Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 139 /Tuesday, July 21, 1998 / Proposed Rules 39065

administrative, and would only add a

framework procedure to the FMP, this

rule would not result in any new

compliance burdens or in any

significant economic impact on small

entities. As a result, a regulatory

flexibility analysis was not prepared.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

Administrative practice and

procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries,

Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives,

Indians, Northern Mariana Islands,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: July 15, 1998.

David L. Evans,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST

COAST STATES AND IN THE

WESTERN PACIFIC

1. The authority citation for part 660

continues to read as follows:

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

2. A new § 660.89 is added to Subpart

F to read as follows:

§ 660.89 Framework procedures.

(a) Introduction. Established

management measures may be revised

and new management measures may be

established and/or revised through

rulemaking if new information

demonstrates that there are biological,

social, or economic concerns in the

precious coral permit area. The

following framework process authorizes

the establishment and revision of

measures that may affect the operation

of the fisheries, gear, quotas, season, or

changes in catch and/or effort.

(b) Annual report. By June 30 of each

year, the Council-appointed Precious

Coral Team will prepare an annual

report on the fisheries in the

management area. The report shall

contain, among other things,

recommendations for Council action

and an assessment of the urgency and

effects of such action(s).

(c) Procedure for established

measures. (1) Established measures are

management measures that, at some

time, have been included in regulations

implementing the FMP, and for which

the impacts have been evaluated in

Council/NMFS documents in the

context of current conditions.

(2) According to the framework

procedures of Amendment 3 to the

FMP, the Council may recommend to

the Regional Administrator that

established measures be modified,

removed, or re-instituted. Such

recommendation shall include

supporting rationale and analysis, and

shall be made after advance public

notice, public discussion, and

consideration of public comment.

NMFS may implement the Council’s

recommendation by rulemaking if

approved by the Regional

Administrator.

(d) Procedure for new measures. (1)

New measures are management

measures that have not been included in

regulations implementing the FMP, or

for which the impacts have not been

evaluated in Council/NMFS documents

in the context of current conditions.

(2) Following the framework

procedures of Amendment 3 to the

FMP, the Council will publicize,

including by a Federal Register

document, and solicit public comment

on, any proposed new management

measure. After a Council meeting at

which the measure is discussed, the

Council will consider recommendations

and prepare a Federal Register

document summarizing the Council’s

deliberations, rationale, and analysis for

the preferred action, and the time and

place for any subsequent Council

meeting(s) to consider the new measure.

At a subsequent public meeting, the

Council will consider public comments

and other information received before

making a recommendation to the

Regional Administrator about any new

measure. If approved by the Regional

Administrator, NMFS may implement

the Council’s recommendation by final

rulemaking, in some instances, or if

circumstances warrant, by proposed and

final rulemaking.

[FR Doc. 98–19391 Filed 7–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 980702167–8167–01; I.D.

051898A]

RIN 0648–AK73

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; Stand Down

Requirements for Trawl Catcher

Vessels Transiting Between the Bering

Sea and Gulf of Alaska

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to

implement a stand down requirement

for trawl catcher vessels transiting

between the Bering Sea and Aleutian

Islands Management Area (BSAI) and

Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is

necessary to prevent unexpected shifts

of fishing effort between BSAI and GOA

fisheries that cause management

problems and can lead to overharvests

of total allowable catch (TAC) in the

Western and Central (W/C) Regulatory

Areas of the GOA. This action is

intended to further the goals and

objectives of the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska and the Fishery Management

Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area

(FMPs).

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule

must be received no later than August

20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to

Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional

Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries,

Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668,

Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori J. Gravel,

or delivered to the Federal Building, 709

West 9th Street, Juneau, AK. Copies of

the Environmental Assessment/

Regulatory Impact Review/Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/

RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action are

available from NMFS at the same

address, or by calling the Alaska Region,

NMFS, at 907–586–7228.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent

Lind, 907–586–7228 or

kent.lind@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

groundfish fisheries off Alaska are

managed by NMFS under the FMPs. The

FMPs were prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

(Council) under the Magnuson-Stevens

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Federal

regulations governing the groundfish

fisheries appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and

679.

Background and Need for Action

In recent years, management of the

inshore pollock and Pacific cod fisheries

of the W/C Regulatory Areas of the GOA

has become increasingly difficult and

the risk of harvest overruns has grown

due to TAC amounts that are small

relative to the potential fishing effort.

The problem has been most acute in the

Western Regulatory Area of the GOA

due to the constant potential that

numerous large catcher vessels based in

the Bering Sea could cross into the GOA
39066 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 139 /Tuesday, July 21, 1998 / Proposed Rules

to participate in pollock and Pacific cod

openings that have relatively small

TACs. NMFS currently lacks a

preseason vessel registration program

that could gauge potential effort in these

fisheries prior to openings, and inseason

catch information in these fisheries is

neither timely nor accurate enough to

allow adequate management.

The difficulty of managing the pollock

fishery in the Western Regulatory Area

was demonstrated in 1997 during the

September 1 third season opening. On

September 4, 1997, NMFS announced a

closure of the fishery effective

September 7, 1997, based on the

observed level of effort in the Western

Regulatory Area. Once the closure date

was announced, a large number of

Bering Sea-based vessels entered the

GOA to participate in the final 2 days

of the fishery. NMFS inseason managers

did not anticipate this increase in effort

because the Bering Sea pollock fishery

was still open at that time and NMFS

expected that Bering Sea-based vessels

would continue to fish in the Bering

Sea. Nevertheless, these Bering Seabased vessels harvested approximately

7,000 mt of pollock from the Western

Regulatory Area in the final 2 days of

the fishery. As a consequence of this

unanticipated effort, the 1997 annual

TAC of 18,600 mt for this area was

exceeded by 8,017 mt or 43 percent of

the total.

In response to the difficulties

associated with managing the pollock

and Pacific cod fisheries of the W/C

Regulatory Areas, the Council has

developed two distinct management

solutions. The first program, adopted by

the Council at its February 1998 meeting

and contained in this proposed rule, is

a stand down requirement for inshore

trawl catcher vessels transiting between

the BSAI and GOA. The second

management program, currently under

development by NMFS and the Council,

is a vessel registration program that

would require vessels to register with

NMFS in advance of entering certain

critical fisheries. Both of these programs

are described in detail in the EA/RIR

prepared for this action.

Elements of the Proposed Rule

This proposed rule would impose a

stand down requirement for all trawl

catcher vessels transiting between the

BSAI and GOA FMP management areas

that would be in effect when the pollock

or Pacific cod fisheries are open in the

BSAI or GOA. Vessels leaving the BSAI

would be required to offload all fish

caught in the BSAI and would be

prohibited from deploying trawl gear in

the W/C Regulatory Areas of the GOA

until 1200 hours A.l.t. on the third day

after the date that offloading was

completed. Vessels transiting from the

Western Regulatory Area to the BSAI

would be subject to the same 3-day

stand down requirement. However,

vessels transiting between the Central

Regulatory Area and the BSAI would

face a 2-day stand down period. The

Council believed that a shorter stand

down period for vessels transiting

between the Central Regulatory Area

and the BSAI was warranted because

the Central Regulatory Area is farther

from the BSAI and less subject to rapid

shifts of effort back and forth from BSAI

fisheries.

The purpose of requiring vessels to

offload all fish caught in one area before

deploying gear in the new area is to aid

enforcement officers in determining

whether a violation of the stand down

requirement has occurred. If vessels

were allowed to retain fish on board the

vessel while transiting to a new area,

enforcement officers boarding a vessel

would have no means of determining

whether the fish on board the vessel

were caught in the previous area, or

caught in the new area in violation of

the stand down requirement. Requiring

vessels to empty their holds before

beginning the stand down period would

eliminate this enforcement difficulty.

Classification

This proposed rule has been

determined to be not significant for the

purposes of E.O. 12866.

NMFS has prepared an initial

regulatory flexibility analysis that

consists of the EA/RIR and the preamble

to this proposed rule. A copy of the EA/

RIR is available from NMFS (see

ADDRESSES).

The proposed stand down

requirement would affect an estimated

275 trawl catcher vessels fishing for

groundfish in the GOA and BSAI, all of

which are considered small entities,

because it would restrict their ability to

make rapid transits between the BSAI

and GOA groundfish fisheries.

Managing pollock and Pacific cod

fisheries in the GOA has been

increasingly difficult because of the

potential for large catcher vessels based

in the BSAI to participate in pollock and

Pacific cod openings in the GOA that

have relatively small TACs and risk

harvest overruns. Ten to 15 catcher

vessels, believed to be based in the

BSAI, made rapid transits from one area

to another in 1997. NMFS cannot

calculate how many such vessels might

transit in 1998 but it is possible that

more than 10–15 catcher vessels could

participate in GOA pollock and Pacific

cod fisheries and risk harvest overruns.

NMFS projects that the proposed

restriction could result in the foregone

harvest of pollock to BSAI-based catcher

vessels, which could exceed the

estimated 7,663 mt of pollock harvested

in 1997 by these vessels. NMFS cannot

calculate this proposed rule’s effect on

the affected vessels, but it is possible

that it could result in losses of 5 percent

or more of these vessels’ gross revenues

and/or increase the costs of production

by more than 5 percent. No entities are

expected to be forced out of business as

a result of this action. As such, based on

NMFS threshold guidelines, this action

could result in a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

This proposed rule would not result

in any new reporting requirements and

does not duplicate, overlap with, or

conflict with any other Federal rules.

Alternatives to the proposed stand

down requirement include no action,

variations on the length or applicability

of the stand down requirement, or

establishing a vessel registration

program. The no action alternative

would preserve the possibility of

distributional impacts resulting from the

BSAI-based fleet taking some of the TAC

that would otherwise be harvested by

the GOA-based fleet. This alternative’s

risks to the long-term health of the

stock, due to the potential for continued

overharvests, could lead to negative

economic impacts in future years.

The Council considered a range of

variations on the length and

applicability of the stand down

requirement. The options that would

have applied the requirements either to

all groundfish vessels, or all trawl

vessels were rejected because the

objective of preventing overharvests

could be achieved through a less

restrictive option that applied the stand

down requirement only to trawl catcher

vessels. The options that would have

applied the stand down requirements to

all target fisheries was selected over the

option that would have applied only to

the pollock and Pacific cod fisheries due

to potential conflicts with the increased

retention/improved utilization program

and the difficulties of enforcing a more

narrowly tailored rule. Reducing the

length of the stand down period for the

Western Regulatory Area from 72 to 48

hours may have marginally reduced

some of the impacts on small entities

and still reduced the number of rapid

transits. However, this alternative

would not have alleviated the impacts

of the offloading requirement and could

have resulted in enforcement

difficulties. There were also several

options concerning when the stand

down period should begin: from the

time of gear retrieval in one area, from
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 139 /Tuesday, July 21, 1998 / Proposed Rules 39067

noon on the date of landing fish, or from

the actual time and date of the delivery

of fish. Beginning the period at the time

of retrieval of gear could have reduced

impacts associated with delay on small

entities. This approach would have

relied on log book data, and vessels

under 60 feet LOA are not required to

maintain logbooks. However, NMFS

does not believe that many of these

small catcher vessels make rapid

transits. Beginning the period at the

time of actual delivery would have

imposed a new record keeping and

reporting requirement, and would have

entailed a Paperwork Reduction Act

clearance process that would have

precluded implementing this action

prior to 1999.

A vessel registration system, which

would require vessels to pre-register for

the areas in which they would be

fishing, would resolve NMFS’s

management problems with the

relatively minor impact of reduced

flexibility for the fishing fleets. In some

cases this option would impose costs on

vessels that realize mid-course they

would prefer to fish in another area, but

it would improve the predictability of

the fishing season and allow fishers to

plan more effectively. The council has

recommended developing this

alternative and implementing it at a

later date.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: July 14, 1998.

David L. Evans,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF

ALASKA

1. The authority citation for part 679

continues to read as follows:

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

seq., and 3631 et seq.

2. In § 679.23 a new paragraph (h) is

added to read as follows:

§ 679.23 Seasons.

* * * * *

(h) Stand down requirements for

catcher vessels transiting between the

BSAI and GOA.

If you own or operate a catcher vesssel and fish for

groundfish with trawl gear in the * * *

You are prohibited from subsequently deploying trawl gear in the

* * *

Until * * *

(1) BSAI while pollock or Pacific cod is open to directed fishing in the BSAI.Western and Central Regulatory

Areas of the GOA.

1200 hours A.l.t. on the third day after the date of

landing or transfer of all groundfish on board the

vessel harvested in the BSAI, unless you are engaged in directed fishing for Pacific cod in the

GOA for processing by the offshore component.

(2) Western Regulatory Area of the GOA while pollock or inshore Pacific cod is open to directed fishing in the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA.BSAI ............................................... 1200 hours A.l.t. on the third day after the date of

landing or transfer of all groundfish on board the

vessel harvested in the Western Regulatory Area

of the GOA.

(3) Central Regulatory Area of the GOA while pollock or inshore Pacific cod is open to directed fishing in the Central Regulatory Area of the GOA.BSAI ............................................... 1200 hours A.l.t. on the second day after the date of

landing or transfer of all groundfish on board the

vessel harvested in the Central Regulatory Area

of the GOA.

[FR Doc. 98–19334 Filed 7–20–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P