Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9451 

component of the Central Regulatory 

Area of the GOA will soon be reached. 

Therefore, the Regional Administrator is 

establishing a directed fishing 

allowance of 8,519 mt, and is setting 

aside the remaining 2,500 mt as bycatch 

to support other anticipated groundfish 

fisheries. In accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional 

Administrator finds that this directed 

fishing allowance has been reached. 

Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by 

vessels catching Pacific cod for 

processing by the inshore component in 

the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA. 

After the effective date of this closure 

the maximum retainable amounts at 

§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time 

during a trip. 

Classification 

This action responds to the best 

available information recently obtained 

from the fishery. The Assistant 

Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA 

(AA), finds good cause to waive the 

requirement to provide prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment 

pursuant to the authority set forth at 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B) as such requirement is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest. This requirement is 

impracticable and contrary to the public 

interest as it would prevent NMFS from 

responding to the most recent fisheries 

data in a timely fashion and would 

delay the closure of Pacific cod 

apportioned to vessels catching Pacific 

cod for processing by the inshore 

component of the Central Regulatory 

Area of the GOA. NMFS was unable to 

publish a notice providing time for 

public comment because the most 

recent, relevant data only became 

available as of February 23, 2007. 

The AA also finds good cause to 

waive the 30 day delay in the effective 

date of this action under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). This finding is based upon 

the reasons provided above for waiver of 

prior notice and opportunity for public 

comment. 

This action is required by § 679.20 

and is exempt from review under 

Executive Order 12866. 

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

Dated: January 26, 2007. 

James P. Burgess, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 07–954 Filed 2–27–07; 2:41 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 070213033–7033–01; I.D. 

112706A] 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands; 2007 and 2008 Final 

Harvest Specifications for Groundfish 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule; closures. 

SUMMARY: NMFS announces 2007 and 

2008 final harvest specifications and 

prohibited species catch (PSC) 

allowances for the groundfish fishery of 

the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

management area (BSAI). This action is 

necessary to establish harvest limits for 

groundfish during the 2007 and 2008 

fishing years and to accomplish the 

goals and objectives of the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Management Area (FMP). The intended 

effect of this action is to conserve and 

manage the groundfish resources in the 

BSAI in accordance with the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (MSA). 

DATES: The 2007 and 2008 final harvest 

specifications and associated 

apportionment of reserves are effective 

at 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), 

March 2, 2007, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., 

December 31, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Alaska 

Groundfish Harvest Specifications 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), 

Record of Decision (ROD), and Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 

prepared for this action are available 

from Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 

21668, Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Ellen 

Sebastian, or from the Alaska Region 

Web site at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov. 

Copies of the 2006 Stock Assessment 

and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) report 

for the groundfish resources of the 

BSAI, dated November 2006, are 

available from the North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, West 4th Avenue, 

Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99510–2252, 

907–271–2809, or from its Web site at 

http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary Furuness, 907–586–7228, or email mary.furuness@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal 

regulations at 50 CFR part 679 

implement the FMP and govern the 

groundfish fisheries in the BSAI. The 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) prepared the FMP, 

and NMFS approved it under the MSA. 

General regulations governing U.S. 

fisheries also appear at 50 CFR part 600. 

The FMP and its implementing 

regulations require NMFS, after 

consultation with the Council, to 

specify the total allowable catch (TAC) 

for each target species and for the ‘‘other 

species’’ category, the sum must be 

within the optimum yield (OY) range of 

1.4 million to 2.0 million metric tons 

(mt) (see § 679.20(a)(1)(i)). Also 

specified are apportionments of TACs, 

and Community Development Quota 

(CDQ) reserve amounts, PSC 

allowances, and prohibited species 

quota (PSQ) reserve amounts. The final 

harvest specifications listed in Tables 1 

through 15 of this action satisfy these 

requirements. For 2007 and 2008, the 

sum of TACs for each year is 2 million 

mt. 

Section 679.20(c)(3) further requires 

NMFS to consider public comment on 

the proposed annual TACs and 

apportionments thereof and the 

proposed PSC allowances, and to 

publish final harvest specifications in 

the Federal Register. The 2007 and 2008 

proposed harvest specifications and PSC 

allowances for the groundfish fishery of 

the BSAI were published in the Federal 

Register on December 15, 2006 (71 FR 

75460). Comments were invited and 

accepted through January 16, 2007. 

NMFS received 4 letters with several 

comments on the proposed harvest 

specifications. These comments are 

summarized and responded to in the 

Response to Comments section of this 

rule. NMFS consulted with the Council 

during the December 2006 Council 

meeting in Anchorage, AK. After 

considering public comments, as well as 

biological and economic data that were 

available at the Council’s December 

meeting, NMFS is implementing the 

2007 and 2008 final harvest 

specifications as recommended by the 

Council. 

Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) and 

TAC Harvest Specifications 

The final ABC levels are based on the 

best available biological and 

socioeconomic information, including 

projected biomass trends, information 

on assumed distribution of stock 

biomass, and revised technical methods 

used to calculate stock biomass. In 

general, the development of ABCs and 

overfishing levels (OFLs) involves 

sophisticated statistical analyses of fish 

populations and is based on a 

successive series of six levels, or tiers, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9452 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

of reliable information available to 

fishery scientists. Tier 1 represents the 

highest level of data quality and tier 6 

the lowest level of data quality 

available. 

In December 2006, the Scientific and 

Statistical Committee (SSC), Advisory 

Panel (AP), and Council reviewed 

current biological information about the 

condition of the BSAI groundfish stocks. 

The Council’s Plan Team compiled and 

presented this information in the 2006 

SAFE report for the BSAI groundfish 

fisheries, dated November 2006. The 

SAFE report contains a review of the 

latest scientific analyses and estimates 

of each species’ biomass and other 

biological parameters, as well as 

summaries of the available information 

on the BSAI ecosystem and the 

economic condition of groundfish 

fisheries off Alaska. The SAFE report is 

available for public review (see 

ADDRESSES). From these data and 

analyses, the Plan Team estimates an 

OFL and ABC for each species or 

species category. 

In December 2006 the SSC, AP, and 

Council reviewed the Plan Team’s 

recommendations. Except for Bering Sea 

subarea and Aleutian Islands (AI) 

subarea pollock, yellowfin sole, rock 

sole, and the ‘‘other species’’ category, 

the SSC, AP, and Council endorsed the 

Plan Team’s ABC recommendations. For 

2007 and 2008, the SSC recommended 

higher pollock OFLs and ABCs than the 

OFLs and ABCs recommended by the 

Plan Team. For Bering Sea subarea 

pollock, the SSC recommended using a 

procedure that sets the ABCs at the F40%

level which results in ABCs lower than 

the maximum permissible, but higher 

than the Plan Teams recommendations. 

For AI subarea pollock, the SSC 

recommended using tier 3 management 

which results in maximum permissible 

ABCs and OFLs higher than the tier 5 

management recommended by the Plan 

Team. For yellowfin sole and rock sole, 

the SSC recommended using tier 1 

management which results in maximum 

permissible ABCs and OFLs higher than 

the tier 3 management recommended by 

the Plan Team. For ‘‘other species,’’ the 

SSC recommended using tier 6 

management for shark and octopus 

species resulting in lower ABCs than the 

Plan Team’s recommended tier 5 

management. The SSC provided 2007 

and 2008 ABC and OFL amounts 

obtained as the sum of the individual 

species ABCs in the ‘‘other species’’

category since the current FMP specifies 

management at the group level. For all 

species, the AP endorsed the ABCs 

recommended by the SSC, and the 

Council adopted them. 

The Plan Team, SSC, AP and Council 

recommended that total removals of 

Pacific cod from the BSAI not exceed 

ABC recommendations. In 2006, the 

Board of Fisheries for the State of 

Alaska (State) established a guideline 

harvest level (GHL) west of 170 degrees 

west longitude in the AI subarea equal 

to 3 percent of the Pacific cod ABC in 

the BSAI. Accordingly, the Council 

recommended that the 2007 and 2008 

TACs be adjusted downward from the 

ABCs by amounts equal to the 2007 and 

2008 GHLs. 

The final TAC recommendations were 

based on the ABCs as adjusted for other 

biological and socioeconomic 

considerations, including maintaining 

the sum of the TACs within the required 

OY range of 1.4 million to 2.0 million 

mt. The Council adopted the AP’s 2007 

and 2008 TAC recommendations. None 

of the Council’s recommended TACs for 

2007 or 2008 exceeds the final 2007 or 

2008 ABC for any species category. The 

2007 and 2008 harvest specifications 

approved by the Secretary of Commerce 

(Secretary) are unchanged from those 

recommended by the Council and are 

consistent with the preferred harvest 

strategy alternative in the EIS. The 2007 

and 2008 TACs are less than the 

maximum permissible ABCs 

recommended by the Council’s plan 

teams and SSC. NMFS finds that the 

recommended OFLs, ABCs, and TACs 

are consistent with the biological 

condition of groundfish stocks as 

described in the 2006 SAFE report that 

was approved by the Council. 

Other Rules Affecting the 2007 and 

2008 Harvest Specifications 

The following paragraphs identify 

actions that are currently under 

consideration by the Council and that, 

if submitted to and approved by the 

Secretary, could change the 2007 and 

2008 final harvest specifications. The 

existing 2007 harvest specifications will 

be updated in early 2007 when final 

harvest specifications for 2007 and new 

harvest specifications for 2008 are 

implemented. The 2008 harvest 

specifications will be updated in early 

2008, when new harvest specifications 

for 2008 and 2009 are implemented. 

In April 2006, the Council adopted 

Amendment 85 to the FMP. 

Amendment 85 would revise the BSAI 

Pacific cod sector allocations. If 

approved by the Secretary, final 

regulations implementing Amendment 

85 are anticipated to be effective for the 

2008 fishing year. The notice of 

availability of Amendment 85 to the 

FMP was published December 7, 2006 

(71 FR 70943), and the comment period 

ended February 5, 2007. In June 2006 

the Council adopted Amendment 80 to 

the FMP. Amendment 80 would provide 

specific groundfish allocations to the 

non-American Fisheries Act (AFA) 

trawl catcher/processor sector and allow 

the formation of cooperatives. If 

approved by the Secretary, final 

regulations implementing Amendment 

80 also are anticipated to be effective for 

the 2008 fishing year. The Council also 

adopted Amendment 84 that would 

modify current regulations for managing 

incidental catch of Chinook and chum 

salmon and may change the PSC limits. 

The Council also is considering two 

proposals. One would allocate the 

Pacific cod TAC by Bering Sea subarea 

and AI subarea instead of a combined 

BSAI TAC. The other would separate 

some species from the ‘‘other rockfish’’

or ‘‘other species’’ categories to establish 

individual OFLs, ABCs, and TACs. 

Changes From the 2007 and 2008 

Proposed Harvest Specifications in the 

BSAI 

In October 2006 the Council’s 

recommendations for the 2007 and 2008 

proposed harvest specifications (71 FR 

75460, December 15, 2006) were based 

largely on information contained in the 

2005 SAFE report for the BSAI 

groundfish fisheries, dated November 

2005. The Council recommended that 

OFLs and ABCs for stocks in tiers 1 

through 3 be based on biomass 

projections as set forth in the 2005 

SAFE report and estimates of groundfish 

harvests through the 2006 fishing year. 

For stocks in tiers 4 through 6, for 

which biomass projections could not be 

made, the Council recommended that 

OFLs and ABCs be unchanged from 

2006 until the 2006 SAFE report could 

be completed. The 2006 SAFE report 

(dated November 2006), which was not 

available when the Council made its 

recommendations in October 2006, 

contains the best and most recent 

scientific information on the condition 

of the groundfish stocks. In December 

2006, the Council considered the 2006 

SAFE report in making its 

recommendations for the 2007 and 2008 

final harvest specifications. Based on 

the 2006 SAFE report, the sum of the 

2007 and 2008 recommended final 

TACs for the BSAI (2,000,000 mt) is the 

same as the sum of the 2007 and 2008 

proposed TACs. Compared to the 2007 

and 2008 proposed harvest 

specifications, the Council’s 2006 final 

TAC recommendations increase fishing 

opportunities for fishermen and 

economic benefits to the nation for 

species for which the Council had 

sufficient information to raise TAC 

levels. These species include BSAI 

flathead sole, Pacific cod, sablefish, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9453 

yellowfin sole, ‘‘other flatfish,’’ Pacific 

ocean perch, northern rockfish, ‘‘other 

rockfish,’’ and squid. Conversely, the 

Council reduced TAC levels to provide 

greater protection for several species 

including Bering Sea subarea pollock, 

rock sole, Greenland turbot, shortraker 

rockfish, rougheye rockfish, and ‘‘other 

species.’’ The changes recommended by 

the Council were based on the best 

scientific information available, 

consistent with National Standard 2 of 

the MSA, and within a reasonable range 

of variation from the proposed TAC 

recommendations so that the affected 

public was fairly apprised and could 

make meaningful comments. 

COMPARISON OF FINAL 2007 AND 2008 WITH PROPOSED 2007 AND 2008 TOTAL ALLOWABLE CATCH IN THE BSAI 

Species Area 2007 final 

TAC 

2007 proposed TAC 

2007 final 

minus 

proposed 

2008 final 

TAC 

2008 proposed TAC 

2008 final 

minus 

proposed 

Pollock ................................... BS ................................ 1,394,000 1,419,800 ¥25,800 1,318,000 1,168,700 149,300 

AI .................................. 19,000 19,000 0 19,000 19,000 0 

Bogoslof ....................... 10 10 0 10 10 0 

Pacific cod ............................. BSAI ............................. 170,720 144,045 26,675 127,070 118,049 9,021 

Sablefish ................................ BS ................................ 2,980 2,580 400 2,970 2,240 730 

AI .................................. 2,810 2,620 190 2,800 2,260 540 

Atka mackerel ........................ EAI/BS ......................... 23,800 16,782 7,018 17,600 24,481 *¥6,881 

CAI ............................... 29,600 38,718 ¥9,118 22,000 27,728 ¥5,728 

WAI .............................. 9,600 7,500 2,100 15,300 12,891 2,409 

Yellowfin sole ........................ BSAI ............................. 136,000 117,100 18,900 150,000 106,400 43,600 

Rock sole ............................... BSAI ............................. 55,000 85,736 ¥30,736 75,000 111,600 ¥36,600 

Greenland turbot ................... BS ................................ 1,680 1,815 ¥135 1,720 1,815 ¥95 

AI .................................. 760 815 ¥55 770 815 ¥45 

Arrowtooth flounder ............... BSAI ............................. 20,000 20,000 0 30,000 144,800 ¥114,800 

Flathead sole ......................... BSAI ............................. 30,000 22,000 8,000 45,000 52,200 ¥7,200 

Other flatfish .......................... BSAI ............................. 10,000 5,000 5,000 21,400 18,100 3,300 

Alaska plaice ......................... BSAI ............................. 25,000 32,000 ¥7,000 60,000 129,637 ¥69,637 

Pacific ocean perch ............... BS ................................ 2,160 3,020 ¥860 4,080 3,020 1,060 

EAI ............................... 4,970 3,322 1,648 4,900 3,322 1,578 

CAI ............................... 5,050 3,277 1,773 5,000 3,277 1,723 

WAI .............................. 7,720 5,481 2,239 7,620 5,481 2,139 

Northern rockfish ................... BSAI ............................. 8,190 5,000 3,190 8,150 5,000 3,150 

Shortraker rockfish ................ BSAI ............................. 424 580 ¥156 424 580 ¥156 

Rougheye rockfish ................. BSAI ............................. 202 224 ¥22 202 224 ¥22 

Other rockfish ........................ BS ................................ 414 810 ¥396 414 810 ¥396 

AI .................................. 585 590 ¥5 585 590 ¥5 

Squid ..................................... BSAI ............................. 1,970 1,275 695 1,970 1,970 0 

Other species ........................ BSAI ............................. 37,355 40,900 ¥3,545 58,015 35,000 23,015 

Total ............................... ...................................... 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 2,000,000 0 

As mentioned in the 2007 and 2008 

proposed harvest specifications, NMFS 

is apportioning the amounts shown in 

Table 2 from the non-specified reserve 

to increase the initial TAC (ITAC) of 

several target species. 

NMFS is revising the BSAI species 

that will be allocated to the CDQ 

Program to include Bering Sea pollock, 

AI pollock, Pacific cod, sablefish from 

both the fixed gear and trawl gear 

allocations, Atka mackerel, yellowfin 

sole, rock sole, Bering Sea Greenland 

turbot, arrowtooth flounder, flathead 

sole, and AI Pacific ocean perch. This 

differs from the suite of species that 

NMFS proposed to allocate to the CDQ 

Program, as described in the 2007 and 

2008 proposed harvest specifications 

(71 FR 75460, December 15, 2006). 

NMFS originally proposed, in addition 

to the species listed above, allocating AI 

Greenland turbot, ‘‘other flatfish,’’ and 

Alaska plaice to the CDQ Program. 

NMFS also proposed to not allocate 

sablefish from the trawl allocation to the 

CDQ Program. 

Furthermore, NMFS is increasing the 

2008 CDQ reserve allocations in Table 1 

to 10.7 percent from 7.5 percent, except 

for pollock and sablefish. The statutory 

requirements and agency determination 

for changing the suite of species and 

percentage allocations made to the CDQ 

Program are described both in the 2007 

and 2008 proposed harvest 

specifications and in the response to 

Comment 3 in the Response to 

Comments section of this action. 

Catch in the CDQ fisheries of species 

in TAC categories that are not allocated 

to the CDQ Program will be managed 

under the regulations and fishery status 

that applies to the TAC category in the 

non-CDQ groundfish fisheries. 

Retention of species closed to directed 

fishing will either be limited to 

maximum retainable amounts or all 

catch of the species will be required to 

be discarded. Notices of closures to 

directed fishing and retention 

requirements for these species will 

apply to the CDQ and non-CDQ sectors. 

The catch of these species in the CDQ 

fisheries would not constrain the catch 

of other CDQ species unless catch by all 

sectors approached an OFL. 

The 2007 and 2008 final TAC 

recommendations for the BSAI are 

within the OY range established for the 

BSAI and do not exceed ABCs for any 

single species or complex. Table 1 lists 

the 2007 and 2008 final OFL, ABC, 

TAC, ITAC, and CDQ reserve amounts 

of the BSAI groundfish. The 

apportionment of TAC amounts among 

fisheries and seasons is discussed 

below. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9454 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 1.

—2007 AND 2008 OVERFISHING

LEVEL (OFL), ACCEPTABLE

BIOLOGICAL

CATCH (ABC), TOTAL

ALLOWABLE

CATCH (TAC), INITIAL TAC (ITAC), AND

CDQ RESERVE

ALLOCATION OF

GROUNDFISH IN THE BSAI 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Area 

2007 2008 

OFL ABC TAC ITAC 2 CDQ 3 OFL ABC TAC ITAC 2 CDQ 3

Pollock 4 ........................... BS2 ............ 1,640,000 1,394,000 1,394,000 1,254,600 139,400 1,431,000 1,318,000 1,318,000 1,186,200 131,800 

AI 2 ............. 54,500 44,500 19,000 17,100 1,900 50,300 41,000 19,000 17,100 1,900 Bogoslof .... 48,000 5,220 10 10 0 48,000 5,220 10 10 0 

Pacific cod 5 ..................... BSAI .......... 207,000 176,000 170,720 145,112 12,804 154,000 131,000 127,070 108,010 13,596 Sablefish 6 ........................ BS .............. 3,520 2,980 2,980 2,458 410 3,290 2,970 2,970 1,263 111 

AI ............... 3,320 2,810 2,810 2,284 474 3,100 2,800 2,800 596 52 

Atka mackerel .................. BSAI .......... 86,900 74,000 63,000 53,550 4,725 64,200 54,900 54,900 46,665 5,874 

EAI/BS ....... n/a 23,800 23,800 20,230 1,785 n/a 17,600 17,600 14,960 1,883 CAI ............ n/a 29,600 29,600 25,160 2,220 n/a 22,000 22,000 18,700 2,354 WAI ............ n/a 20,600 9,600 8,160 720 n/a 15,300 15,300 13,005 1,637 

Yellowfin sole ................... BSAI .......... 240,000 225,000 136,000 115,600 10,200 261,000 245,000 150,000 127,500 16,050 Rock sole ......................... BSAI .......... 200,000 198,000 55,000 46,750 4,125 271,000 268,000 75,000 63,750 8,025 Greenland turbot .............. BSAI .......... 15,600 2,440 2,440 2,074 n/a 16,000 2,490 2,490 2,117 n/a 

BS .............. n/a 1,680 1,680 1,428 126 n/a 1,720 1,720 1,462 184 AI ............... n/a 760 760 646 0 n/a 770 770 655 0 

Arrowtooth flounder ......... BSAI .......... 193,000 158,000 20,000 17,000 1,500 208,000 171,000 30,000 25,500 3,210 Flathead sole ................... BSAI .......... 95,300 79,200 30,000 25,500 2,250 92,800 77,200 45,000 38,250 4,815 Other flatfish 7 .................. BSAI .......... 28,500 21,400 10,000 8,500 0 28,500 21,400 21,400 18,190 0 Alaska plaice .................... BSAI .......... 241,000 190,000 25,000 21,250 0 252,000 199,000 60,000 51,000 0 Pacific ocean perch ......... BSAI .......... 26,100 21,900 19,900 16,915 n/a 25,600 21,600 21,600 18,360 n/a 

BS .............. n/a 4,160 2,160 1,836 0 n/a 4,080 4,080 3,468 0 EAI ............. n/a 4,970 4,970 4,225 373 n/a 4,900 4,900 4,165 524 CAI ............ n/a 5,050 5,050 4,293 379 n/a 5,000 5,000 4,250 535 WAI ............ n/a 7,720 7,720 6,562 579 n/a 7,620 7,620 6,477 815 

Northern rockfish ............. BSAI .......... 9,750 8,190 8,190 6,962 0 9,700 8,150 8,150 6,928 0 Shortraker rockfish ........... BSAI .......... 564 424 424 360 0 564 424 424 360 0 Rougheye rockfish ........... BSAI .......... 269 202 202 172 0 269 202 202 172 0 Other rockfish 8 ................ BSAI .......... 1,330 999 999 849 0 1,330 999 999 849 0 

BS .............. n/a 414 414 352 0 n/a 414 414 352 0 AI ............... n/a 585 585 497 0 n/a 585 585 497 0 

Squid ................................ BSAI .......... 2,620 1,970 1,970 1,675 0 2,620 1,970 1,970 1,675 0 Other species 9 ................ BSAI .......... 91,700 68,800 37,355 31,752 0 91,700 68,800 58,015 49,313 0 

Total .......................... .................... 3,188,973 2,676,035 2,000,000 1,770,474 179,245 3,014,973 2,642,125 2,000,000 1,763,808 187,491 

1These amounts apply to the entire BSAI management area unless otherwise specified. With the exception of pollock, and for the purpose of these harvest specifications, the Bering Sea 

(BS) subarea includes the Bogoslof District. 2Except for pollock and the portion of the sablefish TAC allocated to hook-and-line and pot gear, 15 percent of each TAC is put into a reserve. The ITAC for each species is the remainder 

of the TAC after the subtraction of these reserves. 3Except for Aleutian Islands Greenland turbot, ‘‘other flatfish,’’ Alaska plaice, Bering Sea Pacific ocean perch, northern rockfish, shortraker rockfish, rougheye rockfish, ‘‘other rockfish,’’

squid, and ‘‘other species,’’ 7.5 percent in 2007 and 10.7 percent in 2008 of the TAC is designated as a CDQ reserve for use by CDQ participants (see §§ 679.20(b)(1)(iii), 679.31, and section 305(i)(1)(B)(i) and (ii) of the MSA). 4 Under § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(1), the annual Bering Sea subarea pollock TAC after subtraction for the CDQ directed fishing allowance (10 percent) and the incidental catch allowance (2.8 

percent), is further allocated by sector for a directed pollock fishery as follows: inshore

—50 percent; catcher/processor

—40 percent; and motherships

—10 percent. Under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(

2)(i) and (ii), the annual Aleutian Islands subarea pollock TAC, after subtracting first for the CDQ directed fishing allowance (10 percent) and second for the incidental 

catch allowance (1,600 mt), is allocated to the Aleut Corporation for a directed pollock fishery. 5The Pacific cod TAC is reduced by 3 percent from the ABC to account for the State of Alaska’s (State) guideline harvest level in State waters of the Aleutian Islands subarea. 6Twenty percent of the sablefish TAC allocated to hook-and-line gear or pot gear is reserved for use by CDQ participants (see § 679.20(b)(1)(iii)(B)). 7 ‘‘Other flatfish’’ includes all flatfish species, except for halibut (a prohibited species), flathead sole, Greenland turbot, rock sole, yellowfin sole, arrowtooth flounder and Alaska plaice. 8 ‘‘Other rockfish’’ includes all Sebastes and Sebastolobus species except for Pacific ocean perch, northern, shortraker, and rougheye rockfish. 9 ‘‘Other species’’ includes sculpins, sharks, skates and octopus. Forage fish, as defined at § 679.2, are not included in the ‘‘other species’’ category. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9455 

Reserves and the Incidental Catch 

Allowance (ICA) for Pollock 

Section 679.20(b)(1)(i) of the CFR 

requires the placement of 15 percent of 

the TAC for each target species or 

species group, except for pollock and 

the hook-and-line and pot gear 

allocation of sablefish, in a nonspecified reserve. Section 

679.20(b)(1)(iii)(A) of the CFR and 

section 305(i)(1)(B)(i) and (ii) of the 

MSA further require the allocation of 

one-half of each TAC amount that is 

placed in the non-specified reserve (7.5 

percent of the TAC) in 2007 and 10.7 

percent in 2008 be allocated to the 

groundfish CDQ reserve with the 

exception of Bogoslof pollock, Aleutian 

Islands Greenland turbot, ‘‘other 

flatfish,’’ Alaska plaice, Bering Sea 

Pacific ocean perch, northern rockfish, 

shortraker rockfish, rougheye rockfish, 

‘‘other rockfish,’’ squid, and ‘‘other 

species,’’ as explained above. Section 

679.20(b)(1)(iii)(B) requires 20 percent 

of the hook-and-line and pot gear 

allocation of sablefish be allocated to 

the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve. 

Sections 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A), 

679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(2)(i), and 679.31(a) 

also require the allocation of 10 percent 

of the BSAI pollock TACs to the pollock 

CDQ directed fishing allowance (DFA). 

The entire Bogoslof District pollock 

TAC is allocated as an ICA (see 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(ii)). With the exception of 

the hook-and-line and pot gear sablefish 

CDQ reserve, the regulations do not 

further apportion the CDQ reserves by 

gear. Section 679.21(e)(1)(i) requires 

withholding of 7.5 percent of each PSC 

limit, with the exception of herring, as 

a PSQ reserve for the CDQ fisheries. 

Sections 679.30 and 679.31 set forth 

regulations governing the management 

of the CDQ and PSQ reserves. 

Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(1), 

NMFS allocates a pollock ICA of 2.8 

percent of the Bering Sea subarea 

pollock TAC after subtraction of the 10 

percent CDQ reserve. This allowance is 

based on NMFS’ examination of the 

pollock incidental catch, including the 

incidental catch by CDQ vessels, in 

target fisheries other than pollock from 

1999 through 2006. During this 8-year 

period, the pollock incidental catch 

ranged from a low of 2.4 percent in 

2006, to a high of 5 percent in 1999, 

with a 7-year average of 3.5 percent. 

Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(2)(i) 

and (ii), NMFS recommends pollock 

ICA of 1,600 mt for AI subarea pollock 

after subtraction of the 10 percent CDQ 

DFA. This allowance is based on NMFS’

examination of the pollock incidental 

catch, including the incidental catch by 

CDQ vessels, in target fisheries other 

than pollock from 2003 through 2006. 

During this 4-year period, the incidental 

catch of pollock ranged from a low of 5 

percent in 2006 to a high of 10 percent 

in 2003, with a 4-year average of 7 

percent. 

The regulations do not designate the 

remainder of the non-specified reserve 

by species or species group. Any 

amount of the reserve may be 

apportioned to a target species or to the 

‘‘other species’’ category during the 

year, providing that such 

apportionments do not result in 

overfishing (see § 679.20(b)(1)(ii)). The 

Regional Administrator has determined 

that the ITACs specified for the species 

listed in Table 2 need to be 

supplemented from the non-specified 

reserve because U.S. fishing vessels 

have demonstrated the capacity to catch 

the full TAC allocations. Therefore, in 

accordance with § 679.20(b)(3), NMFS is 

apportioning the amounts shown in 

Table 2 from the non-specified reserve 

to increase the ITAC by 7.5 percent of 

the TAC in 2007. In 2008, northern 

rockfish, shortraker rockfish, rougheye 

rockfish, and Bering Sea ‘‘other 

rockfish’’ are increased by 7.5 percent of 

TAC and Atka mackerel, Pacific ocean 

perch, and Pacific cod by 4.3 percent of 

the TAC. 

TABLE 2.—2007 AND 2008 APPORTIONMENT OF RESERVES TO ITAC CATEGORIES

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species—area or subarea 

2007 

Reserve 

amount 

2007 Final 

ITAC 

2008 

Reserve 

amount 

2008 Final 

ITAC 

Atka mackerel—Eastern Aleutian District and Bering Sea subarea ............................... 1,785 22,015 757 15,717 

Atka mackerel—Central Aleutian District ........................................................................ 2,220 27,380 946 19,646 

Atka mackerel—Western Aleutian District ....................................................................... 720 8,880 658 13,663 

Pacific ocean perch—Eastern Aleutian District ............................................................... 373 4,598 211 4,376 

Pacific ocean perch—Central Aleutian District ................................................................ 379 4,672 215 4,465 

Pacific ocean perch—Western Aleutian District .............................................................. 579 7,141 328 6,805 

Pacific cod—BSAI ............................................................................................................ 12,804 157,916 5,464 113,474 

Shortraker rockfish—BSAI ............................................................................................... 32 392 32 392 

Rougheye rockfish—BSAI ............................................................................................... 15 187 15 187 

Northern rockfish—BSAI .................................................................................................. 614 7,576 611 7,539 

Other rockfish—Bering Sea subarea ............................................................................... 31 383 31 383 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 19,552 241,140 9,268 186,647 

Allocation of Pollock TAC Under the 

American Fisheries Act (AFA) 

Section 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A) requires that 

the pollock TAC apportioned to the 

Bering Sea subarea, after subtraction of 

the 10 percent for the CDQ program and 

the 2.8 percent for the ICA, be allocated 

as a DFA as follows: 50 percent to the 

inshore sector, 40 percent to the 

catcher/processor sector, and 10 percent 

to the mothership sector. In the Bering 

Sea subarea, 40 percent of the DFA is 

allocated to the A season (January 20–

June 10) and 60 percent of the DFA is 

allocated to the B season (June 10–

November 1). In October 2006, the 

State’s Board of Fisheries adopted a 

proposal for a 3,000 mt pollock fishery 

in State waters of the AI subarea. 

However, this action by the State does 

not require a downward adjustment of 

the Federal AI subarea pollock TAC 

because the combined TAC and GHL 

(22,000 mt) are less than the proposed 

ABC of 44,500 mt. The AI directed 

pollock fishery allocation to the Aleut 

Corporation is the amount of pollock 

remaining in the AI subarea after 

subtracting 1,900 mt for the CDQ DFA 

(10 percent) and 1,600 mt for the ICA. 

In the AI subarea, 40 percent of the ABC 

is allocated to the A season and the 

remainder of the directed pollock 

fishery is allocated to the B season. 

Table 3 lists these 2007 and 2008 

amounts. 

Section 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(4) also 

includes several specific requirements 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9456 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

regarding pollock allocations. First, 8.5 

percent of the pollock allocated to the 

catcher/processor sector will be 

available for harvest by AFA catcher 

vessels with catcher/processor sector 

endorsements, unless the Regional 

Administrator receives a cooperative 

contract that provides for the 

distribution of harvest among AFA 

catcher/processors and AFA catcher 

vessels in a manner agreed to by all 

members. Second, AFA catcher/ 

processors not listed in the AFA are 

limited to harvesting not more than 0.5 

percent of the pollock allocated to the 

catcher/processor sector. Table 3 lists 

the 2007 and 2008 allocations of pollock 

TAC. Tables 10 through 15 list the AFA 

catcher/processor and catcher vessel 

harvesting sideboard limits. The tables 

for the pollock allocations to the Bering 

Sea subarea inshore pollock 

cooperatives and open access sector will 

be posted on the Alaska Region Web site 

at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov. 

Table 3 also lists seasonal 

apportionments of pollock and harvest 

limits within the Steller Sea Lion 

Conservation Area (SCA). The harvest 

within the SCA, as defined at 

§ 679.22(a)(7)(vii), is limited to 28 

percent of the annual DFA until April 

1. The remaining 12 percent of the 40 

percent of the annual DFA allocated to 

the A season may be taken outside the 

SCA before April 1 or inside the SCA 

after April 1. If less than 28 percent of 

the annual DFA is taken inside the SCA 

before April 1, the remainder will be 

available to be taken inside the SCA 

after April 1. The A season pollock SCA 

harvest limit will be apportioned to 

each sector in proportion to each 

sector’s allocated percentage of the DFA. 

Table 3 lists by sector these 2007 and 

2008 amounts. 

TABLE 3.—2007 AND 2008 ALLOCATIONS OF POLLOCK TACS TO THE DIRECTED POLLOCK FISHERIES AND TO THE CDQ 

DIRECTED FISHING ALLOWANCES (DFA) 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Area and sector 2007 Allocations 

2007 A season 1 2007 B 

season 1

2008 Allocations 

2008 A season 1 2008 B 

season 1

A season 

DFA 

SCA harvest limit 2 B season 

DFA 

A season 

DFA 

SCA harvest limit 2 B season 

DFA 

Bering Sea subarea ......................... 1,394,000 n/a n/a n/a 1,318,000 n/a n/a n/a 

CDQ DFA ..................................... 139,400 55,760 39,032 83,640 131,800 52,720 36,904 79,080 

ICA1 .............................................. 35,129 n/a n/a n/a 33,214 n/a n/a n/a 

AFA Inshore ................................. 609,736 243,894 170,726 365,841 576,493 230,597 161,418 345,896 

AFA Catcher/Processors 3 ............ 487,788 195,115 136,581 292,673 461,195 184,478 129,134 276,717 

Catch by C/Ps ........................... 446,326 178,531 n/a 267,796 421,993 168,797 n/a 253,196 

Catch by CVs 3 .......................... 41,462 16,585 n/a 24,877 39,202 15,681 n/a 23,521 

Unlisted C/P Limit 4 ............... 2,439 976 n/a 1,463 2,306 922 n/a 1,384 

AFA Motherships ............................. 121,947 48,779 34,145 73,168 115,299 46,119 32,284 69,179 

Excessive Harvesting Limit 5 ............ 213,407 n/a n/a n/a 201,773 n/a n/a n/a 

Excessive Processing Limit 6 ........... 365,841 n/a n/a n/a 345,896 n/a n/a n/a 

Total Bering Sea DFA ...................... 1,358,871 543,548 380,484 815,322 1,284,787 513,914 359,740 770,872 

Aleutian Islands subarea 1 ............... 19,000 n/a n/a n/a 19,000 n/a n/a n/a 

CDQ DFA ..................................... 1,900 760 n/a 1,140 1,900 760 n/a 1,140 

ICA ................................................ 1,600 800 n/a 800 1,600 800 n/a 800 

Aleut Corporation ......................... 15,500 15,500 n/a 0 15,500 15,500 n/a 0 

Bogoslof District ICA7 ...................... 10 n/a n/a n/a 10 n/a n/a n/a 

1Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A), the Bering Sea subarea pollock, after subtraction for the CDQ DFA (10 percent) and the ICA (2.8 percent), is 

allocated as a DFA as follows: inshore sector—50 percent, catcher/processor sector—40 percent, and mothership sector—10 percent. In the 

Bering Sea subarea, 40 percent of the DFA is allocated to the A season (January 20–June 10) and 60 percent of the DFA is allocated to the B 

season (June 10–November 1). Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(iii)(B)(2)(i) and (ii), the annual AI pollock TAC, after subtracting first for the CDQ directed fishing allowance (10 percent) and second the ICA (1,600 mt), is allocated to the Aleut Corporation for a directed pollock fishery. In the AI 

subarea, the A season is allocated 40 percent of the ABC and the B season is allocated the remainder of the directed pollock fishery. 2 In the Bering Sea subarea, no more than 28 percent of each sector’s annual DFA may be taken from the SCA before April 1. The remaining 

12 percent of the annual DFA allocated to the A season may be taken outside of SCA before April 1 or inside the SCA after April 1. If less than 

28 percent of the annual DFA is taken inside the SCA before April 1, the remainder will be available to be taken inside the SCA after April 1. 3Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(4), not less than 8.5 percent of the DFA allocated to listed catcher/processors shall be available for harvest 

only by eligible catcher vessels delivering to listed catcher/processors. 4Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(4)(iii), the AFA unlisted catcher/processors are limited to harvesting not more than 0.5 percent of the catcher/ 

processors sector’s allocation of pollock. 5Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6), NMFS establishes an excessive harvesting share limit equal to 17.5 percent of the sum of the pollock 

DFAs. 6Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7), NMFS establishes an excessive processing share limit equal to 30.0 percent of the sum of the pollock 

DFAs. 7The Bogoslof District is closed by the final harvest specifications to directed fishing for pollock. The amounts specified are for ICA only, and 

are not apportioned by season or sector. 

Allocation of the Atka Mackerel ITAC 

Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(8)(i), up to 2 

percent of the Eastern Aleutian District 

and the Bering Sea subarea Atka 

mackerel ITAC may be allocated to jig 

gear. The amount of this allocation is 

determined annually by the Council 

based on several criteria, including the 

anticipated harvest capacity of the jig 

gear fleet. The Council recommended, 

and NMFS approved, a 1 percent 

allocation of the Atka mackerel ITAC in 

the Eastern Aleutian District and the 

Bering Sea subarea to the jig gear in 

2007 and 2008. Based on the 2007 ITAC 

of 22,015 mt, the jig gear allocation 

would be 220 mt for 2007. Based on the 

2008 ITAC of 15,717 mt, the jig gear 

allocation would be 157 mt for 2008. 

Section § 679.20(a)(8)(ii)(A) 

apportions the Atka mackerel ITAC into 

two equal seasonal allowances. After 

subtraction of the jig gear allocation, the 

first seasonal allowance is made 

available for directed fishing from 

January 1 (January 20 for trawl gear) to 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9457 

April 15 (A season), and the second 

seasonal allowance is made available 

from September 1 to November 1 (B 

season; Table 4). 

Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(8)(ii)(C)(1), the 

Regional Administrator will establish a 

harvest limit area (HLA) limit of no 

more than 60 percent of the seasonal 

TAC for the Western and Central 

Aleutian Districts. A lottery system is 

used for the HLA Atka mackerel 

directed fisheries to reduce the amount 

of daily catch in the HLA by about half 

and to disperse the fishery over two 

districts (see § 679.20(a)(8)(iii)). 

TABLE 4.—2007 AND 2008 SEASONAL AND SPATIAL ALLOWANCES, GEAR SHARES, AND CDQ RESERVE OF THE BSAI 

ATKA MACKEREL TAC1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Subarea and component 2007 

TAC 

2007 CDQ 

reserve 2

2007 CDQ 

reserve 

HLA limit 5

2007 

ITAC 

2007 Seasonal allowances 3

A season 4 B season 4

Total HLA 

limit 5 Total HLA limit 5

Western AI District ................................... 9,600 720 432 8,880 4,440 2,664 4,440 2,664 

Central AI District ..................................... 29,600 2,220 1,332 27,380 13,690 8,214 13,690 8,214 

EAI/BS subarea 6 ..................................... 23,800 1,785 n/a 22,015 n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jig (1%) 7 .......................................... n/a n/a n/a 220 n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Other gear (99%) .............................. n/a n/a n/a 21,795 10,897 n/a 10,897 n/a 

Total ........................................... 63,000 n/a n/a n/a 29,027 n/a 29,027 n/a 

Subarea and component 2008 

TAC 

2008 CDQ 

reserve 2

2008 CDQ 

reserve 

HLA limit 5

2008 

ITAC 

2008 Seasonal allowances 3

A season 4 B season 4

Total HLA 

limit 5 Total HLA 

limit 5

Western AI District ................................... 15,300 1,637 982 13,663 6,831 4,099 6,831 4,099 

Central AI District ..................................... 22,000 2,354 1,412 19,646 9,823 5,894 9,823 5,894 

EAI/BS subarea 6 ..................................... 17,600 1,883 n/a 15,717 n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jig (1%) 7 .......................................... n/a n/a n/a 157 n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Other gear (99%) .............................. n/a n/a n/a 15,560 7,780 n/a 7,780 n/a 

Total ........................................... 54,900 n/a n/a n/a 24,434 n/a 24,434 n/a 

1 Regulations at §§ 679.20(a)(8)(ii) and 679.22(a) establish temporal and spatial limitations for the Atka mackerel fishery. 2The CDQ reserve is 7.5 percent in 2007 and 10.7 percent in 2008 of the TAC for use by CDQ participants (see §§ 679.20(b)(1)(iii), 679.31, 

and section 305(i)(1)(B)(i) and (ii) of the MSA). 3The seasonal allowances of Atka mackerel are 50 percent in the A season and 50 percent in the B season. 

4The A season is January 1 (January 20 for trawl gear) to April 15 and the B season is September 1 to November 1. 

5 Harvest Limit Area (HLA) limit refers to the amount of each seasonal allowance that is available for fishing inside the HLA (see § 679.2). In 

2007 and 2008, 60 percent of each seasonal allowance is available for fishing inside the HLA in the Western and Central Aleutian Districts. 6Eastern Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea. 

7 Regulations at § 679.20 (a)(8)(i) require that up to 2 percent of the Eastern Aleutian District and the Bering Sea subarea ITAC be allocated to 

jig gear. The amount of this allocation is 1 percent. The jig gear allocation is not apportioned by season. 

Allocation of the Pacific cod ITAC 

Pursuant to § 679.20(a)(7)(i)(A), 2 

percent of the Pacific cod ITAC is 

allocated to vessels using jig gear, 51 

percent to vessels using hook-and-line 

or pot gear, and 47 percent to vessels 

using trawl gear. Section 

679.20(a)(7)(i)(B) further allocates the 

portion of the Pacific cod ITAC 

allocated to trawl gear as 50 percent to 

catcher vessels and 50 percent to 

catcher/processors. Section 

679.20(a)(7)(i)(C)(1) sets aside a portion 

of the Pacific cod ITAC allocated to 

hook-and-line or pot gear as an ICA of 

Pacific cod in directed fisheries for 

groundfish using these gear types. The 

Regional Administrator specifies an ICA 

of 500 mt for 2007 and 2008 based on 

anticipated incidental catch in these 

fisheries. The remainder of Pacific cod 

ITAC is further allocated to vessels 

using hook-and-line or pot gear as the 

following DFAs: 80 percent to hookand-line catcher/processors, 0.3 percent 

to hook-and-line catcher vessels, 3.3 

percent to pot catcher/processors, 15 

percent to pot catcher vessels, and 1.4 

percent to catcher vessels under 60 ft 

(18.3 m) length overall (LOA) using 

hook-and-line or pot gear. 

Due to concerns about the potential 

impact of the Pacific cod fishery on 

Steller sea lions and their critical 

habitat, the Pacific cod ITAC is 

apportioned into seasonal allowances to 

disperse the Pacific cod fisheries over 

the fishing year (see 

§§ 679.20(a)(7)(iii)(A) and 679.23(e)(5)). 

For pot and most hook-and-line gear, 

the first seasonal allowance of 60 

percent of the ITAC is made available 

for directed fishing from January 1 to 

June 10, and the second seasonal 

allowance of 40 percent of the ITAC is 

made available from June 10 (September 

1 for pot gear) to December 31. No 

seasonal harvest constraints are 

imposed for the Pacific cod fishery by 

catcher vessels less than 60 ft (18.3 m) 

LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear. 

For trawl gear, the first season is January 

20 to April 1 and is allocated 60 percent 

of the ITAC. The second season, April 

1 to June 10, and the third season, June 

10 to November 1, are each allocated 20 

percent of the ITAC. The trawl catcher 

vessel allocation is further allocated as 

70 percent in the first season, 10 percent 

in the second season and 20 percent in 

the third season. The trawl catcher/ 

processor allocation is allocated 50 

percent in the first season, 30 percent in 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9458 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

the second season, and 20 percent in the 

third season. For jig gear, the first 

season and third seasons are each 

allocated 40 percent of the ITAC and the 

second season is allocated 20 percent of 

the ITAC. Table 5 lists the 2007 and 

2008 allocations and seasonal 

apportionments of the Pacific cod ITAC. 

In accordance with § 679.20(a)(7)(ii)(D) 

and (a)(7)(iii)(B), any unused portion of 

a seasonal Pacific cod allowance will 

become available at the beginning of the 

next seasonal allowance. 

TABLE 5.—2007 AND 2008 GEAR SHARES AND SEASONAL ALLOWANCES OF THE BSAI PACIFIC COD ITAC 

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Gear sector Percent 

2007 

share of 

gear 

sector 

total 

2007 

subtotal 

percentages for 

gear 

sectors 

2007 

share of 

gear 

sector 

total 

2007 seasonal apportionment 1

2008 

share of 

gear 

sector 

total 

2008 

subtotal 

percentages for 

gear 

sectors 

2008 

share of 

gear 

sector 

total 

2008 seasonal apportionment 1

Date Amount Date Amount 

Total hook-and-line/ 

pot gear.

51 80,537 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 57,872 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 

Hook-and-line/pot 

ICA.

n/a n/a n/a 500 n/a .......................... n/a n/a n/a 500 n/a .......................... n/a 

Hook-and-line/pot 

sub-total.

n/a 80,037 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 57,372 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 

Hook-and-line C/P .. n/a n/a 80 64,030 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 38,419 n/a 80 45,897 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 27,538 

.............. .............. .............. .............. Jun 10–Dec 31 ...... 25,611 .............. .............. .............. Jun 10–Dec 31 ...... 18,359 

Hook-and-line CV ... n/a n/a 0.3 240 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 144 n/a 0.3 172 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 103 

.............. .............. .............. .............. Jun 10–Dec 31 ...... 96 .............. .............. .............. Jun 10–Dec 31 ...... 69 

Pot C/P ................... n/a n/a 3.3 2,641 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 1,586 n/a 3.3 1,893 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 1,136 

.............. .............. .............. .............. Sept 1–Dec 31 ....... 1,055 .............. .............. .............. Sept 1–Dec 31 ....... 757 

Pot CV .................... n/a n/a 15 12,006 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 7,203 n/a 15 8,606 Jan 1–Jun 10 ......... 5,163 

.............. .............. .............. .............. Sept 1–Dec 31 ....... 4,803 .............. .............. .............. Sept 1–Dec 31 ....... 3,443 

CV < 60 ft LOA 

using Hook-andline or Pot gear.

n/a n/a 1.4 1,121 n/a .......................... n/a n/a 1.4 803 n/a .......................... n/a 

Total Trawl Gear .... 47 74,221 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 53,333 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 

Trawl CV ......... .............. .............. 50 37,110 Jan 20–Apr 1 ......... 25,977 .............. 50 26,666 Jan 20–Apr 1 ......... 18,666 

.............. .............. .............. n/a Apr 1–Jun 10 ......... 3,711 .............. .............. n/a Apr 1–Jun 10 ......... 2,667 

.............. .............. .............. n/a Jun 10–Nov 1 ........ 7,422 .............. .............. n/a Jun 10–Nov 1 ........ 5,333 

Trawl CP ......... .............. .............. 50 37,110 Jan 20–Apr 1 ......... 18,555 .............. 50 26,666 Jan 20–Apr 1 ......... 13,333 

.............. .............. .............. n/a Apr 1–Jun 10 ......... 11,133 .............. .............. n/a Apr 1–Jun 10 ......... 8,000 

.............. .............. .............. n/a Jun 10–Nov 1 ........ 7,422 .............. .............. n/a Jun 10–Nov 1 ........ 5,333 

Jig ........................... 2 3,158 n/a n/a Jan 1–Apr 30 ......... 1,263 2,269 n/a n/a Jan 1–Apr 30 ......... 908 

.............. .............. n/a n/a Apr 30–Aug 31 ....... 632 .............. n/a n/a Apr 30–Aug 31 ....... 453 

.............. .............. n/a n/a Aug 31–Dec 31 ...... 1,263 .............. n/a n/a Aug 31–Dec 31 ...... 908 

Total ......... 100 157,916 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 113,474 n/a n/a n/a .......................... n/a 

1For most non-trawl gear the first season is allocated 60 percent of the ITAC and the second season is allocated 40 percent of the ITAC. For jig gear, the first season and third seasons are each allocated 40 percent of the ITAC and the second season is allocated 20 percent of the ITAC. No seasonal harvest constraints are imposed for the Pacific cod fishery by catcher vessels less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA using hook-and-line or pot gear. For trawl gear, the first season is allocated 60 percent of the ITAC and the second and third seasons are each allocated 20 percent of the ITAC. The trawl catcher vessels’ allocation is further allocated as 70 percent 

in the first season, 10 percent in the second season and 20 percent in the third season. The trawl catcher/processors’ allocation is allocated 50 percent in the first 

season, 30 percent in the second season and 20 percent in the third season. Any unused portion of a seasonal Pacific cod allowance will be reapportioned to the 

next seasonal allowance. 

Sablefish Gear Allocation 

Sections 679.20(a)(4)(iii) and (iv) 

require the allocation of sablefish TACs 

for the Bering Sea and AI subareas 

between trawl and hook-and-line or pot 

gear. Gear allocations of the TACs for 

the Bering Sea subarea are 50 percent 

for trawl gear and 50 percent for hookand-line or pot gear and for the AI 

subarea are 25 percent for trawl gear and 

75 percent for hook-and-line or pot gear. 

Section 679.20(b)(1)(iii)(B) requires 

apportionment of 20 percent of the 

hook-and-line and pot gear allocation of 

sablefish to the CDQ reserve. The 

Council recommended that only trawl 

sablefish TAC be established biennially. 

The harvest specifications for the hookand-line gear and pot gear sablefish 

Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) fisheries 

will be limited to the 2007 fishing year 

to ensure those fisheries are conducted 

concurrent with the halibut IFQ fishery. 

Concurrent sablefish and halibut IFQ 

fisheries would reduce the potential for 

discards of halibut and sablefish in 

those fisheries. The sablefish IFQ 

fisheries will remain closed at the 

beginning of each fishing year until the 

final specifications for the sablefish IFQ 

fisheries are in effect. Table 6 lists the 

2007 and 2008 gear allocations of the 

sablefish TAC and CDQ reserve 

amounts. 

TABLE 6.—2007 AND 2008 GEAR SHARES AND CDQ RESERVE OF BSAI SABLEFISH TACS

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Subarea and gear Percent of 

TAC 

2007 Share 

of TAC 2007 ITAC 2007 CDQ reserve 

2008 Share 

of TAC 2008 ITAC 2008 CDQ reserve 

Bering Sea: 

Trawl 1 ............................................... 50 1,490 1,266 112 1,485 1,263 111 

Hook-and-line/pot gear 2 ................... 50 1,490 1,192 298 n/a n/a n/a 

Total ........................................... 100 2,980 2,458 410 1,485 1,263 111 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9459 

TABLE 6.—2007 AND 2008 GEAR SHARES AND CDQ RESERVE OF BSAI SABLEFISH TACS—Continued 

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Subarea and gear Percent of 

TAC 

2007 Share 

of TAC 2007 ITAC 2007 CDQ reserve 

2008 Share 

of TAC 2008 ITAC 2008 CDQ reserve 

Aleutian Islands: 

Trawl 1 ............................................... 25 702 597 52 700 596 52 

Hook-and-line/pot gear 2 ................... 75 2,108 1,686 422 n/a n/a n/a 

Total ........................................... 100 2,810 2,283 474 2,800 596 52 

1Except for the sablefish hook-and-line or pot gear allocation, 15 percent of TAC is apportioned to the reserve. The ITAC is the remainder of 

the TAC after the subtraction of these reserves. 2For the portion of the sablefish TAC allocated to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear, 20 percent of the allocated TAC is reserved for use 

by CDQ participants. The Council recommended that specifications for the hook-and-line gear sablefish IFQ fisheries be limited to 1 year. 

Allocation of PSC Limits for Halibut, 

Salmon, Crab, and Herring 

Section 679.21(e) sets forth the BSAI 

PSC limits. Pursuant to § 679.21(e)(1)(v) 

and (e)(2)(i), the BSAI halibut mortality 

limits are 3,675 mt for trawl fisheries 

and 900 mt for the non-trawl fisheries. 

Section 679.21(e)(1)(i) allocates 7.5 

percent of these halibut mortality limits 

as the PSQ reserve for use by the 

groundfish CDQ program. Section 

679.21(e)(1)(vii) specifies 29,000 fish as 

the 2007 and 2008 Chinook salmon PSC 

limit for the Bering Sea subarea pollock 

fishery. Section 679.21(e)(1)(i) allocates 

7.5 percent, or 2,175 Chinook salmon, as 

the PSQ reserve for the CDQ program 

and allocates the remaining 26,825 

Chinook salmon to the non-CDQ 

fisheries. Section 679.21(e)(1)(ix) 

specifies 700 fish as the 2007 and 2008 

Chinook salmon PSC limit for the AI 

subarea pollock fishery. Section 

679.21(e)(1)(i) allocates 7.5 percent, or 

53 Chinook salmon, as the AI subarea 

PSQ for the CDQ program and allocates 

the remaining 647 Chinook salmon to 

the non-CDQ fisheries. Section 

679.21(e)(1)(viii) specifies 42,000 fish as 

the 2007 and 2008 non-Chinook salmon 

PSC limit. Section 679.21(e)(1)(i) 

allocates 7.5 percent, or 3,150 nonChinook salmon, as the PSQ for the 

CDQ program and allocates the 

remaining 38,850 non-Chinook salmon 

to the non-CDQ fisheries. 

PSC limits for crab and herring are 

specified annually based on abundance 

and spawning biomass. The red king 

crab mature female abundance is 

estimated from the 2006 survey data at 

29.7 million red king crabs and the 

effective spawning biomass is estimated 

as 157 million pounds (71,215 mt). 

Based on the criteria set out at 

§ 679.21(e)(1)(ii), the 2007 and 2008 PSC 

limit of red king crab in Zone 1 for trawl 

gear is 197,000 animals. This limit 

results from the mature female 

abundance being above 8.4 million king 

crab and the effective spawning biomass 

estimate being greater than 55 million 

pounds (24,948 mt). 

Section 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B) establishes 

criteria under which NMFS must 

specify an annual red king crab bycatch 

limit for the Red King Crab Savings 

Subarea (RKCSS). The regulations limit 

the RKCSS to up to 35 percent of the 

trawl bycatch allowance specified for 

the rock sole/flathead sole/‘‘other 

flatfish’’ fishery category based on the 

need to optimize the groundfish harvest 

relative to red king crab bycatch. The 

Council recommended, and NMFS 

approves, a red king crab bycatch limit 

equal to 35 percent of the trawl bycatch 

allowance specified for the rock sole/ 

flathead sole/‘‘other flatfish’’ fishery 

category within the RKCSS. 

Based on 2006 survey data, Tanner 

crab (Chionoecetes bairdi) abundance is 

estimated as 866 million animals. Given 

the criteria set out at § 679.21(e)(1)(iii), 

the 2007 and 2008 C. bairdi crab PSC 

limit for trawl gear is 980,000 animals 

in Zone 1 and 2,970,000 animals in 

Zone 2. These limits result from the C. 

bairdi crab abundance estimate of over 

400 million animals. 

Pursuant to § 679.21(e)(1)(iv), the PSC 

limit for snow crab (C. opilio) is based 

on total abundance as indicated by the 

NMFS annual bottom trawl survey. The 

C. opilio crab PSC limit is set at 0.1133 

percent of the Bering Sea abundance 

index. Based on the 2006 survey 

estimate of 3.25 billion animals, the 

calculated limit is 4,350,000 animals. 

Pursuant to § 679.21(e)(1)(i), 7.5 

percent of each PSC limit specified for 

halibut and crab is allocated as a PSQ 

reserve for use by the groundfish CDQ 

program. 

Pursuant to § 679.21(e)(1)(vi), the PSC 

limit of Pacific herring caught while 

conducting any trawl operation for BSAI 

groundfish is 1 percent of the annual 

eastern Bering Sea herring biomass. The 

best estimate of 2007 and 2008 herring 

biomass is 178,652 mt. This amount was 

derived using 2006 survey data and an 

age-structured biomass projection model 

developed by the Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game. Therefore, the herring 

PSC limit for 2007 and 2008 is 1,787 mt. 

Section § 679.21(e)(3) requires the 

apportionment of each trawl PSC limit 

into PSC bycatch allowances for seven 

specified fishery categories. Section 

679.21(e)(4)(ii) authorizes the 

apportionment of the non-trawl halibut 

PSC limit into PSC bycatch allowances 

among five fishery categories. Table 7 

lists the fishery bycatch allowances for 

the trawl and non-trawl fisheries. 

Section 679.21(e)(4)(ii) authorizes the 

exemption of specified non-trawl 

fisheries from the halibut PSC limit. As 

in past years, NMFS, after consultation 

with the Council, exempts pot gear, jig 

gear, and the sablefish IFQ hook-andline gear fishery categories from halibut 

bycatch restrictions because (1) The pot 

gear fisheries have low halibut bycatch 

mortality, (2) halibut mortality for the 

jig gear fleet is assumed to be negligible, 

and (3) the sablefish and halibut IFQ 

fisheries have low halibut bycatch 

mortality because the IFQ program 

(subpart D of 50 CFR part 679) requires 

legal-sized halibut to be retained by 

vessels using hook-and-line gear if a 

halibut IFQ permit holder or a hired 

master is aboard and is holding unused 

halibut IFQ. In 2006, total groundfish 

catch for the pot gear fishery in the 

BSAI was approximately 19,721 mt, 

with an associated halibut bycatch 

mortality of about 5 mt. The 2006 jig 

gear fishery harvested about 84 mt of 

groundfish. Most vessels in the jig gear 

fleet are less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA 

and thus are exempt from observer 

coverage requirements. As a result, 

observer data are not available on 

halibut bycatch in the jig gear fishery. 

However, a negligible amount of halibut 

bycatch mortality is assumed because of 

the selective nature of jig gear and the 

low mortality rate of halibut caught with 

jig gear and released. 

Section 679.21(e)(5) authorizes 

NMFS, after consultation with the 

Council, to establish seasonal 

apportionments of PSC amounts in 

order to maximize the ability of the fleet 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9460 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

to harvest the available groundfish TAC 

and to minimize bycatch. The factors to 

be considered are (1) Seasonal 

distribution of prohibited species, (2) 

seasonal distribution of target 

groundfish species, (3) PSC bycatch 

needs on a seasonal basis relevant to 

prohibited species biomass, (4) expected 

variations in bycatch rates throughout 

the year, (5) expected start of fishing 

effort, and (6) economic effects of 

seasonal PSC apportionments on 

industry sectors. The Council 

recommended and NMFS approves the 

seasonal PSC apportionments in Table 7 

to maximize harvest among gear types, 

fisheries, and seasons while minimizing 

bycatch of PSC based on the above 

criteria. 

TABLE 7.—2007 AND 2008 PROHIBITED SPECIES BYCATCH ALLOWANCES FOR THE BSAI TRAWL AND NON-TRAWL

FISHERIES

Trawl Fisheries 

Prohibited species and zone 

Halibut mortality (mt) 

BSAI 

Herring (mt) 

BSAI 

Red King 

Crab 

(animals) 

Zone 1 1

C. opilio 

(animals) 

COBLZ 1

C. bairdi (animals) 

Zone 1 1 Zone 2 1

Yellowfin sole 936 .................................. 153 33,843 3,098,288 340,844 1,788,459 

January 20–April 1 .............................. 312 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

April 1–May 21 .................................... 195 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

May 21–July 1 ..................................... 49 .................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

July 1–December 31 ........................... 380 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Rock sole/other flat/flathead sole 2 829 .................................. 27 121,413 643,800 365,320 596,154 

January 20–April 1 .............................. 498 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

April 1–July 1 ....................................... 164 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

July 1–December 31 ........................... 167 .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Turbot/arrowtooth/sablefish 3 n/a ................................... 12 n/a 40,238 n/a n/a 

Rockfish n/a ................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

July 1–December 31 ........................... 69 .................................... 10 n/a 40,237 n/a 10,988 

Pacific cod 1,334 ............................... 27 26,563 120,712 183,112 324,176 

Midwater trawl pollock n/a ................................... 1,364 n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other 4 232 .................................. 194 406 80,475 17,224 27,473 

Red King Crab Savings Subarea 5 n/a ................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

(non-pelagic trawl) ............................... n/a ................................... n/a 42,495 n/a n/a n/a 

Total trawl PSC ............................ 3,400 ............................... 1,787 182,225 4,023,750 906,500 2,747,250 

Non-trawl Fisheries 

Pacific cod—Total 775 .................................. .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

January 1–June 10 .............................. 320 .................................. .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

June 10–August 15 ............................. 0 ...................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

August 15–December 31 .................... 455 .................................. .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

Other non-trawl—Total 58 .................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

May 1–December 31 ........................... 58 .................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

Groundfish pot and jig exempt ............................ .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

Sablefish hook-and-line exempt ............................ .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

Total non-trawl PSC ..................... 833 .................................. .................... .................... .................... .................... ....................

PSQ reserve 6 ............................... 342 .................................. n/a 14,775 326,250 73,500 222,750 

PSC grand total ............................ 4,575 ............................... 1,787 197,000 4,350,000 980,000 2,970,000 

1 Refer to § 679.2 for definitions of areas. 2 ‘‘Other flatfish’’ for PSC monitoring includes all flatfish species, except for halibut (a prohibited species), Greenland turbot, rock sole, yellowfin 

sole and arrowtooth flounder. 3Greenland turbot, arrowtooth flounder, and sablefish fishery category. 

4Pollock other than pelagic trawl pollock, Atka mackerel, and ‘‘other species’’ fishery category. 5 In December 2006, the Council recommended that red king crab bycatch for trawl fisheries within the RKCSS be limited to 35 percent of the 

total allocation to the rock sole/flathead sole/’’other flatfish’’ fishery category (see § 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B)). 6With the exception of herring, 7.5 percent of each PSC limit is allocated to the CDQ program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ reserve is not allocated by fishery, gear or season. 

Halibut Discard Mortality Rates 

To monitor halibut bycatch mortality 

allowances and apportionments, the 

Regional Administrator uses observed 

halibut bycatch rates, discard mortality 

rates (DMR), and estimates of 

groundfish catch to project when a 

fishery’s halibut bycatch mortality 

allowance or seasonal apportionment is 

reached. The DMRs are based on the 

best information available, including 

information contained in the annual 

SAFE report. 

The Council recommended, and 

NMFS approves, the halibut DMRs 

developed and recommended by staff of 

the International Pacific Halibut 

Commission (IPHC) for the 2007 and 

2008 BSAI groundfish fisheries. These 

DMRs will be used for monitoring the 

2007 and 2008 halibut bycatch 

allowances (see Table 8). The IPHC 

developed these DMRs using the 10-year 

mean DMRs for the BSAI non-CDQ 

groundfish fisheries. The IPHC will 

analyze observer data annually and 

recommend changes to the DMR where 

a fishery DMR shows large variation 

from the mean. The IPHC has been 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9461 

calculating the DMRs for the CDQ 

fisheries since 1998, and a 10-year mean 

is not yet available. Until 10 years of 

data from CDQ fishing has been 

collected, recommendations will be 

based on averaging all available data. 

The justification for the DMRs is 

discussed in Appendix A of the 2006 

SAFE report dated November 2006 and 

is available from the Council (see 

ADDRESSES). 

TABLE 8.—2007 AND 2008 ASSUMED PACIFIC HALIBUT DISCARD MORTALITY RATES FOR THE BSAI 

Gear Fishery Halibut mortality 

(percent) 

Hook-and-line ....................................................... Greenland turbot ......................................................................................... 13 

Other species ............................................................................................. 11 

Pacific cod .................................................................................................. 11 

Rockfish ...................................................................................................... 17 

Trawl ..................................................................... Arrowtooth flounder .................................................................................... 75 

Atka mackerel ............................................................................................. 76 

Flathead sole .............................................................................................. 70 

Greenland turbot ......................................................................................... 70 

Non-pelagic pollock .................................................................................... 74 

Pelagic pollock ............................................................................................ 88 

Other flatfish ............................................................................................... 74 

Other species ............................................................................................. 70 

Pacific cod .................................................................................................. 70 

Rockfish ...................................................................................................... 76 

Rock sole .................................................................................................... 80 

Sablefish ..................................................................................................... 75 

Yellowfin sole .............................................................................................. 80 

Pot ........................................................................ Other species ............................................................................................. 7 

Pacific cod .................................................................................................. 7 

CDQ trawl ............................................................. Atka mackerel ............................................................................................. 86 

Flathead sole .............................................................................................. 70 

Non-pelagic pollock .................................................................................... 85 

Pelagic pollock ............................................................................................ 90 

Rockfish ...................................................................................................... 76 

Yellowfin sole .............................................................................................. 86 

CDQ hook-and-line ............................................... Greenland turbot ......................................................................................... 13 

Pacific cod .................................................................................................. 10 

CDQ pot ............................................................... Pacific cod .................................................................................................. 7 

Sablefish ..................................................................................................... 34 

Directed Fishing Closures 

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i), 

the Regional Administrator may 

establish a DFA for a species or species 

group, if the Regional Administrator 

determines that any allocation or 

apportionment of a target species or 

‘‘other species’’ category has been or 

will be reached. If the Regional 

Administrator establishes a DFA, and 

that allowance is or will be reached 

before the end of the fishing year, NMFS 

will prohibit directed fishing for that 

species or species group in the specified 

subarea or district (see 

§ 697.20(d)(1)(iii)). Similarly, pursuant 

to § 679.21(e), if the Regional 

Administrator determines that a fishery 

category’s bycatch allowance of halibut, 

red king crab, C. bairdi crab or C. opilio 

crab for a specified area has been 

reached, the Regional Administrator 

will prohibit directed fishing for each 

species in that category in the specified 

area. 

The Regional Administrator has 

determined that the remaining 

allocation amounts in Table 9 will be 

necessary as incidental catch to support 

other anticipated groundfish fisheries 

for the 2007 and 2008 fishing years. 

TABLE 9.—2007 AND 2008 DIRECTED FISHING CLOSURES 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Area Species 

2007 Incidental catch 

allowance 

2008 Incidental catch 

allowance 

Bogoslof District ............................................................ Pollock .......................................................................... 10 10 

Aleutian Islands subarea .............................................. ICA Pollock ................................................................... 1,600 1,600 

‘‘Other rockfish’’ ............................................................ 497 497 

Bering Sea subarea ...................................................... Pacific ocean perch ...................................................... 1,836 3,468 

‘‘Other rockfish’’ ............................................................ 383 383 

ICA Pollock ................................................................... 35,129 33,214 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands .................................. Northern rockfish .......................................................... 7,576 7,539 

Shortraker rockfish ....................................................... 392 392 

Rougheye rockfish ........................................................ 187 187 

‘‘Other species’’ ............................................................ 31,752 49,313 

1 Maximum retainable amounts may be found in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9462 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Consequently, in accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(i), the Regional 

Administrator establishes the DFA for 

the above species or species groups as 

zero. Therefore, in accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), NMFS is prohibiting 

directed fishing for these species in the 

specified areas effective at 1200 hrs, 

A.l.t., March 2, 2007, through 2400 hrs, 

A.l.t., December 31, 2008. 

In addition, the BSAI Zone 1 annual 

red king crab allowance specified for the 

trawl rockfish fishery (see 

§ 679.21(e)(3)(iv)(D)) is 0 mt and the 

BSAI first seasonal halibut bycatch 

allowance specified for the trawl 

rockfish fishery is 0 mt. Also, the BSAI 

annual halibut bycatch allowance 

specified for the trawl Greenland turbot/ 

arrowtooth flounder/sablefish fishery 

categories is 0 mt (see 

§ 679.21(e)(3)(iv)(C)). Therefore, in 

accordance with § 679.21(e)(7)(ii) and 

(v), NMFS is prohibiting directed 

fishing for rockfish by vessels using 

trawl gear in Zone 1 of the BSAI and 

directed fishing for Greenland turbot/ 

arrowtooth flounder/sablefish by vessels 

using trawl gear in the BSAI effective at 

1200 hrs, A.l.t., March 2, 2007, through 

2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2008. 

NMFS also is prohibiting directed 

fishing for rockfish outside Zone 1 in 

the BSAI through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., July 

1, 2007, for 2007 and July 1, 2008, for 

2008. 

Under authority of the 2006 and 2007 

final harvest specifications (71 FR 

10894, March 3, 2006), NMFS 

prohibited directed fishing for Atka 

mackerel in the Eastern Aleutian 

District and the Bering Sea subarea of 

the BSAI effective 1200 hrs, A.l.t., 

February 3, 2007, through 1200 hrs, 

A.l.t., September 1, 2007 (72 FR 5644, 

February 7, 2007). NMFS opened the 

first directed fisheries in the HLA in 

area 542 and area 543 effective 1200 hrs, 

A.l.t., February 5, 2007. The first HLA 

fishery in area 542 remained open 

through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., February 19, 

2007. The first HLA fishery in area 543 

remained open through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., 

February 6, 2007. The second directed 

fisheries in the HLA in area 542 and 

area 543 opened effective 1200 hrs, 

A.l.t., February 21, 2007. The second 

HLA fishery in area 542 remained open 

through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., March 7, 2007. 

The second HLA fishery in area 543 

remained open through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., 

February 22, 2007. NMFS prohibited 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by 

catcher vessels 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA and 

longer using pot gear in the BSAI, 

effective 12 hrs, A.l.t., January 26, 2007 

through 1200 hrs, A.l.t., September 1, 

2007 (72 FR 4217, January 30, 2007). 

NMFS prohibited directed fishing for 

non-CDQ pollock with trawl gear in the 

Chinook Salmon Savings Areas of the 

BSAI, effective 12 noon, A.l.t., February 

6, 2007, through 12 noon, A.l.t., April 

15, 2007, and from 12 noon, A.l.t., 

September 1, 2007, through 12 

midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 2007 (72 

FR 6178, February 9, 2007). NMFS 

prohibited directed fishing for Pacific 

cod by catcher processor vessels using 

hook-and-line gear in the BSAI, effective 

12 noon, A.l.t., February 12 2007, until 

12 noon, A.l.t., August 15, 2007 (72 FR 

7354, February 15, 2007). NMFS closed 

directed fishing for the rock sole, 

flathead sole, and ‘‘other flatfish’’

fishery category by vessels using trawl 

gear in the BSAI effective 12 noon, 

A.l.t., February 17, 2007 through 12 

noon, A.l.t., April 1, 2007 (72 FR xxxx, 

February 22, 2007). NMFS prohibiting 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by 

catcher processor vessels using pot gear 

in the BSAI, effective 12 noon, A.l.t., 

February 20, 2007 through 1200 hrs, 

A.l.t., September 1, 2007 (72 FR xxxx, 

February 23, 2007). NMFS prohibited 

directed fishing for Pacific cod by 

catcher vessels 60 feet (18.3 meters (m)) 

LOA and longer using hook-and-line 

gear in the BSAI, effective 12 noon, 

A.l.t., February 21, 2007 (72 FR xxxx, 

February 26, 2007). 

These closures remain effective under 

authority of these 2007 and 2008 final 

harvest specifications. These closures 

supersede the closures announced 

under authority of the 2006 and 2007 

final harvest specifications (71 FR 

10894, March 3, 2006). While these 

closures are in effect, the maximum 

retainable amounts at § 679.20(e) and (f) 

apply at any time during a fishing trip. 

These closures to directed fishing are in 

addition to closures and prohibitions 

found in regulations at 50 CFR part 679. 

Amendment 68 Sideboards 

Section 802 of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2004 (Public Law 

108–199) grants NMFS specific statutory 

authority to manage the Central Gulf of 

Alaska rockfish fisheries. The Council 

adopted a Central Gulf of Alaska 

Rockfish Pilot Program (Rockfish 

Program) to meet the requirements of 

Section 802 on June 6, 2005. The 

Secretary approved Amendment 68 on 

August 11, 2006. The elements of the 

Rockfish Program are discussed in detail 

in the proposed and final rules for 

Amendment 68 to the FMP for 

Groundfish of the GOA (71 FR 33040, 

June 7, 2006 and 71 FR 67210, 

November 20, 2006, respectively). The 

final rule for Amendment 68 includes 

prohibitions on catcher vessels fishing 

specific groundfish fisheries in the BSAI 

and limitations on fishing Pacific cod in 

the BSAI during July. The basis for the 

fishing prohibitions and the BSAI 

catcher vessel Pacific cod sideboard 

limit is described in detail in the final 

rule for Amendment 68 (71 FR 67210, 

November 20, 2006). Section 

679.82(d)(6)(i) establishes the BSAI 

catcher vessel Pacific cod sideboard 

limit as 0.0 mt. Therefore, in accordance 

with § 679.82(d)(7)(ii), NMFS is 

prohibiting directed fishing for BSAI 

Pacific cod in July for catcher vessels 

under the Rockfish Program sideboard 

limitations. 

Listed AFA Catcher/Processor 

Sideboard Limits 

According to § 679.64(a), the Regional 

Administrator will restrict the ability of 

listed AFA catcher/processors to engage 

in directed fishing for groundfish 

species other than pollock to protect 

participants in other groundfish 

fisheries from adverse effects resulting 

from the AFA and from fishery 

cooperatives in the directed pollock 

fishery. The basis for these sideboard 

limits is described in detail in the final 

rule implementing major provisions of 

the AFA (67 FR 79692, December 30, 

2002). Table 10 lists the 2007 and 2008 

catcher/processor sideboard limits. 

All groundfish other than pollock that 

are harvested by listed AFA catcher/ 

processors, whether as targeted catch or 

incidental catch, will be deducted from 

the sideboard limits in Table 10. 

However, groundfish other than pollock 

that are delivered to listed catcher/ 

processors by catcher vessels will not be 

deducted from the 2007 and 2008 

sideboard limits for the listed catcher/ 

processors. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9463 

TABLE 10.—2007 AND 2008 LISTED BSAI AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER/PROCESSOR GROUNDFISH SIDEBOARD

LIMITS

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Target species Area 

1995–1997 

2007 ITAC 

available to 

trawl C/Ps 

2007 C/P 

sideboard 

limit 

2008 ITAC 

available to 

trawl C/Ps 

2008 C/P 

sideboard 

limit Retained 

catch Total catch 

Ratio of 

retained 

catch to 

total catch 

Pacific cod trawl .... BSAI ..................... 12,424 48,177 0.258 37,110 9,574 26,666 6,880 

Sablefish trawl ....... BS ......................... 8 497 0.016 1,266 20 1,263 20 

AI .......................... 0 145 0.000 597 0 596 0 

Atka mackerel ....... Central AI ............. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

A season1 ............. n/a n/a 0.115 13,690 1,574 9,823 1,130 

HLA limit 2 ............. n/a n/a n/a 8,214 945 5,894 678 

B season1 ............. n/a n/a 0.115 13,690 1,574 9,823 1,130 

HLA limit 2 ............. n/a n/a n/a 8,214 945 5,894 678 

Western AI ............ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

A season1 ............. n/a n/a 0.200 4,440 888 6,831 1,366 

HLA limit 2 ............. n/a n/a n/a 2,664 533 4,099 820 

B season1 ............. n/a n/a 0.200 4,440 888 6,831 1,366 

HLA limit 2 ............. n/a n/a n/a 2,664 533 4,099 820 

Yellowfin sole ........ BSAI ..................... 100,192 435,788 0.230 115,600 26,588 127,500 29,325 

Rock sole .............. BSAI ..................... 6,317 169,362 0.037 46,750 1,730 63,750 2,359 

Greenland turbot ... BS ......................... 121 17,305 0.007 1,428 10 1,462 10 

AI .......................... 23 4,987 0.005 646 3 655 3 

Arrowtooth flounder BSAI ..................... 76 33,987 0.002 17,000 34 25,500 51 

Flathead sole ........ BSAI ..................... 1,925 52,755 0.036 25,500 918 38,250 1,377 

Alaska plaice ......... BSAI ..................... 14 9,438 0.001 21,250 21 51,000 51 

Other flatfish .......... BSAI ..................... 3,058 52,298 0.058 8,500 493 18,190 1,055 

Pacific ocean perch BS ......................... 12 4,879 0.002 1,836 4 3,468 7 

Eastern AI ............. 125 6,179 0.020 4,598 92 4,376 88 

Central AI ............. 3 5,698 0.001 4,672 5 4,465 4 

Western AI ............ 54 13,598 0.004 7,141 29 6,805 27 

Northern rockfish ... BSAI ..................... 91 13,040 0.007 7,576 53 7,539 53 

Shortraker rockfish BSAI ..................... 50 2,811 0.018 392 7 392 7 

Rougheye rockfish BSAI ..................... 50 2,811 0.018 187 3 187 3 

Other rockfish ........ BS ......................... 18 621 0.029 383 11 383 11 

AI .......................... 22 806 0.027 497 13 497 13 

Squid ..................... BSAI ..................... 73 3,328 0.022 1,675 37 1,675 37 

Other species ........ BSAI ..................... 553 68,672 0.008 31,752 254 49,313 395 

1The seasonal apportionment of Atka mackerel in the open access fishery is 50 percent in the A season and 50 percent in the B season. Listed AFA catcher/processors are limited to harvesting no more than zero in the Eastern Aleutian District and Bering Sea subarea, 20 percent of 

the annual ITAC specified for the Western Aleutian District, and 11.5 percent of the annual ITAC specified for the Central Aleutian District. 2 Harvest Limit Area (HLA) limit refers to the amount of each seasonal allowance that is available for fishing inside the HLA (see § 679.2). In 

2007 and 2008, 60 percent of each seasonal allowance is available for fishing inside the HLA in the Western and Central Aleutian Districts. 

Section 679.64(a)(5) establishes a 

formula for PSC sideboard limits for 

listed AFA catcher/processors. The 

basis for these sideboard limits is 

described in detail in the final rule 

implementing major provisions of the 

AFA (67 FR 79692, December 30, 2002). 

PSC species listed in Table 11 that are 

caught by listed AFA catcher/processors 

participating in any groundfish fishery 

other than pollock will accrue against 

the 2007 and 2008 PSC sideboard limits 

for the listed AFA catcher/processors. 

Section 679.21(e)(3)(v) authorizes NMFS 

to close directed fishing for groundfish 

other than pollock for listed AFA 

catcher/processors once a 2007 or 2008 

PSC sideboard limit listed in Table 11 

is reached. 

Crab or halibut PSC caught by listed 

AFA catcher/processors while fishing 

for pollock will accrue against the 

bycatch allowances annually specified 

for either the midwater pollock or the 

pollock/Atka mackerel/‘‘other species’’

fishery categories under regulations at 

§ 679.21(e)(3)(iv). 

TABLE 11.—2007 AND 2008 BSAI AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT LISTED CATCHER/PROCESSOR PROHIBITED SPECIES

SIDEBOARD LIMITS 1

PSC species 

1995–1997 2007 and 

2008 PSC 

available 

to trawl 

vessels 

2007 and 

2008 C/P 

sideboard 

limit PSC catch Total PSC 

Ratio of 

PSC catch 

to total PSC 

Halibut mortality ....................................................................................... 955 11,325 0.084 3,400 286 

Red king crab ........................................................................................... 3,098 473,750 0.007 182,225 1,276 

C. opilio 2 .................................................................................................. 2,323,731 15,139,178 0.153 4,023,750 615,634 

C. bairdi ................................................................................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9464 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 11.—2007 AND 2008 BSAI AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT LISTED CATCHER/PROCESSOR PROHIBITED SPECIES

SIDEBOARD LIMITS 1—Continued 

PSC species 

1995–1997 2007 and 

2008 PSC 

available 

to trawl 

vessels 

2007 and 

2008 C/P 

sideboard 

limit PSC catch Total PSC 

Ratio of 

PSC catch 

to total PSC 

Zone 1 2 .................................................................................................... 385,978 2,750,000 0.140 906,500 126,910 

Zone 2 2 .................................................................................................... 406,860 8,100,000 0.050 2,747,250 137,363 

1 Halibut amounts are in metric tons of halibut mortality. Crab amounts are in numbers of animals. 

2 Refer to § 679.2 for definitions of areas. 

AFA Catcher Vessel Sideboard Limits 

Pursuant to § 679.64(a), the Regional 

Administrator restricts the ability of 

AFA catcher vessels to engage in 

directed fishing for groundfish species 

other than pollock to protect 

participants in other groundfish 

fisheries from adverse effects resulting 

from the AFA and from fishery 

cooperatives in the directed pollock 

fishery. Section 679.64(b) establishes a 

formula for setting AFA catcher vessel 

groundfish and PSC sideboard limits for 

the BSAI. The basis for these sideboard 

limits is described in detail in the final 

rule implementing major provisions of 

the AFA (67 FR 79692, December 30, 

2002). Tables 12 and 13 list the 2007 

and 2008 AFA catcher vessel sideboard 

limits. 

All harvests of groundfish sideboard 

species made by non-exempt AFA 

catcher vessels, whether as targeted 

catch or incidental catch, will be 

deducted from the sideboard limits 

listed in Table 12. 

TABLE 12.—2007 AND 2008 BSAI AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL SIDEBOARD LIMITS

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Fishery by area/season/processor/gear 

Ratio of 

1995–1997 

AFA CV 

catch to 

1995–1997 

TAC 

2007 initial 

TAC 

2007 

Catcher 

vessel 

sideboard 

limits 

2008 initial 

TAC 

2008 

Catcher 

vessel 

sideboard 

limits 

Pacific cod .................................... BSAI .............................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jig gear ......................................... 0.0000 3,158 0 2,269 0 

Hook-and-line CV ......................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan 1–Jun 10 ................................ 0.0006 144 0 103 0 

Jun 10–Dec 31 ............................. 0.0006 96 0 69 0 

Pot gear CV .................................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan 1–Jun 10 ................................ 0.0006 7,203 4 5,163 3 

Sept 1–Dec 31 .............................. 0.0006 4,803 3 3,443 2 

CV < 60 feet LOA using hookand-line or pot gear.0.0006 1,121 1 803 0 

Trawl gear CV .............................. n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan 20–Apr 1 ................................ 0.8609 25,977 22,364 18,666 16,070 

Apr 1–Jun 10 ................................ 0.8609 3,711 3,195 2,667 2,296 

Jun 10–Nov 1 ............................... 0.8609 7,422 6,390 5,333 4,591 

Sablefish ....................................... BS trawl gear ................................ 0.0906 1,266 115 1,263 114 

AI trawl gear ................................. 0.0645 597 39 596 38 

Atka mackerel ............................... Eastern AI/BS ............................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jig gear ......................................... 0.0031 220 1 157 0 

Other gear .................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan 1–Apr 15 ................................ 0.0032 10,897 35 7,780 25 

Sept 1–Nov 1 ................................ 0.0032 10,897 35 7,780 25 

Central AI ...................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan–Apr 15 ................................... 0.0001 13,690 1 9,823 1 

HLA limit ....................................... 0.0001 8,214 1 5,894 1 

Sept 1–Nov 1 ................................ 0.0001 13,690 1 9,823 1 

HLA limit ....................................... 0.0001 8,214 1 5,894 1 

Western AI .................................... n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 

Jan–Apr 15 ................................... 0.0000 4,440 0 6,831 0 

HLA limit ....................................... n/a 2,664 0 4,099 0 

Sept 1–Nov 1 ................................ 0.0000 4,440 0 6,831 0 

HLA limit ....................................... n/a 2,664 0 4,099 0 

Yellowfin sole ................................ BSAI .............................................. 0.0647 115,600 7,479 127,500 8,249 

Rock sole ...................................... BSAI .............................................. 0.0341 46,750 1,594 63,750 2,174 

Greenland Turbot ......................... BS ................................................. 0.0645 1,428 92 1,462 94 

AI .................................................. 0.0205 646 13 655 13 

Arrowtooth flounder ...................... BSAI .............................................. 0.0690 17,000 1,173 25,500 1,760 

Alaska plaice ................................ BSAI .............................................. 0.0441 21,250 937 51,000 2,249 

Other flatfish ................................. BSAI .............................................. 0.0441 8,500 375 18,190 802 

Pacific ocean perch ...................... BS ................................................. 0.1000 1,836 184 3,468 347 

Eastern AI ..................................... 0.0077 4,598 35 4,376 34 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9465 

TABLE 12.—2007 AND 2008 BSAI AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL SIDEBOARD LIMITS—Continued 

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Fishery by area/season/processor/gear 

Ratio of 

1995–1997 

AFA CV 

catch to 

1995–1997 

TAC 

2007 initial 

TAC 

2007 

Catcher 

vessel 

sideboard 

limits 

2008 initial 

TAC 

2008 

Catcher 

vessel 

sideboard 

limits 

Central AI ...................................... 0.0025 4,672 12 4,465 11 

Western AI .................................... 0.0000 7,141 0 6,805 0 

Northern rockfish .......................... BSAI .............................................. 0.0084 7,576 64 7,539 63 

Shortraker rockfish ....................... BSAI .............................................. 0.0037 392 1 392 1 

Rougheye rockfish ........................ BSAI .............................................. 0.0037 187 1 187 1 

Other rockfish ............................... BS ................................................. 0.0048 383 2 383 2 

AI .................................................. 0.0095 497 5 497 5 

Squid ............................................. BSAI .............................................. 0.3827 1,675 641 1,675 641 

Other species ............................... BSAI .............................................. 0.0541 31,752 1,718 49,313 2,668 

Flathead Sole ............................... BS trawl gear ................................ 0.0505 25,500 1,288 38,250 1,932 

Halibut and crab PSC listed in Table 

13 that are caught by AFA catcher 

vessels participating in any groundfish 

fishery for groundfish other than 

pollock will accrue against the 2007 and 

2008 PSC sideboard limits for the AFA 

catcher vessels. Sections 679.21(d)(8) 

and (e)(3)(v) provide authority to close 

directed fishing for groundfish other 

than pollock for AFA catcher vessels 

once a 2007 or 2008 PSC sideboard limit 

listed in Table 13 is reached. The PSC 

that is caught by AFA catcher vessels 

while fishing for pollock in the BSAI 

will accrue against the bycatch 

allowances annually specified for either 

the midwater pollock or the pollock/ 

Atka mackerel/‘‘other species’’ fishery 

categories under regulations at 

§ 679.21(e)(3)(iv). 

TABLE 13.—2007 AND 2008 AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL PROHIBITED SPECIES CATCH SIDEBOARD

LIMITS FOR THE BSAI 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

PSC species Target fishery category 2

Ratio of 

1995–1997 

AFA CV retained catch 

to total retained catch 

2007 and 

2008 PSC 

limit 

2007 and 

2008 AFA 

catcher vessel PSC 

sideboard 

limit 

Halibut ................................................................... Pacific cod trawl ................................................... 0.6183 1,334 825 

Pacific cod hook-and-line or pot .......................... 0.0022 775 2 

Yellowfin sole ....................................................... n/a n/a n/a 

January 20–April 1 ............................................... 0.1144 312 36 

April 1–May 21 ..................................................... 0.1144 195 22 

May 21–July 1 ...................................................... 0.1144 49 6 

July 1–December 31 ............................................ 0.1144 380 43 

Rock sole/flathead sole/other flatfish 5 ................. n/a n/a n/a 

January 20–April 1 ............................................... 0.2841 498 141 

April 1–July 1 ........................................................ 0.2841 164 47 

July 1–December 31 ............................................ 0.2841 167 47 

Turbot/Arrowtooth/Sablefish ................................. 0.2327 0 0 

Rockfish (July 1–December 31) ........................... 0.0245 69 2 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other species ................... 0.0227 232 5 

Red King Crab Zone 1 3 4 ..................................... Pacific cod ............................................................ 0.6183 26,563 16,424 

Yellowfin sole ....................................................... 0.1144 33,843 3,872 

Rock sole/flathead sole/other flatfish 5 ................. 0.2841 121,413 34,493 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other species ................... 0.0227 406 9 

C. opilio COBLZ 3 ................................................. Pacific cod ............................................................ 0.6183 120,712 74,636 

Yellowfin sole ....................................................... 0.1144 3,098,288 354,444 

Rock sole/flathead sole/other flatfish 5 ................. 0.2841 643,800 182,904 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other species ................... 0.0227 120,712 2,740 

Rockfish ................................................................ 0.0245 40,237 986 

Turbot/Arrowtooth/Sablefish ................................. 0.2327 40,238 9,363 

C. bairdi Zone 1 3 .................................................. Pacific cod ............................................................ 0.6183 183,112 113,218 

Yellowfin sole ....................................................... 0.1144 340,844 38,993 

Rock sole/flathead sole/other flatfish 5 ................. 0.2841 365,320 103,787 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other species ................... 0.0227 17,224 391 

C. bairdi Zone 2 3 .................................................. Pacific cod ............................................................ 0.6183 324,176 200,438 

Yellowfin sole ....................................................... 0.1144 1,788,459 204,600 

Rock sole/flathead sole/other flatfish 5 ................. 0.2841 596,154 169,367 

Pollock/Atka mackerel/other species ................... 0.0227 27,473 624 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9466 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 13.—2007 AND 2008 AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL PROHIBITED SPECIES CATCH SIDEBOARD

LIMITS FOR THE BSAI 1—Continued 

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

PSC species Target fishery category 2

Ratio of 

1995–1997 

AFA CV retained catch 

to total retained catch 

2007 and 

2008 PSC 

limit 

2007 and 

2008 AFA 

catcher vessel PSC 

sideboard 

limit 

Rockfish ................................................................ 0.0245 10,988 269 

1 Halibut amounts are in metric tons of halibut mortality. Crab amounts are in numbers of animals. 

2Target fishery categories are defined in regulation at § 679.21(e)(3)(iv). 3 Refer to § 679.2 for definitions of areas. 4 In December 2006, the Council recommended that red king crab bycatch for trawl fisheries within the RKCSS be limited to 35 percent of the 

total allocation to the rock sole/flathead sole/‘‘other flatfish’’ fishery category (see § 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B)). 5 ‘‘Other flatfish’’ for PSC monitoring includes all flatfish species, except for halibut (a prohibited species), Greenland turbot, rock sole, yellowfin 

sole, arrowtooth flounder. 

Sideboard Directed Fishing Closures 

AFA Catcher/Processor and Catcher 

Vessel Sideboard Closures 

The Regional Administrator has 

determined that many of the AFA 

catcher/processor and catcher vessel 

sideboard limits listed in Tables 14 and 

15 are necessary as incidental catch to 

support other anticipated groundfish 

fisheries for the 2007 fishing year. In 

accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(iv), the 

Regional Administrator establishes the 

sideboard limits listed in Tables 14 and 

15 as DFAs. The Regional Administrator 

finds that many of these DFAs will be 

reached before the end of the year. 

Therefore, in accordance with 

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), NMFS is prohibiting 

directed fishing by listed AFA catcher/ 

processors for the species in the 

specified areas set out in Table 14 and 

directed fishing by non-exempt AFA 

catcher vessels for the species in the 

specified areas set out in Table 15. 

TABLE 14.—2007 AND 2008 AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT LISTED CATCHER/PROCESSOR SIDEBOARD DIRECTED FISHING

CLOSURES 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Area Gear types 

2007 

Sideboard 

limit 

2008 

Sideboard 

limit 

Sablefish trawl ................................... BS ..................................................... Trawl ................................................. 20 20 

AI ...................................................... Trawl ................................................. 0 0 

Rock sole .......................................... BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 1,730 2,359 

Greenland turbot ............................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 10 10 

AI ...................................................... all ...................................................... 3 3 

Arrowtooth flounder ........................... BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 34 51 

Pacific ocean perch ........................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 4 7 

Eastern AI ......................................... all ...................................................... 92 88 

Central AI .......................................... all ...................................................... 5 4 

Western AI ........................................ all ...................................................... 29 27 

Northern rockfish ............................... BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 53 53 

Shortraker rockfish ............................ BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 7 7 

Rougheye rockfish ............................ BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 3 3 

Other rockfish .................................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 11 11 

AI ...................................................... all ...................................................... 13 13 

Squid ................................................. BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 37 37 

‘‘Other species’’ ................................. BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 254 395 

1 Maximum retainable amounts may be found in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679. 

TABLE 15.—2007 AND 2008 AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL SIDEBOARD DIRECTED FISHING CLOSURES 1

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Area Gear types 

2007 

Sideboard 

limit 

2008 

Sideboard 

limit 

Pacific cod ......................................... BSAI .................................................. hook-and-line .................................... 0 0 

BSAI .................................................. pot ..................................................... 8 5 

BSAI .................................................. jig ...................................................... 0 0 

Sablefish ............................................ BS ..................................................... trawl .................................................. 115 114 

AI ...................................................... trawl .................................................. 39 38 

Atka mackerel ................................... Eastern AI/BS ................................... jig ...................................................... 1 0 

Eastern AI/BS ................................... other .................................................. 70 50 

Central AI .......................................... all ...................................................... 2 2 

Western AI ........................................ all ...................................................... 0 0 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9467 

TABLE 15.—2007 AND 2008 AMERICAN FISHERIES ACT CATCHER VESSEL SIDEBOARD DIRECTED FISHING CLOSURES 1—

Continued 

[Amounts are in metric tons] 

Species Area Gear types 

2007 

Sideboard 

limit 

2008 

Sideboard 

limit 

Greenland turbot ............................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 92 94 

AI ...................................................... all ...................................................... 13 13 

Arrowtooth flounder ........................... BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 1,173 1,760 

Pacific ocean perch ........................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 184 347 

Eastern AI ......................................... all ...................................................... 35 34 

Central AI .......................................... all ...................................................... 12 11 

Western AI ........................................ all ...................................................... 0 0 

Northern rockfish ............................... BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 64 63 

Shortraker rockfish ............................ BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 1 1 

Rougheye rockfish ............................ BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 1 1 

Other rockfish .................................... BS ..................................................... all ...................................................... 2 2 

AI ...................................................... all ...................................................... 5 5 

Squid ................................................. BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 641 641 

‘‘Other species’’ ................................. BSAI .................................................. all ...................................................... 1,718 2,668 

1 Maximum retainable amounts may be found in Table 11 to 50 CFR part 679. 

Response to Comments 

NMFS received 4 letters of comment 

(19 comments) in response to proposed 

the 2007 and 2008 harvest 

specifications. These comments are 

summarized and responded to below. 

Comment 1: All quotas should be cut 

in half this year and cut by 10 percent 

each year thereafter until we stop 

starving the marine life that depends on 

eating this fish too. 

Response: The decisions on the 

amount of harvest are based on the best 

available science and socioeconomic 

considerations. NMFS finds that the 

ABCs and TACs are consistent with the 

biological condition of the groundfish 

stocks as described in the 2006 SAFE 

report and approved by the Council. 

Comment 2: The Council, SSC and 

Advisory Panel recommended that the 

Alaska Fisheries Science Center 

convene a Pacific cod model workshop 

to consider recommendations from an 

industry sponsored review for changes 

to the stock assessment model. We are 

advised that preparations are underway 

for such a workshop to be held during 

the second quarter of 2007. We 

appreciate this effort and look forward 

to the results and to the next TACsetting process. 

Response: NMFS supports an Alaska 

Fisheries Science Center workshop in 

2007 to evaluate the Pacific cod model. 

Comment 3: NMFS should define 

‘‘directed fishery’’ for purposes of CDQ 

allocations as the target species list in 

the Council’s December 2005 final 

action on management of CDQ reserves. 

Response: This comment was 

submitted by the Western Alaska 

Community Development Association, 

which is the CDQ Program 

administrative panel (‘‘CDQ Panel’’) 

created under the MSA. The CDQ Panel 

proposed an alternative interpretation of 

the term ‘‘directed fishery’’ in section 

305(i)(1) of the MSA. The interpretation 

of this term determines which species or 

species groups are allocated to the CDQ 

Program in the annual harvest 

specifications. 

As described in the 2007 and 2008 

proposed harvest specifications for the 

BSAI, section 305(i)(1) of the MSA was 

amended on July 11, 2006, by the Coast 

Guard and Maritime Transportation Act 

of 2006. Section 305(i)(1)(B)(i) of the 

MSA now requires that ‘‘the annual 

percentage of the total allowable catch, 

guideline harvest level, or other annual 

catch limit allocated to the program in 

each directed fishery of the Bering Sea 

and Aleutian Islands shall be the 

percentage approved by the Secretary, 

or established by Federal law, as of 

March 1, 2006, for the program.’’

Prior to this amendment, the MSA 

stated that ‘‘a percentage of the total 

allowable catch of any Bering Sea 

fishery is allocated to the program.’’

Since 1998, NMFS has allocated to the 

CDQ Program a percentage of each 

groundfish TAC category, except squid. 

Section 305(i)(1) was amended again 

on January 12, 2007, by the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Reauthorization Act of 

2006 (Public Law 109–479). This 

legislation amended section 

305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I) of the MSA. This 

section now requires that ‘‘the 

allocation under the program for each 

directed fishery of the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands (other than a fishery for 

halibut, sablefish, pollock, and crab) 

shall be a total allocation (directed and 

nontarget combined) of 10.7 percent 

effective January 1, 2008.’’

As a result of these two MSA 

amendments, allocations of groundfish 

species or species groups to the CDQ 

Program in 2007 will be made under 

section 305(i)(1)(B)(i). Starting on 

January 1, 2008, allocations of 

groundfish other than pollock or 

sablefish will be made under section 

305(i)(1)(B)(ii)(I). Allocations of pollock 

and sablefish in 2008 and thereafter will 

continue to be made under section 

305(i)(1)(B)(i). 

The MSA requires allocation to the 

CDQ Program of a percentage of ‘‘each 

directed fishery of the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands.’’ However, Congress 

did not define the term ‘‘directed 

fishery’’ in section 305(i)(1) or in other 

provisions of the MSA. NMFS proposed 

that the term be interpreted to mean 

each species or species group with a 

TAC that was open for directed fishing 

in the BSAI in 2006. While this 

interpretation initially appeared 

consistent with the language of section 

305(i)(1), it did not take into 

consideration whether the species or 

species group open for directed fishing 

was economically valuable or whether 

participants in the BSAI groundfish 

fishery actually conducted directed 

fishing for the species or species group 

during the open period. 

The CDQ Panel submitted a comment 

to NMFS that disagreed with this 

interpretation and requested that NMFS 

define ‘‘directed fishery’’ as the list of 

target species the Council identified for 

the CDQ Program in December 2005. 

The CDQ Panel suggested that the term 

‘‘directed fishery’’ means the same thing 

as a target fishery and referenced the 

analysis NMFS prepared for the 

Council’s 2005 action as support for this 

recommendation. In that analysis, 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9468 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

NMFS wrote that target species are 

those species of economic importance 

that are caught as the primary focus of 

a directed fishery. 

After consideration of the CDQ 

Panel’s comments, and upon reexamination of NMFS’s proposed 

interpretation, the statutory language, 

and the legislative history, NMFS has 

determined that the term ‘‘directed 

fishery’’ for purposes of section 305(i)(1) 

of the MSA means a fishery for which 

sufficient quota exists to open a directed 

fishery for that species or species group, 

and the species or species group is 

economically valuable enough for vessel 

operators to conduct directed fishing for 

that species or species group. NMFS 

determined that this interpretation of 

the term ‘‘directed fishery’’ for purposes 

of section 305(i)(1) is a more reasonable 

interpretation because it is more 

consistent with Congressional intent. 

Legislative history for section 

305(i)(1)(B)(i) indicates that Congress 

did not intend ‘‘directed fishery’’ to 

include minor species that are not 

economically valuable or to include 

species or species groups that lack 

sufficient quota to open them to 

directed fishing. NMFS notes that 

because the definition of ‘‘directed 

fishery’’ is based on legislative history 

for section 305(i)(1), the definition is 

only applicable for purposes of section 

305(i)(1). While NMFS does not find 

adequate support for the definition of 

‘‘directed fishery’’ proposed by the CDQ 

Panel, as explained in greater detail 

below, the application of NMFS’s 

revised definition of ‘‘directed fishery’’

results in the allocation of the same 

species and species groups as was 

recommended by the CDQ Panel with 

only one exception for Bogoslof pollock. 

Under NMFS’s definition of ‘‘directed 

fishery,’’ most of the species and species 

groups NMFS proposed to allocate to 

the CDQ Program in 2007 and 2008 will 

remain the same. NMFS proposed that 

Bering Sea pollock, AI pollock, Pacific 

cod, sablefish from the fixed gear 

allocation, Atka mackerel, yellowfin 

sole, rock sole, Bering Sea Greenland 

turbot, arrowtooth flounder, flathead 

sole, and AI Pacific ocean perch be 

allocated to the CDQ Program in 2007 

and 2008 and has determined that these 

species continue to meet the definition 

of ‘‘directed fishery’’ for purposes of 

section 305(i)(1) of the MSA because 

sufficient quota exists to open a directed 

fishery for these species and the species 

are economically valuable. The CDQ 

groups reported directed fisheries for all 

of these species in 2006. The Council 

and the CDQ Panel also recommended 

that these species be allocated to the 

CDQ Program. 

Additionally, most of the species and 

species groups NMFS proposed not to 

allocate to the CDQ Program in 2007 

and 2008 will remain the same. NMFS 

proposed that Bering Sea Pacific ocean 

perch, northern rockfish, shortraker 

rockfish, rougheye rockfish, ‘‘other 

rockfish,’’ squid, and ‘‘other species’’

not be allocated to the CDQ Program in 

2007 and 2008 and has determined that 

these species and species groups still do 

not meet the definition of ‘‘directed 

fishery’’ for purposes of section 

305(i)(1). Sufficient quota does not exist 

to open directed fisheries for any of 

these species or species groups, except 

squid. Although sufficient quota exists 

to open squid to directed fishing, it is 

not economically valuable enough for 

the CDQ groups to target. The CDQ 

groups did not report directed fishing 

for squid in 2006, although they could 

have done so. The Council and the CDQ 

Panel also recommended that these 

species and species groups not be 

allocated to the CDQ Program. 

Under NMFS’s proposed definition of 

‘‘directed fishery,’’ AI Greenland turbot, 

‘‘other flatfish,’’ and Alaska plaice 

would have been allocated to the CDQ 

Program in 2007 and 2008 because 

directed fishing was open for these 

species in the BSAI in 2006. However, 

AI Greenland turbot, ‘‘other flatfish,’’

and Alaska plaice are not directed 

fisheries of the BSAI for purposes of 

section 305(i)(1) of the MSA under the 

revised definition of ‘‘directed fishery.’’

Although sufficient quota exists to open 

these quota categories to directed 

fishing, these species are not 

economically valuable enough for the 

CDQ groups to target them. The CDQ 

groups could have conducted directed 

fisheries for all of these species in 2006, 

but they did not report doing so. It is 

reasonable to assume that the CDQ 

groups did not conduct directed 

fisheries for these species because they 

are not economically valuable enough to 

justify doing so. Therefore, these species 

do not meet the second part of the 

definition of ‘‘directed fishery’’ for 

purposes of section 305(i)(1) and are not 

allocated to the CDQ Program for 2007 

and 2008. Both the Council and the 

CDQ Panel recommended that these 

species and species groups not be 

allocated to the CDQ Program. If, at 

some point in the future, these species 

become economically valuable and 

sufficient quota exists to support 

directed fisheries, these species would 

be allocated to the CDQ Program. 

Under NMFS’s proposed definition of 

‘‘directed fishery,’’ allocations of 

Bogoslof pollock and the trawl 

allocations of sablefish in the Bering Sea 

subarea and the AI subarea would not 

have been made to the CDQ Program in 

2007 and 2008 because directed fishing 

was not allowed for these quota 

categories in 2006. Both the Council and 

the CDQ Panel recommended that these 

species be allocated to the CDQ 

Program. 

Section 679.20(a)(5)(ii) allows the 

allocation of a portion of the Bogoslof 

pollock TAC to the CDQ Program if 

directed fishing for pollock is allowed 

by regulation in this district. However, 

directed fishing for pollock currently is 

not allowed in the Bogoslof District. The 

pollock TAC is set at a low level and all 

of it is allocated as an ICA for both the 

CDQ and non-CDQ sectors. NMFS has 

determined that Bogoslof pollock does 

not meet the first part of the definition 

of a ‘‘directed fishery’’ for purposes of 

section 305(i)(1) of the MSA because 

insufficient TAC exists to support a 

directed fishery. Therefore, NMFS will 

not allocate Bogoslof pollock to the CDQ 

Program for 2007 and 2008. In the 

future, if sufficient TAC exists to allow 

directed fishing for pollock in the 

Bogoslof District, current regulations 

would provide for a DFA of 10 percent 

of this TAC to the CDQ Program. 

The sablefish TACs in the Bering Sea 

subarea and the AI subarea are first 

allocated between hook-and-line or pot 

gear (fixed gear) and trawl gear. After 

those gear allocations are made, 20 

percent of the fixed gear allocation and 

7.5 percent of the trawl allocation is 

allocated to the CDQ Program as two 

separate sablefish CDQ reserves in each 

subarea. Under current regulations, only 

catch of sablefish with fixed gear may 

accrue against the fixed gear sablefish 

CDQ reserve. However, any gear type 

may be used to harvest sablefish that 

accrues against the sablefish CDQ 

reserve that originated from the trawl 

allocation of sablefish. In addition, 

although directed fishing for sablefish 

using trawl gear is prohibited for the 

non-CDQ sectors, this prohibition was 

not applied to the CDQ fisheries. 

Instead, the CDQ groups are prohibited 

from exceeding either of their sablefish 

allocations and they must decide how to 

allocate sablefish among gear types and 

directed fisheries to stay within their 

allocations. The indirect result of these 

allocations is that NMFS has allowed 

directed fishing for sablefish on the 

sablefish CDQ reserve that originates 

from the trawl allocation of sablefish. 

Therefore, NMFS has determined that 

both trawl allocations of sablefish to the 

CDQ Program meet the definition of a 

‘‘directed fishery’’ for purposes of 

section 305(i)(1) of the MSA. Sufficient 

quota exists to allow directed fishing for 

sablefish and sablefish is an 

economically valuable species that for 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9469 

which directed fisheries are conducted 

in both the CDQ and non-CDQ sectors. 

Based on this finding, NMFS will 

continue to allocate 7.5 percent of the 

trawl allocation of sablefish to the CDQ 

Program. 

Comment 4: The proposed harvest 

specifications and accompanying Alaska 

Groundfish Harvest Specifications 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

do not represent a substantial 

implementation of the Alaska 

Groundfish Fisheries Final 

Programmatic Supplemental 

Environmental Impact Statement 

(PSEIS) policy statement, but rather a 

transparent attempt to indemnify the 

agency against the inadequacies of the 

status quo harvest strategy. The 

proposed harvest specifications lack the 

perspective of the ecosystem-based 

policy framework outlined in the PSEIS 

because there are no explicit procedures 

in the TAC-setting process to address 

the impacts of single-species fishing 

strategies on dependent and related 

species and their habitats in an 

ecosystem context. Therefore, the policy 

framework outlined in the PSEIS has 

not been implemented in the regulations 

governing the operation of the 

groundfish fisheries. Under the 

proposed harvest specifications, 

ecosystem concerns would remain at 

best ancillary to the process of 

allocating fish and maximizing shortterm economic benefits. 

Response: The preferred harvest 

strategy alternative described in the EIS 

is derived from the policy adopted as 

the preferred alternative in the PSEIS 

(see ADDRESSES) and is one of the 

actions necessary to implement that 

policy statement. Ecosystem concerns 

are integral to the EIS analysis. The 

purpose of the EIS is to describe the 

potential environmental impacts of the 

alternative harvest strategies, including 

an analysis of the potential impacts of 

these alternatives on ecosystem 

components and the ecosystem as a 

whole. 

In addition to the EIS analysis, all 

available scientific information on the 

ecosystem is analyzed and presented to 

decision-makers and the public on an 

annual basis during the harvest 

specifications process. The annual 

SAFE reports, which provide the 

scientific information to support the 

harvest specifications for each species, 

include ecosystem considerations 

sections that describe the role of each 

target species in the ecosystem. The 

SAFE report also contains a separate 

‘‘Ecosystems Considerations’’ chapter. 

Groundfish fisheries management, 

including the harvest specification 

process, takes account of ecosystem 

requirements related to predation, 

competition, and habitat to provide 

protection for ecosystem components. 

Under the harvest strategy, the 

determination of annual harvest 

specifications incorporates ecosystem 

considerations, in the face of 

uncertainty in the quantitative links 

between species. The most significant 

ecosystem considerations are (1) The 

upper end of the OY range in the BSAI, 

which imposes a constraint on total 

biomass removal, and (2) OFLs that 

prevent overfishing of each stock. A 

species’ OFL is a harvest limit rather 

than a target and ABCs are set below 

OFLs. The tier system sets maximum 

ABCs and managers can set actual ABCs 

lower for ecosystem considerations. 

TACs never exceed ABCs and are 

frequently set at lower levels. TACs can 

also be adjusted downward for 

ecosystem considerations. Additionally, 

managers have established harvest 

control rules for pollock, Pacific cod, 

and Atka mackerel that prohibit 

directed fishing at low biomass levels, 

to account for Steller sea lion prey 

needs. TACs and actual catches are 

often lower than ABCs to protect other 

species, especially halibut, that may be 

taken as bycatch. Managers frequently 

restrict directed fishing for many 

species before TACs are reached to 

comply with PSC limits. Inseason 

management closes directed fisheries 

when TACs are reached, and restricts 

fishing in other fisheries taking the 

species as bycatch when OFLs are 

approached. 

As noted below in the response to 

Comment 5, the groundfish management 

framework includes many measures, in 

addition to the harvest strategy, to 

mitigate the ecosystem impacts of the 

groundfish fisheries. 

Comment 5: Existing management 

measures may be construed as 

consistent with an ecosystem-based 

approach, but they do not address major 

ecosystem impacts of the fisheries as 

promulgated in the annual catch 

specifications. 

Response: Existing management 

measures address major ecosystem 

impacts of the fisheries, and the Council 

and NMFS are engaged in an ongoing 

effort to improve the ways this is done. 

The existing regulatory framework 

imposes many constraints on fishing 

activity, including time, area, and gear 

restrictions, in order to mitigate or 

control ecosystem impacts created by 

fishing activity. Regulations impose 

maximum retainable amounts on the 

volume of bycatch a vessel may deliver 

or have onboard. Prohibited species 

catch (PSC) regulations impose limits on 

harvests of crab, salmon, herring, and 

halibut, and restrict fishing activity once 

those limits are reached. Important 

restrictions have been imposed on key 

fisheries to limit competition for Steller 

sea lion prey and to protect Steller sea 

lion critical habitat. The Pribilof Islands 

Habitat Conservation Area protects 

ecosystem components in the vicinity of 

those islands. The Council and NMFS 

have adopted numerous measures to 

limit bycatch and control the discards of 

low value fish by-products. Seabirds 

attracted to longlines are protected by 

mandatory gear requirements, such as 

streamers, meant to reduce incidental 

takes. Essential fish habitat (EFH) and 

Habitat Areas of Particular Concern 

(HAPC) in the AI subarea are protected 

by an extensive system of closed areas 

(see response to Comment 15). 

NMFS and the Council are continuing 

to develop ecosystem management 

measures for the groundfish fisheries. 

The Council has created a committee to 

inform them of ecosystem developments 

and to assist in formulating positions 

with respect to ecosystem-based 

management. The Council has initiated 

work on a fisheries ecosystem plan for 

the AI subarea. The Council and the 

State have created a staff-level 

interagency AI Ecosystem Team to 

support this effort. It has taken the lead 

in the establishment of the interagency 

Alaska Marine Ecosystem Forum to 

improve inter-agency coordination and 

communication on marine ecosystem 

issues. The SSC has begun to hold 

annual ecosystem scientific meetings at 

the February Council meetings. In 

addition to exploring how to develop 

ecosystem management efforts, the 

Council and NMFS continue to take 

account of ecosystem impacts of fishing 

activity as available information allows. 

For example, the Council has initiated 

an analysis of potential Bering Sea 

subarea habitat conservation measures, 

an analysis to address the potential 

impacts of shifts in fishing activity to 

the north including into the Beaufort 

Sea, and is currently consulting under 

the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for 

Steller sea lions, sperm and humpback 

whales. Ecosystem protection is 

supported by an extensive research 

program by the Alaska Fisheries Science 

Center (AFSC) into ecosystem 

components and integrated ecosystem 

functioning. Exempted fishing permits 

(EFPs) are issued to investigate new 

management approaches for the control 

of salmon bycatch in the BSAI, and 

research into salmon and halibut 

excluder devices. 

Additionally, the EIS considers other 

actions taken to manage the fisheries, 

including reasonable future fisheries 

management actions, as these are 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9470 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

relevant to the environmental 

consequences of the harvest strategy 

alternatives. The Council and NMFS 

have processes consistent with National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to 

evaluate each action to regulate other 

aspects of the fisheries. The overall 

fishery management policy within 

which the harvest strategies fall has 

been evaluated in the PSEIS. Moreover, 

NMFS and the Council evaluated each 

management measure at the time it was 

adopted in the relevant NEPA 

document. Considering different 

management measures in separate 

actions allows for more careful analysis 

of alternatives and the implications of 

each, and is often less confusing to the 

public. The Council and NMFS are 

actively evaluating a wide range of new 

management measures through these 

processes and will continue to do so. 

Comment 6: Levels of exploitation on 

single stocks are set with no explicit 

consideration of the impacts of 

dependent, competing species in the 

food web or other impacts on associated 

species that flow from the exploitation 

of a relative few commercially desirable 

species. The single species F40% policy 

ignores effects on the ecosystem and 

simply assumes that individual target 

species can be fished to the maximum 

sustainable yield (MSY) without 

significant consequences to other 

species in the food web. 

Response: The harvest strategy 

incorporates a key principle of 

ecosystem-based fisheries management 

by preserving individual stocks and 

preventing overfishing of those stocks. 

This is important for protecting 

ecosystem components that depend on 

these individual stocks. The effects of 

the groundfish fisheries and fishing 

rates are analyzed in the EIS and the 

annual SAFE reports. 

The tier system in the FMP and the 

harvest specifications process lead to 

TACs associated with fishing rates that 

are less than FMSY. FOFL is never greater 

than FMSY, or an appropriate FMSY

proxy. Average multi-year fishery 

harvest rates fall below FMSY because 

the tier system treats FOFL as a limit 

rather than a target. The fishing rates 

associated with maximum permissible 

ABC, actual ABC, and the TAC, all fall 

below the FOFL, providing a margin 

between the actual F and the FMSY. 

Moreover, as discussed in response to 

Comment 5, other management 

measures often constrain actual catches 

and fishing rates below the TACs or the 

fishing rates associated with the TACs. 

With current levels of information, we 

cannot precisely specify the margin or 

threshold between FOFL and actual 

harvest rate that provides the 

appropriate level of protection for 

various ecosystem properties. The AFSC 

continues to develop and improve 

scientific information in the Ecosystems 

Considerations section of the SAFE 

report. New information added in 2006 

included the relationship with Bering 

Sea subarea pelagic forage species, the 

relationship between predation/ 

production and fishing/production, a 

metric proposed to evaluate the 

management implications of potential 

exploitation of forage species, and a 

metric proposed to evaluate the 

‘‘footprint’’ of individual fisheries. 

The AFSC also continues to develop 

and improve several multispecies and 

ecosystem models to predict the 

possible effects of fishing and/or climate 

on ecosystem processes. Ecosystem 

modeling is extremely complex, and the 

incorporation of ecosystem 

considerations into the harvest 

specifications process is an evolving 

process. The AFSC is advancing this 

process through the development of 

multispecies fish stock assessment 

models that include predation, 

ecosystem mass-balance and simulation 

models, and single-species stock 

assessment models that include 

predation. The AFSC briefed the 

Groundfish Plan Teams on the results of 

these analyses to help them in their 

deliberations in the harvest 

specifications process. 

Comment 7: Selective removals of 

species and large differences in catch 

rates for managed stocks may be 

responsible for significant and lasting 

changes in the structure of groundfish 

assemblages and food webs in the North 

Pacific, as seen in other ecosystems. 

Selective extraction of a relatively few 

high-value species may provide a 

competitive opportunity for ‘‘underutilized’’ species such as arrowtooth 

flounder, which appear to have 

increased dramatically since the 1970s. 

NMFS consistently attributes regional 

stock declines and broader system 

changes to the weather (‘‘regime 

shifts’’), a transparent stratagem that 

serves to justify the status quo and 

absolve the agency of responsibility for 

fishery-related systemic changes. 

Response: NMFS analyzes and 

considers the interactions among fish 

species in its evaluations of the impacts 

of groundfish fishing. The nature of 

competitive interactions among species 

is an area of ongoing research by the 

AFSC. These issues are discussed in the 

ecosystem sections of individual species 

SAFE reports and by the Plan Teams as 

they formulate their ABC 

recommendations. 

Species interactions are complex and 

imperfectly understood in the North 

Pacific. The AFSC is collaborating to 

develop a detailed, age-structured, 

multispecies statistical model to study 

this complex interaction of pollock and 

arrowtooth flounder. This ‘‘cultivation/ 

depensation’’ model is expected to be 

completed in the near future. In 

December 2006, the BSAI Groundfish 

Plan Team leader briefed the Council 

and its SSC and AP on the complex 

interactions between pollock and 

arrowtooth flounder and on the 

potential application of this model 

whereby a species such as pollock 

‘‘cultivates’’ its young by preying on 

species that would eat its young. 

Regime shifts remain an important 

consideration. Regime shifts are well 

documented; these changes in climate 

are believed to have affected relative 

abundance of species in the past, and 

are expected to do so in the future. 

Comment 8: NMFS fails to analyze the 

cumulative and synergistic effects of 

selective exploitation, benthic habitat 

modification, and serial depletion of 

targeted stocks in the North Pacific. The 

‘‘Ecosystem Considerations’’ chapter in 

the annual SAFE reports does not 

consider the effects of large-scale 

fisheries off Alaska on long-term 

restructuring of food web dynamics and 

on composition of species assemblages. 

An evaluation of this phenomenon, and 

consideration of alternatives to address 

it, is also missing from the EIS and the 

harvest specification process. 

Additionally, the proposed harvest 

specifications do not mitigate the effects 

of selective exploitation and 

disproportionate exploitation rates. 

Response: NMFS takes a conservative 

approach to management in response to 

uncertainties. Conservative elements in 

the harvest strategies and groundfish 

fisheries management are listed in the 

responses to Comments 4, 5, 15, and 16. 

The EIS analyzed alternative harvest 

strategies that met the scope of this 

action, as determined by the statement 

of purpose and need. 

The EIS analyzes the effects of the 

alternative harvest strategies on target 

stocks and habitat in a comprehensive 

way that looks at both the individual 

species impacts and the overall 

ecosystem function impacts. NMFS 

agrees that uncertainty exists in 

assessing the ecosystem effects of 

alternative harvest strategies. One of the 

functions of an EIS is to identify these 

uncertainties. The EIS and the 

Ecosystem Considerations chapter of the 

SAFE reports examine trends in the 

trophic level of catch and species 

diversity. As noted in the response to 

Comment 10, competitive interactions 

between fisheries are an active area of 

AFSC research, and are discussed, as 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9471 

appropriate, in the ecosystem 

discussions in the species-specific 

sections of the SAFE reports. 

Comment 9: Neither the EIS nor its 

alternatives address the issues of setting 

exploitation levels on single stocks with 

no explicit consideration of the impacts 

of dependent, competing species in the 

food web or other impacts on associated 

species that flow from the exploitation 

of a relative few commercially desirable 

species. 

Response: The EIS directly examines 

the impacts of the alternative harvest 

strategies on non-target species, 

including food web interactions. The 

EIS examines the impacts of groundfish 

fishing on forage fish availability in 

Chapter 6, and the trophic level of 

catches in Chapter 11. The EIS includes 

detailed analyses of the impacts on prey 

and habitat for key species and species 

groupings of marine mammals and 

seabirds in Chapters 8 and 9. 

Comment 10: The uncertainties of 

ecosystem mechanics underscore the 

need for a much more precautionary 

approach to fisheries management in the 

context of food web and habitat 

conservation, and illustrate why the 

agency’s determinations of nonsignificance for fishery impacts on prey 

availability and spatial/temporal 

concentration of fisheries are arbitrary 

and capricious. NMFS cannot 

demonstrate that the current and 

proposed levels of fishing permitted in 

protected species’ habitats are ‘‘safe’’ or 

‘‘insignificant.’’ Rather, NMFS assumes 

that the impact is insignificant in the 

absence of conclusive evidence to the 

contrary. The burden of proof is on the 

environment to show harm. This is 

opposite of precautionary and the 

opposite of an ecosystem-based 

approach. 

Response: NMFS did not make a 

determination of non-significance in the 

EIS. The EIS fully discloses known 

impacts, areas of uncertainty, and 

presents the information in comparative 

form to aid in decision-making. NMFS 

agrees that uncertainty exists in 

assessing the ecosystem effects of 

alternative harvest strategies. Identifying 

these uncertainties is one of the 

functions of an EIS. The EIS identifies 

potential adverse impacts of the 

alternatives on the ecosystem and the 

uncertainty of those impacts. NMFS is 

actively taking steps to reduce 

uncertainty and better understand the 

environment through ongoing scientific 

research. Many elements built into the 

harvest specifications process, and into 

the groundfish fisheries management 

regime, described in the responses to 

Comments 4, 5, 15, and 16, contribute 

to conservative management. 

Comment 11: Major habitat impacts of 

fishing on the EFH of FMP-managed 

species and foraging habitats of ESA and 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA)-protected species are not 

addressed in the EIS or mitigated in the 

proposed harvest specifications. 

Response: NMFS has examined in the 

EIS the impacts of fishing on EFH of 

FMP-managed species, and on the 

foraging habitats of ESA- and MMPAprotected species. Chapter 8 examines 

the impacts of alternative groundfish 

harvest strategies on ESA- and MMPAlisted marine mammals. Chapter 9 

provides a similar examination for ESAlisted seabirds. Chapter 10 examines the 

impacts of the harvest strategies on EFH 

and incorporates by reference the 

analysis in the Essential Fish Habitat 

Environmental Impact Statement (EFH 

EIS, see ADDRESSES) that examines the 

impact of fishing on benthic habitat. 

Habitat impacts of fishing on the EFH 

of FMP-managed species and foraging 

habitats of ESA- and MMPA-protected 

species are mitigated by the extensive 

habitat protection measures enacted in 

the BSAI. These are described in the 

response to Comment 15. 

Comment 12: The EIS fails to evaluate 

the impacts of pelagic trawl gear on 

habitat and the impact of the spatial 

concentration of pollock and Pacific cod 

catches on stock size, in a meaningful 

fashion, and fails to consider an 

alternative to address these impacts. 

There is little scientific evidence that 

fishing on spawning stocks of Alaskan 

groundfish has had adverse impacts on 

recruitment success. The status quo 

practice of targeting groundfish on 

spawning grounds, when the fish are 

most vulnerable to fishing gear, is a 

habitat impact of particular significance 

that must be addressed. The dismal 

abundance trends of several regional 

pollock stocks and large uncertainties in 

stock structure among many groundfish 

populations cry out for explicit 

protection of spawning grounds. 

Response: The impacts of pelagic 

trawling on habitat are evaluated in the 

EFH EIS. Chapter 10 of the EIS provides 

an EFH Assessment that incorporates by 

reference the EFH EIS analysis of the 

impacts of the groundfish fisheries on 

EFH. Fisheries management measures, 

other than harvest strategies, are outside 

the scope of the action analyzed in the 

EIS. Pollock and Pacific cod catches are 

apportioned seasonally under existing 

measures adopted to protect Steller sea 

lions. Further seasonal apportionments 

of catch would require regulatory 

changes that were outside the scope of 

this action, as defined by the purpose 

and need. 

Comment 13: The MSA’s EFH 

provisions should require the adoption 

of marine reserves to protect vulnerable 

reproductive habitats that are targeted 

by the fisheries. 

Response: This is not a comment on 

the content of the groundfish harvest 

specifications or on the accompanying 

EIS, and deals with issues that are 

beyond the scope of both. 

Comment 14: The proposed harvest 

specifications and accompanying EIS 

fail to address major groundfish fishery 

impacts on king crab EFH in the most 

heavily trawled area of the Bering Sea, 

the Unimak-Port Moller area. 

Response: These impacts were fully 

analyzed in the EFH EIS. The analysis 

in the EFH EIS has been incorporated 

into the EIS by reference to eliminate 

repetitive discussion in Chapter 10. 

Comment 15: NMFS’ assertions that 

the status quo EFH measures provide 

adequate protection or that the spatial/ 

temporal concentration of the fisheries 

has insignificant impacts on EFH are not 

supported by evidence. The EIS fails to 

evaluate this information and consider 

alternatives that would address these 

impacts on fish habitat, and the 

proposed harvest specifications provide 

no adequate mitigation measures to 

address these impacts. NMFS cannot 

demonstrate that the current and 

proposed levels of fishing permitted in 

managed species’ habitats are 

insignificant or compliant with the 

spirit and letter of the MSA’s EFH 

provisions. Rather, NMFS assumes that 

the impact is insignificant in the 

absence of conclusive evidence to the 

contrary. The burden of proof is on the 

environment and the managed species 

to show harm. This is opposite of a 

precautionary approach to EFH 

conservation. 

Response: In this EIS NMFS fully 

discloses known impacts, identifies 

uncertainties, and presents information 

in comparative form to aid in decisionmaking. Detailed information of the 

effects of fishing on EFH contained in 

the 2005 EFH EIS was incorporated by 

reference in this EIS. As discussed in 

Chapter 2 of the EIS, fisheries 

management measures, other than 

harvest strategies, are outside the scope 

of this action, as defined by the 

statement of purpose and need. 

The discussion of habitat impacts in 

the EIS incorporated by reference the 

science and analysis in the EFH EIS. 

The analyses in Section 4.3 and 

Appendix B of the EFH EIS indicated 

that groundfish fishing has long-term 

effects on benthic habitat features off 

Alaska and acknowledged that 

considerable scientific uncertainty 

remains regarding the consequences of 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9472 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

such habitat changes for the sustained 

productivity of managed species. 

Nevertheless, the EFH EIS concluded 

that the effects on EFH are minimal 

because the analysis found no 

indication that continued fishing 

activities at the current rate and 

intensity would alter the capacity of 

EFH to support healthy populations of 

managed species over the long term. 

Therefore, the EFH EIS determined that 

new protection measures for the 

fisheries to reduce the adverse effects on 

EFH were not required. Nevertheless, 

the Council recommended a suite of 

new conservative measures to reduce 

potential adverse effects to EFH and 

HAPCs from fishing activities. These 

actions continue the Council’s policy of 

implementing conservative conservation 

measures for the Alaska fisheries, as 

described in the management policies 

and objectives added to the groundfish 

FMPs from the PSEIS policy statement. 

NMFS implemented the Council’s 

recommendations in 2006 (71 FR 36694; 

June 28, 2006). 

The Council and NMFS have taken a 

conservative approach to habitat 

protection by enacting substantial 

restrictions on fishing that minimize 

potential adverse effects on EFH. In the 

Bering Sea subarea, bottom trawl 

closures encompass about 30,000 square 

nautical miles to reduce bycatch and 

protect seafloor habitats. Measures to 

protect Steller sea lions have fully or 

partially closed about 58,000 square 

nautical miles to fishing in the AI 

subarea and GOA. More recently, the 

Council and NMFS adopted a suite of 

new measures to reduce the effects of 

fishing on EFH in the AI subarea and 

GOA, protecting nearly 300,000 square 

nautical miles of habitat. The largest of 

these areas, the Aleutian Islands Habitat 

Conservation Area, prohibits bottom 

trawling over 279,000 square nautical 

miles to protect corals and other 

sensitive habitat features. The Bowers 

Ridge Habitat Conservation Zone north 

of Adak is closed to all mobile bottomcontact gear. The Aleutian Islands Coral 

Habitat Protection Areas are closed to 

all bottom-contact fishing gear and 

anchoring, protecting six especially 

sensitive ‘‘coral gardens.’’ The Council 

is presently undertaking an analysis of 

additional habitat conservation 

measures for the Bering Sea subarea, 

which considers both area closures and 

gear restrictions to further limit the 

potential adverse effects of fishing on 

EFH. 

The Council and NMFS have taken 

many other measures to protect habitat. 

These include the trawl standards for 

pelagic trawl gear in the BSAI to reduce 

bottom contact, and a wide range of 

protection measures, including the 

nearshore Bristol Bay trawl closure area, 

the Red King crab savings area, the 

Statistical area 516 seasonal closure, 

and the Pribilof Islands Habitat 

Conservation area. These actions reflect 

a conservative management strategy. 

Comment 16: The lack of spatialtemporal management of groundfish 

stocks has potentially profound adverse 

consequences for ESA-listed Steller sea 

lions and MMPA-listed northern fur 

seals. The apportionment of ABCs 

according to broad management 

subareas does not address the impacts of 

fishing at local scales relevant to 

foraging sea lions, fur seals, and other 

species. NMFS fails to address localized 

effects adequately in any alternative 

considered in the EIS or the proposed 

harvest specifications. NMFS cannot 

demonstrate that the current and 

proposed levels of fishing permitted in 

protected marine mammal species’

habitats are insignificant. Existing 

uncertainties underscore the need for a 

highly precautionary approach to 

habitat conservation, and illustrate why 

the agency’s claims that spatial/ 

temporal concentration of the fisheries 

under the status quo have insignificant 

impacts on marine mammal foraging 

habitats and prey are not supported by 

evidence. As in other instances, the 

burden of proof is on the environment 

to show harm. This is opposite of a 

precautionary approach. 

Response: NMFS did not make a 

determinations of non-significance in 

the EIS. The EIS fully discloses known 

impacts, areas of uncertainty, and 

presents the information in comparative 

form to aid in decision-making. The EIS 

describes localized impacts of fishing 

activity on marine mammals. Chapter 8 

in the EIS evaluates the impacts of this 

action on marine mammals, with 

particular attention to impacts on Steller 

sea lions and northern fur seals. The 

chapter describes what is known about 

the spatial and temporal overlap 

between groundfish fishing activity and 

marine mammal foraging habitat. The 

EIS summarizes the available 

information on the impacts of fishing 

activity on marine mammals and their 

habitat. While information on the 

spatial and temporal impact of 

groundfish fishing on other species is 

relatively limited, the EIS provides a 

review of the information available and 

indicates where information is lacking. 

Endangered Steller sea lions have 

been protected by a suite of measures. 

Groundfish fisheries conducted in 

accordance with the Steller sea lion 

protection measures adopted in 2002 

have been determined not to jeopardize 

Steller sea lions or adversely modify 

their critical habitat. The protection 

measures involve seasonal 

apportionments of annual TACs, limits 

on the proportion of catch within 

habitat important for Steller sea lion 

foraging, limits on fishing activity 

within areas adjacent to haulouts and 

rookeries, and closure of directed 

fishing when biomass falls to low levels. 

The protection measures and the 

conclusions of no jeopardy or adverse 

modification of habitat were arrived at 

after careful evaluation in 2001. Since 

that time, NMFS has continued to 

investigate the determinants of Steller 

sea lion declines. These measures are 

currently being reevaluated in a new 

biological opinion and revised recovery 

plan. 

Comment 17: The proposed harvest 

specifications and the accompanying 

EIS fail in substantive ways to comply 

with the intent of the MSA, NEPA, the 

ESA, and the MMPA. 

Response: Prior to approval, the 

Secretary ensures that this action and all 

actions it takes are in compliance with 

the MSA, NEPA, the ESA, and the 

MMPA. 

Comment 18: Given the current 

uncertainties and lack of scientific 

information, it is essential to adopt a 

highly precautionary approach to 

exploitation of these ecosystems, in 

order to avoid the wholesale system 

reorganization and impoverishment that 

has been linked to fishing in other 

marine ecosystems. 

Response: The Council recommended 

and NMFS approves the use of a 

cautionary approach. 

Comment 19: There is no ‘‘balance’’

between the interests of fisheries and 

other public interests in the North 

Pacific region: the scales are tilted 

entirely to the advantage of the 

industrial fisheries whose interests are 

placed above all other public interests. 

The tradeoffs between often contrary 

FMP objectives are made by a decisionmaking body that is not representative 

of the broader public interest and that 

is biased heavily in favor of commercial 

utilization of the public resource for its 

own benefit. This state of affairs cries 

out for basic reforms of the kind 

outlined by the Pew Oceans 

Commission (2003) and the U.S. Oceans 

Policy Commission (2004) so that other 

public interests and societal goals are 

fairly represented, in order to achieve a 

real ‘‘balance between competing uses’’

of the ocean commons. 

Response: This is not a comment on 

the content of the groundfish harvest 

specifications or on the accompanying 

EIS, and deals with issues that are 

beyond the scope of both. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 9473 

Small Entity Compliance Guide 

The following information is a plain 

language guide to assist small entities in 

complying with this final rule as 

required by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. This final rule’s primary 

management measures are to announce 

2007 and 2008 final harvest 

specifications and prohibited species 

bycatch allowances for the groundfish 

fishery of the BSAI. This action is 

necessary to establish harvest limits and 

associated management measures for 

groundfish during the 2007 and 2008 

fishing years and to accomplish the 

goals and objectives of the FMP. This 

action affects all fishermen who 

participate in the BSAI fishery. The 

specific amounts of OFL, ABC, TAC, 

and PSC amounts are provided in 

tabular form to assist the reader. NMFS 

will announce closures of directed 

fishing in the Federal Register and in 

information bulletins released by the 

Alaska Region. Affected fishermen 

should keep themselves informed of 

such closures. 

Classification 

NMFS determined that the FMP is 

necessary for the conservation and 

management of the BSAI groundfish 

fishery and that it is consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act and 

other applicable laws. 

This action is authorized under 

§ 679.20 and is exempt from review 

under Executive Order 12866. 

NMFS prepared a Draft EIS for this 

action and made it available to the 

public for comment (71 FR 53093, 

September 8, 2006). NMFS prepared the 

Final EIS and made it available to the 

public on January 12, 2007 (72 FR 

1512). On February 13, 2007, NMFS 

issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for 

the Final EIS. Copies of the Final EIS 

and ROD for this action are available 

from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

A Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (FRFA) was prepared to 

evaluate the impacts on small entities of 

alternative harvest strategies for the 

groundfish fisheries in the Exclusive 

Economic Zone (EEZ) off of Alaska on 

small entities. This FRFA meets the 

statutory requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, as 

amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 

(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 601–612). A 

summary of the FRFA follows. 

The action under consideration is 

adoption of a harvest strategy to govern 

the harvest of groundfish in the BSAI. 

The preferred alternative is the status 

quo harvest strategy in which TACs fall 

within the range of ABCs recommended 

through the Council’s harvest 

specification process and TACs 

recommended by the Council. This 

action is taken in accordance with the 

FMP and adopted by the Council 

pursuant to the MSA. 

The proposed harvest specifications 

were published in the Federal Register 

on December 15, 2006 (71 FR 75460). 

An Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (IRFA) was prepared for the 

proposed harvest specifications and was 

described in the classification section of 

that preamble. Copies of the IRFA 

prepared for this action are available 

from NMFS, Alaska Region (see 

ADDRESSES). The public comment 

period ended on January 16, 2007. No 

comments were received regarding the 

economic impacts of this action. 

The need for and objectives of this 

rule are described in the preamble and 

not repeated here. 

Significant issues raised by public 

comment are addressed in the preamble 

and not repeated here. 

The directly regulated small entities 

include approximately 747 small 

catcher vessels, less than 17 small 

catcher-processors, and six Community 

Development Quota (CDQ) Groups. The 

entities directly regulated by this action 

are those that harvest groundfish in the 

EEZ of the BSAI, and in parallel 

fisheries within State of Alaska waters. 

These include entities operating catcher 

vessels and catcher-processor vessels 

within the action area, and entities 

receiving direct allocations of 

groundfish. Catcher vessels and catcher 

processors were considered to be small 

entities if they had annual gross 

receipts, from all of their economic 

activities, and including the revenue of 

their affiliated operations, less than or 

equal to $4 million per year. Data from 

2005 was used because it was the most 

recent available. CDQ groups receive 

direct allocations of groundfish, and 

these were considered to be small 

entities because they are non-profit 

entities. The Aleut Corporation is not a 

small entity because it is a holding 

company which does not meet the SBA 

$6 million threshold for holding 

companies (13 CFR 121.201). 

Estimates of first wholesale gross 

revenues for the BSAI non-CDQ and 

CDQ sectors were used as indices of the 

potential impacts of the alternative 

harvest strategies on small entities. 

Revenues were projected to decline 

from 2006 levels in 2007 and 2008 

under the preferred alternative due to 

declines in ABCs for key species. 

The preferred alternative (Alternative 

2) was compared to four other 

alternatives. These included Alternative 

1, which would set TACs so as to 

generate fishing rates equal to the 

maximum permissible ABC (if the full 

TAC were harvested), unless the sum of 

TACs would exceed the regional OY, in 

which case harvests would be limited to 

the OY. Alternative 3 would set TACs 

to produce fishing rates equal to the 

most recent five year average of fishing 

rates. Alternative 4 would set TACs to 

equal the lower bound of the regional 

OY range. Alternative 5 would set TACs 

equal to zero. 

Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 produced 

smaller first wholesale revenues for 

each of the three groupings, than 

Alternative 2. Thus, Alternatives 3, 4 

and 5 had greater adverse impacts on 

small entities. Alternative 1 sets the 

TACs equal to the maximum 

permissible ABC unless the sum of 

these TACs exceed the OY. In 2007 and 

2008 the sum of the maximum 

permissible ABCs exceeded the OY. 

Therefore, the TACs under Alternative 1 

were set equal to the OY. Also, 

Alternative 2 TACs are constrained by 

the ABCs the Plan Team and SSC 

recommend to the Council on the basis 

of a full consideration of biological 

issues. These ABCs are often less than 

Alternative 1 maximum permissible 

ABCs. Therefore higher TACs under 

Alternative 1 may not be consistent with 

prudent biological management of the 

resource. For these reasons, Alternative 

2 is the preferred alternative. in the 

BSAI (for both non-CDQ and CDQ 

groups). For these reasons, Alternative 2 

is the preferred alternative. 

This action does not modify any 

recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements. 

Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), an agency 

can waive the 30 day delay in 

effectiveness of a rule for good cause. 

These final harvest specifications were 

developed as quickly as possible, Plan 

Team review in November 2006, 

Council consideration and 

recommendations in December 2006, 

and NOAA Fisheries review and 

development in January–February 2007. 

For all fisheries not currently closed 

because the TACs established under the 

2006 and 2007 final harvest 

specifications (71 FR 10894, March 3, 

2006) were reached, the likely 

possibility exists for their closures prior 

to the expiration of a 30-day delayed 

effectiveness period because their TACs 

could be reached. Certain fisheries, such 

as those for pollock, Pacific cod, and 

Atka mackerel are intensive fast-paced 

fisheries. Other fisheries, such as those 

for flatfish, rockfish and ‘‘other 

species,’’ are critical as directed 

fisheries and as incidental catch in other 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
9474 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

fisheries. U.S. fishing vessels have 

demonstrated the capacity to catch the 

TAC allocations in all these fisheries. 

Any delay in allocating the final TAC in 

these fisheries would cause disruption 

to the industry and potential economic 

harm through unnecessary discards. 

Determining which fisheries may close 

is impossible because these fisheries are 

affected by several factors that cannot be 

predicted in advance, including fishing 

effort, weather, movement of fishery 

stocks, and market price. Furthermore, 

the closure of one fishery has a 

cascading effect on other fisheries by 

freeing-up fishing vessels, allowing 

them to move from closed fisheries to 

open ones, increasing the fishing 

capacity in those open fisheries and 

causing them to close at an accelerated 

pace. 

If the final harvest specifications are 

not effective by March 10, 2007, which 

is the start of the Pacific halibut season 

as specified by the IPHC, the hook-andline sablefish fishery will not begin 

concurrently with the Pacific halibut 

season. This would cause sablefish that 

is caught with Pacific halibut to be 

needlessly discarded, as both hook-andline sablefish and Pacific halibut are 

managed under the same IFQ program. 

Immediate effectiveness of the 2007 and 

2008 final harvest specifications will 

allow the sablefish fishery to begin 

concurrently with the Pacific halibut 

season. Also, the immediate 

effectiveness of this action is required to 

provide consistent management and 

conservation of fishery resources based 

on the best available scientific 

information, and to give the fishing 

industry the earliest possible 

opportunity to plan its fishing 

operations. Therefore NMFS finds good 

cause to waive the 30 day delay in 

effectiveness under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Furthermore, the 2007 and 2008 final 

harvest specifications implement the 

groundfish sideboards and sideboard 

closures that restrict the owners of 

vessels with a history of participation in 

the Rockfish Program from using the 

increased flexibility provided by the 

Rockfish Program to expand their level 

of participation the catcher vessel 

Pacific cod fishery in BSAI groundfish 

fisheries. Until the 2007 and 2008 final 

harvest specifications are effective no 

sideboard restrictions or closures apply 

to these vessels. Accordingly, NMFS 

finds that there is good cause to waive 

the 30 day delayed effectiveness period 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1540(f); 

1801 et seq.;1851 note; and 3631 et seq. 

Dated: February 22, 2007. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–3692 Filed 3–1–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES