78344 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

15 CFR Part 902 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 100212086–0532–05] 

RIN 0648–AY68 

Fisheries Off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan; Amendments 20 

and 21; Trawl Rationalization Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is implementing 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Fishery Management 

Plan (FMP), which were partially 

approved by the Secretary on August 9, 

2010. Amendment 20 establishes a trawl 

rationalization program for the Pacific 

Coast groundfish fishery. Amendment 

20’s trawl rationalization program 

consists of: An individual fishing quota 

(IFQ) program for the shorebased trawl 

fleet (including whiting and nonwhiting sectors); and cooperative (coop) 

programs for the at-sea (whiting only) 

mothership and catcher/processor trawl 

fleets. Amendment 21 establishes fixed 

allocations for limited entry trawl 

participants. This final rule 

supplements the final rule published on 

October 1, 2010 (75 FR 60868), and 

provides additional program details, 

including: Program components 

applicable to IFQ gear switching, 

observer programs, retention 

requirements, equipment requirements, 

catch monitors, catch weighing 

requirements, coop permits, coop 

agreement requirements, first receiver 

site licenses, quota share (QS) accounts, 

vessel accounts, further tracking and 

monitoring components, and economic 

data collection requirements. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: Background information 

and documents, including the final 

environmental impacts statements for 

Amendment 20 and Amendment 21, are 

available at the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s Web site at 

http://www.pcouncil.org/. NMFS 

prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (FRFA), which is summarized 

in the Classification section of this final 

rule. Copies of the FRFA and the Small 

Entity Compliance Guide are available 

from William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional 

Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115–0070; or by phone at 

206–526–6150. Copies of the Small 

Entity Compliance Guide are also 

available on the Northwest Regional 

Office Web site at http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/. 

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 William W. Stelle, 

Jr., Regional Administrator, Northwest 

Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way, 

NE., Seattle, WA 98115–0070, and to 

OMB by e-mail to 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax 

to 202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jamie Goen, 206–526–4656; (fax) 206– 

526–6736; Jamie.Goen@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Amendment 20 trawl 

rationalization program is a limited 

access privilege program under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA), as reauthorized in 2007. It 

consists of: (1) An IFQ program for the 

shorebased trawl fleet; and (2) coop 

programs for the mothership and 

catcher-processor trawl fleets. The trawl 

rationalization program is intended to 

increase net economic benefits, create 

individual economic stability, provide 

full utilization of the trawl sector 

allocation, consider environmental 

impacts, and achieve individual 

accountability of catch and bycatch. 

Amendment 21 establishes fixed 

allocations for limited entry trawl 

participants. These allocations are 

intended to improve management under 

the rationalization program by 

streamlining its administration, 

providing stability to the fishery, and 

addressing halibut bycatch. 

The trawl rationalization program is 

scheduled to be implemented on 

January 1, 2011. Due to the complexity 

of the program and the tight timeline for 

implementation, NMFS has issued, or is 

in the process of issuing multiple 

rulemakings to implement this program. 

The following actions are related to the 

trawl rationalization program: 

• A final rule (75 FR 4684, January 

29, 2010) which announced that 

potential participants in the program 

should review and, if necessary, correct 

their data that will be used for the 

issuance of QS, permits, and 

endorsements. It also established which 

data NMFS would use and requested 

ownership information from potential 

participants. 

• A notice of availability for 

Amendments 20 and 21 (75 FR 26702, 

May 12, 2010). 

• A proposed rule (75 FR 32994, June 

10, 2010) followed by a final rule (75 FR 

60868, October 1, 2010) that 

implemented Amendments 20 and 21, 

focused on provisions deemed 

necessary to issue permits and 

endorsements in time for use in the 

2011 fishery and to have the 2011 

harvest specifications reflect the new 

allocation scheme. In addition, the 

October 1st rule also restructured the 

entire Pacific Coast groundfish 

regulations at 50 CFR part 660 from one 

subpart (Subpart G) to five subparts 

(Subparts C–G). 

• A correction to the June 10th 

proposed rule (75 FR 37744, June 30, 

2010) which corrected two dates 

referenced in the preamble to the 

proposed rule regarding the decision 

date for the FMP amendments and the 

end date for the public comment period. 

• The Secretary’s review of and 

decision to partially approve 

Amendments 20 and 21 on August 9, 

2010. 

• A proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010) which proposed for 

implementation on January 1, 2011, 

additional program details, including: 

Measures applicable to gear switching 

for the IFQ program, observer programs, 

retention requirements, equipment 

requirements, catch monitors, catch 

weighing requirements, coop permits, 

coop agreement requirements, first 

receiver site licenses, QS accounts, 

vessel accounts, further tracking and 

monitoring components, and economic 

data collection requirements. 

• A correction to the October 1st final 

rule (75 FR 67032, November 1, 2010) 

to make sure the correct trip limit tables 

for 2010 remain effective after 

November 1, 2010. 

This final rule follows the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380) and 

implements additional program 

components for the trawl rationalization 

program. The preambles to both the 

June 10th and August 31st proposed 

rules provided more details on the 

program and are not fully repeated here. 

The preamble to the June 10th proposed 

rule (75 FR 32994), called the ‘‘initial 

issuance’’ proposed rule because it 

proposed the requirements for initial 

issuance of new permits and 

endorsements for the trawl 

rationalization program, provided 

detailed information on the trawl 

rationalization program and a general 

overview on the provisions in 

Amendments 20 and 21. In addition, the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78345 

preamble to the August 31st proposed 

rule (75 FR 53380), called the ‘‘program 

components’’ proposed rule because it 

proposed further program details for the 

trawl rationalization program, provided 

more detail on the additional program 

components being proposed. 

The Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) began scoping on 

trailing actions for the trawl 

rationalization program in the Fall of 

2010 and intends to continue 

developing trailing actions at its 2011 

Council meetings on topics including, 

but not limited to: Cost recovery, safe 

harbors/community fishing associations, 

the severability of MS/CV endorsements 

from limited entry trawl permits, and 

resubmission of Amendment 21 in 

response to NMFS’ partial disapproval. 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS solicited public comment on 

the proposed rule (75 FR 53380, August 

31, 2010). The comment period ended 

September 30, 2010. NMFS received 15 

individual letters of comments on the 

proposed rule submitted by individuals 

or organizations. 

Some commenters have incorporated 

by reference previous comments 

submitted during the Council process or 

on a rulemaking (notice of availability 

75 FR 26702, May 12, 2010; proposed 

rule 75 FR 32994, June 10, 2010; final 

rule 75 FR 60868, October 1, 2010) for 

the initial issuance of permits and 

endorsements and the review of 

Amendments 20 and 21. Comments 

presented to the Council are part of the 

record and were considered by the 

Council during its deliberation. 

Comments on the previous rulemaking 

were addressed in the final rule for that 

rulemaking. 

General Comments in Support and 

Opposed 

Comment 1. NMFS received multiple 

comments expressing general support 

for the proposed rule. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges these 

comments. 

Comment 2. NMFS received multiple 

comments expressing general 

disagreement with the proposed rule 

and amendments. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges these 

comments. 

Comments on Implementation of the 

Program 

Comment 3. One commenter stated 

that the program and implementing 

regulations should not be effective until 

January 1, 2012, in order to provide 

sufficient time for the groundfish 

industry to plan their operations under 

the new regulatory system. 

Response. This program has been 

developed by the Council and NMFS 

through a public process for over six 

years, and ample opportunities have 

been provided for input into the design 

of the program. The starting date for the 

trawl rationalization program was 

discussed and debated on multiple 

occasions at Council meetings, and 

based on the input from the public, the 

Council recommended, and NMFS 

agreed, to a target implementation date 

of January, 2011. NMFS notes the 

commenter’s recommendation, but has 

determined that implementing the 

program at the earliest practicable date 

best serves the public interest. NMFS 

disagrees that any delay is necessary. 

Comment 4. One commenter 

described port outreach efforts and a 

workshop undertaken by the 

organization designed to complement 

the outreach being conducted by NMFS. 

These outreach meetings and workshop 

are an effort to speed the transition 

process to the new trawl rationalization 

program and provide fishermen tools for 

success under the catch shares program. 

Port outreach meetings were held in 

seven ports, with topics covering ways 

to reduce observer and operating costs, 

managing quota portfolios, establishing 

a business plan, and managing 

constraining stocks among others. In 

addition, the two-day informational 

workshop was attended by over 150 

fishery participants; panels included 

topics on regulatory requirements; 

managing risks associated with 

constraining species and modifying 

fishing behavior; approaches for 

maximizing opportunity; gear 

modification; handling techniques and 

behavior changes; mapping and 

‘‘hotspot’’ management; trading, 

tracking, and financing of quota 

portfolios; strategies for minimizing 

observer and other costs; and strategies 

for improving revenues. 

Response. NMFS appreciates the 

commenter’s outreach efforts. In 

addition to the outreach efforts by 

outside organizations, NMFS has held a 

series of public workshops along the 

West Coast during the months of 

September and October, 2010, to assist 

program participants in transitioning to 

the new trawl rationalization program. 

Further information on NMFS’s 

outreach efforts is described in the 

response to Comment 5. 

Comments on the Rulemaking and 

Trailing Amendments 

Comment 5. Some commenters stated 

that the complexity of the rulemakings 

for the trawl rationalization program 

have made it difficult to provide 

meaningful public input. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges that 

implementation of the trawl 

rationalization program, and associated 

rulemakings, has been complex. 

However, NMFS has been making every 

effort to make the implementation 

process as simple as possible and to 

explain the process in many public 

forums. While the Council developed 

the trawl rationalization program over 

several years, the Council and NMFS set 

an implementation date of January 1, 

2011, giving NMFS and the Council 

approximately a year and a half to 

develop regulations and fine tune the 

program. This is a tight timeline for 

such a complex program which would 

dramatically change the operation and 

management of the trawl sector. Because 

of the tight timeline, NMFS had to split 

implementation into several 

rulemakings, focused on timing the 

rulemakings to allow potential 

participants the most time possible for 

the different phases of implementation 

given the resources available to 

implement the program. Early in the 

rulemaking process, NMFS brought 

forward this approach to the Council at 

their September 2009 meeting. In 

addition, NMFS published a brochure in 

December 2009 which was mailed out to 

the industry announcing the proposed 

January 1, 2011 implementation, the 

rulemaking schedule, and some 

additional details on the first 

rulemaking. 

The first rulemaking, which spanned 

late 2009 and early 2010, announced 

that potential participants should be 

reviewing and, if necessary, correcting 

their data before NMFS used the 

relevant data for initial issuance of 

permits and endorsements (proposed 

rule: 74 FR 47545, September 16, 2009; 

final rule: 75 FR 4684, January 29, 

2010). NMFS initially announced that 

corrections should be done by late-May 

2010 and before the initial issuance 

proposed rule published. NMFS later 

extended the deadline to July 1 in the 

initial issuance proposed rule (75 FR 

32994, June 10, 2010) for both the 

Pacific Fisheries Information Network 

(PacFIN) dataset and for NMFS’ 

Northwest Fisheries Science Center’s 

Pacific whiting observer data from 

NORPAC (a database of North Pacific 

fisheries and Pacific whiting 

information) (this was later changed to 

August 1, 2010 for NORPAC data 

through a public notice dated June 22, 

2010 (NMFS–SEA–10–08)). This first 

rulemaking also required completion of 

an ownership interest form. The results 

of these forms would be used, in part, 

to populate the ownership interest 

forms that would be part of the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78346 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

application process. This rulemaking 

laid the groundwork for the application 

process that would take place in the fall 

of 2010. 

Soon after the final rule published for 

this first rulemaking, the Council began 

meetings of its Regulatory Deeming 

Workgroup (RDW), an advisory body to 

the Council. The RDW held several 

public meetings between February and 

June 2010 to review the regulations that 

NMFS was developing for the program, 

to work through implementation details, 

and to bring issues forward to the 

Council, as needed. NMFS updated the 

RDW at all of their meetings on the 

implementation process and the status 

of the various rulemakings. The RDW 

meetings generally preceded Council 

meetings. The Council then discussed 

the rulemakings, including the 

implementation process and schedule, 

at all of their meetings to date in 2010. 

In the spring of 2010, the NOA for 

both Amendments 20 and 21 was 

published, announcing an open public 

comment period on the amendments (75 

FR 26702, May 12, 2010). Shortly 

thereafter, the second rulemaking was 

initiated that announced the FMP 

amendments and the initial issuance 

process for certain new permits and 

endorsements which required a more 

intensive application process, and thus 

more time for implementation. In 

addition, this rulemaking reorganized 

the existing groundfish regulations to 

accommodate the new trawl 

rationalization program. Staggered after 

this second rulemaking was the third 

rulemaking, the subject of this final rule, 

which announces additional program 

details for January 1, 2011, including: 

IFQ gear switching, observer programs, 

retention requirements, equipment 

requirements, catch monitors, catch 

weighing requirements, coop permits, 

coop agreement requirements, first 

receiver site licenses, quota share (QS) 

accounts, vessel accounts, further 

tracking and monitoring components, 

and economic data collection 

requirements. All of these rulemakings 

have described NMFS’ overall approach 

to the rulemakings and implementation. 

To provide support and guidance for 

the public during this process, NMFS 

has provided outreach along the West 

Coast in September and October 2010. 

These outreach efforts were used to 

announce the program details and 

implementation logistics, including the 

rulemakings and public comment 

periods. In addition, NMFS Office of 

Law Enforcement has provided several 

additional outreach sessions in October 

2010 on compliance under the program. 

NMFS has also created a Web site on the 

trawl rationalization program to keep 

the interested public up to date and 

published and mailed several fact 

sheets, each focused on different aspects 

of the program. These fact sheets are 

also available on the Web site. Finally, 

NMFS has mailed and e-mailed several 

public notices to the industry and 

interested public regarding the trawl 

rationalization program. So while NMFS 

acknowledges that this has been a 

complex rulemaking, NMFS believes 

that the agency has made every effort to 

keep the industry and public informed 

of our approach and aware of the 

rulemaking process. 

Comment 6. One commenter 

requested that the Pacific whiting 

season start dates for the shorebased IFQ 

fishery, the mothership fishery, and the 

catcher-processor fishery be revisited 

under a trailing amendment. The 

commenter explained that separate 

season start dates between the sectors is 

no longer needed under a rationalized 

fishery; staggered start dates contradict 

the intent of the program, undermining 

the goals of the program to increase net 

economic benefits and create individual 

economic stability. 

Response. Start dates for the Pacific 

whiting season are not part of the 

program components rule. The Council 

discussed the Pacific whiting season 

start dates at its April and June 2010 

meetings, and decided not to modify the 

season start dates at that time. The 

Council will continue to review 

management measures in the groundfish 

trawl fisheries after implementation of 

the rationalization program, and 

recommend changes where deemed 

appropriate. NMFS welcomes and 

encourages public participation in the 

Council decision-making process to 

address issues such as this. 

Comment 7. One commenter stated 

that implementing cost recovery 

through a trailing amendment does not 

allow the public or policy makers to 

know the full economic ramifications of 

the program. The commenter suggested 

delaying the program until a cost 

recovery program has been developed. 

Response. Although a 

recommendation was made by the 

Council, and NMFS agreed, that the cost 

recovery program would be 

implemented through the Council 

process as a trailing amendment to the 

program, that does not mean that the 

‘‘costs’’ associated with cost recovery 

cannot be estimated. Under the MSA, as 

amended, cost recovery associated with 

program implementation is capped, or 

restricted to 3 percent of the value of the 

fishery. This anticipated cost recovery 

has been considered by NMFS in its 

record of decision. NMFS encourages 

public participation as the Council 

develops and recommends the cost 

recovery program to be implemented by 

NMFS, based on those 

recommendations. 

Comment 8. Some commenters stated 

that community fishing associations 

(CFAs) should be implemented at the 

start of the program rather than as a 

trailing amendment. One commenter 

suggests delaying the program until 

CFAs have been developed. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges that 

there are members of the public who 

feel that CFAs should be implemented 

at the start of the program. Although the 

Council considered incorporating 

provisions for CFAs into the alternatives 

early in the development process, no 

strong recommendation or advocacy 

was voiced by members of the public or 

representatives on the Trawl Individual 

Quota Committee, which was intended 

to represent a cross section of interests 

for the development of 

recommendations on structuring the 

trawl rationalization program. Proposals 

for including provisions for CFAs in the 

program emerged later on, when the 

Council was at the point of adopting a 

preferred alternative in November 2008, 

in part tied to the issue of how to deal 

with QS holding in excess of 

accumulation limits. Further refinement 

of the preferred alternative, which 

occurred at Council meetings in 2009, 

included additional consideration of 

CFA provisions. Specifically, at the 

April 2009 Council meeting, Agenda 

Item F.4 addressed CFAs, and it was at 

this time that the Council concluded 

that it would be more appropriate for 

CFA provisions to be implemented 

through a trailing action. However, the 

moratorium on the transfer of QS during 

the first two years of the program, 

combined with provisions to allow 

divestiture of QS over accumulation 

limits during years 3 and 4 of the 

program, were designed to facilitate the 

transfer of QS to CFAs. The moratorium 

is in part intended to slow the 

movement of QS holdings out of 

communities during a time when the 

trailing action for CFAs can be 

developed and implemented in a 

considered fashion. Recommendations 

for how to structure the CFA provisions 

in a trailing action are welcome and 

should be brought forward as that 

proposal is developed. The Council is 

likely to begin developing CFA 

provisions in 2011 so that they could be 

in place before the QS divestiture period 

begins. 

Comment 9. One commenter stated 

that the adaptive management program 

(AMP) should be promptly 

implemented as a trailing amendment to 

address unforeseen impacts, promote 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78347 

bycatch reduction, and promote 

sustainable fishing practices. 

Response. The AMP was established 

through the October 1st initial issuance 

final rule (75 FR 60868), and consists of 

two primary phases. For the first two 

years of the program, the 10 percent 

AMP share is allocated to nonwhiting 

QS owners to ease the transition to an 

IFQ system. The Council and NMFS 

will be evaluating the changes that will 

occur after implementation, and will 

then be able to react as necessary in the 

second phase to address specific 

objectives for the AMP, identified on 

page 402 of Appendix A of the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery.’’ This interim situation will also 

allow for some identification of 

unforeseen impacts associated with this 

program, which will better inform both 

the Council and NMFS in addressing 

the issues. 

Comments on Policies and Legal 

Standards 

Comment 10. One commenter 

incorporated by reference comments 

they had previously made on the initial 

issuance proposed rule and 

Amendments 20 and 21 on National 

Standards 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8. 

Response. NMFS’s responses to 

comments 56–68 in the final rule to 

initiate implementation of Amendments 

20 and 21 (75 FR 60868, 60884–60887) 

describe how Amendments 20 and 21, 

as well as that final rule, comply with 

National Standards 1, 2, 4, and 8. The 

explanations articulated there equally 

apply to the instant rule. With regard to 

National Standard 6, the commenter 

does not provide an explanation of why 

either of the rules or the underlying 

amendments would be inconsistent 

with National Standard 6. Nevertheless, 

this response will address consistency 

with National Standard 6. 

National Standard 6 states that 

conservation and management measures 

must: ‘‘take into account and allow for 

variations among, and contingencies in, 

fisheries, fishery resources, and 

catches.’’ 16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(6). The 

National Standard Guidelines further 

state that every effort should be made to 

develop FMPs that discuss and take into 

account vicissitudes and that, to the 

extent practicable, FMPs should provide 

a suitable buffer in favor of 

conservation. 50 CFR 600.335(c)(2). 

Amendments 20 and 21 are expected 

to give fishermen greater flexibility in 

determining when and how to fish, thus 

giving fishermen greater ability to 

respond individually to unanticipated 

occurrences. The AMP will provide 

additional management flexibility and 

will facilitate response to unanticipated 

circumstances. Thus, these amendments 

and the program components 

implemented through this rule are 

consistent with National Standard 6. 

Comment 11. One commenter stated 

that the program is inconsistent with 

National Standards 5 and 8 of the MSA. 

Response. As described in NMFS’s 

response to comment 62 in the final rule 

to initiate implementation of 

Amendments 20 and 21 (75 FR 60868, 

60885), Amendments 20 and 21 were 

designed to achieve multiple objectives 

and are consistent with National 

Standard 5. NMFS has determined that 

this rule to implement certain 

components of those amendments is 

consistent with National Standard 5 for 

the reasons stated in that previous 

preamble. NMFS’s responses to 

comments 64–67 in the final rule to 

initiate implementation of Amendments 

20 and 21 (75 FR 60868, 60886) explain 

how Amendments 20 and 21 are 

consistent with National Standard 8. 

NMFS has determined that this rule to 

implement certain components of those 

amendments is consistent with National 

Standard 8 for the reasons stated in that 

previous preamble. See also responses 

to comments in the FEIS for 

Amendment 20, particularly responses 

to comments 108 and 109. 

Comment 12. One commenter stated 

that the program should be revised to 

fully retain public control over our 

public fisheries resources and indicated 

that the statements in the regulations 

and Amendments that NMFS retains the 

right to modify, revoke, or suspend 

altogether the catch share system are not 

enough. 

Response. Congress, NMFS, and the 

Council have been clear and explicit 

that in a limited access privilege 

program, what is being granted is a 

privilege that is modifiable and 

revocable at any time without 

compensation to the privilege holder 

(see Section A–2.3.4 of the EIS). NMFS’s 

responses to comments in the FEIS for 

Amendment 20, particularly responses 

to comments 86 and 87, provide further 

discussion on this issue and are not 

repeated here. In addition, the 

regulations at §§ 660.25 and 660.100 

clearly state that any permits, 

endorsements, or amounts of harvest 

from the trawl rationalization program 

are a privilege that may be revoked, 

limited, or modified at any time. 

Comments on Program Costs, 

Community Impacts, and the Burden on 

Small Businesses 

Comment 13. Some commenters 

stated NMFS should minimize and 

mitigate impacts on small businesses 

and small communities; the program 

should not benefit large businesses at 

the expense of small businesses. One 

commenter stated that the burden of 

paperwork and costs of the program 

would be too much for small businesses 

and small communities and requested 

that the paperwork burden be 

streamlined. 

Response. NMFS responded to similar 

comments in the October 1st final rule 

(75 FR 60868) about the impacts on 

small businesses. In particular, concerns 

were raised about negative impacts on 

deckhands and smaller boats; that 

program costs to fishermen, including 

the costs of entering the fishery and the 

costs of observers and monitoring are 

too high; that observer rules need to 

change for trawl and small boats to 

reflect the vastly different bycatch 

which occurs when mistakes are made; 

about the impact of the allocation 

formulas on Fort Bragg fishermen; 

concern that average fishermen will not 

be able to afford to participate and that 

this could lead to increased 

consolidation and leave many ports no 

longer viable; about negative impacts on 

processors, that small processors will be 

driven out of business due to 

consolidation; and that it will eliminate 

the ‘‘mom and pop businesses.’’ 

NMFS has responded to these 

comments in detail in the October 1st 

initial issuance final rule (75 FR 60868). 

That response is applicable to the 

comments associated with this rule. In 

terms of impacts on small businesses, 

the trawl rationalization program is 

intended to increase net economic 

benefits, create economic stability, 

provide full utilization of the trawl 

sector allocation, consider 

environmental impacts, and promote 

conservation through individual 

accountability for catch and bycatch. 

The allocations of quota under the new 

program do not differ significantly from 

status quo allocations made biennially 

in terms of total allocations. However, 

instead of fleetwide quotas, there will 

now be individual allocations of quota 

shares and quota pounds to permit 

owners. Allocations of overfished 

species constrain all groundfish 

fishermen, for both large and small 

operations. In some cases, smaller 

operators may be constrained to a 

greater extent. This was recognized in 

development of the program, and 

operators are encouraged to work 

together cooperatively, through 

mechanisms like combining and sharing 

quota amounts. The program provides 

for leasing of additional quota as needed 

to facilitate operations. The program 

includes provisions that would have a 

beneficial impact on small entities. It 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78348 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

would create a management program 

under which most recent participants in 

the Pacific Coast groundfish limited 

entry trawl fishery (many of which are 

small entities) would be eligible to 

continue participating in the fishery and 

under which the fishery itself would 

experience an increase in economic 

profitability. Small entities choosing to 

exit the fishery should receive financial 

compensation from selling their permit 

or share of the resource. To prevent a 

particular individual, corporation, or 

other entity from acquiring an excessive 

share of the total harvest privileges in 

the program, accumulation limits would 

restrict the amount of harvest privileges 

that can be held, acquired, or used by 

individuals and vessels. In addition, for 

the shoreside sector of the fishery, an 

AMP was created to mitigate any 

adverse impacts, including impacts on 

small entities and communities that 

might result from the program. 

It is expected that the shorebased IFQ 

fishery will lead to consolidation and 

this may affect small processors, 

particularly if they are in disadvantaged 

ports. Chapter 4 of the Amendment 20 

FEIS analyzed the effects on processors 

from various perspectives: The 

distribution of landings across west 

coast ports may change as a result of 

fleet consolidation, industry 

agglomeration, and the comparative 

advantage of ports (a function of bycatch 

rates in the waters constituting the 

operational area for the port, differences 

in infrastructure, and other factors). In 

particular, the Council analysis 

indicated that processors associated 

with disadvantaged communities may 

see trawl groundfish volumes decline. 

The analysis highlights that those 

processors receiving landings from 

Central California or Neah Bay may see 

a reduction in trawl caught groundfish 

if the market is able to redirect activity 

toward more efficient and advantaged 

ports. However, in addition to increased 

landings that are expected to result from 

the IFQ program, small processors and 

disadvantaged communities may benefit 

from the control limits, vessel limits, 

and adaptive management policies. 

Control limits will limit the ability of 

large processors to obtain shares of the 

fisheries while the AMP processes will 

allow the Council to consider the 

impacts on small processors and 

disadvantaged communities when 

allocating the AMP quota (10 percent of 

the total non-whiting trawl quotas). 

Although vessel accumulation limits 

tend to lower economic efficiency and 

restrict profitability for the average 

vessel, they could help retain vessels in 

communities because more vessels 

would remain. 

Another process by which small 

processors and disadvantaged 

communities may benefit will be the 

future development of CFAs. Some of 

the potential benefits of CFAs include: 

Ensuring access to the fishery resource 

in a particular area or community to 

benefit the local fishing economy; 

enabling the formation of risk pools and 

sharing monitoring and other costs; 

ensuring that fish delivered to a local 

area will benefit local processors and 

businesses; providing a local source of 

QSs for new entrants and others 

wanting to increase their participation 

in the fishery; increasing local 

accountability and responsibility for the 

resource; and benefiting other providers 

and users of local fishery infrastructure. 

In summary, the major impacts of this 

rule appear to be on shoreside 

processors which are a mix of large and 

small processors, and on shorebased 

trawlers which are also a mix of large 

and small companies. The non-whiting 

shorebased trawlers are currently 

operating at a loss or at best are 

‘‘breaking even.’’ The new 

rationalization program would lead to 

profitability, but with a reduction of 

about 50 percent of the fleet. This 

program would lead to major changes in 

the fishery. To help mitigate against 

these changes, as discussed above, the 

agency has announced its intent, subject 

to available Federal funding, that 

participants would initially be 

responsible for 10 percent of the cost of 

hiring observers and catch monitors. 

The industry proportion of the costs of 

hiring observers and catch monitors 

would be increased every year so that by 

2014, once the fishery has transitioned 

to the rationalization program, the 

industry would be responsible for 100 

percent of the cost of hiring the 

observers and catch monitors. NMFS 

believes that an incrementally reduced 

subsidy to industry funding would 

enhance the observer and catch monitor 

program’s stability, ensure 100 percent 

observer and catch monitor coverage, 

and facilitate the industries’ successful 

transition to the new quota system. In 

addition, to help mitigate against 

negative impacts of this program, the 

Council has adopted an AMP where 

starting in year 3 of the program, 10 

percent of non-whiting QS would be set 

aside every year to address community 

impacts and industry transition needs. 

After reviewing the initial effects of IFQ 

programs in other parts of the world, the 

Council had placed a short term QS 

trading prohibition so that fishermen 

can learn from their experiences and not 

make premature sales of their QS. The 

Council is also envisioning future 

regulatory processes that would allow 

community fisheries associations to be 

established to help aid communities and 

fishermen. 

NMFS has taken a hard look at the 

reporting burdens of the program and, 

given the program requirements, 

reduced the burden on small businesses 

to the extent possible. For instance, in 

the IFQ fishery, transactions for QS 

accounts and vessel accounts will be 

done online, reducing the paperwork 

burden. The QS permit renewal process 

will be the same as the current limited 

entry permit renewal process and 

during the same time period because 

initially most QS permit owners would 

already be familiar with the limited 

entry permit renewal process. Similarly, 

in the mothership sector, the MS/CVendorsed permit renewal will be 

combined with their declaration of 

intent to obligate to a mothership 

processor so that both are done on the 

same form at the same time. To the 

extent possible, NMFS will send out 

permit renewal forms and other 

associated forms, such as the ownership 

interest form, pre-filled to reduce the 

burden on respondents. For the EDC, 

the survey design has sought to avoid 

duplication of data collection, and was 

developed from meetings with industry 

participants to discuss making survey 

questions easily understandable and 

consistent with the record keeping 

practices of survey respondents to 

reduce the burden on respondents. For 

the trawl monitoring requirements, 

NMFS has reduced the burden of the 

catch monitoring plans for first receivers 

by only requiring essential information 

needed to assure adequate catch 

accounting. To reduce the burden of 

requiring electronic fish tickets, fish 

ticket software will be provided at no 

cost, and will use a standard operating 

system and common software already 

owned by most businesses; fish ticket 

software will be compatible with the 

existing fish ticket requirements in each 

of the three states; and the software can 

be used to print a paper copy for 

submission to the state, when state law 

allows. To reduce costs, NMFS has 

determined that a person certified as 

both an observer and a catch monitor 

can serve in both capacities, within 

limitations on hours worked. After 

consideration of all these efforts and the 

requirements of the program, NMFS has 

determined that the remaining reporting 

requirements are necessary. 

Comment 14. One commenter 

expressed concerns that the inequitable 

distribution of overfished species QS, 

such as Canary Rockfish, 

disproportionately impacts California, 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78349 

while favoring Washington and Oregon; 

that the program should not result in an 

unfair allocation between the states; and 

that the program should be designed to 

result in an even consolidation between 

states and between the sectors (nonwhiting shorebased IFQ, whiting 

shorebased IFQ, mothership sector, and 

catcher/processor sector). 

Response. With respect to the effects 

on the States including industry 

consolidation effects, NMFS 

acknowledges that this program may 

have different impacts on different 

states and on different communities. As 

mentioned above, one of the potential 

purposes of the AMP is to address 

differential impacts upon communities 

and thus the states. National Standard 4 

requires that when it becomes necessary 

to allocate or assign fishing privileges 

among various United States fishermen, 

such allocation shall be (A) Fair and 

equitable to all such fishermen; 

(B) reasonably calculated to promote 

conservation; and (C) carried out in 

such a manner that no particular 

individual, corporation, or other entity 

acquires an excessive share of such 

privileges. The National Standard 4 

guidelines at § 600.325(c)(3)(i)(B) state 

that: ‘‘An allocation of fishing privileges 

may impose a hardship on one group if 

it is outweighed by the total benefits 

received by another group or groups. An 

allocation need not preserve the status 

quo in the fishery to qualify as fair and 

equitable, if a restructuring of fishing 

privileges would maximize overall 

benefits. The Council should make an 

initial estimate of the relative benefits 

and hardships imposed by the 

allocation, and compare its 

consequences with those of alternative 

allocation schemes, including the status 

quo.’’ 

Thus, the Councils are given wide 

latitude to determine what is equitable 

within a particular fishery and to create 

the appropriate management measures 

to accomplish the goals of an FMP. The 

issue of allocation of overfished species 

was addressed extensively in the 

response to comments in the October 1st 

final rule. (75 FR 60868, comments 29 

and 31.) Generally speaking, the Council 

evaluated the impacts of its allocation 

decisions and adequately determined 

that, after weighing the costs and 

benefits of its proposed scheme, the 

allocations selected were to the overall 

benefit of the fishery and its 

participants. 

Comment 15. One commenter stated 

that NMFS has not adopted criteria for 

participation in CFAs as required by law 

and improperly excluded CFAs from 

initial allocations. The commenter 

further stated that the 10 percent set 

aside for the AMP would not be enough 

to meet the needs of CFAs, smaller 

vessels idled by the program, 

processors, or new entrants. Another 

commenter stated that the 10 percent set 

aside for the AMP should be used to 

mitigate transition impacts and be used 

as an incentive pool for conservation 

results and to improve the program. 

Response. NMFS responded to a 

similar comment in the October 31st 

final rule (75 FR 60868, comment 41) 

which is incorporated here by reference. 

NMFS disagrees that communities have 

been excluded from initial allocations. 

Communities have not been precluded 

from acquiring groundfish limited entry 

trawl permits, which would make them 

eligible for the initial allocation of QS 

associated with a permit. Additionally, 

the Council’s preferred alternative 

includes a very broad definition of who 

may own quota shares, so communities 

are not precluded from acquiring quota 

once the program is implemented. Just 

as non-trawl fishermen currently need 

to obtain a trawl-endorsed limited entry 

permit to participate in the trawl 

fishery, under the trawl catch shares 

program, a trawl permit and quota 

pounds is all that is needed to 

participate. 

NMFS also disagrees with the 

statement that the Council and NMFS 

did not follow the law with regard to 

CFAs. NMFS created the trawl 

rationalization program, including 

allocation to an AMP, consistent with 

the MSA and with communities in 

mind. The trawl catch shares program 

includes several ways to participate 

beyond the initial issuance of quota 

share. The AMP specifically reserves 10 

percent of the non-whiting shoreside 

quota share to allocate in such a manner 

as to promote a wide range of important 

objectives, beginning with year 3 of the 

program. The objectives for this program 

are: Community stability, processor 

stability, conservation, unintended/ 

unforeseen consequences of IFQ 

management, and facilitation of new 

entrants. NMFS agrees with the 

commenter’s statement that the 

10 percent set aside for the AMP should 

be used to mitigate transition impacts. 

During the first 2 years of the program, 

the AMP will help mitigate transition 

impacts by distributing the resulting to 

QP to trawlers with non-whiting QS to 

help them as they adjust to the new 

program, begin to work together and 

pool their resources, and adjust to new 

costs. In ongoing years, the AMP will 

help mitigate impacts of the program 

and promote conservation following the 

objectives for the AMP stated above. 

In addition to the AMP, the Council 

is also developing provisions for 

community involvement through CFAs 

as a trailing amendment. The trawl 

catch shares program includes a 

moratorium on the transfer of quota 

share during the first two years of the 

program (quota pounds will be able to 

be transferred during the moratorium), 

combined with provisions to require 

divestiture of quota share over 

accumulation limits during years 3 and 

4 of the program. The moratorium is in 

part intended to slow the movement of 

quota share holdings out of 

communities during a time when the 

trailing action for community fishing 

associations can be developed and 

implemented in a considered fashion. 

Recommendations for how to structure 

the CFA provisions in a trailing action 

are welcome and should be brought 

forward as that proposal is developed by 

the Council. Moreover, the Council 

specifically acknowledged flexibility to 

adapt to changing circumstances, 

including provisions for a 

comprehensive review of the program 

that includes a community advisory 

committee, to evaluate effectiveness in 

relation to the original program goals 

and objectives, scheduled for year five 

of the program. The trawl 

rationalization program has addressed 

and continues to address directly these 

issues and ways to improve the 

program. 

Comment 16. One commenter stated 

that the rapid increase in value of QS 

and QP will make it hard for 

communities and CFAs to participate in 

the program. The commenter further 

stated that NMFS’ new measure to allow 

limited entry trawl permit transfers 

during a window of time before the 

permit and endorsement application 

period will foster quick inflation of QS 

value. 

Response. NMFS appreciates the 

commenter’s insight into the value of 

QS based on NMFS providing a window 

of opportunity for limited entry permit 

transfers before the permit and 

endorsement application period. NMFS’ 

intent in providing this window in the 

October 31st initial issuance final rule 

(75 FR 60868) was solely to provide 

some additional flexibility for potential 

participants in the program in making 

their business decisions before being 

locked into their business arrangement 

for the next 2 years. As stated in the 

preamble to the final initial issuance 

rule, NMFS believes this change is 

consistent with the Council’s intent to 

provide an opportunity for entry level 

participants to obtain a qualifying trawl 

limited entry permit prior to initial 

issuance with reasonable certainty of 

anticipated QS that would be issued on 

the basis of that permit. Further, for 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78350 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

permit owners that have qualifying 

history that would exceed control 

limits, this change will provide an 

opportunity to divest permits prior to 

calculation of QS and any redistribution 

of QS. 

Comments on the Observer and Catch 

Monitor Programs 

Comment 17. Some commenters 

stated that alternatives should be 

explored to reduce the industry and 

taxpayer costs of the program, such as 

not requiring the industry to pay for 

observer (i.e., the government should 

pay as part of its enforcement mandate), 

requiring less than 100 percent observer 

coverage, allowing the use of cameras, 

or measures to reduce observer costs 

below $350–500 per day. Another 

commenter agreed with NMFS that an 

observer can also be a catch monitor to 

reduce costs but also to gain data 

tracking efficiencies. A third commenter 

stated support for 100 percent observer 

coverage and rigorous observer and 

catch monitor training requirements. 

Response. Less than 100 percent 

observer coverage and the use of 

cameras to supplement or substitute for 

observer coverage were considered by 

the Council during the program’s 

development, but were rejected. Full 

and independent accountability of all 

catch is key to the success of the catch 

shares program especially programs 

using individual fishing quotas. NMFS 

has recognized the increased costs to the 

industry and is therefore planning to 

subsidize the cost of observer coverage 

for at least the first year, subject to 

appropriations (see response to 

Comment 22). The defraying of cost via 

this subsidy will give the fleet time to 

develop cost cutting measures with 

other industry members in their port 

and with the observer provider 

companies. NMFS recognizes the 

importance of reigning in costs to the 

industry and the public and will 

continue to investigate and implement 

efficiencies when practical. One such 

efficiency is that a person can be trained 

and certified as both an observer and as 

a catch monitor. That person could act 

in both capacities even for the same 

vessel’s offload, subject to maximum 

work hour requirements and other 

limitations, which may provide some 

cost savings. 

Comment 18. The Pacific Fishery 

Management Council commented in 

agreement with the conflict of interest 

regulations as proposed by NMFS under 

Alternative 2 for the observer and catch 

monitor regulations. Another 

commenter supported rigorous conflict 

of interest provisions. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

provided two alternative sections 

addressing conflict of interest 

provisions applicable to observers and 

catch monitors; Alternative 1 provided 

provisions as deemed by the Council, 

Alternative 2 presented the NMFSproposed language. NMFS provided its 

rationale for the NMFS-proposed 

alternative in the proposed rule, and 

explained that the NMFS-proposed 

conflict of interest provisions are 

consistent with existing language in 

NMFS policy statement 04–109–01 and 

current standards in the West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program. NMFS 

specifically requested comment on 

which provisions to include in the final 

rule and NMFS received no comments 

in disagreement with the NMFSproposed alternative included in the 

final rule. 

Comment 19. One commenter stated 

that Morro Bay, California, will not have 

enough trawlers to support a catch 

monitor. 

Response. NMFS responded to a 

similar comment regarding costs of 

monitoring in the October 31st final rule 

(75 FR 60873, comment 22). As stated 

in the response to the prior comment: 

‘‘Analyses indicate that the program 

benefits will outweigh the program 

costs. The EIS anticipates that the value 

of the fishery will increase through a 

variety of mechanisms, including 

increased efficiency of existing vessels, 

the transfer of effort to the most efficient 

vessels, and increased retention of target 

species. The program includes 

opportunities for adaptive management 

if actual impacts differ from projected 

impacts. [* * *] To aid the fishing 

industry during the transition to a 

rationalized fishery, the agency has 

announced its intent, subject to 

available Federal funding, to cover a 

portion of the initial cost of hiring 

observers and catch monitors. As stated 

by the agency, participants would 

initially be responsible for 10 percent of 

the cost of hiring observers and catch 

monitors, with that amount increased 

every year so that by 2014, the industry 

would be responsible for 100 percent of 

the cost of hiring the observers and 

catch monitors.’’ 

Landings monitoring is an essential 

component to the rationalization 

program developed by the Council. 

Thus, industry members and catch 

monitor providers need to work together 

to resolve local implementation issues 

such as the development of costeffective deployment of catch monitors 

in Morro Bay. One potential solution 

provided for in this final rule would be 

to contract with providers for the 

services of observers that are also 

certified as catch monitors. Such ‘‘dual 

certified’’ observers, which would 

already be on board the vessel 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, could assume the catch 

monitor role for the IFQ first receiver. 

Coordination between the fishing vessel, 

the IFQ first receiver, and the observer/ 

catch monitor provider will help 

alleviate concerns of program costs 

under circumstances such as those 

presented at Morro Bay. NMFS 

anticipates that further opportunities to 

reduce costs will develop with 

experience under the program. See also 

the response to Comment 20. 

Comment 20. California Department 

of Fish and Game (CDFG) commented 

that it supports an ongoing dialogue 

with NMFS and the states about the use 

of state employees as observers or catch 

monitors within the trawl 

rationalization program, provided that 

such dialogue includes a mechanism to 

reimburse the states for the use of state 

employees. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges the 

comment and plans to continue its 

dialogue with the states regarding the 

use of state employees as observers and/ 

or catch monitors. Initial discussions 

conducted thus far indicate that the 

states are interested in providing some 

catch monitor services. If state 

employees serve as catch monitors, 

NMFS anticipates that reimbursement 

for costs associated with such services 

would be a component of legal contracts 

entered into between the states and the 

IFQ first receivers or vessels to which 

the states provide services. NMFS looks 

forward to continued discussions with 

the states to support coordination of the 

trawl rationalization program with state 

employees. 

Comment 21. Some commenters 

asked for clarification of the terms, 

‘‘authorized officer,’’ ‘‘authorized 

person,’’ and ‘‘NMFS staff’’ with regard 

to the catch monitor and observer 

regulations. One commenter stated that 

persons authorized access to first 

receiver facilities should include stateauthorized employees, both law 

enforcement and non-law enforcement, 

and Pacific States Marine Fisheries 

Commission staff. Both of these types of 

personnel are involved in the 

monitoring and enforcement of the 

groundfish fishery. The commenter also 

noted inconsistent use of the terms 

‘‘authorized officer’’ and ‘‘authorized 

person’’ in the regulations and 

recommended a consistent and 

encompassing use of the term 

‘‘authorized person.’’ Another 

commenter asked that the term ‘‘NMFS 

staff’’ be defined and should be more 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78351 

narrow than any employee of NMFS. 

The commenter suggested a definition. 

Response. NMFS appreciates the 

comments and how they highlight the 

variety of management and enforcement 

persons that are involved in the 

program. However, NMFS disagrees that 

further definitions are necessary at this 

time. NMFS believes that the current 

use of the terms is appropriate and 

serves to distinguish the different 

persons that must have access to, or 

accomplish other duties in connection 

to program management and 

enforcement. ‘‘Authorized officer’’ is a 

term already defined under the MSA in 

regulations found at 50 CFR part 600. 

The term is focused exclusively on 

enforcement officers, both state and 

Federal, and includes NOAA agents and 

officers, state officers acting under a JEA 

with NOAA and USCG boarding 

officers. This term is important for use 

involving inspection and enforcement 

activities. ‘‘Authorized person’’ is not 

defined but was included to identify 

persons other than enforcement officers 

and NMFS staff who are authorized to 

conduct duties related to the program. 

The term includes catch monitors as 

they are not NMFS staff, but are 

employees of contractors. These persons 

have authority to conduct duties 

pursuant to the program regulations. 

NMFS staff are those persons who have 

authority to conduct duties under the 

program regulations, as well. As for 

state employees, these persons have 

independent authority under state laws 

to enter the facility and do their jobs. 

Comment 22. One commenter asked if 

NMFS’ offer to cover up to 90 percent 

of the costs of the observer program 

during the first year of the program was 

for all sectors of the fishery, or only the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. 

Response. There is no assurance or 

guarantee that NMFS will provide 

funding, as the funding depends on 

Congressional appropriation. However, 

assuming that an appropriation is made 

and those funds are made available to 

the program and not otherwise 

restricted, NMFS NWR would apply 

these funds to help defray both the 

observer and catch monitor program 

costs. Further, NMFS would make the 

funds available to all three sectors (MS, 

C/P, and Shorebased) not just the 

Shorebased IFQ program. 

Comment 23. One commenter 

suggested that language on the catch 

monitor program stating that ‘‘monitors 

have access to telephone lines during 

the times that Pacific whiting was being 

processed’’ may be an artifact of 

previous regulations for catch monitors. 

The commenter suggested that NMFS 

re-examine whether this language 

should apply to more species than 

Pacific whiting. 

Response. NMFS agrees with the 

comment and, upon further review, has 

determined that this requirement is no 

longer necessary. The commenter was 

correct that catch monitors may need 

access to more species that just Pacific 

whiting for the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. In addition, any phone may be 

used, a cell phone or a telephone. 

However, the IFQ first receiver will not 

have to provide catch monitors with 

access to a phone while IFQ species are 

being processed. That is the 

responsibility of the catch monitor 

provider as stated at § 660.17(e)(8)(i)(A). 

NMFS is removing this language from 

the IFQ first receiver responsibilities at 

§ 660.140(i)(4). See the section on 

‘‘Changes from the Proposed Rule.’’ 

Comments on the Economic Data 

Collection (EDC) Program 

Comment 24. Some commenters 

stated that the economic data collection 

questionnaire was too detailed and 

burdensome for small businesses. One 

of those commenters suggested that if it 

is an annual questionnaire, it should be 

simplified to collect only crucial 

information. If the detailed 

questionnaire is continued, it should be 

collected periodically, not annually. 

Another commenter stated that the EDC 

program is too narrow and will not 

capture the effects of the trawl 

rationalization program on jobs, 

businesses, and communities. 

Response. In developing the trawl 

catch share program, NMFS is striking 

a balance. NMFS believes the 

importance and benefits of this program 

outweighs the burden on small 

businesses. The statute authorizing LAP 

programs such as this, Section 303A of 

the MSA, requires periodic reviews. In 

order to do that, NMFS must collect 

both baseline and annual information to 

judge the effectiveness of the program 

for the 5 year review. NMFS will 

continue to work through the Council 

process to make any necessary changes 

to the program to assure that that 

program does collect information 

needed by the Council meets the 

requirements of the MSA and the 

Council including providing 

assessments on the impacts of the 

program on jobs, businesses, and 

communities. 

NMFS’ authority to collect economic 

information is limited to those vessels 

and processors harvesting and 

processing fish that are regulated under 

the MSA. Although NMFS could ask for 

economic information from persons or 

entities that are not directly regulated 

under a fishery program, it would be 

unable to require submission of the 

information. This is a critical difference 

and NMFS cannot establish a voluntary 

economic information program that 

would certainly be rejected by nonfishery industry persons and entities. 

NMFS could not ensure confidentiality 

of voluntarily submitted information 

and this problem would mean NMFS 

would never receive information or 

receive information that was incomplete 

or unreliable. An incomplete or 

unreliable database would be unusable. 

Regarding a commenter’s concern 

over the EDC program not capturing the 

effects of the trawl rationalization 

program on lost jobs, closed businesses, 

and devastated communities, the 

Northwest Fisheries Science Center will 

conduct voluntary interviews through 

the Trawl Rationalization Program 

Human Dimensions Study to try and 

capture some of these other effects of 

the program. 

Comment 25. One commenter agreed 

with NMFS’ definition of ‘‘processor’’ for 

the EDC Program. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges this 

commenter’s concurrence with the 

proposed definition for ‘‘processor’’ for 

the EDC program. 

Comment 26. One commenter 

expressed concerns about the EDC audit 

process, in particular the potential use 

of a third-party auditor to examine EDC 

submissions. The comment focused on 

the handling of ‘‘extremely sensitive 

commercial information’’. The comment 

acknowledges that NMFS states that 

submitted information is confidential, 

but the comment suggests that there are 

no standards or rules in place to ensure 

confidentiality. Further, the comment 

questions whether NMFS can ask for tax 

information and require its submission 

to a third-party auditor and whether this 

practice may violate IRS rules. 

Response. While NMFS understands 

the concern about information 

confidentiality, this issue was 

highlighted in the proposed rule and 

NMFS explained that the EDC program 

will ensure information confidentiality. 

Information submitted to NMFS 

pursuant to the trawl program is 

considered confidential not only under 

the MSA, which specifically states that 

submitted information is confidential 

and not disclosable, but also there are at 

least two other Federal acts that NMFS 

uses to hold commercial and financial 

information confidential, namely the 

FOIA and Trade Secrets Act. NMFS has 

promulgated regulations that describe 

information confidentiality and 

processes to ensure its confidentiality at 

50 CFR 600.405. Further, NMFS follows 

a detailed policy-based process, titled 

NAO 216–100, directing specifically 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78352 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

how NMFS employees and contractors 

ensure information confidentiality. 

NMFS personnel as well as any thirdparty contractor, such as an auditor, are 

required to retain information 

confidentiality. Should information be 

mishandled and inappropriately 

disclosed, both civil and criminal 

sanctions could be applied depending 

on the circumstances. To further ensure 

the confidentiality of information 

submitted to third-parties such as 

auditors, NMFS wrote regulatory 

language at section 660.114(e) 

describing the EDC audit procedures 

that indicates that any information 

required for verification of economic 

data, including that provided to a thirdparty auditor, is considered a required 

submission to NMFS. In other economic 

information collection programs, such 

as those found in the North Pacific crab 

and Bering sea trawl groundfish 

programs, NMFS has adopted the use of 

professional auditors to evaluate 

economic and financial information. 

Due to resource limitations, NMFS has 

no choice but to contract for these 

special services and cannot provide 

them ‘‘in-house.’’ Finally, NMFS—like 

private institutions—can require 

submission of financial documents, 

including tax reporting forms, if 

necessary to ensure that its program 

receives reliable, verifiable information. 

If this was not the case, NMFS could not 

carry-out Congress’ intent that 

commercial and financial information 

be collected and evaluated for this 

limited access program’s future 

evaluation and potential effectiveness. 

Comment 27. One commenter 

suggested revised wording for the 

economic data collection program 

regulations at § 660.114 to require only 

one owner of a processor to submit the 

required data, if the processor is owned 

by more than one person. The 

commenter stated that not all owners 

may have access to the level of detail 

required on the forms and the additional 

burden of requiring all owners to submit 

the data is unnecessary. 

Response. NMFS agrees, but does not 

conclude that a change in the proposed 

rule text is necessary. NMFS is aware 

that some processors are owned by more 

than one person. However, a processor 

can be considered a single person or 

entity and thus would report its 

information on one form. Thus, NMFS 

requires only one EDC form from a 

processor provided that the form 

provides all relevant and complete 

information from the processor. All 

owners of a processor, however, are 

subject to the risk that with the filing of 

one form for the processor, that the form 

may not be timely filed or properly 

completed by whoever is identified as 

the responsible party for submitting it 

on behalf of the processor and thus, all 

the owners. 

Comment 28. One commenter 

suggested that the language in § 660.114, 

for the trawl fishery economic data 

collection program, should be revised to 

read ‘‘holder’’ of a first receiver site 

license rather than ‘‘owner’’ because the 

license is a privilege and conveys no 

ownership rights. 

Response. NMFS agrees with the 

commenter that first receiver site 

licenses are a privilege and not a right, 

but declines to change the term from 

‘‘owner’’ to ‘‘holder’’ as the commenter 

suggests. The regulations at § 660.100 

clearly state that any privileges 

(including IFQ first receiver site 

licenses) in the trawl rationalization 

program may be revoked, limited, or 

modified at any time. In order to take 

delivery of groundfish caught in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, an IFQ first 

receiver would need to have a first 

receiver site license. ‘‘IFQ first receivers’’ 

are defined in the October 31st final rule 

(75 FR 60868) at § 660.111 as ‘‘persons 

who first receive, purchase, or take 

custody, control, or possession of catch 

onshore directly from a vessel that 

harvested the catch while fishing under 

the Shorebased IFQ Program described 

at § 660.140, subpart D.’’ For the first 

receiver site license owner, the term 

‘‘license owner’’ is defined at § 660.11 as 

‘‘a person who is the owner of record 

with NMFS, SFD, Permits Office of a 

License issued under § 660.140, subpart 

D’’ and is cross-referenced from the 

‘‘permit owner’’ definition. 

Comments on Ownership and Transfer 

Comment 29. One commenter asked if 

an estate completes probate court during 

the first two years of the program, can 

ownership of the limited entry trawl 

permit and QS permit be transferred 

from the estate administrator to a 

beneficiary. 

Response. The proposed rule states 

that ‘‘[d]uring the first 2 years after 

implementation of the program, QS or 

IBQ cannot be transferred to another QS 

permit owner, except under U.S. court 

order and as approved by NMFS.’’ 50 

CFR 660.140(d)(3)(ii)(B)(1). During the 

first two years of the program, QS and 

IBQ are non-transferable. However, 

NMFS recognizes that there may be 

some circumstances where a court may 

order or authorize the distribution of 

assets, including QS or IBQ. Such a 

circumstance may arise as a result of 

death or dissolution of a QS owner, 

such as in probate or in a bankruptcy 

action. NMFS drafted this regulatory 

provision to accommodate such 

circumstances. Such a transfer would 

still be subject to review by NMFS, 

however, to determine whether the 

transferee is eligible to own QS and 

whether the ownership interest of the 

transferee would be within the control 

limits; NMFS will not approve a transfer 

if the transferee is ineligible to own QS 

or if the ownership interest of the 

transferee would exceed control limits 

as a result of the transfer. NMFS 

recognizes that not all distributions of 

assets in probate or bankruptcy may be 

set forth in a court order. Accordingly, 

NMFS has clarified its intent by 

modifying the regulatory provision to 

state that ‘‘[d]uring the first 2 years after 

implementation of the program, QS or 

IBQ cannot be transferred * * * except 

under U.S. court order or authorization 

and as approved by NMFS.’’ 

Comment 30. One commenter asked if 

two limited entry trawl permits are 

owned by the same entity, for example 

an estate administrator, can the 

resulting QS from the two limited entry 

trawl permits be separated into two QS 

permits if the court orders the permits 

to be divided between beneficiaries. 

Response. In the situation described 

by this commenter, where a court orders 

division of the permits, NMFS would 

transfer the QS and IBQ to the separate 

beneficiaries, subject to NMFS’ approval 

of the transfer. For NMFS to approve 

such a transfer, NMFS would first 

determine whether each beneficiary is 

eligible to own QS; if a beneficiary is 

eligible and does not already own a QS 

permit, NMFS would issue a QS permit 

to the beneficiary. NMFS would also 

review the transfer to determine 

whether either beneficiary’s ownership 

interest in QS or IBQ would exceed 

control limits as a result of the transfer. 

If a beneficiary is not eligible to own 

QS, or if the transfer of QS would cause 

the beneficiary’s ownership of QS or 

IBQ to exceed control limits, NMFS 

would not approve the transfer. NMFS 

would respond in the same manner if 

the transfer is otherwise authorized by 

a court. See response to Comment 29. 

Comment 31. Several commenters 

commented on application of ownership 

limits on trusts. 

a. One commenter agreed with NMFS 

that the trustee should be considered 

the owner of a trust. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

b. Another commenter agreed that 

NMFS correctly identified the nature of 

trust ownership, but expressed concern 

that a trustor or beneficiaries could exert 

control over the trust. The commenter 

suggested that to prevent this, all parties 

to the trust (trustor, trustee, and 

beneficiaries) should be charged with 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78353 

100 percent of the trust ownership for 

purposes of application of control 

limits. Another commenter similarly 

expressed concern that accumulation 

limits may be exceeded through 

ownership by a trust, and also suggested 

100 percent ownership be applied to the 

trustor, trustee, and beneficiary for 

control test purposes. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges the 

comment that accumulation limits may 

be exceeded by other parties besides a 

trustee where QS or IBQ is owned by a 

trust, but distinguishes between the 

different accumulation limits that apply. 

‘‘Accumulation limits,’’ as defined in the 

proposed rule, means ‘‘the maximum 

extent of permissible ownership, control 

or use of a privilege within the trawl 

rationalization program[.]’’ 75 FR 53413 

(emphasis added). As stated in the 

preamble to the proposed rule, NMFS 

interprets an ownership interest by a 

trust to vest ownership in the trustee; 

this interpretation applies specifically to 

permissible ownership. Ownership 

limits would apply to ownership of MS/ 

CV-endorsed permits and catch history 

assignment, MS permits, and to QS and 

IBQ as a subset of applicable control 

limits. With regard to QS and IBQ and 

control limits Amendment 20 to the 

FMP states that ‘‘[t]he term ‘own or 

control’ was shortened to ‘control’ for 

simplicity[;] ‘Control’ includes 

ownership[.]’’ (Appendix E, footnote y, 

at E–21, August 2010.) In the proposed 

rule, control limits applicable to the 

Shorebased IFQ Program are defined as 

‘‘the maximum amount that a person 

may own or control[.]’’ 75 FR 53413 

(emphasis added). NMFS’ interpretation 

that ownership of QS or IBQ by a trust 

would vest ownership in the trustee (or 

trustees, if more than one) only applies 

to the maximum permissible ownership 

aspect of compliance with control 

limits. 

Ownership of QS or IBQ by a trust 

and control by any party other than the 

trustee—whether such party is the 

trustor, a beneficiary, or any other 

party—are two different things. While 

ownership is one way in which a party 

may exercise control, control is broader 

than ownership and a determination of 

control depends on further investigation 

beyond identification of the legal 

ownership of the QS or IBQ involved. A 

person may exceed control limits for QS 

or IBQ despite having no ownership of 

the QS or IBQ. Investigations regarding 

alleged violations of control limits will 

depend on the facts unique to each 

situation; NMFS will make a 

determination based on all relevant facts 

and circumstances revealed in an 

investigation. Ownership will be one 

fact considered, but not the only one. As 

stated in the preamble to the proposed 

rule, NMFS acknowledges that 

additional information, such as the trust 

document, may be needed to determine 

compliance with control limits. As the 

commenter points out, other facts may 

be needed as well. Accordingly, the 

proposed rule and this final rule 

includes provisions that NMFS may ask 

for additional information it believes to 

be necessary for a determination of 

compliance with control limits. 

NMFS disagrees with the 

commenters’ suggestion that NMFS 

should attribute trust ownership to 

parties other than the trustee for control 

limit purposes. One of the commenters 

described scenarios where parties other 

than the trustee may possibly exert 

control, either directly or indirectly, 

over the trust, the trustee, or the QS or 

IBQ; however, the commenter has not 

provided sufficient facts to enable 

NMFS to determine whether control 

limits are exceeded under these 

scenarios. The commenters’ suggested 

approach would presume control exists 

regardless of the facts and would 

attribute control to trustors and 

beneficiaries even where they have no 

actual control. NMFS acknowledges that 

one of the commenters expressed 

concern that an investigation of control 

would require ‘‘valuable time of NMFS 

staff[,]’’ but this applies for any 

enforcement investigation of control by 

parties other than legal owners, 

regardless of whether the ownership 

interest is a trust or any other form of 

ownership interest. Accordingly, NMFS 

declines to revise its interpretation of 

the attribution of ownership interest of 

a trust to the trustee. 

Comment 32. One commenter stated 

that the proposed Shorebased IFQ 

Program does not comply with MSA 

limitations on who can hold, acquire, or 

use limited access privileges, and that 

unrestricted ownership of quota shares 

will increase the cost of entry into the 

fishery and thwart the conservation 

benefits of the program. 

Response. Section 303A(c)(5)(E) of the 

MSA states that in developing a limited 

access privilege program to harvest fish 

a Council shall ‘‘authorize limited access 

privileges to harvest fish to be held, 

acquired, used by, or issued under the 

system to persons who substantially 

participate in the fishery, including in a 

specific sector of such fishery, as 

specified by the Council.’’ NOAA 

interprets that provision to mean that 

those who substantially participate in 

the fishery must be among those eligible 

to acquire QS, but are not the only 

entities or person who can receive QS. 

In other words, as long as those who 

substantially participate in the fishery 

are included as those eligible to receive 

QS, this provision of the statute is 

satisfied. The Council’s eligibility 

criteria at § 660.140(d)(2) would allow 

all entities that currently substantially 

participate in the shorebased IFQ 

fishery to hold, acquire, use or be issued 

QS. 

Comment 33. One commenter stated 

that the proposed Shorebased IFQ 

Program does not comply with the MSA 

because it allows QS to be acquired to 

perfect a security interest. 

Response. Section 303A(c)(1)(D) of 

the MSA, which addresses requirements 

for eligibility for limited access 

programs, does not prohibit the 

acquisition of QS to perfect a security 

interest. This section states that the 

same statutory eligibility criteria apply 

to all persons who acquire a privilege to 

harvest fish, including those who 

acquire a limited access privilege solely 

for the purpose of perfecting or realizing 

on a security interest in such privilege. 

The MSA would allow United States 

citizens, corporations, partnerships, 

other entities established under the laws 

of the United States or any State, or 

permanent resident aliens to acquire 

privileges to harvest fish, including 

acquiring a privilege for the purpose of 

perfecting or realizing on a security 

interest in such privilege, if they meet 

the eligibility and participation 

requirements established in the 

program. The MSA requires that a 

limited access privilege program 

prohibit other persons from acquiring a 

harvesting privilege. The eligibility and 

participation requirements for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program in § 660.140(d) 

are consistent with the MSA. 

Comment 34. One commenter asked 

for clarification in the final rule on 

whether NMFS addressed the Council’s 

motion that does not require the size (or 

length) endorsement on a vessel to be 

reduced for limited entry trawl permits 

transferred to smaller vessels. 

Response. NMFS addressed this issue, 

consistent with the Council motion, in 

the October 1st final rule (75 FR 60868) 

at § 660.25(b)(3)(iii)(B)(1) which states, 

‘‘A limited entry permit may be 

registered for use with a vessel up to 5 

ft (1.52 m) longer than, the same length 

as, or any length shorter than, the size 

endorsed on the existing permit without 

requiring a combination of permits or a 

change in the size endorsement.’’ 

Previously, limited entry fixed gear and 

limited entry trawl permits had different 

size endorsements limitations. Trawl 

rationalization changed these 

requirements making the trawl size 

endorsement limitations mirror the 

limited entry fixed gear (i.e., the size 

endorsement of neither type of permit 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78354 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

has to be reduced if registered to a 

smaller vessel). 

Comments on Initial Allocation of Catch 

Shares 

Comment 35. One commenter stated 

that the allocation formula for 

overfished species rewarded fishermen 

that caught overfished species while 

penalizing those that successfully 

avoided them. 

Response. NMFS responded to a 

similar comment in the October 31st 

final rule (75 FR 60868, comment 31) 

which stated, ‘‘The Council considered 

and rejected the option of allocating 

overfished species for nonwhiting trips 

using the same method as for other 

nonwhiting IFQ species as not 

appropriate under the circumstances. In 

particular, the relative weighting 

approach, by which landings for a year 

are measured as a percent of all landings 

for the year and species, would have 

given a particularly high amount of 

credit for pounds caught during the 

rebuilding period. Additionally, QS 

would have been allocated to those who 

targeted some of the overfished species 

in the mid-1990s (before they were 

declared overfished) rather than to those 

who need such QS to access current 

target species. Accordingly, the Council 

rejected the approach of using the same 

allocation formula for overfished 

species as for nonwhiting target species 

based on the desire to not reward 

bycatch during the rebuilding period 

and in order to provide QS to those who 

would need it to cover incidental catch 

taken with their target species QS 

allocation. Regarding the comment that 

overfished species years selected were 

arbitrary, the Council’s methodology for 

allocating overfished species is 

significantly different than the 

methodology for allocating target catch. 

