i) The apportionment of pollock in 

all GOA regulatory areas for each 

seasonal allowance described in 

paragraph (a)(5)(iv) of this section will 

be allocated entirely to vessels 

harvesting pollock for processing by the 

inshore component in the GOA after 

subtraction of an amount that is 

projected by the Regional Administrator 

to be caught by, or delivered to, the 

offshore component in the GOA 

incidental to directed fishing for other 

groundfish species.

* * * * *

8. In § 679.21, paragraphs (e)(1)(vii) 

and (e)(7)(viii) are revised and 

paragraph (e)(1)(ix) is added to read as 

follows:

§ 679.21 Prohibited species bycatch 

management.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(1) * * *

(vii) Chinook salmon. The trawl 

closures identified in paragraph 

(e)(7)(viii) of this section will take effect 

when the Regional Administrator 

determines that the PSC limit of 29,000 

Chinook salmon caught while 

harvesting pollock in the BS between 

January 1 and December 31 is attained.

* * * * *

(ix) AI Chinook salmon. The trawl 

closures identified in paragraph 

(e)(7)(viii) of this section will take effect 

when the Regional Administrator 

determines that the AI PSC limit of 700 

Chinook salmon caught while 

harvesting pollock in the AI between 

January 1 and December 31 is attained.

* * * * *

(7) * * *

(viii) 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 

BSAI will reach the annual limits, as 

identified in paragraphs (e)(1)(vii) and 

(e)(1)(ix) of this section, NMFS, by 

notification in the Federal Register will 

close the Chinook Salmon Savings 

Areas, as defined in Figure 8 to this 

part, to directed fishing for pollock with 

trawl gear as follows:

(A) For the BS Chinook salmon PSC 

limit under paragraph (e)(1)(vii) of this 

section, area 1 and area 2 in Figure 8 to 

this part will be closed on the following 

dates:

(1) 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 BS Chinook 

salmon will be attained before April 15.

(2) From September 1 through 

December 31, if the Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

annual limit of BS Chinook salmon will 

be attained after April 15.

(B) For the AI Chinook salmon limit 

under paragraph (e)(1)(ix) of this 

section, area 1 in Figure 8 to this part 

will be closed on the following dates:

(1) 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.

(2) 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.

* * * * *

9. In § 679.23, paragraph (e)(2) is 

revised to read as follows:

§ 679.23 Seasons.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(2) Directed fishing for pollock in the 

Bering Sea subarea by inshore, offshore 

catcher/processor, and mothership 

components, in the AI directed pollock 

fishery, and pollock CDQ fisheries.

Subject to other provisions of this part, 

directed fishing for pollock by vessels 

catching pollock for processing by the 

inshore component, catcher/processors 

in the offshore component, and 

motherships in the offshore component 

in the Bering Sea subarea, directed 

fishing for pollock in the AI directed 

pollock fishery, or directed fishing for 

CDQ pollock in the BSAI is authorized 

only during the following two seasons:

(i) A season. From 1200 hours, A.l.t., 

January 20 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., 

June 10; and

(ii) B season. From 1200 hours, A.l.t., 

June 10 through 1200 hours, A.l.t., 

November 1.

* * * * *

10. In § 679.28, paragraph (g)(2) and 

the first sentence of paragraph (g)(3) are 

revised to read as follows:

§ 679.28 Equipment and operational 

requirements.

* * * * *

(g) * * *

(2) Who is required to prepare and 

submit a CMCP for approval? The 

owner and manager of an AFA inshore 

processor or the owner and manager of 

a shoreside or stationary floating 

processor processing pollock harvested 

in the AI directed pollock fishery are 

required to prepare and submit a CMCP 

which must be approved by NMFS prior 

to the receipt of pollock harvested in the 

BSAI directed pollock fishery.

(3) How is a CMCP approved by 

NMFS? NMFS will approve a CMCP if 

it meets all the requirements specified 

in paragraph (g)(7) of this section. * * *

* * * * *

11. In § 679.50, paragraphs (c)(2)(i), 

(c)(5) paragraph heading, and (e)(1) are 

revised and paragraph (c)(5)(i)(C) is 

added to read as follows:

§ 679.50 Groundfish Observer Program 

applicable through December 31, 2007.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Pollock fishery. In a retained catch 

of pollock that is greater than the 

retained catch of any other groundfish 

species or species group that is specified 

as a separate groundfish fishery under 

this paragraph (c)(2) and in a retained 

catch of pollock harvested in the AI 

directed pollock fishery.

* * * * *

(5) AFA and AI directed pollock 

fishery catcher/processors and 

motherships -- * * *

(i) * * *

(C) AI directed pollock fishery 

catcher/processors and motherships. A 

catcher/processor participating in the AI 

directed pollock fishery or a mothership 

processing pollock harvested in the AI 

directed pollock fishery must have on 

board at least two NMFS-certified 

observers, at least one of which must be 

certified as a lead level 2 observer, for 

each day that the vessel is used to 

harvest, process, or take deliveries of 

70604 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

groundfish. More than two observers are 

required if the observer workload 

restriction at paragraph (c)(5)(ii) of this 

section would otherwise preclude 

sampling as required under 

§ 679.63(a)(1).

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(1) Any vessel, shoreside processor, or 

stationary floating processor required to 

comply with observer coverage 

requirements under paragraphs (c) or (d) 

of this section or under § 679.7(f)(4) or 

a catcher vessel less than 60 ft (18.3 m) 

LOA that is participating in the AI 

directed pollock fishery must use, upon 

written notification by the Regional 

Administrator, NMFS’ staff or an 

individual authorized by NMFS to 

satisfy observer coverage requirements 

as specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of 

this section or for other conservation 

and management purpose.

* * * * *

12. In Subpart F, the subpart heading 

is revised to read as follows:

Subpart F—American Fisheries Act 

and Aleutian Island Directed Pollock 

Fishery Management Measures

13. Section 679.60 is revised to read 

as follows:

§ 679.60 Authority and related regulations.

Regulations under this subpart were 

developed by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service and the North Pacific 

Fishery Management Council to 

implement the American Fisheries Act 

(AFA) [Div. C, Title II, Subtitle II, Public 

Law 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998)] and 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2004 (Public Law 108–199, Sec. 803). 

Additional regulations in this part that 

implement specific provisions of the 

AFA and Public Law 108–199, Sec. 803 

are set out at §§ 679.2 Definitions, 679.4 

Permits, 679.5 Recordkeeping and 

reporting, 679.7 Prohibitions, 679.20 

General limitations, 679.21 Prohibited 

species bycatch management, 679.28 

Equipment and operational 

requirements for Catch Weight 

Measurement, 679.31 CDQ reserves, and 

679.50 Groundfish observer program.

Regulations developed by the 

Department of Transportation to 

implement provisions of the AFA are 

found at 50 CFR part 356.

14. In § 679.61, paragraphs (b), (d)(3), 

and (g) are revised to read as follows:

§ 679.61 Formation and operation of 

fishery cooperatives.

* * * * *

(b) Who must comply this section?

Any fishery cooperative formed under 

section 1 of the Fisherman’s Collective 

Marketing Act 1934 (15 U.S.C. 521) for 

the purpose of cooperatively managing 

directed fishing for BS subarea pollock 

must comply with the provisions of this 

section. The owners and operators of all 

the member vessels that are signatories 

to a fishery cooperative are jointly and 

severally responsible for compliance 

with the requirements of this section.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) What is the deadline for filing?

The contract or renewal letter and 

supporting materials must be received 

by NMFS and by the Council at least 30 

days prior to the start of any fishing 

activity conducted under the terms of 

the contract. In addition, an inshore 

cooperative that is also applying for an 

allocation of BS subarea pollock under 

§ 679.62 must file its contract, any 

amendments hereto, and supporting 

materials no later than December 1 of 

the year prior to the year in which 

fishing under the contract will occur.

* * * * *

(g) Landing tax payment deadline.

You must pay any landing tax owed to 

the State of Alaska under section 210(f) 

of the AFA and paragraph (e)(1)(v) of 

this section before April 1 of the 

following year, or the last day of the 

month following the date of publication 

of statewide average prices by the 

Alaska State Department of Revenue, 

whichever is later. All members of the 

cooperative are prohibited from 

harvesting pollock in the BS subarea 

directed pollock fishery after the 

payment deadline if any member vessel 

has failed to pay all required landing 

taxes from any landings made outside 

the State of Alaska by the landing 

deadline. Members of the cooperative 

may resume directed fishing for pollock 

once all overdue landing taxes are paid.

15. In § 679.62, the introductory text 

in paragraph (a), and paragraphs (a)(2), 

(a)(3), (b)(2)(i), (b)(2)(ii), and (b)(3) are 

revised to read as follows:

§ 679.62 Inshore sector cooperative 

allocation program.

(a) How will inshore sector 

cooperative allocations be made? An 

inshore catcher vessel cooperative that 

applies for and receives an AFA inshore 

cooperative fishing permit under 

§ 679.4(l)(6) will receive a sub-allocation 

of the annual BS subarea inshore sector 

directed fishing allowance. Each inshore 

cooperative’s annual allocation 

amount(s) will be determined using the 

following procedure:

* * * * *

(2) Conversion of individual vessel 

catch histories to annual cooperative 

quota share percentages. Each inshore 

pollock cooperative that applies for and 

receives an AFA inshore pollock 

cooperative fishing permit will receive 

an annual quota share percentage of 

pollock for the BS subarea that is equal 

to the sum of each member vessel’s 

official AFA inshore cooperative catch 

history for the BS subarea divided by 

the sum of the official AFA inshore 

cooperative catch histories of all 

inshore-sector endorsed AFA catcher 

vessels. The cooperative’s quota share 

percentage will be listed on the 

cooperative’s AFA pollock cooperative 

permit.

(3) Conversion of quota share 

percentage to TAC allocations. Each 

inshore pollock cooperative that 

receives a quota share percentage for a 

fishing year will receive an annual 

allocation of pollock that is equal to the 

cooperative’s quota share percentage 

multiplied by the annual inshore BS 

subarea pollock allocation. Each 

cooperative’s annual pollock TAC 

allocation may be published in the 

interim, and final BSAI TAC 

specifications notices.

(b) * * *

(2) * * *

(i) Member vessels. All pollock caught 

by a member vessel while engaged in 

directed fishing for pollock in the BS 

subarea unless the vessel is under 

contract to another cooperative and the 

pollock is assigned to another 

cooperative.

(ii) Contract vessels. All pollock 

contracted for harvest and caught by a 

vessel under contract to the cooperative 

under paragraph (c) of this section while 

the vessel was engaged in directed 

fishing for pollock in the BS subarea.

(3) How must cooperative harvests be 

reported to NMFS? Each inshore pollock 

cooperative must report its BS subarea 

pollock harvest to NMFS on a weekly 

basis according to the recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements set out at 

§ 679.5(o).

* * * * *

16. In § 679.63, paragraph (c) is 

revised to read as follows:

§ 679.63 Catch weighing requirements for 

vessels and processors.

* * * * *

(c) What are the requirements for AFA 

inshore processors? (1) Catch weighing.

All groundfish landed by AFA catcher 

vessels engaged in directed fishing for 

pollock in the BS subarea must be 

sorted and weighed on a scale approved 

by the State of Alaska as described in 

§ 679.28(c), and be made available for 

sampling by a NMFS certified observer. 

The observer must be allowed to test 

any scale used to weigh groundfish in 

order to determine its accuracy.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2004 / Proposed Rules 70605

(2) Observer coverage and prior 

notification. The plant manager or plant 

liaison must notify the observer of the 

offloading schedule for each delivery of 

BS subarea pollock by an AFA catcher 

vessel at least 1 hour prior to offloading. 

The plant manager must ensure that an 

observer monitors each delivery of BS 

subarea pollock from an AFA catcher 

vessel and is on site the entire time the 

delivery is being weighed or sorted.

17. In § 679.64, introductory 

paragraph of (a), paragraphs (a)(1)(i), 

(a)(2)(ii), (a)(4), introductory paragraph 

of (b), and introductory paragraph of 

(b)(3) are revised to read as follows:

§ 679.64 Harvesting sideboard limits in 

other fisheries.

(a) Harvesting sideboards for listed 

AFA catcher/processors. The Regional 

Administrator will restrict the ability of 

listed AFA catcher/processors to engage 

in directed fishing for non-pollock 

groundfish species to protect 

participants in other groundfish 

fisheries from adverse effects resulting 

from the AFA and from fishery 

cooperatives in the BS subarea directed 

pollock fishery.

(1) * * *

(i) Except for Aleutian Islands 

pollock, the Regional Administrator will 

establish annual AFA catcher/processor 

harvest limits for each groundfish 

species or species group in which a TAC 

is specified for an area or subarea of the 

BSAI as follows:

* * * * *

(2) * * *

(ii) If the amount of Pacific ocean 

perch calculated under paragraph 

(a)(2)(i) of this section is determined by 

the Regional Administrator to be 

insufficient to meet bycatch needs of 

AFA catcher/processors in other 

directed fisheries for groundfish, the 

Regional Administrator will prohibit 

directed fishing for Aleutian Islands 

Pacific ocean perch by AFA catcher 

processors and establish the sideboard 

amount equal to the amount of Aleutian 

Islands Pacific ocean perch caught by 

AFA catcher processors incidental to 

directed fishing for other groundfish 

species.

* * * * *

(4) * * *

(i) Except as provided for in 

paragraphs (a)(1)(ii) through (a)(3) of 

this section, the harvest limit for each 

BSAI groundfish species or species 

group will be equal to the 1995 through 

1997 aggregate retained catch of that 

species by catcher/processors listed in 

paragraphs 208(e)(1) through (20) and 

section 209 of the AFA in non-pollock 

target fisheries divided by the sum of 

the catch of that species in 1995 through 

1997 multiplied by the TAC of that 

species available for harvest by catcher/ 

processors in the year in which the 

harvest limit will be in effect.

(ii) If the amount of a species 

calculated under paragraph (a)(4)(i) of 

this section is determined by the 

Regional Administrator to be 

insufficient to meet bycatch needs for 

AFA catcher/processors in other 

directed fisheries for groundfish, the 

Regional Administrator will prohibit 

directed fishing for that species by AFA 

catcher processors and establish the 

sideboard amount equal to the amount 

of that species caught by AFA catcher 

processors incidental to directed fishing 

for other groundfish species.

* * * * *

(b) The Regional Administrator will 

restrict the ability of AFA catcher 

vessels to engage in directed fishing for 

other groundfish species to protect 

participants in other groundfish 

fisheries from adverse effects resulting 

from the AFA and from fishery 

cooperatives in the BS subarea directed 

pollock fishery.

* * * * *

(3) Except for Aleutian Islands 

pollock, the Regional Administrator will 

establish annual AFA catcher vessel 

harvest limits for each groundfish 

species or species group in which a TAC 

is specified for an area or subarea of the 

GOA and BSAI as follows:

* * * * *

18. In § 679.65, paragraphs (a) and (b) 

are revised to read as follows:

§ 679.65 Crab processing sideboard limits.

(a) What is the purpose of crab 

processing limits? The purpose of crab 

processing sideboard limits is to protect 

processors not eligible to participate in 

the BS subarea directed pollock fishery 

from adverse effects as a result of the 

AFA and the formation of fishery 

cooperatives in the BS subarea directed 

pollock fishery.

(b) To whom do the crab processing 

sideboard limits apply? The crab 

processing sideboard limits in this 

section apply to any AFA inshore or 

mothership entity that receives pollock 

harvested in the BS directed pollock 

fishery by a fishery cooperative 

established under § . 679.61 or § 679.62.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 04–26835 Filed 12–6–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 041126333–4333–01; I.D. 

112204C]

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of Alaska; 

Proposed 2005 and 2006 Harvest 

Specifications for Groundfish

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce.

ACTION: 2005 and 2006 proposed harvest 

specifications for groundfish; 

apportionment of reserves; request for 

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes 2005 and 

2006 harvest specifications, reserves 

and apportionments, and Pacific halibut 

prohibited species catch (PSC) limits for 

the groundfish fishery of the Gulf of 

Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary 

to establish harvest limits and 

associated management measures for 

groundfish during the 2005 and 2006 

fishing years. The intended effect of this 

action is to conserve and manage the 

groundfish resources in the GOA in 

accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

DATES: Comments must be received by 

January 6, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 

Salveson, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: 

Lori Durall. Comments may be 

submitted by:

• Mail to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802;

• Hand Delivery to the Federal 

Building, 709 West 9th Street, Room 

420A, Juneau, AK;

• E-mail to 

2005AKgroundfish.tacspecs@noaa.gov

and include in the subject line of the email comments the document identifier: 

2005 Proposed Specifications (E-mail 

comments, with or without attachments, 

are limited to 5 megabytes);

• FAX to 907–586–7557; or

• Webform at the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions at that site for submitting 

comments.

Copies of the draft Environmental 

Assessment/Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (EA/IRFA) prepared 

for this action and the 2001 Biological 

Opinion (BiOp) on the Steller sea lion