59296 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Report 

and Order, MB Docket No. 02–295, 

adopted September 23, 2005, and 

released September 26, 2005. The full 

text of this Commission decision is 

available for inspection and copying 

during normal business hours in the 

FCC’s Reference Information Center at 

Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC, 20554. The 

document may also be purchased from 

the Commission’s duplicating 

contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 

Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 

CY–B402, Washington, DC 20554, 

telephone 1–800–378–3160 or http:// 

www.BCPIWEB.com. This document is 

not subject to the Congressional Review 

Act. (The Commission is, therefore, not 

required to submit a copy of this Report 

and Order to GAO pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A), because the proposed rule 

is dismissed.) 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos, 

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media 

Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 05–20210 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 050921244–5244–01; I.D. 

091305A] 

RIN 0648–AP38 

Fisheries Off West Coast States and in 

the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Fishery; Limited Entry 

Fixed Gear Sablefish Fishery Permit 

Stacking Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed 

rule to implement portions of 

Amendment 14 to the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Fishery Management Plan 

(FMP) for 2007 and beyond. 

Amendment 14, approved by NOAA in 

August 2001, created a permit stacking 

program for limited entry permits with 

sablefish endorsements. This proposed 

rule would implement regulatory 

measures from Amendment 14 that the 

agency could not set in place in time for 

the 2001 through 2006 primary sablefish 

seasons. Amendment 14 was intended 

to improve safety in the primary 

sablefish fishery and to provide greater 

season flexibility for sablefish fishery 

participants. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted in 

writing by December 12, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule to implement 

further limited entry sablefish permit 

stacking program regulations, identified 

by 091305A, by any of the following 

methods: 

• E-mail: 

Amendment14b.nwr@noaa.gov. Include 

I.D 091305A in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 206–526–6736, Attn: Jamie 

Goen 

• Mail: D. Robert Lohn, 

Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115–0070 

Copies of Amendment 14 and its 

Environmental Assessment/Regulatory 

Impact Review (EA/RIR) are available 

from Donald McIsaac, Executive 

Director, Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council), 7700 NE Ambassador 

Place, Portland, OR 97220. Copies of the 

Supplemental Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) are available 

from D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, 

Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand 

Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115–

0070. 

Send comments on the reporting 

burden estimate or any other aspect of 

the collection-of-information 

requirements in this proposed rule to 

Jamie Goen or Kevin Ford, Northwest 

Region, NMFS, and to David Rostker, 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), by e-mail at 

DavidlRostker@omb.gov,or fax to 202–

395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jamie Goen or Kevin Ford (Northwest 

Region, NMFS), phone: 206–526–4646 

or 206–526–6115; fax: 206–526–6736 

and; e-mail: jamie.goen@noaa.gov or 

kevin.ford@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access 

This Federal Register document is 

also accessible via the internet at the 

website of the Office of the Federal 

Register: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/ 

index.html. 

NMFS is proposing this rule to 

implement those portions of 

Amendment 14 to the FMP that NMFS 

was unable to implement in time for the 

2001 through 2006 primary sablefish 

seasons. Amendment 14 implemented a 

permit stacking program for limited 

entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements. This proposed rule is 

based on recommendations of the 

Council, under the authority of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP and the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). The portions 

of Amendment 14 that were 

implemented for the 2001 primary 

sablefish season significantly increased 

safety in the fishery, allowed individual 

fishery participants to more fully use 

their existing vessel capacity, and 

reduced overall capacity in the primary 

fixed gear sablefish fishery. This 

proposed rule would not change any of 

those benefits, but would further 

complete the implementation of 

Amendment 14 by preventing excessive 

fleet consolidation, ensuring processor 

access to sablefish caught in the primary 

season, and maintaining the character of 

the fleet through owner-on-board 

requirements. The background and 

rationale for the Council’s 

recommendations are summarized 

below. The discussion below also 

explains why NMFS will not be 

implementing the Council’s 

recommendation for a hail-in 

requirement for vessels delivering 

primary season sablefish. Furthermore, 

it summarizes some modifications to the 

permit stacking program that the 

Council is considering for future 

implementation. 

Further detail appears in the EA/RIR 

prepared by the Council for Amendment 

14 and in the proposed and final rule to 

implement Amendment 14 for the 2001 

primary sablefish season. The proposed 

rule for the 2001 season was published 

on June 8, 2001 (66 FR 30869), the final 

rule was published on August 7, 2001 

(66 FR 41152), and a correction to the 

final rule was published on August 30, 

2001 (66 FR 45786). 

Background 

For many years, sablefish harvested 

by the limited entry, fixed gear fleet 

north of 36° N. lat. has been separated 

into a small, year-round daily trip limit 

fishery and a primary season fishery 

(from April 1 through October 31). 

Annually, about 85 percent of the 

limited entry fixed gear sablefish 

allocation has been taken in the primary 

season fishery. Before 1997, the Council 

managed harvest in the primary season 

fishery without vessel cumulative limits 

by setting the season length short 

enough to ensure that the fishery would 

not exceed its quota. Capitalization in 

the fixed gear sablefish fleet increased 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59297 

over time and the Council needed to set 

ever shorter primary seasons to control 

catch levels. By 1996, the fleet was able 

to take the bulk of the primary season 

sablefish catch in a 5 day fishery. 

This evolution to a derby-style fishery 

induced the Council to make a series of 

management changes intended to 

rationalize fishing effort and improve 

safety for primary season fishery 

participants. Amendment 9 to the FMP 

introduced a sablefish endorsement 

program that limited the number of 

vessels allowed to participate in the 

primary season fishery. Limited entry 

permit holders with at least 16,000 lb 

(7,257 mt) of sablefish landed in any 

one year from 1984 through 1994 

received sablefish endorsements. This 

program was intended to restrict 

primary season fishery participation to 

those permit holders with historical 

participation in and dependence upon 

the sablefish fishery. 

Following Amendment 9, the Council 

further separated participation in the 

primary season sablefish fishery by 

introducing the three-tier program in 

1998. This program divided sablefishendorsed permits into 3 tiers based on 

historical landings associated with those 

permits. Under the three-tier program, a 

participant in the primary season may 

land an amount of sablefish up to the 

cumulative limit associated with his/her 

permit. Qualifications for each of the 3 

tiers were based on the cumulative 

sablefish landings associated with a 

permit over the same 1984 through 1994 

period: at least 898,000 lb (407.33 mt) to 

qualify for Tier 1, less than 898,000 lb 

(407.33 mt) but more than 380,000 lb 

(172.36 mt) to qualify for Tier 2, and 

less than 380,000 lb (172.36 mt) but at 

least the minimum 16,000 lb (7,257 mt) 

to qualify for Tier 3. The three-tier 

system also set a between-tier ratio to 

describe the relationship between the 

cumulative limits that would be 

available to each tier during the primary 

season fishery. That ratio is 1 (Tier 3): 

1.75 (Tier 2):3.85 (Tier 1). For example, 

if Tier 3 had a cumulative limit of 

10,000 lb (4,536 mt), Tier 2 would have 

a corresponding cumulative limit of 

17,500 lb (7,938 mt), and Tier 1 would 

have a corresponding cumulative limit 

of 38,500 lb (17,463 mt). 

While the three-tier program 

somewhat slowed the pace of the 

primary season fishery, the season was 

still less than 10 days long in each of the 

primary seasons from 1998 to 2000. 

Even under the three-tier program, the 

Council had to set the seasons short 

enough to ensure that not all 

participants would be able to catch the 

full cumulative limits of sablefish 

associated with their permits. A fishery 

where all participants have the 

opportunity to catch a cumulative limit 

and all are able to catch that limit is an 

Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) fishery 

as defined by the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. At the time, the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, as amended by Public Law 106–

554, included a moratorium on the 

implementation of new IFQ programs 

through October 1, 2002. (The 

moratorium has since been lifted). 

However, via Public Law 106–554, 

Congress exempted from the 

moratorium a Pacific Council IFQ 

program for the fixed gear sablefish 

fishery that: (1) allows the use of more 

than one limited entry groundfish 

permit per vessel; and/or (2) sets 

cumulative trip limit periods, up to 12 

months in any calendar year, that allow 

fishing vessels a reasonable opportunity 

to harvest the full amount of the 

associated trip limits. Amendment 14 to 

the FMP implements a permit stacking 

program that meets these moratorium 

exemption requirements. 

Amendment 14 

The Council approved Amendment 14 

at its November 2000 meeting and 

clarified its intent on implementing 

Amendment 14 at its November 2001 

and April 2002 meetings. Amendment 

14 introduced a permit stacking 

program to the limited entry, fixed gear 

primary sablefish fishery. Under this 

permit stacking program, a vessel owner 

may register up to 3 sablefish-endorsed 

permits for use with their vessel to 

harvest each of the primary season 

sablefish cumulative limits associated 

with the stacked permits. By exempting 

the Pacific Coast fixed gear permit 

stacking program from the IFQ 

moratorium, Congress removed the need 

to set short seasons designed to prevent 

participants from catching their full 

cumulative limits. Amendment 14 

allows a season up to 7 months long, 

from April 1 through October 31, which 

allows an ample period for vessels to 

pursue their primary season sablefish 

cumulative limits. Beginning in 2002, 

NMFS implemented the full April 1 

through October 31 season via the 

Pacific Coast groundfish final 

specifications and management 

measures published on March 7, 2002 

(67 FR 10490). 

Provisions subject to the regulatory 

review process required under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and a 

longer NMFS application and 

permitting process were reserved for a 

second set of proposed regulations for 

2002 and beyond. In its June 8, 2001, 

proposed rule, NMFS announced its 

intention to divide Amendment 14 

implementation into two separate 

regulatory processes. Implementation of 

this latter portion of Amendment 14 was 

further postponed in 2002 to allow time 

for NMFS to return to the Council for 

further clarification. On February 14, 

2002, NMFS notified fixed gear permit 

holders by letter to let them know the 

agency would be requesting further 

clarification from the Council. NMFS 

received further clarification at the 

Council’s April 2002 meeting. 

The regulatory changes proposed with 

this Federal Register document would 

implement permit stacking regulations 

that include the following provisions: 

permit owners and permit holders 

would be required to document their 

ownership interests in their permits to 

ensure that no person holds or has 

ownership interest in more than 3 

permits; an owner-on-board requirement 

for permit owners who did not own 

sablefish-endorsed permits as of 

November 1, 2000; an opportunity for 

permit owners to add a spouse as coowner; vessels that do not meet 

minimum frozen sablefish historic 

landing requirements would not be 

allowed to process sablefish at sea; 

permit transferors would be required to 

certify sablefish landings during midseason transfers; and, a definition of the 

term ‘‘base permit.’’

Documenting Permit Ownership 

Interest and Adding a Spouse as Coowner 

Amendment 14 includes several 

ownership-related provisions. (1) No 

partnership or corporation may own a 

sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit 

unless that partnership or corporation 

owned a sablefish-endorsed permit as of 

November 1, 2000 (also referred to as 

grandfathered or first generation permit 

owner). NMFS announced this 

November 1, 2000, control date in an 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on April 3, 2001 (66 FR 

17681). Partnerships or corporations 

that owned permits as of November 1, 

2000, may continue to have ownership 

interest in those same permits and may 

purchase or hold additional permits up 

to the 3–permit limit; however, 

partnerships or corporations that owned 

a permit before November 1, 2000, and 

subsequently sell all of their sablefishendorsed permits, will lose the privilege 

of continuing to own sablefish-endorsed 

permits if they do not buy another 

permit within one year. Any permits 

sold after November 1, 2000, may only 

be sold to an individual person or to 

partnerships or corporations that had 

ownership interest in a sablefishendorsed permit before November 1, 

2000. 

59298 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

(2) No person, partnership, or 

corporation in combination may have 

ownership interest in or hold more than 

3 sablefish-endorsed permits either 

simultaneously or cumulatively over the 

primary season, except for an individual 

person, or partnerships or corporations 

that had ownership interest in more 

than 3 sablefish-endorsed permits as of 

November 1, 2000. An individual 

person, or partnerships or corporations 

that had ownership interest in 3 or more 

sablefish-endorsed permits as of 

November 1, 2000, may not acquire 

additional permits either by purchase or 

holding beyond those sablefishendorsed permits owned on November 

1, 2000, until they own fewer than 3 

permits; at that time they may acquire 

additional permits but may not exceed 

the ownership cap of 3 permits. 

(3) A partnership or corporation will 

lose the exemptions provided in 

paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section on 

the effective date of any change in the 

ownership of a corporation or 

partnership from that which existed on 

November 1, 2000. [Note: In cases where 

multiple corporations or partnership are 

listed on a permit, NMFS will treat them 

as one new entity for purposes of the 

permit count and grandfathered status. 

For example, if Smith, Inc. and Jones, 

Inc. are listed as owning a permit 

together since before November 1, 2000, 

they will be grandfathered as ‘‘Smith, 

Inc. and Jones, Inc.’’ and this entity will 

be counted as owning that 1 permit. If 

Jones, Inc. did not also own a permit on 

its own before November 1, 2000, it 

would not be a grandfathered 

corporation and could not own a permit 

after November 1, 2000. Any change in 

Smith, Inc. and/or Jones, Inc. would 

affect ‘‘Smith, Inc. and Jones, Inc.’’ as 

listed on the permit.] A ‘‘change’’ in the 

partnership or corporation means the 

addition of a partner or shareholder to 

the corporate or partnership 

membership. This definition of 

‘‘change’’ will apply to any person 

added to the corporation or partnership 

since November 1, 2000, including any 

family member of an existing 

shareholder or partner. A change in 

membership is not considered to have 

occurred if a member dies or becomes 

legally incapacitated and a trustee is 

appointed to act on his behalf, nor if the 

ownership of shares among existing 

members changes, nor if a member 

leaves the corporation or partnership 

and is not replaced. Changes in the 

ownership of publicly held stock will 

not be deemed changes in ownership of 

the corporation. Changes in the 

partnership or corporation must be 

reported to NMFS’ Sustainable Fisheries 

Division (SFD) within 15 days of the 

addition of a new partner or 

shareholder. 

(4) An individual person who did not 

own a sablefish-endorsed permit as of 

November 1, 2000, and who purchases 

a sablefish-endorsed permit after 

November 1, 2000, will be required to 

be on board the vessel registered for use 

with the permit when that vessel is 

fishing for sablefish against the primary 

sablefish tier limits associated with the 

permit(s) registered for use with that 

vessel. (Also known as the ‘‘owner-onboard’’ requirement.) 

To implement these four major permit 

ownership provisions, NMFS will need 

to determine which individuals have an 

ownership interest in the partnerships 

and corporations that own and/or hold 

sablefish-endorsed permits. As of 

November 2000, about 40 partnerships 

or corporations were owners of 

sablefish-endorsed permits (this number 

only includes business entities denoted 

as corporation, general partnership, 

limited partnership, etc.). Similarly, 

about 40 partnerships or corporations 

were holders of sablefish-endorsed 

permits with seven of those being 

different from the partnerships or 

corporations that were given as permit 

owners. Once NMFS obtains the names 

of all of the individuals who had 

ownership interest in a sablefishendorsed permit as of November 1, 

2000, as well as all of the individuals 

that had ownership interest in or held 

a sablefish endorsed permit after 

November 1, 2000, the agency will be 

better able to implement the 

Amendment 14 provision that restricts 

the number of permits each person has 

ownership interest in or holds to three 

permits. If a person who has not owned 

all their permits since November 1, 

2000, is found to have ownership 

interest in or hold more than 3 permits, 

NMFS will void all current permits, 

including any grandfathered permits 

owned or held by partnerships or 

corporations, and reissue all permits in 

an ‘‘unidentified’’ status meaning that 

the permits cannot be fished, until such 

time as that individual can prove they 

have ownership interest in or hold no 

more than 3 permits. [Note: A permit 

cannot be fished if it is in 

‘‘unidentified’’ status. The permit must 

be registered for use with the vessel 

being used to land the groundfish as 

specified in 50 CFR 660.333(a).] For 

example, if a person is found to have 

ownership interest in five permits, three 

of which were owned as of November 1, 

2000, NMFS will issue all five permits, 

including any permits shared with other 

individuals, partnerships or 

corporations, into ‘‘unidentified’’ status 

until that person sells at least two of 

their permits so that they own or hold 

no more than three permits. If a person 

had ownership interest in five permits 

as of November 1, 2000, and still has 

ownership interest in those five permits 

and does not own or hold additional 

permits, none of the permits would be 

moved into the ‘‘unidentified’’ status. 

While the Council recommended that 

permit owners would be required to 

document their ownership interests in 

their permits to ensure that no person 

holds or has ownership interest in more 

than 3 permits, NMFS has determined 

that permit holders that are corporations 

or partnerships would also be required 

to document their ownership interests 

for purposes of the permit count which 

was implemented with the first round of 

permit stacking regulations in August 

2001. Therefore, NMFS has interpreted 

the Council’s recommendation to not 

just require permit owners, but also 

permit holders to document their 

ownership interests in their permits to 

ensure that no person holds or has 

ownership interest in more than 3 

permits. For purposes of establishing 

the permit count for each permit owner 

and permit holder, each individual who 

is listed as owner on the permit or is 

listed as having an ownership interest as 

part of a corporation or partnership will 

be counted as owning or holding one 

permit. In cases where a husband and 

wife are listed as co-owners of the same 

permit, both individuals will be counted 

as owning one permit each. However, if 

the husband is listed on the permit as 

the sole owner of that permit, only the 

husband will be counted as owning that 

permit for purposes of restrictions and 

exemptions on the number of permits a 

person may own or hold. 

If a permit owner who owned the 

permit as of November 1, 2000, conveys 

a permit to their spouse upon their 

death, the conveyed permit will count 

toward the permit ownership limits for 

that spouse. ‘‘Spouse’’ means a person 

who is legally married to another person 

as recognized by state law (i.e., one’s 

wife or husband). If the spouse already 

owns or holds 3 permits, he/she will not 

be permitted to retain this additional 

permit, unless he/she conveys 

ownership of or no longer holds one of 

his/her existing permits. 

If a couple were married as of 

November 1, 2000, but only one spouse 

was listed on the permit as the permit 

owner at that time, the spouse of the 

listed permit owner would not be 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement. However, NMFS realizes 

permit owners could not have foreseen 

the implications of not listing their 

spouse under the detailed provisions of 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59299 

the permit stacking program adopted by 

the Council. Therefore, permit owners 

who were married as of the control date 

(November 1, 2000) and who wish to 

add their spouse as co-owner on their 

permit(s) may correct NMFS’ permit 

ownership records as of that control 

date. Permit owners may add a notlisted spouse as a co-owner without 

losing their grandfathered status. As 

previously mentioned, in cases where a 

couple, married as of November 1, 2000, 

are listed as co-owners of the same 

permit, both individuals will be counted 

as owning one permit each and will 

have grandfathered status as a 

partnership as defined at § 660.302. An 

individual within the married couple 

will not, however, be able to retain their 

exemption from owner-on-board 

requirements if they choose to buy 

another permit as an individual and did 

not own a permit as an individual as of 

the control date in NMFS ‘‘corrected’’

records (i.e., NMFS records after 

allowing a not-listed spouse to be added 

as co-owner). Members of partnerships 

and corporations will not be allowed to 

add their spouses to the corporate 

ownership listing as of November 1, 

2000, for purposes of exempting them 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

(Note: NMFS defines a ‘‘partnership’’ as 

two or more individuals, partnerships, 

or corporations, or combinations 

thereof, who have ownership interest in 

a permit, including married couples and 

legally recognized trusts and 

partnerships, such as limited 

partnerships (LP), general partnerships 

(GP), and limited liability partnerships 

(LLP).) 

Upon publication of these regulations 

in the Federal Register, NMFS will send 

a form to permit owners with one 

individual listed as of November 1, 

2000, to allow married individuals who 

wish to declare their spouses as having 

permit ownership interest as of 

November 1, 2000. If the permit owner 

fails to return the form by July 1, 2006, 

the permit name on record with SFD as 

of November 1, 2000, will remain on the 

permit. If the permit owner has been 

married since the control date, chooses 

not to add their spouse as a co-owner 

and the permit owner listed on the 

permit thereafter dies, the spouse will 

not be exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement should the spouse inherit 

the permit. SFD will not accept any 

declarations to add a spouse as coowner for couples married as of the 

control date after the July 1, 2006, 

deadline. 

For corporations and partnerships, 

NMFS will send a form to legally 

recognized corporations and 

partnerships (i.e., permit owners other 

than individuals) that currently own or 

hold sablefish-endorsed permits that 

requests a listing of the names of all 

shareholders or partners as of November 

1, 2000, and a second listing of that 

same information as of the current date 

in 2006. NMFS may require a copy of 

the United States Coast Guard Abstract 

of Title as proof of vessel ownership for 

permit holders and/or owners and may 

require articles of incorporation or other 

documentation deemed necessary for 

proof of corporate or partnership 

ownership. If a corporation or 

partnership fails to return the completed 

form by the deadline date of July 1, 

2006, NMFS will send a second written 

notice to delinquent entities requesting 

the completed form be returned by a 

revised deadline date of August 1, 2006. 

If the permit owning entity fails to 

return the completed form by that 

second deadline date, August 1, 2006, 

NMFS will void their existing permit(s) 

and reissue the permit(s) with a vessel 

registration given as ‘‘unidentified’’

until such time that the completed form 

is provided to NMFS. For purposes of 

determining changes in partnerships/ 

corporations in succeeding years, NMFS 

will send the form to corporations and 

partnerships as part of the annual 

permit renewal process. 

Failure to report or false reporting of 

ownership interest in federal limited 

entry groundfish permits to NMFS may 

be subject to federal civil or criminal 

penalties. 

Owner-on-board Requirement 

As mentioned above, an individual 

person who owns sablefish-endorsed 

permits, but who did not have an 

ownership interest in a sablefishendorsed permit as of November 1, 

2000, would be required to be on board 

the vessel registered for use with that 

permit during any groundfish fishing 

operations within the primary season 

fishery while that permit’s primary 

sablefish season limits are being taken. 

(Note: An individual person, or 

partnerships or corporations that hold(s) 

a sablefish-endorsed permit, but does 

not own a sablefish-endorsed permit, 

are not subject to the owner-on-board 

requirements.) The Council included 

this provision in Amendment 14 as a 

way of ensuring that the fixed gear 

sablefish fleet would maintain its 

character, by requiring that only 

fishermen control sablefish-endorsed 

permits and moving toward a fishery 

where permit owners are working 

onboard the vessel during fishing 

operations. 

The sablefish permit stacking program 

is essentially an IFQ program. A 

concern about IFQ programs is that if 

fishing privileges are for sale, 

individuals or business entities who do 

not fish could buy those privileges. 

Allowing individuals or business 

entities who do not fish to own fishing 

privileges and then rent those privileges 

out to fishers is often referred to as 

‘‘share-cropping’’ the fishing privileges. 

Members of the West Coast sablefish 

fleet were concerned that without an 

owner-on-board provision, permit 

ownership could flow out of fishing 

communities and into the hands of 

speculative non-fishing buyers. To 

ensure that only fishers could buy into 

the sablefish fleet, the Council included 

an owner-on-board provision in 

Amendment 14. 

Under this proposed rule, an 

individual who purchased a sablefishendorsed permit after November 1, 

2000, would be required to be on board 

the vessel registered for use with that 

permit when the vessel is participating 

in any groundfish fishery during the 

primary season and fishing on that 

permit’s sablefish limits until that vessel 

has taken that permit’s primary 

sablefish season limits. Once the 

primary sablefish season starts, any 

sablefish landings made by a vessel 

registered for use with a sablefishendorsed permit count against that 

vessel’s primary season limit(s). This 

aspect of the owner-on-board 

requirement prevents unnecessary 

sablefish discard by ensuring that if 

sablefish is taken incidentally in 

fisheries targeting other groundfish, that 

sablefish will not be discarded and will 

count against the primary season fishery 

limits. All permit owners who are 

subject to the owner-on-board 

requirements would be notified in a 

letter from NMFS in 2006 and prior to 

the start of the primary sablefish season 

on April 1, 2007. 

Permit owners who are subject to the 

owner-on-board requirement may 

request an emergency exemption from 

the requirement in cases of death, 

illness, or injury of the permit owner 

that prevents the permit owner from 

participating in the fishery. This 

exemption would ensure that a permit 

owner’s family could receive the 

sablefish income associated with a 

permit if the permit owner himself is 

unable to participate in the groundfish 

fishery through death, illness, or injury. 

In the case of death of a permit owner, 

the estate of the deceased permit owner 

is afforded a grace period from the 

owner-on-board requirement for up to 3 

years after the death of the individual or 

until such time as there is settlement of 

the permit owner’s estate and the permit 

is transferred to the beneficiary, 

whichever is earlier. In the interim 

59300 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

before the estate is settled, if the 

deceased permit owner was subject to 

the owner-on-board requirements, the 

estate of the deceased permit owner can 

send a letter to NMFS with a copy of the 

death certificate, requesting an 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements until either the estate is 

settled or for up to 3 years after the time 

of death, whichever is earlier. An 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements would be conveyed in a 

letter from NMFS to the estate of the 

permit owner and this letter would be 

required to be on the vessel during 

fishing operations. This grace period 

allows the estate a period of time in 

which to transfer the permit to an 

individual and also allows the estate to 

hire a skipper to fish the permit while 

the estate is being settled. Once the 

permit is transferred, the new owner 

would be subject to the owner-on-board 

requirements. If, after the estate is 

settled, the spouse inherits and 

therefore owns the permit and the 

deceased permit owner was 

grandfathered, but the spouse was not 

listed on the permit as grandfathered, 

the spouse would be a second 

generation owner and would be 

required to be on board the vessel while 

the permit is being fished. 

An exemption due to injury or illness 

would be effective only through the end 

of the calendar year in which it was 

granted. In order to receive an 

exemption due to injury or illness, the 

permit owner must submit a letter to 

NMFS requesting an exemption from 

the owner-on-board requirement, 

explaining the need for the exemption, 

and providing documentation from a 

certified medical practitioner detailing 

why the permit owner is unable to 

continue to be onboard a fishing vessel. 

In order to extend an emergency 

medical exemption for a succeeding 

year, the permit owner must submit a 

new request to NMFS and provide 

documentation from a certified medical 

practitioner detailing why the permit 

owner is still unable to be onboard a 

fishing vessel. An emergency exemption 

would be conveyed in a letter from 

NMFS to the permit owner and this 

letter would be required to be on the 

vessel during fishing operations. All 

emergency exemptions will be 

evaluated by NMFS and a decision will 

be made by SFD in writing to the permit 

owner within 60 days of receipt of the 

original exemption request. Emergency 

medical exemptions will be granted by 

NMFS for no more than three 

consecutive or total years. NMFS will 

consider any exemption granted for less 

than 12 months in a year to count as one 

year against the 3–year cap. 

An individual person, or partnerships 

or corporations who continue to own at 

least one sablefish-endorsed permit that 

was owned as of November 1, 2000, 

would be exempt from the owner-onboard requirement. If a person, 

partnership, or corporation that is 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement no longer owns at least one 

sablefish-endorsed permit for a period 

greater than one year, that permit owner 

would no longer be exempt from the 

owner-on-board requirement. However, 

a person, partnership, or corporation 

that is exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement could sell all of its permits, 

buy another sablefish-endorsed permit 

within 1 year of the date the last permit 

was approved for transfer, and retain its 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements. A person that is part of a 

grandfathered partnership or 

corporation could buy additional 

permits as an individual, up to the limit 

of three per individual, but the 

individual would not be exempt from 

the owner-on-board requirements with 

the new permit. However, if the 

individual was part of grandfathered 

partnership or corporation in which 

they were the only remaining individual 

(i.e., all other individuals with 

ownership interest had left the 

partnership or corporation), this 

individual would still be considered as 

a grandfathered partnership or 

corporation in NMFS records. Thus, 

permits owned by this individual under 

the partnership or corporation would be 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirements. This individual could 

also buy additional permits under the 

partnership or corporation, up to the 

limit of 3 per individual, and would 

remain exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirements with the additional 

permits. 

Additionally, a person, partnership, 

or corporation that qualified for the 

owner-on-board exemption, but later 

divested their interest in a permit or 

permits, may retain rights to an owneron-board exemption as long as that 

person, partnership, or corporation 

purchases another permit within one 

year of the date that the final rule for 

these owner-on-board requirements is 

implemented. A partnership or 

corporation could only purchase a 

permit if it has not added or changed 

individuals since November 1, 2000, 

excluding individuals that have left the 

partnership or corporation or that have 

died. NMFS would send out a letter to 

all individuals, partnerships or 

corporations who owned a permit as of 

November 1, 2000, and who no longer 

own a permit to notify them that they 

would qualify as a grandfathered permit 

owner if they choose to buy a permit 

within one year from the date the final 

rule for these owner-on-board 

requirements is effective. 

If the individuals who have an 

ownership interest in the corporation or 

partnership change from those owning 

the partnership or corporation as of 

November 1, 2000, by adding another 

individual(s), that partnership or 

corporation will lose its exemption from 

both the owner-on-board requirements 

and from the provision that allows only 

an individual person to own a sablefishendorsed permit. Thus, a husband and 

wife who own a permit could not add 

a sibling or child to the permit without 

losing their first generation status and 

losing their exemption from the 

provision that only allows an individual 

person to own permits. Similarly, a 

fisherman who wants to take on a new 

partner because an existing partner is 

retiring could not add that new partner 

without losing his first generation status 

and his exemption from the provision 

that only allows an individual to own 

permits. In the case of a grandfathered 

corporation such as ‘‘Smith, Inc. and 

Jones, Inc.,’’ viewed as one corporation 

in NMFS records, Jones, Inc. could not 

add a new member without causing 

‘‘Smith, Inc. and Jones, Inc.’’ to lose it’s 

grandfathered status. However, an 

individual person, or partnerships and 

corporations may continue to hold 

sablefish-endorsed permits (e.g., 

through a lease arrangement) from any 

permit owner (exempt from owner-onboard or not) and remain exempt from 

the owner-on-board requirements, even 

if their membership has changed or they 

did not hold a sablefish-endorsed 

permit as of November 1, 2000. 

As mentioned above, if a couple was 

married as of November 1, 2000, but 

only one spouse was listed as the permit 

owner at that time, the spouse of the 

listed permit owner would not be 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement. NMFS will allow an 

opportunity for those grandfathered 

permit owners who wish to add their 

spouses as co-owners on their permits to 

correct NMFS’ permit ownership 

records as of that control date 

(November 1, 2000). Permit owners may 

then add not-listed spouses as coowners without losing their 

grandfathered statuses. Their new 

grandfathered status will be as a 

partnership, as defined at § 660.302, 

which includes married couples. 

Individual permit owners will lose their 

individual grandfathered status when 

they add their not-listed spouse unless 

they also owned at least one permit as 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59301 

an individual and did not retroactively 

add a spouse as co-owner on that 

permit. The process that NMFS will 

follow for adding a spouse as co-owner 

is described in the ownership interest 

section of this proposed rule. As 

previously mentioned, in cases where 

married couples are listed as co-owners 

of the same permit, both individuals 

will be counted as owning one permit 

each and will have grandfathered status 

as a partnership, as defined at § 660.302. 

An individual within the married 

couple will not, however, be able to 

retain their exemption from owner-onboard requirements if they choose to 

buy another permit as an individual and 

did not own a permit as an individual 

as of the control date in NMFS 

‘‘corrected’’ records (i.e., NMFS records 

after allowing a not-listed spouse to be 

added as co-owner). Members of 

partnerships and corporations will not 

be allowed to add their spouses as of 

November 1, 2000, for purposes of 

exempting those spouses from the 

owner-on-board requirements or the 

provision that only allows individuals 

to own or hold permits. 

Because only the owners of nonexempt permits that are being fished 

during the trip are required to be on 

board, enforcement agents must be able 

to determine which permits are being 

fished and which owner should be on 

board. In order to enforce the owner-onboard provision, NMFS is requesting 

that the states require that the 

groundfish Federal limited entry permit 

number be written on state fish landing 

receipts (i.e., fish tickets). At the April 

2002 Council meeting in Portland, OR, 

the Council and NMFS requested that 

the States of Washington, Oregon, and 

California modify their fish tickets to 

require a space for recording the permit 

number under which a landing is made. 

The states agreed to consider modifying 

their fish tickets, but requested time to 

consider the implications of such a 

modification and could not guarantee 

that action would be taken in time for 

implementation of the second set of the 

permit stacking regulations. Currently, 

only the State of California has added a 

line for permit information on their state 

fish tickets and enters that information 

into the fish ticket database, PacFIN. 

Until a new fish ticket design is 

available, states should require that 

permit numbers be written somewhere 

on the fish ticket, as appropriate. 

Ultimately, it would be beneficial to 

have these Federal limited entry permit 

numbers entered into the PacFIN 

database so that enforcement could 

query a given permit number and their 

associated fish ticket landings. 

However, until such time, having the 

permit number on the paper fish ticket 

would allow hand searching of paper 

fish tickets for investigations. This 

request is also being made to aid in 

enforcement of mid-season transfers, 

discussed later in this proposed rule. 

Adding a permit number to the fish 

ticket is expected to aid enforcement by 

creating a record of which sablefish 

permit was being fished on a given 

fishing trip. Thus, if enforcement 

boarded a vessel at sea or as they were 

coming into port, enforcement could 

record which owners were on board. At 

a later time, they could then verify 

which permit the sablefish landings 

were credited to on the fish ticket and 

double check that the owner of that 

permit was on board if they were not 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

provisions. 

At a minimum, the permit number 

associated with a landing should be 

recorded on the fish ticket and entered 

into the PacFIN database for tracking 

and enforcement reasons. If Washington 

and Oregon do not require that permit 

numbers be written on the fish tickets 

and entered into the PacFIN database, 

NMFS may require all permit owners 

who are subject to the owner-on-board 

requirement to be onboard the vessel 

when that vessel is fishing for 

groundfish until all sablefish tiers 

associated with that vessel during the 

primary season have been fished (e.g., 

even if landings are only being 

attributed to one permit at a time but all 

three permits are subject to the owneron-board requirement, all three permit 

owners would be required to be onboard 

the vessel until that vessel has finished 

the primary season and completed their 

landings against all three permits). 

Conversely, if Washington and Oregon 

require the permit number on the fish 

ticket, only those permit owners who 

are subject to the owner-on-board 

requirement need to be onboard the 

vessel when that vessel is fishing for 

sablefish against a specific sablefish 

permit (e.g., if landings are only being 

attributed to one permit at a time and 

that permit is subject to the owner-onboard requirement, only that permit 

owner would be required to be onboard 

the vessel when that vessel is fishing 

against that permit). 

Exemptions for Vessels Processing 

Sablefish at Sea 

Sablefish caught off the West Coast 

are often processed and frozen for the 

Japanese market, but the manner of 

processing varies along the West Coast. 

Because of the varied ocean bottom 

topography, some sablefish fishing 

grounds are closer to shoreside 

processing plants than others. Largersized sablefish tend to bring higher 

prices, but those large fish are usually 

found in deep water farther offshore. In 

areas where the sablefish grounds are 

within a single day’s round trip from 

port, fishers might bring their sablefish 

to the processor whole. Processors 

remove the landed fish’s head and guts, 

then glaze and freeze the sablefish body 

as quickly as possible to ensure that the 

processed product meets the high 

standards of the Japanese fish market. 

Fishers who operate farther than a day’s 

trip from port might remove the head 

and guts from their sablefish before 

landing them at the processor to 

preserve the quality of the fish’s flesh 

throughout fishing and processing 

operations. Depending on the care that 

a fisher takes in heading and gutting 

his/her sablefish, the processor may 

have to re-clean the fish before freezing 

and glazing it for sale. 

Because of the primary sablefish 

fishery’s history as a short season, 

fishers have traditionally pulled 

sablefish out of the ocean as quickly as 

possible and have left most or all of the 

processing to the processors. With a 

longer primary sablefish season, fishers 

could operate at a more leisurely pace 

and do more of their own processing. If 

a significant portion of the sablefishendorsed fishers were to begin operating 

as their own processors, however, the 

shoreside processing plants would be 

deprived of their traditional sablefishgenerated income. The value of 

sablefish taken with fixed gear and sold 

as processed product by West Coast 

processors was $9–10 million in 1999 

and $10–11 million in 2000. Those 

amounts include sablefish taken in the 

daily trip limit fisheries and are based 

on round weight of sablefish landed in 

1999 and 2000 with a product recovery 

rate range of 56–60 percent of round 

weight. With implementation of a 

prohibition on processing sablefish at 

sea, revenues in sold sablefish product 

for shoreside processors would be 

expected to remain similar to those 

amounts reported before the control 

date of November 1, 2000. 

To ensure that shoreside processing 

plants would continue to have access to 

sablefish landed from the primary 

sablefish fishery, the Council included a 

provision in Amendment 14 that 

prohibits vessels from processing their 

sablefish at sea. ‘‘Processing’’ is defined 

at 50 CFR 660.302 as, ‘‘the preparation 

or packaging of groundfish to render it 

suitable for human consumption, retail 

sale, industrial uses or long-term 

storage, including, but not limited to, 

cooking, canning, smoking, salting, 

drying, filleting, freezing, or rendering 

59302 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

into meal or oil, but does not mean 

heading and gutting unless additional 

preparation is done.’’

Although most West Coast sablefish 

vessels have not traditionally processed 

their sablefish catch, there are a few 

vessels that may have a history of 

processing sablefish. To acknowledge 

investments these vessel owners have 

made in on board freezing and 

processing equipment, Amendment 14 

includes an exception to the at-sea 

processing prohibition for vessels that 

froze at least 2,000 lb (907.2 mt) round 

weight of sablefish landings in any one 

year of 1998, 1999, or 2000. Because the 

control date for this exemption is also 

November 1, 2000, frozen sablefish 

landings from 2000 would have to have 

occurred before that date. The best 

evidence of a vessel having made frozen 

sablefish landings would be state fish 

tickets for landed sablefish 

accompanied by receipts for frozen 

sablefish from fish buyers or exporters. 

The qualifying landings of frozen 

sablefish must have occurred during the 

primary sablefish fishery season, must 

have been taken in waters from 0–200 

nautical miles offshore of the states of 

Washington, Oregon or California, and 

the vessel owner must have had a valid 

sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit 

at the time the qualifying fish were 

landed. 

NMFS expects that fewer than five 

vessels owners will apply for an at-sea 

processing exemption. NMFS SFD will 

send a letter to sablefish-endorsed 

permit owners and/or fixed gear vessel 

owners announcing the qualification 

requirements for the at-sea processing 

exemption. Permit and/or vessel owners 

who believe that they qualify for an atsea processing exemption would have at 

least 60 days to provide NMFS SFD 

with evidence of their frozen sablefish 

landings via an application to be 

provided by NMFS. The permit and/or 

vessel owner must submit an 

application and supporting evidence to 

SFD no later than July 1, 2006. The 

application will be available from 

NMFS in hard copy and online at http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/permits/ 

prmits01.htm. NMFS SFD would then 

have 30 days to review the submitted 

evidence and make determinations on 

whether an applicant vessel qualifies for 

the at-sea processing exemption. 

Persons whose vessels qualify for the atsea processing exemption will be issued 

a letter from NMFS to carry aboard their 

vessels. 

Permit and/or vessel owners who are 

initially denied the at-sea processing 

exemption but who believe that they 

have further evidence to demonstrate 

their qualifications for the exemption 

will have 30 days from the NMFS SFD 

denial decision to appeal the decision to 

the Regional Administrator. No appeals 

will be accepted after September 1, 

2006. An at-sea processing exemption 

would be issued if the permit and/or 

vessel owner demonstrates that his 

vessel has met the exemption 

qualification requirements. Unlike the 

initial limited entry permitting process, 

there are no hardship allowances for 

appealing denials and there will be no 

industry appeal board to review appeals 

of exemption denials. A complete list of 

the vessels exempted from the at-sea 

processing prohibition would be 

published in the Federal Register in the 

fall of 2006. This exemption would 

apply only to the vessel while it is 

registered for use with a sablefishendorsed limited entry permit. The 

exemption would not be associated with 

any of the permits registered for use 

with the vessel and would not be 

transferable to any other vessel, 

including other vessels belonging to that 

same permit and/or vessel owner. 

Further, the exemption would expire if 

the vessel itself is sold or otherwise 

transferred to a new owner. 

Mid-season Transfers 

With the longer season, there are more 

opportunities for permit owners to 

transfer their permits mid-season. 

Permit transfers will still be constrained 

by limited entry program regulations at 

50 CFR 660.335(e) and (f), which allow 

a permit to be transferred between 

vessels only once per calendar year and 

which make all permit transfers 

effective on the first day of a major 

cumulative limit period. Major 

cumulative limit periods begin on 

January 1, March 1, May 1, July 1, 

September 1 and November 1. While 

permits may only be transferred 

between vessels once per calendar year, 

changes in the permit owner or holder 

may occur at any time during the 

calendar year and as often as necessary. 

However, regardless of whether there is 

a change in the vessel registered to the 

permit and the permit owner/holder or 

just a change in the permit owner/ 

holder, any of these actions would 

require a certification from the permit 

owner of the amount of sablefish 

landings to date. If a permit owner 

wishes to transfer a sablefish-endorsed 

permit mid-season, he/she will have to 

certify the cumulative amount of 

sablefish taken to date with that permit 

on a NMFS permit transfer form. In 

addition, the individual either leasing or 

buying the permit (the transferee) must 

acknowledge the cumulative amount of 

sablefish landed to date by signing the 

transfer form and maintaining the 

permit onboard the vessel. Under 

already existing regulations at 

660.303(c), the transferee would also be 

required to retain onboard any fish 

tickets associated with landings made 

against that transferred permit, 

including any landings made previously 

on the permit during the cumulative 

limit period (i.e., the primary sablefish 

season). This mid-season certification is 

required for enforcement purposes as it 

is a means to associate specific amounts 

of landings to date with an aggregate 

amount reported on fish tickets for a 

particular permit owner. 

In addition to the certification of 

sablefish landings to date, a space will 

be provided on the landings 

certification portion of the permit 

transfer form that requests the sale or 

lease price of the permit. Providing this 

sale or lease price to NMFS is optional. 

This information is being requested so 

that NMFS may build a database on 

permit sale prices. This database would 

be useful in analyzing economic trends 

and the value of the sablefish fishery. 

If during a post-season audit of 

landings associated with a permit, the 

landings exceed the amount available to 

be landed on the permit, enforcement 

measures may be taken against any 

party that had ownership interest in the 

permit during the calendar year. The 

vessel owner or operator may also be 

held liable. It is a violation of both state 

and Federal law to give false or 

incomplete information on fish tickets. 

At the April 2002 Council meeting in 

Portland, OR, the Council and NMFS 

requested that the States of Washington, 

Oregon, and California modify their fish 

tickets to require a space for recording 

the permit number under which a 

landing is made. The states agreed to 

consider modifying their fish tickets, 

but requested time to consider the 

implications of such a modification and 

could not guarantee that action would 

be taken in time for implementation of 

the second set of the permit stacking 

regulations. Currently, only the State of 

California has added a line for permit 

information on their state fish tickets. 

Until a new fish ticket design is 

available, states should require that 

permit numbers be written somewhere 

on the fish ticket, as appropriate, and 

that the permit number be added into 

the PacFIN database. If Washington and 

Oregon do not require that permit 

numbers be written on the fish tickets 

and entered into the PacFIN database, 

NMFS may not allow mid-season 

transfers due to this provision being 

unenforceable. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59303 

Defining the Term ‘‘Base Permit’’

Under Amendment 14, each vessel 

participating in the primary sablefish 

fishery must be registered for use with 

at least one permit with a length 

endorsement appropriate to that vessel. 

Any additional permits need not match 

the vessel’s length (50 CFR 660.334(c)). 

At Section 14.2.4, the FMP describes a 

base permit in a permit stacking 

program as the initial permit needed to 

participate in the limited entry fishery, 

and subject to all of the requirements for 

limited entry permit ownership 

qualifications, and permit gear and 

length endorsements. The FMP further 

allows that any requirements and 

additional privileges for permits stacked 

on to base permits may be authorized in 

a Federal rulemaking. Amendment 14 

and its implementing regulations 

describe the requirements and privileges 

associated with stacking sablefishendorsed limited entry permits. 

This proposed rule would clarify that 

the permit registered for use with a 

vessel that is appropriate to that vessel’s 

length is considered the ‘‘base’’ permit. 

If more than one permit registered for 

use with the vessel has an appropriate 

length endorsement for that vessel, 

NMFS SFD will designate a base permit 

by selecting the permit that has been 

registered to the vessel for the longest 

time. If the permit owner objects to 

NMFS selection of the base permit, the 

permit owner may send a letter to 

NMFS SFD requesting the change and 

the reasons why. If the permit requested 

to be changed to the base permit 

matches the length of the vessel, NMFS 

SFD will reissue the permit with the 

new base permit. 

At least one sablefish-endorsed permit 

must match the length of the vessel that 

will be fishing against the permit’s 

landing limits, as required by current 

regulations at 50 CFR 660.334(c). 

Outside of the primary season, the 

vessel would operate under the per 

vessel cumulative limit restrictions 

appropriate to the gear of the base 

permit. Defining this term would not 

change the effect of limited entry permit 

regulations, but would provide further 

clarity in the regulations for both NMFS 

and for the public. 

Hail-in Requirement - Initial Council 

Recommendation not Proposed by 

NMFS 

In adopting Amendment 14, the 

Council also recommended several 

regulatory measures to implement the 

permit stacking program. One of those 

recommendations was to require fishers 

to provide 6 hours advance notice to 

NMFS Enforcement when making a 

sablefish landing in the primary 

sablefish season. Fishers were to 

provide landings times, hail weights, 

and landings locations as part of the 

hail-in procedure. This hail-in 

requirement was based on a similar 

requirement in place for the sablefish/ 

halibut fisheries off Alaska. For the 

Alaska fisheries, the hail-in requirement 

was intended to prevent quota landings 

violations by giving enforcement 

officers an opportunity to meet the 

incoming vessel to inspect its catch. 

NMFS has subsequently determined 

that this hail-in requirement would be 

unnecessarily burdensome for fishers 

and less useful in enforcing West Coast 

fisheries regulations than it may be in 

Alaska waters. Over 1,000 vessels 

participate in the sablefish/halibut IFQ 

fisheries off Alaska, each landing a 

vessel-specific amount of fish based on 

that vessel’s particular quota share 

amount with many landings occurring 

in remote locations. In the West Coast 

primary sablefish fishery, there are only 

164 sablefish-endorsed permits, which 

means that no more than 164 vessels 

could participate in the fishery. 

Additionally, each permit is assigned to 

one of 3 tiers, which means that there 

is a limited number of possible landings 

amounts available to the vessels 

participating in the primary fishery. 

This relatively simple cumulative limit 

system and the small number of vessels 

involved make a hail-in requirement 

unnecessary. NMFS does not now have 

hail-in requirements for any other West 

Coast groundfish species or fishery and 

does not believe that primary sablefish 

season cumulative limit management 

differs significantly enough from the 

rest of the groundfish fishery’s 

cumulative limit management to 

warrant this additional enforcement and 

reporting burden. 

NMFS consulted with the Council on 

this issue at the Council’s October 29 

through November 2, 2001, meeting in 

Millbrae, CA. The Council, its 

Enforcement Consultants and its 

Groundfish Advisory Subpanel 

concurred with the NMFS decision to 

not propose the hail-in requirement for 

implementation in the West Coast 

sablefish fishery. 

Owner-in-Board Requirement - Future 

Implementation 

The Council is considering another 

qualifier to the owner-on-board 

exemptions for grandfathered 

individuals in partnerships or 

corporations based on the Groundfish 

Advisory Panel’s recommendation. As 

previously mentioned, at the Council’s 

April 2002 meeting, NMFS returned to 

the Council to seek clarification on the 

Council’s intent with the owner-onboard requirement, including duration 

of owner-on-board exemptions, time 

allotted to settle the estate of deceased 

owners, loss of exemption, and joint 

ownership of permits. While clarifying 

these issues, the Council stated that it 

also wished to consider allowing a 

person who had 30 percent or greater 

ownership interest in a partnership or 

corporation that was a first generation 

owner to be exempt from the owner-onboard provision if he/she wishes to own 

a permit under his/her own name, even 

if he/she did not own a permit under 

his/her own name as of November 1, 

2000. The EA for the permit stacking 

program, dated October 2000, did not 

analyze the effects of allowing 

exemptions from the owner-on-board 

requirement for those individuals who 

had only 30 percent or greater 

ownership interest in a permit. Thus, 

further analysis and Council discussion 

is required before NMFS could consider 

this provision for implementation. 

NMFS is also considering 

implementing a phone-in declaration 

system to aid in enforcement of the 

owner-on-board requirement, if having 

the permit numbers on the fish tickets 

is not sufficient. The declaration system 

would require all sablefish endorsed 

permit owners, including those exempt 

from the owner-on-board requirement, 

to call into a phone-in system and 

declare which permit(s) they will be 

fishing. Fishers would not need to call 

back into the system until they change 

the sablefish permit(s) they are currently 

fishing. For any permits reported on the 

phone-in declaration system, if not 

exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement, the permit owner(s) would 

be expected to be onboard the vessel 

while fishing for sablefish. In addition 

to having permit numbers on state fish 

tickets, this would aid enforcement to 

determine, in a more timely manner, if 

the appropriate person was onboard. 

Cap on Number of Permits Held - 

Future Implementation 

Under the Council’s initial regulatory 

recommendations for implementing 

Amendment 14, no more than three 

sablefish-endorsed permits may be 

owned by an individual person, 

partnership or corporation, unless that 

individual person, partnership or 

corporation held more than 3 permits as 

of November 1, 2000. In June 2001, the 

Council clarified this recommendation, 

saying that it had intended to restrict 

each individual person, partnership or 

corporation to holding (owning or 

leasing) no more than 3 permits. The 

Council further clarified that the 

grandfathered exception to the three 

59304 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

permits restriction allowed only those 

individuals, partnerships or 

corporations that had owned more than 

3 permits as of November 1, 2000, to 

continue to own those particular 

permits without acquiring (through 

owning or leasing) additional permits. 

This restriction was implemented 

through a final rule at 66 FR 41152, 

August 7, 2001. 

In 2002, the Council and NMFS 

received a request from a limited entry 

permit owner to revisit the limit on the 

number of permits an entity may own or 

hold. This permit owner wished to hold 

(lease) additional permits beyond those 

he already owned. During the Council’s 

April 2002 meeting, the Council’s 

Groundfish Advisory Subpanel (GAP) 

discussed the issue and voted to retain 

the current regulations, which limits the 

number of permits that can be owned or 

held to no more than three permits, 

unless a person, partnership or 

corporation owned more than three 

permits as of November 1, 2000. An 

individual person, or partnerships or 

corporations that owned more than 

three permits as of November 1, 2000, 

are limited to the number of permits 

owned as of that date. Of the GAP 

members present, eight favored the 

current regulations (status quo), four 

favored recommending a regulatory 

change and four abstained. After the 

GAP meeting, this issue was brought 

before the Council. The Council 

requested that the GAP look into 

alternatives that would revise the 

accumulation cap on the total permits 

an individual person, partnership or 

corporation could hold through leasing 

and report back to the Council at a later 

meeting. Due to the busy agenda of the 

GAP and the Council, this issue has not 

yet been revisited and would require 

further analysis before it could be 

implemented. 

Permit Stacking Program Fee - Future 

Implementation 

NMFS is required under Section 

304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

to collect fees from participants in an 

IFQ program to recover the actual costs 

directly related to the management and 

enforcement of the program. These fees 

shall not exceed 3 percent of the exvessel value of sablefish harvested 

under this IFQ program, to be collected 

as landings fees. 

NMFS implemented a fee system for 

its sablefish/halibut IFQ fishery in 

Alaska on March 20, 2000 (65 FR 14919) 

after a lengthy consultation with the 

fishing industry and in a rulemaking 

specific just to fee implementation. 

NMFS would like an opportunity to 

assess the Alaska fee program and the 

analyses associated with its 

implementation before proposing a fee 

system for West Coast sablefishendorsed limited entry permit holders. 

NMFS has not yet analyzed the cost 

of managing and enforcing the sablefish 

endorsement program and will be better 

able to predict this cost once all of the 

other provisions of Amendment 14 are 

implemented. NMFS will issue a 

separate proposed rule to implement a 

fee system after assessing the 

applicability of the Alaska fee system to 

West Coast fisheries, estimating the 

NMFS cost of managing and enforcing 

the sablefish endorsement program, and 

consulting on the fee system with the 

Council and West Coast industry. 

Classification 

NMFS has determined that the 

proposed rule is consistent with the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP and 

preliminarily determined that the rule is 

consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act and other applicable laws. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

As required by section 603 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), NMFS 

prepared a supplement to the IRFA 

originally prepared by the Council as 

part of the EA. The IRFA describes the 

economic impact this proposed rule, if 

adopted, would have on small entities. 

A description of the action, why it is 

being considered, and the legal basis for 

this action are contained at the 

beginning of this section in the 

preamble and in the SUMMARY section of 

the preamble. A copy of this analysis is 

available from the NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis 

follows. 

This proposed rule would affect only 

the owners of the 164 limited entry 

permits with sablefish endorsements. 

These permit holders use longline or pot 

gear to participate in the limited entry, 

primary sablefish fishery. All of the 

permit owners and vessels in the Pacific 

Coast, limited entry, fixed gear fleet are 

considered small entities under Small 

Business Administration (SBA) 

standards. 

NMFS and the SBA have already 

considered whether Amendment 14 

would significantly affect the small 

entities involved in the limited entry, 

fixed gear sablefish fishery. The 

agencies concluded that while 

Amendment 14 would have significant 

effects on the limited entry, fixed gear 

sablefish fleet, those effects would be 

positive improvements in the safety of 

the fishing season, and in business 

planning flexibility. These conclusions 

were described in the final rule to 

implement Amendment 14 for the 2001 

fishing season (August 7, 2001, 66 FR 

41152) and in the Final Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis prepared for that 

rule. 

The regulatory changes proposed with 

this rule follow out of the regulations 

implementing Amendment 14 (August 

7, 2001, final rule) for 2007 and beyond. 

The regulatory changes in the August 7, 

2001, final rule brought greater 

operational safety and more business 

planning flexibility to the participants 

in both the primary sablefish fishery 

and the daily trip limit fishery for 

sablefish. It allowed participants with 

greater harvest capacity to better match 

their sablefish cumulative limits with 

individual vessel capacity, it reduced 

overall primary fishery capacity, and it 

allowed the fishermen to use the longer 

season to fish more selectively and to 

increase their incomes by improving the 

quality of their ex-vessel product. 

The regulatory changes with this 

proposed rule will require permit 

owners and permit holders to document 

their ownership interests in sablefishendorsed limited entry permits and is 

expected to have no effect on permit 

owners and permit holders beyond the 

time required to complete that 

documentation. The owner-on-board 

requirement will not affect the fishing 

behavior of persons who owned 

sablefish-endorsed permits before 

November 1, 2000, and will only affect 

those who consider purchasing permits 

after that time in that persons who do 

not wish to participate in fishing 

activities aboard a vessel may not wish 

to purchase sablefish-endorsed permits. 

Prohibiting vessels from processing 

sablefish at sea, if they do not meet 

minimum frozen sablefish historic 

landing requirements, is expected to 

simply maintain current sablefish 

landing and processing practices for 

both fishers and processors, therefore 

ensuring shore-based processors will 

continue to receive business from 

sablefish harvesters. Certification of 

current sablefish landings on a permit 

when conducting a mid-season permit 

transfer to another person is not 

expected to have any effect on permit 

owners or holders beyond the time 

required to complete the 

documentation. Defining the term ‘‘base 

permit’’ consistent with the FMP is not 

expected to have any effect on any 

participant in the groundfish fishery 

because it is only an administrative 

change. This rule is also not expected to 

have any effect on the 66 limited entry, 

fixed gear permit holders without 

sablefish endorsements because this 

program only applies to sablefish 

fishery participants with sablefish 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59305 

endorsements (i.e., primary sablefish 

fishery participants). No Federal rules 

duplicate or conflict with these permit 

stacking regulations. 

The criteria used to evaluate whether 

this proposed rule would impose 

‘‘significant economic impacts’’ are 

disproportionality and profitability. 

Disproportionality means that the 

regulations place a substantial number 

of small entities at a significant 

competitive disadvantage to large 

entities. Profitability means that the 

regulation significantly reduces profit 

for a substantial number of small 

entities. These criteria relate to the basic 

purpose of the RFA, i.e., to consider the 

effect of regulations on small businesses 

and other small entities. This proposed 

rule will not impose disproportionate 

affects between small and large business 

entities because all limited entry fixed 

gear vessels, including the sablefish 

endorsed vessels affected by this rule, 

are small business entities. As described 

in the above paragraph, Amendment 14 

to the FMP and implementing 

regulations, including the August 7, 

2001, final rule, increased business 

planning flexibility and profitability 

overall for the affected small businesses. 

This rule further implements provisions 

of Amendment 14, making the 

regulations more enforceable and 

maintaining the small business 

character of the fleet, and, therefore, is 

not expected to change the overall 

increased profitability of the fleet gained 

through the August 7, 2001, final rule. 

However, the owner-on-board 

requirement may decrease the overall 

profitability gained from 

implementation of the initial permit 

stacking provisions from Amendment 

14. An economic analysis of the owneron-board provision from the 

supplemental IRFA (see ADDRESSES) 

shows that the owner-on-board 

requirement may cost second generation 

permit owners approximately $40,400 

per person per year or approximately 

$15 million in lost income for all second 

generation permit owners collectively 

discounted over a 20 year period. In 

addition, the permit value may decrease 

over time due to the reduced flexibility 

associated with use of the permit. 

Overall, when considering all of the 

provisions associated with Amendment 

14, those implemented with the August 

7, 2001, final rule and those that would 

be implemented through this 

rulemaking, profitability is still 

expected to increase over the previous 

sablefish 3–tier management system. 

The actions considered in this 

document are not expected to have 

significant impacts on small entities. 

Public comment is invited on 

adjustments that would reduce the 

impacts on small entities while 

achieving the regulatory objectives and 

on whether the analysis adequately 

takes into account impacts on small 

entities. 

In the EA/RIR prepared by the 

Council for this action (see ADDRESSES), 

two main alternatives were considered, 

a no action alternative and a permit 

stacking regime alternative. The topics 

considered under each of these 

alternatives were permit stacking, 

accumulation, season length, at-sea 

processing, permit ownership/owneron-board, and foreign control. Under the 

no action alternative, the primary 

limited entry, fixed gear sablefish 

fishery would continue under the 3–tier 

management program, with one permit 

associated with each participating 

vessel. In addition, permit stacking 

would not be allowed, the number of 

permits owned would not be limited, 

the season length would be 9–10 days 

and would likely shorten over time, 

vessels without sablefish endorsements 

would not be allowed to fish during the 

primary season, at-sea processing would 

be permitted, permit owners would not 

be required to be onboard their vessel 

during fishing operations, and any legal 

entity allowed to own a U.S. fishing 

vessel may own a permit. 

Under the permit stacking regime 

alternative, 12 provisions, many of 

which include suboptions, were 

considered for the topics (permit 

stacking, accumulation, season length, 

etc.). Thus, the permit stacking regime 

alternative consists of many subalternatives, depending on the 

combination of provisions and 

suboptions adopted by the Council. 

Provisions 1 (allow a basic permit 

stacking program), 2 (gear usage), 4 

(unstacking permits), and 8 (stacking 

non-sablefish limits and sablefish daily 

trip limits) address permit stacking. 

Provision 3 (accumulation limits) 

addresses accumulation. Provisions 5 

(season duration), 9 (opportunities for 

unendorsed vessels), 11 (advanced 

notice of landings), and 12 (stacking 

deadline) address season length. 

Provision 6 (processing prohibition and 

freezer vessel length) addresses at-sea 

processing. Provision 7 (individual 

ownership only and owner-on-board 

requirement) addresses permit 

ownership/owner-on-board. Provision 

10 (U.S. citizenship requirement) 

addresses foreign control. As mentioned 

previously, the final rule for 

Amendment 14 implemented most of 

these provisions. This proposed rule 

would implement parts of the following 

provisions: 2, 6, and 7. The preferred 

alternative recommended by the 

Council and implemented by NMFS was 

the permit stacking regime alternative 

with only certain options within each 

provisions being adopted as preferred. 

The preferred alternative was selected 

because it best met the objectives of the 

action, which for the provisions 

implemented through this action (i.e., 

provisions 2, 6, and 7) included 

directing benefits towards fishing 

communities and preventing excessive 

concentration of harvest privileges. The 

EA/RIR for this action reviewed 

alternatives for their economic impacts. 

Of the provisions that would be 

implemented by this action, only 

provisions 6 and 7 may have economic 

effects. Provision 6 may prevent 

economic efficiencies from developing 

by restricting at-sea processing to 

vessels that processed at-sea as of 

November 1, 2000, and may limit a rise 

in permit prices from what they would 

have been if at-sea processing were 

allowed. Provision 7 may reduce 

flexibility which may in turn reduce 

efficiency and limit the rise in permit 

prices compared to if owner-on-board 

were not required and permits were not 

limited to ownership by individuals. 

This proposed rule contains a 

collection-of-information requirement 

subject to the PRA. This collection-ofinformation requirement has been 

submitted to OMB for approval. 

Proposed regulations further 

implementing provisions of 

Amendment 14 will require information 

collections to determine ownership 

interests of corporations/partnerships 

that own or hold sablefish permits, to 

determine unlisted spouses wishing to 

be listed as co-owner of sablefish 

permits as of a prior date, to certify midseason transfers and to determine 

eligibility of sablefish freezer longliner 

vessels to obtain an exemption from the 

ban on at-sea processing. A summary of 

the information requirements and 

burden estimates follows. 

To determine ownership interests, 

SFD would send an ownership interest 

form to the limited entry sablefishendorsed permits that are owned or held 

by a corporation or partnership. The 

business entity would be requested to 

provide a list of all individuals who 

have an ownership interest in the 

corporation or partnership. The 

ownership interest form would 

document all individuals with an 

ownership interest in the partnership or 

corporation that owned a permit as of 

the control date, November 1, 2000, and 

would request a list of all individuals 

with an ownership interest in the 

partnership or corporation that owned 

or held a permit as of the current date. 

An authorized individual representing 

59306 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

the corporation/partnership would 

certify (by signing/dating the form) that 

no additional individual with 

ownership interest had been added 

since the control date. The applicant 

would be required to provide a 

corporate resolution or other 

authorizing document that authorizes 

the person signing the form to do so on 

behalf of the business entity. NMFS may 

require a copy of the United States Coast 

Guard Abstract of Title as proof of 

ownership for permit holders and/or 

owners and may require articles of 

incorporation or other documentation 

deemed necessary for proof of corporate 

or partnership ownership. SFD would 

compare the ownership interest 

reported on the form from the two dates 

to determine if an additional 

individual(s) with ownership interest 

had been added to the business entity. 

If so, the business entity would lose its 

exempted status and be required to 

divest the permit to an individual owner 

or other eligible entity. Also, SFD staff 

would establish a permit count for every 

individual who owns or holds a 

sablefish endorsed permit as an 

individual or as part of a business entity 

to ensure limits on the number of 

permits that can be owned or held are 

not exceeded. 

After this initial mailing, future forms 

would be included in the annual permit 

renewal packages for those business 

entities that continue to own or hold a 

sablefish endorsed permit or would be 

required whenever a change in permit 

owner, permit holder, or vessel 

registration is requested. The estimated 

burden for this collection is 70 

respondents at 0.5 hours each, or 35 

hours total. The U.S. Census Bureau’s 

Nonemployer Statistics, 2001, is the 

most recent data available for 

determining burden costs for fishermen. 

Using an estimate from the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s Nonemployer Statistics, 2001, 

as a proxy for annual income from 

sablefish fishing of $35,416 and 

breaking that into an hourly wage of 

$17.02, the burden for this collection 

would cost approximately $8.51 per 

respondent for the respondent’s time, or 

$595.70 total. 

For the provision to add a not-listed 

spouse as permit co-owner, SFD would 

mail a cover letter and form to those 

permit owners who list one person as 

owner and where the owner has 

continued to own a sablefish endorsed 

permit since November 1, 2000. SFD 

would afford the opportunity to add a 

spouse as a co-owner on a voluntary, 

one-time only basis. Members of 

partnerships and corporations who have 

an interest in a permit owned since 

November 1, 2000, would not be 

allowed to add their spouses as a coowner of the permit. The current permit 

owner would be required to provide a 

copy of the marriage certificate. SFD 

would allow the addition of a spouse 

who was married according to state law 

to an exempted permit owner as of 

November 1, 2000. After review and 

approval of the application, SFD would 

reissue the permit in the names of both 

spouses. SFD would use this 

information to update the list of permit 

owners and the permit counts 

associated with these individuals. 

Additionally, SFD would revise the list 

of permit owners entitled to grandfather 

privileges (i.e.; exempt from owner on 

board requirements). Spouses listed as 

co-owner would be subject to the limits 

on the number of permits that can be 

owned or held. The estimated burden 

for this collection is 12 respondents at 

0.33 hours each, or 4 hours total. Using 

an estimate from the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s Nonemployer Statistics, 2001, 

as a proxy for annual income from 

sablefish fishing of $35,416 and 

breaking that into an hourly wage of 

$17.02, the burden for this collection 

would cost approximately $5.62 per 

respondent for the respondent’s time, or 

$68.08 total. 

For mid-season transfers of sablefishendorsed permits, a new section would 

be added to the existing permit transfer 

form, also known as ‘‘Change of Vessel 

Registration, Permit Owner/Holder 

Application’’ (i.e.; transfer form). All 

permit owners are currently required to 

use this form to request these changes 

to their permit. The new section to the 

existing transfer form would require the 

permit owner to provide the cumulative 

amount of pounds of sablefish harvested 

on the permit during the current 

primary sablefish season. The permit 

owner would certify that the cumulative 

landing amount is correct by signing 

and dating the form. Similarly, the 

individual either buying the permit or 

seeking to hold the permit (if different 

from owner) will be required to sign an 

acknowledgment of the cumulative 

amount of sablefish landed as given in 

this section. Further, SFD would request 

on a voluntary basis the permit sale 

price or lease price and term of the 

lease. The estimated burden for this 

collection is 25 respondents at 0.5 hours 

each, or 12.5 hours total. Using an 

estimate from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 

Nonemployer Statistics, 2001, as a 

proxy for annual income from sablefish 

fishing of $35,416 and breaking that into 

an hourly wage of $17.02, the burden for 

this collection would cost 

approximately $8.51 per respondent for 

the respondent’s time, or $212.75 total. 

For the sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption, SFD would prepare a onetime application for the purpose of 

determining which vessels are qualified 

for an exemption from the ban on at-sea 

processing. SFD would mail 

applications to all sablefish endorsed 

permit owners. Applicants would be 

required to provide evidence to support 

the number of pounds of sablefish 

processed at-sea as indicated on the 

form. Best evidence supporting the 

landings of processed sablefish would 

be state fish tickets for sablefish 

accompanied by sales receipts for frozen 

sablefish. A list of vessels that qualified 

for the exemption from the ban on 

processing and freezing sablefish at sea 

would be published in the Federal 

Register. The exemption would not be 

transferrable and would expire upon 

transfer of the vessel to a new owner. 

The estimated burden for this collection 

is 2 respondents at 30 minutes each, or 

1 hour total. Using an estimate from the 

U.S. Census Bureau’s Nonemployer 

Statistics, 2001, as a proxy for annual 

income from sablefish fishing of $35,416 

and breaking that into an hourly wage 

of $17.02, the burden for this collection 

would cost approximately $8.51 per 

respondent for the respondent’s time, or 

$17.02 total. 

Operations and maintenance costs 

(copying, fax, mailing, notary) to the 

respondents are estimated to be less 

than $250 for all respondents on an 

annual basis. No fees will be charged to 

the respondents for any of the above 

information collections. 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 David Rostker, OMB, by e-mail at 

DavidlRostker@omb.gov,or fax to 202–

395–7285. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, and no person shall be 

subject to penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

Public comment is sought regarding: 

Whether this proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including the practical utility of 

the information collection; the accuracy 

of the burden estimate; ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59307 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, 

Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, 

Indians, Northern Mariana Islands, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: October 4, 2005. 

William T. Hogarth, 

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. In § 660.302, new definitions for 

‘‘Base permit,’’ ‘‘Change in partnership 

or corporation,’’ ‘‘Corporation,’’

‘‘Partnership,’’ ‘‘Spouse,’’ and 

‘‘Stacking’’ are added and the definition 

of ‘‘Permit holder’’ is revised in 

alphabetical order to read as follows: 

§ 660.302 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Base permit, with respect to a limited 

entry permit stacking program, means a 

limited entry permit described at 

§ 660.333(a) registered for use with a 

vessel that meets the permit length 

endorsement requirements appropriate 

to that vessel, as described at 

§ 660.334(c). 

* * * * * 

Change in partnership or corporation, 

means the addition of a new 

shareholder or partner to the corporate 

or partnership membership. This 

definition of a ‘‘change’’ will apply to 

any person added to the corporate or 

partnership membership since 

November 1, 2000, including any family 

member of an existing shareholder or 

partner. A change in membership is not 

considered to have occurred if a 

member dies or becomes legally 

incapacitated and a trustee is appointed 

to act on his behalf, nor if the ownership 

of shares among existing members 

changes, nor if a member leaves the 

corporation or partnership and is not 

replaced. Changes in the ownership of 

publicly held stock will not be deemed 

changes in ownership of the 

corporation. 

* * * * * 

Corporation, is a legal, business 

entity, including incorporated (INC) and 

limited liability corporations (LLC). 

* * * * * 

Partnership, is two or more 

individuals, partnerships, or 

corporations, or combinations thereof, 

who have ownership interest in a 

permit, including married couples and 

legally recognized trusts and 

partnerships, such as limited 

partnerships (LP), general partnerships 

(GP), and limited liability partnerships 

(LLP). 

* * * * * 

Permit holder means a vessel owner 

as identified on the United States Coast 

Guard form 1270 or state motor vehicle 

licensing document. 

* * * * * 

Spouse, means a person who is legally 

married to another person as recognized 

by state law (i.e., one’s wife or 

husband). 

* * * * * 

Stacking, is the practice of registering 

more than one limited entry permit for 

use with a single vessel (See 

§ 660.335(c)). 

* * * * * 

3. In § 660.303, paragraph (c) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.303 Reporting and Recordkeeping. 

* * * * * 

(c) Any person landing groundfish 

must retain on board the vessel from 

which groundfish is landed, and 

provide to an authorized officer upon 

request, copies of any and all reports of 

groundfish landings containing all data, 

and in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

cumulative limit period during which a 

landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. For participants in the 

primary sablefish season (detailed at 

§ 660.372(b)), the cumulative limit 

period to which this requirement 

applies is April 1 through October 31. 

* * * * * 

4. In § 660.306, paragraph (b)(3) is 

added and paragraphs (e) and (g)(2) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 660.306 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Fail to retain on board a vessel 

from which sablefish caught in the 

primary sablefish season is landed, and 

provide to an authorized officer upon 

request, copies of any and all reports of 

sablefish landings against the sablefish 

endorsed permit’s tier limit, or receipts 

containing all data, and made in the 

exact manner required by the applicable 

state law throughout the primary 

sablefish season during which such 

landings occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

* * * * * 

(e) Fixed gear sablefish fisheries. (1) 

Take, retain, possess or land sablefish 

under the cumulative limits provided 

for the primary limited entry, fixed gear 

sablefish season, described in § 660.372, 

from a vessel that is not registered to a 

limited entry permit with a sablefish 

endorsement. 

(2) Take, retain, possess or land 

sablefish in the primary sablefish season 

described at § 660.372(b) unless the 

owner of the limited entry permit 

registered for use with that vessel and 

authorizing the vessel to participate in 

the primary sablefish season is on board 

that vessel. Exceptions to this 

prohibition are provided at 

§ 660.372(b)(4)(i) and (ii). 

(3) Process sablefish taken in the 

limited entry primary sablefish fishery 

defined at § 660.372 at sea, from a vessel 

that does not have a sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption, defined at 

§ 660.334(e). 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(2) Make a false statement on an 

application for issuance, renewal, 

transfer, vessel registration, replacement 

of a limited entry permit, or a 

declaration of ownership interest in a 

limited entry permit. 

* * * * * 

5. In § 660.334, paragraph (e) is 

redesignated as paragraph (f), and is 

revised; paragraphs (c)(3), d)(4)(ii) and 

(iii) are revised, and paragraphs 

(d)(4)(iv) through (vi) and new 

paragraph (e) are added to read as 

follows: 

§ 660.334 Limited entry permits 

endorsements. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) Size endorsement requirements for 

sablefish-endorsed permits. 

Notwithstanding paragraphs (c)(1) and 

(2) of this section, when multiple 

permits are ‘‘stacked’’ on a vessel, as 

described in § 660.335(c), at least one of 

the permits must meet the size 

requirements of those sections. The 

permit that meets the size requirements 

of those sections is considered the 

vessel’s ‘‘base’’ permit, as defined in 

§ 660.302. If more than one permit 

registered for use with the vessel has an 

appropriate length endorsement for that 

vessel, NMFS SFD will designate a base 

permit by selecting the permit that has 

been registered to the vessel for the 

longest time. If the permit owner objects 

to NMFS’s selection of the base permit, 

the permit owner may send a letter to 

NMFS SFD requesting the change and 

the reasons for the request. If the permit 

requested to be changed to the base 

59308 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

permit is appropriate for the length of 

the vessel as provided for in paragraph 

(c)(2)(i) of this section, NMFS SFD will 

reissue the permit with the new base 

permit. Any additional permits that are 

stacked for use with a vessel 

participating in the limited entry 

primary fixed gear sablefish fishery may 

be registered for use with a vessel even 

if the vessel is more than 5 feet (1.5 

meters) longer or shorter than the size 

endorsed on the permit. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(ii) No individual person, partnership, 

or corporation in combination may have 

ownership interest in or hold more than 

3 permits with sablefish endorsements 

either simultaneously or cumulatively 

over the primary season, except for an 

individual person, or partnerships or 

corporations that had ownership 

interest in more than 3 permits with 

sablefish endorsements as of November 

1, 2000. The exemption from the 

maximum ownership level of 3 permits 

only applies to ownership of the 

particular permits that were owned on 

November 1, 2000. An individual 

person, or partnerships or corporations 

that had ownership interest in 3 or more 

permits with sablefish endorsements as 

of November 1, 2000, may not acquire 

additional permits beyond those 

particular permits owned on November 

1, 2000. If, at some future time, an 

individual person, partnership, or 

corporation that owned more than 3 

permits as of November 1, 2000, sells or 

otherwise permanently transfers (not 

holding through a lease arrangement) 

some of its originally owned permits, 

such that they then own fewer than 3 

permits, they may then acquire 

additional permits, but may not have 

ownership interest in or hold more than 

3 permits. 

(iii) A partnership or corporation will 

lose the exemptions provided in 

paragraphs ((d)(4) (i) and (ii) of this 

section on the effective date of any 

change in the corporation or partnership 

from that which existed on November 1, 

2000. A ‘‘change’’ in the partnership or 

corporation is defined at § 660.302. A 

change in the partnership or corporation 

must be reported to SFD within 15 days 

of the addition of a new shareholder or 

partner. 

(iv) During 2006 when a permit’s 

ownership interest is requested for the 

first time, NMFS anticipates sending a 

form to legally recognized corporations 

and partnerships (i.e., permit owners or 

holders that do not include only 

individual’s names) that currently own 

or hold sablefish-endorsed permits that 

requests a listing of the names of all 

shareholders or partners as of November 

1, 2000, and a listing of that same 

information as of the current date in 

2006. Applicants will be provided at 

least 60 days to submit completed 

applications. If a corporation or 

partnership fails to return the completed 

form by the deadline date of July 1, 

2006, NMFS will send a second written 

notice to delinquent entities requesting 

the completed form by a revised 

deadline date of August 1, 2006. If the 

permit owning or holding entity fails to 

return the completed form by that 

second date, August 1, 2006, NMFS will 

void their existing permit(s) and reissue 

the permit(s) with a vessel registration 

given as ‘‘unidentified’’ until such time 

that the completed form is provided to 

NMFS. For the 2007 fishing year and 

beyond, any partnership or corporation 

with any ownership interest in or that 

holds a limited entry permit with a 

sablefish endorsement shall document 

the extent of that ownership interest or 

the individuals that hold the permit 

with the SFD via the Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form sent to the 

permit owner through the annual permit 

renewal process defined at § 660.335(a) 

and whenever a change in permit 

owner, permit holder, and/or vessel 

registration occurs as defined at 

§ 660.335(d) and (e). SFD will not renew 

a sablefish-endorsed limited entry 

permit through the annual renewal 

process described at § 660.335(a) or 

approve a change in permit owner, 

permit holder, and/or vessel registration 

unless the Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form has been completed. 

Further, if SFD discovers through 

review of the Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that an 

individual person, partnership, or 

corporation owns or holds more than 3 

permits and is not authorized to do so 

under paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this 

section, the individual person, 

partnership or corporation will be 

notified and the permits owned or held 

by that individual person, partnership, 

or corporation will be void and reissued 

with the vessel status as ‘‘unidentified’’

until the permit owner owns and/or 

holds a quantity of permits appropriate 

to the restrictions and requirements 

described in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) of this 

section. If SFD discovers through review 

of the Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form that a partnership or 

corporation has had a change in 

membership since November 1, 2000, as 

described in paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of this 

section, the partnership or corporation 

will be notified, SFD will void any 

existing permits, and reissue any 

permits owned and/or held by that 

partnership or corporation in 

‘‘unidentified’’ status with respect to 

vessel registration until the partnership 

or corporation is able to transfer those 

permits to persons authorized under 

this section to own sablefish-endorsed 

limited entry permits. 

(v) For permit owners with one 

individual listed and who were married 

as of November 1, 2000, and who wish 

to add their spouse as co-owner on their 

permit(s), NMFS will accept corrections 

to NMFS’ permit ownership records. 

Permit owners may add a not-listed 

spouse as a co-owner without losing 

their exemption from the owner-onboard requirements (i.e., grandfathered 

status). Their new grandfathered status 

will be as a partnership, as defined at 

§ 660.302 which includes married 

couples. Individual permit owners will 

lose their individual grandfathered 

status when they add their not-listed 

spouse unless they also owned at least 

one permit as an individual and did not 

retroactively add a spouse as co-owner 

on that permit. In cases where married 

couples are listed as co-owners of the 

same permit, both individuals will be 

counted as owning one permit each and 

will have grandfathered status as a 

partnership. An individual within the 

married couple will not, however, be 

able to retain their exemption from 

owner-on-board requirements if they 

choose to buy another permit as an 

individual and did not own a permit as 

an individual as of the control date in 

NMFS ‘‘corrected’’ records (i.e., NMFS 

records after allowing a not-listed 

spouse to be added as co-owner). 

Members of partnerships and 

corporations will not be allowed to add 

their spouses to the corporate 

ownership listing as of November 1, 

2000, for purposes of exempting them 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

NMFS will send a form to permit 

owners with one individual listed on 

the permit as of November 1, 2000, to 

allow married individuals who wish to 

declare their spouses as having permit 

ownership interest as of November 1, 

2000. Applicants will be required to 

submit a copy of their marriage 

certificate as evidence of marriage. 

Applicants will be provided at least a 60 

day period to submit an application to 

add a spouse as co-owner. Failure to 

return the completed form to NMFS 

SFD by July 1, 2006, will result in the 

individual listed on the permit in SFD 

records as of November 1, 2000, 

remaining on the permit. SFD will not 

accept any declarations to add a spouse 

as co-owner for couples married as of 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59309 

November 1, 2000, postmarked after the 

July 1, 2006, deadline. 

(vi) For an individual person, 

partnership, or corporation that 

qualified for the owner-on-board 

exemption, but later divested their 

interest in a permit or permits, they may 

retain rights to an owner-on-board 

exemption as long as that individual 

person, partnership, or corporation 

obtains another permit within one year 

from the date the final rule for these 

owner-on-board requirements is 

effective. An individual person, 

partnership or corporation could only 

obtain a permit if it has not added or 

changed individuals since November 1, 

2000, excluding individuals that have 

left the partnership or corporation or 

that have died. NMFS would send out 

a letter to all individuals, partnerships 

or corporations who owned a permit as 

of November 1, 2000, and who no longer 

own a permit to notify them that they 

would qualify as a grandfathered permit 

owner if they choose to buy a permit 

within one year from the date the final 

rule is effective. 

(e) Sablefish at-sea processing 

prohibition and exemption—

(1) General. Vessels are prohibited 

from processing sablefish at sea that 

were caught in the primary sablefish 

fishery without sablefish at-sea 

processing exemptions at 

§ 660.306(e)(3). A permit and/or vessel 

owner may get an exemption to this 

prohibition if his/her vessel meets the 

exemption qualifying criteria provided 

in paragraph (e)(2) of this section. The 

sablefish at-sea processing exemption is 

issued to a particular vessel and the 

permit and/or vessel owner who 

requested the exemption. The 

exemption is not part of the limited 

entry permit. The exemption is not 

transferable to any other vessel, vessel 

owner, or permit owner for any reason. 

The sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption will expire upon transfer of 

the vessel to a new owner or if the 

vessel is totally lost, as defined at 

§ 660.302. 

(2) Qualifying criteria. A sablefish atsea processing exemption will be issued 

to any vessel registered for use with a 

sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit 

that meets the sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption qualifying criteria 

and for which the owner submits a 

timely application. The qualifying 

criteria for a sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption are: at least 2,000 lb (907.2 

mt), round weight, of frozen sablefish 

landed by the applicant vessel during 

any one calendar year in either 1998 or 

1999, or between January 1 and 

November 1, 2000. The best evidence of 

a vessel having met these qualifying 

criteria will be receipts from frozen 

product buyers or exporters, 

accompanied by the fish tickets or 

landings receipts appropriate to the 

frozen product. Documentation showing 

investment in freezer equipment 

without also showing evidence of how 

poundage qualifications have been met 

is not sufficient evidence to qualify a 

vessel for a sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption. All landings of sablefish 

must have occurred during the regular 

and/or mop-up seasons and must have 

been harvested in waters managed 

under this part. Sablefish taken in tribal 

set aside fisheries or taken outside of the 

fishery management area, as defined at 

§ 660.302, does not meet the qualifying 

criteria. 

(3) Issuance process for sablefish atsea processing exemptions. 

(i) The SFD will mail sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption applications to all 

limited entry permit owners with 

sablefish endorsements and/or fixed 

gear vessel owners and will make those 

applications available online at http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/1sustfsh/permits/ 

prmits01.htm. Permit and/or vessel 

owners will have at least 60 days to 

submit applications. A permit and/or 

vessel owner who believes that their 

vessel may qualify for the sablefish atsea processing exemption will have 

until July 1, 2006, to submit evidence 

showing how their vessel has met the 

qualifying criteria described in this 

section at paragraph (e)(2) of this 

section. Paragraph (e)(4) of this section 

sets out the relevant evidentiary 

standards and burden of proof. SFD will 

not accept applications for the sablefish 

at-sea processing exemption postmarked 

after July 1, 2006. 

(ii) Within 30 days of the deadline or 

after receipt of a complete application, 

the SFD will notify applicants by letter 

of determination whether their vessel 

qualifies for the sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption. A person who 

has been notified by the SFD that their 

vessel qualifies for a sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption will be issued an 

exemption letter by SFD that must be 

onboard the vessel at all times. After the 

deadline for the receipt of applications 

has expired and all applications 

processed, SFD will publish a list of 

vessels that qualified for the sablefish 

at-sea processing exemption in the 

Federal Register. 

(iii) If a permit and/or vessel owner 

chooses to file an appeal of the 

determination under paragraph (e)(3)(ii) 

of this section, the appeal must be filed 

with the Regional Administrator within 

30 days of the issuance of the letter of 

determination. The appeal must be in 

writing and must allege facts or 

circumstances, and include credible 

evidence demonstrating why the vessel 

qualifies for a sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption. The appeal of a denial of an 

application for a sablefish at-sea 

processing exemption will not be 

referred to the Council for a 

recommendation, nor will any appeals 

be accepted by SFD after September 1, 

2006. 

(iv) Absent good cause for further 

delay, the Regional Administrator will 

issue a written decision on the appeal 

within 30 days of receipt of the appeal. 

The Regional Administrator’s decision 

is the final administrative decision of 

the Department of Commerce as of the 

date of the decision. 

(4) Evidence and burden of proof. A 

permit and/or vessel owner applying for 

issuance of a sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption has the burden to submit 

evidence to prove that qualification 

requirements are met. The following 

evidentiary standards apply: 

(i) A certified copy of the current 

vessel document (USCG or state) is the 

best evidence of vessel ownership and 

LOA. 

(ii) A certified copy of a state fish 

receiving ticket is the best evidence of 

a landing, and of the type of gear used. 

(iii) A copy of a written receipt 

indicating the name of their buyer, the 

date, and a description of the product 

form and the amount of sablefish landed 

is the best evidence of the commercial 

transfer of frozen sablefish product. 

(iv) Such other relevant, credible 

evidence as the applicant may submit, 

or the SFD or the Regional 

Administrator request or acquire, may 

also be considered. 

(f) Endorsement and exemption 

restrictions. ‘‘A’’ endorsements, gear 

endorsements, sablefish endorsements 

and sablefish tier assignments may not 

be transferred separately from the 

limited entry permit. Sablefish at-sea 

processing exemptions are associated 

with the vessel and not with the limited 

entry permit and may not be transferred 

at all. 

* * * * * 

6. In § 660.335, paragraphs (g)(2) 

through (g)(6) are redesignated as 

paragraphs (g)(3) through (g)(7) and a 

new paragraph (g)(2) is added; 

paragraphs, (c), (d)(1), (e)(1) and (e)(3) 

are revised; and paragraphs (a)(4) and 

(e)(4) are added to read as follows: 

§ 660.335 Limited entry permits renewal, 

combination, stacking, change of permit 

owner or holder, and transfer. 

(a) * * * 

(4) Limited entry permits with 

sablefish endorsements, as described at 

59310 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

§ 660.334(d), will not be renewed until 

SFD has received complete 

documentation of permit ownership as 

required under § 660.334(d)(4)(iv). 

* * * * * 

(c) Stacking limited entry permits. 

‘‘Stacking’’ limited entry permits, as 

defined at § 660.302, refers to the 

practice of registering more than one 

permit for use with a single vessel. Only 

limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements may be stacked. Up to 3 

limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements may be registered for use 

with a single vessel during the primary 

sablefish season described at § 660.372. 

Privileges, responsibilities, and 

restrictions associated with stacking 

permits to participate in the primary 

sablefish fishery are described at 

§ 660.372 and at § 660.334(d). 

(d) * * * 

(1) General. The permit owner may 

convey the limited entry permit to a 

different person. The new permit owner 

will not be authorized to use the permit 

until the change in permit ownership 

has been registered with and approved 

by the SFD. The SFD will not approve 

a change in permit ownership for 

limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements that does not meet the 

ownership requirements for those 

permits described at § 660.334 (d)(4). 

Change in permit owner and/or permit 

holder applications must be submitted 

to SFD with the appropriate 

documentation described at 

§ 660.335(g). 

* * * * * 

(3) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a 

permit owner submits an application to 

transfer a sablefish-endorsed limited 

entry permit to a new permit owner or 

holder (transferee) during the primary 

sablefish season described at § 660.372 

(generally April 1 through October 31), 

the initial permit owner (transferor) 

must certify on the application form the 

cumulative quantity of primary season 

sablefish landed against that permit as 

of the application signature date for the 

then current primary season. The 

transferee must sign the application 

form acknowledging the amount of 

landings to date given by the transferor. 

This certified amount should match the 

total amount of primary season sablefish 

landings reported on state fish tickets. 

As required at § 660.303(c), any person 

landing sablefish must retain on board 

the vessel from which sablefish is 

landed, and provide to an authorized 

officer upon request, copies of any and 

all reports of sablefish landings from the 

primary season containing all data, and 

in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

primary sablefish season during which 

a landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) General. A permit may not be used 

with any vessel other than the vessel 

registered to that permit. For purposes 

of this section, a permit transfer occurs 

when, through SFD, a permit owner 

registers a limited entry permit for use 

with a new vessel. Permit transfer 

applications must be submitted to SFD 

with the appropriate documentation 

described at § 660.335(g). Upon receipt 

of a complete application, and following 

review and approval of the application, 

the SFD will reissue the permit 

registered to the new vessel. 

Applications to transfer limited entry 

permits with sablefish endorsements, as 

described at § 660.334(d), will not be 

approved until SFD has received 

complete documentation of permit 

ownership as required under 

§ 660.334(d)(4)(iv). 

* * * * * 

(3) Effective date. Changes in vessel 

registration on permits will take effect 

no sooner than the first day of the next 

major limited entry cumulative limit 

period following the date that SFD 

receives the signed permit transfer form 

and the original limited entry permit. 

No transfer is effective until the limited 

entry permit has been reissued as 

registered with the new vessel. 

(4) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a 

permit owner submits an application to 

register a sablefish-endorsed limited 

entry permit to a new vessel during the 

primary sablefish season described at 

§ 660.372 (generally April 1 through 

October 31), the initial permit owner 

(transferor) must certify on the 

application form the cumulative 

quantity of primary season sablefish 

landed against that permit as of the 

application signature date for the then 

current primary season. The new permit 

owner or holder (transferee) associated 

with the new vessel must sign the 

application form acknowledging the 

amount of landings to date given by the 

transferor. This certified amount should 

match the total amount of primary 

season sablefish landings reported on 

state fish tickets. As required at 

§ 660.303(c), any person landing 

sablefish must retain on board the vessel 

from which sablefish is landed, and 

provide to an authorized officer upon 

request, copies of any and all reports of 

sablefish landings from the primary 

season containing all data, and in the 

exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

primary sablefish season during which 

a landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

* * * * * 

(g) Application and supplemental 

documentation. * * * 

(2) For a request to change a vessel 

registration and/or change in permit 

ownership or permit holder for 

sablefish-endorsed permits with a tier 

assignment for which a corporation or 

partnership is listed as permit owner 

and/or holder, an Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form must be 

completed and included with the 

application form. 

* * * * * 

7. In § 660.372, paragraph (b)(1) is 

revised and paragraph (b)(4) is added to 

read as follows: 

§ 660.372 Fixed gear sablefish fishery 

management. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) Season dates. North of 36E N. lat., 

the primary sablefish season for the 

limited entry, fixed gear, sablefishendorsed vessels begins at 12 noon l.t. 

on April 1 and ends at 12 noon l.t. on 

October 31, unless otherwise announced 

by the Regional Administrator through 

the routine management measures 

process described at § 660.370(c). 

* * * * * 

(4) Owner-on-Board Requirement. 

Any person who owns or has ownership 

interest in a limited entry permit with 

a sablefish endorsement, as described at 

§ 660.334(d), must be aboard the vessel 

registered for use with that permit at 

any time that the vessel has sablefish on 

board the vessel that count toward that 

permit’s cumulative sablefish landing 

limit. This person must carry 

government issued photo identification 

while aboard the vessel. A permit owner 

is not obligated to be on board the vessel 

registered for use with the sablefishendorsed limited entry permit during 

the primary sablefish season if: 

(i) The person, partnership or 

corporation had ownership interest in a 

limited entry permit with a sablefish 

endorsement prior to November 1, 2000. 

A person who has ownership interest in 

a partnership or corporation that owned 

a sablefish-endorsed permit as of 

November 1, 2000, but who did not 

individually own a sablefish-endorsed 

limited entry permit as of November 1, 

2000, is not exempt from the owner-onboard requirement when he/she leaves 

the partnership or corporation and 

purchases another permit individually. 

A person, partnership, or corporation 

that is exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement may sell all of their 

permits, buy another sablefish-endorsed 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Proposed Rules 59311 

permit within up to a year from the date 

the last permit was approved for 

transfer, and retain their exemption 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

Additionally, a person, partnership, or 

corporation that qualified for the owneron-board exemption, but later divested 

their interest in a permit or permits, 

may retain rights to an owner-on-board 

exemption as long as that person, 

partnership, or corporation purchases 

another permit within one year of the 

date the final rule for these owner-onboard requirements is effective. A 

person, partnership or corporation 

could only purchase a permit if it has 

not added or changed individuals since 

November 1, 2000, excluding 

individuals that have left the 

partnership or corporation, or that have 

died. 

(ii) A person who owns or who has 

ownership interest in a sablefishendorsed limited entry permit, in cases 

of death, illness, or injury of the permit 

owner, that prevents the permit owner 

from being onboard a fishing vessel. The 

person requesting the exemption must 

send a letter to NMFS requesting an 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements, with appropriate 

evidence as described at 

§ 660.372(b)(4)(ii)(A) or (B). All 

emergency exemptions for death, injury, 

or illness will be evaluated by NMFS 

and a decision will be made in writing 

to the permit owner within 60 days of 

receipt of the original exemption 

request. 

(A) Evidence of death of the permit 

owner shall be provided to NMFS in the 

form of a copy of a death certificate. In 

the interim before the estate is settled, 

if the deceased permit owner was 

subject to the owner-on-board 

requirements, the estate of the deceased 

permit owner may send a letter to 

NMFS with a copy of the death 

certificate, requesting an exemption 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

An exemption due to death of the 

permit owner will be effective only until 

such time that the estate of the deceased 

permit owner has conveyed the 

deceased permit owner’s permit to a 

beneficiary or up to three years after the 

date of death as proven by a death 

certificate, whichever is earlier. An 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements will be conveyed in a 

letter from NMFS to the estate of the 

permit owner and is required to be on 

the vessel during fishing operations. 

(B) Evidence of illness or injury that 

prevents the permit owner from 

participating in the fishery shall be 

provided to NMFS in the form of a letter 

from a certified medical practitioner. 

This letter must detail the relevant 

medical conditions of the permit owner 

and how those conditions prevent the 

permit owner from being onboard a 

fishing vessel during the primary 

season. An exemption due to injury or 

illness will be effective only for the 

calendar year of the request for 

exemption, and will not be granted for 

more than three consecutive or total 

years. NMFS will consider any 

exemption granted for less than 12 

months in a year to count as one year 

against the 3–year cap. In order to 

extend an emergency medical 

exemption for a succeeding year, the 

permit owner must submit a new 

request and provide documentation 

from a certified medical practitioner 

detailing why the permit owner is still 

unable to be onboard a fishing vessel. 

An emergency exemption will be 

conveyed in a letter from NMFS to the 

permit owner and is required to be on 

the vessel during fishing operations. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–20344 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S