[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 195 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 59814-59815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25777]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 000927275-0275-01; I.D. 082800F]
RIN 0648-AO31


Fisheries off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; 
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Amendment 12

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS is proposing a rule to implement portions of Amendment 12 
to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP). The 
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared Amendment 12 to 
provide procedures for developing rebuilding plans for overfished 
species, for setting guidelines for contents of rebuilding plans, and 
for sending rebuilding plans to NMFS for review and approval/
disapproval. Amendment 12 would also declare all Pacific coast 
groundfish to be fully utilized by domestic harvesters and processors. 
This action would remove references to foreign and joint venture 
fishing in the groundfish regulations, and is intended to update the 
FMP and its implementing regulations to reflect the current status of 
the fishery.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing by November 20, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Donna Darm,, Acting Administrator, 
Northwest Region, (Regional Administrator) NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way 
NE., Seattle, WA 98115; or Rebecca Lent, Administrator, Southwest 
Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-
4213. Copies of Amendment 12 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP, and 
the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review (EA/RIR) are 
available from Donald McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery 
Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 224, Portland, OR 
97201. Send comments regarding any ambiguity or unnecessary complexity 
arising from the language used in this rule to William Stelle, Jr. or 
Rebecca Lent.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Robinson at: phone, 206-526-
6140; fax, 206-526-6736, and email, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d3f343131732f323f34332e32331d33323c3c733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a5c7ccc9c98bd7cac7cccbd6cacbe5cbcac4c48bc2cad3">[email protected]</span></a> Svein 
Fougner at: phone, 562-980-4000; fax, 562-980-4047; and email, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#126164777b7c3c747d67757c7760527c7d73733c757d64"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ef9c998a8681c189809a88818a9daf81808e8ec1888099">[email protected]</span></a>
    Electronic Access: This Federal Registerdocument is also accessible 
via the internet at the website of the Office of the Federal Register: 
http://www.access.gpo.gov/su-docs/aces/aces140.html.<ls-thn-eq><ls-thn-eq>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS is proposing this rule to implement the 
portions of Amendment 12 that declare the West Coast groundfish 
resource fully utilized by domestic harvesting and processing entities. 
Minor regulatory changes would be needed to make the regulations at 50 
CFR part 660 consistent with Amendment 12. This proposed rule is based 
on the Council's recommendations, under the authority of the Pacific 
Coast Groundfish FMP and the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The background and rationale for 
the Council's recommendations are summarized here; further details 
appear in the EA/RIR prepared by the Council for Amendment 12.

Background

    In September 1998, the Council adopted Amendment 11 to the FMP to 
make the FMP consistent with revisions to the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 
Among other things, Amendment 11 set control rules to define rates of 
``overfishing'' and set defined levels at which managed stocks are 
considered ``overfished.'' Amendment 11 was approved and incorporated 
into the FMP in March 1999.
    While implementing Amendment 11 provisions for rebuilding 
overfished stocks, the Council determined that it needed to set 
procedures within the groundfish FMP for developing overfished species 
rebuilding plans and for providing NMFS with the opportunity to review 
and approve/disapprove those plans. Amendment 12 provides a process by 
which the Council will develop overfished species rebuilding plans 
during its annual specifications and management measures process.
    During the Council's two-meeting process for setting annual 
specifications and management measures (usually September and 
November,) the Council would make overfished species rebuilding plans 
available for public review, and would incorporate measures to 
implement those plans within the annual specifications and management 
measures. Rebuilding plan contents are defined in the FMP and rely upon 
the Council's annual stock assessment and review process. Once the 
Council approves a new rebuilding plan, it would submit that plan for 
NMFS review and approval/ disapproval, generally at the same time that 
it submits its annual specifications package for review and approval/ 
disapproval. This process would ensure that rebuilding efforts are 
incorporated into fishery management measures as quickly and 
efficiently as practicable, and that they are consistent with 
management measures for other groundfish species.
    Procedural matters developed in Amendment 12 for overfished species 
rebuilding plans provide the Council with direction for future 
activities, are not regulatory in nature, and so do not result in any 
change to regulations. However, Amendment 12 also announces that the 
Pacific Coast groundfish resource is fully utilized by domestic 
harvesting and processing interests and provides an opportunity for 
NMFS to update its regulations to recognize this fully utilized status.

[[Page 59815]]

Foreign Fisheries and Pacific Coast Underutilized Groundfish Species

    When the FMP was first implemented in 1982, most of the vessels 
were foreign and joint venture vessels and these vessels were primarily 
targeting Pacific whiting. In 1983, about 60 percent of the whiting 
optimum yield (OY) was reserved for domestic harvest, and about 3 
percent of the OY was reserved for domestic processing. 
``Americanization'' happened slowly for the Pacific whiting resource; 
the whiting OY was not fully utilized by domestic harvesters until 
1989, and not fully utilized by domestic processors until 1991. In 
addition to whiting, there were minor joint venture processing 
opportunities for shortbelly rockfish and jack mackerel. Those species 
were considered fully utilized by the domestic fleet by 1992.
    In 1991, Amendment 6 to the FMP created a limited entry program and 
specifically addressed domestic underutilization of the groundfish 
resource with ``designated species B'' permits. These permits were made 
available to fishing vessels that had not qualified for limited entry 
``A'' permits, to encourage those vessels to fish specifically for 
Pacific whiting, jack mackerel, and shortbelly rockfish. By the time 
that the limited entry permit program was implemented in 1994, foreign 
harvest and processing of the three underutilized species were no 
longer an issue.
    Although the West Coast groundfish fishery has been fully 
Americanized for almost a decade, the Council had not amended the FMP 
to reflect the full and expected long-term domestic utilization of the 
resource until Amendment 12. Amendment 12 still leaves open the 
possibility of future foreign harvest of West Coast groundfish should 
domestic utilization decline, but requires an FMP amendment to re-open 
the fisheries to foreign access. The primary effect of declaring the 
West Coast groundfish resource fully utilized by domestic fisheries 
would be to modestly reduce NMFS' and Council's workload associated 
with the annual specifications and management measures process.
    Regulatory changes to implement Amendment 12 would simply remove 
references within the regulations at 50 CFR 660 to foreign and joint 
venture fishing. These changes would have neither biological nor socio-
economic effects on the environment.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not determined whether Amendment 12 that 
this rule would implement is consistent with the national standards of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making 
that determination, will take into account the data, views, and 
comments received during the comment period.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The full effect of this proposed rule would be to remove outdated 
regulatory language at 50 CFR 660 that refers to foreign and joint 
venture fishing. There have been no foreign or joint venture fisheries 
for West Coast groundfish since 1992. These regulatory changes would 
have no effect on any U.S. businesses, small or otherwise. As a result, 
a regulatory flexibility analysis was not prepared.
    The President has directed Federal agencies to use plain language 
in their communications with the public, including regulations. To 
comply with this directive, we seek public comment on any ambiguity or 
unnecessary complexity arising from the language used in this rule (see 
ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, 
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, Indians, Northern Mariana Islands, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 3, 2000.
Penelope D. Dalton,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN 
PACIFIC

    l. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as 
follows:

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

    2. In Sec.  660.302, the definitions for ``Reserve'' and 
``Specification'' are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 660.302  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Reserve means a portion of the harvest guideline or quota set aside 
at the beginning of the year to allow for uncertainties in preseason 
estimates.
* * * * *
    Specification is a numerical or descriptive designation of a 
management objective, including, but not limited to: ABC; optimum 
yield; harvest guideline; quota; limited entry or open access 
allocation; a set aside or allocation for a recreational or treaty 
Indian fishery; an apportionment of the above to an area, gear, season, 
fishery, or other subdivision.
* * * * *

    3. In Sec.  660.303, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 660.303  Reporting and recordkeeping.

    (a) This subpart recognizes that catch and effort data necessary 
for implementing the PCGFMP are collected by the States of Washington, 
Oregon, and California under existing state data collection 
requirements. Telephone surveys of the domestic industry may be 
conducted by NMFS to determine amounts of whiting that may be available 
for reallocation under 50 CFR 660.323 (a)(4(v). No Federal reports are 
required of fishermen or processors, so long as the data collection and 
reporting systems operated by state agencies continue to provide NMFS 
with statistical information adequate for management.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-25777 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>