Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 47545 

value of the portion and how frequently 

the portion is used by the species. In 

addition, the portion may contribute to 

resiliency for other reasons—for 

instance, it may contain an important 

concentration of certain types of habitat 

that are necessary for the species to 

carry out its life history functions, such 

as breeding, feeding, migration, 

dispersal, or wintering. 

Redundancy of populations may be 

needed to provide a margin of safety for 

the species to withstand catastrophic 

events. This does not mean that any 

portion that provides redundancy is a 

significant portion of the range of a 

species. The idea is to conserve enough 

areas of the range such that random 

perturbations in the system act on only 

a few populations. Therefore, each area 

must be examined based on whether 

that area provides an increment of 

redundancy that is important to the 

conservation of the species. 

Adequate representation insures that 

the species’ adaptive capabilities are 

conserved. Specifically, the portion 

should be evaluated to see how it 

contributes to the genetic diversity of 

the species. The loss of genetic diversity 

may substantially reduce the ability of 

the species to respond and adapt to 

future environmental changes. A 

peripheral population may contribute 

meaningfully to representation if there 

is evidence that it provides genetic 

diversity due to its location on the 

margin of the species’ habitat 

requirements. 

Based upon factors that contribute to 

our analysis of whether a species or 

subspecies is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of 

its range, and in consideration of the 

status of, and threats to, the Bliss Rapids 

snail discussed previously, we find that 

the primary threats to the continued 

existence of the Bliss Rapids snail occur 

throughout all of its range. Therefore, it 

is not necessary to conduct further 

analysis with respect to the significance 

of any portion of its range. 

Finding 

On the basis of the best available 

scientific and commercial information, 

as discussed above, we find that the 

Bliss Rapids snail is likely to become 

endangered within the foreseeable 

future (i.e., it is threatened, as defined 

by the Act). Therefore, removing the 

Bliss Rapids snail from the List is not 

warranted. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

herein is available upon request from 

the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Author 

The primary authors of this document 

are the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Authority 

The authority for this action is the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

Dated: August 26, 2009. 

Daniel M. Ashe, 

Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–21949 Filed 9–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 0907281183–91184–01] 

RIN 0648–AX98 

Fisheries off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Data 

Collection for the Trawl Rationalization 

Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to collect 

data to support implementation of a 

future trawl rationalization program 

under the Pacific Coast Groundfish 

Fishery Management Plan (FMP). NMFS 

proposes to collect ownership 

information from all potential 

participants in the trawl rationalization 

program. In addition, NMFS is notifying 

potential participants that the agency 

intends to use the Pacific States Marine 

Fisheries Commission’s Pacific 

Fisheries Information Network (PacFIN) 

database and NMFS’ Northwest 

Fisheries Science Center’s Pacific 

whiting observer data from NORPAC (a 

database of North Pacific fisheries and 

Pacific whiting information) to 

determine initial allocation of quota 

share (QS) for the trawl rationalization 

program, if it is approved and 

implemented. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received no later than 5 p.m., 

local time on October 16, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN 0648–AX98 by any 

one of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Fax: 206–526–6736, Attn: Jamie Goen. 

Mail: Barry Thom, Acting 

Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, 

Seattle, WA 98115–0070, Attn: Jamie 

Goen. 

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 (enter N/A in the required 

fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. Written 

comments regarding the burden-hour 

estimates or other aspects of the 

collection-of-information requirements 

contained in this proposed rule may be 

submitted to NMFS, Northwest Region 

and by e-mail to 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to 

(202) 395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jamie Goen, phone: 206–526–4656, fax: 

206–526–6736, and e-mail 

jamie.goen@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access 

This proposed rule is accessible via 

the Internet at the Office of the Federal 

Register’s Web site at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

Background information and documents 

are available at the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s website at http:// 

www.pcouncil.org/. 

Background 

Since 2003, the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Council) has been 

developing a trawl rationalization 

program, which would affect the limited 

entry trawl fishery of the Pacific Coast 

groundfish fishery. 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. 

The Council has developed the trawl 

rationalization program through two 

amendments to the Groundfish FMP: (1) 

Amendment 20, the trawl 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47546 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

rationalization program; and (2) 

Amendment 21, intersector allocation. 

Amendment 20 would create the 

structure and management details of the 

trawl rationalization program, while 

Amendment 21 would allocate the 

groundfish stocks between trawl and 

non-trawl fisheries. The Council took 

final action on Amendment 20 at their 

November 2008 meeting, with trailing 

actions at its March 2009, April 2009, 

and June 2009 meetings. The Council 

took final action on Amendment 21 at 

its April 2009 meeting. When the 

Council formally transmits those 

amendments to NMFS, the agency will 

publish a notice of availability (NOA) of 

an FMP amendment and a proposed 

rule in the Federal Register to announce 

a public comment period. Following the 

public comment period on the NOA and 

proposed rule, NMFS will announce its 

decision on whether or not to approve 

the amendments in a final rule 

published in the Federal Register. The 

FMP approval process and 

implementation, if appropriate, are 

expected to occur in 2010. 

The trawl rationalization program 

would be a limited access privilege 

program (LAPP) under the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C.1851– 

1891d, as reauthorized in 2007. A LAPP 

is considered a grant of permission to 

the holder of the limited access 

privilege or QS to participate in the 

program and may be revoked, limited, 

or modified at any time. In other words, 

it is a conditional privilege, conveyed 

through QS or catch shares, to harvest 

a specified amount of fish. The MSA 

requires the Council or the Secretary of 

Commerce to ensure that limited access 

privilege holders do not acquire an 

excessive share of the total limited 

access privileges in the program and to 

establish a maximum share, expressed 

as a percentage that each limited access 

privilege holder may hold, acquire, or 

use. For the trawl rationalization 

program, the Council has adopted limits 

on the amount of pounds a vessel can 

hold, acquire, or use (i.e., vessel limits) 

and limits on the amount of QS that can 

be held, acquired, or used (i.e., control 

limits). 

Trawl Rationalization Program 

Structure 

The trawl rationalization program 

would consist of: (1) An individual 

fishing quota (IFQ) program for the 

shore-based trawl fleet; and (2) 

cooperative (co-op) programs for the atsea trawl fleet. Under trawl 

rationalization, the shore-based trawl 

fleet would consist of IFQ participants 

who land groundfish to shore-based 

processors or first receivers. The at-sea 

trawl fleet would consist of fishery 

participants harvesting whiting with 

midwater trawl gear (i.e., whiting 

catcher/processor vessels, whiting 

motherships, and whiting catcher 

vessels associated with motherships). 

The co-op programs for the at-sea trawl 

fleet would be further divided as 

follows: (1) The whiting catcher/ 

processor co-op; and (2) the whiting 

mothership co-ops. The mothership coops may consist of a single co-op or 

multiple co-ops where vessels pool their 

harvest together, or it may consist of 

vessels not associated with a particular 

mothership (i.e., ‘‘non-co-op’’ segment 

of the mothership fishery). 

The IFQ program for the shore-based 

fleet would require an initial allocation 

of harvest QS to individual participants 

based on historic participation in the 

fishery, specifically to limited entry 

trawl permit owners and shore-based 

whiting processors who meet the 

eligibility requirements. In order to 

comply with the MSA, NMFS would be 

required to determine and track 

ownership interest in QS to determine 

if individuals are within set limits, both 

at the initial allocation stage and during 

the operation of the program. In 

Amendment 20, the Council has 

adopted limits (by species group and 

area) on the amount of QS an individual 

can control (control limits). 

The Council has adopted different 

program structures for the whiting 

catcher/processor co-ops and whiting 

mothership co-ops, based on how these 

co-ops have operated in the past. The 

structure of the co-ops will be described 

in more detail in the proposed rule to 

implement Amendment 20, which is 

expected in 2010. The catcher/processor 

co-op would not require an initial 

allocation of QS to individual vessels, 

provided a co-op is established. 

QS for the at-sea mothership fleet 

(called ‘‘catch history assignments’’ in 

Council documents) would initially be 

allocated to the individual whiting 

catcher vessels associated with the 

mothership fishery, and would be nontransferable amounts associated with 

the vessel. The QS allocated to 

individual vessels would reflect that 

individual vessel’s contribution to the 

total amount of fish its mothership coop can harvest. However, an individual 

vessel in the co-op could harvest more 

than its at-sea quota, within the 

restrictions on individual vessel harvest 

and mothership co-op limits. Similar to 

the shore-based IFQ program, NMFS 

would be required to track ownership 

interest in QSs to determine if 

individuals are within set limits. In 

addition, ownership interest in the coop programs (both the catcher/processor 

and mothership) and IFQ program 

would be tracked at the individual level 

to monitor crossover of participants and 

ownership interest among the programs. 

Collection of Ownership Information 

Pursuant to section 402(a)(2) of the 

MSA, if the Secretary of Commerce 

determines that additional information 

is necessary for developing or 

implementing an FMP, the Secretary 

may, by regulation, implement an 

information collection program 

requiring submission of additional 

information for the fishery. In this 

proposed rule, ownership information 

would be collected from the potential 

participants in the trawl rationalization 

program, including the at-sea fleet 

(whiting motherships, whiting 

mothership catcher vessels, and whiting 

catcher/processors), the shore-based 

fleet (whiting and non-whiting permit 

owners and holders) and the shorebased whiting processors. Ownership 

information would be collected to 

support and facilitate the timely 

implementation of the potential future 

trawl rationalization program under the 

Groundfish FMP. 

Similar to current NMFS 

requirements to collect ownership 

information from the limited entry fixed 

gear sablefish fleet, the primary purpose 

of collecting ownership interest 

information from the trawl fleet is to 

allow NMFS to monitor control of the 

groundfish resource in the trawl fishery 

to ensure participants remain within the 

accumulation limits, or control limits on 

QS, recommended by the Council in 

Amendment 20 to the FMP. Initially, 

NMFS would use the ownership 

information collected under this rule as 

the first step in the application process 

to determine which potential QS 

holders might be over their 

accumulation limits as individuals or as 

members of a business entity. By 

collecting ownership information from 

potential participants in advance of the 

FMP amendment approval process, 

NMFS would expedite the QS initial 

issuance process, which is expected to 

take place in the fall of 2010. After 

ownership interest forms from this 

rulemaking are completed early in 2010, 

NMFS intends to provide pre-filled 

ownership interest forms with the initial 

issuance application package in the fall 

of 2010, thereby reducing the burden on 

potential participants and shortening 

the application process. If the collection 

of the ownership information requested 

as part of this rulemaking is not 

completed at the time NMFS provides 

these forms, NMFS may delay 

implementation of the trawl 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 47547 

rationalization program or the issuance 

of an eligible participant’s QS due to the 

additional time needed to gather the 

ownership information and determine if 

an eligible participant is within the 

accumulation limits. 

In addition, the ownership 

information collected would create a 

baseline of ownership information to 

evaluate the trawl rationalization 

program during periodic reviews of the 

program, as required by the MSA. It 

would allow NMFS to better understand 

the relationship between processors, 

permit owners, and the entities owning 

the vessel registered to the permit (i.e., 

permit holders). In other words, it 

would allow NMFS to better understand 

who will control QS and which 

individuals will potentially use quota 

pounds (QP). Moreover, the ownership 

information would allow NMFS to 

better understand potential vessel 

accounts for QP and to better 

understand the ownership of vessels 

that crossover between different sectors 

in the trawl fishery. For example, it 

would allow NMFS to better understand 

the ownership of vessels that participate 

in both the whiting shore-based and the 

mothership fisheries. 

NMFS would send a Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form to potential participants in the 

trawl rationalization program requiring 

the following information to be filled 

out: Type of entity; qualifying permit 

number; name of company or name of 

individuals owning the limited entry 

permit, vessel or processing plant; tax 

identification number (TIN) for each 

entity; date of birth (DOB) for each 

individual; state in which each business 

entity is registered; business mailing 

address; physical address for processing 

plants; business phone number, fax 

number and email; authorized 

representative’s name; name of each 

individual having ownership interest in 

the limited entry permit, vessel or 

processing plant; the individual’s 

business addresses; percentage of 

ownership by each entity (if there are 

multiple entities given as an owner of 

the permit, vessel, or processing plant) 

and each individual shareholder in each 

entity; printed name of authorized 

representative, their signature, and the 

date. The percentage of ownership of all 

shareholders must equal 100 percent. 

The form would also allow owners to 

certify whether or not they are a small 

business according to Small Business 

Administration (SBA) and the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

standards. 

For permits, the legal owner of the 

permit or authorized representative 

would be required to complete the form 

and provide all necessary information 

on the individual or entity owning each 

groundfish limited entry trawl permit. 

For vessels, the vessel owner would be 

required to complete the form and 

provide all necessary information on the 

individual or entity owning each vessel 

that is registered to a groundfish limited 

entry trawl permit (i.e., permit holder). 

For shore-based whiting processors or 

first receivers, the legal owner or 

authorized representative would be 

required to complete the form and 

provide all necessary information on the 

individual or entity owning each shorebased whiting processing or first 

receiver company. The individual 

signing the form would certify under 

penalty of perjury that the information 

provided is true and correct and the 

form would be required to be notarized 

by a notary public. 

The form would be required even if 

the owner of the permit or potential 

participant in the trawl rationalization 

program is a person and not an entity. 

This form does NOT prequalify these 

persons for QS nor guarantee that they 

will qualify for QS under the future 

trawl rationalization program. 

In addition to filling out the 

mandatory ownership interest form, 

potential trawl rationalization program 

participants may be required to submit 

additional documentation to NMFS. If 

the ownership interest in the permit, 

vessel, or potential QS includes a 

business entity, then additional 

documentation will be required. If there 

is an authorized representative for a 

business entity, then a corporate 

resolution would be required 

authorizing the person signing to do so 

on behalf of the entity. Business entities 

established under the laws of the United 

States or of any State would be required 

to provide proof of the establishment of 

their business and to verify that they are 

an active corporation. If an entity was 

not established under the laws of the 

United States or of any other State, this 

rule would not require the entity to 

become so established. However, an 

entity must be established under the 

laws of the United States or of any State 

in order to qualify for an initial 

allocation of QS, pursuant to section 

303A(c)(1)(D) of the MSA. Providing the 

information at this stage will expedite 

the initial issuance process. 

Additional documentation that NMFS 

may request after review of the 

completed Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form includes 

articles of incorporation, a contract, or 

any other credible documentation that 

substantiates those with ownership 

interests in the entity and their percent 

ownership. NMFS may require a 

certified copy of the current vessel 

document (United States Coast Guard or 

state) as evidence of vessel ownership. 

NMFS may also request or consider any 

other relevant, credible evidence. 

NMFS would send out the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form with instructions to the current 

address in NMFS records for potential 

participants in the trawl rationalization 

program. Completion of this form would 

be required only once in preparation for 

implementation of the trawl 

rationalization program. This form 

would be sent to the at-sea fleet (whiting 

motherships, whiting mothership 

catcher vessels, and whiting catcher/ 

processors), the shore-based fleet 

(whiting and non-whiting permit 

owners and holders) and the shorebased whiting processors. Potential 

participants would have at least 60 days 

from the effective date of the Federal 

Register final rule for this action to 

return the completed form. The 

completed form must be returned to 

NMFS no later than May 1, 2010. In the 

future and if the trawl program is 

implemented under Amendment 20, the 

ownership interest form would likely be 

required during the permit or QS 

renewal process and during any permit 

or QS transfers. 

Databases to be Used for Initial 

Allocation of Quota Share 

Potential participants of the trawl 

rationalization program should be aware 

that the agency intends to use landings 

data from the Pacific States Marine 

Fisheries Commission’s PacFIN 

database and NMFS’ Northwest 

Fisheries Science Center’s Pacific 

whiting observer data from NORPAC to 

determine initial allocations of QS for 

the trawl rationalization program. 

Landings data from state fish tickets, as 

provided by the states to the PacFIN 

database, would be used to determine 

initial allocation of IFQ QS for the 

shore-based whiting and nonwhiting 

harvesters and for the shore-based 

whiting processors. Landings data from 

the NORPAC database would be used to 

determine initial allocation of at-sea QS 

for the whiting mothership catcher 

vessels. 

NMFS intends to ‘‘freeze’’ the 

databases for the purposes of initial 

allocation on the date the proposed rule 

proposing to implement Amendment 20 

to the FMP is published in the Federal 

Register. This should allow time for 

NMFS to compile the dataset and cross 

check the data for any errors. ‘‘Freezing’’ 

the databases means that NMFS will 

extract a snapshot of the databases as of 

the proposed rule publication date and 

will use those for initial allocation of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
47548 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

QS. ‘‘Freezing’’ the databases is 

necessary to hold them constant for use 

during qualification and initial issuance 

of the trawl rationalization program and 

to form an administrative record of the 

database at a given point in time. 

Following the ‘‘freezing’’ of the 

databases, any corrections to the 

‘‘frozen’’ database would be made with 

NMFS through the processes set forth in 

future trawl rationalization rules. After 

NMFS extracts a copy of the databases, 

the PacFIN and NORPAC databases will 

continue to exist and be updated 

through their normal processes, but 

such updates may not be used for initial 

allocations of QS. 

If potential participants in the trawl 

rationalization program have concerns 

over the accuracy of their data in the 

PacFIN database, they should contact 

the state in which they landed those fish 

to correct any errors. Any revisions to 

an entity’s fish tickets would have to be 

approved by the state in order to be 

accepted. State contacts are as follows: 

(1) Washington - Carol Turcotte (360– 

902–2253, Carol.Turcotte@dfw.wa.gov); 

(2) Oregon - Michelle Grooms (503–947– 

6247, Michelle.L.Grooms@state.or.us); 

and (3) California - Gerry Kobylinski 

(916–323–1456, Gkobylin@dfg.ca.gov). 

For concerns over the accuracy of 

NORPAC data, contact Janell Majewski 

(206–860–3293, 

janell.majewski@noaa.gov). NMFS urges 

potential QS owners to go directly to the 

source where fisheries data is entered in 

the database to get it corrected before 

NMFS extracts the data for initial 

issuance of QS. 

Classification 

Pursuant to section 402(a)(2) of the 

MSA, the NMFS Assistant 

Administrator, acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce, has determined 

that information collected under this 

proposed rule is necessary for 

developing and implementing the trawl 

rationalization program. The NMFS 

Assistant Administrator has also 

determined that this proposed rule is 

consistent with other applicable law, 

subject to further consideration after 

public comment. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

An initial regulatory flexibility 

analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as 

required by section 603 of the RFA. The 

IRFA describes the economic impact 

this proposed rule, if adopted, would 

have on small entities. A description of 

the action, why it is being considered, 

and the legal basis for this action are 

contained at the beginning of this 

section in the preamble and in the 

SUMMARY section of the preamble. A 

copy of the IRFA is available from the 

NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of 

the analysis follows: 

The proposed rule would allow 

NMFS to collect data to support 

implementation of a future trawl 

rationalization program, Amendment 

20, to the Groundfish FMP. A separate 

Regulatory Impact Review/IRFA will be 

prepared for the full trawl 

rationalization program as part of the 

rulemaking for Amendment 20. This 

proposed rule would also announce that 

NMFS intends to use landings data from 

the PacFIN and NORPAC databases to 

determine initial allocations of QS for 

the trawl rationalization program. 

Section 402(a)(2) of the MSA gives the 

legal authority for the action. If the 

Secretary determines that additional 

information is necessary for developing 

or implementing an FMP, the Secretary 

may, by regulation, implement an 

information collection requiring 

submission of such additional 

information for the fishery. 

The Council has recommended 

accumulation limits to comply with the 

MSA requirement to ensure that 

participants do not acquire an excessive 

share of the total limited access 

privileges in the trawl rationalization 

program. Initially, NMFS would use the 

ownership information collected as the 

first step in the application process to 

determine which potential QS holders 

might be over their accumulation limits 

as individuals or as members of a 

business entity. By collecting ownership 

information from potential participants 

in advance of the FMP amendment 

approval process, NMFS would 

expedite the initial issuance of QS, 

which is expected to take place in the 

fall of 2010. Also, NMFS could use the 

completed forms to troubleshoot any 

unforeseen data collection issues and to 

provide pre-filled ownership interest 

forms with the initial issuance package 

in the fall of 2010. Pre-filled forms 

would reduce the burden on potential 

participants and shorten the initial 

issuance and appeals process. 

The IRFA considers three alternatives: 

(1) No action; (2) a blank form to collect 

ownership interest information; and (3) 

a partially pre-filled form to collect 

ownership information. The no action 

alternative would delay collecting any 

ownership interest information until the 

initial issuance and appeals process for 

the trawl rationalization program, which 

is expected to take place in the fall of 

2010. Under the second alternative, 

NMFS would mail a blank Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form to potential participants in the 

trawl rationalization program. Under the 

third and selected alternative, NMFS 

would mail out a partially pre-filled 

Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form to potential participants 

in the trawl rationalization program. 

NMFS would use its Permit Office’s 

database to pre-fill the permit and/or 

vessel owner’s name of record and 

address. NMFS would also use this 

information to begin to fill out the 

names of participants with ownership 

interest. 

Compared to the no action alternative, 

both alternatives would facilitate a 

timelier implementation of the trawl 

rationalization program. Additionally, 

the preferred alternative, partially prefilled forms, would further expedite the 

trawl rationalization program 

implementation process and would be 

the most helpful to the person 

completing the form. This should aid 

the person completing the form by 

providing details on what information is 

needed and how NMFS database 

currently views the permit and/or vessel 

owner or owner of the whiting 

processor. While timely implementation 

of the trawl rationalization program 

benefits its participants, NMFS must 

also be aware that doing so is not too 

burdensome and costly to the potential 

trawl rationalization program 

participants. This proposed rule would 

establish a onetime mailing requesting 

ownership information. Filling out a 

Trawl Ownership Interest Form is 

expected to take approximately 30 

minutes per response and cost 

approximately $19.15 per response 

(which includes the respondent’s time 

($8.51), mailing, photocopying, and 

notary fee). There is no fee for this form. 

There is an incentive to respond 

because this is the initial step by any 

business to gain ownership rights in the 

fishery that can, at a future time, be 

harvested, sold, leased, or combined 

with other businesses in fishing 

operations. The financial benefits of 

participating in the trawl rationalization 

program should far outweigh the 

minimal cost of time and effort to fill 

out a form. (Very preliminary Pacific 

Council estimates indicate that for the 

harvesting vessels, after taking into 

account the costs of having observer 

coverage, over time the fishery may 

increase annual profits (revenue minus 

costs) by $10 to $20 million.) 

This proposed rule would collect 

ownership information from 

approximately 250 potential 

participants who may receive initial 

allocation of QS, including the at-sea 

fleet (whiting motherships, whiting 

mothership catcher vessels, and whiting 

catcher/processors), the shore-based 

fleet (whiting and non-whiting permit 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 16, 2009 / Proposed Rules 47549 

owners and holders) and the shorebased whiting processors. Using SBA 

standards, most of the estimated 250 

entities are considered small businesses, 

except for some catcher vessels that also 

fish off Alaska, some shoreside 

processors and all catcher-processors 

and motherships (fewer than 30) that are 

affiliated with larger processing 

companies or large international seafood 

companies. One of the purposes of this 

data collection is to have these entities 

certify that they are ‘‘small’’ or ‘‘large’’ 

entities based on SBA size and 

affiliation criteria. 

This information collection would be 

requested of all potential participants in 

the trawl rationalization program, 

regardless of size, and would not have 

a disproportionate effect on small versus 

large entities. Nor would this 

information collection have any effect 

on profitability for small entities. 

These changes will not duplicate, 

overlap or conflict with other laws or 

regulations. This proposed action is not 

expected to meet any of the RFA tests 

of having a ‘‘significant’’ economic 

impact on a ‘‘substantial number’’ of 

small entities. Nonetheless, NMFS has 

prepared an IRFA for this action. NMFS 

is requesting comments on this 

conclusion. 

This proposed rule contains a 

collection-of-information requirement 

subject to review and approval by OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). This requirement has been 

submitted to OMB for approval. The 

public reporting burden for the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form is estimated to average 30 minutes 

per response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

information. This form is estimated to 

cost approximately $19.15 per response 

(which includes the respondent’s time 

($8.51), mailing, photocopying, and 

notary fee). There is no fee for this form. 

Public comment is sought regarding: 

Whether this proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

the accuracy of the burden estimate; 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information, 

including through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. Send comments 

on these or any other aspects of the 

collection of information to NMFS, 

Northwest Region (see ADDRESSES

section), and by e-mail to 

DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to 

(202) 395–7285. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, and no person shall be 

subject to 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. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 

Fishing, Fisheries, and Indian 

Fisheries. 

Dated: September 11, 2009. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator For 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR Part 660 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

1. The authority citation for part 660 

continues to read as follows: 

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

2. A new § 660.337 is added to read 

as follows: 

§ 660.337 Trawl rationalization program - 

data collection requirements. 

(a) Ownership reporting requirements 

- (1) In 2010, NMFS will send a Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form to the current address on record 

requesting information from 

participants in the trawl fishery. Receipt 

of this form does NOT prequalify these 

persons for quota share nor does it 

guarantee that they will qualify for 

quota share under a future trawl 

rationalization program. The following 

participants in the trawl fishery must 

complete and return the form to NMFS: 

(i) Owners of each limited entry 

permit endorsed for trawl gear; 

(ii) Owners of each vessel registered 

to a limited entry permit endorsed for 

trawl gear (i.e., permit holder) if not 

identical to the permit owner covered 

by paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section; 

(iii) Owners of each vessel registered 

to a Pacific whiting vessel license that 

are not covered by paragraphs (a)(1)(i) 

and (ii) above; and 

(iv) First receivers issued current 

Pacific whiting first receiver exempted 

fishing permits. 

(2) Supporting documentation. 

(i) Business entities completing the 

Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form are required to submit the 

following: 

(A) A corporate resolution or any 

other credible documentation as proof 

of the authorized representative selected 

to act on behalf of the entity; and 

(B) Proof that the business entity was 

established and is currently recognized 

as active under the laws of the United 

States or any State, if indeed they were. 

(ii) After review of the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form, NMFS may require the following 

additional documentation: 

(A) Articles of incorporation, a 

notarized contract, or any other credible 

documentation that identifies each 

person who owns an interest in the 

entity and their percentage of 

ownership; 

(B) A certified copy of the current 

vessel document (United States Coast 

Guard or state) as evidence of vessel 

ownership; or 

(C) Such other relevant, credible 

evidence as the applicant may submit, 

or as the SFD or the Regional 

Administrator request or acquire. 

(3) Deadline. Persons listed in 

paragraph (a)(1) will be provided at least 

60 calendar days to submit completed 

forms. All forms must be completed and 

returned to NMFS with a postmark no 

later than the deadline date of May 1, 

2010. 

(b) [Reserved] 

[FR Doc. E9–22325 Filed 9–15–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS