[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 107 (Thursday, June 4, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30381-30410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14596]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 970703166-8129-03; I.D. 060997A]
RIN 0648-AH65


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Community 
Development Quota Program

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues a final rule that would implement part of 
Amendment 39 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery 
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area (BSAI) and part of 
Amendment 5 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Commercial King and 
Tanner Crab Fisheries in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands (BS/AI). These 
regulations implement administrative revisions and the catch monitoring 
and accounting requirements for the Multispecies Community Development 
Quota (MS CDQ) Program.

DATES: Effective July 6, 1998 except for Secs. 679.5(n), 
679.30(a)(5)(i)(A)(2), and 679.32(c)(4)(i) which are not effective 
until the Office of Management and Budget approves the information 
collection requirement contained in those sections. NMFS will publish a 
document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date for 
those sections. Community Development Plans (CDPs) for the MS CDQ 
Program for the 1998 through 2000 CDP cycle must be submitted to NMFS 
by July 7, 1998. Fishing under the approved multispecies groundfish 
CDPs is authorized to begin on October 1, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact 
Review (EA/RIR) for this action may be obtained from the North Pacific 
Fishery Management Council, Suite 306, 605 West 4th Avenue, Anchorage, 
AK 99501-2252; telephone: 907-271-2809.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Bibb, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. groundfish fisheries of the Gulf of 
Alaska (GOA) and the BSAI in the EEZ are managed by NMFS pursuant to 
the fishery management plans (FMPs) for groundfish in the respective

[[Page 30382]]

management areas. The commercial king crab and Tanner crab fisheries in 
the BS/AI are managed by the State of Alaska with Federal oversight, 
pursuant to the FMP for those fisheries. The FMPs were prepared by the 
Council, pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., and are 
implemented by regulations for U.S. fisheries at 50 CFR part 679. 
General regulations at 50 CFR part 600 also apply.
    On August 15, 1997, NMFS published a proposed rule to implement the 
MS CDQ Program and the Groundfish and Crab License Limitation Program 
(LLP) (62 FR 43866). This proposed rule contained a description of, and 
rationale for, the MS CDQ Program. Public comment on the proposed rule 
was invited through September 29, 1997. Thirty-six letters of comment 
about the MS CDQ portion of the proposed rule were received and are 
addressed in the following Response to Comments section. Additionally, 
the Response to Comments section addresses comments about the MS CDQ 
Program requirements that were received in response to the proposed 
rule for the at-sea scales program published on June 16, 1997 (62 FR 
32564). The final rule implementing the performance and technical 
requirements for at-sea scales was published on February 4, 1998 (63 FR 
5836).
    Because of the size and complexity of the final rule to implement 
the MS CDQ and LLP Programs, the need to respond to the large number of 
public comments received, and the need to respond to time critical 
events in the fishery, the LLP and MS CDQ programs are being 
implemented by means of three separate final rule documents. The first 
of these final rules was published on February 19, 1998 (63 FR 8356) 
and implemented the multispecies groundfish and crab CDQ reserves and 
closure of the Southeast Outside District of the GOA to fishing with 
trawl gear. The CDQ reserves had to be implemented early in 1998 in 
order to allocate groundfish, prohibited species, and crab to the MS 
CDQ Program for CDQ fishing in 1998.
    This final rule is the second of the three final rules implementing 
the MS CDQ and LLP Programs. It implements revisions to the 
administrative regulations and new catch monitoring regulations for the 
MS CDQ fisheries.

Response to Comments

Comments on Program Implementation

    Comment 1: Does NMFS have adequate funding and manpower to 
implement the many obligations that it imposes upon itself with the 
proposed MS CDQ Program?
    Response: NMFS' Alaska Region has obtained approval for the funding 
and additional staff necessary to implement the MS CDQ Program.
    Comment 2: The proposed regulations for combining vessels and 
processors participating in the groundfish and halibut CDQ fisheries 
under one set of regulations are burdensome for participants in the 
halibut CDQ fishery, do not consider the differences between the 
groundfish fisheries and the halibut fisheries, and generate 
information not worth the additional effort and cost to the CDQ 
participants or NMFS. Specifically, requirements for CDQ observers in 
shoreside processors taking deliveries of halibut CDQ, retention and 
delivery of all groundfish CDQ species by small vessels, CDQ check-in/
check-out reports for all vessels, and weekly summaries of the catch by 
all vessels are not necessary for the halibut CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS agrees that differences exist between the small 
vessel halibut CDQ fisheries and the other groundfish CDQ fisheries, 
including fixed gear sablefish. In 1997, 1,884,000 lb (854 mt) of 
halibut CDQ was allocated to six CDQ groups. At least 75 percent of the 
1997 catch was landed by small boats and skiffs under 32 ft (9.73 m) 
length overall (LOA) at about 10 small shoreside processors or at 
buying stations in Western Alaska villages. These processors do not 
submit other landing reports to NMFS and are not required to have 
observer coverage. In contrast, NMFS expects that most of the 
groundfish CDQ will be harvested by catcher/processors or large catcher 
vessels delivering to large groundfish shoreside processing plants.
    In the proposed rule, NMFS proposed to consolidate all of the CDQ 
fisheries that would be managed by NMFS under one set of monitoring and 
catch accounting regulations to implement the Council's and NMFS' 
intent that all catch in the groundfish and halibut CDQ fisheries be 
accounted for by a CDQ allocation. Although NMFS proposed different 
observer coverage, equipment, and reporting requirements for different 
size and gear type vessels, no distinction was made between the 
requirements for vessels of the same size fishing in the halibut CDQ 
fisheries or fishing in the groundfish CDQ fisheries.
    However, based on public comment, NMFS has determined that the 
differences between the small-scale halibut CDQ fisheries and the 
larger-scale groundfish CDQ fisheries warrant consideration of 
different catch monitoring and CDQ accounting regulations. Therefore, 
in this final rule, NMFS revises part 679 as follows:
    1. Three new definitions are added in Sec. 679.2 to distinguish 
between the three separate CDQ fisheries that will be managed in 1998. 
These definitions will be effective only for 1998 and will be removed 
or revised in future rulemaking.
    a. Fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fishing means fishing with 
fixed gear by an eligible vessel listed on an approved Community 
Development Plan (CDP) that results in the catch of any halibut CDQ or 
in the catch of any sablefish CDQ that accrues against the fixed gear 
sablefish CDQ reserve.
    b. Pollock CDQ fishing means fishing with pelagic trawl gear by an 
eligible vessel listed on an approved CDP that results in the catch of 
pollock that accrues against the CDQ group's allocation of pollock CDQ.
    c. Groundfish CDQ fishing means fishing by an eligible vessel 
listed on an approved CDP that results in the catch of any CDQ or 
prohibited species quota (PSQ) species other than pollock CDQ, halibut 
CDQ, and fixed gear sablefish CDQ.
    2. In Sec. 679.32(a), the reference to the halibut CDQ fisheries in 
the first sentence of the applicability paragraph is removed. The 
sentence now reads ``for all CDQ and PSQ caught while groundfish CDQ 
fishing as defined at Sec. 679.2'' instead of ``in the groundfish or 
halibut CDQ fisheries * * *.''
    No significant changes are made with the final rule to state how 
the small vessel halibut CDQ fishery will be managed in 1999 and 
thereafter because NMFS plans to solicit Council and public input 
before developing such measures. NMFS will publish rulemaking prior to 
December 31, 1998, to remove the sections with sunset dates at 
Secs. 679.2, 679.32(a)(2) and (3), and 679.32(e) and (f). This future 
rulemaking will combine the catch accounting regulations for pollock 
CDQ fishing and fixed gear sablefish CDQ fishing with the multispecies 
groundfish CDQ fisheries managed under Sec. 679.32 (a) through (d). At 
that time, NMFS will consider whether the small vessel halibut CDQ 
fisheries that deliver halibut CDQ to Western Alaska villages should be 
managed under different regulations than those under the groundfish CDQ 
fisheries. Council and public comment will be requested on any proposed 
changes to the current regulations.

Comments on CDQ Administration

    Comment 3: The preamble to the proposed rule states that a CDQ 
group has a fiduciary responsibility to manage

[[Page 30383]]

CDQ assets in the best interests of the CDQ communities. This statement 
conflicts with corporate law because, under corporate law, board 
members have a fiduciary responsibility to the corporation, not to the 
individual shareholders. The obligation of the CDQ groups to operate on 
behalf of the member communities is already enunciated throughout the 
CDP and the allocation process.
    Response: As do directors of other corporate entities, the board of 
directors of a CDQ group has primary fiduciary responsibility to the 
CDQ group corporation. However, the CDQ group corporation exists solely 
to serve the interests of the member communities as a whole. When a CDQ 
group does not serve the interests of the member communities as a 
whole, the CDQ group should be dissolved, and a new CDQ group should 
take its place. The interests of the member communities should be 
expressed in the CDP. If a CDQ group meets the milestones and goals of 
an approved CDP, the interests of the member communities will likely be 
realized. If a CDQ group does not follow its CDP and does not meet its 
milestones and goals, the CDQ group is likely not operating in the best 
interests of the member communities. No change to the regulations is 
required because this topic was discussed only in the preamble to the 
proposed rule.
    Comment 4: The preamble to the proposed rule states that the 
communities have the opportunity to review the activities of the board 
members and the CDQ group, which implies access to confidential data. 
An ``open book'' policy would have a chilling effect on the CDQ group's 
ability to operate successful businesses.
    Response: Any member of the public may request information about a 
CDQ group from NMFS. If NMFS determines that the requested information 
is not confidential and would not result in substantial competitive 
harm, NMFS will release that information to the public.
    Comment 5: Members of the board of directors of a CDQ group should 
not be required to be elected by community members as proposed at 
Sec. 679.30(a)(2)(iv). Board members are volunteers. Community 
elections of board members would require expenditure for advertisement 
and other election expenses and would discourage the most qualified 
from serving. NMFS should not remove the existing regulation that 
requires the board of directors to include one member from each 
community. Finally, the definition of ``qualified applicant'' should be 
revised to explain that board members may be elected by a community-
wide election, by the local fishermen's organization's membership, or 
by the CDQ community's governing body.
    Response: NMFS concurs. The requirement in the proposed rule in 
Sec. 679.30(a)(2)(iv) that ``[i]f a qualified applicant represents more 
than one community, the board of directors of the qualified applicant 
must include at least one member elected in an at-large election by his 
or her community, for each community in the CDQ group.'' is changed to 
read, ``[i]f a qualified applicant represents more than one community, 
the board of directors of the qualified applicant must include at least 
one member from each of the communities represented.'' NMFS notes that 
CDQ board members are not volunteers and are usually paid an honorarium 
for their participation.
    Comment 6: The information about the board of directors in section 
Sec. 679.30(a)(2)(iv) under the Managing Organization Information 
should be placed in the definition for ``qualified applicant'' in the 
definitions section at Sec. 679.2. Such a change would be an 
improvement because the board of directors constitutes a part of the 
qualified applicant and not a part of the managing organization.
    Response: The information about the board of directors must remain 
in Sec. 679.30(a) because all information required to be in a proposed 
CDP must be in this section. NMFS recognizes that paragraph (a)(2)(iv) 
is located in a section that describes managing organization 
information. However, no other location exists in Sec. 679.30(a) for 
the board of directors information that is more acceptable than the 
current location.
    Comment 7: NMFS should substitute the word ``approved'' for 
``effective'' in the definition of a CDQ group because the word 
``effective'' is not clear.
    Response: NMFS concurs that the word ``effective'' is unclear and 
changes the definition of a ``CDQ group'' in Sec. 679.2 from ``a 
qualified applicant with an effective CDP'' to ``a qualified applicant 
with an approved CDP.''
    Comment 8: NMFS should make the information requirements for a 
proposed CDP consistent with the State of Alaska's requirements.
    Response: NMFS, as the Federal agency responsible for implementing 
the CDQ program, requires that the information requested in 
Sec. 670.30(a) be included in the proposed CDPs. The State of Alaska, 
as the initial recipient of the proposed CDPs, may request the CDQ 
groups to provide additional information in the proposed CDPs, or may 
request the CDQ groups to provide the proposed CDP information in a 
particular format, as long as the State requirements do not conflict 
with the Federal requirements.
    Comment 9: The proposed CDQ regulations require a transition plan 
that includes a schedule for transition from reliance on quota 
allocations to self sufficiency in fisheries for each CDQ project. A 
transition plan for each CDQ project would be cumbersome and not very 
meaningful. A better transition plan would be one that estimates the 
impact on all CDQ group activities and the long-term revenue stream in 
the event that CDQ allocations cease.
    Response: NMFS concurs. The regulations are changed at 
Sec. 679.30(a)(6)(i) to define a transition plan as an overall schedule 
for transition from reliance on CDQ allocations to self-sufficiency in 
fisheries, based on the CDQ group's long-term revenue stream without 
CDQs.
    Comment 10: NMFS should eliminate the requirement to revise the 
general CDP budget to reflect the annual budget reconciliation report 
(Sec. 679.30(g)(3)). The obligation to prepare a final general CDP 
budget, particularly since it will be months after the year end, is 
unnecessary for the full disclosure of annual financial operations.
    Response: NMFS concurs. The CDQ regulations are changed at 
Sec. 679.30(g)(3) to remove the requirement that the general CDP budget 
be revised to reflect the annual budget reconciliation.
    Comment 11: Section 679.30(g)(4)(iv)(B) is not clear about whether 
halibut catcher vessels are considered ``CDQ partners.'' If NMFS 
considers that halibut catcher vessels are CDQ partners, then a full 
substantial amendment will be required to add or remove a vessel from a 
CDP. NMFS should make the CDQ regulations clear that a halibut catcher 
boat can be added to a CDP with a technical amendment.
    Rseponse: NMFS does not have a definition of ``CDQ partner'' in the 
CDQ regulations. Vessels may be added or removed from a CDP with a 
technical amendment, except that a substantial amendment must be used 
to add a vessel to a CDP if the CDQ group is proposing an alternative 
catch estimation method under Sec. 679.30(a)(5)(iii) (see further 
discussion under Changes from the Proposed Rule, item #8). However, if 
a CDQ group wants to add a vessel from a company that does not have a 
business relationship with the CDQ group (a new harvesting partner), 
the CDQ group may want to draft and sign a contract with the new 
harvesting partner to make clear the responsibilities of each party

[[Page 30384]]

during CDQ operations. Signing a new contract with a new harvesting 
partner requires a substantial amendment in most cases. Also, some 
vessels under the MS CDQ Program have equipment and operational 
requirements that must be met before they can be added to the list of 
eligible CDQ vessels. The CDQ group must ensure that any vessel that it 
adds to its list of eligible CDP vessels with a technical amendment has 
met the equipment and operational requirements of the CDQ regulations.
    Comment 12: NMFS should require the State of Alaska to establish a 
separate panel or committee to review CDPs and make objective decisions 
regarding CDQ and PSQ allocations. An independent panel would be better 
suited to make good allocation decisions without being influenced by 
political pressures.
    Response: The State is authorized to make recommendations to NMFS 
regarding the approval of proposed CDPs and CDQ/PSQ allocations. NMFS 
requires that the State hold public hearings on the CDQ applications 
and consult with the Council about its recommendations. The public has 
the opportunity to comment on the State's process and recommendations 
in an open forum at both of these meetings. NMFS reviews the State's 
written recommendations and the administrative record from the public 
hearings before making a final decision to approve or disapprove the 
State's recommended CDQ allocations. Therefore, at this time NMFS does 
not believe there is a need for further requirements about how the 
State makes CDQ allocation decisions.
    Comment 13: NMFS should change the date for the transmittal of 
proposed CDPs from the State to NMFS from October 7 to October 15 to 
give the State additional time if it is necessary to revise CDPs after 
the September Council meeting.
    Response: NMFS concurs and revises Sec. 679.30(d) to change the 
transmittal date for proposed CDPs from October 7 to October 15.
    Comment 14: The proposed regulations would remove Sec. 679.30(f) of 
current CDQ regulations that provides for the suspension or termination 
of a CDP. NMFS should re-insert this language. It is a necessary 
management tool.
    Response: The final rule includes a portion of the language from 
Sec. 679.30(f) of the current CDQ regulations in the final rule as 
Sec. 679.30(h). Also, NMFS is planning to promulgate additional 
regulations clarifying the process for suspending or terminating a CDP. 
Other portions of the current regulations are not included in the final 
rule because civil procedure regulations at 15 CFR part 904 already 
provide a system for prosecuting violations of MS CDQ regulations.

Comments on CDQ Allocations and Transfers

    Comment 15: NMFS should clarify what activity is prohibited in the 
proposed rule at Sec. 679.7(d)(15), which stated ``for a catcher 
vessel, catch, retain on board or deliver CDQ groundfish or halibut 
together with non-CDQ groundfish or halibut, except that IFQ sablefish 
and halibut may be caught, retained, or delivered together with CDQ 
groundfish and halibut by vessels using fixed gear.''
    Response: Section 679.7(d)(15) in the proposed rule is now 
Sec. 679.7(d)(13) in the final rule. This section applies only to 
catcher vessels participating in the groundfish CDQ fisheries. 
Operators of these catcher vessels are prohibited from catching, 
retaining on board, or delivering groundfish CDQ or halibut CDQ 
together with non-CDQ groundfish, with one exception: Catcher vessels 
using fixed gear are allowed to catch, retain on board, and deliver 
Individual Fishing Quota Program (IFQ) sablefish and IFQ halibut 
together with groundfish CDQ and halibut CDQ. This prohibition is 
necessary for catcher vessels to account for all catch during a CDQ 
fishing trip with CDQ, PSQ, or IFQ. Failure to prohibit this activity 
would allow catcher vessels fishing in the CDQ fisheries to attribute 
some of their catch against the moratorium groundfish fishery 
allocations of total allowable catch (TAC) amounts, which would be 
contrary to the Council's and NMFS' intent.
    This prohibition can be stated more clearly by using the definition 
of moratorium groundfish species in existing regulations. Therefore, 
the prohibition is revised to read: ``for the operator of a catcher 
vessel, catch, retain on board, or deliver groundfish CDQ species 
together with moratorium groundfish species.'' NMFS is also adding to 
this final rule a prohibition against catcher/processors catching 
groundfish CDQ species together with moratorium groundfish species in 
the same haul, set, or pot.
    Comment 16: In Sec. 679.7(d)(16) of the proposed rule, NMFS 
proposed to prohibit catcher/processors and observed catcher vessels 
from (1) combining catch from more than one CDQ group in the same haul 
or set and (2) combining CDQ and IFQ in the same haul or set. NMFS 
received comments opposed to this proposal by CDQ groups that have 
purchased halibut IFQ to fish together with their CDQ allocations. The 
halibut IFQ would be used by CDQ groups to retain halibut in their 
fixed gear groundfish CDQ fisheries.
    NMFS also received comments opposed to the prohibition against 
combining catch from more than one CDQ group in a haul, set, or 
delivery from CDQ groups. Commenters state that this restriction would 
limit the CDQ groups' ability to fully harvest their CDQ allocations 
and would create difficulties in managing small CDQs. Furthermore, NMFS 
currently allows this practice in the existing CDQ programs.
    Response: Section 679.7(d)(16) of the proposed rule is now 
Sec. 679.7(d)(15) in the final rule. NMFS has not changed this section 
in the final rule in response to these comments for the following 
reasons:
    Allowing catch from the same haul or set to be split among two or 
more CDQ groups would allow de facto transfers to occur outside the 
established procedure for State and NMFS review and approval of 
transfers. For example, the final rule requires that PSQ may be 
transferred only in combination with CDQ and only during the month of 
January. However, if splitting hauls or sets were allowed, one CDQ 
group could claim the CDQ species in a haul or set and another CDQ 
group could claim the PSQ species. Although this would not be an actual 
transfer of PSQ from one group to another, it would allow a CDQ group 
to catch CDQ even if it had no PSQ remaining to support its groundfish 
CDQ fisheries. NMFS believes that the question of allowing split hauls 
or sets should be more thoroughly analyzed and considered by the 
Council before making a change in the regulations.
    NMFS also has declined to change the final rule to allow vessel 
operators to catch CDQ and IFQ species in the same set because of the 
significant increase in the complexity of the catch monitoring and 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements that would result. The catch 
of IFQ species is monitored on the basis of the vessel operator's 
report of retained catch weight made to NMFS Enforcement. Estimates 
based on observer data are not used for IFQ accounting. However, the 
catch of CDQ species will be determined based on the CDQ observer's 
estimate of total catch weight and species composition for each set. 
The vessel operator's reports of retained catch weight will not be used 
for CDQ catch accounting. This difference in the catch accounting 
occurs because only retained catch accrues against an IFQ account, 
while all catch (retained and discarded) accrues against a CDQ account. 
An

[[Page 30385]]

unacceptable level of complexity is added if the two different catch 
accounting methods have to be applied to catch in the same set of gear. 
Therefore, while vessel owners may catch IFQ and CDQ together in the 
same fishing trip, they will be prohibited from catching IFQ and CDQ in 
the same set of gear.
    Comment 17: NMFS should continue to require that herring prohibited 
species bycatch be discarded from the vessel and should not require 
that the herring be retained until it is weighed on a scale. The 
herring PSQ is not a strict quota that will require trawl vessels 
fishing for a CDQ group to stop fishing altogether once it is attained. 
Rather, once the herring PSQ is reached, all trawl vessels fishing for 
the CDQ group would be required to stop fishing in the Herring Savings 
Areas (HSA) during certain times of the year. Therefore, the quota 
monitoring needs of the CDQ program are not great enough to warrant a 
change in retention requirements for herring PSQ. Implementation of 
this requirement would also require the State of Alaska to change 
regulations prohibiting the retention of herring.
    Response: NMFS recommended retention of herring PSQ because 
observers on catcher vessels using trawl gear do not have the ability 
to estimate the weight of herring bycatch discarded at sea accurately 
enough for NMFS to enforce closures of the HSA once the herring PSQ is 
reached by a CDQ group. In addition, all herring bycatch by vessels 
using trawl gear is assumed to be dead after it is brought on board the 
vessel. However, NMFS recognizes that a change in State regulations is 
needed before NMFS could require retention and delivery of herring to 
an onshore plant and that this change is unlikely to occur prior to 
implementation of the MS CDQ Program. Therefore, NMFS has determined 
that the only option is not to allocate 7.5 percent of the herring 
prohibited species catch (PSC) limit to the MS CDQ fisheries, to accrue 
all herring bycatch by vessels using trawl gear in the MS CDQ fisheries 
to the overall herring PSC limit, and to require vessels fishing in MS 
CDQ fisheries to comply with closure of the HSAs once the herring PSC 
limit is reached. This final rule amends Sec. 679.21(1)(i) to remove 
the herring PSQ reserve so that a 7.5-percent allocation of the herring 
PSC limit is not made to the CDQ fisheries. Additionally, the 
requirement for catcher vessels to retain herring PSQ is removed from 
Sec. 679.32(c) and the prohibition against fishing in the HSAs once the 
herring PSQ is attained is removed. Finally, recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements and catch accounting requirements in 
Secs. 679.5(n) and 679.32 are amended to remove references to the 
herring PSQ. Incorporation of the herring PSC limit into the MS CDQ 
fisheries may be considered by the Council and NMFS in a future 
rulemaking that would allow more time to resolve the conflict between 
State regulations and NMFS' catch accounting requirements.
    Comment 18: CDQ groups should be restricted to pelagic trawl gear 
only in the 1998 pollock fishery because bycatch in the pollock CDQ 
fisheries will not accrue against the CDQ and PSQ allocations until 
1999.
    Response: NMFS agrees. The Council made this recommendation to NMFS 
at its meeting in April 1996, and the provision was not included in the 
proposed rule. NMFS adds the requirement into the final rule under the 
definition of pollock CDQ fishing in Sec. 679.2 and in the prohibitions 
at Sec. 679.7(d)(24).
    Comment 19: If NMFS approves a CDP with a fishing plan that 
specifies a different procedure for determining CDQ catches, the CDQ 
group should be able to revert to NMFS' standard estimates by filing a 
letter of notification to the State with a copy to NMFS if an 
alternative, higher sampling frequency plan approved by NMFS is 
attempted but, for some reason, does not work out. The vessel should be 
authorized to act as the agent of the CDQ group so that immediate 
action could take place.
    Response: A CDQ group could include this type of contingency plan 
in its proposed fishing plan for NMFS review. No change to the 
regulations appears to be necessary at this time.
    Comment 20: In the preamble to the proposed rule, NMFS stated that 
a species or species group would be included in the CDQ program's non-
specific reserve if the species was low valued, no target fishery 
currently existed, and a sufficient buffer existed between the TAC and 
ABC (Acceptable Biological Catch). Given the structure of the 
overfishing definition, which sets the squid overfishing limit (OFL) 
equal to the average historical catch, an adequate buffer does not 
exist; thus, this species should not be part of the non-specific 
reserve.
    Response: The preamble of the proposed rule incorrectly stated the 
criteria for a species to be considered for the CDQ non-specific 
reserve. The criteria should have said ``sufficient buffer between the 
TAC and the overfishing limit'' rather than a ``sufficient buffer 
between TAC and ABC.'' In the 1998 specifications, neither squid nor 
the ``other species'' TAC category has a buffer between TAC and ABC 
because TAC is set equal to ABC. However, a buffer does exist between 
the TAC and the OFL.
    Comment 21: The prohibition against exceeding a CDQ allocation is 
stricter than the moratorium groundfish fisheries and IFQ fisheries 
requirements. The CDQ groups will always have to undershoot their 
quotas and leave substantial amounts of all species unfished. The 
prohibition will probably limit the CDQ longline cod fishery and some 
of the trawl flatfish fisheries when no biological or economic 
rationale exists for doing so. Therefore, NMFS should allow the CDQ 
participants to discard a particular species once the CDQ is reached 
rather than require that no CDQ be exceeded. This would be similar to 
the ``PSC status'' that is allowed in the moratorium groundfish 
fisheries whereby NMFS places groundfish on PSC status once the TAC is 
reached.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. NMFS approved a Council recommendation 
that results in an allocation of 7.5 percent of the groundfish TACs 
(except fixed gear sablefish) to the CDQ program. Allowing the CDQ 
fisheries to discard a particular species after its CDQ is reached 
could cause the overall CDQ program to exceed its 7.5-percent 
allocation. This would violate NMFS and Council intent for the CDQ 
program. The Council confirmed this intent at its April 1996 meeting. 
The only exception proposed by NMFS and accepted by the Council was the 
``CDQ non-specific reserve.''
    Comment 22: The CDQ non-specific reserve is inadequate. The squid 
bycatch could limit the pollock CDQ fisheries, and skate bycatch could 
limit the longline cod CDQ fishery. The ``other species'' TAC normally 
is not reached in the open access fisheries because a large percentage 
of the cod is taken with trawls with a lower skate bycatch. However, 
most cod CDQ will be taken with longline in order to reduce halibut 
bycatch mortality, resulting in more skate bycatch. Two recommendations 
were made. First, NMFS should not prohibit CDQ groups from exceeding 
CDQs for squid, arrowtooth flounder, and ``other species,'' all of 
which are bycatch species with no danger of becoming overfished and 
with little or no commercial value. Rather, once the CDQ is reached, 
these species should go on PSC status as they do in the open access 
fisheries. Second, NMFS should increase the percentage of the squid, 
arrowtooth flounder, and ``other species'' TACs apportioned from the 
CDQ reserve to the CDQ non-specific reserve from 15 percent to 50 
percent.

[[Page 30386]]

    Response: As proposed, the CDQ non-specific reserve provides a 
limited ability for the CDQ fisheries to exceed their 7.5-percent 
allocation of some species groups. However, NMFS will not increase the 
apportionment to the CDQ non-specific reserve or allow CDQ groups to 
exceed CDQs for the reasons stated above in the response to Comment 21.
    Comment 23: CDQ groups should be allowed an overage allowance for 
target species that would come off the following year's quota as is 
allowed for the IFQ program.
    Response: NMFS did not include overage or underage provisions for 
the CDQ program because none were recommended by the Council or 
requested by the State of Alaska CDQ program managers. In fact, yearly 
overages are prohibited as explained in the response to Comments 21 and 
22. Underages were not addressed but should have been expected, given 
the prohibition on overages.
    Comment 24: NMFS should allow CDQ groups to substitute halibut CDQ 
for halibut PSQ. If CDQ groups achieve bycatch savings of halibut PSQ, 
they should be allowed to harvest the savings as retainable halibut 
CDQ.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Substitution of halibut CDQ and halibut 
PSQ would be a significant change in the CDQ program design that NMFS 
would not make without a recommendation to do so from the Council after 
analysis and public comment.
    Comment 25: NMFS should exempt unobserved halibut CDQ catcher 
vessels from the requirement to retain and weigh salmon and herring PSC 
and groundfish bycatch except cod and pollock, which must be retained 
under Improved Retention/Improved Utilization (IR/IU). The amounts 
involved are trivial in comparison with the groundfish fisheries 
overall, but the retention requirement will create a hardship for the 
small vessels.
    Response: See response to Comment 2. NMFS will propose regulations 
for the small vessel halibut CDQ fisheries in a separate rulemaking.
    Comment 26: The proposed rule states that target fishery categories 
and gear allocations will be dropped for halibut PSQ but is silent on 
whether the target fishery categories will be dropped for crab PSQs. 
Will crab PSQ allocations and use be the same as halibut PSQ?
    Response: The target fishery designations for allocation of 
prohibited species bycatch in the moratorium groundfish fisheries will 
not be used in the CDQ fisheries. However, while the CDQ groups are 
simply prohibited from exceeding their halibut PSQ, the crab PSQ will 
be managed with the same time and area closures as the moratorium 
groundfish fisheries. Therefore, only the catch of crab in the trawl 
fisheries will accrue to the CDQ group's crab PSQs. The CDQ groups will 
be prohibited from using trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in (1) 
Zone 1 after the CDQ group's red king crab PSQ or C. bairdi Tanner crab 
PSQ in Zone 1 is attained, (2) Zone 2 after the CDQ group's PSQ for C. 
bairdi Tanner crab in Zone 2 is attained, and (3) the C. opilio Bycatch 
Limitation Zone (COBLZ) after the CDQ group's PSQ for C. opilio Tanner 
crab PSQ is attained.
    A prohibition against using trawl gear in the COBLZ is added. The 
new C. opilio bycatch limit and the COBLZ were added to 50 CFR part 679 
(62 FR 66829, December 22, 1997) after the proposed rule for the MS CDQ 
Program was published.
    Comment 27: The proposed constraints on transfer of PSQ and CDQ 
between CDQ groups are overly restrictive and will prevent the 
attainment of optimum yield (OY) because a group must cease fishing 
once any quota is reached and some of the quotas will be very small. 
CDQ groups need a more timely process for transferring CDQ in season.
    In addition to several general comments suggesting more flexible 
transfer provisions, NMFS received the following specific 
recommendations:
    1. NMFS should allow transfers of more than 10 percent of a group's 
CDQ and transfers of PSQ with a technical amendment rather than a 
substantial amendment. Requiring these transfers to undergo the 
substantial amendment process could result in ``considerable quantities 
of fish left on the table'' each year;
    2. NMFS should allow transfers of 25 mt of CDQ, the equivalent 
percentage of CDQ allocation, or 10 percent of the CDQ allocation, 
whichever is greater, with a technical amendment;
    3. NMFS should allow transfers of up to 2 percent of a group's PSQ 
by PSQ species without a concurrent transfer of CDQ and at any time 
during the year;
    4. NMFS should allow submission of amendments to transfer PSQ 
allocations at any time during the year, and, upon approval, make such 
transfers effective in the following calendar year.
    Response: NMFS included the transfer provisions and restrictions 
recommended by the Council and supported by the State of Alaska, which 
makes the original recommendations on CDQ allocations and reviews and 
approves all amendments to the CDPs before they are sent to NMFS for 
review and approval. The Council and the State believed that transfers 
of CDQ or PSQ allocations, transfers of more than 10 percent of a CDQ 
group's CDQ for any species or species group, or the transfer of PSQ 
should be made by substantial amendment in order to provide a more 
comprehensive and extended review of the proposed transfers. As a 
result, no significant change is made to the CDQ or PSQ transfer 
provisions set out in the proposed rule (see response to Comment 29).
    Comment 28: NMFS received two recommendations on allowing transfers 
of CDQ and PSQ after an overage had occurred. The first recommendation 
was a general request to allow transfers after fish have been caught to 
cover overages. The second recommendation was to allow up to 2 percent 
of CDQs or PSQs to be transferred after fish have been harvested in the 
event that one group has a small overage and can transfer it to another 
group with an equivalent amount of unharvested CDQ. The rationale for 
the second recommendation was that it would limit the number of 
enforcement actions necessary for small overages while allowing a 
higher percentage of the quotas to be taken.
    Response: NMFS disagrees and will make no provision for transfers 
to cover overages of CDQ and PSQ after that catch has occurred because 
this provision would undermine NMFS' ability to monitor and enforce 
requirements that CDQ groups not exceed their quotas.
    Comment 29: NMFS should require transfers of CDQ allocations, PSQ 
allocations, CDQ, and PSQ to be in whole integer percentages or amounts 
to simplify the transfer process.
    Response: NMFS agrees and has revised Sec. 679.30(e) accordingly.

Comments on CDQ Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    Comment 30: In Sec. 679.5(m) in the proposed rule, NMFS proposed 
requiring a CDQ representative to submit a check-in/check-out report 
for each vessel harvesting groundfish and halibut CDQ. NMFS received 
the following comments about the proposed requirement as it would have 
applied to catcher/processors and motherships. First, NMFS should allow 
catcher/processors and motherships to continue to submit the existing 
check-in and check-out reports required at Sec. 679.5(h) because the 
proposed CDQ check-in/check-out reports duplicate this requirement. 
Second, NMFS should require that the check-in/check-out reports be 
submitted by the vessel operator to NMFS directly, rather than

[[Page 30387]]

to the CDQ representative. Submission directly to NMFS would save time 
and avoid the confusion that may arise from requiring the CDQ 
representative to be the intermediary between the vessels and NMFS. 
Third, NMFS should not require that the check-out report be received by 
NMFS before the vessel can deploy gear in a non-CDQ fishery because the 
time period between CDQ and non-CDQ fishing is less than an hour in 
some cases and because vessel operators have no way to determine 
whether NMFS has received the notification. Fourth, if NMFS continues 
to require that the check-out report be received before the vessel 
deploys gear in a non-CDQ fishery, then NMFS should consider allowing 
the vessel's fax confirmation report to verify receipt by NMFS or allow 
the submission of the check-out report by electronic mail.
    Response: In the final rule, NMFS removed the requirement in 
Secs. 679.5(m) and 679.32(e) of the proposed rule for CDQ check-in/
check-out reports for catcher/processors, motherships, and catcher 
vessels. NMFS determined that the information about eligible vessels in 
the CDPs, observer coverage, and the existing check-in/check-out 
reports for processors is sufficient to monitor CDQ fishing activity.
    Catcher/processors and motherships participating in the CDQ 
fisheries will continue to be required to submit the check-in/check-out 
report at Sec. 679.5(h). NMFS revised the wording of Sec. 679.5(h) to 
refer to fishing for CDQ species, rather than for each CDQ allocation. 
The operator of the catcher/processor or mothership is required to 
submit a check-in report prior to fishing for CDQ species and a check-
out report within 24 hours after fishing for CDQ species has ceased. 
Vessels or processors must file separate check-in/check-out reports for 
each CDQ group number.
    In the final rule, check-in/check-out reports are not required for 
catcher vessels although they may be considered in the future if 
measures in this final rule are not adequate.
    Comment 31: The requirement for check-in/check-out reports for 
small catcher vessels in the halibut CDQ fishery is too burdensome 
because it would be too difficult for the CDQ representative to keep 
track of the many 18-32 ft (5.49-9.75 m) LOA vessels in short openings 
spread out over 14 communities and 25,000 square miles (64,750 square 
kilometers). This requirement would generate much paperwork that would 
not provide information worth the effort of the vessel owners, the CDQ 
representative, or NMFS. Two recommendations were received on the 
check-in/check-out requirement for the halibut CDQ fisheries. First, 
NMFS could require that the CDQ representative file one check-in report 
for all vessels at the beginning of the season and one check-out report 
at the end of the season for all vessels. Second, NMFS could require 
that check-in/check-out reports be submitted only by vessels over a 
minimum size of 30 ft (9.14 m).
    Response: The final rule has been changed to remove the requirement 
for CDQ check-in/check-out reports. See response to Comment 30.
    Comment 32: The proposed requirement to submit a CDQ catch report 
for each vessel each week that CDQ fishing occurs is excessive for 
small vessels fishing for halibut CDQ. NMFS might consider combining 
skiffs under a CDQ permit into a CDQ group fleet catch report.
    Response: See response to Comment 2. In 1998, vessels participating 
in the halibut CDQ fisheries will continue to submit reports to NMFS 
Enforcement under the IFQ program. CDQ representatives are not required 
to submit information about halibut CDQ reported under the IFQ program 
reporting requirements on the CDQ catch report in 1998.
    Comment 33: NMFS should use the shoreside processor's weekly 
production report (WPR) as a weekly report of CDQ catch.
    Response: NMFS requires information about the weight and numbers of 
all CDQ and PSQ species landed by each vessel fishing under a CDP. The 
shoreside processor's WPR provides the total CDQ and PSQ landed by all 
vessels fishing under a CDP each week, but it does not provide detail 
for the individual vessel's landed catch. In addition, the CDQ catch 
report is required to be submitted by the CDQ representative on behalf 
of the CDQ group that has received the groundfish CDQ allocation. The 
report must be signed and submitted by the CDQ representative to verify 
to NMFS that the CDQ group acknowledges the CDQ and PSQ catch made by 
vessels and processors under its CDP.
    Comment 34: In Sec. 679.32 of the proposed rule, NMFS proposed to 
use the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) fish ticket as a 
record of the catch weight and numbers for CDQ and PSQ landed at 
shoreside processors. However, ADF&G fish tickets are not designed to 
report halibut PSQ discarded at sea.
    Response: The final rule contains a change in this requirement. 
Rather than using an ADF&G fish ticket, each shoreside processor must 
submit a CDQ delivery report for each delivery of CDQ and PSQ. NMFS 
determined that ADF&G fish tickets would not provide adequate landings 
records for several reasons. First, ADF&G fish tickets are used 
primarily to report the weight of fish purchased by the processor and 
are less reliable for documenting the weights of fish that are 
delivered but not purchased either due to economic reasons or for being 
prohibited species. Second, ADF&G fish tickets are not available to 
NMFS soon enough to be used to monitor landings in-season. Finally, 
NMFS requires information about each CDQ delivery to link with the 
observer report from the same delivery so that information about at-sea 
discards of CDQ and PSQ can be quickly and accurately combined with 
delivery information from the processor.
    As a result of these comments, the following changes have been made 
in this final rule:
    1. The requirements for the CDQ delivery report are added to 
Sec. 679.5(n)(1). A CDQ delivery report is required to be submitted by 
shoreside processors for each groundfish CDQ delivery. The processor 
must include the vessel's CDQ delivery number on the CDQ delivery 
report.
    2. In Sec. 679.32(c), the ADF&G fish ticket is removed as one of 
NMFS' standard sources of data for deliveries to shoreside processors.
    Comment 35: If CDQ groups are required to report information about 
vessels fishing under their CDPs, NMFS should extend the reporting 
deadline from 24 to 48 hours after the vessel reporting deadline to 
allow time for information to get from the vessel to the CDQ group and 
to NMFS.
    Response: NMFS changed the deadline for receipt of the CDQ catch 
report Sec. 679.5(n)(2) to ``within 7 days of the date CDQ catch was 
delivered by a catcher vessel to a shoreside processor, buying station, 
or mothership or within 7 days of the date gear used to catch CDQ was 
retrieved for catcher/processors.'' This change should allow the CDQ 
groups sufficient time to get information from the processor or vessel 
reports if it is needed, although NMFS expects that most data used by 
the CDQ representative will come from observer reports rather than from 
vessel or processor reports submitted to NMFS.
    Comment 36: NMFS should require that the catch of halibut and 
sablefish CDQ be reported in pounds, rather than to the nearest 0.001 
mt.
    Response: Currently, halibut and sablefish CDQ catch reported to 
NMFS Enforcement under the IFQ regulations may be reported in pounds or 
kilograms as required for the IFQ landings report. Reporting 
requirements for halibut CDQ

[[Page 30388]]

after 1998 will be addressed in a future rulemaking. See response to 
Comment 2.
    Any CDQ catch reported on the CDQ delivery report or CDQ catch 
report at Sec. 679.5(n) must be reported in metric tons to the nearest 
0.001 mt, as is required for weekly production reports. Allowing CDQ 
representatives to chose among options for the units of measurement 
that may be used would increase reporting and data entry errors and 
complicate the CDQ information system.
    Comment 37: NMFS should provide an alternative to supplying vessel 
name on CDQ reports because many skiffs do not have names.
    Response: The requirement to submit the vessel name on the CDQ 
reports is changed in the final rule to read ``vessel name, writing 
`unnamed' if the vessel has no name.''

Comments on the CDQ Observer, Observer Duties, and Observer Coverage 
Requirements

    Comment 38: NMFS should not create a special category of observer 
for the MS CDQ fisheries. NMFS has not demonstrated that successful 
data collection on MS CDQ vessels will require specialized observers 
and additional observer training. Specifically, it is unclear that the 
needs of the MS CDQ Program will be different from the needs of the 
current pollock CDQ fishery, for which specialized training is not 
required. NMFS has rated the observers in the pollock CDQ fisheries as 
acceptable or better, demonstrating that these observers have been 
capable of meeting the demands of the pollock CDQ fisheries. The MS CDQ 
fisheries do not require any better or more experienced observers than 
those required by the open-access fisheries.
    The responsibilities of MS CDQ observing are not significantly 
different from those for the other fisheries. On vessels with two CDQ 
observers, each observer would have less work to do. In addition, 
implementation of electronic reporting of observer data and scales to 
weigh catch on some processor vessels will reduce observer workload. 
Rather than requiring that vessels carry a specially trained, 
designated CDQ observer, NMFS should revise current observer training 
and briefing to prepare all observers for the requirements of the 
multispecies CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The MS CDQ Program does require 
specialized observers and additional observer training because the 
demands of the MS CDQ Program will be very different from the current 
pollock CDQ fishery. For many MS CDQ vessels, estimates based on 
observer data will be used as the primary source of information about 
the catch of all species, including prohibited species. In order to 
fulfill the responsibility of determining CDQ and PSQ catch, the MS CDQ 
observer must have both prior experience as an observer and training 
specific to the CDQ program. Additionally, the equipment requirements 
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements, with which the MS CDQ 
observer must be familiar, will be different in the MS CDQ fisheries 
from the existing requirements for the CDQ and IFQ fisheries and for 
the moratorium groundfish fisheries.
    Comment 39: NMFS has inadequate infrastructure to provide the 
support CDQ observers will need. Observers in the CDQ fisheries will 
have an increased compliance monitoring role, which will lead to 
increased pressure from vessel operators and processors. Observers need 
to know that they will be supported by NMFS if they are being pressured 
in any way. The NMFS Observer Program and Enforcement Office will need 
additional staff to address problems that will arise with the multi-
species CDQ program. How will NMFS address these additional needs?
    Response: NMFS has received approval for additional staff and 
funding for the North Pacific Groundfish Observer Program to implement 
the MS CDQ Program and to support observers in the demanding role of a 
CDQ observer. In addition, equipment requirements such as scales to 
weigh total catch and observer sampling stations will provide 
additional tools to assist CDQ observers in estimating CDQ and PSQ 
catch.
    Comment 40: Observers could suffer financially under the proposal 
to create a special category of observer for the CDQ fisheries. 
Contractors may not deploy persons qualified as CDQ observers on non-
CDQ trips in order to have them available if a CDQ observer is needed. 
As a result, lead CDQ observers may be able to work only 2 to 3 weeks 
out of each season.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Certification as a CDQ observer will 
increase the types of observer employment that an individual is 
qualified for and should, therefore, improve his or her financial 
situation.
    Comment 41: The proposal to create a special category of observers 
for the CDQ fisheries will increase costs to observer contractors and 
to the fishing industry. Observer contractors will have less 
flexibility when deploying observers because fewer observers will be 
qualified as CDQ and lead CDQ observers. The special training for CDQ 
observers will increase training costs, which will be passed on to the 
fishing industry. Observer travel costs will increase. Vessels face 
possible down time if the CDQ observers are not immediately available.
    Response: NMFS agrees that requirements for CDQ observers may 
increase costs to participants in the CDQ fisheries and may reduce the 
flexibility of observer contractors. However, it is anticipated that 
sufficient numbers of CDQ observers will be available and vessels 
should not experience a delay due to a lack of CDQ observers (see 
responses to Comments 44 and 45.) The CDQ observer is necessary to 
implement the MS CDQ Program.
    Comment 42: The proposal to create a special category of observers 
for the CDQ fisheries will negatively impact the overall quality of 
data collected for other groundfish fisheries, because experienced 
observers will be concentrated in CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS disagrees that requirements for the CDQ observers 
will reduce the quality of observers or observer data collected in the 
other groundfish fisheries. Many factors contribute to the overall 
quality of observer data, including certification requirements, 
training, compensation, working conditions, and NMFS support. NMFS is 
pursuing improvements to some of these factors through separate 
development of policy and rulemaking. The requirement for CDQ observers 
alone is not expected to have a significant negative effect on the 
number or quality of observers available for non-CDQ fisheries. In 
addition, CDQ observers will not be required to work in CDQ fisheries 
all the time and will continue to be available for the non-CDQ 
fisheries.
    Comment 43: NMFS requires at least one lead CDQ observer on all 
vessels. What is the difference in responsibilities between the CDQ 
observer and the lead CDQ observer on a vessel with two observers?
    Response: The sampling duties will be similar between the lead CDQ 
observer and other CDQ observers. Each will be expected to work a 12-
hour shift. However, the lead observer will be the liaison person 
between the vessel and NMFS and will be responsible for determining 
whether any impediments to sampling exist and for resolving problems 
with sampling or data collection. The lead CDQ observer will be 
responsible for ensuring complete and correct data and will carry this 
responsibility through the debriefing process.

[[Page 30389]]

    Comment 44: If qualified CDQ observers are not available, NMFS 
should waive the requirement for two CDQ observers or should reduce the 
requirements for CDQ observers.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The requirements for a CDQ observer are 
based on the anticipated needs of the CDQ program. NMFS believes that a 
sufficient number of observers meet the requirements for certification 
as CDQ observers (see response to Comment 45). Therefore, waivers or 
changes to the requirements for CDQ observers should not be necessary.
    Comment 45: NMFS received the following comments about the proposed 
experience requirements for CDQ observers and lead CDQ observers:
    1. NMFS proposed that one of the requirements for a CDQ observer be 
that he or she must have completed at least 60 days of observer data 
collection on a vessel using the same gear type as the CDQ vessel on 
which he or she will be deployed. NMFS should require instead that the 
CDQ observer have experience in the type of sampling and the type of 
fishery he or she will be observing in the CDQ fisheries.
    2. NMFS proposed that the lead CDQ observer be required to complete 
at least 20 days of observer data collection on a vessel participating 
in a CDQ fishery in addition to the other requirements for a CDQ 
observer. The experience requirement for a lead CDQ observer should be 
a minimum of one full contract, rather than 20 days.
    3. If all pot catcher vessels are required to have one CDQ observer 
who must be a lead CDQ observer, how do non-lead CDQ observers ever get 
the opportunity to qualify as lead observers for pot catcher vessels?
    4. Do enough people exist with the qualifications required for CDQ 
observer to supply the number of CDQ and lead CDQ observers that will 
be necessary?
    Response: After examining the work history for current observers, 
NMFS decided to reduce the experience requirements necessary for CDQ 
observers in order to increase the number of current observers who 
would be eligible to apply for certification as a CDQ observer. Section 
679.50(h)(1)(i)(D) and (E) were changed as follows:
    1. The CDQ observer is required to have 60 days of observer data 
collection experience, in general, rather than 60 days of experience in 
the same gear type as the CDQ vessel on which he or she will be 
deployed; and
    2. The requirement for sampling experience on a vessel with the 
same gear type as the CDQ vessel on which the observer will be deployed 
now applies only to the lead CDQ observer.
    3. The lead CDQ observer is no longer required to have 20 days of 
observer data collection on a vessel participating in a CDQ fishery.
    The following table summarizes the experience requirements for CDQ 
observers (this does not include rating, training, or other general 
performance requirements):
    The following table summarizes the experience requirements for CDQ 
observers (this does not include rating, training, or other general 
performance requirements):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CDQ observer classification            Experience requirements      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All CDQ observers.................  60 days observer data collection.   
Additional requirements for                                             
 ``Lead'' CDQ Observers:                                                
    Lead on catcher/processor (c/   2 cruises and sampled at least 100  
     p) using trawl gear or a        hauls on a c/p using trawl gear or 
     mothership.                     a mothership.                      
    Lead on catcher vessel using    2 cruises and sampled at least 50   
     trawl gear.                     hauls on a catcher vessel using    
                                     trawl gear.                        
    Lead on vessel using nontrawl   2 cruises of at least 10 days each  
     gear.                           and sampled at least 60 sets on a  
                                     vessel using nontrawl gear.        
    Lead in shoreside plant.......  Observed at least 30 days in a      
                                     shoreside processing plant.        
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to part 3 of this comment, under the proposed rule, a 
catcher vessel using pot gear would have been required to have a lead 
CDQ observer. In order to qualify as a lead CDQ observer for this 
vessel under the proposed rule, a person would have been required to 
have the following observer experience: (1) At least 60 days of 
observer data collection on a vessel using pot gear and (2) at least 20 
days of experience on a vessel in a CDQ fishery. The commenter is 
expressing concern about how a non-lead CDQ observer (a person who had 
met the 60 days of pot gear experience) would be able to obtain the 
experience necessary to become a lead CDQ observer (a person with 20 
days experience in the CDQ fisheries).
    Under the proposed rule the requirement for 20 days experience in a 
CDQ fishery could have been obtained on a vessel using any gear type, 
as long as it was CDQ fishing. Under the final rule, these experience 
requirements are more flexible. The pot catcher vessel still is 
required to have a lead CDQ observer, but the experience requirement 
has changed to be as follows: (1) At least 60 days of observer data 
collection (no specific gear requirement for this experience), and (2) 
two cruises of at least 10 days each on a vessel using nontrawl gear in 
which the observer sampled at least 30 sets per cruise. Non-lead CDQ 
observers must get their 60 days of observer data collection experience 
in the non-CDQ groundfish fisheries. Lead CDQ observers may obtain 
their experience with specific gear types in either the CDQ or non-CDQ 
fisheries. Observer experience on vessels using longline, pot, or jig 
gear counts toward the nontrawl gear experience requirement.
    Comment 46: NMFS proposed that one of the requirements for a CDQ 
observer be that he or she have received ``the rating of 1 for 
``exceptional'' or 2 for ``meets expectations'' by NMFS for his or her 
most recent deployment.'' The NMFS rating system is 2 for 
``exceptional'' and 1 for ``meets expectations.''
    Response: The proposed rule was incorrect, and 
Sec. 679.50(h)(1)(i)(D)(2) has been corrected to state that the CDQ 
observer must have received the rating of 1 for ``meets expectations'' 
or 2 for ``exceptional'' by NMFS for the most recent deployment. This 
requirement provides that only observers in good standing are eligible 
for certification as CDQ observers, which are the majority of observers 
deployed over the last 3 years. Those observers who would be ineligible 
as CDQ observers are those either under suspension pending review for 
decertification or in probationary status.
    Comment 47: The NMFS rating system for observers does not 
appropriately indicate whether a person will be a competent CDQ 
observer. Unless the rating and evaluation system is drastically 
revised, it should not be used as an employment indicator for the CDQ 
program.
    Response: NMFS believes that using the observer evaluation system 
is appropriate because it is only one component of determining whether 
an

[[Page 30390]]

observer will be a competent CDQ observer. The rating will be used to 
determine whether an observer meets the minimum qualifications for a 
CDQ observer. However, evaluation of competency will occur primarily 
during training and through continued performance evaluations.
    Comment 48: In Sec. 679.50(c)(4) of the proposed rule, NMFS 
proposed that no CDQ observer could be required to be on duty for more 
than 12 hours in a 24-hour period, to sample for more than 9 hours in a 
24-hour period, or to sample more than three hauls in a 24-hour period 
on a vessel using trawl gear or a processor taking deliveries from 
vessels using trawl gear.
    NMFS received several comments opposed to the proposed requirement 
that all hauls be sampled by an observer for species composition and 
that each observer be required to sample no more than three hauls each 
24-hour period. This proposed requirement would limit trawl catcher/
processors to six hauls per day. Most comments opposed this proposal 
because operators of catcher/processors want to make small hauls or 
``test'' hauls to check the species composition of fish available for 
harvest in a particular area. The commenters stated that this practice 
allows them to minimize the bycatch and discard of undesired or 
prohibited species. Therefore, the limit of six hauls per day will 
likely increase bycatch and discards and increase the mortality rate of 
discarded catch. In addition, NMFS received comments that the fish 
quality declines when fish are harvested in large hauls or hauls towed 
for a long time. Catcher/processors that head and gut their product 
currently aim for hauls that average 10 mt and make between 8 and 10 
hauls per day. In order for these vessels to continue both to take 
small test hauls and to maintain production levels while complying with 
a six hauls per day limit, vessels would be required to take some hauls 
as large as 30 mt to 50 mt.
    In addition to the general recommendation that NMFS remove the 
limitation on the number of hauls that could be sampled, two other 
suggestions were made. First, NMFS should work with each vessel 
individually to develop a catch accounting plan through the CDQ permit 
process. Second, NMFS should establish a threshold for the number or 
percentage of hauls that must be observed.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the limitation on the number of hauls 
that can be sampled by an observer is not sufficiently flexible for the 
variety of fishing situations that may be experienced on all trawl 
catcher/processors. Therefore, in the final rule, the limitation that 
an observer may sample only three hauls per shift has been removed. 
However, the requirement that all hauls or sets on catcher/processors 
must be sampled by an observer remains, as do the limitations on the 
number of hours that the CDQ observer is required to work each day.
    A CDQ group will be required in its CDPs to demonstrate that 
vessels fishing under the CDPs have sufficient observer coverage to 
sample each haul or set. The final rule requires additional information 
to be submitted with the fishing plan in the CDP to provide NMFS with 
information to evaluate whether the requirement to sample each haul or 
set on each eligible vessel can be met with the minimum number of CDQ 
observers. The additional information that must be submitted includes 
(1) the number of CDQ observers that will be aboard the vessel; (2) the 
average and maximum number of hauls, sets, or pots that will be 
retrieved each day; (3) the average and maximum estimated total catch 
weight for each haul for vessels using trawl gear; (4) the time 
necessary to process the average and maximum haul size for vessels 
using trawl gear; and (5) the average number of hooks in each set and 
estimated time it will take to retrieve each set for vessels using 
hook-and-line gear.
    Comment 49: NMFS' proposal to limit observers to being on duty for 
12 hours per day and sampling no more than 9 hours per day does not 
give the observer credit for the amount of work they have already 
demonstrated they can do.
    Response: NMFS recognizes that many observers work more than the 
limitations proposed for the MS CDQ Program. However, the need to 
sample each haul or set on catcher/processors requires a limit on the 
ability of the vessel to make sampling demands on observers.
    Comment 50: Has NMFS determined the average number of hauls in a 
24-hour period expected in each CDQ fishery? Does NMFS have any 
assessment of how this average may vary with vessel size, if it varies 
at all?
    Response: NMFS has not performed this type of analysis. Our 
recommendations for the number of hauls that could be sampled by an 
observer in a 12-hour shift were based on NMFS staff estimates of the 
average observer workload requirements.
    Comment 51: Will the number of unobserved hauls increase if NMFS 
limits the number of observed hauls to six per day?
    Response: The final rule does not include the limit on the number 
of hauls that may be observed (see response to Comment 48). However, 
Sec. 679.32(d) does require that all hauls and sets on observed vessels 
be sampled for species composition.
    Comment 52: NMFS should require that one haul or set per observer's 
shift should be a partial-haul sample for prohibited species.
    Response: NMFS will request that CDQ observers take as large a 
sample as possible from each haul while also ensuring that he or she 
samples each haul and set during his or her shift. Equipment 
requirements such as the scale to weigh total catch and the observer 
sampling station should allow the observers to take larger samples. 
However, NMFS will not place any additional specific requirements about 
the size or method of sampling in regulation.
    Comment 53: NMFS should allow sorting by the crew with monitoring 
by the observer on catcher/processors to increase sample sizes and 
better provide for enumeration of all prohibited species, rather than 
depending on extrapolation from a limited number of relatively small 
basket samples.
    Response: Current regulations at Sec. 679.50(f)(1)(viii) require 
that the vessel crew assist the observer in sampling when requested to 
do so. NMFS also will review any proposals in the CDP that would 
provide for assistance from the crew to produce larger sample sizes. 
NMFS may approve CDP proposals for the vessel crew to perform sampling, 
sorting, and species identification with appropriate observer 
monitoring of the process to provide independent verification of catch. 
Also see the response to Comment 52.
    Comment 54: In Sec. 679.32(d)(4)(iv) of the proposed rule, NMFS 
proposed that ``each CDQ set or pot must be sampled by a CDQ observer 
for species composition and average weight.'' It is not possible to 
sample each and every pot.
    Response: NMFS agrees. In the final rule, the requirement to sample 
each pot is removed. The observer will be requested to sample as many 
pots in the set as possible to estimate species composition.
    Comment 55: NMFS should allow the use of grid sorting to reduce the 
mortality of halibut bycatch in the CDQ fisheries provided that 
International Pacific Halibut Commission and observer program 
requirements are met.
    Response: Grid sorting has been discussed by the Council as an 
alternative to reduce the mortality of halibut bycatch. If NMFS 
implements

[[Page 30391]]

regulations allowing grid sorting in the future, these regulations 
would likely apply to all groundfish fisheries, including the CDQ 
fisheries. Until then, pre-sorting of halibut bycatch by the crew is 
prohibited.
    Comment 56: NMFS should establish a provision to review the effects 
of the CDQ observer requirements on the quantity and quality of 
observer data in the groundfish and halibut CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS will evaluate the results of all requirements for 
the CDQ program, including the requirement for CDQ observers. However, 
it may be difficult to perform the specific evaluation requested 
because of the many other factors that affect the quantity and quality 
of observer data and the priority of this type of evaluation relative 
to other responsibilities of NMFS staff.
    Comment 57: In the event that an observer's error is found during 
debriefing results in a significant recalculation of harvest, NMFS 
should not penalize vessel operators or CDQ groups that have relied on 
the observer data in good faith.
    Response: NMFS will make every effort to minimize observer errors 
and to identify and correct them as soon as possible. If the error 
results in calculations that reduce the estimate of CDQ catch, that 
amount of fish, i.e., the difference between the estimate of caught 
fish and the CDQ, will then be available for harvest by the CDQ group. 
If the error results in calculations that increase the estimate of CDQ 
catch that then results in a CDQ overage, NMFS will consider all of the 
reasons for the overage in determining whether to pursue enforcement 
action against the CDQ group.
    Comment 58: The catch accounting and monitoring system proposed for 
the MS CDQ Program is also being considered for use in other fisheries 
and FMPs in the future. In the final rule, NMFS should discuss the 
anticipated trade-offs and problems this proposal may create.
    Response: The catch accounting system implemented for the MS CDQ 
Program is not necessarily the system that would be used for other 
individual vessel monitoring programs. The role of the State of Alaska, 
as a co-manager of the CDQ fisheries, and the requirement that CDQ 
groups apply for CDQ allocations every 3 years are among the important 
features that distinguish the MS CDQ Program from other proposed 
individual vessel monitoring programs. The catch monitoring and 
enforcement systems for other fishery management programs will be 
developed based on the needs and characteristics of those programs and 
participants. NMFS anticipates that experience with the MS CDQ Program 
catch monitoring and enforcement will provide valuable information 
about whether the catch monitoring program implemented for the 
groundfish CDQ fisheries should be applied to other programs.
    Comment 59: NMFS should clarify in Sec. 679.32(f)(4) that catcher 
vessels equal to or greater than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA that deliver 
unsorted codends to processor vessels are not required to carry an 
observer during their CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS revised paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) in Sec. 679.32 
to include catcher vessels delivering unsorted codends as unobserved 
vessels.
    Comment 60: Processors taking deliveries of Pacific cod or rockfish 
delivered with halibut CDQ should be required to comply with NMFS' 
requirements for a Federal processor permit and NMFS' observer 
coverage. These processors should not be exempt from this requirement 
under the MS CDQ Program.
    Response: Current regulations at Sec. 679.4(f) require all 
shoreside processors that take deliveries of groundfish harvested in 
the EEZ of the GOA or BSAI or deliveries from vessels with Federal 
fisheries permits to obtain a Federal processor permit. Therefore, 
shoreside processors receiving groundfish harvested in halibut IFQ or 
CDQ fisheries by vessels that do not have Federal fisheries permits and 
have fished only in Alaska State waters would not be required to have a 
Federal processor permit. NMFS observer coverage requirements for the 
general groundfish fisheries apply only to shoreside processors with a 
Federal processor permit. No changes to these regulations are made in 
this final rule.
    Comment 61: Shoreside processors processing only halibut should be 
exempt from observer coverage requirements as is the current practice. 
Many of the halibut processors are very small operations, and the 
imposition of additional costs will have a large impact on the ability 
of these facilities to operate. There have been no reported problems 
with the accounting of halibut CDQ. It is unlikely that there will be 
enough work to keep the observers busy.
    Response: This final rule contains no requirements for observer 
coverage for shoreside processors or registered buyers taking 
deliveries of only halibut. As stated in the response to Comment 2, 
NMFS will consider management measures for the halibut CDQ fishery in 
1999 and beyond in a separate rulemaking.
    Comment 62: Shoreplants processing less groundfish than a specified 
minimum should be exempt from CDQ observer coverage requirements as is 
done for the moratorium groundfish fisheries.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. All deliveries from vessels fishing for 
groundfish CDQ must be observed by a lead CDQ observer in the 
shoreplant regardless of the observer coverage on the vessel. As stated 
in the response to Comment 2, NMFS will consider management measures 
for the halibut CDQ fishery in 1999 and beyond in a separate 
rulemaking.
    Comment 63: NMFS should require two observers in shoreside plants 
for observer coverage around the clock, and those observers should have 
the same responsibility as observers at sea, i.e., full sampling 
responsibilities, and not simply a monitoring function.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. No change is made in the final rule. The 
CDQ observer in the shoreplant will be required to monitor the sorting 
and weighing of all CDQ and PSQ species to verify that accurate 
delivery weights are reported on the CDQ delivery report.
    Comment 64: In Sec. 679.50(c)(4)(i), NMFS proposed to require that 
a mothership or catcher/processor of any length must have at least two 
CDQ observers, at least one of whom must be certified as a lead CDQ 
observer. This is a one-size-fits-all rule that fails to take into 
account the differences between vessels and gear type. On certain size 
vessels, it will not be possible to have two observers, because there 
is insufficient room. One result of this regulation is to limit the 
size and type of catcher/processors CDQ groups can use. This may result 
in forcing CDQ groups to cease using longline catcher/processors for 
their Aleutian Islands sablefish CDQ, since most of those vessels 
cannot carry two observers. The additional cost is an unnecessary 
burden on longline catcher/processors. These vessels harvest fish one 
at a time, which is very different from the large tows associated with 
trawl catcher/processors.
    The following specific recommendations were made:
    1. NMFS should require that longline catcher/processors less than 
125 ft (38.10 m) LOA carry only one CDQ observer and allow the Regional 
Administrator (RA) to require a second observer at his or her 
discretion.
    2. NMFS should require that longline catcher/processors of any size 
carry only one CDQ observer and allow the RA to require a second 
observer at his or her discretion.

[[Page 30392]]

    Response: NMFS agrees that, under some circumstances, two observers 
may not be necessary on catcher/processors using nontrawl gear. 
Therefore, NMFS made the following changes in the final rule.
    1. Section 679.50(c)(4) was changed to require two CDQ observers on 
catcher/processors of any length using hook-and-line gear, unless NMFS 
approves a CDP authorizing the vessel to carry only one CDQ observer, 
who must be certified as a lead CDQ observer. A CDP authorizing the 
vessel to carry only one CDQ observer will be approved by NMFS if the 
CDQ group supplies logbook or observer data for that vessel (from CDQ 
or non-CDQ fisheries for the same species, gear, and areas) that 
demonstrate that one CDQ observer can sample each set for species 
composition in one 12-hour shift per fishing day. NMFS will not approve 
a CDP that would require observers to divide his or her 12-hour shifts 
into shifts of less than 6 hours, because this would not allow the 
observer sufficient time to sleep.
    2. Section 679.50(c)(4) was changed to require catcher/processors 
of any length using pot gear to have one lead CDQ observer, rather than 
two CDQ observers.
    Comment 65: Longline catcher vessels less than 125 ft (38.10 m) LOA 
should have the same observer coverage requirements as the fixed gear 
halibut and sablefish IFQ fisheries. A discrepancy exists between 
approved IFQ regulations and proposed CDQ regulations: The same vessel 
could fish IFQ without observers yet be required to carry two observers 
for CDQ. In both instances, the vessel would be fishing against a 
defined quota, which requires an exact catch measurement for 
enforcement purposes. If there is going to be a difference, it should 
be justified sufficiently to warrant the imposition of a more 
burdensome regulation on one component of the same fishery.
    Response: The catch monitoring requirements for the fixed gear 
halibut and sablefish IFQ fisheries and the MS CDQ fisheries are 
different. The IFQ fisheries require accounting of the catch of 
retained halibut and sablefish only. When these species are retained, 
NMFS Enforcement can check deliveries or product transfers to verify 
the accuracy of IFQ landings reports. The multispecies CDQ fisheries 
will require accounting for all catch, including prohibited species and 
other groundfish discarded at sea. The reliance on observer data and 
the source of data about CDQ and PSQ catch on these vessels warrant the 
additional observer coverage.
    Comment 66: If longline catcher vessels between 60 ft (18.29 m) and 
125 ft (38.10 m) LOA participating in the fixed gear halibut and 
sablefish CDQ fisheries are required to carry one CDQ observer, this 
requirement should be delayed until 1999.
    Response: NMFS proposed that these observer coverage requirements 
would not be effective until January 1, 1999. These requirements are 
not changed in the final rule.

Comments on Equipment Requirements

    Comment 67: The Magnuson-Stevens Act exempts longline catcher/
processors from being required to weigh their catch on a scale.
    Response: NMFS disagrees that section 312(h) of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1862(h)) exempts any vessel from requirements to 
weigh catch if these requirements are recommended by the Council and 
approved by the Secretary of Commerce. This section does, however, 
state that the Council should recommend measures to assist processors 
and processing vessels to acquire scales, unless the Council determines 
that such weighing is not necessary. The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides 
the Council authority to recommend scales on any type of fishing or 
processing vessel.
    Comment 68: NMFS received comments opposing the proposed 
requirement that catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships 
weigh total catch in the CDQ fisheries on a scale approved by NMFS 
under Sec. 679.28. General comments stated that scales to weigh catch 
at sea are not necessary to determine the weight of CDQ catch. One 
comment stated that product recovery rates should be sufficient to 
estimate the weight of species, such as flatfish, for which the 
overfishing limit is well above the TAC.
    Response: NMFS has determined that scales to weigh total catch on 
catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships are necessary to 
manage the multispecies groundfish CDQ fisheries to obtain more 
accurate and verifiable catch weight estimates. The Council recommended 
the use of scales in the BSAI pollock fisheries in September 1994, and 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorizes the Council to recommend the use of 
scales. Although volumetric-based methods currently are used by 
observers and could be used in the CDQ fisheries, an accurate scale 
weight is preferred by NMFS because it shifts the responsibility for 
estimating total catch weight from the observer to the vessel operator. 
Volumetric estimates place the responsibility primarily on the 
observer. On many vessels, the equipment or operational situation does 
not provide the observer with the conditions necessary to obtain a good 
estimate of the volume or the density of fish. If the vessel operator 
disagrees with the process or outcome of the observer's volumetric 
estimate, pressure could be placed on the observer. However, if a scale 
is used to weigh catch, the observer's role is to monitor the use of 
the scale, and the vessel operator is responsible for maintaining and 
using the scale properly, testing the scale, and reporting the scale 
weights.
    Because attainment of CDQs or PSQs will require the vessels fishing 
for a CDQ group to stop fishing sometimes before quotas for all species 
are reached, the pressure on observers in the MS CDQ fisheries is 
likely to be even greater than that on observers in other fisheries. 
NMFS expects that vessel operators will pay much closer attention to 
the observer data than they do in the moratorium groundfish fisheries, 
because their individual fishing activity will be decided based upon 
these data (unless some other method is approved by NMFS in the CDP). A 
scale to weigh total catch will increase the amount of information used 
to manage the CDQ fisheries that comes from the vessel operator, rather 
than from the observer.
    Product recovery rates are used only to estimate the weight of 
retained catch. They are not appropriate as a method for estimating the 
total catch of CDQ species because they do not account for the weight 
of catch that is discarded prior to processing.
    Comment 69: Some vessel owners may not be able to install scales, 
either due to space constraints on the vessel or due to the cost of the 
scale. A scale may not be capable of weighing accurately on small 
catcher/processors, because the vessels pitch and roll so much in bad 
weather. These scale requirements may prevent fishing companies that 
already have contracts with CDQ groups from being able to participate 
in the CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS has determined that a scale is necessary on all 
catcher/processors using trawl gear and on motherships for the reasons 
stated in the response to Comment 68. Processor vessels that cannot 
meet the installation, use, and daily testing requirements for a scale 
to weigh total catch will not be permitted to participate in the CDQ 
fisheries, regardless of any contracts with a CDQ group. Participation 
in the CDQ fisheries is voluntary and regulations governing the CDQ 
fisheries do not preclude these vessels from continuing to fish in the 
moratorium groundfish fisheries.

[[Page 30393]]

    Comment 70: NMFS has underestimated the costs of installing a 
scale. The purchase of the scale and redesign of one vessel is 
estimated to cost approximately $500,000.
    Response: In the proposed rule, NMFS estimated that the purchase of 
a scale may cost between $30,000 (hopper scales) and $50,000 (belt-
conveyor scales). Installation costs will vary depending on the type of 
scale selected, the modifications necessary to accommodate the scale, 
and changes in the sorting and discarding operations. NMFS estimated 
that installation of an at-sea scale could cost from $5,000 to $250,000 
per vessel and that the installation of the scale could also reduce the 
efficiency of the fish processing factory, particularly if processing 
equipment had to be relocated. The installation estimates were based on 
discussions with vessel owners and businesses that design fish 
processing factories. However, specific estimates of the purchase and 
installation of scales on particular processor vessels were not 
undertaken. NMFS acknowledges the uncertainty associated with the 
estimates and cannot either confirm or refute the cost estimate made in 
this comment. Participation in CDQ fisheries is voluntary and NMFS 
anticipates that only those vessels for which participation is cost-
effective will chose to fish for CDQ.
    Comment 71: The following comment was received about the impact on 
small entities of the requirement that catcher/processors using trawl 
gear and motherships weigh CDQ catch on a scale approved by NMFS (text 
in italics added by NMFS for clarification).

    We understand that NMFS has never done other than a finding of 
no significant impact (FONSI) when looking at effects of regulations 
under the standards of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. However, we 
feel certain that the agency must find a significant impact from 
this certification regulation and the ensuing regulations which 
specify who must comply with this one (scale requirement). The 
additional cost of the compliance of my vessels with these 
regulations will be considerably more than the ten-percent used by 
NMFS as a marker. And a quick review of the vessels doing CDQ 
indicate that more than 20% will be significantly impacted.

    Response: The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires NMFS to 
consider the capacity of those affected by regulations to bear the 
direct and indirect costs of regulation. If an action will have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities, an 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) must be prepared to 
identify the need for the action, alternatives, potential costs and 
benefits of the action, the distribution of these impacts, and a 
determination of net benefits. NMFS standards for determining whether 
an action is likely to have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities are outlined in the Classification 
section of this rule.
    Four of the 58 catcher/processors using trawl gear in the BSAI 
groundfish fisheries are considered small entities because they are 
fish-harvesting businesses that are independently owned and operated, 
not dominant in their field of operation, and probably have annual 
receipts not in excess of $3,000,000.
    NMFS estimates that up to 37 of the 58 catcher/processors using 
trawl gear in the BSAI groundfish fisheries will participate in the MS 
groundfish CDQ fisheries, including all 4 of the catcher/processors 
determined to be small entities. Furthermore, NMFS has determined that 
these small entities may be significantly impacted by the observer 
coverage and equipment requirements, because these costs could reduce 
annual gross revenues by more than 5 percent, could result in 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for small entities that are at 
least 10 percent higher than compliance costs as a percent of sales for 
large entities, or could result in capital costs of compliance that 
represent a significant portion of capital available to small entities, 
considering internal cash flow and external financing capabilities. In 
addition to these 4 catcher/processors using trawl gear, NMFS 
determined that an additional 29 of the small entities expected to 
participate in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries also may be 
significantly impacted by observer and equipment requirements for the 
MS CDQ fisheries. Additional information about these other small 
entities is included in the Classification section of this final rule 
and in a Supplemental Regulatory Impact Review available from NMFS (see 
ADDRESSES).
    However, although NMFS has determined that the MS CDQ monitoring 
regulations may have a significant economic impact on approximately 33 
of the expected participants in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries, these 
regulations will not impact a ``substantial number'' of small entities 
in the universe of 403 small entities. NMFS generally considers a 
substantial number to be 20 percent or more of the universe of small 
entities. The 33 vessels that could experience significant economic 
impacts as a result of this rule constitute only 8.2 percent of the 
universe of affected small entities (403).
    In addition, participation in the CDQ fisheries is voluntary. CDQ 
groups, vessels, and processors are expected to participate only if the 
CDQ fisheries would generate some net economic gain for their business. 
They would not be expected to participate in the CDQ fisheries if that 
participation would result in significant negative economic impact.
    Comment 72: NMFS should not require scales until more research is 
done on whether scales will weigh accurately on all vessel types and 
sizes and in the range of environmental conditions that occur at sea. 
Scales have not been proven to weigh accurately on all vessels and 
under all conditions that will be experienced in the BSAI.
    Response: NMFS cannot guarantee that scales will weigh accurately 
on all vessels and under all conditions and is not setting this as a 
condition for implementing the scale requirement in the CDQ fisheries. 
Rather, NMFS has determined that CDQ catch made by catcher/processors 
using trawl gear or delivered to motherships must be weighed on a scale 
that meets the requirements of Sec. 679.28(c). No exemptions or 
exceptions will be made. If a scale on a vessel cannot meet these 
standards for any reason, even reasons relating to the type or size of 
vessel or the weather or sea conditions, the vessel should not 
participate in the CDQ fisheries; if it does, it will be in violation 
of NMFS regulations.
    Comment 73: NMFS should allow the use of other methods, such as 
volumetrics, if a scale fails an at-sea scale test or the scale 
malfunctions. It is unreasonable to expect the vessel to return to port 
in the middle of a trip.
    Response: NMFS will not allow the use of volumetric methods as a 
back-up in case the scale fails an at-sea test or malfunctions. Such an 
allowance would undermine the requirement to weigh all catch on a 
scale. Catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships are required 
to weigh all catch in the CDQ fisheries on a scale approved under, and 
meeting all of the operational requirements of, Sec. 679.28(c).
    Comment 74: NMFS should require that total catch weight estimates 
on processor vessels meet a standard for accuracy, rather than 
prescribe a method such as weighing on a scale. Regulations should 
specify a result and not a method.
    Response: NMFS interprets this suggestion to mean that NMFS should 
specify a level of accuracy that must be achieved in catch weight 
estimation and allow vessel operators to demonstrate

[[Page 30394]]

that this level of accuracy has been met. Although no specific 
proposals were set forth, NMFS does not believe that this type of 
approach could be implemented. If NMFS specified, for example, that 
total catch weight must be determined to within 3 percent of its known 
weight, how would a vessel owner demonstrate that the volumetric or 
production-based method being used achieved this level of accuracy?
    Volumetric estimates are a product of the estimate of the volume of 
fish in a net or holding bin in cubic meters and the density of fish in 
metric tons per cubic meter. The observer multiplies the cubic meters 
of fish in the net or bin by the density factor to convert cubic meters 
of fish into metric tons of fish. The estimates of the cubic meters of 
fish and the estimate of the density factor have inherent errors. NMFS 
has recently recommended a standard density factor for catches that are 
95 percent or more pollock after conducting lengthy research. However, 
no similar research has been done for the mixed-species fisheries where 
determination of a density factor is complicated by the changing 
species composition of catch from haul to haul. The fishing industry 
likely could not perform the research necessary to specify conditions 
for volumetric estimates of catch weight in the mixed-species fisheries 
that would demonstrate that the catch weight on each vessel had been 
estimated within a specific range of error or accuracy standard.
    The only practical option is to set such performance standards for 
particular types of equipment or approaches as are established in 
Sec. 679.28 for scales and volumetrics, then specify which procedure 
must be followed and the associated equipment and operational 
requirements. In the case of the multispecies CDQ fisheries, NMFS has 
specified that scales are required and volumetrics will not be 
acceptable.
    Comment 75: NMFS must have scale inspectors readily available in 
Seattle and Dutch Harbor to conduct scale inspections. The scale 
requirement will effectively require the State of Alaska to station 
inspectors in these ports.
    Response: Refer to the response to comments in the final rule for 
the at-sea scales program (63 FR 5836, February 4, 1998) for more 
information on the scale inspection program. Although no State of 
Alaska inspector will be stationed in Seattle or Dutch Harbor, NMFS is 
requiring that scale inspections be conducted within 10 working days of 
the date on which the State of Alaska receives a written request from 
the vessel owner.
    Comment 76: The proposed requirement to weigh CDQ catch on a scale 
does not address the uncertainty associated with species composition 
sampling to determine the estimated weight of each CDQ species in the 
catch.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the uncertainty associated with species 
composition sampling is not changed by the requirement to weigh total 
catch. Observers will continue to sample the catch to determine the 
proportion of each species in each haul, set, or pot. However, some 
aspects of the multispecies CDQ regulations should improve these 
samples. For example, additional observers and the requirement that 
each haul or set be sampled will increase the amount of the catch that 
is sampled for species composition. The requirement that the scale used 
to weigh total catch be available for the observer to weigh large 
partial haul samples should provide for increased sample sizes, and the 
requirement for a motion-compensated platform scale should increase the 
accuracy of the sample weights.
    Methods proposed by NMFS that would be based on observer sampling 
to estimate species composition of the catch would use sample sizes and 
procedures that NMFS believes an observer could reasonably accomplish 
in the time available to him or her under the fishing and processing 
conditions on a vessel. Observers would obtain the largest sample sizes 
they can, given time, equipment, available space, and catch 
composition. NMFS is not proposing to specify minimum sample sizes 
necessary to obtain catch weight estimates with specific statistical 
qualities. The staff resources and data necessary to develop sampling 
plans appropriate for specific target fisheries or specific vessels are 
not available at this time. In addition, NMFS expects that the minimum 
sample sizes required to estimate the weight of infrequently occurring 
species on a haul-by-haul basis with a high level of confidence would 
be too large to accommodate in the space available on many vessels and 
would require more than two observers to sort and weigh. If NMFS 
develops sampling plans or minimum sample sizes for the groundfish 
fisheries as a whole in the future, this information could be added to 
the CDQ fishery requirements at that time.
    Comment 77: The scale may have to be installed in a location that 
prevents the observer from seeing the fish at all points between the 
live tank and the sampling station.
    Response: NMFS is not requiring that the scale be located so that 
the observer can see fish at all points between the live tank and the 
sampling station.
    Comment 78: NMFS should adopt a pre-approval process to review and 
approve or conditionally approve vessel modification plans for scales 
and observer sampling stations.
    Response: NMFS will review plans for vessel modifications and 
discuss installation and technical requirements if requested to do so 
by a vessel owner. However, NMFS cannot approve the vessel owner's 
plans. Determination of whether equipment meets NMFS' requirements can 
only be determined once the equipment is installed and in use.
    Comment 79: NMFS should clarify that reinspection of bins is not 
required for the 1998 pollock season for currently participating 
vessels.
    Response: Bins that are currently certified based on regulations at 
Sec. 679.32(e) with certification documents dated before July 6, 1998 
do not have to meet two new requirements in this final rule. These 
requirements are (1) the requirement at Sec. 679.28(e)(2)(i) that the 
numerals at the 10-cm increment marks be at least 4 cm high, and (2) 
the requirement at Sec. 679.28(e)(3) for the information that must be 
submitted to NMFS in the bin certification documents. As stated in the 
proposed rule, because the bin certification requirements would be 
effective only for 1998 in the CDQ fisheries, vessel owners should not 
be required to modify numerals on previously certified bins. However, 
any bins certified for the first time or recertified after the 
effective date of this final rule must comply with this requirement.
    Comment 80: The proposed requirement for an observer sampling 
station is a positive development for observers. Observers will be able 
to accomplish their duties much more efficiently, resulting in higher 
quality data and possibly larger sample sizes.
    Response: NMFS agrees.
    Comment 81: The proposed requirement that the observer sampling 
station on longline or pot catcher vessels or catcher/processors be 
located within 3 m of the location where fish are brought on board the 
vessel is unsafe. It will place observers dangerously close to the 
location where fish are landed. Three recommendations were made. The 
first recommendation is to specify the components and dimensions of the 
observer sampling station and allow the vessel to place it in a safe 
location as close as possible to where the fish are brought on board 
the vessel or to where the observer has first access to fish after they 
have been removed from the hook or pot. If there

[[Page 30395]]

must be an absolute distance requirement, it should be as close as 
possible but not more than 40 ft (12.19 m). The second recommendation 
is for NMFS to work with individual vessels and decide on the best 
placement of sampling stations on a vessel-by-vessel basis. The third 
recommendation is to allow the observer to determine the location of 
the observer sampling station, as currently is the practice.
    Response: NMFS revised the requirement in Sec. 679.28(d)(2)(ii) for 
the observer sampling station on vessels using nontrawl gear as 
follows: ``The observer sampling station must be located within 5 m of 
the location where fish are brought on board the vessel, unless any 
location within this distance is unsafe for the observer. The vessel 
owner must submit a written proposal to NMFS for an alternative 
location, including the reasons why a location within 5 m of where fish 
are brought onboard the vessel is unsafe.'' This written proposal must 
be included in the proposed CDP.
    Comment 82: In Sec. 679.28(d)(3) of the proposed rule, NMFS 
proposed that the observer sampling station be at least 1.8 m wide by 
2.5 m long (approximately 6 ft x 8 ft), including the observer's 
sampling table. The proposed size is too large considering the limited 
space available on most trawl and longline vessels. Some otherwise 
highly desirable CDQ partners may be precluded from participation in 
the CDQ program as a result of this requirement.
    Response: The specified amount of space is necessary for the 
observer sampling station. No change was made in the final rule in 
response to this comment.
    Comment 83: The sampling station should also include a requirement 
for a checker bin or container where an observer can deposit and hold 
fish while sampling.
    Response: Although it would be helpful for the vessel owner to 
provide such a container for observers, it is not an essential element 
of an observer sampling station. No change was made in response to this 
comment.
    Comment 84: Deck sorting of catch on trawl catcher/processors is a 
technique used to reduce the mortality rate of some bycatch species, 
such as crab and halibut. The observer may participate in collecting 
and recording data regarding this bycatch as deck sorting is taking 
place. It would be dangerous for the observer sampling station to be 
located within 4 m of that location.
    Response: The observer sampling station on a trawl catcher/
processor is required to be within 4 m of where the observer samples 
unsorted catch, which generally occurs below deck as fish are being 
removed from the holding bins. Therefore, NMFS does not expect that any 
observer sampling station would be located on deck for catcher/
processors using trawl gear. With respect to sorting prohibited species 
from the deck of trawl catcher/processors, current requirements at 
Sec. 679.7(g) prohibit any person from interfering with or biasing the 
sampling procedure employed by an observer, including physical, 
mechanical, or other sorting or discarding of catch, including bycatch, 
before sampling. Therefore, if the observer is sampling catch below 
deck, the vessel crew is prohibited from sorting any catch from the 
deck.

Other Miscellaneous Comments

    Comment 85: NMFS should allow vessels using trawl gear in the 
groundfish CDQ fisheries to start fishing on January 1, rather than 
requiring them to comply with the closure to fishing with trawl gear in 
the BSAI at Sec. 679.23. The period between January 1 and 20 is an 
attractive time for many CDQ vessels to target pollock and rock sole to 
maximize the value of these fisheries. Maintaining this closure reduces 
the value of the CDQ fisheries.
    Response: NMFS believes that this issue should be addressed before 
the Council with an opportunity for analysis and public comment. 
Therefore, the final rule will not be changed in response to this 
comment.
    Comment 86: Retention and utilization requirements under the IR/IU 
program should not apply to the MS CDQ Program. These requirements are 
unnecessary and unreasonable, since the CDQ program, by its nature, 
ensures that the CDQ groups will rationally determine the optimal 
balance between socioeconomic needs and production cost, thus 
eliminating waste.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The CDQ fisheries will not be exempt from 
retention and utilization requirements that must be met by any vessel 
fishing for groundfish in the BSAI. The commenter is referred to the 
proposed and final rules implementing the IR/IU Program for a 
description of the purpose and need of the IR/IU Program (62 FR 34429, 
June 26, 1997, and 62 FR 63880, December 3, 1997).
    Comment 87: The interim specifications process allows the harvest 
of only 25 percent of the CDQ and PSQ amounts until the specifications 
are finalized for the fishing year. This creates unnecessary problems 
that hamper the MS CDQ Program's effectiveness. NMFS should change the 
regulations to assign 50 percent of the proposed CDQs to the CDQ 
groups.
    Response: The Council and NMFS are considering changes to the 
annual specifications process. Therefore, NMFS recommends that concerns 
about the impact of the specifications process on the CDQ fisheries be 
addressed through this ongoing Council process. No change to the final 
rule was made in response to this comment.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    In addition to the changes described in the Response to Comments 
section, NMFS has made the following changes from the proposed rule:
    1. The definition of CDQ number was revised to specify that this 
number is to be used on all reports submitted by vessels and processors 
participating in the CDQ program in addition to being used by the CDQ 
representative.
    2. The requirement for a CDQ permit was removed from the final rule 
because it was redundant; there are other requirements to demonstrate 
compliance with equipment requirements. Additionally, the fact that 
only certain vessels and processors were required to have a CDQ permit 
caused confusion. The objective of the CDQ permit was to provide a 
mechanism to verify that the scales and the observer sampling station 
required on vessels and sorting and weighing requirements for shoreside 
processors complied with requirements in Sec. 679.28 before a vessel or 
processor was allowed to participate in the CDQ fisheries. The final 
rule replaces the CDQ permit with the requirement at Sec. 679.28(d)(8) 
for an inspection of the observer sampling station by NMFS to verify 
that requirements for the observer sampling station are met. A 
prohibition against participating in the CDQ fisheries without a valid 
observer sampling station inspection report is added to Sec. 679.7. The 
process for inspecting and approving at-sea scales already exists at 
Sec. 679.28(b).
    3. In the final rule, NMFS removed the sentence in 
Sec. 679.32(a)(2) of the proposed rule, which stated, ``[t]he catch of 
* * * sablefish with fixed gear in the multispecies CDQ fisheries in 
1998 will not accrue to the CDQs for these species.'' NMFS reviewed the 
Council's recommendations from its meeting in April 1996 and determined 
that the Council intended to exempt only groundfish and prohibited 
species bycatch in the fixed gear sablefish CDQ fisheries from accrual 
to the CDQs and PSQs for these species in 1998. This provision is made 
in Sec. 679.32(g). However, the Council did not request that NMFS 
exempt sablefish catch in

[[Page 30396]]

other groundfish CDQ fisheries from accrual against the sablefish CDQ 
in 1998. Therefore, the final rule requires bycatch of sablefish in 
other CDQ fisheries in 1998 to accrue against a CDQ group's sablefish 
CDQ.
    4. NMFS added prohibitions to Sec. 679.7 against owners or 
operators of vessels or processors participating in the CDQ fisheries 
in violation of equipment requirements.
    5. NMFS added a new paragraph (h) to Sec. 679.22 to cross reference 
the MS CDQ Program's prohibited species catch closures that are listed 
in Sec. 679.7(d).
    6. NMFS revised Sec. 679.28(d)(5) to be consistent with 
requirements for the observer sampling scale added to the final rule 
for the at-sea scale program (63 FR 5836, February 4, 1998). The 
observer sampling scale must be approved by NMFS under paragraph (b) of 
this section, must be tested daily as required under paragraph (b)(3) 
of this section, and must meet the maximum permissible error 
requirement specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section.
    7. NMFS revised Sec. 679.30(a)(5)(iii) to add the provision that a 
substantial amendment must be used to add a vessel to an approved CDP 
if the CDQ group submits a proposed alternative to NMFS's standard 
methods of determining CDQ and PSQ catch for that vessel under 
Sec. 679.30(a)(5)(ii). In this case, a technical amendment would not 
provide sufficient time for NMFS' review of the alternative proposal.
    8. The final rule makes three technical corrections to the proposed 
rule. First, the allocation of PSC to the MS CDQ program is moved from 
Sec. 679.21(e)(3) to Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(i) in order to 
solve cross referencing problems that were created when the instruction 
was placed in paragraph (e)(3). Second, cross references to paragraphs 
of Secs. 679.2, 679.21, and 679.31 that are changed by this rule are 
updated. Third, the stricture that PSQ is not apportioned by gear or 
fishery is made explicit in Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(ii).
    9. The final rule amends 15 CFR part 902 to add the OMB control 
number for the at-sea scales program to the list of approved NOAA 
information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Classification

    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of E.O. 12866.
    At the proposed rule stage, the Assistant General Counsel for 
Legislation and Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to 
the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration 
that this rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. NMFS received one comment on that 
certification (see Comment 71 and the response to it). For the 
following reasons, this comment did not lead NMFS to change its 
certification and as a result, a regulatory flexibility analysis was 
not prepared.
    The MS CDQ Program is comprised of three different CDQ fisheries: 
(1) The multispecies groundfish CDQ fisheries, which include the 
current pollock and fixed gear sablefish CDQ fisheries, as well as the 
additional groundfish and prohibited species added to the CDQ program 
in 1998; (2) the fixed gear halibut CDQ fisheries; and (3) the crab CDQ 
fisheries. Information about the impact of the allocation of the CDQ 
reserves from the TACs available to non-CDQ fisheries was discussed in 
the final rule that implemented the multispecies groundfish and crab 
CDQ reserves (63 FR 8356, February 19, 1998). The final rule being 
published today includes the administrative requirements for all of the 
CDQ fisheries and the reporting and catch monitoring requirements for 
the groundfish and halibut CDQ fisheries. Catch monitoring for the crab 
CDQ fisheries is the responsibility of the State of Alaska and NMFS 
does not promulgate regulations governing catch monitoring for the crab 
CDQ fisheries. In addition, this final rule makes no significant 
changes to the catch monitoring requirements for the halibut CDQ 
fisheries. Therefore, the primary economic impact of this final rule on 
participants in the CDQ fisheries is the impact of the equipment and 
observer coverage requirements for vessels and processors participating 
in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries. Therefore, the remainder of this 
discussion focuses on participants in that fishery only (MS groundfish 
CDQ).
    NMFS prepared a Supplemental Regulatory Impact Review to analyze 
the impact of the equipment and observer coverage requirements for 
vessels and processors participating in the MS groundfish CDQ 
fisheries. This analysis is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
    The universe of entities that could participate in the MS 
groundfish CDQ program is comprised of all 471 current participants in 
the BSAI groundfish fisheries, including the CDQ groups, vessels, and 
processors. The individual participants are divided into the following 
categories: CDQ groups, catcher vessels using trawl gear on vessels 
less than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA, catcher vessels using fixed gear 
(longline and pot gear) on vessels less than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA, 
catcher vessels using trawl gear on vessels 60' and over LOA, catcher 
vessels using fixed gear on vessels 60' and over LOA, catcher/
processors of any length using trawl gear, catcher/processors of any 
length using fixed gear, motherships, floating processors (processor 
vessels operating within 3 miles of the coast of Alaska), and shoreside 
processing plants. Of these 471 entities, 403 (86 percent) are 
considered small entities and, therefore, make up the ``universe of 
small entities.''
    Of the 471 affected entities, NMFS estimates that 92 will 
participate in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries based on current 
participation in the pollock and fixed gear sablefish CDQ fisheries and 
on the CDQ groups' projections of the number of additional participants 
that will enter the CDQ fisheries once the MS CDQ Program is 
implemented. The 92 participants are comprised of 6 CDQ groups; 28 
catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA and over using trawl gear; 5 
catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA and over using longline gear; 37 
catcher/processors using trawl gear; 10 catcher/processor using 
longline gear; 2 motherships; and 4 shoreside processing plants.
    Of these 92 expected participants in the MS groundfish CDQ 
fisheries, 57 are considered small entities by NMFS. The small entities 
include 6 CDQ groups; 28 catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA and over 
using trawl gear; 5 catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA and over using 
longline gear; 4 of the 37 catcher/processors using trawl gear; 10 
catcher/processor using longline gear; 4 shoreside processing plants.
    NMFS further determined that 33 of the 57 small entities expected 
to participate in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries may be significantly 
impacted by the observer coverage and equipment requirements for the 
following reasons.
    Six CDQ groups: the costs of observer coverage and equipment 
requirements are directly paid by the vessels and processors 
participating in the CDQ fisheries. However, these costs may be passed 
on to the CDQ groups in the form of lower royalties. Therefore, the CDQ 
groups may indirectly bear the costs of these requirements. Because 
NMFS does not know whether these costs will be passed on or to what 
degree, NMFS determines that the CDQ groups may be significantly 
impacted by the observer coverage and equipment requirements because 
these costs could reduce annual gross revenues to the CDQ groups by 
more than 5 percent.
    Four catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) and over using trawl gear: 24 
of the 28 catcher vessels that are expected to

[[Page 30397]]

participate in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries will not be 
significantly impacted by the observer coverage requirements because 
they already are required to have this level of observer coverage under 
current regulations for the pollock CDQ fisheries. However, the 4 
additional catcher vessels that NMFS expects may enter the MS 
groundfish CDQ fisheries in the future could be significantly impacted 
by the observer coverage requirements because these costs could reduce 
annual gross revenues by more than 5 percent, or could result in 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for small entities that are at 
least 10 percent higher than compliance costs as a percent of sales for 
large entities.
    Five catcher vessels 60 ft (18.29 m) and over using longline gear: 
NMFS determines that these small entities may be significantly impacted 
by the observer coverage requirements because these costs could reduce 
annual gross revenues by more than 5 percent, or could result in 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for small entities that are at 
least 10 percent higher than compliance costs as a percent of sales for 
large entities.
    Four of the 37 catcher/processors using trawl gear: NMFS determines 
that these small entities may be significantly impacted by the observer 
coverage and equipment requirements because these costs could reduce 
annual gross revenues by more than 5 percent, could result in 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for small entities that are at 
least 10 percent higher than compliance costs as a percent of sales for 
large entities, or could result in capital costs of compliance that 
represent a significant portion of capital available to small entities, 
considering internal cash flow and external financing capabilities.
    Ten catcher/processor using longline gear: NMFS determines that 
these small entities may be significantly impacted by the observer 
coverage and equipment requirements because these costs could reduce 
annual gross revenues by more than 5 percent, could result in 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for small entities that are at 
least 10 percent higher than compliance costs as a percent of sales for 
large entities, or could result in capital costs of compliance that 
represent a significant portion of capital available to small entities, 
considering internal cash flow and external financing capabilities.
    Four shoreside processing plants: NMFS determines that these small 
entities may be significantly impacted by the observer coverage 
requirements because these costs could reduce annual gross revenues by 
more than 5 percent, or could result in compliance costs as a percent 
of sales for small entities that are at least 10 percent higher than 
compliance costs as a percent of sales for large entities.
    NMFS has determined that, while the MS CDQ monitoring regulations 
may have a significant impact on approximately 33 of the expected 
participants in the MS groundfish CDQ fisheries, these regulations will 
not impact a ``substantial number'' of small entities in the universe 
of 403 small entities. A substantial number is defined by NMFS as 20 
percent or more of the universe of small entities. The participants 
that could experience significant economic impacts constitute 8.2 
percent of the total universe of affected small entities (403).
    In addition, participation in the CDQ fisheries is voluntary. It is 
anticipated that CDQ groups, vessels, and processors would weigh the 
cost of compliance with these regulations against the potential profits 
associated with participating in the CDQ program and would enter the 
CDQ fisheries only if they expected to realize a net economic benefit.
    Finally, some of the catch monitoring costs will be deductible 
under the future CDQ fee collection program. The Magnuson-Stevens Act, 
section 305(i)(3) states that ``The Secretary shall deduct from any 
fees collected from a community development quota program under section 
304(d)(2) the costs incurred by participants in the program for 
observer and reporting requirements which are in addition to observer 
and reporting requirements of other participants in the fishery in 
which the allocation to such program has been made.''
    This rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject 
to the Paperwork Reduction Act. A request will be submitted to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval of the requirements 
for the CDQ delivery report (Sec. 679.5(n)(1)), prior notice to the 
observer on catcher/processors and motherships that CDQ catch will be 
brought onboard the vessel (Sec. 679.32(c)(4)(i)), additional 
information in the CDQ catch report (Sec. 679.5(n)(2)) and additional 
information in the CDP (Sec. 679.30(a)(5)(i)(A)(2)). The public 
reporting burden for these proposed requirements is estimated to be 1 
hour per response for the CDQ delivery report, 2 minutes per response 
for prior notice to the observers, \1/2\ hour per response for the CDQ 
catch report and 20 hours per response for the additional information 
required in the CDP.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty 
for failure to comply with, a collection-of-information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection-of-information displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. These estimates include the time 
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering 
and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information. Send comments regarding these burden 
estimates or any other aspect of the data requirements, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Washington, DC 
20503, Attention: NOAA Desk Officer.
    The other collections of information in this rule have been 
approved by OMB, OMB control number 0648-0269. The public reporting 
burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 500 
hours per response for the CDPs, 40 hours per response for the annual 
report, 20 hours per response for the annual budget reports, 8 hours 
per response for the annual budget reconciliation reports, 8 hours per 
response for substantial amendments, 4 hours per response for technical 
amendments, 2 hours per response for CDQ catch reports, 2 hours per 
response for the request for an inspection of the observer sampling 
station (information required under the CDQ permit in the proposed 
rule), 2 minutes per response for prior notices to the observer that 
CDQ catch will be offloaded at the shoreside processing plant, and 10 
minutes per response for printing and retaining scale printouts by 
shoreside processors. The public reporting burden for requirements 
applicable in 1998 is estimated to average only 8 hours per response to 
complete bin certification documents, 0.5 hour per response for changes 
to the list of CDQ halibut/sablefish cardholders, and 1 hour per 
response for changes to CDP lists of vessels for halibut/sablefish.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 902

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.


[[Page 30398]]


    Dated: May 27, 1998.
David L. Evans,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.

    For reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902 and 50 CFR 
part 679 are amended as follows:

15 CFR Chapter IX

PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE 
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS

    1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as 
follows:

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


Sec. 902.1  [Amended]

    2. In Sec. 902.1, paragraph (b), in the table, under 50 CFR, the 
following changes are made:
    a. To the entry ``679.5'', the number ``-0269'' is added to the 
list of numbers in the right column.
    b. The entry ``679.28'' is added in numerical order in the left 
column and the corresponding entry ``-0330'' is added in the right 
column.
    c. To the entry ``679.32'', the number ``-0272'' is added to the 
list of numbers in the right column.
    d. The entries for ``679.33'' and ``679.34'' are removed.

50 CFR Chapter VI

PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

    3. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., and 3631 et seq.

    4. In Sec. 679.1, paragraph (e) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 679.1  Purpose and scope.

* * * * *
    (e) Western Alaska CDQ Program. The goals and purpose of the CDQ 
program are to allocate CDQ to eligible Western Alaska communities to 
provide the means for starting or supporting commercial fisheries 
business activities that will result in an ongoing, regionally based, 
fisheries-related economy.
* * * * *
    5. In Sec. 679.2, the definition for ``Governor'' is removed; the 
definitions for ``Community Development Plan (CDP)'', ``Community 
Development Quota (CDQ)'', ``Person'', ``Prohibited species quota'', 
``Qualified applicant'', and ``Resident fisherman'' are revised; and 
definitions for ``CDQ allocation'', ``CDQ group'', ``CDQ number'', 
``CDQ project'', ``CDQ representative'', ``CDQ species'', ``Eligible 
community'', ``Fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fishing'', 
``Groundfish CDQ fishing'', ``Managing organization'', ``Pollock CDQ 
fishing'', ``PSQ allocation'', and ``PSQ species'' are added in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec. 679.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    CDQ allocation means a percentage of a CDQ reserve under 
Sec. 679.31 that is assigned to a CDQ group when NMFS approves a 
proposed CDP.
    CDQ group means a qualified applicant with an approved CDP.
    CDQ number means a number assigned to a CDQ group by NMFS that must 
be used on all reports submitted by the CDQ group or by vessels and 
processors catching CDQ or PSQ under an approved CDP.
    CDQ project means any program that is funded by a CDQ group's 
assets for the economic or social development of a community or group 
of communities that are participating in a CDQ group, including, but 
not limited to, infrastructure development, CDQ investments, employment 
and training programs, and CDP administration.
    CDQ representative means the individual who is the official contact 
for NMFS regarding all matters relating to a CDQ group's activities.
    CDQ species means any species or species group that has been 
assigned to a CDQ reserve under Sec. 679.31.
* * * * *
    Community Development Plan (CDP) means a business plan for the 
economic and social development of a specific Western Alaska community 
or group of communities under the CDQ program at Sec. 679.30.
    Community Development Quota (CDQ) means the amount of a CDQ species 
established under Sec. 679.31, in metric tons, that is allocated to the 
CDQ program.
* * * * *
    Eligible community means a community that is listed in Table 7 to 
this part or that meets all of the following requirements:
    (1) The community is located within 50 nm from the baseline from 
which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured along the Bering 
Sea coast from the Bering Strait to the most western of the Aleutian 
Islands, or on an island within the Bering Sea. A community is not 
eligible if it is located on the GOA coast of the North Pacific Ocean, 
even if it is within 50 nm of the baseline of the Bering Sea.
    (2) That is certified by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to 
the Native Claims Settlement Act (Pub. L. 92-203) to be a native 
village.
    (3) Whose residents conduct more than half of their current 
commercial or subsistence fishing effort in the waters of the BSAI.
    (4) That has not previously developed harvesting or processing 
capability sufficient to support substantial groundfish fisheries 
participation in the BSAI, unless the community can show that benefits 
from an approved CDP would be the only way to realize a return from 
previous investments. The community of Unalaska is excluded under this 
provision.
* * * * *
    Fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fishing (applicable through 
December 31, 1998) means fishing with fixed gear by an eligible vessel 
listed on an approved CDP that results in the catch of any halibut CDQ 
or the catch of any sablefish CDQ that accrues against the fixed gear 
sablefish CDQ reserve.
* * * * *
    Groundfish CDQ fishing (applicable through December 31, 1998) means 
fishing by an eligible vessel listed on an approved CDP that results in 
the catch of any CDQ or PSQ species other than pollock CDQ, halibut 
CDQ, and fixed gear sablefish CDQ.
* * * * *
    Managing organization means the organization responsible for 
managing all or part of a CDP.
* * * * *
    Person means:
    (1) For purposes of IFQ species and the CDQ program, any individual 
who is a citizen of the United States or any corporation, partnership, 
association, or other entity (or its successor-in-interest), regardless 
of whether organized or existing under the laws of any state, who is a 
U.S. citizen.
    (2) For purposes of High Seas Salmon Fishery permits issued under 
Sec. 679.4(h), the term ``person'' excludes any nonhuman entity.
    (3) (Applicable through December 31, 1998). For purposes of the 
moratorium, any individual who is a citizen of the United States or any 
U.S. corporation, partnership, association, or other entity (or its 
successor-in-interest), regardless of whether organized or existing 
under the laws of any state.
* * * * *
    Pollock CDQ fishing (applicable through December 31, 1998) means 
fishing with pelagic trawl gear by an eligible vessel listed on an 
approved CDP that results in the catch of pollock that accrues against 
a CDQ group's allocation of pollock CDQ.
* * * * *

[[Page 30399]]

    Prohibited species quota (PSQ) means the amount of a prohibited 
species catch limit established under Sec. 679.21(e) (1) and (2) that 
is allocated to the groundfish CDQ program under Sec. 679.21 (e)(1)(i) 
and (e)(2)(i).
* * * * *
    PSQ allocation means a percentage of a PSQ reserve specified 
pursuant to Sec. 679.31(g) that is assigned to a CDQ group when NMFS 
approves a proposed CDP.
    PSQ species means any species that has been assigned to a PSQ 
reserve as specified at Sec. 679.31(g) for purposes of the CDQ program.
    Qualified applicant means, for the purposes of the CDQ program:
    (1) A local fishermen's organization that:
    (i) Represents an eligible community or group of eligible 
communities;
    (ii) Is incorporated under the laws of the State of Alaska or under 
Federal law; and
    (iii) Has a board of directors composed of at least 75 percent 
resident fishermen of the community (or group of communities); or
    (2) A local economic development organization that:
    (i) Represents an eligible community or group of communities;
    (ii) Is incorporated under the laws of the State of Alaska or under 
Federal law specifically for the purpose of designing and implementing 
a CDP; and
    (iii) Has a board of directors composed of at least 75 percent 
resident fishermen of the community (or group of communities).
* * * * *
    Resident fisherman means an individual with documented commercial 
or subsistence fishing activity who maintains a mailing address and 
permanent domicile in an eligible community and is eligible to receive 
an Alaska Permanent Fund dividend at that address.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec. 679.5, paragraphs (h)(2)(i)(C) and (h)(2)(ii)(F) are 
revised, and a new paragraph (n) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 679.5  Recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (C) Fishing for groundfish CDQ species. The operator of a catcher/
processor or mothership must submit by fax a check-in report to the 
Regional Administrator prior to fishing for any CDQ species. A separate 
report must be submitted for each CDQ number.
    (ii) * * *
    (F) Fishing for groundfish CDQ species. The operator of a catcher/
processor or mothership must submit by fax a check-out report to the 
Regional Administrator within 24 hours after fishing for any CDQ 
species has ceased. A separate report must be submitted for each CDQ 
number.
* * * * *
    (n) Groundfish CDQ fisheries--(1) CDQ delivery report. The manager 
of each shoreside processor and the manager or operator of each buying 
station taking deliveries of CDQ or PSQ species from catcher vessels 
must submit the following information on the CDQ delivery report to 
NMFS within 24 hours of each delivery of groundfish CDQ species:
    (i) CDQ number.
    (ii) Name of the vessel delivering CDQ, writing ``unnamed'' if the 
vessel has no name.
    (iii) ADF&G number of the vessel delivering CDQ.
    (iv) Federal fisheries permit number of the vessel delivering CDQ, 
if applicable.
    (v) Name of the processor taking delivery of the CDQ.
    (vi) Federal processor permit number of the processor taking 
delivery of the CDQ.
    (vii) Gear used to catch CDQ.
    (viii) The CDQ delivery number, which is a unique, sequential 
number assigned by the catcher vessel operator and recorded in the 
DCPL.
    (ix) Reporting area where CDQ catch was made.
    (x) For catcher vessels using trawl gear, whether the catch was 
from the CVOA or from the COBLZ.
    (xi) Date the CDQ catch was delivered to the processor.
    (xii) Species codes using codes in Table 2 to this part.
    (xiii) Product codes using the product codes listed in Table 1 to 
this part for groundfish and at Sec. 679.42(c)(2)(iii) for halibut, 
using product code 98 to designate at-sea discards reported by the 
operator of an unobserved vessel.
    (xiv) Product weight to the nearest 0.001 mt for groundfish CDQ and 
halibut CDQ or PSQ, and the total number of salmon PSQ and crab PSQ 
delivered to the processor. The weight of halibut CDQ, halibut PSQ, 
halibut IFQ, and sablefish IFQ must be reported separately on the CDQ 
delivery report. In addition, PSQ delivered to the processor must be 
reported separately from PSQ discarded at sea by unobserved catcher 
vessels. For catcher vessels with a CDQ observer, do not report 
estimates of at-sea discards on the CDQ delivery report.
    (xv) The printed name, signature, and date of signature for the 
vessel operator and the manager of the shoreside processing plant or 
operator or the buying station.
    (2) CDQ catch report. The CDQ catch report is required for all 
catch made by vessels groundfish CDQ fishing as defined at Sec. 679.2. 
The CDQ representative must submit the following information to NMFS 
within 7 days of the date CDQ catch was delivered by a catcher vessel 
to a shoreside processor, buying station, or mothership, or within 7 
days of the date gear used to catch CDQ was retrieved for catcher/
processors.
    (i) For all CDQ catch reports. (A) CDQ number.
    (B) Name of vessel used to catch CDQ, writing ``unnamed'' if the 
vessel has no name.
    (C) Federal fisheries permit number of the vessel used to catch 
CDQ.
    (D) ADF&G number of the vessel used to catch CDQ.
    (E) Gear used to catch CDQ.
    (F) Reporting area where CDQ catch was made.
    (G) For vessels using trawl gear, whether the catch was from the 
CVOA or COBLZ.
    (H) Species codes using codes in Table 2 to this part.
    (I) The CDQ representative's printed name, signature, and date of 
signature.
    (ii) For catcher vessels retaining all groundfish CDQ and 
delivering it to a shoreside processing plant (Option 1 in the CDP). 
(A) Name of the processor taking delivery of the CDQ.
    (B) Federal processor permit number of the processor taking 
delivery of the CDQ.
    (C) Date CDQ catch was delivered.
    (D) The CDQ delivery number.
    (E) Product codes using the product codes listed in Table 1 to this 
part for groundfish and at Sec. 679.42(c)(2)(iii) for halibut, using 
product code 98 to designate at-sea discards reported by the operator 
of an unobserved vessel.
    (F) Product weight to the nearest 0.001 mt for groundfish CDQ and 
halibut CDQ or PSQ, and the total number of salmon PSQ and crab PSQ. 
The weight of halibut and sablefish CDQ and IFQ, and the weight of 
halibut PSQ must be reported separately. PSQ reports must include all 
PSQ delivered to the processor and all PSQ reported as discarded at sea 
by the vessel operator for unobserved vessels and by the CDQ observer 
for vessels required to carry a CDQ observer. The CDQ catch report must 
identify whether sablefish CDQ accrues against the fixed gear sablefish 
CDQ reserve or the sablefish CDQ reserve as defined at 
Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii).

[[Page 30400]]

    (iii) For catcher/processors; catcher vessels delivering to 
motherships; and catcher vessels using nontrawl gear discarding 
groundfish CDQ at sea and delivering to shoreside processing plants 
(Option 2 in the CDP). (A) Name, Federal fisheries permit number, and 
ADF&G number of the mothership, if applicable.
    (B) Name and Federal processor permit of the shoreside processing 
plant, if applicable.
    (C) The CDQ observer's haul or set number.
    (D) Date gear retrieved by the catcher/processor, mothership, or 
catcher vessel as determined by the CDQ observer.
    (E) The total weight to the nearest 0.001 mt for groundfish CDQ and 
halibut PSQ, the product code and product weight for halibut CDQ, and 
the total number of salmon PSQ and crab PSQ. The weight of halibut CDQ 
and halibut PSQ must be reported separately and the CDQ catch report 
must identify whether sablefish CDQ accrues against the fixed gear 
sablefish CDQ reserve or the sablefish CDQ reserve as defined at 
Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii).
    (3) Halibut CDQ. All halibut CDQ harvested by vessels while 
groundfish CDQ fishing as defined at Sec. 679.2 must be reported on the 
CDQ delivery report and on the CDQ catch report.
    7. In Sec. 679.7, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 679.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (d) CDQ. (1) Participate in a Western Alaska CDQ program in 
violation of this part.
    (2) Fail to submit, submit inaccurate information on, or 
intentionally submit false information on any report, application, or 
statement required under this part.
    (3) Participate as a community in more than one CDP, unless the 
second CDP is for vessels fishing halibut CDQ only.
    (4) Harvest groundfish CDQ or halibut CDQ or PSQ on behalf of a CDQ 
group with a vessel that is not listed as an eligible vessel on an 
approved CDP for that CDQ group.
    (5) For a CDQ group, exceed a CDQ, halibut PSQ, or crab PSQ.
    (6) For the operator of an eligible vessel listed on an approved 
CDP, use trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in Zone 1 after the CDQ 
group's red king crab PSQ or C. bairdi Tanner crab PSQ in Zone 1 is 
attained.
    (7) For the operator of an eligible vessel listed on an approved 
CDP, use trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in Zone 2 after the CDQ 
group's PSQ for C. bairdi Tanner crab in Zone 2 is attained.
    (8) For the operator of an eligible vessel listed on an approved 
CDP, use trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in the C. opilio Bycatch 
Limitation Zone after the CDQ group's PSQ for C. opilio Tanner crab is 
attained.
    (9) For the operator of an eligible vessel listed on an approved 
CDP, use trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in the Chinook Salmon 
Savings Area between January 1 and April 15 after the CDQ group's 
chinook salmon PSQ is attained.
    (10) For the operator of an eligible vessel listed on an approved 
CDP, use trawl gear to harvest groundfish CDQ in the Chum Salmon 
Savings Area between September 1 and October 14 after the CDQ group's 
non-chinook salmon PSQ is attained.
    (11) For the operator of a catcher vessel using trawl gear or any 
vessel less than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA, discard any groundfish CDQ 
species or salmon PSQ before it is delivered to an eligible processor 
listed on an approved CDP.
    (12) For the operator of a vessel using trawl gear, release CDQ 
catch from the codend before it is brought on board the vessel and 
weighed on a scale approved by NMFS under Sec. 679.28(b) or delivered 
to a processor. This includes, but is not limited to, ``codend 
dumping'' and ``codend bleeding.''
    (13) For the operator of a catcher vessel, catch, retain on board, 
or deliver groundfish CDQ species together with moratorium groundfish 
species.
    (14) For the operator of a catcher/processor, catch groundfish CDQ 
species together with moratorium groundfish species in the same haul, 
set, or pot.
    (15) For the operator of a catcher/processor or a catcher vessel 
required to carry a CDQ observer, combine catch from two or more CDQ 
groups or from CDQ and IFQ in the same haul or set.
    (16) Use any groundfish CDQ species as a basis species for 
calculating retainable bycatch amounts under Sec. 679.20.
    (17) For the operator of a catcher/processor using trawl gear or a 
mothership, harvest or take deliveries of CDQ or PSQ species without a 
valid scale inspection report signed by an authorized scale inspector 
under Sec. 679.28(b)(2) on board the vessel.
    (18) For the operator of a vessel required to have an observer 
sampling station described at Sec. 679.28(d), harvest or take 
deliveries of CDQ or PSQ species without a valid observer sampling 
station inspection report issued by NMFS under Sec. 679.28(d)(8) on 
board the vessel.
    (19) For the operator of a catcher/processor using trawl gear or a 
mothership, sort, process, or discard CDQ or PSQ species before the 
total catch is weighed on a scale that meets the requirements of 
Sec. 679.28(b).
    (20) For the operator of a vessel required to have a scale to weigh 
total catch or an observer sampling scale, harvest or take deliveries 
of CDQ or PSQ species if any scale fails to meet the daily test 
requirements described at Sec. 679.28(b)(3).
    (21) For the manager of a shoreside processor or the manager or 
operator of a buying station that is required elsewhere in this part to 
weigh catch on a scale approved by the State of Alaska under 
Sec. 679.28(b), fail to weigh catch on a scale that meets the 
requirements of Sec. 679.28(b).
    (22) For the operator of a catcher/processor or mothership that is 
required elsewhere in this part to provide certified bins for 
volumetric estimates that meet the requirements of Sec. 679.28(e), fail 
to provide bins that meet the requirements of Sec. 679.28(e).
    (23) For a CDQ representative, use methods other than those 
approved in the CDP to determine the catch of CDQ and PSQ reported to 
NMFS on the CDQ catch report.
    (24) For the operator of a vessel using trawl gear, harvest pollock 
CDQ in 1998 with trawl gear other than pelagic trawl gear.
    (25) For a CDQ group, report catch of sablefish CDQ for accrual 
against the fixed gear sablefish CDQ reserve if that sablefish CDQ was 
caught with fishing gear other than fixed gear.
    (26) For the operator of a vessel, harvest halibut CDQ with other 
than fixed gear.
    (27) For a CDQ group, fail to ensure that all vessels and 
processors listed as eligible on the CDQ group's approved CDP comply 
with all regulations in this part while fishing for CDQ.
    (28) Fail to comply with the requirements of a CDP.
* * * * *
    8. Section 679.21 is amended by making the following changes:
    a. Paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(3) are revised;
    b. The introductory text of paragraphs (e)(1)(i), (e)(1)(ii), 
(e)(1)(iii), and paragraphs (e)(1)(iv) through (e)(1)(vii) are 
redesignated as the introductory text of paragraphs (e)(1)(ii), 
(e)(1)(iii), (e)(1)(iv) and paragraphs (e)(1)(v) through (viii), 
respectively;
    c. New paragraph (e)(1)(i) introductory text is added;
    d. Newly redesignated paragraph (e)(1)(viii) and paragraph (e)(2) 
are revised;
    e. Paragraph (e)(3) is removed;

[[Page 30401]]

    f. Paragraphs (e)(4) through (e)(9) are redesignated as paragraphs 
(e)(3) through (e)(8) respectively; and
    g. Newly redesignated paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (e)(4)(i) are 
revised. The newly added and revised text reads as follows:


Sec. 679.21  Prohibited species bycatch management.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) After allowing for sampling by an observer, if an observer is 
aboard, sort its catch immediately after retrieval of the gear and, 
except as provided below, return all prohibited species or parts 
thereof to the sea immediately, with a minimum of injury, regardless of 
its condition. The following exceptions are made:
    (A) Salmon prohibited species catch in the BSAI groundfish 
fisheries under paragraph (c) of this section and Sec. 679.26; and
    (B) Salmon PSQ caught by catcher vessels using trawl gear in the 
CDQ fisheries under subpart C of this part.
    (3) Rebuttable presumption. Except as provided under paragraph (c) 
of this section, Sec. 679.26, or for salmon PSQ retained by catcher 
vessels using trawl gear in the CDQ fisheries, there will be a 
rebuttable presumption that any prohibited species retained on board a 
fishing vessel regulated under this part was caught and retained in 
violation of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) PSQ reserve. 7.5 percent of each PSC limit set forth in 
paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) through (v), (e)(1)(vii), and (e)(1)(viii) of 
this section is allocated to the groundfish CDQ program as PSQ reserve. 
The PSQ reserve is not apportioned by gear or fishery.
* * * * *
    (viii) Non-chinook salmon. The PSC limit of non-chinook salmon 
caught by vessels using trawl gear during August 15 through October 14 
in the CVOA is 42,000 fish.
    (2) Nontrawl gear, halibut. (i) The PSC limit of halibut caught 
while conducting any nontrawl fishery for groundfish in the BSAI during 
any fishing year is the amount of halibut equivalent to 900 mt of 
halibut mortality.
    (ii) 7.5 percent of the nontrawl gear halibut PSC limit set forth 
in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section is allocated to the groundfish 
CDQ program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ reserve is not apportioned by gear 
or fishery.
    (3) * * *
    (i) General. NMFS, after consultation with the Council and after 
subtraction of PSQ reserve, will apportion each PSC limit set forth in 
paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section into bycatch 
allowances for fishery categories defined in paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of 
this section, based on each category's proportional share of the 
anticipated incidental catch during a fishing year of prohibited 
species for which a PSC limit is specified and the need to optimize the 
amount of total groundfish harvested under established PSC limits.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) General. NMFS, after consultation with the Council and after 
subtraction of PSQ reserve, may apportion the halibut PSC limit for 
nontrawl gear set forth under paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section into 
bycatch allowances for nontrawl fishery categories defined under 
paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this section based on each category's 
proportional share of the anticipated bycatch mortality of halibut 
during a fishing year and the need to optimize the amount of total 
groundfish harvested under the nontrawl halibut PSC limit. The sum of 
all bycatch allowances of any prohibited species will equal its PSC 
limit.
* * * * *


Sec. 679.21  [Amended]

    9. In addition to the amendments set forth above, Sec. 679.21 is 
amended by making the following changes:
    a. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(1)(ii) introductory text, 
the reference to paragraph (e)(1)(i)(A) is removed and a reference to 
(e)(1)(iii)(A) is added in its place.
    b. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(1)(iii) introductory text, 
the reference to (e)(1)(ii)(A) is removed and a reference to 
(e)(1)(iii)(A) is added in its place.
    c. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(3)(i), the references to 
(e)(1)(i) through (vii) are removed and references to (e)(1)(ii) 
through (viii) are added in their place.
    d. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(B)(2), the reference 
to (e)(1)(i) is removed and a reference to (e)(1)(ii) is added in its 
place.
    10. In Sec. 679.22, a new paragraph (h) is added to read as 
follows:


Sec. 679.22  Closures.

* * * * *
    (h) CDQ Fisheries. See Sec. 679.7(d)(6) through (10) for time and 
area closures that apply to the CDQ fisheries once salmon and crab PSQ 
amounts have been reached.
    11. In Sec. 679.23, the headings of paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) 
are revised, and paragraph (e)(3)(iv) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 679.23  Seasons.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Halibut CDQ. * * *
    (ii) Sablefish CDQ. * * *
* * * * *
    (iv) Groundfish CDQ. Fishing for groundfish CDQ species, other than 
fixed gear sablefish CDQ under subpart C of this part, is authorized 
from 0001 hours, A.l.t., January 1, through the end of each fishing 
year, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, and in 1998 
when fishing for groundfish CDQ species other than fixed gear sablefish 
is authorized from 1200 hours, A.l.t., October 1, through the end of 
the fishing year.
* * * * *
    12. In Sec. 679.28, paragraph (a) is revised, and new paragraphs 
(c) through (e) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 679.28  Equipment and operational requirements for catch weight 
measurement.

    (a) Applicability. This section contains the requirements for 
scales, observer sampling stations, and bins for volumetric estimates 
approved by NMFS and requirements for scales approved by the State of 
Alaska. This section does not require any vessel or processor to 
provide this equipment. Such requirements appear elsewhere in this 
part.
* * * * *
    (c) Scales approved by the State of Alaska. Scales used to weigh 
groundfish catch that are also required to be approved by the State of 
Alaska under Alaska Statutes 45.75 must meet the following 
requirements:
    (1) Verification of approval. The scale must display a valid State 
of Alaska sticker indicating that the scale was inspected and approved 
within the previous 12 months.
    (2) Visibility. The scale and scale display must be visible 
simultaneously to the observer. Observers, NMFS personnel, or an 
authorized officer must be allowed to observe the weighing of fish on 
the scale and be able to read the scale display at all times.
    (3) Printed scale weights. Printouts of the scale weight of each 
haul, set, or delivery must be made available to observers, NMFS 
personnel, or an authorized officer at the time printouts are generated 
and thereafter upon request for the duration of the fishing year. 
Printouts must be retained by the operator or manager as specified in 
Sec. 679.5(a)(15).

[[Page 30402]]

    (d) Observer sampling station--(1) Accessibility. All of the 
equipment required for an observer sampling station must be available 
to the observer at all times while a sampling station is required and 
the observer is aboard the vessel, except that the observer sampling 
scale may be used by vessel personnel to conduct material tests of the 
scale used to weigh total catch under paragraph (b)(3) of this section, 
as long as the use of the observer's sampling scale by others does not 
interfere with the observer's sampling duties.
    (2) Location--(i) Motherships and catcher/processors or catcher 
vessels using trawl gear. The observer sampling station must be located 
within 4 m of the location from which the observer samples unsorted 
catch. Clear, unobstructed passage must be provided between the 
observer sampling station and the location where the observer samples 
unsorted catch.
    (ii) Vessels using nontrawl gear. The observer sampling station 
must be located within 5 m of the location where fish are brought on 
board the vessel, unless any location within this distance is unsafe 
for the observer. Clear, unobstructed passage must be provided between 
the observer sampling station and the location where the observer 
samples unsorted catch. NMFS will approve an alternative location if 
the vessel owner submits a written proposal describing the alternative 
location, the reasons why a location within 5 m of where fish are 
brought on board the vessel is unsafe, and if the proposed observer 
sampling station meets all other applicable requirements of this 
section.
    (3) Minimum work space. The observer must have a working area at 
least 1.8 m wide by 2.5 m long, including the observer's sampling 
table, for sampling and storage of fish to be sampled. The observer 
must be able to stand upright in the area in front of the table and 
scale.
    (4) Table. The observer sampling station must include a table at 
least 0.6 m deep, 1.2 m wide and 0.9 m high and no more than 1.1 m 
high. The entire surface area of the table must be available for use by 
the observer. Any area used for the observer sampling scale is in 
addition to the minimum space requirements for the table. The 
observer's sampling table must be secured to the floor or wall.
    (5) Observer sampling scale. The observer sampling station must 
include an electronic motion-compensated platform scale with a capacity 
of at least 50 kg located within 1 m of the observer's sampling table. 
The scale must be approved by NMFS under paragraph (b) of this section 
and must meet the maximum permissible error requirement specified in 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section when tested by the observer.
    (6) Other requirements. The sampling station must include floor 
grating, adequate lighting, and a hose that supplies fresh or sea water 
to the observer.
    (7) Requirements for sampling catch. On motherships and catcher/
processors using trawl gear, the conveyor belt conveying unsorted catch 
must have a removable board to allow fish to be diverted from the belt 
directly into the observer's sampling baskets. The diverter board must 
be located after the scale used to weigh total catch so that the 
observer can use this scale to weigh large samples.
    (8) Inspection of the observer sampling station. Each observer 
sampling station must be inspected and approved by NMFS prior to its 
use for the first time and then one time each year within 12 months of 
the date of the most recent inspection with the following exceptions. 
If the observer sampling station is moved or if the space or equipment 
available to the observer is reduced or removed, the observer sampling 
station inspection report issued under this section is no longer valid, 
and the observer sampling station must be reinspected and approved by 
NMFS. Inspection of the observer sampling station is in addition to 
inspection of the at-sea scales by an authorized scale inspector 
required at paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
    (i) How does a vessel owner arrange for an observer sampling 
station inspection? The time and place of the inspection may be 
arranged by submitting to NMFS a written request for an inspection. 
Inspections will be scheduled no later than 10 working days after NMFS 
receives a complete application for an inspection, including the 
following information:
    (A) Name and signature of the person submitting the application, 
and the date of the application.
    (B) Street address, business address, telephone number, and fax 
number of the person submitting the application.
    (C) Whether the vessel or processor has received an observer 
sampling scale inspection before and, if so, the date of the most 
recent inspection report.
    (D) Vessel name.
    (E) Federal fishery permit number.
    (F) Location of vessel where sampling station inspection is 
requested to occur, including street address and city.
    (G) For catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships, a 
diagram drawn to scale showing the location(s) where all CDQ and PSQ 
will be weighed, the location where observers will sample unsorted 
catch, the location of the observer sampling station as described at 
paragraph (d) of this section, including the observer sampling scale, 
the name of the manufacturer, model of the scale to weigh total catch, 
and the observer sampling scale.
    (H) For all other vessels, a diagram drawn to scale showing the 
location(s) where catch comes on board the vessel, the location where 
observers will sample unsorted catch, the location of the observer 
sampling station, including the observer sampling scale, and the name 
of the manufacturer and model of the observer sampling scale.
    (I) For all vessels, a copy of the most recent scale inspection 
report issued under paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
    (ii) Where will observer sampling station inspections be conducted? 
Inspections will be conducted on vessels tied up at docks in Dutch 
Harbor, Alaska, and in the Puget Sound area of Washington State.
    (iii) Observer sampling station inspection report. An observer 
sampling station inspection report, valid for 12 months from the date 
it is signed by NMFS, will be issued to the vessel owner if the 
observer sampling station meets the requirements in this paragraph (d). 
The vessel owner must maintain a current observer sampling station 
inspection report on board the vessel at all times when the vessel is 
required to provide an observer sampling station approved for use under 
this paragraph (d). The observer sampling station inspection report 
must be made available to the observer, NMFS personnel, or to an 
authorized officer upon request.
    (e) Certified bins for volumetric estimates of catch weight--
    (1) Certification. The information required in this paragraph (e) 
must be prepared, dated, and signed by a licensed engineer with no 
financial interest in fishing, fish processing, or fish tendering 
vessels. Complete bin certification documents must be submitted to the 
Regional Administrator prior to harvesting or receiving groundfish from 
a fishery in which certified bins are required and must be on board the 
vessel and available to the observer at all times.
    (2) Specifications--(i) Measurement and marking. The volume of each 
bin must be determined by accurate measurement of the internal 
dimensions of the bin. The internal walls of the bin must be 
permanently marked and numbered in 10-cm increments indicating the 
level of fish in the bin in

[[Page 30403]]

cm. All marked increments and numerals must be readable from the 
outside of the bin through a viewing port or hatch at all times. Marked 
increments are not required on the wall in which the viewing port is 
located, unless such increments are necessary to determine the level of 
fish in the bin from another viewing port. Bins must be lighted in a 
manner that allows marked increments to be read from the outside of the 
bin by an observer or authorized officer. For bin certification 
documents dated after July 6, 1998, the numerals at the 10-cm increment 
marks must be at least 4 cm high.
    (ii) Viewing ports. Each bin must have a viewing port or ports from 
which the internal bin markings and numerals on all walls of the bin 
can be seen from the outside of the bin, except that bin markings and 
numerals are not required on the wall in which the viewing port is 
placed, if that wall cannot be seen from any other viewing port in the 
bin.
    (3) Information required. For bin certification documents submitted 
after July 6, 1998, the person certifying the bins must provide:
    (i) The vessel name;
    (ii) The date the engineer measured the bins and witnessed the 
location of the marked increments and numerals;
    (iii) A diagram, to scale, of each bin showing the location of the 
marked increments on each internal wall of the bin, the location, and 
dimensions of each viewing port or hatch, and any additional 
information needed to estimate the volume of fish in the bin;
    (iv) Tables indicating the volume of each certified bin in cubic 
meters for each 10-cm increment marked on the sides of the bins;
    (v) Instructions for determining the volume of fish in each bin 
from the marked increments and table; and
    (vi) The person's name and signature and the date on which the 
completed bin certification documents were signed.
    (4) Recertification. The bin's volume and the marked and numbered 
increments must be recertified if the bin is modified in a way that 
changes its size or shape or if marking strips or marked increments are 
moved or added.
    (5) Operational requirements--(i) Placement of catch in certified 
bins. All catch must be placed in a bin certified under this paragraph 
(e) to estimate total catch weight prior to sorting. Refrigerated 
seawater tanks may be used for volumetric estimates only if the tanks 
comply with all other requirements of this paragraph (e). No 
adjustments of volume will be made for the presence of water in the bin 
or tank.
    (ii) Prior notification. Vessel operators must notify observers 
prior to any removal of fish from or addition of fish to each bin used 
for volumetric measurements of catch so that an observer may make bin 
volume estimates prior to fish being removed from or added to the bin. 
Once a volumetric estimate has been made, additional fish may not be 
added to the bin until at least half the original volume has been 
removed. Fish may not be removed from or added to a bin used for 
volumetric estimates of catch weight until an observer indicates that 
bin volume estimates have been completed and any samples of catch 
required by the observer have been taken.
    (iii) Fish from separate hauls or deliveries from separate 
harvesting vessels may not be mixed in any bin used for volumetric 
measurements of catch.
    (iv) The bins must not be filled in a manner that obstructs the 
viewing ports or prevents the observer from seeing the level of fish 
throughout the bin.
    13. Section 679.30 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 679.30  General CDQ regulations.

    (a) Application procedure. The CDQ program is a voluntary program. 
Allocations of CDQ and PSQ are made to CDQ groups and not to vessels or 
processors fishing under contract with any CDQ group. Any vessel or 
processor harvesting or processing CDQ or PSQ under a CDP must comply 
with all other requirements of this part. In addition, the CDQ group is 
responsible to ensure that vessels and processors listed as eligible on 
the CDQ group's approved CDP comply with all requirements of this part 
while harvesting or processing CDQ species. Allocations of CDQ and PSQ 
are harvest privileges that expire upon the expiration of the CDP. When 
a CDP expires, further CDQ allocations are not implied or guaranteed, 
and a qualified applicant must re-apply for further allocations on a 
competitive basis with other qualified applicants. The CDQ allocations 
provide the means for CDQ groups to complete their CDQ projects. A 
qualified applicant may apply for CDQ and PSQ allocations by submitting 
a proposed CDP to the State during the CDQ application period that is 
announced by the State. A proposed CDP must include the following 
information:
    (1) Community development information. Community development 
information includes:
    (i) Project description. A detailed description of all proposed CDQ 
projects, including the short-and long-term benefits to the qualified 
applicant from the proposed CDQ projects. CDQ projects should not be 
designed with the expectation of CDQ allocations beyond those requested 
in the proposed CDP.
    (ii) Project schedule. A schedule for the completion of each CDQ 
project with measurable milestones for determining the progress of each 
CDQ project.
    (iii) Employment. The number of individuals to be employed through 
the CDP projects, and a description of the nature of the work and the 
career advancement potential for each type of work.
    (iv) Community eligibility. A list of the participating 
communities. Each participating community must be listed in Table 7 to 
this part or meet the criteria for an eligible community under 
Sec. 679.2.
    (v) Community support. A demonstration of each participating 
community's support for the qualified applicant and the managing 
organization through an official letter approved by the governing body 
of each such community.
    (2) Managing organization information. A proposed CDP must include 
the following information about the managing organization:
    (i) Structure and personnel. A description of the management 
structure and key personnel of the managing organization, such as 
resumes and references, including the name, address, fax number, and 
telephone number of the qualified applicant's CDQ representative.
    (ii) Management qualifications. A description of how the managing 
organization is qualified to carry out the CDP projects in the proposed 
CDP, and a demonstration that the managing organization has the 
management, technical expertise, and ability to manage CDQ allocations 
and prevent exceeding a CDQ or PSQ.
    (iii) Legal relationship. Documentation of the legal relationship 
between the qualified applicant and the managing organization (if the 
managing organization is different from the qualified applicant) 
clearly describing the responsibilities and obligations of each party 
as demonstrated through a contract or other legally binding agreement.
    (iv) Board of directors. The name, address, and telephone number of 
each member of the board of directors of the qualified applicant. If a 
qualified applicant represents more than one community, the board of 
directors of the qualified applicant must include at least one member 
from each of the communities represented.

[[Page 30404]]

    (3) Business information. A proposed CDP must include the following 
business information:
    (i) Business relationships. A description of all business 
relationships between the qualified applicant and all individuals who 
have a financial interest in a CDQ project or subsidiary venture, 
including, but not limited to, any arrangements for management and 
audit control and any joint venture arrangements, loans, or other 
partnership arrangements, including the distribution of proceeds among 
the parties.
    (ii) Profit sharing. A description of all profit sharing 
arrangements.
    (iii) Funding. A description of all funding and financing plans.
    (iv) General budget for implementing the CDP. A general account of 
estimated income and expenditures for each CDQ project for the total 
number of calendar years that the CDP is in effect.
    (v) Financial statement for the qualified applicant. The most 
recent audited income statement, balance sheet, cash flow statement, 
management letter, and agreed upon procedures report.
    (vi) Organizational chart. A visual representation of the qualified 
applicant's entire organizational structure, including all divisions, 
subsidiaries, joint ventures, and partnerships. This chart must include 
the type of legal entity for all divisions, subsidiaries, joint 
ventures, and partnerships; state of registration of the legal entity; 
and percentage owned by the qualified applicant.
    (4) Request for CDQ and PSQ allocations. A list of the percentage 
of each CDQ reserve and PSQ reserve, as defined at Sec. 679.31(a) 
through (e), that is being requested. The request for allocations of 
CDQ and PSQ must identify percentage allocations requested for CDQ 
fisheries identified by the primary target species of the fishery as 
defined by the qualified applicant and the gear types of the vessels 
that will be used to harvest the catch.
    (5) Fishing plan for groundfish and halibut CDQ fisheries. The 
following information must be provided for all vessels and processors 
that will be harvesting or processing groundfish and halibut CDQ.
    (i) List of eligible vessels and processors--(A) Vessels--(1) 
Information required for all vessels. A list of the name, Federal 
fisheries permit number (if applicable), ADF&G vessel number, LOA, gear 
type, and vessel type (catcher vessel, catcher/processor, or 
mothership) for each vessel that will be used to catch or process CDQ. 
For each vessel, report only the gear types and vessel types that will 
be used while CDQ fishing. Any CDQ vessel that is exempt from the 
moratorium under Sec. 679.4(c)(3)(v) must be identified as such.
    (2) Information required for observed vessels using trawl or hook-
and-line gear and motherships taking deliveries from these vessels. For 
each catcher/processor and catcher vessel 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA or 
greater using trawl or hook-and-line gear and not delivering unsorted 
codends, or for each mothership, the CDP must include the following 
information that will be used by NMFS to determine whether sufficient 
observer coverage is provided to sample each CDQ haul, set, or 
delivery. Provide the information for groundfish CDQ fishing as defined 
under Sec. 679.2 and provide separate information by management area or 
fishery if information differs among management areas or fisheries.
    (i) Number of CDQ observers that will be aboard the vessel. For 
catcher/processors using hook-and-line gear proposing to carry only one 
CDQ observer, the CDP must include vessel logbook or observer data that 
demonstrates that one CDQ observer can sample each set for species 
composition in one 12-hour shift per fishing day.
    (ii) Average and maximum number of hauls, sets, or pots that will 
be retrieved on any given fishing day while groundfish CDQ fishing.
    (iii) For vessels using trawl gear, the average and maximum total 
catch weight for any given haul while groundfish CDQ fishing.
    (iv) For vessels using trawl gear, the number of hours necessary to 
process the average and maximum haul size while groundfish CDQ fishing.
    (v) For vessels using hook-and-line gear, the average number of 
hooks in each set and estimated time it will take to retrieve each set 
while groundfish CDQ fishing.
    (vi) Whether any halibut CDQ will be harvested by vessels 
groundfish CDQ fishing.
    (B) Shoreside processors or buying stations. A list of the name, 
Federal processor permit number, and location of each shoreside 
processor or buying station that is required to have a Federal 
processor permit under Sec. 679.4(f) and will take deliveries of, or 
process, CDQ catch.
    (C) Buyers of halibut CDQ. A list of processors or registered 
buyers of halibut CDQ that are not required to have a Federal processor 
permit under Sec. 679.4(f), including the name of the buyer or 
processor, mailing address, telephone number, and location where 
halibut CDQ will be landed.
    (ii) Sources of data or methods for estimating CDQ and PSQ catch. 
The sources of data or methods that will be used to determine catch 
weight of CDQ and PSQ for each vessel or processor proposed as eligible 
under the CDP. For each vessel or processor, the CDP must specify 
whether the NMFS' standard sources of data set forth at 
Sec. 679.32(d)(2) or some other alternative will be used. For catcher 
vessels using nontrawl gear, the CDP must also specify whether the 
vessel will be retaining all groundfish CDQ catch (Option 1) or will be 
discarding some groundfish CDQ catch at sea (Option 2). The qualified 
applicant may propose the use of an alternative method such as the 
sorting and weighing of all catch by species on processor vessels or 
using larger sample sizes than could be collected by one observer. NMFS 
will review the proposal and approve it or notify the qualified 
applicant in writing if the proposed alternative does not meet these 
requirements. The qualified applicant may remove the vessel or 
processor for which the alternative method is proposed from the 
proposed CDP to facilitate approval of the CDP and add the vessel or 
processor to the approved CDP by substantial amendment at a later date. 
Alternatives to the requirement for a certified scale or an observer 
sampling station may not be proposed. NMFS will review the alternative 
proposal to determine if it meets all of the following requirements:
    (A) The alternative proposed must provide equivalent or better 
estimates than use of the NMFS standard data source would provide and 
the estimates must be independently verifiable;
    (B) Each haul or set on an observed vessel must be able to be 
sampled by an observer for species composition;
    (C) Any proposal to sort catch before it is weighed must assure 
that the sorting and weighing process will be monitored by an observer; 
and
    (D) The time required for the CDQ observer to complete sampling, 
data recording, and data communication duties shall not exceed 12 hours 
in each 24-hour period and the CDQ observer is required to sample no 
more than 9 hours in each 24-hour period.
    (iii) Amendments to the list of eligible vessels and processors. 
The list of eligible vessels and processors may be amended by 
submitting the information required in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) and (ii) of 
this section as an amendment to the approved CDP. A technical amendment 
may be used to remove any vessel from a CDP, to add any vessel to a CDP 
if the CDQ group will use NMFS' standard

[[Page 30405]]

sources of data to determine CDQ and PSQ catch for the vessel, or to 
add any vessel to a CDP for which an alternative method of determining 
CDQ and PSQ catch has been approved by NMFS under an approved CDP for 
another CDQ group. A substantial amendment must be used to add a vessel 
to an approved CDP if the CDQ group submits a proposed alternative 
method of determining CDQ and PSQ catch for NMFS review.
    (6) CDQ planning--(i) Transition plan. A proposed CDP must include 
an overall plan and schedule for transition from reliance on CDQ 
allocations to self-sufficiency in fisheries. The plan for transition 
to self-sufficiency must be based on the qualified applicant's long-
term revenue stream without CDQs.
    (ii) Post-allocation plan. [Reserved]
    (b) Public hearings on CDQ application. When the CDQ application 
period has ended, the State must hold a public hearing to obtain 
comments on the proposed CDPs from all interested persons. The hearing 
must cover the substance and content of proposed CDPs so that the 
general public, particularly the affected parties, have a reasonable 
opportunity to understand the impact of the proposed CDPs. The State 
must provide reasonable public notification of hearing date and 
location. At the time of public notification of the hearing, the State 
must make available for public review all State materials pertinent to 
the hearing.
    (c) Council consultation. Before the State sends its 
recommendations for approval of proposed CDPs to NMFS, the State must 
consult with the Council and make available, upon request, the proposed 
CDPs that are not part of the State's recommendations.
    (d) Review and approval of proposed CDPs. The State must transmit 
the proposed CDPs and its recommendations for approval of each of the 
proposed CDPs to NMFS, along with the findings and the rationale for 
the recommendations, by October 15 of the year prior to the first year 
of the proposed CDP, except in 1998, when CDPs for the 1998 through 
2000 multispecies groundfish CDQs must be submitted by July 6, 1998. 
The State shall determine in its recommendations for approval of the 
proposed CDPs that each proposed CDP meets all applicable requirements 
of this part. Upon receipt by NMFS of the proposed CDPs and the State's 
recommendations for approval, NMFS will review the proposed CDPs and 
approve those that it determines meet all applicable requirements. NMFS 
shall approve or disapprove the State's recommendations within 45 days 
of their receipt. In the event of approval of the CDP, NMFS will notify 
the State in writing that the proposed CDP is approved by NMFS and is 
consistent with all requirements for CDPs. If NMFS finds that a 
proposed CDP does not comply with the requirements of this part, NMFS 
must so advise the State in writing, including the reasons thereof. The 
State may submit a revised proposed CDP along with revised 
recommendations for approval to NMFS.
    (e) Transfer. CDQ groups may request that NMFS transfer CDQ 
allocations, CDQ, PSQ allocations, or PSQ from one group to another by 
each group filing an appropriate amendment to its CDP. Transfers of CDQ 
and PSQ allocations must be in whole integer percentages, and transfers 
of CDQ and PSQ must be in whole integer amounts. If NMFS approves both 
amendments, NMFS will make the requested transfer(s) by decreasing the 
account balance of the CDQ group from which the CDQ or PSQ species is 
transferred by the amount transferred and by increasing the account 
balance of the CDQ group receiving the transferred CDQ or PSQ species 
by the amount transferred. NMFS will not approve transfers to cover 
overages of CDQ or PSQ.
    (1) CDQ allocation. CDQ groups may request that NMFS transfer any 
or all of one group's CDQ allocation to another by each group filing an 
amendment to its CDP through the CDP substantial amendment process set 
forth at paragraph (g)(4) of this section. The CDQ allocation will be 
transferred as of January 1 of the calendar year following the calendar 
year NMFS approves the amendments of both groups and is effective for 
the duration of the CDPs.
    (2) CDQ. CDQ groups may request that NMFS transfer any or all of 
one group's CDQ for a calendar year to another by each group filing an 
appropriate amendment to its CDP. If the amount to be transferred is 10 
percent or less of a group's initial CDQ amount for that year, that 
group's request may be made through the CDP technical amendment process 
set forth at paragraph (g)(5) of this section. If the amount to be 
transferred is greater than 10 percent of a group's initial CDQ amount 
for the year, that group's request must be made through the CDP 
substantial amendment process set forth at paragraph (g)(4) of this 
section. The CDQ will be transferred as of the date NMFS approves the 
amendments of both groups and is effective only for the remainder of 
the calendar year in which the transfer occurs.
    (3) PSQ allocation. CDQ groups may request that NMFS transfer any 
or all of one group's PSQ allocation to another CDQ group through the 
CDP substantial amendment process set forth at paragraph (g)(4) of this 
section. Each group's request must be part of a request for the 
transfer of a CDQ allocation, and the requested amount of PSQ 
allocation must be the amount reasonably required for bycatch needs 
during the harvesting of the CDQ. Requests for the transfer of a PSQ 
allocation may be submitted to NMFS from January 1 through January 31. 
Requests for transfers of a PSQ allocation will not be accepted by NMFS 
at other times of the year. The PSQ allocation will be transferred as 
of January 1 of the calendar year following the calendar year NMFS 
approves the amendments of both groups and is effective for the 
duration of the CDPs.
    (4) PSQ. CDQ groups may request that NMFS transfer any or all of 
one group's PSQ for one calendar year to another by each group filing 
an amendment to its CDP through the CDP substantial amendment process 
set forth at paragraph (g)(4) of this section. Each group's request 
must be part of a request for the transfer of CDQ, and the requested 
amount of PSQ must be the amount reasonably required for bycatch needs 
during the harvesting of the CDQ. Requests for the transfer of PSQ may 
be submitted to NMFS from January 1 through January 31. Requests for 
transfers of PSQ will not be accepted by NMFS at other times of the 
year. The PSQ will be transferred as of the date NMFS approves the 
amendments of both groups and is effective only for the remainder of 
the calendar year in which the transfer occurs.
    (f) CDQ group responsibilities. A CDQ group's responsibilities 
include, but are not limited to, the following:
    (1) Direct and supervise all activities of the managing 
organization;
    (2) Maintain the capability to communicate with all vessels 
harvesting its CDQ and PSQ at all times;
    (3) Monitor the catch of each CDQ or PSQ;
    (4) Submit the CDQ catch report described at Sec. 679.5(n)(2);
    (5) Ensure that no CDQ, halibut PSQ, or crab PSQ is exceeded;
    (6) Ensure that the CDQ group's CDQ harvesting vessels and CDQ 
processors will:
    (i) Provide observer coverage, equipment, and operational 
requirements for CDQ catch monitoring;
    (ii) Provide for the communication of observer data from their 
vessels to NMFS and the CDQ representative;
    (iii) Maintain contact with the CDQ group for which it is 
harvesting CDQ and PSQ;

[[Page 30406]]

    (iv) Cease fishing operations when requested by the CDQ group; and
    (v) Comply with all requirements of this part while harvesting or 
processing CDQ species.
    (7) Comply with all requirements of this part.
    (g) Monitoring of CDPs--(1) Annual progress report. (i) The State 
must submit to NMFS, by October 31 of each year, an annual progress 
report for the previous calendar year for each CDP.
    (ii) Annual progress reports must be organized on a project-by-
project basis and include information for each CDQ project in the CDP 
describing how each scheduled milestone in the CDP has been met, and an 
estimation by the State of whether each of the CDQ projects in the CDP 
is likely to be successful.
    (iii) The annual report must include a description by the State of 
any problems or issues in the CDP that the State encountered during the 
annual report year.
    (2) Annual budget report. (i) Each CDQ group must submit to NMFS an 
annual budget report by December 15 preceding the year for which the 
annual budget applies.
    (ii) An annual budget report is a detailed estimate of the income 
from the CDQ project and of the expenditures for each subsidiary, 
division, joint venture, partnership, investment activity, or CDQ 
project as described in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section for a 
calendar year. A CDQ group must identify the administrative costs for 
each CDQ project. The CDQ group's total administrative costs will be 
considered a separate CDQ project.
    (iii) An annual budget report is approved upon receipt by NMFS, 
unless disapproved by NMFS in writing by December 31. If disapproved, 
the annual budget report will be returned to the CDQ group for revision 
and resubmittal to NMFS.
    (3) Annual budget reconciliation report. A CDQ group must reconcile 
its annual budget by May 30 of the year following the year for which 
the annual budget applied. Reconciliation is an accounting of the 
annual budget's estimated income and expenditures with the actual 
income and expenditures, including the variance in dollars and variance 
in percentage for each CDQ project that is described in paragraph 
(a)(1)(i) of this section.
    (4) Substantial amendments. A CDP is a working business plan and 
must be kept up to date.
    (i) Substantial amendments to a CDP require a written request by 
the CDQ group to the State and NMFS for approval of the amendment. The 
State must forward the amendment to NMFS with a recommendation as to 
whether it should be approved.
    (ii) NMFS will notify the State in writing of the approval or 
disapproval of the amendment within 30 days of receipt of both the 
amendment and the State's recommendation. Except for substantial 
amendments for the transfer of CDQ and PSQ, which are effective only 
for the remainder of the calendar year in which the transfer occurs 
(see paragraphs (e)(2) and (4) of this section), once a substantial 
amendment is approved by NMFS, the amendment will be effective for the 
duration of the CDP.
    (iii) If NMFS determines that the CDP, if changed, would no longer 
meet the requirements of this subpart, NMFS will notify the State in 
writing of the reasons why the amendment cannot be approved.
    (iv) For the purposes of this section, substantial amendments are 
defined as changes in a CDP, including, but not limited to:
    (A) Any change in the list of communities comprising the CDQ group 
or replacement of the managing organization.
    (B) A change in the CDP applicant's harvesting or processing 
partner.
    (C) Funding a CDP project in excess of $100,000 that is not part of 
an approved general budget.
    (D) More than a 20-percent increase in the annual budget of an 
approved CDP project.
    (E) More than a 20-percent increase in actual expenditures over the 
approved annual budget for administrative operations.
    (F) A change in the contractual agreement(s) between the CDQ group 
and its harvesting or processing partner or a change in a CDP project, 
if such change is deemed by the State or NMFS to be a material change.
    (G) Any transfer of a CDQ allocation, PSQ allocation, PSQ, or a 
transfer of more than 10 percent of a CDQ.
    (H) The addition of a vessel to a CDP if the CDQ group submits a 
proposed alternative method of determining CDQ and PSQ catch under 
paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of this section for NMFS review.
    (v) The request for approval of a substantial amendment to a CDP 
shall include the following information:
    (A) The background and justification for the amendment that 
explains why the proposed amendment is necessary and appropriate.
    (B) An explanation of why the proposed change to the CDP is a 
substantial amendment.
    (C) A description of the proposed amendment, explaining all changes 
to the CDP that result from the proposed amendment.
    (D) A comparison of the original CDP text, with the text of the 
proposed changes to the CDP, and the revised pages of the CDP for 
replacement in the CDP binder. The revised pages must have the revision 
date noted, with the page number on all affected pages. The table of 
contents may also need to be revised to reflect any changes in 
pagination.
    (E) Identification of any NMFS findings that would need to be 
modified if the amendment is approved, along with the proposed modified 
text.
    (F) A description of how the proposed amendment meets the 
requirements of this subpart. Only those CDQ regulations that are 
affected by the proposed amendment need to be discussed.
    (5) Technical amendments. Any change to a CDP that is not 
considered a substantial amendment under paragraph (g)(4)(iv) of this 
section is a technical amendment.
    (i) The CDQ group must notify the State in writing of any technical 
amendment. Such notification must include a copy of the pages of the 
CDP that would be revised by the amendment, with the text highlighted 
to show the proposed deletions and additions, and a copy of the CDP 
pages as they would be revised by the proposed amendment for insertion 
into the CDP binder. All revised CDP pages must include the revision 
date, amendment identification number, and CDP page number. The table 
of contents may also need to be revised to reflect any changes in 
pagination.
    (ii) The State must forward the technical amendment to NMFS with 
its recommendations for approval or disapproval of the amendment. A 
technical amendment is approved by NMFS and is effective when, after 
review, NMFS notifies the State in writing of the technical amendment's 
receipt and approval.
    (h) Suspension or termination of a CDP. An annual progress report, 
required under paragraph (g)(1) of this section, will be used by the 
State to review each CDP to determine whether the CDP, CDQ, and PSQ 
allocations thereunder should be continued, decreased, partially 
suspended, suspended, or terminated under the following circumstances:
    (1) If the State determines that the CDP will successfully meet its 
goals and objectives, the CDP may continue without any Secretarial 
action.
    (2) If the State recommends to NMFS that an allocation be 
decreased, the State's recommendation for decrease

[[Page 30407]]

will be deemed approved if NMFS does not notify the State in writing 
within 30 days of receipt of the State's recommendation.
    (3) If the State determines that a CDP has not successfully met its 
goals and objectives or appears unlikely to become successful, the 
State may submit a recommendation to NMFS that the CDP be partially 
suspended, suspended, or terminated. The State must set out, in 
writing, the reasons for recommending suspension or termination of the 
CDP.
    (4) After review of the State's recommendation and reasons thereof, 
NMFS will notify the Governor, in writing, of approval or disapproval 
of the recommendation within 30 days of its receipt. In the case of 
suspension or termination, NMFS will publish notification in the 
Federal Register, with reasons thereof.
    14. In Sec. 679.31, the section heading and paragraph (e) are 
revised, and a new paragraph (g) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 679.31  CDQ reserves.

* * * * *
    (e) PSQ reserve. (See Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2)(ii)).
* * * * *
    (g) Non-specific CDQ reserve. Annually, NMFS will apportion 15 
percent of each squid, arrowtooth flounder, and ``other species'' CDQ 
for each CDQ group to a non-specific CDQ reserve. A CDQ group's non-
specific CDQ reserve must be for the exclusive use of that CDQ group. A 
release from the non-specific CDQ reserve to the CDQ group's squid, 
arrowtooth flounder, or ``other species'' CDQ is a technical amendment 
as described in Sec. 679.30(g)(5). The technical amendment must be 
approved before harvests relying on CDQ transferred from the non-
specific CDQ reserve may be conducted.
    15. Section 679.32 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 679.32  Groundfish and halibut CDQ catch monitoring.

    (a) Applicability. (1) The CDQ group and the operator or manager of 
a buying station, the operator of a vessel, and the manager of a 
shoreside processor must comply with the requirements of this section 
for all CDQ and PSQ caught while groundfish CDQ fishing as defined at 
Sec. 679.2, with the exceptions listed in paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) 
of this section. In addition, the CDQ group is responsible for ensuring 
that vessels and processors listed as eligible on the CDQ group's 
approved CDP comply with all requirements of this section while 
harvesting or processing CDQ species.
    (2) Pollock CDQ fishing in 1998 (applicable through December 31, 
1998). Regulations governing the catch of pollock CDQ while pollock CDQ 
fishing as defined in Sec. 679.2 in 1998 are in paragraph (e) of this 
section. The catch of pollock by vessels that are not pollock CDQ 
fishing as defined in Sec. 679.2 will not accrue against the pollock 
CDQ in 1998.
    (3) Fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fishing in 1998 
(applicable through December 31, 1998). Regulations governing the catch 
of sablefish and halibut CDQ by vessels using fixed gear in 1998 are in 
paragraph (f) of this section.
    (b) PSQ catch. Time and area closures required once a CDQ group has 
reached its salmon PSQ or crab PSQ are listed in Sec. 679.7(d)(7) 
through (10). The catch of salmon or crab by vessels using other than 
trawl gear does not accrue to the PSQ for these species. The discard of 
halibut by vessels using pot or jig gear will not accrue to the halibut 
PSQ if this bycatch has been exempted from the halibut PSC limit under 
Sec. 679.21(e)(5) in the annual specifications published in the Federal 
Register.
    (c) Requirements for vessels and processors. In addition to 
complying with the minimum observer coverage requirements at 
Sec. 679.50(c)(4), operators of vessels groundfish CDQ fishing and 
managers or operators of shoreside processing plants or buying stations 
taking deliveries from vessels groundfish CDQ fishing must comply with 
the following requirements:
    (1) Catcher vessels without an observer. (i) Operators of catcher 
vessels less than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA must retain all groundfish CDQ, 
halibut CDQ, and salmon PSQ until it is delivered to a processor that 
meets the requirements of paragraph (c)(3) or (c)(4) of this section. 
All halibut PSQ and crab PSQ must be discarded at sea. Operators of 
catcher vessels using trawl gear must report the at-sea discards of 
halibut PSQ or crab PSQ on the CDQ delivery report. Operators of 
catcher vessels using nontrawl gear must report the at-sea discards of 
halibut PSQ on the CDQ delivery report, unless exempted from accounting 
for halibut PSQ under paragraph (b) of this section.
    (ii) Catcher vessels delivering unsorted codends. Operators of 
catcher vessels delivering unsorted codends to trawl catcher/processors 
or motherships must retain all CDQ and PSQ species and deliver them to 
a catcher/processor or mothership that meets the requirements of 
paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
    (2) Catcher vessels with observers. Operators of catcher vessels 
equal to or greater than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA must comply with the 
following requirements:
    (i) If using trawl gear, the vessel operator must:
    (A) Retain all CDQ species and salmon PSQ until they are delivered 
to a processor that meets the requirements of paragraph (c)(3) or 
(c)(4) of this section;
    (B) Retain all halibut and crab PSQ in a bin or other location 
until it is counted and sampled by a CDQ observer; and
    (C) Provide space on the deck of the vessel for the CDQ observer to 
sort and store catch samples and a place from which to hang the 
observer sampling scale.
    (ii) If using nontrawl gear, the vessel operator must either:
    (A) Option 1: Retain all CDQ species. Retain all CDQ species until 
they are delivered to a processor that meets the requirements of 
paragraph (c)(3) or (c)(4) of this section and have all of the halibut 
PSQ counted by the CDQ observer and sampled for length or average 
weight; or
    (B) Option 2: Discard some CDQ species at sea. May discard some CDQ 
species at sea if the following requirements are met:
    (1) Observer sampling station. The vessel owner provides an 
observer sampling station that complies with Sec. 679.28(d) so that the 
CDQ observer can accurately determine the average weight of discarded 
CDQ species. A valid observer sampling station inspection report 
described at Sec. 679.28(d)(8) must be on board the vessel at all times 
when a sampling station is required; and
    (2) Species composition. Each CDQ set on vessels using hook-and-
line gear is sampled for species composition by a CDQ observer.
    (3) Shoreside processors and buying stations. The operator of a 
buying station or the manager of a shoreside processor must comply with 
all of the following requirements:
    (i) Prior notice to observer of offloading schedule. Notify the CDQ 
observer of the offloading schedule of each groundfish CDQ delivery at 
least 1 hour prior to offloading to provide the CDQ observer an 
opportunity to monitor the sorting and weighing of the entire delivery.
    (ii) CDQ and PSQ by weight. Sort and weigh on a scale approved by 
the State of Alaska under Sec. 679.28(c) all groundfish and halibut CDQ 
or PSQ by species or species group.
    (iii) PSQ by number. Sort and count all salmon and crab PSQ.

[[Page 30408]]

    (iv) CDQ and PSQ sorting and weighing. Sorting and weighing of CDQ 
and PSQ must be monitored by a CDQ observer.
    (v) CDQ delivery report. Submit a CDQ delivery report described at 
Sec. 679.5(n)(1) for each delivery from vessels groundfish CDQ fishing 
as defined at Sec. 679.2.
    (4) Catcher/processors and motherships. The operator of a catcher/
processor or a mothership must comply with the following requirements:
    (i) Prior notice to observer of CDQ catch. Notify the CDQ 
observer(s) before CDQ catch is brought onboard the vessel and notify 
the CDQ observer(s) of the CDQ group and CDQ number associated with the 
CDQ catch.
    (ii) Observer sampling station. Provide an observer sampling 
station as described at Sec. 679.28(d). A valid observer sampling 
station inspection report described at Sec. 679.28(d)(8) must be on 
board the vessel at all times when a sampling station is required.
    (iii) Catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships. The 
operator of a catcher/processor using trawl gear or of a mothership 
must weigh all catch on a scale that complies with the requirements of 
Sec. 679.28(b). A valid scale inspection report described at 
Sec. 679.28(b)(2) must be on board the vessel at all times when a scale 
is required. Catch from each CDQ haul must be weighed separately. Catch 
must not be sorted before it is weighed, unless a provision for doing 
so is approved by NMFS for the vessel in the CDP. Each CDQ haul must be 
sampled by a CDQ observer for species composition and the vessel 
operator must allow CDQ observers to use any scale approved by NMFS to 
weigh partial CDQ haul samples.
    (iv) Catcher/processors using nontrawl gear. Each CDQ set on a 
vessel using hook-and-line gear must be sampled by a CDQ observer for 
species composition and average weight.
    (d) Recordkeeping and reporting--(1) Catch record. The operator or 
manager of a buying station and the manager of a shoreside processor 
must submit to NMFS the CDQ delivery report required in 
Sec. 679.5(n)(1). The CDQ representative must submit to NMFS the CDQ 
catch report required in Sec. 679.5(n)(2). Additionally, all other 
applicable requirements in Sec. 679.5 for groundfish fishing must be 
met.
    (2) Verification of CDQ and PSQ catch reports. CDQ groups may 
specify the sources of data listed below as the sources they will use 
to determine CDQ and PSQ catch on the CDQ catch report by specifying 
``NMFS standard sources of data'' in their CDP. In the case of a 
catcher vessel using nontrawl gear, the CDP must specify whether the 
vessel will be retaining all groundfish CDQ (Option 1) or discarding 
some groundfish CDQ species at sea (Option 2). CDQ species may be 
discarded at sea by these vessels only if the requirements of paragraph 
(c)(2)(ii)(B) of this section are met. NMFS will use the following 
sources to verify the CDQ catch reports, unless an alternative catch 
estimation procedure in the CDP is approved by NMFS under 
Sec. 679.30(a)(5)(ii).
    (i) Catcher vessels less than 60 ft (18.29 m) LOA. The weight or 
numbers of all CDQ and PSQ species will be the same as the information 
on the CDQ delivery report if all CDQ species and salmon PSQ are 
retained on board the vessel, delivered to a shoreside processor listed 
as eligible in the CDP, and sorted and weighed in compliance with 
paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
    (ii) Catcher vessels delivering unsorted codends. The weight and 
numbers of CDQ and PSQ species will be determined by applying the 
species composition sampling data collected for each CDQ haul by the 
CDQ observer on the mothership to the total weight of each CDQ haul as 
determined by weighing all catch from each CDQ haul on a scale approved 
under Sec. 679.28(b).
    (iii) Observed catcher vessels using trawl gear. The weight of 
halibut and numbers of crab PSQ discarded at sea will be determined by 
using the CDQ observer's sample data. The weight or numbers of all 
groundfish CDQ and salmon PSQ will be the same as the information 
submitted on the CDQ delivery report if all CDQ species and salmon PSQ 
are retained on board the vessel until delivered to a processor listed 
as eligible in the CDP, and sorted and weighed in compliance with 
paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
    (iv) Observed catcher vessels using nontrawl gear--(A) Option 1. 
The weight of halibut PSQ discarded at sea will be determined by using 
the CDQ observer's sample data. The weight of all groundfish CDQ will 
be the same as the information submitted on the CDQ delivery report if 
all CDQ species are retained on board the vessel until delivered to a 
processor, and sorted and weighed in compliance with paragraph (c)(3) 
of this section (Option 1); or
    (B) Option 2. The weight of halibut PSQ and all groundfish CDQ 
species will be determined by applying the CDQ observer's species 
composition sampling data to the estimate of total catch weight if any 
CDQ species are discarded at sea.
    (v) Catcher/processors using trawl gear and motherships. The weight 
and numbers of CDQ and PSQ species will be determined by applying the 
CDQ observer's species composition sampling data for each CDQ haul to 
the total weight of the CDQ haul as determined by weighing all catch 
from each CDQ haul on a scale certified under Sec. 679.28(b).
    (vi) Catcher/processors using nontrawl gear. The weight of halibut 
PSQ and all groundfish CDQ species will be determined by applying the 
CDQ observer's species composition sampling data to the estimate of 
total catch weight, if any CDQ species are discarded at sea.
    (e) Pollock CDQ (applicable through December 31, 1998)--(1) 
Applicability. The owner or operator of a vessel pollock CDQ fishing as 
defined at Sec. 679.2 and the owner or operator of a processor taking 
deliveries from vessels pollock CDQ fishing must comply with the 
requirements of this paragraph (e).
    (2) Catch of non-pollock. The catch of all non-pollock species for 
which a TAC or PSC limit is specified will accrue against the TACs and 
PSC limits for moratorium groundfish species. The owner or operator of 
a vessel that is pollock CDQ fishing and the owner or operator of a 
processor taking deliveries from vessels that are pollock CDQ fishing 
must comply with regulations governing maximum retainable bycatch 
amounts and prohibited species status in the moratorium groundfish 
fisheries at Sec. 679.20(d)(1)(iii).
    (3) Recordkeeping and reporting. The CDQ representative, the 
operator or manager of a buying station, the operator of a vessel, and 
the manager of a shoreside processor must submit all applicable reports 
in Sec. 679.5, including the CDQ delivery report and the CDQ catch 
report. Catch from the pollock CDQ fisheries must be identified 
separately from catch in other CDQ fisheries on the CDQ catch report. 
Harvest of species other than pollock in the pollock CDQ fisheries must 
not be reported on the CDQ catch report.
    (4) Observer coverage. Two observers are required on all catcher/
processors and motherships harvesting, processing, or taking deliveries 
of pollock CDQ; one observer is required on all catcher vessels 
harvesting pollock CDQ; and one observer is required in a shoreside 
processing plant while pollock CDQ is being delivered, sorted, or 
processed.
    (5) Estimation of the weight of pollock CDQ--(i) Shoreside 
processors and buying stations. All pollock CDQ delivered to a 
shoreside processor or buying station must be weighed on a scale 
approved by the State of Alaska under Sec. 679.28(c). The manager of 
each shoreside processor or buying station must notify the observer of 
the

[[Page 30409]]

offloading schedule of each pollock CDQ delivery at least 1 hour prior 
to offloading to provide the observer an opportunity to monitor the 
weighing of the entire delivery.
    (ii) Motherships and catcher/processors. Operators of motherships 
and catcher/processors must provide holding bins and comply with the 
operational requirements at Sec. 679.28(e) in order for volumetric 
estimates of total catch weight to be made.
    (f) Sablefish and halibut CDQ fisheries (applicable through 
December 31, 1998)--(1) Applicability. The owner or operator of a 
vessel or processor harvesting or accepting deliveries of fixed gear 
sablefish or halibut CDQ in 1998 must comply with the requirements of 
this paragraph (f).
    (2) Catch of other groundfish. All groundfish for which a TAC is 
specified and all prohibited species caught while fixed gear sablefish 
and halibut CDQ fishing will accrue against the TACs and PSC limits for 
moratorium groundfish species. Regulations governing maximum retainable 
bycatch amounts and prohibited species status in the moratorium 
groundfish fisheries at Sec. 679.20(d)(1)(iii) must be complied with 
while fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fishing.
    (3) Permits. The managing organization responsible for carrying out 
an approved CDP must have a halibut and/or sablefish CDQ permit issued 
by the Regional Administrator. A copy of the halibut and/or sablefish 
CDQ permit must be carried on any fishing vessel operated by, or for, 
the managing organization and be made available for inspection by an 
authorized officer. Such halibut and/or sablefish CDQ permit is non-
transferable and is effective for the duration of the CDP or until 
revoked, suspended, or modified.
    (4) CDQ cards. All individuals named on an approved CDP application 
must have a valid halibut and/or sablefish CDQ card issued by the 
Regional Administrator before landing any halibut and/or sablefish. 
Each halibut and/or sablefish CDQ card will identify a CDQ permit 
number and the individual authorized by the managing organization to 
land halibut and/or sablefish for debit against its CDQ allocation.
    (5) Alteration. No person may alter, erase, or mutilate a halibut 
and/or sablefish CDQ permit, card, registered buyer permit, or any 
valid and current permit or document issued under this part. Any such 
permit, card, or document that has been intentionally altered, erased, 
or mutilated is invalid.
    (6) Landings. Halibut and/or sablefish harvested pursuant to an 
approved CDP may be landed only by a person with a valid halibut and/or 
sablefish CDQ card, delivered only to a person with a valid registered 
buyer permit, and reported in compliance with Sec. 679.5(l)(1) and 
(l)(2).
    (7) Recordkeeping and reporting. Vessels and processors with 
Federal fisheries or processor permits under Sec. 679.4(f) must report 
all catch of groundfish, including sablefish CDQ, and prohibited 
species from the fixed gear sablefish and halibut CDQ fisheries on 
logbooks and weekly production reports required under Sec. 679.5.


Secs. 679.33 and 679.34  [Removed]

    16. Sections 679.33 and 679.34 are removed.
    17. In Sec. 679.50, the section heading and the last sentence of 
paragraph (a) are revised, and paragraphs (c)(4), (d)(4), (h)(1)(i)(D), 
and (h)(1)(i)(E) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 679.50  Groundfish Observer Program.

    (a) * * * Observer coverage for the CDQ fisheries obtained in 
compliance with paragraphs (c)(4) and (d)(4) of this section may not be 
used to comply with observer coverage requirements for non-CDQ 
groundfish fisheries specified in this section.
* * * * *
    (c) Observer requirements for vessels. * * *
    (4) Groundfish CDQ fisheries. Except as provided for under 
Sec. 679.32(e), the owner or operator of a vessel groundfish CDQ 
fishing as defined at Sec. 679.2 must comply with the following minimum 
observer coverage requirements each day that the vessel is used to 
harvest, transport, process, deliver, or take deliveries of CDQ or PSQ 
species. The time required for the CDQ observer to complete sampling, 
data recording, and data communication duties shall not exceed 12 hours 
in each 24-hour period and the CDQ observer is required to sample no 
more than 9 hours in each 24-hour period.
    (i) Motherships or catcher/processors using trawl gear. A 
mothership or catcher/processor using trawl gear must have at least two 
CDQ observers as described at paragraphs (h)(1)(i)(D) and (E) of this 
section aboard the vessel, at least one of whom must be certified as a 
lead CDQ observer.
    (ii) Catcher/processors using hook-and-line gear. A catcher/
processor using hook-and-line gear must have at least two CDQ observers 
as described at paragraphs (h)(1)(i)(D) and (E) of this section aboard 
the vessel, unless NMFS approves a CDP authorizing the vessel to carry 
only one CDQ observer. At least one of the CDQ observers must be 
certified as a lead CDQ observer. A CDP authorizing the vessel to carry 
only one lead CDQ observer may be approved by NMFS if the CDQ group 
supplies vessel logbook or observer data that demonstrates that one CDQ 
observer can sample each CDQ set for species composition in one 12-hour 
shift per fishing day. NMFS will not approve a CDP that would require 
the observer to divide a 12-hour shift into shifts of less than 6 
hours.
    (iii) Catcher/processors using pot gear. A catcher/processor using 
pot gear must have at least one lead CDQ observer as described at 
paragraph (h)(1)(i)(E) of this section aboard the vessel.
    (iv) Catcher vessel. A catcher vessel equal to or greater than 60 
ft (18.29 m) LOA, except a catcher vessel that delivers only unsorted 
codends to a processor or another vessel, must have at least one lead 
CDQ observer as described at paragraph (h)(1)(i)(E) of this section 
aboard the vessel.
    (d) Observer requirements for shoreside processors. * * *
    (4) Groundfish CDQ fisheries. Each shoreside processor required to 
have a Federal processor permit under Sec. 679.4(f) and taking 
deliveries of CDQ or PSQ from vessels groundfish CDQ fishing as defined 
at Sec. 679.2 must have at least one lead CDQ observer as described at 
paragraph (h)(1)(i)(E) of this section present at all times while CDQ 
is being received or processed. The time required for the CDQ observer 
to complete sampling, data recording, and data communication duties 
shall not exceed 12 hours in each 24-hour period, and the CDQ observer 
is required to sample no more than 9 hours in each 24-hour period.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D) For purposes of the groundfish CDQ fisheries, a NMFS-certified 
CDQ observer must meet the following requirements.
    (1) Be a prior observer in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska who 
has completed at least 60 days of observer data collection.
    (2) Receive the rating of 1 for ``meets expectations'' or 2 for 
``exceptional'' by NMFS for his or her most recent deployment.
    (3) Successfully complete a NMFS-approved CDQ observer training 
and/or briefing as prescribed by NMFS and available from the Observer 
Program Office.
    (4) Comply with all of the other requirements of this section.
    (E) In addition to the requirements in paragraph (h)(1)(i)(D) of 
this section, to

[[Page 30410]]

be certified as a ``lead CDQ observer'', an observer must meet the 
following requirements.
    (1) A ``lead CDQ observer'' on a catcher/processor using trawl gear 
or a mothership must have completed two observer cruises (contracts) 
and sampled at least 100 hauls on a catcher/processor using trawl gear 
or a mothership.
    (2) A ``lead CDQ observer'' on a catcher vessel using trawl gear 
must have completed two observer cruises (contracts) and sampled at 
least 50 hauls on a catcher vessel using trawl gear.
    (3) A ``lead CDQ observer'' on a vessel using nontrawl gear must 
have completed two observer cruises (contracts) of at least 10 days 
each and sampled at least 60 sets on a vessel using nontrawl gear.
    (4) A ``lead CDQ observer'' in a shoreside processing plant must 
have observed at least 30 days in a shoreside processing plant.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-14596 Filed 6-3-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P