82296 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: December 27, 2010. 

Emily H. Menashes, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32951 Filed 12–27–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 101221628–0628–01] 

RIN 0648–BA40 

Fisheries Off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan; Amendments 20 

and 21; Trawl Rationalization Program; 

Allocations for the Start of the 2011 

Fishery 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary rule; emergency 

action; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this rule to 

implement an interim reduction to the 

2010 harvest level for sablefish, issue 

revised quota pounds for individual 

fishing quota (IFQ) species, revise the 

calculation for the Pacific halibut trawl 

bycatch mortality limit for the trawl 

rationalization program; and adjust the 

trawl Rockfish Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) and landing allowances for nonIFQ species and Pacific whiting for the 

start of the 2011 groundfish fishery. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 

2011. Comments must be received no 

later than 5 p.m. local time on January 

31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by 0648–BA40, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal, at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Fax: 206–526–6736, Attn: Kevin 

Duffy. 

• Mail: William W. Stelle, Jr., 

Regional Administrator, Northwest 

Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way, 

NE., Seattle, WA 98115–0070, Attn: 

Kevin Duffy. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (if 

submitting comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal, enter ‘‘N/A’’ in the 

relevant required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, 

or Adobe PDF file formats only. 

Background information and 

documents, including the 

environmental assessment for this 

action, 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin C. Duffy, 206–526–4743; (fax) 

206–526–6736; Kevin.Duffy@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In this emergency action, NMFS is 

implementing interim measures for the 

Pacific coast groundfish fisheries 

beginning in January, 2011. The interim 

measures include: interim reductions to 

the 2010 harvest level for sablefish; 

issuance of quota pounds (QP) for IFQ 

species; revisions to the calculation for 

the Pacific halibut trawl bycatch 

mortality limit; and adjustment of the 

trawl Rockfish Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) and landing allowances for nonIFQ species and Pacific whiting. These 

interim measures are necessary due to a 

delay in the finalization of the 2011– 

2012 harvest specifications and 

management measures, and are needed 

to meet the scheduled implementation 

of the trawl rationalization program in 

January 2011. These measures are 

intended to manage the early part of the 

2011 groundfish fishery in a manner 

that prevents any conservation concerns 

until the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures are implemented, currently 

anticipated in April 2011, and to 

accommodate the transition to a 

rationalized trawl fishery. For more 

background on the trawl rationalization 

program, see the preamble to the June 

10, 2010, proposed rule (75 FR 32994), 

the August 31, 2010, proposed rule (75 

FR 53380), the October 1, 2010, final 

rule (74 FR 60868), and the December 

15, 2010, final rule (75 FR 78344). 

The 2011–2012 harvest specifications 

and management measures final rule 

was scheduled to publish late in 2010 

so that the trawl rationalization program 

and the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures (2011–2012 specifications) 

would be implemented simultaneously. 

However, the 2011–2012 specifications, 

including several pieces necessary to 

sustainably manage the entire fishery 

and to begin the rationalized trawl 

fishery, have been delayed and will not 

be in place for the start of the 2011 

groundfish fisheries. As a result of this 

delay, the harvest specifications and 

management measures that were 

implemented during 2010 will remain 

in place for the start of 2011, until 

NMFS takes action through a 

rulemaking to revise them. This may be 

problematic in some instances, as 

discussed below. Therefore, NMFS is 

taking action in this interim, emergency 

rulemaking to revise some harvest 

specifications and management 

measures. 

Interim 2011 Harvest Specifications 

Because the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures rulemaking is delayed, if 

NMFS does not take any action, the 

harvest specifications and management 

measures that were implemented during 

2010 will remain in place in 2011 until 

they are revised through a subsequent 

rulemaking. If the 2010 harvest 

specifications are allowed to remain in 

place and if catch early in 2011 is too 

high, both the biological resource and 

communities may be subject to 

overfishing and early fishery closure, 

respectively. This concern is highest for 

species that are caught by fisheries early 

in the year and where there may be 

limited ability to manage the fishery 

inseason to reduce catch later in the 

year. NMFS raised these issues to the 

Pacific Fishery Management Council at 

its November 2–9, 2010 meeting in 

Costa Mesa, California, and received 

recommendations from the Council 

regarding this interim rule to address 

these concerns. 

The proposed rule for the 2011–2012 

Biennial Harvest Specifications and 

Management Measures; Amendment 

16–5; and Amendment 23 published on 

November 3, 2010 (75 FR 67810). As 

part of that rulemaking, in August 2010, 

the Council published a draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Proposed Harvest Specifications and 

Management Measures for the 2011– 

2012 Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

(DEIS), which included a range of 2011– 

2012 harvest levels. When the proposed 

2011 harvest levels are compared with 

the levels that were in place for 2010, 

there are many species of groundfish for 

which the proposed 2011 harvest levels 

are lower than those that were in place 

for 2010. However, for many of those 

species, there is a low level of concern 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82297 

that starting the year with the same 

harvest specifications as those in place 

for 2010 would result in a conservation 

issues. 

Therefore, in this action, NMFS is 

making no changes to the 2010 harvest 

levels for species other than sablefish 

north of 36° N. lat. (i.e., the 2010 harvest 

levels will remain in place at the start 

of the 2011 fishing year, except for 

sablefish north of 36° N. lat.). For 

sablefish, NMFS proposed harvest levels 

for 2011 based on the best available 

scientific information and management 

policy, as described in detail in the 

November 3, 2010 proposed rule for the 

2011–2012 harvest specifications and 

management measures (75 FR 67810). In 

this action, NMFS is reducing the 

sablefish harvest level for the area north 

of 36° N. lat. consistent with the 

proposed harvest specifications for 

2011, from 6,471 mt to 5,515 mt for the 

start of 2011. This interim measure is 

necessary to prevent conservation 

concerns with issuance of trawl fishery 

QP. Also, this interim reduction to the 

harvest level will allow NMFS to 

calculate the fixed gear primary 

sablefish fishery tier limits for 2011 at 

a level that will reduce concerns for 

overfishing, and will allow NMFS to 

take routine inseason actions to control 

catch of sablefish in the limited entry 

fixed gear and open access daily trip 

limit fisheries in early 2011, if 

necessary. 

Issuance of QPs for the Shorebased IFQ 

Fishery 

As a result of the delay in 

implementing 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures rulemaking, NMFS must 

determine what value to base the 

issuance of QP to quota share (QS) 

accounts. The shorebased trawl 

allocation for IFQ species is used to 

calculate how many QP to issue to QS 

accounts at the start of the fishing year 

(QS percent for a species multiplied by 

the shorebased trawl allocation equals 

QP for that species). NMFS calculated 

what the shorebased trawl allocation 

would be under the 2010 OYs and what 

it would be under Councilrecommended amounts for 2011. To 

avoid the risk of over-issuing QP, which 

would then require reductions in April 

when the 2011 harvest specifications 

become finalized, NMFS is adopting the 

lower of these calculated amounts in 

this rule. These shorebased trawl 

allocations announced in this interim 

rule may be revised once the 2011 

harvest specifications are finalized, and 

QP will be adjusted as appropriate. 

NMFS determined the shorebased 

trawl allocations for IFQ species based 

on either the 2010 OY or proposed 2011 

annual catch limits (ACLs) by taking the 

following steps. As specified at 

§ 660.55(b), the OY (or ACL) was 

reduced by a specific amount for: the 

Pacific Coast treaty Indian Tribal 

harvest; projected scientific research 

catch of all groundfish species; 

estimates of fishing mortality in nongroundfish fisheries; and, as necessary, 

set-asides for EFPs. In order to retain the 

greatest flexibility when the final 2011 

harvest specifications become available, 

NMFS used the larger of these amounts 

from 2010 and 2011, which resulted in 

a greater deduction from the OY (or 

ACL), and thus a more conservative 

amount for the calculation of the 

allocations. The remaining amount of 

available harvest after these deductions 

are made is called the fishery harvest 

guideline, which is then further divided 

into allocations for groundfish trawl 

(shorebased and at-sea) and non-trawl 

(limited entry fixed gear, open access, 

and recreational) fisheries. For most 

species, this was done according to the 

allocation percentages specified at 

§ 660.55(c); however, IFQ species not 

listed in the table at § 660.55(c) are 

allocated between the trawl and 

nontrawl fisheries through the biennial 

harvest specifications process. Due to 

the delay of final 2011 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures, NMFS calculated the trawl 

allocation for species not listed in the 

table at § 660.55(c) by using either the 

proposed trawl allocation (in metric 

tons) from the proposed 2011 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures (75 FR 67810, November 3, 

2010) or a proportional amount of the 

2010 OY. The trawl allocation is further 

subdivided among the trawl sectors 

(mothership (MS), catcher/processor 

(C/P), and shorebased trawl (or IFQ)). 

The resulting shorebased trawl 

allocation (mt) is then used to calculate 

individual QPs. NMFS calculated the 

shorebased trawl allocation under both 

the 2010 OYs and under proposed 2011 

ACLs, and is adopting the lower of the 

two for each IFQ species on an interim 

basis, so that quota pounds may be 

issued for the start of the 2011 fishery. 

In some cases, NMFS is adopting a 

more conservative shorebased trawl 

allocation based upon current 

regulations, recommendations provided 

by the Council at its November 2010 

meeting, or to provide NMFS flexibility 

in order to be consistent with the court 

order when the 2011 harvest 

specifications are finalized. In 

particular, this rule adopts a shorebased 

trawl allocation for Pacific whiting 

based on the lower end of the range of 

potential ACLs analyzed in the DEIS for 

the 2011 harvest specifications, 

consistent with current regulations at 

§ 660.140(d)(1)(ii)(B)(2). This rule also 

adopts an interim shorebased trawl 

allocation for calculation of yelloweye 

rockfish QP based on the Council’s 

November 2010 recommendation that 

the shorebased trawl allocation be set at 

0.3 mt, as opposed to the 0.6 mt 

allocation that was recommended in 

June 2010 under a proposed 2011 

yelloweye rockfish ACL of 20 mt. NMFS 

also applied the Council’s November 

2010 recommended increased set asides 

in the calculation of yellowtail rockfish 

QP. NMFS declined to apply the 

Council’s November 2010 

recommendation to temporarily 

suspend the petrale sole trawl/non-trawl 

split, because doing so would result in 

a larger issuance of petrale sole QP. This 

rule also adopts a shorebased trawl 

allocation for calculation of cowcod QP 

based on a more conservative harvest 

level of 3 mt, to provide flexibility in 

order to be consistent within the April 

22, 2010 court order in NRDC v. Locke, 

Case 3:01–cv–00421–JLI, when the 2011 

harvest specifications are finalized. 

NMFS is adopting the lower 

shorebased trawl allocations in this rule 

in order to avoid the risk of over-issuing 

QP; these shorebased trawl allocations 

may change once the 2011 harvest 

specifications are finalized. NMFS will 

recalculate QP for IFQ species, other 

than Pacific halibut, once final 2011 

harvest specifications are put in place, 

and will make adjustments in QS 

accounts as appropriate. If the final 

2011 harvest specifications are greater 

than those used for the issuance of QP 

in this interim rule for the start of the 

fishing year, NMFS will issue additional 

QP later in 2011 for the difference. 

Calculation of the Pacific Halibut Trawl 

Bycatch Mortality Limit 

Under the trawl rationalization 

program, individual bycatch quota (IBQ) 

pounds for Pacific halibut north of 

40°10′ N. lat. are issued based on a 

calculation where a QS permit owner’s 

IBQ (expressed as a percent) is 

multiplied by the trawl mortality 

bycatch limit for halibut after any setasides have been deducted. As specified 

in current regulations at § 660.55(m), the 

FMP sets a trawl mortality bycatch limit 

for legal and sublegal halibut at 15 

percent of the Area 2A constant 

exploitation yield (CEY) for legal size 

halibut, not to exceed 130,000 pounds 

for the first four years of trawl 

rationalization and not to exceed 

100,000 pounds starting in the fifth 

year. This total bycatch limit may be 

adjusted downward or upward through 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
82298 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

the biennial specifications and 

management measures process. Part of 

the overall total catch limit is a set-aside 

of 10 mt of Pacific halibut to 

accommodate bycatch in the at-sea 

Pacific whiting fishery and in the 

shoreside trawl fishery south of 40°10′ 

N. lat. (estimated to be approximately 5 

mt each). The intent of the Council for 

this approach was to reduce halibut 

mortality that has been observed in 

recent years in the trawl fishery by 

approximately 50 percent. 

At the November 2010 Council 

meeting, the Council and NMFS 

received the most recent total mortality 

information from the Northwest Fishery 

Science Center (NWFSC), in a report 

titled ‘‘Pacific Halibut Bycatch in the 

U.S. West Coast Groundfish Fishery 

from 2002 through 2009’’, published in 

October 2010. This report indicated that 

the proportion of sublegal sized halibut 

(under 32 inches) to legal sized halibut 

(length 32 inches and over) was higher 

than the Council had realized when the 

IBQ pound provisions were adopted. 

The method of calculating halibut IBQ 

pounds specified in current regulations 

at § 660.55(m), which was developed 

prior to the October 2010 NWFSC 

report, would result in issuance of fewer 

individual bycatch quota pounds than 

the target set by the Council, and could 

create a chokehold species that would 

threaten successful implementation of 

the rationalization program. 

The calculation of the trawl mortality 

bycatch limit, as specified at 

§ 660.55(m) and in the FMP, would 

include both legal (length 32 inches and 

over) and sublegal (under 32 inches) 

halibut. At its November 2010 Council 

meeting, the Council discussed an 

alternate approach for calculation of the 

total trawl mortality bycatch limit, 

which includes legal-sized halibut only 

and is greater than 15 percent of the 

2010 total CEY of Pacific halibut. This 

approach more closely reflects the 

Council’s intent of a 50-percent 

reduction in halibut mortality. 

Consistent with the Council’s 

recommendation at its November 2010 

meeting, NMFS is revising §§ 660.55(m) 

and 660.140(d)(1)(ii)(C) in this rule to 

modify the calculation of the trawl 

mortality bycatch limit so that it is 

based on ‘‘130,000 pounds of legal sized 

halibut, net weight.’’ Because halibut 

IBQ pounds are expressed in round 

weight, this limit, expressed in net 

weight, is converted to round weight by 

dividing by 0.75 (a conversion factor 

used by the International Pacific Halibut 

Commission (IPHC)), resulting in 

173,333 pounds. In addition, because 

halibut IBQ pounds cover both legal and 

sublegal sized halibut, the calculation is 

further divided by 0.62 to determine the 

total number of both legal and sublegal 

sized halibut, in round pounds. The 

conversion factor of 0.62 to convert legal 

sized halibut into both legal and 

sublegal sized halibut is based on the 

Council’s November 2010 

recommendation, which was derived 

from the October 2011 NWFSC report. 

The resulting 2011 trawl bycatch 

mortality limit is 279,570 pounds. In 

order to calculate IBQ pounds, this 

amount is reduced by the 10 mt (22,046 

pounds) set aside to accommodate 

bycatch in the at-sea Pacific whiting 

fishery and in the shoreside trawl 

fishery south of 40°10′ N. lat. NMFS will 

issue Pacific halibut IBQ pounds to QS 

permit owners based on their halibut 

IBQ percent multiplied by 257,524 

pounds. 

Trawl Rockfish Conservation Areas 

(RCAs) and Landing Allowances for 

Non-IFQ Species 

Because the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures rulemaking is delayed, if 

NMFS does not take any action, the 

harvest specifications and management 

measures that were in place and 

implemented during 2010 will remain 

in place in 2011 until they are revised 

through rulemaking. Also, the trawl 

rationalization program is scheduled to 

begin in January 2011. Because of this 

circumstance, management measures for 

the 2010 limited entry trawl fishery, 

which would have been amended for 

the 2011–2012 biennium, will remain in 

place. However, some of these measures 

are not appropriate for managing a 

rationalized fishery. In particular, trip 

limits would remain in place for the 

limited entry trawl fishery, including 

trip limits for IFQ species. Also, the 

trawl RCA boundaries that were in place 

in 2010 would be repeated for 2011, and 

those also may not be appropriate for a 

fishery that is operating under the trawl 

rationalization program. NMFS 

requested guidance from the Council on 

what the appropriate trip limits for nonIFQ species might be and what the 

appropriate RCA boundaries might be 

for the rationalized trawl fishery at its 

November 2010 meeting. 

In June 2010, the Council 

recommended landing allowances for 

non-IFQ species and Pacific whiting 

(outside the primary whiting season) for 

implementation in the 2011–2012 

harvest specifications and management 

measures, with the intent that they 

would be implemented with similar 

timing of the trawl rationalization 

program, in January 2011. However, 

with the delay in implementation of the 

2011 harvest specifications and 

management measures, the Council, at 

its November 2010 meeting, reconsidered appropriate landing 

allowances for non-IFQ species and 

whiting and RCA boundaries to be 

implemented via interim emergency 

rule for the start of the 2011 fishery. 

The Council’s Groundfish 

Management Team considered whether 

the landing allowances for non-IFQ 

species and whiting that were adopted 

by the Council in June 2010 would still 

be appropriate for the start of 2011, 

given the most recent fishery 

information and a NWFSC report on 

total groundfish mortality from 2009 

fisheries that was released in November 

2010. Considering the most recent 

fishery information, the landing 

allowances that were recommended by 

the Council in June 2010 were deemed 

appropriate by the Council and were 

recommended for implementation for 

the interim period until the 2011–2012 

harvest specification and management 

measures are finalized later in 2011. The 

Council did, however, consider changes 

to the longnose skate landing 

allowances for the beginning of 2011, 

but did not recommend changes, based 

on the reasons described below. 

The 2009 total mortality report 

indicated that the total mortality of 

longnose skate exceeded the 2009 OY of 

1,349 mt by 106 mt, or 8 percent. 2009 

was the first year that longnose skate 

was managed with a species-specific 

harvest specification and was therefore 

required to be sorted by species for 

catch accounting against the OY. Until 

2009, the best available catch 

information indicated that catch of 

longnose skate was only about 800 mt 

per year. The trip limit that the Council 

recommended in June 2010 for longnose 

skate, a non-IFQ species, for 2011 was 

‘‘Not limited,’’ based on the information 

on catch and discards that was available 

at the time, which indicated that a trip 

limit was unnecessary with a proposed 

harvest level of 1,349 mt. In 2009, only 

about 800 mt of longnose skate were 

landed, so much of the additional 

mortality was from discarding, bringing 

the total mortality above the 2009 OY. 

Trip limits, or landing allowances have 

a limited ability to control total 

mortality; they directly affect the 

amount of fish that may be landed, and 

may have indirect effects on whether 

vessels will target a species if the trip 

limit is low. However, with much of the 

mortality of longnose skate coming from 

discards at sea, trip limits may be less 

effective at keeping total mortality of 

longnose skate below the OY. 

Additional analysis of available 

observer data may provide additional 

information on the management 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82299 

measures that may be necessary to keep 

total mortality of longnose skate within 

the harvest specifications; however 

there was not sufficient time between 

receiving the 2009 total mortality report 

in November 2010 to develop and 

implement those measures in this 

interim emergency rulemaking. The 

total mortality of longnose skate in 2009 

was well below the ABC (only 48 

percent of the ABC), therefore the risk 

of overfishing in 2011 if no action were 

taken is very low. Therefore, the 

Council recommended keeping an 

interim landing allowance for longnose 

skate at ‘‘Not limited’’ for the start of 

2011 and continuing analysis of 

potential management measures for 

longnose skate that can be implemented 

inseason during 2011 to keep the total 

mortality within the 2011 harvest 

specifications. 

The Council also considered 

adjustments to the boundaries of the 

trawl RCA for the start of 2011. In June 

2010, the Council recommended that 

the trawl RCA boundaries that were 

scheduled for the 2010 calendar year, as 

of June 2010, be in place for 2011 as 

well. The Council considered extending 

the seaward boundary of the trawl RCA 

seaward to close some deeper areas 

where darkblotched rockfish are 

encountered, given concerns with 

higher than anticipated darkblotched 

rockfish mortality in 2010. However, 

given the personal accountability 

features offered by a rationalized 

fishery, the Council did not recommend 

additional restrictions for the trawl RCA 

implemented by this rule. 

No changes to management measures 

are being made for non-trawl 

commercial fisheries or recreational 

fisheries; however, the titles for the trip 

limit tables that are not otherwise 

revised by this interim rule are re-titled 

to reflect their ongoing effectiveness. 

Therefore, the Council recommended 

and NMFS is implementing changes to 

the trip limits and RCA boundaries in 

Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) to 

subpart D. These changes will establish 

landing allowances for non-IFQ species 

and Pacific whiting outside the primary 

season and will adjust the trawl RCA 

boundaries. NMFS is also implementing 

changes to §§ 660.60 and 660.130 to 

remove obsolete language about trip 

limits in the trawl fishery, which are 

being removed for IFQ species in this 

interim rule. NMFS acknowledges that 

some obsolete language regarding trip 

limits, crossover provisions, and varying 

trip limits based on the gear type that is 

used will remain in regulations. NMFS 

intends to issue a follow-up rulemaking 

that will remove or revise outdated 

language that is outside of the scope of 

this interim rule. Also, NMFS is 

implementing revisions to the titles of 

Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) to Part 

660, subpart E and to Tables 3 (North) 

and 3 (South) to Part 660, subpart F, to 

reflect the ongoing effectiveness of the 

trip limits contained therein. 

Classification 

These interim measures are issued 

under the authority of, and are 

consistent with section 305(c)(1) of, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act and 

regulations at 50 CFR part 660, subparts 

C through G (the groundfish regulations 

implementing the FMP). 

The Assistant Administrator 

Fisheries, NOAA (AA) finds good cause 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive the 

requirement for prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment, as 

such procedures are impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest. 

In June 2010, the Council 

recommended, and NMFS is working to 

implement, specifications and 

management measures for the 2011– 

2012 biennium. Given the complexity of 

the biennial specifications and 

management measures, the need for 

adequate NEPA-related documents and 

public review periods, and competing 

workloads, NMFS did not have enough 

time to implement a final rule by 

January 1, 2011. In light of the delay in 

availability of the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures rulemaking, the interim 

measures set out in this rule are 

necessary to implement the trawl 

rationalization program in January 2011 

without causing risk of overfishing or 

the need for potentially severe 

restrictions to fishery management 

measures later in the year to prevent the 

final harvest specifications or 

allocations for 2011 from being 

exceeded. 

It is in the public interest to reduce 

the harvest level for sablefish for the 

beginning of 2011. Failure to implement 

an interim harvest level reduction by 

January 1, 2011 would prevent NMFS 

from having the ability to take routine 

inseason action, if necessary, to keep 

projected mortality below the sablefish 

harvest level during the interim period 

(between January 1, 2011 and when the 

final 2011 harvest specifications are 

implemented) and would risk premature 

closure of fisheries that are important to 

coastal communities, which would fail 

to meet the objectives of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish FMP to allow for year 

round fishing opportunities to provide 

community stability. This is 

contradictory to one of the goals of the 

FMP to keep year round fishing 

opportunities for target stocks. 

It is also in the public interest to issue 

QP for IFQ species as described in this 

interim emergency rule by January 1, 

2011. For some species for which the 

final 2011 harvest level may be lower 

than in 2010, without this rule, the 

rationalized trawl fishery would receive 

total QP that could: (1) Preclude fishing 

for such species in other non-trawl 

sectors (e.g., sablefish); or (2) exceed the 

final 2011 harvest specifications when 

they are implemented later in the year 

(e.g., petrale sole). Failure to implement 

interim QP for IFQ species would keep 

harvest levels for the trawl fishery in 

place that are not based on the best 

available data and would risk premature 

closure of fisheries that are important to 

coastal communities, which would fail 

to meet the objectives of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish FMP to allow for year 

round fishing opportunities to provide 

community stability. 

It is also in the public interest to 

revise the calculation method for Pacific 

halibut IBQ pounds. New information 

was received by the Council at its 

November 2010 meeting indicating that 

the proportion of sublegal sized halibut 

to legal sized halibut in bycatch of the 

limited entry trawl fishery was higher 

than the Council had realized when the 

IBQ pound provisions were adopted. 

There was not sufficient time after that 

meeting to draft this document and 

undergo proposed and final rulemaking 

before these actions need to be in effect. 

It would be contrary to the public 

interest to wait to implement these 

changes until after public notice and 

comment, because making this 

regulatory change quickly allows 

additional harvest in fisheries that are 

important to coastal communities. 

Failure to implement an interim 

calculation method for Pacific halibut 

IBQ would keep regulations in place 

that are not based on the best available 

data and could lead to early closures of 

the fishery because such regulations 

would result in issuance of fewer IBQ 

pounds than the target set by the 

Council. Premature closure of fisheries 

that are important to coastal 

communities would fail to meet the 

objectives of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish FMP to allow for year round 

fishing opportunities to provide 

community stability. 

It is also in the public interest to 

adjust RCAs and landing allowances for 

non-IFQ species. RCAs are important to 

facilitate rebuilding of overfished 

species. Failure to adjust interim trawl 

RCAs would keep regulations in place 

that are not based on the best available 

data, as they were not specifically 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
82300 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

developed for use in a rationalized trawl 

fishery. This would be contrary to the 

public interest and with the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish FMP to rebuild 

overfished species while allowing for 

harvest opportunities to support local 

communities. Failure to remove trip 

limits for IFQ species would cause 

duplicative regulations, where vessels 

would be fishing for their QP for IFQ 

species and would then also be 

restricted by trip limits. This would be 

very confusing to the regulated public. 

Removal of trip limits for IFQ species 

relieves an unnecessary restriction and 

allows flexibility for vessels fishing IFQ 

species. 

For the same reasons, NMFS finds 

good cause to waive the 30-day delay in 

effectiveness pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3), so that this final rule may 

become effective on January 1, 2011. 

Because notice and opportunity for 

comment are not required pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 553 or any other law, the 

analytical requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) are inapplicable. Therefore, a 

regulatory flexibility analysis is not 

required and has not been prepared. 

This interim rule has been determined 

to be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

A Regulatory Impact Review was 

completed and is available upon request 

from the NMFS, Northwest Region (see 

ADDRESSES). 

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. 

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. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 

Fisheries, Fishing, and Indian 

fisheries. 

Dated: December 22, 2010. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR Chapter VI is 

amended as follows: 

50 CFR Chapter VI 

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 660 

continues to read as follows: 

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

U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 

Subpart C—West Coast Groundfish 

Fisheries 

■ 2. In § 660.50, paragraph (f)(2)(ii) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.50 Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

fisheries. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) The Tribal allocation is set at 543 

mt as an interim measure until the 2011 

harvest specifications are finalized. This 

allocation is 10 percent of the Monterey 

through Vancouver area (North of 36° N. 

lat.) OY, less 1.6 percent estimated 

discard mortality. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 660.55, paragraph (m) is 

revised to read as follows: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82301 

§ 660.55 Allocations. 

* * * * * 

(m) Pacific halibut bycatch allocation. 

The Pacific halibut fishery off 

Washington, Oregon and California 

(Area 2A in the halibut regulations) is 

managed under regulations at 50 CFR 

part 300, subpart E. Beginning with the 

2011–2012 biennial specifications 

process, the PCGFMP sets a trawl 

mortality bycatch limit for legal size 

halibut of 130,000 pounds, net weight, 

for the first four years of trawl 

rationalization and not to exceed 

100,000 pounds starting in the fifth 

year. This total bycatch limit may be 

adjusted downward or upward through 

the biennial specifications and 

management measures process. Part of 

the overall total catch limit is a set-aside 

of 10 mt of Pacific halibut (legal and 

sublegal, round weight), to 

accommodate bycatch in the at-sea 

Pacific whiting fishery and in the 

shorebased trawl fishery south of 40°10′ 

N. lat. (estimated to be approximately 5 

mt each). 

■ 4. In § 660.60, paragraphs (h)(7) 

introductory text and (h)(7)(i) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.60 Specifications and management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(7) Crossover provisions. NMFS uses 

different types of management areas for 

West Coast groundfish management. 

One type of management area is the 

north-south management area, a large 

ocean area with northern and southern 

boundary lines wherein trip limits, 

seasons, and conservation areas follow a 

single theme. Within each north-south 

management area, there may be one or 

more conservation areas, defined at 

§ 660.11 and §§ 660.60 through 660.74, 

subpart C. The provisions within this 

paragraph apply to vessels operating in 

different north-south management areas. 

Crossover provisions also apply to 

vessels that fish in both the limited 

entry and open access fisheries, or that 

use open access non-trawl gear while 

registered to limited entry fixed gear 

permits. Fishery specific crossover 

provisions can be found in subparts D 

through F of this part. 

(i) Operating in north-south 

management areas with different trip 

limits. Trip limits for a species or a 

species group may differ in different 

north-south management areas along the 

coast. The following crossover 

provisions apply to vessels operating in 

different geographical areas that have 

different cumulative or ‘‘per trip’’ trip 

limits for the same species or species 

group. Such crossover provisions do not 

apply to: IFQ species defined at 

§ 660.140(c), subpart D, for vessels that 

are declared into the shorebased IFQ 

sector (see 660.13 (d)(5)(iv)(A) for valid 

shorebased IFQ declaration reports), 

species that are subject only to daily trip 

limits, or to the trip limits for black 

rockfish off Washington, as described at 

§ 660.230(d), subpart E and § 660.330(e), 

subpart F. 

* * * * * 

■ 5a. Table 2a to part 660, subpart C is 

revised to read as follows: 

* * * * * 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.000</GPH>
82302 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.001</GPH> ER30DE10.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82303 

■ 5b. Table 2c to part 660, subpart C and 

footnotes a through ll to Table 2c are 

revised to read as follows: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

a/ ABCs apply only to the U.S. portion of 

the Vancouver area. 

b/ Optimum Yields (OYs) and Harvest 

Guidelines (HGs) are specified as total catch 

values. A harvest guideline is a specified 

harvest target and not a quota. The use of this 

term may differ from the use of similar terms 

in State regulation. 

c/ Lingcod—A coastwide lingcod stock 

assessment was prepared in 2005. The 

lingcod biomass was estimated to be at 64 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2005. The ABC of 4,829 mt was calculated 

using an FMSY proxy of F45%. Because the 

stock is above B40% coastwide, the 

coastwide OY was set equal to the ABC. The 

Tribal harvest guideline is 250 mt. 

d/ ‘‘Other species’’—These species are 

neither common nor important to the 

commercial and recreational fisheries in the 

areas footnoted. Accordingly, these species 

are included in the harvest guidelines of 

‘‘other fish’’, ‘‘other rockfish’’ or ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’. 

e/ Pacific Cod—The 3,200 mt ABC for the 

Vancouver-Columbia area is based on 

historical landings data. The 1,600 mt OY is 

the ABC reduced by 50 percent as a 

precautionary adjustment. A Tribal harvest 

guideline of 400 mt is deducted from the OY 

resulting in a commercial OY of 1,200 mt. 

f/ Pacific whiting—The most recent stock 

assessment was prepared in January 2010. 

The stock assessment base model estimated 

the Pacific whiting biomass to be at 31 

percent (50th percentile estimate of 

depletion) of its unfished biomass in 2010. 

The U.S.-Canada coastwide ABC is 455,550 

mt, the U.S. share of the ABC is 336,560 mt 

(73.88 percent of the coastwide ABC). The 

U.S.-Canada coastwide Pacific whiting OY is 

262,500 mt, with a corresponding U.S. OY of 

193,935 mt. The Tribal allocation is 49,939 

mt. The amount estimated to be taken as 

research catch and in non-groundfish 

fisheries is 3,000 mt. The commercial OY is 

140,996 mt. Each sector receives a portion of 

the commercial OY, with the catcher/ 

processors getting 34 percent (47,939 mt), 

motherships getting 24 percent (33,839 mt), 

and the shore-based sector getting 42 percent 

(59,218 mt). No more than 2,961 mt (5 

percent of the shore-based allocation) may be 

taken in the fishery south of 42° N. lat. prior 

to the start of the primary season for the 

shorebased fishery north of 42° N. lat. 

g/ Sablefish—A coastwide sablefish stock 

assessment was prepared in 2007. The 

coastwide sablefish biomass was estimated to 

be at 38.3 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The 2010 coastwide ABC of 9,217 mt 

was based on the new stock assessment with 

a FMSY proxy of F45%. The 40–10 harvest 

policy was applied to the ABC, then 

apportioned between the northern and 

southern areas with 28 percent going to the 

area south of 36° N. lat. The OY for the area 

north of 36° N. lat. is set at 5,515 mt as an 

interim measure until the 2011 harvest 

specifications are finalized. When 

establishing the OY for the area south of 36° 

N. lat. a 50 percent reduction was made 

resulting in a Conception area OY of 1,258 

mt. The Tribal allocation for the area north 

of 36° N. lat. is set at 552 mt (10 percent of 

the OY north of 36° N. lat.) as an interim 

measure until the 2011 harvest specifications 

are finalized, which is further reduced by 1.6 

percent to account for discard mortality. The 

Tribal landed catch value is set at 543 mt as 

an interim measure until the 2011 harvest 

specifications are finalized. 

h/ Cabezon south of 42° N. lat. was 

assessed in 2005. The Cabezon stock was 

estimated to be at 40 percent of its unfished 

biomass north of 34° 27′ N. lat. and 28 

percent of its unfished biomass south of 34° 

27′ N. lat. in 2005. The ABC of 111 mt is 

based on the 2005 stock assessment with a 

harvest rate proxy of F45%. The OY of 79 mt 

is consistent with the application of a 60–20 

harvest rate policy specified in the California 

Nearshore Fishery Management Plan. 

i/ Dover sole north of 34° 27′ N. lat. was 

assessed in 2005. The Dover sole biomass 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.003</GPH>
82304 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

was estimated to be at 59.8 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2005 and was projected 

to be increasing. The ABC of 28,582 mt is 

based on the results of the 2005 assessment 

with an FMSY proxy of F40%. Because the 

stock is above B40% coastwide, the OY could 

be set equal to the ABC. The OY of 16,500 

mt is less than the ABC. The OY is set at the 

MSY harvest level which is considerably 

larger than the coastwide catches in any 

recent years. 

j/ A coastwide English sole stock 

assessment was prepared in 2005 and 

updated in 2007. The stock was estimated to 

be at 116 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The stock biomass is believed to be 

declining. The ABC of 9,745 mt is based on 

the results of the 2007 assessment update 

with an FMSY proxy of F40%. Because the 

stock is above B40%, the OY was set equal 

to the ABC. 

k/ A petrale sole stock assessment was 

prepared for 2005. In 2005 the petrale sole 

stock was estimated to be at 32 percent of its 

unfished biomass coastwide (34 percent in 

the northern assessment area and 29 percent 

in the southern assessment area). The 2010 

ABC of 2,751 mt is based on the 2005 

assessment with a F40% FMSY proxy. To 

derive the 2010 OY, the 40–10 harvest policy 

was applied to the ABC for both the northern 

and southern assessment areas. As a 

precautionary measure, an additional 25 

percent reduction was made in the OY 

contribution for the southern area due to 

assessment uncertainty. As another 

precautionary measure, an additional 1,193 

mt reduction was made in the coastwide OY 

due to preliminary results of the more 

pessimistic 2009 stock assessment. The 

coastwide OY is 1,200 mt in 2010. 

l/ Arrowtooth flounder was assessed in 

2007 and was estimated to be at 79 percent 

of its unfished biomass in 2007. Because the 

stock is above B40%, the OY is set equal to 

the ABC. 

m/ Starry Flounder was assessed for the 

first time in 2005 and was estimated to be 

above 40 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2005. However, the stock was projected to 

decline below 40 percent in both the 

northern and southern areas after 2008. For 

2010, the coastwide ABC of 1,578 mt is based 

on the 2005 assessment with a FMSY proxy 

of F40%. To derive the OY of 1,077 mt, the 

40–10 harvest policy was applied to the ABC 

for both the northern and southern 

assessment areas then an additional 25 

percent reduction was made due to 

assessment uncertainty. 

n/ ‘‘Other flatfish’’ are those flatfish species 

that do not have individual ABC/OYs and 

include butter sole, curlfin sole, flathead 

sole, Pacific sanddab, rex sole, rock sole, and 

sand sole. The other flatfish ABC is based on 

historical catch levels. The ABC of 6,731 mt 

is based on the highest landings for sanddabs 

(1995) and rex sole (1982) for the 1981–2003 

period and on the average landings from the 

1994–1998 period for the remaining other 

flatfish species. The OY of 4,884 mt is based 

on the ABC with a 25 percent precautionary 

adjustment for sanddabs and rex sole and a 

50 percent precautionary adjustment for the 

remaining species. 

o/ A POP stock assessment was prepared 

in 2005 and was updated in 2007. The stock 

assessment update estimated the stock to be 

at 27.5 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The ABC of 1,173 mt for the Vancouver 

and Columbia areas is based on the 2007 

stock assessment update with an FMSY 

proxy of F50%. The OY of 200 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2017 and an SPR harvest rate of 

86.4 percent. The OY is reduced by 2.0 mt 

for the amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity and 0.14 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. 

p/ Shortbelly rockfish remains an 

unexploited stock and is difficult to assess 

quantitatively. To understand the potential 

environmental determinants of fluctuations 

in the recruitment and abundance of an 

unexploited rockfish population in the 

California Current ecosystem, a nonquantitative assessment was conducted in 

2007. The results of the assessment indicated 

the shortbelly stock was healthy with an 

estimated spawning stock biomass at 67 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC and OY are being set at 6,950 mt which 

is 50 percent of the 2008 ABC and OY values. 

The stock is expected to remain at its current 

equilibrium with these harvest specifications. 

q/ Widow rockfish was assessed in 2005, 

and an update was prepared in 2007. The 

stock assessment update estimated the stock 

to be at 36.2 percent of its unfished biomass 

in 2006. The ABC of 6,937 mt is based on the 

stock assessment update with an F50% 

FMSY proxy. The OY of 509 mt is based on 

a rebuilding plan with a target year to rebuild 

of 2015 and an SPR harvest rate of 95 

percent. To derive the commercial harvest 

guideline of 447.4 mt, the OY is reduced by 

1.1 mt for the amount anticipated to be taken 

during research activity, 45.5 mt for the 

Tribal set-aside, 7.2 mt the amount estimated 

to be taken in the recreational fisheries, 0.4 

mt for the amount expected to be taken 

incidentally in non-groundfish fisheries, and 

7.4 mt for EFP fishing activities. 

r/ Canary rockfish—A canary rockfish 

stock assessment was completed in 2007 and 

the stock was estimated to be at 32.7 percent 

of its unfished biomass coastwide in 2007. 

The coastwide ABC of 940 mt is based on a 

FMSY proxy of F50%. The OY of 105 mt is 

based on a rebuilding plan with a target year 

to rebuild of 2021 and a SPR harvest rate of 

88.7 percent. To derive the commercial 

harvest guideline of 42.3 mt, the OY is 

reduced by 8.0 mt for the amount anticipated 

to be taken during research activity, 7.3 mt 

the Tribal set-aside, 43.8 mt the amount 

estimated to be taken in the recreational 

fisheries, 0.9 mt for the amount expected to 

be taken incidentally in non-groundfish 

fisheries, and 2.7 mt for the amount expected 

to be taken during EFP fishing. The following 

harvest guidelines are being specified for 

catch sharing in 2009: 19.7 mt for limited 

entry Non-Whiting Trawl, 18.0 mt for limited 

entry Whiting Trawl, 2.2 mt for limited entry 

fixed gear, 2.5 mt for directed open access, 

4.9 mt for Washington recreational, 16.0 mt 

for Oregon recreational, and 22.9 mt for 

California recreational. 

s/ Chilipepper rockfish was assessed in 

2007 and the stock was estimated to be at 71 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2007. The ABC of 2,576 mt is based on the 

new assessment with an FMSY proxy of 

F50%. Because the unfished biomass is 

estimated to be above 40 percent of the 

unfished biomass, the default OY could be 

set equal to the ABC. However, the OY of 

2,447 mt was the ABC reduced by 5 percent 

as a precautionary measure. Open access is 

allocated 44.3 percent (1,084 mt) of the 

commercial HG and limited entry is allocated 

55.7 percent (1,363 mt) of the commercial 

HG. 

t/ A bocaccio stock assessment and a 

rebuilding analysis were prepared in 2007. 

The bocaccio stock was estimated to be at 

13.8 percent of its unfished biomass in 2007. 

The ABC of 793 mt for the MontereyConception area is based on the new stock 

assessment with an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

The OY of 288 is based on a rebuilding plan 

with a target year to rebuild of 2026 and a 

SPR harvest rate of 77.7 percent. To derive 

the commercial harvest guideline of 206.4 

mt, the OY is reduced by 2.0 mt for the 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity, 67.3 mt for the amount 

estimated to be taken in the recreational 

fisheries, 1.3 mt for the amount expected to 

be taken incidentally in non-groundfish 

fisheries, and 11.0 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. 

u/ Splitnose rockfish—The ABC is 615 mt 

in the Monterey-Conception area. The 461 mt 

OY for the area reflects a 25 percent 

precautionary adjustment because of the less 

rigorous stock assessment for this stock. In 

the north (Vancouver, Columbia and Eureka 

areas), splitnose is included within the minor 

slope rockfish OY. Because the harvest 

assumptions used to forecast future harvest 

were likely overestimates, carrying the 

previously used ABCs and OYs forward into 

2010 was considered to be conservative and 

based on the best available data. 

v/ Yellowtail rockfish—A yellowtail 

rockfish stock assessment was prepared in 

2005 for the Vancouver, Columbia, Eureka 

areas. Yellowtail rockfish was estimated to be 

above 40 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2005. The ABC of 4,562 mt is based on the 

2005 stock assessment with the FMSY proxy 

of F50%. The OY of 4,562 mt was set equal 

to the ABC, because the stock is above the 

precautionary threshold of B40%. 

w/ Shortspine thornyhead was assessed in 

2005 and the stock was estimated to be at 63 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC of 2,411 mt is based on a 

F50%FMSYproxy. For that portion of the 

stock (66 percent of the biomass) north of 

Point Conception (34° 27′ N. lat.), the OY of 

1,591 mt was set at equal to the ABC because 

the stock is estimated to be above the 

precautionary threshold. For that portion of 

the stock south of 34° 27′ N. lat. (34 percent 

of the biomass), the OY of 410 mt was the 

portion of the ABC for the area reduced by 

50 percent as a precautionary adjustment due 

to the short duration and amount of survey 

data for that area. 

x/ Longspine thornyhead was assessed 

coastwide in 2005 and the stock was 

estimated to be at 71 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2005. The coastwide ABC of 3,671 

mt is based on a F50%FMSYproxy. The OY 

is set equal to the ABC because the stock is 

above the precautionary threshold. Separate 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82305 

OYs are being established for the areas north 

and south of 34° 27′ N. lat. (Point 

Conception). The OY of 2,175 mt for that 

portion of the stock in the northern area (79 

percent) was the ABC reduced by 25 percent 

as a precautionary adjustment. For that 

portion of the stock in the southern area (21 

percent), the OY of 385 mt was the portion 

of the ABC for the area reduced by 50 percent 

as a precautionary adjustment due to the 

short duration and amount of survey data for 

that area. 

y/ Cowcod in the Conception area was 

assessed in 2007 and the stock was estimated 

to be between 3.4 to 16.3 percent of its 

unfished biomass. The ABC for the Monterey 

and Conception areas is 14 mt and is based 

on the 2007 rebuilding analysis in which the 

Conception area stock assessment projection 

was doubled to account for both areas. A 

single OY of 4 mt is being set for both areas. 

The OY of 4 mt is based on the need to 

conform the 2010 cowcod harvest 

specifications to the Court’s Order in Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. Locke, Civil 

Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The amount 

anticipated to be taken during scientific 

research activity is 0.2 mt and the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP activity is 

0.24 mt. 

z/ Darkblotched rockfish was assessed in 

2007 and a rebuilding analysis was prepared. 

The new stock assessment estimated the 

stock to be at 22.4 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2007. The ABC is projected to be 

440 mt and is based on the 2007 stock 

assessment with an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

The OY of 330 mt is based on the need to 

conform the 2010 darkblotched rockfish 

harvest specifications to the Court’s Order in 

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Locke, 

Civil Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The amount 

anticipated to be taken during scientific 

research activity is 2.0 mt and the amount 

anticipated to be taken during EFP activity is 

0.95 mt. 

aa/ Yelloweye rockfish was fully assessed 

in 2006 and an assessment update was 

completed in 2007. The 2007 stock 

assessment update estimated the spawning 

stock biomass in 2006 to be at 14 percent of 

its unfished biomass coastwide. The 32 mt 

coastwide ABC was derived from the base 

model in the new stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50%. The 14 mt OY is based 

on the need to conform the 2010 yelloweye 

rockfish harvest specifications to the Court’s 

Order in Natural Resources Defense Council 

v. Locke, Civil Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

scientific research activity is 1.3 mt, the 

amount anticipated to be taken in the Tribal 

fisheries is 2.3 mt, and the amount 

anticipated to be taken incidentally in nongroundfish fisheries is 0.3 mt. The catch 

sharing harvest guidelines for yelloweye 

rockfish in 2010 are: Limited entry nonwhiting trawl 0.3 mt, limited entry whiting 

0.0 mt, limited entry fixed gear 0.8 mt, 

directed open access 1.2 mt, Washington 

recreational 2.6 mt, Oregon recreational 2.3 

mt, California recreational 2.7 mt, and 0.2 mt 

for exempted fishing. 

bb/ California Scorpionfish south of 34° 27′ 

N. lat. (point Conception) was assessed in 

2005 and was estimated to be above 40 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC of 155 mt is based on the new 

assessment with a harvest rate proxy of 

F50%. Because the stock is above 

B40%coastwide, the OY is set equal to the 

ABC. 

cc/ New assessments were prepared for 

black rockfish south of 45° 56.00 N. lat. (Cape 

Falcon, Oregon) and for black rockfish north 

of Cape Falcon. The ABC for the area north 

of 46° 16′ N. lat. (Washington) is 464 mt (97 

percent) of the 478 mt ABC contribution from 

the northern assessment area. The ABC for 

the area south of 46° 16′ N. lat. (Oregon and 

California) is 1,317 mt which is the sum of 

a contribution of 14 mt (3 percent) from the 

northern area assessment, and 1,303 mt from 

the southern area assessment. The ABCs were 

derived using an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

Because both portions of the stock are above 

40 percent, the OYs could be set equal to the 

ABCs. For the area north of 46°16′ N. lat., the 

OY of 490 mt is set equal to the ABC. The 

following Tribal harvest guidelines are being 

set: 30,000 lb (13.6 mt) north of Cape Alava, 

WA (48° 09.50′ N. lat.) and 10,000 lb (4.5 mt) 

between Destruction Island, WA (47° 40′ N. 

lat.) and Leadbetter Point, WA (46° 38.17′ N. 

lat.) For the area south of 46° 16′ N. lat., the 

OY of 1,000 mt is a constant harvest level. 

The black rockfish OY in the area south of 

46° 16′ N. lat., is subdivided with separate 

HGs being set for the area north of 42° N. lat. 

(580 mt/58 percent) and for the area south of 

42° N. lat. (420 mt/42 percent). 

dd/ Minor rockfish north includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Vancouver, Columbia, and 

Eureka areas combined. These species 

include ‘‘remaining rockfish’’, which 

generally includes species that have been 

assessed by less rigorous methods than stock 

assessments, and ‘‘other rockfish’’, which 

includes species that do not have 

quantifiable stock assessments. Blue rockfish 

has been removed from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

and added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC of 3,678 mt is the sum of the individual 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other 

rockfish’’ ABCs. The remaining rockfish 

ABCs continue to be reduced by 25 percent 

(F = 0.75M) as a precautionary adjustment. 

To obtain the total catch OY of 2,283 mt, the 

remaining rockfish ABCs were further 

reduced by 25 percent and other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure to address limited 

stock assessment information. 

ee/ Minor rockfish south includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Monterey and Conception 

areas combined. These species include 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ which generally 

includes species that have been assessed by 

less rigorous methods than stock assessment, 

and ‘‘other rockfish’’ which includes species 

that do not have quantifiable stock 

assessments. Blue rockfish has been removed 

from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ and added to the 

remaining rockfish. The ABC of 3,382 mt is 

the sum of the individual ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

ABCs. The remaining rockfish ABCs continue 

to be reduced by 25 percent (F = 0.75M) as 

a precautionary adjustment. The remaining 

rockfish ABCs are further reduced by 25 

percent, with the exception of blackgill 

rockfish (see footnote gg). The other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure due to limited stock 

assessment information. The resulting minor 

rockfish OY is 1,990 mt. 

ff/ Bank rockfish—The ABC is 350 mt 

which is based on a 2000 stock assessment 

for the Monterey and Conception areas. This 

stock contributes 263 mt towards the minor 

rockfish OY in the south. 

gg/ Blackgill rockfish in the Monterey and 

Conception areas was assessed in 2005 and 

is estimated to be at 49.9 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2008. The ABC of 292 

mt for the Monterey and Conception areas is 

based on the 2005 stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50% and is the two year 

average ABC for the 2007 and 2008 periods. 

This stock contributes 292 mt towards minor 

rockfish south. 

hh/ ‘‘Other rockfish’’ includes rockfish 

species listed in 50 CFR 660.302. A new 

stock assessment was conducted for blue 

rockfish in 2007. As a result of the new stock 

assessment, the blue rockfish contribution to 

the other rockfish group, of 30 mt in the 

north and 232 mt in the south, are removed. 

A new contribution of 28 mt contribution in 

the north and 202 mt contribution in the 

south is added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC for the remaining species is based on 

historical data from a 1996 review landings 

and includes an estimate of recreational 

landings. Most of these species have never 

been assessed quantitatively. 

ii/ Longnose skate was fully assessed in 

2006 and an assessment update was 

completed in 2007. The ABC of 3,428 is 

based on the 2007 with an FMSY proxy of 

F45%. Longnose skate was previously 

managed as part of the Other Fish complex. 

The 2009 OY of 1,349 mt is a precautionary 

OY based on historical total catch increased 

by 50 percent. 

jj/ ‘‘Other fish’’ includes sharks, skates, 

rays, ratfish, morids, grenadiers, kelp 

greenling, and other groundfish species noted 

above in footnote d/. The longnose skate 

contribution is being removed from this 

complex. 

kk/ Sablefish allocation north of 36° N. 

lat.—The limited entry allocation is further 

divided with 58 percent allocated to the 

trawl fishery and 42 percent allocated to the 

fixed-gear fishery. 

ll/ Specific open access/limited entry 

allocations specified in the FMP have been 

suspended during the rebuilding period as 

necessary to meet the overall rebuilding 

target while allowing harvest of healthy 

stocks. 

Subpart D—West Coast Groundfish— 

Limited Entry Trawl Fisheries 

■ 6. In § 660.130, paragraphs (c) 

introductory text and (c)(4)(ii)(B) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.130 Trawl fishery—management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(c) Prohibitions by limited entry trawl 

gear type. Management measures may 

vary depending on the type of trawl gear 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
82306 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(i.e., large footrope, small footrope, 

selective flatfish, or midwater trawl 

gear) used and/or on board a vessel 

during a fishing trip, cumulative limit 

period, and the area fished. Trawl nets 

may be used on and off the seabed. For 

some species or species groups, Table 1 

(North) and Table 1 (South) of this 

subpart provide trip limits that are 

specific to different types of trawl gear: 

large footrope, small footrope (including 

selective flatfish), selective flatfish, 

midwater, and multiple types. If Table 

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

subpart provide gear specific limits for 

a particular species or species group, it 

is unlawful to take and retain, possess 

or land that species or species group 

with limited entry trawl gears other than 

those listed. 

* * * * * 

(4) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) For vessels using more than one 

type of trawl gear during a cumulative 

limit period, limits are additive up to 

the largest limit for the type of gear used 

during that period. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 660.140, as amended at 75 

FR 78391, December 15, 2010, is further 

amended by revising paragraph 

(d)(1)(ii)(C) and adding paragraph 

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

§ 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(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 IFQ Program 

component of the trawl mortality limit 

for that year (expressed in net weight), 

dividing by 0.75 to convert to round 

weight pounds, and dividing by 0.62 to 

convert from legal sized to legal and 

non-legal sized halibut. Consistent with 

§ 660.55(m), the Shorebased IFQ 

Program component of the trawl 

mortality limit will be 130,000 pounds 

of legal size halibut, net weight 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. lat. 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) For the start of the 2011 trawl 

fishery, NMFS will issue QP based on 

the following shorebased trawl 

allocations: 

IFQ species Management area 

Shorebased 

trawl allocation 

(mt) 

Lingcod ................................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 1,863.30 

Pacific cod .............................................................. ......................................................................................................................... 1,135.00 

Pacific Whiting ........................................................ ......................................................................................................................... 18,467.00 

Sablefish ................................................................. North of 36° N. lat. ......................................................................................... 2,546.34 

Sablefish ................................................................. South of 36° N. lat. ......................................................................................... 514.08 

Dover sole .............................................................. ......................................................................................................................... 14,159.50 

English sole ............................................................ ......................................................................................................................... 9,157.75 

PETRALE SOLE .................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 860.07 

Arrowtooth flounder ................................................ ......................................................................................................................... 7,622.30 

Starry flounder ........................................................ ......................................................................................................................... 530.00 

Other flatfish ........................................................... ......................................................................................................................... 4,197.40 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH ...................................... North of 40°10′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 119.36 

WIDOW ROCKFISH ............................................... ......................................................................................................................... 282.55 

CANARY ROCKFISH ............................................. ......................................................................................................................... 25.90 

Chilipepper rockfish ................................................ South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 1,475.25 

BOCACCIO ROCKFISH ......................................... South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 60.00 

Splitnose rockfish ................................................... South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 431.30 

Yellowtail rockfish ................................................... North of 40°10′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 3,094.16 

Shortspine thornyhead ........................................... North of 34°27′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 1,431.60 

Shortspine thornyhead ........................................... South of 34°27′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 50.00 

Longspine thornyhead ............................................ North of 34°27′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 1,966.25 

COWCOD ............................................................... South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 1.35 

DARKBLOTCHED ROCKFISH .............................. ......................................................................................................................... 250.84 

YELLOWEYE ROCKFISH ...................................... ......................................................................................................................... 0.30 

Minor shelf rockfish complex .................................. North of 40°10′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 522.00 

Minor shelf rockfish complex .................................. South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 86.00 

Minor slope rockfish complex ................................. North of 40°10′ N. lat. ..................................................................................... 829.52 

Minor slope rockfish complex ................................. South of 40°10′ N. lat. .................................................................................... 377.37 

■ 8. Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) 

to part 660, subpart D are revised to read 

as follows: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82307 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.004</GPH>
82308 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 9. Table 2 (North) and Table 2 (South) 

to part 660, subpart E are revised to read 

as follows: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.005</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82309 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.006</GPH>
82310 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.007</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82311 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.008</GPH>
82312 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 10. Table 3 (North) and Table 3 

(South) to part 660, subpart F are 

revised to read as follows: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.009</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82313 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.010</GPH>
82314 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 82315 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.012</GPH>
82316 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2010–32833 Filed 12–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with RULESER30DE10.013</GPH> ER30DE10.014</GPH>