The 1994–2003 period is still used to 

determine the target species allocation, 

and the harvest patterns from the 2003– 

2006 logbooks are used to determine the 

amount of overfished species an entity 

would need to take its target species. In 

this fashion, more recent information for 

the fishery is used without rewarding 

post control date increases in effort. The 

1994–2003 harvest patterns were not 

used to determine a target species QS 

recipients need for overfished species 

QS. This is because of the substantial 

changes in fishing patterns which were 

induced by the determination that some 

species were overfished and the 

implementation of the RCAs and 

because the RCAs will remain in place 

after the trawl rationalization system is 

put into place. Therefore, the Council 

considered that an estimate of likely 

patterns of activity should be based on 

a period of time when the RCAs were 

in place. The RCAs were not in place for 

most of the 1994–2003 period but were 

in place for 2003–2006, further 

supporting the conclusion to use this 

period for the allocation of overfished 

species.’’ 

Comment 36. Several commenters 

stated that the program should not 

result in an unfair allocation between 

the states, and should be designed to 

result in an even consolidation between 

states and between the sectors (nonwhiting shorebased IFQ, whiting 

shorebased IFQ, mothership sector, and 

catcher/processor sector). One 

commenter stated that California 

fishermen have received an unfair 

allocation of overfished species 

compared to fishermen in Washington 

and Oregon, which was not discussed 

by the Council, analyzed under NEPA, 

or justified under the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. 

Response. NMFS responded to a 

similar comment in the October 31st 

final rule (75 FR 60868, 60885, 

comment 61). As stated in the response 

to the prior comment: ‘‘The trawl 

rationalization program was developed 

through the Council process, which 

facilitates substantial participation by 

state representatives. Generally, state 

proposals are brought forward when 

alternatives are crafted and integrated to 

the degree practicable. Decisions about 

catch allocation between different 

sectors or gear groups are also part of 

this participatory process, and emphasis 

is placed on equitable division while 

ensuring conservation goals. The 

Council determined that none of the 

alternatives considered, including the 

final plan, would discriminate against 

residents of different states. The 

rationalization program was structured 

to provide fair and equitable allocations 

of both target species and overfished 

species to participants.’’ These concerns 

were expressly identified and addressed 

in the FEIS for Amendment 20, as well. 

See the FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery’’ in Chapter 6, Section 6.2 

on pages 611. See also the response to 

Comment 14, supra. 

Comment 37. One commenter 

disagreed with NMFS’ decision to move 

forward with formal allocations to the 

trawl fishermen, favoring the most 

impactful gear. The commenter is 

hopeful that the program can still be 

utilized to create conservation benefits 

and lessen bycatch and habitat impacts 

from destructive gears. 

Response. NMFS responded to a 

similar comment in the October 31st 

final rule (75 FR 60868, comment 81) 

which stated, in part, ‘‘The action [from 

the October 31st final rule] largely limits 

the trawl allocation of many of the 

Amendment 21 species to percentages 

less than the historical trawl catch 

shares to the benefit of the non-trawl 

sectors. For instance, the proposed 

action limits the maximum trawl 

allocation of any Amendment 21species 

to 95 percent of the directed harvest 

when historical trawl catch shares for 

many of these species have been higher 

than 95 percent. Amendment 21 

species’ allocations that tend to favor 

non-trawl sectors (i.e., non-trawl sector 

allocations greater than observed in the 

1995 to 2005 historical catch) include 

Pacific cod, Pacific ocean perch, 

chilipepper rockfish south of 40°10′ N. 

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

lat., shortspine thornyhead north of 

34°27′ N. lat., longspine thornyhead 

north of 34°27′ N. lat., darkblotched 

rockfish, Dover sole, English sole, 

petrale sole, arrowtooth flounder, starry 

flounder, and species in the Other 

Flatfish complex. All other Amendment 

21 species’ allocations under the 

proposed action are generally favorable 

to non-trawl sectors in that the highest 

non-trawl sector catch percentages 

analyzed were proposed to be allocated 

to the non-trawl sectors. The only 

exception to this general trend is 

lingcod, where a more favorable trawl 

allocation was adopted as the final 

action. The rationale for a higher trawl 

allocation of lingcod is that, unlike the 

non-trawl sectors that predominantly 

use hook-and-line gear to target 

groundfish, the trawl sectors are not as 

constrained by management measures 

designed to foster yelloweye rockfish 

rebuilding. This is because the 

mandatory use of trawls with smalldiameter footropes (i.e., at least 8 

inches) shoreward of the RCA 

effectively keeps bottom trawls out of 

the high relief habitats where yelloweye 

occur. A higher trawl allocation of 

lingcod would minimize stranding of 

harvestable yields of lingcod that would 

otherwise be allocated to non-trawl 

sectors and unavailable for harvest due 

to yelloweye rebuilding constraints. 

Thus, the inter-sector allocation does 

not provide more bottom trawl 

opportunity than status quo 

management measures and allocations. 

In addition, the trawl rationalization 

allows limited entry trawl permit 

holders to switch from trawl to fixed 

gears to fish their quotas, which, in turn, 

would reduce trawl impacts. It also 

allows nontrawl vessels to harvest the 

allocation to the trawl sector if they 

acquire a trawl permit and IFQ. These 

facts lead to the conclusion that 

potential adverse impacts from trawl 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78355 

gear could be expected to be lower 

under the proposed action than under 

status quo management or under any of 

the other alternatives analyzed. 

Moreover, the allocations are consistent 

with the current distribution of fishing 

opportunity among groundfish sectors. 

Even if the fixed gear sector had the 

capacity and desire to catch 

significantly greater amounts of 

groundfish, which is questionable, those 

factors are not, in and of themselves, 

criteria for determining allocations. 

Allocations are necessary precisely 

because more than one group has some 

level of ‘‘capacity and desire,’’ which 

engenders potential conflicts over 

resource access that must be resolved 

through allocation.’’ 

Comments on the Shorebased IFQ 

Program 

Comment 38. One commenter 

disagrees with the regulatory provision 

that allows the Shorebased IFQ Program 

to be closed as a result of a projected 

overage in another trawl sector (MS 

Coop Program, C/P Coop Program). The 

commenter believes NMFS 

misinterpreted the Council’s intent. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges the 

comment, and appreciates the 

commenter’s concern. This concern was 

raised by representatives of the trawl 

sectors through the Council during the 

regulatory deeming process. As 

explained at that time, this language 

reflects NMFS’ authority to take action 

in any and/or all sectors of the fishery 

based on a conservation concern. 

Overfishing or projected overages on 

OYs are expected to be less likely under 

the trawl rationalization program, 

however, consistent with the MSA, 

NMFS retains the authority to take 

action to protect the status of the stocks, 

if needed. 

Comment 39. One commenter stated 

that fishermen who receive minimal QS 

or zero QS for overfished bycatch 

species would face the choice of being 

tied up at the dock or paying other 

fishermen for the privilege of using their 

IFQ for overfished bycatch species. 

Response. NMFS disagrees with the 

comment that these are the only choices 

available to fishermen that receive low 

initial allocations of QS for overfished 

bycatch species. QS is associated with 

QS permit owners, and is tracked in the 

QS permit owner’s QS account. Each 

year, NMFS will deposit QP in the QS 

account based on the amount of QS for 

the IFQ species and the shoreside trawl 

allocation for that species. In order for 

a fisherman to use QP, the fisherman 

must obtain QP to transfer into the 

fisherman’s unique vessel account 

associated with the vessel the fisherman 

will use to catch the fish. QP is required 

in the vessel account to cover catch of 

IFQ species. 

Unless a fisherman has a negative 

balance of QP for any IFQ species in 

their vessel account, they can go fishing 

in the Shorebased IFQ Program. This is 

true even if they have zero QP for some 

IFQ species, including overfished 

bycatch species. To the extent that the 

fisherman is adept at avoiding bycatch 

of IFQ species which the fisherman has 

no QP for, no QP need ever be 

transferred to that fisherman’s vessel 

account for those species. If the 

fisherman does catch IFQ species for 

which they do not have QP, the 

fisherman would have 30 days to obtain 

and transfer QP for that species into 

their vessel account. Alternatively, if the 

amount of QP that they need to cover 

the overage is within the carryover 

provisions, they can opt out of the 

fishery for the remainder of the year and 

use the next year’s QP to cover that 

overage (see comment 41). Fisherman 

also have the option of working together 

to share their QP for overfished bycatch 

species by avoiding overfished bycatch 

species as much as possible, forming 

risk pools to use collectively, and using 

that amount to address inadvertent 

catch of unwanted bycatch by members 

of the pooling arrangement. 

Comment 40. One commenter 

supported the proposed requirement 

that the owner of a vessel account must 

cover a deficit for any IFQ species 

within 30 days of when the deficit 

occurs, or, if the vessel chooses to 

invoke the carryover provision to avoid 

penalties, opt out of the fishery for the 

remainder of the year. The commenter 

also suggested that in order to encourage 

clean fishing practices, NMFS should 

limit the number of times a vessel can 

use this provision to two years total. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

specifically requested comment on the 

carryover provision. NMFS 

acknowledges the comment in support 

of the proposed regulation and the 

requirement to opt out of the IFQ fishery 

for the remainder of the year if a 

fisherman invokes the carryover 

provision to cover a deficit. Nothing in 

the Council motion, however, 

authorizes NMFS to limit the carryover 

provision to only two years of the 

program. Amendment 20 does not 

restrict the carryover provision to the 

first two years of the program, but does 

provide a method for future revision of 

the carryover limit, which may be 

changed during the biennial 

specifications process. Appendix E, A– 

2.2.2b; at E–13. Moreover, the carryover 

provision, as well as other relevant 

issues, will be reviewed during the 5- 

year review. To the extent that the 

commenter suggests a more restrictive 

carryover provision than that described 

in the proposed rule, the appropriate 

avenue for consideration of this 

suggestion under the FMP would be 

through the biennial specifications 

process or as part of the 5-year review. 

Comment 41. Another commenter 

stated that the proposed rule would 

require fishermen to cover a deficit 

within 30 days or opt out of the fishery 

for the year, and that under the 

commenter’s reading of the proposed 

rule, fishermen that receive zero QS/QP 

would start from a position of 

noncompliance, and would be required 

to first obtain QP to fish for target 

species. 

Response. The commenter correctly 

states that a deficit must be covered 

within 30 days, but does not accurately 

state what would be required for 

compliance with this provision. In order 

to harvest fish without incurring a 

deficit, a vessel must have sufficient QP 

in its vessel account. Each vessel 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program would have a vessel account, 

and all vessel accounts start with a zero 

balance. In order to be in compliance, 

the owner of the vessel would have to 

acquire QP only for the fish that it 

catches; having a zero balance for QP for 

any one IFQ species does not 

automatically result in noncompliance. 

Under the rationalized fishery, 

fishermen have several options to plan 

their fishing strategies. A QS owner may 

choose to transfer the resulting QP to 

the owner’s own vessel account, or may 

elect to lease the QP and transfer them 

to another vessel account entirely. A 

vessel owner that chooses to go fishing 

can obtain QP before the vessel goes 

fishing, whether from the vessel owner’s 

own QS account or by transfer from 

another owner of QP, for IFQ species 

that the vessel intends to harvest or 

anticipates harvesting, and may go 

fishing with a zero balance for IFQ 

species which it intends to avoid. 

Moreover, if a vessel fishing with a zero 

balance for an IFQ species were to catch 

that species, the vessel would have 30 

days after that occurrence within which 

to obtain sufficient QP to cover the 

deficit, and if the deficit is within the 

carryover limit, the vessel owner has the 

option to opt out of the IFQ fishery for 

the remainder of the year and cover the 

deficit with QP issued in the following 

year. A vessel that opts out of the IFQ 

fishery to use the carryover provision 

may still fish in other fisheries during 

the remainder of the year, and may 

transfer unused QP from the vessel 

account to another vessel account. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78356 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Under none of these scenarios would 

the fisherman be in a ‘‘position of 

noncompliance,’’ despite having started 

with a zero balance of QP. 

Comment 42. Multiple commenters 

addressed NMFS’ proposed weight 

conversions. Some commenters agreed 

with NMFS on the need for a standard, 

coastwide set of conversion factors for 

fish not landed whole. The commenters 

agreed with the values NMFS published 

in the August 31st proposed rule (75 FR 

53380) for most species. For sablefish, 

lingcod, Pacific whiting, and skates, the 

commenters recommended NMFS use 

values from the Oregon Department of 

Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). Another 

commenter only supported a non-sector 

specific sablefish conversion factor of 

1.6, but did not support any other 

proposed additional weight conversion 

factors at this time for several reasons. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

specifically requested comment on the 

actual values and implications of the 

proposed conversion factors. NMFS’ 

intent is to have consistent coastwide 

conversion factors that are as consistent 

as possible with existing state practices. 

It is NMFS’ understanding that 

processors will report on electronic fish 

tickets in a similar manner as the states 

have been doing for the state paper fish 

ticket system, which is to report the 

groundfish species to sorting groups 

with their current condition noted (e.g., 

headed and gutted (eviscerated)). If the 

states have more restrictive landings 

requirements on the species or 

condition that fish may be landed in, 

the Federal regulations will not 

supersede those more restrictive state 

requirements. The conversion factor 

would be applied to the state, PacFIN, 

or Federal data systems later in the 

process. While ideally the Federal 

weight conversion factors would be 

consistent with values used by the 

states, they are independent and may be 

different. As stated in the preamble to 

the proposed rule, Federal regulations at 

§ 660.60(h)(5)(ii) state that Federal 

conversion factors will be used for 

participants in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. However, for the limited entry 

fixed gear and open access fisheries, the 

regulations say that state conversion 

factors will be used. 

Based on Council discussion at the 

September 2010 meeting and on public 

comment received, NMFWS has revised 

the regulations in this final rule to make 

sablefish, lingcod, and Pacific whiting 

consistent with the values from the 

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(ODFW), with some exceptions, and to 

clarify that Federal regulations do not 

supersede more restrictive state 

regulations on landings requirements for 

the species or condition that fish may be 

landed. NMFS is not adopting ODFW 

conversion factors for filleted Pacific 

whiting, for winged skates, or for glazed 

sablefish because processing of 

groundfish is prohibited at-sea by 

vessels in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

at § 660.112(b)(1)(xii), with narrow 

exceptions, inapplicable here. In 

addition, skates are not an IFQ species. 

The value from ODFW for lingcod of 1.1 

uses the term ‘‘gilled and gutted’’ which 

is equivalent to ‘‘gutted with the head 

on’’ in Federal regulations. The values 

for other groundfish species will remain 

as previously specified in the August 

31st proposed rule, including a value for 

Pacific whiting that has been headed 

and gutted with tail removed. This 

conversion factor is necessary because 

there is an exception from the 

prohibition on processing at-sea for 

Pacific whiting for vessels that are equal 

to or shorter than 75-ft (23-m) that head, 

gut, remove tails and freeze whiting. See 

the section on ‘‘Changes from the 

Proposed Rule.’’ The conversion factors 

implemented through this final rule are 

based on the best available information 

and are subject to change on the basis 

of improved scientific information. 

Comment 43. One commenter 

disagreed with the proposed regulations 

at § 660.113(a)(4)(i) to record the weight 

of fish on electronic fish tickets in 

round weight only. The commenter 

suggested that the weight of fish 

recorded on electronic fish tickets 

should be the weight of the fish based 

on the condition it was landed in, 

whether dressed or round, and the 

conversion factors for dressed fish 

should be applied after the fish ticket 

reporting. The commenter provided 

several reasons why this would be 

preferable, including: ease for the catch 

monitors to verify weights without 

dealing with conversion factors; more 

assurance by NMFS and states that the 

correct conversion factors are applied, 

reducing the likelihood of confusion for 

buyers between state and electronic fish 

tickets; and consistent weights between 

state and electronic fish tickets. 

Response. NMFS appreciates the 

comment and has reviewed the required 

information for electronic fish tickets. 

NMFS is developing an electronic fish 

ticket system where weight limit 

conversion factor will be automated and 

applied once the data is entered into the 

data system. Accordingly, the required 

information that IFQ first receivers must 

provide on electronic fish tickets is 

being revised in this final rule to require 

the actual weight and condition of 

species landed, rather than the round 

weight. NMFS is also requiring the 

vessel account number to be reported on 

the electronic fish ticket to accurately 

track landed catch to a specific vessel 

account. To be clear, the Federal 

electronic landing report (electronic fish 

ticket) does not replace any state 

reporting requirements for landings but 

is in addition to those requirements. 

Comment 44. One commenter stated 

that NMFS failed to consider impacts of 

gear switching on fixed gear fisheries, 

on ports and processors dependent on 

species harvested by trawl gear, and on 

the inequities created between sectors 

(fixed gear and trawl) for gear 

conversion. 

Response. As discussed in response to 

the commenter’s similar comments on 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP, the 

potential effects of the trawl 

rationalization program on other 

fisheries and on ports and processors 

dependent on species harvested by 

trawl gear are specifically addressed in 

the FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’ in Chapter 4, Sections 4.8.2 

and 4.8.3 on pages 402–409, and Section 

4.9.2 on pages 413–423, respectively. 

Potential effects specifically due to gear 

switching that were analyzed in the 

FEIS include spillover of vessel 

participation, grounds competition, 

market competition and regional shifts 

in landings. These potential effects were 

identified and analyzed, to the extent 

possible, without the knowledge of 

observed or actual impacts. These 

potential impacts were highlighted for 

the purpose of monitoring behavioral 

changes in the fishery, understanding 

their impacts, and reacting through the 

Council process to minimize impacts. 

These matters will also be evaluated 

through the 5 year comprehensive 

review of the trawl rationalization 

program. 

Regarding the comment about alleged 

inequities between sectors, under the 

license limitation program, trawl vessels 

are already allowed to use fixed gear to 

take the trawl allocation, albeit they 

must do so under the open access 

regulations, which have much lower 

limits. In contrast, fixed gear 

endorsements give a vessel access to the 

fixed gear allocation. Allowing trawl 

vessels to switch gear (or other vessels 

to acquire a trawl permit and IFQ) does 

not give trawl-permitted vessels access 

to the fixed gear quota; it merely allows 

the vessel to use nontrawl gear to take 

the trawl IFQ. Moreover, with regard to 

intersector allocations and allowing 

fixed gear to harvest trawl quota, it 

should be noted that trawlers who have 

entered the fishery since 1994 have had 

to buy trawl permits to access trawl 

quota, thus in this respect other vessels 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78357 

would be on an even footing with trawl 

vessels. This issue of requiring a trawl 

permit and quota to harvest trawl quota 

with fixed gear was addressed in the 

response to comments on the 

Amendment 20 FEIS at page 661. On 

average there are about 120 trawl vessels 

that participate in the fishery each year; 

however, there are about 168 permits. 

This indicates some opportunity for 

nontrawl vessels to acquire trawl 

permits and use trawl IFQ. Further, it is 

expected that there will be 

consolidation in the trawl fleet, 

increasing the number of trawl permits 

potentially available for use by nontrawl 

vessels. Thus, despite the limited scope, 

the IFQ system will allow for some use 

of trawl IFQ by nontrawl vessels. 

Comment 45. One commenter 

expressed support for gear switching 

and recommended that NMFS create 

incentives for permanent conversion to 

lower impact gears. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges the 

comment in support of gear switching 

provisions in the proposed rule; 

however, nothing in Amendment 20 

allows NMFS to provide incentives for 

permanent gear conversion. The Council 

considered and rejected permanent gear 

conversion in its development of 

alternatives for Amendment 20. The 

Council’s rationale for rejecting 

permanent gear conversion is included 

in the FEIS at Appendix A, Section A.7, 

on pages A–419 to A–423. Since 

permanent gear conversion is not within 

the scope of the trawl rationalization 

program, NMFS declines to provide any 

incentives for permanent gear 

conversion. 

Comment 46. One commenter was 

concerned with the timing of applying 

for an interim first receiver site license 

and the start of the fishery. The 

commenter suggested that, if the fishery 

starts January 1, 2011, no first receiver 

site license (interim or permanent) 

should be required until February 1, 

2011. 

Response. NMFS understands the 

commenter’s concerns, but believes the 

interim first receiver site license will 

accommodate the needs of the fishery. 

Due to the quick implementation of this 

program, the interim first receiver site 

license was developed to allow industry 

participants time to obtain permanent 

site licenses. An interim first receiver 

site license is required before an IFQ 

first receiver begins accepting landings 

of IFQ species, which could be as early 

as January 1, 2011. Site licenses are 

required for tracking and documentation 

purposes to account for the landings 

from the quota-based program. NMFS 

will work with industry from the start 

of the program through June 30, 2011, 

to complete an acceptable application 

and monitoring plan for an annual first 

receiver site license, including site 

inspections. First receivers that have 

accepted Pacific whiting in the past 

three years are already familiar with 

many of the site license requirements, 

including preparation of a monitoring 

plan, and should only require some 

modifications to their plans such as 

expanding them to cover more 

groundfish species. 

Comment 47. Some commenters 

stated that the maximized retention in 

the Shorebased IFQ Program should be 

consistent with the existing maximized 

retention fishery, where some discards 

are allowed for operational and safety 

reasons, but those discards are 

estimated by an observer. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

specifically requested comment on any 

implications that the prohibition on 

discarding may have on the prosecution 

of a maximized retention fishery, and 

further requested comment on what 

should constitute discarding under this 

provision of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. NMFS agrees with the 

commenters that the maximized 

retention in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program should be consistent with the 

existing maximized retention fishery. 

Under current practices in the 

maximized retention Pacific whiting 

fisheries, some minor amounts of 

operational discard are allowed. Under 

trawl rationalization, any minor 

operational amounts of discard would 

be estimated by the observer and 

deducted from allocations. NMFS has 

modified the final rule language in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program to be 

consistent with the MS Coop Program 

language on maximized retention which 

allows minor operational amounts of 

discard which are estimated by the 

observer. See the section on ‘‘Changes 

from the Proposed Rule.’’ 

Comment 48. One commenter 

disagreed with the requirement that a 

vessel fish in a single management area 

during a single trip. The commenter 

stated that with 100 percent observer 

coverage, observer access to vessel 

location, all catch recorded, and—in the 

future—electronic logbooks, there is no 

need to restrict a vessel’s operation by 

restricting them to a single management 

area per trip. 

Response. Several IFQ species are 

either a single species with different QS 

by area; or are a single species in one 

area and a component of an assemblage, 

such as minor shelf rockfish or minor 

slope rockfish, in another. For instance, 

QS for sablefish is issued with area 

distinctions either north or south of 

36° N. lat. Likewise, QS for shortspine 

thornyhead is issued with area 

distinctions either north or south of 

34°27′ N. lat. One example of an IFQ 

species would be yellowtail rockfish, 

which is an individual IFQ species 

north of 40°10′, but a component of the 

minor shelf rockfish species complex 

south of 40°10′. Similar distinctions 

exist for bocaccio rockfish, chilipepper 

rockfish, cowcod, Pacific ocean perch, 

and splitnose rockfish. 

Discards will be accounted for at the 

tow level, with 100 percent observer 

coverage and haul locations. However, 

not all retained catch will be estimated 

by observers. Landed catch, therefore, 

would not be attributable to the 

appropriate management area if a vessel 

were to fish in multiple management 

areas in one trip. For example, if a 

vessel were to catch sablefish both 

North and South of 36° in the same trip, 

it would not be possible for an IFQ first 

receiver to sort or for the catch monitor 

to verify how much sablefish was 

caught in either area in order to enter on 

the electronic fish ticket the appropriate 

amount for sablefish north of 36° N. lat. 

versus sablefish south of 36° N. lat. Nor 

would it be possible for NMFS to 

determine how much QP should be 

subtracted from the vessel account for 

their QP of each IFQ species. 

NMFS raised this concern with the 

Council in its March 2010 meeting. 

Because landings are a mix of all hauls 

taken during a single trip, NMFS 

indicated its intent to implement this 

provision in order to simplify sorting 

requirements, at-sea observation, and 

enforcement of IFQ limits. NMFS 

considers this approach to be the most 

straightforward and efficient method to 

track and verify total catch of a vessel’s 

IFQ limits for individual species and 

rockfish complexes. Therefore, the 

Council deemed, and NMFS has 

implemented, the requirement in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program for a vessel to 

fish in a single management area during 

a trip. 

Comment 49. One commenter 

requested clarification on the provision 

that allows a vessel to deliver a load of 

fish to more than one first receiver and 

how that relates to the requirement that 

all fish be offloaded once an offload has 

begun. 

Response. A vessel may make more 

than one delivery as part of the same 

landing. Current regulations at § 660.11 

define land or landing as ‘‘to begin 

transfer of fish, offloading fish, or to 

offload fish from any vessel[;] Once 

transfer of fish begins, all fish aboard 

the vessel are counted as part of the 

landing.’’ This definition does not 

prohibit a landing from being offloaded 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78358 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

through more than one delivery; 

however, all fish aboard a vessel at the 

start of the first transfer are considered 

part of the same landing. Current 

regulations at § 660.12(e)(5) prohibit 

vessels from landing fish without 

observer coverage when a vessel is 

required to carry an observer. The 

proposed regulations at 

§§ 660.112(b)(1)(xiii) and 660.140(h)(1) 

clarify that observer coverage 

requirements under the Shorebased IFQ 

Program include having an observer 

onboard during a trip until such time 

that all fish from that trip have been 

offloaded. Observers must also be 

onboard the vessel during transit from 

one delivery site to another. Section 

660.60(h)(2) reiterates the definition of a 

landing at § 660.12, and clarifies that 

not only are all fish aboard the vessel at 

the time offloading begins counted as 

part of the same landing, but also that 

they would be required to be reported 

as such. Section 660.60(h)(2) of the 

proposed rule would also prohibit 

catcher vessels in the mothership sector 

from setting the gear for a subsequent 

haul; however, the regulations did not 

specify that all fish from an IFQ landing 

would need to be completed before a 

new fishing trip begins. NMFS 

appreciates the comment pointing to 

this discrepancy in the regulations, and 

accordingly is including additional 

regulatory language to clarify that an 

IFQ landing would need to be offloaded 

prior to starting a new fishing trip. See 

the section on ‘‘Changes from the 

Proposed Rule’’ for specific regulatory 

citations. 

Comment 50. One commenter 

requested clarification on the printed 

record requirement for scales at first 

receivers as stated at § 660.140(j)(2)(i) 

and (ii). The commenter stated that one 

paragraph exempted scales used for 

bulk weighing from the printed record 

requirement while the other paragraph 

limits the exemption based on the 

purchasing record of the first receiver 

and other factors having nothing to do 

with bulk weighing. 

Response. The commenter appears to 

have misread the exemption. Scales 

NOT designed for bulk weighing may be 

exempted from all or part of the printed 

record requirements (i.e. platform 

scales). The second paragraph 

referenced outlines the conditions that 

are required to obtain the exemption. 

Based on comments received from 

industry during public workshops, 

including comments about the costs for 

small business that do not accept large 

volumes of fish, NMFS considered a 

specific standard for this exemption as 

appropriate. The requirement for a 

printed record is to assist the catch 

monitor in independently monitoring 

the sorting and weighing processes and 

ensuring catch accountability. 

Monitoring may be conducted 

effectively at facilities that accept small 

volumes of catch, without the need for 

a printed record from non-bulk 

weighing scales, pending the first 

receiver ensuring that all catch is 

weighed and that independent 

verification of the weights are possible. 

Comment 51. One commenter 

suggested that the responsibilities of the 

first receiver site license should go to 

the ‘‘holder’’ of the license rather than 

the owner of the first receiver company 

because the holder could be an 

individual other than an owner and 

restrictions on the license is a primary 

enforcement tool. 

Response. NMFS agrees with the 

comment. NMFS is revising the final 

rule at § 660.140(j)(2)(i) and (j)(3) to 

change the regulations from ‘‘the owner 

of an IFQ first receiver must* * * ’’ to 

‘‘the IFQ first receiver must* * *. ’’ ‘‘IFQ 

first receivers’’ are defined in the 

October 31st final rule (75 FR 60868) at 

§ 660.111 as ‘‘persons who first receive, 

purchase, or take custody, control, or 

possession of catch onshore directly 

from a vessel that harvested the catch 

while fishing under the Shorebased IFQ 

Program described at § 660.140, subpart 

D.’’ For the first receiver site license 

owner, the term ‘‘license owner’’ is 

defined at § 660.11 as ‘‘a person who is 

the owner of record with NMFS, SFD, 

Permits Office of a License issued under 

§ 660.140, subpart D’’ and is crossreferenced from the ‘‘permit owner’’ 

definition. See the section on ‘‘Changes 

from the Proposed Rule’’ for specific 

regulatory citations. 

Comments on At-Sea Whiting Programs 

(Mothership or Catcher/Processor) 

Comment 52. One commenter stated 

that transfers of MS/CV endorsed 

permits should be effective immediately 

rather than at the start of the next 

cumulative limit period because 

2-month cumulative trip limits do not 

apply to the at-sea fishery. Another 

commenter agreed with NMFS’ 

statement in the proposed rule that 

transfers of MS permits and C/Pendorsed limited entry permits would 

be effective immediately upon 

reissuance to the new vessel because 

neither of these permits would be 

affected by trip limits. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

specifically requested comment on the 

effective date for an MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit’s second transfer 

within the same year. At the September 

2010 Council meeting and in the 

Council’s letter of public comment on 

the August 31st proposed rule, the 

Council stated that the second transfer 

of an MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

permit should be effective immediately 

because trip limits will not apply to the 

at-sea sectors (MS or C/P) in 2011 and 

2012. NMFS agrees with the Council’s 

recommendation and revised the 

regulations in this final rule to reflect 

that. See the section on ‘‘Changes from 

the Proposed Rule’’ for specific 

regulatory citations. NMFS also agrees 

with the second commenter who 

reaffirmed NMFS regulations in the 

proposed rule that transfers of MS 

permits and C/P-endorsed limited entry 

permits would be effective immediately 

because they are not subject to trip 

limits. 

Comment 53. Some commenters 

stated that there is no need for the 

regulations on the at-sea sector donation 

program (which allows amounts over 

retention limits to be donated instead of 

discarded) because there are no 2-month 

cumulative trip limits in the at-sea 

fishery. 

Response. In the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380), NMFS 

specifically requested comment on the 

implications of removing or retaining 

the at-sea sector donation program and 

requested suggested language revisions. 

The at-sea sector donation program, 

called the ‘‘bycatch reduction and full 

utilization program for at-sea 

processors’’ in regulation, was 

previously established to allow vessels 

harvesting unsorted catch to retain and 

donate amounts of groundfish that were 

in excess of trip limits. At the 

September 2010 Council meeting, the 

Council clarified that the at-sea sector 

regulations should not require vessels to 

be subject to trip limits for bycatch of 

non-whiting groundfish species. In 

addition to public comment from the 

Council, another commenter supported 

this conclusion and both recommended 

that the donation program is no longer 

necessary. NMFS agrees with this 

conclusion and has removed the at-sea 

donation program from the regulations 

in this final rule. See the section on 

‘‘Changes from the Proposed Rule’’ for 

specific regulatory citations. 

In reviewing regulations that may no 

longer be necessary because of changes 

in the trip limit requirements for the atsea fishery, NMFS also notes that there 

may be regulations that are no longer 

necessary or need revisions because of 

changes in the trip limit requirements 

for the Shorebased IFQ Program. For the 

2011–2012 groundfish harvest 

specifications and management 

measures, the Council has 

recommended trip limits only for nonVerDate Mar<15>2010 20:38 Dec 14, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\15DER2.SGM 15DER2

emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78359 

IFQ species. The trawl fishery crossover 

provision regulations, specified in the 

October 1st final rule at § 660.120, list 

requirements for handling trip limits 

when a vessel crosses over a 

management area within a 2-month 

cumulative trip limit period. However, 

all of the species listed in this section 

of the regulations are now IFQ species 

that are no longer subject to 2-month 

cumulative trip limits. NMFS intends to 

revisit these regulations through a future 

action to determine if they should be 

removed altogether or revised with new 

species or based on changing 

management concerns. 

Comment 54. One commenter asked 

for clarification on whether discarding 

of non-whiting species would be 

required in the absence of 2-month 

cumulative trip limits in the at-sea 

fishery. 

Response. The regulations for at-sea 

coop programs would not require 

discarding of non-whiting groundfish 

species in the absence of 2-month 

cumulative trip limits. Allocations of 

non-whiting species to the at-sea sectors 

are specified at § 660.150(c) for the MS 

Coop Program and at § 660.160(c) for the 

C/P Coop Program, including 

allocations for some overfished nonwhiting groundfish species at risk of 

being caught with Pacific whiting, setasides for other non-whiting groundfish 

species less likely to be caught in 

whiting fisheries, and no allocation or 

set-aside for species not expected to be 

caught in whiting fisheries. Over time, 

the Council may revisit these 

allocations, set-asides (or lack thereof), 

and trip limits if catch of non-whiting 

groundfish species increases in the atsea sectors. 

Comment 55. One commenter agreed 

with NMFS’ interpretation of the 

processor obligation for the MS Coop 

Program where the MS/CV-endorsed 

permit’s catch history assignment is 

obligated to an MS permit for the year. 

The commenter also agreed with the 

timing of the declaration in regulations 

which is reported to NMFS through the 

annual MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

trawl permit renewal and again through 

the MS Coop permit application. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

Comment 56. One commenter asked 

for clarification about items applicable 

to the MS Coop Program that NMFS 

disapproved in Amendment 20, as 

stated in the preamble to the August 

31st proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

53396), and whether they should apply 

to the C/P Coop Program. In particular, 

the commenter questioned the 

requirement for coop agreements to be 

submitted to the Council and available 

for public review before the coop is 

authorized to go fishing, and the 

requirement to submit a letter to the 

Department of Justice and provide a 

copy to NMFS. 

Response. On August 9, 2010, NMFS 

made its decision to partially approve 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP. The 

preamble to the October 1st final rule 

(75 FR 60868) discussed the partial 

approval of Amendments 20 and 21. 

The August 31st proposed rule (75 FR 

53380) for the additional program 

components, developed by NMFS and 

deemed by the Council prior to NMFS’ 

partial approval of the amendments, 

contained several provisions that NMFS 

subsequently disapproved. The 

commenter correctly noted that the 

preamble to the August 31st proposed 

rule (75 FR 53380, 53396) described 

disapproval of items applicable to the 

MS Coop Program, but did not specify 

whether similar provisions should 

apply to the C/P Coop Program. The 

similar provisions applicable to the 

C/P Coop Program were not specifically 

contained in Amendment 20 to the FMP 

and thus were not specifically 

disapproved by NMFS’ decision on the 

Amendments; however, they had been 

deemed by the Council as necessary and 

appropriate in the regulations for the 

implementation of the program. NMFS 

has considered the issue in light of the 

disapproval of provisions of 

Amendment 20 applicable to the MS 

Coop Program, and believes the reasons 

for disapproval apply equally to the 

C/P Coop Program. Accordingly, with 

this final rule, NMFS is removing the 

requirement that the C/P coop file a 

coop contract with the Council and 

make it available for public review and 

the requirement that the C/P coop file a 

letter from the Department of Justice 

and provide a copy to NMFS. See the 

section on ‘‘Changes from the Proposed 

Rule’’ for specific regulatory citations. 

Items NMFS Requested Comment on in 

the Proposed Rule 

In addition to the comments received 

above, NMFS specifically requested 

comment on several items in the 

proposed rule. NMFS received 

comments on some but not all of those 

items. Where NMFS has made changes 

to the proposed rule where comments 

were specifically requested, these 

specific requests are identified in the 

section on ‘‘Changes from the Proposed 

Rule.’’ 

Changes From the Proposed Rule 

A. All Trawl Programs 

I. Changes To Reflect Recent NMFS 

Actions 

Some changes are made in this final 

rule to update the regulations to reflect 

actions that have been implemented at 

50 CFR part 660 since the proposed rule 

(75 FR 53380, August 31, 2010) was 

published. The regulations in this final 

rule were reviewed and revised to 

reflect changes implemented in the final 

rule published on October 1, 2010 (75 

FR 60868), called the ‘‘initial issuance’’ 

final rule. For example, 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(iv)(A) was revised to 

include the language from the final rule 

regarding the restriction on changes in 

permit ownership during application 

period. 

II. Changes Due to Partial Disapproval of 

Amendment 20 

On August 9, 2010, NMFS made its 

decision to partially approve 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP. The 

preamble to the final rule (75 FR 60868, 

October 1, 2010) discussed the partial 

approval of Amendments 20 and 21. 

The proposed rule (75 FR 53380, August 

31, 2010), which was developed by 

NMFS and deemed necessary by the 

Council prior to NMFS’ partial approval 

of the amendments, contained several 

provisions in the MS Coop Program and 

C/P Coop Program that NMFS 

subsequently disapproved. Public 

comment on the proposed rule 

requested clarification whether the 

items that were disapproved only 

affected the MS Coop Program, or 

whether similar provisions applicable to 

the C/P Coop Program would also be 

revised. The similar provisions 

applicable to the C/P Coop Program 

were not specifically contained in 

Amendment 20 to the FMP, however, 

they had been deemed by the Council as 

necessary and appropriate for the 

implementation of the program. NMFS 

has considered the issue in light of the 

disapproval of provisions of 

Amendment 20 applicable to the MS 

Coop Program, and believes the reasons 

for disapproval apply equally to the 

C/P Coop Program. Accordingly, with 

this final rule, NMFS is removing or 

revising regulatory language for three 

provisions based on the partial 

disapproval of Amendment 20: (1) The 

requirement that MS coops or the C/P 

coop file a coop contract with the 

Council and to make it available for 

public review [it must still be filed with 

NMFS]; (2) the requirement that MS 

coops or the C/P coop file a letter from 

the Department of Justice; and (3) the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78360 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

requirement that MS coop agreements 

include a clause that at least a majority 

of the members are required to dissolve 

the coop. 

The first provision stated: ‘‘Signed 

copies of the coop agreement must be 

submitted to NMFS and the Council and 

available for public review before the 

coop is authorized to engage in fishing 

activities.’’ NMFS disapproved of the 

requirement to submit agreements to the 

Council and for public review because 

not only would it be impracticable given 

the timing for public review, but also 

could violate restrictions on the 

disclosure of confidential information 

under the MSA. Accordingly, NMFS is 

revising this provision in the final rule 

for both the MS Coop Program 

(§ 660.150 (d)(1)(iii)(A)) and the C/P 

Coop Program (§ 660.160 (d)(1)(iii)(A)) 

to state: ‘‘Signed copies of the coop 

agreement must be submitted to NMFS 

before the coop is authorized to engage 

in fishing activities.’’ The second 

provision would have required coops to 

submit a letter to the Department of 

Justice requesting a business review 

letter on the fishery coop, and to submit 

copies of all such correspondence with 

a coop permit application. NMFS 

disapproved this provision because 

compliance with antitrust laws is a 

separate and distinct obligation of each 

and every participant and does not need 

to be a requirement specified in the 

FMP. Accordingly, NMFS is removing 

this provision entirely in the final rule 

for both the MS Coop Program (from 

§ 660.150 (d)(1)(iii)(A)(2)) and the C/P 

Coop Program (from § 660.160 

(d)(1)(iii)(A)(2)). The third provision 

would have required coop agreements 

in the MS Coop Program to include ‘‘A 

requirement that agreement by at least a 

majority of the members is required to 

dissolve the coop.’’ NMFS disapproved 

this provision because it would interfere 

with private parties’ ability to contract 

and agree to the terms of dissolution 

that are appropriate for their coop. 

Accordingly, NMFS is removing this 

provision in the final rule for the MS 

Coop Program from § 660.150 

(d)(1)(iii)(A)(1). 

III. Observer and Catch Monitor 

Programs 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on two alternatives 

to the conflict of interest provisions of 

the observer and catch monitor 

regulations. Alternative 1 (Councildeemed) represented the more narrow 

interpretation of the conflict of interest 

regulations recommended and deemed 

by the Council. As mentioned in the 

preamble to the proposed rule, NMFS 

had concerns that the Council’s 

recommended regulatory language was 

not consistent with national policy, 

with conflict of interest regulations for 

other sectors of the groundfish fishery, 

or with regulations for other NMFS 

programs. Therefore, NMFS proposed to 

implement Alternative 2 (NMFSproposed) using its authority under 

section 305(d) of the MSA to publish 

language in the final rule that differs 

from what was deemed by the Council. 

The Council discussed this issue further 

at their September 2010 meeting and 

submitted public comment on the 

proposed rule supporting Alternative 2 

(NMFS-proposed) (see Comment 18). 

With this final rule, NMFS is 

implementing the conflict of interest 

regulations from Alternative 2 (NMFSproposed) in the proposed rule for the 

observer programs 

(§§ 660.140(h)(6)(vii)), 660.150(j)(6)(vii), 

and 660.160(g)(6)(i)(G)) and for the 

catch monitor program (§ 660.18(c)). 

In this final rule, NMFS has further 

clarified a provision at 

§ 660.112(b)(1)(xiii), Trawl fishery— 

prohibitions, to make it clear that 

observer coverage must continue until 

all IFQ species from the trip are 

offloaded, regardless of whether the fish 

is delivered to one or multiple IFQ first 

receiver(s). Once all IFQ species from 

the trip are offloaded, the observer will 

inspect the hold to verify that all IFQ 

species have been offloaded, completing 

that trip. In addition, new prohibitions 

have been added to § 660.12, General 

groundfish prohibitions, at paragraphs 

(e)(9) and (f)(9) to make it clear that it 

is prohibited to fail to meet observer 

provider and catch monitor provider 

responsibilities. 

Also in this final rule, NMFS has 

further clarified provisions in the 

observer program regulations on the 

effective date of a decertification. The 

following sentence has been added to 

regulations at §§ 660.140(h)(6)(ix)(C), 

660.150(j)(6)(ix)(C), 

660.160(g)(6)(i)(I)(3), ‘‘Decertification is 

effective 30 calendar days after the date 

on the IAD, unless there is an appeal.’’ 

Language for the observer and catch 

monitor regulations at §§ 660.18, 

660.140(h), 660.150(j), and 660.160(g) 

have also been revised to make the 

language on the IAD and appeals more 

consistent between these sections and 

with the IAD and appeals language for 

the trawl rationalization permits and 

endorsements. Language in these 

sections has also been revised to make 

them as consistent with each other as 

appropriate. 

With this final rule, language at 

§ 660.17, Catch monitors and catch 

monitor providers, and at § 660.18, 

Certification and decertification 

procedures for catch monitors and catch 

monitor providers, was revised in some 

places to replace the terms ‘‘processor’’ 

or ‘‘processing facility’’ with ‘‘first 

receiver.’’ Language in these sections has 

also been revised to make them as 

consistent as possible with similar 

provisions for the observer program at 

§§ 660.140(h), 660.150(j), and 

660.160(g). New language was added to 

the catch monitor provider 

responsibilities at § 660.17(e)(1)(vii) 

consistent with similar requirements for 

the observer program to include 

additional specifications for the health 

and fitness exams of catch monitors, 

including a certificate of insurance. In 

§ 660.17(e)(1)(ix) regarding priority 

given to candidates that prove their 

knowledge of West Coast marine 

species, ability to communicate in 

writing, etc. was deleted from this final 

rule because it is not necessary to 

specify in regulation. Also consistent 

with the observer program 

requirements, a new paragraph was 

added to the catch monitor provider 

responsibilities at § 660.17(e)(14) to 

include information on catch monitor 

training certificate, annual briefing 

requirement, and validity of the 

certificate. 

With this final rule, a sentence was 

deleted from § 660.140(i)(2) that stated, 

‘‘IFQ first receivers are responsible for 

all associated costs including training 

time, debriefing time, and lodging while 

deployed.’’ This sentence was deleted 

because this is a requirement of the 

catch monitor provider. The contract 

between the catch monitor provider and 

the first receiver will determine the cost 

paid for catch monitor services. 

Based on public comment received 

(see Comment 23), NMFS is removing 

regulations regarding telephone access 

while processing whiting 

(§ 660.140(i)(4)(iv) of the August 31st 

proposed rule) because they are no 

longer necessary. 

IV. Initial Issuance Appeals Deadline 

NMFS has decided to extend the 

deadline to appeal an IAD for the initial 

issuance of the following permits and 

endorsements: QS permit and associated 

QS and/or IBQ, MS permit, MS/CV 

endorsement and associated catch 

history assignment, and C/P 

endorsement. Upon further 

consideration, NMFS is extending the 

deadline published in the October 1st 

final rule (75 FR 60868) from 30 

calendar days to 60 calendar days. 

NMFS believes this extension of time is 

warranted given the time of year in 

which NMFS anticipates sending out 

IADs and the potential difficulties in 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78361 

meeting a 30 day deadline due to 

holidays, with corresponding reduced 

staffing, increased administrative 

burdens, and potential postal delays. 

Additionally, the extension provides 

applicants more time to gather 

documentation in support of any appeal 

that applicants may wish to make. The 

regulations at §§ 660.25(g)(4), 

660.140(d)(8)(ix), 660.150(f)(6)(vi) and 

(g)(6)(viii), and 660.160(e)(6)(vii) are 

revised to reflect the 60 calendar day 

deadline to appeal an IAD. 

V. Minor Edits 

NMFS has made some minor edits to 

the regulations to make terminology 

more consistent (e.g., references to 

shorebased IFQ fishery are edited to 

read Shorebased IFQ Program) and to 

correct typographical errors and 

technical errors (e.g., capitalize 

Shorebased IFQ Program; use ‘‘an’’ 

before MS permit and MS/CV-endorsed 

permit; and add a hyphen to ‘‘MS/CVendorsed’’ and ‘‘C/P-endorsed’’). In 

addition, in § 660.25(b)(4) regarding 

limited entry permits, NMFS has 

replaced the term ‘‘transfer’’ with 

‘‘change in vessel registration’’ as 

appropriate to distinguish such transfers 

from changes in permit ownership. To 

the extent that ‘‘transfer’’ may be used in 

other sections where a similar confusion 

may arise, NMFS intends to clarify the 

term as appropriate in future 

rulemakings. 

B. Shorebased IFQ Program 

I. General 

Some general changes are made to 

regulatory language in this final rule. 

Similar to what was implemented with 

the ‘‘initial issuance’’ final rule (75 FR 

60868, October 1, 2010), where 

appropriate, the terms ‘‘QS’’ and ‘‘QP’’ 

have been revised to read ‘‘QS and IBQ’’ 

and ‘‘QP or IBQ pounds,’’ respectively. 

Pacific halibut is listed as an IFQ 

species. Pacific halibut, however, has an 

individual bycatch quota (IBQ) which is 

distinct from QS for groundfish species 

listed under the groundfish FMP. This 

change is to make it clear that Pacific 

halibut IBQ and IBQ pounds are distinct 

and may be managed differently than 

QS or QP. 

II. Maximized Retention in the Pacific 

Whiting IFQ Fishery 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on any implications 

that the prohibition on discarding may 

have on the prosecution of a maximized 

retention fishery, and further requested 

comment on what should constitute 

discarding under this provision of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. NMFS 

received two comments on this issue, 

both of which stated that the maximized 

retention provision in the Shorebased 

IFQ Program should be consistent with 

the existing maximized retention 

fishery, where some discards are 

allowed for operational and safety 

reasons, but those discards are 

estimated by an observer (see Comment 

47). Under current practices in the 

maximized retention Pacific whiting 

fisheries, some minor amounts of 

operational discard are allowed. Under 

trawl rationalization, any minor 

operational amounts of discard would 

be estimated by the observer and 

deducted from allocations. NMFS raised 

this issue at the Council’s March 2010 

meeting for the maximized retention 

fishery in the mothership sector 

(Agenda Item E.6.b, NMFS Report 1, 

March 2010, #25). For the Shorebased 

IFQ Program, however, the Council 

motion was ambiguous. In the proposed 

rule, NMFS proposed regulations 

consistent with the Council motion, but 

not consistent with current practice nor 

with regulations for the MS Coop 

Program. With this final rule and based 

on public comment, NMFS is revising 

the language at § 660.140(g)(2) to be 

consistent with the MS Coop Program 

language at § 660.150(i). The revised 

language reads, ‘‘Maximized retention 

vessels participating in the Pacific 

whiting IFQ fishery may discard minor 

operational amounts of catch at sea if 

the observer has accounted for the 

discard (i.e., a maximized retention 

fishery).’’ In addition, the prohibition on 

discarding IFQ species at 

§ 660.112(b)(1)(xiv) is revised to clarify 

that it is prohibited to discard IFQ 

species at sea unless that discard has 

been documented or estimated by an 

observer. 

III. Weight Limits and Conversions 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on the actual values 

and implications of the proposed 

conversion factors. NMFS received 

multiple comments on this issue (see 

Comment 42). Based on the September 

2010 Council meeting and on public 

comment received, the regulations at 

§ 660.60(h)(5) have been revised in this 

final rule to make sablefish, lingcod, 

and Pacific whiting consistent with the 

values from ODFW (with some 

exceptions, described below) and to 

clarify that Federal regulations do not 

supersede more restrictive state 

regulations on landings requirements for 

the species or condition that fish may be 

landed. There will not be a Federal 

conversion factor for filleted Pacific 

whiting, for winged skates, or for glazed 

sablefish because processing of 

groundfish is prohibited at-sea by 

vessels in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

at § 660.112(b)(1)(xii), with narrow 

exceptions, inapplicable here. In 

addition, skates are not an IFQ species 

and so are not appropriate to be 

included. The value from ODFW for 

lingcod of 1.1 uses the term ‘‘gilled and 

gutted’’ which is equivalent to ‘‘gutted 

with the head on’’ in Federal 

regulations. The values for other 

groundfish species will remain as 

previously specified in the August 31st 

proposed rule. The conversion factors 

implemented through this final rule are 

based on the best available scientific 

information and may change in a future 

rulemaking based on improved science. 

In this final rule, NMFS is also 

revising regulations at § 660.113(b)(4)(i) 

on recordkeeping and reporting for 

electronic fish tickets in the Shorebased 

IFQ Program. In making the revisions to 

the weight limit and conversions 

regulations and in response to public 

comment (see Comment 43), NMFS 

reviewed the required information for 

electronic fish tickets. NMFS is 

developing an electronic fish ticket 

system where weight limit conversion 

factor will be automated and applied 

once the data is input in the data 

system. Accordingly, the required 

information that IFQ first receivers must 

provide on electronic fish tickets is 

being revised in this final rule to require 

the actual weight and condition of 

species landed, rather than the round 

weight. NMFS is also requiring the 

vessel account number to be reported on 

the electronic fish ticket to accurately 

track landed catch to a specific vessel 

account. 

IV. Landing Groundfish in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program 

NMFS received public comment 

requesting clarification of the provision 

that allows a vessel to deliver a load of 

fish to more than one first receiver and 

how that relates to the requirement that 

all fish be offloaded once an offload has 

begun (see Comment 49). Based on the 

public comment received, NMFS is 

further clarifying this provision in the 

final rule at § 660.60(h)(2) and is adding 

a prohibition at § 660.112(b)(1)(xv). 

These changes will clarify that a vessel 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program may not begin a new fishing 

trip until all fish aboard the vessel have 

been offloaded. 

V. IFQ Species and Species Groupings 

The regulations at § 660.140(c)(1), as 

specified in the initial issuance final 

rule (75 FR 60868, October 1, 2010), list 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78362 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

the IFQ species/species groups and area 

specific designations for those species. 

Those regulations also state that the IFQ 

species groupings and area subdivisions 

will be those for which OYs are 

specified in the ABC/OY tables, and 

those for which there is an area-specific 

precautionary harvest policy. Upon 

further review, NMFS determined that 

the IFQ species list published in the 

initial issuance final rule did not match 

the ABC/OY table, in particular with 

regards to area designations for those 

species. The description of IFQ species 

in this section needs to be clarified in 

order for the reallocation provisions 

(§ 660.140(c)(3)(vii)) to be applied in the 

future. This final rule clarifies the area 

designations at § 660.140(c)(1) for the 

following IFQ species: Pacific ocean 

perch (north of 40°10′ N. lat.), 

chilipepper rockfish (south of 40°10′ N. 

lat.), bocaccio (south of 40°10′ N. lat.), 

splitnose rockfish (south of 40°10′ N. 

lat.), yellowtail rockfish (north of 40°10′ 

N. lat.), cowcod (south of 40°10′ N. lat.), 

minor shelf rockfish complex north (of 

40°10′ N. lat.), minor shelf rockfish 

complex south (of 40°10′ N. lat.), minor 

slope rockfish complex north (of 40°10′ 

N. lat.), and minor slope rockfish 

complex south (of 40°10′ N. lat.). 

Similarly, language is revised to reflect 

these area designations in the tables at 

§ 660.140(d)(4)(i)(C) on the QS and IBQ 

control limits and at § 660.140(e)(4)(i) 

on the vessel limits. 

In addition, NMFS is clarifying 

regulations at § 660.140(c)(1) in this 

final rule to reference the definition of 

‘‘Groundfish’’ at § 660.11 for the list of 

which individual groundfish species are 

included in the minor shelf complex 

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

minor slope complex north and south 

40°10′ N. lat., and in the other flatfish 

complex. 

VI. QS Accounts and Vessel Accounts 

With this final rule, NMFS has 

expanded the description of the 

operation of QS accounts and vessel 

accounts. NMFS has further clarified 

regulations to require designated 

account managers for both QS accounts 

and vessel accounts; to prohibit QP and 

IBQ pound transfers between vessel 

accounts from December 15 through 31 

each year in order to allow NMFS to 

reconcile accounts; and to clarify that 

once a QS account transaction or vessel 

account transaction has been accepted 

by the transferee, the transaction will be 

considered final and permanent. In 

addition to these more substantive 

changes which are further described 

below, NMFS has made some minor 

changes to these regulations to make the 

QS account regulations and vessel 

account regulations more consistent 

with each other. For example, 

information on the type of computer 

access necessary to use the vessel 

account has been added to the 

regulations at § 660.140(e), consistent 

with the regulations for the QS account. 

The proposed rule generally described 

QS accounts and vessel accounts that 

NMFS will use to manage QS and IBQ, 

and QP and IBQ pounds, respectively. 

The final rule expands upon this 

description, providing further detail of 

how the QS accounts and vessel 

accounts will operate. The revised 

paragraph describes how NMFS will 

manage QS accounts and vessel 

accounts, particularly with regards to 

how NMFS will issue QP and IBQ 

pounds each year, how NMFS will 

adjust QS and IBQ amounts if and when 

necessary, and the mechanics for 

operation of these accounts. 

Additionally, NMFS has clarified how 

the operation of online access to these 

accounts will function, particularly in 

regard to transfers between accounts. 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010), the vessel account 

regulations (§ 660.140(e)) specified an 

account manager, but the same 

requirement was not specified under the 

QS account regulations 

(§ 660.140(d)(3)). A designated account 

manager is necessary for either a QS 

account or a vessel account in order to 

manage the account activity in cases 

where the account owner is a business 

(individuals may name themselves as an 

account manager). Without a designated 

account manager when the account 

owner is a business, sensitive 

information (e.g., notices of account 

activity or the personal identification 

number (PIN) or password) may not get 

directed to the proper person. The 

designated account manager would be 

identified to NMFS through the QS 

permit or vessel account renewal 

process (except that for the 2011 fishery, 

the designated QS account manager may 

be requested by NMFS through a 

separate process because this 

information was not included on the 

initial issuance applications for QS 

permits). The designated account 

manager’s contact information, such as 

phone number and email, would be 

requested. Their email address, while 

optional, provides the most flexibility 

and quickest resource for disseminating 

information. The designated account 

manager is an extension of what NMFS 

brought forward at the June 2010 

Council meeting (Agenda Item B.6.b, 

Supplemental NMFS Report 3, June 

2010, #10) which stated that NMFS 

would issue a unique ID and PIN to 

account owners. If the account owner is 

not a business but is an individual 

person, the account owner would be the 

designated account manager. Because of 

the sensitive nature of this information 

and because account owners may be 

businesses, NMFS is revising language 

in this final rule to identify designated 

account managers and their contact 

information for QS accounts and for 

vessel accounts. 

There may be times when transactions 

in QS accounts and vessel accounts may 

need to be prohibited. As stated in the 

August 31st proposed rule for both 

types of accounts, ‘‘during the year there 

may be situations where NMFS deems 

it necessary to prohibit transfers (i.e., 

account reconciliation, system 

maintenance, or for emergency fishery 

management reasons).’’ In addition, the 

August 31st proposed rule stated that, 

for QS accounts, transactions are 

prohibited between December 1 and 

December 31 each year. This prohibition 

is intended to provide time for the QS 

account to remain stable for a period of 

time prior to the start of the next fishing 

year so that NMFS can issue the 

corresponding QP and IBQ pounds in to 

the QS account (see Council’s June 2010 

meeting, Agenda Item B.6.b, 

Supplemental NMFS Report 3, #9). 

Upon further consideration and as the 

logical extension of what was proposed, 

NMFS has determined to apply a similar 

requirement to vessel accounts as that 

proposed for QS accounts. For vessel 

accounts, this prohibition is intended to 

allow time for the vessel account to 

remain stable in order to calculate any 

carryover provisions that would be 

applicable for the next fishing year. 

However, QP and IBQ pounds in vessel 

accounts need to be available as late as 

possible in the year to provide 

flexibility to fishermen fishing later in 

the year and to allow vessel account 

owners to cover deficits. Therefore, for 

vessel accounts, NMFS has adopted a 

shorter time for the agency to reconcile 

the account, approximately two weeks. 

With this final rule, regulations at 

§ 660.140(e) have been revised to 

prohibit QP and IBQ pound transfers 

between vessel accounts from December 

15 through 31 each year. This provision 

may be reviewed and revised through a 

future rulemaking based on experience 

during the first years of the program. 

NMFS has clarified in this final rule 

at § 660.140(d)(3) and (e) that 

transactions in QS accounts or vessel 

accounts are final and permanent once 

the transaction is accepted by both 

parties. NMFS will not review or undo 

these transactions once they are 

accepted by both parties. If one of the 

parties feels the transaction was for the 

wrong amount, they would need to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78363 

resolve any dispute over the transaction 

on their own independently of NMFS, 

and if an adjustment is needed to 

resolve the dispute, would need to 

conduct another transfer. NMFS will 

only review transactions if an error is 

identified with NMFS’ online system. 

VII. Transfers of QS and/or IBQ 

The proposed rule would prohibit 

transfer of QS or IBQ in the first two 

years of the program except under U.S. 

court order as approved by NMFS. 

NMFS recognizes, however, that there 

may be some circumstances where a 

court may authorize the distribution of 

assets, including QS or IBQ, without a 

specific court order. Such a 

circumstance may arise as a result of 

death or dissolution of a QS owner, 

such as in probate or in a bankruptcy 

action. Based on public comment 

received, the regulations at 

§ 660.140(d)(3)(ii)(B)(1) have been 

revised in this final rule to allow QS 

and IBQ transfers during the first two 

years of the program under a U.S court 

order or authorization, to accommodate 

such circumstances (see Comment 29). 

Such transfers would still be subject to 

NMFS’ approval, including a 

determination of the transferee’s 

eligibility to own QS and a 

determination that the transferee’s 

ownership interest would not exceed 

applicable control limits (see Comment 

30). 

VIII. Eligibility To Own a QS Permit 

The August 31st proposed rule (75 FR 

53380) included language that states 

that eligibility to own and control a U.S. 

fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 

12113 is required for U.S. citizens, 

permanent resident aliens, and for 

corporations, partnerships, or other 

entities, in order to be eligible to own 

a QS permit. However, application of 

Title 46 of the U.S. Code to U.S. citizens 

or permanent resident aliens in this 

context is confusing. Under 46 U.S.C. 

12113, all U.S. citizens are 

automatically eligible to own and 

control a U.S. fishing vessel with a 

fishery endorsement, thus the additional 

language is redundant. Also, under 46 

U.S.C. 12113, all permanent resident 

aliens are ineligible to own and control 

a U.S. fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement, thus the additional 

language appears to effectively bar 

permanent resident aliens from owning 

a QS permit. In this final rule, NMFS 

has retained the language deemed by the 

Council in the proposed rule. However, 

NMFS will continue to assess this issue, 

and if appropriate, may request further 

consideration by the Council. 

IX. Carryover Provision 

In the proposed rule, NMFS included 

a provision that would allow a vessel 

owner to cover a deficit in the vessel 

account with QP from the following 

year if the deficit is within the carryover 

limit and the vessel declares out of the 

IFQ fishery for the remainder of the year 

prior to the 30-day deadline by which 

a deficit would otherwise be required to 

be covered. The declaration by the 

vessel owner that the vessel opts out of 

the IFQ fishery for the remainder of the 

year would notify NMFS enforcement in 

order to delay opening an investigation 

for failure to cover the deficit within 30 

days. The proposed regulation, 

however, did not specify how the vessel 

owner would be able to declare out of 

the fishery. In this final rule, NMFS has 

specified that the vessel owner could 

declare out of the IFQ fishery by a 

written letter to the NMFS Office of Law 

Enforcement declaring the vessel 

owner’s intent to declare out of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program for the 

remainder of the year and invoke the 

carryover provision to cover the deficit. 

Because the declaration would provide 

evidence documenting the vessel 

owner’s intent to remain out of the 

fishery for the remainder of the year, 

NMFS has determined that the letter 

from the vessel owner must be signed, 

dated, and notarized. If the deficit 

occurs less than 30 days before the end 

of the calendar year, declaring out of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program for the 

remainder of the year would not be 

required, however, the vessel owner 

must notify the NMFS Office of Law 

Enforcement of the owner’s intent to 

invoke the carryover provision to cover 

the deficit. This final rule clarifies what 

would meet the carryover provision 

requirement for declaring out of the 

fishery for the remainder of the year. 

X. IFQ First Receiver and First Receiver 

Site Licenses 

NMFS is revising the final rule at 

§ 660.140(j)(2)(i) and (j)(3) to change the 

regulations from ‘‘the owner of an IFQ 

first receiver must * * * ’’ to ‘‘the IFQ 

first receiver must * * *. ’’ This change 

is being made to clarify that the 

obligation applies to the IFQ first 

receiver, and is being made after further 

consideration and review of the record 

and in response to public comment (see 

Comment 51). 

In addition, NMFS is revising this 

final rule at § 660.140(f) to clarify the 

first receiver site license application 

process and to revise language to be 

clear that the non-interim site licenses 

are effective for one year from the date 

of issuance. A catch monitoring plan, 

including a written request for a site 

inspection, must be submitted with a 

first receiver site license application. 

Once NMFS receives the application 

package, NMFS will contact the 

applicant to arrange a site inspection. 

C. At-Sea Coop Programs 

Some changes from the August 31st 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380) for the Atsea Coop Programs, both the MS Coop 

Program and the C/P Coop Program, 

resulting from items disapproved in 

Amendment 20 were discussed 

previously in the preamble for this final 

rule under ‘‘A. All Trawl Programs, II. 

Changes due to Partial Disapproval of 

Amendment 20.’’ 

I. Effective Date of Permit Transfers and 

No Trip Limits 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380), 

NMFS specifically requested comment 

on the effective date for an MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit’s second 

transfer within the same year. At the 

September 2010 Council meeting and in 

the Council’s letter of public comment 

on the August 31st proposed rule, the 

Council stated that the second transfer 

of an MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

permit should be effective immediately 

because trip limits will not apply to the 

at-sea sectors (MS or C/P) in 2011 and 

2012. Based on the September 2010 

Council meeting and on public 

comment received (see Comment 52), 

the regulations at § 660.25(b)(4)(vi)(C) 

have been revised in this final rule to 

make the second transfer of an MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit effective 

immediately. In addition, the 

regulations at § 660.131(b)(3), Trip 

limits in the whiting fishery, have been 

clarified in this final rule to be clear that 

they only apply to the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. 

II. At-Sea Sector Donation Program 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 53380), 

NMFS specifically requested comment 

on the implications of removing or 

retaining the at-sea sector donation 

program and requested suggested 

language revisions. The at-sea sector 

donation program was an optional 

provision in the August 31st proposed 

rule regulations at § 660.131(g), where it 

was called the ‘‘bycatch reduction and 

full utilization program for at-sea 

processors.’’ This program was 

previously established to allow vessels 

harvesting unsorted catch in the at-sea 

sectors to retain and donate amounts of 

groundfish that were in excess of trip 

limits. At the September 2010 Council 

meeting, the Council clarified that the 

at-sea sector regulations should not 

require vessels to be subject to trip 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78364 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

limits for bycatch of non-whiting 

groundfish species. Therefore, the 

donation program is no longer 

necessary. Based on the September 2010 

Council meeting and on public 

comment received which supported 

removal of donation program (see 

Comment 53), the proposed rule 

regulations at § 660.131(g) have been 

removed in this final rule. 

III. MS Coop Program Processor 

Obligation for 2011 

In this final rule, NMFS is revising 

regulations for the timing of the 

processor obligation provision in the 

MS Coop Program for 2011. The 

regulations specifying coop agreement 

contents for the MS Coop Program 

include a clause stating that each 

MS/CV-endorsed permit must have 

notified a specific MS permit by 

September 1 of the previous year of that 

MS/CV-endorsed permit’s intent to 

obligate its catch history assignment to 

that MS permit in that year. Because 

these regulations will not be effective 

until after September 1, 2010, this 

clause must be adjusted for application 

to the 2011 fishery. This final rule 

revises the regulations at 

§ 660.150(d)(1)(iii)(A)(1)(iii) to require a 

coop agreement to include ‘‘[a] processor 

obligation clause indicating that each 

MS/CV-endorsed permit has notified a 

specific MS permit by September 1 of 

the previous year of that MS/CVendorsed permit’s intent to obligate its 

catch history assignment to that MS 

permit, except that for the 2011 fishery, 

such notification must have been made 

prior to submission of the MS coop 

permit application.’’ 

IV. Minor Edits 

NMFS has made some minor edits to 

the regulations to make references in the 

regulatory text consistent. Specifically, 

this final rule revises language to make 

references in § 660.25(e)(1) and (2) 

consistent with the categories in the 

paragraph headers at § 660.150 for MS 

coop permits and § 660.160 for the C/P 

coop permit. The revised language 

removes references to ‘‘renewal’’ and 

‘‘change of permit ownership’’ because 

these provisions do not apply to coop 

permits. In addition, the regulations at 

§ 660.111, ‘‘accumulation limit’’ (2)(i), is 

revised to clarify that the MS permit 

usage limit only applies to a person 

‘‘owning an MS permit.’’ 

Classification 

The NMFS Assistant Administrator 

has determined that this final rule is 

consistent with the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish FMP, other provisions of the 

MSA, and other applicable law. To the 

extent that the regulations in this final 

rule differ from what was deemed by the 

Council, NMFS invokes its independent 

authority under 16 U.S.C. 1855(d). 

NMFS and the Council prepared final 

environmental impact statements (EISs) 

for Amendment 20 and for Amendment 

21 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP. 

A notice of availability was published 

on June 25, 2010 (75 FR 36386). In 

partially approving FMP Amendments 

20 and 21 on August 9, 2010, NMFS 

issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for 

each amendment identifying the 

selected alternatives. Copies of the 

RODs are available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

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 January 1, 

2011. The trawl rationalization program 

has been developed through the public 

fishery management council process 

since 2003 and has culminated in 

multiple rulemakings over the fall of 

2009 through 2010. NMFS announced 

through the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council process and through these 

rulemakings its intent to implement this 

program on January 1, 2011. The public 

has been aware of this implementation 

date. In addition, NMFS has conducted 

numerous outreach workshops along the 

West Coast over the fall of 2010 to assist 

the affected public in preparing for 

January 1, 2011 implementation (see 

response to comment 5 in the 

preamble). NMFS has also provided 

outreach specifically to the shorebased 

IFQ first receivers for the new 

requirements under the program and 

also provided an interim first receiver 

site license with a shortened issuance 

process in order to facilitate 

implementation on January 1. In 

addition, NMFS provided preliminary 

guidance during the fall of 2010 to assist 

first receivers in preparing their catch 

monitoring plans in anticipation of a 

January 1, 2011 implementation. 

NMFS has determined it is critical to 

the fishery to implement this program 

on January 1, 2011, the start of the 

fishing year. The program creates a 

system where participants can choose 

when to fish during the year, giving 

them ample time to harvest their 

available catch and to come into 

compliance with these regulations. 

Under the Shorebased IFQ Program, 

fishermen can choose when to fish 

between January 1 and December 15 

every year. Under the At-Sea Coop 

Programs, fishermen can choose when 

to fish after their season opens in the 

spring through December every year. 

Thus, the program provides fishermen 

with more individual choice on when to 

fish than the two-month cumulative 

limit system that was in place before the 

trawl rationalization program. Delaying 

the effectiveness of this rule and 

beginning January 1 with the two-month 

cumulative limit system in place prior 

to implementing the trawl 

rationalization program would be 

confusing to the public, would cause 

problems in the fishery, and would be 

contrary to the public good. If the trawl 

fishery starts the year with two-month 

cumulative limits, the fleet could catch 

up to the available trip limits for some 

groundfish species, which could create 

an incentive for participants to fish as 

much as possible at the start of the year, 

especially if the participant knew they 

did not receive much initial allocation 

of certain groundfish species. There 

would then be a lag time of up to several 

months before the landings data would 

be available to determine the remaining 

amount of catch available to the trawl 

fishery to start the trawl rationalization 

program. There is likelihood that some 

species could have little or no harvest 

remaining for the trawl rationalization 

program in 2011. Thus, a delay in the 

effectiveness of the program could 

require unnecessarily restrictive 

measures later in the year, including 

possible fishery closures, to make up for 

harvest that would be allowed under the 

two-month cumulative limits at the start 

of the year. In addition, it would be 

confusing to the public to have two 

different systems of regulations 

including, but not limited to, different 

harvest limits, observer requirements, 

permit requirements, and reporting 

requirements. These reasons constitute 

good cause under authority contained in 

5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), to establish an 

effective date less than 30 days after 

date of publication. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

The preamble to the proposed rule (75 

FR 53380, August 31, 2010) included a 

detailed summary of the analyses 

contained in the IRFA. NMFS, pursuant 

to section 604 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) prepared a FRFA 

in support of this rule. The FRFA 

incorporates the IRFA, a summary of the 

significant issues raised by the public 

comments in response to the IRFA, and 

NMFS’s responses to those comments. A 

copy of the FRFA is available from 

NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and a summary 

of the FRFA follows: 

The Council prepared two EIS 

documents: Amendment 20— 

Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery, which creates the structure and 

management details of the trawl fishery 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78365 

rationalization program; and 

Amendment 21—Allocation of Harvest 

Opportunity Between Sectors of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery, which 

allocates the groundfish stocks between 

trawl and non-trawl fisheries. Each of 

the two EIS’s prepared by the Council 

provide economic analyses of the 

Council’s preferred alternatives and 

draft RIR and IRFAs (DEIS IRFAs). The 

DEIS IRFAs were updated and 

combined into a single RIR/IRFA for use 

with the ‘‘initial issuance’’ proposed rule 

that was published on June 10, 2010 (75 

FR 32994) (June 10th PR IRFA). The 

June 10th PR IRFA reviewed and 

summarized the benefits and costs, and 

the economic effects of the Council’s 

recommendations as presented in the 

two EIS’s. In addition, the June 10th PR 

IRFA contained additional information 

on characterizing the participants in the 

fishery and on the tracking and 

monitoring costs associated with this 

program. 

The June 10th PR IRFA analyzed the 

overall program as recommended by the 

Pacific Fishery Management Council. 

The analysis encompassed aspects of 

the initial issuance rule which 

establishes the allocations set forth 

under Amendment 21 and procedures 

for initial issuance of permits, 

endorsements, quota shares, and catch 

history assignments under the IFQ and 

coop programs. It also encompassed this 

rule—the ‘‘program components’’ rule 

which provides additional details, 

including: Program components 

applicable to IFQ gear switching, 

observer programs, retention 

requirements, equipment requirements, 

catch monitors, catch weighing 

requirements, coop permits/agreements, 

first receiver site licenses, quota share 

accounts, vessel accounts, further 

tracking and monitoring components, 

and economic data collection 

requirements. Revenue and landings 

data in the RIR/IRFA for the program 

components proposed rule (75 FR 

53380, August 31, 2010) (August 31st 

PR IRFA) were updated based on recent 

analysis by the Council (Appendix F: 

Historical Landings and Revenue in 

Groundfish Fisheries; Agenda Item 

B.3.a, Attachment 3, June 2010). The 

Council analysis provided revenue 

trends based on inflation adjusted 

dollars where estimates are adjusted to 

current (2009) dollars. The August 31st 

PR IRFA was also revised based on 

comments received on the initial 

issuance rule and included a discussion 

of the other alternatives considered by 

the Council. 

Although other alternatives were 

examined, the FRFA focused on the two 

key alternatives—the No-Action 

Alternative and the Preferred 

Alternative. The EISs include an 

economic analysis of the impacts of all 

the alternatives and the August 31st PR 

IRFA and the FRFA incorporate this 

analysis. For the Amendment 20 EIS, 

the alternatives ranged from status quo 

(no action), to IFQ for all trawl sectors, 

IFQ for the non-whiting sector and 

coops for all whiting sectors, and IFQ 

for the shorebased sector and coops for 

the at-sea sectors (preferred). Various 

elements were part of each of these 

alternatives and varied among them, 

including initial qualifications and 

allocations, accumulation limits, 

grandfathering, processor shares, 

species covered, number of sectors, 

adaptive management, area 

management, and carryover provisions. 

The preferred alternative was a blending 

of components from the other 

alternatives analyzed in the EIS. For the 

Amendment 21 EIS, alternatives were 

provided for 6 decision points: (1) 

Limited entry trawl allocations for 

Amendment 21 species, (2) shoreside 

trawl sector allocations, (3) trawl sector 

allocations of trawl-dominant 

overfished species, (4) at-sea whiting 

trawl sector set-asides, (5) Pacific 

halibut total bycatch limits, and (6) 

formal allocations in the FMP. For most 

of these decision points, the alternatives 

within them were crafted around 

approximately maintaining historical 

catch levels by the sectors or, in some 

cases, increasing opportunity for the 

non-trawl sector. 

By focusing on the two key 

alternatives in the August 31st PR IRFA 

and in the FRFA (no action and 

preferred), it encompasses parts of the 

other alternatives and informs the 

reader of these regulations. The analysis 

of the no action alternative describes 

what is likely to occur in the absence of 

the proposed action. It provides a 

benchmark to compare the incremental 

effects of the action. Under the no action 

alternative, the current, primary 

management tool used to control the 

Pacific coast groundfish trawl catch 

includes a system of two month 

cumulative landing limits for most 

species and season closures for Pacific 

whiting. This management program 

would continue under the no action 

alternative. Only long-term, fixed 

allocations for Pacific whiting and 

sablefish north of 36° N. lat. would 

exist. All other groundfish species 

would not be formally allocated 

between the trawl and non-trawl 

sectors. Allocating the available harvest 

of groundfish species and species 

complexes would occur in the Council 

process of deciding biennial harvest 

specifications and management 

measures and, as such, would be 

considered short term allocations. 

The analysis of the preferred 

alternative describes what is likely to 

occur as a result of the action. Under the 

preferred alternative, the existing 

shorebased whiting and shorebased 

non-whiting sectors of the Pacific Coast 

groundfish limited entry trawl fishery 

would be managed as one sector under 

a system of IFQs, and the at-sea whiting 

sectors of the fishery (i.e., catcherprocessor sector and mothership sector, 

which includes motherships and 

catcher vessels) would be managed 

under a system of sector-specific 

harvesting cooperatives (coops). The 

catcher-processor sector would continue 

to operate under the existing, selfdeveloped coop program entered into 

voluntarily by that sector. A distinct set 

of groundfish species and Pacific 

halibut would be covered by the 

rationalization program. Amendment 20 

would include a tracking and 

monitoring program to assure that all 

catch (including discards) would be 

documented and matched against QP. 

The Council specified that observers 

would be required on all vessels and 

shorebased monitoring (catch monitors) 

would be required during all off-loading 

(100 percent coverage). Compared to 

status quo monitoring, this would be a 

monitoring and observer coverage level 

increase for a large portion of the trawl 

fleet, particularly for non-whiting 

shorebased vessels. 

The limited entry trawl fishery is 

divided into two broad sectors: a multispecies trawl fishery, which most often 

uses bottom trawl gear (hereafter called 

the non-whiting fishery), and the Pacific 

whiting fishery, which uses midwater 

trawl gear. Over the 2005–2009 period, 

these fisheries when combined have 

average annual inflation adjusted 

revenues of about $57 million and total 

landings of about 215,000 tons. The 

non-whiting fishery has been 

principally managed through 2-month 

cumulative landing limits along with 

closed areas to limit overfished species 

bycatch. Fishery participants target the 

range of species described above with 

the exception of Pacific whiting. By 

weight, the vast majority of trawl vessel 

groundfish is caught in the Pacific 

whiting fishery. In contrast, the nonwhiting fishery accounts for the 

majority of limited entry trawl fishery 

ex-vessel revenues. On average, for the 

period 2005–2009, Pacific whiting 

accounted for about 90 percent of the 

quantity of groundfish landed in the 

limited entry trawl fishery, but only 44 

percent of the value due to their 

relatively low ex-vessel price. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78366 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Non-whiting trawl vessels deliver 

their catch to shoreside processors and 

buyers located along the coasts of 

Washington, Oregon, and California, 

and tend to have their homeports 

located in towns within the same 

general area where they make deliveries, 

though there are several cases of vessels 

delivering to multiple ports during a 

year. Some Pacific whiting trawl vessels 

are catcher-processors, which, as their 

name implies, process their catch onboard, while other vessels in this sector 

deliver their catch to shoreside 

processors or motherships that receive 

Pacific whiting for processing but do not 

directly harvest the fish. 

Over time, landings in the limited 

entry trawl fishery have fluctuated, 

especially on a species-specific basis. 

Pacific whiting has grown in 

importance, especially in recent years. 

Through the 1990s, the volume of 

Pacific whiting landed in the fishery 

increased. In 2002 and 2003, landings of 

Pacific whiting declined due to 

information showing the stock was 

depleted and the subsequent regulations 

that restricted harvest in order to 

rebuild the species. Over the years 

2005–2009, estimated Pacific whiting 

ex-vessel revenues averaged about $25 

million (figures have been adjusted to 

2009 dollars to account for inflation). In 

2008, these participants harvested about 

216,000 tons of whiting worth about $51 

million in ex-vessel revenues, based on 

shorebased ex-vessel prices of $235 per 

ton, the highest ex-vessel revenues and 

prices on record. In comparison, the 

2007 fishery harvested about 214,000 

tons worth $29 million at an average exvessel price of about $137 per ton while 

the 2009 non-tribal fishery harvested 

about 99,000 tons worth about $12 

million at a price of $120 per ton. 

While the Pacific whiting fishery has 

grown in importance in recent years, 

harvests in the non-whiting component 

of the limited entry trawl fishery have 

declined steadily since the 1980s. Nonwhiting trawl ex-vessel revenues 

(adjusted for inflation) in the fishery 

peaked in the mid 1990s at about $40 

million. Following the passage of the 

Sustainable Fisheries Act (1996) and the 

listing of several species as overfished, 

harvests became increasingly restricted 

and landings and revenues declined 

steadily until 2002. Over the period 

2005 to 2009, inflation adjusted exvessel revenues from groundfish in the 

non-whiting trawl sector have averaged 

$27 million annually; ranging from $24 

million (2005) to $32 million (2008). 

The 2009 fishery earned $30 million in 

ex-vessel revenues. Under the trawl 

rationalization program, shorebased 

whiting sector will be joined with the 

shorebased non-whiting sector. For 

perspective, when these fisheries are 

combined, their total ex-vessel revenues 

have averaged about $36 million 

annually over the last five years. 

Expected Effects of Amendment 21— 

Intersector Allocation 

The allocation of harvest opportunity 

between sectors under the new 

regulations (75 FR 60868, October 1, 

2010) does not differ significantly from 

the allocation made biennially under 

the no action alternative. The primary 

economic effect of the long-term 

allocation under the new regulations is 

to provide more certainty in future trawl 

harvest opportunities, which would 

enable better business planning for 

participants in the rationalized fishery. 

As described elsewhere, the trawl 

rationalization program could create an 

incentive structure and facilitate more 

comprehensive monitoring to allow 

bycatch reduction and effective 

management of the groundfish fisheries. 

In support of the trawl rationalization 

program, the main socioeconomic 

impact of Amendment 21 allocations is 

longer term stability for the trawl 

industry. While the preferred 

Amendment 21 allocations do not differ 

significantly from status quo ad hoc 

allocations made biennially, there is 

more certainty in future trawl harvest 

opportunities, which enables better 

business planning for participants in the 

rationalized fishery. This is the main 

purpose for the Amendment 21 actions. 

The economic effects of Amendment 21 

arise from the impacts on current and 

future harvests. The need to constrain 

groundfish harvests to address 

overfishing has had substantial 

socioeconomic impacts. The groundfish 

limited entry trawl sector has 

experienced a large contraction, spurred 

in part by a partially federallysubsidized vessel and permit buyback 

program implemented in 2005. This $46 

million buyback program was financed 

by a Congressional appropriation of $10 

million and an industry loan of $36 

million. Approximately 240 groundfish, 

crab, and shrimp permits were retired 

from state and federal fisheries, and 

there was a 35 percent reduction in the 

groundfish trawl permits. To repay the 

loan, groundfish, shrimp and crab 

fisheries are subject to landings fees. 

Follow-on effects of the buyback have 

been felt in coastal communities where 

groundfish trawlers comprise a large 

portion of the local fleet. As the fleet 

size shrinks and ex-vessel revenues 

decline, income and employment in 

these communities is affected. Fisheryrelated businesses in the community 

may cease operations because of lost 

business. This can affect non-groundfish 

fishery sectors that also depend on the 

services provided by these businesses, 

such as providing ice and buying fish. 

An objective to the trawl rationalization 

program is to mitigate some of these 

effects by increasing revenues and 

profits within the trawl sector. However, 

because further fleet consolidation is 

expected, the resulting benefits are 

likely to be unevenly distributed among 

coastal communities. Some 

communities may see their groundfish 

trawl fleet shrink further as the 

remaining vessels concentrate in a few 

major ports. Species subject to 

Amendment 21 allocations would be: 

lingcod, Pacific cod, sablefish south of 

36° N. lat., Pacific ocean perch, widow 

rockfish, chilipepper rockfish, splitnose 

rockfish, yellowtail rockfish north of 40° 

10′ N. lat., shortspine thornyhead (north 

and south of 34° 27′ N. lat.), longspine 

thornyhead north of 34° 27′ N. lat., 

darkblotched rockfish, minor slope 

rockfish (north and south of 40° 10′ N. 

lat.), Dover sole, English sole, petrale 

sole, arrowtooth flounder, starry 

flounder, and Other Flatfish. While the 

preferred Amendment 21 allocations of 

these species do not differ significantly 

from status quo ad hoc allocations made 

biennially, there is more certainty in 

future trawl harvest opportunities, 

which enables better business planning 

for participants in the rationalized 

fishery. This is the main purpose for the 

Amendment 21 actions. 

Based on ex-vessel revenue 

projections, Table 4–18 (ISA DEIS) 

shows the potential 2010 yield to trawl 

and non-trawl (including recreational) 

sectors under the Amendment 21 

alternatives and the potential 2010 

value of alternative trawl allocations. 

Under the status quo option Alternative 

1, the projected ex-vessel value of the 

trawl allocation is $56 million while the 

projected ex-vessel value of the 

Council’s preferred alternative is $54 

million, indicating a potential increase 

to the non-trawl sectors and a potential 

decrease to the trawl sector. 

In addition to the species above, 

halibut would also be specifically 

allocated to the trawl fishery. The 

proposed regulations include a halibut 

trawl bycatch reduction program in 

phases to provide sufficient time to 

establish a baseline of trawl halibut 

bycatch and for harvesters to explore 

methods (e.g., adjustments to time and/ 

or area fished, gear modifications) to 

reduce halibut bycatch and bycatch 

mortality. Pacific halibut are currently 

not allowed to be retained in any U.S. 

or Canadian trawl fisheries per the 

policy of the IPHC. The Council’s intent 

on setting a total catch limit of Pacific 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78367 

halibut in Area 2A trawl fisheries is to 

limit the bycatch and progressively 

reduce the bycatch to provide more 

benefits to directed halibut fisheries. 

The program establishes a limit for total 

Pacific halibut bycatch mortality (legalsized and sublegal fish) through the use 

of an individual bycatch quota in the 

trawl fishery. The initial amount for the 

first four years of the trawl 

rationalization program would be 

calculated by taking 15 percent of the 

Area 2A Total Constant Exploitation 

Yield (CEY) as set by the IPHC for the 

previous year, not to exceed 130,000 lbs 

per year for total mortality. For example, 

if the trawl rationalization program 

went into effect in 2013, the trawl 

halibut IBQ would be set at 15 percent 

of the Area 2A CEY adopted for 2012 or 

130,000 lbs per year, whichever is less, 

for each year from 2013 through 2016 

(years 1 through 4 of the program). 

Beginning with the fifth year of 

implementation, the maximum amount 

set aside for the trawl rationalization 

program would be reduced to 100,000 

lbs per year for total mortality. This 

amount may be adjusted through the 

biennial specifications process for 

future years. 

Currently there are no total catch 

limits of Pacific halibut specified for the 

west coast trawl fishery. Trawl bycatch 

of Pacific halibut, therefore, does not 

limit the trawl fishery. A phased in, 

halibut bycatch reduction program, 

would provide sufficient time to 

establish a baseline of trawl halibut 

bycatch under the new rationalization 

program and for harvesters to explore 

methods (e.g., adjustments to time and/ 

or area fished, gear modifications) to 

reduce both halibut bycatch and bycatch 

mortality. By limiting the bycatch of 

Pacific halibut in the LE trawl fisheries, 

Amendment 21 would control bycatch 

and could provide increased benefits to 

Washington, Oregon, and California 

fishermen targeting Pacific halibut. 

Reducing the trawl limit would also 

provide more halibut to those who 

participate in the directed tribal, 

commercial and recreational halibut 

fisheries. 

Effects of Amendment 20—Trawl 

Rationalization 

An overall comprehensive model that 

simultaneously captures changes in 

fishermens’ behavior, changes in the 

markets, and changes in communities 

was not feasible because of lack of data 

and empirical analyses that show 

needed relationships. Instead, a set of 

models designed to focus on specific 

issues was developed. For example, 

models were used to: analyze the effects 

of the initial allocation of QS in the 

trawl IFQ program; project geographic 

shifts in fishery patterns; and illustrate 

the potential for reducing bycatch, 

increasing target catch, and increasing 

revenues. To illustrate the benefits of 

the IFQ program, a model projecting the 

expected amount of fleet consolidation 

in the shorebased non-whiting fishery 

was developed. This model illustrated 

the potential for the fleet to reduce 

bycatch and potentially increase the 

amount of target species harvested. This 

model was primarily based on bycatch 

reduction experiences in the Pacific 

whiting fishery and under an Exempted 

Fishing Permit carried out in the 

arrowtooth flounder fishery. The model 

accounted for the fact that trawlers 

harvest many species (multiple 

outputs). The model also used fish 

ticket data and the data from the 

recently completed West Coast Limited 

Entry Cost Earnings Survey sponsored 

by the NMFS Northwest Fisheries 

Science Center. (For the other sectors, 

similar models could not be developed 

because the appropriate cost data was 

unavailable.) 

Estimates of potential economic 

benefits were generated based on the 

predicted harvesting practices from the 

first step analysis. Because the west 

coast non-whiting groundfish fishery is 

not a derby fishery, it is expected that 

economic benefits will come through 

cost reductions and increased access to 

target species that arise from 

modifications in fishing behavior 

(overfished species avoidance). The key 

output of this analysis was an estimate 

of post-rationalization equilibrium 

harvesting cost. 

Changes in harvesting costs can arise 

from three sources. First, the total fixed 

costs incurred by the groundfish trawl 

fleet change as the size of the fleet 

changes. Since many limited entry 

trawlers incur annual fixed costs of at 

least $100,000, reductions in fleet size 

can result in substantial cost savings. In 

other words, a fewer number of vessels 

in the fishery will lead to decreased 

costs through a decrease in annual fixed 

costs. Second, costs may change as 

fishery participation changes and no 

longer incur diseconomies of scope 

(such as the costs of frequently 

switching gear for participating in 

multiple fisheries). Third, costs may 

change as vessels are able to buy and 

sell quota to take advantage of 

economies of scale and operate at the 

minimum point on their long-run 

average cost curve (i.e. the strategy that 

minimizes the cost of harvesting). 

The major conclusions of this model 

suggested that (with landings held at 

2004 levels), the current groundfish fleet 

(non-whiting component) which 

consisted of 117 vessels in 2004, will be 

reduced by roughly 50 percent to 66 

percent, or 40–60 vessels under an IFQ 

program. The reduction in fleet size 

implies cost savings of $18–$22 million 

for the year 2004 (most recent year of 

the data). Vessels that remain active 

will, on average, be more cost efficient 

and will benefit from economies of scale 

that are currently unexploited under 

controlled access regulations in the 

fishery. The cost savings estimates are 

significant, amounting to approximately 

half of the costs incurred currently, 

suggesting that IFQ management may be 

an attractive option for the Pacific coast 

groundfish fishery. Assuming a 10 

percent annual return to the vessel 

capital investment, estimates indicate 

that the 2004 groundfish fleet incurred 

a total cost of $39 million. The PacFIN 

data indicate fleetwide revenue (this 

includes groundfish, crab, and other 

species) at roughly $36 million in 2004, 

and, therefore, fleet wide losses of about 

$3 million occurred in 2004. Based on 

a lower 5 percent return to vessel 

capital, the results suggest that the 

groundfish fleet merely broke even in 

2004; i.e., dockside revenues were offset 

by the fleetwide harvesting costs. The 

results also suggest a switch from the 

current controlled access management 

program to IFQs could yield a 

significant increase in resource rents in 

the Pacific coast groundfish fishery. For 

instance, the analysis finds that the 

2004 groundfish catch generated zero 

resource rent. Instead, it could have 

yielded a substantial positive rent of 

about $14 million. 

As the model was based on the 2004 

fishery, it may be useful to show current 

trends in the fishery. In 2004, the 

shorebased non-whiting trawl fishery 

generated about $21 million in 

groundfish ex-vessel revenues (inflation 

adjusted). But according to cost 

estimates discussed above, this fishery 

was at best breaking even or perhaps 

suffering a loss of up to $2 million. 

Since 2004, shorebased non-whiting 

trawl fisheries have increased their 

revenues to about $30 million. The 

increase in shorebased revenues have 

come from increased landings of flatfish 

and sablefish and significant increase in 

sablefish ex-vessel prices. Sablefish now 

accounts for almost 40 percent of the 

trawl fleet’s revenues. While revenues 

were increasing, so were fuel prices. 

Fuel costs now account for 

approximately 30 to 40 percent of the 

vessels’ revenues. The average 2005– 

2009 revenues were about $27 million, 

or 29 percent greater than 2004. The 

average 2005–2009 fuel price was about 

$2.81 per gallon, 70 percent greater than 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78368 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

that of 2004. Therefore, it appears that 

the profitability of the 2009 fishery may 

not be that much improved over that of 

2004. 

Ex-vessel revenues for the nonwhiting sector of the limited entry trawl 

fishery are projected to be 

approximately $30–40 million per year 

under the preferred alternative, 

compared to $22–25 million under the 

no action alternative. These projections 

yield a potential range in increased 

revenues of 20 to 80 percent. This 

revenue increase is expected to occur in 

a rationalized fishery, because target 

species quotas can be more fully 

utilized. Currently, in the non-whiting 

sector, cumulative landing limits for 

target species have to be set lower 

because the bycatch of overfished 

species cannot be directly controlled. 

Introducing accountability at the 

individual vessel level by means of IFQs 

provides a strong incentive for bycatch 

avoidance (because of the actual or 

implicit cost of quota needed to cover 

bycatch species) and prevents the 

bycatch of any one vessel from affecting 

the harvest opportunities of others. In 

addition, under the preferred 

alternative, the non-whiting sector 

would have control over harvest timing 

over the whole calendar year. Nonwhiting harvesters currently operate 

under 2-month cumulative landing 

limits, which allow greater flexibility in 

terms of harvest timing between 2- 

month periods but less flexibility within 

periods (because any difference between 

actual limits and the period limit cannot 

be carried over to the next period). In 

contrast, under the IFQ program 

harvesters will have control over harvest 

timing over the whole calendar year. 

However, in terms of any influence on 

price, this increased flexibility is 

unlikely to have a noticeable effect. 

Finally, the ability for vessels managed 

under IFQs to use other types of legal 

groundfish gear could allow some 

increases in revenue by targeting highervalue line or pot gear caught fish. This 

opportunity would mainly relate to 

sablefish, which are caught in deeper 

water, rather than nearshore species 

where state level regulatory constraints 

apply. 

Costs for the non-whiting sector of the 

limited entry trawl fishery are expected 

to decrease under the preferred 

alternative because of productivity gains 

related to fleet consolidation. 

Productivity gains would be achieved 

through lower capital requirements and 

a move to more efficient vessels. 

Operating costs for the non-whiting 

sector are predicted to decrease by as 

much as 60 percent annually. Based on 

estimates of current costs, this 

percentage decrease represents a $13.8 

million cost reduction relative to the no 

action alternative. 

The accumulation limits considered 

under the preferred alternative are not 

expected to introduce cost inefficiencies 

in the non-whiting sector, provided that 

current prices and harvest volumes do 

not decrease. However, the preferred 

alternative would impose new costs on 

the non-whiting sector that would not 

be incurred under the no action 

alternative. First, a landings fee of up to 

3 percent of the ex-vessel value of fish 

harvested would be assessed under the 

preferred alternative to recover 

management costs, such as maintenance 

of the system of QS accounts. Second, 

new at-sea observer requirements would 

be introduced, and vessels would have 

to pay the costs of complying with these 

requirements, estimated at $500 a day if 

independent contractors are hired. The 

daily observer cost could place a 

disproportionate adverse economic 

burden on small businesses because 

such costs would comprise a larger 

portion of small vessels costs than that 

of larger vessels. 

The increase in profits that 

commercial harvesters are expected to 

experience under the preferred 

alternative may render them better able 

to sustain the costs of complying with 

the new reporting and monitoring 

requirements. The improved harvesting 

cost efficiency under the preferred 

alternative may allow the non-whiting 

sector to realize profits of $14–23 

million compared to $0 or less under 

the no action alternative. In addition, a 

provision that allows vessels managed 

under the IFQ program to use other legal 

gear (gear switching) would allow 

sablefish allocated to the trawl sector to 

be sold at a higher price per pound, 

possibly contributing to increased 

profits. The imposition of accumulation 

limits could reduce the expected 

increase in the profitability of the nonwhiting sector by restricting the amount 

of expected cost savings, and the costs 

of at-sea observers may reduce profits by 

about $2.2 million, depending on the fee 

structure. However, the profits earned 

by the non-whiting sector would still be 

substantially higher under the preferred 

alternative than under the no action 

alternative. 

New entrants are likely to face a 

barrier to entry in the Pacific coast 

groundfish limited entry trawl fishery in 

the form of the cost of acquiring QS (or 

a coop share in the case of the at-sea 

whiting sector). This disadvantages 

them in comparison to those entities 

that receive an initial allocation of 

harvest privileges. Small entities may be 

particularly disadvantaged to the degree 

that they may find it more difficult to 

finance such quota purchases. Among 

the goals the Council identified for the 

adaptive management program was to 

use the reserved non-whiting QS to 

facilitate new entry into the fishery. In 

addition, the Council identified, as a 

trailing action, a framework to allow the 

establishment and implementation of 

Community Fishing Associations as part 

of the adaptive management program. 

These entities could facilitate entry into 

the fishery by leasing QS at below 

market rates, thereby leveling the 

playing field in terms of costs between 

initial recipients of QS and new 

entrants. 

The incremental effects of the 

preferred alternative on buyers and 

processors of trawl caught groundfish 

are detailed in Sections 4.9–4.10 of the 

Rationalization of the Amendment 20 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery DEIS. Even though 

processors may have to pay fishermen 

higher ex-vessel prices, processors may 

see cost savings under the preferred 

alternative to the degree that 

rationalization allows greater processors 

and fishermen greater ability to plan the 

timing, location, and species mix of 

landings. Processors could use current 

plant capacity more efficiently, because 

available information suggests that 

processing facilities are currently 

underutilized. Fleet consolidation in the 

non-whiting sector could also provide 

cost savings for processors if landings 

occur in fewer locations, thereby 

reducing the need for facilities and/or 

transport. The preferred alternative 

would also impose new costs on 

processors that would not be incurred 

under the no action alternative. 

Processors would be required to pay 

some or all of the costs of plant 

monitors, who would verify landings. 

Similar to at-sea observers, these 

monitors would be independent 

contractors rather than direct employees 

of the processing firm. 

In the non-whiting processing 

industry, harvest volumes may increase 

because of a decrease in constraining 

species bycatch and a subsequent 

increase in under-utilized target species 

catch. This boost in target species catch 

may increase utilization of processing 

capital and processing activity. (It 

should be noted that if under the 

current system bycatch has been 

underreported, with 100 percent 

observer coverage under the new 

system, the gains in increased target 

catches may be less than expected.) 

Consequently, the possibility of capital 

consolidation in the non-whiting 

shorebased sector may be less than in 

the shore-based whiting sector. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78369 

However, shifts in the distribution of 

landings across ports as a result of fleet 

consolidation, industry agglomeration, 

and the comparative advantage of ports 

(a function of bycatch rates in the waters 

constituting the operational area for the 

port, differences in infrastructure, and 

other factors) could lead to 

consolidation in processing activity at a 

localized or regional scale and an 

expansion in processing activity 

elsewhere. To mitigate harm to 

adversely impacted non-whiting 

shoreside processors, the adaptive 

management program provides a 

mechanism to distribute non-whiting 

QS to processors, thereby ensuring that 

some processors receive greater landings 

of groundfish than would otherwise be 

the case. 

As noted above, the preferred 

alternative may reduce the power of 

non-whiting shoreside processors to 

negotiate ex-vessel prices with 

harvesters. The larger harvest volume 

due to bycatch avoidance may lower 

processor average costs, which could 

offset the negative effects on nonwhiting shoreside processors of a shift 

in bargaining power. In addition, QS 

could be purchased by processors over 

the long term, thereby increasing 

processors’ negotiation power. However, 

the accumulation limits included in the 

preferred alternative would limit the 

ability of processors to purchase 

substantial quantities of QS. 

Alternatively, the adaptive management 

provision could be used to allocate QS 

to non-whiting shoreside processors, 

thereby providing them additional 

leverage when negotiating terms with 

harvesters. 

The allocation of 20 percent of the 

initial shorebased whiting QS to the 

shoreside processor portion of the 

groundfish fishery would give these 

processors more influence in 

negotiations over ex-vessel prices and 

would tend to offset the gains in 

bargaining power for harvesters. For 

example, a processor could use QS to 

induce a harvester that is short of quota 

pounds for a Pacific whiting trip to 

make deliveries under specified 

conditions and prices. However, 

because of a reduction in peak harvest 

volume, fewer processing companies 

and/or facilities may be necessary to 

handle harvest volumes of Pacific 

whiting, meaning some companies may 

find themselves without enough 

product to continue justifying 

processing operations of Pacific whiting. 

Revenues from harvesting and 

processing trawl-caught groundfish are 

expected to increase. Revenues in the 

non-whiting trawl sector are projected 

to increase by 20 to 80 percent in a 

rationalized fishery, depending on 

bycatch rate reductions and stock status. 

Revenue increases are mainly expected 

because under rationalized fisheries, 

target species quotas can be more fully 

utilized. Currently, in the non-whiting 

sector, cumulative landing limits for 

target species have to be set lower 

because the bycatch of overfished 

species cannot be directly controlled. 

Introducing accountability at the 

individual vessel level provides a strong 

incentive for bycatch avoidance 

(because of the actual or implicit cost of 

quota needed to cover bycatch species) 

and prevents the bycatch of any one 

vessel from affecting the harvest 

opportunity of others. Whiting fisheries 

are more directly managed through 

quotas, and in recent years, by limits on 

bycatch. Beginning in 2009, bycatch 

limits have been established for each of 

the three whiting sectors. For the shorebased and mothership whiting sectors, 

the fishery can potentially close before 

the whiting allocation is fully harvested 

because a bycatch cap is reached. (The 

catcher-processor sector currently 

operates as a voluntary co-op and is 

therefore better able to coordinate 

harvest strategy to avoid reaching 

bycatch limits.) However, in general, the 

whiting sectors have been able to 

harvest their sector allocations. Whiting 

vessels could increase revenues due to 

improved product recovery as a result of 

the ability to better control harvest 

timing. As mentioned above, the ability 

for vessels managed under IFQs to use 

other types of legal groundfish gear 

could allow some increases in revenue 

by targeting higher-value line or pot gear 

caught fish. 

Harvester and possibly processor 

costs are expected to decrease because 

of productivity gains related to fleet 

consolidation. Cost savings would be 

due to lower capital requirements and a 

move to more efficient vessels in the 

non-whiting sector. Costs are predicted 

to decrease by as much as 60 percent 

annually, which based on estimates of 

current operating costs would represent 

a $13.8 million decrease. Similar levels 

of consolidation are expected for 

shorebased and mothership catcher 

vessels. Proposed mitigation measures 

could reduce these costs savings. For 

example, a 1 percent quota share 

accumulation limit could reduce cost 

savings by as much as 20 percent. But 

the accumulation limits considered in 

the alternatives are not expected to 

introduce higher costs at current prices 

and harvest volume. The proposed 

action would introduce some new costs. 

First, up to 3 percent of the value of 

landings may be assessed to cover 

administrative and management costs. 

Second, new at-sea observer 

requirements would be introduced and 

vessels would have to pay the cost, 

estimated at $350–$500 a day. 

Processors may see cost-savings to the 

degree that rationalization allows 

greater control over the timing and 

location of landings. Processors could 

use current plant capacity more 

efficiently, because available 

information suggests that processing 

facilities are currently underutilized. 

Fleet consolidation could also drive 

some cost savings on the part of 

processors if landings occur in fewer 

locations. This would reduce the need 

for facilities and/or transport. Under the 

proposed action, processors would be 

required to pay the costs of plant 

monitors, who would verify landings. 

These monitors would not be directly 

employed by the processing firm but, 

similar to at-sea observers, be 

independent contractors. 

Rationalization of the groundfish 

trawl sector is expected to free up 

capital and labor because of increases in 

productivity. (Since the basic input, 

trawl-caught fish, is subject to an 

underlying constraint due to biological 

productivity, increases in labor and 

capital productivity are expected to 

reduce the amount of those inputs 

needed.) However, from a national net 

benefit perspective these effects are 

neutral since capital and labor can be 

put to some productive use elsewhere in 

the broader economy. Also, current 

groundfish fishery participants that 

receive QS (trawl limited entry trawl 

permit holders and eligible shoreside 

processors) are compensated to the 

degree that the asset value of the QS 

covers capital losses. 

The Amendment 20 DEIS IRFA 

presents an explicit range of costs based 

on different daily observer cost rates. 

What follows is a summary of those 

estimates—these estimates are focused 

on the shorebased non-whiting fishery 

so that it is compared to the results of 

the NWFSC economic model of this 

fishery. After a transition period, for the 

shorebased fishery, the initial estimates 

of the annual federal and state agency 

costs to run this program are about 

$5 million; and after the transition 

period, these costs could fall to $4.0 

million. Based on the observer cost of 

$500 per day, the annual costs to the 

vessel of observer monitoring is about 

$4 million. Based on $350 per day, the 

annual costs of compliance monitors is 

just over $1 million. These figures add 

up to about $10 million. From a costbenefit viewpoint, if consolidation leads 

to $14 million savings from reduced 

harvesting costs and the new program 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78370 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

increases the tracking and monitoring 

costs of $10 million, there is a projected 

net gain of about $4 million. These 

estimates do not take into account 

expectations that agency, observer and 

compliance costs are likely to be 

reduced due to consolidation or the 

expected increases in revenues 

discussed above. Better planning by the 

industry and companies that provide 

the observers and compliance monitors 

should further reduce costs. Recent 

analyses developed for the North Pacific 

Fishery Management Council and for 

the New England Fishery Management 

Council were reviewed. The New 

England Council analysis includes 

observer cost estimates associated with 

the Canadian Pacific Groundfish fishery. 

Based on a review of these analyses, a 

daily observer rate of $350 a day is 

feasible. If so, the annual shoreside nonwhiting costs of observers and catch 

monitors will add up to about $3.5 

million. (For purposes of implementing 

the observer and catch monitoring 

reimbursement program, NMFS is 

continuing to research what is the 

appropriate daily rate.) 

In contrast to the shoreside nonwhiting fishery, the effect of the 

preferred alternative on revenues and 

costs in the whiting sector of the limited 

entry trawl fishery can only be 

discussed qualitatively, as there is no 

economic model because of lack of cost 

data. The lower motivation to ‘‘race for 

fish’’ due to coop harvest privileges is 

expected to result in improved product 

quality, slower-paced harvest activity, 

increased yield (which should increase 

ex-vessel prices), and enhanced 

flexibility and ability for business 

planning. The overall effect of these 

changes would be higher revenues and 

profits for harvesters in the shoreside 

and mothership portions of the whiting 

fishery in comparison to the no action 

alternative. Under the preferred 

alternative, some consolidation may 

occur in the shoreside and mothership 

sectors of the Pacific whiting fishery, 

though the magnitude of consolidation 

is expected to be less than in the nonwhiting sector. The existing catcherprocessor coop would continue under 

the preferred alternative, with effects on 

the catcher-processor sector that look 

similar, or identical, to those of the no 

action alternative. However, the change 

from a vessel-based limit under 

Amendment 15 to the permit-based 

limit of Amendment 21 will provide 

additional flexibility that currently does 

not exist in the catcher-processor 

fishery. Using estimates of $350 per day 

for observers and compliance monitors, 

the total annual costs of observers and 

catch monitors for the whiting sector 

(shoreside harvesters, processors, 

mothership processors, mothership 

catcher vessels, and catcher-processors) 

is about $1.5 million. Additional agency 

costs associated with managing these 

whiting fisheries are included in the 

estimates provided in the above 

discussion on shorebased non-whiting 

costs. 

This rule regulates businesses that 

harvest groundfish and processors that 

wish to process limited entry trawl 

groundfish. Under the RFA, the term 

‘‘small entities’’ includes small 

businesses, small organizations, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. For 

small businesses, the SBA has 

established size criteria for all major 

industry sectors in the U.S., including 

fish harvesting and fish processing 

businesses. A business involved in fish 

harvesting is a small business if it is 

independently owned and operated and 

not dominant in its field of operation 

(including its affiliates) and if it has 

combined annual receipts not in excess 

of $4.0 million for all its affiliated 

operations worldwide. A seafood 

processor is a small business if it is 

independently owned and operated, not 

dominant in its field of operation, and 

employs 500 or fewer persons on a full 

time, part time, temporary, or other 

basis, at all its affiliated operations 

worldwide. A business involved in both 

the harvesting and processing of seafood 

products is a small business if it meets 

the $4.0 million criterion for fish 

harvesting operations. A wholesale 

business servicing the fishing industry 

is a small business if it employs 100 or 

fewer persons on a full time, part time, 

temporary, or other basis, at all its 

affiliated operations worldwide. For 

marinas and charter/party boats, a small 

business is one with annual receipts not 

in excess of $7.0 million. The RFA 

defines a small organization as any 

nonprofit enterprise that is 

independently owned and operated and 

is not dominant in its field. The RFA 

defines small governmental 

jurisdictions as governments of cities, 

counties, towns, townships, villages, 

school districts, or special districts with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

NMFS makes the following 

conclusions based primarily on analyses 

associated with fish ticket data and 

limited entry permit data, available 

employment data provided by 

processors, information on the 

charterboat and tribal fleets, and 

available industry responses to on-going 

surveys on ownership. Entities were 

analyzed as to whether they were only 

affected by the Amendment 21 

allocation processes (non-trawl), or if 

they were affected by both Amendments 

20 and 21 (trawl). 

The non-trawl businesses are 

associated with the following fleets: 

Limited entry fixed gear (approximately 

150 companies), open access groundfish 

(1,100), charterboats (465), and the tribal 

fleet (four tribes with 66 vessels). 

Available information on average 

revenue per vessel suggests that all the 

entities in this group can be considered 

small. 

For the trawl sector, there are 177 

permit holders. Nine limited entry trawl 

permits are associated with the catcherprocessing vessels which are considered 

‘‘large’’ companies. Of the remaining 168 

limited entry permits, 25 limited entry 

trawl permits are either owned or 

closely associated with a ‘‘large’’ shorebased processing company or with a 

non-profit organization who considers 

itself a ‘‘large’’ organization. Nine other 

permit owners indicated that they were 

large ‘‘companies.’’ Almost all of these 

companies are associated with the 

shorebased and mothership whiting 

fisheries. The remaining 134 limited 

entry trawl permits are projected to be 

held by ‘‘small’’ companies. Three of the 

six mothership processors are ‘‘large’’ 

companies. Within the 14 shorebased 

whiting first receivers/processors, there 

are four ‘‘large’’ companies. Including 

the shorebased whiting first receivers, in 

2008, there were 75 first receivers that 

purchased limited entry trawl 

groundfish. There were 36 small 

purchasers (less than $150,000); 26 

medium purchasers (purchases greater 

than $150,000 but less than $1,000,000); 

and 13 large purchasers (purchases 

greater than $1.0 million). Because of 

the costs of obtaining a ‘‘processor site 

license,’’ procuring and scheduling a 

catch monitor, and installing and using 

the electronic fish ticket software, these 

‘‘small’’ purchasers will likely opt out of 

buying groundfish, or make 

arrangements to purchase fish from 

another company that has obtained a 

processing site license. 

NMFS received several comments that 

concerned the burdens and effects on 

small businesses and on small 

communities, but not specifically on the 

IRFA. These include comments about 

the burden of paperwork and costs of 

the program on small businesses and 

small communities; that NMFS should 

minimize and mitigate impacts on small 

businesses and small communities; that 

the program should not result in an 

unfair allocation between the states; that 

the program should be designed to 

result in an even consolidation between 

states and between the sectors (nonwhiting shorebased IFQ, whiting 

shorebased IFQ, mothership sector, and 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78371 

catcher/processor sector) and that the 

program should not benefit large 

businesses at the expense of small 

businesses. 

NMFS responded to similar 

comments in the final initial issuance 

rule (75 FR 60868, October 1, 2010) on 

the impacts on small businesses. In 

particular, concerns were raised about 

negative impacts on smaller boats, 

deckhands, and smaller boats; that 

program costs to fishermen, including 

the costs of entering the fishery and the 

costs of observers and monitoring are 

too high; that observer rules need to 

change for trawl and small boats to 

reflect the vastly different bycatch 

which occurs when mistakes are made; 

about the impact of the allocation 

formulas on Fort Bragg fishermen; 

concern that average fishermen will not 

be able to afford to participate and that 

this will lead to increased consolidation 

and leave many ports no longer viable; 

about negative impacts on processors, 

that small processors will be driven out 

of business due to consolidation; and 

that it will eliminate the ‘‘mom and pop 

businesses.’’ 

NMFS has responded to these 

comments in detail in the final initial 

issuance rule. The overall general nature 

of NMFS’ response is applicable to the 

comments associated with this rule. In 

terms of impacts on small businesses, 

the trawl rationalization program is 

intended to increase net economic 

benefits, create economic stability, 

provide full utilization of the trawl 

sector allocation, consider 

environmental impacts, and promote 

conservation through individual 

accountability for catch and bycatch. 

The allocations of quota under the new 

program do not differ significantly from 

status quo allocations made biennially 

in terms of total allocations. However, 

instead of fleetwide quotas, there will 

now be individual allocations of quota 

shares and quota pounds to permit 

owners. Allocations of overfished 

species constrain all groundfish 

fishermen, for both large and small 

operations. In some cases, smaller 

operators may be constrained to a 

greater extent. This was recognized in 

development of the program, and 

operators are encouraged to work 

together cooperatively, through 

mechanisms like combining and sharing 

quota amounts. The program provides 

for leasing of additional quota as needed 

to facilitate operations. The program 

includes provisions that would have a 

beneficial impact on small entities. It 

would create a management program 

under which most recent participants in 

the Pacific Coast groundfish limited 

entry trawl fishery (many of which are 

small entities) would be eligible to 

continue participating in the fishery and 

under which the fishery itself would 

experience an increase in economic 

profitability. Small entities choosing to 

exit the fishery should receive financial 

compensation from selling their permit 

or share of the resource. To prevent a 

particular individual, corporation, or 

other entity from acquiring an excessive 

share of the total harvest privileges in 

the program, accumulation limits would 

restrict the amount of harvest privileges 

that can be held, acquired, or used by 

individuals and vessels. In addition, for 

the shoreside sector of the fishery, an 

AMP was created to mitigate any 

adverse impacts, including impacts on 

small entities and communities that 

might result from the program. 

It is expected that the shorebased IFQ 

fishery will lead to consolidation and 

this may affect small processors, 

particularly if they are in disadvantaged 

ports. Chapter 4 of the FEIS analyzed 

the effects on processors from various 

perspectives: The distribution of 

landings across west coast ports may 

change as a result of fleet consolidation, 

industry agglomeration, and the 

comparative advantage of ports (a 

function of bycatch rates in the waters 

constituting the operational area for the 

port, differences in infrastructure, and 

other factors). In particular, the Council 

analysis indicated that processors 

associated with disadvantaged 

communities may see trawl groundfish 

volumes decline. The analysis 

highlights that those processors 

receiving landings from Central 

California or Neah Bay may see a 

reduction in trawl caught groundfish if 

the market is able to redirect activity 

toward more efficient and advantaged 

ports. However, in addition to increased 

landings that are expected to result from 

the IFQ program, small processors and 

disadvantaged communities may benefit 

from the control limits, vessel limits, 

and adaptive management policies. 

Control limits will limit the ability of 

large processors to obtain shares of the 

fisheries while the adaptive 

management processes will allow the 

Council to consider the impacts on 

small processors, and disadvantaged 

communities when allocating the 

adaptive management quota (10 percent 

of the total non-whiting trawl quotas). 

Although vessel accumulation limits 

tend to lower economic efficiency and 

restrict profitability for the average 

vessel, they could help retain vessels in 

communities because more vessels 

would remain. 

Another process by which small 

processors and disadvantaged 

communities may benefit from will be 

the future development of CFAs. Some 

of the potential benefits of CFAs 

include: Ensuring access to the fishery 

resource in a particular area or 

community to benefit the local fishing 

economy; enabling the formation of risk 

pools and sharing monitoring and other 

costs; ensuring that fish delivered to a 

local area will benefit local processors 

and businesses; providing a local source 

of QSs for new entrants and others 

wanting to increase their participation 

in the fishery; increasing local 

accountability and responsibility for the 

resource; and benefiting other providers 

and users of local fishery infrastructure. 

In summary, the primary impacts of 

this rule appear to be on shoreside 

processors which are a mix of large and 

small processors, and on shorebased 

trawlers which are also a mix of large 

and small companies. The non-whiting 

shorebased trawlers are currently 

operating at a loss or at best are 

‘‘breaking even.’’ The new 

rationalization program would lead to 

profitability, but only with a reduction 

of about 50 percent of the fleet. This 

program would lead to major changes in 

the fishery. To help mitigate against 

these changes, as discussed above, the 

agency has announced its intent, subject 

to available Federal funding, that 

participants would initially be 

responsible for 10 percent of the cost of 

hiring observers and catch monitors. 

The industry proportion of the costs of 

hiring observers and catch monitors 

would be increased every year so that by 

2014, once the fishery has transitioned 

to the rationalization program, the 

industry would be responsible for 100 

percent of the cost of hiring the 

observers and catch monitors. NMFS 

believes that an incrementally reduced 

subsidy to industry funding would 

enhance the observer and catch monitor 

program’s stability, ensure 100 percent 

observer and catch monitor coverage, 

and facilitate the industries’ successful 

transition to the new quota system. In 

addition, to help mitigate against 

negative impacts of this program, the 

Council has adopted an Adaptive 

Management Program where starting in 

year 3 of the program, 10 percent of 

non-whiting QS would be set aside 

every year to address community 

impacts and industry transition needs. 

After reviewing the initial effects of IFQ 

programs in other parts of the world, the 

council had placed a short term QS 

trading prohibition so that fishermen 

can learn from their experiences and not 

make premature sales of their QS. The 

Council is also envisioning future 

regulatory processes that would allow 

community fisheries associations to be 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78372 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

established to help aid communities and 

fishermen. 

NMFS has taken a hard look at the 

reporting burden of the program and we 

believe we have reduced the burden on 

small businesses to the extent possible. 

The reporting requirements are 

necessary. With respect to the effects on 

the States including industry 

consolidation effects, NMFS 

acknowledges that this program has 

different impacts on different states and 

on different communities. This 

rulemaking does not set up an allocation 

scheme. As mentioned above, one of the 

potential purposes of the Adaptive 

Management Program is to address 

differential impacts upon communities 

and thus the states. 

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 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. 

As part of this rulemaking process, a 

small entity compliance guide (the 

guide) was prepared. Copies of this final 

rule are available from the Northwest 

Regional Office and the guide will be 

sent to all permit owners for the fishery. 

The guide and this final rule will also 

be available on the Northwest Regional 

Office Web site (see ADDRESSES) and 

upon request. 

This final rule contains a collectionof-information requirement subject to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and 

which has been approved by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) 

under control numbers 0648–0271 

(Northwest Region Logbook Family of 

Forms), 0648–0573 (Expanded Vessel 

Monitoring System Requirement for the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery), 

0648–0593 (NMFS Observer Programs’ 

Information That Can be Gathered Only 

Through Questions), 0648–0618 (West 

Coast Groundfish Trawl Economic 

Data), 0648–0620 (Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Trawl—permits and 

licenses), and 0648–0619 (Northwest 

Region Groundfish Trawl Fishery 

Monitoring and Catch Accounting 

Program). Public reporting burden for 

the Economic Data Collection survey is 

estimated to average 8 hours per 

response (268 responses). Public 

reporting burden for QS Permit Renewal 

Application is estimated to average 0.33 

hours per response (120 responses), 

First Receiver Site License Initial 

Issuance/Renewal Application is 

estimated to average 0.5 hours per 

response (80 responses), MS Renewal 

Application is estimated to average 0.33 

hours per response (6 responses), MS 

Transfer Application is estimated to 

average 0.5 hours per response (3 

responses), C/P Coop Permit Transfer 

Application is estimated to average 3 

hours per response (1 response), MS 

Coop Permit Application is estimated to 

average 3 hours per response (1 

response), Change in vessel fishing for 

coop form is estimated to average 0.33 

hours per response (3 responses), 

Material Change form is estimated to 

average 2 hours per response (3 

responses), MS Withdrawal/Mutual 

Exception form is estimated to average 

2 hours per response (2 responses), 

Ownership Interest Form Renewal is 

estimated to average 0.5 hours per 

response (156 responses), Ownership 

Interest Form Transfer, is estimated to 

average 0.5 hours per response (20 

responses), Vessel Account Registration 

(Initial) is estimated to average 0.5 hours 

per response (120 responses), Vessel 

Account Registration (ongoing) is 

estimated to average 0.5 hours per 

response (10 responses), Vessel Account 

Renewal (annual) is estimated to 

average 0.33 hour per response (30 

responses), QS Account Registration is 

estimated to average 1 hour per 

response (1 response), QS/QP transfer 

from QS account to vessel account is 

estimated to average 0.25 hours per 

response (180 responses), QP Transfer 

from vessel account to vessel account is 

estimated to average 0.25 hours per 

response (600 responses), Transaction 

Dispute Request is estimated to average 

1 hour per response (10 responses). 

Public reporting burden for the catch 

monitor providers, Application 

preparation & submission is estimated 

to average 10 hours per response (3 

responses), Training registration is 

estimated to average 1 hour per 

response (3 responses), Exit Interview 

registration is estimated to average 10 

minutes per response (3 responses), 

Appeals—written response and 

submission is estimated to average 4 

hours per response (1 response). Public 

reporting burden for the catch monitors 

application appeals—written response & 

submission is estimated to average 4 

hours per response (5 responses). Public 

reporting burden for the catch 

monitoring plans, Preparation & 

submission is estimated to average 4 

hours per response (80 responses), 

Inspection is estimated to average 2 

hours per response (80 response), 

inseason scale testing is estimated to 

average 1 hour per response (80 

responses), reports are estimated to 

average 10 minutes per response (2,400 

responses). Public reporting burden for 

electronic fish tickets is estimated to 

average 10 minutes per response (400 

responses). Public reporting burden for 

the changes to the declaration reporting 

system (OMB Control No. 0648–0573) 

and the changes to the observer program 

(OMB Control No. 0648–0593) are not 

expected to change the public reporting 

burden. Public reporting burden for the 

changes to the cease fishing report for 

the at-sea whiting fisheries (OMB 

Control No. 0648–0271) will reduce the 

public reporting burden. These 

estimates include the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection information. 

Send comments on these or any other 

aspects of the collection of information 

to NMFS, Northwest Region, at the 

ADDRESSES section above; and to OMB 

by e-mail to 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov; or fax 

to 202–395–7285. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, and no person shall be 

subject to penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

NMFS issued Biological Opinions 

under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) on August 10, 1990, November 

26, 1991, August 28, 1992, September 

27, 1993, May 14, 1996, and December 

15, 1999 pertaining to the effects of the 

Pacific Coast groundfish FMP fisheries 

on Chinook salmon (Puget Sound, 

Snake River spring/summer, Snake 

River fall, upper Columbia River spring, 

lower Columbia River, upper Willamette 

River, Sacramento River winter, Central 

Valley spring, California coastal), coho 

salmon (Central California coastal, 

southern Oregon/northern California 

coastal), chum salmon (Hood Canal 

summer, Columbia River), sockeye 

salmon (Snake River, Ozette Lake), and 

steelhead (upper, middle and lower 

Columbia River, Snake River Basin, 

upper Willamette River, central 

California coast, California Central 

Valley, south/central California, 

northern California, southern 

California). These biological opinions 

have concluded that implementation of 

the FMP for the Pacific Coast groundfish 

fishery was not expected to jeopardize 

the continued existence of any 

endangered or threatened species under 

the jurisdiction of NMFS, or result in 

the destruction or adverse modification 

of critical habitat. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78373 

NMFS reinitiated a formal section 7 

consultation under the ESA in 2005 for 

both the Pacific whiting midwater trawl 

fishery and the groundfish bottom trawl 

fishery. The December 19, 1999, 

Biological Opinion had defined an 

11,000 Chinook incidental take 

threshold for the Pacific whiting fishery. 

During the 2005 Pacific whiting season, 

the 11,000 fish Chinook incidental take 

threshold was exceeded, triggering 

reinitiation. Also in 2005, new data 

from the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program became available, 

allowing NMFS to complete an analysis 

of salmon take in the bottom trawl 

fishery. 

NMFS prepared a Supplemental 

Biological Opinion dated March 11, 

2006, which addressed salmon take in 

both the Pacific whiting midwater trawl 

and groundfish bottom trawl fisheries. 

In its 2006 Supplemental Biological 

Opinion, NMFS concluded that catch 

rates of salmon in the 2005 whiting 

fishery were consistent with 

expectations considered during prior 

consultations. Chinook bycatch has 

averaged about 7,300 fish over the last 

15 years and has only occasionally 

exceeded the reinitiation trigger of 

11,000 fish. 

Since 1999, annual Chinook bycatch 

has averaged about 8,450 fish. The 

Chinook ESUs most likely affected by 

the whiting fishery has generally 

improved in status since the 1999 

section 7 consultation. Although these 

species remain at risk, as indicated by 

their ESA listing, NMFS concluded that 

the higher observed bycatch in 2005 

does not require a reconsideration of its 

prior ‘‘no jeopardy’’ conclusion with 

respect to the fishery. For the 

groundfish bottom trawl fishery, NMFS 

concluded that incidental take in the 

groundfish fisheries is within the 

overall limits articulated in the 

Incidental Take Statement of the 1999 

Biological Opinion. The groundfish 

bottom trawl limit from that opinion 

was 9,000 fish annually. NMFS will 

continue to monitor and collect data to 

analyze take levels. NMFS also 

reaffirmed its prior determination that 

implementation of the Groundfish FMP 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any of the affected ESUs. 

Lower Columbia River coho (70 FR 

37160, June 28, 2005) were recently 

listed and Oregon Coastal coho (73 FR 

7816, February 11, 2008) were recently 

relisted as threatened under the ESA. 

The 1999 biological opinion concluded 

that the bycatch of salmonids in the 

Pacific whiting fishery were almost 

entirely Chinook salmon, with little or 

no bycatch of coho, chum, sockeye, and 

steelhead. 

The Southern Distinct Population 

Segment (DPS) of green sturgeon was 

listed as threatened under the ESA (71 

FR 17757, April 7, 2006). The southern 

DPS of Pacific eulachon was listed as 

threatened on March 18, 2010, under 

the ESA (75 FR 13012). NMFS has 

reinitiated consultation on the fishery, 

including impacts on green sturgeon, 

eulachon, marine mammals, and turtles. 

After reviewing the available 

information, NMFS has concluded that, 

consistent with Sections 7(a)(2) and 7(d) 

of the ESA, the proposed action would 

not jeopardize any listed species, would 

not adversely modify any designated 

critical habitat, and would not result in 

any irreversible or irretrievable 

commitment of resources that would 

have the effect of foreclosing the 

formulation or implementation of any 

reasonable and prudent alternative 

measures. 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP 

were developed after meaningful 

consultation and collaboration, through 

the Council process, with the tribal 

representative on the Council. The 

Amendments have no direct effect on 

tribes; these proposed regulations were 

deemed by the Council as ‘‘necessary or 

appropriate’’ to implement the FMP as 

amended. 

List of Subjects 

15 CFR Part 902 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

50 CFR Part 660 

Fisheries, Fishing, and Indian 

fisheries. 

Dated: December 1, 2010. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 15 CFR chapter IX and 50 

CFR chapter VI are amended as follows: 

15 CFR Chapter IX 

PART 902—NOAA INFORMATION 

COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER 

THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: 

OMB CONTROL NUMBERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 902 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 902.1(b), in the table under the 

entry ‘‘50 CFR’’, add new entries and 

corresponding OMB numbers for 

§§ 660.13, 660.14, 660.16, 660.17, 

660.114, 660.140, 660.150, 660.160, 

660.216, and 660.316; and revise the 

entries for §§ 660.25 and 660.113. 

The additions and revisions read as 

follows: 

§ 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned 

pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

CFR part or section where 

the information collection 

requirement is located 

Current OMB 

control number 

(all numbers 

begin with 

0648–) 

* * * * * 

50 CFR 

* * * * * 

660.13 ............................ –0573 

660.14 ............................ –0573 

660.16 ............................ –0593 

660.17 ............................ –0619 

660.25 ............................ –0203, –0620 

660.113 .......................... –0271, –0573, 

–0618, –0619 

660.114 .......................... –0618 

660.140 .......................... –0593, –0619, 

–0620 

660.150 .......................... –0593, –0620 

660.160 .......................... –0593, –0620 

660.216 .......................... –0593 

* * * * * 

660.316 .......................... –0593 

* * * * * 

50 CFR Chapter VI 

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 660 

is revised 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. 

■ 4. In § 660.11, the definitions for 

‘‘Processing or to process’’ and 

‘‘Processor’’ are revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.11 General definitions. 

* * * * * 

Processing or to process means the 

preparation or packaging of groundfish 

to render it suitable for human 

consumption, retail sale, industrial uses 

or long-term storage, including, but not 

limited to, cooking, canning, smoking, 

salting, drying, filleting, freezing, or 

rendering into meal or oil, but does not 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78374 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

mean heading and gutting unless 

additional preparation is done. (Also see 

an exception to certain requirements at 

§ 660.131(a), subpart D pertaining to 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessels 75-ft 

(23-m) or less LOA that, in addition to 

heading and gutting, remove the tails 

and freeze catch at sea.) 

(1) At-sea processing means 

processing that takes place on a vessel 

or other platform that floats and is 

capable of being moved from one 

location to another, whether shorebased or on the water. 

(2) Shorebased processing or 

processing means processing that takes 

place at a facility that is permanently 

fixed to land. (Also see the definition for 

shoreside processing at § 660.140, 

subpart D which defines shoreside 

processing for the purposes of 

qualifying for a Shorebased IFQ Program 

QS permit.) For the purposes of 

economic data collection in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, shorebased 

processing means either of the 

following: 

(i) Any activity that takes place 

shoreside; and that involves: Cutting 

groundfish into smaller portions; or 

freezing, cooking, smoking, drying 

groundfish; or packaging that 

groundfish for resale into 100 pound 

units or smaller; for sale or distribution 

into a wholesale or retail market. 

(ii) The purchase and redistribution in 

to a wholesale or retail market of live 

groundfish from a harvesting vessel. 

Processor means a person, vessel, or 

facility that engages in commercial 

processing; or receives live groundfish 

directly from a fishing vessel for retail 

sale without further processing. (Also 

see the definition for processors at 

§ 660.140, subpart D which defines 

processor for the purposes of qualifying 

for initial issuance of QS in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program.) 

(1) For the purposes of economic data 

collection in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, shorebased processor means a 

person that engages in commercial 

processing, that is an operation working 

on U.S. soil or permanently fixed to 

land, that takes delivery of fish that has 

not been subject to at-sea processing or 

shorebased processing; and that 

thereafter engages that particular fish in 

shorebased processing; and excludes 

retailers, such as grocery stores and 

markets, which receive whole or headed 

and gutted fish that are then filleted and 

packaged for retail sale. At § 660.114(b), 

trawl fishery—economic data collection 

program, the definition of processor is 

further refined to describe which 

shorebased processors are required to 

submit their economic data collection 

forms. 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 660.12, paragraph (e)(7) and 

(e)(8) are revised, paragraph (f) is 

redesignated as paragraph (g), and a new 

paragraph (f) is added to read as follows: 

§ 660.12 General groundfish prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(7) Fail to provide departure or cease 

fishing reports specified at §§ 660.140, 

660.150, 660.160, subpart D; § 660.216, 

subpart E; or § 660.316, subpart F. 

(8) Fail to meet the vessel 

responsibilities specified at §§ 660.140, 

660.150, 660.160, subpart D; § 660.216, 

subpart E; or § 660.316, subpart F. 

(9) Fail to meet the observer provider 

responsibilities specified at §§ 660.140, 

660.150, 660.160, subpart D. 

(f) Groundfish catch monitor program. 

(1) Forcibly assault, resist, oppose, 

impede, intimidate, harass, sexually 

harass, bribe, or interfere with a catch 

monitor. 

(2) Interfere with or bias the 

monitoring procedure employed by a 

catch monitor, including either 

mechanically or manually sorting or 

discarding catch before it’s monitored. 

(3) Tamper with, destroy, or discard a 

catch monitor’s collected samples, 

equipment, records, photographic film, 

papers, or personal effects. 

(4) Harass a catch monitor by conduct 

that: 

(i) Has sexual connotations, 

(ii) Has the purpose or effect of 

interfering with the catch monitor’s 

work performance, and/or 

(iii) Otherwise creates an 

intimidating, hostile, or offensive 

environment. In determining whether 

conduct constitutes harassment, the 

totality of the circumstances, including 

the nature of the conduct and the 

context in which it occurred, will be 

considered. The determination of the 

legality of a particular action will be 

made from the facts on a case-by-case 

basis. 

(5) Receive, purchase, or take custody, 

control, or possession of a delivery 

without catch monitor coverage when 

such coverage is required under 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

(6) Fail to allow the catch monitor 

unobstructed access to catch sorting, 

processing, catch counting, catch 

weighing, or electronic or paper fish 

tickets. 

(7) Fail to provide reasonable 

assistance to the catch monitor. 

(8) Require, pressure, coerce, or 

threaten a catch monitor to perform 

duties normally performed by 

employees of the first receiver, 

including, but not limited to duties 

associated with the receiving of landing, 

processing of fish, sorting of catch, or 

the storage of the finished product. 

(9) Fail to meet the catch monitor 

provider responsibilities specified at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 660.13, paragraph (d)(5)(iv) 

introductory text, paragraph 

(d)(5)(iv)(A) introductory text, and 

paragraphs (d)(5)(iv)(A)(1) through (4), 

and (6) through (8) are revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(5) * * * 

(iv) Declaration reports will include: 

The vessel name and/or identification 

number, and gear type (as defined in 

paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A) of this section). 

Upon receipt of a declaration report, 

NMFS will provide a confirmation code 

or receipt to confirm that a valid 

declaration report was received for the 

vessel. Retention of the confirmation 

code or receipt to verify that a valid 

declaration report was filed and the 

declaration requirement was met is the 

responsibility of the vessel owner or 

operator. Vessels using nontrawl gear 

may declare more than one gear type 

with the exception of vessels 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program (i.e. gear switching), however, 

vessels using trawl gear may only 

declare one of the trawl gear types listed 

in paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A) of this section 

on any trip and may not declare 

nontrawl gear on the same trip in which 

trawl gear is declared. 

(A) One of the following gear types or 

sectors must be declared: 

(1) Limited entry fixed gear, not 

including shorebased IFQ, 

(2) Limited entry groundfish nontrawl, shorebased IFQ, 

(3) Limited entry midwater trawl, 

non-whiting shorebased IFQ, 

(4) Limited entry midwater trawl, 

Pacific whiting shorebased IFQ, 

* * * * * 

(6) Limited entry midwater trawl, 

Pacific whiting mothership sector 

(catcher vessel or mothership), 

(7) Limited entry bottom trawl, 

shorebased IFQ, not including demersal 

trawl, 

(8) Limited entry demersal trawl, 

shorebased IFQ, 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 660.14, paragraph (b)(1) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.14 Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78375 

(1) Any vessel registered for use with 

a limited entry ‘‘A’’ endorsed permit 

(i.e., not an MS permit) that fishes in 

state or Federal waters seaward of the 

baseline from which the territorial sea is 

measured off the States of Washington, 

Oregon or California (0–200 nm 

offshore). 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Section 660.15 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.15 Equipment requirements. 

(a) Applicability. This section 

contains the equipment and operational 

requirements for scales used to weigh 

catch at sea, scales used to weigh catch 

at IFQ first receivers, computer 

hardware for electronic fish ticket 

software, and computer hardware for 

electronic logbook software. Unless 

otherwise specified by regulation, the 

operator or manager must retain, for 3 

years, a copy of all records described in 

this section and make available the 

records upon request of NMFS staff or 

authorized officer. 

(b) Scales used to weigh catch at 

sea—performance and technical 

requirements. (1) Scales approved by 

NMFS for MS and C/P Coop Programs. 

A scale used to weigh catch in the MS 

and C/P Coop Programs must meet the 

type evaluation and initial inspection 

requirements set forth in 50 CFR 

679.28(b)(1) and (2), and must be 

approved by NMFS. 

(2) Annual inspection. Once a scale is 

installed on a vessel and approved by 

NMFS for use, it must be inspected 

annually as described in 50 CFR 

679.28(b). 

(3) Daily testing. Each scale must be 

tested daily and meet the maximum 

permissible error (MPE) requirements 

described at described at paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section. 

(4) At-sea scale tests. To verify that 

the scale meets the maximum 

permissible errors (MPEs) specified in 

this paragraph, the vessel operator must 

ensure that vessel crew test each scale 

used to weigh catch at least one time 

during each 24-hour period when use of 

the scale is required. The vessel owner 

must ensure that these tests are 

performed in an accurate and timely 

manner. 

(i) Belt scales. The MPE for the daily 

at-sea scale test is plus or minus 3 

percent of the known weight of the test 

material. The scale must be tested by 

weighing at least 400 kg (882 lb) of fish 

or an alternative material supplied by 

the scale manufacturer on the scale 

under test. The known weight of the fish 

or test material must be determined by 

weighing it on a platform scale 

approved for use under 50 CFR 

679.28(b)(7). 

(ii) Platform scales used for observer 

sampling on MSs and C/Ps. A platform 

scale used for observer sampling must 

be tested at 10, 25, and 50 kg (or 20, 50, 

and 100 lb if the scale is denominated 

in pounds) using approved test weights. 

The MPE for the daily at-sea scale test 

is plus or minus 0.5 percent. 

(iii) Approved test weights. Each test 

weight must have its weight stamped on 

or otherwise permanently affixed to it. 

The weight of each test weight must be 

annually certified by a National Institute 

of Standards and Technology approved 

metrology laboratory or approved for 

continued use by the NMFS authorized 

inspector at the time of the annual scale 

inspection. 

(iv) Requirements for all at-sea scale 

tests. The vessel operator must ensure 

that vessel crew: 

(A) Notify the observer at least 15 

minutes before the time that the test will 

be conducted, and conduct the test 

while the observer is present. 

(B) Conduct the scale test and record 

the following information on the at-sea 

scale test report form: 

(1) Vessel name; 

(2) Month, day, and year of test; 

(3) Time test started to the nearest 

minute; 

(4) Known weight of test weights; 

(5) Weight of test weights recorded by 

scale; 

(6) Percent error as determined by 

subtracting the known weight of the test 

weights from the weight recorded on the 

scale, dividing that amount by the 

known weight of the test weights, and 

multiplying by 100; and 

(7) Sea conditions at the time of the 

scale test. 

(C) Maintain the test report form on 

board the vessel until the end of the 

fishing year during which the tests were 

conducted, and make the report forms 

available to observers, NMFS staff, or 

authorized officers. In addition, the 

vessel owner must retain the scale test 

report forms for 3 years after the end of 

the fishing year during which the tests 

were performed. Each scale test report 

form must be signed by the vessel 

operator immediately following 

completion of each scale test. 

(5) Scale maintenance. The vessel 

owner must ensure that the vessel 

operator maintains the scale in proper 

operating condition throughout its use, 

that adjustments made to the scale are 

made so as to bring the performance 

errors as close as practicable to a zero 

value, and that no adjustment is made 

that will cause the scale to weigh 

inaccurately. 

(6) Printed reports from the scale. The 

vessel owner must ensure that the 

printed reports are provided to NMFS as 

required by this paragraph. Printed 

reports from the scale must be 

maintained on board the vessel until the 

end of the year during which the reports 

were made, and be made available to 

NMFS staff or authorized officers. In 

addition, the vessel owner must retain 

printed reports for 3 years after the end 

of the year during which the printouts 

were made. 

(i) Reports of catch weight and 

cumulative weight. Reports must be 

printed at least once every 24 hours. 

Reports must also be printed before any 

information stored in the scale 

computer memory is replaced. Scale 

weights must not be adjusted by the 

scale operator to account for the 

perceived weight of water, slime, mud, 

debris, or other materials. Scale 

printouts must show: 

(A) The vessel name and Federal 

vessel permit number; 

(B) The date and time the information 

was printed; 

(C) The haul number; 

(D) The total weight of the haul; and 

(E) The total cumulative weight of all 

fish and other material weighed on the 

scale since the last annual inspection. 

(ii) Printed report from the audit trail. 

The printed report must include the 

information specified in sections 

2.3.1.8, 3.3.1.7, and 4.3.1.8 of appendix 

A to 50 CFR part 679. The printed report 

must be provided to the authorized 

scale inspector at each scale inspection 

and must also be printed at any time 

upon request of NMFS staff or other 

authorized officer. 

(iii) Platform scales used for observer 

sampling. A platform scale used for 

observer sampling is not required to 

produce a printed record. 

(c) Scales used to weigh catch at IFQ 

first receivers—performance and 

technical requirements. Scale 

requirements in this paragraph are in 

addition to those requirements set forth 

by the State in which the scale is 

located, and nothing in this paragraph 

may be construed to reduce or 

supersede the authority of the State to 

regulate, test, or approve scales within 

the State. Scales used to weigh catch 

that are also required to be approved by 

the State must meet the following 

requirements: 

(1) Verification of approval. The scale 

must display a valid sticker indicating 

that the scale is currently approved in 

accordance with the laws of the state 

where the scale is located. 

(2) Visibility. NMFS staff, NMFSauthorized personnel, or authorized 

officers must be allowed to observe the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78376 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

weighing of catch on the scale and be 

allowed to read the scale display at all 

times. 

(3) Printed scale weights. (i) An IFQ 

first receiver must ensure that printouts 

of the scale weight of each delivery or 

offload are made available to NMFS 

staff, to NMFS-authorized personnel, or 

to authorized officers at the time 

printouts are generated. An IFQ first 

receiver must maintain printouts on site 

until the end of the fishing year during 

which the printouts were made and 

make them available upon request by 

NMFS staff, NMFS-authorized 

personnel, or authorized officers for 3 

years after the end of the fishing year 

during which the printout was made. 

(ii) All scales identified in a catch 

monitoring plan (see § 660.140(f)(3), 

subpart D) must produce a printed 

record for each delivery, or portion of a 

delivery, weighed on that scale, unless 

specifically exempted by NMFS. NMFS 

may exempt, as part of the NMFSaccepted catch monitoring plan, scales 

not designed for automatic bulk 

weighing from part or all of the printed 

record requirements. For scales that 

must produce a printed record, the 

printed record must include: 

(A) The IFQ first receiver’s name; 

(B) The weight of each load in the 

weighing cycle; 

(C) The total weight of fish in each 

landing, or portion of the landing that 

was weighed on that scale; 

(D) The date the information is 

printed; and 

(E) The name and vessel registration 

or documentation number of the vessel 

making the delivery. The scale operator 

may write this information on the scale 

printout in ink at the time of printing. 

(4) Inseason scale testing. IFQ first 

receivers must allow, and provide 

reasonable assistance to NMFS staff, 

NMFS-authorized personnel, and 

authorized officers to test scales used to 

weigh IFQ catch. A scale that does not 

pass an inseason test may not be used 

to weigh IFQ catch until the scale passes 

an inseason test or is approved for 

continued use by the weights and 

measures authorities of the State in 

which the scale is located. 

(i) Inseason testing criteria. To pass an 

inseason test, NMFS staff or authorized 

officers must be able to verify that: 

(A) The scale display and printed 

information are clear and easily read 

under all conditions of normal 

operation; 

(B) Weight values are visible on the 

display until the value is printed; 

(C) The scale does not exceed the 

maximum permissible errors specified 

in the following table: 

Test load in scale divisions 

Maximum 

error in scale 

divisions 

(1) 0–500 .............................. 1 

(2) 501–2,000 ....................... 2 

(3) 2,001–4,000 .................... 3 

(4) >4,000 ............................. 4 

(D) Automatic weighing systems. An 

automatic weighing system must be 

provided and operational that will 

prevent fish from passing over the scale 

or entering any weighing hopper unless 

the following criteria are met: 

(1) No catch may enter or leave a 

weighing hopper until the weighing 

cycle is complete; 

(2) No product may be cycled and 

weighed if the weight recording element 

is not operational; and 

(3) No product may enter a weighing 

hopper until the prior weighing cycle 

has been completed and the scale 

indicator has returned to a zero. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(d) Electronic fish tickets. IFQ first 

receivers using the electronic fish ticket 

software provided by Pacific States 

Marine Fisheries Commission are 

required to meet the hardware and 

software requirements below. Those IFQ 

first receivers who have NMFSapproved software compatible with the 

standards specified by Pacific States 

Marine Fisheries Commission for 

electronic fish tickets are not subject to 

any specific hardware or software 

requirements. 

(1) Hardware and software 

requirements. (i) A personal computer 

with Pentium 75-MHz or higher. 

Random Access Memory (RAM) must 

have sufficient megabyte (MB) space to 

run the operating system, plus an 

additional 8 MB for the software 

application and available hard disk 

space of 217 MB or greater. A CD–ROM 

drive with a Video Graphics Adapter 

(VGA) or higher resolution monitor 

(super VGA is recommended). 

(ii) Microsoft Windows 2000 (64 MB 

or greater RAM required), Windows XP 

(128 MB or greater RAM required), or 

later operating system. 

(iii) Microsoft Access 2003 or newer. 

(2) NMFS approved software 

standards and internet access. The IFQ 

first receiver is responsible for 

obtaining, installing, and updating 

electronic fish tickets software either 

provided by Pacific States Marine 

Fisheries Commission, or compatible 

with the data export specifications 

specified by Pacific States Marine 

Fisheries Commission and for 

maintaining internet access sufficient to 

transmit data files via e-mail. Requests 

for data export specifications can be 

submitted to: Attn: Electronic Fish 

Ticket Monitoring, National Marine 

Fisheries Service, Northwest Region, 

Sustainable Fisheries Division, 7600 

Sand Point Way, NE, Seattle, WA 98115. 

(3) Maintenance. The IFQ first 

receiver is responsible for ensuring that 

all hardware and software required 

under this subsection are fully 

operational and functional whenever 

they receive, purchase, or take custody, 

control, or possession of an IFQ landing. 

(4) Improving data quality. Vessel 

owners and operators, IFQ first 

receivers, or shoreside processor 

owners, or managers may contact NMFS 

in writing to request assistance in 

improving data quality and resolving 

issues. Requests may be submitted to: 

Attn: Electronic Fish Ticket Monitoring, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Northwest Region, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE, 

Seattle, WA 98115. 

■ 9. Section 660.16 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.16 Groundfish observer program. 

(a) General. Vessel owners, operators, 

and managers are jointly and severally 

responsible for their vessel’s compliance 

with observer requirements specified in 

this section and within §§ 660.140, 

660.150, 660.160, subpart D; § 660.216, 

subpart E; § 660.316, subpart F; or 

subpart G. 

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the 

Groundfish Observer Program is to 

collect fisheries data necessary and 

appropriate for, among other relevant 

purposes, management, compliance 

monitoring, and research in the 

groundfish fisheries and for the 

conservation of living marine resources. 

(c) Observer coverage requirements. 

The following table provides references 

to the paragraphs in the Pacific coast 

groundfish subparts that contain fishery 

specific requirements. Observer 

coverage required for the Shorebased 

IFQ Program, MS Coop Program, or 

C/P Coop Program shall not be used to 

comply with observer coverage 

requirements for any other Pacific coast 

groundfish fishery in which that vessel 

may also participate. 

West Coast Groundfish Fishery Regulation section 

(1) Shorebased IFQ Program—Trawl Fishery ...................................................................................................................... § 660.140, subpart D. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78377 

West Coast Groundfish Fishery Regulation section 

(2) MS Coop Program—Whiting At-sea Trawl Fishery ........................................................................................................ § 660.150, subpart D. 

(3) C/P Coop Program—Whiting At-sea Trawl Fishery ........................................................................................................ § 660.160, subpart D. 

(4) Fixed Gear Fisheries ....................................................................................................................................................... § 660.216, subpart E. 

(5) Open Access Fisheries ................................................................................................................................................... § 660.316, subpart F. 

■ 10. Section 660.17 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.17 Catch monitors and catch 

monitor providers. 

(a) Catch monitor certification. Catch 

monitor certification authorizes an 

individual to fulfill duties as specified 

by NMFS while under the employ of a 

certified catch monitor provider. 

(b) Catch monitor certification 

requirements. NMFS may certify 

individuals who: 

(1) Are employed by a certified catch 

monitor provider at the time of the 

issuance of the certification and 

qualified, as described at paragraph 

(e)(1)(i) through (viii) of this section and 

have provided proof of qualifications to 

NMFS, through the certified catch 

monitor provider. 

(2) Have successfully completed 

NMFS-approved training. 

(i) Successful completion of training 

by an applicant consists of meeting all 

attendance and conduct standards 

issued in writing at the start of training; 

meeting all performance standards 

issued in writing at the start of training 

for assignments, tests, and other 

evaluation tools; and completing all 

other training requirements established 

by NMFS. 

(ii) If a candidate fails training, he or 

she will be notified in writing on or 

before the last day of training. The 

notification will indicate: The reasons 

the candidate failed the training; 

whether the candidate can retake the 

training, and under what conditions. 

(3) Have not been decertified as an 

observer or catch monitor under 

provisions in §§ 660.18, 660.140(h)(6), 

660.150(g)(6), and 660.160(g)(6). 

(4) Existing catch monitors as of 2010. 

A catch monitor who has completed 

sampling or monitoring activities in 

2010 in NMFS-managed West Coast 

groundfish fisheries, and has not had 

his or her certification revoked during 

or after that time, will be considered to 

have met his or her certification 

requirements under this section. These 

catch monitors will be issued a new 

catch monitor certification prior to their 

first deployment to a first receiver after 

December 31, 2010, unless NMFS 

determines that he or she has not 

completed any additional training 

required for this program. 

(c) Catch monitor standards of 

behavior. Catch monitors must do the 

following: 

(1) Perform authorized duties as 

described in training and instructional 

manuals or other written and oral 

instructions provided by NMFS. 

(2) Accurately record and submit the 

required data, which includes fish 

species composition, identification, 

sorting, and weighing information. 

(3) Write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations. 

(4) Keep confidential and not disclose 

data and observations collected at the 

first receiver to any person except, 

NMFS staff or authorized officers or 

others as specifically authorized by 

NMFS. 

(d) Catch monitor provider 

certification. Persons seeking to provide 

catch monitor services under this 

section must obtain a catch monitor 

provider certification from NMFS. 

(1) Applications. Persons seeking to 

provide catch monitor services must 

submit a completed application by mail 

to the NMFS Northwest Region, Permits 

Office, ATTN: Catch Monitor 

Coordinator, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE, 

Seattle, WA 98115. An application for a 

catch monitor provider permit shall 

consist of a narrative that contains the 

following: 

(i) Identification of the management, 

organizational structure, and ownership 

structure of the applicant’s business, 

including identification by name and 

general function of all controlling 

management interests in the company, 

including but not limited to owners, 

board members, officers, authorized 

agents, and staff. If the applicant is a 

corporation, the articles of incorporation 

must be provided. If the applicant is a 

partnership, the partnership agreement 

must be provided. 

(ii) Contact information. (A) The 

owner’s permanent mailing address, 

telephone, and fax numbers. 

(B) The business mailing address, 

including the physical location, e-mail 

address, telephone and fax numbers. 

(C) Any authorized agent’s mailing 

address, physical location, e-mail 

address, telephone and fax numbers. An 

authorized agent means a person 

appointed and maintained within the 

United States who is authorized to 

receive and respond to any legal process 

issued in the United States to an owner 

or employee of a catch monitor 

provider. 

(iii) Prior experience. A statement 

identifying prior relevant experience in 

recruiting, hiring, deploying, and 

providing support for individuals in 

marine work environments in the 

groundfish fishery or other fisheries of 

similar scale. 

(iv) Ability to perform or carry out 

responsibilities of a catch monitor 

provider. A description of the 

applicant’s ability to carry out the 

responsibilities of a catch monitor 

provider is set out under paragraph (e) 

of this section. 

(v) A statement describing any 

criminal convictions of each owner and 

board member, officer, authorized agent, 

and staff; a list of Federal contracts held 

and related performance ratings; and, a 

description of any previous 

decertification actions that may have 

been taken while working as an observer 

or observer provider. 

(vi) A statement describing each 

owner and board member, officer, 

authorized agent, and staff indicating 

that they are free from conflict of 

interest as described under § 660.18(d). 

(2) Application review. (i) The 

certification official, described in 

§ 660.18(a), may issue catch monitor 

provider certifications upon 

determination that the application 

submitted by the candidate meets all 

requirements specified in paragraph 

(d)(2)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) Issuance of the certification will, 

at a minimum, be based on the 

completeness of the application, as well 

as the following criteria: 

(A) The applicant’s ability to carry out 

the responsibilities and relevant 

experience; 

(B) Satisfactory performance ratings 

on any Federal contracts held by the 

applicant. 

(C) Absence of a conflict of interest. 

(D) Absence of relevant criminal 

convictions. 

(3) Agency determination. The 

certification official will make a 

determination to approve or deny the 

application and notify the applicant by 

letter via certified return receipt mail, 

within 60 days of receipt of the 

application. Additional certification 

procedures are specified in § 660.18, 

subpart C. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78378 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(4) Existing catch monitor providers 

as of 2010. NMFS-certified providers 

who deployed catch monitors in a 

NMFS-managed West Coast groundfish 

fishery or observers under the North 

Pacific Groundfish Program in 2010, are 

exempt from the requirement to apply 

for a permit for 2011 and will be issued 

a catch monitor provider permit 

effective through December 31, 2011, 

except that a change in ownership of an 

existing catch monitor provider or 

observer provider after January 1, 2011, 

requires a new permit application under 

this section. To receive catch monitor 

certification for 2012 and beyond, these 

exempted catch monitor providers must 

follow application procedures otherwise 

set forth in this section. 

(e) Catch monitor provider 

responsibilities. (1) Provide qualified 

candidates to serve as catch monitors. 

To be qualified a candidate must: 

(i) Be a U.S. citizen or have 

authorization to work in the United 

States; 

(ii) Be at least 18 years of age; 

(iii) Have a high school diploma and; 

(A) At least two years of study from 

an accredited college with a major study 

in natural resource management, natural 

sciences, earth sciences, natural 

resource anthropology, law 

enforcement/police science, criminal 

justice, public administration, 

behavioral sciences, environmental 

sociology, or other closely related 

subjects pertinent to the management 

and protection of natural resources, or; 

(B) One year of specialized experience 

performing duties which involved 

communicating effectively and 

obtaining cooperation, identifying and 

reporting problems or apparent 

violations of regulations concerning the 

use of protected or public land areas, 

and carrying out policies and 

procedures within a recreational area or 

natural resource site. 

(iv) Computer skills that enable the 

candidate to work competently with 

standard database software and 

computer hardware. 

(v) Have a current and valid driver’s 

license. 

(vi) Have had a background 

investigation and been found to have 

had no criminal or civil convictions that 

would affect their performance or 

credibility as a catch monitor. 

(vii) Have had health and physical 

fitness exams and been found to be fit 

for the job duties and work conditions; 

(A) Physical fitness exams shall be 

conducted by a medical doctor who has 

been provided with a description of the 

job duties and work conditions and who 

provides a written conclusion regarding 

the candidate’s fitness relative to the 

required duties and work conditions. A 

signed and dated statement from a 

licensed physician that he or she has 

physically examined a catch monitor or 

catch monitor candidate. The statement 

must confirm that, based on that 

physical examination, the catch monitor 

or catch monitor candidate does not 

have any health problems or conditions 

that would jeopardize that individual’s 

safety or the safety of others while 

deployed, or prevent the catch monitor 

or catch monitor candidate from 

performing his or her duties 

satisfactorily. The physician’s statement 

must be submitted to the catch monitor 

program office prior to certification of a 

catch monitor. The physical exam must 

have occurred during the 12 months 

prior to the catch monitor’s or catch 

monitor candidate’s deployment. The 

physician’s statement will expire 12 

months after the physical exam 

occurred. A new physical exam must be 

performed, and accompanying 

statement submitted, prior to any 

deployment occurring after the 

expiration of the statement. 

(B) Physical exams may include 

testing for illegal drugs. 

(C) Certificates of insurance. Copies of 

‘‘certificates of insurance’’, that names 

the NMFS Catch Monitor Program 

leader as the ‘‘certificate holder’’, shall 

be submitted to the Catch Monitor 

Program Office by February 1 of each 

year. The certificates of insurance shall 

verify the following coverage provisions 

and state that the insurance company 

will notify the certificate holder if 

insurance coverage is changed or 

canceled. 

(1) Coverage under the U.S. Longshore 

and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act 

($1 million minimum). 

(2) States Worker’s Compensation as 

required. 

(3) Commercial General Liability. 

(viii) Have signed a statement 

indicating that they are free from 

conflict of interest as described under 

§ 660.18(c). 

(2) Standards. Provide to the 

candidate a copy of the standards of 

conduct, responsibilities, conflict of 

interest standards and drug and alcohol 

policy. 

(3) Contract. Provide to the candidate 

a copy of a written contract signed by 

the catch monitor and catch monitor 

provider that shows among other factors 

the following provisions for 

employment: 

(i) Compliance with the standards of 

conduct, responsibilities, conflict of 

interest standards and drug and alcohol 

policy; 

(ii) Willingness to complete all 

responsibilities of current deployment 

prior to performing jobs or duties which 

are not part of the catch monitor 

responsibilities. 

(iii) Commitment to return all 

sampling or safety equipment issued for 

the deployment. 

(4) Catch monitors provided to a first 

receiver. 

(i) Must have a valid catch monitor 

certification; 

(ii) Must not have informed the 

provider prior to the time of assignment 

that he or she is experiencing a mental 

illness or a physical ailment or injury 

developed since submission of the 

physician’s statement, as required in 

paragraph (e)(1)(vii)(A) of this section 

that would prevent him or her from 

performing his or her assigned duties; 

and 

(iii) Must have successfully 

completed all NMFS required training 

and briefing before assignment. 

(5) Respond to industry requests for 

catch monitors. A catch monitor 

provider must provide a catch monitor 

for assignment pursuant to the terms of 

the contractual relationship with the 

first receiver to fulfill first receiver 

requirements for catch monitor coverage 

under paragraph (e)(10)(i)(C)(1)(ii) of 

this section. An alternate catch monitor 

must be supplied in each case where 

injury or illness prevents the catch 

monitor from performing his or her 

duties or where the catch monitor 

resigns prior to completion of his or her 

duties. If the catch monitor provider is 

unable to respond to an industry request 

for catch monitor coverage from a first 

receiver for whom the provider is in a 

contractual relationship due to the lack 

of available catch monitors, the provider 

must report it to NMFS at least 4 hours 

prior to the expected assignment time. 

(6) Ensure that catch monitors 

complete duties in a timely manner. 

Catch monitor providers must ensure 

that catch monitors employed by that 

provider do the following in a complete 

and timely manner: 

(i) Submit to NMFS all data, logbooks 

and reports as required under the catch 

monitor program deadlines. 

(ii) Report for his or her scheduled 

debriefing and complete all debriefing 

responsibilities. 

(7) Provide catch monitor salaries and 

benefits. A catch monitor provider must 

provide to its catch monitor employees 

salaries and any other benefits and 

personnel services in accordance with 

the terms of each catch monitor’s 

contract. 

(8) Provide catch monitor assignment 

logistics. 

(i) A catch monitor provider must 

ensure each of its catch monitors under 

contract: 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78379 

(A) Has an individually assigned 

mobile or cell phones, in working order, 

for all necessary communication. A 

catch monitor provider may 

alternatively compensate catch monitors 

for the use of the catch monitor’s 

personal cell phone or pager for 

communications made in support of, or 

necessary for, the catch monitor’s 

duties. 

(B) Has Internet access for catch 

monitor program communications and 

data submission 

(C) Remains available to NOAA Office 

for Law Enforcement and the catch 

monitor program until the completion of 

the catch monitors’ debriefing. 

(D) Receives all necessary 

transportation, including arrangements 

and logistics, of catch monitors to the 

location of assignment, to all subsequent 

assignments during that assignment, 

and to the debriefing location when an 

assignment ends for any reason; and 

(E) Receives lodging, per diem, and 

any other services necessary to catch 

monitors assigned to first receivers, as 

specified in the contract between the 

catch monitor and catch monitor 

provider. 

(F) While under contract with a 

permitted catch monitor provider, catch 

monitor shall be provided with 

accommodations in accordance with the 

contract between the catch monitor and 

the catch monitor provider. If the catch 

monitor provider is responsible for 

providing accommodations under the 

contract with the catch monitor, the 

accommodations must be at a licensed 

hotel, motel, bed and breakfast, or other 

accommodations that have an assigned 

bed for each catch monitor that no other 

person may be assigned to for the 

duration of that catch monitor’s stay. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(9) Catch monitor assignment 

limitations and workload. 

(i) Not assign a catch monitor to the 

same first receiver for more than 90 

calendar days in a 12-month period, 

unless otherwise authorized by NMFS. 

(ii) Not exceed catch monitor 

assignment limitations and workload as 

outlined in § 660.140(i)(3)(ii), subpart D. 

(10) Maintain communications with 

catch monitors. A catch monitor 

provider must have an employee 

responsible for catch monitor activities 

on call 24 hours a day to handle 

emergencies involving catch monitors or 

problems concerning catch monitor 

logistics, whenever catch monitors are 

assigned, or in transit, or awaiting first 

receiver reassignment. 

(11) Maintain communications with 

the catch monitor program office. A 

catch monitor provider must provide all 

of the following information by 

electronic transmission (e-mail), fax, or 

other method specified by NMFS. 

(i) Catch monitor training, briefing, 

and debriefing registration materials. 

This information must be submitted to 

the catch monitor program at least 7 

business days prior to the beginning of 

a scheduled catch monitor certification 

training or briefing session. 

(A) Training registration materials 

consist of the following: 

(1) Date of requested training; 

(2) A list of catch monitor candidates 

that includes each candidate’s full name 

(i.e., first, middle and last names), date 

of birth, and gender; 

(3) A copy of each candidate’s 

academic transcripts and resume; 

(4) A statement signed by the 

candidate under penalty of perjury 

which discloses the candidate’s 

criminal convictions; 

(5) Projected candidate assignments. 

Prior to the completion of the training 

session, the catch monitor provider 

must submit to the catch monitor 

program a statement of projected catch 

monitor assignments that includes each 

catch monitor’s name and length of 

catch monitors contract. 

(B) Briefing registration materials 

consist of the following: 

(1) Date and type of requested briefing 

session; 

(2) List of catch monitors to attend the 

briefing session, that includes each 

catch monitor’s full name (first, middle, 

and last names); 

(3) Projected catch monitor 

assignments. Prior to the catch 

monitor’s completion of the briefing 

session, the catch monitor provider 

must submit to the catch monitor 

program a statement of projected catch 

monitor assignments that includes each 

catch monitor’s name and length of 

observer contract. 

(C) Debriefing. The catch monitor 

program will notify the catch monitor 

provider which catch monitors require 

debriefing and the specific time period 

the provider has to schedule a date, 

time, and location for debriefing. The 

catch monitor provider must contact the 

catch monitor program within 5 

business days by telephone to schedule 

debriefings. 

(1) Catch monitor providers must 

immediately notify the catch monitor 

program when catch monitors end their 

contract earlier than anticipated. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(ii) Catch monitor provider contracts. 

If requested, catch monitor providers 

must submit to the catch monitor 

program a completed and unaltered 

copy of each type of signed and valid 

contract (including all attachments, 

appendices, addendums, and exhibits 

incorporated into the contract) between 

the catch monitor provider and those 

entities requiring catch monitor services 

under § 660.140(i)(1), subpart D. Catch 

monitor providers must also submit to 

the catch monitor program upon 

request, a completed and unaltered copy 

of the current or most recent signed and 

valid contract (including all 

attachments, appendices, addendums, 

and exhibits incorporated into the 

contract and any agreements or policies 

with regard to catch monitor 

compensation or salary levels) between 

the catch monitor provider and the 

particular entity identified by the catch 

monitor program or with specific catch 

monitors. The copies must be submitted 

to the catch monitor program via e-mail, 

fax, or mail within 5 business days of 

the request. Signed and valid contracts 

include the contracts a catch monitor 

provider has with: 

(A) First receivers required to have 

catch monitor coverage as specified at 

paragraph § 660.140(i)(1), subpart D; 

and 

(B) Catch monitors. 

(iii) Change in catch monitor provider 

management and contact information. 

A catch monitor provider must submit 

to the catch monitor program any 

change of management or contact 

information submitted on the provider’s 

permit application under paragraphs 

(d)(1) of this section within 30 days of 

the effective date of such change. 

(iv) Catch monitor status report. Each 

Tuesday, catch monitor providers must 

provide NMFS with an updated list of 

contact information for all catch 

monitors that includes the catch 

monitor’s name, mailing address, e-mail 

address, phone numbers, first receiver 

assignment for the previous week and 

whether or not the catch monitor is ‘‘in 

service’’, indicating when the catch 

monitor has requested leave and/or is 

not currently working for the provider. 

(v) Informational materials. Providers 

must submit to NMFS, if requested, 

copies of any information developed 

and used by the catch monitor providers 

and distributed to first receivers, 

including, but not limited to, 

informational pamphlets, payment 

notification, and description of catch 

monitor duties. 

(vi) Other reports. Reports of the 

following must be submitted in writing 

to the catch monitor program by the 

catch monitor provider via fax or e-mail 

address designated by the catch monitor 

program within 24 hours after the catch 

monitor provider becomes aware of the 

information: 

(A) Any information regarding 

possible catch monitor harassment; 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78380 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(B) Any information regarding any 

action prohibited under § 660.12(f); 

(C) Any catch monitor illness or 

injury that prevents the catch monitor 

from completing any of his or her duties 

described in the catch monitor manual; 

and 

(D) Any information, allegations or 

reports regarding catch monitor conflict 

of interest or breach of the standards of 

behavior described in catch monitor 

provider policy. 

(12) Replace lost or damaged gear. A 

catch monitor provider must replace all 

lost or damaged gear and equipment 

issued by NMFS to a catch monitor 

under contract to that provider. 

(13) Confidentiality of information. A 

catch monitor provider must ensure that 

all records on individual catch monitor 

performance received from NMFS under 

the routine use provision of the Privacy 

Act or as otherwise required by law 

remain confidential and are not further 

released to anyone outside the employ 

of the catch monitor provider company 

to whom the catch monitor was 

contracted except with written 

permission of the catch monitor. 

(14) Catch monitor program training 

and certification—(i) A training 

certification signifies the successful 

completion of the training course 

required to obtain catch monitor 

certification. This endorsement expires 

when the catch monitor has not been 

deployed and performed sampling 

duties as required by the catch monitor 

program office for a period of time, 

specified by the catch monitor program, 

after his or her most recent debriefing. 

The catch monitor can renew the 

certification by successfully completing 

training once more. 

(ii) Catch monitor program annual 

briefing. Each catch monitor must attend 

an annual briefing prior to his or her 

first deployment within any calendar 

year subsequent to a year in which a 

training certification is obtained. To 

maintain certification, a catch monitor 

must successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the catch 

monitor program. All briefing 

attendance, performance, and conduct 

standards required by the catch monitor 

program must be met. 

(iii) Maintaining the validity of a 

catch monitor certification. After initial 

issuance, a catch monitor must keep 

their certification valid by meeting all of 

the following requirements specified 

below: 

(A) Successfully perform their 

assigned duties as described in the 

Catch Monitor Manual or other written 

instructions from the catch monitor 

program. 

(B) Accurately record their data, write 

complete reports, and report accurately 

any observations of suspected violations 

of regulations relevant to conservation 

of marine resources or their 

environment. 

(C) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

or in the first receiver facility to any 

person except the owner or operator of 

the observed vessel, first receiver 

management or an authorized officer or 

NMFS. 

(D) Successfully complete NMFSapproved annual briefings as prescribed 

by the catch monitor program. 

(E) Successful completion of a 

briefing by a catch monitor consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 

all other briefing requirements 

established by the catch monitor 

program. 

(F) Successfully meet all expectations 

in all debriefings including reporting for 

assigned debriefings. 

(G) Submit all data and information 

required by the catch monitor program 

within the program’s stated guidelines. 

■ 11. Section 660.18 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 660.18 Certification and decertification 

procedures for catch monitors and catch 

monitor providers. 

(a) Certification official. The Regional 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate a NMFS catch monitor 

certification official who will make 

decisions on whether to issue or deny 

catch monitor or catch monitor provider 

certification pursuant to the regulations 

at §§ 660.17 and 660.18, subpart C. 

(b) Agency determinations on 

certifications. (1) Issuance of 

certifications—Certification may be 

issued upon determination by the 

certification official that the candidate 

has successfully met all requirements 

for certification as specified in: 

(i) § 660.17(b) for catch monitors; and 

(ii) § 660.17(d) for catch monitor 

providers. 

(2) Denial of a certification. The 

NMFS certification official will issue a 

written determination identifying the 

reasons for denial of a certification. 

(c) Limitations on conflict of interest 

for catch monitors. (1) Catch monitors 

must not have a direct financial interest, 

other than the provision of observer or 

catch monitor services, in a North 

Pacific fishery managed pursuant to an 

FMP for the waters off the coast of 

Alaska, Alaska state waters, or in a 

Pacific Coast fishery managed by either 

the state or Federal Governments in 

waters off Washington, Oregon, or 

California, including but not limited to: 

(i) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shore-based or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(ii) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shore-based or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(iii) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shore-based or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(2) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value from anyone who either 

conducts activities that are regulated by 

NMFS or has interests that may be 

substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

catch monitor’s official duties. 

(3) May not serve as a catch monitor 

at any shoreside or floating stationary 

processing facility owned or operated 

where a person was previously 

employed in the last two years. 

(4) May not solicit or accept 

employment as a crew member or an 

employee of a vessel, or shoreside 

processor while employed by a catch 

monitor provider. 

(5) Provisions for remuneration of 

catch monitors under this section do not 

constitute a conflict of interest. 

(d) Limitations on conflict of interest 

for catch monitor providers. Catch 

monitor providers must not have a 

direct financial interest, other than the 

provision of observer or catch monitor 

services, in a North Pacific fishery 

managed pursuant to an FMP for the 

waters off the coast of Alaska, Alaska 

state waters, or in a Pacific Coast fishery 

managed by either the state or Federal 

Governments in waters off Washington, 

Oregon, or California, including but not 

limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shore-based or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shore-based or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shore-based or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(e) Decertification. (1) Decertification 

review official—The Regional 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78381 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate a decertification review 

official(s), who will have the authority 

to review certifications and issue IADs 

of decertification. 

(2) Causes for decertification. The 

decertification official may initiate 

decertification proceedings when it is 

alleged that any of the following acts or 

omissions have been committed: 

(i) Failed to satisfactorily perform the 

specified duties and responsibilities; 

(ii) Failed to abide by the specified 

standards of conduct; 

(iii) Upon conviction of a crime or 

upon entry of a civil judgment for: 

(A) Commission of fraud or other 

violation in connection with obtaining 

or attempting to obtain certification, or 

in performing the duties and 

responsibilities specified in this section; 

(B) Commission of embezzlement, 

theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or 

destruction of records, making false 

statements, or receiving stolen property; 

(C) Commission of any other offense 

indicating a lack of integrity or honesty 

that seriously and directly affects the 

fitness of catch monitors. 

(3) Issuance of IAD. Upon 

determination that decertification is 

warranted under § 660.17(c) or (e), the 

decertification official will issue a 

written IAD. The IAD will identify the 

specific reasons for the action taken. 

Decertification is effective 30 calendar 

days after the date on the IAD, unless 

there is an appeal. 

(4) Appeals. A certified catch monitor 

who receives an IAD that suspends or 

revokes his or her catch monitor 

certification may appeal the 

determination within 30 calendar days 

after the date on the IAD to the Office 

of Administrative Appeals pursuant to 

§ 679.43. 

■ 12. In § 660.25, paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A) 

and (B) are removed; paragraph 

(b)(4)(i)(F) is added; the heading to 

paragraph (b)(4) and paragraphs 

(b)(4)(iv)(A), (b)(4)(v)(A) through (C), the 

heading to paragraph (b)(4)(vi), and 

paragraphs (b)(4)(vi)(A), (b)(4)(vi)(C), 

and (g)(4) are revised; and paragraph (e) 

is added to read as follows: 

§ 660.25 Permits. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(4) Limited entry permit actions— 

renewal, combination, stacking, change 

of permit ownership or permit 

holdership, and change in vessel 

registration— 

(i) * * * 

(F) A limited entry permit will not be 

renewed until a complete economic data 

collection form is submitted as required 

under § 660.113(b), (c) and (d), subpart 

D. The permit renewal will be marked 

incomplete until the required 

information is submitted. 

* * * * * 

(iv) Changes in permit ownership and 

permit holder—(A) General. The permit 

owner may convey the limited entry 

permit to a different person. The new 

permit owner will not be authorized to 

use the permit until the change in 

permit ownership has been registered 

with and approved by the SFD. The SFD 

will not approve a change in permit 

ownership for a limited entry permit 

with a sablefish endorsement that does 

not meet the ownership requirements 

for such permit described at paragraph 

(b)(3)(iv)(C) of this section. The SFD 

will not approve a change in permit 

ownership for a limited entry permit 

with an MS/CV endorsement or an MS 

permit that does not meet the ownership 

requirements for such permit described 

at § 660.150(g)(3), subpart D, and 

§ 660.150(f)(3), subpart D, respectively. 

Change in permit owner and/or permit 

holder applications must be submitted 

to SFD with the appropriate 

documentation described at paragraph 

(b)(4)(vii) of this section. 

(1) During the initial issuance 

application period for the trawl 

rationalization program, NMFS will not 

review or approve any request for a 

change in limited entry trawl permit 

owner, as specified at 

§ 660.140(d)(8)(viii) for QS permit 

applicants, at § 660.150(g)(6)(vii) for 

MS/CV endorsement applicants, and at 

§ 660.160(d)(7)(vii) for C/P endorsement 

applicants. The initial issuance 

application period for the trawl 

rationalization program will begin on 

either November 1, 2010, or the date 

upon which the application is received 

by NMFS, whichever occurs first. 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(v) Changes in vessel registration of 

limited entry permits and gear 

endorsements—(A) General. A permit 

may not be used with any vessel other 

than the vessel registered to that permit. 

For purposes of this section, a permit 

change in vessel registration occurs 

when, through SFD, a permit owner 

registers a limited entry permit for use 

with a new vessel. Permit change in 

vessel registration applications must be 

submitted to SFD with the appropriate 

documentation described at paragraph 

(b)(4)(vii) of this section. Upon receipt 

of a complete application, and following 

review and approval of the application, 

the SFD will reissue the permit 

registered to the new vessel. 

Applications to change vessel 

registration on limited entry permits 

with sablefish endorsements will not be 

approved until SFD has received 

complete documentation of permit 

ownership as described at paragraph 

(b)(3)(iv)(C)(4) and as required under 

paragraph (b)(4)(vii) of this section. 

Applications to change vessel 

registration on limited entry permits 

with trawl endorsements or MS permits 

will not be approved until SFD has 

received complete EDC forms as 

required under § 660.114, subpart D. 

(B) Application. A complete 

application must be submitted to SFD in 

order for SFD to review and approve a 

change in vessel registration. At a 

minimum, a permit owner seeking to 

change vessel registration of a limited 

entry permit shall submit to SFD a 

signed application form and his/her 

current limited entry permit before the 

first day of the cumulative limit period 

in which they wish to fish. If a permit 

owner provides a signed application 

and current limited entry permit after 

the first day of a cumulative limit 

period, the permit will not be effective 

until the succeeding cumulative limit 

period. SFD will not approve a change 

in vessel registration until it receives a 

complete application, the existing 

permit, a current copy of the USCG 

1270, and other required 

documentation. 

(C) Effective date. Changes in vessel 

registration on permits will take effect 

no sooner than the first day of the next 

major limited entry cumulative limit 

period following the date that SFD 

receives the signed permit change in 

vessel registration form and the original 

limited entry permit, except that 

changes in vessel registration on MS 

permits and C/P-endorsed permits will 

take effect immediately upon reissuance 

to the new vessel, and a change in 

vessel registration on MS/CV-endorsed 

permits will take effect immediately 

upon reissuance to the new vessel only 

on the second transfer for the year. No 

change in vessel registration is effective 

until the limited entry permit has been 

reissued as registered with the new 

vessel. 

* * * * * 

(vi) Restriction on frequency of 

changes in vessel registration—(A) 

General. A permit owner may designate 

the vessel registration for a permit as 

‘‘unidentified,’’ meaning that no vessel 

has been identified as registered for use 

with that permit. No vessel is 

authorized to use a permit with the 

vessel registration designated as 

‘‘unidentified.’’ A vessel owner who 

removes a permit from his vessel and 

registers that permit as ‘‘unidentified’’ is 

not exempt from VMS requirements at 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78382 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 660.14, subpart C unless specifically 

authorized by that section. When a 

permit owner requests that the permit’s 

vessel registration be designated as 

‘‘unidentified,’’ the transaction is not 

considered a change in vessel 

registration for purposes of this section. 

Any subsequent request by a permit 

owner to change from the ‘‘unidentified’’ 

status of the permit in order to register 

the permit with a specific vessel will be 

considered a change in vessel 

registration and subject to the restriction 

on frequency and timing of changes in 

vessel registration. 

* * * * * 

(C) Limited entry MS permits and 

limited entry permits with an MS/CV or 

a C/P endorsement. Limited entry MS 

permits and limited entry permits with 

an MS/CV or a C/P endorsement may be 

registered to another vessel up to two 

times during the fishing season as long 

as the second change in vessel 

registration is back to the original 

vessel. The original vessel is either the 

vessel registered to the permit as of 

January 1, or if no vessel is registered to 

the permit as of January 1, the original 

vessel is the first vessel to which the 

permit is registered after January 1. 

After the original vessel has been 

established, the first change in vessel 

registration would be to another vessel, 

but any second change in vessel 

registration must be back to the original 

vessel. For an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

on the second change in vessel 

registration back to the original vessel, 

that vessel must be used to fish 

exclusively in the MS Coop Program 

described § 660.150, and declare in to 

the limited entry mid water trawl, 

Pacific whiting mothership sector as 

specified at § 660.13(d)(5)(iv). 

* * * * * 

(e) Coop permit—(1) MS coop permit. 

An MS coop permit conveys a 

conditional privilege to an eligible coop 

entity to receive and manage a coop’s 

allocation of designated species and 

species groups. An MS coop permit is 

not a limited entry permit. The 

provisions for the MS coop permit, 

including eligibility, annual registration, 

fees, and appeals are described in the 

MS Coop Program at § 660.150, subpart 

D. 

(2) C/P coop permit. A C/P coop 

permit conveys a conditional privilege 

to an eligible coop entity to receive and 

manage a coop’s allocation of 

designated species and species groups. 

A C/P coop permit is not a limited entry 

permit. The provisions for the C/P coop 

permit, including eligibility, annual 

registration, fees, and appeals are 

described in the C/P Coop Program at 

§ 660.160, subpart D. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(4) Timing of appeals. (i) For permit 

actions related to the application and 

initial issuance process for QS permits, 

MS permits, MS/CV endorsements, and 

C/P endorsements for the trawl 

rationalization program listed in subpart 

D of part 660, if an applicant appeals an 

IAD, the appeal must be postmarked, 

faxed, or hand delivered to NMFS no 

later than 60 calendar days after the date 

on the IAD. If the applicant does not 

appeal the IAD within 60 calendar days, 

the IAD becomes the final decision of 

the Regional Administrator acting on 

behalf of the Secretary of Commerce. 

(ii) For all other permit actions, if an 

applicant appeals an IAD, the appeal 

must be postmarked, faxed, or hand 

delivered to NMFS no later than 30 

calendar days after the date on the IAD. 

If the applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 30 calendar days, the IAD 

becomes the final decision of the 

Regional Administrator acting on behalf 

of the Secretary of Commerce. 

(iii) The time period to submit an 

appeal begins with the date on the IAD. 

If the last day of the time period is a 

Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, 

the time period will extend to the close 

of business on the next business day. 

* * * * * 

§ 660.26 [Removed] 

■ 13. Section 660.26 is removed. 

■ 14. In § 660.55, paragraph (i)(2) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.55 Allocations. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(2) The commercial harvest guideline 

for Pacific whiting is allocated among 

three sectors, as follows: 34 percent for 

the C/P Coop Program; 24 percent for 

the MS Coop Program; and 42 percent 

for the Shore based IFQ Program. No 

more than 5 percent of the Shore based 

IFQ Program allocation may be taken 

and retained south of 42° N. lat. before 

the start of the primary Pacific whiting 

season north of 42° N. lat. Specific 

sector allocations for a given calendar 

year are found in Tables 1a and 2a of 

this subpart. Set asides for other species 

for the at-sea whiting fishery for a given 

calendar year are found in Tables 1d 

and 2d of this subpart. 

* * * * * 

■ 15. In § 660.60, paragraph (d)(1), 

paragraph (h)(2), and paragraph (h)(5)(ii) 

are revised; and paragraphs (h)(5)(iii) 

and (h)(5)(iv) are removed to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.60 Specifications and management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) Automatic actions are used in the 

Pacific whiting fishery to: 

(i) Close an at-sea sector of the fishery 

when that sector’s Pacific whiting 

allocation is reached, or is projected to 

be reached; 

(ii) Close all at-sea sectors or a single 

sector of the fishery when a non-whiting 

groundfish species with allocations is 

reached or projected to be reached; 

(iii) Reapportion unused allocations 

of non-whiting groundfish species from 

one at-sea sector of the Pacific whiting 

fishery to another. 

(iv) Implement the Ocean Salmon 

Conservation Zone, described at 

§ 660.131(c)(3), subpart D, when NMFS 

projects the Pacific whiting fishery may 

take in excess of 11,000 Chinook within 

a calendar year. 

(v) Implement Pacific Whiting 

Bycatch Reduction Areas, described at 

§ 660.131(c)(4) Subpart D, when NMFS 

projects a sector-specific bycatch limit 

will be reached before the sector’s 

whiting allocation. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(2) Landing. As stated at § 660.11, 

subpart C (in the definition of 

‘‘Landing’’), once the offloading of any 

species begins, all fish aboard the vessel 

are counted as part of the landing and 

must be reported as such. All fish from 

an IFQ landing must be offloaded from 

the vessel before a new fishing trip 

begins. Transfer of fish at sea is 

prohibited under § 660.12, subpart C, 

unless a vessel is participating in the 

primary whiting fishery as part of the 

mothership or catcher/processor sectors, 

as described at § 660.131(a), subpart D. 

Catcher vessels in the mothership sector 

must transfer all catch from a haul to the 

same vessel registered to an MS permit 

prior to the gear being set for a 

subsequent haul. Catch may not be 

transferred to a tender vessel. 

* * * * * 

(5) * * * 

(ii) Weight limits and conversions. To 

determine the round weight, multiply 

the processed weight times the 

conversion factor. Federal commercial 

groundfish regulations do not supersede 

more restrictive state commercial 

groundfish regulations, including 

landings requirements regarding 

groundfish species or the condition in 

which they may be landed. 

(A) Limited entry fixed gear or open 

access fisheries. The weight limit 

conversion factor established by the 

state where the fish is or will be landed 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78383 

will be used to convert the processed 

weight to round weight for purposes of 

applying the trip limit or other 

allocation. Weight conversions provided 

herein are those conversions currently 

in use by the States of Washington, 

Oregon, and California and may be 

subject to change by those states. 

Fishery participants should contact 

fishery enforcement officials in the state 

where the fish will be landed to 

determine that state’s official conversion 

factor. 

(1) Sablefish. The following 

conversion applies to both the limited 

entry fixed gear and open access 

fisheries when trip limits are in effect 

for those fisheries. For headed and 

gutted (eviscerated) sablefish the weight 

conversion factor is 1.6 (multiply the 

headed and gutted weight by 1.6 to 

determine the round weight). 

(2) Lingcod. The following 

conversions apply in both limited entry 

fixed gear and open access fisheries. 

(i) North of 42° N. lat., for lingcod 

with the head removed, the minimum 

size limit is 18 inches (46 cm), which 

corresponds to 22 inches (56 cm) total 

length for whole fish. 

(ii) South of 42° N. lat., for lingcod 

with the head removed, the minimum 

size limit is 19.5 inches (49.5 cm), 

which corresponds to 24 inches (61 cm) 

total length for whole fish. 

(iii) The weight conversion factor for 

headed and gutted lingcod is 1.5. The 

conversion factor for lingcod that has 

only been gutted with the head on is 

1.1. 

(B) Shorebased IFQ Program. For 

vessels landing sorted catch, the weight 

conversions for purposes of applying QP 

are provided below. 

(1) Sablefish. The weight conversion 

factor for headed and gutted 

(eviscerated) sablefish is 1.6. 

(2) Lingcod. The following 

conversions apply: 

(i)The minimum size limit lingcod 

North of 42° N. lat., with the head 

removed, is 18 inches (46 cm), which 

corresponds to 22 inches (56 cm) total 

length for whole fish. 

(ii) The minimum size limit for 

lingcod South of 42° N. lat., with the 

head removed, is 19.5 inches (49.5 cm), 

which corresponds to 24 inches (61 cm) 

total length for whole fish. 

(iii) The weight conversion factor for 

headed and gutted (eviscerated) lingcod 

is 1.5; for lingcod that has only been 

gutted with the head on, the weight 

conversion factor is 1.1. 

(3) Pacific whiting. For headed and 

gutted Pacific whiting (head removed 

just in front of the collar bone and 

viscera removed,) the weight conversion 

factor is 1.56; and for headed and gutted 

Pacific whiting with the tail removed 

the weight conversion factor is 2.0. 

(4) Rockfish (including thornyheads), 

except POP. For headed and gutted 

(eviscerated), the weight conversion 

factor is 1.75; for headed and gutted, 

western cut (head removed just in front 

of the collar bone and viscera removed,) 

the weight conversion factor is 1.66; for 

headed and gutted, eastern cut (head 

removed just behind the collar bone and 

viscera removed,) the weight conversion 

factor is 2.0. 

(5) Pacific ocean perch (POP). For 

headed and gutted (eviscerated), the 

weight conversion factor is 1.6. 

(6) Pacific cod. For headed and gutted 

(eviscerated), the weight conversion 

factor is 1.58. 

(7) Dover sole, English sole, and 

‘‘other flatfish’’. For headed and gutted 

(eviscerated), the weight conversion 

factor is 1.53. 

(8) Petrale sole. For headed and gutted 

(eviscerated), the weight conversion 

factor is 1.51. 

(9) Arrowtooth flounder. For headed 

and gutted (eviscerated), the weight 

conversion factor is 1.35. 

(10) Starry flounder. For headed and 

gutted (eviscerated), the weight 

conversion factor is 1.49. 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Section 660.100 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 660.100 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart covers the Pacific coast 

groundfish limited entry trawl fishery. 

Under the trawl rationalization program, 

the limited entry trawl fishery consists 

of the Shorebased IFQ Program, the MS 

Coop Program, and the C/P Coop 

Program. Nothing in these regulations 

shall be construed to modify, impair, or 

supersede the operation of any of the 

antitrust laws. The trawl rationalization 

program creates limited access 

privileges. These limited access 

privileges, including the QS or IBQ, QP 

or IBQ pounds, and catch history 

assignments, may be revoked, limited or 

modified at any time in accordance with 

the MSA—and do not create any right 

of compensation to the holder of the 

limited access privilege if it is revoked, 

limited, or modified. The trawl 

rationalization program does not create 

any right, title, or interest in or to any 

fish before the fish is harvested by the 

holder and shall be considered a grant 

of permission to the holder of the 

limited access privilege to engage in 

activities permitted by the trawl 

rationalization program. 

■ 17. In § 660.111, the following 

definitions are removed: ‘‘Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receivers’’, 

‘‘Pacific whiting shoreside or shorebased fishery’’, ‘‘Pacific whiting 

shoreside vessel,’’ and ‘‘Vessel limits’’; 

the definition of ‘‘Pacific whiting IFQ 

fishery’’ is revised; and new definitions 

are added in alphabetical order for: 

‘‘Accumulation limits,’’ ‘‘Charterer,’’ 

‘‘Complete economic data collection 

(EDC) form,’’ ‘‘IFQ trip’’, ‘‘Lessee,’’ and 

‘‘Pacific whiting IFQ trip’’. 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery—definitions. 

* * * * * 

Accumulation limits mean the 

maximum extent of permissible 

ownership, control or use of a privilege 

within the trawl rationalization 

program, and include the following: 

(1) Shorebased IFQ Program. (i) 

Control limits means the maximum 

amount of QS or IBQ that a person may 

own or control, as described at 

§ 660.140(d)(4). 

(ii) Vessel limits means the maximum 

amount of QP a vessel can hold, acquire, 

and/or use during a calendar year, and 

specify the maximum amount of QP that 

may be registered to a single vessel 

during the year (QP Vessel Limit) and, 

for some species, the maximum amount 

of unused QP registered to a vessel 

account at any one time (Unused QP 

Vessel Limit), as described at 

§ 660.140(e)(4). 

(2) MS Coop Program. (i) MS permit 

usage limit means the maximum 

amount of the annual mothership sector 

Pacific whiting allocation that a person 

owning an MS permit may cumulatively 

process, no more than 45 percent, as 

described at § 660.150(f)(3)(i). 

(ii) MS/CV permit ownership limit 

means the maximum amount of catch 

history assignment that a person may 

own, no more than 20 percent of the MS 

sector’s allocation of Pacific whiting, as 

described at § 660.150(g)(3)(i). 

(iii) Catcher vessel usage limit means 

the maximum amount of the annual 

mothership sector Pacific whiting 

allocation that a vessel may catch, no 

more than 30 percent, as described at 

§ 660.150(g)(3)(ii). 

* * * * * 

Charterer means, for the purpose of 

economic data collection program, a 

person, other than the owner of the 

vessel, who: entered in to any agreement 

or commitment by which the possession 

or services of the vessel are secured for 

a period of time for the purposes of 

commercially harvesting or processing 

fish. A long-term or exclusive contract 

for the sale of all or a portion of the 

vessel’s catch or processed products is 

not considered a charter. 

* * * * * 

Complete economic data collection 

(EDC) form means that a response is 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78384 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

supplied for each question, subquestion, and answer-table cell. If 

particular question or sub-question is 

not applicable, ‘‘NA’’, must be entered in 

the appropriate space on the form. The 

form must also be signed and dated to 

certify that the information is true and 

complete to the best of the signatory’s 

knowledge. 

* * * * * 

IFQ trip means a trip in which the 

vessel has a valid fishing declaration for 

any of the following: Limited entry 

midwater trawl, non-whiting shorebased 

IFQ; Limited entry midwater trawl, 

Pacific whiting shorebased IFQ; Limited 

entry bottom trawl, shorebased IFQ, not 

including demersal trawl; Limited entry 

demersal trawl, shorebased IFQ; or 

Limited entry groundfish non-trawl, 

shorebased IFQ. 

* * * * * 

Lessee means, for the purpose of 

economic data collection program, a 

person, other than the owner of the 

vessel or facility, who: was identified as 

the leaseholder, in a written lease, of the 

vessel or facility, or paid expenses of the 

vessel or facility, or claimed expenses 

for the vessel or facility as a business 

expense on a federal income tax return, 

or on a state income tax return. 

* * * * * 

Pacific whiting IFQ fishery means the 

Shorebased IFQ Program fishery 

composed of vessels making Pacific 

whiting IFQ trips pursuant to the 

requirements at § 660.131 during the 

primary whiting season fishery dates for 

the Shorebased IFQ Program. 

Pacific whiting IFQ trip means a trip 

in which a vessel registered to a limited 

entry permit uses legal midwater 

groundfish trawl gear with a valid 

declaration for limited entry midwater 

trawl, Pacific whiting shorebased IFQ, 

as specified at § 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A) 

during the dates for the Pacific whiting 

IFQ fishery primary season. 

* * * * * 

■ 18. In § 660.112: 

■ a. Paragraph (f) is removed; 

■ b. Paragraph (a)(2) is added; 

■ c. Paragraph (a)(3)(iii) is added; 

■ d. Paragraph (a)(4) is redesignated as 

paragraph (a)(5), and a new paragraph 

(a)(4) is added; and 

■ e. Paragraphs (b) through (e) are added 

to read as follows: 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery—prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(2) Sorting. Fail to sort catch 

consistent with the requirements 

specified at § 660.130(d). 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iii) Failure to submit a complete EDC 

form to NMFS as required by § 660.113. 

* * * * * 

(4) Observers.—(i) Fish (including 

processing, as defined at § 600.10 of this 

chapter) in the Shorebased IFQ Program, 

the MS Coop Program, or the C/P Coop 

Program if NMFS determines the vessel 

is unsafe for an observer. 

(ii) Fish in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, the MS Coop Program, or the 

C/P Coop Program without observer 

coverage. 

* * * * * 

(b) Shorebased IFQ Program—(1) 

General. (i) Own or control by any 

means whatsoever an amount of QS or 

IBQ that exceeds the Shorebased IFQ 

Program accumulation limits. 

(ii) Fish in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program with a vessel that does not 

have a valid vessel account or that has 

a vessel account with a deficit (negative 

balance) for any species/species group. 

(iii) Have any IFQ species/species 

group catch (landings and discards) 

from an IFQ trip not covered by QP for 

greater than 30 days from the date the 

deficit (negative balance) from that trip 

is documented, unless the deficit is 

within the limits of the carryover 

provision specified at § 660.140(e)(5), 

subpart D, in which case the vessel has 

30 days after the QP for the following 

year are issued to eliminate the deficit. 

(iv) Transfer the limited entry trawl 

endorsed permit to another vessel or sell 

the limited entry trawl endorsed permit 

to another owner if the vessel registered 

to the permit has an overage (catch not 

covered by QP), until the overage is 

covered, regardless of the amount of the 

overage. 

(v) Use QP by vessels not registered to 

a limited entry trawl permit with a valid 

vessel account. 

(vi) Use QP in an area or for species/ 

species groups other than that for which 

it is designated. 

(vii) Fish in more than one IFQ 

management area, specified at 

§ 660.140(c)(2), on the same trip. 

(viii) Fish on a Pacific whiting IFQ 

trip with a gear other than legal 

midwater groundfish trawl gear. 

(ix) Fish on a Pacific whiting IFQ trip 

without a valid declaration for limited 

entry midwater trawl, Pacific whiting 

shorebased IFQ, as specified at 

§ 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), subpart C. 

(x) Use midwater trawl gear to fish for 

Pacific whiting within an RCA outside 

the Pacific whiting IFQ fishery primary 

season as specified at 

§ 660.131(b)(2)(iii). 

(xi) Bring a haul on board before all 

catch from the previous haul has been 

stowed. 

(xii) Process groundfish at-sea (‘‘at-sea 

processing’’) by vessels in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program regardless of 

the type of gear used, with the following 

exceptions: 

(A) A vessel that is 75-ft (23-m) or less 

LOA that harvests whiting and, in 

addition to heading and gutting, cuts the 

tail off and freezes the whiting, is not 

considered to be a catcher/processor nor 

is it considered to be processing fish, 

and 

(B) A vessel that has a sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption, defined at 

§ 660.25(b)(3)(iv)(D), subpart C may 

process sablefish at-sea. 

(xiii) Retain any IFQ species/species 

group onboard a vessel unless the vessel 

has observer coverage during the entire 

trip and until all IFQ species from the 

trip are offloaded. A vessel may deliver 

IFQ species/species groups to more than 

one IFQ first receiver, but must 

maintain observer coverage until all IFQ 

species from the trip are offloaded. Once 

transfer of fish begins, all fish aboard 

the vessel are counted as part of the 

same landing as defined at § 660.11. 

(xiv) Discard IFQ species/species 

group at sea unless the observer has 

documented or estimated the discards. 

(xv) Begin a new fishing trip until all 

fish from an IFQ landing have been 

offloaded from the vessel. 

(2) IFQ first receivers. (i) Accept an 

IFQ landing without a valid first 

receiver site license. 

(ii) Fail to sort fish received from a 

IFQ landing prior to first weighing after 

offloading as specified at § 660.130(d)(2) 

for the Shorebased IFQ Program, except 

the vessels declared in to the limited 

entry midwater trawl, Pacific whiting 

shorebased IFQ at § 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), 

subpart C may weigh catch on a bulk 

scale before sorting as described at 

§ 660.140(j)(2). 

(iii) Process, sell, or discard any 

groundfish received from an IFQ 

landing that has not been weighed on a 

scale that is in compliance with 

requirements at § 660.15, subpart C. 

(iv) Transport catch away from the 

point of landing before that catch has 

been sorted and weighed by federal 

groundfish species or species group, and 

recorded for submission on an 

electronic fish ticket. (If fish will be 

transported to a different location for 

processing, all sorting and weighing to 

federal groundfish species groups must 

occur before transporting the catch away 

from the point of landing). 

(v) Receive an IFQ landing without 

coverage by a catch monitor when one 

is required by regulations, unless NMFS 

has granted a written waiver exempting 

the IFQ first receiver from the catch 

monitor coverage requirements. On a 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78385 

case-by-case basis, a temporary written 

waiver may be granted by the Assistant 

Regional Administrator or designee if 

he/she determines that the failure to 

obtain coverage of a catch monitor was 

due to circumstances beyond the control 

of the first receiver. The duration of the 

waiver will be determined on a case-bycase basis. 

(vi) Receive an IFQ landing without a 

NMFS-accepted catch monitoring plan 

or not in accordance with their NMFSaccepted catch monitoring plan. 

(vii) Mix catch from more than one 

IFQ landing prior to the catch being 

sorted and weighed. 

(viii) Fail to comply with the IFQ first 

receiver responsibilities specified at 

§ 660.140(b)(2). 

(ix) Process, sell, or discard any 

groundfish received from an IFQ 

landing that has not been accounted for 

on an electronic fish ticket with the 

identification number for the vessel that 

delivered the fish. 

(x) Fail to submit, or submit 

incomplete or inaccurate information on 

any report, application, or statement 

required under this part. 

(c) MS and C/P Coop Programs. (1) 

Process Pacific whiting in the fishery 

management area during times or in 

areas where at-sea processing is 

prohibited for the sector in which the 

vessel fishes, unless: 

(i) The fish are received from a 

member of a Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

tribe fishing under § 660.50, subpart C; 

(ii) The fish are processed by a wasteprocessing vessel according to 

§ 660.131(h), subpart D; or 

(iii) The vessel is completing 

processing of Pacific whiting taken on 

board prior to the close of that vessel’s 

primary season. 

(2) During times or in areas where atsea processing is prohibited, take and 

retain or receive Pacific whiting, except 

as cargo or fish waste, on a vessel in the 

fishery management area that already 

has processed Pacific whiting on board. 

An exception to this prohibition is 

provided if the fish are received within 

the tribal U&A from a member of a 

Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribe fishing 

under § 660.50, subpart C. 

(3) Operate as a waste-processing 

vessel within 48 hours of a primary 

season for Pacific whiting in which that 

vessel operates as a catcher/processor or 

mothership, according to § 660.131(h), 

subpart D. 

(4) On a vessel used to fish for Pacific 

whiting, fail to keep the trawl doors on 

board the vessel, when taking and 

retention is prohibited under 

§ 660.131(b), subpart D. 

(5) Sort or discard any portion of the 

catch taken by a catcher vessel in the 

mothership sector before the catcher 

vessel observer completes sampling of 

the catch, with the exception of minor 

amounts of catch that are lost when the 

codend is separated from the net and 

prepared for transfer. 

(d) MS Coop Program (coop and noncoop fisheries). (1) Catch, take, or 

harvest fish in the mothership non-coop 

fishery with a vessel that is not 

registered to a current MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry trawl permit. 

(2) Receive catch, process catch, or 

otherwise fish as a mothership vessel if 

it is not registered to a current MS 

permit. 

(3) Fish with a vessel in the 

mothership sector, if that vessel was 

used to fish in the C/P fishery in the 

same calendar year. 

(4) Catch, take, or harvest fish in the 

MS Coop Program with a vessel that 

does not have a valid VMS declaration 

for limited entry midwater trawl, Pacific 

whiting mothership sector, as specified 

at § 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), subpart C. 

(5) Transfer catch to a vessel that is 

not registered to an MS permit. (i.e. a 

tender vessel). 

(6) Use a vessel registered to a limited 

entry permit with a trawl endorsement 

(with or without an MS/CV 

endorsement) to catch more than 30 

percent of the Pacific whiting allocation 

for the mothership sector. 

(7) Process more than 45 percent of 

the annual mothership sector’s Pacific 

whiting allocation. 

(8) Catch, take, or harvest fish before 

all catch from any previous haul has 

been transferred to a single vessel 

registered to an MS permit. 

(9) Transfer catch from a single haul 

to more than one permitted MS vessel. 

(10) Catch, take, or harvest fish for a 

MS coop with a vessel that has not been 

identified by the coop as a vessel 

authorized to harvest that coop’s 

allocation. 

(11) Catch, take, or harvest fish in the 

non-coop fishery with a vessel 

registered to an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

in the same year the MS/CV-endorsed 

permit was registered to a vessel that 

fished as a member of a coop in the MS 

Coop Program. 

(12) Sort or discard any portion of the 

catch taken by a catcher vessel in the 

mothership sector before the catcher 

vessel observer completes sampling of 

the catch, except for minor operational 

amounts of catch lost by a catcher vessel 

provided the observer has accounted for 

the discard (i.e., a maximized retention 

fishery). 

(13) Mix catch from more than one 

haul before the observer completes their 

collection of catch for sampling. 

(14) Take deliveries without a valid 

scale inspection report signed by an 

authorized scale inspector on board the 

vessel. 

(15) Sort, process, or discard catch 

delivered to a mothership before the 

catch is weighed on a scale that meets 

the requirements of § 660.15(b), 

including the daily test requirements. 

(e) C/P Coop Program. (1) Fish with 

a vessel in the catcher/processor sector 

that is not registered to a current C/Pendorsed limited entry trawl permit. 

(2) Fish as a catcher/processor vessel 

in the same year that the vessel fishes 

as a catcher vessel in the mothership 

fishery. 

(3) Fish as a catcher/processor vessel 

in the same year that the vessel operates 

as a mothership in the mothership 

fishery. 

(4) Fish in the C/P Coop Program with 

a vessel that does not have a valid VMS 

declaration for limited entry midwater 

trawl, Pacific whiting catcher/processor 

sector, as specified at 

§ 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A). 

(5) Fish in the C/P Coop Program with 

a vessel that is not identified in the C/ 

P coop agreement. 

(6) Fish in the C/P Coop Program 

without a valid scale inspection report 

signed by an authorized scale inspector 

on board the vessel. 

(7) Sort, process, or discard catch 

before the catch is weighed on a scale 

that meets the requirements of 

§ 660.15(b), including the daily test 

requirements. 

(8) Discard any catch from the codend 

or net (i.e. bleeding) before the observer 

has completed their data collection. 

(9) Mix catch from more than one 

haul before the observer completes their 

collection of catch for sampling. 

■ 19. In § 660.113, paragraphs (a) 

through (c) are added, and paragraph (d) 

is revised, to read as follows: 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery—recordkeeping 

and reporting. 

* * * * * 

(a) General requirements. (1) All 

records or reports required by this 

paragraph (a) must: be maintained in 

English, be accurate, be legible, be based 

on local time, and be submitted in a 

timely manner. 

(2) Retention of Records. All records 

used in the preparation of records or 

reports specified in this section or 

corrections to these reports must be 

maintained for a period of not less than 

three years after the date of landing and 

must be immediately available upon 

request for inspection by NMFS or 

authorized officers or others as 

specifically authorized by NMFS. 

Records used in the preparation of 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78386 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

required reports specified in this section 

or corrections to these reports that are 

required to be kept include, but are not 

limited to, any written, recorded, 

graphic, electronic, or digital materials 

as well as other information stored in or 

accessible through a computer or other 

information retrieval system; 

worksheets; weight slips; preliminary, 

interim, and final tally sheets; receipts; 

checks; ledgers; notebooks; diaries; 

spreadsheets; diagrams; graphs; charts; 

tapes; disks; or computer printouts. All 

relevant records used in the preparation 

of electronic fish ticket reports or 

corrections to these reports must be 

maintained for a period of not less than 

three years after the date and must be 

immediately available upon request for 

inspection by NMFS or authorized 

officers or others as specifically 

authorized by NMFS. 

(b) Shorebased IFQ Program. (1) 

Economic data collection (EDC) 

program. The following persons are 

required to submit an EDC form as 

specified at § 660.114: 

(i) All owners, lessees, and charterers 

of a catcher vessel registered to a limited 

entry trawl endorsed permit. 

(ii) All owners of a first receiver site 

license. 

(iii) All owners and lessees of a 

shorebased processor. 

(2) Electronic vessel logbook. 

[Reserved] 

(3) Gear switching declaration. Any 

person with a limited entry trawl permit 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program using groundfish non-trawl 

gear (i.e., gear switching) must submit a 

valid gear declaration reporting such 

participation as specified in 

§ 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A). 

(4) Electronic fish ticket. The IFQ first 

receiver is responsible for compliance 

with all reporting requirements 

described in this paragraph. 

(i) Required information. All IFQ first 

receivers must provide the following 

types of information: Date of landing, 

vessel that made the delivery, vessel 

account number, gear type used, catch 

area, first receiver, actual weights of 

species landed listed by species or 

species group including species with no 

value, condition landed, number of 

salmon by species, number of Pacific 

halibut, and any other information 

deemed necessary by the Regional 

Administrator as specified on the 

appropriate electronic fish ticket form. 

(ii) Submissions. The IFQ first 

receiver must: 

(A) Include as part of each electronic 

fish ticket submission, the actual scale 

weight for each groundfish species as 

specified by requirements at § 660.15(c) 

and the vessel identification number. 

(B) Use for the purpose of submitting 

electronic fish tickets, and maintain in 

good working order, computer 

equipment as specified at § 660.15(d)(1); 

(C) Install, use, and update as 

necessary, any NMFS-approved 

software described at § 660.15(d)(3); 

(D) Submit a completed electronic 

fish ticket for every IFQ landing no later 

than 24 hours after the date the fish are 

received, unless a waiver of this 

requirement has been granted under 

provisions specified at paragraph 

(b)(4)(iv) of this section. 

(iii) Revising a submission. In the 

event that a data error is found, 

electronic fish ticket submissions may 

be revised by resubmitting the revised 

form. Electronic fish tickets are to be 

used for the submission of final data. 

Preliminary data, including estimates of 

fish weights or species composition, 

shall not be submitted on electronic fish 

tickets. 

(iv) Waivers for submission. On a 

case-by-case basis, a temporary written 

waiver of the requirement to submit 

electronic fish tickets may be granted by 

the Assistant Regional Administrator or 

designee if he/she determines that 

circumstances beyond the control of a 

first receiver would result in inadequate 

data submissions using the electronic 

fish ticket system. The duration of the 

waiver will be determined on a case-bycase basis. 

(v) Reporting requirements when a 

temporary waiver has been granted. IFQ 

First receivers that have been granted a 

temporary waiver from the requirement 

to submit electronic fish tickets must 

submit on paper the same data as is 

required on electronic fish tickets 

within 24 hours of the date received 

during the period that the waiver is in 

effect. Paper fish tickets must be sent by 

facsimile to NMFS, Northwest Region, 

Sustainable Fisheries Division, 206– 

526– 6736 or by delivering it in person 

to 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115. The requirements for 

submissions of paper tickets in this 

paragraph are separate from, and in 

addition to existing state requirements 

for landing receipts or fish receiving 

tickets. 

(c) MS Coop Program (coop and noncoop fisheries)—(1) Economic data 

collection (EDC) program. The following 

persons are required to submit a 

complete economic data collection form 

as specified at § 660.114. 

(i) All owners, lessees, and charterers 

of a catcher vessel registered to a limited 

entry trawl MS/CV-endorsed permit. 

(ii) All owners, lessees, and charterers 

of a vessel registered to an MS permit. 

(2) NMFS-approved scales—(i) Scale 

test report form. Mothership vessel 

operators are responsible for conducting 

scale tests and for recording the scale 

test information on the at-sea scale test 

report form as specified at § 660.15(b), 

subpart C, for mothership vessels. 

(ii) Printed scale reports. Specific 

requirements pertaining to printed scale 

reports and scale weight print outs are 

specified at § 660.15(b), subpart C, for 

mothership vessels. 

(iii) Retention of scale records and 

reports. The vessel must maintain the 

test report form on board until the end 

of the fishing year during which the 

tests were conducted, and make the 

report forms available to observers, 

NMFS staff, or authorized officers. In 

addition, the vessel owner must retain 

the scale test report forms for 3 years 

after the end of the fishing year during 

which the tests were performed. All 

scale test report forms must be signed by 

the vessel operator. 

(3) Annual coop report—(i) The 

designated coop manager for the 

mothership coop must submit an annual 

report to the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council for their 

November meeting each year. The 

annual coop report will contain 

information about the current year’s 

fishery, including: 

(A) The mothership sector’s annual 

allocation of Pacific whiting and the 

permitted mothership coop allocation; 

(B) The mothership coop’s actual 

retained and discarded catch of Pacific 

whiting, salmon, Pacific halibut, 

rockfish, groundfish, and other species 

on a vessel-by-vessel basis; 

(C) A description of the method used 

by the mothership coop to monitor 

performance of coop vessels that 

participated in the fishery; 

(D) A description of any actions taken 

by the mothership coop in response to 

any vessels that exceed their allowed 

catch and bycatch; and 

(E) Plans for the next year’s 

mothership coop fishery, including the 

companies participating in the 

cooperative, the harvest agreement, and 

catch monitoring and reporting 

requirements. 

(ii) The annual coop report submitted 

to the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council must be finalized to capture any 

additional fishing activity that year and 

submitted to NMFS by March 31 of the 

following year before a coop permit is 

issued for the following year. 

(4) Cease fishing report. As specified 

at § 660.150(c)(4)(ii), the designated 

coop manager, or in the case of an intercoop agreement, all of the designated 

coop managers must submit a cease 

fishing report to NMFS indicating that 

harvesting has concluded for the year. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78387 

(d) C/P Coop Program—(1) Economic 

data collection (EDC) program. All 

owners, lessees, and charterers of a 

vessel registered to a C/P-endorsed 

limited entry trawl permit are required 

to submit a complete economic data 

collection form as specified at § 660.114. 

(2) NMFS-approved scales—(i) Scale 

test report form. Catcher/processor 

vessel operators are responsible for 

conducting scale tests and for recording 

the scale test information on the at-sea 

scale test report form as specified at 

§ 660.15(b), subpart C, for C/P vessels. 

(ii) Printed scale reports. Specific 

requirements pertaining to printed scale 

reports and scale weight print outs are 

specified at § 660.15(b), subpart C, for C/ 

P vessels. 

(iii) Retention of scale records and 

reports. The vessel must maintain the 

test report form on board until the end 

of the fishing year during which the 

tests were conducted, and make the 

report forms available to observers, 

NMFS staff, or authorized officers. In 

addition, the vessel owner must retain 

the scale test report forms for 3 years 

after the end of the fishing year during 

which the tests were performed. All 

scale test report forms must be signed by 

the vessel operator. 

(3) Annual coop report—(i) The 

designated coop manager for the C/P 

coop must submit an annual report to 

the Pacific Fishery Management Council 

for their November meeting each year. 

The annual coop report will contain 

information about the current year’s 

fishery, including: 

(A) The C/P sector’s annual allocation 

of Pacific whiting; 

(B) The C/P coop’s actual retained and 

discarded catch of Pacific whiting, 

salmon, Pacific halibut, rockfish, 

groundfish, and other species on a 

vessel-by-vessel basis; 

(C) A description of the method used 

by the C/P coop to monitor performance 

of cooperative vessels that participated 

in the fishery; 

(D) A description of any actions taken 

by the C/P coop in response to any 

vessels that exceed their allowed catch 

and bycatch; and 

(E) Plans for the next year’s C/P coop 

fishery, including the companies 

participating in the cooperative, the 

harvest agreement, and catch 

monitoring and reporting requirements. 

(ii) The annual coop report submitted 

to the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council must be finalized to capture any 

additional fishing activity that year and 

submitted to NMFS by March 31 of the 

following year before a coop permit is 

issued for the following year. 

(4) Cease fishing report. As specified 

at § 660.160(c)(5), the designated coop 

manager must submit a cease fishing 

report to NMFS indicating that 

harvesting has concluded for the year. 

■ 20. Section 660.114 is added to read 

as follows: 

§ 660.114 Trawl fishery—economic data 

collection program. 

(a) General. The economic data 

collection (EDC) program collects 

mandatory economic data from 

participants in the trawl rationalization 

program. NMFS requires submission of 

an EDC form to gather ongoing, annual 

data for 2011 and beyond, as well as a 

onetime collection in 2011 of baseline 

economic data from 2009 through 2010. 

(b) Economic data collection program 

requirements. The following fishery 

participants in the limited entry 

groundfish trawl fisheries are required 

to comply with the following EDC 

program requirements: 

Fishery 

participant Economic data collection Who is required to submit an EDC? 

Consequence for failure to submit (In addition to consequences listed below, failure to submit an EDC may 

be a violation of the MSA.) 

(1) Limited entry trawl catcher vessels.(i) Baseline (2009 and 

2010) economic data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a catcher 

vessel registered to a 

limited entry trawl endorsed permit at any 

time in 2009 or 2010.

(A) For permit owner, a limited entry trawl permit application (including MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

trawl permit) will not be considered complete until 

the required EDC for that permit owner associated 

with that permit is submitted, as specified at 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration, vessel account actions, or if own 

QS permit, issuance of annual QP or IBQ pounds) 

will not be authorized until the required EDC for that 

owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in 

part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), subpart C and 

§ 660.140(e), subpart D. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery (including, but not limited to, 

issuance of annual QP or IBQ pounds if own QS or 

IBQ) will not be authorized, until the required EDC 

for their operation of that vessel is submitted. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78388 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Fishery 

participant Economic data collection Who is required to submit an EDC? 

Consequence for failure to submit (In addition to consequences listed below, failure to submit an EDC may 

be a violation of the MSA.) 

(ii) Annual/ongoing (2011 

and beyond) economic 

data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a catcher 

vessel registered to a 

limited entry trawl endorsed permit at any 

time in 2011 and beyond.

(A) For permit owner, a limited entry trawl permit application (including MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

trawl permit) will not be considered complete until 

the required EDC for that permit owner associated 

with that permit is submitted, as specified at 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration, vessel account actions, or if own 

QS permit, issuance of annual QP or IBQ pounds) 

will not be authorized until the required EDC for that 

owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in 

part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), subpart C and 

§ 660.140(e), subpart D. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery (including, but not limited to, 

issuance of annual QP or IBQ pounds if own QS or 

IBQ) will not be authorized, until the required EDC 

for their operation of that vessel is submitted. 

(2) Motherships .................... (i) Baseline (2009 and 

2010) economic data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a 

mothership vessel that 

received whiting in 2009 

or 2010 as recorded in 

NMFS’ NORPAC database.

(A) For permit owner, an MS permit application will not 

be considered complete until the required EDC for 

that permit owner associated with that permit is submitted, as specified at § 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration) will not be authorized until the required EDC for that owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), 

subpart C. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery will not be authorized, until 

the required EDC for their operation of that vessel is 

submitted. 

(ii) Annual/ongoing (2011 

and beyond) economic 

data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a 

mothership vessel registered to an MS permit 

at any time in 2011 and 

beyond.

(A) For permit owner, an MS permit application will not 

be considered complete until the required EDC for 

that permit owner associated with that permit is submitted, as specified at § 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration) will not be authorized until the required EDC for that owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), 

subpart C. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery will not be authorized, until 

the required EDC for their operation of that vessel is 

submitted. 

(3) Catcher processors ........ (i) Baseline (2009 and 

2010) economic data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a catcher 

processor vessel that 

harvested whiting in 

2009 or 2010 as recorded in NMFS’ 

NORPAC database.

(A) For permit owner, a C/P-endorsed limited entry 

trawl permit application will not be considered complete until the required EDC for that permit owner 

associated with that permit is submitted, as specified at § 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration) will not be authorized until the required EDC for that owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), 

subpart C. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery will not be authorized, until 

the required EDC for their operation of that vessel is 

submitted. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78389 

Fishery 

participant Economic data collection Who is required to submit an EDC? 

Consequence for failure to submit (In addition to consequences listed below, failure to submit an EDC may 

be a violation of the MSA.) 

(ii) Annual/ongoing (2011 

and beyond) economic 

data.

All owners, lessees, and 

charterers of a catcher 

processor vessel registered to a catcher processor permit at any time 

in 2011 and beyond.

(A) For permit owner, a C/P-endorsed limited entry 

trawl permit application will not be considered complete until the required EDC for that permit owner 

associated with that permit is submitted, as specified at § 660.25(b)(4)(i), subpart C. 

(B) For a vessel owner, participation in the groundfish 

fishery (including, but not limited to, changes in vessel registration) will not be authorized until the required EDC for that owner for that vessel is submitted, as specified, in part, at § 660.25(b)(4)(v), 

subpart C. 

(C) For a vessel lessee or charterer, participation in 

the groundfish fishery will not be authorized, until 

the required EDC for their operation of that vessel is 

submitted. 

(4) First receivers/ 

shorebased processors.

(i) Baseline (2009 and 

2010) economic data.

All owners and lessees of 

a shorebased processor 

and all buyers that received groundfish or 

whiting harvested with a 

limited entry trawl permit 

as listed in the PacFIN 

database in 2009 or 

2010.

A first receiver site license application for a particular 

physical location for processing and buying will not 

be considered complete until the required EDC for 

the applying processor or buyer is submitted, as 

specified at § 660.140(f)(3), subpart D. 

(ii) Annual/ongoing (2011 

and beyond) economic 

data.

(A) All owners of a first receiver site license in 

2011 and beyond.

A first receiver site license application will not be considered complete until the required EDC for that license owner associated with that license is submitted, as specified at § 660.140(f)(3), subpart D. 

See paragraph (b)(4)(ii)(A) of this table. 

(B) All owners and lessees 

of a shore-based processor (as defined under 

‘‘processor’’ at § 660.11, 

subpart C, for purposes 

of EDC) that received 

round or headed-andgutted IFQ species 

groundfish or whiting 

from a first receiver in 

2011 and beyond.

(c) Submission of the EDC form and 

deadline—(1) Submission of the EDC 

form. The complete, certified EDC form 

must be submitted to ATTN: Economic 

Data Collection Program (FRAM 

Division), NMFS, Northwest Fisheries 

Science Center, 2725 Montlake 

Boulevard East, Seattle, WA 98112. A 

complete EDC form contains responses 

for all data fields, which include but are 

not limited to costs, labor, earnings, 

activity in a fishery, vessel or plant 

characteristics, value, quota, operational 

information, location of expenditures 

and earnings, ownership information 

and leasing information. 

(2) Deadline. Complete, certified EDC 

forms must be mailed and postmarked 

by or hand-delivered to NMFS NWFSC 

no later than September 1, 2011, for 

baseline data, and, for the annual/ 

ongoing data collection beginning 

September 1, 2012, September 1 each 

year for the prior year’s data. 

(d) Confidentiality of information. 

Information received on an EDC form 

will be considered confidential under 

applicable law and guidance. 

(e) EDC audit procedures—(1) NMFS 

reserves the right to conduct verification 

of economic data with the submitter of 

the form. NMFS may employ a third 

party agent to conduct the audits. 

(2) The submitter of the EDC form 

must respond to any inquiry by NMFS 

or a NMFS agent within 20 days of the 

date of issuance of the inquiry, unless 

an extension is granted by NMFS. 

(3) The submitter of the form must 

provide copies of additional data to 

facilitate verification by NMFS or 

NMFS’ agent upon request. The NMFS 

auditor may review and request copies 

of additional data provided by the 

submitter, including but not limited to, 

previously audited or reviewed 

financial statements, worksheets, tax 

returns, invoices, receipts, and other 

original documents substantiating the 

economic data submitted. 

§ 660.116 [Removed] 

■ 21. Section 660.116 is removed. 

■ 22. In § 660.130, paragraphs (a) and 

(d) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.130 Trawl fishery—management 

measures. 

(a) General. Limited entry trawl 

vessels are those vessels registered to a 

limited entry permit with a trawl 

endorsement and those vessels 

registered to an MS permit. Most species 

taken in limited entry trawl fisheries 

will be managed with quotas (see 

§ 660.140), allocations or set-asides (see 

§ 660.150 or § 660.160), or cumulative 

trip limits (see trip limits in Tables 1 

(North) and 1 (South) of this subpart), 

size limits (see § 660.60 (h)(5), subpart 

C), seasons (see Pacific whiting at 

§ 660.131(b), subpart D), gear 

restrictions (see paragraph (b) of this 

section) and closed areas (see paragraph 

(e) of this section and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79, subpart C). The trawl fishery has 

gear requirements and harvest limits 

that differ by the type of trawl gear on 

board and the area fished. Groundfish 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78390 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

vessels operating south of Point 

Conception must adhere to CCA 

restrictions (see paragraph (e)(1) of this 

section and § 660.70, subpart C). The 

trip limits in Tables 1 (North) and 1 

(South) of this subpart apply to vessels 

participating in the limited entry 

groundfish trawl fishery and may not be 

exceeded. Federal commercial 

groundfish regulations are not intended 

to supersede any more restrictive state 

commercial groundfish regulations 

relating to federally-managed 

groundfish. 

* * * * * 

(d) Sorting. Under § 660.12(a)(8), 

subpart C, it is unlawful for any person 

to ‘‘fail to sort, prior to the first weighing 

after offloading, those groundfish 

species or species groups for which 

there is a trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY, if the vessel fished or 

landed in an area during a time when 

such trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY applied.’’ The states of 

Washington, Oregon, and California 

may also require that vessels record 

their landings as sorted on their state 

landing receipt. 

(1) Species and areas—(i) Coastwide. 

Widow rockfish, canary rockfish, 

darkblotched rockfish, yelloweye 

rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, black 

rockfish, blue rockfish, minor nearshore 

rockfish, minor shelf rockfish, minor 

slope rockfish, shortspine and longspine 

thornyhead, Dover sole, arrowtooth 

flounder, petrale sole, starry flounder, 

English sole, other flatfish, lingcod, 

sablefish, Pacific cod, spiny dogfish, 

other fish, longnose skate, and Pacific 

whiting; 

(ii) North of 40°10′ N. lat. POP, 

yellowtail rockfish; 

(iii) South of 40°10′ N. lat. Minor 

shallow nearshore rockfish, minor 

deeper nearshore rockfish, California 

scorpionfish, chilipepper rockfish, 

bocaccio rockfish, splitnose rockfish, 

Pacific sanddabs, cowcod, 

bronzespotted rockfish and cabezon. 

(2) Sorting requirements for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program—(i) First 

receivers. Fish landed at IFQ first 

receivers (including shoreside 

processing facilities and buying stations 

that intend to transport catch for 

processing elsewhere) must be sorted, 

prior to first weighing after offloading 

from the vessel and prior to transport 

away from the point of landing, except 

the vessels declared in to the limited 

entry midwater trawl, Pacific whiting 

shorebased IFQ at § 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), 

subpart C, may weigh catch on a bulk 

scale before sorting as described at 

§ 660.140(j)(2). 

(ii) Catcher vessels. All catch must be 

sorted to the species groups specified in 

paragraph (d)(1) of this section for 

vessels with limited entry permits, 

except those retaining all catch during 

a Pacific whiting IFQ trip. The catch 

must not be discarded from the vessel 

and the vessel must not mix catch from 

hauls until the observer has sampled the 

catch. Prohibited species must be sorted 

according to the following species 

groups: Dungeness crab, Pacific halibut, 

Chinook salmon, other salmon. Nongroundfish species must be sorted as 

required by the state of landing. 

(3) Sorting requirements for the at-sea 

sectors of the Pacific whiting fishery. 

(i) Pacific whiting at-sea processing 

vessels may use an accurate in-line 

conveyor or hopper type scale to derive 

an accurate total catch weight prior to 

sorting. Immediately following weighing 

of the total catch, the catch must be 

sorted to the species groups specified in 

paragraph (d)(1) of this section and all 

incidental catch (groundfish and nongroundfish species) must be accurately 

accounted for and the weight of 

incidental catch deducted from the total 

catch weight to derive the weight of 

target species. 

(ii) Catcher vessels in the MS sector. 

If sorting occurs on the catcher vessel, 

the catch must not be discarded from 

the vessel and the vessel must not mix 

catch from hauls until the observer has 

sampled the catch. 

* * * * * 

■ 23. In § 660.131: 

■ a. Paragraphs (a) and (b), the 

introductory text of paragraph (c), and 

paragraphs (e) and (f) are revised; 

■ b. Paragraphs (g), (h), (i) and (k) are 

removed; 

■ c. Paragraph (j) is redesignated as 

paragraph (g) to read as follows: 

§ 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

* * * * * 

(a) Sectors—(1) The catcher/processor 

sector, or C/P Coop Program, is 

composed of catcher/processors 

registered to a limited entry permit with 

a C/P endorsement. 

(2) The mothership sector, or MS 

Coop Program, is composed of 

motherships and catcher vessels that 

harvest Pacific whiting for delivery to 

motherships. Motherships are vessels 

registered to an MS permit, and catcher 

vessels are vessels registered to a 

limited entry permit with an MS/CV 

endorsement or vessels registered to a 

limited entry permit without an MS/CV 

endorsement if the vessel is authorized 

to harvest the coop’s allocation. 

(3) The Pacific whiting IFQ fishery is 

composed of vessels that harvest Pacific 

whiting for delivery shoreside to IFQ 

first receivers during the primary 

season. 

(b) Pacific whiting seasons—(1) 

Primary seasons. The primary seasons 

for the Pacific whiting fishery are: 

(i) For the Shorebased IFQ Program, 

Pacific whiting IFQ fishery, the 

period(s) of the large-scale target fishery 

is conducted after the season start date; 

(ii) For catcher/processors, the 

period(s) when catching and at-sea 

processing is allowed for the catcher/ 

processor sector (after the season closes 

at-sea processing of any fish already on 

board the processing vessel is allowed 

to continue); and 

(iii) For vessels delivering to 

motherships, the period(s) when 

catching and at-sea processing is 

allowed for the mothership sector (after 

the season closes at-sea processing of 

any fish already on board the processing 

vessel is allowed to continue). 

(2) Different primary season start 

dates. North of 40°30′ N. lat., different 

starting dates may be established for the 

catcher/processor sector, the mothership 

sector, and in the Pacific whiting IFQ 

fishery for vessels delivering to IFQ first 

receivers north of 42° N. lat. and vessels 

delivering to IFQ first receivers between 

42° through 40°30′ N. lat. 

(i) Procedures. The primary seasons 

for the whiting fishery north of 40°3′ N. 

lat. generally will be established 

according to the procedures of the 

PCGFMP for developing and 

implementing harvest specifications and 

apportionments. The season opening 

dates remain in effect unless changed, 

generally with the harvest specifications 

and management measures. 

(ii) Criteria. The start of a primary 

season may be changed based on a 

recommendation from the Council and 

consideration of the following factors, if 

applicable: Size of the harvest 

guidelines for whiting and bycatch 

species; age/size structure of the whiting 

population; expected harvest of bycatch 

and prohibited species; availability and 

stock status of prohibited species; 

expected participation by catchers and 

processors; the period between when 

catcher vessels make annual processor 

obligations and the start of the fishery; 

environmental conditions; timing of 

alternate or competing fisheries; 

industry agreement; fishing or 

processing rates; and other relevant 

information. 

(iii) Primary whiting season start 

dates and duration. After the start of a 

primary season for a sector of the 

whiting fishery, the season remains 

open for that sector until the sector 

allocation of whiting or non-whiting 

groundfish (with allocations) is reached 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78391 

or projected to be reached and the 

fishery season for that sector is closed 

by NMFS. The starting dates for the 

primary seasons for the whiting fishery 

are as follows: 

(A) Catcher/processor sector—May 15. 

(B) Mothership sector—May 15. 

(C) Shorebased IFQ Program, Pacific 

whiting IFQ fishery. 

(1) North of 42° N. lat.—June 15; 

(2) Between 42°–40°30′ N. lat.—April 

1; and 

(3) South of 40°30′ N. lat.—April 15. 

(3) Trip limits in the whiting fishery. 

The ‘‘per trip’’ limit for whiting before 

the regular (primary) season for the 

shorebased sector is announced in Table 

1 of this subpart, and is a routine 

management measure under § 660.60(c). 

This trip limit includes any whiting 

caught shoreward of 100–fm (183–m) in 

the Eureka, CA area. The ‘‘per trip’’ limit 

for other groundfish species for the 

shorebased sector are announced in 

Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) of 

this subpart and apply as follows: 

(i) During the groundfish cumulative 

limit periods both before and after the 

primary whiting season, vessels may use 

either small and/or large footrope gear, 

but are subject to the more restrictive 

trip limits for those entire cumulative 

periods. 

(ii) If, during a primary whiting 

season, a whiting vessel harvests a 

groundfish species other than whiting 

for which there is a midwater trip limit, 

then that vessel may also harvest up to 

another footrope-specific limit for that 

species during any cumulative limit 

period that overlaps the start or end of 

the primary whiting season. 

(c) Closed areas. Vessels fishing in the 

Pacific whiting primary seasons for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, MS Coop 

Program, or C/P Coop Program shall not 

target Pacific whiting with midwater 

trawl gear in the following portions of 

the fishery management area: 

* * * * * 

(e) At-sea processing. Whiting may 

not be processed at sea south of 42°00′ 

N. lat. (Oregon-California border), 

unless by a waste-processing vessel as 

authorized under paragraph (g) of this 

section. 

(f) Time of day. Vessels fishing in the 

Pacific whiting primary seasons for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, MS Coop 

Program or C/P Coop Program shall not 

target Pacific whiting with midwater 

trawl gear in the fishery management 

area south of 42°00′ N. lat. between 0001 

hours to one-half hour after official 

sunrise (local time). During this time 

south of 42°00′N. lat., trawl doors must 

be on board any vessel used to fish for 

whiting and the trawl must be attached 

to the trawl doors. Official sunrise is 

determined, to the nearest 5° lat., in The 

Nautical Almanac issued annually by 

the Nautical Almanac Office, U.S. Naval 

Observatory, and available from the U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

* * * * * 

■ 24. In § 660.140: 

■ a. Paragraphs (a), (d)(1), (d)(4)(i)(C), 

(d)(4)(iv), and (d)(8)(ix) are revised; 

■ b. The heading of paragraph (b) is 

revised, and text is added to paragraph 

(b). 

■ c. The heading of paragraph (c) and 

paragraph (c)(1) are revised, paragraph 

(c)(2) is redesignated as paragraph (c)(3) 

and a new paragraph (c)(2) is added, 

and the newly redesignated paragraph 

(c)(3)(vi) is revised; 

■ d. Paragraphs (c)(3)(vii), (d)(2), (d)(3), 

(d)(5), and (e) through (h) are added; 

and 

■ e. Paragraphs (j) through (m) are 

redesignated as paragraphs (i) through 

(l), the headings of newly designated 

paragraphs (i) and (k) are revised, and 

text is added to the newly redesignated 

paragraphs (i) through (l) to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. 

* * * * * 

(a) General. The Shorebased IFQ 

Program requirements in this section 

will be effective beginning January 1, 

2011, except for paragraphs (d)(4), 

(d)(6), and (d)(8) of this section, which 

are effective immediately. The 

Shorebased IFQ Program applies to 

qualified participants in the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish fishery and includes a 

system of transferable QS for most 

groundfish species or species groups, 

IBQ for Pacific halibut, and trip limits 

or set-asides for the remaining 

groundfish species or species groups. 

NMFS will issue a QS permit to eligible 

participants and will establish a QS 

account for each QS permit owner to 

track the amount of QS or IBQ and QP 

or IBQ pounds owned by that owner. QS 

permit owners may own QS or IBQ for 

IFQ species, expressed as a percent of 

the allocation to the Shorebased IFQ 

Program for that species. NMFS will 

issue QP or IBQ pounds to QS permit 

owners, expressed in pounds, on an 

annual basis, to be deposited in the 

corresponding QS account. NMFS will 

establish a vessel account for each 

eligible vessel owner participating in 

the Shorebased IFQ Program, which is 

independent of the QS permit and QS 

account. In order to use QP or IBQ 

pounds, a QS permit owner must 

transfer the QP or IBQ pounds from the 

QS account into the vessel account for 

the vessel to which the QP or IBQ 

pounds is to be assigned. Harvests of 

IFQ species may only be delivered to an 

IFQ first receiver with a first receiver 

site license. In addition to the 

requirements of this section, the 

Shorebased IFQ Program is subject to 

the following groundfish regulations of 

subparts C and D: 

(1) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart C: § 660.11 

Definitions, § 660.12 Prohibitions, 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting, 

§ 660.14 VMS requirements, § 660.15 

Equipment requirements, § 660.16 

Groundfish observer program, § 660.20 

Vessel and gear identification, § 660.25 

Permits, § 660.55 Allocations, § 660.60 

Specifications and management 

measures, § 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications, and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79 Closed areas. 

(2) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart D: 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery definitions, 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery prohibitions, 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery recordkeeping 

and reporting, § 660.120 Trawl fishery 

crossover provisions, § 660.130 Trawl 

fishery management measures, and 

§ 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

(3) The Shorebased IFQ Program may 

be restricted or closed as a result of 

projected overages within the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, the MS Coop 

Program, or the C/P Coop Program. As 

determined necessary by the Regional 

Administrator, area restrictions, season 

closures, or other measures will be used 

to prevent the trawl sector in aggregate 

or the individual trawl sectors 

(Shorebased IFQ, MS Coop, or C/P 

Coop) from exceeding an OY, or formal 

allocation specified in the PCGFMP or 

regulation at § 660.55, subpart C, or 

§§ 660.140, 660.150, or 660.160, subpart 

D. 

(b) Participation requirements and 

responsibilities—(1) IFQ vessels. (i) 

Vessels must be registered to a 

groundfish limited entry permit, 

endorsed for trawl gear with no C/P 

endorsement. 

(ii) To start a fishing trip in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, a vessel and 

its owner(s) (as described on the USCG 

documentation or state registration 

document) must be registered to the 

same vessel account established by 

NMFS with no deficit (negative balance) 

for any species/species group. 

(iii) All IFQ species/species group 

catch (landings and discards) must be 

covered by QP or IBQ pounds. Any 

deficit (negative balance in a vessel 

account) must be cured within 30 

calendar days from the date the deficit 

from that trip is documented in the 

vessel account, unless the deficit is 

within the limits of the carryover 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78392 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

provision at paragraph (e)(5) of this 

section, in which case the vessel may 

declare out of the IFQ fishery for the 

remainder of the year in which the 

deficit occurred, and must cure the 

deficit within 30 days after the issuance 

of QP or IBQ pounds for the following 

year. 

(iv) Any vessel with a deficit (negative 

balance) in its vessel account is 

prohibited from fishing that is within 

the scope of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program until sufficient QP or IBQ 

pounds are transferred into the vessel 

account to remove any deficit, 

regardless of the amount of the deficit. 

(v) A vessel account may not have QP 

or IBQ pounds (used and unused 

combined) in excess of the QP Vessel 

Limit in any year, and for species 

covered by Unused QP Vessel Limit, 

may not have QP or IBQ pounds in 

excess of the Unused QP Vessel Limit at 

any time. These amounts are specified 

at paragraph (e)(4) of this section. 

(vi) Vessels must use either trawl gear 

as specified at § 660.130(b), or a legal 

non-trawl groundfish gear under the 

gear switching provisions as specified at 

§ 660.140(k). 

(vii) Vessels that are registered to MS/ 

CV-endorsed permits may be used to 

fish in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

provided that the vessel is registered to 

a valid Shorebased IFQ Program vessel 

account. 

(viii) In the same calendar year, a 

vessel registered to a trawl endorsed 

limited entry permit with no MS/CV or 

C/P endorsements may be used to fish 

in the Shorebased IFQ Program if the 

vessel has a valid vessel account, and to 

fish in the mothership sector for a 

permitted MS coop as authorized by the 

MS coop. 

(ix) Vessels that are registered to C/Pendorsed permits may not be used to 

fish in the Shorebased IFQ Program. 

(2) IFQ first receivers. The IFQ first 

receiver must: 

(i) Ensure that all catch removed from 

a vessel making an IFQ delivery is 

weighed on a scale or scales meeting the 

requirements described in § 660.15(c), 

subpart C; 

(ii) Ensure that all catch is landed, 

sorted, and weighed in accordance with 

a valid catch monitoring plan as 

described in § 660.140(f)(3)(iii), 

subpart D. 

(iii) Ensure that all catch is sorted, 

prior to first weighing, by species or 

species groups as specified at 

§ 660.130(d), except the vessels declared 

in to the limited entry midwater trawl, 

Pacific whiting shorebased IFQ at 

§ 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), subpart C may 

weigh catch on a before sorting as 

described at § 660.140(j)(2). 

(iv) Provide uninhibited access to all 

areas where fish are or may be sorted or 

weighed to NMFS staff, NMFSauthorized personnel, or authorized 

officer at any time when a delivery of 

IFQ species, or the processing of those 

species, is taking place. 

(v) Ensure that each scale produces a 

complete and accurate printed record of 

the weight of all catch in a delivery, 

unless exempted in the NMFS-accepted 

catch monitoring plan. 

(vi) Retain and make available to 

NMFS staff, NMFS-authorized 

personnel, or an authorized officer, all 

printed output from any scale used to 

weigh catch, and any hand tally sheets, 

worksheets, or notes used to determine 

the total weight of any species. 

(vii) Ensure that each delivery of IFQ 

catch is monitored by a catch monitor 

and that the catch monitor is on site the 

entire time the delivery is being 

weighed or sorted. 

(viii) Ensure that sorting and weighing 

is completed prior to catch leaving the 

area that can be monitored from the 

observation area. 

* * * * * 

(c) IFQ species, management areas, 

and allocations. 

(1) IFQ species. IFQ species are those 

groundfish species and Pacific halibut 

in the exclusive economic zone or 

adjacent state waters off Washington, 

Oregon and California, under the 

jurisdiction of the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, for which QS and 

IBQ will be issued. Groupings and area 

subdivisions for IFQ species are those 

groupings and area subdivisions for 

which OYs are specified in the Tables 

1a through 2d, subpart C, and those for 

which there is an area-specific 

precautionary harvest policy. The lists 

of individual groundfish species 

included in the minor shelf complex 

north of 40°10′ N. lat., minor shelf 

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

slope complex north 40°10′ N. lat., 

minor slope complex south of 40°10′ N. 

lat., and in the other flatfish complex 

are specified under the definition of 

‘‘groundfish’’ at § 660.11. The following 

are the IFQ species: 

IFQ SPECIES

ROUNDFISH 

Lingcod 

Pacific cod 

Pacific whiting 

Sablefish N. of 36° 

Sablefish S. of 36° 

FLATFISH 

Dover sole 

English sole 

IFQ SPECIES—Continued 

Petrale sole 

Arrowtooth flounder 

Starry flounder 

Other flatfish stock complex 

Pacific halibut (IBQ) N. of 40°10′ 

ROCKFISH 

Pacific ocean perch N. of 40°10′ 

Widow rockfish 

Canary rockfish 

Chilipepper rockfish S. of 40°10′ 

Bocaccio S. of 40°10′ 

Splitnose rockfish S. of 40°10′ 

Yellowtail rockfish N. of 40°10′ 

Shortspine thornyhead N. of 34°27′ 

Shortspine thornyhead S. of 34°27′ 

Longspine thornyhead N. of 34°27′ 

Cowcod S. of 40°10′ 

Darkblotched rockfish 

Yelloweye rockfish 

Minor shelf rockfish complex N. of 40°10′ 

Minor shelf rockfish complex S. of 40°10′ 

Minor slope rockfish complex N. of 40°10′ 

Minor slope rockfish complex S. of 40°10′ 

(2) IFQ management areas. A vessel 

participating in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program may not fish in more than one 

IFQ management area during a trip. IFQ 

management areas are as follows: 

(i) Between the US/Canada border and 

40°10′ N. lat., 

(ii) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 36° N. 

lat., 

(iii) Between 36° N. lat. and 34°27′ N. 

lat., and 

(iv) Between 34°27′ N. lat. and the 

US/Mexico border. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(vi) For each IFQ species, NMFS will 

determine annual sub-allocations to 

individual QS accounts by multiplying 

the percent of QS or IBQ registered to 

the account by the amount of each 

respective IFQ species allocated to the 

Shorebased IFQ Program for that year. 

For each IFQ species, NMFS will 

deposit QP or IBQ pounds in the 

respective QS account in the amount of 

each sub-allocation determined. 

(vii) Reallocations—(A) Reallocation 

with changes in management areas. 

(1) Area subdivision. If at any time 

after the initial allocation, an IFQ 

species is geographically subdivided, 

those holding QS or IBQ for the IFQ 

species being subdivided will receive an 

amount of QS or IBQ for each newly 

created area that is equivalent to the 

amount they held for the area before it 

was subdivided. 

(2) Area recombination. When two 

areas are combined for an IFQ species, 

the QS or IBQ held by individuals in 

each area will be adjusted 

proportionally such that: 

(i) The total QS or IBQ for the area 

sums to 100 percent, and 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78393 

(ii) A person holding QS or IBQ in the 

newly created area will receive the same 

amount of total QP or IBQ pounds as 

they would if the areas had not been 

combined. 

(3) Area line movement. When a 

management area boundary line is 

moved for an IFQ species, the QS or IBQ 

held by individuals in each area will be 

adjusted proportionally such that they 

each maintain their same share of the 

trawl allocation on a coastwide basis 

(a fishing area may expand or decrease, 

but the individual’s QP or IBQ pounds 

for both areas combined wouldn’t 

change because of the change in areas). 

In order to achieve this end, the holders 

of QS or IBQ in the area being reduced 

will receive QS or IBQ for the area being 

expanded, such that the total QP or IBQ 

pounds they would be issued will not 

be reduced as a result of the area 

reduction. Those holding QS or IBQ in 

the area being expanded will have their 

QS or IBQ reduced such that the total 

QP or IBQ pounds they receive in the 

year of the line movement will not 

increase as a result of the expansion 

(nor will it be reduced). 

(B) Reallocation with subdivision of a 

species group. If at any time after the 

initial allocation an IFQ species which 

is a species group is subdivided, each 

species or species group resulting from 

the subdivision will be an IFQ species. 

QS owners for the species group being 

subdivided will receive an amount of 

QS for each newly created IFQ species 

that is equivalent to the amount they 

held for the species group before it was 

subdivided. For example, if a person 

holds one percent of a species group 

before the subdivision, that person will 

hold one percent of the QS for each IFQ 

species resulting from the subdivision. 

* * * * * 

(d) QS permits and QS accounts—(1) 

General. In order to obtain QS and/or 

IBQ, a person must apply for a QS 

permit. NMFS will determine if the 

applicant is eligible to own QS and/or 

IBQ in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) 

of this section. If eligible, NMFS will 

issue a QS permit, and will establish a 

QS account to track QS and IBQ 

balances for all IFQ species identified at 

§ 660.140(c)(1). NMFS will issue initial 

allocations of QS and IBQ in accordance 

with paragraph (d)(8) of this section. 

Transfers of QS and IBQ, and of QP or 

IBQ pounds, are subject to provisions at 

paragraph (d)(3) of this section. QS 

permit owners can monitor the status of 

their QS and IBQ, and associated QP 

and IBQ pounds, throughout the year in 

their QS account. 

(i) Annual QS adjustments. On or 

about January 1 each year, QS permit 

owners will be notified, via the IFQ Web 

site and their QS account, of any 

adjustments to their QS and/or IBQ 

allocations, for each of the IFQ species. 

Updated QS and/or IBQ values, if 

applicable, will reflect the results of: 

any recalculation of initial allocation 

formulas resulting from changes in 

provisional OYs used in the allocation 

formulas or appeals, any redistribution 

of QS and IBQ (e.g., resulting from 

permanent revocation of applicable 

permits, subject to accumulation limits), 

and any transfers of QS and/or IBQ 

made during the prior year. 

(ii) Annual QP and IBQ pound 

allocations. QP and IBQ pounds will be 

deposited into QS accounts annually. 

QS permit owners will be notified of QP 

deposits via the IFQ Web site and their 

QS account. QP and IBQ pounds will be 

issued to the nearest whole pound using 

standard rounding rules (i.e. decimal 

amounts less than 0.5 round down and 

0.5 and greater round up), except that in 

the first year of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, issuance of QP for overfished 

species greater than zero but less than 

one pound will be rounded up to one 

pound. QS permit owners must transfer 

their QP and IBQ pounds from their QS 

account to a vessel account in order for 

those QP and IBQ pounds to be fished. 

QP and IBQ pounds must be transferred 

in whole pounds (i.e. no fraction of a QP 

or IBQ pound can be transferred). All 

QP and IBQ pounds in a QS account 

must be transferred to a vessel account 

by September 1 of each year in order to 

be fished. 

(A) Nonwhiting QP annual suballocations. NMFS will issue QP for IFQ 

species other than Pacific whiting and 

Pacific halibut annually by multiplying 

the QS permit owner’s QS for each such 

IFQ species by that year’s shorebased 

trawl allocation for that IFQ species. 

Deposits to QS accounts for IFQ species 

other than Pacific whiting and Pacific 

halibut will be made on or about 

January 1 each year. 

(B) Pacific whiting QP annual 

allocation. NMFS will issue QP for 

Pacific whiting annually by multiplying 

the QS permit owner’s QS for Pacific 

whiting by that year’s shorebased trawl 

allocation for Pacific whiting. 

(1) In years where the Pacific whiting 

harvest specification is known by 

January 1, deposits to QS accounts for 

Pacific whiting will be made on or about 

January 1. 

(2) In years where the Pacific whiting 

harvest specification is not known by 

January 1, NMFS will issue Pacific 

whiting QP in two parts. On or about 

January 1, NMFS will deposit Pacific 

whiting QP based on the shorebased 

trawl allocation multiplied by the lower 

end of the range of potential harvest 

specifications for Pacific whiting for 

that year. After the final Pacific whiting 

harvest specifications are established 

later in the year, NMFS will deposit 

additional QP to the QS account so that 

the total QP issued for that year is equal 

to the QS permit owner’s QS for Pacific 

whiting multiplied by that year’s 

shorebased trawl allocation for Pacific 

whiting. 

(C) Pacific halibut IBQ pounds annual 

allocation. NMFS will issue IBQ pounds 

for Pacific halibut annually by 

multiplying the QS permit owner’s IBQ 

percent by the shorebased component of 

the trawl mortality limit for that year 

(expressed in net weight), and dividing 

by 0.75 to convert to round weight 

pounds. Consistent with § 660.55(m), 

the shorebased component of the trawl 

mortality limit will be calculated by 

multiplying the total constant 

exploitation yield of the prior year by 15 

percent, not to exceed 130,000 pounds 

in the first four years of the Shorebased 

IFQ Program and not to exceed 100,000 

pounds starting in the fifth year of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, less the setaside amount of Pacific halibut to 

accommodate the incidental catch in the 

trawl fishery south of 40°10′ N. latitude 

and in the at-sea whiting fishery. 

Deposits to QS accounts for Pacific 

halibut IBQ pounds will be made on or 

about January 1 each year. 

(D) [Reserved] 

(2) Eligibility and registration—(i) 

Eligibility. Only the following persons 

are eligible to own QS permits: 

(A) A United States citizen, that is 

eligible to own and control a U.S. 

fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 

12113 (general fishery endorsement 

requirements and 75 percent citizenship 

requirement for entities); 

(B) A permanent resident alien, that is 

eligible to own and control a U.S. 

fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 

12113 (general fishery endorsement 

requirements and 75 percent citizenship 

requirement for entities); or 

(C) A corporation, partnership, or 

other entity established under the laws 

of the United States or any State, that is 

eligible to own and control a U.S. 

fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 

12113 (general fishery endorsement 

requirements and 75 percent citizenship 

requirement for entities). However, 

there is an exception for any entity that 

owns a mothership that participated in 

the west coast groundfish fishery during 

the allocation period and is eligible to 

own or control that U.S. fishing vessel 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78394 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

with a fishery endorsement pursuant to 

sections 203(g) and 213(g) of the AFA. 

(ii) Registration. A QS account will be 

established by NMFS with the issuance 

of a QS permit. The administrative 

functions associated with the 

Shorebased IFQ Program (e.g., account 

registration, landing transactions, and 

transfers) are designed to be 

accomplished online; therefore, a 

participant must have access to a 

computer with Internet access and must 

set up online access to their QS account 

to participate. The computer must have 

Internet browser software installed (e.g., 

Internet Explorer, Netscape, Mozilla 

Firefox); as well as the Adobe Flash 

Player software version 9.0 or greater. 

NMFS will mail initial QS permit 

owners instructions to set up online 

access to their QS account. NMFS may 

require QS account owners that are 

business entities to designate an account 

manager that may act on behalf of the 

entity and their contact information. 

NMFS will use the QS account to send 

messages to QS permit owners; it is 

important for QS permit owners to 

monitor their online QS account and all 

associated messages. 

(3) Renewal, change of permit 

ownership, and transfers—(i) Renewal. 

(A) QS permits expire at the end of each 

calendar year, and must be renewed 

between October 1 and November 30 of 

each year in order to remain in force the 

following year. A complete QS permit 

renewal package must be received by 

SFD no later than November 30 to be 

accepted by NMFS. 

(B) Notification to renew QS permits 

will be sent by SFD by September 1 

each year to the QS permit owner’s most 

recent address in the SFD record. The 

QS permit owner shall provide SFD 

with notice of any address change 

within 15 days of the change. 

(C) Any QS permit for which SFD 

does not receive a QS permit renewal 

request by November 30 will have its 

QS account inactivated by NMFS at the 

end of the calendar year and the QS 

permit will not be renewed by NMFS for 

the following year. NMFS will not issue 

QP or IBQ pounds to the inactivated QS 

account associated with the nonrenewed QS permit for that year. Any 

QP or IBQ pounds derived from the QS 

or IBQ in the inactivated QS account 

will be redistributed among all other QS 

permit owners that renewed their 

permit by the deadline. Redistribution 

of QP or IBQ pounds to QS permit 

owners will be proportional to the QS 

or IBQ for each IFQ species. A nonrenewed QS permit may be renewed in 

a subsequent year by submission of a 

complete QS permit renewal package 

during the permit renewal period for 

that year, and NMFS will issue the 

associated QP or IBQ pounds for that 

year. 

(D) QS permits will not be renewed 

until SFD has received a complete 

application for a QS permit renewal, 

which includes payment of required 

fees, complete documentation of QS 

permit ownership on the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form as required under paragraph 

(d)(4)(iv) of this section, a complete 

economic data collection form if 

required under § 660.114, subpart D. 

The QS permit renewal will be 

considered incomplete until the 

required information is submitted. 

NMFS may require QS account owners 

that are business entities to designate an 

account manager and their contact 

information through the QS permit 

renewal process. 

(E) Effective Date. A QS permit is 

effective on the date given on the permit 

and remains effective until the end of 

the calendar year. 

(F) IAD and appeals. QS permit 

renewals are subject to the permit 

appeals process specified at § 660.25(g), 

subpart C. 

(ii) Change of permit ownership and 

transfer restrictions—(A) Restriction on 

the transfer of ownership for QS 

permits. A QS permit cannot be 

transferred to another individual or 

entity. The QS permit owner cannot 

change or add additional individuals or 

entities as owners of the permit (i.e., 

cannot change the registered permit 

owners as given on the permit). Any 

change to the owner of the QS permit 

requires the new owner(s) to apply for 

a QS permit, and is subject to 

accumulation limits and approval by 

NMFS. 

(B) Transfers of QS or IBQ or QP or 

IBQ pounds. (1) General. Transfers of 

QS or IBQ from one QS account to 

another QS account and transfers of QP 

or IBQ pounds from a QS account to a 

vessel account must be accomplished 

via the online QS account. During the 

year there may be situations where 

NMFS deems it necessary to prohibit 

transfers (i.e., account reconciliation, 

system maintenance, or for emergency 

fishery management reasons). To make 

a transfer, a QS permit owner must 

initiate a transfer request by logging 

onto the online QS account. Following 

the instructions provided on the Web 

site, the QS permit owner must enter 

pertinent information regarding the 

transfer request including, but not 

limited to: IFQ species, amount of QS, 

IBQ, QP, or IBQ pounds to be 

transferred for each IFQ species; name 

and any other identifier of the eligible 

transferee (e.g., QS permit number, 

vessel account number); and the value 

of the transferred QS, IBQ, QP, or IBQ 

pounds for each IFQ species. The online 

system will verify whether all 

information has been entered and 

whether the transfer complies with 

ownership limits or vessel limits, as 

applicable. If the information is not 

accepted, an electronic message will 

record as much in the transferor’s QS 

account explaining the reason(s). If the 

information is accepted, the online 

system will record the pending transfer 

in both the transferor’s QS account and 

the transferee’s QS account or vessel 

account. The transferee must approve 

the transfer by electronic signature in 

order for the transfer to be completed. 

If the transferee accepts the transfer, the 

online system will record the transfer 

and confirm the transaction in both the 

transferor’s QS account and the 

transferee’s QS account or vessel 

account through a transaction 

confirmation notice. Once the transferee 

accepts the transaction, the transaction 

is final and permanent. 

(2) Transfer of QS or IBQ between QS 

accounts. After the second year of the 

trawl rationalization program, QS 

permit owners may transfer QS or IBQ 

to another QS permit owner, subject to 

accumulation limits and approval by 

NMFS. QS or IBQ is transferred as a 

percent, divisible to one-thousandth of 

a percent (i.e., greater than or equal to 

0.001%). During the first 2 years after 

implementation of the program, QS or 

IBQ cannot be transferred to another QS 

permit owner, except under U.S. court 

order or authorization and as approved 

by NMFS. QS or IBQ may not be 

transferred between December 1 through 

December 31 each year. QS or IBQ may 

not be transferred to a vessel account. 

(3) Transfer of QP or IBQ pounds from 

a QS account to a vessel account. QP or 

IBQ pounds must be transferred in 

whole pounds (i.e. no fraction of a QP 

can be transferred). QP or IBQ pounds 

must be transferred to a vessel account 

in order to be used. Transfers of QP or 

IBQ pounds from a QS account to a 

vessel account are subject to vessel 

accumulation limits and NMFS’ 

approval. All QP or IBQ pounds from a 

QS account must be transferred to one 

or more vessel accounts by September 1 

each year. Once QP or IBQ pounds are 

transferred from a QS account to a 

vessel account (accepted by the 

transferee/vessel owner), they cannot be 

transferred back to a QS account and 

may only be transferred to another 

vessel account. QP or IBQ pounds may 

not be transferred from one QS account 

to another QS account. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78395 

(C) Effective date—(1) Transfer of QS 

or IBQ between QS accounts is effective 

on the date approved by NMFS. 

(2) Transfer of QP or IBQ pounds from 

a QS account to a vessel account is 

effective on the date approved by 

NMFS. 

(D) IAD and appeals. Transfers are 

subject to the permit appeals process 

specified at § 660.25 (g), subpart C. 

* * * * * 

(4) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(C) The Shorebased IFQ Program 

accumulation limits are as follows: 

Species category 

QS and IBQ 

control limit 

(in percent) 

Non-whiting groundfish species 2.7 

Lingcod—coastwide .................. 2.5 

Pacific cod ................................ 12.0 

Pacific whiting (shoreside) ........ 10.0 

Sablefish: 

N. of 36° (Monterey north) .... 3.0 

S. of 36° (Conception area) .. 10.0 

Pacific ocean perch N. of 

40°10′ .................................... 4.0 

Widow rockfish ......................... 5.1 

Canary rockfish ......................... 4.4 

Chilipepper rockfish S. of 

40°10′ .................................... 10.0 

Bocaccio S. of 40°10′ ............... 13.2 

Splitnose rockfish S. of 40°10′ 10.0 

Yellowtail rockfish N. of 40°10′ 5.0 

Shortspine thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ ........................... 6.0 

S. of 34°27′ ........................... 6.0 

Longspine thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ ........................... 6.0 

Cowcod S. of 40°10′ ................ 17.7 

Darkblotched rockfish ............... 4.5 

Yelloweye rockfish .................... 5.7 

Minor rockfish complex N. of 

40°10′: 

Shelf species ......................... 5.0 

Slope species ........................ 5.0 

Minor rockfish complex S. of 

40°10′: 

Shelf species ......................... 9.0 

Slope species ........................ 6.0 

Dover sole ................................ 2.6 

English sole .............................. 5.0 

Petrale sole ............................... 3.0 

Arrowtooth flounder .................. 10.0 

Starry flounder .......................... 10.0 

Other flatfish stock complex ..... 10.0 

Pacific halibut (IBQ) N. of 

40°10′ .................................... 5.4 

* * * * * 

(iv) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that owns a 

limited entry trawl permit and that is 

applying for or renewing a QS permit 

shall document those persons that have 

an ownership interest in the limited 

entry trawl or QS permit greater than or 

equal to 2 percent. This ownership 

interest must be documented with the 

SFD via the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form. For renewal, 

if the limited entry trawl permit and QS 

permit have identical ownership 

interest, only one form need be 

submitted attesting to such ownership. 

SFD will not issue a QS permit unless 

the Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form has been completed. 

Further, if SFD discovers through 

review of the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that a person 

owns or controls more than the 

accumulation limits and is not 

authorized to do so under paragraph 

(d)(4)(v) of this section, the person will 

be notified and the QS permit will be 

issued up to the accumulation limit 

specified in the QS or IBQ control limit 

table from paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this 

section. NMFS may request additional 

information of the applicant as 

necessary to verify compliance with 

accumulation limits. 

* * * * * 

(5) Appeals. An appeal to a QS permit 

or QS account action follows the same 

process as the general permit appeals 

process as defined at § 660.25(g), 

subpart C. 

* * * * * 

(8) * * * 

(ix) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of QS 

and IBQ, the applicant will receive a QS 

permit specifying the amounts of QS 

and IBQ for which the applicant has 

qualified and the applicant will be 

registered to a QS account. If NMFS 

disapproves or partially disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. As part of the IAD, NMFS will 

indicate whether the QS permit owner 

qualifies for QS or IBQ in amounts that 

exceed the accumulation limits and are 

subject to divestiture provisions given at 

paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section, or 

whether the QS permit owner qualifies 

for QS or IBQ that exceed the 

accumulation limits and does not 

qualify to receive the excess under 

paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section. If the 

applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 60 calendar days of the date on 

the IAD, the IAD becomes the final 

decision of the Regional Administrator 

acting on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce. 

* * * * * 

(e) Vessel accounts—(1) General. In 

order to participate in the Shorebased 

IFQ Program, a vessel must be registered 

to an eligible limited entry trawl permit. 

A vessel account will be established on 

request for an owner of a vessel 

registered to an eligible limited entry 

trawl permit in order to track QP and 

IBQ pounds. QP or IBQ pounds will 

have the same species/species groups 

and area designations as the QS or IBQ 

from which it was issued. Annually, QS 

or IBQ (expressed as a percent) are 

converted to QP or IBQ pounds 

(expressed as a weight) in a QS account. 

QP or IBQ pounds may be transferred 

from a QS account to a vessel account 

or from one vessel account to another 

vessel account. QP or IBQ pounds are 

required to cover catch (landings and 

discards) by limited entry trawl vessels 

of all IFQ species/species groups, except 

for: 

(i) Gear exception. Vessels with a 

limited entry trawl permit using the 

following gears would not be required to 

cover groundfish catch with QP or 

Pacific halibut catch with IBQ pounds: 

Non-groundfish trawl, gear types 

defined in the coastal pelagic species 

FMP, gear types defined in the highly 

migratory species FMP, salmon troll, 

crab pot, and limited entry fixed gear 

when the vessel also has a limited entry 

permit endorsed for fixed gear and has 

declared that they are fishing in the 

limited entry fixed gear fishery. 

(ii) Species exception. QP are not 

required for the following species: 

Longspine thornyheads south of 34°27′ 

N. lat., minor nearshore rockfish (north 

and south), black rockfish (coastwide), 

California scorpionfish, cabezon, kelp 

greenling, shortbelly rockfish, and 

‘‘other fish’’ (as defined at § 660.11, 

subpart C, under the definition of 

‘‘groundfish’’). For these species, trip 

limits remain in place as specified in 

the trip limit tables at Table 1 (North) 

and Table 1 (South) of this subpart. 

(2) Eligibility and registration—(i) 

Eligibility. To establish a registered 

vessel account, a person must own a 

vessel and that vessel must be registered 

to a groundfish limited entry permit 

endorsed for trawl gear. 

(ii) Registration. A vessel account 

must be registered with the NMFS SFD 

Permits Office. A vessel account may be 

established at any time during the year. 

An eligible vessel owner must submit a 

request in writing to NMFS to establish 

a vessel account. The request must 

include the vessel name; USCG vessel 

registration number (as given on USCG 

Form 1270) or state registration number, 

if no USCG documentation; all vessel 

owner names (as given on USCG Form 

1270, or on state registration, as 

applicable); and business contact 

information, including: Address, phone 

number, fax number, and e-mail. NMFS 

may require vessel account owners that 

are business entities to designate an 

account manager that may act on behalf 

of the entity and their contact 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78396 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

information. Requests for a vessel 

account must also include the following 

information: A complete economic data 

collection form as required under 

§ 660.113(b), (c) and (d), subpart D, and 

a complete Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form as required 

under paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section. 

The request for a vessel account will be 

considered incomplete until the 

required information is submitted. Any 

change in the legal name of the vessel 

owner(s) will require the new owner to 

register with NMFS for a vessel account. 

A participant must have access to a 

computer with Internet access and must 

set up online access to their vessel 

account to participate. The computer 

must have Internet browser software 

installed (e.g., Internet Explorer, 

Netscape, Mozilla Firefox); as well as 

the Adobe Flash Player software version 

9.0 or greater. NMFS will mail vessel 

account owners instructions to set up 

online access to their vessel account. 

NMFS may require vessel account 

owners that are business entities to 

designate an account manager that may 

act on behalf of the entity and their 

contact information. NMFS will use the 

vessel account to send messages to 

vessel owners in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program; it is important for vessel 

owners to monitor their online vessel 

account and all associated messages. 

(3) Renewal, change of account 

ownership, and transfer of QP or IBQ 

pounds—(i) Renewal. (A) Vessel 

accounts expire at the end of each 

calendar year, and must be renewed 

between October 1 and November 30 of 

each year in order to ensure the vessel 

account is active on January 1 of the 

following year. A complete vessel 

account renewal package must be 

received by SFD no later than November 

30 to be accepted by NMFS. 

(B) Notification to renew vessel 

accounts will be issued by SFD prior to 

September 1 each year to the vessel 

account owner’s most recent address in 

the SFD record. The vessel account 

owner shall provide SFD with notice of 

any address change within 15 days of 

the change. 

(C) Any vessel account for which SFD 

does not receive a vessel account 

renewal request by November 30 will 

have its vessel account inactivated by 

NMFS at the end of the calendar year. 

NMFS will not issue QP or IBQ pounds 

to the inactivated vessel account. Any 

QP or IBQ pounds in the vessel account 

will expire and surplus QP or IBQ 

pounds will not be available for 

carryover. A non-renewed vessel 

account may be renewed in a 

subsequent year by submission of a 

complete vessel account renewal 

package. 

(D) Vessel accounts will not be 

renewed until SFD has received a 

complete application for a vessel 

account renewal, which includes 

payment of required fees, a complete 

documentation of permit ownership on 

the Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form as required under (e)(4)(ii) 

of this section, and a complete 

economic data collection form as 

required under § 660.114, subpart D. 

The vessel account renewal will be 

considered incomplete until the 

required information is submitted. 

NMFS may require vessel account 

owners that are business entities to 

designate an account manager that may 

act on behalf of the entity and their 

contact information. 

(E) Effective Date. A vessel account is 

effective on the date issued by NMFS 

and remains effective until the end of 

the calendar year. 

(F) IAD and appeals. Vessel account 

renewals are subject to the appeals 

process specified at § 660.25(g), 

subpart C. 

(ii) Change in vessel account 

ownership. Vessel accounts are nontransferable and ownership of a vessel 

account cannot change. If the ownership 

of a vessel changes, then a new vessel 

account must be opened by the new 

owner in order for the vessel to 

participate in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. 

(iii) Transfer of QP or IBQ pounds— 

(A) General. QP or IBQ pounds may 

only be transferred from a QS account 

to a vessel account or between vessel 

accounts. QP or IBQ pounds cannot be 

transferred from a vessel account to a 

QS account. Transfers of QP or IBQ 

pounds are subject to accumulation 

limits. QP or IBQ pounds in a vessel 

account may only be transferred to 

another vessel account. QP or IBQ 

pounds must be transferred in whole 

pounds (i.e., no fraction of a QP or IBQ 

pound can be transferred). During the 

year there may be situations where 

NMFS deems it necessary to prohibit 

transfers (i.e., account reconciliation, 

system maintenance, or for emergency 

fishery management reasons). 

(B) Transfer procedures. QP or IBQ 

pound transfers from one vessel account 

to another vessel account must be 

accomplished via the online vessel 

account. To make a transfer, a vessel 

account owner must initiate a transfer 

request by logging onto the online vessel 

account. Following the instructions 

provided on the Web site, the vessel 

account owner must enter pertinent 

information regarding the transfer 

request including, but not limited to: 

IFQ species, amount of QP or IBQ 

pounds to be transferred for each IFQ 

species (in whole pound increments); 

name and any other identifier of the 

eligible transferee (e.g., USCG 

documentation number or state 

registration number, as applicable) of 

the eligible vessel account receiving the 

transfer; and the value of the transferred 

QP or IBQ pounds. The online system 

will verify whether all information has 

been entered and whether the transfer 

complies with vessel limits, as 

applicable. If the information is not 

accepted, an electronic message will 

record as much in the transferor’s vessel 

account explaining the reason(s). If the 

information is accepted, the online 

system will record the pending transfer 

in both the transferor’s and the 

transferee’s vessel accounts. The 

transferee must approve the transfer by 

electronic signature. If the transferee 

accepts the transfer, the online system 

will record the transfer and confirm the 

transaction in both accounts through a 

transaction confirmation notice. Once 

the transferee accepts the transaction, 

the transaction is final and permanent. 

QP or IBQ pounds may be transferred to 

vessel accounts at any time during 

January 1 through December 14 each 

year unless otherwise notified by 

NMFS. QP or IBQ pounds may not be 

transferred between December 15 and 

December 31 each year. 

(4) Accumulation limits—(i) Vessel 

limits. Vessel accounts may not have QP 

or IBQ pounds in excess of the QP 

Vessel Limit in any year, and, for 

species covered by Unused QP Vessel 

Limits, may not have QP or IBQ pounds 

in excess of the Unused QP Vessel Limit 

at any time. These amounts are as 

follows: 

Species category 

QP vessel 

limit 

(annual 

limit) 

(in percent) 

Unused 

QP vessel 

limit 

(daily limit) 

(in percent) 

Non-whiting groundfish species ....................................................................................................................................... 3.2 ....................


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78397 

Species category 

QP vessel 

limit 

(annual 

limit) 

(in percent) 

Unused 

QP vessel 

limit 

(daily limit) 

(in percent) 

Lingcod—coastwide ......................................................................................................................................................... 3.8 ....................

Pacific cod ....................................................................................................................................................................... 20.0 ....................

Pacific whiting (shoreside) ............................................................................................................................................... 15.0 ....................

Sablefish: 

N. of 36° (Monterey north) ....................................................................................................................................... 4.5 ....................

S. of 36° (Conception area) ..................................................................................................................................... 15.0 ....................

Pacific ocean perch N. of 40°10′ ..................................................................................................................................... 6.0 4.0 

Widow rockfish 1 .............................................................................................................................................................. 8.5 5.1 

Canary rockfish ................................................................................................................................................................ 10.0 4.4 

Chilipepper rockfish S. of 40°10′ ..................................................................................................................................... 15.0 ....................

Bocaccio S. of 40°10′ ...................................................................................................................................................... 15.4 13.2 

Splitnose rockfish S. of 40°10′ ........................................................................................................................................ 15.0 ....................

Yellowtail rockfish N. of 40°10′ ........................................................................................................................................ 7.5 ....................

Shortspine thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ .............................................................................................................................................................. 9.0 ....................

S. of 34°27′ ............................................................................................................................................................... 9.0 ....................

Longspine thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ .............................................................................................................................................................. 9.0 ....................

Cowcod S. of 40°10′ ........................................................................................................................................................ 17.7 17.7 

Darkblotched rockfish ...................................................................................................................................................... 6.8 4.5 

Yelloweye rockfish ........................................................................................................................................................... 11.4 5.7 

Minor rockfish complex N. of 40°10′: 

Shelf species ............................................................................................................................................................ 7.5 ....................

Slope species ........................................................................................................................................................... 7.5 ....................

Minor rockfish complex S. of 40°10′: 

Shelf species ............................................................................................................................................................ 13.5 ....................

Slope species ........................................................................................................................................................... 9.0 ....................

Dover sole ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3.9 ....................

English sole ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7.5 ....................

Petrale sole ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4.5 ....................

Arrowtooth flounder ......................................................................................................................................................... 20.0 ....................

Starry flounder ................................................................................................................................................................. 20.0 ....................

Other flatfish stock complex ............................................................................................................................................ 15.0 ....................

Pacific halibut (IBQ) N. of 40°10′ .................................................................................................................................... 14.4 5.4 

1 If widow rockfish is rebuilt before initial allocation of QS, the vessel limit will be set at 1.5 times the control limit. 

(ii) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that owns a 

vessel registered to a limited entry trawl 

permit and that is applying for or 

renewing a vessel account shall 

document those persons that have an 

ownership interest in the vessel greater 

than or equal to 2 percent. This 

ownership interest must be documented 

with the SFD via the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form. SFD will not issue a vessel 

account unless the Trawl Identification 

of Ownership Interest Form has been 

completed. NMFS may request 

additional information of the applicant 

as necessary to verify compliance with 

accumulation limits. 

(5) Carryover. The carryover provision 

allows a limited amount of surplus QP 

or IBQ pounds in a vessel account to be 

carried over from one year to the next 

or allows a deficit in a vessel account in 

one year to be covered with QP or IBQ 

pounds from a subsequent year, up to a 

carryover limit. The carryover limit is 

calculated by multiplying the carryover 

percentage by the cumulative total of QP 

or IBQ pounds (used and unused) in a 

vessel account for the base year, less any 

transfers out of the vessel account or 

any previous carryover amounts. The 

percentage used for the carryover 

provision may be changed during the 

biennial specifications and management 

measures process. 

(i) Surplus QP or IBQ pounds. A 

vessel account with a surplus of QP or 

IBQ pounds (unused QP or IBQ pounds) 

for any IFQ species at the end of the 

fishing year may carryover for use in the 

immediately following year an amount 

of unused QP or IBQ pounds up to its 

carryover limit. The carryover limit for 

the surplus is calculated as 10 percent 

of the cumulative total QP or IBQ 

pounds (used and unused, less any 

transfers or any previous carryover 

amounts) in the vessel account at the 

end of the year. NMFS will credit the 

carryover amount to the vessel account 

in the immediately following year. If 

there is a decline in the OY between the 

base year and the following year in 

which the QP or IBQ pounds would be 

carried over, the carryover amount will 

be reduced in proportion to the 

reduction in the OY. Surplus QP or IBQ 

pounds may not be carried over for 

more than one year. Any amount of QP 

or IBQ pounds in a vessel account and 

in excess of the carryover amount will 

expire on December 31 each year and 

will not be available for any future use. 

(ii) Deficit QP or IBQ pounds. A vessel 

account with a deficit (negative balance) 

of QP or IBQ pounds for any IFQ species 

in the current year may cover that 

deficit with QP or IBQ pounds from the 

following year without incurring a 

violation if all of the following 

conditions are met: 

(A) The vessel declares out of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program for the year in 

which the deficit occurred. To declare 

out of the Shorebased IFQ Program, the 

vessel owner must submit a signed, 

dated, and notarized letter to the NMFS 

Office of Law Enforcement, declaring 

the vessel owner’s intent to declare out 

of the Shorebased IFQ Program for the 

remainder of the year and invoke the 

carryover provision to cover the deficit. 

(If the deficit occurs less than 30 days 

before the end of the calendar year, 

declaring out of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program for the remainder of the year is 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78398 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

not required, however, the vessel owner 

must notify the NMFS Office of Law 

Enforcement of the owner’s intent to 

invoke the carryover provision to cover 

the deficit.) 

(B) The amount of QP or IBQ pounds 

required to cover the deficit from the 

current fishing year is less than or equal 

to the vessel’s carryover limit for a 

deficit. The carryover limit for a deficit 

is calculated as 10 percent of the total 

cumulative QP or IBQ pounds (used and 

unused, less any transfers or any 

previous carryover amounts) in the 

vessel account 30 days after the date the 

deficit is documented; and 

(C) Sufficient QP or IBQ pounds are 

transferred in to the vessel account to 

cure the deficit within 30 days of 

NMFS’ issuance of QP or IBQ pounds to 

QS accounts in the following year. 

(6) Appeals. An appeal to a vessel 

account action follows the appeals 

process defined at § 660.25(g), subpart 

C. 

(7) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with the 

vessel accounts consistent with the 

provisions given at § 660.25(f), subpart 

C. 

(8) Cost recovery. [Reserved] 

(f) First receiver site license—(1) 

General. Any IFQ first receiver that 

receives IFQ landings must hold a valid 

first receiver site license. The first 

receiver site license authorizes the 

holder to receive, purchase, or take 

custody, control, or possession of an 

IFQ landing at a specific physical site 

onshore directly from a vessel. Once the 

trawl rationalization program is 

implemented, a temporary, interim first 

receiver site license will be available by 

application to NMFS and will be valid 

until June 30, 2011, or until an 

application for a first receiver site 

license as specified in paragraph (f)(3) of 

this section is approved by NMFS, 

whichever comes first. An application 

for an interim first receiver site license 

is subject to all of the requirements in 

this paragraph (f) including the 

submission of a catch monitoring plan, 

except that the catch monitoring plan in 

paragraph (f)(3)(iii) does not have to 

have been previously accepted by 

NMFS and the site does not have to 

have been previously inspected. 

(2) Issuance. (i) First receiver site 

licenses will only be issued to a person 

registered to a valid license issued by 

the state of Washington, Oregon, or 

California, and that authorizes the 

person to receive fish from a catcher 

vessel. 

(ii) A first receiver may apply for a 

first receiver site license at any time 

during the calendar year. 

(iii) A first receiver site license is 

valid for one year from the date it was 

issued by NMFS, or until the state 

license required by paragraph (f)(2)(i) of 

this section is no longer effective, 

whichever occurs first. IFQ first 

receivers must reapply for a first 

receiver site license each year and 

whenever a change in the ownership 

occurs. 

(3) Application process. Persons 

interested in being licensed as an IFQ 

first receiver must submit a complete 

application for a first receiver site 

license to NMFS, Northwest Region, 

Permits Office, ATTN: Catch Monitor 

Coordinator, Bldg. 1, 7600 Sand Point 

Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115. NMFS will 

only consider complete applications for 

approval. A complete application 

includes: 

(i) State license. A copy of a valid 

license issued by the state in which they 

operate which allows the person to 

receive fish from a catcher vessel. 

(ii) Contact information. (A) The 

name of the first receiver, 

(B) The physical location of the first 

receiver, including the street address 

where the IFQ landings will be received 

and/or processed. 

(C) The name and phone number of 

the plant manager and any other 

authorized representative who will 

serve as a point of contact with NMFS. 

(iii) A NMFS-accepted catch 

monitoring plan. All IFQ first receivers 

must prepare and operate under a 

NMFS-accepted catch monitoring plan. 

NMFS will not issue a first receiver site 

license to a processor that does not have 

a current, NMFS-accepted catch 

monitoring plan. 

(A) Catch monitoring plan review 

process. NMFS will accept a catch 

monitoring plan if it meets all the 

requirements specified in paragraph 

(f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. The site 

must be inspected by NMFS staff or a 

NMFS designated inspector prior to 

acceptance to ensure that the first 

receiver conforms to the elements 

addressed in the catch monitoring plan. 

If NMFS does not accept a catch 

monitoring plan for any reason, a new 

or revised catch monitoring plan may be 

submitted. 

(B) Arranging an inspection. The time 

and place of a monitoring plan 

inspection must be arranged by 

submitting a written request for an 

inspection as part of the application for 

a first receiver site license. After 

receiving a complete application for a 

first receiver site license, NMFS will 

contact the applicant to schedule a site 

inspection. The inspection request must 

include: 

(1) Name and signature of the person 

submitting the application and the date 

of the application; 

(2) Address, telephone number, fax 

number, and email address (if available) 

of the person submitting the 

application; 

(3) A proposed catch monitoring plan 

detailing how the IFQ first receiver will 

meet each of the performance standards 

in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. 

(C) Contents of a catch monitoring 

plan. The catch monitoring plan must: 

(1) Catch sorting. Describe the amount 

and location of all space used for sorting 

catch, the number of staff assigned to 

catch sorting, and the maximum rate 

that catch will flow through the sorting 

area. 

(2) Monitoring for complete sorting. 

Detail how IFQ first receiver staff will 

ensure that sorting is complete; what 

steps will be taken to prevent unsorted 

catch from entering the factory or other 

areas beyond the location where catch 

sorting and weighing can be monitored 

from the observation area; and what 

steps will be taken if unsorted catch 

enters the factory or other areas beyond 

the location where catch sorting and 

weighing can be monitored from the 

observation area. 

(3) Scales used for weighing IFQ 

landings. Identify each scale that will be 

used to weigh IFQ landings by the type 

and capacity and describe where it is 

located and what it will be used for. 

Each scale must be appropriate for its 

intended use. 

(4) Printed record. Identify all scales 

that will be used to weigh IFQ landings 

that cannot produce a complete printed 

record as specified at § 660.15(c), 

subpart C. State how the scale will be 

used, and how the plant intends to 

produce a complete and accurate record 

of the total weight of each delivery. 

(5) Weight monitoring. Detail how the 

IFQ first receiver will ensure that all 

catch is weighed and the process used 

to meet the catch weighing requirements 

specified at paragraph (j) of this section. 

If a catch monitoring plan proposes the 

use of totes in which IFQ species will 

be weighed, or a deduction for the 

weight of ice, the catch monitoring plan 

must detail how the process will 

accurately account for the weight of ice 

and/or totes. 

(6) Delivery points. Identify specific 

delivery points where catch is removed 

from an IFQ vessel. The delivery point 

is the first location where fish removed 

from a delivering catcher vessel can be 

sorted or diverted to more than one 

location. If the catch is pumped from 

the hold of a catcher vessel or a codend, 

the delivery point will be the location 

where the pump first discharges the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78399 

catch. If catch is removed from a vessel 

by brailing, the delivery point normally 

will be the bin or belt where the brailer 

discharges the catch. 

(7) Observation area. Designate and 

describe the observation area. The 

observation area is a location where a 

catch monitor may monitor the flow of 

fish during a delivery, including: Access 

to the observation area, the flow of fish, 

and lighting used during periods of 

limited visibility. Standards for the 

observation area are specified at 

paragraph (i)(4)(ii) of this section. 

(8) Lockable cabinet. Identify the 

location of a secure, dry, and lockable 

cabinet or locker with the minimum 

interior dimensions of two feet wide by 

two feet tall by two feet deep for the 

exclusive use of the catch monitor, 

NMFS staff, or authorized officers. 

(9) Plant liaison. Identify the 

designated plant liaison. The plant 

liaison responsibilities are specified at 

paragraph (i)(6) of this section. 

(10) First receiver diagram. The catch 

monitoring plan must be accompanied 

by a diagram of the plant showing: 

(i) The delivery point(s); 

(ii) The observation area; 

(iii) The lockable cabinet; 

(iv) The location of each scale used to 

weigh catch; and 

(v) Each location where catch is 

sorted. 

(D) Catch monitoring plan acceptance 

period and changes. NMFS will accept 

a catch monitoring plan if it meets the 

performance standards specified in 

paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. 

For the first receiver site license to 

remain in effect, an owner or manager 

must notify NMFS in writing of any and 

all changes made in IFQ first receiver 

operations or layout that do not conform 

to the catch monitoring plan. 

(E) Changing a NMFS-accepted catch 

monitoring plan. An owner and 

manager may change an accepted catch 

monitoring plan by submitting a plan 

addendum to NMFS. NMFS will accept 

the modified catch monitoring plan if it 

continues to meet the performance 

standards specified in paragraph 

(f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section. Depending 

on the nature and magnitude of the 

change requested, NMFS may require an 

additional catch monitoring plan 

inspection. A catch monitoring plan 

addendum must contain: 

(1) Name and signature of the person 

submitting the addendum; 

(2) Address, telephone number, fax 

number and email address (if available) 

of the person submitting the addendum; 

(3) A complete description of the 

proposed catch monitoring plan change. 

(iv) Completed EDC form. A first 

receiver site license application must 

include a complete economic data 

collection form as required under 

§ 660.113(b), subpart D. The application 

for a first receiver site license will be 

marked incomplete until the required 

information is submitted. 

(4) Initial administrative 

determination. For all complete 

applications, NMFS will issue an IAD 

that either approves or disapproves the 

application. If approved, the IAD will 

include a first receiver site license. If 

disapproved, the IAD will provide the 

reasons for this determination. 

(5) Effective date. The first receiver 

site license is effective upon approval 

and issuance by NMFS and will be 

effective for one year from the date of 

NMFS issuance. 

(6) Reissuance in subsequent years. 

Existing license holders must reapply 

annually. If the existing license holder 

fails to reapply, the first receiver’s site 

license will expire one year from the 

date of NMFS issuance of the license. 

The first receiver will not be authorized 

to receive or process groundfish IFQ 

species if their first receiver site license 

has expired. 

(7) Change in ownership of an IFQ 

first receiver. If there are any changes to 

the owner of a first receiver registered 

to a first receiver site license during a 

calendar year, the first receiver site 

license is void. The new owner of the 

first receiver must apply to NMFS for a 

first receiver site license. A first receiver 

site license is not transferrable by the 

license holder to any other person. 

(8) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with 

processing the application consistent 

with the provisions given at § 660.25(f), 

subpart C. 

(9) Appeals. If NMFS does not accept 

the first receiver site license application 

through an IAD, the applicant may 

appeal the IAD consistent with the 

general permit appeals process defined 

at § 660.25(g), subpart C. 

(g) Retention requirements (whiting 

and non-whiting vessels)—(1) Nonwhiting vessels. Vessels participating in 

the Shoreside IFQ Program other than 

vessels participating in the Pacific 

whiting IFQ fishery (non-whiting 

vessels) may discard IFQ species/ 

species groups, provided such discards 

are accounted for and deducted from QP 

in the vessel account. Non-whiting 

vessels must discard Pacific halibut and 

the discard mortality must be accounted 

for and deducted from IBQ pounds in 

the vessel account. Non-whiting vessels 

may discard non-IFQ species and nongroundfish species. The sorting of catch, 

the weighing and discarding of any IBQ 

and IFQ species, and the retention of 

IFQ species must be monitored by the 

observer. 

(2) Whiting maximized retention 

vessels. Maximized retention vessels 

participating in the Pacific whiting IFQ 

fishery may discard minor operational 

amounts of catch at sea if the observer 

has accounted for the discard (i.e., a 

maximized retention fishery). 

(3) Whiting vessels sorting at-sea. 

Vessels participating in the Pacific 

whiting IFQ fishery that sort their catch 

at sea (whiting vessels sorting at-sea) 

may discard IFQ species/species groups, 

provided such discards are accounted 

for and deducted from QP in the vessel 

account. Whiting vessels sorting at sea 

must discard Pacific halibut and such 

discard mortality must be accounted for 

and deducted from IBQ pounds in the 

vessel account. Whiting vessels sorting 

at-sea may discard non-IFQ species and 

non-groundfish species. The sorting of 

catch, weighing and discarding of any 

IFQ or IBQ species must be monitored 

by the observer. 

(h) Observer requirements—(1) 

Observer coverage requirements. (i) Any 

vessel participating in the Shorebased 

IFQ Program must carry a NMFScertified observer during any trip until 

all fish from that trip have been 

offloaded. If a vessel delivers fish from 

an IFQ trip to more than one IFQ first 

receiver, the observer must remain 

onboard the vessel during any transit 

between delivery points. 

(ii) Observer deployment limitations 

and workload. Observer must not be 

deployed for more than 22 calendar 

days in a calendar month. The observer 

program may issue waivers to allow 

observers to work more than 22 calendar 

days per month when it’s anticipated 

one trip will last over 20 days or for 

issues with observer availability due 

illness or injury of other observers. 

(A) If an observer is unable to perform 

their duties for any reason, the vessel is 

required to be in port within 36 hours 

of the last haul sampled by the observer. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(iii) Refusal to board. Any boarding 

refusal on the part of the observer or 

vessel must be immediately reported to 

the observer program and NOAA OLE 

by the observer provider. The observer 

must be available for an interview with 

the observer program or NOAA OLE if 

necessary. 

(2) Vessel responsibilities. An 

operator and/or crew of a vessel 

required to carry an observer must 

provide: 

(i) Accommodations and food. (A) 

Accommodations and food for trips less 

than 24 hours must be equivalent to 

those provided for the crew. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78400 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(B) Accommodations and food for 

trips of 24 hours or more must be 

equivalent to those provided for the 

crew and must include berthing space, 

a space that is intended to be used for 

sleeping and is provided with installed 

bunks and mattresses. A mattress or 

futon on the floor or a cot is not 

acceptable if a regular bunk is provided 

to any crew member, unless other 

arrangements are approved in advance 

by the Regional Administrator or their 

designee. 

(ii) Safe conditions. (A) Maintain safe 

conditions on the vessel for the 

protection of observers including 

adherence to all U.S. Coast Guard and 

other applicable rules, regulations, 

statutes, and guidelines pertaining to 

safe operation of the vessel, including, 

but not limited to rules of the road, 

vessel stability, emergency drills, 

emergency equipment, vessel 

maintenance, vessel general condition 

and port bar crossings. An observer may 

refuse boarding or reboarding a vessel 

and may request a vessel to return to 

port if operated in an unsafe manner or 

if unsafe conditions are identified. 

(B) Have on board a valid Commercial 

Fishing Vessel Safety Decal that certifies 

compliance with regulations found in 

33 CFR Chapter I and 46 CFR Chapter 

I, a certificate of compliance issued 

pursuant to 46 CFR 28.710 or a valid 

certificate of inspection pursuant to 46 

U.S.C. 3311. 

(iii) Computer hardware and software. 

[Reserved] 

(iv) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to the vessel’s navigation 

equipment and personnel, on request, to 

determine the vessel’s position. 

(v) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working deck, holding 

bins, sorting areas, cargo hold, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish at any time. 

(vi) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board to allow 

sampling the catch. 

(vii) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any state or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(viii) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(A) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(B) Providing a designated working 

area on deck for the observer(s) to 

collect, sort and store catch samples. 

(C) Collecting samples of catch. 

(D) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish. 

(E) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(F) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(G) Providing time between hauls to 

sample and record all catch. 

(H) Sorting retained and discarded 

catch into quota pound groupings. 

(I) Stowing all catch from a haul 

before the next haul is brought aboard. 

(ix) Sampling station. To allow the 

observer to carry out the required 

duties, the vessel owner must provide 

an observer sampling station that is: 

(A) Accessible. The observer sampling 

station must be available to the observer 

at all times. 

(B) Limits hazards. To the extent 

possible, the area should be free and 

clear of hazards including, but not 

limited to, moving fishing gear, stored 

fishing gear, inclement weather 

conditions, and open hatches. 

(x) Transfers at sea. Transfers at-sea 

are prohibited. 

(3) Procurement of observer services— 

(i) Owners of vessels required to carry 

observers under paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section must arrange for observer 

services from a permitted observer 

provider, except that: 

(A) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

when NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or an individual authorized 

by NMFS in lieu of an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(B) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

and a permitted observer provider when 

NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff and/or individuals 

authorized by NMFS, in addition to an 

observer provided by a permitted 

observer provider. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) Application to become an observer 

provider. Any observer provider holding 

a valid permit issued by the North 

Pacific observer program in 2010 can 

supply observer services to the west 

coast trawl fishery and will be issued a 

West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program permit. 

(5) Observer provider responsibilities. 

(i) Provide qualified candidates to 

serve as observers. Observer providers 

must provide qualified candidates to 

serve as observers. To be qualified, a 

candidate must have: 

(A) A Bachelor’s degree or higher 

from an accredited college or university 

with a major in one of the natural 

sciences; 

(B) Successfully completed a 

minimum of 30 semester hours or 

equivalent in applicable biological 

sciences with extensive use of 

dichotomous keys in at least one course; 

(C) Successfully completed at least 

one undergraduate course each in math 

and statistics with a minimum of 5 

semester hours total for both; and 

(D) Computer skills that enable the 

candidate to work competently with 

standard database software and 

computer hardware. 

(ii) Hiring an observer candidate—(A) 

The observer provider must provide the 

candidate a copy of NMFS-provided 

pamphlets, information and other 

literature describing observer duties, for 

example, the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program’s sampling manual. 

Observer job information is available 

from the Observer Program Office’s web 

site at http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/ 

research/divisions/fram/observer/ 

index.cfm. 

(B) Observer contracts. The observer 

provider must have a written contract or 

a written contract addendum signed by 

the observer and observer provider prior 

to the observer’s deployment with the 

following clauses: 

(1) That all the observer’s in-season 

messages and catch reports required to 

be sent while deployed are delivered to 

the Observer Program Office as specified 

by written Observer Program 

instructions; 

(2) That the observer inform the 

observer provider prior to the time of 

embarkation if he or she is experiencing 

any new mental illness or physical 

ailments or injury since submission of 

the physician’s statement as required as 

a qualified observer candidate that 

would prevent him or her from 

performing their assigned duties; and 

(3) That every observer completes a 

basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation/ 

first aid course prior to the end of the 

NMFS West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Training class. 

(iii) Ensure that observers complete 

duties in a timely manner. An observer 

provider must ensure that observers 

employed by that observer provider do 

the following in a complete and timely 

manner: 

(A) Submit to NMFS all data, 

logbooks and reports and biological 

samples as required under the observer 

program policy deadlines. 

(B) Report for his or her scheduled 

debriefing and complete all debriefing 

responsibilities; and 

(C) Return all sampling and safety 

gear to the Observer Program Office at 

the termination of their contract. 

(D) Immediately report to the 

Observer Program Office and the NOAA 

OLE any refusal to board an assigned 

vessel. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78401 

(iv) Observers provided to vessel. (A) 

Must have a valid West Coast 

Groundfish observer certification 

endorsement; 

(B) Must not have informed the 

provider prior to the time of 

embarkation that he or she is 

experiencing a mental illness or a 

physical ailment or injury developed 

since submission of the physician’s 

statement, as required in paragraph 

(h)(5)(xi)(B) of this section that would 

prevent him or her from performing his 

or her assigned duties; and 

(C) Must have successfully completed 

all NMFS required training and briefing 

before deployment. 

(v) Respond to industry requests for 

observers. An observer provider must 

provide an observer for deployment 

pursuant to the terms of the contractual 

relationship with the vessel to fulfill 

vessel requirements for observer 

coverage under paragraphs (h)(5)(xi)(D) 

of this section. An alternate observer 

must be supplied in each case where 

injury or illness prevents the observer 

from performing his or her duties or 

where the observer resigns prior to 

completion of his or her duties. If the 

observer provider is unable to respond 

to an industry request for observer 

coverage from a vessel for whom the 

provider is in a contractual relationship 

due to the lack of available observers by 

the estimated embarking time of the 

vessel, the provider must report it to 

NMFS at least 4 hours prior to the 

vessel’s estimated embarking time. 

(vi) Provide observer salaries and 

benefits. An observer provider must 

provide to its observer employees 

salaries and any other benefits and 

personnel services in accordance with 

the terms of each observer’s contract. 

(vii) Provide observer deployment 

logistics. (A) An observer provider must 

ensure each of its observers under 

contract: 

(1) Has an individually assigned 

mobile or cell phones, in working order, 

for all necessary communication. An 

observer provider may alternatively 

compensate observers for the use of the 

observer’s personal cell phone or pager 

for communications made in support of, 

or necessary for, the observer’s duties. 

(2) Calls into the NMFS deployment 

hotline upon departing and arriving into 

port for each trip to leave the following 

information: observer name, phone 

number, vessel departing on, expected 

trip end date and time. 

(3) Remains available to NOAA Office 

for Law Enforcement and the Observer 

Program until the conclusion of 

debriefing. 

(4) Receives all necessary 

transportation, including arrangements 

and logistics, of observers to the initial 

location of deployment, to all 

subsequent vessel assignments during 

that deployment, and to the debriefing 

location when a deployment ends for 

any reason; and 

(5) Receives lodging, per diem, and 

any other services necessary to 

observers assigned to fishing vessels. 

(i) An observer under contract may be 

housed on a vessel to which he or she 

is assigned: Prior to their vessel’s initial 

departure from port; for a period not to 

exceed twenty-four hours following the 

completion of an offload when the 

observer has duties and is scheduled to 

disembark; or for a period not to exceed 

twenty-four hours following the vessel’s 

arrival in port when the observer is 

scheduled to disembark. 

(ii) During all periods an observer is 

housed on a vessel, the observer 

provider must ensure that the vessel 

operator or at least one crew member is 

aboard. 

(iii) Otherwise, each observer between 

vessels, while still under contract with 

a permitted observer provider, shall be 

provided with accommodations in 

accordance with the contract between 

the observer and the observer provider. 

If the observer provider is responsible 

for providing accommodations under 

the contract with the observer, the 

accommodations must be at a licensed 

hotel, motel, bed and breakfast, or other 

shoreside accommodations that has an 

assigned bed for each observer that no 

other person may be assigned to for the 

duration of that observer’s stay. 

Additionally, no more than four beds 

may be in any room housing observers 

at accommodations meeting the 

requirements of this section. 

(viii) Observer deployment limitations 

and workload. (A) Not deploy an 

observer on the same vessel more than 

90 calendar days in a 12-month period, 

unless otherwise authorized by NMFS. 

(B) Not exceed observer deployment 

limitations and workload as outlined in 

paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section. 

(ix) Verify vessel’s safety decal. An 

observer provider must verify that a 

vessel has a valid USCG safety decal as 

required under paragraph (h)(2)(ii)(B) of 

this section before an observer may get 

underway aboard the vessel. One of the 

following acceptable means of 

verification must be used to verify the 

decal validity: 

(A) An employee of the observer 

provider, including the observer, 

visually inspects the decal aboard the 

vessel and confirms that the decal is 

valid according to the decal date of 

issuance; or 

(B) The observer provider receives a 

hard copy of the USCG documentation 

of the decal issuance from the vessel 

owner or operator. 

(x) Maintain communications with 

observers. An observer provider must 

have an employee responsible for 

observer activities on call 24 hours a 

day to handle emergencies involving 

observers or problems concerning 

observer logistics, whenever observers 

are at sea, in transit, or in port awaiting 

vessel reassignment. 

(xi) Maintain communications with 

the Observer Program Office. An 

observer provider must provide all of 

the following information by electronic 

transmission (e-mail), fax, or other 

method specified by NMFS. 

(A) Observer training, briefing, and 

debriefing registration materials. This 

information must be submitted to the 

Observer Program Office at least 7 

business days prior to the beginning of 

a scheduled West Coast groundfish 

observer certification training or briefing 

session. 

(1) Training registration materials 

consist of the following: 

(i) Date of requested training; 

(ii) A list of observer candidates that 

includes each candidate’s full name 

(i.e., first, middle and last names), date 

of birth, and gender; 

(iii) A copy of each candidate’s 

academic transcripts and resume; 

(iv) A statement signed by the 

candidate under penalty of perjury 

which discloses the candidate’s 

criminal convictions; 

(v) Projected observer assignments. 

Prior to the observer’s completion of the 

training or briefing session, the observer 

provider must submit to the Observer 

Program Office a statement of projected 

observer assignments that includes each 

observer’s name, current mailing 

address, e-mail address, phone numbers 

and port of embarkation (‘‘home port’’); 

and 

(vi) Length of each observer’s contract. 

(2) Briefing registration materials 

consist of the following: 

(i) Date and type of requested briefing 

session; 

(ii) List of observers to attend the 

briefing session, that includes each 

observer’s full name (first, middle, and 

last names); 

(iii) Projected observer assignments. 

Prior to the observer’s completion of the 

training or briefing session, the observer 

provider must submit to the Observer 

Program Office a statement of projected 

observer assignments that includes each 

observer’s name, current mailing 

address, e-mail address, phone numbers 

and port of embarkation (‘‘home port’’); 

and 

(iv) Length of each observer’s contract. 

(3) Debriefing. The West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program will 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78402 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

notify the observer provider which 

observers require debriefing and the 

specific time period the provider has to 

schedule a date, time, and location for 

debriefing. The observer provider must 

contact the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer program within 5 business 

days by telephone to schedule 

debriefings. 

(i) Observer providers must 

immediately notify the observer 

program when observers end their 

contract earlier than anticipated. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(B) Physical examination. A signed 

and dated statement from a licensed 

physician that he or she has physically 

examined an observer or observer 

candidate. The statement must confirm 

that, based on that physical 

examination, the observer or observer 

candidate does not have any health 

problems or conditions that would 

jeopardize that individual’s safety or the 

safety of others while deployed, or 

prevent the observer or observer 

candidate from performing his or her 

duties satisfactorily. The statement must 

declare that, prior to the examination, 

the physician was made aware of the 

duties of the observer and the 

dangerous, remote, and rigorous nature 

of the work by reading the NMFSprepared information. The physician’s 

statement must be submitted to the 

Observer Program Office prior to 

certification of an observer. The 

physical exam must have occurred 

during the 12 months prior to the 

observer’s or observer candidate’s 

deployment. The physician’s statement 

will expire 12 months after the physical 

exam occurred. A new physical exam 

must be performed, and accompanying 

statement submitted, prior to any 

deployment occurring after the 

expiration of the statement. 

(C) Certificates of insurance. Copies of 

‘‘certificates of insurance’’, that name the 

NMFS Observer Program leader as the 

‘‘certificate holder’’, shall be submitted 

to the Observer Program Office by 

February 1 of each year. The certificates 

of insurance shall verify the following 

coverage provisions and state that the 

insurance company will notify the 

certificate holder if insurance coverage 

is changed or canceled. 

(1) Maritime Liability to cover 

‘‘seamen’s’’ claims under the Merchant 

Marine Act (Jones Act) and General 

Maritime Law ($1 million minimum). 

(2) Coverage under the U.S. Longshore 

and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act 

($1 million minimum). 

(3) States Worker’s Compensation as 

required. 

(4) Commercial General Liability. 

(D) Observer provider contracts. If 

requested, observer providers must 

submit to the Observer Program Office 

a completed and unaltered copy of each 

type of signed and valid contract 

(including all attachments, appendices, 

addendums, and exhibits incorporated 

into the contract) between the observer 

provider and those entities requiring 

observer services under paragraph 

(h)(1)(i) of this section. Observer 

providers must also submit to the 

Observer Program Office upon request, 

a completed and unaltered copy of the 

current or most recent signed and valid 

contract (including all attachments, 

appendices, addendums, and exhibits 

incorporated into the contract and any 

agreements or policies with regard to 

observer compensation or salary levels) 

between the observer provider and the 

particular entity identified by the 

Observer Program or with specific 

observers. The copies must be submitted 

to the Observer Program Office via email, fax, or mail within 5 business days 

of the request. Signed and valid 

contracts include the contracts an 

observer provider has with: 

(1) Vessels required to have observer 

coverage as specified at paragraph 

(h)(1)(i) of this section; and 

(2) Observers. 

(E) Change in observer provider 

management and contact information. 

An observer provider must submit to the 

Observer Program Office any change of 

management or contact information 

submitted on the provider’s permit 

application under paragraph (h)(4) of 

this section within 30 days of the 

effective date of such change. 

(F) Biological samples. The observer 

provider must ensure that biological 

samples are stored/handled properly 

prior to delivery/transport to NMFS. 

(G) Observer status report. Each 

Tuesday, observer providers must 

provide NMFS with an updated list of 

contact information for all observers 

that includes the observer’s name, 

mailing address, e-mail address, phone 

numbers, port of embarkation (‘‘home 

port’’), fishery deployed the previous 

week and whether or not the observer is 

‘‘in service’’, indicating when the 

observer has requested leave and/or is 

not currently working for the provider. 

(H) Providers must submit to NMFS, 

if requested, copies of any information 

developed and used by the observer 

providers distributed to vessels, such as 

informational pamphlets, payment 

notification, description of observer 

duties, etc. 

(I) Other reports. Reports of the 

following must be submitted in writing 

to the West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program Office by the observer provider 

via fax or e-mail address designated by 

the Observer Program Office within 24 

hours after the observer provider 

becomes aware of the information: 

(1) Any information regarding 

possible observer harassment; 

(2) Any information regarding any 

action prohibited under § 660.112 or 

§ 600.725(o), (t) and (u); 

(3) Any concerns about vessel safety 

or marine casualty under 46 CFR 4.05– 

1(a)(1) through (7); 

(4) Any observer illness or injury that 

prevents the observer from completing 

any of his or her duties described in the 

observer manual; and 

(5) Any information, allegations or 

reports regarding observer conflict of 

interest or breach of the standards of 

behavior described in observer provider 

policy. 

(xii) Replace lost or damaged gear. An 

observer provider must replace all lost 

or damaged gear and equipment issued 

by NMFS to an observer under contract 

to that provider. All replacements must 

be in accordance with requirements and 

procedures identified in writing by the 

Observer Program Office. 

(xiii) Maintain confidentiality of 

information. An observer provider must 

ensure that all records on individual 

observer performance received from 

NMFS under the routine use provision 

of the Privacy Act or as otherwise 

required by law remain confidential and 

are not further released to anyone 

outside the employ of the observer 

provider company to whom the observer 

was contracted except with written 

permission of the observer. 

(xiv) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. Observer providers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in the North Pacific or 

Pacific coast fishery managed under an 

FMP for the waters off the coasts of 

Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and 

California, including, but not limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel or 

shoreside processor facility involved in 

the catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any vessel 

or shoreside processors participating in 

a fishery managed pursuant to an FMP 

in the waters off the coasts of Alaska, 

California, Oregon, and Washington, or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel or shoreside processor 

participating in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP in the waters off the 

coasts of Alaska, California, Oregon, and 

Washington. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78403 

(B) Must assign observers without 

regard to any preference by 

representatives of vessels other than 

when an observer will be deployed. 

(C) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value except for compensation 

for providing observer services from 

anyone who conducts fishing or fish 

processing activities that are regulated 

by NMFS in the Pacific coast or North 

Pacific regions, or who has interests that 

may be substantially affected by the 

performance or non-performance of the 

official duties of observer providers. 

(xv) Observer conduct and behavior. 

An observer provider must develop and 

maintain a policy addressing observer 

conduct and behavior for their 

employees that serve as observers. 

(A) The policy shall address the 

following behavior and conduct 

regarding: 

(1) Observer use of alcohol; 

(2) Observer use, possession, or 

distribution of illegal drugs; and; 

(3) Sexual contact with personnel of 

the vessel or processing facility to 

which the observer is assigned, or with 

any vessel or processing plant personnel 

who may be substantially affected by 

the performance or non-performance of 

the observer’s official duties. 

(B) An observer provider shall 

provide a copy of its conduct and 

behavior policy to each observer 

candidate and to the Observer Program 

by February 1 of each year. 

(xvi) Refusal to deploy an observer. 

Observer providers may refuse to deploy 

an observer on a requesting vessel if the 

observer provider has determined that 

the requesting vessel is inadequate or 

unsafe pursuant to those described at 

§ 600.746 or U.S. Coast Guard and other 

applicable rules, regulations, statutes, or 

guidelines pertaining to safe operation 

of the vessel. 

(6) Observer certification and 

responsibilities—(i) Applicability. 

Observer certification authorizes an 

individual to fulfill duties as specified 

in writing by the NMFS Observer 

Program Office while under the employ 

of a NMFS-permitted observer provider 

and according to certification 

requirements as designated under 

paragraph (h)(6)(iii) of this section. 

(ii) Observer certification official. The 

Regional Administrator will designate a 

NMFS observer certification official 

who will make decisions for the 

Observer Program Office on whether to 

issue or deny observer certification. 

(iii) Certification requirements—(A) 

Initial certification. NMFS may certify 

individuals who, in addition to any 

other relevant considerations: 

(1) Are employed by an observer 

provider company permitted pursuant 

to § 660.140(h) at the time of the 

issuance of the certification; 

(2) Have provided, through their 

observer provider: 

(i) Information identified by NMFS at 

§ 679.50 regarding an observer 

candidate’s health and physical fitness 

for the job; 

(ii) Meet all observer candidate 

education and health standards as 

specified in § 679.50; and 

(iii) Have successfully completed 

NMFS-approved training as prescribed 

by the At-Sea Hake and/or West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program. 

Successful completion of training by an 

observer applicant consists of meeting 

all attendance and conduct standards 

issued in writing at the start of training; 

meeting all performance standards 

issued in writing at the start of training 

for assignments, tests, and other 

evaluation tools; and completing all 

other training requirements established 

by the Observer Program. 

(iv) Have not been decertified under 

paragraph (h)(6)(ix) of this section, or 

pursuant to § 679.50. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(iv) Denial of a certification. The 

NMFS observer certification official will 

issue a written determination denying 

observer certification if the candidate 

fails to successfully complete training, 

or does not meet the qualifications for 

certification for any other relevant 

reason. 

(v) Issuance of an observer 

certification. An observer certification 

may be issued upon determination by 

the observer certification official that 

the candidate has successfully met all 

requirements for certification as 

specified at paragraph (h)(6)(iii) of this 

section. The following endorsements 

must be obtained in addition to observer 

certification, in order for an observer to 

deploy. 

(A) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program training certification 

endorsement. A training certification 

endorsement signifies the successful 

completion of the training course 

required to obtain observer certification. 

This endorsement expires when the 

observer has not been deployed and 

performed sampling duties as required 

by the Observer Program Office for a 

period of time, specified by the 

Observer Program, after his or her most 

recent debriefing. The Observer can 

renew the endorsement by successfully 

completing training once more. 

(B) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program annual general endorsement. 

Each observer must obtain an annual 

general endorsement to their 

certification prior to his or her first 

deployment within any calendar year 

subsequent to a year in which a training 

certification endorsement is obtained. 

To obtain an annual general 

endorsement, an observer must 

successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the Observer 

Program. All briefing attendance, 

performance, and conduct standards 

required by the Observer Program must 

be met. 

(C) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program deployment endorsement. Each 

observer who has completed an initial 

deployment after their certification or 

annual briefing must receive a 

deployment endorsement to their 

certification prior to any subsequent 

deployments for the remainder of that 

year. An observer may obtain a 

deployment endorsement by 

successfully completing all briefing 

requirements, when applicable. The 

type of briefing the observer must attend 

and successfully complete will be 

specified in writing by the Observer 

Program during the observer’s most 

recent debriefing. 

(vi) Maintaining the validity of an 

observer certification. After initial 

issuance, an observer must keep their 

certification valid by meeting all of the 

following requirements specified below: 

(A) Successfully perform their 

assigned duties as described in the 

Observer Manual or other written 

instructions from the Observer Program 

Office including calling in to the NMFS 

deployment hotline upon departing and 

arriving in to port each trip to leave the 

following information: Observer name, 

phone number, vessel name departing 

on, date and time of departure and date 

and time of expected return. 

(B) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 

(C) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

or in the processing facility to any 

person except the owner or operator of 

the observed vessel or an authorized 

officer or NMFS. 

(D) Successfully complete NMFSapproved annual briefings as prescribed 

by the West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program. 

(E) Successful completion of briefing 

by an observer applicant consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78404 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

all other briefing requirements 

established by the Observer Program. 

(F) Hold current basic 

cardiopulmonary resuscitation/first aid 

certification as per American Red Cross 

Standards. 

(G) Successfully meet all expectations 

in all debriefings including reporting for 

assigned debriefings. 

(H) Submit all data and information 

required by the Observer Program 

within the program’s stated guidelines. 

(I) Meet the minimum annual 

deployment period of 3 months at least 

once every 12 months. 

(vii) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. Observers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP for the waters off 

the coast of Alaska, or in a Pacific Coast 

fishery managed by either the state or 

Federal Governments in waters off 

Washington, Oregon, or California, 

including but not limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shore-based or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shore-based or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shore-based or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(B) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value from anyone who either 

conducts activities that are regulated by 

NMFS in the Pacific coast or North 

Pacific regions or has interests that may 

be substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

observers’ official duties. 

(C) May not serve as observers on any 

vessel or at any shore-based owned or 

operated by a person who employed the 

observer in the last two years. 

(D) May not solicit or accept 

employment as a crew member or an 

employee of a vessel or shore-based 

processor while employed by an 

observer provider. 

(E) Provisions for remuneration of 

observers under this section do not 

constitute a conflict of interest. 

(viii) Standards of behavior. 

Observers must: 

(A) Perform their duties as described 

in the Observer Manual or other written 

instructions from the Observer Program 

Office. 

(B) Immediately report to the 

Observer Program Office and the NOAA 

OLE any time they refuse to board a 

vessel. 

(C) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to the conservation of marine 

resources of their environment. 

(D) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

to any person except the owner or 

operator of the observed vessel, an 

authorized officer, or NMFS. 

(ix) Suspension and decertification— 

(A) Suspension and decertification 

review official. The Regional 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate an observer suspension and 

decertification review official(s), who 

will have the authority to review 

observer certifications and issue initial 

administrative determinations of 

observer certification suspension and/or 

decertification. 

(B) Causes for suspension or 

decertification. The suspension and 

decertification official may initiate 

suspension or decertification 

proceedings against an observer: 

(1) When it is alleged that the 

observer has not met applicable 

standards, including any of the 

following: 

(i) Failed to satisfactorily perform 

duties as described or directed by the 

observer program; or 

(ii) Failed to abide by the standards of 

conduct for observers, including 

conflicts of interest; 

(2) Upon conviction of a crime or 

upon entry of a civil judgment for: 

(i) Commission of fraud or other 

violation in connection with obtaining 

or attempting to obtain certification, or 

in performing the duties as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

(ii) Commission of embezzlement, 

theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or 

destruction of records, making false 

statements, or receiving stolen property; 

(iii) Commission of any other offense 

indicating a lack of integrity or honesty 

that seriously and directly affects the 

fitness of observers. 

(C) Issuance of initial administrative 

determination. Upon determination that 

suspension or decertification is 

warranted, the suspension/ 

decertification official will issue a 

written IAD to the observer via certified 

mail at the observer’s most current 

address provided to NMFS. The IAD 

will identify whether a certification is 

suspended or revoked and will identify 

the specific reasons for the action taken. 

Decertification is effective 30 calendar 

days after the date on the IAD, unless 

there is an appeal. 

(D) Appeals. A certified observer who 

receives an IAD that suspends or 

revokes his or her observer certification 

may appeal the determination within 30 

calendar days after the date on the IAD 

to the Office of Administrative Appeals 

pursuant to § 679.43. 

(i) Catch monitor requirements for 

IFQ first receivers—(1) Catch monitor 

coverage requirements. A catch monitor 

is required be present at each IFQ first 

receiver whenever an IFQ landing is 

received, unless the first receiver has 

been granted a written waiver from the 

catch monitor requirements by NMFS. 

(2) Procurement of catch monitor 

services. Owners or managers of each 

IFQ first receiver must arrange for catch 

monitor services from a certified catch 

monitor provider prior to accepting IFQ 

landings. 

(3) Catch monitor safety. (i) Each IFQ 

first receiver must adhere to all 

applicable rules, regulations, or statutes 

pertaining to safe operation and 

maintenance of a processing and/or 

receiving facility. 

(ii) The working hours of each 

individual catch monitor will be limited 

as follows: 

(A) An individual catch monitor shall 

not be required or permitted to work 

more than 16 hours per calendar day, 

with maximum of 14 hours being work 

other than the summary and submission 

of catch monitor data. 

(B) Following monitoring shift of 

more than 10 hours, each catch monitor 

must be provided with a minimum 6 

hours break before they may resume 

monitoring. 

(4) Catch monitor access. (i) Each IFQ 

first receiver must allow catch monitors 

free and unobstructed access to the 

catch throughout the sorting process 

and the weighing process. 

(ii) The IFQ first receiver must ensure 

that there is an observation area 

available to the catch monitor that meets 

the following standards: 

(A) Access to the observation area. 

The observation area must be freely 

accessible to NMFS staff, NMFSauthorized personnel, or authorized 

officers at any time a valid catch 

monitoring plan is required. 

(B) Monitoring the flow of fish. The 

catch monitor must have an 

unobstructed view or otherwise be able 

to monitor the entire flow of fish 

between the delivery point and a 

location where all sorting has takes 

place and each species has been 

weighed. 

(C) Adequate lighting. Adequate 

lighting must be provided during 

periods of limited visibility. 

(iii) Each IFQ first receiver must allow 

catch monitors free and unobstructed 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78405 

access to any documentation required 

by regulation including fish tickets, 

scale printouts and scale test results. 

(5) Lockable cabinet. Each IFQ first 

receiver must provide a secure, dry, and 

lockable cabinet or locker with the 

minimum interior dimensions of two 

feet wide by two feet tall by two feet 

deep for the exclusive use the catch 

monitor and NMFS staff or NMFSauthorized agents. 

(6) Plant liaison for the catch monitor. 

Each IFQ first receiver must designate a 

plant liaison. The plant liaison is 

responsible for: 

(i) Orienting new catch monitors to 

the facility; 

(ii) Assisting in the resolution of catch 

monitoring concerns; and 

(iii) Informing NMFS if changes must 

be made to the catch monitoring plan. 

(7) Reasonable assistance. Each IFQ 

first receiver must provide reasonable 

assistance to the catch monitors to 

enable each catch monitor to carry out 

his or her duties. Reasonable assistance 

includes, but is not limited to: 

informing the monitor when bycatch 

species will be weighed, and providing 

a secure place to store equipment and 

gear. 

(j) Catch weighing requirements—(1) 

Catch monitoring plan. All first 

receivers must operate under a NMFSaccepted catch monitoring plan. 

(2) Sorting and weighing IFQ 

landings—(i) Approved scales. The IFQ 

first receiver must ensure that all IFQ 

species received from a vessel making 

an IFQ landing are weighed on a scale(s) 

that meets the requirements specified at 

§ 660.15(c). 

(ii) Printed record. All scales 

identified in the catch monitoring plan 

accepted by NMFS during the first 

receiver site license application process, 

must produce a printed record for each 

delivery, or portion of a delivery, 

weighed on that scale, with the 

following exception: If approved by 

NMFS as part of the catch monitoring 

plan, scales not designed for automatic 

bulk weighing may be exempted from 

part or all of the printed record 

requirements. The printed record must 

include: 

(A) The first receiver’s name; 

(B) The weight of each load in the 

weighing cycle; 

(C) The total weight of fish in each 

landing, or portion of the landing that 

was weighed on that scale; 

(D) The date the information is 

printed; and 

(E) The name and vessel registration 

or documentation number of the vessel 

making the delivery. The scale operator 

may write this information on the scale 

printout in ink at the time of printing. 

(iii) Scales that may be exempt from 

printed report. An IFQ first receiver that 

receives no more than 200,000 pounds 

of groundfish in any calendar month 

will be exempt from the requirement to 

produce a printed record provided that: 

(A) The first receiver has not 

previously operated under a catch 

monitoring plan where a printed record 

was required; 

(B) The first receiver ensures that all 

catch is weighed; and 

(C) The catch monitor, NMFS staff, or 

authorized officer can verify that all 

catch is weighed. 

(iv) Retention of printed records. An 

IFQ first receiver must maintain 

printouts on site until the end of the 

fishing year during which the printouts 

were made and make them available 

upon request by NMFS staff or an 

authorized officer for 3 years after the 

end of the fishing year during which the 

printout was made. 

(v) Weight monitoring. An IFQ first 

receiver must ensure that it is possible 

for the catch monitor, NMFS staff, or 

authorized officer to verify the weighing 

of all catch. 

(vi) Catch sorting. All fish delivered to 

the plant must be sorted and weighed by 

species as specified at § 660.130(d). 

(vii) Complete sorting. Sorting and 

weighing must be completed prior to 

catch leaving the area that can be 

monitored from the catch monitor’s 

observation area. 

(viii) Pacific whiting. For Pacific 

Whiting taken with midwater trawl gear, 

IFQ first receivers may use an in-line 

conveyor or hopper type scale to derive 

an accurate total catch weight prior to 

sorting. Immediately following weighing 

of the total catch and prior to processing 

or transport away from the point of 

landing, the catch must be sorted to the 

species groups specified at § 660.130(d) 

and all incidental catch (groundfish and 

non groundfish species) must be 

accurately weighed and the weight of 

incidental catch deducted from the total 

catch weight to derive the weight of 

target species. 

(ix) For all other IFQ landings the 

following weighing standards apply: 

(A) A belt or automatic hopper scale 

may be used to weigh all of the catch 

prior to sorting. All but a single 

predominant species must then be 

reweighed. 

(B) An in-line conveyor or automatic 

hopper scale may be used to weigh the 

predominant species after catch has 

been sorted. Other species must be 

weighed in a manner that facilitates 

tracking of the weights of those species. 

(C) IFQ species or species group may 

be weighed in totes on a platform scale 

capable of printing a label or tag and 

recording the label or tag information to 

memory for printing a report as 

specified at § 660.15. The label or tag 

must remain affixed to the tote until the 

tote is emptied. The label or tag must 

show the following information: 

(1) The species or species group; 

(2) The weight of the fish in the tote; 

(3) The date the label or tag was 

printed; and 

(4) The vessel name. 

(D) Totes and ice. If a catch 

monitoring plan proposes the use of 

totes in which fish will be weighed, or 

a deduction for the weight of ice, the 

deduction must be accurately accounted 

for. No deduction may be made for the 

weight of water or slime. This standard 

may be met by: 

(1) Taring the empty or pre-iced tote 

on the scale prior to filling with fish; 

(2) Labeling each tote with an 

individual tare weight. This weight 

must be accurate within 500 grams (1 

pound if scale is denominated in 

pounds) for any given tote and the 

average error for all totes may not 

exceed 200 grams (8 ounces for scales 

denominated in pounds); 

(3) An alternate approach accepted by 

NMFS. NMFS will only accept 

approaches that do not involve the 

estimation of the weight of ice or the 

weight of totes and allow NMFS staff or 

an authorized officer to verify that the 

deduction or tare weight is accurate. 

(E) An alternate approach accepted by 

NMFS in the catch monitoring plan. 

(3) IFQ first receiver responsibilities 

relative to catch weighing and 

monitoring of catch weighing. The IFQ 

first receiver must: 

(i) General. (A) Ensure that all IFQ 

landings are sorted and weighed as 

specified at § 660.130(d) and in 

accordance with an approved catch 

monitoring plan. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(ii) Catch monitors, NMFS staff, and 

authorized officers. (A) Have a catch 

monitor on site the entire time an IFQ 

landing is being offloaded, sorted, or 

weighed. 

(B) Notify the catch monitor of the 

offloading schedule. 

(C) Provide catch monitors, NMFS 

staff, or an authorized officer with 

unobstructed access to any areas where 

IFQ species are or may be sorted or 

weighed at any time IFQ species are 

being landed or processed. 

(D) Ensure that catch monitors, NMFS 

staff, or an authorized officer are able to 

simultaneously observe the weighing of 

catch on the scale and read the scale 

display at any time. 

(E) Ensure that printouts of the scale 

weight of each delivery or offload are 

made available to catch monitors, NMFS 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78406 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

staff, or an authorized officer at the time 

printouts are generated. 

(4) Scale tests. (i) All testing must 

meet the scale test standards specified at 

§ 660.15(c). 

(ii) Inseason scale testing. First 

receivers must allow, and provide 

reasonable assistance to a catch monitor, 

NMFS staff or an authorized officer to 

test scales used to weigh IFQ catch. A 

scale that does not pass an inseason test 

may not be used to weigh IFQ catch 

until the scale passes an inseason test or 

is approved for continued use by the 

weights and measures authorities of the 

state in which the scale is located. 

(k) Gear switching. (1) Participants in 

the Shorebased IFQ Program may take 

IFQ species using any legal groundfish 

non-trawl gear (i.e., gear switching) and 

are exempt from the gear endorsements 

at § 660.25(b)(3) for limited entry fixed 

gear permits, provided the following 

requirements are met: 

(i) The vessel must be registered to a 

limited entry trawl permit. 

(ii) The vessel must be registered to a 

vessel account that is not in deficit on 

any IFQ species. 

(iii) The vessel operator must have 

submitted a valid gear declaration for 

the trip that declares ‘‘Limited entry 

groundfish non-trawl, shorebased IFQ,’’ 

as specified in § 660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), and 

does not declare any other designation 

(a Shorebased IFQ Program trip may not 

be combined with any other 

designation). 

(iv) The vessel must comply with 

prohibitions applicable to limited entry 

fixed gear fishery as specified at 

§ 660.212, gear restrictions applicable to 

limited entry fixed gear as specified in 

§§ 660.219 and 660.230(b), and 

management measures specified in 

§ 660.230(d), including restrictions on 

the fixed gear allowed onboard, its 

usage, and applicable fixed gear 

groundfish conservation area 

restrictions, except that the vessel will 

not be subject to limited entry fixed gear 

trip limits when fishing in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. 

(v) The vessel must comply with the 

limited entry trawl trip limits for 

species/species groups not covered 

under the Shorebased IFQ Program or 

whiting trip limits outside the primary 

season. 

(vi) The vessel must comply with 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements applicable to limited entry 

trawl gear as specified in § 660.113. 

(vii) The vessel must comply with and 

observer requirements and all other 

provisions of the Shoreside IFQ Program 

as specified in this section. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(l) Adaptive management program— 

(1) General. The adaptive management 

program (AMP) is a set-aside of 10 

percent of the non-whiting QS to 

address the following objectives: 

(i) Community stability; 

(ii) Processor stability; 

(iii) Conservation; 

(iv) Unintended/unforeseen 

consequences of IFQ management; or 

(v) Facilitating new entrants. 

(2) Years one and two. The 10 percent 

of non-whiting QS will be reserved for 

the AMP during years one and two of 

the Shorebased IFQ Program, but the 

resulting AMP QP will be issued to all 

QS permit owners in proportion to their 

non-whiting QS during years one and 

two. 

■ 25. In § 660.150; 

■ a. Paragraph (a) introductory text and 

paragraphs (a)(3), (a)(4), (d), (f)(3), 

(f)(6)(vi), (g)(3)(i)(C), and (g)(6)(viii) are 

revised; 

■ b. The headings of paragraphs (b), (c), 

(e), (g)(1)(iv), (g)(2), and (k) are revised, 

and text is added to paragraphs (b), (c), 

(e), (g)(1)(iv), (g)(2), and (k). 

■ c. Paragraphs (f)(2), (f)(4), (g)(3)(ii), 

(g)(4), and (h) through (j) are added; and 

■ d. Paragraph (g)(1) introductory text is 

revised, and paragraph (g)(1)(v) is 

removed; 

■ e. Paragraph (l) is removed to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.150 Mothership (MS) Coop Program. 

(a) General. The MS Coop Program 

requirements in this section will be 

effective beginning January 1, 2011. The 

MS Coop Program is a general term to 

describe the limited access program that 

applies to eligible harvesters and 

processors in the mothership sector of 

the Pacific whiting at-sea trawl fishery. 

Eligible harvesters and processors, 

including coop and non-coop fishery 

participants, must meet the 

requirements set forth in this section of 

the Pacific Coast groundfish regulations. 

Each year a vessel registered to an MS/ 

CV-endorsed permit may fish in either 

the coop or non-coop portion of the MS 

Coop Program, but not both. In addition 

to the requirements of this section, the 

MS Coop Program is subject to the 

following groundfish regulations of 

subparts C and D of this part: 

* * * * * 

(3) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart C: § 660.11 

Definitions, § 660.12 Prohibitions, 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting, 

§ 660.14 VMS requirements, § 660.15 

Equipment requirements, § 660.16 

Groundfish Observer Program, § 660.20 

Vessel and gear identification, § 660.25 

Permits, § 660.55 Allocations, § 660.60 

Specifications and management 

measures, § 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications, and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79 Closed areas. 

(4) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart D: 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery definitions, 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery prohibitions, 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery recordkeeping 

and reporting, § 660.120 Trawl fishery 

crossover provisions, § 660.130 Trawl 

fishery management measures, and 

§ 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

* * * * * 

(b) Participation requirements and 

responsibilities—(1) Mothership vessels. 

(i) Mothership vessel participation 

requirements. A vessel is eligible to 

receive and process catch as a 

mothership in the MS Coop Program if: 

(A) The vessel is registered to an MS 

permit; 

(B) The vessel is not used to fish as 

a catcher vessel in the mothership sector 

of the Pacific whiting fishery in the 

same calendar year; and 

(C) The vessel is not used to fish as 

a C/P in the Pacific whiting fishery in 

the same calendar year. 

(ii) Mothership vessel responsibilities. 

The owner and operator of a mothership 

vessel must: 

(A) Recordkeeping and reporting. 

Maintain a valid declaration as specified 

at § 660.13(d), subpart C; and, maintain 

and submit all records and reports 

specified at § 660.113(c) including, 

economic data, scale tests records, and 

cease fishing reports. 

(B) Observers. As specified at 

paragraph (j) of this section, procure 

observer services, maintain the 

appropriate level of coverage, and meet 

the vessel responsibilities. 

(C) Catch weighing requirements. The 

owner and operator of a MS vessel must: 

(1) Ensure that all catch is weighed in 

its round form on a NMFS-approved 

scale that meets the requirements 

described in section § 660.15(b), subpart 

C; 

(2) Provide a NMFS-approved 

platform scale, belt scale, and test 

weights that meet the requirements 

described in section § 660.15(b), subpart 

C. 

(2) Mothership catcher vessels—(i) 

Mothership catcher vessel participation 

requirements—(A) A vessel is eligible to 

harvest in the MS Coop Program if the 

following conditions are met: 

(1) If the vessel is used to fish as a 

mothership catcher vessel for a 

permitted MS coop, the vessel is 

registered to a limited entry permit with 

a trawl endorsement and NMFS has 

been notified that the vessel is 

authorized to fish for the coop. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78407 

(2) If the vessel is used to harvest fish 

in the non-coop fishery, the vessel is 

registered to an MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit. 

(3) The vessel is not used to harvest 

fish or process as a mothership or 

catcher/processor vessel in the same 

calendar year. 

(4) The vessel does not catch more 

than 30 percent of the Pacific whiting 

allocation for the mothership sector. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(ii) Mothership catcher vessel 

responsibilities—(A) Observers. As 

specified at paragraph (j) of this section, 

procure observer services, maintain the 

appropriate level of coverage, and meet 

the vessel responsibilities. 

(B) Recordkeeping and reporting. 

Maintain a valid declaration as specified 

at § 660.13(d), subpart C; and, maintain 

and submit all records and reports 

specified at § 660.113(c) including, 

economic data and scale tests records, if 

applicable. 

(3) MS coops—(i) MS coop 

participation requirements. For a MS 

coop to participate in the Pacific 

whiting mothership sector fishery it 

must: 

(A) Be issued a MS coop permit; 

(B) Be composed of MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit owners; 

(C) Be formed voluntarily; 

(D) Be a legally recognized entity that 

represents its members; 

(E) Designate an individual as a coop 

manager; and 

(F) Include at least 20 percent of all 

MS/CV-endorsed permits as members. 

The coop membership percentage will 

be interpreted by rounding to the 

nearest whole permit (i.e. less than 0.5 

rounds down and 0.5 and greater rounds 

up). 

(ii) MS coop responsibilities. A MS 

coop is responsible for: 

(A) Applying for and being registered 

to a MS coop permit; 

(B) Organizing and coordinating 

harvest activities of vessels authorized 

to fish for the coop; 

(C) Reassigning catch history 

assignments for use by coop members; 

(D) Organizing and coordinating the 

transfer and leasing of catch allocations 

with other permitted coops through 

inter-coop agreements; 

(E) Monitoring harvest activities and 

enforcing the catch limits of coop 

members; 

(F) Submitting an annual report. 

(G) Having a designated coop 

manager. The designated coop manager 

must: 

(1) Serve as the contact person 

between NMFS, the Council, and other 

coops; 

(2) Be responsible for the annual 

distribution of catch and bycatch 

allocations among coop members; 

(3) Oversee reassignment of catch 

allocations within the coop; 

(4) Oversee inter-coop catch 

allocation reassignments; 

(5) Prepare and submit an annual 

report on behalf of the coop; 

(6) Be authorized to receive or 

respond to any legal process in which 

the coop is involved; and 

(7) Notify NMFS if the coop dissolves. 

(iii) MS coop compliance and joint/ 

several liability. An MS coop must 

comply with the provisions of this 

section. The MS coop, member limited 

entry permit owners, and owners and 

operators of vessels registered to 

member limited entry permits, are 

jointly and severally responsible for 

compliance with the provisions of this 

section. Pursuant to 15 CFR part 904, 

each MS coop, member permit owner, 

and owner and operator of a vessel 

registered to a coop member permit may 

be charged jointly and severally for 

violations of the provisions of this 

section. For purposes of enforcement, an 

MS coop is a legal entity that can be 

subject to NOAA enforcement action for 

violations of the provisions of this 

section. 

(c) MS Coop Program species and 

allocations—(1) MS Coop Program 

species. MS Coop Program species are 

as follows: 

(i) Species with formal allocations to 

the MS Coop Program are Pacific 

whiting, canary rockfish, darkblotched 

rockfish, Pacific Ocean perch, and 

widow rockfish; 

(ii) Species with set-asides for the MS 

and C/P Coop Programs combined, as 

described in Tables 1d and 2d, subpart 

C. 

(2) Annual mothership sector suballocations. Annual allocation 

amount(s) will be determined using the 

following procedure: 

(i) MS/CV catch history assignments. 

Catch history assignments will be based 

on catch history using the following 

methodology: 

(A) Pacific whiting catch history 

assignment. For each MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit, the permit’s entire 

catch history assignment of Pacific 

whiting will be annually allocated to a 

single permitted MS coop or to the noncoop fishery. An MS/CV-endorsed 

permit owner cannot divide the permit’s 

catch history assignment between more 

than one MS coop or between a coop 

and the non-coop fishery for that year. 

Once assigned to a permitted MS coop 

or to the non-coop fishery, the permit’s 

catch history assignment remains with 

that permitted MS coop or non-coop 

fishery for that calendar year. When the 

mothership sector allocation is 

established through the final Pacific 

whiting specifications, the information 

for the conversion of catch history 

assignment to pounds will be made 

available to the public through a 

Federal Register announcement and/or 

public notice and/or the NMFS Web 

site. The amount of whiting from the 

catch history assignment will be issued 

to the nearest whole pound using 

standard rounding rules (i.e. less than 

0.5 rounds down and 0.5 and greater 

rounds up). 

(B) Non-whiting groundfish species 

catch—(1) Non-whiting groundfish 

species with a mothership sector 

allocation will be divided annually 

between the permitted coops and the 

non-coop fishery. The pounds 

associated with each permitted MS coop 

will be provided when the coop permit 

is issued. 

(2) Groundfish species with at-sea 

sector set-asides will be managed on an 

annual basis unless there is a risk of a 

harvest specification being exceeded, 

unforeseen impact on another fisheries, 

or conservation concerns in which case 

inseason action may be taken. Set asides 

may be adjusted through the biennial 

specifications and management 

measures process as necessary. 

(3) Groundfish species not addressed 

in paragraph (1) or (2) above, will be 

managed on an annual basis unless 

there is a risk of a harvest specification 

being exceeded, unforeseen impact on 

another fisheries, or conservation 

concerns in which case inseason action 

may be taken. 

(4) Halibut set-asides. Annually a 

specified amount of the Pacific halibut 

will be held in reserve as a shared setaside for bycatch in the at-sea Pacific 

whiting fisheries and the shorebased 

trawl sector south of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(ii) Annual coop allocations—(A) 

Pacific whiting. Each permitted MS 

coop is authorized to harvest a quantity 

of Pacific whiting that is based on the 

sum of the catch history assignments for 

each member MS/CV-endorsed permit 

identified in the NMFS-accepted coop 

agreement for a given calendar year. 

Other limited entry permits registered to 

vessels that will fish for the coop do not 

bring catch allocation to a permitted MS 

coop. 

(B) Non-whiting groundfish with 

allocations. Sub-allocations of nonwhiting groundfish species with 

allocations to permitted MS coops will 

be in proportion to the Pacific whiting 

catch history assignments assigned to 

each permitted MS coop. 

(iii) Annual non-coop allocation—(A) 

Pacific whiting. The non-coop whiting 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78408 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

fishery is authorized to harvest a 

quantity of Pacific whiting that is 

remaining in the mothership sector 

annual allocation after the deduction of 

all coop allocations. 

(B) Non-whiting groundfish with 

allocations. The sub-allocation to the 

non-coop fishery will be in proportion 

to the mothership catcher vessel Pacific 

whiting catch history assignments for 

the non-coop fishery. 

(C) Announcement of the non-coop 

fishery allocations. Information on the 

amount of Pacific whiting and nonwhiting groundfish with allocations that 

will be made available to the non-coop 

fishery when the final Pacific whiting 

specifications for the mothership sector 

is established and will be announced to 

the public through a Federal Register 

announcement and/or public notice 

and/or the NMFS Web site. 

(3) Reaching an allocation or suballocation. When the mothership sector 

Pacific whiting allocation, Pacific 

whiting sub-allocation, or non-whiting 

groundfish catch allocation is reached 

or is projected to be reached, the 

following action may be taken: 

(i) Further harvesting, receiving or atsea processing by a mothership or 

catcher vessel in the mothership sector 

is prohibited when the mothership 

sector Pacific whiting allocation or nonwhiting groundfish allocation is 

projected to be reached. No additional 

unprocessed groundfish may be brought 

on board after at-sea processing is 

prohibited, but a mothership may 

continue to process catch that was on 

board before at-sea processing was 

prohibited. Pacific whiting may not be 

taken and retained, possessed, or landed 

by a catcher vessel participating in the 

mothership sector. 

(ii) When a permitted MS coop suballocation of Pacific whiting or nonwhiting groundfish species is reached, 

further harvesting or receiving of 

groundfish by vessels fishing in the 

permitted MS coop must cease, unless 

the permitted MS coop is operating 

under an NMFS-accepted inter-coop 

agreement. 

(iii) When the non-coop fishery suballocation of Pacific whiting or nonwhiting groundfish species is projected 

to be reached, further harvesting or 

receiving of groundfish by vessels 

fishing in under the non-coop fishery 

must cease. 

(4) Non-whiting groundfish species 

reapportionment. This paragraph (c)(4) 

describes the process for reapportioning 

non-whiting groundfish species with 

allocations between permitted MS coops 

and the catcher/processor sector. 

Reapportionment of mothership sector 

allocations to the catcher/processor will 

not occur until all permitted MS coops 

and the non-coop fishery have been 

closed by NMFS or have informed 

NMFS that they have ceased operations 

for the remainder of the calendar year. 

(i) Within the mothership sector. The 

Regional Administrator may make 

available for harvest to permitted coops 

and the non-coop fishery that have not 

notified NMFS that they have ceased 

fishing for the year, the amounts of a 

permitted MS coop’s non-whiting catch 

allocation remaining when a coop 

reaches its Pacific whiting allocation or 

when the designated coop manager 

notifies NMFS that a permitted coop has 

ceased fishing for the year. The 

reapportioned allocations will be in 

proportion to their original allocations. 

(ii) Between the mothership and 

catcher/processor sectors. The Regional 

Administrator may make available for 

harvest to the catcher/processor sector 

of the Pacific whiting fishery, the 

amounts of the mothership sector’s nonwhiting catch allocation remaining 

when the Pacific whiting allocation is 

reached or participants in the sector do 

not intend to harvest the remaining 

allocation. The designated coop 

manager, or in the case of an inter-coop, 

all of the designated coop managers 

must submit a cease fishing report to 

NMFS indicating that harvesting has 

concluded for the year. At any time after 

greater than 80 percent of the 

Mothership sector Pacific whiting 

allocation has been harvested, the 

Regional Administrator may contact 

designated coop managers to determine 

whether they intend to continue fishing. 

When considering redistribution of nonwhiting catch allocation, the Regional 

Administrator will take in to 

consideration the best available data on 

total projected fishing impacts. 

Reapportionment between permitted 

MS coops and the non-coop fishery 

within the mothership sector will be in 

proportion to their original coop 

allocations for the calendar year. 

(iii) Set-aside species. No inseason 

management actions are associated with 

set asides. 

(5) Announcements. The Regional 

Administrator will announce in the 

Federal Register when the mothership 

sector or the allocation of Pacific 

whiting or non-whiting groundfish with 

an allocation is reached, or is projected 

to be reached, and specify the 

appropriate action. In order to prevent 

exceeding an allocation and to avoid 

underutilizing the resource, 

prohibitions against further taking and 

retaining, receiving, or at-sea processing 

of Pacific whiting, or reapportionment 

of non-whiting groundfish with 

allocations may be made effective 

immediately by actual notice to fishers 

and processors, by e-mail, internet 

(www.nwr.noaa.gov/GroundfishHalibut/Groundfish-FisheryManagement/Whiting-Management/ 

index.cfm), phone, fax, letter, press 

release, and/or USCG Notice to Mariners 

(monitor channel 16 VHF), followed by 

publication in the Federal Register, in 

which instance public comment will be 

sought for a reasonable period of time 

thereafter. 

(6) Redistribution of annual 

allocation—(i) Between permitted MS 

coops (inter-coop). (A) Through an 

inter-coop agreement, the designated 

coop managers of permitted MS coops 

may distribute Pacific whiting and nonwhiting groundfish allocations among 

one or more permitted MS coops, 

provided the processor obligations at 

paragraph (c)(7) of this section have 

been met or a mutual agreement 

exception at paragraph (c)(7)(iv) of this 

section has been submitted to NMFS. 

(B) In the case of a MS coop failure 

during the Pacific whiting primary 

season for the mothership sector, 

unused allocation associated with the 

catch history will not be available for 

harvest by the coop that failed, by any 

former members of the coop that failed, 

or any other MS coop for the remainder 

of that calendar year. 

(ii) Between the MS coop and noncoop fisheries. Pacific whiting may not 

be redistributed between the coop and 

non-coop fisheries. 

(ii) Between Pacific whiting sectors. 

Pacific whiting may not be redistributed 

between the mothership sector and 

catcher/processor sector. Whiting may 

not be redistributed to the Shorebased 

IFQ Program. 

(7) Processor obligation and mutual 

agreement exceptions—(i) Processor 

obligation. Through the annual MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit renewal 

process, the MS/CV-endorsed permit 

owner must identify to NMFS to which 

MS permit the MS/CV permit owner 

intends to obligate the catch history 

assignment associated with that permit 

if they are participating in the MS coop 

fishery. Only one MS permit may be 

designated (the obligation may not be 

split among MS permits). 

(ii) Expiration of a processor 

obligation. Processor obligations expire 

at the end of each calendar year when 

the MS Coop Permit expires. 

(iii) Processor obligation when MS 

coop allocation is redistributed. When a 

permitted MS coop redistributes Pacific 

whiting allocation within the permitted 

MS coop or from one permitted MS 

coop to another permitted MS coop 

through an inter-coop agreement, such 

allocations must be delivered to the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78409 

mothership registered to the MS permit 

to which the allocation was obligated 

under the processor obligation 

submitted to NMFS, unless a mutual 

agreement exception has been submitted 

to NMFS. 

(iv) Mutual agreement exception. An 

MS/CV-endorsed permit’s catch history 

assignment can be released from a 

processor obligation through a mutual 

agreement exception. The MS/CVendorsed permit owner must submit a 

copy to NMFS of the written agreement 

that includes the initial MS permit 

owner’s acknowledgment of the release 

of the MS/CV-endorsed permit owner’s 

processor obligation and the MS/CVendorsed permit owner must identify a 

processor obligation for a new MS 

permit. 

(v) MS permit withdrawal. If an MS 

permit withdraws from the mothership 

fishery before the resulting amounts of 

catch history assignment have been 

announced by NMFS, any MS/CVendorsed permit obligated to the MS 

permit may elect to participate in the 

coop or non-coop fishery. In such an 

event, the MS permit owner must 

provide written notification of its 

withdrawal to NMFS and all MS/CVendorsed permits that are obligated to 

the MS permit, and the owner of each 

MS/CV-endorsed permit obligated to the 

MS permit must provide written 

notification to NMFS of their intent to 

either participate in the non-coop 

fishery or the coop fishery, and if 

participating in the coop fishery must 

identify a processor obligation for a new 

MS permit. 

(vi) Submission of a mutual 

agreement exception or MS permit 

withdrawal. Written notification of a 

mutual exception agreement or MS 

permit withdrawal must be submitted to 

NMFS, Northwest Region, Permits 

Office, Bldg. 1, 7600 Sand Point Way, 

NE., Seattle, WA 98115. 

(d) MS coop permit and agreement— 

(1) Eligibility and registration. (i) 

Eligibility. To be an eligible coop entity 

a group of MS/CV-endorsed permit 

owners (coop members) must be a 

recognized entity under the laws of the 

United States or the laws of a State and 

represent all of the coop members. 

(ii) Annual registration and deadline. 

Each year, a coop entity intending to 

participate as a coop under the MS Coop 

Program must submit an application for 

a MS coop permit between February 1 

and March 31 of the year in which it 

intends to fish. NMFS will not consider 

any applications received after March 

31. A MS coop permit expires on 

December 31 of the year in which it was 

issued. 

(iii) Application for MS coop permit. 

The designated coop manager, on behalf 

of the coop entity, must submit a 

complete application form and include 

each of the items listed in paragraph 

(d)(1)(iii)(A) of this section. Only 

complete applications will be 

considered for issuance of a MS coop 

permit. An application will not be 

considered complete if any required 

application fees and annual coop 

reports have not been received by 

NMFS. NMFS may request additional 

supplemental documentation as 

necessary to make a determination of 

whether to approve or disapprove the 

application. Application forms and 

instruction are available on the NMFS 

NWR Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov) or by request from 

NMFS. The designated coop manager 

must sign the application 

acknowledging the responsibilities of a 

designated coop manager defined in 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 

(A) Coop agreement. Signed copies of 

the coop agreement must be submitted 

to NMFS before the coop is authorized 

to engage in fishing activities. A coop 

agreement must include all of the 

information listed in this paragraph to 

be considered a complete coop 

agreement. NMFS will only review 

complete coop agreements. A coop 

agreement will not be accepted unless it 

includes all of the required information; 

the descriptive items listed in this 

paragraph appear to meet the stated 

purpose; and information submitted is 

correct and accurate. 

(1) Coop agreement contents. Each 

coop agreement must be signed by all of 

the coop members (MS/CV-endorsed 

permit owners) and include the 

following information: 

(i) A list of all vessels, and permit 

holders participating in the coop and 

their share of the allocated catch which 

must match the amount distributed to 

individual permit owners by NMFS. 

(ii) All MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

member permits identified by permit 

number. 

(iii) A processor obligation clause 

indicating that each MS/CV-endorsed 

permit has notified a specific MS permit 

by September 1 of the previous year of 

that MS/CV-endorsed permit’s intent to 

obligate its catch history assignment to 

that MS permit, except that for the 2011 

fishery, such notification must have 

been made prior to submission of the 

MS coop permit application. 

(iv) A clause indicting that each 

member MS/CV-endorsed permit’s catch 

history assignment is based on the catch 

history assignment calculation by NMFS 

used for distribution to the coop. 

(v) A description of the coop’s plan to 

adequately monitor and account for the 

catch of Pacific whiting and nonwhiting groundfish allocations, and to 

monitor and account for the catch of 

prohibited species. 

(vi) A clause stating that if a permit is 

transferred during the effective period of 

the coop agreement, any new owners of 

that member permit would be coop 

members required to comply with 

membership restrictions in the coop 

agreement. 

(vii) A description of the coop’s 

enforcement and penalty provisions 

adequate to maintain catch of Pacific 

whiting and non-whiting groundfish 

within the allocations. 

(viii) A description of measures to 

reduce catch of overfished species. 

(ix) A clause describing the co-op 

manager’s responsibility for managing 

inter-coop reassignments of catch 

history assignment, should any occur. 

(x) A clause describing how the 

annual report will be produced to 

document the coop’s catch, bycatch 

data, inseason catch history 

reassignments and any other significant 

activities undertaken by the coop during 

the year, and the submission deadlines 

for that report. 

(xi) Identification of the designated 

coop manager. 

(xii) Provisions that prohibit member 

permit owners that have incurred legal 

sanctions that prevent them from fishing 

groundfish in the Council region from 

fishing in the coop. 

(2) Inter-coop agreement. The coop 

entity must provide, at the time of 

annual application, copies of any intercoop agreement(s) into which the coop 

has entered. Such agreements must 

incorporate and honor the provisions of 

the individual coop agreements for each 

coop that is a party to the inter-coop 

agreement. Inter-coop agreements are 

specified at paragraph (e) of this section. 

(B) Acceptance of a coop agreement— 

(1) If NMFS does not accept the coop 

agreement, the coop permit application 

will be returned to the applicant with a 

letter stating the reasons the coop 

agreement was not accepted by NMFS. 

(2) Coop agreements that are not 

accepted may be resubmitted for review 

by sufficiently addressing the 

deficiencies identified in the NMFS 

letter and resubmitting the entire coop 

permit application by the date specified 

in the NMFS letter. 

(3) An accepted coop agreement that 

was submitted with the MS coop permit 

application and for which a MS coop 

permit was issued will remain in place 

through the end of the calendar year. 

The designated coop manager must 

resubmit a complete coop agreement to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78410 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

NMFS consistent with the coop 

agreement contents described in 

paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(A)(1) of this section 

if there is a material change to the coop 

agreement. 

(4) Within 7 calendar days following 

a material change, the designated coop 

manager must notify NMFS of the 

material change. Within 30 calendar 

days, the designated coop manger must 

submit to NMFS the revised coop 

agreement with a letter that describes 

such changes. NMFS will review the 

material changes and provide a letter to 

the coop manager that either accepts the 

changes as given or does not accept the 

revised coop agreement with a letter 

stating the reasons that it was not 

accepted by NMFS. The coop may 

resubmit the coop agreement with 

further revisions to the material changes 

responding to NMFS concerns. 

(iv) Effective date of MS coop permit. 

A MS coop permit will be effective 

upon the date approved by NMFS and 

will allow fishing from the start of the 

MS sector primary whiting season until 

the end of the calendar year or until one 

or more of the following events occur, 

whichever comes first: 

(A) NMFS permanently closes the 

mothership sector fishing season for the 

year or a specific MS coop or the 

designated coop manager notifies NMFS 

that the coop has completed fishing for 

the calendar year, 

(B) The coop has reached its Pacific 

whiting allocation, 

(C) A material change to the coop 

agreement has occurred and the 

designated coop manager failed to notify 

NMFS within 7 calendar days of the 

material change and submit to NMFS 

the revised coop agreement with a letter 

that describes such changes within 30 

calendar days, or 

(D) NMFS has determined that a coop 

failure occurred. 

(2) Initial administrative 

determination. For all complete 

applications, NMFS will issue an IAD 

that either approves or disapproves the 

application. If approved, the IAD will 

include a MS coop permit. If 

disapproved, the IAD will provide the 

reasons for this determination. 

(3) Appeals. An appeal to a MS coop 

permit action follows the same process 

as the general permit appeals process 

defined at § 660.25(g), subpart C. 

(4) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with the 

issuance of a MS coop permit consistent 

with the provisions given at § 660.25(f), 

subpart C. 

(5) Cost recovery. [Reserved] 

(e) Inter-coop agreements—(1) 

General. Permitted MS coops may 

voluntarily enter into inter-coop 

agreements for the purpose of sharing 

permitted MS coop allocations of Pacific 

whiting and allocated non-whiting 

groundfish. If two or more permitted MS 

coops enter into an inter-coop 

agreement, the inter-coop agreement 

must incorporate and honor the 

provisions of each permitted MS coop 

subject to the inter-coop agreement. 

(2) Submission of inter-coop 

agreements. Inter-coop agreements must 

be submitted to NMFS for acceptance. 

(3) Inter-coop agreement review 

process. Each designated coop manager 

must submit a copy of the inter-coop 

agreement signed by both designated 

coop managers for review. Complete 

coop agreements containing all items 

listed under paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(A)(1) 

will be reviewed by NMFS. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) Renewal, change of permit 

ownership, or vessel registration—(i) 

Renewal. An MS permit must be 

renewed annually consistent with the 

limited entry permit regulations given at 

§ 660.25(b)(4), subpart C. If a vessel 

registered to the MS permit will operate 

as a mothership in the year for which 

the permit is renewed, the permit owner 

must make a declaration as part of the 

permit renewal that while participating 

in the whiting fishery it will operate 

solely as a mothership during the 

calendar year to which its limited entry 

permit applies. Any such declaration is 

binding on the vessel for the calendar 

year, even if the permit is transferred 

during the year, unless it is rescinded in 

response to a written request from the 

permit owner. Any request to rescind a 

declaration must be made by the permit 

holder and granted in writing by the 

Regional Administrator before any 

unprocessed whiting has been taken on 

board the vessel that calendar year. 

(ii) Change of permit ownership. An 

MS permit is subject to the limited entry 

permit change in permit ownership 

regulations given at § 660.25(b)(4), 

subpart C. 

(iii) Change of vessel registration. An 

MS permit is subject to the limited entry 

permit change of vessel registration 

regulations given at § 660.25(b)(4), 

subpart C. 

(3) Accumulation limits—(i) MS 

permit usage limit. No person who owns 

an MS permit(s) may register the MS 

permit(s) to vessels that cumulatively 

process more than 45 percent of the 

annual mothership sector Pacific 

whiting allocation. For purposes of 

determining accumulation limits, NMFS 

requires that permit owners submit a 

complete trawl ownership interest form 

for the permit owner as part of annual 

renewal for the MS permit. An 

ownership interest form will also be 

required whenever a new permit owner 

obtains an MS permit as part of a permit 

transfer request. Accumulation limits 

will be determined by calculating the 

percentage of ownership interest a 

person has in any MS permit. 

Determination of ownership interest 

will subject to the individual and 

collective rule. 

(ii) Ownership—individual and 

collective rule. The ownership that 

counts toward a person’s accumulation 

limit will include: 

(A) Any MS permit owned by that 

person, and 

(B) A portion of any MS permit 

owned by an entity in which that person 

has an interest, where the person’s share 

of interest in that entity will determine 

the portion of that entity’s ownership 

that counts toward the person’s limit. 

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that is 

applying for or renewing an MS permit 

shall document those persons that have 

an ownership interest in the permit 

greater than or equal to 2 percent. This 

ownership interest must be documented 

with the SFD via the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form. SFD will not issue an MS Permit 

unless the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form has been 

completed. NMFS may request 

additional information of the applicant 

as necessary to verify compliance with 

accumulation limits. 

(4) Appeals. An appeal to an MS 

permit action follows the same process 

as the general permit appeals process 

defined at § 660.25(g), subpart C. 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

(vi) Initial administrative 

determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of an MS 

permit, the applicant will receive an MS 

permit. If NMFS disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. If the applicant does not appeal 

the IAD within 60 calendar days of the 

date on the IAD, the IAD becomes the 

final decision of the Regional 

Administrator acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce. 

* * * * * 

(g) Mothership catcher vessel (MS/ 

CV)—endorsed permit—(1) General. 

Any vessel that delivers whiting to a 

mothership processor in the Pacific 

whiting fishery mothership sector must 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78411 

be registered to an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit, except that a vessel registered to 

limited entry trawl permit without an 

MS/CV or C/P endorsement may fish for 

a coop if authorized by the coop. Within 

the MS Coop Program, an MS/CVendorsed permit may participate in an 

MS coop or in the non-coop fishery. An 

MS/CV-endorsed permit is a limited 

entry permit and is subject to the 

limited entry permit provisions given at 

§ 660.25(b), subpart C. 

* * * * * 

(iv) Restrictions on processing for MS/ 

CV-endorsed permits. A vessel 

registered to an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

in a given year shall not engage in 

processing of Pacific whiting during that 

year. 

* * * * * 

(2) Renewal, change of permit owner, 

vessel registration, or combination—(i) 

Renewal. An MS/CV-endorsed permit 

must be renewed annually consistent 

with the limited entry permit 

regulations given at § 660.25(b)(4), 

subpart C. During renewal, all MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit owners 

must make a preliminary declaration 

regarding their intent to participate in 

the coop or non-coop portion of the MS 

Coop Program for the following year. If 

the owner of the MS/CV-endorsed 

permit intends to participate in the coop 

portion of the MS Coop Program, they 

must also declare which MS vessel to 

which they intend to obligate the 

permit’s catch history assignment. MS/ 

CV-endorsed permits not obligated to a 

permitted MS coop by March 31 of the 

fishing year will be assigned to the noncoop fishery. For an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit that is not renewed, the 

following occurs: 

(A) For the first year after the permit 

is not renewed, the permit will be 

extinguished, and the catch history 

assignment from that permit will be 

assigned to the non-coop fishery. 

(B) In the year after the permit is 

extinguished (the second year after the 

permit is not renewed), the catch history 

assignment from that permit will be 

redistributed proportionally to all valid 

MS/CV-endorsed permits. 

(ii) Change of permit ownership. An 

MS/CV-endorsed permit is subject to the 

limited entry permit change in permit 

ownership regulations given at 

§ 660.25(b)(4), subpart C. 

(iii) Change of vessel registration. An 

MS/CV-endorsed permit is subject to the 

limited entry permit change of vessel 

registration regulations given at 

§ 660.25(b)(4), subpart C. 

(iv) Combination. An MS/CVendorsed permit may be combined with 

one or more other limited entry trawl 

permits; the resulting permit will be a 

single permit with an increased size 

endorsement. If the MS/CV-endorsed 

permit is combined with another 

limited entry trawl-endorsed permit 

other than a C/P-endorsed permit, the 

resulting permit will be MS/CVendorsed. If an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

is combined with a C/P-endorsed 

permit, the resulting permit will be 

exclusively a C/P-endorsed permit, and 

will not have an MS/CV endorsement. If 

an MS/CV-endorsed permit is combined 

with another MS/CV-endorsed permit, 

the combined catch history assignment 

of the permit(s) will be added to the 

active permit (the permit remaining 

after combination) and the other permit 

will be retired. NMFS will not approve 

a permit combination if it results in a 

person exceeding the accumulation 

limits specified at paragraph (g)(3) of 

this section. Any request to combine 

permits is subject to the provision 

provided at § 660.25(b), including the 

combination formula for resulting size 

endorsements. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(C) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that owns a 

limited entry trawl permit and that is 

applying for or renewing an MS/CV 

endorsement shall document those 

persons that have an ownership interest 

in the permit greater than or equal to 2 

percent. This ownership interest must 

be documented with the SFD via the 

Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form. SFD will not issue an 

MS/CV endorsement unless the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form has been completed. NMFS may 

request additional information of the 

applicant as necessary to verify 

compliance with accumulation limits. 

Further, if SFD discovers through 

review of the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that a person 

owns or controls more than the 

accumulation limits, the person will be 

subject to divestiture provisions 

specified in paragraph (g)(3)(i)(D) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(ii) Catcher vessel usage limit. No 

vessel may catch more than 30 percent 

of the mothership sector’s whiting 

allocation. 

(4) Appeals. An appeal to an MS/CVendorsed permit action follows the same 

process as the general permit appeals 

process defined at § 660.25(g), subpart 

C. 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

(viii) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of an 

MS/CV-endorsed permit and associated 

catch history assignment, the applicant 

will receive an MS/CV endorsement on 

a limited entry trawl permit specifying 

the amounts of catch history assignment 

for which the applicant has qualified. If 

NMFS disapproves an application, the 

IAD will provide the reasons. If known 

at the time of the IAD, NMFS will 

indicate if the owner of the MS/CVendorsed permit has ownership interest 

in catch history assignments that exceed 

the accumulation limits and are subject 

to divestiture provisions given at 

paragraph (g)(3)(i)(D) of this section. If 

the applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 60 calendar days of the date on 

the IAD, the IAD becomes the final 

decision of the Regional Administrator 

acting on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce. 

* * * * * 

(h) Non-coop fishery—(1) Access to 

non-coop fishery allocation. All vessels 

registered to the MS/CV-endorsed 

permits assigned to the non-coop fishery 

will have access to harvest and deliver 

the aggregate catch history assignment 

of all MS/CV permits assigned to the 

non-coop fishery. 

(2) Non-coop fishery closure. The 

non-coop fishery will be closed by 

automatic action as specified at 

§ 660.60(d) when the Pacific whiting or 

non-whiting allocations to the non-coop 

fishery have been reached or are 

projected to be reached. 

(i) Retention requirements. Catcher 

vessels participating in the MS Coop 

Program may discard minor operational 

amounts of catch at sea if the observer 

has accounted for the discard (i.e., a 

maximized retention fishery). 

(j) Observer requirements—(1) 

Observer coverage requirements. (i) 

Coverage. (A) Motherships. Any vessel 

registered to an MS permit 125 ft 

(38.1 m) LOA or longer must carry two 

NMFS-certified observers, and any 

vessel registered to an MS permit 

shorter than 125 ft (38.1 m) LOA must 

carry one NMFS-certified observer, each 

day that the vessel is used to take, 

retain, receive, land, process, or 

transport groundfish. 

(B) Catcher vessels. Any vessel 

delivering catch to any mothership must 

carry one NMFS-certified observer each 

day that the vessel is used to take 

groundfish. 

(ii) Observer workload—(A) 

Motherships. The time required for the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78412 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

observer to complete sampling duties 

must not exceed 12 consecutive hours 

in each 24-hour period. 

(B) Catcher vessels. If an observer is 

unable to perform their duties for any 

reason, the vessel is required to be in 

port within 36 hours of the last haul 

sampled by the observer. 

(iii) Refusal to board. Any boarding 

refusal on the part of the observer or 

vessel must be reported to the observer 

program and NOAA OLE by the 

observer provider. The observer must be 

available for an interview with the 

observer program or NOAA OLE if 

necessary. 

(2) Vessel responsibilities. An 

operator and/or crew of a vessel 

required to carry an observer must 

provide: 

(i) Accommodations and food—(A) 

Motherships. Provide accommodations 

and food that are equivalent to those 

provided for officers, engineers, 

foremen, deck-bosses or other 

management level personnel of the 

vessel. 

(B) Catcher vessels—(1) 

Accommodations and food for trips less 

than 24 hours must be equivalent to 

those provided for the crew. 

(2) Accommodations and food for 

trips of 24 hours or more must be 

equivalent to those provided for the 

crew and must include berthing space, 

a space that is intended to be used for 

sleeping and is provided with installed 

bunks and mattresses. A mattress or 

futon on the floor or a cot is not 

acceptable if a regular bunk is provided 

to any crew member, unless other 

arrangements are approved in advance 

by the Regional Administrator or their 

designee. 

(ii) Safe conditions. Motherships and 

Catcher Vessels must: 

(A) Maintain safe conditions on the 

vessel for the protection of observers 

including adherence to all U.S. Coast 

Guard and other applicable rules, 

regulations, or statutes pertaining to safe 

operation of the vessel including, but 

not limited to, rules of the road, vessel 

stability, emergency drills, emergency 

equipment, vessel maintenance, vessel 

general condition, and port bar 

crossings. An observer may refuse 

boarding or reboarding a vessel and may 

request a vessel return to port if 

operated in an unsafe manner or if 

unsafe conditions are indentified. 

(B) Have on board a valid Commercial 

Fishing Vessel Safety Decal that certifies 

compliance with regulations found in 

33 CFR chapter I and 46 CFR Chapter 

I, a certificate of compliance issued 

pursuant to 46 CFR 28.710 or a valid 

certificate of inspection pursuant to 46 

U.S.C. 3311. 

(iii) Computer hardware and 

software—(A) Motherships must: 

(1) Provide hardware and software 

pursuant to regulations at 

§§ 679.50(g)(1)(iii)(B)(1) through 

679.50(g)(1)(iii)(B)(3). 

(2) Provide the observer(s) access to a 

computer required under paragraph 

(j)(2)(iii)(A) of this section, and that is 

connected to a communication device 

that provides a point-to-point 

connection to the NMFS host computer. 

(3) Ensure that the mothership has 

installed the most recent release of 

NMFS data entry software provided by 

the Regional Administrator, or other 

approved software prior to the vessel 

receiving, catching or processing IFQ 

species. 

(4) Ensure that the communication 

equipment required in paragraph 

(j)(2)(iii) of this section and that is used 

by observers to enter and transmit data, 

is fully functional and operational. 

‘‘Functional’’ means that all the tasks 

and components of the NMFS supplied, 

or other approved, software described at 

paragraph (j)(2)(iii) of this section and 

the data transmissions to NMFS can be 

executed effectively aboard the vessel 

by the communications equipment. 

(B) Catcher vessels. [Reserved] 

(iv) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to the vessel’s navigation 

equipment and personnel, on request, to 

determine the vessel’s position. 

(v) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working decks, holding 

bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, 

weight scales, cargo holds, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish or fish 

products at any time. 

(vi) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board, or fish and 

fish products are transferred from the 

vessel, to allow sampling the catch or 

observing the transfer. 

(vii) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any state or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(viii) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(A) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(B) Providing the observer(s) with a 

safe work area. 

(C) Collecting samples of catch. 

(D) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish. 

(E) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(F) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(ix) Sample station and operational 

requirements. 

(A) Motherships. To allow the 

observer to carry out required duties, 

the vessel owner must provide an 

observer sampling station that meets the 

following requirements: 

(1) Accessibility. The observer 

sampling station must be available to 

the observer at all times. 

(2) Location. The observer sampling 

station must be located within 4 m of 

the location from which the observer 

samples unsorted catch. 

(3) Access. Unobstructed passage 

must be provided between the observer 

sampling station and the location where 

the observer collects sample catch. 

(4) Minimum work space. The 

observer must have a working area of at 

least 4.5 square meters, including the 

observer’s sampling table, for sampling 

and storage of fish to be sampled. The 

observer must be able to stand upright 

and have a work area at least 0.9 m deep 

in the area in front of the table and 

scale. 

(5) Table. The observer sampling 

station must include a table at least 

0.6 m deep, 1.2 m wide and 0.9 m high 

and no more than 1.1 m high. The entire 

surface area of the table must be 

available for use by the observer. Any 

area for the observer sampling scale is 

in addition to the minimum space 

requirements for the table. The 

observer’s sampling table must be 

secured to the floor or wall. 

(6) Diverter board. The conveyor belt 

conveying unsorted catch must have a 

removable board (‘‘diverter board’’) to 

allow all fish to be diverted from the 

belt directly into the observer’s 

sampling baskets. The diverter board 

must be located downstream of the scale 

used to weigh total catch. At least 1 m 

of accessible belt space, located 

downstream of the scale used to weigh 

total catch, must be available for the 

observer’s use when sampling. 

(7) Other requirements. The sampling 

station must be in a well-drained area 

that includes floor grating (or other 

material that prevents slipping), lighting 

adequate for day or night sampling, and 

a hose that supplies fresh or sea water 

to the observer. 

(8) Observer sampling scale. The 

observer sample station must include a 

NMFS-approved platform scale 

(pursuant to requirements at 

§ 679.28(j)(2)) with a capacity of at least 

50 kg located within 1 m of the 

observer’s sampling table. The scale 

must be mounted so that the weighing 

surface is no more than 0.7 m above the 

floor. 

(B) Catcher vessels. To allow the 

observer to carry out the required 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78413 

duties, the vessel owner must provide 

an observer sampling station that is: 

(1) Accessible. The observer sampling 

station must be available to the observer 

at all times. 

(2) Limits hazards. To the extent 

possible, the area should be free and 

clear of hazards including, but not 

limited to, moving fishing gear, stored 

fishing gear, inclement weather 

conditions, and open hatches. 

(x) Transfer at sea. Observers may be 

transferred at-sea between motherships, 

between motherships and catcherprocessors, or between a mothership 

and a catcher vessel. Transfers at-sea 

between catcher vessels is prohibited. 

For transfers, both vessels must: 

(A) Ensure that transfers of observers 

at sea via small boat under its own 

power are carried out during daylight 

hours, under safe conditions, and with 

the agreement of observers involved. 

(B) Notify observers at least 3 hours 

before observers are transferred, such 

that the observers can finish any 

sampling work, collect personal 

belongings, equipment, and scientific 

samples. 

(C) Provide a safe pilot ladder and 

conduct the transfer to ensure the safety 

of observers during transfers. 

(D) Provide an experienced crew 

member to assist observers in the small 

boat in which any transfer is made. 

(3) Procurement of observer services— 

(i) Motherships—(A) Owners of vessels 

required to carry observers under 

paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section must 

arrange for observer services from a 

permitted observer provider, except 

that: 

(1) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

when NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or an individual authorized 

by NMFS in lieu of an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(2) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

and a permitted observer provider when 

NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff and/or individuals 

authorized by NMFS, in addition to an 

observer provided by a permitted 

observer provider. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(ii) Catcher vessels—(A) Owners of 

vessels required to carry observers 

under paragraph (j)(1)(i) of this section 

must arrange for observer services from 

a permitted observer provider, except 

that: 

(1) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

when NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or an individual authorized 

by NMFS in lieu of an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(2) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

and a permitted observer provider when 

NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff and/or individuals 

authorized by NMFS, in addition to an 

observer provided by a permitted 

observer provider. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(4) Application to become an observer 

provider—(i) Motherships. Any observer 

provider holding a valid permit issued 

by the North Pacific Groundfish 

Observer Program in 2010 can supply 

observer services and will be issued a 

West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program permit. 

(ii) Catcher vessels. [Reserved] 

(5) Observer provider 

responsibilities—(i) Provide qualified 

candidates to serve as observers. 

Observer providers must provide 

qualified candidates to serve as 

observers. To be qualified, a candidate 

must have: 

(A) A Bachelor’s degree or higher 

from an accredited college or university 

with a major in one of the natural 

sciences; 

(B) Successfully completed a 

minimum of 30 semester hours or 

equivalent in applicable biological 

sciences with extensive use of 

dichotomous keys in at least one course; 

(C) Successfully completed at least 

one undergraduate course each in math 

and statistics with a minimum of 5 

semester hours total for both; and 

(D) Computer skills that enable the 

candidate to work competently with 

standard database software and 

computer hardware. 

(ii) Hiring an observer candidate—(A) 

Motherships. 

(1) The observer provider must 

provide the candidate a copy of NMFSprovided pamphlets, information and 

other literature describing observer 

duties (i.e. The At-Sea Hake Observer 

Program’s Observer Manual) prior to 

hiring the candidate. Observer job 

information is available from the 

Observer Program Office’s Web site at 

http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/ 

divisions/fram/observer/atseahake.cfm. 

(2) Observer contracts. The observer 

provider must have a written contract or 

a written contract addendum that is 

signed by the observer and observer 

provider prior to the observer’s 

deployment with the following clauses: 

(i) That all the observer’s in-season 

messages and catch reports required to 

be sent while deployed are delivered to 

the Observer Program Office as specified 

by written Observer Program 

instructions; 

(ii) That the observer inform the 

observer provider prior to the time of 

embarkation if he or she is experiencing 

any new mental illness or physical 

ailments or injury since submission of 

the physician’s statement as required as 

a qualified observer candidate that 

would prevent him or her from 

performing their assigned duties. 

(B) Catcher vessels—(1) Provide the 

candidate a copy of NMFS-provided 

pamphlets, information and other 

literature describing observer duties, for 

example, the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program’s sampling manual. 

Observer job information is available 

from the Observer Program Office’s Web 

site at http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/ 

research/divisions/fram/observer/ 

index.cfm. 

(2) Observer contracts. The observer 

provider must have a written contract or 

a written contract addendum that is 

signed by the observer and observer 

provider prior to the observer’s 

deployment with the following clauses: 

(i) That all the observer’s in-season 

messages and catch reports required to 

be sent while deployed are delivered to 

the Observer Program Office as specified 

by written Observer Program 

instructions; 

(ii) That the observer inform the 

observer provider prior to the time of 

embarkation if he or she is experiencing 

any new mental illness or physical 

ailments or injury since submission of 

the physician’s statement as required as 

a qualified observer candidate that 

would prevent him or her from 

performing their assigned duties; and 

(iii) That the observer completes a 

basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation/ 

first aid course prior to the end of the 

NMFS West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Training class. 

(iii) Ensure that observers complete 

duties in a timely manner—(A) 

Motherships. An observer provider must 

ensure that observers employed by that 

observer provider do the following in a 

complete and timely manner: 

(1) Submit to NMFS all data, 

logbooks, and reports as required by the 

Observer Manual; 

(2) Report for his or her scheduled 

debriefing and complete all debriefing 

responsibilities; 

(3) Return all sampling and safety gear 

to the Observer Program Office; 

(4) Submit all biological samples from 

the observer’s deployment by the 

completion of the electronic vessel and/ 

or processor survey(s); and 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78414 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(5) Immediately report to the Observer 

Program Office and the NOAA OLE any 

refusal to board an assigned vessel. 

(B) Catcher vessels. An observer 

provider must ensure that observers 

employed by that observer provider do 

the following in a complete and timely 

manner: 

(1) Submit to NMFS all data, 

logbooks, and reports as required by the 

Observer Manual; 

(2) Report for his or her scheduled 

debriefing and complete all debriefing 

responsibilities; and 

(3) Return all sampling and safety gear 

to the Observer Program Office. 

(4) Immediately report to the Observer 

Program Office and the NOAA OLE any 

refusal to board an assigned vessel. 

(iv) Observers provided to vessel—(A) 

Motherships. Observers provided to 

mothership vessels: 

(1) Must have a valid North Pacific 

groundfish observer certification 

endorsement and an At-Sea Hake 

Observer Program certification; 

(2) Must not have not informed the 

provider prior to the time of 

embarkation that he or she is 

experiencing a mental illness or a 

physical ailment or injury developed 

since submission of the physician’s 

statement that would prevent him or her 

from performing his or her assigned 

duties; and 

(3) Must have successfully completed 

all NMFS required training and briefing 

before deployment. 

(B) Catcher vessels. Observers 

provided to catcher vessels: 

(1) Must have a valid West Coast 

Groundfish observer certification; 

(2) Must have not informed the 

provider prior to the time of 

embarkation that he or she is 

experiencing a mental illness or a 

physical ailment or injury developed 

since submission of the physician’s 

statement, as required in paragraph 

(j)(5)(x)(B)(2) of this section that would 

prevent him or her from performing his 

or her assigned duties; and 

(3) Must have successfully completed 

all NMFS required training and briefing 

before deployment. 

(v) Respond to industry requests for 

observers. An observer provider must 

provide an observer for deployment 

pursuant to the terms of the contractual 

relationship with the vessel to fulfill 

vessel requirements for observer 

coverage specified at paragraph (j)(1)(i) 

of this section. An alternate observer 

must be supplied in each case where 

injury or illness prevents the observer 

from performing his or her duties or 

where the observer resigns prior to 

completion of his or her duties. If the 

observer provider is unable to respond 

to an industry request for observer 

coverage from a vessel for whom the 

provider is in a contractual relationship 

due to lack of available observers by the 

estimated embarking time of the vessel, 

the provider must report it to the 

observer program at least 4 hours prior 

to the vessel’s estimated embarking 

time. 

(vi) Provide observer salaries and 

benefits. An observer provider must 

provide to its observer employees 

salaries and any other benefits and 

personnel services in accordance with 

the terms of each observer’s contract. 

(vii) Provide observer deployment 

logistics—(A) Motherships. An observer 

provider must provide to each of its 

observers under contract: 

(1) All necessary transportation, 

including arrangements and logistics, of 

observers to the initial location of 

deployment, to all subsequent vessel 

assignments during that deployment, 

and to the debriefing location when a 

deployment ends for any reason; and 

(2) Lodging, per diem, and any other 

services necessary to observers assigned 

to fishing vessels. 

(3) An observer under contract may be 

housed on a vessel to which he or she 

is assigned: 

(i) Prior to their vessel’s initial 

departure from port; 

(ii) For a period not to exceed twentyfour hours following the completion of 

an offload when the observer has duties 

and is scheduled to disembark; or 

(iii) For a period not to exceed twentyfour hours following the vessel’s arrival 

in port when the observer is scheduled 

to disembark. 

(iv) During all periods an observer is 

housed on a vessel, the observer 

provider must ensure that the vessel 

operator or at least one crew member is 

aboard. 

(v) An observer under contract who is 

between vessel assignments must be 

provided with shoreside 

accommodations pursuant to the terms 

of the contract between the observer 

provider and the observers. If the 

observer provider is responsible for 

providing accommodations under the 

contract with the observer, the 

accommodations must be at a licensed 

hotel, motel, bed and breakfast, or other 

shoreside accommodations for the 

duration of each period between vessel 

or shoreside assignments. Such 

accommodations must include an 

assigned bed for each observer and no 

other person may be assigned that bed 

for the duration of that observer’s stay. 

Additionally, no more than four beds 

may be in any room housing observers 

at accommodations meeting the 

requirements of this section. 

(B) Catcher vessels. An observer 

provider must ensure each of its 

observers under contract: 

(1) Has an individually assigned 

mobile or cell phones, in working order, 

for all necessary communication. An 

observer provider may alternatively 

compensate observers for the use of the 

observer’s personal cell phone or pager 

for communications made in support of, 

or necessary for, the observer’s duties. 

(2) Calls into the NMFS deployment 

hotline upon departing and arriving into 

port for each trip to leave the following 

information: Observer name, phone 

number, vessel departing on, expected 

trip end date and time. 

(3) Remains available to NOAA OLE 

and the Observer Program until the 

conclusion of debriefing. 

(4) Receives all necessary 

transportation, including arrangements 

and logistics, of observers to the initial 

location of deployment, to all 

subsequent vessel assignments during 

that deployment, and to the debriefing 

location when a deployment ends for 

any reason; and 

(5) Receives lodging, per diem, and 

any other services necessary to 

observers assigned to fishing vessels. 

(i) An observer under contract may be 

housed on a vessel to which he or she 

is assigned: Prior to their vessel’s initial 

departure from port; for a period not to 

exceed 24 hours following the 

completion of an offload when the 

observer has duties and is scheduled to 

disembark; or for a period not to exceed 

twenty-four hours following the vessel’s 

arrival in port when the observer is 

scheduled to disembark. 

(ii) During all periods an observer is 

housed on a vessel, the observer 

provider must ensure that the vessel 

operator or at least one crew member is 

aboard. 

(iii) Otherwise, each observer between 

vessels, while still under contract with 

a permitted observer provider, shall be 

provided with accommodations in 

accordance with the contract between 

the observer and the observer provider. 

If the observer provider is responsible 

for providing accommodations under 

the contract with the observer, the 

accommodations must be at a licensed 

hotel, motel, bed and breakfast, or other 

shoreside accommodations that has an 

assigned bed for each observer that no 

other person may be assigned to for the 

duration of that observer’s stay. 

Additionally, no more than four beds 

may be in any room housing observers 

at accommodations meeting the 

requirements of this section. 

(viii) Observer deployment 

limitations—(A) Motherships. Unless 

alternative arrangements are approved 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78415 

by the Observer Program Office, an 

observer provider must not: 

(1) Deploy an observer on the same 

vessel more than 90 days in a 12-month 

period; 

(2) Deploy an observer for more than 

90 days in a single deployment; 

(3) Include more than four vessels 

assignments in a single deployment, or 

(4) Disembark an observer from a 

vessel before that observer has 

completed his or her sampling or data 

transmission duties. 

(B) Catcher vessels. Not deploy an 

observer on the same vessel more than 

90 calendar days in a 12-month period. 

(ix) Verify vessel’s safety decal. An 

observer provider must verify that a 

vessel has a valid USCG safety decal as 

required under paragraph (j)(2)(ii)(B) of 

this section before an observer may get 

underway aboard the vessel. One of the 

following acceptable means of 

verification must be used to verify the 

decal validity: 

(A) The observer provider or 

employee of the observer provider, 

including the observer, visually inspects 

the decal aboard the vessel and confirms 

that the decal is valid according to the 

decal date of issuance; or 

(B) The observer provider receives a 

hard copy of the USCG documentation 

of the decal issuance from the vessel 

owner or operator. 

(x) Maintain communications with 

observers. An observer provider must 

have an employee responsible for 

observer activities on call 24 hours a 

day to handle emergencies involving 

observers or problems concerning 

observer logistics, whenever observers 

are at sea, in transit, or in port awaiting 

vessel reassignment. 

(xi) Maintain communications with 

the Observer Program Office. An 

observer provider must provide all of 

the following information by electronic 

transmission (e-mail), fax, or other 

method specified by NMFS. 

(A) Motherships—(1) Training and 

briefing registration materials. The 

observer provider must submit training 

and briefing registration materials to the 

Observer Program Office at least 5 

business days prior to the beginning of 

a scheduled observer at-sea hake 

training or briefing session. 

(i) Registration materials consist of the 

date of requested training or briefing 

with a list of observers including each 

observer’s full name (i.e., first, middle 

and last names). 

(ii) Projected observer assignments. 

Prior to the observer’s completion of the 

training or briefing session, the observer 

provider must submit to the Observer 

Program Office a statement of projected 

observer assignments that include the 

observer’s name; vessel, gear type, and 

vessel/processor code; port of 

embarkation; and area of fishing. 

(2) Observer debriefing registration. 

The observer provider must contact the 

At-Sea Hake Observer Program within 5 

business days after the completion of an 

observer’s deployment to schedule a 

date, time and location for debriefing. 

Observer debriefing registration 

information must be provided at the 

time of debriefing scheduling and must 

include the observer’s name, cruise 

number, vessel name(s) and code(s), and 

requested debriefing date. 

(3) Observer provider contracts. If 

requested, observer providers must 

submit to the Observer Program Office 

a completed and unaltered copy of each 

type of signed and valid contract 

(including all attachments, appendices, 

addendums, and exhibits incorporated 

into the contract) between the observer 

provider and those entities requiring 

observer services under paragraph 

(j)(1)(i) of this section. Observer 

providers must also submit to the 

Observer Program Office upon request, 

a completed and unaltered copy of the 

current or most recent signed and valid 

contract (including all attachments, 

appendices, addendums, and exhibits 

incorporated into the contract and any 

agreements or policies with regard to 

observer compensation or salary levels) 

between the observer provider and the 

particular entity identified by the 

Observer Program or with specific 

observers. The copies must be submitted 

to the Observer Program Office via fax 

or mail within 5 business days of the 

request. Signed and valid contracts 

include the contracts an observer 

provider has with: 

(i) Vessels required to have observer 

coverage as specified at paragraph 

(j)(1)(i) of this section; and 

(ii) Observers. 

(4) Change in observer provider 

management and contact information. 

Observer providers must submit 

notification of any other change to 

provider contact information, including 

but not limited to, changes in contact 

name, phone number, email address, 

and address. 

(5) Other reports. Reports of the 

following must be submitted in writing 

to the At-Sea Hake Observer Program 

Office by the observer provider via fax 

or email address designated by the 

Observer Program Office within 24 

hours after the observer provider 

becomes aware of the information: 

(i) Any information regarding possible 

observer harassment; 

(ii) Any information regarding any 

action prohibited under §§ 660.112 or 

600.725(o), (t) and (u); 

(iii) Any concerns about vessel safety 

or marine casualty under 46 CFR 4.05– 

1(a)(1) through (7); 

(iv) Any observer illness or injury that 

prevents the observer from completing 

any of his or her duties described in the 

observer manual; and 

(v) Any information, allegations or 

reports regarding observer conflict of 

interest or breach of the standards of 

behavior described in observer provider 

policy. 

(B) Catcher vessels. An observer 

provider must provide all of the 

following information by electronic 

transmission (e-mail), fax, or other 

method specified by NMFS. 

(1) Observer training, briefing, and 

debriefing registration materials. This 

information must be submitted to the 

Observer Program Office at least 7 

business days prior to the beginning of 

a scheduled West Coast groundfish 

observer certification training or briefing 

session. 

(i) Training registration materials 

consist of the following: Date of 

requested training; a list of observer 

candidates that includes each 

candidate’s full name (i.e., first, middle 

and last names), date of birth, and 

gender; a copy of each candidate’s 

academic transcripts and resume; a 

statement signed by the candidate under 

penalty of perjury which discloses the 

candidate’s criminal convictions; 

projected observer assignments—Prior 

to the observer’s completion of the 

training or briefing session, the observer 

provider must submit to the Observer 

Program Office a statement of projected 

observer assignments that include that 

includes each observer’s name, current 

mailing address, e-mail address, phone 

numbers and port of embarkation 

(‘‘home port’’); and length of observers 

contract. 

(ii) Briefing registration materials 

consist of the following: Date and type 

of requested briefing session; list of 

observers to attend the briefing session, 

that includes each observer’s full name 

(first, middle, and last names); projected 

observer assignments—Prior to the 

observer’s completion of the training or 

briefing session, the observer provider 

must submit to the Observer Program 

Office a statement of projected observer 

assignments that include that includes 

each observer’s name, current mailing 

address, e-mail address, phone numbers 

and port of embarkation (‘‘home port’’); 

and length of observer contract. 

(iii) Debriefing. The West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program will 

notify the observer provider which 

observers require debriefing and the 

specific time period the provider has to 

schedule a date, time, and location for 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78416 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

debriefing. The observer provider must 

contact the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer program within 5 business 

days by telephone to schedule 

debriefings. Observer providers must 

immediately notify the observer 

program when observers end their 

contract earlier than anticipated. 

(2) Physical examination. A signed 

and dated statement from a licensed 

physician that he or she has physically 

examined an observer or observer 

candidate. The statement must confirm 

that, based on that physical 

examination, the observer or observer 

candidate does not have any health 

problems or conditions that would 

jeopardize that individual’s safety or the 

safety of others while deployed, or 

prevent the observer or observer 

candidate from performing his or her 

duties satisfactorily. The statement must 

declare that, prior to the examination, 

the physician was made aware of the 

duties of the observer and the 

dangerous, remote, and rigorous nature 

of the work by reading the NMFSprepared information. The physician’s 

statement must be submitted to the 

Observer Program Office prior to 

certification of an observer. The 

physical exam must have occurred 

during the 12 months prior to the 

observer’s or observer candidate’s 

deployment. The physician’s statement 

will expire 12 months after the physical 

exam occurred. A new physical exam 

must be performed, and accompanying 

statement submitted, prior to any 

deployment occurring after the 

expiration of the statement. 

(3) Certificates of insurance. Copies of 

‘‘certificates of insurance’’, that names 

the NMFS Observer Program leader as 

the ‘‘certificate holder’’, shall be 

submitted to the Observer Program 

Office by February 1 of each year. The 

certificates of insurance shall verify the 

following coverage provisions and state 

that the insurance company will notify 

the certificate holder if insurance 

coverage is changed or canceled. 

(i) Maritime Liability to cover 

‘‘seamen’s’’ claims under the Merchant 

Marine Act (Jones Act) and General 

Maritime Law ($1 million minimum). 

(ii) Coverage under the U.S. 

Longshore and Harbor Workers’ 

Compensation Act ($1 million 

minimum). 

(iii) States Worker’s Compensation as 

required. 

(iv) Commercial General Liability. 

(4) Observer provider contracts. If 

requested, observer providers must 

submit to the Observer Program Office 

a completed and unaltered copy of each 

type of signed and valid contract 

(including all attachments, appendices, 

addendums, and exhibits incorporated 

into the contract) between the observer 

provider and those entities requiring 

observer services under paragraph 

(j)(1)(i) of this section. Observer 

providers must also submit to the 

Observer Program Office upon request, 

a completed and unaltered copy of the 

current or most recent signed and valid 

contract (including all attachments, 

appendices, addendums, and exhibits 

incorporated into the contract and any 

agreements or policies with regard to 

observer compensation or salary levels) 

between the observer provider and the 

particular entity identified by the 

Observer Program or with specific 

observers. The copies must be submitted 

to the Observer Program Office via fax 

or mail within 5 business days of the 

request. Signed and valid contracts 

include the contracts an observer 

provider has with: 

(i) Vessels required to have observer 

coverage as specified at paragraph 

(j)(1)(i) of this section; and 

(ii) Observers. 

(5) Change in observer provider 

management and contact information. 

An observer provider must submit to the 

Observer Program office any change of 

management or contact information 

submitted on the provider’s permit 

application under paragraphs (j)(4) of 

this section within 30 days of the 

effective date of such change. 

(6) Boarding refusals. The observer 

provider must report to NMFS any trip 

that has been refused by an observer 

within 24 hours of the refusal. 

(7) Biological samples. The observer 

provider must ensure that biological 

samples are stored/handled properly 

prior to delivery/transport to NMFS. 

(8) Observer status report. Each 

Tuesday, observer providers must 

provide NMFS with an updated list of 

contact information for all observers 

that includes the observer’s name, 

mailing address, e-mail address, phone 

numbers, port of embarkation (‘‘home 

port’’), fishery deployed the previous 

week and whether or not the observer is 

‘‘in service’’, indicating when the 

observer has requested leave and/or is 

not currently working for the provider. 

(9) Providers must submit to NMFS, if 

requested, copies of any information 

developed and used by the observer 

providers distributed to vessels, such as 

informational pamphlets, payment 

notification, description of observer 

duties, etc. 

(10) Other reports. Reports of the 

following must be submitted in writing 

to the At-Sea Hake or West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program Office by 

the observer provider via fax or email 

address designated by the Observer 

Program Office within 24 hours after the 

observer provider becomes aware of the 

information: 

(i) Any information regarding possible 

observer harassment; 

(ii) Any information regarding any 

action prohibited under §§ 660.112 or 

600.725(o), (t) and (u); 

(iii) Any concerns about vessel safety 

or marine casualty under 46 CFR 4.05– 

1(a)(1) through (7); 

(iv) Any observer illness or injury that 

prevents the observer from completing 

any of his or her duties described in the 

observer manual; and 

(v) Any information, allegations or 

reports regarding observer conflict of 

interest or breach of the standards of 

behavior described in observer provider 

policy. 

(xii) Replace lost or damaged gear. An 

observer provider must replace all lost 

or damaged gear and equipment issued 

by NMFS to an observer under contract 

to that provider. All replacements must 

be in accordance with requirements and 

procedures identified in writing by the 

Observer Program Office. 

(xiii) Maintain confidentiality of 

information. An observer provider must 

ensure that all records on individual 

observer performance received from 

NMFS under the routine use provision 

of the Privacy Act or as otherwise 

required by law remain confidential and 

are not further released to anyone 

outside the employ of the observer 

provider company to whom the observer 

was contracted except with written 

permission of the observer. 

(xiv) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. Observer providers must meet 

limitations on conflict of interest. 

Observer providers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in the North Pacific or 

Pacific Coast Groundfish fishery 

managed under an FMP for the waters 

off the coasts of Alaska, Washington, 

Oregon, and California, including, but 

not limited to, 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, or 

shoreside processor facility involved in 

the catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any vessel 

or shoreside processors participating in 

a fishery managed pursuant to an FMP 

in the waters off the coasts of Alaska, 

California, Oregon, and Washington, or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel or shoreside processor 

participating in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP in the waters off the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78417 

coasts of Alaska, California, Oregon, and 

Washington. 

(B) Must assign observers without 

regard to any preference by 

representatives of vessels other than 

when an observer will be deployed. 

(C) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value except for compensation 

for providing observer services from 

anyone who conducts fishing or fish 

processing activities that are regulated 

by NMFS, or who has interests that may 

be substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

official duties of observer providers. 

(xv) Observer conduct and behavior. 

Observer providers must develop and 

maintain a policy addressing observer 

conduct and behavior for their 

employees that serve as observers. The 

policy shall address the following 

behavior and conduct regarding: 

(A) Observer use of alcohol; 

(B) Observer use, possession, or 

distribution of illegal drugs and; 

(C) Sexual contact with personnel of 

the vessel or processing facility to 

which the observer is assigned, or with 

any vessel or processing plant personnel 

who may be substantially affected by 

the performance or non-performance of 

the observer’s official duties. 

(D) An observer provider shall 

provide a copy of its conduct and 

behavior policy by February 1 of each 

year, to: Observers, observer candidates 

and; the Observer Program Office. 

(xvi) Refusal to deploy an observer. 

Observer providers may refuse to deploy 

an observer on a requesting vessel if the 

observer provider has determined that 

the requesting vessel is inadequate or 

unsafe pursuant to those regulations 

described at § 600.746 or U.S. Coast 

Guard and other applicable rules, 

regulations, statutes, or guidelines 

pertaining to safe operation of the 

vessel. 

(6) Observer certification and 

responsibilities—(i) Applicability. 

Observer certification authorizes an 

individual to fulfill duties as specified 

in writing by the NMFS Observer 

Program Office while under the employ 

of a NMFS-permitted observer provider 

and according to certification 

endorsements as designated under 

paragraph (j)(6)(iii) of this section. 

(ii) Observer certification official. The 

Regional Administrator will designate a 

NMFS observer certification official 

who will make decisions for the 

Observer Program Office on whether to 

issue or deny observer certification. 

(iii) Certification requirements—(A) 

Initial certification. NMFS may certify 

individuals who, in addition to any 

other relevant considerations: 

(1) Are employed by an observer 

provider company permitted pursuant 

to § 679.50 at the time of the issuance 

of the certification; 

(2) Have provided, through their 

observer provider: 

(i) Information identified by NMFS at 

§ 679.50 regarding an observer 

candidate’s health and physical fitness 

for the job; 

(ii) Meet all observer education and 

health standards as specified in § 679.50 

and 

(iii) Have successfully completed 

NMFS-approved training as prescribed 

by the At-Sea Hake and/or the West 

Coast Groundfish Observer Program. 

Successful completion of training by an 

observer applicant consists of meeting 

all attendance and conduct standards 

issued in writing at the start of training; 

meeting all performance standards 

issued in writing at the start of training 

for assignments, tests, and other 

evaluation tools; and completing all 

other training requirements established 

by the Observer Program. 

(iv) Have not been decertified under 

paragraph (j)(6)(ix) of this section, or 

pursuant to § 679.50. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(iv) Denial of a certification. The 

NMFS observer certification official will 

issue a written determination denying 

observer certification if the candidate 

fails to successfully complete training, 

or does not meet the qualifications for 

certification for any other relevant 

reason. 

(v) Issuance of an observer 

certification. An observer certification 

will be issued upon determination by 

the observer certification official that 

the candidate has successfully met all 

requirements for certification as 

specified at paragraph (j)(6)(iii) of this 

section. The following endorsements 

must be obtained, in addition to 

observer certification, in order for an 

observer to deploy. 

(A) Motherships—(1) North Pacific 

Groundfish Observer Program 

certification training endorsement. A 

certification training endorsement 

signifies the successful completion of 

the training course required to obtain 

observer certification. This endorsement 

expires when the observer has not been 

deployed and performed sampling 

duties as required by the Observer 

Program Office for a period of time, 

specified by the Observer Program, after 

his or her most recent debriefing. The 

observer can renew the endorsement by 

successfully completing certification 

training once more. 

(2) North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program annual general endorsements. 

Each observer must obtain an annual 

general endorsement to their 

certification prior to his or her first 

deployment within any calendar year 

subsequent to a year in which a 

certification training endorsement is 

obtained. To obtain an annual general 

endorsement, an observer must 

successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the Observer 

Program. All briefing attendance, 

performance, and conduct standards 

required by the Observer Program must 

be met. 

(3) North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program deployment endorsements. 

Each observer who has completed an 

initial deployment after certification or 

annual briefing must receive a 

deployment endorsement to their 

certification prior to any subsequent 

deployments for the remainder of that 

year. An observer may obtain a 

deployment endorsement by 

successfully completing all pre-cruise 

briefing requirements. The type of 

briefing the observer must attend and 

successfully complete will be specified 

in writing by the Observer Program 

during the observer’s most recent 

debriefing. 

(4) At-Sea Hake Observer Program 

endorsements. A Pacific hake fishery 

endorsement is required for purposes of 

performing observer duties aboard 

vessels that process groundfish at sea in 

the Pacific whiting fishery. A Pacific 

whiting fishery endorsement to an 

observer’s certification may be obtained 

by meeting the following requirements: 

(i) Be a prior NMFS-certified observer 

in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska; 

(ii) Receive an evaluation by NMFS 

for his or her most recent deployment 

that indicated that the observer’s 

performance met Observer Program 

expectations for that deployment; 

successfully complete a NMFSapproved observer training and/or 

Pacific whiting briefing as prescribed by 

the Observer Program; and comply with 

all of the other requirements of this 

section. 

(B) Catcher vessels. The following 

endorsements must be obtained in 

addition to observer certification, in 

order for an observer to deploy. 

(1) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program training certification 

endorsement. A training certification 

endorsement signifies the successful 

completion of the training course 

required to obtain observer certification. 

This endorsement expires when the 

observer has not been deployed and 

performed sampling duties as required 

by the observer Program office for a 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78418 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

period of time, specified by the 

Observer Program, after his or her most 

recent debriefing. The observer can 

renew the endorsement by successfully 

completing training once more. 

(2) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program annual general endorsement. 

Each observer must obtain an annual 

general endorsement to their 

certification prior to his or her first 

deployment within any calendar year 

subsequent to a year in which a training 

certification endorsement is obtained. 

To obtain an annual general 

endorsement, an observer must 

successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the Observer 

Program. All briefing attendance, 

performance, and conduct standards 

required by the Observer Program must 

be met. 

(3) West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program deployment endorsement. Each 

observer who has completed an initial 

deployment after their certification or 

annual briefing must receive a 

deployment endorsement to their 

certification prior to any subsequent 

deployments for the remainder of that 

year. An observer may obtain a 

deployment endorsement by 

successfully completing all briefing 

requirements, when applicable. The 

type of briefing the observer must attend 

and successfully complete will be 

specified in writing by the Observer 

Program during the observer’s most 

recent debriefing. 

(vi) Maintaining the validity of an 

observer certification. After initial 

issuance, an observer must keep their 

certification valid by meeting all of the 

following requirements specified below: 

(A) Motherships—(1) Successfully 

perform their assigned duties as 

described in the Observer Manual or 

other written instructions from the 

Observer Program Office including 

calling into the NMFS deployment 

hotline upon departing and arriving into 

port each trip to leave the following 

information: Observer name, phone 

number, vessel name departing on, date 

and time of departure and date and time 

of expected return. 

(2) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 

(3) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

or in the processing facility to any 

person except the owner or operator of 

the observed vessel or an authorized 

officer or NMFS. 

(4) Successfully complete NMFSapproved annual briefings as prescribed 

by the At-Sea Hake Observer Program. 

(5) Successful completion of briefing 

by an observer applicant consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 

all other briefing requirements 

established by the Observer Program. 

(6) Successfully meet all expectations 

in all debriefings including reporting for 

assigned debriefings. 

(7) Submit all data and information 

required by the observer program within 

the program’s stated guidelines. 

(B) Catcher vessels. After initial 

issuance, an observer must keep their 

certification valid by meeting all of the 

following requirements specified below: 

(1) Successfully perform their 

assigned duties as described in the 

Observer Manual or other written 

instructions from the Observer Program 

Office including calling into the NMFS 

deployment hotline upon departing and 

arriving into port each trip to leave the 

following information: Observer name, 

phone number, vessel name departing 

on, date and time of departure and date 

and time of expected return. 

(2) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 

(3) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

or in the processing facility to any 

person except the owner or operator of 

the observed vessel or an authorized 

officer or NMFS. 

(4) Successfully complete NMFSapproved annual briefings as prescribed 

by the West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program. 

(5) Successful completion of briefing 

by an observer applicant consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 

all other briefing requirements 

established by the Observer Program. 

(6) Hold current basic 

cardiopulmonary resuscitation/first aid 

certification as per American Red Cross 

Standards. 

(7) Successfully meet all expectations 

in all debriefings including reporting for 

assigned debriefings. 

(8) Submit all data and information 

required by the observer program within 

the program’s stated guidelines. 

(9) Meet the minimum annual 

deployment period of 3 months at least 

once every 12 months. 

(vii) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. Observers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP for the waters off 

the coast of Alaska, or in a Pacific Coast 

fishery managed by either the State or 

Federal Governments in waters off 

Washington, Oregon, or California, 

including but not limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shore-based or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shore-based or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shore-based or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(B) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value from anyone who either 

conducts activities that are regulated by 

NMFS in the Pacific coast or North 

Pacific regions or has interests that may 

be substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

observers’ official duties. 

(C) May not serve as observers on any 

vessel or at any shore-based owned or 

operated by a person who employed the 

observer in the last two years. 

(D) May not solicit or accept 

employment as a crew member or an 

employee of a vessel or shore-based 

processor while employed by an 

observer provider. 

(E) Provisions for remuneration of 

observers under this section do not 

constitute a conflict of interest. 

(viii) Standards of behavior. 

Observers must: 

(A) Perform their assigned duties as 

described in the Observer Manual or 

other written instructions from the 

Observer Program Office. 

(B) Immediately report to the observer 

program office and the NMFS OLE any 

time they refuse to board. 

(C) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78419 

(D) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

to any person except the owner or 

operator of the observed vessel, an 

authorized officer, or NMFS. 

(ix) Suspension and decertification— 

(A) Suspension and decertification 

review official. The Regional 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate an observer suspension and 

decertification review official(s), who 

will have the authority to review 

observer certifications and issue initial 

administrative determinations of 

observer certification suspension and/or 

decertification. 

(B) Causes for suspension or 

decertification. The suspension/ 

decertification official may initiate 

suspension or decertification 

proceedings against an observer: 

(1) When it is alleged that the 

observer has not met applicable 

standards, including any of the 

following: 

(i) Failed to satisfactorily perform 

duties of observers as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

or 

(ii) Failed to abide by the standards of 

conduct for observers, including 

conflicts of interest; 

(2) Upon conviction of a crime or 

upon entry of a civil judgment for: 

(i) Commission of fraud or other 

violation in connection with obtaining 

or attempting to obtain certification, or 

in performing the duties as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

(ii) Commission of embezzlement, 

theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or 

destruction of records, making false 

statements, or receiving stolen property; 

(iii) Commission of any other offense 

indicating a lack of integrity or honesty 

that seriously and directly affects the 

fitness of observers. 

(C) Issuance of initial administrative 

determination. Upon determination that 

suspension or decertification is 

warranted, the suspension/ 

decertification official will issue a 

written IAD to the observer via certified 

mail at the observer’s most current 

address provided to NMFS. The IAD 

will identify whether a certification is 

suspended or revoked and will identify 

the specific reasons for the action taken. 

Decertification is effective 30 calendar 

days after the date on the IAD, unless 

there is an appeal. 

(D) Appeals. A certified observer who 

receives an IAD that suspends or 

revokes his or her observer certification 

may appeal the determination within 30 

calendar days after the date on the IAD 

to the Office of Administrative Appeals 

pursuant to § 679.43. 

(k) MS coop failure—(1) The Regional 

Administrator will determine that a 

permitted MS coop is considered to 

have failed if: 

(i) The coop members dissolve the 

coop, or 

(ii) The coop membership falls below 

20 percent of the MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permits, or 

(iii) The coop agreement is no longer 

valid. 

(2) If a permitted MS coop dissolves, 

the designated coop manager must 

notify NMFS SFD in writing of the 

dissolution of the coop. 

(3) In the event of a NMFS determined 

coop failure, or reported failure, the 

designated coop manager will be 

notified in writing about NMFS’ 

determination. Upon notification of a 

coop failure, fishing under the MS coop 

permit will no longer be allowed. 

Should a coop failure determination be 

made during the Pacific whiting 

primary season for the mothership 

sector, unused allocation associated 

with the catch history will not be 

available for harvest by the coop that 

failed, by any former members of the 

coop that failed, or any other MS coop 

for the remainder of that calendar year. 

■ 26. In § 660.160: 

■ a. Paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) are 

revised; 

■ b. Paragraphs (g) and (h) are removed; 

■ c. Paragraphs (b) through (f) are 

redesignated as paragraphs (c) through 

(g); 

■ d. A new paragraph (b) is added; 

■ e. Text is added to the newly 

designated paragraph (c)(2) and (d); 

■ f. The headings of newly designated 

paragraphs (e)(2) through (e)(4) are 

revised; 

■ g. New paragraphs (c)(3) through (c)(7) 

are added, and text is added to newly 

designated paragraphs (e)(2) through 

(e)(4); 

■ h. The newly designated paragraph 

(e)(1) introductory text is revised, and 

newly designated paragraph (e)(5) is 

removed and reserved; 

■ i. The newly designated paragraph 

(e)(7) is redesignated as paragraph (e)(6) 

and newly designated paragraph 

(e)(6)(vii) is revised; 

■ j. Text is added to the newly 

designated paragraph (g); and 

■ k. A new paragraph (h) is added to 

read as follows: 

§ 660.160 Catcher/processor (C/P) Coop 

Program. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(3) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart C: § 660.11 

Definitions, § 660.12 Prohibitions, 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting, 

§ 660.14 VMS requirements, § 660.15 

Equipment requirements, § 660.16 

Groundfish Observer Program, § 660.20 

Vessel and gear identification, § 660.25 

Permits, § 660.55 Allocations, § 660.60 

Specifications and management 

measures, § 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications, and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79 Closed areas. 

(4) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart D: 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery definitions, 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery prohibitions, 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery recordkeeping 

and reporting, § 660.120 Trawl fishery 

crossover provisions, § 660.130 Trawl 

fishery management measures, and 

§ 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

* * * * * 

(b) Participation requirements and 

responsibilities—(1) C/P vessels—(i) C/P 

vessel participation requirements. A 

vessel is eligible to fish as a catcher/ 

processor in the C/P Coop Program if: 

(A) The vessel is registered to a C/Pendorsed limited entry trawl permit. 

(B) The vessel is not used to harvest 

fish as a catcher vessel in the 

mothership coop program in the same 

calendar year. 

(C) The vessel is not used to fish as 

a mothership in the MS Coop Program 

in the same calendar year. 

(ii) C/P vessel responsibilities. The 

owner and operator of a catcher/ 

processor vessel must: 

(A) Recordkeeping and reporting. 

Maintain a valid declaration as specified 

at § 660.13(d), subpart C; and maintain 

and submit all records and reports 

specified at § 660.113(d) including, 

economic data, scale tests records, and 

cease fishing reports. 

(B) Observers. As specified at 

paragraph (g) of this section, procure 

observer services, maintain the 

appropriate level of coverage, and meet 

the vessel responsibilities. 

(C) Catch weighing requirements. The 

owner and operator of a C/P vessel 

must: 

(1) Ensure that all catch is weighed in 

its round form on a NMFS-approved 

scale that meets the requirements 

described in § 660.15(b), subpart C; 

(2) Provide a NMFS-approved 

platform scale, belt scale, and test 

weights that meet the requirements 

described in § 660.15(b), subpart C. 

(2) C/P coops—(i) C/P coop 

participation requirements. For a C/P 

coop to participate in the catcher/ 

processor sector of the Pacific whiting 

fishery, the C/P coop must: 

(A) Be issued a C/P coop permit; 

(B) Be composed of all C/P-endorsed 

limited entry permits and their owners; 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78420 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(C) Be formed voluntarily; 

(D) Be a legally recognized entity that 

represents its members; and 

(E) Designate an individual as a coop 

manager. 

(ii) C/P coop responsibilities. A C/P 

coop is responsible for: 

(A) Applying for and being registered 

to a C/P coop permit; 

(B) Organizing and coordinating 

harvest activities of vessels that fish for 

the coop; 

(C) Allocating catch for use by 

specific coop members; 

(D) Monitoring harvest activities and 

enforcing the catch limits of coop 

members; 

(E) Submitting an annual report. 

(F) Having a designated coop 

manager. The designated coop manager 

must: 

(1) Serve as the contact person with 

NMFS and the Council; 

(2) Be responsible for the annual 

distribution of catch and bycatch 

allocations among coop members; 

(3) Prepare and submit an annual 

report on behalf of the coop; and 

(4) Be authorized to receive or 

respond to any legal process in which 

the coop is involved; and 

(5) Notify NMFS if the coop dissolves. 

(iii) C/P coop compliance and joint/ 

several liability. A C/P coop must 

comply with the provisions of this 

section. The C/P coop, member limited 

entry permit owners, and owners and 

operators of vessels registered to 

member limited entry permits, are 

jointly and severally responsible for 

compliance with the provisions of this 

section. Pursuant to 15 CFR part 904, 

each C/P coop, member permit owner, 

and owner and operator of a vessel 

registered to a coop member permit may 

be charged jointly and severally for 

violations of the provisions of this 

section. For purposes of enforcement, a 

C/P coop is a legal entity that can be 

subject to NOAA enforcement action for 

violations of the provisions of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) C/P Coop Program annual 

allocations. The C/P Coop Program 

allocation of Pacific whiting is equal to 

the catcher/processor sector allocation. 

Only a single coop may be formed in the 

catcher/processor sector with the one 

permitted coop receiving the catcher/ 

processor sector allocation. 

(3) Non-whiting groundfish species— 

(i) Non-whiting groundfish species with 

a catcher/processor sector allocation are 

established in accordance with 

regulation at § 660.55(i). The pounds 

associated with each species will be 

provided when the coop permit is 

issued. 

(ii) Groundfish species with at-sea 

sector set-asides will be managed on an 

annual basis unless there is a risk of a 

harvest specification being exceeded, 

unforeseen impact on another fisheries, 

or conservation concerns in which case 

inseason action may be taken. Set asides 

may be adjusted through the biennial 

specifications and management 

measures process as necessary. 

(iii) Groundfish species not addressed 

under paragraph (i) or (ii) above, will be 

managed on an annual basis unless 

there is a risk of a harvest specification 

being exceeded, unforeseen impact on 

another fisheries, or conservation 

concerns in which case inseason action 

may be taken. 

(4) Halibut set-asides. Annually a 

specified amount of the Pacific halibut 

will be held in reserve as a shared setaside for bycatch in the at-sea Pacific 

whiting fisheries and the shorebased 

trawl sector south of 40°10′ N lat. 

(5) Non-whiting groundfish species 

reapportionment. The Regional 

Administrator may make available for 

harvest to the mothership sector of the 

Pacific whiting fishery, the amounts of 

the catcher/processor sector’s nonwhiting catch allocation remaining 

when the catcher/processor sector 

reaches its Pacific whiting allocation or 

participants in the catcher/processor 

sector do not intend to harvest the 

remaining sector allocation. The 

designated coop manager must submit a 

cease fishing report to NMFS indicating 

that harvesting has concluded for the 

year. At any time after greater than 80 

percent of the catcher/processor sector 

Pacific whiting allocation has been 

harvested, the Regional Administrator 

may contact the designated coop 

manager to determine whether they 

intend to continue fishing. When 

considering redistribution of nonwhiting catch allocation, the Regional 

Administrator will take into 

consideration the best available data on 

total projected fishing impacts. 

(6) Reaching the catcher/processor 

sector allocation. When the catcher/ 

processor sector allocation of Pacific 

whiting or non-whiting groundfish 

catch allocation is reached or is 

projected to be reached, further taking 

and retaining, receiving, or at-sea 

processing by a catcher/processor is 

prohibited. No additional unprocessed 

groundfish may be brought on board 

after at-sea processing is prohibited, but 

a catcher/processor may continue to 

process catch that was on board before 

at-sea processing was prohibited. The 

catcher/processor sector will close when 

the allocation of any one species is 

reached or projected to be reached. 

(7) Announcements. The Regional 

Administrator will announce in the 

Federal Register when the catcher/ 

processor sector allocation of Pacific 

whiting or non-whiting groundfish with 

an allocation is reached, or is projected 

to be reached, and specify the 

appropriate action. In order to prevent 

exceeding an allocation and to avoid 

underutilizing the resource, 

prohibitions against further taking and 

retaining, receiving, or at-sea processing 

of Pacific whiting, or reapportionment 

of non-whiting groundfish with 

allocations may be made effective 

immediately by actual notice to fishers 

and processors, by e-mail, Internet 

(http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/GroundfishHalibut/Groundfish-FisheryManagement/Whiting-Management/ 

index.cfm), phone, fax, letter, press 

release, and/or USCG Notice to Mariners 

(monitor channel 16 VHF), followed by 

publication in the Federal Register, in 

which instance public comment will be 

sought for a reasonable period of time 

thereafter. 

(d) C/P coop permit and agreement— 

(1) Eligibility and registration—(i) 

Eligibility. To be an eligible coop entity 

a group of C/P-endorsed permit owners 

(coop members) must be a recognized 

entity under the laws of the United 

States or the laws of a State and that 

represents all of the coop members. 

(ii) Annual registration and deadline. 

Each year, the coop entity must submit 

a complete application to NMFS for a C/ 

P coop permit. The application must be 

submitted to NMFS by between 

February 1 and March 31 of the year in 

which it intends to participate. NMFS 

will not consider any applications 

received after March 31. A C/P coop 

permit expires on December 31 of the 

year in which it was issued. 

(iii) Application for a C/P coop 

permit. The designated coop manager, 

on behalf of the coop entity, must 

submit a complete application form and 

include each of the items listed in 

paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(A) of this section. 

Only complete applications will be 

considered for issuance of a C/P coop 

permit. An application will not be 

considered complete if any required 

application fees and annual coop 

reports have not been received by 

NMFS. NMFS may request additional 

supplemental documentation as 

necessary to make a determination of 

whether to approve or disapprove the 

application. Application forms and 

instruction are available on the NMFS 

NWR Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov) or by request from 

NMFS. The designated coop manager 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78421 

must sign the application 

acknowledging the responsibilities of a 

designated coop manager defined in 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

(A) Coop agreement. Signed copies of 

the coop agreement must be submitted 

to NMFS before the coop is authorized 

to engage in fishing activities. A coop 

agreement must include all of the 

information listed in this paragraph to 

be considered a complete coop 

agreement. NMFS will only review 

complete coop agreements. A coop 

agreement will not be accepted unless it 

includes all of the required information; 

the descriptive items listed in this 

paragraph appear to meet the stated 

purpose; and information submitted is 

correct and accurate. 

(1) Coop agreement contents. The 

coop agreement must be signed by the 

coop members (C/P-endorsed permit 

owners) and include the following 

information: 

(i) A list of all vessels registered to C/ 

P-endorsed permits that the member 

permit owners intend to use for fishing 

under the C/P coop permit. 

(ii) All C/P-endorsed limited entry 

member permits identified by permit 

number. 

(iii) A description of the coop’s plan 

to adequately monitor and account for 

the catch of Pacific whiting and nonwhiting groundfish allocations, and to 

monitor and account for the catch of 

prohibited species. 

(iv) A clause stating that if a permit is 

transferred during the effective period of 

the co-op agreement, any new owners of 

that member permit would be coop 

members and are required to comply 

with membership restrictions in the 

coop agreement. 

(v) A description of the coop’s 

enforcement and penalty provisions 

adequate to maintain catch of Pacific 

whiting and non-whiting groundfish 

within the allocations. 

(vi) A description of measures to 

reduce catch of overfished species. 

(vii) A clause describing how the 

annual report will be produced to 

document the coop’s catch, bycatch 

data, and any other significant activities 

undertaken by the coop during the year, 

and the submission deadlines for that 

report. 

(viii) Identification of the designated 

coop manager. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(B) Acceptance of a coop agreement— 

(1) If NMFS does not accept the coop 

agreement, the coop permit application 

will be returned to the applicant with a 

letter stating the reasons the coop 

agreement was not accepted by NMFS. 

(2) Coop agreements that are not 

accepted may be resubmitted for review 

by sufficiently addressing the 

deficiencies identified in the NMFS 

letter and resubmitting the entire coop 

permit application by the date specified 

in the NMFS letter. 

(3) An accepted coop agreement that 

was submitted with the C/P coop permit 

application and for which a C/P coop 

permit was issued will remain in place 

through the end of the calendar year. 

The designated coop manager must 

resubmit a complete coop agreement to 

NMFS consistent with the coop 

agreement contents described in this 

paragraph if there is a material change 

to the coop agreement. 

(4) Within 7 calendar days following 

a material change, the designated coop 

manager must notify NMFS of the 

material change. Within 30 calendar 

days, the designated coop manger must 

submit to NMFS the revised coop 

agreement with a letter that describes 

such changes. NMFS will review the 

material changes and provide a letter to 

the coop manager that either accepts the 

changes as given or does not accept the 

revised coop agreement with a letter 

stating the reasons that it was not 

accepted by NMFS. The coop may 

resubmit the coop agreement with 

further revisions to the material changes 

responding to NMFS concerns. 

(iv) Effective date of C/P coop permit. 

A C/P coop permit will be effective on 

the date approved by NMFS and will 

allow fishing from the start of the C/P 

sector primary whiting season until the 

end of the calendar year or until one or 

more of the following events occur, 

whichever comes first: 

(A) NMFS closes the C/P sector 

fishing season for the year or the 

designated coop manager notifies NMFS 

that the coop has completed fishing for 

the calendar year, 

(B) The C/P coop has reached its 

Pacific whiting allocation, 

(C) A material change to the coop 

agreement has occurred and the 

designated coop manager failed to notify 

NMFS within 7 calendar days of the 

material change and submit to NMFS 

the revised coop agreement with a letter 

that describes such changes within 30 

calendar days, or 

(D) NMFS has determined that a coop 

failure occurred. 

(2) Initial administrative 

determination. For all complete 

applications, NMFS will issue an IAD 

that either approves or disapproves the 

application. If approved, the IAD will 

include a C/P coop permit. If 

disapproved, the IAD will provide the 

reasons for this determination. 

(3) Appeals. An appeal to a C/P coop 

permit action follows the same process 

as the general permit appeals process 

defined at § 660.25(g), subpart C. 

(4) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with the 

issuance of a C/P coop permit consistent 

with the provisions given at § 660.25(f), 

subpart C. 

(5) Cost recovery. [Reserved] 

(e) C/P-endorsed permit—(1) General. 

Any vessel participating in the C/P 

sector of the non-tribal primary Pacific 

whiting fishery during the season 

described at § 660.131(b) of this subpart 

must be registered to a valid limited 

entry permit with a C/P endorsement. A 

C/P-endorsed permit is a limited entry 

permit and is subject to the limited 

entry permit provisions given at 

§ 660.25(b), subpart C. 

* * * * * 

(2) Renewal, change in permit 

ownership, vessel registration, or 

combination. 

(i) Renewal. A C/P-endorsed permit 

must be renewed annually consistent 

with the limited entry permit 

regulations given at § 660.25(b)(4), 

subpart C. If a vessel registered to the C/ 

P-endorsed permit will operate as a 

mothership in the year for which the 

permit is renewed, the permit owner 

must make a declaration as part of the 

permit renewal that while participating 

in the whiting fishery they will operate 

solely as a mothership during the 

calendar year to which its limited entry 

permit applies. Any such declaration is 

binding on the vessel for the calendar 

year, even if the permit is transferred 

during the year, unless it is rescinded in 

response to a written request from the 

permit owner. Any request to rescind a 

declaration must be made by the permit 

holder and granted in writing by the 

Regional Administrator before any 

unprocessed whiting has been taken on 

board the vessel that calendar year. 

(ii) Change of permit ownership. A C/ 

P-endorsed permit is subject to the 

limited entry permit change in permit 

ownership regulations given at 

§ 660.25(b)(4), subpart C. 

(iii) Change of vessel registration. A 

C/P-endorsed permit is subject to the 

limited entry permit change of vessel 

registration regulations given at 

§ 660.25(b)(4), subpart C. 

(iv) Combination. If two or more 

permits are combined, the resulting 

permit is one permit with an increased 

size endorsement. A C/P-endorsed 

permit that is combined with another 

limited entry trawl-endorsed permit that 

does not have a C/P endorsement will 

result in a single trawl limited entry 

permit with a C/P endorsement with a 

larger size endorsement. Any request to 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78422 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

combine permits is subject to the 

provisions provided at § 660.25(b), 

including the combination formula for 

resulting size endorsements. 

(3) Appeals. An appeal to a C/Pendorsed permit action follows the same 

process as the general permit appeals 

process defined at § 660.25(g), subpart 

C. 

(4) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for the 

administrative costs associated with 

review and issuance of a C/P 

endorsement consistent with the 

provisions at § 660.25(f), subpart C. 

(5) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(6) * * * 

(vii) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application, the applicant will receive a 

C/P endorsement on a limited entry 

trawl permit. If NMFS disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. If the applicant does not appeal 

the IAD within 60 calendar days of the 

date on the IAD, the IAD becomes the 

final decision of the Regional 

Administrator acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce. 

* * * * * 

(g) Observer requirements—(1) 

Observer coverage requirements—(i) 

Coverage. Any vessel registered to a C/ 

P-endorsed limited entry trawl permit 

that is 125 ft (38.1 m) LOA or longer 

must carry two NMFS-certified 

observers, and any vessel registered to a 

C/P-endorsed limited entry trawl permit 

that is shorter than 125 ft (38.1 m) LOA 

must carry one NMFS-certified observer, 

each day that the vessel is used to take, 

retain, receive, land, process, or 

transport groundfish. 

(ii) Observer workload. The time 

required for the observer to complete 

sampling duties must not exceed 12 

consecutive hours in each 24-hour 

period. 

(iii) Refusal to board. Any boarding 

refusal on the part of the observer or 

vessel must be reported to the observer 

program and NOAA OLE by the 

observer provider. The observer must be 

available for an interview with the 

observer program or NOAA OLE if 

necessary. 

(2) Vessel responsibilities. An 

operator and/or crew of a vessel 

required to carry an observer must 

provide: 

(i) Accommodations and food. 

Provide accommodations and food that 

are equivalent to those provided for 

officers, engineers, foremen, deck-bosses 

or other management level personnel of 

the vessel. 

(ii) Safe conditions—(A) Maintain safe 

conditions on the vessel for the 

protection of observers including 

adherence to all U.S. Coast Guard and 

other applicable rules, regulations, or 

statutes pertaining to safe operation of 

the vessel, including but not limited to, 

rules of the road, vessel stability, 

emergency drills, emergency equipment, 

vessel maintenance, vessel general 

condition, and port bar crossings. An 

observer may refuse boarding or 

reboarding a vessel and may request a 

vessel to return to port if operated in an 

unsafe manner or if unsafe conditions 

are identified. 

(B) Have on board a valid Commercial 

Fishing Vessel Safety Decal that certifies 

compliance with regulations found in 

33 CFR chapter I and 46 CFR chapter I, 

a certificate of compliance issued 

pursuant to 46 CFR 28.710 or a valid 

certificate of inspection pursuant to 46 

U.S.C. 3311. 

(iii) Computer hardware and software. 

Catcher/processor vessels must: 

(A) Provide hardware and software 

pursuant to regulations at 

§§ 679.50(g)(1)(iii)(B)(1) through 

679.50(g)(1)(iii)(B)(3). 

(B) Provide the observer(s) access to a 

computer required under paragraph 

(g)(2)(iii) of this section that is 

connected to a communication device 

that provides a point-to-point 

connection to the NMFS host computer. 

(C) Ensure that the catcher/processor 

has installed the most recent release of 

NMFS data entry software provided by 

the Regional Administrator, or other 

approved software prior to the vessel 

receiving, catching or processing IFQ 

species. 

(D) Ensure that the communication 

equipment required in paragraph 

(g)(2)(iii) of this section and used by 

observers to enter and transmit data, is 

fully functional and operational. 

‘‘Functional’’ means that all the tasks 

and components of the NMFS supplied, 

or other approved, software described at 

paragraph (g)(2)(iii) of this section and 

the data transmissions to NMFS can be 

executed effectively aboard the vessel 

by the communications equipment. 

(iv) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to, the vessel’s navigation 

equipment and personnel, on request, to 

determine the vessel’s position. 

(v) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working decks, holding 

bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, 

weight scales, cargo holds, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish or fish 

products at any time. 

(vi) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board, or fish and 

fish products are transferred from the 

vessel, to allow sampling the catch or 

observing the transfer. 

(vii) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any State or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(viii) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(A) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(B) Providing the observer(s) with a 

safe work area. 

(C) Collecting samples of catch. 

(D) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish. 

(E) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(F) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(ix) Sampling station and operational 

requirements for catcher/processor 

vessels. This paragraph contains the 

requirements for observer sampling 

stations. To allow the observer to carry 

out the required duties, the vessel 

owner must provide an observer 

sampling station that meets the 

following requirements: 

(A) Accessibility. The observer 

sampling station must be available to 

the observer at all times. 

(B) Location. The observer sampling 

station must be located within 4 m of 

the location from which the observer 

samples unsorted catch. 

(C) Access. Unobstructed passage 

must be provided between the observer 

sampling station and the location where 

the observer collects sample catch. 

(D) Minimum work space. The 

observer must have a working area of at 

least 4.5 square meters, including the 

observer’s sampling table, for sampling 

and storage of fish to be sampled. The 

observer must be able to stand upright 

and have a work area at least 0.9 m deep 

in the area in front of the table and 

scale. 

(E) Table. The observer sampling 

station must include a table at least 0.6 

m deep, 1.2 m wide and 0.9 m high and 

no more than 1.1 m high. The entire 

surface area of the table must be 

available for use by the observer. Any 

area for the observer sampling scale is 

in addition to the minimum space 

requirements for the table. The 

observer’s sampling table must be 

secured to the floor or wall. 

(F) Diverter board. The conveyor belt 

conveying unsorted catch must have a 

removable board (‘‘diverter board’’) to 

allow all fish to be diverted from the 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78423 

belt directly into the observer’s 

sampling baskets. The diverter board 

must be located downstream of the scale 

used to weigh total catch. At least 1 m 

of accessible belt space, located 

downstream of the scale used to weight 

total catch, must be available for the 

observer’s use when sampling. 

(G) Other requirements. The sampling 

station must be in a well-drained area 

that includes floor grating (or other 

material that prevents slipping), lighting 

adequate for day or night sampling, and 

a hose that supplies fresh or sea water 

to the observer. 

(H) Observer sampling scale. The 

observer sample station must include a 

NMFS-approved platform scale 

(pursuant to requirements at 

§ 679.28(d)(5)) with a capacity of at least 

50 kg located within 1 m of the 

observer’s sampling table. The scale 

must be mounted so that the weighing 

surface is no more than 0.7 m above the 

floor. 

(x) Transfer at sea. Observers may be 

transferred at-sea between catcherprocessors, between catcher-processors 

and motherships, or between a catcherprocessor and a catcher vessel. Transfers 

at-sea between catcher vessels is 

prohibited. For transfers, both vessels 

must: 

(A) Ensure that transfers of observers 

at sea via small boat under its own 

power are carried out during daylight 

hours, under safe conditions, and with 

the agreement of observers involved. 

(B) Notify observers at least 3 hours 

before observers are transferred, such 

that the observers can finish any 

sampling work, collect personal 

belongings, equipment, and scientific 

samples. 

(C) Provide a safe pilot ladder and 

conduct the transfer to ensure the safety 

of observers during transfers. 

(D) Provide an experienced crew 

member to assist observers in the small 

boat in which any transfer is made. 

(3) Procurement of observer services— 

(i) Owners of vessels required to carry 

observers under paragraph (g)(1) of this 

section must arrange for observer 

services from a permitted observer 

provider, except that: 

(A) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

when NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or an individual authorized 

by NMFS in lieu of an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(B) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

and a permitted observer provider when 

NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff and/or individuals 

authorized by NMFS, in addition to an 

observer provided by a permitted 

observer provider. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) Application to become an observer 

provider. Any observer provider holding 

a valid permit issued by the North 

Pacific Groundfish Observer Program in 

2010 can supply observer services and 

will be issued a West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program permit. 

(5) Observer provider 

responsibilities—(i) Provide qualified 

candidates to serve as observers. 

Observer providers must provide 

qualified candidates to serve as 

observers. To be qualified, a candidate 

must have: 

(A) A Bachelor’s degree or higher 

from an accredited college or university 

with a major in one of the natural 

sciences; 

(B) Successfully completed a 

minimum of 30 semester hours or 

equivalent in applicable biological 

sciences with extensive use of 

dichotomous keys in at least one course; 

(C) Successfully completed at least 

one undergraduate course each in math 

and statistics with a minimum of 5 

semester hours total for both; and 

(D) Computer skills that enable the 

candidate to work competently with 

standard database software and 

computer hardware. 

(ii) Hiring an observer candidate—(A) 

The observer provider must provide the 

candidate a copy of NMFS-provided 

pamphlets, information and other 

literature describing observer duties (i.e. 

The At-Sea Hake Observer Program’s 

Observer Manual) prior to hiring an 

observer candidate. Observer job 

information is available from the 

Observer Program Office’s Web site at 

www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/ 

divisions/fram/observer/atseahake.cfm. 

(B) Observer contracts. The observer 

provider must have a written contract or 

a written contract addendum that is 

signed by the observer and observer 

provider prior to the observer’s 

deployment with the following clauses: 

(1) That all the observer’s in-season 

messages and catch reports required to 

be sent while deployed are delivered to 

the Observer Program Office as specified 

by written Observer Program 

instructions; 

(2) That the observer inform the 

observer provider prior to the time of 

embarkation if he or she is experiencing 

any new mental illness or physical 

ailments or injury since submission of 

the physician’s statement as required as 

a qualified observer candidate that 

would prevent him or her from 

performing their assigned duties. 

(iii) Ensure that observers complete 

duties in a timely manner. An observer 

provider must ensure that observers 

employed by that observer provider do 

the following in a complete and timely 

manner: 

(A) Submit to NMFS all data, 

logbooks and reports as required by the 

Observer Manual; 

(B) Report for his or her scheduled 

debriefing and complete all debriefing 

responsibilities; 

(C) Return all sampling and safety 

gear to the Observer Program Office; 

(D) Submit all biological samples from 

the observer’s deployment by the 

completion of the electronic vessel and/ 

or processor survey(s); and 

(E) Immediately report to the Observer 

Program Office and the NOAA OLE any 

refusal to board an assigned vessel. 

(iv) Observers provided to vessel. 

Observers provided to catcher 

processors: 

(A) Must have a valid North Pacific 

groundfish observer certification 

endorsements and an At-Sea Hake 

Observer Program certification; 

(B) Must not have informed the 

provider prior to the time of 

embarkation that he or she is 

experiencing a mental illness or a 

physical ailment or injury developed 

since submission of the physician’s 

statement that would prevent him or her 

from performing his or her assigned 

duties; and 

(C) Must have successfully completed 

all NMFS required training and briefing 

before deployment. 

(v) Respond to industry requests for 

observers. An observer provider must 

provide an observer for deployment as 

requested pursuant to the contractual 

relationship with the vessel to fulfill 

vessel requirements for observer 

coverage specified under paragraph 

(g)(1) of this section. An alternate 

observer must be supplied in each case 

where injury or illness prevents the 

observer from performing his or her 

duties or where the observer resigns 

prior to completion of his or her duties. 

If the observer provider is unable to 

respond to an industry request for 

observer coverage from a vessel for 

whom the provider is in a contractual 

relationship due to lack of available 

observers by the estimated embarking 

time of the vessel, the provider must 

report it to the observer program at least 

4 hours prior to the vessel’s estimated 

embarking time. 

(vi) Provide observer salaries and 

benefits. An observer provider must 

provide to its observer employees 

salaries and any other benefits and 

personnel services in accordance with 

the terms of each observer’s contract. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78424 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(vii) Provide observer deployment 

logistics. An observer provider must 

provide to each of its observers under 

contract: 

(A) All necessary transportation, 

including arrangements and logistics, of 

observers to the initial location of 

deployment, to all subsequent vessel 

assignments during that deployment, 

and to the debriefing location when a 

deployment ends for any reason; and 

(B) Lodging, per diem, and any other 

services necessary to observers assigned 

to fishing vessels. 

(1) An observer under contract may be 

housed on a vessel to which he or she 

is assigned: 

(i) Prior to their vessel’s initial 

departure from port; 

(ii) For a period not to exceed 24 

hours following the completion of an 

offload when the observer has duties 

and is scheduled to disembark; or 

(iii) For a period not to exceed twentyfour hours following the vessel’s arrival 

in port when the observer is scheduled 

to disembark. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(C) During all periods an observer is 

housed on a vessel, the observer 

provider must ensure that the vessel 

operator or at least one crew member is 

aboard. 

(D) An observer under contract who is 

between vessel assignments must be 

provided with shoreside 

accommodations in accordance with the 

contract between the observer and the 

observer provider. If the provider is 

providing accommodations, it must be 

at a licensed hotel, motel, bed and 

breakfast, or other shoreside 

accommodations for the duration of 

each period between vessel or shoreside 

assignments. Such accommodations 

must include an assigned bed for each 

observer and no other person may be 

assigned that bed for the duration of that 

observer’s stay. Additionally, no more 

than four beds may be in any room 

housing observers at accommodations 

meeting the requirements of this 

section. 

(viii) Observer deployment 

limitations. An observer provider must 

not exceed observer deployment 

limitations specified in this paragraph 

unless alternative arrangements are 

approved by the Observer Program 

Office. An observer provider must not: 

(A) Deploy an observer on the same 

vessel for more than 90 days in a 12- 

month period; 

(B) Deploy an observer for more than 

90 days in a single deployment; 

(C) Include more than four vessel 

assignments in a single deployment, or 

(D) Disembark an observer from a 

vessel before that observer has 

completed his or her sampling or data 

transmission duties. 

(ix) Verify vessel’s safety decal. An 

observer provider must verify that a 

vessel has a valid USCG safety decal as 

required under paragraph (g)(2)(ii)(B) of 

this section before an observer may get 

underway aboard the vessel. One of the 

following acceptable means of 

verification must be used to verify the 

decal validity: 

(A) The observer provider or 

employee of the observer provider, 

including the observer, visually inspects 

the decal aboard the vessel and confirms 

that the decal is valid according to the 

decal date of issuance; or 

(B) The observer provider receives a 

hard copy of the USCG documentation 

of the decal issuance from the vessel 

owner or operator. 

(x) Maintain communications with 

observers. An observer provider must 

have an employee responsible for 

observer activities on call 24 hours a 

day to handle emergencies involving 

observers or problems concerning 

observer logistics, whenever observers 

are at sea, in transit, or in port awaiting 

vessel reassignment. 

(xi) Maintain communications with 

the Observer Program Office. An 

observer provider must provide all of 

the following information by electronic 

transmission (e-mail), fax, or other 

method specified by NMFS. 

(A) Observer training and briefing. 

Observer training and briefing 

registration materials must be submitted 

to the Observer Program Office at least 

5 business days prior to the beginning 

of a scheduled observer at-sea hake 

training or briefing session. Registration 

materials consist of the following: The 

date of requested training or briefing 

with a list of observers including each 

observer’s full name (i.e., first, middle 

and last names). 

(B) Projected observer assignments. 

Prior to the observer’s completion of the 

training or briefing session, the observer 

provider must submit to the Observer 

Program Office a statement of projected 

observer assignments that include the 

observer’s name; vessel, gear type, and 

vessel/processor code; port of 

embarkation; and area of fishing. 

(C) Observer debriefing registration. 

The observer provider must contact the 

At-Sea Hake Observer Program within 5 

business days after the completion of an 

observer’s deployment to schedule a 

date, time and location for debriefing. 

Observer debriefing registration 

information must be provided at the 

time of debriefing scheduling and must 

include the observer’s name, cruise 

number, vessel name(s) and code(s), and 

requested debriefing date. 

(D) Observer provider contracts. If 

requested, observer providers must 

submit to the Observer Program Office 

a completed and unaltered copy of each 

type of signed and valid contract 

(including all attachments, appendices, 

addendums, and exhibits incorporated 

into the contract) between the observer 

provider and those entities requiring 

observer services under paragraph (g)(1) 

of this section. Observer providers must 

also submit to the Observer Program 

Office upon request, a completed and 

unaltered copy of the current or most 

recent signed and valid contract 

(including all attachments, appendices, 

addendums, and exhibits incorporated 

into the contract and any agreements or 

policies with regard to observer 

compensation or salary levels) between 

the observer provider and the particular 

entity identified by the Observer 

Program or with specific observers. The 

copies must be submitted to the 

Observer Program Office via fax or mail 

within 5 business days of the request. 

Signed and valid contracts include the 

contracts an observer provider has with: 

(1) Vessels required to have observer 

coverage as specified at paragraph (g)(1) 

of this section; and 

(2) Observers. 

(E) Change in observer provider 

management and contact information. 

Observer providers must submit 

notification of any other change to 

provider contact information, including 

but not limited to, changes in contact 

name, phone number, e-mail address, 

and address. 

(F) Other reports. Reports of the 

following must be submitted in writing 

to the At-Sea Hake Observer Program 

Office by the observer provider via fax 

or e-mail address designated by the 

Observer Program Office within 24 

hours after the observer provider 

becomes aware of the information: 

(1) Any information regarding 

possible observer harassment; 

(2) Any information regarding any 

action prohibited under §§ 660.112 or 

600.725(o), (t) and (u); 

(3) Any concerns about vessel safety 

or marine casualty under 46 CFR 4.05– 

1(a)(1) through (7); 

(4) Any observer illness or injury that 

prevents the observer from completing 

any of his or her duties described in the 

observer manual; and 

(5) Any information, allegations or 

reports regarding observer conflict of 

interest or breach of the standards of 

behavior described in observer provider 

policy. 

(xii) Replace lost or damaged gear. An 

observer provider must replace all lost 

or damaged gear and equipment issued 

by NMFS to an observer under contract 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78425 

to that provider. All replacements must 

be in accordance with requirements and 

procedures identified in writing by the 

Observer Program Office. 

(xiii) Maintain confidentiality of 

information. An observer provider must 

ensure that all records on individual 

observer performance received from 

NMFS under the routine use provision 

of the Privacy Act or other applicable 

law remain confidential and are not 

further released to anyone outside the 

employ of the observer provider 

company to whom the observer was 

contracted except with written 

permission of the observer. 

(xiv) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. An observer provider must 

meet limitations on conflict of interest. 

Observer providers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in a fishery managed 

under an FMP for the waters off the 

coasts of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, 

and California, including, but not 

limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel or 

shoreside processor facility involved in 

the catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any vessel 

or shoreside processors participating in 

a fishery managed pursuant to an FMP 

in the waters off the coasts of Alaska, 

California, Oregon, and Washington, or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel or shoreside processor 

participating in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP in the waters off the 

coasts of Alaska, California, Oregon, and 

Washington. 

(B) Must assign observers without 

regard to any preference by 

representatives of vessels other than 

when an observer will be deployed. 

(C) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value except for compensation 

for providing observer services from 

anyone who conducts fishing or fish 

processing activities that are regulated 

by NMFS in the Pacific coast or North 

Pacific regions, or who has interests that 

may be substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

official duties of observer providers. 

(xv) Observer conduct and behavior. 

An observer provider must develop and 

maintain a policy addressing observer 

conduct and behavior for their 

employees that serve as observers. The 

policy shall address the following 

behavior and conduct: 

(A) Observer use of alcohol; 

(B) Observer use, possession, or 

distribution of illegal drugs; and 

(C) Sexual contact with personnel of 

the vessel or processing facility to 

which the observer is assigned, or with 

any vessel or processing plant personnel 

who may be substantially affected by 

the performance or non-performance of 

the observer’s official duties. 

(D) An observer provider shall 

provide a copy of its conduct and 

behavior policy by February 1 of each 

year, to observers, observer candidates, 

and the Observer Program Office. 

(xvi) Refusal to deploy an observer. 

Observer providers may refuse to deploy 

an observer on a requesting vessel if the 

observer provider has determined that 

the requesting vessel is inadequate or 

unsafe pursuant to those regulations 

described at § 600.746 or U.S. Coast 

Guard and other applicable rules, 

regulations, statutes, or guidelines 

pertaining to safe operation of the 

vessel. 

(6) Observer certification and 

responsibilities—(i) Applicability. 

Observer certification authorizes an 

individual to fulfill duties as specified 

in writing by the NMFS Observer 

Program Office while under the employ 

of a NMFS-permitted observer provider 

and according to certification 

endorsements as designated under 

paragraph (g)(6)(iii) of this section. 

(ii) Observer certification official. The 

Regional Administrator will designate a 

NMFS observer certification official 

who will make decisions for the 

Observer Program Office on whether to 

issue or deny observer certification. 

(iii) Certification requirements—(A) 

Initial certification. NMFS may certify 

individuals who, in addition to any 

other relevant considerations: 

(1) Are employed by an observer 

provider company holding a valid North 

Pacific Groundfish Observer Program 

permit at the time of the issuance of the 

certification to the observer; 

(2) Have provided, through their 

observer provider: 

(i) Information set forth at § 679.50 

regarding an observer candidate’s health 

and physical fitness for the job; 

(ii) Meet all observer education and 

health standards as specified in 

§ 679.50; and 

(iii) Have successfully completed 

NMFS-approved training as prescribed 

by the At-Sea Hake Observer Program 

and/or the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program. Successful 

completion of training by an observer 

applicant consists of meeting all 

attendance and conduct standards 

issued in writing at the start of training; 

meeting all performance standards 

issued in writing at the start of training 

for assignments, tests, and other 

evaluation tools; and completing all 

other training requirements established 

by the Observer Program. 

(iv) Have not been decertified under 

paragraph (g)(6)(ix) of this section, or 

pursuant to § 679.50. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(iv) Denial of a certification. The 

NMFS observer certification official will 

issue a written determination denying 

observer certification if the candidate 

fails to successfully complete training, 

or does not meet the qualifications for 

certification for any other relevant 

reason. 

(v) Issuance of an observer 

certification. An observer certification 

may be issued upon determination by 

the observer certification official that 

the candidate has successfully met all 

requirements for certification as 

specified in paragraph (g)(6)(iii) of this 

section. The following endorsements 

must be obtained, in addition to 

observer certification, in order for an 

observer to deploy. 

(A) North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program certification training 

endorsement. A certification training 

endorsement signifies the successful 

completion of the training course 

required to obtain observer certification. 

This endorsement expires when the 

observer has not been deployed and 

performed sampling duties as required 

by the Observer Program Office for a 

period of time, specified by the 

Observer Program, after his or her most 

recent debriefing. The observer can 

renew the endorsement by successfully 

completing certification training once 

more. 

(B) North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program annual general endorsements. 

Each observer must obtain an annual 

general endorsement to their 

certification prior to his or her first 

deployment within any calendar year 

subsequent to a year in which a 

certification training endorsement is 

obtained. To obtain an annual general 

endorsement, an observer must 

successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the Observer 

Program. All briefing attendance, 

performance, and conduct standards 

required by the Observer Program must 

be met. 

(C) North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program deployment endorsements. 

Each observer who has completed an 

initial deployment after certification or 

annual briefing must receive a 

deployment endorsement to their 

certification prior to any subsequent 

deployments for the remainder of that 

year. An observer may obtain a 

deployment endorsement by 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
78426 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

successfully completing all pre-cruise 

briefing requirements. The type of 

briefing the observer must attend and 

successfully complete will be specified 

in writing by the Observer Program 

during the observer’s most recent 

debriefing. 

(D) At-Sea Hake Observer Program 

endorsements. A Pacific hake fishery 

endorsement is required for purposes of 

performing observer duties aboard 

vessels that process groundfish at sea in 

the Pacific whiting fishery. A Pacific 

whiting fishery endorsement to an 

observer’s certification may be obtained 

by meeting the following requirements: 

(1) Be a prior NMFS-certified observer 

in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska, 

unless an individual with this 

qualification is not available; 

(2) Receive an evaluation by NMFS 

for his or her most recent deployment 

that indicated that the observer’s 

performance met Observer Program 

expectations for that deployment; 

(3) Successfully complete a NMFSapproved observer training and/or 

Pacific whiting briefing as prescribed by 

the Observer Program; and 

(4) Comply with all of the other 

requirements of this section. 

(vi) Maintaining the validity of an 

observer certification. After initial 

issuance, an observer must keep their 

certification valid by meeting all of the 

following requirements specified below: 

(A) Successfully perform their 

assigned duties as described in the 

Observer Manual or other written 

instructions from the Observer Program 

Office including calling into the NMFS 

deployment hotline upon departing and 

arriving into port each trip to leave the 

following information: Observer name, 

phone number, vessel name departing 

on, date and time of departure and date 

and time of expected return. 

(B) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 

(C) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

or in the processing facility to any 

person except the owner or operator of 

the observed vessel or an authorized 

officer or NMFS. 

(D) Successfully complete NMFSapproved annual briefings as prescribed 

by the At-Sea Hake Observer Program. 

(E) Successful completion of briefing 

by an observer applicant consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 

all other briefing requirements 

established by the Observer Program. 

(F) Successfully meet all expectations 

in all debriefings including reporting for 

assigned debriefings. 

(G) Submit all data and information 

required by the observer program within 

the program’s stated guidelines. 

(vii) Limitations on conflict of 

interest. Observers: 

(A) Must not have a direct financial 

interest, other than the provision of 

observer services, in a fishery managed 

pursuant to an FMP for the waters off 

the coast of Alaska, or in a Pacific Coast 

fishery managed by either the state or 

Federal Governments in waters off 

Washington, Oregon, or California, 

including but not limited to: 

(1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shore-based or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(2) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shore-based or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(3) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shore-based or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(B) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value from anyone who either 

conducts activities that are regulated by 

NMFS in the Pacific coast or North 

Pacific regions or has interests that may 

be substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

observers’ official duties. 

(C) May not serve as observers on any 

vessel or at any shore-based owned or 

operated by a person who employed the 

observer in the last two years. 

(D) May not solicit or accept 

employment as a crew member or an 

employee of a vessel or shore-based 

processor while employed by an 

observer provider. 

(E) Provisions for remuneration of 

observers under this section do not 

constitute a conflict of interest. 

(viii) Standards of behavior. 

Observers must: 

(A) Perform their assigned duties as 

described in the Observer Manual or 

other written instructions from the 

Observer Program Office. 

(B) Immediately report to the observer 

program office and the NOAA Office of 

Law Enforcement any time they refuse 

to board a vessel. 

(C) Accurately record their sampling 

data, write complete reports, and report 

accurately any observations of 

suspected violations of regulations 

relevant to conservation of marine 

resources or their environment. 

(D) Not disclose collected data and 

observations made on board the vessel 

to any person except the owner or 

operator of the observed vessel, an 

authorized officer, or NMFS. 

(ix) Suspension and decertification— 

(A) Suspension and decertification 

review official. The Regional 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate an observer suspension and 

decertification review official(s), who 

will have the authority to review 

observer certifications and issue initial 

administrative determinations of 

observer certification suspension and/or 

decertification. 

(B) Causes for suspension or 

decertification. The suspension/ 

decertification official may initiate 

suspension or decertification 

proceedings against an observer: 

(1) When it is alleged that the 

observer has committed any acts or 

omissions of any of the following: 

Failed to satisfactorily perform the 

duties of observers as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

or failed to abide by the standards of 

conduct for observers (including 

conflicts of interest); 

(2) Upon conviction of a crime or 

upon entry of a civil judgment for: 

Commission of fraud or other violation 

in connection with obtaining or 

attempting to obtain certification, or in 

performing the duties as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

commission of embezzlement, theft, 

forgery, bribery, falsification or 

destruction of records, making false 

statements, or receiving stolen property; 

or commission of any other offense 

indicating a lack of integrity or honesty 

that seriously and directly affects the 

fitness of observers. 

(C) Issuance of initial administrative 

determination. Upon determination that 

suspension or decertification is 

warranted, the suspension/ 

decertification official will issue a 

written IAD to the observer via certified 

mail at the observer’s most current 

address provided to NMFS. The IAD 

will identify whether a certification is 

suspended or revoked and will identify 

the specific reasons for the action taken. 

Decertification is effective 30 calendar 

days after the date on the IAD, unless 

there is an appeal. 

(D) Appeals. A certified observer who 

receives an IAD that suspends or 

revokes the observer certification may 

appeal the determination within 30 

calendar days after the date on the IAD 

to the Office of Administrative Appeals 

pursuant to § 679.43. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 78427 

(h) C/P coop failure—(1) The Regional 

Administrator will determine that a 

permitted C/P coop is considered to 

have failed if any one of the following 

occurs: 

(i) Any current C/P-endorsed limited 

entry trawl permit is not identified as a 

C/P coop member in the coop agreement 

submitted to NMFS during the C/P coop 

permit application process; 

(ii) Any current C/P-endorsed permit 

withdraws from the C/P coop 

agreement; 

(iii) The coop members voluntarily 

dissolve the coop; or 

(iv) The coop agreement is no longer 

valid. 

(2) If the permitted C/P coop 

dissolves, the designated coop manager 

must notify NMFS SFD in writing of the 

dissolution of the coop. 

(3) The Regional Administrator may 

make an independent determination of 

a coop failure based on factual 

information collected by or provided to 

NMFS. 

(4) In the event of a NMFSdetermined coop failure, or reported 

failure, the designated coop manager 

will be notified in writing about NMFS’ 

determination. 

(i) Upon notification of a coop failure, 

the C/P coop permit will no longer be 

in effect. 

(ii) The C/P sector will convert to an 

IFQ-based fishery beginning the 

following calendar year after a coop 

failure, or a soon as practicable 

thereafter. NMFS will develop 

additional regulations, as necessary to 

implement an IFQ fishery for the C/P 

sector. Each C/P-endorsed permit would 

receive an equal distribution of QS from 

the total IFQ for the catcher/processor 

sector allocation. 

■ 27. In § 660.212, the introductory text, 

and paragraphs (a)(2) and (c)(1), are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.212 Fixed gear fishery— 

prohibitions. 

These prohibitions are specific to the 

limited entry fixed gear fisheries and to 

the limited entry trawl fishery 

Shorebased IFQ Program under gear 

switching. General groundfish 

prohibitions are found at § 660.12, 

subpart C. In addition to the general 

groundfish prohibitions specified in 

§ 660.12, subpart C, it is unlawful for 

any person to: 

(a) * * * 

(2) Take, retain, possess, or land more 

than a single cumulative limit of a 

particular species, per vessel, per 

applicable cumulative limit period, 

except for sablefish taken in the limited 

entry, fixed gear sablefish primary 

season from a vessel authorized to fish 

in that season, as described at § 660.231, 

subpart E and except for IFQ species 

taken in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

from a vessel authorized under gear 

switching provisions as described at 

§ 660.140. 

* * * * * 

(c) Fishing in conservation areas—(1) 

Operate a vessel registered to a limited 

entry permit with a longline, trap (pot), 

or trawl endorsement and longline and/ 

or trap gear onboard in an applicable 

GCA (as defined at § 660.230(d)), except 

for purposes of continuous transiting, 

with all groundfish longline and/or trap 

gear stowed in accordance with 

§ 660.212(a) or except as authorized in 

the groundfish management measures at 

§ 660.230. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2010–30527 Filed 12–7–10; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES2