Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11895 

Authority 

The authorities for this action are 16 

U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–1544; and 

4201–4245, unless otherwise noted. 

Martha Williams, 

Senior Advisor to the Secretary, Exercising 

the Delegated Authority of the Director, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2021–04209 Filed 2–26–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 679 and 680 

[Docket No. 2102190025] 

RIN 0648–BJ73 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Central Gulf of Alaska 

Rockfish Program; Amendment 111 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to 

implement Amendment 111 to the 

Fishery Management Plan for 

Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska 

Management Area (GOA FMP) and a 

regulatory amendment to reauthorize 

the Central Gulf of Alaska (CGOA) 

Rockfish Program. This final rule retains 

the conservation, management, safety, 

and economic gains realized under the 

Rockfish Program and makes minor 

revisions to improve administration of 

the Rockfish Program. This final rule is 

necessary to continue the conservation 

benefits, improve efficiency, and 

provide economic benefits of the 

Rockfish Program that would otherwise 

expire on December 31, 2021. This final 

rule is intended to promote the goals 

and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, the GOA FMP, and other applicable 

laws. 

DATES: This rule is effective on March 

31, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the 

Environmental Assessment and the 

Regulatory Impact Review (collectively 

referred to as the ‘‘Analysis’’) and the 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

prepared for this final rule may be 

obtained from https://

www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS 

Alaska Region website at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/region/alaska. 

Written comments regarding the 

burden-hour estimates or other aspects 

of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this final rule 

may be submitted to NMFS Alaska 

Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802–1668, Attn: Glenn Merrill; in 

person at NMFS Alaska Region, 709 

West 9th Street, Room 401, Juneau, AK; 

and to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Warpinski, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

published the Notice of Availability for 

Amendment 111 in the Federal Register 

on July 27, 2020 (85 FR 15367), with 

public comments invited through 

September 28, 2020. NMFS published 

the proposed rule to implement 

Amendment 111 in the Federal Register 

on September 4, 2020 (85 FR 55243) 

with public comments invited through 

October 5, 2020. The Secretary of 

Commerce approved Amendment 111 

on October 22, 2020 after accounting for 

information from the public, and 

determining that Amendment 111 is 

consistent with the GOA FMP, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable laws. The FMP amendment 

text includes two grammatical errors 

that were not found prior to the 

approval. These errors do not materially 

change the language in the FMP 

amendment nor are these errors 

reflected in the regulatory text that this 

final rule promulgates. The regulatory 

text accurately reflects the amendment’s 

intent. NMFS received ten comment 

letters on the proposed Amendment 111 

and the proposed rule. A summary of 

the comments and NMFS’ responses are 

provided under the heading ‘‘Comments 

and Responses’’ below. 

Background 

The following background sections 

describe the Rockfish Program and the 

need for this final rule. 

The Rockfish Program 

This section provides a brief overview 

of the existing Rockfish Program. A 

detailed description of the Rockfish 

Program and its development is 

provided in the preamble to the 

proposed rule and in Section 1.2 of the 

Analysis. 

The Rockfish Program is a type of 

limited access privilege program (LAPP) 

developed to enhance resource 

conservation and improve economic 

efficiency in the CGOA rockfish 

fisheries. The Rockfish Program as 

implemented under this final rule will 

continue the LAPP management 

structure, and will provide the same 

benefits established under the previous 

Rockfish Program implemented by 

Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 

81247, December 27, 2011). For more 

information about the background and 

history of this program, see the 

preamble to the proposed rule (85 FR 

55243, September 4, 2020) and the 

Analysis (See ADDRESSES). 

The Rockfish Program (1) assigns 

quota share (QS) and cooperative quota 

(CQ) to participants for primary and 

secondary species, (2) allows a 

participant holding an LLP license with 

rockfish QS to form a rockfish 

cooperative with other persons, (3) 

allows holders of catcher/processor LLP 

licenses to opt-out of rockfish 

cooperatives for a given year, (4) 

establishes a limited access fishery for 

participants who do not participate in a 

fishery cooperative for a given year, (5) 

includes an entry level longline fishery 

for persons who do not hold rockfish 

QS, (6) establishes constraints, 

commonly known as sideboard limits, 

for other non-Rockfish Program fisheries 

that apply to vessels and LLP licenses 

eligible to participate in the Rockfish 

Program, and (7) includes monitoring 

and enforcement provisions. 

As summarized in Sections 2 and 3.5 

of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES), the 

Rockfish Program provided greater 

security to harvesters through the 

formation of rockfish cooperatives. 

Fishing under cooperative management 

resulted in a slower-paced fishery that 

allows a harvester to choose when to 

fish. The Rockfish Program also 

provided greater stability for processors 

by spreading out production over a 

longer period. Overall, the Rockfish 

Program provides greater benefits to 

shoreside processors, catcher/ 

processors, CGOA fishermen, and 

communities than were realized under 

the previous LLP management scheme. 

Need for This Final Rule 

Under Amendment 88, the current 

Rockfish Program was given a 10-year 

life span. The North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Council) 

recommended this action to prevent the 

Rockfish Program from expiring on 

December 31, 2021. This final rule 

maintains the conservation 

management, safety, and economic 

benefits of the Rockfish Program and 

improves efficiency by making minor 

revisions to existing regulations to 

improve administrative provisions of 

the Rockfish Program. 

11896 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

Unless otherwise noted, the 

reauthorized Rockfish Program includes 

all regulatory provisions established 

under the Rockfish Program 

implemented by Amendment 88. These 

provisions include the existing 

allocation of QS among the fishery 

participants, the process and 

requirements to fish in a cooperative, 

sideboard limitations, and monitoring 

and reporting requirements. Section 1.7 

of the Analysis describes the 

alternatives considered and Section 

1.10.2 provides the rationale for the 

reauthorized Rockfish Program. The 

reader is referred to those sections of the 

Analysis (See ADDRESSES) for additional 

details. 

Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP and 

this final rule reauthorize the Rockfish 

Program and address a variety of 

administrative and management issues 

of the Rockfish Program. The specific 

regulatory changes recommended by the 

Council and included in this final rule 

are discussed in Section 1.6.2 of the 

Analysis (See ADDRESSES) and include: 

• Removing the Rockfish Program 

sunset date of December 31, 2021, with 

the effect of allowing the Rockfish 

Program to continue indefinitely; 

• Specifying that only shoreside 

processors receiving Rockfish Program 

CQ must submit the Rockfish Ex-vessel 

Volume and Value Report, rather than 

catcher/processors; 

• Modifying cooperative check-in 

notice timing into the Rockfish Program 

from 48 to 24 hours; 

• Removing requirements that an 

annual Rockfish Program cooperative 

report be submitted to NMFS. The 

Council requested that the Rockfish 

Program cooperatives continue to 

voluntarily provide annual reports to 

the Council; 

• Removing requirements for a 

fishing plan to be submitted with a 

cooperative application for CQ; 

• Requiring annual NMFS cost 

recovery reports in regulation; 

• Allowing NMFS to reallocate 

unharvested Pacific cod allocated to 

Rockfish Program cooperatives to other 

non-Rockfish Program sectors after the 

Rockfish Program fisheries close on 

November 15, consistent with existing 

inseason management regulatory 

authorities; 

• Allowing NMFS to reallocate 

unused rockfish incidental catch 

allowances (ICA) to Rockfish Program 

cooperatives; 

• Clarifying regulations regarding 

accounting for inseason use caps to 

specify that any transfer of unused 

rockfish ICAs or catcher/processor CQ 

to catcher vessel cooperatives does not 

apply to catcher vessel ownership, 

cooperative, harvester CQ, or shoreside 

processor CQ use caps; 

• Exempting vessels from Crab 

Rationalization Program sideboard 

limits when fishing in the Rockfish 

Program; 

• Removing catcher/processor 

rockfish program sideboard limits in the 

Western GOA rockfish fisheries; 

• Removing the requirement for a 

trawl catcher vessel that has checked 

into and is participating in the Rockfish 

Program fishery to stand down for three 

days when transiting from the BSAI to 

the GOA while Pacific cod or pollock is 

open to directed fishing in the BSAI; 

• Removing requirements for 

shoreside processors under the Rockfish 

Program to provide an observer work 

station and observer communication 

requirements; and 

• Making minor technical corrections 

to clarify the season dates for directed 

fishing for Pacific cod under the 

Rockfish Program, and updating 

references to dusky rockfish (Sebastes 

variabilis) throughout regulations in 50 

CFR part 679. 

The following section describes the 

regulatory changes in greater detail. 

This Final Rule 

This section describes the changes to 

current regulations included in this 

final rule. This final rule will modify 

regulations at § 679.80(a)(2) to remove 

the expiration date of the Rockfish 

Program. The Rockfish Program had a 

10-year authorization that required the 

Council to review the Rockfish Program 

and make any necessary changes to 

management based on that review, or 

allow the Rockfish Program to expire. 

This action responds to the Council’s 

review. 

This final rule modifies Rockfish 

Program recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements to: (1) Amend regulations 

at § 679.5(r)(10)(i) to clearly state that 

only shoreside processors taking 

deliveries of species harvested using 

Rockfish Program CQ must submit the 

Rockfish Ex-Vessel Volume and Value 

Report; (2) modify cooperative check-in 

times from 48 to 24 hours at 

§ 679.5(r)(8)(i)(A)(1); (3) remove the 

requirement for an annual Rockfish 

Program cooperative report to be 

submitted to NMFS at § 679.5(r)(6), and 

§ 679.81(i)(3)(xxv) and (xxvi); (4) 

remove the requirement for rockfish 

cooperatives to submit a fishing plan 

with annual applications for CQ at 

§ 679.81(f)(4)(i)(D)(3); and (5) add a 

regulation at § 679.85(g) that states 

NMFS will annually publish a 

mandatory rather than voluntary 

Rockfish Program cost recovery report. 

Additional detail describing the 

impact of these recordkeeping and 

reporting changes is included in the 

preamble of the proposed rule and in 

Section 3.7 of the Analysis (See 

ADDRESSES). 

This final rule adds regulations at 

§ 679.81(j) to authorize NMFS to 

reallocate unharvested Pacific cod after 

directed fishing under the Rockfish 

Program closes on November 15, 

consistent with existing reallocation 

procedures for Pacific cod in the Gulf of 

Alaska. Regulations at § 679.20(a)(12)(ii) 

allow NMFS to reallocate unused 

Rockfish Program Pacific cod. Under 

this provision, and taking into account 

the capability of a sector to harvest the 

reallocation, NMFS will allocate unused 

Rockfish Program Pacific cod first to 

catcher vessels, then to the combined 

catcher vessel and catcher/processor pot 

sector, and then to all other catcher/ 

processor sectors. 

This final rule adds regulations at 

§ 679.81(j)(2), that authorize NMFS to 

reallocate unharvested rockfish species 

Incidental Catch Allowances (ICAs) to 

rockfish cooperatives. ICAs are set in 

the annual harvest specifications to 

account for incidental catch in other 

fisheries so that the TAC will not be 

exceeded. Section 3.7.10 of the Analysis 

and the preamble of the proposed rule 

details the process of determining 

reallocations of ICAs. If NMFS 

determines there is not sufficient ICA to 

reallocate, then no reallocation would 

occur. 

This final rule adds regulations at 

§ 679.82(a)(1)(vi) to clarify that any 

transfer of reallocated Rockfish Program 

ICAs or catcher/processor CQ to a 

catcher vessel cooperative does not 

apply when calculating catcher vessel 

use caps, including CV ownership, 

cooperative CQ, harvester QS, or 

shoreside processor caps. Use caps are 

established to limit consolidation. 

(Please see the preamble of the proposed 

rule and Section 3.7.11 of the Analysis 

for additional detail on use cap 

provisions.) 

This final rule makes several changes 

to regulations governing the sideboards 

and other tools designed to protect other 

Gulf of Alaska fishery participants 

outside of the Rockfish Program. 

Sideboards are limitations on the ability 

of harvesters to harvest in fisheries other 

than the CGOA rockfish fisheries. The 

changes include: (1) Exempting 

Rockfish Program vessels from 

sideboard limits implemented under the 

Crab Rationalization Program at 

§ 680.22(a)(1); (2) removing the Western 

GOA directed fishing prohibition and 

rockfish sideboard ratios at 

§ 679.82(e)(4) for Rockfish Program 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11897 

catcher/processors; and (3) as further 

discussed below, removing the 

requirement at § 679.23(h)(1) for a trawl 

catcher vessel checked into and 

participating in the Rockfish Program 

fishery to stand down for three days 

when transiting from the BSAI to the 

GOA while Pacific cod or pollock is 

open to directed fishing in the BSAI. In 

addition, NMFS also adds a clarifying 

technical revision to the remaining 

information at § 679.82(e)(4) to remove 

the table and reorganize the West 

Yakutat District rockfish sideboard 

ratios. 

For this final rule, NMFS modifies 

§ 679.23(h)(1) to remove the 3-day stand 

down requirement when a vessel moves 

from the BSAI to the GOA and is 

checked-in and participating in a 

Rockfish Program cooperative. This 

revision removes a regulatory limitation 

on vessels moving into the Rockfish 

Program but does not increase potential 

harvests in other non-Rockfish Program 

fisheries. Vessels that are not 

participating in the Rockfish Program 

must still comply with the 3-day stand 

down. 

This final rule modifies regulations at 

§ 679.84(f)(1) to remove unnecessary 

requirements for shoreside processors to 

maintain an observer workstation and 

communications equipment. These 

requirements were originally 

implemented under the Rockfish Pilot 

Program, which required that fisheries 

observers be stationed at shoreside 

processors participating in the Rockfish 

Pilot Program. Observer requirements 

for shoreside processors were removed 

with the implementation of the Rockfish 

Program in 2012, making these 

equipment requirements no longer 

necessary. 

This final rule includes two 

additional technical corrections to 

regulations that clarify the season dates 

for directed fishing for Pacific cod under 

the Rockfish Program and updates 

references to dusky rockfish throughout 

the regulations. This final rule clarifies 

the season dates for directed fishing for 

Pacific cod with trawl gear at 

§ 679.23(d)(3)(ii) by cross-referencing 

the Rockfish Program season dates in 

§ 679.84(g). Current Rockfish Program 

regulations at § 679.80(a)(3)(ii) specify 

that fishing by vessels participating in a 

Rockfish Program cooperative is 

authorized from 1200 hours, A.l.t., May 

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

15. To clarify this, NMFS modifies 

regulations at § 679.23(d)(3)(ii) in this 

final rule to reference the specific 

season dates authorized under the 

Rockfish Program. 

This final rule changes references to 

‘‘pelagic shelf’’ rockfish to ‘‘dusky’’ 

rockfish throughout regulations in 50 

CFR part 679 to update regulations 

consistent with changes that have 

occurred to species categories since 

2012 and the implementation of the 

Rockfish Program. Revising the 

references from pelagic shelf rockfish to 

dusky rockfish within the regulations 

and FMP is consistent with existing 

protocols for the annual stock 

assessment and harvest specifications of 

dusky rockfish. 

This final rule clarifies at 

§ 679.82(e)(9)(iii) that a rockfish 

cooperative may not exceed any deepwater or shallow-water halibut PSC 

sideboard limit assigned to that 

cooperative. This clarification was 

meant to be included with the Rockfish 

Program implemented by Amendment 

88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81247, 

December 27, 2011). If a cooperative 

uses halibut PSC fishing for rockfish in 

the WGOA or the West Yakutat District, 

any halibut PSC used will be debited 

from the deep-water complex halibut 

PSC limit assigned to that cooperative. 

Once a cooperative reaches its deepwater halibut PSC sideboard limit, it 

will be able to continue to fish for 

rockfish in the Western GOA or West 

Yakutat District. This is further 

explained in the response to comment 3 

in the ‘‘Comments and Responses’’ 

section below as well as in the ‘‘Changes 

from Proposed to Final Rule’’ section 

below. 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS received 10 comment letters on 

the NOA for Amendment 111 and the 

proposed rule. NMFS has summarized 

and responded to 18 unique comments 

below. One of the comment letters 

received was outside the scope of the 

proposed rule. The comments were from 

individuals, environmental groups, and 

Rockfish Program cooperative 

participants. 

Comments on the Proposed Rule 

Comment 1: Several commenters 

expressed general support for the 

reauthorization of the Rockfish Program 

without a sunset date. Commenters 

support the reauthorization of the 

Rockfish Program and the benefits the 

Program has created for historical 

harvesters, processors and the 

community of Kodiak. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

Comment 2: One commenter 

expressed support for the modification 

to § 679.82(e)(4), which removes the 

definition of sideboard ratios for 

Rockfish Program catcher/processors in 

the WGOA. However, the commenter 

does not support the proposed change to 

§ 679.82(e)(2) that would remove the 

reference to the WGOA in this 

paragraph. This modification to 

§ 679.82(e)(2) would lift the existing 

prohibition on directed rockfish fishing 

in the WGOA for non-Amendment 80 

catcher/processors, which was not 

considered nor recommended by the 

Council. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges the 

respondent’s support for the change to 

sideboard ratios for the Western GOA at 

§ 679.82(e)(4). NMFS agrees that the 

proposed rule incorrectly proposed to 

modify regulations at § 679.82(e)(2) by 

removing the words ‘‘Western GOA’’ in 

this paragraph. This error has been 

corrected in this final rule. 

Comment 3: A commenter requested 

that NMFS further clarify regulations 

implementing Amendment 88 to the 

GOA FMP (76 FR 81248, December 27, 

2011). In the response to comment 31 in 

the final rule implementing Amendment 

88 to the GOA FMP, NMFS responded 

to three questions related to the 

application of the deep-water halibut 

complex halibut PSC sideboard. NMFS 

stated in the final rule that if a 

cooperative uses halibut PSC fishing for 

rockfish in the Western GOA or the 

West Yakutat District, any halibut PSC 

used will be debited from the deepwater complex halibut PSC limit 

assigned to that cooperative. Once a 

cooperative reaches its deep-water 

halibut PSC sideboard limit, it will be 

able to continue to fish for rockfish in 

the Western GOA or West Yakutat 

District. However, reaching the deepwater halibut PSC limit would not 

prohibit the harvester from fishing for 

rockfish in the Western GOA or West 

Yakutat region. Any halibut PSC used 

for fishing rockfish would be debited 

from the deep-water complex halibut 

PSC limit assigned to that cooperative. 

In the final rule implementing 

Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP, NMFS 

clarified this by modifying regulations 

at § 679.7(n)(6)(iv) however, the 

commenter requested that NMFS update 

regulations at § 679.82(e)(9)(iii) to 

further clarify this point in this rule as 

intended in the final rule implementing 

Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP. 

Response: NMFS agrees that this 

clarification is needed and this change 

is included in this final rule. As further 

explained in the ‘‘Changes from 

Proposed to Final Rule’’ section of this 

final rule, NMFS adds a clarification at 

§ 679.82(e)(9)(iii) that was meant to be 

added in at the implementation of the 

Rockfish Program through Amendment 

88 to the GOA FMP. Once a halibut PSC 

limit is reached by a rockfish 

cooperative, that cooperative is 

prohibited from directed fishing in the 

11898 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

shallow-water or deep-water flatfish 

complex depending on which PSC 

halibut sideboard had been reached in 

in the Western GOA or the West Yakutat 

District. 

Comment 4: A commenter disagreed 

with the proposed changes to remove 

observer coverage requirements and 

observer workstations under the 

Rockfish Program because data collected 

by observers is necessary to investigate 

corruption in this fishery. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges the 

commenter’s support for observer data 

collected in the Rockfish Program 

fisheries. However, NMFS disagrees that 

the requirement for a shoreside 

processor to provide an observer 

workstation and communication 

equipment should not be removed. This 

final rule maintains existing observer 

coverage requirements for all 

participants for the purpose of 

monitoring the Rockfish Program 

fisheries as implemented under 

Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 

81248, December 27, 2011). However, as 

part of that 2011 action, observer 

coverage requirements for shoreside 

processors were removed but the 

observer workstation and 

communication equipment 

requirements inadvertently remained in 

place. Without a requirement for 

observer coverage at shoreside 

processors under the Rockfish Program 

the observer workstation and 

communications equipment are not 

necessary and therefore these 

requirements are removed from 

regulation in this final rule. These 

changes are further described in the 

preamble to the proposed rule and 

Section 3.7.9 of the Analysis (See 

ADDRESSES). 

Comment 5: A commenter stated that 

there is no such thing as ‘‘unused’’ fish 

and asserts that NMFS should not be 

authorized to reallocate any unused fish 

or Pacific cod under this Program. 

Response: NMFS disagrees. Each year, 

after consultation with the Council, 

NMFS publishes the final harvest 

specifications, to specify the total 

allowable catch (TAC) for each target 

groundfish species and apportionments 

thereof, Pacific halibut prohibited 

species catch (PSC) limits, and seasonal 

allowances of pollock and Pacific cod. 

‘‘Unused’’ fish in this context means 

unharvested and refers to the amount of 

catch for a particular species has been 

specified for harvest up to the TAC or 

apportionment of the TAC but has not 

yet been fully harvested in the specified 

time period. Under the GOA FMP and 

its implementing regulations, NMFS has 

existing authority to reallocate 

unharvested species. This final rule 

authorizes NMFS to reallocate Pacific 

cod and rockfish ICA’s that would 

otherwise remain unharvested without 

reallocation. These changes will 

contribute to achieving optimum yield 

under National Standard 1 and 

potentially reduce mandatory discards 

of these species in other fisheries. 

Additional information is included in 

the preamble to the proposed rule and 

Sections 1.9.2, 3.7.2, and 3.7.10 in the 

Analysis (See ADDRESSES). 

Comment 6: A commenter stated that 

proposed changes to regulations 

implementing the Rockfish Program, 

including changes to recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements, appear to 

increase unsustainable overharvesting of 

the fisheries. 

Response: NMFS disagrees. Changes 

to recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements are summarized in the 

classification section of this final rule 

and do not modify provisions of the 

Rockfish Program that would affect 

NMFS’ ability to monitor fishery 

harvests under the Rockfish Program. 

These recordkeeping and reporting 

changes clarify existing provisions of 

the program and remove unnecessary 

reporting requirements. These changes 

are described in more detail in Section 

3.7 of the Analysis (See ADDRESSES). 

Comment 7: We support the proposed 

revisions to remove unnecessary 

reporting requirements. Removing the 

requirements to submit a fishing plan 

and to submit a cooperative report to 

NMFS will save industry unnecessary 

time as neither report is used in actively 

managing the fishery. Although the 

Cooperative Manager will still give a 

voluntary cooperative report/ 

presentation to the Council once per 

year to inform the Council and the 

public on the program’s and 

cooperative’s performance, we estimate 

the time saved will be up to 25 hours 

per year. We also support reducing the 

submission time for a cooperative 

check-in report from at least 48 hours to 

at least 24 hours before the vessel begins 

a fishing trip to help improve fishing 

efficiency. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

Comment 8: Two commenters suggest 

that NMFS should not use information 

submitted by commercial fishermen for 

fisheries management. The commenters 

suggested that the changes to reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements 

proposed by this action are inconsistent 

with the MSA and are likely to decrease 

the robustness of science-based 

components of the program and lead to 

increased accidental or intentional 

overfishing. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. This final rule makes minor 

administrative changes to the Rockfish 

Program, none of which modify the 

types of information that NMFS relies 

on to make fishery management 

decisions. The Magnuson-Stevens Act 

and the GOA FMP require, among other 

things, that fishery management 

decisions be based on the best scientific 

information available. This final rule 

does not change the data sources used 

to monitor the harvest of species 

allocated under the Rockfish Program. 

Comment 9: NMFS received several 

comment letters addressing issues 

outside the scope of this action. 

Commenters did not support this action 

because of the effects of fishing on 

natural resources, including marine 

mammals, and suggested that NMFS cut 

all commercial fishing quota by 50 

percent, ban trawling in the Gulf of 

Alaska, and stop fishing for Pacific cod 

entirely. 

Response: These comments address 

management issues that are beyond the 

scope of Amendment 111 and this 

regulatory action. This final rule does 

not change the process of allocating 

quota or establishing TACs or sideboard 

limits under the Rockfish Programs, nor 

does this final rule change specific 

management measures that govern the 

harvest of allocated species under the 

Rockfish Program, such as fishing 

location, timing, effort, or authorized 

gear types. This final rule removes the 

sunset date and makes minor changes to 

the regulations implementing the 

Rockfish Program. The MagnusonStevens Act and the GOA FMP require, 

among other things, that the Council 

and NMFS manage fisheries to prevent 

overfishing while achieving, on a 

continuing basis, the optimum yield 

from each fishery and base management 

decisions on the best scientific 

information available. The commenter 

provided no information to support 

cutting commercial fishing quota by 50 

percent off Alaska. Currently, 

commercial groundfish fisheries off 

Alaska are being responsibly managed 

with conservative harvest strategies and 

provide important economic benefits to 

Alaskan communities. Additionally, in 

Section 2 of the Analysis prepared for 

this action, NMFS considered impacts 

on endangered and threatened species 

and marine mammals (See ADDRESSES). 

Comment 10: One commenter 

questioned how the quality of goods 

would be affected by the slower fishing 

times and if the industry will have to 

deal with quality control declines as 

production slows, including training 

procedures for this scenario. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11899 

Response: Sections 3.5.7 and 3.5.8 in 

the Analysis describes rockfish 

products, markets, and associated 

wholesale market values (See 

ADDRESSES). Section 4.1 of the Analysis 

goes into detail on how each National 

Standard is met (See ADDRESSES). The 

Rockfish Program establishes CQ 

allocations that allow stakeholders and 

groups of stakeholders to more 

efficiently utilize the CGOA resource 

relative to the limited access 

management that would go into place 

with no action. Efficiency is enhanced 

by allowing CQ holders to scale effort 

spatially and temporally to reduce costs 

and increase value. 

In addition, there is a downward 

trend for rockfish products; however, it 

is attributed to currency valuation and 

rising secondary processing costs, not 

slower fishing time. At this time, NMFS 

is not aware of reduced quality control 

under the Rockfish Program, either at 

this present time or at implementation 

of the Pilot Program, when the LAPP 

was established. As such, NMFS does 

not provide training procedures that 

address quality control in an established 

LAPP. 

Comment 11: One commenter 

questioned if this rule supports the 

common (or great) good and if this rule 

is against the rights of other businesses 

fishing in the area for their own 

productivity. 

Response: In recommending 

Amendment 111, the Council 

considered the 10 National Standards as 

contained in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

The National Standards are principles 

with which fishery management plans 

and their implementing regulations 

must be consistent, thereby ensuring 

sustainable and responsible fishery 

management. Section 4.1 of the Analysis 

goes into detail on how each National 

Standard is met (See ADDRESSES). This 

final rule promotes National Standards 

5 and 6, specifically, in terms of 

community and economic 

considerations. This final rule maintains 

existing fish harvesting efficiencies 

under the Rockfish Program and 

modifies specific administrative 

provisions to improve operational 

efficiency of the Rockfish Program. The 

Rockfish Program takes into account the 

unique nature of the CGOA rockfish 

fishery in terms of its timing during the 

fishing year and value to the community 

of Kodiak. The Rockfish Program allows 

the fishery to be prosecuted during a 

longer period of time and avoid 

conflicts with the salmon fisheries that 

take place during July. 

Comment 12: In the preamble of the 

proposed rule, NMFS omitted mention 

of thornyhead rockfish (Sebastolobus 

alaskanus), which is a secondary 

species for both catcher vessel and 

catcher processor cooperatives. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges the 

error in the preamble of the proposed 

rule. The secondary species rationalized 

under the Rockfish Program include 

Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, 

shortraker rockfish, sablefish, and 

thornyhead rockfish. The regulatory text 

correctly specifies Rockfish Program 

secondary species. In Section 2.2 of the 

Analysis, thornyhead rockfish are 

discussed in detail as a secondary 

species (See ADDRESSES). 

Comment 13: The proposed regulation 

will undermine both the environmental 

and economic protections Congress 

intended with the MSA by increasing 

the TACs while simultaneously 

removing the sensible reporting and 

monitoring of this commercial activity. 

The past disasters, both for rockfish and 

for the people who depend on them for 

their livelihood, show a clear need for 

sensible common sense restrictions on 

fishing and continued reporting 

mandates. 

Response: One of the goals of the 

Rockfish Program is to enhance resource 

conservation in the CGOA rockfish 

fisheries. The Rockfish Program, as 

implemented by this rule and 

Amendment 111 to the GOA FMP, 

continues the cooperative management 

structure that provides the fleet with 

tools to minimize bycatch to the extent 

practicable, reduce discards and 

improve utilization of groundfish 

species. 

Overfishing Limits (OFLs) and TACs 

are set each year with conservation in 

mind. The Rockfish Program’s primary 

and secondary species are not subject to 

overfishing and are not overfished; 

TACs are set in a precautionary manner. 

The current harvest specifications 

process and authorities for in-season 

management prevent overfishing and 

provide for the Rockfish Program to 

achieve optimum yield on a continuing 

basis. As described in the proposed rule 

and Section 2.2 of the Analysis, and this 

final rule, harvest of Rockfish Program 

quota will continue to be established by 

the Council and NMFS through the 

annual harvest specifications (85 FR 

13802, March 10, 2020) (See 

ADDRESSES). Amendment 111 and this 

final rule do not substantively change 

conservation and management of the 

species managed under the CGOA 

Rockfish Program. 

As described in the response to 

comment 8, this final rule makes minor 

administrative changes to the Rockfish 

Program, none of which modify the 

types of information that NMFS relies 

on to make fishery management 

decisions. This final rule does not 

change the data sources used to monitor 

the harvest of species allocated under 

the Rockfish Program. 

Comment 14: The MSA states that any 

conservation efforts in the area must 

take into account any potential effects it 

could have on surrounding fishing 

communities. Fishing communities are 

defined as ‘‘a social or economic group 

whose members reside in a specific 

location and share a common 

dependency on commercial, 

recreational, or subsistence fishing.’’ 

This would include many of the region’s 

indigenous communities. Amendment 

111 has not demonstrated sufficient 

concern towards the cultural and health 

impacts it will have on Alaska Native 

communities. 

Putting the area’s rockfish population 

at risk of overharvesting would have 

direct negative impacts on Alaska 

Native communities who have long 

depended on rockfish for nutritional 

and cultural needs. Lack of precautions 

to assure sustainable catch of rockfish 

populations could have negative 

impacts on food insecurity. The 

ambition of industry should not curtail 

the cultural and subsistence use of wild 

fish stocks by Native Alaskans. We 

request that the agency review and 

weigh the impact that this rulemaking 

will have on Native Alaskan 

communities. 

Response: As explained in the 

response to comment 12, Amendment 

111 and this final rule do not 

substantively change conservation and 

management of the species managed in 

the CGOA Rockfish Program. Section 

2.2 of the Analysis and the response to 

comment 12 describe how the GOA 

rockfish population is not at risk of 

being overfished or subjected to 

overfishing (See ADDRESSES). 

This final rule and Amendment 111 

are consistent with National Standard 8 

and maintain the existing management 

structure of the Rockfish Program. As 

described in Section 3.5.6 of the 

Analysis and the Social Impact 

Assessment, no issues were identified 

for this final rule that would put the 

sustained participation of any fishing 

communities, including Alaska Native 

communities, at risk. Implementing this 

final rule would not change the 

community protection measures built 

into the Rockfish Program and 

previously found to be functioning as 

intended. The Rockfish Program is 

likely to have continued beneficial 

impacts on fishing communities. 

Patterns of community participation in 

the CGOA rockfish fisheries are unlikely 

to change with implementation of the 

final rule. Among communities 

11900 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

substantially engaged in and/or 

substantially dependent on the CGOA 

rockfish fisheries managed under the 

Rockfish Program, Kodiak is the most 

centrally engaged in and dependent on 

the fishery as measured by multiple 

indices across multiple sectors of the 

fishery. Kodiak has experienced 

beneficial impacts across harvester, 

processor, and support services sectors 

because of the implementation of the 

Rockfish Program, relative to the preRockfish Pilot Program conditions, and 

has specifically benefitted from several 

community protection measures built 

into the program. Although not all 

individual operations have benefitted 

equally from the change in qualifying 

years between the Rockfish Pilot 

Program and the Rockfish Program, no 

substantial adverse sector-level or 

community-level impacts resulting from 

the implementation of the Rockfish 

Program have been identified for the 

community of Kodiak. 

Comment 15: It is indicated within 

the EA that climate change is a 

reasonably foreseeable future action that 

may have an impact on primary and 

secondary species located within the 

action area. Given this explicit 

understanding of the looming 

detrimental impacts of climate change, 

even if the drastic increase in harvesting 

does not single handedly reduce the 

viability of the fish population, there is 

minimal room for natural phenomena to 

take place in combination with the 

harvesting increase while maintaining a 

viable fish stock that can support the 

industry. To ignore the risks of climate 

change and resulting El Nin ̃ o events on 

the rockfish population coupled with 

increasing harvest, and its potential to 

decimate this rockfish population as 

seen in the West Coast, suggest that the 

proposed rule should fully consider the 

risk of climate change and take more 

restrictive conservational measures. 

Response: Section 2.2.3 of the EA 

states that climate change is the only 

reasonably foreseeable future action 

(RFFA) identified as likely to have an 

impact on primary and secondary target 

species allocated within the action area 

and timeframe, the EA concludes that 

‘‘considering the direct and indirect 

impacts of the proposed action when 

added to the impacts of past and present 

actions, previously analyzed in other 

documents incorporated by reference, 

and the impacts of the RFFAs listed 

above, the cumulative impacts of the 

proposed action are determined to be 

insignificant.’’ Effects of the action and 

RFFAs on the target species are 

considered insignificant, because they 

are not expected to jeopardize the 

capacity of the stock to yield sustainable 

biomass on a continuing basis and are 

unlikely to affect the distribution of 

harvested stocks either spatially or 

temporally such that it has an effect on 

the ability of the stock to sustain itself. 

Although the net effect of climate 

change on fish resources is currently 

difficult to predict with accuracy, NMFS 

and the Council use the Ecosystem 

Status Reports (ESR) to track the status 

and trends of ecosystem components 

through a variety of indicators that are 

synthesized through a blend of data 

analysis and modeling to produce 

ecosystem assessments. The ESR may 

thus provide early warning signals of 

direct ecosystem impacts that may affect 

fish resources, including rockfish 

species that could warrant management 

intervention or evidence of the efficacy 

of previous management actions, as well 

as track performance in meeting the 

stated ecosystem-based management 

goals of the Council. 

NMFS reviews the RFFAs, including 

climate change, as described in the 

Harvest Specifications Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) each year to 

determine whether they occurred and, if 

they did occur, whether they would 

change the analysis in the Harvest 

Specifications EIS of the impacts of the 

harvest strategy on the human 

environment (See ADDRESSES). In 

addition, NMFS considers each year 

whether other actions not anticipated in 

the Harvest Specifications EIS occurred 

that would have a bearing on the harvest 

strategy or its impacts. Each year stock 

assessment authors review the previous 

year’s ESR for factors that may impact 

stock/complex biomass and summarize 

those for the Plan Teams’ review. 

Indicators of concern can be highlighted 

within each stock assessment and can 

be used by the Groundfish Plan Teams 

and the Council to justify modification 

of allowable biological catch (ABC) 

recommendations or time/space 

allocations of catch. NMFS anticipates 

that current monitoring of groundfish 

trends and environmental conditions 

through selected key indicators, 

reporting in the annual ESRs, and 

incorporation of this information into 

the annual stock assessments and the 

harvest specification process is 

currently sufficient to alert the Council 

and NMFS managers to changes to 

rockfish population trends and 

conditions. 

Comments on the Information 

Collection Supporting Statements for 

OMB Control Numbers 0648–0678 and 

0648–0545 

Comment 16: A commenter identified 

a couple changes to the supporting 

statement for the Rockfish Program 

collection of information (OMB Control 

Number 0648–0545). First, the 

commenter disagreed with the statement 

that ‘‘the cooperative must form an 

association with the processor to which 

it historically delivered the most 

rockfish. The cooperative/processor 

associations are intended to ensure that 

a cooperative lands a substantial portion 

of its catch with its members’ historic 

processor.’’ This was the case during the 

Rockfish Pilot Program. However, with 

the current Rockfish Program a 

cooperative must form an association 

with a processor within the city limits 

of Kodiak but that processor need not be 

the member’s ‘‘historic’’ processor. 

Second, the supporting statement notes 

that the Rockfish Program Vessel CheckIn/Check-Out and Termination of 

Fishing Report and Application for 

Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota 

(CQ) may be submitted to NMFS more 

often than quarterly. The commenter 

thinks the Agency meant that the 

Application for Inter-Cooperative 

Transfer of Rockfish Cooperative Quota 

and the Rockfish Program Vessel CheckIn/Check-Out reports may be submitted 

more often than quarterly (these 

transfers and check ins/outs occur many 

times over the season). The Application 

for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota 

is submitted only once per year and any 

Termination of Fishing Report would be 

submitted only once per year. 

Response: NMFS agrees with these 

changes, and they are reflected in the 

supporting statement for OMB Control 

Number 0648–0545 associated with this 

final rule. 

Comment 17: A commenter was 

heartened to read that NMFS Alaska 

Region is currently working on offering 

submission of the Application for 

Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota 

application online through eFISH. The 

use of eFISH for vessel check-in and 

check-outs and CQ transfers greatly 

reduced the time and paperwork burden 

for the cooperatives so they look 

forward to being able to submit the 

annual cooperative applications online 

through eFISH. 

Response: NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

Comment 18: Note that the fishery 

management council in Alaska is the 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (NPFMC), not ‘‘Alaska 

Council.’’ Note that the program is 

titled, ‘‘Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish 

Program,’’ not ‘‘Alaska Rockfish 

Program.’’ 

Response: In response to this 

comment, the title of the information 

collection for OMB Control Number 

0648–0678 has been changed from 

Alaska Council Cooperative Annual 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11901 

Reports to North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council Cooperative 

Annual Reports to reflect the correct 

name of the regional fishery 

management council. The title of the 

information collection for OMB Control 

Number 0648–0545 has been changed 

from Alaska Rockfish Program: Permits 

and Reports to Central Gulf of Alaska 

Rockfish Program: Permits and Reports 

to refer to the correct name of the 

program. 

Changes From Proposed to Final Rule 

There were two changes from the 

proposed to the final rule to correct an 

error in the proposed rule for this action 

and to correct an error included in the 

final rule implementing Amendment 88 

to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81248, 

December 27, 2011). 

The proposed rule inadvertently 

proposed to remove the words ‘‘Western 

Gulf of Alaska’’ in regulations at 

§ 679.82(e)(2). Based on public comment

2 above, the final rule does not remove

the words ‘‘Western Gulf of Alaska’’ at

§ 679.82(e)(2). The proposed change to

paragraph § 679.82(e)(2) would have

removed Western Gulf of Alaska

sideboard limits applicable to vessels

operating in fisheries outside the

Rockfish Program. This proposed

change to paragraph (e)(2) would have

removed the Western Gulf of Alaska

directed fishing prohibition applicable

to vessels operating in fisheries outside

the Rockfish Program. This is outside

the scope of the action recommended by

the Council and therefore this

previously proposed change is not

included in this final rule.

The second change from proposed to 

final rule corrects an inadvertent 

omission in the final rule implementing 

Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 

81248, December 27, 2011). Comment 3 

in this final rule provides support for 

this change. As originally described by 

NMFS in the response to comment 31 

(76 FR 81248, December 27, 2011), this 

change clarifies that catcher/processors 

are limited from expanding their 

harvests of deep-water flatfish beyond 

an amount that could be supported by 

the proportion of the halibut PSC 

historically used by a cooperative. 

NMFS adds a clarification at 

§ 679.82(e)(9)(iii) that was meant to be

added in at the implementation of the

Rockfish Program through Amendment

88 to the GOA FMP (76 FR 81247,

December 27, 2011). A rockfish

cooperative may not exceed any deepwater or shallow-water halibut PSC

sideboard limit assigned to that

cooperative. If a cooperative uses

halibut PSC while fishing for rockfish in

the WGOA or the West Yakutat District,

any halibut PSC used will be debited 

from the deep-water complex halibut 

PSC sideboard limit assigned to that 

cooperative. Once a cooperative reaches 

its deep-water halibut PSC sideboard 

limit, it could continue to fish for 

rockfish in the Western GOA or West 

Yakutat District because the Council 

intended to limit the ability of 

cooperatives to expand their harvests of 

deep-water flatfish with the halibut PSC 

sideboard limit beyond an amount that 

could be supported by the proportion of 

the halibut PSC historically used by a 

cooperative during 2000 through 2006. 

The Council did not intend to limit the 

rockfish fisheries, which were fully 

harvested during this period. NMFS is 

clarifying that once the deep-water 

halibut PSC sideboard limit it reached, 

cooperatives may not continue to fish 

for deep-water species, except rockfish 

that are open for directed fishing, in the 

Western GOA or West Yakutat District 

and this is in response to a comment 

received at the final rule stage. Any 

halibut PSC that continues to accrue in 

the rockfish fishery by the cooperative 

in the WGOA and West Yakutat District 

will continue to accrue to the overall 

deep-water species fishery halibut PSC 

limit for the GOA. 

Classification 

Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 

305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 

NMFS Assistant Administrator has 

determined that Amendment 111 to the 

GOA FMP and this final rule are 

necessary for the conservation and 

management of the CGOA Rockfish 

Program and are consistent with the 

GOA FMP, other provisions of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for the purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

Small Entity Compliance Guide 

Section 212 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 states that, for each rule or group 

of related rules for which an agency is 

required to prepare a final regulatory 

flexibility analysis (FRFA), the agency 

shall publish one or more guides to 

assist small entities in complying with 

the rule, and shall designate such 

publications as ‘‘small entity 

compliance guides.’’ The agency shall 

explain the actions a small entity is 

required to take to comply with a rule 

or group of rules. The preambles to the 

proposed rule and this final rule include 

a detailed description of the actions 

necessary to comply with this rule and 

as part of this rulemaking process. 

NMFS has published on its website a 

summary of compliance requirements 

that serves as the small entity 

compliance guide for the Rockfish 

Program: https://www.fisheries.noaa.

gov/resource/document/central-gulfalaska-rockfish-program-informationalguide. This rule does not require any 

additional compliance from small 

entities that is not described in the 

preambles. Copies of this final rule are 

available from NMFS at the following 

website: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

region/alaska. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(FRFA) 

This FRFA incorporates the Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a 

summary of the significant issues raised 

by the public comments in response to 

the IRFA, NMFS’ responses to those 

comments, and a summary of the 

analyses completed to support the final 

rule. 

Section 604 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that, 

when an agency promulgates a final rule 

under section 553 of Title 5 of the U.S. 

Code (5 U.S.C. 553), after being required 

by that section or any other law to 

publish a general notice of final 

rulemaking, the agency shall prepare a 

FRFA (5 U.S.C. 604). Section 604 

describes the required contents of a 

FRFA: (1) A statement of the need for 

and objectives of the rule; (2) a 

statement of the significant issues raised 

by the public comments in response to 

the IRFA, a statement of the assessment 

of the agency of such issues, and a 

statement of any changes made to the 

proposed rule as a result of such 

comments; (3) the response of the 

agency to any comments filed by the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) in 

response to the proposed rule, and a 

detailed statement of any change made 

to the proposed rule in the final rule as 

a result of the comments; (4) a 

description of and an estimate of the 

number of small entities to which the 

rule will apply or an explanation of why 

no such estimate is available; (5) a 

description of the projected reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements of the rule, including an 

estimate of the classes of small entities 

that will be subject to the requirement 

and the type of professional skills 

necessary for preparation of the report 

or record; and (6) a description of the 

steps the agency has taken to minimize 

the significant economic impact on 

small entities consistent with the stated 

objectives of applicable statutes 

including a statement of the factual, 

policy, and legal reasons for selecting 

the alternative adopted and why each 

11902 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

one of the other significant alternatives 

to the rule considered by the agency 

which affect the impact on small 

entities was rejected. 

A description of this final rule and the 

need for and objectives of this rule are 

contained in the preamble to the 

proposed rule (85 FR 55243, September 

4, 2020) and final rule and are not 

repeated here. 

Public and Chief Counsel for Advocacy 

Comments on the IRFA 

An IRFA was prepared in the 

Classification section of the preamble to 

the proposed rule. The Chief Counsel 

for Advocacy of the SBA did not file any 

comments on the proposed rule. NMFS 

received no comments specifically on 

the IRFA. 

Number and Description of Small 

Entities Regulated by This Final Rule 

This final rule will directly regulate 

the owners and operators of catcher 

vessels, catcher/processor vessels, and 

shoreside processors eligible to 

participate in the CGOA Rockfish 

Program. In 2019 (the most recent year 

of complete data), 54 vessel owners 

participated in the Rockfish Program, 19 

of which are considered small entities 

based on the $11 million threshold. No 

catcher/processor vessels are classified 

as small entities because their combined 

gross income through affiliation with 

the Amendment 80 cooperative exceeds 

the $11 million first wholesale value 

threshold. In 2018 and 2019, six shorebased cooperatives were associated with 

a unique shoreside processor under the 

Rockfish Program. Reliable information 

is not available on ownership 

affiliations among individual processing 

operations or employment for the fish 

processors directly regulated by this 

final rule. Therefore, NMFS assumes 

that all of the processors directly 

regulated by this final rule could be 

small. Additional detail is included in 

Sections 3.5.5 and 3.9 in the Analysis 

prepared for this final rule (see 

ADDRESSES). 

In addition to the main program, this 

final rule also maintains the ‘‘entry 

level’’ fishery for the longline sector. 

Since participation in that fishery is 

voluntary, the number of small entities 

participating in future years cannot be 

reliably predicted. From 2012 to 2019, 

an average of 4 vessels targeted CGOA 

rockfish in the entry level longline 

sector. Participation in this fishery has 

typically included vessels using jig gear 

and are considered small entities. 

Therefore, it is likely that a substantial 

portion of the entry level longline 

fishery participants will be small 

entities. 

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other 

Compliance Requirements 

This final rule will modify 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements under the Rockfish 

Program to (1) clarify that only 

shoreside processors receiving Rockfish 

Program CQ must submit the Rockfish 

Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report; (2) 

modify cooperative check-in times from 

48 to 24 hours; (3) remove the 

requirement for an annual Rockfish 

Program cooperative report to be 

submitted to NMFS; (4) remove the 

requirement for rockfish cooperatives to 

submit a fishing plan with its annual 

application for cooperative quota; and 

(5) require NMFS to annually publish a 

Rockfish Program cost recovery report. 

These recordkeeping and reporting 

changes will clarify existing provisions 

of the program and remove unnecessary 

reporting requirements, slightly 

reducing the reporting burden for all 

directly regulated entities including 

small entities. The impacts of these 

changes are described in more detail in 

Section 3.7 of the Analysis prepared for 

this final rule (See ADDRESSES). 

Description of Significant Alternatives 

Considered to the Final Action That 

Minimize Adverse Impacts on Small 

Entities 

The final rule builds upon the 

Rockfish Pilot Program and the 

previously implemented Rockfish 

Program. The Rockfish Pilot Program 

was originally enacted through 

congressional direction to address 

economic inefficiencies in the fishery 

that primarily affected small entities. In 

recommending this final rule, the 

Council considered two alternatives, as 

it evaluated the potential for the 

continued rationalization of the CGOA 

rockfish fisheries. The two alternatives 

are the ‘‘no action’’ alternative 

(Alternative 1) that allows the Rockfish 

Program to expire on December 31, 2021 

and an action alternative (Alternative 2) 

reauthorizing the Rockfish Program with 

numerous alternative elements to 

address a suite of potential management 

revisions. The Council considered 

alternatives that would modify the 

duration of the Rockfish Program: (1) 

Remove the sunset date, or (2) 

implement a new sunset date of 10 to 

20 years; and select from numerous 

alternative elements to revise 

administrative provisions of the 

Rockfish Program. The Council selected 

Alternative 2 with the suite of elements 

included in this final rule to remove the 

sunset date and modify specific 

provisions of the Rockfish Program. 

Based upon the best available 

scientific data, and in consideration of 

the Council’s objectives of this action, it 

appears that there are no significant 

alternatives to the final rule that have 

the potential to accomplish the stated 

objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

and any other applicable statutes and 

that have the potential to minimize any 

significant adverse economic impact of 

the proposed rule on small entities. 

After public process, the Council 

concluded that the proposed Rockfish 

Program will best accomplish the stated 

objectives articulated in the preamble 

for this final rule, and in applicable 

statutes, and will minimize to the extent 

practicable adverse economic impacts 

on the universe of directly regulated 

small entities. 

Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting 

Federal Rules 

NMFS has not identified any 

duplication, overlap, or conflict 

between this final rule and existing 

Federal rules. 

Collection-of-Information Requirements 

This final rule contains collection-ofinformation requirements subject to 

review and approval by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). 

This rule changes the existing 

requirements for two collections of 

information—OMB Control Numbers 

0648–0678 (Alaska Council Cooperative 

Annual Reports) and 0648–0545 (Alaska 

Rockfish Program: Permits and 

Reports)—and requests extension of 

OMB Control Number 0648–0545. 

OMB Control Number 0648–0678 

This rule revises the information 

collection requirements contained in 

OMB Control Number 0648–0678 to 

remove the requirement for an annual 

Rockfish Program cooperative report to 

be submitted to NMFS. This 

requirement is unnecessary, and 

removing it decreases the respondents’ 

reporting costs. Another revision, which 

is not connected to this final rule, 

removes the AFA Catcher Vessel 

Intercooperative Agreement as a 

separate component of this collection 

because this is already included as an 

appendix to the AFA Annual Catcher 

Vessel Intercooperative Report, which is 

approved under OMB Control Number 

0648–0678. The public reporting burden 

is estimated to average per individual 

response 40 hours for the AFA Annual 

Catcher Vessel Intercooperative Report 

and 25 to 40 hours for the annual 

Rockfish Program cooperative report 

submitted to the Council. The burden 

hours reported in the proposed rule 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 11903 

were erroneously reported in minutes 

instead of hours. This final rule 

includes the accurate estimate of burden 

hours. The estimated burden hours for 

the submission of cooperative reports to 

NMFS reduces the overall burden hour 

estimate for this collection by 45 hours. 

OMB Control Number 0648–0545 

This final rule revise the information 

collection requirements contained in 

OMB Control Number 0648–0545, and 

NMFS has requested an extension of 

this collection for three years. This 

collection contains three applications 

and reports used by Rockfish Program 

cooperatives to apply for cooperative 

fishing permits, transfer cooperative 

quota, and manage cooperative fishing 

activity. This collection is necessary for 

NMFS to effectively administer and 

monitor compliance with the 

management provisions of the Rockfish 

Program. 

This rule removes the requirement for 

a rockfish cooperative to submit a 

fishing plan with its Application for 

Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota. No 

change is made to the estimated 

reporting burden or costs for this 

application as the estimate allows for 

differences in the time needed to 

complete and submit the application. 

This rule also reduces the time for a 

Rockfish Program catcher vessel to 

submit a cooperative check-in report 

from 48 hours to 24 hours before the 

start of a fishing trip. This does not 

change the estimated reporting burden 

or costs for this report. These changes 

are necessary to remove unnecessary 

reporting requirements. 

The respondents are the seven 

Rockfish Program cooperatives; the 

estimated total annual burden hours are 

35 hours; and the estimated total annual 

cost to the public for recordkeeping and 

reporting costs is $35. 

Public reporting burden per 

individual response is estimated to 

average 2 hours for the Application for 

Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota; 10 

minutes for the Application for InterCooperative Transfer of Rockfish 

Cooperative Quota; and 10 minutes for 

the Rockfish Program Vessel Check-In/ 

Check-Out and Termination of Fishing 

Report. 

The public reporting burden includes 

the time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection of information. 

We invite the general public and other 

Federal agencies to comment on 

proposed and continuing information 

collections, which helps us assess the 

impact of our information collection 

requirements and minimize the public’s 

reporting burden. Written comments 

and recommendations for this 

information collection should be 

submitted on the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Find these particular information 

collections by using the search function 

and entering either the title of the 

collection or the OMB Control Number 

(0648–0678 or 0648–0545). 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirement of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

List of Subjects 

50 CFR Part 679 

Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

50 CFR Part 680 

Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: February 19, 2021. 

Samuel D. Rauch, III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR parts 679 and 680 are 

amended as follows: 

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 679 continues to read as follows: 

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

seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447; Pub. L. 

111–281. 

§ 679.2 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 679.2, in paragraph (1) of the 

definition for ‘‘Rockfish Program 

species’’ and paragraph (1) of the 

definition for ‘‘Rockfish sideboard 

limit’’, remove the words ‘‘pelagic shelf 

rockfish’’ and add in their place the 

words ‘‘dusky rockfish’’. 

■ 3. In § 679.5, remove and reserve 

paragraph (r)(6) and revise paragraph 

(r)(8)(i)(A)(1) and (r)(10)(i). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting 

(R&R). 

* * * * * 

(r) * * * 

(8) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) * * * 

(1) At least 24 hours prior to the time 

the catcher vessel begins a fishing trip 

to fish under a CQ permit; or 

* * * * * 

(10) * * * 

(i) Applicability. A rockfish processor 

(as defined at § 679.2) that receives and 

purchases landings of rockfish CQ 

groundfish must submit annually to 

NMFS a complete Rockfish Ex-vessel 

Volume and Value Report, as described 

in this paragraph (r)(10), for each 

reporting period for which the rockfish 

processor receives rockfish CQ 

groundfish. 

* * * * * 

§ 679.20 [Amended] 

■ 4. In § 679.20, in paragraph 

(d)(1)(vi)(C)(1), remove the words 

‘‘pelagic shelf rockfish’’ and add in their 

place the words ‘‘dusky rockfish’’. 

■ 5. In § 679.23, revise paragraphs 

(d)(3)(ii) introductory text and (h)(1) to 

read as follows: 

§ 679.23 Seasons. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) Trawl gear. Subject to other 

provisions of this part, directed fishing 

for Pacific cod with trawl gear in the 

Western and Central Regulatory Areas is 

authorized only during the following 

two seasons except as authorized in 

Subpart G of this Section under the 

Rockfish Program: 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

11904 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 38 / Monday, March 1, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

If you own or operate a catcher 

vessel and fish for groundfish with 

trawl gear in the *** 

You are prohibited from subsequently deploying trawl gear in 

the *** 

Until *** 

(1) BSAI while pollock or Pacific 

cod is open to directed fishing in 

the BSAI.

Western and Central GOA regulatory areas.1200 hours A.l.t. on the third day after the date of landing or transfer 

of all groundfish on board the vessel harvested in the BSAI, unless 

you are engaged in directed fishing for Pacific cod in the GOA for 

processing by the offshore component or if checked-in and participating in a CGOA Rockfish Program cooperative. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 679.80 revise the paragraph (a) 

subject heading and remove and reserve 

paragraph (a)(2). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 679.80 Allocation and transfer of 

rockfish QS. 

* * * * * 

(a) Applicable areas and seasons— 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 679.81, remove and reserve 

paragraph (f)(4)(i)(D)(3), remove 

paragraphs (i)(3)(xxv) and (xxvi), and 

add paragraph (j). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 679.81 Rockfish Program annual 

harvester privileges. 

* * * * * 

(j) Reallocations—Annual reallocation 

of Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish 

species— 

(1) Pacific cod. After the Rockfish 

Program fisheries close on November 

15, the Regional Administrator may 

reallocate any unused amount of Pacific 

cod from the Rockfish Program to other 

sectors through notification in the 

Federal Register consistent with 

regulations at § 679.20(a)(12)(ii). 

(2) Rockfish ICAs—(i) General. The 

Regional Administrator may reallocate a 

portion of a Central GOA rockfish ICAs 

to rockfish cooperatives if the amounts 

assigned to the Central GOA rockfish 

ICAs are projected not to be harvested 

or used. The timing of a reallocation 

will be at the discretion of the Regional 

Administrator. 

(ii) Reallocation of Central Gulf of 

Alaska rockfish ICA species. If, during 

a fishing year, the Regional 

Administrator determines that a 

reallocation of a portion of the ICAs of 

Central Gulf of Alaska rockfish species 

to rockfish cooperatives is appropriate, 

the Regional Administrator will issue a 

revised CQ permit to reallocate that 

amount of Central Gulf of Alaska 

rockfish species to rockfish cooperatives 

according to the following: 

(A) Catcher vessel rockfish 

cooperatives will be given priority for 

reallocation; and 

(B) The amount of additional CQ 

issued to each rockfish cooperative = 

Amount of Central Gulf of Alaska 

rockfish species available for 

reallocation to rockfish cooperatives × 

(Amount of CQ for that Central Gulf of 

Alaska rockfish species initially 

assigned to that rockfish cooperative/S 

CQ for that Central Gulf of Alaska 

rockfish species initially assigned to all 

rockfish cooperatives in the respective 

sector). 

■ 8. In § 679.82: 

■ a. Add paragraph (a)(1)(vi); 

■ b. In paragraphs (d)(3) and (e)(2), 

remove the words ‘‘pelagic shelf 

rockfish’’ and add in their place the 

words ‘‘dusky rockfish’’; and 

■ c. Revise paragraphs (e)(4) and 

(e)(9)(iii). 

The addition and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 679.82 Rockfish Program use caps and 

sideboard limits. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(vi) Any transfer of reallocated 

rockfish ICA (as authorized under 

§ 679.81(j)(2)) or catcher/processor CQ 

to a catcher vessel cooperative does not 

apply to catcher vessel ownership, 

cooperative, harvester CQ, or shoreside 

processor CQ use caps. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(4) West Yakutat District rockfish 

sideboard ratios. The rockfish sideboard 

ratio for each rockfish fishery in the 

West Yakutat District is an established 

percentage of the TAC for catcher/ 

processors in the directed fishery for 

dusky rockfish and Pacific ocean perch. 

These percentages are confidential. 

* * * * * 

(9) * * * 

(iii) A rockfish cooperative may not 

exceed any deep-water or shallow-water 

halibut PSC sideboard limits assigned to 

that cooperative when directed fishing 

for species other than rockfish. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. In § 679.84, revise paragraph (f)(1) 

to read as follows: 

§ 679.84 Rockfish Program recordkeeping, 

permits, monitoring, and catch accounting. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) Catch monitoring and control plan 

(CMCP). The owner or operator of a 

shoreside processor receiving deliveries 

from a catcher vessel described in 

§ 679.51(a)(2) must ensure the shoreside 

processor complies with the CMCP 

requirements described in § 679.28(g) 

except the requirements for an observer 

workstation and communication with 

observer as specified in 

§ 679.28(g)(7)(vii) and (viii). 

* * * * * 

■ 10. In § 679.85, add paragraph (g) to 

read as follows: 

§ 679.85 Cost recovery. 

* * * * * 

(g) Annual report. Each year, NMFS 

will publish a report describing the 

rockfish program cost recovery fee 

program. 

PART 680—SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF 

THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE 

OFF ALASKA 

■ 11. The authority citation for part 680 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109– 

241; Pub. L. 109–479. 

■ 12. In § 680.22, revise paragraph (a)(1) 

introductory text to read as follows: 

§ 680.22 Sideboard protections for GOA 

groundfish fisheries. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) Vessels subject to GOA groundfish 

sideboard directed fishing closures. Any 

vessel that NMFS has determined meets 

one or both of the following criteria is 

subject to GOA groundfish sideboard 

directed fishing closures issued under 

paragraph (e) of this section except 

when participating in the Rockfish 

Program authorized under part 679, 

subpart G, of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–03859 Filed 2–26–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P