79880 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 2569.405 (Corrected) 

■ 3. In section 2569.405, on page 

75889, in the third column, delete the 

second ‘‘(d)’’ immediately after the 

paragraph designated ‘‘(d)’’. 

§ 2569.411 (Corrected) 

■ 4. In section 2569.411, on page 

75890, in the first column, delete the 

second ‘‘(c)’’ immediately after the 

paragraph designated ‘‘(c)’’. 

§ 2569.501 (Corrected) 

■ 5. In section 2569.501, on page 

75891, in the first column, delete the 

second ‘‘(j)’’ immediately after the 

paragraph designated ‘‘(j)’’. 

§ 2569.506 (Corrected) 

■ 6. In section 2569.506, on page 

75892, in the first column, make the 

second paragraph ‘‘(c)’’ into a paragraph 

‘‘(d)’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2020–24954 Filed 12–10–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1300–00–D 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 201204–0325] 

RIN 0648–BJ74 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 

Fisheries Off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan; Amendment 29; 

2021–22 Biennial Specifications and 

Management Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule establishes the 

2021–22 harvest specifications for 

groundfish taken in the U.S. exclusive 

economic zone off the coasts of 

Washington, Oregon, and California, 

consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act and the Pacific Coast Groundfish 

Fishery Management Plan (PCGFMP). 

This final rule revises the management 

measures that are intended to keep the 

total annual catch of each groundfish 

stock or stock complex within the 

annual catch limits. These measures are 

intended to help prevent overfishing, 

rebuild overfished stocks, achieve 

optimum yield, and ensure that 

management measures are based on the 

best scientific information available. 

Additionally, this final rule implements 

Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP, which 

designates shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species, and 

changes the trawl and nontrawl 

allocations for blackgill rockfish within 

the southern slope complex south of 

40°10’ North latitude (N. lat.), petrale 

sole, lingcod south of 40°10′ N lat., and 

widow rockfish. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

January 1, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: 

Electronic Access 

This rule is accessible via the internet 

at the Office of the Federal Register 

website at https://

www.federalregister.gov/. Background 

information and documents including 

an integrated analysis for this action 

(Analysis), which addresses the 

statutory requirements of the Magnuson 

Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens 

Act), the National Environmental Policy 

Act, Presidential Executive Order 

12866, and the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act are available at the NMFS West 

Coast Region website at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/region/westcoast and at the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s website at http:// 

www.pcouncil.org. The final 2020 Stock 

Assessment and Fishery Evaluation 

(SAFE) report for Pacific Coast 

groundfish, as well as the SAFE reports 

for previous years, are also available 

from the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council’s website at http://

www.pcouncil.org. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Palmigiano, phone: 206–526– 

4491 or email: 

karen.palmigiano@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Harvest Specifications 

This final rule sets 2021–22 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures for 127 of the 128 groundfish 

stocks which currently have annual 

catch limits (ACLs) or ACL 

contributions to stock complexes 

managed under the PCGFMP, except for 

Pacific whiting. Pacific whiting harvest 

specifications are established annually 

through a separate bilateral process with 

Canada. Under Amendment 29, 

shortbelly rockfish, which was managed 

with harvest specifications in the most 

recent biennium (2019–20), will no 

longer be managed with harvest 

specifications and will be instead 

designated as an ecosystem component 

species. 

The overfishing limits (OFLs), 

acceptable biological catch (ABCs), and 

ACLs are based on the best available 

biological and socioeconomic data, 

including projected biomass trends, 

information on assumed distribution of 

stock biomass, and revised technical 

methods used to calculate stock 

biomass. See Tables 1a and 2a to Part 

660, Subpart C in the regulatory text 

supporting this rule for the 2021–22 

OFLs, ABCs, and ACLs for each stock or 

stock complex. 

A detailed description of each stock 

and stock complex for which the 

Council establishes harvest 

specifications set through this rule can 

be found in the 2020 SAFE document 

posted on the Council’s website at 

http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/ 

safe-documents/. A summary of how the 

2021–22 harvest specifications were 

developed, including a description of 

off-the-top deductions for tribal, 

research, incidental, and experimental 

fisheries, was provided in the proposed 

rule and is not repeated here. 

Additional information on the 

development of these harvest 

specifications is also provided in the 

Analysis. 

For most stocks, the Council 

recommended harvest specifications 

based on the default harvest control rule 

used in the prior biennium. The Council 

recommended deviating from the 

default harvest control rule for four 

stocks in 2021–2022. Table 1 presents a 

summary of the changes to the harvest 

control rules for these four stocks for the 

2021–22 biennium. Each of these 

changes was discussed in the proposed 

rule and that discussion is not repeated 

here. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79881 

II. Management Measures 

This section describes management 

measures (i.e., biennial fishery harvest 

guidelines and set-asides) used to 

further allocate the ACLs to the various 

sectors of the fishery and to manage the 

fishery. Management measures for the 

commercial fishery modify fishing 

behavior during the fishing year to 

ensure that catch does not exceed the 

ACL, and include trip and cumulative 

landing limits, time/area closures, size 

limits, and gear restrictions. 

Management measures for the 

recreational fisheries include bag limits, 

size limits, gear restrictions, fish 

dressing requirements, and time/area 

closures. Each of these changes was 

discussed in the proposed rule and that 

discussion is not repeated here. 

A. Deductions From the ACLs 

Before making allocations to the 

primary commercial and recreational 

components of groundfish fisheries, the 

Council recommends ‘‘off-the-top 

deductions,’’ or deductions from the 

ACLs to account for anticipated 

mortality for certain types of activities: 

Harvest in Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

tribal fisheries; harvest in scientific 

research activities; harvest in nongroundfish fisheries (incidental catch); 

and harvest that occurs under exempted 

fishing permits (EFPs). These off-the-top 

deductions are for individual stocks or 

stock complexes and can be found in 

the footnotes to Tables 1a and 2a to part 

660, subpart C. 

B. Tribal Fisheries 

The Quileute Tribe, Quinault Indian 

Nation, Makah Indian Tribe, and Hoh 

Indian Tribe (collectively, ‘‘the Pacific 

Coast Tribes’’) implement management 

measures for Tribal fisheries both 

independently as sovereign 

governments and cooperatively with the 

management measures in the Federal 

regulations. The Pacific Coast Tribes 

may adjust their Tribal fishery 

management measures inseason to stay 

within the Tribal harvest targets and 

estimated impacts to overfished stocks. 

Table 2 provides the Tribal harvest 

targets for the 2021–22 biennium. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.023</GPH>
79882 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

C. Biennial Fishery Allocations 

The Council recommends two-year 

trawl and nontrawl allocations during 

the biennial specifications process for 

all stocks without formal allocations (as 

defined in Section 6.3.2 of the PCGFMP) 

or stocks where the long-term allocation 

is suspended because the stock is 

declared overfished. As part of the 

2021–22 biennium, the Council also 

decided to revise the trawl and nontrawl 

allocations for canary rockfish, as well 

as Petrale sole, widow rockfish, lingcod 

south of 40°10′ N lat., and the slope 

rockfish complex south of 40°10′ N. lat., 

which were established through 

Amendment 21 to the PCGFMP (75 FR 

32993, June 10, 2010), to better align 

these allocations with current harvest 

trends. The changes to these allocations 

are part of Amendment 29 and were 

discussed in the Notice of Availability 

for that amendment (85 FR 54529, 

September 2, 2020). 

The trawl and nontrawl allocations, 

with the exception of sablefish north of 

36° N lat., are based on the fishery 

harvest guideline. The fishery harvest 

guideline is the tonnage that remains 

after subtracting the off-the-top 

deductions described in Section II, A, 

entitled ‘‘Deductions from the ACLs,’’ in 

this preamble. The trawl and nontrawl 

allocations are designed to 

accommodate anticipated mortality in 

each sector as well as variability and 

uncertainty in those mortality estimates. 

Additional information on the Council’s 

allocation framework and formal 

allocations can be found in Section 6.3 

of the PCGFMP and § 660.55 of the 

Federal regulations. Trawl and nontrawl 

allocations are detailed in Tables 1b and 

2b in the regulatory text for this rule. 

D. Corrections to Waypoints for Rockfish 

Conservation Areas 

Rockfish Conservation Areas (RCAs) 

are large groundfish area closures 

intended to reduce the catch of a stock 

or stock complex by restricting fishing 

activity at specific depths. The 

boundaries for RCAs are defined by 

straight lines connecting a series of 

latitude and longitude coordinates that 

approximate depth contours. These sets 

of coordinates, or lines, are not gear or 

fishery specific, but can be used in 

combination to define an area. NMFS 

then implements fishing restrictions for 

a specific gear and/or fishery within 

each defined area. Table 3 below shows 

the RCA boundaries by gear type in 

place starting in 2021. 

For the 2021–22 biennium, the 

Council recommended and NMFS is 

implementing minor adjustments to the 

40 fathom (fm) depth contour offshore 

of San Mateo in Central California, and 

the 100 fm depth contours off of 

California to more accurately refine the 

depth contours, as well as the addition 

of coordinates to define the 100 fm line 

around the Channel Islands (Table 3). 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.024</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79883 

E. Limited Entry Trawl 

The limited entry trawl fishery is 

made up of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, which includes both whiting 

and non-whiting targets, and the at-sea 

whiting sectors. For some stocks and 

stock complexes with a trawl allocation, 

an amount is first set-aside for the at-sea 

whiting sector with the remainder of the 

trawl allocation going to the Shorebased 

IFQ Program. Set-asides are not actively 

managed by NMFS or the Council 

except in the case of a risk to the ACL. 

At-Sea Set-Asides 

For several species, the trawl 

allocation is reduced by an amount setaside for the at-sea whiting sector. This 

amount is designed to accommodate 

catch by the at-sea whiting sector when 

they are targeting Pacific whiting. The 

Council recommended and NMFS is 

implementing the set-asides in Table 4 

for the 2021–22 biennium. 

Incidental Trip Limits for IFQ Vessels 

For vessels fishing in the Shorebased 

IFQ Program, with either groundfish 

trawl gear or nontrawl gears, the 

following incidentally-caught stocks are 

managed with trip limits: Minor 

Nearshore Rockfish north and south, 

black rockfish, cabezon (46°16′ to 40°10′ 

N lat. and south of 40°10′ N lat.), spiny 

dogfish, shortbelly rockfish, big skate, 

Pacific whiting, and the Other Fish 

complex. For all these stocks, except big 

skate, this rule is implementing the 

same IFQ fishery trip limits for these 

stocks for the 2021–22 biennium as 

those in place in 2020. For big skate, the 

Council recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, an unlimited trip limit at 

the start of 2021. Additionally, the 

Council recommended and NMFS is 

implementing a trip limit for blackgill 

rockfish within the southern slope 

rockfish complex. The trip limit is 

unlimited to start the 2021 fishing year. 

The purpose of the blackgill trip limit is 

to allow the Council to reduce targeting 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.025</GPH> ER11DE20.026</GPH>
79884 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

of blackgill rockfish inseason, if needed. 

Trip limits for the IFQ fishery can be 

found in Table 1 North and Table 1 

South to part 660, subpart D in the 

regulatory text of this rule. Changes to 

trip limits for the IFQ fishery are 

considered a routine measure under 

§ 660.60(c), and may be implemented or 

adjusted, if determined necessary, 

through inseason action. 

F. Limited Entry Fixed Gear and Open 

Access Nontrawl Fishery 

Management measures for the Limited 

Entry Fixed Gear (LEFG) and Open 

Access (OA) nontrawl fisheries tend to 

be similar because the majority of 

participants in both fisheries use hookand-line gear. Management measures, 

including area restrictions (e.g., 

nontrawl RCA) and trip limits in these 

nontrawl fisheries, are generally 

designed to allow harvest of target 

stocks while keeping catch of overfished 

stocks low. For the 2021–22 biennium, 

the Council recommended, and NMFS 

is implementing, increased trip limits 

for almost all LEFG and OA fisheries, 

many of which were first implemented 

decades ago and do not reflect stocks 

that rebuilt in previous biennium or 

other management changes (e.g., stock 

complex reorganizations). LEFG and OA 

trip limits are specified in Table 2 

(North), Table 2 (South) to subpart E for 

LEFG and in Table 3 (North) and Table 

3 (South) to subpart F for OA in the 

regulatory text of this rule. 

Sablefish Trip Limits 

Sablefish are managed separately 

north and south of 36°N lat. For the 

portion of the stock north of 36°N lat., 

the Council recommended and NMFS is 

implementing higher trip limits for the 

LEFG and OA fisheries in 2021. For the 

portion south of 36°N lat., the Council 

recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, removing the daily trip 

limit for the OA fishery but maintaining 

the same weekly and bimonthly trip 

limits as were in place in the start of 

2020. The sablefish trip limits for 2021– 

22 are shown in Table 5. 

LEFG and OA Trip Limits 

The Council recommended, and 

NMFS is implementing, higher trip 

limits for LEFG and OA fisheries in 

2021, including trip limits for 

shortspine thornyhead, longspine 

thornyhead, widow rockfish, shelf 

rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, canary 

rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, yellowtail 

rockfish, slope rockfish, darkblotched 

rockfish, Lingcod, nearshore rockfish, 

black rockfish, Other Flatfish, bocaccio 

south of 40°10′ N lat., and chilipepper 

rockfish. 

As discussed in the proposed rule for 

this action (85 FR 62492; October 2, 

2020), the Council recommended 

establishing an OA trip limit for 

shortspine and longspine thornyheads 

in the area between 40°10′ N lat. and 

34°27′ N lat. Therefore, NMFS is 

implementing a 50 lb (22.7 kg) per 

month limit for OA fisheries targeting 

shortspine and longspine thornyheads 

in the area between 40°10′ N lat. and 

34°27′ N lat. 

Primary Sablefish Tier Limits 

Some limited entry fixed gear permits 

are endorsed to receive annual sablefish 

quota, or tier limits. Vessels registered 

with one, two, or up to three of these 

permits may participate in the primary 

sablefish fishery. The tier limits are as 

follows: In 2021, Tier 1 at 58,649 lb 

(26,602 kg), Tier 2 at 26,659 lb (12,092 

kg), and Tier 3 at 15,234 lb (6,910 kg). 

For 2022 the limits are: Tier 1 at 55,858 

lb (25,337 kg), Tier 2 at 25,390 lb 

(11,517 kg), and Tier 3 at 14,509 lb 

(6,581 kg). 

Yellowtail Trip Limit for the Salmon 

Troll Fishery North and South of 40°10′ 

N Lat. 

The Council recommended and 

NMFS is implementing an increase to 

the yellowtail rockfish limit in the 

salmon troll fishery north of 40°10′ N 

lat. from 200 lbs (91 kg) to 500 lbs (227 

kg) and removing the ratio for yellowtail 

to salmon. 

The Council also recommended, and 

NMFS is implementing, a yellowtail 

rockfish trip limit in the salmon troll 

fishery south of 40°10′ N lat. of 1 lb 

(0.45 kg) of yellowtail rockfish for every 

2 lbs (0.9 kg) of Chinook salmon landed, 

with a cumulative limit of 200 lb (91 kg) 

per month, both within and outside of 

the RCA. This second change was 

included in the regulatory text of the 

proposed rule. However, the description 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.027</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79885 

of this change was inadvertently left out 

of the preamble. This was highlighted 

by a commenter during the public 

comment period. See Comment 4 in 

Section III, entitled ‘‘Response to 

Comments.’’ 

Removal of Other Flatfish Gear 

Restriction Off California 

The Council recommended and 

NMFS is removing the gear restrictions 

for the LEFG and OA fisheries targeting 

stocks in the Other Flatfish complex 

inside the nontrawl RCA south of 42° N 

lat. 

Nontrawl RCA Adjustments 

In addition to increasing the LEFG 

and OA trip limits, the Council 

recommended and NMFS is 

implementing the following changes to 

the Nontrawl RCA off Oregon and 

Washington: 

• Between 40°10′ N lat. and 46°16′ N 

lat. (the Oregon-Washington border): 

Open the area between the 30- and 40- 

fm management lines to hook-and-line 

gear except bottom longline and 

dinglebar, as defined in the ‘‘general 

definitions’’ section of the Federal 

regulations at 50 CFR 660.11; 

• Between 38°57.5′ N lat. and 34°27′ 

N lat., (Point Arena to Point 

Conception): Open the area between 40 

fm and 50 fm; and 

• South of 34°27′ N lat.: Open the 

area between 75 fm and 100 fm. 

These changes, along with the 

changes to recreational conservation 

areas (discussed in Section II, H., 

Recreational Fisheries) will provide 

much needed access to these areas for 

the LEFG and OA fisheries to better 

attain their trip limits. Nontrawl RCA 

closures can be found in the LEFG and 

OA trip limits in Table 2 (North), Table 

2 (South) to subpart E for LEFG and in 

Table 3 (North) and Table 3 (South) to 

subpart F for OA in the regulatory text 

of this rule. 

New Management Line at 38°57.5′ N 

Lat. 

In order to make some of the changes 

to the Nontrawl RCA, the Council also 

recommended and NMFS is 

implementing a new management line 

at 38°57.5′ N lat., which is Point Arena, 

California. Point Arena is already 

defined in Federal regulations under the 

definition for North-South Management 

Areas, as a commonly used geographic 

coordinate. 

H. Recreational Fisheries 

This section outlines the recreational 

fisheries management measures for 

2021–22. Washington, Oregon, and 

California each proposed, the Council 

recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing different combinations of 

seasons, bag limits, area closures, and 

size limits for stocks targeted in 

recreational fisheries. 

Washington 

This rule implements the following 

season structure in Table 6. 

The aggregate groundfish bag limits in 

waters adjacent to Washington will 

continue to be nine fish in all areas with 

a sub-bag limit for cabezon (one per 

day), rockfish (seven per day), and 

lingcod (two per day). The flatfish limit 

will be five fish, and is not counted 

towards the groundfish bag limit of nine 

but is in addition to it. 

Consistent with the 2019–20 

biennium, the Council recommended 

and NMFS is implementing to continue 

to prohibit recreational fishing for 

groundfish and Pacific halibut inside 

the North Coast Recreational Yelloweye 

Rockfish Conservation Area (YRCA), a 

C-shaped closed area off the northern 

Washington coast. However, the Council 

recommended and NMFS is 

implementing opening the South Coast 

Recreational YRCA and the Westport 

Offshore YRCA to recreational fishing 

for the 2021–22 biennium. Coordinates 

for YRCAs are defined at § 660.70. 

Oregon 

The Council recommended, and 

NMFS is implementing, an all months 

all depths season structure for the 

Oregon recreational fishery to start the 

2021 fishing year. The Council 

recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, the following aggregate 

bag and size limits: Three lingcod per 

day, with a minimum size of 22 in (56 

cm); 25 flatfish per day, excluding 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.028</GPH>
79886 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

Pacific halibut; and a marine fish 

aggregate bag limit of 10 fish per day, 

where cabezon have a minimum size of 

16 in (41 cm). 

As part of the 2021–22 biennium, the 

ODFW also requested that the Council 

consider allowing longleader gear 

fishing and ‘‘all-depth’’ Pacific halibut 

fishing on the same trip, which is 

currently prohibited. Therefore, the 

Council recommended, and NMFS is 

removing the prohibition on combining 

Oregon longleader trips with all depths 

halibut trips. 

California 

Table 7 shows the season structure 

and depth limits by California 

management area for 2021 and 2022. 

The Council recommended, and NMS 

is implementing, size limits that are the 

same in 2021 as they were for 2020 for 

all stocks. However, the Council 

recommended and NMFS is eliminating 

the sub-bag limits for black rockfish, 

canary rockfish, and cabezon, and 

NMFS is implementing a sub-bag limit 

for vermillion rockfish of five fish. 

III. Response to Comments 

NMFS received nine unique comment 

letters during the public comment 

period on the proposed rule (October 2, 

2020 through November 2, 2020). Two 

state agencies submitted comments, the 

California Department of Fish and 

Wildlife (CDFW) and the Oregon 

Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(ODFW). The letters from the state 

agencies included requests for 

clarifications on information included 

in the preamble to the proposed rule, 

noted several small errors and 

inconsistencies in the regulatory text of 

the proposed rule, and also provided 

more substantive comments. The 

Northwest Fisheries Science Center 

(NWFSC) also submitted a comment 

noting an error. NMFS has addressed 

those small errors and inconsistencies 

in Section IV, ‘‘Corrections to the 

Proposed Rule.’’ The more substantive 

comments are addressed below. 

The seven other comment letters were 

from private citizens and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). 

Two of those letters made comments 

that were outside the scope of this 

action and are not addressed here. Four 

letters were received from members of 

industry and made substantially similar 

comments. The responses to these 

comments have been grouped together 

and addressed below. The remaining 

comment letter contained substantive 

comments. NMFS addresses all 

substantive comments below. Changes 

from the proposed rule as a result of 

substantive comments received during 

the comment period are addressed in 

Section V, ‘‘Changes to the Proposed 

Rule.’’ 

Comment 1: Two commenters stated 

their support for the at-sea set-aside 

values. 

NMFS Response: We agree and 

appreciate the collaborative work 

undertaken by the members of different 

sectors of the Pacific whiting fishery to 

come together to develop a proposal for 

the at-sea set-aside values for the 2021– 

22 biennium. Collaborative work always 

delivers a better product, and we hope 

this type of collaboration will continue 

into future harvest specification cycles. 

Comment 2: Three commenters stated 

their support for Amendment 29 and the 

designation of shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species based on 

extensive discussion over several 

meetings at the Council and based on 

the best available science. 

NMFS Response: We agree that the 

Council has spent significant time over 

the past two years in order to develop 

the best approach to managing 

shortbelly rockfish based on the best 

available science and in a way in which 

it will not significantly impact industry 

or the resource. 

Comment 3: One commenter stated 

their support for the changes in 

Amendment 29 to the trawl and 

nontrawl allocations for blackgill 

rockfish south of 40°10 N lat., petrale 

sole, lingcod south of 40°10 N lat., and 

widow rockfish, and for keeping 

blackgill rockfish in the slope rockfish 

complex south of 40°10 N lat. 

NMFS Response: We agree with the 

changes in Amendment 29 to the trawl 

and nontrawl allocations for these 

species. These changes better reflect the 

current distribution of catch and will 

likely allow more of the ACLs for these 

stocks and the stock complex to be 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.029</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79887 

caught, resulting in more economic 

benefit to the fishing communities 

without significantly impacting the 

resources. 

Comment 4: One commenter stated 

that the discussion in the proposed rule 

for yellowtail trip limits in the salmon 

troll fishery north of 40°10′′ N lat. 

neglected to include any discussion on 

the change for the salmon troll fishery 

south of 40°10′ N lat. 

NMFS response: We agree. The 

commenter is correct that the discussion 

of the yellowtail trip limits in the 

salmon troll fishery south of 40°10′ N 

lat. was inadvertently left out of the 

preamble of the proposed rule. 

Therefore, in this final rule, we updated 

the heading and added a discussion of 

the rationale for the regulatory change, 

as now found above, under the 

subheading ‘‘Yellowtail Trip Limits in 

the Salmon Troll Fishery North and 

South of 40°10′ N lat.’’ in Section II, 

‘‘Management Measures,’’ paragraph ‘‘F. 

Limited Entry Fixed Gear and Open 

Access Nontrawl Fishery’’. 

Comment 5: One commenter stated 

that the regulatory text of the proposed 

rule for the removal of the gear 

restriction for other flatfish gear in the 

open access fishery correctly reflected 

the changes in the trip limit tables for 

south of 40°10′ N lat., but neglected to 

include this change in Table 1 for the 

open access fishery between 40°10′ and 

42° N lat. The Council intended to 

remove this restriction for the entire 

state of California (south of 42° N lat.). 

Therefore, the change should also be, 

made in both Tables 2 North and South 

for the open access fishery. 

NMFS response: We agree. The 

proposed rule inadvertently left in the 

gear restrictions for other flatfish gear 

for the open access fishery for the area 

between 40°10′ and 42° N lat. in Table 

2 North. Therefore, Table 2 North in the 

regulatory text of this final rule has been 

corrected to reflect that this change was 

made for the entire state of California 

(south of 42° N lat.). 

Comment 6: One commenter stated 

their concern with allowing vessels to 

fish with hook and line gears, except 

dinglebar and longline, in the RCA 

between 42° N lat. and 40°10′ N lat. and 

30 fm to 40 fm. The commenter is 

concerned that having differential gear 

allowances within the nontrawl RCA 

will complicate enforcement in these 

areas, particularly without the addition 

of a new declaration to clarify if a vessel 

was fishing with hook and line gear, but 

not fishing with longline or dinglebar 

gear. Additionally, because the Council 

is also removing the limitation on the 

number and size of hooks allowed by 

the open access fishery when fishing for 

other flatfish inside the RCAs off 

California, the commenter is concerned 

about the compounded impacts by 

removing these two provisions at once. 

NMFS response: We disagree that the 

change to allow vessels using hook and 

line gears, except dinglebar and bottom 

longline gear, to fish between 30 fm and 

40 fms in this area will cause confusion 

and complication amongst members of 

law enforcement. The Council’s 

Groundfish Management Team (GMT) 

has worked with the Council’s 

Enforcement Committee and NMFS’ 

Office of Law Enforcement (OLE) to 

ensure that there are no enforcement 

issues associated with this action. 

Although the Council did not 

recommend and NMFS is not 

implementing changes to the 

declarations so that vessels can declare 

hook and line gear that is not dinglebar 

or longline, this does not appear to be 

an issue. In recent years, vessels have 

been notifying NMFS OLE when making 

declarations of the type of hook and line 

gear used when making their 

declaration for hook and line gears. 

Additionally, in recent years, the total 

number of vessels that have used bottom 

longline or dinglebar gear versus other 

types of hook-and-line gear have been a 

small proportion of the total landings, 

because other gears are more efficient 

for the types of species targeted. For 

example, for vessels targeting lingcod 

between 2017 and 2019, 20.7 percent of 

landings by commercial non-trawl gear 

were taken by bottom longline and 78.6 

percent were taken by other hook-andline gears. For midwater shelf rockfishes 

(i.e., yellowtail, canary, widow, 

vermillion and other rockfishes that 

occur on the shelf), 37.3 percent was 

taken by bottom longline compared to 

62.7 percent taken by other hook-andline gears. In addition, based on 

conversations with NMFS OLE, of the 

other hook-and-line gears being used, 

only about five vessels use dinglebar 

gear annually. Therefore, NMFS also 

does not have concerns over the 

allowing the use of hook and line gear, 

except bottom longline or dinglebar, in 

the nontrawl RCA between 42° N lat. 

and 40°10′ N lat. 

Comment 7: Two commenters stated 

their opposition to the Council’s 

recommendation and NMFS’s proposal 

to designate shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species beginning 

with the 2021–22 biennium. In stating 

their opposition, the commenters raised 

multiple issues, and we provide a 

response for each stated issue below. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 1: 

Shortbelly rockfish must remain in the 

fishery because the species is in need of 

conservation and management. 

NMFS Response: We disagree. Section 

302(h)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

requires a Council to prepare an FMP 

for each fishery under its authority that 

is in need of conservation and 

management. ‘‘Conservation and 

management’’ is defined in section 3(5) 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The 

National Standard guidelines at 

§ 600.305(c) provide direction for 

determining which stocks will require 

conservation and management and 

provide direction to regional councils 

and NMFS for how to consider these 

factors in making this determination. 

First, NMFS must consider whether the 

stocks are ‘‘predominately caught in 

Federal waters and are overfished or 

subject to overfishing, or likely to 

become overfished or subject to 

overfishing.’’ 50 CFR 600.305(c). Such 

stocks require conservation and 

management. If a stock is not likely to 

become overfished or be subject to 

overfishing, Councils may still decide 

that it is appropriate for conservation 

and management. The guidelines direct 

regional fishery management councils 

and NMFS to consider a non-exhaustive 

list of ten factors when deciding 

whether stocks require conservation and 

management. After considering the 10 

factors, based on the best available 

science, the Council recommended and 

NMFS is implementing designating 

shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem 

component species. 

Conservation and management, as 

defined under the MSA and the 

National Standard guidelines, is needed 

when a stock must be rebuilt, restored, 

or to maintain the status of a stock. 

Shortbelly rockfish is not under a 

rebuilding status, and it is not 

overfished, subject to overfishing or 

likely to become overfished or subject to 

overfishing. Stock status was estimated 

during the last stock assessment to be 

above 73 percent of the unfished 

biomass, and less than 20 percent of the 

ABC has been taken annually in the past 

several years; these metrics indicate the 

stock does not need to be rebuilt or 

restored. Over the past 10 years the 

population has remained constant and 

likely has even increased in abundance, 

with new information suggesting that 

the population could be booming. As 

was discussed in the Analysis, based on 

multiple strong incoming year-classes 

and as supported by current scientific 

literature, the shortbelly rockfish stock 

is expected to thrive for at least the next 

decade or so. 

We agree with the commenter that 

shortbelly rockfish are an important 

forage species and are increasingly 

caught in federally managed fisheries. 

However, these factors are not 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
79888 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

1https://reports.psmfc.org/pacfin/ 

f?p=501:1000:13391209073431:::::. 

determinative that a stock is in need of 

conservation and management as 

defined under the MSA. Nor do these 

factors disqualify a stock from being 

designated an ecosystem component 

species. Because there is no directed 

fishing and incidental fishing-related 

mortality has been low in comparison to 

the ABC, it is very unlikely that catch 

would exceed the overfishing limit for 

shortbelly rockfish, resulting in 

shortbelly rockfish becoming overfished 

and in need of rebuilding. There are no 

known conservation concerns for 

shortbelly rockfish, since they are not 

targeted (shortbelly are primarily caught 

as bycatch in the Pacific whiting 

fishery), are not profitable, and future 

uses of shortbelly rockfish remain 

unavailable. Therefore, maintaining 

shortbelly rockfish as a target species in 

the PCGFMP is not likely to change 

stock condition. As discussed in the 

Council meetings, Council reports, and 

the Analysis, after reviewing each of the 

ten factors, the Council recommended 

and NMFS agrees that shortbelly 

rockfish are not in need of conservation 

and management, as defined by the 

MSA. 

Finally, we disagree with the 

requester that designating shortbelly 

rockfish as an ecosystem component 

species would prevent NMFS from 

addressing bycatch in the future, should 

that become an issue. As stated in the 

scope of the action in the Analysis, the 

Council has the ability to change the 

designation of a stock or stock complex 

every biennium based on new 

information. While we agree that we are 

unable to predict whether or not this 

fishery will become a target in the 

future, designating shortbelly rockfish 

as an ecosystem component species 

does not mean that NMFS will not 

monitor the stock or be unable to revisit 

that designation. Catch of shortbelly 

rockfish will continue to be reported on 

fish tickets and that catch data is 

available to the public on a daily basis 

through the Pacific Fisheries 

Information Network (PacFIN) 

database.1 Additionally, the Council has 

already tasked the Council’s GMT with 

providing updates at each Council 

meeting on the current catch of 

shortbelly rockfish. If bycatch of the 

stock starts to increase or a fishery for 

the stock were to begin to develop, the 

Council would have the ability to take 

action to reevaluate the designation of 

shortbelly rockfish. In the event that the 

stock becomes in need of conservation 

and management, the Council would 

have the obligation to include it in the 

PCGFMP. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 2: 

Shortbelly rockfish play a vital role in 

the California current ecosystem. 

NMFS Response: We agree. As 

discussed in the Analysis, shortbelly 

rockfish is a vital species in the 

California Current Ecosystem. However, 

while importance in the marine 

ecosystem is one of the factors we 

consider, it alone is not determinative of 

whether a stock is in need of 

conservation and management as 

defined under the MSA. In 

recommending Amendment 29, the 

Council relied on the best available 

science, which indicated increased 

stock abundance in recent years, to 

determine that there was a lack of a 

need for conservation and management 

of this stock in the 2021–22 biennium. 

Recent scientific literature indicates that 

the increased abundance due to high 

recruitment in 2013 (51 times higher 

than in 2014) and 2014 (1,750 times 

higher than 2005) and the extension of 

the stock’s range into more northern 

waters where Pacific whiting is targeted 

likely resulted in the higher bycatch in 

2018 and 2019 (Agenda Item H.6.a, 

GMT Report 2, November 2019). Even 

with the higher bycatch of shortbelly 

rockfish in recent years, total shortbelly 

rockfish catch has stayed below 50 

percent of the stock’s OFL and less than 

75 percent of the stock’s ABC since 

2011. There is no evidence to 

demonstrate that these catch trends 

would increase exponentially under an 

ecosystem component species 

designation. 

The commenters also stated their 

specific concerns for the marbled 

murrelet in California, Oregon, and 

Washington, as the species is listed as 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA), and for the 

California least tern, which is listed as 

endangered. On May 2, 2017, the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) issued 

a biological opinion (2017 biological 

opinion) concurring with NMFS that the 

fishery is not likely to adversely affect 

the marbled murrelet or California least 

tern, among other species, because 

adverse interactions with vessels and 

forage depletion are extremely unlikely 

to occur. Notably, the FWS concluded 

that small pelagic rockfish, including 

shortbelly rockfish, are expected to 

increase in abundance during the 

continued operation of the groundfish 

fishery. This action is not expected to 

change the conclusions from the 2017 

biological opinion, because it does not 

modify the action analyzed in that 

opinion in a manner or to an extent that 

would cause an effect to listed species 

or critical habitat that was not 

previously considered =. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 3: NMFS 

has not shown that reclassifying 

shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem 

component species would prevent 

overfishing. 

NMFS Response: We disagree. 

National Standard 9 provides that 

‘‘[c]onservation and management 

measures shall, to the extent practicable: 

(1) Minimize bycatch; and (2) To the 

extent bycatch cannot be avoided, 

minimize the mortality of such 

bycatch.’’ Designating shortbelly 

rockfish does not impair the PCGFMP’s 

ability to meet this requirement. All of 

the PCGFMP’s bycatch reduction 

components are unaffected by this 

action. Furthermore, there is no 

evidence to suggest that bycatch of 

shortbelly rockfish will increase due to 

this action. 

There is no evidence to suggest that 

designating shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species would 

result in a significant increase in catch. 

As has been discussed by members of 

industry at every Council meeting since 

November 2018, and as was also stated 

in the Analysis, the proposed rule, and 

the NOA for this action, industry has 

significant incentives not to catch 

shortbelly rockfish. Currently, 

shortbelly rockfish prices for processing 

are extremely low and often don’t cover 

the cost of the vessel to catch and 

deliver the shortbelly rockfish. 

Shortbelly rockfish can also clog nets 

and may spoil Pacific whiting catch. 

There are no known conservation 

concerns for shortbelly rockfish since 

they are not targeted, are not profitable, 

and future uses of shortbelly rockfish 

remain unavailable. Therefore, the 

incentives exist to avoid shortbelly 

rockfish, and there is no indication that 

changing the designation of this stock 

will alter these incentives. 

In the future, if there were indications 

of bycatch of shortbelly rockfish at 

significantly higher levels than what has 

been caught in recent years, the Council 

would be able to revisit the ecosystem 

component species designation. The 

Council has previously done exactly 

this for big skate. The Council 

designated big skate as an ecosystem 

component species in the 2017–18 

biennium, but after catch of big skate 

began to increase, the Council redesignated big skate as a stock that is in 

need of conservation and management 

in the 2019–20 biennium. As discussed 

above and below, designation of 

shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem 

component species does not preclude 

NMFS or the Council from monitoring 

the stock or taking action to minimize 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79889 

bycatch, if necessary. Catch of 

shortbelly rockfish will continue to be 

reported, and that catch data is available 

publicly through the PacFIN database. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 4: Removing 

all management measures to constrain 

or reduce shortbelly rockfish bycatch 

ignores NMFS’ ongoing mandate to 

reduce bycatch. 

NMFS Response: We disagree. 

Designating shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species does not 

preclude the Council from monitoring 

catch of shortbelly rockfish or 

developing management measures to 

reduce bycatch, if necessary. As stated 

in the 2020 SAFE document and at 

§ 600.305(c)(5), consistent with National 

Standard 9, MSA section 303(b)(12), and 

other applicable MSA sections, 

management measures can be adopted 

in order to, for example, collect data on 

the ecosystem component species, 

minimize bycatch or bycatch mortality 

of ecosystem component species, 

protect the associated role of ecosystem 

component species in the ecosystem, 

and/or to address other ecosystem 

issues. Further, the PCGFMP clarifies 

that ecosystem component species 

should be monitored to the extent that 

any new pertinent scientific information 

becomes available (e.g., catch trends, 

vulnerability, etc.) to determine changes 

in their status or their vulnerability to 

the fishery. In making its decision in 

June 2020 to recommend designating 

shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem 

component species, the Council 

specifically noted that catch of 

shortbelly rockfish would continue to be 

monitored by the Council’s GMT, and 

inseason catches will be reported out to 

the Council at each meeting using the 

species scorecard. Therefore, in the 

event that bycatch of shortbelly rockfish 

does increase significantly in the future, 

the Council will be notified and will 

have the ability to adopt management 

measures in order to minimize bycatch 

of shortbelly rockfish while it is an 

ecosystem component species. In 

designating shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species, the 

Council still has the ability to 

recommend, and NMFS can still 

implement, management measures for 

shortbelly rockfish to address high 

bycatch in the future. 

The most recent scientific literature 

indicates that population abundance has 

increased, accompanied by a northern 

range expansion. These changes are the 

most likely explanation for the 

increased bycatch levels since 2018. 

Following the ACL (the ACL is a harvest 

specification) overages in 2018 and 

2019, the Council considered this issue 

extensively and was unable to conclude 

that any specific management measure 

would prevent the ACL overages, largely 

because the stock is not directly targeted 

and industry already has significant 

incentives to avoid the stock. However, 

even without effective management 

measures, bycatch of shortbelly rockfish 

has remained less than 50 percent of the 

stock’s OFL. Because of the increasing 

abundance of the stock and the lack of 

apparent management measures which 

will maintain or improve stock status, 

the Council recommended, and NMFS 

is implementing, designating shortbelly 

rockfishas an ecosystem component 

species. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 5: 

Designating shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species ignores 

the best available science. 

NMFS Response: We disagree. The 

Council recommended and NMFS is 

implementing designation of shortbelly 

rockfish as an ecosystem component 

species based on the best available peerreviewed scientific information. The 

Council and NMFS relied on the most 

recent and best information available to 

make determinations on the 

management of shortbelly rockfish. This 

information is extensively documented 

throughout the record of Council 

meetings discussing shortbelly rockfish 

since 2018, including Council 

discussions, advisory body reports and 

meeting briefing books, and in the 

Analysis for this rule. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 6: As 

applied to shortbelly rockfish, the 

regulations authorizing NMFS to 

designate ecosystem component species 

violate the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

NMFS Response: We disagree. After 

extensive analysis and consideration of 

the best available scientific information 

and public comment, the Council 

recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, designation of shortbelly 

rockfish as an ecosystem component 

species for the 2021–22 biennium. Since 

2018, the Council and its advisory 

bodies have considered this issue 

extensively, as documented in Council 

discussion, briefing books and advisory 

body reports. Both the Council and 

NMFS have extensively discussed and 

analyzed the best way to conserve and 

manage shortbelly rockfish. The most 

recent information on stock abundance, 

the likely extension of the stock into 

northern waters, the lack of a targeted 

fishery, and the existing disincentives 

for industry to catch shortbelly rockfish 

all support the designation of shortbelly 

rockfish as an ecosystem component 

species. As discussed above, 

designation as an ecosystem species 

does not preclude the Council from 

monitoring catch of the stock, adopting 

management measures to reduce 

bycatch, or revisiting the designation. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 7: NMFS 

must consult on the designation of 

shortbelly rockfish as an ecosystem 

component species as it may affect ESAlisted species. 

NMFS Response: We disagree that 

additional consultation is needed due to 

the designation of shortbelly rockfish as 

an ecosystem component species for the 

2021–22 biennium. As discussed above, 

the USFWS issued the 2017 biological 

opinion regarding the effects of the 

continued operation of the Pacific Coast 

groundfish fishery (which includes 

shortbelly rockfish) on California least 

tern, southern sea otter, bull trout, 

marbled murrelet, and short-tailed 

albatross. This action is not expected to 

change the conclusions of the 2017 

biological opinion because it does not 

modify the action analyzed in that 

opinion in a manner or to an extent that 

would cause an effect to listed species 

or critical habitat that was not 

previously considered . On December 

11, 2017, NMFS issued a biological 

opinion finding that the effects of the 

continued operation of the Pacific Coast 

groundfish fishery is likely to adversely 

affect, but is not likely to jeopardize, the 

continued existence of the following 

listed salmon evolutionarily significant 

units: Puget Sound Chinook, Snake 

River Fall Chinook, Lower Columbia 

River Chinook, Upper Willamette River 

Chinook, Snake River spring/summer 

Chinook, California Coastal Chinook, 

Lower Columbia River Coho, Oregon 

Coast Coho, Southern Oregon/Northern 

California coho, and Central California 

Coast coho. This action does not modify 

the action analyzed in the December 

2017 biological opinion in a manner 

that may affect listed species in a 

manner or to an extent not previously 

considered. 

Shortbelly Rockfish Issue 8: 

Designating shortbelly rockfish as an 

ecosystem component species could 

result in the deprioritization of it as a 

stock to be assessed as part of the 2023– 

24 biennium. 

NMFS Response: We neither agree nor 

disagree. The Council has adopted a list 

of candidate stocks for assessment in 

2023 for which shortbelly rockfish is 

included. The Council will make a final 

decision on this candidate list in June 

2022. While we do not know what 

decision the Council will ultimately 

make, we have no indication that the 

Council will remove shortbelly rockfish 

from this list based on designation as an 

ecosystem component species. There is 

no requirement that the Council 

prioritize only those stocks that are in 

need of conservation and management 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
79890 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

for stock assessments. We anticipate 

that the Council will continue to weigh 

all options and needs when finalizing 

their prioritized list of stocks to be 

assessed for the 2023–24 biennium. 

IV. Corrections to the Proposed Rule 

NMFS received comment letters from 

the NWFSC, the CDFW, and the ODFW 

noting inaccuracies in information 

presented in the preamble to the 

proposed rule. NMFS offers the 

following corrections in this final rule. 

These clarifications and corrections to 

the information described in the 

preamble to the proposed rule do not 

change the substance or intent of this 

action. Where necessary, corrections to 

harvest specifications numbers in the 

preamble have been carried through to 

the regulatory text of this final rule. 

Table 1 in the preamble of the 

proposed rule was not labeled correctly. 

Instead of being labeled as the ‘‘Old and 

New s Values for Category 1–3 Stocks 

Over a 10-Year Period’’ the table should 

have been labeled, ‘‘A Comparison of 

the Old and New Scientific Uncertainty 

Reductions for P*=0.45’’. These 

percentages represent the buffer 

between the OFL, given a P* value of 

0.45, and the ABC. 

Table 2 in the preamble, and 

subsequent discussion thereafter, 

provided incorrect values for the ACLs 

for sablefish north and south of 36° N 

lat. and the coastwide apportionment of 

the ABC for sablefish south of 36° N lat. 

It was determined during review of the 

Analysis that these errors were the 

result of typographical errors in the 

Council’s background material. The 

errors were not carried through to the 

calculations for allocations made below 

the ACLs. The Council recommended 

these technical changes be made at their 

September 2020 meeting. Therefore, this 

final rule corrects the Sablefish ACLs 

and the Sablefish apportionment, as 

follows: 

On page 62495 of the proposed rule, 

the section header, entitled ‘‘C. 

Proposed ACLs for 2019 and 2020’’, 

used the incorrect years; the title should 

have used the correct years, 2021 and 

2022. 

On page 62498 of the proposed rule, 

the section header entitled ‘‘D. 

Summary of ACL Changes from 2019 to 

2021–22’’, used the incorrect year. The 

year 2019 was incorrect and should 

have read 2020. 

Table 5—ACLs for Major Stocks for 

2020, and 2021–22, on page 62499 of 

the proposed rule, included incorrect 

values for the ACL for Nearshore 

Rockfish North. These number should 

be 79 mt and 77 mt for 2021 and 2022, 

respectively. 

In the proposed rule, there were two 

tables labeled as ‘‘Table 9’’: Table 9— 

2021 and 2022 Allocations of Canary 

Rockfish on page 62502, and Table 9— 

2021 and 2022 Trawl/NonTrawl 

Allocations of Cowcod on page 62503. 

The second Table 9 for cowcod should 

have been numbered as Table 10. 

In the proposed rule’s Table 9—2021 

and 2022 Trawl/NonTrawl Allocations 

of Cowcod on page 62502, the nontrawl 

and trawl allocation values were 

transposed. They should have been 32 

mt for the non-trawl fishery and 18 mt 

for the trawl fishery in both 2021 and 

2022. In Table 10 of this final rule, these 

values have been updated to reflect the 

correct allocations. 

In the proposed rule’s Table 10—2021 

and 2022 Trawl/Nontrawl Allocations of 

Lingcod south of 40°10′ N lat. on page 

62503, the allocations for trawl and nontrawl were transposed. The nontrawl 

allocation should be 653.4 mt for 2021 

and 695.4 mt for 2022. The trawl 

allocation should be 435.6 mt in 2021 

and 463.6 mt in 2022. The correct 

allocations can be found in Table 11 of 

this final rule. 

In the proposed rule’s Table 19— 

Proposed Season Structure and Depth 

Limits by Management Area for 2021 

and 2022 on page 62509, for the 

southern management area, the depth 

limit was incorrectly listed as <50 fm 

which was the same depth for the two 

areas north of the southern management 

area (San Francisco and Central 

management areas). This depth was 

inadvertently carried through to the 

southern management area. However, 

the depth limit should be <100 fm, as 

recommended by the Council. The 

correct value is included in Table 20 of 

this final rule. 

The CDFW and the ODFW also 

highlighted several technical errors in 

the regulatory text of the proposed rule. 

These technical errors are discussed 

below, and are corrected in the 

regulatory text of this final rule, but do 

not change the substance of this final 

rule. 

In Table 1a, Subpart C—2021 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT, 

and Fishery HG in the regulatory text, 

in footnote ‘‘h’’ for bocaccio on page 

62515, the nearshore and non-nearshore 

allocation listed was the allocation for 

2022 (315.7 mt) instead of for 2021 

(320.2 mt). In this final rule, the same 

table contains the corrected allocation, 

320.2 mt for 2021. 

In Table 1a, Subpart C—2021 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT, 

and Fishery HG in the regulatory text of 

the proposed rule, in footnote ‘‘aa’’ for 

sablefish south of 36° N. lat. on page 

62517, the percentage of the coastwide 

catch was shown as 21.5 percent. This 

number has been corrected in this final 

rule to be shown as 21.6 percent, which 

accurately reflects the Council’s 

recommended allocation percentage of 

sablefish south of 36° N. lat.. 

In Table 1b, Subpart C—2021 

Allocations by Species or Species Group 

of the regulatory text of the proposed 

rule on page 62519, the trawl allocation 

for English sole had a comma in the 

wrong place. In this final rule, the value 

is correctly listed as 8,478.2 mt. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.030</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79891 

In Table 2a, Subpart C—2022 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT 

and Fishery Harvest Guidelines in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule, in 

footnote ‘‘h’’ for bocaccio on page 

62523, there was no listed amount for 

the combined nearshore and nonnearshore fishery. In this final rule, 

footnote ‘‘h’’ of this table states that the 

2022 combined allocation to the 

nearshore and non-nearshore fishery is 

315.7 mt. 

In Table 2a, Subpart C—2022 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT 

and Fishery Harvest Guidelines in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule, in 

footnote ‘‘u’’ for longspine thornyhead 

on page 52523, the value was 

incorrectly listed as 77771.8 mt. In this 

final rule, the value has been corrected 

so that it is 771.8 mt. 

In Table 2a, Subpart C—2022 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT 

and Fishery Harvest Guidelines in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule, in 

footnote ‘‘w’’ on page 62524, the harvest 

guideline value for Pacific ocean perch 

was incorrectly listed as 3,829.3 mt. In 

this final rule, the value has been 

corrected to 3,686.2 mt. 

In Table 2a, Subpart C—2022 

Specifications of OFL, ABC, ACL, ACT 

and Fishery Harvest Guidelines in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule, in 

footnote ‘‘mm’’ for Nearshore Rockfish 

north of 40°10′ N lat. on page 62525, the 

last sentence in the footnote referred to 

the harvest guidelines as recreational 

harvest guidelines. However, these 

guideline apply to more than just 

recreational fisheries. Therefore, in this 

final rule this text has been corrected by 

changing ‘‘Recreational HGs are’’ to 

‘‘State-specific HGs are’’. 

In Table 2b, Subpart C—2022 and 

Beyond, Allocations by Species or 

Species Group, in the regulatory text of 

the proposed rule on page 62526, the 

fishery harvest guideline for yellowtail 

rockfish was incorrectly listed in the 

proposed rule as 4,793.5 mt. This value 

has been corrected to 4,783.5 mt in this 

final rule. 

In Table 1 to paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(D) in 

§ 660.140 ‘‘Shorebased IFQ Program’’ in 

the regulatory text of the proposed rule 

on page 62528, the 2021 and 2022 

shorebased trawl allocations for 

Sablefish south of 36° N lat. were 

incorrectly listed as 782.3 mt and 744.9 

mt, respectively. These values have 

been corrected to 786 mt and 748 mt, 

respectively, in this final rule. 

In Table 1 to paragraph (d)(1)(ii)(D) in 

§ 660.140 ‘‘Shorebased IFQ Program’’ in 

the regulatory text of the proposed rule 

on page 62528, the 2022 shorebased 

trawl allocations for Yellowtail Rockfish 

were incorrectly listed as 3,889.4 mt. 

This value has been corrected to 

3,898.24 mt, in this final rule. 

In Table 3 (North), Subpart F—NonTrawl Rockfish Conservation Areas and 

Trip Limits for Open Access Gears 

North of 40°10′ N lat., in the regulatory 

text of the proposed rule on page 62534, 

the text describing the salmon troll limit 

in the north was been cut off. In this 

final rule, the table cell has been resized 

so that all the text is shown. 

In Table 3 (South), Subpart F—NonTrawl Rockfish Conservation Areas and 

Trip Limits for Open Access Gears 

South of 40°10′ N lat., in the regulatory 

text of the proposed rule on page 62535, 

the text of the salmon troll trip limit 

incorrectly stated the area of the limit as 

‘‘This limit is within the 4,000 lbs per 

2 month limit for minor shelf rockfish 

between 40°10′ N lat. and 24°27′ N lat.’’ 

In this final rule, the text has been 

corrected to state that ‘‘This limit is 

within the 4,000 lbs per 2 month limit 

for minor shelf rockfish between 40°10′ 

N lat. and 34°27′ N lat.’’. 

In Table 3 (South), Subpart F—NonTrawl Rockfish Conservation Areas and 

Trip Limits for Open Access Gears 

South of 40°10′ N lat., in the regulatory 

text of the proposed rule on page 62535, 

the text describing the Pink shrimp 

Nongroundfish Trawl fishery (Line 49) 

was been cut off. In this final rule, the 

table cell has been resized so that all the 

text is shown. 

In § 660.360(c)(3)(i)(A) in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule on 

page 62537, the text inadvertently 

referenced the coordinates 

approximating the boundary lines at 10- 

fm (18 m) through 40-fm (73 m) depth 

contours at § 660.71. However, because 

the recreational fisheries extend from 

50-fm to 100-fm, the referenced 

coordinates should be at §§ 660.72 and 

660.73. In this final rule, this text has 

been amended to include reference to 

the correct sections. 

In § 660.360(c)(3)(ii)(B) in the 

regulatory text of the proposed rule on 

page 62537, the text states ‘‘In times and 

areas when the recreational season for 

the RCG Complex is open, there is a 

limit of 2 hooks and 1 line when fishing 

for the RCG complex and lingcod.’’ 

Lingcod does not need to be listed here, 

as it is address in § 660.360(c)(3)(iii); 

therefore, the reference has been 

removed from the regulatory text in this 

final rule. 

V. Changes From the Proposed Rule 

As a result of comments received on 

the proposed rule, NMFS is making the 

following changes to the proposed rule. 

In addition, one set of minor changes is 

being made to the proposed rule in 

accordance with a November 2020 

Council recommendation based on 

newly updated catch data that was not 

available before the proposed rule was 

published. 

In § 660.230(d)(10)(i), current 

regulations include reference to the 

other flatfish gear prohibition on the 

number and size of hooks allowed for 

the open access fishery. This text was 

not suggested to be deleted in the 

proposed rule. However, because the 

Council recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, changes to this 

prohibition, conforming amendments to 

this text should also have been 

proposed to reflect this change. Because 

the text at § 660.230(d)(10)(i) is no 

longer necessary, this final rule removes 

pargraph § 660.230(d)(10)(i). 

The regulatory text in the proposed 

rule removed the recreational season 

structure text in § 660.360(c)(3)(i)(A)(1)- 

(5), and replaced it with a table. The 

CDFW commented that it had concerns 

with the change and felt that it omitted 

text that was critical for state 

enforcement and which was referenced 

in state regulations. Based on this 

concern, in this final rule, NMFS has 

removed Table 2 in this section and 

replaced it with the paragraph structure 

used in the 2019–20 biennium. All 

Council recommendations are reflected 

in the new paragraph structure. 

In § 660.360(c)(3)(i)(A)(1) of the 

regulatory text in the proposed rule, 

there is only reference to the depth 

contour (‘‘prohibited seaward of the 30 

fm (55 m) depth contour along the 

mainland coast and along islands and 

offshore seamounts’’), without any 

reference to the boundary line. To 

remain consistent with other sections of 

the regulatory text that describe the 

boundary lines for the recreational 

fisheries, this final rule is corrected to 

to read, ‘‘prohibited seaward of the 

boundary line approximating the 30 fm 

(55 m) depth contour along the 

mainland coast and along islands and 

offshore seamounts’’. 

In § 660.360(c)(3)(i)(A)(2) of the 

regulatory text in the proposed rule, 

there is only reference to the depth 

contour, without any reference to the 

boundary line. To remain consistent 

with other section of the regulatory text 

that describe the boundary lines for the 

recreational fisheries, in this final rule, 

this text has been updated from ‘‘is 

prohibited seaward of the 20 fm (37 m) 

depth contour along the mainland coast 

and along islands and offshore 

seamounts’’ to read, ‘‘is prohibited 

seaward of the boundary line 

approximating the 20 fm (37 m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts’’. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
79892 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

Finally, at its November 2020 

meeting, the Council recommended 

changes to the trip limits for the limited 

entry and open access fisheries north 

and south of 36° N lat. for sablefish and 

lingcod south of 40°10′ N lat., and the 

open access trip limit for shortspine and 

longspine thornyhead south of 34°27′ N 

lat. All changes are to increase trip 

limits as a result of updated catch data 

that show lower than projected 

attainment for these stocks in the most 

recent fishing season. As a result, trip 

limits can be raised to allow for full 

attainment of the HG for both of these 

stocks in 2021. These changes were 

recommended by the Council to NMFS 

through the inseason action process and 

are incorporated into this final rule for 

implementation for the 2021 fisheries. 

Because these trip limits are within the 

range of what was previously analyzed, 

they constitute a minor, routine 

adjustment to the management measures 

for the 2021 groundfish fisheries. 

VI. Classification 

Pursuant to section 304 (b)(3) of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS 

Assistant Administrator has determined 

that this final rule is consistent with the 

PCGFMP, other provisions of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law. 

NMFS finds good cause to waive the 

30-day delay in effectiveness pursuant 

to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), so that this final 

rule may become effective on January 1, 

2021. This action establishes the final 

specifications (i.e., annual catch limits) 

for the Pacific Coast groundfish fisheries 

for the 2021 fishing year, which begins 

on January 1, 2021. If this final rule is 

not effective on January 1, 2021, then 

the fishing year begins using the catch 

limits and management measures from 

2020. 

Because this final rule increases the 

catch limits for several species for 2021, 

leaving 2020 harvest specifications in 

place could unnecessarily delay fishing 

opportunities until later in the year, 

potentially reducing the total catch for 

these species in 2021. Thus, a delay in 

effectiveness could ultimately cause 

economic harm to the fishing industry 

and associated fishing communities or 

result in harvest levels inconsistent with 

the best available scientific information. 

This final rule is not unexpected or 

controversial. The groundfish harvest 

specifications are published biennially 

and are intended to be effective on 

January 1 of odd numbered years. 

Additionally, the subject of this final 

rule has been developed over a series of 

six public meetings of the Council from 

June 2019 to June 2020. The public is 

given notice of these meetings, and the 

public is provided opportunity to 

comment on actions through that venue 

as well as through the rulemaking 

process. 

Because of the potential harm to 

fishing communities that could be 

caused by delaying the effectiveness of 

this final rule, and because of the 

previous notification to the regulated 

public of these changes through the 

Council process, NMFS finds there is 

good cause to waive the 30-day delay in 

effectiveness. 

Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, 

this rule was developed after 

meaningful consultation and 

collaboration with tribal officials from 

the area covered by the PCGFMP. Under 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act at 16 U.S.C. 

1852(b)(5), one of the voting members of 

the Pacific Council must be a 

representative of an Indian tribe with 

federally recognized fishing rights from 

the area of the Council’s jurisdiction. In 

addition, regulations implementing the 

PCGFMP establish a procedure by 

which the tribes with treaty fishing 

rights in the area covered by the 

PCGFMP request new allocations or 

regulations specific to the tribes, in 

writing, before the first of the two 

meetings at which the Council considers 

groundfish management measures. The 

regulations at 50 CFR 660.324(d) further 

direct NMFS to develop tribal 

allocations and regulations in 

consultation with the affected tribes. 

The tribal management measures in this 

proposed rule have been developed 

following these procedures. The tribal 

representative on the Council made a 

motion to adopt the non-whiting tribal 

management measures, which was 

passed by the Council. Those 

management measures, which were 

developed and proposed by the tribes, 

are included in this final rule. 

The Council prepared an 

environmental assessment for 

Amendment 29 to the PCGFMP and the 

2021–22 harvest specifications and 

management measures, and concluded 

that there will be no significant impact 

on the human environment as a result 

of this rule. A copy of the integrated 

analysis is available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

This final rule is not an Executive 

Order 13771 regulatory action because 

this action is not significant under 

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 during 

the proposed rule stage that this action 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The factual basis for the 

certification was published in the 

proposed rule, and is not repeated here. 

No comments were received regarding 

this certification. As a result, a final 

regulatory flexibility analysis was not 

required and none was prepared. 

This final rule contains no 

information collection requirements 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: December 7, 2020. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is amended 

as follows: 

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 660 

continues to read as follows: 

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

773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 660.11, revise the introductory 

text and paragraph (2)(xviii) of the 

definition of ‘‘North-South management 

area’’ to read as follows: 

§ 660.11 General definitions. 

* * * * * 

North-South management area means 

the management areas defined in 

paragraph (1) of this definition, or 

defined and bounded by one or more or 

the commonly used geographic 

coordinates set out in paragraph (2) of 

this definition for the purposes of 

implementing different management 

measures in separate geographic areas of 

the U.S. West Coast. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(xviii) Point Arena, CA—management 

line—38°57.50′ N lat. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 660.40 by: 

■ a. Revising the section heading; 

■ b. Removing paragraph (a); 

■ c. Redesignating paragraph (b) as 

paragraph (a), and revising newly 

redesignated paragraph (a); and 

■ d. Adding and reserving a new 

paragraph (b). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 660.40 Rebuilding plans. 

* * * * * 

(a) Yelloweye rockfish. Yelloweye 

rockfish was declared overfished in 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79893 

2002. The target year for rebuilding the 

yelloweye rockfish stock to BMSY is 

2029. The harvest control rule to be 

used to rebuild the yelloweye rockfish 

stock is an annual SPR harvest rate of 

65.0 percent. 

(b) [Reserved] 

■ 4. In § 660.50, revise paragraphs 

(f)(2)(ii) and (f)(6) to read as follows: 

§ 660.50 Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

fisheries. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) The Tribal allocation is 689.2 mt 

in 2021 and 656.6 mt in 2022 per year. 

This allocation is, for each year, 10 

percent of the Monterey through 

Vancouver area (North of 36° N lat.) 

ACL. The Tribal allocation is reduced 

by 1.7 percent for estimated discard 

mortality. 

* * * * * 

(6) Petrale sole. For petrale sole, treaty 

fishing vessels are restricted to a 

fleetwide harvest target of 350 mt each 

year. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 660.71 by: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (o)(133) 

through (216) as paragraphs (o)(135) 

through (218); and 

■ b. Adding new paragraphs (o)(133) 

and (134) to read as follows: 

§ 660.71 Latitude/longitude coordinates 

defining the 10-fm (18-m) through 40-fm (73- 

m) depth contours. 

* * * * * 

(o) * * * 

(133) 37°25.00′ N lat., 122°38.66′ W 

long.; 

(134) 37°20.68′ N lat., 122°36.79′ W 

long.; 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 660.73 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraphs (a)(2902) and 

(a)(309) through (315); 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (a)(316) through 

(321); 

■ c. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(14); 

■ d. Adding paragraph (b)(15); 

■ e. Revising paragraphs (c)(10) through 

(14); 

■ f. Redesignatng paragraphs (d) 

through (l) as paragraphs (e) through 

(m); and 

■ g. Adding new paragraph (d). 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 660.73 Latitude/longitude coordinates 

defining the 100 fm (183 m) through 150 fm 

(274 m) depth contours. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(290) 34°03.33′ N lat., 119°12.93′ W 

long.; 

* * * * * 

(309) 33°2.81′ N lat., 117°21.17′ W 

long.; 

(310) 33°1.76′ N lat., 117°20.51′ W 

long.; 

(311) 32°59.90′ N lat., 117°19.38′ W 

long.; 

(312) 32°57.29′ N lat., 117°18.94′ W 

long.; 

(313) 32°56.15′ N lat., 117°19.54′ W 

long.; 

(314) 32°55.30′ N lat., 117°19.38′ W 

long.; and 

(315) 32°54.27′ N lat., 117°17.17′ W 

long. 

(316) 32°52.94′ N lat., 117°17.11′ W 

long.; 

(317) 32°52.66′ N lat., 117°19.67′ W 

long.; 

(318) 32°50.95′ N lat., 117°21.17′ W 

long.; 

(319) 32°47.11′ N lat., 117°22.98′ W 

long.; 

(320) 32°45.60′ N lat., 117°22.64′ W 

long.; and 

(321) 32°42.79′ N lat., 117°21.16′ W 

long.; 

(b) * * * 

(1) 33°04.80′ N lat., 118°37.90′ W 

long.; 

(2) 33°02.65′ N lat., 118°34.08′ W 

long.; 

(3) 32°55.80′ N lat., 118°28.92′ W 

long.; 

(4) 32°55.04′ N lat., 118°27.68′ W 

long.; 

(5) 32°49.79′ N lat., 118°20.87′ W 

long.; 

(6) 32°48.05′ N lat., 118°19.62′ W 

long.; 

(7) 32°47.41′ N lat., 118°21.86′ W 

long.; 

(8) 32°44.03′ N lat., 118°24.70′ W 

long.; 

(9) 32°47.81′ N lat., 118°30.20′ W 

long.; 

(10) 32°49.79′ N lat., 118°32.00′ W 

long.; 

(11) 32°53.36′ N lat., 118°33.23′ W 

long.; 

(12) 32°55.13′ N lat., 118°35.31′ W 

long.; 

(13) 33°00.22′ N lat., 118°38.68′ W 

long.; 

(14) 33°03.13′ N lat., 118°39.59′ W 

long.; and 

(15) 33°04.80′ N lat., 118°37.90′ W 

long. 

(c) * * * 

(10) 33°18.14′ N lat., 118°27.94′ W 

long.; 

(11) 33°19.84′ N lat., 118°32.22′ W 

long.; 

(12) 33°20.81′ N lat., 118°32.91′ W 

long.; 

(13) 33°21.94′ N lat., 118°32.03′ W 

long.; 

(14) 33°23.14′ N lat., 118°30.12′ W 

long.; 

(d) The 100 fm (183 m) depth contour 

around the northern Channel Islands off 

the state of California is defined by 

straight lines connecting all of the 

following points in the order stated: 

(1) 34°12.89′ N lat., 120°29.31′ W 

long.; 

(2) 34°10.96′ N lat., 120°25.19′ W 

long.; 

(3) 34°08.74′ N lat., 120°18.00′ W 

long.; 

(4) 34°07.02′ N lat., 120°10.45′ W 

long.; 

(5) 34°06.75′ N lat., 120°05.09′ W 

long.; 

(6) 34°08.15′ N lat., 119°54.96′ W 

long.; 

(7) 34°′07.17 N lat., 119°48.54′ W 

long.; 

(8) 34°05.66′ N lat., 119°37.58′ W 

long.; 

(9) 34°04.76′ N lat., 119°26.28′ W 

long.; 

(10) 34°02.93′ N lat., 119°18.06′ W 

long.; 

(11) 34°00.97′ N lat., 119°18.78′ W 

long.; 

(12) 33°59.38′ N lat., 119°21.71′ W 

long.; 

(13) 33°58.62′ N lat., 119°32.05′ W 

long.; 

(14) 33°57.69′ N lat., 119°33.38′ W 

long.; 

(15) 33°57.40′ N lat., 119°35.84′ W 

long.; 

(16) 33°56.07′ N lat., 119°41.10′ W 

long. 

(17) 33°55.54′ N lat., 119°47.99′ W 

long.; 

(18) 33°56.60′ N lat., 119°51.40′ W 

long.; 

(19) 33°55.56′ N lat., 119°53.87′ W 

long.; 

(20) 33°54.40′ N lat., 119°53.74′ W 

long.; 

(21) 33°52.72′ N lat., 119°54.62′ W 

long.; 

(22) 33°47.95′ N lat., 119°53.50′ W 

long.; 

(23) 33°45.75′ N lat., 119°51.04′ W 

long.; 

(24) 33°40.18′ N lat., 119°50.36′ W 

long.; 

(25) 33°38.19′ N lat., 119°57.85′ W 

long.; 

(26) 33°44.92′ N lat., 120°02.95′ W 

long.; 

(27) 33°48.90′ N lat., 120°05.34′ W 

long.; 

(28) 33°51.64′ N lat., 120°08.11′ W 

long.; 

(29) 33°58.31′ N lat., 120°27.99′ W 

long.; 

(30) 34°03.23′ N lat., 120°34.34′ W 

long.; 

(31) 34°09.42′ N lat., 120°37.64′ W 

long.; and 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
79894 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

(32) 34°12.89′ N lat., 120°29.31′ W 

long. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Revise table 1a to subpart C to read 

as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79895 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.031</GPH>
79896 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.032</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79897 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.033</GPH>
79898 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.034</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79899 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.035</GPH>
79900 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.036</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79901 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.037</GPH>
79902 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 8. Revise Table 1b to subpart C to read 

as follows 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.038</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79903 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.039</GPH>
79904 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 9. Revise Table 1c to subpart C to read 

as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.040</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79905 

■ 10. Revise Table 2a to Subpart C, are 

revised to read as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.041</GPH>
79906 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.042</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79907 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.043</GPH>
79908 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.044</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79909 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.045</GPH>
79910 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.046</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79911 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.047</GPH>
79912 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.048</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79913 

■ 11. Revise Table 2b to subpart C to 

read as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.049</GPH>
79914 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.050</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79915 

■ 12. Revise Table 2c to subpart C to 

read as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.051</GPH>
79916 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 13. In § 660.140, revise paragraphs 

(d)(1)(ii)(D) to read as follows: 

§ 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.052</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79917 

(ii) * * * (D) For the trawl fishery, NMFS will 

issue QP based on the following 

shorebased trawl allocations: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
79918 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.053</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79919 

* * * * * ■ 14. Revise Tables 1 (North) and 1 

(South) to part 660, subpart D to read as 

follows: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.054</GPH>
79920 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.016</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79921 

■ 14. Amend § 660.230 by removing and 

reserving paragraph (d)(10)(i) and 

revising paragraph (d)(10)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.230 Fixed gear fishery— 

management measures. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(10) * * * 

(ii) Fishing for rockfish and lingcod is 

permitted shoreward of the boundary 

line approximating the 40 fm (73 m) 

depth contour within the CCAs when 

trip limits authorize such fishing and 

provided a valid declaration report as 

required at § 660.13(d) has been filed 

with NMFS OLE. Coordinates for the 

boundary line approximating the 40 fm 

(73 m) depth contour are listed in 

§ 660.71. 

* * * * * 

■ 15. In § 660.231, revise paragraph 

(b)(3)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 660.231 Limited entry fixed gear 

sablefish primary fishery. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * (i) A vessel participating in 

the primary season will be constrained 

by the sablefish cumulative limit 

associated with each of the permits 

registered for use with that vessel. 

During the primary season, each vessel 

authorized to fish in that season under 

paragraph (a) of this section may take, 

retain, possess, and land sablefish, up to 

the cumulative limits for each of the 

permits registered for use with that 

vessel (i.e., stacked permits). If multiple 

limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements are registered for use with 

a single vessel, that vessel may land up 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.017</GPH>
79922 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

to the total of all cumulative limits 

announced in this paragraph for the 

tiers for those permits, except as limited 

by paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. 

Up to 3 permits may be registered for 

use with a single vessel during the 

primary season; thus, a single vessel 

may not take and retain, possess or land 

more than 3 primary season sablefish 

cumulative limits in any one year. A 

vessel registered for use with multiple 

limited entry permits is subject to per 

vessel limits for species other than 

sablefish, and to per vessel limits when 

participating in the daily trip limit 

fishery for sablefish under § 660.232. In 

2021, the following annual limits are in 

effect: Tier 1 at 58,649 lb (26,602 kg), 

Tier 2 at 26,659 lb (12,092 kg), and Tier 

3 at 15,234 lb (6,910 kg). In 2022 and 

beyond, the following annual limits are 

in effect: Tier 1 at 55,858 lb (25,337 kg), 

Tier 2 at 25,390 lb (11,517 kg), and Tier 

3 at 14,509 lb (6,581 kg). 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Revise Table 2 (North) and Table 

2 (South) to part 660, subpart E, to read 

as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.018</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79923 

■ 17. Revise Table 3 (North) and Table 

3 (South) in part 660, subpart F, to read 

as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.019</GPH>
79924 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.020</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79925 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.021</GPH>
79926 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

■ 18. Amend § 660.360 by: 

■ a. Removing paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(D)(1) 

through (3); and 

■ b. Revising paragraphs (c)(1) 

introductory text, (c)(1)(i)(B), (c)(1)(i)(C), 

(c)(1)(i)(D), (c)(2)(i)(B), (c)(2)(i)(D), 

(c)(3)(i)(A), and (c)(3)(ii)(B). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 660.360 Recreational fishery— 

management measures. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Washington. For each person 

engaged in recreational fishing off the 

coast of Washington, the groundfish bag 

limit is 9 groundfish per day, including 

rockfish, cabezon and lingcod. Within 

the groundfish bag limit, there are sublimits for rockfish, lingcod, and cabezon 

outlined in paragraph (c)(1)(i)(D) of this 

section. In addition to the groundfish 

bag limit of 9, there will be a flatfish 

limit of 5 fish, not to be counted 

towards the groundfish bag limit but in 

addition to it. The recreational 

groundfish fishery will open the second 

Saturday in March through the third 

Saturday in October for all species. In 

the Pacific halibut fisheries, retention of 

groundfish is governed in part by 

annual management measures for 

Pacific halibut fisheries, which are 

published in the Federal Register. The 

following seasons, closed areas, sublimits and size limits apply: 

(i) * * * 

(B) South coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish and halibut is 

allowed within the South Coast 

Recreational YRCA. The South Coast 

Recreational YRCA is defined by 

latitude and longitude coordinates 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

(C) Westport offshore recreational 

yelloweye rockfish conservation area. 

Recreational fishing for groundfish and 

halibut is allowed within the Westport 

Offshore Recreational YRCA. The 

Westport Offshore Recreational YRCA is 

defined by latitude and longitude 

coordinates specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. 

(D) Recreational rockfish conservation 

area. Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA unless otherwise 

stated. It is unlawful to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

recreational gear within the recreational 

RCA unless otherwise stated. A vessel 

fishing in the recreational RCA may not 

be in possession of any groundfish 

unless otherwise stated. [For example, if 

a vessel participates in the recreational 

salmon fishery within the RCA, the 

vessel cannot be in possession of 

groundfish while in the RCA. The vessel 

may, however, on the same trip fish for 

and retain groundfish shoreward of the 

RCA on the return trip to port.] 

Coordinates approximating boundary 

lines at the 10-fm (18-m) through 100- 

fm (183-m) depth contours can be found 

at § 660.71 through § 660.73. The 

Washington recreational fishing season 

structure is as follows: 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.022</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 79927 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) Recreational rockfish conservation 

area (RCA). Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA, a type of closed 

area or groundfish conservation area, 

except with long-leader gear (as defined 

at § 660.351). It is unlawful to take and 

retain, possess, or land groundfish taken 

with recreational gear within the 

recreational RCA, except with longleader gear (as defined at § 660.351). A 

vessel fishing in the recreational RCA 

may not be in possession of any 

groundfish. [For example, if a vessel 

fishes in the recreational salmon fishery 

within the RCA, the vessel cannot be in 

possession of groundfish while within 

the RCA. The vessel may, however, on 

the same trip fish for and retain 

groundfish shoreward of the RCA on the 

return trip to port.] Off Oregon, from 

January 1 through December 31, 

recreational fishing for groundfish is 

allowed in all depths. Coordinates 

approximating boundary lines at the 10- 

fm (18 m) through 100-fm (183-m) depth 

contours can be found at § 660.71 

through § 660.73. 

* * * * * 

(D) In the Pacific halibut fisheries. 

Retention of groundfish is governed in 

part by annual management measures 

for Pacific halibut fisheries, which are 

published in the Federal Register. 

Between the Columbia River and 

Humbug Mountain, during days open to 

the ‘‘all-depth’’ sport halibut fisheries, 

when Pacific halibut are onboard the 

vessel, no groundfish, except sablefish, 

Pacific cod, and other species of flatfish 

(sole, flounder, sanddab), may be taken 

and retained, possessed or landed, 

except with long-leader gear (as defined 

at § 660.351). ‘‘All-depth’’ season days 

are established in the annual 

management measures for Pacific 

halibut fisheries, which are published in 

the Federal Register and are announced 

on the NMFS Pacific halibut hotline, 1– 

800–662–9825. 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) Recreational rockfish conservation 

areas. The recreational RCAs are areas 

that are closed to recreational fishing for 

groundfish. Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA, except that 

recreational fishing for species in the 

Other Flatfish complex, petrale sole, 

and starry flounder is permitted within 

the recreational RCA as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section. It is 

unlawful to take and retain, possess, or 

land groundfish taken with recreational 

gear within the recreational RCA, unless 

otherwise authorized in this section. A 

vessel fishing in the recreational RCA 

may not be in possession of any species 

prohibited by the restrictions that apply 

within the recreational RCA. For 

example, if a vessel fishes in the 

recreational salmon fishery within the 

RCA, the vessel cannot be in possession 

of rockfish while in the RCA. The vessel 

may, however, on the same trip fish for 

and retain rockfish shoreward of the 

RCA on the return trip to port. If the 

season is closed for a species or species 

group, fishing for that species or species 

group is prohibited both within the 

recreational RCA and shoreward of the 

recreational RCA, unless otherwise 

authorized in this section. Coordinates 

approximating boundary lines at the 10- 

fm (18 m) through 100-fm (183-m) depth 

contours can be found at § 660.71 

through § 660.73. The California 

recreational fishing season structure and 

RCA depth boundaries by management 

area and month are as follows: 

(1) Between 42° N lat. (California/ 

Oregon border) and 40°10′ N lat. 

(Northern Management Area), 

recreational fishing for all groundfish 

(except petrale sole, starry flounder, and 

‘‘Other Flatfish’’ as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) is 

closed from January 1 through April 30; 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULESER11DE20.055</GPH>
79928 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 239 / Friday, December 11, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

is prohibited seaward of the 30 fm (55 

m) depth contour along the mainland 

coast and along islands and offshore 

seamounts from May 1 through October 

31 (shoreward of 30 fm is open); and is 

open at all depths from November 1 

through December 31. 

(2) Between 40°10′ N lat. and 

38°57.50′ N lat. (Mendocino 

Management Area), recreational fishing 

for all groundfish (except petrale sole, 

starry flounder, and ‘‘Other Flatfish’’ as 

specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this 

section) is closed from January 1 

through April 30; prohibited seaward of 

the 30 fm (55 m) depth contour along 

the mainland coast and along islands 

and offshore seamounts from May 1 

through October 31 (shoreward of 30 fm 

is open), and is open at all depths from 

November 1 through December 31. 

(3) Between 38°57.50′ N lat. and 

37°11′ N lat. (San Francisco 

Management Area), recreational fishing 

for all groundfish (except petrale sole, 

starry flounder, and ‘‘Other Flatfish’’ as 

specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this 

section) is closed from January 1 

through March 31; is prohibited 

seaward of the boundary line 

approximating the 50 fm (91 m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts 

from April 1 through December 31 

(shoreward of 50 fm is open). Closures 

around Cordell Bank (see paragraph 

(c)(3)(i)(C) of this section) also apply in 

this area. 

(4) Between 37°11′ N lat. and 34°27′ 

N lat. (Central Management Area), 

recreational fishing for all groundfish 

(except petrale sole, starry flounder, and 

‘‘Other Flatfish’’ as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) is 

closed from January 1 through March 

31; and is prohibited seaward of a 

boundary line approximating the 50 fm 

(91 m) depth contour along the 

mainland coast and along islands and 

offshore seamounts from April 1 

through December 31. 

(5) South of 34°27′ N lat. (Southern 

Management Area), recreational fishing 

for all groundfish (except California 

scorpionfish, ‘‘Other Flatfish,’’ petrale 

sole, and starry flounder) is closed 

entirely from January 1 through the last 

day of February. Recreational fishing for 

all groundfish (except ‘‘Other Flatfish,’’ 

petrale sole, and starry flounder, as 

specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this 

section) is prohibited seaward of a 

boundary line approximating the 100 fm 

(137 m) depth contour from April 1 

through December 31 along the 

mainland coast and along islands and 

offshore seamounts, except in the CCAs 

where fishing is prohibited seaward of 

the 40 fm (73 m) depth contour when 

the fishing season is open (see 

paragraph (c)(3)(i)(B) of this section). 

* * * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Bag limits, hook limits. In times 

and areas when the recreational season 

for the RCG Complex is open, there is 

a limit of 2 hooks and 1 line when 

fishing for the RCG complex. The bag 

limit is 10 RCG Complex fish per day 

coastwide, with a sub-bag limit of 5 fish 

for vermilion rockfish. This sub-bag 

limit counts towards the bag limit for 

the RCG Complex and is not in addition 

to that limit. Retention of yelloweye 

rockfish, bronzespotted rockfish, and 

cowcod is prohibited. Multi-day limits 

are authorized by a valid permit issued 

by California and must not exceed the 

daily limit multiplied by the value of 

days in the fishing trip. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2020–27142 Filed 12–10–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 665 

[Docket No. 201204–0324] 

RIN 0648–BJ84 

Pacific Islands Fisheries; 2020–2023 

Annual Catch Limit and Accountability 

Measures for Hawaii Kona Crab 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this final rule, NMFS 

implements an annual catch limit (ACL) 

of 30,802 lb (13,972 kg), and an annual 

catch target (ACT) of 25,491 lb (11,563 

kg), of Hawaii Kona crab for fishing 

years 2020–2023. This rule also 

implements, as accountability measures 

(AM), an in-season closure of the fishery 

if catch is projected to reach the ACT, 

and a post-season adjustment if catch 

exceeds the ACL. This action support 

the long-term sustainability of the 

Hawaii Kona crab fishery. 

DATES: The final rule is effective January 

11, 2021. The final rule is applicable in 

fishing years 2020, 2021, 2022, and 

2023. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Fishery 

Ecosystem Plan for the Hawaii 

Archipelago (Hawaii FEP) are available 

from the Western Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Council), 1164 

Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 

96813, tel. 808–522–8220, fax 808–522– 

8226, or www.wpcouncil.org. 

Copies of the environmental analyses 

and other supporting documents for this 

action are available from https://

www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAANMFS-2020-0091, or from Michael D. 

Tosatto, Regional Administrator, NMFS 

Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp 

Blvd., Bldg. 176, Honolulu, HI 96818. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate 

Taylor, NMFS PIRO Sustainable 

Fisheries, 808–725–5182. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS is 

implementing an ACL of 30,802 lb 

(13,972 kg) and an ACT of 25,491 lb 

(11,563 kg) of Hawaii Kona crab for each 

of the 2020–2023 fishing years, as 

recommended by the Council. The 

fishing year is the calendar year, and 

catch from State and Federal waters will 

count toward the ACL and ACT. 

NMFS is also implementing both an 

in-season and post-season AM. Under 

the in-season AM, when NMFS projects 

that the catch of Kona crab will reach 

the ACT, we will close the commercial 

and non-commercial fisheries for Kona 

crab in Federal waters for the remainder 

of the year. For the post-season AM, if 

NMFS and the Council determine, after 

the end of each fishing year, that the 

catch exceeded the ACL, NMFS will 

reduce the ACL and ACT in the 

subsequent fishing year by the amount 

of the overage. In the event that the 

catch exceeds the ACT, but is below the 

ACL, we will not apply a post-season 

correction. 

This final rule will make a 

housekeeping change in the regulations 

for Hawaii Kona crab and deepwater 

shrimp ACLs and AMs. Specifically, 

this rule adds a separate paragraph for 

each stock in 50 CFR 665.253 to 

distinguish between the ACLs for 

Hawaii Kona crab and deepwater 

shrimp. 

Additional background information 

on this action is found in the preamble 

to the proposed specifications; we do 

not repeat it here. 

Comments and Responses 

On October 15, 2020, NMFS 

published a proposed rule and request 

for comments (85 FR 65336). The 

comment period for the proposed 

specification ended on November 5, 

2020. NMFS received comments from 

four individuals that generally 

supported the action and responds 

below. 

Comment 1: This rule is necessary to 

ensure the sustainability of the main 

Hawaiian Islands (MHI) Kona crab 

populations and the proposed ACL and 

ACT are very reasonable. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES