Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5681 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule simply promulgates the operating 

regulations or procedures for 

drawbridges. Normally such actions are 

categorically excluded from further 

review, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(32)(e), of the Instruction. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of 

the Instruction, an environmental 

analysis checklist and a categorical 

exclusion determination are not 

required for this rule. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

V. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We view public participation as 

essential to effective rulemaking, and 

will consider all comments and material 

received during the comment period. 

Your comment can help shape the 

outcome of this rulemaking. If you 

submit a comment, please include the 

docket number for this rulemaking, 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov. If your material 

cannot be submitted using http://

www.regulations.gov, contact the person 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document for 

alternate instructions. 

We accept anonymous comments. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. For more about privacy and 

the docket, you may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding the Federal Docket 

Management System in the March 24, 

2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 

FR 15086). 

Documents mentioned in this 

document, and all public comments, are 

in our online docket at http://

www.regulations.gov and can be viewed 

by following that Web site’s 

instructions. Additionally, if you go to 

the online docket and sign up for email 

alerts, you will be notified when 

comments are posted or a final rule is 

published. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117 

Bridges. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows: 

PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE 

OPERATION REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 117 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Revise § 117.233(a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 117.233 Broad Creek. 

(a) The draw of the Norfolk Southern 

bridge at mile 8.0, at Laurel, need not 

open for the passage of vessels. 

* * * * * 

Dated: January 14, 2016. 

Stephen P. Metruck, 

Rear Admiral, United States Coast Guard 

Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2016–01897 Filed 2–2–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 150629562–6025–01] 

RIN 0648–BF25 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Bycatch Management 

in the Bering Sea Pollock Fishery 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to 

implement Amendment 110 to the 

Fishery Management Plan for 

Groundfish of the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands Management Area 

(FMP). If approved, Amendment 110 

and this proposed rule would improve 

the management of Chinook and chum 

salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea 

pollock fishery by creating a 

comprehensive salmon bycatch 

avoidance program. This action is 

necessary to minimize Chinook and 

chum salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea 

pollock fishery to the extent practicable 

while maintaining the potential for the 

full harvest of the pollock total 

allowable catch within specified 

prohibited species catch limits. 

Amendment 110 is intended to promote 

the goals and objectives of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, the 

FMP, and other applicable laws. 

DATES: Comments must be received no 

later than March 4, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2015–0081 of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015- 

0081, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: 

Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. 

Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ 

A’’ in the required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). 

Electronic copies of Amendment 110 

and the Environmental Assessment/

Regulatory Impact Review/Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/

RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action 

(collectively the ‘‘Analysis’’) may be 

obtained from www.regulations.gov. 

Written comments regarding the 

burden-hour estimates or other aspects 

of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this rule may 

be submitted by mail to NMFS Alaska 

Region, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802–1668, Attn: Ellen Sebastian, 

Records Officer; in person at NMFS 

Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, 

Room 420A, Juneau, AK; and by email 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5682 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or 

by fax to 202–395–5806. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gretchen Harrington or Alicia Miller, 

907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS 

manages the groundfish fisheries in the 

exclusive economic zone of the Bering 

Sea and Aleutian Islands Management 

Area (BSAI) under the FMP. The North 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

(Council) prepared the FMP under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. Regulations governing U.S. 

fisheries and implementing the FMP 

appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679. 

This proposed rule would implement 

Amendment 110 to the FMP. The 

Council has submitted Amendment 110 

for review by the Secretary of 

Commerce, and a Notice of Availability 

(NOA) of this amendment was 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 8, 2016, with comments invited 

through March 8, 2015 (81 FR 897). 

Respondents do not need to submit the 

same comments on both the NOA and 

this proposed rule. All relevant written 

comments received by the end of the 

applicable comment period, whether 

specifically directed to the FMP 

amendment, this proposed rule, or both, 

will be considered in the approval/

disapproval decision for Amendment 

110 and addressed in the response to 

comments in the final decision. 

The following sections describe the 

fisheries and the current management 

programs that would be affected by 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule: 

(1) The Bering Sea pollock fishery, (2) 

salmon bycatch in the Bering Sea 

pollock fishery, (3) importance of 

salmon in western Alaska, (4) 

management of salmon bycatch in the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands, (5) 

objectives of and rationale for 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule, 

(6) proposed salmon bycatch 

management measures, (7) proposed 

changes to monitoring and enforcement 

requirements, and (8) other regulatory 

changes in the proposed rule. 

The Bering Sea Pollock Fishery 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would apply to owners and 

operators of catcher vessels, catcher/

processors, motherships, inshore 

processors, and the six Western Alaska 

Community Development Quota (CDQ) 

Program groups participating in the 

pollock (Gadus chalcogrammus) fishery 

in the Bering Sea subarea of the BSAI. 

Currently, pollock in the BSAI is 

managed in three separate geographic 

units: The Bering Sea subarea, the 

Aleutian Islands subarea, and the 

Bogoslof District of the Bering Sea 

subarea. Amendment 110 and this 

proposed rule only apply to 

management of the pollock fishery in 

the Bering Sea subarea. Amendment 110 

would not affect the management of 

pollock fisheries in the Aleutian Islands 

or the status of pollock fishing in the 

Bogoslof District. Therefore, in this 

proposed rule, the term ‘‘pollock 

fishery’’ refers only to the Bering Sea 

pollock fishery, unless otherwise 

specified. 

The pollock fishery is the largest 

single species fishery, by volume, in the 

United States. The wholesale gross 

value of this fishery was more than 

1.329 billion dollars in 2013, the most 

recent year of complete wholesale value 

data. The pollock fishery is managed 

under the American Fisheries Act (AFA) 

(16 U.S.C. 1851 note). In October 1998, 

Congress enacted the AFA, which 

‘‘rationalized’’ the pollock fishery by 

identifying the vessels and processors 

eligible to participate in the fishery and 

allocating pollock among those eligible 

participants. For more information on 

the AFA, please see the final rule 

implementing the AFA (67 FR 79692, 

December 30, 2002). 

Under the AFA, 10 percent of the 

pollock total allowable catch (TAC) is 

allocated to the CDQ Program. After the 

CDQ Program allocation is subtracted, 

an amount needed for the incidental 

catch of pollock in other non-pollock 

groundfish fisheries is subtracted from 

the TAC. In 2015, the pollock TAC was 

1,310,000 metric tons (mt). In 2015, the 

CDQ allocation was 131,000 mt of 

pollock and the incidental catch 

allowance was 47,160 mt. The ‘‘directed 

fishing allowance’’ is the remaining 

amount of pollock, after subtraction of 

the CDQ Program allocation and the 

incidental catch allowance. The 

directed fishing allowance is then 

allocated among the AFA inshore sector 

(50 percent), the AFA catcher/processor 

sector (40 percent), and the AFA 

mothership sector (10 percent). 

Annually, NMFS further apportions the 

pollock allocations to the CDQ Program 

and the AFA sectors between two 

seasons—40 percent to the A season 

(January 20 to June 10) and 60 percent 

to the B season (June 10 to November 1) 

(see § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B)(1)). 

The allocation of pollock to the CDQ 

sector is further allocated among the six 

non-profit corporations (CDQ groups) 

that represent the 65 communities 

eligible for the CDQ Program under 

section 305(i)(1)(D) of the MagnusonStevens Act. The current percentage 

allocations of pollock among the six 

CDQ groups were approved by NMFS in 

2005 based on recommendations from 

the State of Alaska (State). These 

percentage allocations are now the 

required allocations of pollock among 

the CDQ groups under section 

305(i)(1)(B) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. More information about the 

allocations of pollock, other groundfish, 

crab, and prohibited species (including 

Chinook salmon) among the six CDQ 

groups is provided in the Federal 

Register notice that described the effect 

of the 2006 amendments to the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act on CDQ Program 

allocations (71 FR 51804, August 31, 

2006). 

CDQ groups typically sell or lease 

their pollock allocations to harvesting 

partners, including vessels owned, in 

part, by the CDQ group. Although CDQ 

groups are not required to partner with 

AFA-permitted vessels to harvest CDQ 

pollock, to date, the vessels harvesting 

CDQ pollock have also been AFApermitted vessels. Specifically, the CDQ 

pollock allocations have most often 

been harvested by AFA catcher/

processors, and to a lesser extent, AFA 

catcher vessels delivering to a 

mothership. A relatively small amount 

of CDQ pollock has been harvested by 

AFA catcher vessels delivering to 

inshore processing plants. 

The AFA allows for the formation of 

fishery cooperatives within the nonCDQ sectors. A purpose of these AFA 

cooperatives is to further subdivide each 

sector’s or inshore cooperative’s pollock 

allocation among participants in the 

sector or cooperative through private 

contractual agreements. The 

cooperatives manage these allocations to 

ensure that individual vessels and 

companies do not harvest more than 

their agreed upon share. The 

cooperatives also facilitate transfers of 

pollock among the cooperative 

members, enforce contract provisions, 

and participate in an intercooperative 

agreement to minimize non-Chinook 

salmon bycatch and an incentive plan 

agreement to minimize Chinook salmon 

bycatch. 

Each year, catcher vessels eligible to 

deliver pollock to the seven eligible 

AFA inshore processors may form 

inshore cooperatives associated with a 

particular inshore processor. NMFS 

permits the inshore cooperatives, 

allocates pollock to them, and manages 

these allocations through a regulatory 

prohibition against an inshore 

cooperative exceeding its pollock 

allocation. The amount of pollock 

allocated to each inshore cooperative is 

based on the member vessel’s pollock 

catch history from 1995 through 1997, 

as required under section 210(b) of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5683 

AFA (16 U.S.C. 1851 note). These 

catcher vessels are not required to join 

an inshore cooperative. Those that do 

not join an inshore cooperative are 

managed by NMFS under the ‘‘inshore 

open access fishery.’’ For 2015, seven 

inshore cooperatives have been formed 

by AFA eligible inshore catcher vessels 

and their partner inshore processors. 

The AFA catcher/processor sector is 

made up of the catcher/processors and 

catcher vessels eligible under the AFA 

to deliver to catcher/processors. Owners 

of the catcher/processors that are listed 

by name in the AFA and are still active 

in the pollock fishery have formed a 

cooperative called the Pollock 

Conservation Cooperative (PCC). 

Owners of the catcher vessels eligible to 

deliver pollock to the catcher/processors 

have formed a cooperative called the 

High Seas Catcher’s Cooperative 

(HSCC). Collectively, the AFA catcher/ 

processor sector operates as a single 

entity and coordinates the harvesting of 

its pollock allocation. All participants 

that harvest pollock allocated to the 

catcher/processor sector are members of 

the two cooperatives, except for one 

participant. Section 208(e)(21) of the 

AFA expressly limits the amount of 

harvest by the one participant in the 

catcher/processor sector who is not a 

member of a cooperative to 0.5 percent 

of the TAC allocated to the catcher/

processor sector. 

The AFA mothership sector is made 

up of three motherships named in the 

AFA that are eligible to receive and 

process pollock harvested by catcher 

vessels, and the catcher vessels eligible 

under the AFA to deliver pollock to 

these motherships. All catcher vessels 

delivering to these three motherships 

have formed a cooperative called the 

Mothership Fleet Cooperative (MFC). 

The primary purpose of the cooperative 

is to sub-allocate the mothership sector 

pollock allocation among the catcher 

vessels authorized to harvest this 

pollock and to manage these allocations. 

The cooperatives control the harvest 

by their member vessels so that the 

pollock allocation to the sector is not 

exceeded. However, NMFS monitors 

pollock harvest by all members of the 

catcher/processor sector and mothership 

sector. NMFS retains the authority to 

close directed fishing for pollock by a 

sector if vessels in that sector continue 

to fish once the sector’s seasonal 

allocation of pollock has been 

harvested. 

Salmon Bycatch in the Bering Sea 

Pollock Fishery 

Pollock is harvested with fishing 

vessels using trawl gear, which are large 

nets towed through the water by the 

vessel. Pollock can occur in the same 

locations as Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon. Consequently, Chinook salmon 

and chum salmon are incidentally 

caught in the nets as fishermen target 

pollock. 

Section 3 of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act defines bycatch as fish that are 

harvested in a fishery, which are not 

sold or kept for personal use. Therefore, 

Chinook salmon and chum salmon 

caught in the pollock fishery are 

considered bycatch under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the FMP, and 

NMFS regulations at 50 CFR part 679. 

Bycatch of any species, including 

discard or other mortality caused by 

fishing, is a concern of the Council and 

NMFS. National Standard 9 and section 

303(a)(11) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

require the Council to select, and NMFS 

to implement, conservation and 

management measures that, to the 

extent practicable, minimize bycatch 

and bycatch mortality. 

The bycatch of culturally and 

economically valuable species like 

Chinook salmon and chum salmon, 

which are fully allocated and, in some 

cases, facing conservation concerns, are 

categorized as prohibited species under 

the FMP. They are the most regulated 

and closely managed category of 

bycatch in the groundfish fisheries off 

Alaska, and specifically in the BS 

pollock fishery. In addition to Pacific 

salmon, other species including 

steelhead trout, Pacific halibut, king 

crab, Tanner crab, and Pacific herring 

are classified as prohibited species in 

the groundfish fisheries off Alaska. As a 

prohibited species, fishermen must 

avoid salmon bycatch and any salmon 

caught must either be donated to the 

Prohibited Species Donation (PSD) 

Program (see regulations at § 679.26), or 

returned to Federal waters as soon as is 

practicable, with a minimum of injury, 

after an observer has determined the 

number of salmon and collected any 

scientific data or biological samples. 

The PSD Program was established to 

reduce the amount of edible protein 

discarded under prohibited species 

catch (PSC) regulatory requirements (see 

regulations § 679.21). One reason for 

requiring the discard of prohibited 

species is that some of the fish may live 

if they are returned to the sea with a 

minimum of injury and delay. However, 

salmon caught incidentally in trawl nets 

die as a result of that capture due to 

damage they suffer within the nets. The 

PSD Program allows permitted seafood 

processors to retain salmon bycatch for 

distribution to economically 

disadvantaged individuals through taxexempt hunger relief organizations. 

Section 4.5.6 of the Analysis provides 

additional detail on the PSD Program 

and donations received and processed 

through that program. 

Chinook Salmon Bycatch 

The pollock fishery catches more than 

95 percent of the Chinook salmon taken 

incidentally in the BSAI groundfish 

fisheries, based on data from 1992 

through 2014. However, the amount of 

Chinook salmon bycatch taken by the 

pollock fishery has declined since 2007. 

From 1992 through 2001 the average 

Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock 

fishery was 32,482 fish per year. 

Bycatch increased substantially from 

2002 through 2007, to an average of 

74,067 Chinook salmon per year. A 

historic high of approximately 122,000 

Chinook salmon was taken in the 

pollock fishery in 2007. However, since 

2007 Chinook salmon bycatch declined 

substantially to an average of 15,500 

Chinook salmon per year from 2008 to 

2014. The decline is most likely due to 

a combination of factors, including 

changes in abundance and distribution 

of Chinook salmon and pollock, as well 

as changes in fleet behavior to avoid 

salmon bycatch. 

In years of historically high Chinook 

salmon bycatch in the pollock fishery 

(2002 through 2007), the rate of Chinook 

salmon bycatch averaged 52 Chinook 

salmon per 1,000 tons of pollock 

harvested. With so few salmon relative 

to the large amount of pollock 

harvested, Chinook salmon encounters 

are difficult to predict or avoid. Vessellevel cooperation to share information 

about areas of high Chinook salmon 

encounter rates probably is the best tool 

that the industry currently has to 

quickly identify areas of high bycatch 

and to avoid fishing there. However, it 

will continue to be difficult to predict 

when and where large amounts of 

Chinook salmon bycatch will be 

encountered by the pollock fleet, 

primarily because of the current lack of 

understanding of the biological and 

oceanographic conditions that influence 

the distribution and abundance of 

salmon in the areas where the pollock 

fishery occurs. 

Chinook salmon taken in the pollock 

fishery originate from river systems in 

Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and 

Canada. Estimates vary from year to 

year, but on average approximately 65 

percent of the Chinook salmon bycatch 

in the pollock fishery may be destined 

for western Alaska. Western Alaska 

includes the Bristol Bay, Kuskokwim, 

Yukon, and Norton Sound areas. 

Chinook salmon destined for elsewhere 

in Alaska, the Pacific Northwest, and 

Canada comprise approximately 28 

percent of the bycatch. Section 3.4 of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5684 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

the Analysis provides additional 

information about Chinook salmon 

biology, distribution, and stock 

assessments by river system or region 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Chum Salmon Bycatch 

The pollock fishery catches over 95 

percent of the chum salmon taken 

incidentally as bycatch in the BSAI 

groundfish fisheries. The pollock fishery 

catches chum salmon almost 

exclusively in the B season (after June 

10). The pollock fishery has caught large 

numbers of chum, with a historic high 

of approximately 700,000 chum salmon 

taken in 2005. Since then, bycatch 

levels in the pollock fishery have been 

quite variable, ranging from a low of 

13,280 chum salmon in 2010 to a high 

of 309,646 chum salmon in 2006. 

Average chum salmon bycatch from 

2006 through to 2014 was 115,190 chum 

salmon. In 2014, the pollock fishery 

caught 219,428 chum salmon. 

Genetic information indicates that the 

majority of the chum salmon caught in 

the pollock fishery are of Asian origin 

(approximately 60 percent) while a 

smaller percentage (approximately 21 

percent) originate from aggregate 

streams in western Alaska. Chum 

salmon from elsewhere in Alaska, the 

Pacific Northwest, and Canada comprise 

the remaining percentage of the bycatch 

(approximately 19 percent). While the 

genetics cannot differentiate hatcheryorigin fish from wild Asian chum 

salmon, given the high proportion of 

Pacific Rim hatchery-released chum 

from Japan, much of the Asian origin 

chum observed in the bycatch is likely 

to be of Asian hatchery-origin. Alaska 

chum salmon runs have indicated a 

history of volatility in run sizes, and 

chum salmon stocks in Alaska are 

generally at higher levels of abundance 

than historical periods. Section 3.4 of 

the Analysis provides additional 

information about chum salmon 

biology, distribution, and stock 

assessments by river system or region 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Importance of Salmon in Western 

Alaska 

The Council and NMFS have been 

concerned about the potential impact of 

Chinook and chum salmon bycatch on 

returns to western Alaska given the 

relatively large proportion of bycatch 

from these river systems that occurs in 

the pollock fishery. Chinook salmon and 

chum salmon destined for western 

Alaska support commercial, 

subsistence, sport, and personal use 

fisheries. The Alaska Board of Fisheries 

adopts regulations through a public 

process to conserve salmon and to 

allocate salmon to the various users. 

The State of Alaska Department of Fish 

and Game manages the salmon 

commercial, subsistence, sport, and 

personal use fisheries. The first 

management priority is to meet 

spawning escapement goals to sustain 

salmon resources for future generations. 

The next priority is for subsistence use 

under both State and Federal law. 

Salmon is a primary subsistence food in 

some areas. Subsistence fisheries 

management includes coordination with 

U.S. Federal agencies where Federal 

rules apply under the Alaska National 

Interest Lands Conservation Act. 

Section 3.4 of the Analysis provides a 

detailed description of the State and 

Federal management process. Appendix 

A–4 of the Analysis provides an 

overview of the importance of 

subsistence salmon harvests and 

commercial salmon harvests. 

Management of Salmon Bycatch in the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) 

Over the last 20 years, the Council 

and NMFS have adopted and 

implemented several management 

measures to limit salmon bycatch in the 

BSAI trawl fisheries, and particularly in 

the pollock fishery. Management 

measures have focused on minimizing 

Chinook salmon bycatch, chum salmon 

bycatch, and non-Chinook salmon 

bycatch. Non-Chinook bycatch is a 

category that includes all salmon 

species except Chinook salmon, but is 

comprised predominantly of chum 

salmon. 

In 1994, the Chum Salmon Savings 

Area in the eastern Bering Sea was 

established by an emergency rule (59 FR 

35476, July 12, 1994). This Chum 

Salmon Savings Area corresponded to a 

region of historically high chum salmon 

bycatch compared to other areas in the 

Bering Sea. The Council subsequently 

recommended maintaining the Chum 

Salmon Savings Area under 

Amendment 35 to the FMP (60 FR 

34904, July 5, 1995). Amendment 35 

closed the Chum Salmon Savings Area 

to all trawling from August 1 through 

August 31 and established a 42,000 nonChinook salmon PSC limit for trawl 

vessels operating in the Bering Sea. A 

PSC limit is effectively a bycatch limit; 

it constrains fishing once the amount of 

PSC is reached. Amendment 35 also 

established a separate Catcher Vessel 

Operational Area. The Catcher Vessel 

Operational Area corresponds to 

another region in the eastern Bering Sea 

where trawl catcher vessels had 

historically been observed to have high 

non-Chinook salmon (i.e., chum 

salmon) bycatch. Under Amendment 35, 

if the non-Chinook salmon PSC limit 

was caught in the Catcher Vessel 

Operational Area between August 15 

and October 14, NMFS prohibited 

fishing with trawl gear for the remainder 

of the period September 1 through 

October 14 in the Chum Salmon Savings 

Area. Figure 9 to part 679 shows the 

Chum Salmon Savings Area and Catcher 

Vessel Operational Area. 

In 1995, NMFS also established the 

Chinook Salmon Savings Area, which 

was implemented under Amendment 

21b to the FMP (60 FR 61215, November 

29, 1995). The Chinook Salmon Savings 

Area was established based on historic 

information regarding the location and 

timing of Chinook salmon bycatch. 

Regulations implementing Amendment 

21b established annual PSC limits for 

Chinook salmon and specific seasonal 

no-trawling zones in the Chinook 

Salmon Savings Area that would close 

when the limits were reached. Once the 

48,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit was 

reached, these regulations prohibited 

trawling in the Chinook Salmon Savings 

Area through April 15. 

In 2000, NMFS implemented 

Amendment 58 to the FMP, which 

reduced the Chinook Salmon Savings 

Area PSC limit from 42,000 to 29,000 

Chinook salmon, redefined the Chinook 

Salmon Savings Area as two noncontiguous areas (Area 1 in the Aleutian 

Islands subarea and Area 2 in the Bering 

Sea subarea), and established new 

closure periods (65 FR 60587, October 

12, 2000). 

In 2005, NMFS implemented 

Amendment 82 to the FMP. 

Amendment 82 established the Aleutian 

Islands Chinook salmon PSC limit of 

700 fish. If the limit is reached, NMFS 

will close the directed pollock fishery in 

the Aleutian Islands Chinook Salmon 

Savings Area (70 FR 9856, March 1, 

2005). 

In 2007, NMFS implemented 

Amendment 84 to the FMP to enhance 

the effectiveness of salmon bycatch 

measures. The Council and NMFS were 

concerned that increases in Chinook 

salmon and non-Chinook 

(predominantly chum) salmon bycatch 

in the pollock fishery were occurring 

despite Chinook and chum salmon PSC 

limits being reached and the closures of 

the Chinook Salmon Savings Area and 

Chum Salmon Savings Area (72 FR 

61070, October 29, 2007). Amendment 

84 exempted pollock vessels from 

Chinook Salmon Savings Area and 

Chum Salmon Savings Area closures if 

they participate in an intercooperative 

agreement (ICA) to reduce salmon 

bycatch. Amendment 84 also exempted 

vessels participating in non-pollock 

trawl fisheries from Chum Salmon 

Savings Area closures because these 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5685 

fisheries intercept minimal amounts of 

salmon. In 2010, NMFS implemented 

Amendment 91 to the FMP to manage 

Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock 

fishery (75 FR 53026, August 30, 2010), 

and to remove Chinook salmon from the 

Amendment 84 regulations. However, 

Amendment 84 continues to apply to 

non-Chinook salmon bycatch. 

The ICA allowed vessels participating 

in the pollock fishery to use their 

internal cooperative structure to reduce 

Chinook salmon and non-Chinook 

salmon bycatch using a method called 

the voluntary rolling hotspot system. 

Amendment 84 required that parties to 

the ICA include the AFA cooperatives; 

the six CDQ groups; at least one thirdparty group, including any 

organizations representing western 

Alaskans who depend on salmon and 

have an interest in salmon bycatch 

reduction but do not directly fish in a 

groundfish fishery; and at least one 

entity retained to facilitate bycatch 

avoidance behavior and information 

sharing. All AFA cooperatives and CDQ 

groups participated in the ICA and 

continue to do so to avoid incidentally 

catching non-Chinook salmon. 

Amendment 84 continues to exempt 

vessels participating in the ICA from the 

Chum Salmon Savings Area closure. 

Closure of the Chum Salmon Savings 

Area was designed to reduce the total 

amount of chum salmon bycatch by 

closing areas with historically high 

levels of chum salmon bycatch. The ICA 

operates in lieu of a fixed area closure, 

and is required to identify and close 

areas of high salmon bycatch and move 

vessels to other areas. 

Fishery participants provide the ICA 

with real-time salmon bycatch 

information and the ICA uses that 

information to inform other fishery 

participants to avoid areas of high nonChinook salmon bycatch rates. Using a 

system specified in regulations, the ICA 

assigns vessels in a cooperative to 

certain tiers, based on bycatch rates of 

vessels in that cooperative relative to a 

base rate established in regulations, and 

implements large area closures for 

vessels in tiers associated with higher 

bycatch rates. The ICA managers 

monitor salmon bycatch in the pollock 

fisheries and announce area closures for 

areas with relatively high salmon 

bycatch rates. Monitoring and 

enforcement are accomplished through 

private contractual arrangements. The 

efficacy of voluntary closures and 

bycatch reduction measures are reported 

to the Council annually. 

Amendment 91, as implemented in 

2010 to manage Chinook salmon 

bycatch in the pollock fishery (75 FR 

53026, August 30, 2010), combined a 

limit on the amount of Chinook salmon 

that may be caught incidentally with a 

novel approach designed to minimize 

bycatch to the extent practicable in all 

years and prevent bycatch from reaching 

the limit in most years, while providing 

the fleet the flexibility to harvest the 

pollock TAC. Amendment 91 removed 

Chinook salmon from the Amendment 

84 regulations, and established two 

Chinook salmon PSC limits for the 

pollock fishery—60,000 and 47,591 

Chinook salmon. Under Amendment 91, 

the PSC limit is 60,000 Chinook salmon 

if some, or all, of the pollock fishery 

participates in an industry-developed 

contractual arrangement, called an 

incentive plan agreement (IPA). An IPA 

establishes an incentive program to 

minimize bycatch at all levels of 

Chinook salmon abundance. 

Participation in an IPA is voluntary; 

however, any vessel or CDQ group that 

chooses not to participate in an IPA is 

subject to a restrictive opt-out allocation 

(also called a backstop cap). Since 

Amendment 91 was implemented, all 

AFA vessels have participated in an 

IPA. 

To ensure participants develop 

effective IPAs, participants provide the 

Council and NMFS an annual report 

that describes the efforts each IPA is 

taking to accomplish the intent of the 

program that each vessel actively avoids 

Chinook salmon at all times while 

fishing for pollock and, collectively, that 

bycatch is minimized in each year. The 

IPA system is designed to be flexible, 

responsive, and can be tailored by each 

sector to fit its operational needs. The 

IPAs impose rewards for avoiding 

Chinook salmon bycatch or penalties for 

failure to avoid Chinook salmon bycatch 

at the vessel level. While the IPAs 

provide an incentive to minimize 

bycatch in all years to a level below the 

limit, a limit of 60,000 Chinook salmon 

provides the industry the flexibility to 

harvest the pollock TAC in highencounter years when bycatch is 

difficult to avoid. 

Since implementation, all the 

participants in the pollock fishery are 

currently participating in IPA 

agreements. There are three NMFSapproved IPA agreements currently in 

place: the Inshore Chinook Salmon 

Savings Incentive Plan Agreement, the 

Mothership Salmon Savings Incentive 

Plan Agreement, and the Catcher 

Processor Chinook Salmon Bycatch 

Reduction Incentive Plan and 

Agreement. Section 2.1.2.3 of the 

Analysis provides details on the features 

of the current IPA agreements. 

Under Amendment 91, if fishery 

participants do not form any IPAs, the 

47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit 

applies rather than the 60,000 Chinook 

salmon PSC limit. This PSC limit was 

the approximate 10-year average of 

Chinook salmon bycatch from 1997 to 

2006, the years considered by the 

Council and NMFS when developing 

Amendment 91. The 47,591 Chinook 

salmon PSC limit constrains Chinook 

salmon bycatch in the pollock fishery if 

no other incentives, namely the IPAs, 

are operating to minimize bycatch 

below this level. 

Both the 60,000 and 47,591 Chinook 

salmon PSC limits are apportioned 

between the A and B seasons and 

allocated to the AFA catcher/processor 

sector, the AFA mothership sector, the 

AFA inshore sector, and CDQ Program. 

NMFS further allocates the AFA inshore 

sector PSC among the inshore 

cooperative and the CDQ Program PSC 

among the CDQ groups. Chinook salmon 

PSC allocations made to sectors, inshore 

cooperatives, and the CDQ groups are 

transferable. Transferability mitigates 

the variation in the salmon encounter 

rates among sectors, inshore 

cooperatives, and CDQ groups, in a 

given pollock season. It allows eligible 

participants to obtain a larger portion of 

the PSC allocation in order to harvest 

their pollock allocation or to transfer 

surplus PSC allocation to other entities. 

When a Chinook salmon PSC allocation 

is reached, the affected sector, inshore 

cooperative, or CDQ group must stop 

fishing for pollock for the remainder of 

the season even if its pollock allocation 

has not been fully harvested. 

Amendment 91 also established a 

performance standard as an additional 

tool to ensure that the IPA is effective 

and that the AFA sectors and the CDQ 

Program do not fully harvest their 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations under 

the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit in 

most years. For an AFA sector or the 

CDQ Program to continue to receive 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations under 

the 60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit, 

that AFA sector or the CDQ Program 

may not exceed its annual threshold 

amount in any three years within seven 

consecutive years. If this performance 

standard is not met, that AFA sector or 

CDQ Program will permanently be 

allocated a portion of the 47,591 

Chinook salmon PSC limit. The risk of 

bearing the potential adverse economic 

impacts of a reduction from the 60,000 

PSC limit to the 47,591 PSC limit 

creates incentives for fishery 

participants to cooperate in an effective 

IPA. 

Before each fishing year, NMFS 

calculates each sector’s annual 

threshold amount. If some, but not all, 

members of a sector were to participate 

in an IPA, NMFS would reduce that 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5686 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

sector’s annual threshold amount by an 

amount equal to the sum of each nonparticipating vessel’s portion of the 

applicable performance standard. At the 

end of each fishing year, NMFS 

evaluates each sector’s annual bycatch 

against that sector’s annual threshold 

amount. Only the bycatch of vessels or 

CDQ groups participating in an IPA 

accrue against a sector’s annual 

threshold amount. A sector’s annual 

threshold amount does not change when 

vessels from other sectors or entire 

sectors opt out of an IPA or if another 

sector exceeds its performance standard. 

Additional information the provisions 

of Amendment 91 are provided in the 

final rule prepared for that action (75 FR 

53026, August 30, 2010). 

Objectives of and Rationale for 

Amendment 110 and This Proposed 

Rule 

In April 2015, the Council adopted 

Amendment 110. The objective of 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule 

is to create a comprehensive salmon 

bycatch avoidance program that would 

work more effectively than the current 

salmon bycatch programs to avoid 

Chinook salmon bycatch and Alaskaorigin chum salmon bycatch. The 

Council’s action is designed to consider 

the importance of continued production 

of critical chum salmon runs in western 

Alaska by focusing on bycatch 

avoidance of Alaskan chum salmon 

runs. These runs have a history of 

volatility in run sizes, and are of historic 

importance in the subsistence lifestyle 

of Alaskans. Additional protections to 

other chum stocks outside of Alaska are 

embedded in the Council’s objective to 

avoid the high bycatch of chum salmon 

overall, recognizing that most nonAlaska chum salmon are likely from 

Asian hatcheries. 

The Council recognized that the chum 

salmon bycatch reduction program 

under Amendment 84 does not meet the 

Council’s objective for the pollock 

fishery to effectively avoid both 

Chinook salmon and chum salmon 

bycatch. Amendment 84 did not provide 

the flexibility necessary to avoid 

Chinook salmon when fishermen 

encountered both species, avoid Alaska 

chum salmon stocks, or to harvest 

pollock in times and places that best 

support those goals. 

The Council recognized that Chinook 

salmon are an extremely important 

resource to Alaskans who depend on 

local fisheries for their sustenance and 

livelihood. Multiple years of historically 

low Chinook salmon abundance have 

resulted in significant restrictions for 

subsistence users in western Alaska and 

failure to achieve conservation 

objectives. The current Chinook salmon 

bycatch reduction program under 

Amendment 91 was designed to 

minimize bycatch to the extent 

practicable in all years, under all 

conditions of salmon and pollock 

abundance. While Chinook salmon 

bycatch impact rates have been low 

under the program, the Council 

determined that there is evidence that 

improvements could be made to ensure 

the program is reducing Chinook 

salmon bycatch at low levels of salmon 

abundance. An analysis of the possible 

improvements is provided in section 

3.5.3 of the Analysis. 

The Council considered a broad suite 

of measures to induce some level of 

behavior change to further avoid salmon 

bycatch, which is the primary objective 

of this action. Experience has shown 

that salmon avoidance requires 

flexibility and the ability of vessels to 

adjust to real-time information and 

fishery conditions. The Council also 

considered the trade-offs between the 

potential salmon saved and the forgone 

pollock catch. 

In selecting the proposed salmon 

bycatch avoidance program, the Council 

considered five alternatives, with many 

options, to assess the impacts of 

minimizing Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon bycatch to the extent practicable 

while maintaining the potential for the 

full harvest of the pollock TAC. The 

Analysis contains a complete 

description of the alternatives and a 

comparative analysis of the potential 

impacts of the alternatives (see 

ADDRESSES). 

The Council recommended all four 

action alternatives as Amendment 110. 

Amendment 110 would adjust the 

existing Chinook salmon bycatch 

program to incorporate revised chum 

salmon bycatch measures into the 

existing IPAs. In addition, the Council 

sought to provide greater incentives to 

avoid Chinook salmon by strengthening 

incentives during times of historically 

low Chinook salmon abundance in 

western Alaska. Thus, the management 

measures included in Amendment 110 

focus on retaining the incentives to 

avoid Chinook salmon bycatch at all 

levels of abundance as intended by 

Amendment 91. The Council also 

expressed that it remains extremely 

important to provide the incentives to 

avoid Alaska-origin chum salmon while 

maintaining the flexibility to avoid 

Chinook salmon. 

In developing Amendment 110, the 

Council and NMFS considered 

consistency with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act’s 10 National Standards and sought 

to balance the competing demands of 

the National Standards. Specifically, the 

Council and NMFS recognized the need 

to balance and be consistent with both 

National Standard 9 and National 

Standard 1. National Standard 9 

requires that conservation and 

management measures minimize 

bycatch to the extent practicable. 

National Standard 1 requires that 

conservation and management measures 

prevent overfishing while achieving, on 

a continuing basis, the optimum yield 

from each fishery for the U. S. fishing 

industry. Amendment 110 meets 

National Standards 1 and 9, as well as 

the other eight National Standards. 

Amendment 110 also retains the 

structure and meets the original goals of 

Amendment 91, but makes 

improvements by providing greater 

incentives to minimize salmon bycatch 

in all conditions of abundance, while 

also providing a reasonable opportunity 

to harvest the full pollock TAC each 

year and to achieve the optimum yield 

for pollock over the long term. 

The provisions of Amendment 110, 

and the rational for each provision, are 

described in the following section on 

the proposed salmon bycatch 

management measures. 

Proposed Salmon Bycatch Management 

Measures 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would— 

• incorporate chum salmon 

avoidance into the IPAs established 

under Amendment 91 to the FMP, and 

remove the non-Chinook salmon 

bycatch reduction ICA previously 

established under Amendment 84 to the 

FMP; 

• modify the requirements for the 

content of the IPAs to increase the 

incentives for fishermen to avoid 

Chinook salmon; 

• change the seasonal apportionments 

of the pollock TAC to allow more 

pollock to be harvested earlier in the 

year; 

• reduce the Chinook salmon PSC 

limit and performance standard in years 

with low Chinook salmon abundance in 

western Alaska; and 

• improve the monitoring of salmon 

bycatch in the pollock fishery. 

Incorporate Chum Salmon Avoidance 

Into the Incentive Plan Agreements 

(IPAs) 

Currently, Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon bycatch are managed under two 

different programs (Amendment 84 for 

chum salmon bycatch and Amendment 

91 for Chinook salmon bycatch). This 

has created inefficiencies, as having 

separate programs does not allow 

participants in the pollock fishery the 

flexibility to modify harvest patterns 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5687 

and practices to effectively minimize 

both Chinook salmon and chum salmon 

bycatch. Adding chum salmon measures 

to the IPAs would increase flexibility in 

responding to changing conditions and 

provide greater incentives to reduce 

bycatch of both salmon species, thereby 

making salmon bycatch management 

more effective, comprehensive, and 

efficient. The chum salmon-specific 

requirements in the Amendment 84 

implementing regulations sometimes 

prevent fishery participants from 

making decisions to avoid Chinook 

salmon when vessels encounter both 

chum salmon and Chinook salmon. 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would incorporate chum salmon 

avoidance into the IPAs established 

under Amendment 91. This proposed 

rule would remove the Amendment 84 

implementing regulations by removing 

§ 679.21(g). However, Amendment 110 

and this proposed rule would maintain 

the current non-Chinook salmon PSC 

limit of 42,000 fish and the closure of 

the Chum Salmon Savings Area to the 

pollock fishery when the 42,000 nonChinook salmon PSC limit has been 

reached (see the above section 

Management of Salmon Bycatch in the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) 

for more detail on the existing salmon 

regulations). Vessels that participate in 

an IPA would be exempt from the Chum 

Salmon Savings Area closure. The 

purpose of maintaining the nonChinook salmon PSC limit and the 

Chum Salmon Savings Area closure is to 

provide additional incentives for vessels 

to join an IPA, and to serve as back-stop 

chum salmon measures for those vessels 

that choose not to participate in an IPA. 

Incorporating chum salmon into the 

IPAs meets the purpose of this action by 

providing measures to prevent high 

chum salmon bycatch, while also giving 

participants in the pollock fishery the 

flexibility to avoid Alaska chum stocks, 

and to use coordinated management 

under the IPAs to adapt quickly to 

changing conditions. The Council 

determined and NMFS agreed that this 

action for chum bycatch would strike an 

appropriate balance between regulatory 

requirements and adaptive management. 

To incorporate chum salmon into the 

IPAs, the proposed rule would modify 

the required contents of the IPAs at 

§ 679.21(f)(12), to include the following: 

• The incentives for the operator of 

each vessel to avoid Chinook salmon 

and chum salmon bycatch under any 

condition of pollock and Chinook 

salmon abundance in all years. 

• An explanation of how the 

incentives to avoid chum salmon do not 

increase Chinook salmon bycatch. 

• The rewards for avoiding Chinook 

salmon, and the penalties for failure to 

avoid, Chinook salmon at the vessel 

level. 

• An explanation of how the 

incentive measures in the IPA are 

expected to promote reductions in a 

vessel’s Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon bycatch rates relative to what 

might have occurred in absence of the 

incentive program. 

• An explanation of how the 

incentive measures in the IPA promote 

Chinook salmon savings and chum 

salmon savings in any condition of 

pollock abundance or Chinook salmon 

abundance in a manner that is expected 

to influence operational decisions by 

vessel operators to avoid Chinook 

salmon and chum salmon. 

• An explanation of how the IPA 

ensures that the operator of each vessel 

governed by the IPA will manage that 

vessel’s Chinook salmon bycatch to 

keep total bycatch below the 

performance standard for the sector in 

which the vessel participates. 

• An explanation of how the IPA 

ensures that the operator of each vessel 

governed by the IPA will manage that 

vessel’s chum salmon bycatch to avoid 

areas and times where the chum salmon 

are likely to return to western Alaska. 

• The rolling hot spot program for 

salmon bycatch avoidance and the 

agreement to provide notifications of 

closure areas and any violations of the 

rolling hot spot program to at least one 

third party group representing western 

Alaskans who depend on salmon and do 

not directly fish in a groundfish fishery. 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would maintain the important 

chum salmon avoidance features of the 

Amendment 84 ICAs. Amendment 110 

and this proposed rule would: (1) 

Ensure that the operator of each vessel 

governed by the IPA will manage that 

vessel’s chum salmon bycatch to avoid 

areas and times where the chum salmon 

are likely to return to western Alaska, 

(2) require the use of the rolling hot spot 

program for salmon bycatch avoidance, 

and (3) require notifications of closure 

areas and any violations of the rolling 

hot spot program to at least one third 

party group representing western 

Alaskans. Because Amendment 110 and 

this proposed rule would require a 

rolling hot spot program for both 

Chinook and chum salmon, the 

notification process would apply for 

both species. This proposed rule would 

also add reporting requirements to the 

IPA Annual Report in regulations at 

§ 679.21(f)(13) to require the IPA 

representative to describe how the IPA 

addresses the goals and objectives in the 

IPA provisions related to chum salmon. 

Section 3.5.2 of the Analysis provides 

more detail on adding elements of chum 

salmon management. 

Modify the IPAs To Increase the 

Incentives to Avoid Chinook Salmon 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would modify the IPAs to increase 

the incentives for fishermen to avoid 

Chinook salmon. The Council and 

NMFS recognize that the IPAs were 

effective at providing incentives for 

each vessel to avoid Chinook salmon, 

but that additional measures were 

necessary to address higher Chinook 

salmon PSC rates observed in October 

(the last month when the pollock fishery 

is authorized to operate) and to address 

concerns with individual vessels that 

consistently have significantly higher 

Chinook salmon PSC rates relative to 

other vessels fishing at the same time. 

The Council and NMFS wanted to 

ensure the use of salmon excluder 

devices (i.e., gear modifications that are 

designed to exclude salmon bycatch 

while retaining pollock) and a rolling 

hotspot program. The proposed new 

provisions described below are intended 

to provide an opportunity for IPAs to 

increase their responsiveness in 

October, and improve performance of 

individual vessels. 

These new provisions would increase 

the incentives to reduce Chinook 

salmon bycatch within the IPAs. To 

incorporate additional incentives for 

Chinook salmon savings into the IPAs, 

the proposed rule would modify the 

required contents of the IPAs at 

§ 679.21(f)(12) to include the following 

six provisions. 

• Restrictions or penalties targeted at 

vessels that consistently have 

significantly higher Chinook salmon 

PSC rates relative to other vessels 

fishing at the same time. 

• Requirement that vessels to enter a 

fishery-wide in-season salmon PSC data 

sharing agreement. 

• Requirement for the use of salmon 

excluder devices, with recognition of 

contingencies, from January 20 through 

March 31 and from September 1 until 

the end of the B season. 

• Requirement for a rolling hotspot 

program that operates throughout the 

entire A and B seasons. 

• For savings-credit-based IPAs, 

limititation on the salmon savings 

credits to maximum of three years. 

• Restrictions or performance criteria 

to ensure that Chinook salmon PSC rates 

in October are not significantly higher 

than those achieved in the preceding 

months, thereby avoiding late-season 

spikes in salmon PSC. 

Restrictions or penalties targeted at 

vessels that consistently have 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5688 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

significantly higher Chinook salmon 

PSC rates. To reduce the potential for a 

vessel to consistently maintain higher 

rates of Chinook salmon PSC than other 

vessels fishing at the same time (i.e., an 

outlier), Amendment 110 and this 

proposed rule would incorporate 

additional restrictions or penalties 

targeted at individual vessels that 

consistently have significantly higher 

PSC rates as a way for IPAs to increase 

their responsiveness and improve an 

individual vessel’s performance. 

Restrictions or penalties targeted at the 

outliers have the potential to induce 

changes in fishing behaviors. Strong 

incentives will induce vessel operators 

to change where they fish to avoid 

Chinook salmon bycatch. Changes in 

fishing patterns can involve several 

different behaviors: Avoiding an area 

that has historically or recently had high 

bycatch; using and sharing more 

information on high-bycatch areas; and 

moving immediately once high bycatch 

has been observed. Section 3.5.3.1 of the 

Analysis provides more detail on this 

addition to the IPA requirements. 

Require vessels to enter a fishery-wide 

in-season salmon PSC data sharing 

agreement. Information sharing is a core 

component of the IPA agreements for all 

sectors. While unlikely, communication 

about salmon bycatch could be withheld 

or distorted with the new incentives 

that would reward or punish vessels 

based on their relative performance. In 

order to reduce this possibility, 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule 

would require the IPAs to require 

sharing information on PSC. PSC data is 

not confidential. Section 3.5.3.1 of the 

Analysis provides more detail on this 

addition to the IPA requirements. 

Require use of a salmon excluder 

device. Salmon excluder devices are 

modifications to trawl gear that allow 

salmon to escape the trawl net while the 

net is in the water. The majority of 

pollock fishermen in the Bering Sea 

regularly use salmon excluder devices 

as part of the steps taken by the fishery 

to reduce its salmon bycatch. 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule 

would require that IPAs require all 

vessels to use a salmon excluder device 

from January 20 through March 31, and 

from September 1 until the end of the 

B season. This is the time when there is 

a potential for pollock fishermen to 

encounter Chinook salmon bycatch. 

Salmon excluder devices would not be 

required in the few remaining months of 

the pollock season when Chinook 

salmon are not typically encountered. 

The Council and NMFS also recognize 

that contingencies exist when vessels 

cannot use excluder devices. Trawl gear 

can have problems; therefore, salmon 

excluder devices would not be required 

during rare occasions such as when a 

net tears or a spare excluder device is 

not available. In order to allow for 

innovation that might lead to the 

development of better excluder devices, 

the requirement to use a salmon 

excluder device does not specify the 

type of design. Section 3.5.3.2 of the 

Analysis provides more detail on this 

addition to the IPA requirements (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Require a rolling hotspot program. A 

Chinook salmon rolling hotspot program 

is a component of the current IPAs, 

however, it is not a mandatory 

requirement. The catcher/processor IPA 

and the mothership IPA have a rolling 

hotspot program in place throughout the 

year. The inshore IPA has a rolling 

hotspot program that can be suspended 

during the season. This provision would 

require all IPAs to have a rolling hot 

spot program that operates throughout 

the entire A and B seasons. This 

provision would also require 

notifications of closure areas and any 

violations of the rolling hot spot 

program to at least one third party group 

representing western Alaskans, 

consistent with the requirement for the 

chum salmon rolling hotspot program. 

This notification provision, which is an 

important feature of the current 

Amendment 84 ICAs, would not entail 

the release of any confidential data. 

Section 3.5.3.3 of the Analysis provides 

more detail on this addition to the IPA 

requirements (see ADDRESSES). 

Limit the use of salmon savings 

credits to a maximum of three years. 

The inshore IPA and mothership IPA 

allow vessels to earn credits by avoiding 

salmon in one year, which they can use 

in the future to fish above the vessel or 

mothership platform’s share of the 

performance standard for a limited 

number of years. In no case can credits 

saved in the inshore IPA or mothership 

IPA allow that sector to exceed its 

annual allocation of Chinook salmon 

PSC. Savings credits can only be used 

by vessels within an IPA up to the 

overall allocation for the AFA 

mothership sector or inshore 

cooperative. 

For IPAs based on savings credits, 

Amendment 110 and this proposed rule 

would limit the amount of time savings 

credits could be used to three years after 

the year that the savings credits are 

earned. The Council and NMFS 

reviewed the use of savings credits and 

concluded that limiting the duration of 

credits to three years would likely 

increase the incentive to earn credits 

and increase the incentive to reduce 

Chinook salmon PSC. Section 3.5.3.4 of 

the Analysis provides more detail on 

this addition to the IPA requirements 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Restrictions or performance criteria to 

prevent significantly higher Chinook 

salmon PSC rates in October. The 

purpose of this provision is for the IPAs 

to implement restrictions or criteria 

designed to ensure that vessels do not 

have ‘‘excessive’’ bycatch late in 

October. Chinook salmon bycatch rates 

are generally higher in October. This 

provision would strengthen incentives 

to fish early in the B season and provide 

greater flexibility to vessels to catch 

their pollock quota while ensuring 

vessels do not have excessively high 

Chinook salmon bycatch late in the 

season. Section 3.5.3.5 of the Analysis 

provides more detail on this addition to 

the IPA requirements (see ADDRESSES). 

Revise the Bering Sea Pollock Seasonal 

Allocations 

This proposed rule would change the 

pollock allocation between the A and B 

seasons at § 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B)(1). Five 

percent of the pollock allocation for the 

B season would be reallocated to the A 

season for new seasonal apportionments 

of 45 percent in the A season and 55 

percent in the B season. The proposed 

rule maintains the rollover of any 

remaining pollock from the A season to 

the B season. The Council recognized 

that shifting a limited amount of pollock 

to the A season would relieve some 

fishing pressure in the B season and 

allow the fleet more flexibility to change 

fishing practices to avoid salmon 

bycatch while harvesting the pollock 

TAC. Additionally, because pollock is 

more valuable in the A season, this 

allocation change may increase the 

value of pollock and offset the costs 

associated with avoiding salmon 

bycatch. 

Revising the season allocation would 

work in conjunction with the new IPA 

requirements to shift effort out of the 

late B season and provide fishery 

participants more flexibility to avoid 

Chinook salmon PSC in the late B 

season. Both the research on salmon 

migration patterns and Chinook salmon 

bycatch rates show the time at which 

there is the greatest overlap with 

Chinook salmon and pollock fishing. In 

general, more Chinook salmon are on 

the grounds in the early A season and 

the late B season, and less Chinook 

salmon on the grounds during the late 

A season and early B season. This 

provision is intended to shift pollock 

effort away from these high overlap 

periods and allow for more effort during 

the low overlap periods. With the 

existing rollover provision, this 

adjustment in the seasonal allocation of 

pollock does not mandate that more 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5689 

pollock be harvested in the A season, 

but it does provide the flexibility for up 

to 5 percent more pollock to be 

harvested in times when salmon PSC is 

lower. Section 3.5.4 of the Analysis 

provides more detail on this addition to 

the IPA requirements (see ADDRESSES). 

Reduce the Chinook Salmon 

Performance Standard and PSC Limit in 

Years of Low Chinook Salmon 

Abundance in Western Alaska 

Amendment 110 and this proposed 

rule would add a new lower Chinook 

salmon performance standard and PSC 

limit for the pollock fishery in years of 

low Chinook salmon abundance in 

western Alaska. The Council and NMFS 

determined that a lower performance 

standard and PSC limit would be 

appropriate at low levels of Chinook 

salmon abundance in western Alaska to 

accommodate the fact that most of the 

Chinook salmon bycatch comes from 

western Alaska. These provisions would 

work in conjunction with the proposed 

changes to the IPA requirements to 

ensure that Chinook salmon bycatch is 

avoided at all times, particularly at low 

abundance levels. 

Each year, NMFS would determine 

whether Chinook salmon was at low 

abundance based on information 

provided by the State. By October 1 of 

each year, the State would provide an 

index of abundance based on the postseason in-river Chinook salmon run size 

for the Kuskokwim, Unalakleet, and 

Upper Yukon aggregate stock grouping. 

When this index is less than or equal to 

250,000 Chinook salmon, the new lower 

performance standard and low PSC 

limit would apply. 

The Council and State conducted an 

extensive analysis about the appropriate 

index to use to indicate a low Chinook 

salmon abundance year. Low Chinook 

salmon abundance years are years 

characterized by difficulty meeting 

escapement goals and in-river salmon 

fisheries being severely restricted or 

fully closed. Section 2.6 of the Analysis 

evaluates various indices and shows 

that the 3-system index (Unalakleet, 

Upper Yukon, and Kuskokwim river 

systems) meets the objectives. These 

river systems provide a broad regional 

representation of stocks and signify very 

important river systems and subsistence 

fisheries in western Alaska. Subsistence 

harvests from these three river systems 

account for up to 87 percent of the 

statewide subsistence harvest of 

Chinook salmon. As shown in the 

Analysis, having more than one system 

in the index and having broad regional 

representation makes the index more 

robust. The Analysis also shows a clear 

natural break in the data that index sizes 

less than 250,000 Chinook salmon 

correspond to years with historically 

low run sizes. 

If NMFS determines it was a low 

Chinook salmon abundance year, NMFS 

would set the performance standard at 

33,318 Chinook salmon and the PSC 

limit at 45,000 Chinook salmon for the 

following pollock fishing year. NMFS 

would publish the lower PSC limit and 

performance standard in the annual 

harvest specifications. In years when 

abundance is above 250,000 Chinook 

salmon, NMFS would manage under the 

current 47,591 Chinook salmon 

performance standard and 60,000 

Chinook salmon PSC limit established 

under Amendment 91. 

The performance standard of 33,318 

Chinook salmon would function the 

same as the existing performance 

standard of 47,591 Chinook salmon 

under Amendment 91. The 33,318 

performance standard would apply to 

each sector that has at least some 

members participating in an IPA. In 

each low Chinook salmon abundance 

year, NMFS would allocate the 33,318 

performance standard as an ‘‘annual 

threshold amount’’ to the catcher/

processor sector, the mothership sector, 

the inshore sector, and the CDQ 

Program. The same seasonal and sector 

apportionments would apply to both 

performance standards. Although 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations are 

made to the inshore cooperatives and 

the CDQ groups, the performance 

standard applies to the sector, not to 

individual inshore cooperatives or CDQ 

groups. In addition to participation by at 

least some members in an IPA, for each 

sector to continue to receive its 

allocation of the 45,000 Chinook salmon 

PSC limit in low Chinook salmon 

abundance years, the total annual 

Chinook salmon bycatch by all members 

of a sector participating in an IPA could 

not exceed the sector’s annual threshold 

amount (the sector’s annual portion of 

the performance standard) in any three 

years within a consecutive seven-year 

period. The 33,318 performance 

standard would also be the PSC limit in 

low abundance years if no IPA was 

approved or for a sector that had 

exceeded its performance standard. 

If there is an approved IPA, then the 

PSC limit in low Chinook salmon 

abundance years would be 45,000 

Chinook salmon. The 45,000 PSC limit 

would function the same as the 60,000 

Chinook salmon PSC limit under 

Amendment 91. NMFS would issue 

allocations of the 45,000 PSC limit to 

the AFA catcher/processor sector, the 

AFA mothership sector, the AFA 

inshore cooperatives, and the CDQ 

groups using the same seasonal and 

sector apportionments. Separate 

allocations would be issued for the A 

season and the B season. Chinook 

salmon remaining from the A season 

could be used in the B season 

(‘‘rollover’’). Entities could transfer PSC 

allocations within a season and could 

also receive transfers of Chinook salmon 

bycatch to cover overages (‘‘postdelivery transfers’’). 

The inclusion of a lower PSC limit 

and performance standard is based on 

the need to reduce bycatch when these 

Chinook salmon stocks are critically low 

in order to minimize the impact of the 

pollock fishery on the stocks. Any 

additional Chinook salmon returning to 

Alaska rivers improves the ability to 

meet the State’s spawning escapement 

goals, which is necessary for long-term 

sustainability of Chinook salmon and 

the people reliant on salmon fisheries. 

While the performance standard is the 

functional limit in the IPAs, the Council 

and NMFS determined that the 60,000 

PSC limit should also be reduced given 

the potential for decreased bycatch 

reduction incentives should a sector 

exceed its performance standard before 

the PSC limit is reached. The reduced 

PSC limit is intended to encourage 

vessels to avoid bycatch to a greater 

degree in years of low abundance, and 

to set a maximum permissible PSC limit 

that reduces the risk of adverse impact 

on stocks in western Alaska during 

periods of low abundance. 

Proposed Changes to Monitoring and 

Enforcement Requirements 

This proposed rule would amend the 

monitoring and enforcement regulations 

to clarify and strengthen those 

implemented by Amendment 91. These 

changes would: Revise salmon retention 

and handling requirements on catcher 

vessels; improve observer data entry and 

transmission requirements aboard 

catcher vessels; clarify the requirements 

applicable to viewing salmon in a 

storage container; and clarify the 

requirements for the removal of salmon 

from an observer sample area at the end 

of a haul or delivery. 

Salmon Retention and Handling on 

Catcher Vessels 

Current catch handling practices on 

catcher vessels includes the delivery of 

‘‘deckloaded’’ pollock to shoreside 

processors or stationary floating 

processors. Deckloading is the practice 

of retaining catch in the codend of the 

net rather than dumping the catch in 

refrigerated saltwater tanks (RSW). For 

reasons detailed in the Section 2.7 of the 

Analysis, NMFS has recognized 

deckloading as a historic and 

operationally important practice for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5690 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

catcher vessels participating in the 

pollock fishery. This proposed rule 

would move regulations currently at 

§ 679.21(c) to § 679.21(f)(15), modify 

regulations currently at § 679.21(c)(2)(ii) 

to remove the requirement to store all 

salmon bycatch in an RSW, which is not 

possible when a vessel’s catch exceeds 

the storage capacity of the RSW tanks, 

and add the following requirements at 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(B) to clarify catch 

handling, sorting, and storage 

requirements on board catcher vessels: 

(1) All salmon must be retained until 

delivery to the processor. 

(2) The vessel operator must notify 

the observer at least 15 minutes prior to 

the transfer of fish from one storage 

location to another, or any sorting, 

handling, or discard of catch prior to 

delivery. 

(3) After the observer has completed 

sampling duties, catch must be secured 

on board the vessel until delivery. 

(Catch may be handled after securing it, 

but only if the observer is notified and 

catch re-secured after the completion of 

catch handling activity.) 

These additional catch handling and 

notification requirements would 

facilitate observer sampling during the 

delivery, and ensure observers are given 

the opportunity to monitor all catch 

handling activities when sorting or 

discard of salmon may occur. This 

would ensure accurate salmon 

accounting at the processor receiving 

the vessel’s catch. 

Observer Data Entry and Transmission 

Requirements Aboard Catcher Vessels 

Catcher vessels participating in the 

pollock fishery are required to carry an 

observer on all trips but only catcher 

vessels greater than or equal to 125 ft 

length overall (LOA) are required to 

provide a computer, data entry software, 

and data transmission capabilities to the 

observer. Currently, an observer on 

board a catcher vessel less than 125 ft 

LOA sends data to NMFS on paper 

forms via facsimile at the completion of 

each trip. Observer data sent to NMFS 

via fax can take a week or more to be 

available for management purposes. 

Access to a computer for electronic data 

entry significantly increases the speed at 

which observer data can be made 

available for inseason management and 

catch accounting. Further, the data 

validation measures built into the 

software improve initial data quality 

and decrease the need for corrections 

during the observer debriefing process. 

Additional information about the 

projected costs and benefits of this 

proposed regulatory amendment are 

detailed in Sections 2.7 and 4.8.4 of the 

Analysis. 

This proposed regulatory amendment 

will clarify the existing observer data 

entry and communications requirements 

and expand the equipment and software 

requirements to apply to all catcher 

vessels less than 125 ft LOA 

participating in the pollock fishery. 

NMFS proposes to reorganize 

regulations at § 679.51(e)(1)(iii) to 

separate the equipment requirements 

from the applicability paragraphs to 

clearly identify which vessel operators 

must provide a computer, software, and 

data transmission capabilities. As a 

result of this proposed action, current 

requirements for observer data entry 

equipment, software, and transmission 

would remain, and the computer and 

software requirements would be 

expanded to apply to catcher vessels 

less than 125 ft LOA participating in the 

pollock fishery. 

Viewing Salmon in a Storage Container 

Regulations at § 679.28(d)(7)(ii) 

require that all salmon stored in the 

salmon storage container on a catcher/ 

processor or mothership must remain in 

view of the observer at the observer 

sampling station at all times during the 

sorting of each haul. NMFS proposes to 

revise the wording of this regulation to 

better reflect the intent that the salmon 

storage container (and not each 

individual salmon in the container) 

must remain in view of the observer at 

the observer sampling station at all 

times during the sorting of each haul. 

Removal of Salmon From Observer 

Sample Area at the End of a Haul or 

Delivery 

Current regulations do not require 

that all salmon be removed from the 

observer sampling area and the salmon 

storage location at the end of each haul 

or each delivery. NMFS proposes to 

modify regulations at 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(A)(3) and 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(C)(6) to require that all 

salmon must be removed, in the 

presence of the observer, from the 

salmon storage container and adjacent 

area at the end of each haul or delivery 

after the observer has completed his or 

her data collection duties. NMFS 

proposes this revision to the regulations 

to ensure that salmon are properly 

accounted for between hauls and 

deliveries. 

Other Regulatory Changes 

NMFS proposes to revise to the 

regulations for clarity and efficiency, as 

follows— 

• Remove Tables 47a, b, c, and d to 

part 679; 

• Correct a cross reference error in 

paragraph (6) of the definition of a 

fishing trip in § 679.2. 

• Remove the requirement to submit 

an application form with a proposed 

IPA or amended IPA at 

§ 679.21(f)(12)(iii)(A) and 

§ 679.21(f)(12)(v)(C); 

• Remove the requirement at 

§ 679.21(f)(12)(v)(C)(2) that an 

amendment to the list of IPA 

participants be received by NMFS no 

later than 1700 hours, Alaska local time, 

on December 1; 

• Move and consolidate the 

regulations for the non-Chinook salmon 

PSC limit and Chum Salmon Savings 

Area from § 679.21(e) to § 679.21(f)(14); 

• Move and consolidate the 

regulations for Chinook salmon bycatch 

in the Aleutian Islands pollock fishery 

from § 679.21(e) to § 679.21(g); 

• Correct a cross reference error in 

§ 679.51(e)(2); 

• Remove ‘‘aboard the vessel’’ from 

§ 679.51(e)(2)(iii)(B)(3); and 

• Make additional very minor nonsubstantive technical edits. 

Remove Tables 47a, b, c, and d 

NMFS proposes to remove Tables 47a, 

b, c, and d to part 679 from the 

regulations and would instead maintain 

these tables on the NMFS Alaska Region 

Web site. Removing these tables would 

not impose any costs on industry and 

would decrease the costs of regulatory 

amendments necessary to update the 

tables in the future. 

NMFS added Tables 47a, b, c, and d 

to part 679 with the final rule to 

implement Amendment 91. At that 

time, Tables 47a, b, c, and d were the 

most efficient way to be transparent 

about the values NMFS uses in making 

the necessary calculations under 

Amendment 91: The percent of each 

sector’s pollock allocation, numbers of 

Chinook salmon associated with each 

vessel in the sector used to calculate the 

opt-out allocation and annual threshold 

amounts, and the percent of the pollock 

allocation associated with each vessel 

that NMFS uses to calculate minimum 

participation in the IPAs. 

Since these tables were published in 

August 2010, catcher vessels have 

changed names and consolidated 

pollock allocations. In June 2014, NMFS 

recalculated the pollock allocations and 

Chinook salmon limits for catcher 

vessels whose allocation and limits has 

changes since 2010. NMFS revised 

Table 47c to show the original and 

revised information and published the 

revised table on the NMFS Alaska 

Region’s Web site. 

However, a regulatory amendment is 

required to change these tables in the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5691 

regulations. Changes to the information 

in these tables may become more 

frequent as vessels change names, 

ownership, or are replaced under the 

provisions of the recently implemented 

regulations for Amendment 106 (79 FR 

54590, September 12, 2014). Removing 

these tables from regulation, and posting 

the necessary information on the Alaska 

Region Web site, would reduce 

inaccuracies that could exist between 

actual vessel characteristics and the 

table in regulations. 

Correct a Cross Reference Error in the 

Definition of a Fishing Trip 

The proposed rule would correct a 

cross reference error in paragraph (6) of 

the definition of a fishing trip in § 679.2. 

This paragraph defines a fishing trip for 

purposes of implementing the postdelivery transfer provisions under 

Amendment 91. These provisions are 

described in more detail on page 14026 

and 14027 of the proposed rule for 

Amendment 91 (75 FR 14016; March 23, 

2010). The cross reference to the CDQ 

Program prohibition in paragraph (6) of 

the fishing trip definition should refer to 

§ 679.7(d)(5)(ii)(C)(2) instead of 

§ 679.7(d)(9). 

Remove Requirement To Submit an 

Application With a Proposed or 

Amended IPA 

NMFS proposes to remove the 

requirement at § 679.21(f)(12)(iii)(A) and 

§ 679.21(f)(12)(v)(C) that an IPA 

representative submit an application 

form along with a proposed IPA or 

amended IPA based on public comment 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

every three years NMFS is required to 

obtain approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) to 

continue to collect information 

authorized under previous final rules. 

The most recent request for public 

comments on renewal of the 

information collection authorized under 

the AFA (OMB Control Number 0648– 

0401) was published in the Federal 

Register on June 19, 2014 (79 FR 35150). 

In response to this request for 

comments, NMFS received a comment 

that the requirement to submit an 

application form in addition to 

submitting a proposed or amended IPA 

was duplicative with the information in 

the IPA itself. NMFS agrees that the 

application form is unnecessary and 

therefore proposes removing it from the 

regulations. 

Remove the Deadline for an 

Amendment to the List of IPA 

Participants 

NMFS proposes to remove the 

requirement at § 679.21(f)(12)(v)(C)(2) 

that an amendment to the list of IPA 

participants (vessels) must be received 

by NMFS no later than 1700 hours, 

A.l.t., on December 1. In removing this 

requirement, NMFS proposes to add a 

requirement at § 679.21(f)(12)(ii)(D) that 

once a member of an IPA, a vessel 

owner or CDQ group cannot withdraw 

from the IPA during the fishing year. 

This change more directly implements 

the Amendment 91 requirement that 

IPA members cannot leave an IPA midyear and that changes to an IPA 

membership must be made after the 

directed pollock fishery closes by 

regulation (after November 1 of each 

year). 

Move and Consolidate the Regulations 

for the Non-Chinook Salmon PSC Limit 

and Chum Salmon Savings Area 

Regulations at § 679.21(e)(1)(vii), 

(e)(3)(i)(A)(3)(ii), (e)(7)(vii), and (e)(7)(ix) 

pertain to the non-Chinook salmon PSC 

limit, the allocation of the non-Chinook 

salmon PSC to the CDQ Program, the 

closure of the Chum Salmon Savings 

Area, and the exemption to the closure 

for participants in an ICA. NMFS 

proposes to move these regulations to 

§ 679.21(f)(14) where other salmon 

bycatch regulations are found because 

they are management measures to 

address salmon bycatch in the pollock 

fishery. NMFS does not propose any 

substantive changes to these regulations, 

except to replace the term ‘‘ICA’’ with 

‘‘IPA’’ in the regulations to be consistent 

with the proposed revisions described 

earlier in this preamble. 

Move and Consolidate the Regulations 

for Chinook Salmon Bycatch in the 

Aleutian Islands Pollock Fishery 

Regulations at § 679.21(e)(1)(viii), 

(e)(3)(i)(A)(3)(i), and (e)(7)(viii) pertain 

to the Chinook salmon PSC limit for the 

Aleutian Islands pollock fishery, the 

allocation of the Aleutian Islands 

Chinook salmon PSC to the CDQ 

Program, and closure of the Aleutian 

Islands Chinook Salmon Savings Area. 

NMFS proposes to move these 

regulations to § 679.21(g). NMFS does 

not propose any substantive changes to 

these regulations. 

Correct a Cross Reference Error in 

§ 679.51(e)(2) 

The proposed rule would correct a 

cross reference error in § 679.51(e)(2). 

This paragraph describes the 

applicability of manager responsibilities 

for a shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor required to maintain 

observer coverage. The cross reference 

to the observer requirements for 

shoreside processors and stationary 

floating processors should refer to 

§ 679.51(b) instead of § 679.51(d). 

Remove ‘‘Aboard the Vessel’’ From 

§ 679.51(e)(2)(iii)(B)(3) 

Regulations at § 679.51(e)(2)(iii)(B)(3) 

pertain to the observer data entry and 

communications equipment required at 

a shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor, some of which are 

not vessels. Therefore, NMFS proposes 

to remove the language ‘‘aboard the 

vessel’’ from this paragraph for clarity. 

Classification 

Pursuant to sections 304(b) and 305(d) 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS 

Assistant Administrator has determined 

that this proposed rule is consistent 

with the FMP, other provisions of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law, subject to further 

consideration of comments received 

during the public comment period. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) 

An RIR was prepared to assess all 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives. The RIR considers all 

quantitative and qualitative measures. A 

copy of this analysis is available from 

NMFS (see ADDRESSES). The Council 

recommended Amendment 110 based 

on those measures that maximized net 

benefits to the Nation. Specific aspects 

of the economic analysis are discussed 

below in the Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis section. 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(IRFA) 

An IRFA was prepared for this action, 

as required by section 603 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The 

IRFA for this proposed action describes 

the reasons why this action is being 

proposed; the objectives and legal basis 

for the proposed rule; the number of 

small entities to which the proposed 

rule would apply; any projected 

reporting, recordkeeping, or other 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed rule; any overlapping, 

duplicative, or conflicting Federal rules; 

and any significant alternatives to the 

proposed rule that would accomplish 

the stated objectives of the MagnusonStevens Act and any other applicable 

statutes, and that would minimize any 

significant adverse economic impacts of 

the proposed rule on small entities. 

Descriptions of the proposed action, its 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5692 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

purpose, and the legal basis are 

contained earlier in this preamble and 

are not repeated here. A summary of the 

IRFA follows. A copy of the IRFA is 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

Number and Description of Small 

Entities Regulated by the Proposed 

Action 

The proposed action applies only to 

those entities that participate in the 

directed pollock trawl fishery in the 

Bering Sea. These entities include 

vessels harvesting pollock under the 

AFA and the six CDQ groups that 

receive allocations of pollock. 

The RFA requires consideration of 

affiliations among entities for the 

purpose of assessing if an entity is 

small. The AFA pollock cooperatives 

are a type of affiliation. All the non-CDQ 

entities directly regulated by the 

proposed action were members of AFA 

cooperatives in 2014 and, therefore, 

NMFS considers them ‘‘affiliated’’ large 

(non-small) entities for RFA purposes. 

Section 5.6 of the IRFA notes that all of 

the AFA cooperatives have gross annual 

revenues that are substantially greater 

than $20.5 million, the standard used by 

the Small Business Administration to 

define the annual gross revenue of a 

large (non-small) business engaged in 

finfish harvesting, such as pollock. 

Therefore, all the non-CDQ pollock 

fishery participants are defined as large 

(non-small) entities. 

Due to their status as non-profit 

corporations, the six CDQ groups are 

identified as ‘‘small’’ entities for RFA 

purposes. This proposed action directly 

regulates the six CDQ groups. As 

described in regulations implementing 

the RFA (13 CFR 121.103), the CDQ 

groups’ affiliations with other large 

entities do not define them as large 

entities. 

The six CDQ groups, formed to 

manage and administer the CDQ 

allocations, investments, and economic 

development projects, are the Aleutian 

Pribilof Island Community Development 

Association, the Bristol Bay Economic 

Development Corporation, the Central 

Bering Sea Fishermen’s Association, the 

Coastal Villages Region Fund, the 

Norton Sound Economic Development 

Corporation, and the Yukon Delta 

Fisheries Development Association. The 

65 communities, with approximately 

27,000 total residents, benefit from 

participation in the CDQ Program, but 

are not directly regulated by this action. 

Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other 

Compliance Requirements 

This proposed rule would revise some 

existing requirements and remove some 

requirements. The revised requirements 

are those related to— 

• Development and submission of 

proposed IPAs and amendments to 

approved IPAs; 

• An annual report from the 

participants in each IPA, documenting 

information and data relevant to the 

Bering Sea Chinook salmon bycatch 

management program; and 

• Salmon handling and storage on 

board a vessel, and obligations to 

facilitate observer data reporting. 

The proposed rule would remove the 

requirements for an application form for 

a proposed IPA or amended IPA. 

Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting 

Federal Rules 

No duplication, overlap, or conflict 

between this proposed action and 

existing Federal rules has been 

identified. 

Description of Significant Alternatives 

That Minimize Adverse Impacts on 

Small Entities 

The proposed action is a 

comprehensive program to minimize 

Chinook and chum salmon bycatch that 

accomplished the stated objectives and 

is consistent with applicable statutes. 

No alternatives were identified in 

addition to those analyzed in the IRFA 

that had the potential to further reduce 

the economic burden on small entities, 

while achieving the objectives of this 

action. Section 2.10 of the Analysis 

contains a detailed discussion of 

alternatives considered and eliminated 

from further analysis (see ADDRESSES). 

This proposed rule includes 

performance standards, rather than 

design standards, to minimize Chinook 

salmon and chum salmon bycatch, 

while limiting the burden on CDQ 

groups. A system of transferable PSC 

allocations and a performance standard, 

even in years of low Chinook salmon 

abundance, would allow CDQ groups to 

decide how best to comply with the 

requirements of this action, given the 

other constraints imposed on the 

pollock fishery (e.g., pollock TAC, 

market conditions, area closures 

associated with other rules, gear 

restrictions, climate and oceanographic 

change). 

Tribal Summary Impact Statement (E.O. 

13175) 

Executive Order 13175 of November 

6, 2000 (25 U.S.C. 450 note), the 

Executive Memorandum of April 29, 

1994 (25 U.S.C. 450 note), the American 

Indian and Alaska Native Policy of the 

U.S. Department of Commerce (March 

30, 1995), and the Tribal Consultation 

and Coordination Policy of the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (May 21, 

2013), outline the responsibilities of 

NMFS in matters affecting tribal 

interests. Section 161 in Division H of 

Public Law 108–199 (188 Stat. 452), as 

amended by section 518 in Division H 

of Public Law 108–447 (118 Stat. 3267), 

extends the consultation requirements 

of Executive Order 13175 to Alaska 

Native corporations. 

NMFS is obligated to consult and 

coordinate with federally recognized 

tribal governments and Alaska Native 

Claims Settlement Act regional and 

village corporations on a government-togovernment basis pursuant to Executive 

Order 13175 which establishes several 

requirements for NMFS, including (1) to 

provide regular and meaningful 

consultation and collaboration with 

Indian tribal governments and Alaska 

Native corporations in the development 

of Federal regulatory practices that 

significantly or uniquely affect their 

communities, (2) to reduce the 

imposition of unfunded mandates on 

Indian tribal governments, and (3) to 

streamline the applications process for 

and increase the availability of waivers 

to Indian tribal governments. Executive 

Order 13175 requires Federal agencies 

to have an effective process to involve 

and consult with representatives of 

Indian tribal governments in developing 

regulatory policies and prohibits 

regulations that impose substantial, 

direct compliance costs on Indian tribal 

governments. 

Section 5(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 

13175 requires NMFS to prepare a tribal 

summary impact statement as part of the 

final rule. This statement must contain 

(1) a description of the extent of the 

agency’s prior consultation with tribal 

officials, (2) a summary of the nature of 

their concerns, (3) the agency’s position 

supporting the need to issue the 

regulation, and (4) a statement of the 

extent to which the concerns of tribal 

officials have been met. If the Secretary 

of Commerce approves Amendment 

110, a tribal impact summary statement 

that summarizes and responds to issues 

raised in all tribal consultations on the 

proposed action and describes the 

extent to which the concerns of tribal 

officials have been met will be included 

in the final rule for Amendment 110. 

The consultation process for this 

action started during the Council 

process when the Council started 

developing Amendment 110. A number 

of tribal representatives and tribal 

organizations provided written public 

comments and oral public testimony to 

the Council during Council outreach 

meetings on Amendment 110 and at the 

numerous Council meetings at which 

Amendment 110 was discussed. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5693 

NMFS conducted two tribal 

consultations, one in December 2014 

and one in April 2015, with 

representatives from the Tanana Chiefs 

Conference; the Association of Village 

Council Presidents; the Yukon River 

Drainage Fisheries Association; the 

Kawerak, Inc.; and the Bering Sea 

Fishermen’s Association. These 

organizations prepared letters for the 

Council and requested the consultations 

to discuss the salmon bycatch 

management measures under 

consideration by the Council. NMFS 

posted reports from these consultations 

on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at 

https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/tribalconsultations. 

NMFS continued the consultation 

process by sending a letter to all Alaska 

Native representatives when the Notice 

of Availability for Amendment 110 

published in the Federal Register 

notifying them of the opportunity to 

comment. 

Collection-of-Information Requirements 

This proposed rule contains 

collection-of-information requirements 

subject to review and approval by OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA). These requirements have been 

submitted to OMB for approval. The 

collections are listed below by OMB 

control number. 

OMB Control Number 0648–0318 

Public reporting burden is estimated 

to average 5 minutes per individual 

response for use of a vessel’s computer, 

software, and data transmission; 5 

minutes per individual response for 

notification of observer before handling 

the vessel’s Bering Sea pollock catch; 

and 5 minutes for notification of crew 

person responsible for ensuring all 

sorting, retention, and storage of 

salmon. 

OMB Control Number 0648–0393 

Public reporting burden is estimated 

to average 8 hours per individual 

response for the Application to Receive 

Transferable Chinook Salmon PSC 

Allocations, including the attached 

contract; 4 hours for the amendment to 

contract; and 15 minutes for the 

Application for the Transfer of Chinook 

Salmon PSC Allocations. 

OMB Control Number 0648–0401 

Public reporting burden is estimated 

to average 40 hours per individual 

response for the Salmon Bycatch 

Incentive Plan Agreement (IPA); and 8 

hours for the IPA Annual Report. 

Public reporting burden includes the 

time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection of information. 

Public comment is sought regarding 

(1) whether this proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information shall have practical utility; 

(2) the accuracy of the burden estimate; 

(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information, 

including through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. Send comments 

on these or any other aspects of the 

collection of information to NMFS 

Alaska Region at the ADDRESSES above, 

email to OIRA_Submission@

omb.eop.gov, or fax to (202) 395–5806. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

All currently approved NOAA 

collections of information may be 

viewed at: http://www.cio.noaa.gov/

services_programs/prasubs.html. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679 

Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements. 

Dated: January 28, 2016. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 679 continues to read as follows: 

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

seq.; 3631 et seq.; Pub. L. 108–447; Pub. L. 

111–281. 

■ 2. In § 679.2: 

■ a. Remove the definition for ‘‘Chinook 

salmon bycatch incentive plan 

agreement (IPA)’’; 

■ b. Revise the definitions for ‘‘Chum 

Salmon Savings Area of the BSAI 

CVOA’’, and paragraph (6) of ‘‘Fishing 

trip’’; 

■ c. Remove the definition for ‘‘NonChinook salmon bycatch reduction 

intercooperative agreement (ICA)’’; 

■ d. Revise the definition for ‘‘PSQ 

reserve’’; and 

■ c. Add the definition for ‘‘Salmon 

bycatch incentive plan agreement (IPA)’’ 

in alphabetical order; 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 679.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Chum Salmon Savings Area of the 

BSAI CVOA (See § 679.21(f)(14) and 

Figure 9 to this part). 

* * * * * 

Fishing trip means: * * * 

(6) For purposes of 

§ 679.7(d)(5)(ii)(C)(2) for CDQ groups 

and § 679.7(k)(8)(ii) for AFA entities, the 

period beginning when a vessel operator 

commences harvesting any pollock that 

will accrue against a directed fishing 

allowance for pollock in the BS or 

against a pollock CDQ allocation 

harvested in the BS and ending when 

the vessel operator offloads or transfers 

any processed or unprocessed pollock 

from that vessel. 

* * * * * 

PSQ reserve means the amount of a 

prohibited species catch limit 

established under § 679.21 that has been 

allocated to the CDQ Program under 

§ 679.21. 

* * * * * 

Salmon bycatch incentive plan 

agreement (IPA) is a voluntary private 

contract, approved by NMFS under 

§ 679.21(f)(12), that establishes 

incentives for participants to avoid 

Chinook salmon and chum salmon 

bycatch while directed fishing for 

pollock in the BS. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 679.7: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (d)(5)(ii)(B), 

(d)(5)(ii)(C)(5), and (k)(8) heading; 

■ b. Redesignate paragraph (k)(8)(iv) as 

(k)(8)(v); and 

■ c. Add new paragraph (k)(8)(iv). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 679.7 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(5) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Non-Chinook salmon. For the 

operator of a vessel, to use trawl gear to 

harvest pollock CDQ in the Chum 

Salmon Savings Area between 

September 1 and October 14 after the 

CDQ group’s non-Chinook salmon PSQ 

is attained, unless the vessel is 

participating in an approved IPA under 

§ 679.21(f)(12). 

(C) * * * 

(5) For the operator of a catcher vessel 

delivering pollock CDQ catch to a 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5694 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

shoreside processor or stationary 

floating processor to: 

(i) Deliver pollock CDQ to a processor 

that does not have a catch monitoring 

and control plan approved under 

§ 679.28(g). 

(ii) Handle, sort, or discard catch 

without notifying the observer 15 

minutes prior to handling, sorting, or 

discarding catch as described in 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(B)(2). 

(iii) Fail to secure catch after the 

completion of catch handling and the 

collection of scientific data and 

biological samples as described in 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(B)(3). 

* * * * * 

(k) * * * 

(8) Salmon PSC. * * * 

* * * * * 

(iv) Catcher vessels. (A) For the 

operator of a catcher vessel, to handle, 

sort, or discard catch without notifying 

the observer 15 minutes prior to 

handling, sorting, or discarding catch as 

described in § 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(B)(2). 

(B) For the operator of a catcher vessel 

to fail to secure catch after the 

completion of catch handling and the 

collection of scientific data and 

biological samples as described in 

§ 679.21(f)(15)(ii)(B)(3). 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 679.20, revise paragraph 

(a)(5)(i)(B)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 679.20 General limitations. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(5) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(1) Inshore, catcher/processor, 

mothership, and CDQ sectors. The 

portions of the BS subarea pollock 

directed fishing allowances allocated to 

each sector under sections 206(a) and 

206(b) of the AFA and the CDQ 

allowance in the BSAI will be divided 

into two seasonal allowances 

corresponding to the two fishing 

seasons set out at § 679.23(e)(2), as 

follows: 

(i) A Season, 45 percent; 

(ii) B Season, 55 percent. 

* * * * * 

5. In § 679.21: 

a. Remove and reserve paragraph (c); 

b. Remove paragraphs (e)(1)(vi), (vii), 

and (viii); (e)(3)(i)(A)(3); and (e)(7)(vii), 

(viii), and (ix); and 

c. Revise paragraphs (f) and (g) to read 

as follows: 

§ 679.21 Prohibited species bycatch 

management. 

* * * * * 

(f) Salmon Bycatch Management in 

the BS Pollock Fishery —(1) 

Applicability. This paragraph contains 

regulations governing the bycatch of 

salmon in the BS pollock fishery. 

(2) Chinook salmon prohibited species 

catch (PSC) limit. Each year, NMFS will 

allocate to AFA sectors listed in 

paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this section a 

portion of the applicable Chinook 

salmon PSC limit. NMFS will publish 

the applicable Chinook salmon PSC 

limit in the annual harvest 

specifications after determining if it is a 

low Chinook salmon abundance year. 

NMFS will determine that it is a low 

Chinook salmon abundance year when 

abundance of Chinook salmon in 

western Alaska is less than or equal to 

250,000 Chinook salmon. By October 1 

of each year, the State of Alaska will 

provide to NMFS an estimate of 

Chinook salmon abundance based on a 

post-season in-river Chinook salmon 

run size index for western Alaska based 

on the Kuskokwim, Unalakleet, and 

Upper Yukon aggregate stock grouping. 

(i) An AFA sector will receive a 

portion of the 47,591 Chinook salmon 

PSC limit, or, in a low Chinook salmon 

abundance year, the 33,318 Chinook 

salmon PSC limit, if— 

(A) No Chinook salmon bycatch 

incentive plan agreement (IPA) is 

approved by NMFS under paragraph 

(f)(12) of this section; or 

(B) That AFA sector has exceeded its 

performance standard under paragraph 

(f)(6) of this section. 

(ii) An AFA sector will receive a 

portion of the 60,000 Chinook salmon 

PSC limit, or, in a low Chinook salmon 

abundance year, the 45,000 Chinook 

salmon PSC limit, if— 

(A) At least one IPA is approved by 

NMFS under paragraph (f)(12) of this 

section; and 

(B) That AFA sector has not exceeded 

its performance standard under 

paragraph (f)(6) of this section. 

(3) Allocations of the Chinook salmon 

PSC limits—(i) Seasonal apportionment. 

NMFS will apportion the Chinook 

salmon PSC limits annually 70 percent 

to the A season and 30 percent to the 

B season, which are described in 

§ 679.23(e)(2). 

(ii) AFA sectors. Each year, NMFS 

will make allocations of the applicable 

Chinook salmon PSC limit to the 

following four AFA sectors: 

AFA Sector: Eligible participants are: 

(A) Catcher/processor ..................... AFA catcher/processors and AFA catcher vessels delivering to AFA catcher/processors, all of which are 

permitted under § 679.4(l)(2) and (l)(3)(i)(A), respectively. 

(B) Mothership ................................ AFA catcher vessels harvesting pollock for processing by AFA motherships, all of which are permitted 

under § 679.4(l)(3)(i)(B) and (l)(4), respectively. 

(C) Inshore ...................................... AFA catcher vessels harvesting pollock for processing by AFA inshore processors, all of which are permitted under § 679.4(l)(3)(i)(C). 

(D) CDQ Program ........................... The six CDQ groups authorized under section 305(i)(1)(D) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act to participate in 

the CDQ Program. 

(iii) Allocations to each AFA sector. 

NMFS will allocate the Chinook salmon 

PSC limits to each AFA sector as 

follows: 

(A) If a sector is managed under the 

60,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit, the 

maximum amount of Chinook salmon 

PSC allocated to each sector in each 

season and annually is— 

AFA sector 

A season B season Annual total 

% Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook 

(1) Catcher/processor .............................. 32.9 13,818 17.9 3,222 28.4 17,040 

(2) Mothership .......................................... 8.0 3,360 7.3 1,314 7.8 4,674 

(3) Inshore ................................................ 49.8 20,916 69.3 12,474 55.6 33,390 

(4) CDQ Program ..................................... 9.3 3,906 5.5 990 8.2 4,896 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5695 

(B) If the sector is managed under the 

45,000 Chinook salmon PSC limit, the 

sector will be allocated the following 

amount of Chinook salmon PSC in each 

season and annually: 

AFA sector 

A season B season Annual total 

% Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook 

(1) Catcher/processor .............................. 32.9 10,363 17.9 2,415 28.4 12,780 

(2) Mothership .......................................... 8.0 2,520 7.3 987 7.8 3,510 

(3) Inshore ................................................ 49.8 15,687 69.3 9,355 55.6 25,020 

(4) CDQ Program ..................................... 9.3 2,930 5.5 743 8.2 3,690 

(C) If the sector is managed under the 

47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit, the 

sector will be allocated the following 

amount of Chinook salmon PSC in each 

season and annually: 

AFA sector 

A season B season Annual total 

% Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook 

(1) Catcher/processor .............................. 32.9 10,906 17.9 2,556 28.4 13,516 

(2) Mothership .......................................... 8.0 2,665 7.3 1,042 7.8 3,707 

(3) Inshore ................................................ 49.8 16,591 69.3 9,894 55.6 26,485 

(4) CDQ Program ..................................... 9.3 3,098 5.5 785 8.2 3,883 

(D) If the sector is managed under the 

33,318 Chinook salmon PSC limit, the 

sector will be allocated the following 

amount of Chinook salmon PSC in each 

season and annually: 

AFA sector 

A season B season Annual total 

% Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook % Allocation # of Chinook 

(1) Catcher/processor .............................. 32.9 7,673 17.9 1,789 28.4 9,462 

(2) Mothership .......................................... 8.0 1,866 7.3 730 7.8 2,599 

(3) Inshore ................................................ 49.8 11,615 69.3 6,926 55.6 18,525 

(4) CDQ Program ..................................... 9.3 2,169 5.5 550 8.2 2,732 

(iv) Allocations to the AFA catcher/

processor and mothership sectors. (A) 

NMFS will issue transferable Chinook 

salmon PSC allocations under paragraph 

(f)(3)(iii) of this section to entities 

representing the AFA catcher/processor 

sector and the AFA mothership sector if 

these sectors meet the requirements of 

paragraph (f)(8) of this section. 

(B) If no entity is approved by NMFS 

to represent the AFA catcher/processor 

sector or the AFA mothership sector, 

then NMFS will manage that sector 

under a non-transferable Chinook 

salmon PSC allocation under paragraph 

(f)(10) of this section. 

(v) Allocations to inshore cooperatives 

and the AFA inshore open access 

fishery. NMFS will further allocate the 

inshore sector’s Chinook salmon PSC 

allocation under paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of 

this section among the inshore 

cooperatives and the inshore open 

access fishery based on the percentage 

allocations of pollock to each inshore 

cooperative under § 679.62(a). NMFS 

will issue transferable Chinook salmon 

PSC allocations to inshore cooperatives. 

Any Chinook salmon PSC allocated to 

the inshore open access fishery will be 

as a non-transferable allocation 

managed by NMFS under the 

requirements of paragraph (f)(10) of this 

section. 

(vi) Allocations to the CDQ Program. 

NMFS will further allocate the Chinook 

salmon PSC allocation to the CDQ 

Program under paragraph (f)(3)(iii) of 

this section among the six CDQ groups 

based on each CDQ group’s percentage 

of the CDQ Program pollock allocation. 

NMFS will issue transferable Chinook 

salmon PSC allocations to CDQ groups. 

(vii) Accrual of Chinook salmon 

bycatch to specific PSC allocations. 

If a Chinook salmon PSC allocation is: Then all Chinook salmon bycatch: 

(A) A transferable allocation to a sector-level entity, inshore cooperative, or CDQ group under paragraph (f)(8) of this section.By any vessel fishing under a transferable allocation will accrue against 

the allocation to the entity representing that vessel. 

(B) A non-transferable allocation to a sector or the inshore open access fishery under paragraph (f)(10) of this section.By any vessel fishing under a non-transferable allocation will accrue 

against the allocation established for the sector or inshore open access fishery, whichever is applicable. 

(C) The opt-out allocation under paragraph (f)(5) of this section ............ By any vessel fishing under the opt-out allocation will accrue against 

the opt-out allocation. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5696 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

(viii) Public release of Chinook 

salmon PSC information. For each year, 

NMFS will release to the public and 

publish on the NMFS Alaska Region 

Web site (http://alaskafisheries.

noaa.gov/): 

(A) The Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations for each entity receiving a 

transferable allocation; 

(B) The non-transferable Chinook 

salmon PSC allocations; 

(C) The vessels fishing under each 

transferable or non-transferable 

allocation; 

(D) The amount of Chinook salmon 

bycatch that accrues towards each 

transferable or non-transferable 

allocation; 

(E) Any changes to these allocations 

due to transfers under paragraph (f)(9) of 

this section, rollovers under paragraph 

(f)(11) of this section, and deductions 

from the B season non-transferable 

allocations under paragraphs (f)(5)(v) or 

(f)(10)(iii) of this section; and 

(F) Tables for each sector that provide 

the percent of the sector’s pollock 

allocation, numbers of Chinook salmon 

associated with each vessel in the sector 

used to calculate the opt-out allocation 

and annual threshold amounts, and the 

percent of the pollock allocation 

associated with each vessel that NMFS 

will use to calculate IPA minimum 

participation assigned to each vessel. 

(4) Reduction in allocations of the 

Chinook salmon PSC limit—(i) 

Reduction in sector allocations. NMFS 

will reduce the seasonal allocation of 

the Chinook salmon PSC limit to the 

catcher/processor sector, the mothership 

sector, the inshore sector, or the CDQ 

Program under paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(A) or 

(B) of this section, if the owner of any 

permitted AFA vessel in that sector, or 

any CDQ group, does not participate in 

an approved IPA under paragraph (f)(12) 

of this section. NMFS will subtract the 

amount of Chinook salmon from each 

sector’s allocation associated with each 

vessel not participating in an approved 

IPA. 

(ii) Adjustments to the inshore sector 

and inshore cooperative allocations. (A) 

If some members of an inshore 

cooperative do not participate in an 

approved IPA, NMFS will reduce the 

allocation to the cooperative to which 

those vessels belong, or the inshore 

open access fishery. 

(B) If all members of an inshore 

cooperative do not participate in an 

approved IPA, the amount of Chinook 

salmon that remains in the inshore 

sector’s allocation, after subtracting the 

amount of Chinook salmon associated 

with the non-participating inshore 

cooperative, will be reallocated among 

the inshore cooperatives participating in 

an approved IPA based on the 

proportion each participating 

cooperative represents of the Chinook 

salmon PSC initially allocated among 

the participating inshore cooperatives 

that year. 

(iii) Adjustment to CDQ group 

allocations. If a CDQ group does not 

participate in an approved IPA, the 

amount of Chinook salmon that remains 

in the CDQ Program’s allocation, after 

subtracting the amount of Chinook 

salmon associated with the nonparticipating CDQ group, will be 

reallocated among the CDQ groups 

participating in an approved IPA based 

on the proportion each participating 

CDQ group represents of the Chinook 

salmon PSC initially allocated among 

the participating CDQ groups that year. 

(iv) All members of a sector do not 

participate in an approved IPA. If all 

members of a sector do not participate 

in an approved IPA, the amount of 

Chinook salmon that remains after 

subtracting the amount of Chinook 

salmon associated with the nonparticipating sector will not be 

reallocated among the sectors that have 

members participating in an approved 

IPA. This portion of the PSC limit will 

remain unallocated for that year. 

(5) Chinook salmon PSC opt-out 

allocation. The following table describes 

requirements for the opt-out allocation: 

(i) What is the amount of Chinook salmon PSC that will be allocated to 

the opt-out allocation in the A season and the B season?.

The opt-out allocation will equal the sum of the Chinook salmon PSC 

deducted under paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section from the seasonal 

allocations of each sector with members not participating in an approved IPA. 

(ii) Which participants will be managed under the opt-out allocation? .... Any AFA-permitted vessel or any CDQ group that is a member of a 

sector eligible under paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section to receive allocations of the 60,000 PSC limit or the 45,000 PSC limit, but that is 

not participating in an approved IPA. 

(iii) What Chinook salmon bycatch will accrue against the opt-out allocation?.All Chinook salmon bycatch by participants under paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of 

this section. 

(iv) How will the opt-out allocation be managed? .................................... All participants under paragraph (f)(5)(ii) of this section will be managed as a group under the seasonal opt-out allocations. If the Regional Administrator determines that the seasonal opt-out allocation 

will be reached, NMFS will publish a notice in the Federal Register 

closing directed fishing for pollock in the BS, for the remainder of the 

season, for all vessels fishing under the opt-out allocation. 

(v) What will happen if Chinook salmon bycatch by vessels fishing 

under the opt-out allocation exceeds the amount allocated to the A 

season opt-out allocation?.

NMFS will deduct from the B season opt-out allocation any Chinook 

salmon bycatch in the A season that exceeds the A season opt-out 

allocation. 

(vi) What will happen if Chinook salmon bycatch by vessels fishing 

under the opt-out allocation is less than the amount allocated to the 

A season opt-out allocation?.

If Chinook salmon bycatch by vessels fishing under the opt-out allocation in the A season is less than the amount allocated to the opt-out 

allocation in the A season, this amount of Chinook salmon will not be 

added to the B season opt-out allocation. 

(vii) Is Chinook salmon PSC allocated to the opt-out allocation transferable?.No. Chinook salmon PSC allocated to the opt-out allocation is not 

transferable. 

(6) Chinook salmon bycatch 

performance standard. If the total 

annual Chinook salmon bycatch by the 

members of a sector participating in an 

approved IPA is greater than that 

sector’s annual threshold amount of 

Chinook salmon in any three of seven 

consecutive years, that sector will 

receive an allocation of Chinook salmon 

under the 47,591 PSC limit in all future 

years, except in low Chinook salmon 

abundance years when that sector will 

receive an allocation under the 33,318 

Chinook salmon PSC limit. 

(i) Annual threshold amount. Prior to 

each year, NMFS will calculate each 

sector’s annual threshold amount. 

NMFS will post the annual threshold 

amount for each sector on the NMFS 

Alaska Region Web site (http://alaska

fisheries.noaa.gov/). At the end of each 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5697 

year, NMFS will evaluate the Chinook 

salmon bycatch by all IPA participants 

in each sector against that sector’s 

annual threshold amount. 

(ii) Calculation of the annual 

threshold amount. A sector’s annual 

threshold amount is the annual number 

of Chinook salmon that would be 

allocated to that sector under the 47,591 

Chinook salmon PSC limit, as shown in 

the table in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of 

this section, or the 33,318 Chinook 

salmon PSC limit in low Chinook 

salmon abundance years, as shown in 

the table in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(D) of 

this section. If any vessels in a sector do 

not participate in an approved IPA, 

NMFS will reduce that sector’s annual 

threshold amount by the number of 

Chinook salmon associated with each 

vessel not participating in an approved 

IPA. If any CDQ groups do not 

participate in an approved IPA, NMFS 

will reduce the CDQ Program’s annual 

threshold amount by the number of 

Chinook salmon associated with each 

CDQ group not participating in an 

approved IPA. 

(iii) Exceeding the performance 

standard. If NMFS determines that a 

sector has exceeded its performance 

standard by exceeding its annual 

threshold amount in any three of seven 

consecutive years, NMFS will issue a 

notification in the Federal Register that 

the sector has exceeded its performance 

standard. In all subsequent years, NMFS 

will allocate to that sector either the 

amount of Chinook salmon in the table 

in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section 

or, in low Chinook salmon abundance 

years, the amount of Chinook salmon in 

the table in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(D) of 

this section. All members of the affected 

sector will fish under this lower PSC 

allocation regardless of whether a vessel 

or CDQ group within that sector 

participates in an approved IPA. 

(7) Replacement vessels. If an AFApermitted vessel is no longer eligible to 

participate in the BS pollock fishery or 

if a vessel replaces a currently eligible 

vessel, NMFS will assign the portion 

and number of Chinook salmon 

associated with that vessel to the 

replacement vessel or distribute it 

among other eligible vessels in the 

sector based on the procedures in the 

law, regulation, or private contract that 

accomplishes the vessel removal or 

replacement action. 

(8) Entities eligible to receive 

transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations. (i) NMFS will issue 

transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations to the following entities, if 

these entities meet all the applicable 

requirements of this section. 

(A) Inshore cooperatives. NMFS will 

issue transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations to the inshore cooperatives 

permitted annually under § 679.4(l)(6). 

The representative and agent for service 

of process (see definition at § 679.2) for 

an inshore cooperative is the 

cooperative representative identified in 

the application for an inshore 

cooperative fishing permit issued under 

§ 679.4(l)(6), unless the inshore 

cooperative representative notifies 

NMFS in writing that a different person 

will act as its agent for service of 

process for purposes of this paragraph 

(f). An inshore cooperative is not 

required to submit an application under 

paragraph (f)(8)(ii) of this section to 

receive a transferable Chinook salmon 

PSC allocation. 

(B) CDQ groups. NMFS will issue 

transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations to the CDQ groups. The 

representative and agent for service of 

process for a CDQ group is the chief 

executive officer of the CDQ group, 

unless the chief executive officer 

notifies NMFS in writing that a different 

person will act as its agent for service 

of process. A CDQ group is not required 

to submit an application under 

paragraph (f)(8)(ii) of this section to 

receive a transferable Chinook salmon 

PSC allocation. 

(C) Entity representing the AFA 

catcher/processor sector. NMFS will 

authorize only one entity to represent 

the catcher/processor sector for 

purposes of receiving and managing 

transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations on behalf of the catcher/ 

processors eligible to fish under 

transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations. NMFS will issue 

transferable Chinook salmon allocations 

under the Chinook salmon PSC limit to 

the entity representing the catcher/ 

processor sector if that entity represents 

all the owners of AFA-permitted vessels 

in this sector that are participants in an 

approved IPA. 

(D) Entity representing the AFA 

mothership sector. NMFS will authorize 

only one entity to represent the 

mothership sector for purposes of 

receiving and managing transferable 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations on 

behalf of the vessels eligible to fish 

under transferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations. NMFS will issue 

transferable Chinook salmon allocations 

under the Chinook salmon PSC limit to 

an entity representing the mothership 

sector if that entity represents all the 

owners of AFA-permitted vessels in this 

sector that are participants in an 

approved IPA. 

(ii) Request for approval as an entity 

eligible to receive transferable Chinook 

salmon PSC allocations. A 

representative of an entity representing 

the catcher/processor sector or the 

mothership sector may request approval 

by NMFS to receive transferable 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations on 

behalf of the members of the sector. The 

application must be submitted to NMFS 

at the address in paragraph (b)(6) of this 

section. A completed application 

consists of the application form and a 

contract, described below. 

(A) Application form. The applicant 

must submit a paper copy of the 

application form with all information 

fields accurately filled in, including the 

affidavit affirming that each eligible 

vessel owner, from whom the applicant 

received written notification requesting 

to join the sector entity, has been 

allowed to join the sector entity subject 

to the same terms and conditions that 

have been agreed on by, and are 

applicable to, all other parties to the 

sector entity. The application form is 

available on the NMFS Alaska Region 

Web site (http://alaskafisheries.

noaa.gov/) or from NMFS at the address 

in paragraph (b)(6) of this section. 

(B) Contract. A contract containing 

the following information must be 

attached to the completed application 

form: 

(1) Information that documents that 

all vessel owners party to the contract 

agree that the entity, the entity’s 

representative, and the entity’s agent for 

service of process named in the 

application form represent them for 

purposes of receiving transferable 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations. 

(2) A statement that the entity’s 

representative and agent for service of 

process are authorized to act on behalf 

of the vessel owners party to the 

contract. 

(3) Signatures, printed names, and 

date of signature for the owners of each 

AFA-permitted vessel identified in the 

application form. 

(C) Contract duration. Once 

submitted, the contract attached to the 

application form is valid until amended 

or terminated by the parties to the 

contract. 

(D) Deadline. An application form and 

contract must be received by NMFS no 

later than 1700 hours, A.l.t., on October 

1 of the year prior to the year for which 

the Chinook salmon PSC allocations are 

effective. 

(E) Approval. If more than one entity 

application form is submitted to NMFS, 

NMFS will approve the application 

form for the entity that represents the 

most eligible vessel owners in the 

sector. 

(F) Amendments to the sector entity. 

(1) An amendment to the sector entity 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5698 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

contract, with no change in entity 

participants, may be submitted to NMFS 

at any time and is effective upon written 

notification of approval by NMFS to the 

entity representative. To amend a 

contract, the entity representative must 

submit a complete application, as 

described in paragraph (f)(8)(ii) of this 

section. 

(2) To make additions or deletions to 

the vessel owners represented by the 

entity for the next year, the entity 

representative must submit a complete 

application, as described in paragraph 

(f)(8)(ii) of this section, by December 1. 

(iii) Entity representative. (A) The 

entity’s representative must— 

(1) Act as the primary contact person 

for NMFS on issues relating to the 

operation of the entity; 

(2) Submit on behalf of the entity any 

applications required for the entity to 

receive a transferable Chinook salmon 

PSC allocation and to transfer some or 

all of that allocation to and from other 

entities eligible to receive transfers of 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations; 

(3) Ensure that an agent for service of 

process is designated by the entity; and 

(4) Ensure that NMFS is notified if a 

substitute agent for service of process is 

designated. Notification must include 

the name, address, and telephone 

number of the substitute agent in the 

event the previously designated agent is 

no longer capable of accepting service 

on behalf of the entity or its members 

within the 5-year period from the time 

the agent is identified in the application 

to NMFS under paragraph (f)(8)(ii) of 

this section. 

(B) Any vessel owner that is a member 

of an inshore cooperative, or a member 

of the entity that represents the catcher/ 

processor sector or the mothership 

sector, may authorize the entity 

representative to sign a proposed IPA 

submitted to NMFS, under paragraph 

(f)(12) of this section, on his or her 

behalf. This authorization must be 

included in the contract submitted to 

NMFS, under paragraph (f)(8)(ii)(B) of 

this section, for the sector-level entities 

and in the contract submitted annually 

to NMFS by inshore cooperatives under 

§ 679.61(d). 

(iv) Agent for service of process. The 

entity’s agent for service of process 

must— 

(A) Be authorized to receive and 

respond to any legal process issued in 

the United States with respect to all 

owners and operators of vessels that are 

members of an entity receiving a 

transferable allocation of Chinook 

salmon PSC or with respect to a CDQ 

group. Service on or notice to the 

entity’s appointed agent constitutes 

service on or notice to all members of 

the entity. 

(B) Be capable of accepting service on 

behalf of the entity until December 31 

of the year five years after the calendar 

year for which the entity notified the 

Regional Administrator of the identity 

of the agent. 

(v) Absent a catcher/processor sector 

or mothership sector entity. If the 

catcher/processor sector or the 

mothership sector does not form an 

entity to receive a transferable allocation 

of Chinook salmon PSC, the sector will 

be managed by NMFS under a nontransferable allocation of Chinook 

salmon PSC under paragraph (f)(10) of 

this section. 

(9) Transfers of Chinook salmon PSC. 

(i) A Chinook salmon PSC allocation 

issued to eligible entities under 

paragraph (f)(8)(i) of this section may be 

transferred to any other entity receiving 

a transferable allocation of Chinook 

salmon PSC by submitting to NMFS an 

application for transfer described in 

paragraph (f)(9)(iii) of this section. 

Transfers of Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations among eligible entities are 

subject to the following restrictions: 

(A) Entities receiving transferable 

allocations under the 60,000 PSC limit 

may only transfer to and from other 

entities receiving allocations under the 

60,000 PSC limit. 

(B) Entities receiving transferable 

allocations under the 45,000 PSC limit 

may only transfer to and from other 

entities receiving allocations under the 

45,000 PSC limit. 

(C) Entities receiving transferable 

allocations under the 47,591 PSC limit 

may only transfer to and from other 

entities receiving allocations under the 

47,591 PSC limit. 

(D) Entities receiving transferable 

allocations under the 33,318 PSC limit 

may only transfer to and from other 

entities receiving allocations under the 

33,318 PSC limit. 

(E) Chinook salmon PSC allocations 

may not be transferred between seasons. 

(ii) Post-delivery transfers. If the 

Chinook salmon bycatch by an entity 

exceeds its seasonal allocation, the 

entity may receive transfers of Chinook 

salmon PSC to cover overages for that 

season. An entity may conduct transfers 

to cover an overage that results from 

Chinook salmon bycatch from any 

fishing trip by a vessel fishing on behalf 

of that entity that was completed or is 

in progress at the time the entity’s 

allocation is first exceeded. Under 

§ 679.7(d)(5)(ii)(C)(2) and (k)(8)(v)(B), 

vessels fishing on behalf of an entity 

that has exceeded its Chinook salmon 

PSC allocation for a season may not start 

a new fishing trip for pollock in the BS 

on behalf of that same entity for the 

remainder of that season. 

(iii) Application for transfer of 

Chinook salmon PSC allocations—(A) 

Completed application. NMFS will 

process a request for transfer of Chinook 

salmon PSC provided that a paper or 

electronic application is completed, 

with all information fields accurately 

filled in. Application forms are available 

on the NMFS Alaska Region Web site 

(http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/) or 

from NMFS at the address in paragraph 

(b)(6) of this section. 

(B) Certification of transferor—(1) 

Non-electronic submittal. The 

transferor’s designated representative 

must sign and date the application 

certifying that all information is true, 

correct, and complete. The transferor’s 

designated representative must submit 

the paper application as indicated on 

the application. 

(2) Electronic submittal. The 

transferor’s designated entity 

representative must log onto the NMFS 

online services system and create a 

transfer request as indicated on the 

computer screen. By using the 

transferor’s NMFS ID, password, and 

Transfer Key, and submitting the 

transfer request, the designated 

representative certifies that all 

information is true, correct, and 

complete. 

(C) Certification of transferee—(1) 

Non-electronic submittal. The 

transferee’s designated representative 

must sign and date the application 

certifying that all information is true, 

correct, and complete. 

(2) Electronic submittal. The 

transferee’s designated representative 

must log onto the NMFS online services 

system and accept the transfer request 

as indicated on the computer screen. By 

using the transferee’s NMFS ID, 

password, and Transfer Key, the 

designated representative certifies that 

all information is true, correct, and 

complete. 

(D) Deadline. NMFS will not approve 

an application for transfer of Chinook 

salmon PSC after June 25 for the A 

season or after December 1 for the B 

season. 

(10) Non-transferable Chinook salmon 

PSC allocations. (i) All vessels 

belonging to a sector that is ineligible to 

receive transferable allocations under 

paragraph (f)(8) of this section, any 

catcher vessels participating in an 

inshore open access fishery, and all 

vessels fishing under the opt-out 

allocation under paragraph (f)(5) of this 

section will fish under specific nontransferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocations. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5699 

(ii) All vessels fishing under a nontransferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocation, including vessels fishing on 

behalf of a CDQ group, will be managed 

together by NMFS under that nontransferable allocation. If, during the 

fishing year, the Regional Administrator 

determines that a seasonal nontransferable Chinook salmon PSC 

allocation will be reached, NMFS will 

publish a notice in the Federal Register 

closing the BS to directed fishing for 

pollock by those vessels fishing under 

that non-transferable allocation for the 

remainder of the season or for the 

remainder of the year. 

(iii) For each non-transferable 

Chinook salmon PSC allocation, NMFS 

will deduct from the B season allocation 

any amount of Chinook salmon bycatch 

in the A season that exceeds the amount 

available under the A season allocation. 

(11) Rollover of unused A season 

allocation—(i) Rollovers of transferable 

allocations. NMFS will add any 

Chinook salmon PSC allocation 

remaining at the end of the A season, 

after any transfers under paragraph 

(f)(9)(ii) of this section, to an entity’s B 

season allocation. 

(ii) Rollover of non-transferable 

allocations. For a non-transferable 

allocation for the mothership sector, 

catcher/processor sector, or an inshore 

open access fishery, NMFS will add any 

Chinook salmon PSC remaining in that 

non-transferable allocation at the end of 

the A season to that B season nontransferable allocation. 

(12) Salmon bycatch incentive plan 

agreements (IPAs)—(i) Minimum 

participation requirements. More than 

one IPA may be approved by NMFS. 

Each IPA must have participants that 

represent the following: 

(A) Minimum percent pollock. Parties 

to an IPA must collectively represent at 

least 9 percent of the BS pollock quota. 

(B) Minimum number of unaffiliated 

AFA entities. Parties to an IPA must 

represent any combination of two or 

more CDQ groups or corporations, 

partnerships, or individuals who own 

AFA-permitted vessels and are not 

affiliated, as affiliation is defined for 

purposes of AFA entities in § 679.2. 

(ii) Membership in an IPA. (A) No 

vessel owner or CDQ group is required 

to join an IPA. 

(B) For a vessel owner in the catcher/ 

processor sector or mothership sector to 

join an IPA, that vessel owner must be 

a member of the entity representing that 

sector under paragraph (f)(8). 

(C) For a CDQ group to be a member 

of an IPA, the CDQ group must sign the 

IPA and list in that IPA each vessel 

harvesting BS pollock CDQ, on behalf of 

that CDQ group, that will participate in 

that IPA. 

(D) Once a member of an IPA, a vessel 

owner or CDQ group cannot withdraw 

from the IPA during a fishing year. 

(iii) Request for approval of a 

proposed IPA. The IPA representative 

must submit a proposed IPA to NMFS 

at the address in paragraph (b)(6) of this 

section. The proposed IPA must contain 

the following information: 

(A) Affidavit. The IPA must include 

the affidavit affirming that each eligible 

vessel owner or CDQ group, from whom 

the IPA representative received written 

notification requesting to join the IPA, 

has been allowed to join the IPA subject 

to the same terms and conditions that 

have been agreed on by, and are 

applicable to, all other parties to the 

IPA. 

(B) Name of the IPA. 

(C) Representative. The IPA must 

include the name, telephone number, 

and email address of the IPA 

representative who submits the 

proposed IPA on behalf of the parties 

and who is responsible for submitting 

proposed amendments to the IPA and 

the annual report required under 

paragraph (f)(13) of this section. 

(D) Third party group. The IPA must 

identify at least one third party group. 

Third party groups include any entities 

representing western Alaskans who 

depend on salmon and have an interest 

in salmon bycatch reduction but do not 

directly fish in a groundfish fishery. 

(E) Description of the incentive plan. 

The IPA must contain a description of 

the following— 

(1) The incentive(s) that will be 

implemented under the IPA for the 

operator of each vessel participating in 

the IPA to avoid Chinook salmon and 

chum salmon bycatch under any 

condition of pollock and Chinook 

salmon abundance in all years. 

(2) How the incentive(s) to avoid 

chum salmon do not increase Chinook 

salmon bycatch. 

(3) The rewards for avoiding Chinook 

salmon, penalties for failure to avoid 

Chinook salmon at the vessel level, or 

both. 

(4) How the incentive measures in the 

IPA are expected to promote reductions 

in a vessel’s Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon bycatch rates relative to what 

would have occurred in absence of the 

incentive program. 

(5) How the incentive measures in the 

IPA promote Chinook salmon and chum 

salmon savings in any condition of 

pollock abundance or Chinook salmon 

abundance in a manner that is expected 

to influence operational decisions by 

vessel operators to avoid Chinook 

salmon and chum salmon. 

(6) How the IPA ensures that the 

operator of each vessel governed by the 

IPA will manage that vessel’s Chinook 

salmon bycatch to keep total bycatch 

below the performance standard 

described in paragraph (f)(6) of this 

section for the sector in which the 

vessel participates. 

(7) How the IPA ensures that the 

operator of each vessel governed by the 

IPA will manage that vessel’s chum 

salmon bycatch to avoid areas and times 

where the chum salmon are likely to 

return to western Alaska. 

(8) The rolling hot spot program for 

salmon bycatch avoidance that operates 

throughout the entire A season and B 

season and the agreement to provide 

notifications of closure areas and any 

violations of the rolling hot spot 

program to the third party group. 

(9) The restrictions or penalties 

targeted at vessels that consistently have 

significantly higher Chinook salmon 

PSC rates relative to other vessels 

fishing at the same time. 

(10) The requirement for vessels to 

enter a fishery-wide in-season salmon 

PSC data sharing agreement. 

(11) The requirement for the use of 

salmon excluder devices, with 

recognition of contingencies, from 

January 20 to March 31, and from 

September 1 until the end of the B 

season. 

(12) The requirement that salmon 

savings credits are limited to a 

maximum of three years for IPAs with 

salmon savings credits. 

(13) The restrictions or performance 

criteria used to ensure that Chinook 

salmon PSC rates in October are not 

significantly higher than those achieved 

in the preceding months. 

(F) Compliance agreement. The IPA 

must include a written statement that all 

parties to the IPA agree to comply with 

all provisions of the IPA. 

(G) Signatures. The names and 

signatures of the owner or 

representative for each vessel and CDQ 

group that is a party to the IPA. The 

representative of an inshore cooperative, 

or the representative of the entity 

formed to represent the AFA catcher/

processor sector or the AFA mothership 

sector under paragraph (f)(8) of this 

section may sign a proposed IPA on 

behalf of all vessels that are members of 

that inshore cooperative or sector level 

entity. 

(iv) Deadline and duration—(A) 

Deadline for proposed IPA. A proposed 

IPA must be received by NMFS no later 

than 1700 hours, A.l.t., on October 1 of 

the year prior to the year for which the 

IPA is proposed to be effective. 

(B) Duration. Once approved, an IPA 

is effective starting January 1 of the year 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5700 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

following the year in which NMFS 

approves the IPA, unless the IPA is 

approved between January 1 and 

January 19, in which case the IPA is 

effective starting in the year in which it 

is approved. Once approved, an IPA is 

effective until December 31 of the first 

year in which it is effective or until 

December 31 of the year in which the 

IPA representative notifies NMFS in 

writing that the IPA is no longer in 

effect, whichever is later. An IPA may 

not expire mid-year. No party may join 

or leave an IPA once it is approved, 

except as allowed under paragraph 

(f)(12)(v)(C) of this section. 

(v) NMFS review of a proposed IPA— 

(A) Approval. An IPA will be approved 

by NMFS if it meets the following 

requirements: 

(1) Meets the minimum participation 

requirements in paragraph (f)(12)(i) of 

this section; 

(2) Is submitted in compliance with 

the requirements of paragraphs (f)(12)(ii) 

and (iv) of this section; and 

(3) Contains the information required 

in paragraph (f)(12)(iii) of this section. 

(B) IPA identification number. If 

approved, NMFS will assign an IPA 

identification number to the approved 

IPA. This number must be used by the 

IPA representative in amendments to 

the IPA. 

(C) Amendments to an IPA. 

Amendments to an approved IPA may 

be submitted to NMFS at any time and 

will be reviewed under the 

requirements of this paragraph (f)(12). 

An amendment to an approved IPA is 

effective upon written notification of 

approval by NMFS to the IPA 

representative. 

(D) Disapproval. (1) NMFS will 

disapprove a proposed IPA or a 

proposed amendment to an IPA for 

either of the following reasons: 

(i) If the proposed IPA fails to meet 

any of the requirements of paragraphs 

(f)(12)(i) through (iii) of this section, or 

(ii) If a proposed amendment to an 

IPA would cause the IPA to no longer 

be consistent with the requirements of 

paragraphs (f)(12)(i) through (iv) of this 

section. 

(2) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). If, in NMFS’ 

review of the proposed IPA, NMFS 

identifies deficiencies in the proposed 

IPA that require disapproval of the 

proposed IPA, NMFS will notify the 

applicant in writing. The IPA 

representative will be provided one 30- 

day period to address, in writing, the 

deficiencies identified by NMFS. 

Additional information or a revised IPA 

received by NMFS after the expiration 

of the 30-day period specified by NMFS 

will not be considered for purposes of 

the review of the proposed IPA. NMFS 

will evaluate any additional information 

submitted by the applicant within the 

30-day period. If the Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

additional information addresses 

deficiencies in the proposed IPA, the 

Regional Administrator will approve the 

proposed IPA under paragraphs 

(f)(12)(iv)(B) and (f)(12)(v)(A) of this 

section. However, if, after consideration 

of the original proposed IPA and any 

additional information submitted during 

the 30-day period, NMFS determines 

that the proposed IPA does not comply 

with the requirements of paragraph 

(f)(12) of this section, NMFS will issue 

an initial administrative determination 

(IAD) providing the reasons for 

disapproving the proposed IPA. 

(3) Administrative Appeals. An IPA 

representative who receives an IAD 

disapproving a proposed IPA may 

appeal under the procedures set forth at 

§ 679.43. If the IPA representative fails 

to file an appeal of the IAD pursuant to 

§ 679.43, the IAD will become the final 

agency action. If the IAD is appealed 

and the final agency action is a 

determination to approve the proposed 

IPA, then the IPA will be effective as 

described in paragraph (f)(12)(iv)(B) of 

this section. 

(4) Pending appeal. While appeal of 

an IAD disapproving a proposed IPA is 

pending, proposed members of the IPA 

subject to the IAD that are not currently 

members of an approved IPA will fish 

under the opt-out allocation under 

paragraph (f)(5) of this section. If no 

other IPA has been approved by NMFS, 

NMFS will issue all sectors allocations 

of the 47,591 Chinook salmon PSC limit 

as described in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of 

this section, or, in low Chinook salmon 

abundance years, allocations of the 

33,318 Chinook salmon PSC limit as 

described in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(D) of 

this section. 

(vi) Public release of an IPA. NMFS 

will make all proposed IPAs and all 

approved IPAs and the list of 

participants in each approved IPA 

available to the public on the NMFS 

Alaska Region Web site (http://alaska

fisheries.noaa.gov/). 

(13) IPA Annual Report. The 

representative of each approved IPA 

must submit a written annual report to 

the Council at the address specified in 

§ 679.61(f). The Council will make the 

annual report available to the public. 

(i) Submission deadline. The IPA 

Annual Report must be received by the 

Council no later than March 15. 

(ii) Information requirements. The 

IPA Annual Report must contain the 

following information: 

(A) A comprehensive description of 

the incentive measures, including the 

rolling hot spot program and salmon 

excluder use, in effect in the previous 

year; 

(B) A description of how these 

incentive measures affected individual 

vessels; 

(C) An evaluation of whether 

incentive measures were effective in 

achieving salmon savings beyond levels 

that would have been achieved in 

absence of the measures, including the 

effectiveness of— 

(1) Measures to ensure that chum 

salmon were avoided in areas and at 

times where chum salmon are likely to 

return to western Alaska; 

(2) Restrictions or penalties that target 

vessels that consistently have 

significantly higher Chinook salmon 

PSC rates relative to other vessels; and 

(3) Restrictions or performance 

criteria used to ensure that Chinook PSC 

rates in October are not significantly 

higher than in previous months. 

(D) A description of any amendments 

to the terms of the IPA that were 

approved by NMFS since the last annual 

report and the reasons that the 

amendments to the IPA were made. 

(E) The sub-allocation to each 

participating vessel of the number of 

Chinook salmon PSC and amount of 

pollock (mt) at the start of each fishing 

season, and number of Chinook salmon 

PSC and amount of pollock (mt) caught 

at the end of each season. 

(F) The following information on inseason transfer of Chinook salmon PSC 

and pollock among AFA cooperatives, 

entities eligible to receive Chinook 

salmon PSC allocations, or CDQ groups: 

(1) Date of transfer; 

(2) Name of transferor; 

(3) Name of transferee; 

(4) Number of Chinook salmon PSC 

transferred; and 

(5) Amount of pollock (mt) 

transferred. 

(G) The following information on inseason transfers among vessels 

participating in the IPA: 

(1) Date of transfer; 

(2) Name of transferor; 

(3) Name of transferee; 

(4) Number of Chinook salmon PSC 

transferred; and 

(5) Amount pollock (mt) transferred. 

(14) Non-Chinook salmon prohibited 

species catch (PSC) limit and Chum 

Salmon Savings Area. (i) The PSC limit 

for non-Chinook salmon caught by 

vessels using trawl gear from August 15 

through October 14 in the Catcher 

Vessel Operational Area, as defined 

under § 679.22(a)(5) and in Figure 2 to 

this part, is 42,000 fish. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 5701 

(ii) 10.7 percent of the non-Chinook 

PSC limit is allocated to the CDQ 

Program as a PSQ reserve. 

(iii) If the Regional Administrator 

determines that 42,000 non-Chinook 

salmon have been caught by vessels 

using trawl gear during the period 

August 15 through October 14 in the 

Catcher Vessel Operational Area, NMFS 

will prohibit fishing for pollock for the 

remainder of the period September 1 

through October 14 in the Chum Salmon 

Savings Area as defined in Figure 9 to 

this part. 

(iv) Trawl vessels participating in 

directed fishing for pollock and 

operating under an IPA approved by 

NMFS under paragraph (f)(12) of this 

section are exempt from closures in the 

Chum Salmon Savings Area. 

(15) Salmon handling. Regulations in 

this paragraph apply to vessels directed 

fishing for pollock in the BS, including 

pollock CDQ, and processors taking 

deliveries from these vessels. 

(i) Salmon discard. The operator of a 

vessel and the manager of a shoreside 

processor or SFP must not discard any 

salmon or transfer or process any 

salmon under the PSD Program at 

§ 679.26 if the salmon were taken 

incidental to a directed fishery for 

pollock in the BS until the number of 

salmon has been determined by the 

observer and the observer’s collection of 

any scientific data or biological samples 

from the salmon has been completed. 

(ii) Salmon retention and storage. (A) 

Operators of catcher/processors or 

motherships must— 

(1) Sort and transport all salmon 

bycatch from each haul to an approved 

storage container located adjacent to the 

observer sampling station that allows an 

observer free and unobstructed access to 

the salmon (see § 679.28(d)(2)(i) and 

(d)(7)). The salmon storage container 

must remain in view of the observer 

from the observer sampling station at all 

times during the sorting of the haul. 

(2) If, at any point during sorting of a 

haul or delivery, the salmon are too 

numerous to be contained in the salmon 

storage container, cease all sorting and 

give the observer the opportunity to 

count the salmon in the storage 

container and collect scientific data or 

biological samples. Once the observer 

has completed all counting and 

sampling duties for the counted salmon, 

the salmon must be removed by vessel 

personnel from the approved storage 

container and the observer sampling 

station, in the presence of the observer. 

(3) Before sorting of the next haul may 

begin, give the observer the opportunity 

to complete the count of salmon and the 

collection of scientific data or biological 

samples from the previous haul. When 

the observer has completed all counting 

and sampling duties for a haul or 

delivery, vessel personnel must remove 

the salmon, in the presence of the 

observer, from the salmon storage 

container and the observer sampling 

station. 

(4) Ensure no salmon of any species 

pass the observer sample collection 

point, as identified in the scale drawing 

of the observer sample station (see 

§ 679.28(d)(2)(i) and (d)(7)). 

(B) Operators of vessels delivering to 

shoreside processors or stationary 

floating processors must— 

(1) Retain all salmon taken incidental 

to a directed fishery for pollock in the 

BS until the salmon are delivered to the 

processor receiving the vessel’s BS 

pollock catch. 

(2) Notify the observer at least 15 

minutes before handling catch on board 

the vessel, including, but not limited to, 

moving catch from one location to 

another, sorting, or discard of catch 

prior to the delivery of catch to the 

processor receiving the vessel’s BS 

pollock catch. This notification 

requirement is in addition to the 

notification requirements in § 679.51(e). 

(3) Secure all salmon and catch after 

the observer has completed the 

collection of scientific data and 

biological samples and after the vessel 

crew has completed handling the catch. 

All salmon and any other catch retained 

on board the vessel must be made 

unavailable for sorting and discard until 

the delivery of catch to the processor 

receiving the vessel’s BS pollock catch. 

Methods to make salmon or retained 

catch unavailable for sorting or discard 

include but are not limited to securing 

the catch in a completely enclosed 

container above or below deck, securing 

the catch in an enclosed codend, or 

completely and securely covering the 

fish on deck. 

(4) Comply with the requirements in 

paragraphs (f)(15)(ii)(B)(2) and (3) of this 

section, before handling the catch prior 

to delivery. 

(C) Shoreside processors or stationary 

floating processors must — 

(1) Comply with the requirements in 

§ 679.28(g)(7)(vii) for the receipt, 

sorting, and storage of salmon from 

deliveries of catch from the BS pollock 

fishery. 

(2) Ensure no salmon of any species 

pass beyond the last point where sorting 

of fish occurs, as identified in the scale 

drawing of the plant in the Catch 

Monitoring Control Plan (CMCP). 

(3) Sort and transport all salmon of 

any species to the salmon storage 

container identified in the CMCP (see 

§ 679.28(g)(7)(vi)(C) and(g)(7)(x)(F)). The 

salmon must remain in that salmon 

storage container and within the view of 

the observer at all times during the 

offload. 

(4) If, at any point during the offload, 

salmon are too numerous to be 

contained in the salmon storage 

container, cease the offload and all 

sorting and give the observer the 

opportunity to count the salmon and 

collect scientific data or biological 

samples. The counted salmon then must 

be removed from the area by plant 

personnel in the presence of the 

observer. 

(5) At the completion of the offload, 

give the observer the opportunity to 

count the salmon and collect scientific 

data or biological samples. 

(6) Before sorting of the next offload 

of catch from the BS pollock fishery 

may begin, give the observer the 

opportunity to complete the count of 

salmon and the collection of scientific 

data or biological samples from the 

previous offload of catch from the BS 

pollock fishery. When the observer has 

completed all counting and sampling 

duties for the offload, plant personnel 

must remove the salmon, in the 

presence of the observer, from the 

salmon storage container and location 

where salmon are counted and 

biological samples or scientific data are 

collected. 

(iii) Assignment of crew to assist 

observer. Operators of vessels and 

managers of shoreside processors and 

SFPs that are required to retain salmon 

under paragraph (f)(15)(i) of this section 

must designate and identify to the 

observer aboard the vessel, or at the 

shoreside processor or SFP, a crew 

person or employee responsible for 

ensuring all sorting, retention, and 

storage of salmon occurs according to 

the requirements of (f)(15)(ii) of this 

section. 

(iv) Discard of salmon. Except for 

salmon under the PSD Program at 

§ 679.26, all salmon must be returned to 

the sea as soon as is practicable, 

following notification by an observer 

that the number of salmon has been 

determined and the collection of 

scientific data or biological samples has 

been completed. 

(g) Chinook salmon bycatch 

management in the AI pollock fishery— 

(1) Applicability. This paragraph 

contains regulations governing the 

bycatch of Chinook salmon in the AI 

pollock fishery. 

(2) AI Chinook salmon PSC limit. (i) 

The PSC limit for Chinook salmon 

caught by vessels while harvesting 

pollock in the AI is 700 fish. 

(ii) 7.5 percent of the PSC limit is 

allocated to the CDQ Program as a PSQ 

reserve. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

5702 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 22 / Wednesday, February 3, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Area closures. If, during the 

fishing year, the Regional Administrator 

determines that catch of Chinook 

salmon by vessels using trawl gear 

while directed fishing for pollock in the 

AI will reach the PSC limit, NMFS, by 

notification in the Federal Register, will 

close the AI Chinook Salmon Savings 

Area, as defined in Figure 8 to this part, 

to directed fishing for pollock with 

trawl gear on the following dates: 

(i) From the effective date of the 

closure until April 15, and from 

September 1 through December 31, if 

the Regional Administrator determines 

that the annual limit of AI Chinook 

salmon will be attained before April 15. 

(ii) From September 1 through 

December 31, if the Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

annual limit of AI Chinook salmon will 

be attained after April 15. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 679.22, revise paragraph (a)(10) 

to read as follows: 

§ 679.22 Closures. 

(a) * * * 

(10) Chum Salmon Savings Area. 

Directed fishing for pollock by vessels 

using trawl gear is prohibited from 

August 1 through August 31 in the 

Chum Salmon Savings Area defined at 

Figure 9 to this part (see also 

§ 679.21(f)(14)). Vessels directed fishing 

for pollock in the BS, including pollock 

CDQ, and operating under an approved 

IPA under § 679.21(f)(12) are exempt 

from closures in the Chum Salmon 

Savings Area. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 679.28, revise paragraphs 

(d)(7)(i), (ii), and (iii) to read as follows: 

§ 679.28 Equipment and operational 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(7) * * * 

(i) A salmon storage container must be 

located adjacent to the observer 

sampling station; 

(ii) The salmon storage container must 

remain in view of the observer at the 

observer sampling station at all times 

during the sorting of each haul; and 

(iii) The salmon storage container 

must be at least 1.5 cubic meters. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. In § 679.51, revise paragraphs 

(e)(1)(iii), (e)(2) introductory text, and 

(e)(2)(iii)(B)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 679.51 Observer requirements for 

vessels and plants. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) Communications and observer 

data entry—(A) Observer use of 

equipment. Allow an observer to use the 

vessel’s communications equipment and 

personnel, on request, for the 

confidential entry, transmission, and 

receipt of work-related messages, at no 

cost to the observer or the United States. 

(B) The operator of a catcher/

processor, mothership, or catcher vessel 

125 ft LOA or longer (except for a 

catcher vessel fishing for groundfish 

with pot gear) must provide the 

following equipment, software and data 

transmission capabilities: 

(1) Observer access to computer. Make 

a computer available for use by the 

observer. 

(2) NMFS-supplied software. Ensure 

that the most recent release of NMFS 

data entry software provided by the 

Regional Administrator or other 

approved software is installed on the 

computer described in paragraph 

(e)(1)(iii)(B)(1) of this section. 

(3) Data transmission. The computer 

and software described in paragraphs 

(e)(1)(iii)(B)(1) and (2) of this section 

must be connected to a communication 

device that provides a point-to-point 

connection to the NMFS host computer. 

(4) Functional and operational 

equipment. Ensure that the required 

equipment described in paragraph 

(e)(1)(iii)(B) of this section and that is 

used by an observer to enter or transmit 

data is fully functional and operational. 

‘‘Functional’’ means that all the tasks 

and components of the NMFS-supplied, 

or other approved, software described in 

paragraph (e)(1)(iii)(B)(2) of this section 

and any required data transmissions to 

NMFS can be executed effectively 

aboard the vessel by the equipment. 

(C) The operator of a catcher vessel 

participating in the Rockfish Program or 

a catcher vessel less than 125 ft LOA 

directed fishing for pollock in the BS 

must comply with the computer and 

software requirements described in 

paragraphs (e)(1)(iii)(B)(1), (2), and (4) of 

this section. 

* * * * * 

(2) Shoreside processor and stationary 

floating processor responsibilities. A 

manager of a shoreside processor or a 

stationary floating processor that is 

required to maintain observer coverage 

as specified under paragraph (b) of this 

section must: 

* * * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(3) Functional and operational 

equipment. Ensuring that the 

communications equipment required 

under paragraph (e)(2)(iii)(B) of this 

section that is used by observers to enter 

and transmit data is functional and 

operational. ‘‘Functional’’ means that all 

the tasks and components of the NMFSsupplied, or other approved, software 

described at paragraph (e)(2)(iii)(B)(2) of 

this section and any data transmissions 

to NMFS can be executed effectively by 

the communications equipment. 

* * * * * 

Tables 47a through 47d to Part 679 

[Removed] 

■ 9. Remove Tables 47a through 47d to 

part 679. 

[FR Doc. 2016–01890 Filed 2–2–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS