60868 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

15 CFR Part 902 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 100212086–0354–04] 

RIN 0648–AY68 

Fisheries off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan; Amendments 20 

and 21; Trawl Rationalization Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is implementing 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Fishery Management 

Plan (FMP), which were partially 

approved by the Secretary on August 9, 

2010. Amendment 20 establishes a trawl 

rationalization program for the Pacific 

Coast groundfish fishery. Amendment 

20’s trawl rationalization program 

consists of: an individual fishing quota 

(IFQ) program for the shorebased trawl 

fleet (including whiting and nonwhiting sectors); and cooperative (coop) 

programs for the at-sea (whiting only) 

mothership and catcher/processor trawl 

fleets. The trawl rationalization program 

is intended to increase net economic 

benefits, create individual economic 

stability, provide full utilization of the 

trawl sector allocation, consider 

environmental impacts, and achieve 

individual accountability of catch and 

bycatch. Amendment 21 establishes 

fixed allocations for limited entry trawl 

participants. These allocations are 

intended to improve management under 

the rationalization program by 

streamlining its administration, 

providing stability to the fishery, and 

addressing halibut bycatch. This rule 

finalizes only certain key components 

necessary for issuance of permits and 

endorsements in time for use in the 

2011 fishery and in order to have the 

2011 specifications reflect the new 

allocation scheme. Specifically, this rule 

establishes the allocations set forth 

under Amendment 21 and establishes 

procedures for initial issuance of 

permits, endorsements, quota shares 

(QS), and catch history assignments 

under the IFQ and coop programs. In 

addition, this rule restructures the entire 

Pacific Coast groundfish regulations to 

more closely track the organization of 

the proposed management measures and 

to make the total groundfish regulations 

more clear. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

1, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Background information 

and documents, including the final 

environmental impacts statements for 

Amendment 20 and Amendment 21, are 

available at the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s Web site at 

http://www.pcouncil.org/. NMFS 

prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis (FRFA), which is summarized 

in the Classification section of this final 

rule. Copies of the FRFA and the Small 

Entity Compliance Guide are available 

from William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional 

Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115–0070; or by phone at 

206–526–6150. 

Written comments regarding the 

burden-hour estimates or other aspects 

of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this final rule 

may be submitted to William W. Stelle, 

Jr., Regional Administrator, Northwest 

Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way 

NE., Seattle, WA 98115–0070, and by email to 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax 

to 202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jamie Goen, 206–526–4656; (fax) 206– 

526–6736; Jamie.Goen@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background 

The Amendment 20 trawl 

rationalization program is a limited 

access privilege program under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA), as reauthorized in 2007. It 

consists of: (1) An IFQ program for the 

shorebased trawl fleet; and (2) coop 

programs for the mothership and 

catcher-processor trawl fleets. The trawl 

rationalization program is intended to 

increase net economic benefits, create 

individual economic stability, provide 

full utilization of the trawl sector 

allocation, consider environmental 

impacts, and achieve individual 

accountability of catch and bycatch. 

Amendment 21 establishes fixed 

allocations for limited entry trawl 

participants. These allocations are 

intended to improve management under 

the rationalization program by 

streamlining its administration, 

providing stability to the fishery, and 

addressing halibut bycatch. 

The trawl rationalization program is 

scheduled to be implemented on 

January 1, 2011. Due to the complexity 

of the program and the tight timeline for 

implementation, NMFS has issued, or is 

in the process of issuing multiple 

rulemakings that would implement this 

program. The following actions are 

related to the trawl rationalization 

program: 

• A final rule (75 FR 4684, January 

29, 2010) which announced that 

potential participants in the program 

should review and, if necessary, correct 

their data that will be used for the 

issuance of QS, permits, and 

endorsements. It also established which 

data NMFS would use and requested 

ownership information from potential 

participants. 

• A notice of availability for 

Amendments 20 and 21 (75 FR 26702, 

May 12, 2010). 

• A proposed rule (75 FR 32994, June 

10, 2010) that would implement 

Amendments 20 and 21, focused on 

provisions deemed necessary to issue 

permits and endorsements in time for 

use in the 2011 fishery and to have the 

2011 harvest specifications reflect the 

new allocation scheme. In addition, the 

June 10th proposed rule also proposed 

to restructure the entire Pacific Coast 

groundfish regulations at 50 CFR part 

660 from one subpart (Subpart G) to five 

subparts (Subparts C–G). 

• A correction to the June 10th 

proposed rule (75 FR 37744, June 30, 

2010) which corrected two dates 

referenced in the preamble to the 

proposed rule regarding the decision 

date for the FMP amendments and the 

end date for the public comment period. 

• The Secretary’s review of and 

decision to partially approve 

Amendments 20 and 21 on August 9, 

2010. 

• A proposed rule (75 FR 53380, 

August 31, 2010) which proposes for 

implementation on January 1, 2011, 

additional program details, including: 

measures applicable to gear switching 

for the IFQ program, observer programs, 

retention requirements, equipment 

requirements, catch monitors, catch 

weighing requirements, coop permits, 

coop agreement requirements, first 

receiver site licenses, QS accounts, 

vessel accounts, further tracking and 

monitoring components, and economic 

data collection requirements. 

This final rule follows the June 10th 

proposed rule (75 FR 32994) and 

implements the following aspects of 

Amendments 20 and 21: (1) The 

allocations set forth under Amendment 

21, and (2) procedures for initial 

issuance of permits, endorsements, QS, 

individual bycatch quota (IBQ), and 

catch history assignments under the IFQ 

and coop programs. In addition, this 

rule restructures the entire Pacific Coast 

groundfish regulations to more closely 

track the organization of the proposed 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60869 

management measures and to make the 

total groundfish regulations more clear. 

The preamble to the proposed rule (75 

FR 32994, June 10, 2010), called the 

‘‘initial issuance’’ proposed rule because 

it proposed the requirements for initial 

issuance of new permits and 

endorsements for the trawl 

rationalization program, provided 

detailed information on the trawl 

rationalization program and a general 

overview on the provisions in 

Amendments 20 and 21, and is not fully 

repeated here. 

Partial Approval of Amendments 20 

and 21 

NMFS partially approved 

Amendments 20 and 21 on August 9, 

2010. Some minor provisions were 

disapproved in both Amendments 20 

and 21. In Amendment 20, NMFS 

disapproved three provisions applicable 

to mothership coops (MS coops): (1) The 

requirement that MS coops file a coop 

contract with the Council and to make 

it available for public review [it must 

still be filed with NMFS]; (2) the 

requirement that MS coops file a letter 

from the Department of Justice; and (3) 

the requirement that coop agreements 

include a clause that at least a majority 

of the members are required to dissolve 

the coop. In Amendment 21, NMFS 

disapproved language that referred to 

the trawl, non-trawl allocations 

superseding limited entry, open access 

allocations. This partial disapproval of 

Amendment 21 does not affect 

implementation of the trawl 

rationalization program or the harvest 

specifications for 2011 because these 

allocations are currently suspended as a 

result of overfished species rebuilding 

plans. However, NMFS has requested 

the Council to go through the 

amendment process to make the FMP 

more clear on how the limited entry, 

open access allocations relate to the 

trawl, non-trawl allocations. 

Description of Data Used for Initial 

Issuance Decisions 

The allocation formulas in 

Amendment 20 and implemented by 

this final rule are based on vessel 

landings or processor receipt histories 

for the shoreside sector. As discussed in 

the preamble to the proposed rule, 

NMFS will use data from the Pacific 

Fisheries Information Network (PacFIN) 

of the Pacific States Marine Fisheries 

Commission (PSMFC) to derive these 

histories. Since 1974, PSMFC has 

worked actively with its member states 

and State and Federal fisheries agencies 

to improve the quality and timeliness of 

fisheries data collection, processing, and 

analysis, and to produce regionally 

coherent data summaries required for 

regional conservation and management 

purposes. PacFIN is a regional fisheries 

data network that is a joint Federal and 

State data collection and information 

management project; for more 

information see http://pacfin.psmfc.org/ 

index.php. Although it addresses other 

species of fish and related uses, PacFIN 

has a strong focus on the informational 

needs of the Council. PacFIN first came 

on line in 1981 by providing the 

Council’s Groundfish Management 

Team, originally called the Plan Team, 

with two reports and an associated 

retrieval system. One report displayed 

monthly catch by species by area and 

another report displayed monthly catch 

by species by data source, including 

foreign countries and joint-ventures. 

The data in PacFIN include fish 

tickets, or state landings receipts, which 

are official documents required by the 

states of California, Oregon, and 

Washington, and logbook information. 

The information collected by the states 

undergoes substantial quality control 

and quality assurance processes before 

and after it is submitted to PacFIN. 

Since 1981, PacFIN data have provided 

the basis for numerous Federal and state 

fishery management actions, including 

harvest determinations necessary to take 

inseason action to maintain fishing 

levels within established quotas and 

fishery closures; analyses of major 

management restructuring programs 

such as the Council’s groundfish limited 

entry system or the Federal groundfish 

trawl buyback program; assessments of 

salmon and groundfish fishery disaster 

programs including determining and 

verifying which fishermen and 

processors receive aid and at what level; 

and for scientific stock assessments and 

other scientific research carried out by 

states, NMFS, and academia. The states, 

the Council, and NMFS rely on the 

PacFIN information as the best scientific 

information available. 

Similarly, the initial allocations for 

the at-sea coops rely on the observer 

data from NMFS’ Northwest Fisheries 

Science Center’s Pacific whiting 

observer data in NORPAC (NORPAC 

data), which also undergoes substantial 

quality control and quality assurance of 

the data. As with the PacFIN data, 

NMFS, the Council, and the states rely 

on the NORPAC data as the best 

scientific information available, and use 

it for multiple purposes, including 

quota monitoring and stock 

assessments. 

In addition to the PacFIN and 

NORPAC quality control and quality 

assurance process, in early 2010, NMFS 

provided notice to all participants 

(basically all current owners of limited 

entry trawl permits and groundfish first 

receivers) to review their catch data for 

the purpose of ensuring that the QS and 

other calculations would be based on 

the best available data. As explained in 

more detail in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, NMFS provided 

instructions and Federal and state 

contact information for participants to 

use in requesting data and correcting 

data, and in support of this process, the 

PSMFC developed scripts for the States 

to use in providing fishermen and 

processors their data directly related to 

their business interests, specifically 

landings sold or purchased by the data 

requestor. A similar process was 

established for the NORPAC data. In 

order for participants to understand the 

calculations and application of the 

PacFIN and NORPAC information, the 

Council provided a series of tables with 

its preliminary estimates of QS, which 

were mailed to current permit owners, 

who were again notified of the 

importance of correcting the underlying 

data bases. These timely corrections 

through the states and ultimately to 

PacFIN were extremely important to 

assure that the data used by NMFS to 

determine the initial allocations are 

based on the best scientific information 

available because the correction process 

cannot be made by NMFS unilaterally 

and additional corrections or 

modifications to the underlying data 

would not be appropriate during the 

application process. 

Use of 2011 Harvest Specifications and 

Management Measures 

Some of the initial issuance formulas 

include calculations that depend on 

results of the 2011–2012 biennial 

harvest specifications and management 

measures process. In particular, 

calculations for initial issuance of QS 

for overfished species caught 

incidentally (Group 2 and Group 3 

species) and for Pacific halibut IBQ 

require that the target species used as a 

basis for the calculation be converted to 

pounds using the 2011 OYs in order to 

determine the relative weighting 

between the target species. The use of 

2011 OYs in these formulas presents 

several implementation issues. First, the 

harvest specifications and management 

measures will not be final until after the 

initial issuance of QS and IBQ for the 

trawl rationalization program is 

scheduled to occur. Second, while the 

Council motion for trawl rationalization 

and the final initial issuance rule 

published here refer to OYs, the Council 

has been proceeding with the adoption 

of an FMP amendment on a parallel 

track, Amendment 23, which would 

replace OYs with annual catch limits 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60870 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(ACLs) (if Amendment 23 is adopted, 

NMFS intends to replace all references 

to OY in the initial issuance regulations 

with references to ACL). Because of 

these two issues, pre-filled applications 

and initial issuance of QS and IBQ will 

be provisional based on the projected 

2011 ACLs recommended by the 

Council during the 2011–2012 harvest 

specifications and management 

measures process. Thus, the initial 

issuance of QS and IBQ may be adjusted 

if NMFS adopts different OYs or ACLs 

for 2011 and 2012 than the ACLs 

adopted by the Council at their June 

2010 meeting. 

Similarly, some of the QS allocation 

formulas depend upon allocations 

between whiting and non-whiting trips 

developed as part of the 2011–2012 

harvest specifications and management 

measures process. As described at 

§ 660.140(d)(8)(iv)(A)(10) of this final 

rule, canary rockfish, bocaccio, cowcod, 

yelloweye rockfish, minor shelf rockfish 

N. of 40°10′ N. lat., and minor shelf 

rockfish S. of 40°10′ N. lat., and minor 

slope rockfish S. of 40°10′ N. lat. were 

not allocated between whiting and nonwhiting trips through Amendment 21, 

and instead will be decided through the 

harvest specifications and management 

measures process. Consistent with the 

Council’s June 2010 motion on the 

harvest specifications and with 

Amendment 21, Table 1e of the harvest 

specifications and management 

measures will list all of the IFQ species 

and the percentages of QS for whiting 

trips versus non-whiting trips. The 

initial issuance of QS for these species 

will be provisional based on the 

allocations recommended by the 

Council at its June 2010 meeting, 

pending final decision of the Secretary 

on the 2011 harvest specifications and 

management measures. 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS solicited public comment on 

both Amendments 20 and 21 (75 FR 

26702, May 12, 2010) and on the 

proposed rule (75 FR 32994, June 10, 

2010). The comment period for these 

notices ended July 12, 2010. Because 

these notices are related, the responses 

to public comments in this section of 

the preamble address Amendments 20 

and 21 and the proposed rule. 

NMFS received 33 individualized 

letters of comments on the proposed 

rule and amendments, submitted by 

individuals or organizations and 385 

form letters. The letters raised a variety 

of issues related to the proposed rule 

and Amendments 20 and 21. 

Some commenters have incorporated 

by reference previous comments 

submitted during the Council process. 

Comments presented to the Council are 

part of the record and were considered 

by the Council during their deliberation. 

In reviewing the proposed rule and 

amendments, NMFS considered the 

record as a whole. 

General Comments in Support and 

Opposed 

Comment 1. NMFS received multiple 

comments expressing general support 

for the proposed rule and amendments. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges these 

comments. 

Comment 2. NMFS received multiple 

comments expressing general 

disagreement with the proposed rule 

and amendments. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges these 

comments. 

Comment 3. NMFS received multiple 

comments expressing support for the 

proposed rule and amendments and 

identifying expected benefits such as 

that it would help conservation of the 

resource, increase net economic 

benefits, provide stability, and reduce 

bycatch; stabilize the whiting fishery 

and traditional fisheries; give fishermen 

greater control over the resource; 

stabilize fishing communities; and 

eliminate regulatory discards. 

Response. NMFS concurs that 

multiple benefits are anticipated as a 

result of Amendments 20 and 21 and 

the proposed rule. The analyses 

supporting the amendments and the 

rule describe both costs and benefits, 

and conclude that the costs are justified 

by the benefits. 

Comment 4. NMFS received multiple 

comments objecting to the proposed 

rule and amendments on the grounds 

that they would not promote 

conservation or maximize economic 

benefit. Commenters stated that 

predicted benefits have been overstated 

and cited the example of the Orange 

Roughy. Commenters also cited studies 

that show catch share programs have 

hidden costs and adverse impacts on 

quality of life. Some commenters stated 

that the proposed rule and amendments 

would not meet the objectives of 

rationalization. 

Response. The underlying analyses 

support the conclusions regarding the 

anticipated effects of these measures 

and the extent to which they meet their 

objectives. While we can learn from 

other fisheries around the world, every 

fishery is different. The 5 year review 

will give us a chance to assess whether 

the program is working as anticipated 

and what changes may need to be made. 

Comment 5. NMFS received multiple 

comments objecting to the proposed 

rule and amendments due to general 

policy objections including to the use of 

quotas, the perception that the proposal 

serves the interests of a few against the 

interests of many, and objections to 

perceived redistribution of wealth and 

privatization of a public resource. In 

addition, NMFS received comments 

suggesting alternative management 

measures that commenters would prefer 

to see adopted such as owner on board 

requirements, IFQs for all three whiting 

sectors, and other approaches. 

Response. The MSA expressly 

authorizes the use of Limited Access 

Privilege Programs (LAPPs) and vests 

the Council with responsibility for 

developing and identifying which 

management measures to recommend 

through its open public process. The 

Council considered a number of 

alternative management measures in the 

development of this program, inclusive 

of those suggested in public comments. 

Appendix A ‘‘Analysis of Components, 

Elements, and Options for the 

Individual Fishing Quota Alternative 

Trawl Individual Quota Components’’ of 

the final EIS ‘‘Rationalization of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery’’ documents these 

considerations in two sections. Under 

Section A–2, IFQ System Details, pages 

A–33 to A–397, for many of the program 

details, a description is provided of 

options considered but either not 

included or not analyzed further. 

Additionally, Section A–3 of Appendix 

A, pages A–402 to A–444, addressed a 

number of options, including: Adaptive 

Management; Halibut Individual 

Bycatch Quota; Program Duration (Fixed 

Term and Auctions); Gear Conversion; 

Regional Landing Zones; Community 

Fishing Associations; Owner on Board 

Provisions; and Sideboard Measures to 

Prevent Spillover (into other fisheries). 

Council rationale and decisions 

regarding which options were selected, 

and which were not, are described. 

NMFS has reviewed the FEIS’s, the 

public comments, and the record as a 

whole and concludes that the decision 

is consistent with MSA and other 

applicable law. 

Comment 6. NMFS received multiple 

comments praising the Council’s 

process for development of the 

amendments for its transparency and 

fairness. 

Response. NMFS agrees that the 

Council utilized a fair and transparent 

public process that included numerous 

public committee meetings and Council 

meetings, as described in pages 19–22 in 

the FEIS (detailed list of those 

meetings). 

Comment 7: NMFS received some 

comments stating that the public 

process has been inadequate. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60871 

Response. NMFS disagrees. In 

addition to the Council process 

referenced above, the agency complied 

with the MSA requirement to have a 

public comment period on both 

amendments and the proposed rule for 

initial issuance, and the NEPA 

requirement to have a comment period 

on the draft environmental impact 

statement (DEIS). NMFS also intends to 

publish for public comment the 

proposed rule on the program 

components. 

Comment 8. NMFS received multiple 

comments objecting to the proposed 

rule because it did not contain certain 

components such as the observer 

coverage requirements and tracking and 

monitoring requirements. One 

commenter added that the proposed 

rule’s administrative provisions lack 

due process. 

Response. NMFS published a 

proposed rule to implement program 

components on August 31, 2010 (75 FR 

53380). Prior to publication in the 

Federal Register, both rules to 

implement the rationalization program 

have gone through substantial public 

review and comment by the Council, 

including several public meetings of the 

Council’s Regulatory Deeming 

Workgroup. As described above, the 

Council and NMFS followed an open 

public process in developing and 

adopting the amendments and the 

implementing regulations. 

Comment 9: Some commenters 

advocated partial approval for different 

elements of the program, such as 

disapproval of the shorebased section; 

approval of whiting components only; 

disapproval with respect to non-whiting 

groundfish. 

Response. NMFS has reviewed the 

amendments in their entirety and, 

except for several minor provisions, has 

not identified a basis for partial 

approval. 

Comment 10. One commenter stated 

that the trailing amendments burden the 

wrong people. 

Response. These amendments are 

currently under development by the 

Council. When completed, they will be 

submitted to NMFS for agency review in 

conjunction with public comment 

periods. Members of the public should 

participate in the Council process to 

help design these amendments. 

Comment 11. One commenter stated 

that the proposed rule and amendments 

should be disapproved due to 

unexplored alternatives and negative 

impacts. 

Response. As described in the EIS, 

NMFS and the Council have explored a 

wide range of alternatives and analyzed 

the potential impacts. As stated in the 

responses to comments 19 and 34, the 

underlying analyses conclude that the 

negative impacts are justified by the 

anticipated benefits. 

Comment 12. NMFS received 

multiple comments citing problems 

with the status quo. 

Response. NMFS acknowledges this 

comment. 

Comment 13. One commenter 

requested a workshop to explain the 

shoreside whiting allocation procedure. 

Response. NMFS has developed 

outreach materials that are currently 

available at: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ 

Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-FisheryManagement/Trawl-Program/index.cfm. 

In addition, NMFS is planning a series 

of public workshops in September/ 

October in California, Oregon and Idaho 

(session in Idaho during two evenings at 

the September Council meeting) at six 

locations to discuss the specifics of the 

program. These workshops are designed 

to address all aspects of the trawl 

rationalization program. 

Comments Pertaining to Timing 

Comment 14. Congressman 

Thompson submitted a comment 

requesting a delay issuing rules until 

fully briefed. 

Response. The Congressman’s staff 

has been briefed by NMFS on the 

provisions associated with the trawl 

rationalization program. 

Comment 15. One commenter 

suggested not making this a permanent 

program, to keep some flexibility when 

stocks rebuild. 

Response. The Council envisions a 

process whereby the program will adapt 

to changing circumstances. A major 

component of the program at the outset 

is the Adaptive Management Program 

(AMP), which sets aside 10 percent of 

the nonwhiting shoreside quota shares 

to address unforeseen impacts, 

beginning with year 3 of the program. 

Additionally, a comprehensive review 

of the program to evaluate effectiveness 

in relation to the original program goals 

and objectives is scheduled for year five 

of the program. Flexibility to adapt to 

changing circumstances was specifically 

acknowledged. On page 54 of the EIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’, it states ‘‘In taking this action, 

the Council acknowledged that work 

will have to continue to monitor the 

program and to make adjustments in 

response to program performance. Even 

prior to implementation, the Council 

will continue to work on provisions for 

Community Fishing Associations 

(CFAs) and an AMP. While there may be 

unintended and unanticipated 

consequences, there will be an 

opportunity to modify the program 

through a review process, and a data 

collection process will be implemented 

to support that review.’’ 

Comment 16. One commenter 

suggested a delay of the program until 

a referendum is conducted. 

Response. The Council chose not to 

consider a referendum (vote by 

fishermen in support or disapproval) 

prior to moving forward. This program 

has been under development through 

the Council process for over five years, 

and ample opportunities have been 

provided for input into the design of the 

program. See response to comment 18 

below for additional details on the 

public input process. 

Comment 17. One commenter 

suggested the program should not be 

implemented because the fishermen are 

still experiencing negative effects and 

financial impacts from buyback. 

Response. In 2003, approximately 

one-half of the West Coast Limited Entry 

Groundfish Trawl Fishery permits were 

retired as part of a voluntary 

government-backed loan and auction 

buyback scheme. Section 2.6.5 of the 

EIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’ describes broad level Council 

concerns and tradeoffs in choosing 

between status quo and trawl 

rationalization, and the buyback 

program was part of that discussion 

(page 53). The Council concluded that 

the trawl rationalization program 

addresses many of the difficult, timeconsuming management problems it has 

struggled with under status quo. It is 

expected to provide a basic management 

framework that will provide the most 

benefits to the nation for the public 

resource, including: assigning personal 

accountability for the fisheries; 

providing opportunities for bycatch 

reduction; enhancing stock rebuilding 

through improved fishery information 

and full observer coverage; providing 

opportunities to maximize catch of 

targeted species while protecting 

species of concern; improving economic 

performance; helping to maintain 

community stability; improving safety; 

guarding against local stock depletion; 

and addressing unforeseen 

circumstances through an innovative 

adaptive management provision. The 

trawl rationalization program is a 

program that will help address 

conservation concerns and take a system 

that is not economically viable for many 

and turn it into one that will work for 

those who remain in the fishery after 

rationalization. 

Comment 18. There were a number of 

public comments on timing and 

implementation of the trawl 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60872 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

rationalization program. The comments 

ranged from those wanting to 

implement the program as proposed, 

without delay, to comments stating their 

opposition to implementation generally, 

to the ‘‘incremental approach, and the 

lack of opportunity for public comment 

and short time frames for review. 

Response. The public participation 

process involving the Council’s 

deliberations is specifically identified in 

detail in Chapter 1 of the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery, June 2010’’ on pages 15–18. 

Development and refinement of the 

alternatives leading to the Council’s 

choice of a preferred alternative has 

taken more than five years, with 

numerous Council and committee 

meetings during the process. The 

Council’s initial scoping and program 

development process began at a Council 

meeting in September, 2003. The EIS 

includes Table 1–1 on page 18, listing 

all of the Council committees associated 

with this subject matter. The EIS also 

includes Table 1–2, on pages 19–22, 

listing the meetings that have been held 

by the committees as well as Council 

meetings at which trawl rationalization 

or intersector allocation were discussed, 

with a brief description of the topics 

covered in each meeting. 

At the agency level, NMFS has 

complied with the statutory 

requirements regarding public comment 

on the Amendments, the proposed 

initial issuance rule, and the DEIS. In 

addition, consistent with statutory 

requirements, NMFS will provide for 

public review and comment on the 

program components rule. NMFS 

believes that were adequate 

opportunities for public comment on 

proposed Amendments 20 and, the 

NEPA documents and the initial 

issuance rule for trawl rationalization. 

As for the incremental approach, NMFS 

has fully analyzed the program and 

made that analysis available to the 

public and used it in the decision on the 

Amendments. The Council agreed with 

the agency’s approach to implement the 

Amendments through two rulemakings. 

Comments on Program Costs 

Comment 19. One commenter 

expressed concern about negative 

impacts on smaller boats, deckhands, 

and smaller ports, pointing out issues 

such as vessels in certain ports that will 

receive lower catch, but have increased 

costs, and the effects of fleet reduction 

on port infrastructure. 

Response. While the trawl 

rationalization program would move the 

fishery toward some of its most 

important goals and objectives, in order 

for the program to realize those benefits, 

a large amount of consolidation would 

have to occur, resulting in fewer people 

employed in the fishery. The Council 

acknowledged and expressed concern 

about the expected consolidation and its 

impacts, and noted the need to attend to 

the potential for disproportionate 

impacts on some communities. There 

was also concern that the potential 

accumulation of wealth under the IFQ 

program should have corresponding 

levels of benefit for the nation, and that 

state implementation costs be 

addressed. The Council also expressed 

an interest in maintaining the character 

of the fleet and a diversified industry. 

Balancing the need for consolidation to 

generate adequate levels of benefit with 

the potential adverse impacts of 

consolidation was a major challenge. At 

the same time, continuation of status 

quo would have its own impacts, with 

both the buyback program and 

cumulative limits having caused 

significant consolidation in the fleet and 

a redistribution of vessels along the 

coast. 

Because of the high degree of concern 

about impacts on communities and 

maintaining some sharing of benefits 

(both among harvesters and between 

harvesters, processors, and others 

dependent on the fishery) the Council 

made a number of tradeoffs in the trawl 

rationalization program that may 

prevent the program from reaching the 

full degree of economic efficiency that 

might otherwise be achievable through 

rationalization. For example, 

accumulation limits would help 

disperse fishery benefits, but would 

inhibit consolidation. Additionally, 

some QS was set aside for use in an 

AMP to address such objectives as 

community and processor stability, new 

entry, conservation, and other 

unidentified/unforeseen adverse 

consequences. A number of other 

measures were also considered as the 

Council struggled to find a balance 

among sectors, states, vessels, ports, 

conservation obligations, and its 

responsibility to try to develop a regime 

that maximizes economic benefits while 

simultaneously realizing, recognizing, 

and honoring the social effects of its 

decisions. 

Consideration was also given to 

allocating QSs to communities and crew 

members. With respect to the Council 

consideration of CDQs, up to the very 

end of the Council’s deliberations, 

communities expressed little or no 

interest in receiving an initial allocation 

of QSs. Therefore, the Council 

developed other mechanisms to address 

concerns about communities, including, 

but not limited to, the AMP, a two-year 

moratorium on QS transfers, a five-year 

review that includes a community 

advisory committee, accumulation 

limits and a two-year review of some of 

the limits, the opportunity for 

communities to receive an initial QS 

allocation by acquiring a trawl permit, 

and a trailing action on CFAs. With 

respect to crew members, an initial 

allocation is difficult because there is 

limited historic information on the 

identity of crew members who have 

fished on trawl vessels. It is the 

Council’s hope that by providing highly 

divisible QSs and ensuring that other 

elements of the program design facilitate 

crew ownership of QS, that crew 

members who want to do so will be able 

to incrementally accumulate QSs. 

In terms of impacts on small 

businesses, the trawl rationalization 

program is intended to increase net 

economic benefits, create economic 

stability, provide full utilization of the 

trawl sector allocation, consider 

environmental impacts, and promote 

conservation through individual 

accountability for catch and bycatch. 

The allocations of quota under the new 

program do not differ significantly from 

status quo allocations made biennially 

in terms of total allocations. However, 

instead of fleetwide quotas, there will 

now be individual allocations of quota 

shares and quota pounds to permit 

owners. Allocations of overfished 

species constrain all groundfish 

fishermen, for both large and small 

operations. In some cases, smaller 

operators may be constrained to a 

greater extent. This was recognized in 

development of the program, and 

operators are encouraged to work 

together cooperatively, through 

mechanisms like combining and sharing 

quota amounts. The program provides 

for leasing of additional quota as needed 

to facilitate operations. 

The proposed action includes 

provisions that would have a beneficial 

impact on small entities. It would create 

a management program under which 

most recent participants in the Pacific 

Coast groundfish limited entry trawl 

fishery (many of which are small 

entities) would be eligible to continue 

participating in the fishery and under 

which the fishery itself would 

experience an increase in economic 

profitability. Small entities choosing to 

exit the fishery should receive financial 

compensation from selling their permit 

or share of the resource. To prevent a 

particular individual, corporation, or 

other entity from acquiring an excessive 

share of the total harvest privileges in 

the program, accumulation limits would 

restrict the amount of harvest privileges 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60873 

that can be held, acquired, or used by 

individuals and vessels. In addition, for 

the shoreside sector of the fishery, an 

AMP was created to mitigate any 

adverse impacts, including impacts on 

small entities and communities that 

might result from the proposed action. 

Comment 20. The Council has not 

adopted a methodology for a costrecovery plan, as required by the MSA, 

and the cost to taxpayers and 

participants is too high. 

Response. Information about program 

costs was included in the EIS and the 

RIR/IRFA. The Council took all of these 

factors into consideration in moving 

forward with a recommendation to 

implement the trawl rationalization 

program. The Council intends to 

develop a cost recovery plan through a 

trailing amendment. NMFS encourages 

public participation in both the Council 

and the Secretarial review process. 

Comment 21. The costs to the 

government are too high and will divert 

funds from other conservation purposes. 

Response. NMFS has taken the costs 

of implementing the amendments into 

consideration when approving them. To 

the extent allowed by the MSA, NMFS 

will recover the agency costs of 

management, data collection and 

analysis, and enforcement activities 

from the fishing industry when a costrecovery plan is implemented. 

Comment 22. The program costs to 

fishermen, including the costs of 

entering the fishery and the costs of 

observers and monitoring, are too high. 

Response. Analyses indicate that the 

program benefits will outweigh the 

program costs. The EIS anticipates that 

the value of the fishery will increase 

through a variety of mechanisms, 

including increased efficiency of 

existing vessels, the transfer of effort to 

the most efficient vessels, and increased 

retention of target species. The program 

includes opportunities for adaptive 

management if actual impacts differ 

from projected impacts. In addition, the 

Council made quota shares highly 

divisible to increase the ability of crew 

members and others to buy into the 

fishery. To aid the fishing industry 

during the transition to a rationalized 

fishery, the agency has announced its 

intent, subject to available Federal 

funding, to cover a portion of the initial 

cost of hiring observers and catch 

monitors. As stated by the agency, 

participants would initially be 

responsible for 10 percent of the cost of 

hiring observers and catch monitors, 

with that amount increased every year 

so that by 2014, the industry would be 

responsible for 100 percent of the cost 

of hiring the observers and catch 

monitors. 

Comments on the Observer Program 

Comment 23. One commenter stated 

that observer rules need to change for 

trawl and small boats to reflect the 

‘‘vastly different bycatch which occurs 

when mistakes are made.’’ 

Response. The final design features of 

the observer program and applicability 

to both large and small vessels were 

evaluated thoroughly through 

development of these program 

components, and ultimately led to the 

Council decision to require 100 percent 

observations for those fishing vessels 

that continue trawling under this 

rationalization program. By ‘‘mistakes’’ 

we assume the commenter meant 

situations where high bycatch of 

overfished species events occur, and 

that larger vessels may have potentially 

greater negative impacts. While this may 

be true, vessels that participate in the 

shorebased IFQ program will be held 

individually accountable for any 

bycatch of overfished species. In the atsea program, there are sector specific 

bycatch caps that will remain in place. 

These bycatch caps are limits, and can 

have the effect of closing sectors of the 

trawl industry when reached. 

Conservation measures in order to 

facilitate the rebuilding of overfished 

species were specific components of the 

trawl rationalization program. 

Comment 24. Public comments 

expressed concern that the cost of the 

observer program disadvantages smaller 

operators; that IFQs, even with 

observers, increase the risk of highgrading; that observer costs are generally 

too high; and that observer program 

doesn’t enhance conservation, just total 

catch accounting. 

Response. Appendix H to the EIS for 

Amendment 20, the ‘‘Regulatory Impact 

Review and Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis, (RIR/IRFA)’’ 

addresses a number of these issues. As 

noted in the RIR/IRFA, the cost 

estimates are preliminary; the direct 

observer and monitoring costs depend 

heavily on operational decisions by 

industry (both fishing vessels and 

processors) to reduce costs. In addition, 

it is impossible to predict how much 

consolidation will occur, especially in 

the initial years of program 

implementation. For these reasons, the 

RIR/IRFA makes broad assumptions 

about industry behavior to frame the 

range of costs. At one extreme, annual 

observer costs could rise to $18 million 

if a 100-vessel fleet needed observers 

365 days a year at a cost of $500 per 

day. However, as stated at numerous 

Council meetings, the industry could 

reduce costs by voluntary limits on the 

number of vessels that can be at sea at 

any one time or agreements to share 

observer coverage between multiple 

vessels. Observer and other costs could 

decline as the number of participating 

vessels decline, when the fleet 

consolidates because of the program. As 

discussed in the RIR/IRFA, the Lian 

analysis (Lian et al., 2008) indicates an 

expectation that there will be a fleet of 

50 to 60 vessels of a size of 60 to 70 feet 

after rationalization. If this were to 

happen, one would expect the costs to 

be significantly lower and 

approximately half of the estimated 

costs for the current fleet. 

As stated in the response to comments 

on the draft EIS ‘‘Rationalization of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery,’’ analysis indicates that 

the program benefits will outweigh the 

program costs. For those participants 

who feel the costs are too much of a 

burden, they have the option of selling 

or leasing their QS. In addition, as 

stated at Council meetings, vessels, both 

large and small, are encouraged to 

coordinate with each other and with the 

observer providers to reduce costs and 

provide more efficiency. 

In terms of the comment that the risk 

of high-grading (sorting to retain more 

marketable fish) will be increased under 

and IFQ system, NMFS believes that the 

exact opposite will occur under total 

catch accounting. With 100 percent 

mandated observer coverage, all catch 

will be accounted for, and individuals 

will be held responsible for their 

behavior. This structure leads to the 

opposite conclusion regarding highgrading. 

One commenter questioned what 

conservation goals the observer program 

is achieving other than total catch 

accounting, citing lack of economic 

benefits and lack of individual stability. 

NMFS disagrees with this perspective. 

Conservation of the fishery resources 

and rebuilding of overfished species are 

the main reasons why the Council has 

recommended a program with total 

catch accounting. Individuals will be 

held responsible for conducting harvests 

consistent with their QS and QP 

allocated. To the extent that individuals 

may need additional QS and QP to 

conduct their operations, the options of 

leasing of QS and purchasing QS and 

QP through time should lead to 

economic stability for those individuals 

whom choose to remain as active 

participants in the trawl rationalization 

program. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60874 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Comments on Initial Allocation of Catch 

Shares 

a. General Comments 

Comment 25. One commenter argued 

that shore-based processors should not 

receive 20 percent of the quota because 

that sector has too much control over 

the fishing fleet. Another commenter 

expressed support for the proposed 

allocation of quota to processors. 

Response. The Council recommended 

that 20 percent of the shoreside harvest 

allocation of whiting would be initially 

allocated to shoreside processors, based 

on those processors’ history. The 

Council concluded, and NMFS agrees, 

that this initial allocation was fair and 

equitable, thus consistent with section 

303A(c)(5) of the MSA, which requires 

the Council to ‘‘ensure fair and equitable 

allocations, including consideration of 

(i) current and historical harvests; (ii) 

employment in the harvesting and 

processing sectors; (iii) investments in, 

and dependence upon, the fishery; and 

(iv) the current and historical 

participation of fishing communities.’’ 

As explained in Section A–2.1.1a 

(Appendix A) of the EIS, NMFS and the 

Council took the statutory factors into 

account and determined that, among the 

various alternatives under 

consideration, the initial allocation of 

whiting harvesting privileges as a 20/80 

percent split to processors and current 

permit holders was fair and equitable. 

The issue of reduced competition and 

anticompetitive impacts of allocating 

quota to processors was analyzed 

extensively in the EIS and was 

discussed and considered carefully by 

the Council. During development of the 

trawl rationalization program, the 

NOAA Office of General Counsel (GC) 

had informal consultations with the 

Antitrust Division of the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Based on those 

informal consultations and analysis of 

relevant facts and applicable legal rules, 

NOAA GC submitted a letter to the 

Council dated October 11, 2008, in 

which the antitrust savings clause in 

Section 303A of the MSA was noted and 

advised ‘‘that any fishery participants 

that are uncertain about the legality 

under the antitrust laws of the United 

States of any of their anticipated 

activities should consult legal counsel 

prior to commencing those activities.’’ 

The NOAA GC letter provided citations 

to guidance or resource documents 

available on the Federal Trade 

Commission Web site. The NOAA GC 

letter is available on the Pacific 

Council’s Web site at http:// 

www.pcouncil.org/bb/2008/1108/ 

F3d_SUP_GC_1108.pdf. 

Comment 26. It is unfair that permits 

that have not made payments for the 

buyback program will receive an initial 

allocation. 

Response. All permits will receive an 

initial allocation of non-overfished 

species, based on the equal division of 

QS associated with the history of the 

permits bought back plus an amount of 

QS related to the actual 1994–2003 

deliveries by the permit. The 

designation of an equal allocation 

amount based on the history of the 

buyback permits was viewed as an 

equitable way to help resolve the initial 

allocation issue, ensuring that the 

smaller producing harvesters were more 

likely to receive an initial allocation 

adequate to cover their needs while the 

larger producing harvesters, more likely 

to be better financed, might have to 

purchase more QS to maintain their 

recent harvest levels. NMFS and the 

Council are aware that this will include 

some permits that have not made 

landings since the inception of the 

buyback loan payback program 

(December 2003). The Council 

recommended, and NMFS is 

implementing, what it believes to be the 

best balance among a variety of possible 

allocation approaches. 

Comment 27. The quota allocations 

do not support current fishing practices. 

In order to keep fishing, some fishermen 

will have to purchase additional quota 

of some species while receiving more 

than needed of other species. In order 

for high producers to fish all their boats, 

they will have to buy more quota. 

Response. Chapter 4 the Amendment 

20 EIS described in detail the 

anticipated impacts of the trawl 

rationalization program on the various 

sectors of the fishing industry. NMFS 

acknowledges that, depending on the 

allocation formula, some permit holders 

and catcher vessels may receive a 

greater or lesser amount of allowable 

catch than under status quo conditions. 

In addition, they may receive a different 

mix of species allocated as quota 

compared to the mix of species they 

currently harvest. In the long run, 

however, transfers of those fishing 

privileges should occur in a way that is 

more optimal to individual harvesters, 

and that transfer will act as a cost to 

those that purchase the shares and as a 

benefit to those that sell them. 

The Council anticipates that 

consolidation is likely to occur in the 

nonwhiting sector that will trend 

toward the most efficient vessels. The 

fleet reduction and cost efficiency 

model shows the consolidation that may 

occur could diminish the number of 

vessels by 50 to 66 percent. 

Comment 28. One comment criticizes 

the eligibility criteria for initial 

allocations as too narrowly focused, not 

providing for captains and crew due to 

a lack of data. 

Response. Although a lack of data was 

one factor in the decision not to extend 

eligibility to receive an initial QS 

allocation, there were several other 

factors considered. The Council 

enumerates several of the reasons 

behind the decision to allocate to 

permits and processors in A–14 and A– 

15 of the Amendment 20 EIS, Appendix 

A. 

Direct allocation to skippers and 

crewmembers was discussed and the 

costs and complexity of identifying 

vessel workers and determining whether 

they participated on vessels while those 

vessels were fishing in the groundfish 

trawl fishery were noted. Complexities 

include the fact that crew memberlicensing requirements vary between 

states and in some cases crewmembers 

are not required to have permits. 

Multiple alternative sources of 

information would have to be 

considered in determining crew member 

eligibility for an initial allocation. 

With respect to relative impacts of an 

initial QS allocation on different classes 

of fishery participants, it was noted that 

for a crew member dislocated because of 

the IFQ program there would likely be 

a greater number of economic 

alternatives available, as compared to a 

fishing permit or vessel. Additionally, 

since crew members move between 

fishing operations, an allocation to crew 

could reduce the initial allocation 

available to a harvester in comparison 

with its recent operation levels, leaving 

fixed capital assets without significant 

production opportunities. While 

harvesters receiving less than their 

needs would be able to acquire 

additional QS through purchase, the 

need to make such purchases would 

likely mean a greater disruption during 

initial implementation of the program. 

b. Allocation Formula in General 

Comment 29. Several commenters 

addressed the qualifying history period 

selected by the Council for both whiting 

and nonwhiting non-overfished species. 

One commenter criticized the period as 

‘‘arbitrary.’’ Others expressed a belief 

that MSA ‘‘recency’’ requirements are 

not being met because the qualifying 

period of 1994–2003 is too out of date. 

One commenter suggested increasing 

emphasis on recent years by moving the 

start of the allocation period from 1994 

to 1997 and the end from 2003 to 2006 

(and using 2003 through 2006 for the 

allocation period for overfished 

species), recognizing a new control date 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60875 

of January 1, 2007. Further comments 

on the qualifying history period include: 

• It rewards the inefficiencies, 

inadequate infrastructure and lack of 

investment that characterized the 

qualifying year window. Allocations of 

nonwhiting groundfish to inactive 

participants in the fishery harm active 

participants. 

• The allocation period includes 

years with inaccurate species 

composition and discard data that will 

skew the picture of the true state of 

nature. 

• More current data is available and 

critically important. 

• There have been dramatic changes 

in the whiting fishery starting in 2001, 

and which have been especially 

significant after 2003. 

Response. Similar comments were 

received during the public comment 

period on the draft EIS ‘‘Rationalization 

of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited 

Entry Trawl Fishery.’’ Parts of the 

detailed response to those comments 

bears repeating as directly relevant and 

responsive to the comments received 

recently. In recommending initial 

allocations, the Council is required to 

consider several factors including 

current harvests and historic harvests. 

See 16 U.S.C. 1853a(c)(5)(A); see also 16 

U.S.C. 1853(b)(6). Appendix A to the 

Amendment 20 EIS includes a review of 

the Council’s consideration of all of 

these factors, including a discussion of 

the rationale for considering a variety of 

dates for the allocation period, 

including start dates of 1994 and each 

year from 1997 through 2001. The 

allocation dates selected represent a 

balance between emphasis on more 

recent history and considering the 

historic fishing opportunities which 

may have had a determining effect on 

the levels of capital investment by 

individual firms. The start date of 1994 

was selected because 1994 was the first 

year of the license limitation program. 

The decision to utilize a long allocation 

period was deliberate; it is likely that 

capital investment is based on longer 

term opportunity and that capital 

persists after contractions in the fishery 

such as that reflected by the disaster 

declaration in 2000. On this basis it is 

appropriate to give some weight to 

landings from the 1990s. Because more 

fish was taken during that time period, 

the relative pounds approach 

(measuring catch history as a vessel’s 

share of total catch) reduces the 

emphasis on a pound of fish caught in 

the 1990s as compared to a pound of 

fish caught after 2000. While some argue 

that fishermen who caught fish in the 

mid-1990s caused the disaster and 

should not receive QS for that fish, the 

catch taken in the mid-1990s was in line 

with what was allowed under the 

regulations and believed to be 

sustainable at the time. 

The Council selected the ending year 

of 2003 because that year corresponds to 

the previously announced control date 

for the fishery. The Council adopted and 

published the control date of November 

6, 2003 (see 69 FR 1563 (January 9, 

2004); 70 FR 29713 (May 24, 2005). The 

Council believes it is very important 

that the 2003 control date be used in 

order to prevent future fishery 

disruptions. The purpose of announcing 

a control date in advance of developing 

a LAPP is to discourage entry into a 

fishery and increased harvest while the 

Council goes through the process of 

developing the program details, which 

can be a lengthy exercise. If the Council 

develops a pattern of announcing and 

abandoning control dates, then the 

announcement of control dates will 

become a signal to harvesters to 

intensify their efforts to catch fish in 

order to increase their odds of 

qualifying for greater initial allocations. 

Such a response would be disruptive to 

fisheries and exacerbate the challenges 

of meeting conservation objectives. 

Additionally, abandoning the original 

control date would reduce the perceived 

fairness of the program by rewarding 

those who fished speculatively after the 

control date (fishing primarily on the 

chance that the control date would be 

abandoned and they would acquire 

more quota as a result of their post 

control date fishing) at the expense of 

those who heeded the control date. In 

balancing the importance of the reliable 

control date, and the importance of 

considering historic participation, 

against the potential for some disruption 

of using a time period ending several 

years prior to the start of the program, 

the Council found that it was preferable 

to use the 2003 control date. 

The public was given significant 

notice of the use of November 6, 2003, 

as a potential control date. The notice 

was originally published in the Federal 

Register on January 9, 2004, and an 

additional notice was published on May 

24, 2005. Both notices were posted on 

the Council’s Web site, with an 

explanation of the possible 

consequences of the control date. In 

addition, starting in October 2003, The 

Council and its Trawl Individual Quota 

Committee held numerous public 

meetings and discussions at Council 

meetings on the trawl rationalization 

program including the use of the control 

date and the alternate qualifying 

periods. 

The Council disagrees with the 

commenter’s assertion that Amendment 

15 to the Groundfish management plan 

created a new control date of January 1, 

2007, that should be controlling here. 

Nowhere does Amendment 15 address 

the 2003 control date or purport to 

change the qualifying period for the 

groundfish trawl program. Amendment 

15 was a limited interim action for the 

non-Tribal whiting fishery issued in 

anticipation of the trawl rationalization 

that in no way attempted to address 

matters beyond its limited scope. 

Moreover, the Council has explicitly 

stated that vessels that qualified for 

Pacific whiting fishery participation 

under Amendment 15 were not 

guaranteed future participation or 

inclusion in the Pacific whiting fishery 

under the provisions of Amendment 20. 

See http://www.pcouncil.org/ 

groundfish/fishery-management-plan/ 

fmp-amendment-15. 

With regards to ‘‘recency’’ concerns, 

the Council does take into account 

recent participation patterns in the 

fishery by allocating QS to current 

permit holders rather than to 

individuals or vessels that originally 

caught the fish. In this way, during the 

extensive period required to develop a 

program of this kind, entry and exit can 

occur and QS can be allocated in a less 

disruptive manner than would occur if 

the allocations went to the individuals 

who caught the fish historically. 

While the overfished species 

allocation formula includes logbooks for 

2003–2006, these records are used to 

determine the fishing pattern, not the 

overall level of harvest activity. The 

Council’s methodology for allocating 

overfished species is significantly 

different than the methodology for 

allocating target catch. The 1994–2003 

period is still used to determine the 

target species allocation, and the harvest 

patterns from the 2003–2006 logbooks 

are used to determine the amount of 

overfished species an entity would need 

to take its target species. In this fashion, 

more recent information for the fishery 

is used without rewarding post control 

date increases in effort. The 1994–2003 

harvest patterns were not used to 

determine a target species QS recipient’s 

need for overfished species QS. This is 

because of the substantial changes in 

fishing patterns which were induced by 

the determination that some species 

were overfished and the implementation 

of the rockfish conservation areas 

(RCAs) and because the RCAs will 

remain in place after the trawl 

rationalization system is put into place. 

Therefore the Council considered that 

an estimate of likely patterns of activity 

should be based on a period of time 

when the RCAs were in place. The 

RCAs were not in place for most of the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60876 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1994–2003 period but were in place for 

2003–2006. 

One commenter made the point that 

the initial allocation, because it is 

different from the current distribution of 

harvest, may reward inefficiencies and 

reverse recent conservation gains, 

including reductions in bycatch. While 

it is possible that the initial allocations 

may not go to the most efficient and 

innovative harvesters, because of the 

need to draw a balance between a 

reliable control date and disruption, 

fairness and equity, recent participation 

and historic participation issues, it is 

expected that society will benefit over 

the long haul as the quota is transferred 

to use by the most efficient harvesters as 

the program progresses. Independent of 

the initial allocation, the QS system is 

expected to provide substantial 

incentive for vessels to avoid bycatch. 

One hundred percent observer coverage 

will ensure full individual vessel 

accountability. These individual vessel 

incentives are expected to preserve 

gains made in bycatch avoidance in 

recent years. 

The same commenter also made the 

point that the discard and catch 

composition data quality from those 

years is poor and will skew the picture 

of the true state of nature. The allocation 

formula does not use discard data from 

the mid-1990s. With respect to catch 

composition data, it has been accepted 

that these data may skew the mix of 

species any particular permit would 

receive away from its actual catch, 

simply because the catch composition 

data was designed to estimate catch at 

the fleet level rather than the individual 

vessel level. Catch composition data has 

the same problem whether it is from the 

mid-1990s or early 2000s. While the 

catch composition data might be of 

better quality in more recent years, the 

Council felt that it was more important 

that the control date and longer 

allocation period be maintained and 

worth the tradeoff entailed in relying on 

older catch composition data. 

Comment 30. A comment was 

submitted on behalf of owners and 

operators of a harvesting vessel, in 

support generally of Amendments 20 

and 21 for improving management of 

groundfish but noting that the program 

improperly excludes valid ‘‘B’’ Permit 

groundfish fishing history in the initial 

allocation process. The commenter 

submitted multiple exhibits in support 

of their comments. 

Response. NMFS has reviewed the 

comments and the supporting exhibits. 

The commenter’s position is that the 

prior permit owner’s assignment in 2004 

of all fishing history to the current 

vessel/permit owner included the 

groundfish ‘‘B’’ Permit fishing history 

from 1994, 1995 and 1996, and therefore 

the program improperly excludes valid 

‘‘B’’ Permit groundfish fishing history in 

the initial allocation process. Further, 

the comment notes that nothing in 

Amendment 20 or 21 precludes 

inclusion of that ‘‘B’’ Permit history in 

the total catch history owned by the 

current permit owner. NMFS disagrees, 

for the following reasons. 

Amendment 20 specifies that the 

initial allocation will be made to the 

current owner of groundfish limited 

entry permits. These permits have been 

in place since 1994, as part of the 

implementation of Amendment 6, the 

groundfish limited entry program. 

Limited entry permits with ‘‘A’’ and ‘‘B’’ 

endorsements were implemented as part 

of the groundfish limited entry program 

(57 FR 54001–01, November 16, 1992). 

The program established permits with 

‘‘A’’ endorsements, which were 

transferable, for trawl vessels that met 

specific minimum landing 

requirements. It also established permits 

with ‘‘B’’ endorsements, which were not 

transferable, and which expired upon 

transfer to a different owner, or at the 

end of 1996 (whichever occurred first). 

These ‘‘B’’ endorsements were intended 

for vessels that had some low level of 

activity in the fishery prior to August 1, 

1988, and under the current owner, but 

did not meet the landing requirements 

for vessels receiving ‘‘A’’ endorsements. 

The ‘‘B’’ endorsements provided a threeyear adjustment period during which 

the vessel owners could either make 

arrangements to stay in the fishery 

through the purchase of an existing ‘‘A’’ 

endorsed permit or stop participating in 

the limited entry fishery. NMFS 

accordingly removed the ‘‘B’’ 

endorsement provisions from the 

regulation after the ‘‘B’’ endorsements 

had expired; in addition to the ‘‘A’’ 

endorsement, the only endorsements on 

limited entry permits are now gear 

endorsements (trawl, longline, pot or 

trap) and size endorsements (see 66 FR 

29729, June 1, 2001, and 50 CFR 

660.333). 

Consistent with this background, the 

current limited entry permits are ‘‘A’’ 

endorsed only and have no relationship 

to ‘‘B’’ endorsed permits, which expired 

at the end of 1996. The current limited 

entry permits in the trawl fishery with 

trawl endorsements originally, under 

Amendment 6, were called limited entry 

permits with ‘‘A’’ endorsements. When 

the ‘‘B’’ permits expired, NMFS revised 

the regulations to refer to limited entry 

permits with trawl endorsements. These 

are the limited entry permits referred to 

in the trawl rationalization program and 

they and their landings history, are 

distinct from the permits with ‘‘B’’ 

endorsements that are no longer in 

existence. 

NMFS recognizes that the supporting 

exhibits submitted by the commenter 

show that for purposes of the American 

Fisheries Act (AFA), the NMFS, Alaska 

Region, approved the request that the F/ 

V Pacific Challenger be named as a 

replacement vessel for the F/V Amber 

Dawn. However, this decision for the 

AFA fisheries is separate from and has 

no effect on the relation to the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish permits and the trawl 

rationalization fishery. 

c. Allocation of Bycatch/Overfished 

Species IFQ 

Comment 31. Some commenters 

stated that the program has been 

compromised by a Council 

recommendation to not allocate 

overfished species in the same manner 

as all other species, but to instead use 

a method based on a constrained fleet 

outside of the time frame which the rest 

of the program is based. Commenters 

state that during the years used for the 

overfished species allocation, 

responsible operators made efforts to 

minimize bycatch of overfished species. 

They further state that this punishes 

those who attempted to fish sustainably 

and rewards those who maximized their 

landings in a manner contrary to the 

conservation goals of the MagnusonStevens Act. 

Response. The Council considered 

and rejected the option of allocating 

overfished species for nonwhiting trips 

using the same method as for other 

nonwhiting IFQ species as not 

appropriate under the circumstances. In 

particular, the relative weighting 

approach, by which landings for a year 

are measured as a percent of all landings 

for the year and species, would have 

given a particularly high amount of 

credit for pounds caught during the 

rebuilding period. Additionally, QS 

would have been allocated to those who 

targeted some of the overfished species 

in the mid-1990s (before they were 

declared overfished) rather than to those 

who need such QS to access current 

target species. Accordingly, the Council 

rejected the approach of using the same 

allocation formula for overfished 

species as for nonwhiting target species 

based on the desire to not reward 

bycatch during the rebuilding period 

and in order to provide QS to those who 

would need it to cover incidental catch 

taken with their target species QS 

allocation. 

Regarding the comment that 

overfished species years selected were 

arbitrary, the Council’s methodology for 

allocating overfished species is 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60877 

significantly different than the 

methodology for allocating target catch. 

The 1994–2003 period is still used to 

determine the target species allocation, 

and the harvest patterns from the 2003– 

2006 logbooks are used to determine the 

amount of overfished species an entity 

would need to take its target species. In 

this fashion, more recent information for 

the fishery is used without rewarding 

post control date increases in effort. The 

1994–2003 harvest patterns were not 

used to determine a target species QS 

recipients need for overfished species 

QS. This is because of the substantial 

changes in fishing patterns which were 

induced by the determination that some 

species were overfished and the 

implementation of the RCAs and 

because the RCAs will remain in place 

after the trawl rationalization system is 

put into place. Therefore the Council 

considered that an estimate of likely 

patterns of activity should be based on 

a period of time when the RCAs were 

in place. The RCAs were not in place for 

most of the 1994–2003 period but were 

in place for 2003–2006, further 

supporting the conclusion to use this 

period for the allocation of overfished 

species. 

Comment 32. One comment expressed 

concern over the impact of the 

allocation formulas on Fort Bragg 

fishermen. 

Response. After the adoption of its 

final preferred alternative, the Council 

heard public comment with regard to 

concerns of the owners of Fort Bragg 

trawl vessels over the initial allocation 

of QS for constraining overfished 

species. The Council considered such 

testimony and subsequently revised its 

initial final preferred alternative so that 

all permits would receive an allocation 

of canary rockfish from the equal 

division of the pool of QS associated 

with the catch history of the buyback 

permits. The Council declined to revise 

the FPA for constraining overfished 

species other than canary. 

Comment 33. A comment stated that 

establishing IFQs for overfished species 

will not solve problems of overfishing. 

IFQs will be transferrable and 

distributed freely in the initial 

allocation to those who are deemed to 

have the greatest need due to catch 

history. IFQs are presumed to 

incentivize responsible fishing due to 

the cost of purchasing additional quota. 

Because the value of IFQs is likely to 

skyrocket due to high demand for a 

scarce resource, this system favors larger 

operations with greater access to capital. 

Response. The Council recommended 

its preferred alternative in response to 

the identified need for bycatch control 

and the need for conservation through 

its focus on individual accountability 

for catch and bycatch. At present, total 

mortality for all species is measured and 

controlled by monitoring total landings 

and sampling 20 percent of the trawl 

trips to estimate bycatch rates (discard 

rates) that are then applied to landings 

to develop an estimate of total catch and 

mortality. With this approach, there is 

substantially less certainty about total 

catch and mortality than there are total 

landings. Further, while agencies are 

able to regulate total landings in the 

nonwhiting trawl fishery through twomonth cumulative limit periods and 

influence bycatch rates with catch area 

restrictions and gear restrictions, they 

face difficulties in managing for total 

catch in the nonwhiting portion of the 

trawl fishery. The fishery is a mixed 

stock fishery. When, despite best 

regulatory efforts, a fisherman 

encounters amounts of certain species 

that are in excess of the two-month 

cumulative landing limits, they may 

continue to fish for other target species, 

discarding the species for which they 

have reached their limit. The current 

monitoring system was designed to 

provide fleetwide total catch estimates 

over the course of a year. It was not 

intended as a tool for managing 

individual vessel discards in the 

nonwhiting trawl fishery or for 

providing for individual accountability. 

With 100-percent observer coverage, 

NMFS and the Council will be able to 

better monitor total mortality of all 

groundfish species. Better mortality 

estimates will improve both stock 

assessments and the ability to keep 

catch below the harvest limits 

developed based on those assessments, 

substantially contributing to 

conservation goals. Additionally, 

rationalization, based on a system that 

relies on transferable quotas, enhances 

the incentive to avoid bycatch. Without 

transferable quota, the incentive is to 

reduce bycatch only to the point where 

all targeted species can be harvested. 

With transferable quotas, fishermen who 

can lower bycatch rates even further 

have a potential opportunity to sell their 

unused quota to others, thus benefitting 

from reducing their bycatch rate to a 

level lower than what was necessary for 

them to take their own available target 

harvest. 

Finally, this is a forward-looking 

management program. It is expected to 

improve the economics of the overall 

trawl fishery. Economic analysis of the 

fishery indicates that the average 

nonwhiting shoreside fisherman is 

either breaking even or losing money 

(not fully covering its capital costs). 

Fishing businesses that don’t receive an 

initial allocation may participate either 

by acquiring QP each year from quota 

shareholders or acquiring long-term 

security through the purchase of QS. 

Those fishing businesses that do not 

choose to acquire QS will have to 

compete each year in the market for QP. 

Their ability to purchase QP will 

depend on their ability to be more 

efficient than other fishing businesses, 

and thereby more able to offer a higher 

price for the QP. Fishing businesses that 

choose to do so will be able to increase 

the security of their investments by 

acquiring QS. 

Comments on Quota Ownership and 

Transfer 

Comment 34. Commenters expressed 

concern that the average fisherman will 

not be able to afford to participate and 

that this will lead to increased 

consolidation and leave many ports no 

longer viable. 

Response. NMFS recognizes the 

likelihood of increased consolidation 

and negative impacts on some 

communities. The RIR/IRFA and FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’ analyze these impacts and 

consider them in the context of other 

costs and benefits expected to result 

from this program. Based on these 

analyses, the program is expected to 

achieve net benefits to the nation. 

It is recognized that fleet 

consolidation will have an impact on 

communities; however, other measures 

are provided to mitigate impacts on 

communities (see Section 10.1.5 of the 

FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’). Under an IFQ program, 

communities will have opportunities to 

plan and control their destiny through 

the acquisition of QS, if they so desire. 

Furthermore, the Council may use part 

or all of the 10 percent quota set aside 

in the AMP to mitigate impacts on 

communities. The Council will also be 

considering a trailing amendment to 

allow community fishing associations to 

acquire quota, potentially in excess of 

control limits. 

While this rule and amendments may 

have negative impacts on certain 

communities and participants, viewing 

the fishery as a whole, the rule and 

amendments are expected to improve 

the economics of the overall trawl 

fishery. 

The Council recognizes that for new 

entrants, the cost of acquiring 

individual quota will add to the expense 

of entering the fishery. An increase in 

profits (before taking into account the 

cost of the quota and normal profits 

after taking into account the cost of the 

quota) and stability is expected to 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60878 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

compensate for the increase in costs. 

Under status quo management, the 

value of a new entrant’s capital 

investment would be at greater risk 

because of the potential erosion of 

fishing opportunity through the 

increased effort of others. With respect 

to the capital badly needed for 

infrastructure and vessel improvements, 

this is a condition that has occurred 

under status quo management. There is 

no reason to believe that continuation of 

status quo would improve the situation; 

however, under IFQs, greater economic 

stability may facilitate a safer fleet with 

a stronger infrastructure. Section 

A–2.2.2.d of Appendix A to the EIS 

identifies ways in which the Council 

considered the needs of new entrants. 

With respect to new entrants working 

their way up from the bottom, the QS 

system provides an opportunity for 

individuals such as crew members to 

accumulate capital. For example, crew 

members might invest in some QS, 

which is highly divisible, and sell their 

QP to the vessel each year, creating a 

stream of income which may be 

accumulated to allow them to purchase 

more QS and eventually a vessel. 

Comment 35. Commenters stated that 

there should be greater restrictions on 

ownership and transfer, such as 

requirements for an owner on board, 

maximum lease percentages, and 

control at the community level. Some 

commenters also stated that captains 

and crew can be disadvantaged when 

employed on vessels with leased quota 

as opposed to when fishing on vessels 

run by quota owners. One commenter 

stated that the need to recoup the price 

of the quota lease makes it more 

difficult for vessels fishing leased quota 

to be profitable and provides an 

example from the Canadian halibut 

fishery. 

Response. As noted above, with 

respect to new entrants working their 

way up from the bottom, the QS system 

provides an opportunity for individuals 

such as crew members to accumulate 

capital. For example, crew members 

might invest in some QS, which is 

highly divisible, and sell their QP to the 

vessel each year, creating a stream of 

income. In addition, the AMP may 

potentially be used for aiding new 

entrants into the fishery; the Council 

will be addressing the AMP program 

during the first two years of the 

rationalization program. 

The Council considered requiring an 

owner on board, but rejected that 

alternative due to: The impracticality of 

such a provision in a multispecies 

fishery which would rely heavily on 

quota trading to match quota mix to 

catch mix; the substantial increase in 

tracking and monitoring costs that such 

a provision would entail; and the fact 

that the owner-operator mode of 

organization is less dominant in the 

trawl fleet than in other, smaller boat, 

fisheries. 

The Council recommended 

accumulation limits that reflect the 

current level of concentration in the 

fleet, as reflected by the harvest activity 

of individual permits. After 

consideration of a variety of approaches, 

the Council recommended control at 

levels more constraining than necessary 

to address concerns related to the 

effective functioning of QS markets. 

This was done in order to achieve 

certain objectives related to the 

distribution of QS ownership. 

Accumulation limits for IFQ fisheries 

range widely depending on the needs 

and circumstances of any particular 

fishery. The U.S. surf clam and 

Wreckfish IFQ programs have no limits 

and rely on antitrust laws to ensure 

excessive control does not occur. Limits 

in the New Zealand system range from 

10 to 40 percent, and limits in Iceland’s 

IFQ system run from 12 to 35 percent. 

Nova Scotia has a limit of 2 percent. 

Limits in the halibut and sablefish IFQ 

fisheries in Alaska are set at 0.5 and 1.0 

percent. The method used by the 

Council to develop the QS control limits 

for this program considered experiences 

with these approaches in other 

programs and is explained in the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery.’’ 

The Council’s recommended limits 

are intended to facilitate fleet 

consolidation and increase efficiency. 

Comment 36: Two commenters 

supported substantially rewriting the 

ownership and control rules in 

proposed § 660.140(d)(4)(iii). 

Response: The specific comments are 

summarized and addressed below. 

a. Under proposed 

§ 660.140(d)(4)(iii)(B), ‘‘any person who 

serves in an executive or management 

capacity of a corporate entity that may 

own quota shares is considered to have 

control, even though that person may 

have not actual control over the use of 

the company’s quota shares.’’ A similar 

situation exists with (iii)(F), where there 

is implied control as a coincidental 

circumstance of employment with a 

particular entity. 

The commenters provided an example 

where the Vice President of Human 

Resources of Company X would be 

considered to have control even though 

she has no control over fishing 

activities, and such Vice President is 

also a member of a family corporation 

that owns a boat that has quota shares. 

The commenters ask who would be 

required to divest shares in excess of the 

accumulation limits, if the total of the 

‘‘two completely separate and distinct 

quota share holding exceeds the 

accumulation limits, or whether the 

Vice President would be required to 

resign her position. 

NMFS does not agree that 

§ 660.140(d)(4)(iii)(B) needs revision. 

The commenters did not provide 

sufficient facts to enable NMFS to 

determine whether the Vice President’s 

position provides her the type and 

scope of authority described in that 

section of the regulations. It did not 

provide sufficient information to 

determine her share of the family 

corporation to determine how much of 

that corporation’s quota share she has 

attributed to her for ownership 

purposes. It also does not describe the 

amount of control she has within the 

family corporation or to determine 

whether she should be attributed with 

control over the entire family share. A 

determination of whether this person 

would exceed any control limit would 

be based on a variety of factors, 

including the details of the Vice 

President’s position with Company X, 

the share of the family corporation she 

has, and her position in the structure of 

the family corporation. As to divestiture 

when a limit is exceeded, the parties 

involved would need to make the 

decision on how to divest or otherwise 

come into compliance with the limits. 

b. Proposed § 660.140(d)(4)(iii)(D) and 

(E) ‘‘could eliminate the ability of a 

quota share/quota pound owner to 

obtain necessary financing for fishing 

operations. Under these sub-clauses, a 

bank or other financial institution 

would be unable to provide loans using 

quota shares/pounds as collateral, a 

common practice in limited access 

fisheries. A quota share brokerage 

would be unable to take title or 

otherwise encumber quota shares/ 

pounds beyond the accumulation limits, 

even if a fisherman requested the broker 

do so.’’ 

NMFS does not intend that these 

sections apply to banks or financial 

institutions, unless the financial 

documents specify control beyond 

normal business agreements. NMFS has 

modified the regulations accordingly. 

As for quota share brokerages, each 

transaction must comply with the 

accumulation or control limits; 

however, compliance does not prevent 

brokerage transactions. Compliance 

would be based on the facts of the 

transactions. 

c. Proposed § 660.140(d)(4)(iii)(D) and 

(E), ‘‘along with sub-clause (iii)(H), 

could prevent the formation of 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60879 

cooperative entities among fishermen to 

maximize efficiencies, reduce observer 

costs, and increase revenues—all 

activities that are assumed to be benefits 

and expected outcomes of Amendment 

20.’’ 

In response, NMFS notes that 

participants in any cooperative 

arrangement need to comply with the 

accumulation limits; it will be 

important that the terms of the 

cooperative arrangement, or any other 

arrangement, be carefully drafted and 

implemented such that the 

accumulation limits are not exceeded. 

The Council has stated its intent to 

consider a type of cooperative 

arrangement for communities 

(community fishing associations or 

CFAs) in the future as a trailing 

amendment—proponents of CFAs have 

suggested the need for modifications to 

the accumulation limits under certain 

circumstances. 

NMFS acknowledges that participants 

in the fishery may be concerned about 

whether potential actions would comply 

with the accumulation limits. It is the 

responsibility of the participants to 

comply with the regulations; if 

participants have questions about 

potential actions, NMFS encourages 

those participants to provide the agency 

with specific facts and questions prior 

to entering into agreements or taking 

action in order to understand NMFS’s 

interpretation of the potential facts in 

relation to the regulation. 

Comment 37. Commenters stated that 

factors such as the cost of quota, 

unrestricted leasing, and no owner-onboard requirement will increase 

involvement of those not currently 

involved in fishing to the detriment of 

fishing families and communities. 

Response. This issue, as well as 

eligibility-to-own rules, and other 

relevant issues will be reviewed during 

the 5-year review. The proposed 

program components rule includes a 

comprehensive mandatory economic 

data collection program that is 

specifically designed to provide 

socioeconomic data that will assist the 

Council in their scheduled 5-year 

review of the program. NMFS has 

published a final rule (75 FR 4684, 

January 29, 2010) to collect information 

needed to track ownership patterns. 

This issue, as well as eligibility-to-own 

rules, and other relevant issues will be 

reviewed during the 5-year review. 

Comment 38. A commenter expressed 

concern that the cost of quota shares 

will lead to dominance by larger scale 

participants resulting in a loss of 

political voice by smaller scale 

fishermen affecting the Council’s ability 

to change or revoke catch shares in the 

future. 

Response. The Council will conduct a 

comprehensive review no later than five 

years after the implementation of the 

program to determine whether the 

program has achieved the goals and 

objectives of Amendment 20. Based on 

this review, which will be during the 

public Council process, the Council may 

recommend a variety of actions, 

including dissolution of the program, 

revocation of all or part of the quota 

shares, or other fundamental changes to 

the program. 

Comment 39. Several commenters 

objected to the ownership and transfer 

provisions for the following reasons: 

Concerns over consolidation that may 

leave ports no longer viable; negative 

effects on captains and crew when 

employed on vessels with leased quota; 

concerns about loss of opportunity to 

comment in the process; auctions and 

rent caps should have been considered; 

costs of quota and unrestricted leasing 

will increase involvement of those 

currently not participating; and the need 

for owner on board requirements. 

Response. With respect to the concern 

that excessive consolidation will leave 

some ports no longer viable, and that 

this is inconsistent with MSA national 

standards, as stated in the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery,’’ Chapter 10, page 672, National 

Standard 8 states that ‘‘Conservation and 

management measures shall, consistent 

with the conservation requirements of 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act (including 

the prevention of overfishing and 

rebuilding of overfished stocks), take 

into account the importance of fishery 

resources to fishing communities in 

order to: (1) Provide for the sustained 

participation of such communities; and 

(2) To the extent practicable, minimize 

adverse economic impacts on such 

communities.’’ 

Chapter 4.14 of the analysis describes 

anticipated impacts on communities 

and acknowledges a possibly profound 

impact on communities that depend on 

trawling. This is due to the nature of 

rationalization which results in fewer 

fishery participants and likely 

geographic shifts. The goal of attaining 

a sustainable fishery as a whole requires 

some impacts to individual 

communities. However, the Council also 

recommended measures that should 

mitigate these impacts. For example, the 

program would allow communities to 

purchase quota or permits to keep some 

of the fishery in the community. In 

addition, the AMP is intended for use in 

ameliorating impacts on communities. 

In addition, fishing community 

participation is addressed in the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery,’’ on page 676. Appendix A 

provides additional discussion of the 

Council’s consideration of communities 

at Section A–2.1.1.a, and lists 

alternative means by which Amendment 

20 addresses community needs, 

including: 

• Maintenance of a split between the 

at-sea and shoreside trawl sectors. 

• Broad eligibility for ownership. 

• A temporary moratorium on the 

transfer of QS to ease the adjustment 

period and allow for adaptive response. 

• Specification of vessel and control 

limits to spread QS among more owners 

and potentially more communities. 

• Inclusion of a community advisory 

committee as a formal part of the 

program performance review process. 

• The Adaptive Management setaside. 

In conclusion, NMFS believes that 

potential impacts to Pacific coast 

communities as a result of trawl 

rationalization were well analyzed, and 

the rationalization program minimizes 

these impacts to the extent practicable. 

With respect to the concern that 

vessel leasing arrangements can 

adversely impact the captains and crew 

participating under a quota share 

program, NMFS notes that captains and 

crew have the option of selecting 

employment opportunities under the 

trawl rationalization program that best 

suits their individual needs, including 

selection based on their understanding 

of the terms associated with their 

employment. In addition, the 

accumulation limits envisioned under 

this program place serious constraints 

on the abilities of vessel owners to 

accumulate quota through leasing 

arrangements. 

With respect to the comment that 

there was a lack of opportunity to 

comment on the QS ownership and 

transfer options, NMFS does not agree 

that there was a lack of opportunity to 

comment on the specifics of this 

program. The reader is referred to the 

response to comment 18 above where 

the public input process is described in 

detail. 

With respect to the suggestions 

regarding the auction concept and rent 

caps suggested by one commenter, or 

‘‘cap-rent-recycle model alternative,’’ 

NMFS’s response was addressed in the 

response to comments on the draft EIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery,’’ and is repeated here. This 

alternative would have government 

capture resource rents to be used for 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60880 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

public purposes. The use of fixed-term 

QS that would be auctioned off 

periodically is one method to achieve 

such ‘‘rent capture.’’ The Council 

considered fixed terms and auctions but 

rejected this mechanism from further 

detailed study. In doing so, the Council 

considered the analysis contained in 

Appendix F of the EIS and the critique 

of the analysis presented by their SSC. 

The Council rejected inclusion of fixedterm QS and auctions in the range of 

alternatives, because (1) auctioning 

quota at the outset of the program could 

make it more difficult for the groundfish 

trawl fleet to successfully transition to 

IFQ/co-op management, and (2) 

exclusion of auctions from the range of 

alternatives does not imply that access 

privileges have been irrevocably 

distributed. 

NMFS and the Council intend to give 

further consideration of auctioning 

harvest privileges during the 5-year 

program review. 

With respect to the comment that 

unrestricted leasing could be 

problematic, NMFS agrees with this 

perspective, and in Appendix A of the 

FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery,’’ on pages A–284 to A–307, 

there is a lengthy discussion of the 

vessel limits and QS control limits 

recommended by the Council. 

Accumulation limits are described 

generally on page A–284, ‘‘This 

provision restricts the amount of QS and 

QP that may be held. Three types of 

accumulation limits are included, 

control limits, vessel limits, and an 

unused QP limit for vessels. The control 

limit would apply to QS; the vessel 

limit would cap the total amount of QP 

that may be registered to a single vessel 

during the year, and would cover both 

the vessels’ used and unused QP. Under 

this limit, a vessel could not have more 

QPs registered for the vessel than a 

predetermined percentage of the QP 

pool. The unused QP limit for vessels 

would cap the amount of unused QP in 

a vessel’s account.’’ From page A–285, 

‘‘There is a tension between allowing a 

sufficient accumulation to improve the 

efficiencies of harvesting activities and 

preventing levels of accumulation that 

could result in a variety of adverse 

economic and social effects.’’ NMFS 

believes that the accumulation limits 

established for Amendment 20 represent 

a reasonable balance of interests. 

The owner-on-board provision was 

addressed in the response to comments 

on the draft EIS ‘‘Rationalization of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery,’’ and is repeated here. 

‘‘An owner-operator or owner-on-board 

provision was considered but rejected. 

In Section A–11 of Appendix A, three 

reasons are identified for rejection of the 

provisions: First, the impracticality of 

such a provision in a multispecies 

fishery which would rely heavily on 

quota trading to match quota mix to 

catch mix; second, the substantial 

increase in tracking and monitoring 

costs that such a provision would entail; 

and third, the owner-operator mode of 

organization is less dominant in the 

trawl fleet than in other, smaller boat, 

fisheries.’’ 

Comments on Community Impacts, 

Involvement, and CFAs 

Comment 40. A commenter expressed 

concern that the cost of quota shares 

will lead to dominance by larger scale 

participants resulting in a loss of 

political voice by certain communities 

and negative impacts on community 

infrastructure. 

Response. As stated in responses to 

comments 39, and 65–67, the 

underlying analyses consider a wide 

variety of community impacts, 

including impacts related to 

consolidation. However, the Council 

process is an open public process and 

communities will continue to be able to 

participate regardless of the amount of 

QS located within a community. 

Comment 41. Several commenters 

stated that there should be an initial 

allocation to communities and that the 

Council should have worked with 

communities. Some commenters 

provided additional specific input on 

this point such as that the crabbers in 

San Francisco are forming a CFA and 

would benefit from an initial allocation. 

One commenter stated that CFAs should 

receive 25 percent at time of initial 

allocation. Another suggested providing 

CFA an initial allocation out the 

adaptive management program, from 

quota from the ‘‘bought out draggers’’, or 

from increases in fish populations due 

to rebuilding. 

Response. The Council conducted 

extensive outreach to communities 

beginning very early in the development 

of Amendments 20 and 21. The results 

of this outreach effort and community 

concerns thereby raised was 

summarized in Appendix H to the 

Council’s 2005 scoping report (see pp. 

108–112). The Trawl Individual Quota 

Committee (TIQC) also discussed 

community-related issues at length; as 

with all Council committees, their 

meetings were open to the public and 

opportunities for public comments from 

non-committee members were provided. 

Another example of community 

outreach may be found in the 2004 

Environmental Defense report submitted 

to the Council summarizing the results 

of a survey of community stakeholders 

and their concerns over the 

development of the trawl rationalization 

program. 

In June 2005, the Council directed the 

analytical team in consultation with the 

Council’s SSC to draft a range of 

alternatives for community involvement 

in the trawl rationalization program. 

Then in November 2005, the Council 

devoted substantial time to the 

consideration of options to address 

community impacts, including the 

distribution of QS to communities. DEIS 

Appendix A, pp. A–41 to A–42, 

summarizes results of the process, 

noting the difficulty in identifying an 

appropriate representative body within 

the community that would hold QS. As 

described there, at that time community 

leaders did not express interest in 

receiving an initial allocation of QS 

because of the administrative and 

political costs of managing such an 

allocation. Furthermore, communities 

(through whatever organizational 

mechanism) have not been precluded 

from acquiring groundfish limited entry 

trawl permits, which would make them 

eligible for the initial allocation of QS 

associated with a permit. Additionally, 

the Council’s preferred alternative 

includes a very broad definition of who 

may own QS so communities are not 

precluded from acquiring QS once the 

program is implemented. Appendix A of 

the 2005 Council’s scoping report also 

contains an analysis of community 

measures and effects in the context of 

the use of regional area restrictions. 

Although the Council considered 

incorporating provisions for CFAs into 

the alternatives early in the 

development process, no strong 

recommendation or advocacy was 

voiced by members of the public or 

representatives on the TIQC, which was 

intended to represent a cross section of 

interests for the development of 

recommendations on structuring the 

trawl rationalization program. Proposals 

for including provisions for CFAs in the 

program emerged later on, when the 

Council was at the point of adopting a 

preferred alternative in November 2008, 

in part tied to the issue of how to deal 

with QS holding in excess of 

accumulation limits. Further refinement 

of the preferred alternative, which 

occurred at Council meetings in 2009, 

included additional consideration of 

CFA provisions. Specifically, at the 

April 2009 Council meeting, Agenda 

Item F.4 addressed CFAs, and it was at 

this time that the Council concluded 

that it would be more appropriate for 

CFA provisions to be implemented 

through a trailing action. However, the 

moratorium on the transfer of QS during 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60881 

the first two years of the program, 

combined with provisions to allow 

divestiture of QS over accumulation 

limits during years 3 and 4 of the 

program, were designed to facilitate the 

transfer of QS to CFAs. The moratorium 

is in part intended to slow the 

movement of QS holdings out of 

communities during a time when the 

trailing action for CFAs can be 

developed and implemented in a 

considered fashion. Recommendations 

for how to structure the CFA provisions 

in a trailing action are welcome and 

should be brought forward as that 

proposal is developed. The Council is 

likely to begin developing CFA 

provisions in 2010 so that they could be 

in place before the QS divestiture period 

begins. 

Comment 42. Several commenters 

stated that it is important that CFAs be 

formed at the start of the process, rather 

than after the initial issuance. They 

stated that the proposed rule would 

hinder development of CFAs. One 

commenter stated that having to 

purchase quota will make it too 

expensive for communities, without a 

public subsidy, to acquire what was 

once a public resource. 

Response. See response to comment 

41 above with respect to the timing 

issue. See the discussion in section 

13(a), below, about perceptions 

regarding the privatization of a public 

resource. 

Comment 43. One commenter stated 

that the development of coops for 

nonwhiting shoreside would help 

communities, but the rule seems to 

preclude this. 

Response. This rule does nothing to 

preclude the formation of coops as long 

as they are consistent with 

accumulation and control limits. 

However, other authorities may apply, 

including but limited to the Fishermen’s 

Collective Marketing Act, 15 U.S.C. 12. 

Comment 44. Some commenters 

stated that the proposed rule and 

amendments would have negative 

impacts on community infrastructure. 

Specific examples of negative impacts, 

projected to be devastating, were 

provided for several communities 

including Humboldt Bay, and Port 

Orford. One commenter stated that the 

Council refused to evaluate impacts to 

Port Orford. 

Response. See response to comments 

39, 40 and 65–67. Impacts on a broad 

range of communities are assessed and 

acknowledged. 

Comment 45. Some commenters 

objected to the disparate impacts on 

some communities versus others. 

Response. See response to comments 

39, 40 and 65–67. Impacts on a broad 

range of communities are assessed and 

acknowledged. 

Comment 46. Some commenters 

stated that as a result of consolidation 

there will be fewer active fishing ports. 

Response. See response to comments 

39, 40 and 65–67. Impacts on a broad 

range of communities are assessed and 

acknowledged. 

Comments on Adaptive Management 

Comment 47. Two comments were 

received regarding the AMP: One felt 

the AMP ‘‘should be used to mitigate 

‘one-off’ transition impacts including 

the one-time resolution of proven 

stranded capital issues. It should then 

be held, to provide an incentive pool for 

conservation results and for further 

transitions as required to improve the 

program;’’ and the other general 

comment was ‘‘too little too late.’’ 

Response. The comments on how the 

AMP should be used can be seen as 

entirely consistent with the intent of the 

Council and NMFS in designing the 

program. Beginning in year 3, the AMP 

set-aside of 10 percent of the 

nonwhiting QS in the shoreside non 

whiting sector will be used to address 

specific objectives, identified on page 

402 of Appendix A of the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery.’’ The objectives are: 

‘‘Community stability, processor 

stability, conservation, unintended/ 

unforeseen consequences of IFQ 

management, and facilitating new 

entrants.’’ The objective of an incentive 

pool for conservation results was 

identified by NMFS as a high priority 

for use of the AMP in future years. 

Regarding the ‘‘too little too late’’ 

comment, for the first two years of the 

program, the 10 percent AMP is 

allocated to the shoreside nonwhiting 

sector to ease the transition to an IFQ 

system. The Council and NMFS will be 

evaluating the changes that will occur 

after implementation, and will be in a 

position to react as necessary to address 

impacts under the objectives already 

identified. NMFS believes this is the 

proper way to proceed with the AMP 

component of the program, and is not 

too little or too late. 

Comments on Participation by and 

Effect on Nontrawl Fisheries 

Comment 48. Comments on 

participation by and effect on non-trawl 

fisheries as a result of this rule 

included: Concerns with spillover 

effects in non-trawl fisheries; impacts 

on fixed gear fleet; impacts on crab and 

shrimp fisheries; more equitable 

intersector allocation to allow fixed gear 

to harvest trawl quota; and lack of 

conservation associated with gear 

switching provisions. 

Response. The potential spillover 

effects on other fisheries associated with 

the trawl rationalization program are 

specifically addressed in the FEIS 

‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’ in Chapter 4, Sections 4.8.2 

and 4.8.3 on pages 402–409. The 

potential effects due to rationalization 

include fleet consolidation, harvest 

timing flexibility, bycatch, and gear 

switching. All of these potential effects 

were identified and analyzed, to the 

extent possible, without the knowledge 

of observed or actual impacts. These 

potential impacts were highlighted for 

the purpose of monitoring behavioral 

changes in the fishery, understanding 

their impacts, and reacting through the 

Council process to minimize impacts. 

These matters will also be evaluated 

through the 5 year comprehensive 

review of the trawl rationalization 

program. 

With regard to intersector allocations 

and allowing fixed gear to harvest trawl 

quota, it should be noted that trawlers 

who have entered the fishery since 1994 

have had to buy trawl permits to access 

trawl quota, thus in this respect other 

vessels would be on an even footing 

with trawl vessels. This issue of 

requiring a trawl permit and quota to 

harvest trawl quota with fixed gear is 

addressed in Chapter 10, page 661 of the 

FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery.’’ On average there are about 120 

trawl vessels that participate in the 

fishery each year; however, there are 

about 168 permits. This indicates some 

opportunity for nontrawl vessels to 

acquire trawl permits and use trawl IFQ. 

Further, it is expected that there will be 

consolidation in the trawl fleet, 

increasing the number of trawl permits 

potentially available for use by nontrawl 

vessels. Thus, despite the limited scope 

the IFQ system will allow for some use 

of trawl IFQ by nontrawl vessels. 

Regarding the comment about lack of 

conservation associated with gear 

switching provisions, this issue of 

fishing with more environmentally 

friendly gear can be evaluated through 

time. All fishing associated with trawl 

IFQ will be subject to 100 percent 

observer requirements, including trawl 

IFQ that is harvested with fixed gear. 

Given this, there will be documentation 

of impacts associated with target catch, 

bycatch of overfished species, and nontarget species. This documentation will 

provide first hand opportunities for 

assessing the impacts of differential gear 

types on all groundfish species in a 

quantitative manner. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60882 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Comments on Other Effects 

Comment 49. Some commenters 

stated that there will be negative 

impacts on processors, that small 

processors will be driven out of 

business due to consolidation, and that 

processors will not be able to make up 

losses from lost trawl revenues, and that 

shortened seasons will further affect 

them. Some commenters stated that the 

proposed rule and amendments will 

change the nature of the fishery, and 

eliminate the ‘‘mom and pop’’ 

businesses, and cause loss of fishing 

heritage. 

Response. This response builds on the 

response to Comment 19. The 

processing sector is organized with a 

few very large operations and their 

subsidiaries, along with a number of 

small and mid-sized firms. Based on 

available information, the processing 

sector for nonwhiting trawl groundfish 

is characterized by a relatively small 

number of processing companies 

processing most of the harvest. The 

three largest companies handle 

approximately 80 percent of the 

nonwhiting trawl landings, while the 

fourth through sixth largest companies 

handle just over 10 percent of the 

landings. For 2008, purchases of limited 

entry trawl groundfish by first receiver. 

In 2008, 75 first receivers purchased 

limited entry trawl groundfish. There 

were 36 small purchasers (less than 

$150,000), 26 medium purchasers 

(purchases equal to or greater than 

$150,000 but less than $1,000,000), and 

13 large purchasers (purchases equal to 

or greater than $1.0 million). When the 

trawl rationalization program is 

implemented, to continue buying 

limited entry trawl groundfish, these 

purchasers will have to obtain a 

processor site license that includes 

requirements to submit electronic fish 

tickets, provide a catch monitoring plan, 

and schedule a catch monitor. Given the 

costs associated with these reporting 

requirements, it is expected that many 

of the 36 small purchasers will cease 

buying fish altogether or obtain their 

fish through other processors that have 

invested in a site license. 

It is expected that the TIQ will lead 

to consolidation and this may affect 

small processors, particularly if they are 

in disadvantaged ports. Chapter 4 of the 

FEIS analyzed the effects on processors 

from various perspectives: The 

distribution of landings across west 

coast ports may change as a result of 

fleet consolidation, industry 

agglomeration, and the comparative 

advantage of ports (a function of bycatch 

rates in the waters constituting the 

operational area for the port, differences 

in infrastructure, and other factors). In 

particular, the Council analysis 

indicated that processors associated 

with disadvantaged communities may 

see trawl groundfish volumes decline. 

The analysis highlights that those 

processors receiving landings from 

Central California or Neah Bay may see 

a reduction in trawl caught groundfish 

if the market is able to redirect activity 

toward more efficient and advantaged 

ports. However, in addition to increased 

landings that are expected to result from 

the TIQ program, small processors and 

disadvantaged communities may benefit 

from the control limits, vessel limits, 

and adaptive management policies. 

Control limits will limit the ability of 

large processors to obtain shares of the 

fisheries while the adaptive 

management processes will allow the 

Council to consider the impacts on 

small processors, and disadvantaged 

communities when allocating the 

adaptive management quota (10 percent 

of the total non-whiting trawl quotas). 

Although vessel accumulation limits 

tend to lower economic efficiency and 

restrict profitability for the average 

vessel, they could help retain vessels in 

communities because more vessels 

would remain. 

Another process by which small 

processors and disadvantaged 

communities may benefit from will be 

the future establishment of regulations 

and policies that allow CFAs to be 

formed. Some of the potential benefits 

of CFAs include: Ensuring access to the 

fishery resource in a particular area or 

community to benefit the local fishing 

economy; enabling the formation of risk 

pools and sharing monitoring and other 

costs; ensuring that fish delivered to a 

local area will benefit local processors 

and businesses; providing a local source 

of QSs for new entrants and others 

wanting to increase their participation 

in the fishery; increasing local 

accountability and responsibility for the 

resource; and benefiting other providers 

and users of local fishery infrastructure. 

The development of CFAs could have a 

positive impact on the culture of fishing 

communities. Although little research 

has been done on the effect of CFAs on 

culture, it seems likely that CFAs could 

strengthen a community’s cultural 

associations with fishing by 

contributing to a unique sense of 

identity, increasing accountability for 

both natural and cultural resources, and 

building and strengthening connections 

among community members. 

Comments on the RIR/IRFA 

Comment 50. One commenter stated 

that the summary of the initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 

contained in the preamble makes 

erroneous assumptions regarding costs 

and benefits. Benefits to harvesters are 

in part predicated on the idea that 

somehow raw fish prices can increase if 

harvesters have enough time available to 

suspend their fishing activity and hold 

fish processors hostage (‘‘The extended 

period would give harvesters greater 

latitude to hold out for better prices 

compared to the no action alternative.’’ 

75 FR 33022). The commenter noted 

that the idea that fishermen going on 

strike to force higher prices of a 

commodity that has substantial 

substitutability in the marketplace was 

unreasonable and referred the preparers 

of the IRFA to review reports in local 

and trade press regarding the groundfish 

trawl vessel tie-up that occurred in 

March and April of 2007 and its 

aftermath to see where their 

assumptions are erroneous. Similarly, 

the commenter objected to the following 

in the summary of the IRFA: ‘‘Even 

though processors may have to pay 

fishermen higher ex-vessel prices, 

processors may see cost savings under 

the preferred alternative to the degree 

that rationalization allows greater 

control over the timing and location of 

landings.’’ The commenter noted that if 

the preferred alternative is going to 

allow fishermen to control timing 

through their ability to hold out for 

better prices, how can it also allow 

processors to control timing? 

Response. There are two versions of 

the IRFA. The first version of the IRFA 

was a preliminary analysis that was 

developed for the DEISs (DEIS IRFAs): 

Amendment 20—Rationalization of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Limited Entry 

Trawl Fishery, which would create the 

structure and management details of the 

trawl fishery rationalization program; 

and Amendment 21—Allocation of 

Harvest Opportunity Between Sectors of 

the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery, 

which would allocate the groundfish 

stocks between trawl and non-trawl 

fisheries. The second version of the 

IRFA was developed to support the 

proposed rule (75 FR 32994, June 10, 

2010) associated with this final rule (PR 

IRFA) and is a combination and update 

of the DEIS IRFAs. NMFS has reviewed 

the summary of the PR IRFA contained 

in the preamble to the proposed rule 

and concludes that the summary 

statements are inconsistent with 

Chapter 4 of the Amendment 20 DEIS 

and with that DEIS IRFA. 

The main analysis of the Amendment 

20 DEIS IRFA included the following 

correct statement, which was not 

included in the PR IRFA: ‘‘Groundfish 

compete in regional, national, and 

global markets where many products are 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60883 

substitutable. Therefore, west coast 

groundfish producers (harvesters and 

buyers/processors) have little ability to 

influence price based on supply. In 

general, the ability to influence price is 

not expected to change under the 

proposed action. However, 

rationalization of the fishery could 

allow quality improvement and the 

development of new product forms/ 

markets that could increase prices for 

certain species of fish currently caught. 

As noted above as an example, the 

whiting fishery operates as a derby 

fishery (especially in relation to bycatch 

species limits rather than the target 

species) causing the fishery to close due 

to imposed limits rather than 

availability of fish or market conditions. 

Whiting attain a larger size later in the 

year, commanding a higher unit price. 

Nonwhiting harvesters currently operate 

under 2-month cumulative landing 

limits, which allow greater flexibility in 

terms of harvest timing between 2- 

month periods but less flexibility within 

periods (because any difference between 

actual limits and the period limit cannot 

be carried over to the next period). In 

contrast, under the IFQ program 

harvesters will have control over harvest 

timing over the whole calendar year. 

However, in terms of any influence on 

price, this increased flexibility is 

unlikely to have a noticeable effect. The 

degree to which harvesters versus 

processors are able to capture profits 

due to increases in price depends on 

their relative bargaining power * * *.’’ 

Bargaining power is a concept related to 

the abilities of parties in a given 

situation to exert influence over each 

other. Fishermen and processors 

negotiate the prices that are paid to the 

fishermen for delivering their fish to the 

processor. One way for fishermen to 

exert influence on the prices they 

receive for their fish is to delay the 

delivery of fish until the processor 

provides the desired price. Under the 

IFQ system, fishermen have the ability 

to choose when they can deliver their 

fish. Under the current system, the 

fishermen are given two month landing 

limits and these limits are designed to 

achieve a year-round fishery and to 

address the seasonality of the market. 

Given that the current system is already 

designed to address the seasonality of 

the market, the influence of fishermen 

to raise market prices based on the 

timing of deliveries relative to the 

current timing of deliveries is not 

expected to be great. 

Chapter 4 of the FEIS (http:// 

www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/fisherymanagement-plan/fmp-amendment-20/ 

#EIS) provides the following analyses 

concerning the issue of a fishermen’s 

strike: ‘‘In order to foster the year-round 

goal of this fishery, regulations are 

created with the intention of spreading 

the harvest throughout the year. These 

management tools evolved into twomonth catch limits, which effectively 

act as a two-month nontransferable 

quota for vessels in the fishery. Because 

of this two-month quota system, 

Olympic conditions do not exist in this 

fishery, and large pulses of harvest over 

a short time generally do not occur, 

except in cases where prolonged 

episodes of poor weather have restricted 

harvest opportunities. The two-month 

limit structure and elimination of 

Olympic fishery conditions make it 

possible for harvesters in this sector to 

collectively negotiate over ex-vessel 

prices with processors compared to 

harvesters in the whiting fishery. 

However, the ability for these 

negotiations to occur appears to be 

somewhat limited by the length of the 

two-month period. If harvesters strike 

for more than 60 days, they risk 

foregoing the harvest available to them 

during that two-month period. While 

managers may increase opportunities 

later in the year to make up for lost 

harvest, history has shown that often 

this is not possible because of timesensitive interactions with rebuilding 

stocks and the fact that protecting 

rebuilding stocks often leads to a 

reduction in harvest opportunity for 

healthy stocks. This means that, while 

harvesters have a greater likelihood of 

collectively negotiating higher prices in 

the nonwhiting fishery, the ability to do 

so may break down quickly as the end 

of a two-month limit approaches. 

A review of relevant articles indicates 

that 100 fishermen did undergo a six 

week strike from March 1, 2007 to April 

12, 2007, seeking an agreement with 

processors for increased prices for 

petrale sole and dover sole and that the 

strike was unsuccessful. Within these 

articles the following factors were 

mentioned: Prestrike glut due to high 

effort and trip limits; loss of income to 

fishermen; differences between fishing 

groups; differences between processors; 

that the major products were sold in 

fresh markets; competition with frozen 

product; increased quotas for dover sole 

and petrale sole; effects of the 

bimonthly trip limits; processor fleets 

versus fishermen’s association fleet; 

independent fishermen; destabilized 

prices; major decrease in prices, because 

of the strike—loss of market share to 

tilapia; and the inability of the largest 

groundfish fishermen’s association and 

two of the largest processors to come to 

an agreement. 

Therefore, in response to this 

comment, the FRFA will contain this 

comment and response and NMFS will 

make the summary consistent with main 

body of analysis by redrafting the 

summary to reflect the following 

statement: ‘‘Nonwhiting harvesters 

currently operate under 2-month 

cumulative landing limits, which allow 

greater flexibility in terms of harvest 

timing between 2-month periods but 

less flexibility within periods (because 

any difference between actual limits and 

the period limit cannot be carried over 

to the next period). In contrast, under 

the IFQ program harvesters will have 

control over harvest timing over the 

whole calendar year. However, in terms 

of any influence on price, this increased 

flexibility is unlikely to have a 

noticeable effect.’’ 

Comments on Policies and Legal 

Standards 

Comment 51. One commenter stated 

that Amendment 20 fails to meet the 

goals and objectives for the program 

established for it by the Council which 

are to: create and implement a capacity 

rationalization plan that increases net 

economic benefits, creates individual 

economic stability, provides for full 

utilization of the trawl sector allocation, 

considers environmental impacts, and 

achieves individual accountability of 

catch and bycatch. The commenter 

further states that Amendment 20 fails 

to meet at least four of the eight specific 

objectives identified by the Council: It 

does not provide for a viable, profitable 

and efficient groundfish fishery in 

northern California; it does not increase 

operational flexibility for the shoreside 

non-whiting sector (in fact the opposite 

is true); it does not ‘‘minimize adverse 

effects from an IFQ program on fishing 

communities and other fisheries to the 

extent practical;’’ and it will destroy 

fishing related employment in Fort 

Bragg, rather than ‘‘promot[ing] 

measurable economic and employment 

benefits through the seafood catching, 

processing, distribution elements and 

support sectors of the industry.’’ 

Response. The analyses included in 

the FEIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery’’ fully disclose anticipated 

impacts and recognize that catch share 

programs can have disparate impacts on 

different segments of the fishery. Thus, 

while negative impacts will occur in 

some areas, NMFS believes that 

Amendment 20 will result in a fishery 

that is more sustainable as a whole and 

that will provide maximum benefits to 

the nation. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60884 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

a. Public Trust and Privatization 

Comment 52. Some comments 

expressed concern that the trawl IQ 

program gives a public resource to 

individual fishermen and fishing 

corporations in perpetuity. 

Response. The Amendments do not 

change the fundamental nature of the 

Pacific groundfish fishery. Fishery 

resources continue to be public 

resources managed under the MSA and 

fish are not considered to be private 

property until they are harvested. The 

MSA authorizes the implementation of 

limited access programs such as the 

trawl IQ program. Under this program, 

fishermen will need to acquire QS, 

through initial allocation or subsequent 

transfer, before harvesting fish. IQs are 

Federal fishing permits that may be 

transferred to qualified individuals or 

entities. They also may be revoked, 

limited or modified. NMFS and the 

Council will monitor the programs 

established by Amendments 20 and 21, 

and can amend the programs if they are 

not in the public interest. 

Comment 53. A comment expressed 

concern that QS will be treated as assets 

to be traded, pledged as collateral, and 

held by third parties with no interest in 

fishing. 

Response. QS are federal fishing 

permits that may be revoked, limited or 

modified. After the first 2 years of 

program implementation, transfers of 

QS would be allowed. While criteria for 

initial issuance limit recipients to 

owners of LE trawl permits, after the 

first 2 years, transfers could be made to 

a broader group. Generally, anyone 

eligible to own a U.S.-documented 

fishing vessel could acquire QS and QP 

in increments as small as one pound. As 

long as the regulatory requirements are 

met, this rule does not limit private 

arrangements for use or transfer of QS. 

Comment 54: Some commenters 

expressed concern that the American 

public is not compensated for the 

privatization of a public resource. 

Response: The Council intends to 

develop a trailing amendment that will 

provide for a program of fees to recover 

the agency costs of management, data 

collection and analysis, and 

enforcement activities, within limits 

established by the MSA. In addition, the 

Council considered an auction system to 

collect royalties for the initial allocation 

of QS, as required by the MSA. The 

Council concluded that the collection of 

resource rents without a phase-in would 

be disruptive to the fishery. Therefore, 

the Council deferred further 

deliberations on royalties until the first 

5-year review of the program. As the 

trawl rationalization program matures in 

the future, the Council may provide for 

a greater return to the American public. 

Comment 55: Commenters opposed 

the future use of public funds to 

compensate permittees, or to assist new 

entrants in buying QS from those who 

received it at no cost to themselves. 

Response: These comments address 

future actions and are beyond the scope 

of this final rule. The regulations at 50 

CFR 660.25(h)(2)(iii) state that the 

permits do not confer a right to 

compensation to the permit owner if a 

permit is revoked, limited or modified. 

In addition, the regulations at 50 CFR 

660.24(h)(2)(iii) state that the permits do 

not create any right, title or interest in 

fish before the fish is harvested by the 

holder. Courts have found that a fishing 

ban and a revocation of a fishing permit 

do not constitute a taking under the 5th 

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

(See Conti v. United States, 291 F.3d 

1334 (U.S. Ct. App. 2002); American 

Pelagic Fishing Company v. United 

States, 379 F.3d 1363 (U.S. Ct. App. 

2004.) The Council will continue to 

monitor the fishery and will solicit 

public comments on future amendments 

as necessary. 

b. Magnuson-Stevens Act 

Comment 56. Several commenters 

made general statements that the 

proposed rule and amendments appear 

inconsistent with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act, National Standards 2, 7, 8, and 9 

of the MSA, and/or other applicable 

laws. 

Response. NMFS disagrees for the 

reasons described in this document, and 

specifically in the responses to 

comments 57 through 78. 

Comment 57. One commenter stated 

that, because allocations are not fair and 

equitable, they do not achieve OY. 

Specifically, the commenter states that 

inequitable allocations of overfished 

incidental catch species will result in 

leaving sustainable stocks in the water, 

undermining the ability to achieve 

optimum yield. 

Response. National Standard 1 

requires that: ‘‘Conservation and 

management measures shall prevent 

overfishing while achieving, on a 

continuing basis, the optimum yield 

from each fishery * * *’’ MSA section 

301(a)(1). The MSA defines OY to mean: 

‘‘The amount of fish which—will 

provide the greatest overall benefit to 

the Nation, particularly with respect to 

food production and recreational 

opportunities, and taking into account 

the protection of marine ecosystems; is 

prescribed on the basis of the 

‘‘maximum sustainable yield’’ (MSY) 

from the fishery, as reduced by any 

relevant social, economic, or ecological 

factor; and in the case of an overfished 

fishery, provides for rebuilding to a 

level consistent with producing the 

maximum sustainable yield in such 

fishery. MSA section 3(28); See also 50 

CFR 600.310(e)(3). Thus, National 

Standard 1 does not require that FMPs 

provide for 100 percent harvest of all 

healthy stocks. 

As described in the preamble to the 

proposed rule, Amendment 20 is 

intended to ameliorate the existing 

problem of overfished species 

constraining the harvest of healthier 

stocks. See response to comment 61 

addressing the claims that the 

allocations are not fair and equitable. 

Comment 58. One commenter stated 

that logbook data used to develop the 

allocations of overfished species is not 

the ‘‘best available data’’ because the 

years selected skew the results. 

Response. The Council’s selection of 

years on which to base the allocations 

of overfished species was a policy 

decision. See responses to comments 29 

and 31 for more information on the 

rationale for that policy decision. The 

data used to inform that 

recommendation and the development 

of the allocations complied with 

National Standard 2. 

The Council considered and rejected 

the option of allocating overfished 

species for nonwhiting trips using the 

same method as for other nonwhiting 

IFQ species as not appropriate under the 

circumstances. In particular, the relative 

weighting approach, by which landings 

for a year are measured as a percent of 

all landings for the year and species, 

would have given a particularly high 

amount of credit for pounds caught 

during the rebuilding period. 

Additionally, QS would have been 

allocated to those who targeted some of 

the overfished species in the mid-1990s 

(before they were declared overfished) 

rather than to those who need such QS 

to access current target species. 

Accordingly, the Council rejected the 

approach of using the same allocation 

formula for overfished species as for 

nonwhiting target species based on the 

desire to not reward bycatch during the 

rebuilding period and in order to 

provide QS to those who would need it 

to cover incidental catch taken with 

their target species QS allocation. 

Comment 59. Some commenters 

stated that the proposed rule and 

amendments do not comply with 

National Standard 2 because some 

relevant case studies were not 

considered. 

Response. Chapter 4.3.2 of the EIS 

provides descriptions of case studies 

and lessons learned from IFQ programs 

around the world. The Council and the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60885 

agency considered a broad range of case 

studies that focused on IQ programs in 

other parts of the United States or the 

world. See also the response to 

comment 68 below. 

Comment 60. The comment stated 

that the choice of 1994–2003 as the 

qualifying years does not reflect the 

‘‘best scientific information available,’’ 

as required by 16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(2), 

because it ignores the dramatic changes 

that began taking place in the whiting 

fishery starting in 2001, and which have 

been especially significant after 2003. 

Response. Generally speaking, NMFs 

disagrees that impermissibly dated or 

stale information was used for this 

action. The Council and NMFS have 

used the best information available at 

each step of the process in 

implementing the trawl rationalization 

program. The Council and NMFS 

analyzed and considered data including 

past and present participation, historical 

dependence of various sectors on the 

groundfish resource, economic impacts 

of the action on various sectors, cultural 

and social framework of the various 

sectors, impacts on other fisheries, and 

other relevant considerations. 

As discussed in detail above, see 

response to comment 29, the Council is 

required to consider and balance several 

factors, including current harvests and 

historic harvests, when making initial 

allocation decisions. Although the 

Council did examine present 

participation levels, the Council gave 

greater weight to historic participation 

in determining the initial allocation. 

Comment 61. Commenters stated that 

the allocation of overfished species QS 

violates National Standard 4 because 

some permit holders received up to 0.67 

metric tons of Canary Rockfish while 

others ‘‘in effect received zero.’’ Further, 

this ‘‘failure to equitably allocate QS for 

overfished incidental catch species’’ will 

prevent the fishery from achieving 

optimum yield. Because the plan will 

benefit the offshore whiting fleet 

primarily based in Washington and 

Oregon while harming the non-whiting 

shore based trawlers in Fort Bragg, 

California, the plan discriminates 

against citizens of different states. The 

commenter stated that ‘‘participants 

along the entire coast should bear 

equally’’ the burdens of protecting 

overfished stocks. Finally, the allocation 

of QS of healthy stocks violates National 

Standard 4 because it benefits ‘‘boats 

that only fish off the lower west coast 

on a part time basis,’’ while harming full 

time fishermen from Oregon. 

Response. National Standard 4 

requires that conservation and 

management measures shall not 

discriminate between residents of 

different States. If it becomes necessary 

to allocate or assign fishing privileges 

among various United States fishermen, 

such allocation shall be (A) fair and 

equitable to all such fishermen; (B) 

reasonably calculated to promote 

conservation; and (C) carried out in 

such a manner that no particular 

individual, cooperation, or other entity 

acquires an excessive share of such 

privileges. 

The National Standard 4 guidelines at 

§ 600.325(c)(3)(i)(B) state that: ‘‘An 

allocation of fishing privileges may 

impose a hardship on one group if it is 

outweighed by the total benefits 

received by another group or groups. An 

allocation need not preserve the status 

quo in the fishery to qualify as fair and 

equitable, if a restructuring of fishing 

privileges would maximize overall 

benefits. The Council should make an 

initial estimate of the relative benefits 

and hardships imposed by the 

allocation, and compare its 

consequences with those of alternative 

allocation schemes, including the status 

quo.’’ 

Therefore, the Councils are given 

wide latitude to determine what is 

equitable within a particular fishery and 

to create the appropriate management 

measures to accomplish the goals of an 

FMP. 

With respect to the allocation of 

overfished species in particular, see the 

response to comments 29 and 31. 

Generally, the adoption of any limited 

access privilege program has the 

potential to benefit certain fishermen, 

while disadvantaging others. The 

Council analyzed the positive and 

negative consequences of its decisions, 

and in Amendment 20 it chose to 

allocate QS in a manner that emphasizes 

historical participation in the 

Groundfish fishery. The underlying 

analyses adequately estimate the 

relative benefits and hardships imposed 

by the allocation, and the recommended 

measures comply with National 

Standard 4. 

The trawl rationalization program was 

developed through the Council process, 

which facilitates substantial 

participation by state representatives. 

Generally, state proposals are brought 

forward when alternatives are crafted 

and integrated to the degree practicable. 

Decisions about catch allocation 

between different sectors or gear groups 

are also part of this participatory 

process, and emphasis is placed on 

equitable division while ensuring 

conservation goals. The Council 

determined that none of the alternatives 

considered, including the final plan, 

would discriminate against residents of 

different states. The rationalization 

program was structured to provide fair 

and equitable allocations of both target 

species and overfished species to 

participants. 

Comment 62. One commenter 

indicated that the amendments violate 

National Standard 5’s requirement that 

management measures may not have 

economic allocation as the sole purpose. 

Response. As described in the 

preamble to the proposed rule at 75 FR 

32996, Amendments 20 and 21 are 

intended to achieve multiple objectives 

beyond economic allocation. 

Amendment 20 is intended to: Create 

and implement a capacity 

rationalization plan that increases net 

economic benefits, creates individual 

economic stability, provides for full 

utilization of the trawl sector allocation, 

considers environmental impacts, and 

achieves individual accountability of 

catch and bycatch. The Council further 

identified eight specific objectives to 

support achievement of the goal: 

1. Provide a mechanism for total catch 

accounting. 

2. Provide for a viable, profitable, and 

efficient groundfish fishery. 

3. Promote practices that reduce 

bycatch and discard mortality, and 

minimize ecological impacts. 

4. Increase operational flexibility. 

5. Minimize adverse effects from an 

IFQ program on fishing communities 

and other fisheries to the extent 

practical. 

6. Promote measurable economic and 

employment benefits through the 

seafood catching, processing, 

distribution elements, and support 

sectors of the industry. 

7. Provide quality product for the 

consumer. 

8. Increase safety in the fishery. 

Because OY on healthy stocks is 

constrained by rebuilding needs of cooccurring overfished stocks, 

Amendment 20 is intended to 

implement an approach that will 

support attainment of OY while 

improving bycatch avoidance and 

supporting rebuilding. 

The purposes of Amendment 21 are 

to: Simplify or streamline future 

decisions by establishing allocations of 

specified groundfish stocks and stock 

complexes within the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish FMP; support 

rationalization of the LE trawl fishery 

(Amendment 20) by providing more 

certainty to the affected sectors and 

reducing the risk that these sectors 

would be closed because of other nontrawl sectors exceeding their allocation; 

facilitate individuals’ ability to make 

long-range planning decisions based on 

the allocation of harvest privileges; 

support overall total catch accounting of 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60886 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

groundfish species by the group within 

the trawl sector; and limit the bycatch 

of Pacific halibut in future LE trawl 

fisheries. 

Comment 63. One commenter stated 

that the proposed rule and amendments 

violate national standard 7 because they 

do not reduce costs compared to the 

status quo. 

Response. National Standard 7 

requires that ‘‘Conservation and 

management measures shall, where 

practicable, minimize costs and avoid 

unnecessary duplication.’’ MSA section 

301(a)(7). This is not a simple question 

of whether proposed measures will be 

more expensive than the status quo. The 

supporting analyses show that the costs 

imposed by the proposed rule and 

amendments are necessary and justified 

in order to achieve the anticipated 

benefits. 

Comment 64. Some commenters 

stated that the proposed rule and 

amendments do not minimize impacts 

on fishing communities to the extent 

practicable. One commenter stated 

further that the impacts on small 

communities such as Fort Bragg have 

not been sufficiently analyzed and the 

approach of providing for mitigation 

measures through a future action 

violates NS 8. 

Response. See responses to comments 

39, 40, and 65–67. 

Comment 65. Some commenters 

stated that the analysis of the impacts of 

consolidation on communities is 

inadequate and provides examples of 

impacts experienced in the Bering Sea/ 

Aleutian Islands crab fishery and the 

British Columbia halibut fishery. 

Response. NMFS and the Council 

have analyzed the likely effects of 

consolidation on communities. The 

Executive Summary of the FEIS, on 

pages xix and xx, lists the following 

expectations: ‘‘Fishing communities 

would be differentially affected due to 

the fleet and processor consolidation. 

Some communities would likely benefit 

and others would be harmed. Fleet and 

processor consolidation could result in 

the concentration of vessels and 

commercial infrastructure in fewer 

ports, disadvantaging communities that 

lose vessels and infrastructure. Limits 

on the amount of QSs an entity can 

control would reduce ownership 

consolidation and would increase the 

number and types of businesses 

involved in the fishery, contributing to 

diversity and stability. Isolated 

communities, where there are few 

alternative employment opportunities, 

could be adversely affected by the loss 

of fishing-related jobs. Processors would 

likely consolidate and possibly move, 

affecting processor labor and municipal 

revenue. Fishing, in all its diversity, is 

culturally important to coastal 

communities. As a consequence, 

communities experiencing a decline in 

fishing activity due to trawl 

rationalization would be adversely 

affected. Family fishing businesses 

would have to deal with the 

implications of the asset value 

associated with IFQs (or co-op shares). 

This can complicate fishery entry and 

exit, leading to intra-family strife. 

Tourism could be adversely affected in 

communities that lose a working 

waterfront to the degree it is important 

to the tourist identity of the community. 

Nontrawl communities could be 

affected by rationalization through 

increased competition, gear conflicts, 

impacts on the support sector, 

infrastructure impacts, and competition 

in the marketplace.’’ 

NMFS and the Council have 

considered the case studies cited in 

section 4.3.2.1 of the FEIS. 

National Standard 8 requires 

consideration of impacts on 

communities, but recognizes the higher 

priority of National Standard 1. 

Specifically, National Standard 8 states 

that ‘‘Conservation and management 

measures shall, consistent with the 

conservation requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act (including the 

prevention of overfishing and rebuilding 

of overfished stocks), take into account 

the importance of fishery resources to 

fishing communities in order to: (1) 

Provide for the sustained participation 

of such communities; and (2) To the 

extent practicable, minimize adverse 

economic impacts on such 

communities.’’ 

Chapter 4.14 of the analysis describes 

anticipated impacts on communities 

and acknowledges a possibly profound 

impact on communities that depend on 

trawling. This is due to the nature of 

rationalization which results in fewer 

fishery participants and likely 

geographic shifts. The goal of attaining 

a sustainable fishery as a whole requires 

some impacts to individual 

communities. However, the Council also 

recommended measures that should 

mitigate these impacts. 

For example, the program would 

allow communities to purchase quota or 

permits to keep some of the fishery in 

the community. In addition, the AMP is 

intended for use in ameliorating impacts 

on communities. 

Comment 66. Some commenters 

stated that captains and crew are an 

integral component to ‘‘aggregate 

community benefits,’’ and more data and 

analysis are needed on impacts to 

captains and crew in order to accurately 

evaluate the impacts of these 

amendments. 

Response. NMFS and the Council 

considered effects on captains and crew 

in chapter 4.7 of the FEIS. While more 

data would be beneficial, the analysis 

uses the best available information. 

Comment 67. One commenter stated 

that, with respect to leased quota, 

National Standard 8 requires broader 

control at the community level and with 

restrictions on leasing as well as owneron-board requirements. 

Response. National Standard 8 

requires that: ‘‘Conservation and 

management measures shall, consistent 

with the conservation requirements of 

this chapter (including the prevention of 

overfishing and rebuilding of overfished 

stocks), take into account the 

importance of fishery resources to 

fishing communities by utilizing 

economic and social data that meet the 

requirements of paragraph (2)(N.S. 2) in 

order to: (A) Provide for the sustained 

participation of such communities, and 

(B) to the extent practicable, minimize 

adverse economic impacts on such 

communities.’’ MSA section 301(a)(8). 

The adaptive management program is 

intended to minimize adverse impacts 

on communities. 

Appendix A provides additional 

discussion of the Council’s 

consideration of communities at Section 

A–2.1.1.a, and lists alternative means by 

which Amendment 20 addresses 

community needs, including: 

• Maintenance of a split between the 

at-sea and shoreside trawl sectors. 

• Broad eligibility for ownership. 

• A temporary moratorium on the 

transfer of QS to ease the adjustment 

period and allow for adaptive response. 

• Specification of vessel and control 

limits to spread QS among more owners 

and potentially more communities. 

• Inclusion of a community advisory 

committee as a formal part of the 

program performance review process. 

• The Adaptive Management setaside. 

While initial allocations of quota 

would be limited based on qualifying 

criteria, after the first two years, the 

proposed program would allow both 

ownership of privileges by communities 

and acquisition by entry level 

participants. In addition, parties, 

including communities, desiring to 

receive initial issuance would be able to 

purchase limited entry permits such as 

The Nature Conservancy has done and 

receive initial issuance. Appendix A 

Sections A–2.2.2.d and A–2.2.3 describe 

entry level opportunities and transfer 

provisions. 

Comment 68. Some commenters 

stated that the proposed rule and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60887 

amendments will not reduce bycatch, 

which is one of the objectives of 

National Standard 9. Specifically, one 

stated that allowing lessees to fish will 

reduce incentive to avoid bycatch and 

undermine achievement of bycatch 

reduction goals. Another stated that 

catch shares could increase bycatch. 

Response. There is a requirement that 

when a fisher runs out of quota, he must 

stop fishing regardless of whether he 

leases or owns. Chapter 4.17.2.2 of the 

EIS for Amendment 20 provides 

information indicating that the 

proposed trawl rationalization program 

would be expected to be more effective 

at reducing bycatch than the status quo. 

Based on the information in the record, 

NMFS believes that the proposed rule 

and amendments will achieve 

reductions in bycatch. 

The study by Redstone Strategy Group 

and Environmental Defense (2007) 

analyzing pre- and post-implementation 

performance of 10 LAPPs, including all 

seven U.S. programs, cites interviews 

with fishery participants and other 

sources showing that QS value 

‘‘transformed the mindset of fishermen, 

who developed a real stake in the 

outcome of their fishing practices’’ (p. 

7). Other studies and reviews support 

the proposition that individual 

accountability fostered by IFQs (or the 

small group collective responsibility of 

the whiting co-ops) helps to reduce 

bycatch. ‘‘Sharing the Fish,’’ a report on 

IFQs requested by Congress from the 

NRC (1999), includes bycatch reduction 

as part of the rationale for implementing 

IFQs, noting that harvesters can more 

carefully choose their time and area of 

fishing, which may ‘‘reduce bycatch of 

non-target species since operations can 

be moved to target more favorable 

harvesting conditions, or it might allow 

the opportunity to develop practices 

that could reduce bycatch’’ (p. 35). The 

aforementioned report by Redstone 

Strategy Group and Environmental 

Defense (2007) found that ‘‘nearly all the 

fisheries experienced decreases in their 

respective discard rates’’ when the LAPP 

was implemented. 

Comment 69. One commenter stated 

that catch shares are not necessary to 

reduce bycatch and that TAC could be 

used as a stand-alone tool to reduce 

bycatch. 

Response. The proposed rule and 

amendments offer multiple tools for 

addressing bycatch. The multiple tools 

employed are intended to increase the 

overall effectiveness. See also response 

to comment 68. 

Comment 70. Some commenters 

stated that the proposed rule and 

amendments will help reduce bycatch 

and will address bycatch problems that 

the current system cannot solve. 

Response. NMFS agrees. 

Comment 71. One commenter stated 

that the proposed rule and amendments 

violate the MSA’s LAPP provisions 

because they do not include owner-onboard requirements, restrictions on 

leasing, a 10-year sunset, and 

prohibitions on compensating for 

revoked permits. 

Response. The regulations at 50 CFR 

660.25(h)(2)(iii) state that the permits do 

not confer a right to compensation to the 

permit owner if a permit is revoked, 

limited, or modified. In addition, certain 

provisions of section 303A of the MSA, 

such as the permit characteristics in 

section 303A(f) apply to all LAPPs and 

do not need to be repeated in fishery 

management plans or implementing 

regulations. The Council and NMFS 

have provided for transferability of 

limited access privileges as required by 

303A(c)(7). The Council considered, but 

did not include, an owner-on-board 

requirement. The MSA does not 

mandate such requirements. 

Comment 72. One commenter stated 

that the proposed rule and amendments 

do not comply with 303A(a)(1) and 

(c)(1) of the MSA, which requires LAPPs 

to ‘‘promote’’ not ‘‘consider’’ 

conservation. The commenter interprets 

the preamble to the proposed rule as to 

indicate that NMFS intends the action 

to achieve economic benefits while only 

considering, not promoting, 

conservation. 

Response. The preamble describes the 

Council’s goals for Amendment 20 as 

follows: ‘‘Create and implement a 

capacity rationalization plan that 

increases net economic benefits, creates 

individual economic stability, provides 

for full utilization of the trawl sector 

allocation, considers environmental 

impacts, and achieves individual 

accountability of catch and bycatch. The 

Council further identified eight specific 

objectives to support achievement of the 

goal: 

1. Provide a mechanism for total catch 

accounting. 

2. Provide for a viable, profitable, and 

efficient groundfish fishery. 

3. Promote practices that reduce 

bycatch and discard mortality, and 

minimize ecological impacts. 

4. Increase operational flexibility. 

5. Minimize adverse effects from an 

IFQ program on fishing communities 

and other fisheries to the extent 

practical. 

6. Promote measurable economic and 

employment benefits through the 

seafood catching, processing, 

distribution elements, and support 

sectors of the industry. 

7. Provide quality product for the 

consumer. 

8. Increase safety in the fishery. 

Because OY on healthy stocks is 

constrained by rebuilding needs of cooccurring overfished stocks, 

Amendment 20 is intended to 

implement an approach that will 

support attainment of OY while 

improving bycatch avoidance and 

supporting rebuilding.’’ 

Read in complete context, the 

Council’s goals and objectives comply 

with the MSA. Furthermore, the effects 

of the actions are anticipated to promote 

both efficiency and conservation. 

Comment 74. One commenter stated 

that Congress required the Council to 

develop criteria for qualifying 

communities to participate including 

initial allocation. 

Response. Section 303A(c)(5) of the 

MSA requires that a Council consider 

the current and historical participation 

of fishing communities when 

establishing procedures to ensure fair 

and equitable initial allocations. In 

addition, the Council must consider the 

basic cultural and social framework of 

the fishery. The Council has complied 

with these requirements. Section 

303A(c)(3) addresses eligibility of 

fishing communities, but does not 

require that a Council develop criteria 

for eligible communities to receive 

initial allocations of limited access 

privileges. The Council intends to 

address eligibility of fishing 

communities in future FMP 

amendments. 

Comment 75. One commenter 

questioned NMFS’s compliance with 

the Secretarial review provisions of the 

MSA at 304(b)(1). 

Response. NMFS has complied with 

section 304 of the MSA which requires 

that upon transmittal of an FMP 

amendment by the Council NMFS shall: 

(A) Immediately commence a review of 

the plan or amendment to determine 

whether it is consistent with the 

national standards, the other provisions 

of this chapter, and any other applicable 

law; and (B) immediately publish in the 

Federal Register a notice stating that the 

plan or amendment is available and that 

written information, views, or 

comments of interested persons on the 

plan or amendment may be submitted to 

the Secretary during the 60-day period 

beginning on the date the notice is 

published, which was accomplished on 

May 12, 2010 (75 FR 26702). 

For regulations, the MSA requires 

that, upon transmittal of proposed 

regulations to implement an FMP or 

amendment, NMFS must ‘‘immediately 

initiate an evaluation of the proposed 

regulations to determine whether they 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60888 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

are consistent with the fishery 

management plan, plan amendment, 

this chapter and other applicable law,’’ 

and within 15 days of initiating that 

evaluation, make a determination, and 

(A) if that determination is affirmative, 

the Secretary shall publish such 

regulations in the Federal Register, with 

such technical changes as may be 

necessary for clarity and an explanation 

of those changes, for a public comment 

period of 15 to 60 days (75 FR 32994, 

June 10, 2010 had a comment period of 

33 days); or (B) if that determination is 

negative, the Secretary shall notify the 

Council in writing of the inconsistencies 

and provide recommendations on 

revisions that would make the proposed 

regulations consistent with the fishery 

management plan, plan amendment, 

this chapter, and other applicable law. 

Comment 76. One commenter stated 

that because of the expense of 

participation, capital will be redirected 

away from facilities, infrastructure and 

vessel improvements. As a result safety 

and efficiency will be sacrificed. 

Response. NMFS and the Council 

recognize that for new entrants, the cost 

of acquiring individual quota will add 

to the expense of entering the fishery. 

An increase in profits (before taking into 

account the cost of the quota and 

normal profits after taking into account 

the cost of the quota) and stability is 

expected to compensate for the increase 

in costs. Under status quo management, 

the value of a new entrant’s capital 

investment would be at greater risk 

because of the potential erosion of 

fishing opportunity through the 

increased effort of others. With respect 

to the capital badly needed for 

infrastructure and vessel improvements, 

this is a condition that has occurred 

under status quo management. There is 

no reason to believe that continuation of 

status quo would improve the situation; 

however, under IFQs, greater economic 

stability may facilitate a safer fleet with 

a stronger infrastructure. 

Comment 77: Multiple commenters 

suggested that NMFS should ‘‘remand’’ 

the proposal to the Council and require 

the Council to develop and submit a 

specific management alternative. For 

example, one suggestion was to direct 

the Council to revise the proposal to 

consist of a whiting IFQ program for all 

three sectors and develop program for 

nonwhiting shoreside groundfish in the 

future such as cap and rent, and owner 

on board. 

Response. The MSA expressly vests 

the Council with responsibility for 

developing and identifying which 

management measures to recommend 

through its open public process. It is not 

appropriate for NMFS to dictate the 

policy recommendations that are not 

produced through the MSA Council 

system. 

Comment 78. One commenter stated 

that the regulations as deemed do not 

reflect Council intent. 

Response. NMFS disagrees. NMFS 

and the Council conducted an extensive 

and public deeming process that 

included public Council meetings and 

public committee meetings. 

c. Other Applicable Law 

Comment 79. The EIS should have 

analyzed other alternatives, including 

existing catch share programs 

worldwide, and their full range of 

impacts. 

Response. CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 

1502.14 require agencies to ‘‘rigorously 

explore and objectively evaluate all 

reasonable alternatives.’’ The Council 

engaged in an open scoping process to 

determine the scope of issues to be 

addressed and to identify the significant 

issues related to the action. In addition, 

other suggested alternatives were 

addressed in the response to comments 

in the FEIS. NMFS and the Council 

considered many other programs as 

described in section 4.3.2.1 of the EIS. 

However, neither NEPA nor the MSA 

requires that the Council, through the 

EIS, analyze all existing catch share 

programs worldwide. 

Comment 80. A Supplemental EIS is 

needed because portions of the program 

related to observer coverage, 

monitoring, and other conservationrelated measures are not included in 

this rulemaking. 

Response. NMFS disagrees. The 

Council considered and the FEIS 

analyzed alternatives relative to those 

specific issues. NMFS, consistent with 

Council intent, is implementing 

regulations through two rulemakings; 

the proposed rule for program 

components was published on August 

31, 2010 (75 FR 53380) and will be 

implemented prior to the January 1, 

2011 implementation date. 

Comments on Intersector Allocations 

Comment 81. Some commenters 

raised concerns regarding the 

allocations to the trawl sector. 

Commenters argue that Groundfish are 

being allocated away from the fixed gear 

fleet to the trawl fleet, diminishing the 

value of fixed gear permits and 

impermissibly discriminating against 

fixed gear permit holders. Others argue 

that the trawl fishery is responsible for 

overfished conditions, but open access 

and fixed gear fishermen are being 

penalized. 

Response. NMFS does not agree that 

the regulations punish the non-trawl 

sectors, or privilege the trawl sector. 

Most of the species subject to trawl/nontrawl allocations in this action are trawl 

dominant (sector dominance for a 

species is defined in the Amendment 21 

EIS as average landings during the 1995 

to 2005 period to the sector at least 90 

percent of total directed non-treaty 

landings; see Amendment 21 FEIS Table 

4–17) based on the sector catch histories 

used in Amendment 21 analyses. The 

action largely limits the trawl allocation 

of many of the Amendment 21 species 

to percentages less than the historical 

trawl catch shares to the benefit of the 

non-trawl sectors. For instance, the 

proposed action limits the maximum 

trawl allocation of any Amendment 21 

species to 95 percent of the directed 

harvest when historical trawl catch 

shares for many of these species have 

been higher than 95 percent. 

Amendment 21 species’ allocations that 

tend to favor non-trawl sectors (i.e., 

non-trawl sector allocations greater than 

observed in the 1995 to 2005 historical 

catch) include Pacific cod, Pacific ocean 

perch, chilipepper rockfish south of 

40°10′ N lat., splitnose rockfish south of 

40°10′ N lat., shortspine thornyhead 

north of 34°27′ N lat., longspine 

thornyhead north of 34°27′ N lat., 

darkblotched rockfish, Dover sole, 

English sole, petrale sole, arrowtooth 

flounder, starry flounder, and species in 

the Other Flatfish complex. All other 

Amendment 21 species’ allocations 

under the proposed action are generally 

favorable to non-trawl sectors in that the 

highest non-trawl sector catch 

percentages analyzed were proposed to 

be allocated to the non-trawl sectors. 

The only exception to this is lingcod 

where a more favorable trawl allocation 

was adopted as the final action. The 

rationale for a higher trawl allocation of 

lingcod is that, unlike the non-trawl 

sectors that predominantly use hookand-line gear to target groundfish, the 

trawl sectors are not as constrained by 

management measures designed to 

foster yelloweye rockfish rebuilding. 

This is because the mandatory use of 

trawls with small-diameter footropes 

(i.e., at least 8 inches) shoreward of the 

RCA effectively keeps bottom trawls out 

of the high relief habitats where 

yelloweye occur. A higher trawl 

allocation of lingcod would minimize 

stranding of harvestable yields of 

lingcod that would otherwise be 

allocated to non-trawl sectors and 

unavailable for harvest due to yelloweye 

rebuilding constraints. 

Thus, the inter-sector allocation does 

not provide more bottom trawl 

opportunity than status quo 

management measures and allocations. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60889 

In addition, the trawl rationalization 

allows limited entry trawl permit 

holders to switch from trawl to fixed 

gears to fish their quotas, which, in turn, 

would reduce trawl impacts. It also 

allows nontrawl vessels to harvest the 

allocation to the trawl sector if they 

acquire a trawl permit and IFQ. These 

facts lead to the conclusion that 

potential adverse impacts from trawl 

gear could be expected to be lower 

under the proposed action than under 

status quo management or under any of 

the other alternatives analyzed. 

Moreover, the allocations are 

consistent with the current distribution 

of fishing opportunity among 

Groundfish sectors. Even if the fixed 

gear sector had the capacity and desire 

to catch significantly greater amounts of 

Groundfish, which is questionable, 

those factors are not, in and of 

themselves, criteria for determining 

allocations. Allocations are necessary 

precisely because more than one group 

has some level of ‘‘capacity and desire,’’ 

which engenders potential conflicts 

over resources access that must be 

resolved through allocation. 

Comment 82. One commenter felt that 

the allocation of sablefish to the limited 

entry tier system unfairly impacts open 

access fishermen. 

Response. This comment is not 

specifically related to the actions 

contemplated under Amendments 20 

and 21. Under the FEIS ‘‘Allocation of 

Harvest Opportunity Between Sectors of 

the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery, 

the Council recommended a sector split 

between the trawl and non-trawl sectors 

of the groundfish fishery. The Council 

did not consider, as part of this process, 

allocations of sablefish between the 

limited entry fixed gear and directed 

open access fisheries of the non-trawl 

sector. 

Comment 83. Trawl gear does more 

damage to fishery resources than fixed 

gear, but the program will favor the 

trawl sector. Gear switching is not a 

sufficient incentive for quota owners to 

give up trawling in favor of less 

damaging gear because gear switching 

will only enable trawlers to fill in offseason by temporarily using fixed gear 

to take huge hauls out of the fixed gear 

fishing grounds. 

Response. NMFS disagrees with the 

commenter’s characterization of the 

trawl fleet. That said, the FEIS identifies 

and discloses the potential adverse 

impacts of trawl gear cited by this 

commenter. To the degree that these 

impacts may exist, they are not 

increased under trawl rationalization 

and may be reduced because it allows 

more opportunities for use of fixed gear 

to harvest the trawl allocation. The 

Council actions under Amendment 20 

provide an opportunity for the 

transition of harvest away from the 

trawl sector and its action under 

Amendment 21 limits the trawl fleet 

allocation to the lower end of its recent 

harvest share. Furthermore, the 

allocations provided to trawlers in 

Amendment 21 are not permanent and 

may be changed in the future as it is 

determined to be appropriate. 

Additionally, trawl rationalization is 

expected to decrease total trawling 

hours required to take a given amount 

of harvest. Amendment 20 allows some 

movement of harvest toward the 

nontrawl gear through gear switching 

and the transfer of IFQ to the nontrawl 

fleet. For the time being, that movement 

is constrained by the number of trawl 

permits available and the dictates of the 

market place, combined with any 

incentives or subsidies that may be 

created. 

Given that formal allocations of trawldominant and other important trawl 

target species have been judged in the 

scoping process to be important to 

support trawl rationalization, the 

proposed action under Amendment 21, 

by indirectly supporting trawl 

rationalization, should reduce species 

impacts by monitoring 100 percent of 

the total catch of IFQ species and 

reducing potential habitat impacts 

through rationalized fleet consolidation 

relative to status quo allocations and 

management measures. 

While there are no formal incentives 

to encourage gear switching, the existing 

provision alone may have a mitigating 

effect compared to status quo, since 

trawl-endorsed permits are currently 

prohibited from using other gear types 

to fish against their bimonthly limits. 

Any vessel switching gear types with 

less habitat impacts would represent a 

reduction in impacts compared to 

existing, ongoing habitat impacts due to 

trawl fishing under status quo. Under 

the license limitation program, trawl 

vessels are already allowed to use fixed 

gear to take the trawl allocation, albeit 

they must do so under the open access 

regulations, which have much lower 

limits. Fixed gear endorsements give a 

vessel access to the fixed gear 

allocation. Allowing trawl vessels to 

gear switch (or other vessels to acquire 

a trawl permit and IFQ) does not give 

trawl permitted vessels access to the 

fixed gear quota; it merely allows the 

vessel to use nontrawl gear to take the 

trawl IFQ. 

Comment 84. One commenter felt the 

halibut bycatch rates should be based on 

all landed flatfish using 1994–2003 as 

opposed to using petrale sole and 

arrowtooth flounder harvests in 2003– 

2006 to determine bycatch rates, so 

targets match better with bycatch. 

Response. Under the FEIS ‘‘Allocation 

of Harvest Opportunity Between Sectors 

of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery,’’ 

the Council recommended to allocate 15 

percent of the Area 2A (i.e. all waters off 

Washington, Oregon, and California) 

total constant exploitation yield (total 

harvest expressed in terms of legal-sized 

halibut, since the primary commercial 

target halibut fishery, using gear other 

than trawl, can only retain and land 

legal-sized halibut) halibut to the 

limited entry trawl sector, not to exceed 

130,000 pounds for the first four years 

of the program and not to exceed 

100,000 pounds for years five and 

beyond. The method for the initial 

allocation of halibut is similar to that 

used for overfished species (Appendix C 

of the EIS ‘‘Rationalization of the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery.’’ The Council decided to base 

initial allocation of IBQ on the different 

rates of bycatch in different areas or in 

association with various target species 

(e.g. arrowtooth flounder and Petrale 

sole). Halibut cannot be allocated based 

on individual vessel records because 

halibut mortality is estimated based on 

fleet averages. The 130,000 pounds 

recommended by the Council represents 

an approximate reduction of 50 percent 

from the total bycatch estimate provided 

by the Northwest Fisheries Science 

Center for the most recent year 

estimated (2007) and is contained in 

Agenda Item E.1.b, Supplemental NMFS 

Report, September, 2008. Pacific halibut 

IBQ would function in a manner similar 

to IFQ for other species, except that 

retention and landing of halibut would 

be prohibited, and only pounds of dead 

halibut would be counted against the 

IBQ. Discard at sea of Pacific halibut 

would be required; before discard 

occurred, observers would estimate the 

halibut bycatch mortality on that vessel 

(average mortality rates would be 

applied based on the condition of the 

halibut in a particular tow) to provide 

greater individual accountability and 

incentives for harvesters to control 

halibut mortality. 

Under any of the allocation 

alternatives suggested by the Council, 

halibut IBQ as part of the trawl 

rationalization program will be 

constraining, and this was specifically 

the intent in designing the methods 

selected. Because the limit 

recommended by the Council is lower 

than the bycatch observed, it was 

unclear how such a stringent limit 

might affect the fishery. As stated under 

the EIS ‘‘Allocation of Harvest 

Opportunity Between Sectors of the 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery’’ on 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60890 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Page 36, ‘‘It may turn out that the 

socioeconomic impacts are too great 

under these stringent limits, and the 

Council may ultimately decide to 

increase the total catch limit. 

Conversely, the trawl industry may 

adjust well to these lower limits, and 

the realized bycatch of Pacific halibut 

will be lower than the prescribed limits. 

In that case, the Council may want to 

adjust the future total catch limit 

downward from 100,000 pounds to 

provide more benefits to Area 2A 

directed halibut fisheries. In either case, 

the Council preferred the flexibility of 

deciding future total catch limits of 

Pacific halibut in the biennial 

specifications and management 

measures process. 

Items NMFS Requested Comment on in 

the Proposed Rule 

In addition to the comments received 

above, NMFS specifically requested 

comment on several items upon which 

no comments were received. Where 

NMFS has made changes to the 

proposed rule where comments were 

specifically requested, these specific 

requests are identified in the section on 

‘‘changes from the proposed rule.’’ 

Changes From the Proposed Rule 

A. All Trawl Programs 

I. Definitions 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 32994, 

June 10, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on revised 

definitions. No comments were received 

on the definitions in the proposed rule. 

However, based on further review and 

as the logical extension of what was 

proposed, NMFS is making some 

changes to the definitions as follows. 

The definition of ‘‘ownership interest’’ at 

§ 660.11 is revised for the limited entry 

trawl fishery to reflect that ownership 

interest information will also be 

collected from owners of vessel 

accounts because ownership of vessel 

accounts may be tied to control of QS 

or IBQ. In addition, the definition of 

‘‘mutual agreement exception’’ at 

§ 660.111 is revised to reflect that a 

processor obligation applies to a MS/ 

CV-endorsed permit rather than the 

vessel registered to that permit, and that 

it is the catch history assignment of that 

permit that is obligated to the 

mothership processor. 

II. Ownership Issues 

Language was added to 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(iv)(A) to cross-reference 

the language in the specific trawl 

rationalization programs that states the 

owner of a limited entry trawl permit 

may not change during the application 

process for a QS permit, an MS/CV 

endorsement, or a C/P endorsement, as 

specified at §§ 660.140(d)(8)(viii), 

660.150(g)(6)(vii), and 660.160(d)(7)(vi), 

respectively. 

NMFS is also revising the provisions 

for determination of ownership interest 

based on further review of the proposed 

regulation. In reviewing provisions on 

calculating ownership interest, NMFS 

has identified two ownership structures 

where the ownership of the permit may 

not be clear for the purpose of 

determining compliance with 

accumulation limits: (1) Joint 

ownership, and (2) ownership by a trust. 

A joint ownership situation exists where 

more than one person claims an interest 

indivisible from that of another person, 

such that the total ownership interest is 

greater than 100 percent. In these 

situations, NMFS would credit each 

owner with the full percent claimed, 

even though the sum of all ownership 

interests would exceed 100 percent. 

NMFS believes that for some owners, 

the benefits of joint tenancy may be 

greater than the parties’ concern for 

accumulation limits, particularly if they 

are more interested in estate planning 

than accumulation of privileges, and 

that if the parties to a joint tenancy 

don’t want to avoid individual 

accountability for the entire ownership 

interest, they would have the option of 

restructuring. With a trust, generally, a 

trustee holds title to the property 

granted by the trustor on behalf of the 

beneficiaries of the trust. Because a trust 

vests the legal title to the property in the 

trustee, under the proposed rule NMFS 

would credit ownership to the trustee. 

If there is more than one trustee (i.e., 

‘‘co-trustees’’), NMFS would consider 

each trustee to have 100 percent 

ownership of the trust property. In the 

preamble to the program components 

proposed rule (75 FR 53380, August 31, 

2010), NMFS requests additional 

comment on any other ownership 

structures that may affect accumulation 

limits; NMFS may add provisions for 

additional ownership structures as a 

result. This final rule also includes 

provisions that NMFS may ask for 

additional information it believes to be 

necessary for determination of 

compliance with accumulation limits. 

Some additional modifications have 

been made to the accumulation limits 

language. For the Shorebased IFQ 

Program, as described in the responses 

to comments, above, NMFS does not 

intend that control rules would apply to 

banks and other financial institutions 

that rely on QS or IBQ as collateral for 

loans, unless the financial documents 

specify control beyond normal business 

agreements. Accordingly, based on 

further agency consideration and in 

response to public comment received, 

NMFS further clarified the application 

of the control rules for QS or IBQ at 

§ 660.140(d)(4). In addition, in the MS 

Coop Program, NMFS further clarified 

the ownership language at 

§§ 660.150(f)(3)(ii) and 

660.150(g)(3)(i)(A) for MS permits and 

MS/CV endorsements, respectively. 

III. Allocations 

In § 660.55, Allocations, paragraph (h) 

on sablefish allocations north of 36° N. 

lat., is corrected to specify that the 

remainder of the sablefish quota after 

deductions for the tribal fishery is 

available to the nontribal fishery (both 

commercial and recreational), not just to 

the nontribal commercial fishery as had 

been stated in the proposed rule. In 

addition, sablefish allocations between 

the commercial limited entry and open 

access fisheries are specified in 

regulation consistent with the FMP, 

instead of just referencing the FMP. 

In § 660.55(a) language has been 

added to implement Amendment 21 

stating that a formal allocation may be 

suspended when a species is overfished. 

The proposed rule only contained the 

prior language from the existing FMP 

regarding suspension of limited entry/ 

open access allocations for overfished 

species. There are additional minor 

edits in this section, consistent with the 

partial disapproval of a minor section of 

Amendment 21 to indicate that the 

Amendment 21 allocations did not 

override the limited entry/open access 

allocations. These limited entry/open 

access allocations have not been 

implemented recently because the 

constraints of the rebuilding plans have 

overridden the ability to achieve these 

allocations. The allocations are directly 

suspended for the overfished species 

themselves, and the access to healthy 

stocks in various places in the EEZ has 

been limited by the need to significantly 

reduce fishing mortality on overfished 

species. 

IV. Application and Appeals Process 

No comments were received on the 

application and appeals process 

specified in the proposed regulations. 

Based on further agency consideration 

of the proposed regulations, NMFS has 

modified the regulations as described 

here. The proposed regulations 

specified in several places that NMFS 

would ‘‘extract’’ landings data from 

PacFIN, in the case of calculating 

shoreside landings history, or NORPAC, 

in the case of calculating at-sea harvest 

history, on July 1, 2010. NMFS extended 

the date for allowing the public to 

correct NORPAC data until August 1, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60891 

2010, as announced on June 22, 2010; 

this final regulation is modified 

accordingly. 

In addition, NMFS is clarifying that 

the initial allocation calculations will be 

based on the relevant ‘‘PacFIN dataset 

on July 1, 2010,’’ and as appropriate, the 

relevant ‘‘NORPAC dataset on August 1, 

2010.’’ NMFS has removed the term 

‘‘extracted’’ from the regulations in order 

to be more specific. As explained above, 

NMFS has determined that the July 1, 

2010, dataset in PacFIN and the August 

1, 2010, dataset in NORPAC as corrected 

through the public process and in 

conjunction with the relevant data base 

QA/QC processes, constitute the best 

scientific information available. 

NMFS is also clarifying the specified 

basis for appeal of the agency’s Initial 

Administrative Determination (IAD) by 

replacing the words ‘‘extracted’ or 

extraction’’ with more specific terms. 

The proposed regulations state in 

several places that items not subject to 

appeal include, but are not limited to, 

the accuracy of the permit landings data 

in ‘‘the data set extracted from PacFIN’’ 

or, as appropriate, ‘‘extracted from 

NORPAC.’’ The proposed bases for 

appeal of the IAD are ‘‘errors in NMFS’ 

extraction, aggregation, or expansion of 

data, including: (1) Errors in NMFS’ 

extraction of landings data from PacFIN; 

(2) errors in NMFS’ extraction of state 

logbook data from PacFIN; (3) errors in 

NMFS’ application of the QS allocation 

formula; (4) errors in identification of 

permit owner, permit combinations, or 

vessel registration as listed on NMFS 

permit database; and (5) errors in 

identification of ownership information 

for the first receiver or the processor 

that first processed the fish.’’ In 

addition, NMFS is adding another item 

for appeal, ‘‘NMFS’ use or application of 

ownership interest information.’’ 

In order to be more specific and 

accurate, the final regulations specify 

that items not subject to appeal include, 

but are not limited to, the accuracy of 

data in the relevant ‘‘PacFIN dataset on 

July 1, 2010,’’ and as appropriate, the 

relevant ‘‘NORPAC dataset on August 1, 

2010.’’ Similarly, the bases for appeal 

are revised to read: ‘‘Errors in NMFS’ 

use or application of data, including: (1) 

Errors in NMFS’ use or application of 

landings data from PacFIN; (2) errors in 

NMFS’ use or application of state 

logbook data from PacFIN; (3) errors in 

NMFS’ application of the QS allocation 

formula; (4) errors in identification of 

permit owner, permit combinations, or 

vessel registration as listed on NMFS 

permit database; (5) errors in 

identification of ownership information 

for the first receiver or the processor 

that first processed the fish; and (6) 

errors in NMFS’ use or application of 

ownership interest information.’’ 

As mentioned in the preamble to the 

proposed rule and described in more 

detail in a NMFS report for the March 

2010 Council meeting, because of the 

timing of this application process for an 

initial issuance of a permit, 

endorsement, or QS under the trawl 

rationalization program, the owner of a 

limited entry trawl permit may not 

change during the application process 

for the initial issuance of a QS permit, 

an MS/CV-endorsed permit, or a C/Pendorsed permit, as specified at 

§§ 660.140(d)(8)(viii), 660.150(g)(6)(vii), 

and 660.160(d)(7)(vi), respectively. In 

other words, the limited entry trawl 

permit owner may not transfer his or her 

permit to another owner once the 

application process has started until the 

application process is complete. This is 

necessary for administration of the 

agency process of considering 

applications and making the IAD. The 

proposed rule stated that the application 

process would begin on the date of 

publication of this final rule. NMFS 

received no comment on this provision. 

However, based on further agency 

consideration of the proposed 

regulations, NMFS has changed the start 

of the application period during which 

permits could not be transferred. In this 

final rule, NMFS establishes that the 

start date for the application period will 

begin either 30 days after the 

publication of this final rule, or when 

the agency receives an application for 

initial issuance of a QS permit, an MS/ 

CV-endorsed permit, or a C/P-endorsed 

permit, whichever date occurs first. 

NMFS is making this change to allow 

permit owners an opportunity to 

transfer their permits after receiving prefilled applications from NMFS 

indicating anticipated issuance of QS or 

endorsements based on PacFIN and/or 

NORPAC data, as described above. 

NMFS believes this change is consistent 

with the Council intent to provide an 

opportunity for entry level participants 

to obtain a qualifying trawl limited 

entry permit prior to initial issuance 

with reasonable certainty of anticipated 

QS that would be issued on the basis of 

that permit. Further, for permit owners 

that have qualifying history that would 

exceed control limits, this change will 

provide an opportunity to divest 

permits prior to calculation of QS and 

any redistribution of QS under 

§ 660.140(d)(4)(v). Accordingly, NMFS 

is changing the language to state, 

‘‘NMFS will not review or approve any 

request for a change in limited entry 

trawl permit owner at any time after 

either November 1, 2010 or the date 

upon which the application is received 

by NMFS, whichever occurs first, until 

a final decision is made by the Regional 

Administrator on behalf of the Secretary 

of Commerce * * *’’ Limited entry 

trawl permits may be transferred after 

the application process is complete, 

once the permit owner has received a 

final decision (i.e., the QS, permit, or 

endorsement has been issued and the 

appeals process has been completed). 

NMFS recognizes that during the 

application process it may receive 

multiple applications for QS that reflect 

identical ownership. NMFS intends to 

issue a single QS permit for each 

individual owner, thus where multiple 

applications are received for the same 

person (e.g., where the same person 

owns several qualifying permits), NMFS 

will issue a single QS permit that 

combines the amounts of all QS or IBQ 

derived from all limited entry permits 

for that unique owner, subject to 

accumulation limits and divestiture 

provisions. Because QS and IBQ 

ownership is subject to accumulation 

limits and because QS and IBQ will be 

highly divisible, NMFS does not believe 

there is any need to issue more than one 

QS permit for each unique owner and is 

taking this implementation approach to 

reduce redundancy, minimize costs, and 

improve efficiency in the administration 

of the program. The proposed rule set 

forth accumulation limits and 

divestiture provisions, and the program 

components proposed rule sets forth 

divisibility of QS and IBQ. No 

regulation change is made in this final 

rule regarding NMFS approach to 

combining QS or IBQ amounts from 

multiple applications for the same 

unique owner, because none is needed. 

NMFS highlights this in this preamble 

to clarify the initial issuance process for 

QS permits. 

V. Application Deadline 

The application deadline for the 

initial issuance of QS permits, MS 

permits, MS/CV endorsements, and C/P 

endorsements has been changed from 

what was described in the proposed 

rule. The proposed rule stated that 

applications would be due no later than 

60 days after date of publication of the 

final rule in the Federal Register. 

However, this final rule specifies that 

applications are due no later than 

November 1, 2010. NMFS has 

determined that the November 1 

deadline provides applicants with 

sufficient time to submit applications, 

while still providing the agency with 

sufficient time to process the 

applications. The agency intends that 

pre-filled applications will be available 

to current permit owners in mid-to-late 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60892 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

September, and the agency will hold a 

series of informational meetings with 

the public during the month of 

September to address, among other 

things, the application process. 

Therefore, with this final rule, NMFS is 

setting a specific deadline date for all 

applications of November 1, 2010. 

Applications must be complete and 

received by NMFS, or postmarked, no 

later than November 1, 2010. 

VI. Changes To Reflect Recent NMFS 

Actions 

Some changes are made in this final 

rule to update the regulations to reflect 

inseason actions that have been 

implemented at 50 CFR part 660 since 

the proposed rule (75 FR 32994, June 

10, 2010) was published. Section 

660.231(b)(3)(iv) of this final rule is 

updated to incorporate changes to the 

retention of Pacific halibut in the fixed 

gear sablefish fishery from an inseason 

action published May 4, 2010 (75 FR 

23615). Section 660.131(b)(5)(i) of this 

final rule is updated to incorporate 

changes to the bycatch limits for Pacific 

whiting fisheries from a final rule 

published May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23620) 

[the 2010 tribal allocation was already 

reflected the June 10th proposed rule]. 

VII. Whiting Closure and 

Reapportionment Authority 

The existing regulations at 

§ 660.323(c) allow for closure of the 

individual sectors when each sector’s 

allocation is reached or projected to be 

reached, and reapportionment of 

unused whiting to another sector before 

the end of the year. Under the Trawl 

Rationalization program whiting sectors 

will not be closed because the 

achievement of the individual quotas or 

coop allocations will close the fisheries, 

and whiting will not be reapportioned 

between sectors. In 2010, however, this 

closure and reapportionment ability is 

still in effect. In the reorganization of 

the existing regulations in the proposed 

rule this provision would have been 

inadvertently overwritten. Therefore, 

the closure and reapportionment 

authority for whiting is being 

renumbered and included in this final 

rule at § 660.131(b)(6). NMFS intends to 

remove this section in the program 

components final rule, which 

establishes the management measures 

specific to the groundfish management 

in 2011 and beyond under trawl 

rationalization. 

VIII. Minor Edits 

NMFS has made some minor edits to 

the regulations to make terminology 

more consistent (e.g., references to 

shorebased IFQ fishery are edited to 

read Shorebased IFQ Program) and to 

correct typographical errors and 

technical errors (e.g., ‘‘Other fish’’ are 

not an IFQ species and are thus 

removed from the QS accumulation 

limit table). In addition, Table 2d of Part 

660, Subpart C (2012 At-sea Whiting 

Fishery Set-asides) is removed and 

Table 1d of Part 660, Subpart C is 

relabeled, ‘‘At-Sea Whiting Fishery 

Annual Set-Asides, 2011 and 2012’’ to 

cover annual set-asides for both 2011 

and 2012. 

B. Shorebased IFQ Program 

I. General 

Some general changes are made to 

regulatory language in this final rule. 

Where appropriate, the terms ‘‘QS’’ and 

‘‘QP’’ have been revised to read ‘‘QS and 

IBQ’’ and ‘‘QP or IBQ pounds,’’ 

respectively. Pacific halibut is listed as 

an IFQ species. However, Pacific halibut 

has an individual bycatch quota (IBQ) 

which is distinct from QS for groundfish 

species listed under the groundfish 

FMP. This change is to make it clear 

that Pacific halibut IBQ or IBQ pounds 

are distinct and may be managed 

differently than QS or QP. This 

distinction in the regulations was 

highlighted by NMFS at the Council’s 

June 2010 meeting. 

II. Accumulation Limits 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 32994, 

June 10, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on how NMFS 

would calculate aggregate nonwhiting 

QS for compliance with accumulation 

limits. NMFS received no comment on 

this issue. Consistent with the Council 

motion, NMFS will calculate aggregate 

nonwhiting QS using the 2010 OYS. To 

determine the shoreside trawl allocation 

for the purpose of determining 

compliance with the control limit 

during initial issuance, NMFS will 

apply the Amendment 21 allocation 

percentages to the 2010 OYs for species 

that are allocated by Amendment 21, 

and where applicable, will deduct the 

Amendment 21 preliminary set-asides 

for the at-sea sectors for these species. 

To determine the shoreside trawl 

allocations for species not allocated by 

Amendment 21, NMFS will apply a 

percentage based on the Northwest 

Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC) final 

report on 2010 estimated total fishing 

mortality of groundfish by sector, or the 

most recent final report available if the 

final report for 2010 is not available. 

The regulations at § 660.140(d)(4)(i)(B) 

have been revised to reflect this 

clarification. 

NMFS also specifically requested 

comment in the proposed rule (75 FR 

32994, June 10, 2010) on the method 

(order) of calculating control limits for 

divestiture purposes. NMFS received no 

comments on this issue. Based on 

further review of the record and in order 

to result in an initial issuance of QS that 

more closely reflects the weighting of 

nonwhiting species in the permit’s 

history, NMFS will calculate aggregate 

limits first, when determining 

compliance with control rules. 

Regulations at § 660.140(d)(4)(v) in this 

final rule have been revised to reflect 

this clarification. 

III. Initial Issuance Allocation Formulas 

In the proposed rule (75 FR 32994, 

June 10, 2010), NMFS specifically 

requested comment on the use of data 

other than PacFIN in cases where 

species in PacFIN do not match IFQ 

species. For example, unspecified 

rockfish in PacFIN do not match an IFQ 

species group. As described above, the 

information contained in the PacFIN 

database represents the best scientific 

information available, and NMFS 

believes that an analysis to match 

groundfish species in PacFIN that do 

not exactly match an IFQ species using 

state landing receipts and logbook 

information (instead of PacFIN) would 

be impracticable, extremely time 

consuming, and likely to result in 

inaccurate information. NMFS received 

no comments on this issue. Thus, in this 

final rule, NMFS has removed the 

regulatory language from the proposed 

rule at § 660.140(d)(8)(iii)(A)(2) that 

read, ‘‘For species that do not match IFQ 

species categories after applying 

standard PacFIN species composition 

algorithms, NMFS will assign species to 

an IFQ species category based on other 

information from state landing receipts 

or logbook information in PacFIN.’’ 

NMFS will use data from PacFIN that 

matches IFQ species/species groupings 

and will not make assumptions for 

unspecified groundfish. 

An additional change to the proposed 

rule on the initial issuance allocation 

formulas for QS and IBQ is a step added 

at §§ 660.140(d)(8)(iii)(G) and 

660.140(d)(8)(iv)(I) to clarify that NMFS 

will redistribute any QS or IBQ in 

excess of accumulation limits for 

permits transferred after November 8, 

2008, or not registered with NMFS by 

November 30, 2008, as specified at 

§ 660.140(d)(4)(v). 

For the initial issuance calculation, 

the Council motion requires that 

bycatch rates be calculated for 8 

geographic areas for overfished species 

and 4 geographic areas for Pacific 

halibut. These include zones stratified 

by latitude and depth. Bycatch rates 

included in the proposed rule were 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60893 

estimates used for example purposes. 

Subsequently, NWFSC has completed 

its calculation of bycatch rates based on 

West Coast Groundfish Observer 

Program (WCGOP) data, and the 

finalized bycatch rates are included in 

this final rule at § 660.140(d)(8). 

In calculating the bycatch rates, to 

determine depth stratification, the 

NWFSC evaluated models to determine 

an appropriate break to isolate data as 

either shoreward or seaward of the 

Rockfish Conservation Areas (RCAs). 

The NWFSC concluded that the 115 

fathom break was an appropriate means 

of stratifying the data shoreward and 

seaward of the RCA, as had been 

previously requested by the Council for 

Pacific halibut bycatch ratios. NMFS has 

revised the final rule to reflect the use 

of 115 fathoms as the division between 

shoreward and seaward geographical 

areas for the purpose of calculating QS 

for Group 2 and Group 3 species. 

Estimated bycatch rates in the 

proposed rule were truncated to the 

eighth decimal place, however, the 

bycatch rates published in the final rule 

are the rates calculated by the NWFSC 

truncated to the ninth decimal place. 

NMFS decided to extend the published 

rates to the ninth decimal place in order 

to assure accuracy of calculations to 

one-tenth of one pound, consistent with 

standard rounding rules discussed in 

the regulations. 

C. At-Sea Coop Programs 

I. MS Coop Program 

In the MS Coop Program, eligibility 

requirements for ownership of an MS 

permit has been clarified. MS permits, 

as a new type of limited entry permit, 

are subject to eligibility requirements for 

all limited entry permits at 

§ 660.25(b)(1)(ii), which states: ‘‘Only a 

person eligible to own a documented 

vessel under the terms of 46 U.S.C. 

12113(a) may be issued or may hold a 

limited entry permit.’’ The proposed 

rule at § 660.150(f)(1)(i) stated: ‘‘To 

acquire an MS permit a person must be 

eligible to own and control a U.S. 

fishing vessel with a fishery 

endorsement pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 

12113 (general fishery endorsement 

requirements and 75 percent citizenship 

requirement for entities) and must be: A 

United States citizen; a permanent 

resident alien; or a corporation, 

partnership or other entity established 

under the laws of the United States or 

any State.’’ The language in § 660.150 

had been adopted by the Council with 

regards to eligibility to own QS or IBQ 

in the Shorebased IFQ Program, and had 

been inadvertently repeated in the 

provisions for the MS Coop Program. 

Accordingly, the provision included in 

the proposed rule has been removed 

from this final rule. 

Another change from the proposed 

rule for the MS Coop Program in this 

final rule is the removal of all references 

to ‘‘control’’ at § 660.150. The Council 

motion for the MS Coop Program, as 

reflected in Appendix E to the FMP, did 

not identify any ownership rules or 

control limits for either MS/CVendorsed permits or MS permits. At its 

June 2010 meeting, the Council clarified 

that for the purpose of accumulation 

limits, ownership of MS/CV-endorsed 

permits and MS permits is subject to the 

individual and collective rule. 

NMFS is also changing the divestiture 

provisions for MS/CV-endorsed permits 

from that described in the proposed 

rule. Upon further review of the 

regulation comparing the MS/CVendorsed permit and the QS permit 

divestiture provisions and after 

consideration of oral comments 

submitted to the Council at its June 

2010 meeting, NMFS is revising the 

divestiture provisions for the MS/CVendorsed permits to provide additional 

time for owners of MS/CV-endorsed 

permits to come into compliance with 

accumulation limits. The divestiture 

provision for QS permits allows 2 years 

for a permit owner to come in to 

compliance with the requirement. As 

drafted in the proposed rule, the 

divestiture provision for owners of MS/ 

CV-endorsed permits would only allow 

these individuals a couple of months, at 

most, to come in to compliance with the 

provision. NMFS believes that a longer 

time for divestiture would be 

appropriate for owners of MS/CVendorsed permits. Applying a similar 

time frame for divestiture in the MS 

Coop Program as the divestiture 

provision for the Shorebased IFQ 

Program is a logical extension from 

what was proposed, and is consistent, 

NMFS believes, with the Council’s 

intent in Amendment 20. One difference 

that will remain between the two 

divestiture provisions is that the QS 

permits must divest between years 3 

and 4 after implementation of the 

program, which is after the 2 year 

moratorium on the transfer of QS. In 

Amendment 20, the MS/CV-endorsed 

permits are not subject to a 2 year 

moratorium on transfers. Thus, NMFS is 

revising the divestiture provision at 

§ 660.150(g)(3)(i)(D) to allow MS/CVendorsed permit owners 2 years after 

implementation of the program to divest 

of excess ownership in MS/CV-endorsed 

permit(s). 

II. C/P Coop Program 

There are no substantive changes to 

the C/P Coop Program from the 

proposed rule. 

Classification 

The Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS, determined that FMP 

Amendments 20 and 21, as 

implemented in part through this final 

rule, are necessary for the conservation 

and management of the Pacific coast 

groundfish fishery and that they are 

consistent with the MSA and other 

applicable laws. 

NMFS and the Council prepared final 

environmental impact statements (EISs) 

for Amendment 20 and for Amendment 

21 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP. 

A notice of availability was published 

on June 25, 2010 (75 FR 36386). In 

partially approving FMP Amendments 

20 and 21 on August 9, 2010, NMFS 

issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for 

each amendment identifying the 

selected alternatives. Copies of the 

RODs are available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

This final rule has been determined to 

be significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

The preamble to the proposed rule (75 

FR 32994, June 10, 2010) included a 

detailed summary of the analyses 

contained in the IRFA, and that 

discussion is not repeated here. NMFS, 

pursuant to section 604 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

prepared a FRFA in support of this rule. 

The FRFA incorporates the IRFA, a 

summary of the significant issues raised 

by the public comments in response to 

the IRFA, and NMFS’s responses to 

those comments. A copy of the FRFA is 

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES) 

and a summary of the FRFA follows: 

The Council has prepared two EIS 

documents: Amendment 20— 

Rationalization of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Limited Entry Trawl 

Fishery, which would create the 

structure and management details of the 

trawl fishery rationalization program; 

and Amendment 21—Allocation of 

Harvest Opportunity Between Sectors of 

the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery, 

which would allocate the groundfish 

stocks between trawl and non-trawl 

fisheries. The two draft EIS’s prepared 

by the Council provide economic 

analyses of the Council’s preferred 

alternatives and draft RIR and IRFAs 

(DEIS IRFAs). The DEIS IRFAs were 

updated and combined into a single 

RIR/IRFA for use with the ‘‘initial 

issuance’’ proposed rule that was 

published on June 10, 2010 (75 FR 

32994) (PR IRFA). The PR IRFA 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60894 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

reviewed and summarized the benefits 

and costs, and the economic effects of 

the Council’s recommendations as 

presented in the two EIS’s. 

Although other alternatives were 

examined in the EISs, the FRFA focuses 

on the two key alternatives—the NoAction Alternative and the Preferred 

Alternative. The EISs include an 

economic analysis of the impacts of all 

the alternatives and the PR IRFA and 

the FRFA incorporates this analysis. For 

the Amendment 20 EIS, the alternatives 

ranged from status quo (no action), to 

IFQ for all trawl sectors, IFQ for the 

non-whiting sector and coops for all 

whiting sectors, and IFQ for the 

shorebased sector and coops for the atsea sectors (preferred). Various elements 

were part of each of these alternatives 

and varied among them, including 

initial qualifications and allocations, 

accumulation limits, grandfathering, 

processor shares, species covered, 

number of sectors, adaptive 

management, area management, and 

carryover provisions. The preferred 

alternative is a blending of components 

from the other alternatives analyzed in 

the EIS. For the Amendment 21 EIS, 

alternatives were provided for 6 

decision points: (1) Limited entry trawl 

allocations for Amendment 21 species, 

(2) shoreside trawl sector allocations, (3) 

trawl sector allocations of trawldominant overfished species, (4) at-sea 

whiting trawl sector set-asides, (5) 

Pacific halibut total bycatch limits, and 

(6) formal allocations in the FMP. For 

most of these decision points, the 

alternatives within them were crafted 

around approximately maintaining 

historical catch levels by the sectors or, 

in some cases, increasing opportunity 

for the non-trawl sector. 

By focusing on the two key 

alternatives in the PR IRFA and in the 

FRFA (no action and preferred), it 

encompasses parts of the other 

alternatives and informs the reader of 

these regulations. The analysis of the no 

action alternative describes what is 

likely to occur in the absence of the 

action. It provides a benchmark against 

which the incremental effects of the 

action can be compared. Under the no 

action alternative, the current, primary 

management tool used to control the 

Pacific coast groundfish trawl catch 

includes a system of two month 

cumulative landing limits for most 

species and season closures for Pacific 

whiting. This management program 

would continue under the no action 

alternative. Only long-term, fixed 

allocations for Pacific whiting and 

sablefish north of 36° N. lat. would 

exist. All other groundfish species 

would not be formally allocated 

between the trawl and non-trawl 

sectors. Allocating the available harvest 

of groundfish species and species 

complexes would occur in the Council 

process of deciding biennial harvest 

specifications and management 

measures and, as such, would be 

considered short term allocations. 

The analysis of the preferred 

alternative describes what is likely to 

occur as a result of the action. 

Alternative 4b was the Council’s 

preferred alternative for rationalizing 

the west coast groundfish limited entry 

trawl fishery. The Council’s preferred 

alternative establishes IFQs for both 

shoreside sectors of the trawl fishery 

and allows them to trade IFQs between 

one another, effectively combining both 

shoreside sectors, whiting and nonwhiting, into one. Under the preferred 

alternative, shoreside processors are 

allocated 20 percent of the shoreside 

IFQ for whiting. Under the preferred 

alternative, shoreside processors would 

not receive IFQ for nonwhiting species 

that have been landed with whiting. 

Furthermore, a subset of species is 

covered with IFQs in the shoreside 

fishery and with allocations in the at-sea 

fishery, rather than all species in the 

Council’s ABC/OY table for groundfish. 

Those species which are not covered 

with IFQs or allocations are excluded 

because the incidental catch of those 

species is small relative to management 

targets and the inclusion of those 

species may have negative economic 

implications with little to no benefit to 

management. The mothership sector is 

managed with harvest cooperatives 

(coops), and each catcher vessel wanting 

to participate in a coop must declare a 

mothership to which it will deliver in 

the upcoming year. The catcherprocessor sector is managed with a 

limited entry system designed to 

facilitate the continuation of the 

voluntary cooperative in that sector. In 

the event that the voluntary cooperative 

breaks apart, each permit is allocated an 

equal number of QS, and the catcherprocessor sector becomes an IFQ 

fishery. 

Other provisions of Alternative 4b 

include initial allocation that allocates 

bycatch species based on a bycatch rate 

(in the nonwhiting portion of the 

fishery) and on a pro rata distribution 

for the whiting portion of the fishery. 

The initial allocation of IFQ to the 

shoreside sectors divides the buyback 

portion of catch history equally for some 

IFQ species and is based on the years 

1994 to 2003, where the two worst years 

are dropped. This equal division only 

applies to non-overfished species and 

canary rockfish. The other overfished 

species would be allocated based on 

current permits’ landing history alone. 

In the mothership sector, the best 8 out 

of 10 years are used between 1994 and 

2003 for calculating catch history. 

The need for a change from status quo 

is identified in the problem statement. 

After reviewing the status quo situation 

and both the beneficial and adverse 

impacts of the trawl rationalization 

alternatives (as described in detail in 

Chapter 2, Chapter 4, and the 

appendices to the Amendment 20 EIS), 

the Council’s judgment was that the 

advantages of its final preferred 

alternative for trawl rationalization, 

Alternative 4b, outweighed the 

disadvantages in comparison to 

continuation with status quo 

management, the other trawl 

rationalization alternatives that were 

considered, and other proposals for 

modification of status quo (e.g., 

providing longer cumulative limit 

periods). There are two primary drivers 

in the problem statement that guided 

this process: the first is the need to 

account for, control, and reduce 

bycatch, and the second is the need to 

provide for an economically sustainable 

fishery for the benefit of industry 

participants and fishery dependent 

communities. These needs are both 

reflected in the goal for this action: 

Create and implement a capacity 

rationalization plan that increases net 

economic benefits, creates individual 

economic stability, provides for full 

utilization of the trawl sector allocation, 

considers environmental impacts, and 

achieves individual accountability of 

catch and bycatch. There are no 

significant alternatives to this action 

that accomplish the stated objectives of 

applicable statutes and that minimize 

any of the significant economic impact 

of the rule on small entities. As 

discussed below, the action includes 

provisions that would have a beneficial 

impact on small entities. 

As described in the RIR/IRFA, NMFS 

developed the following estimates of the 

number of small entities to which this 

rule would apply. NMFS makes the 

following conclusions based primarily 

on analyses associated with fish ticket 

data and limited entry permit data, 

available employment data provided by 

processors, information on the 

charterboat and tribal fleets, and 

available industry responses industry to 

on-going survey on ownership. Entities 

were analyzed as to whether they were 

only affected by the Amendment 21 

allocation processes (non-trawl), or if 

they were affected by both Amendment 

20 and 21 (trawl). 

The non-trawl businesses are 

associated with the following fleets: 

limited entry fixed gear (approximately 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60895 

150 companies), open access groundfish 

(1,100), charterboats (465), and the tribal 

fleet (four tribes with 66 vessels). 

Available information on average 

revenue per vessel suggests that all the 

entities in this group can be considered 

small. For the trawl sector, there are 177 

permit holders. Nine limited entry trawl 

permits are associated with the catcherprocessing vessels which are considered 

‘‘large’’ companies. Of the remaining 168 

limited entry permits, 25 limited entry 

trawl permits are either owned or 

closely associated with a ‘‘large’’ shorebased processing company or with a 

non-profit organization who considers 

itself a ‘‘large’’ organization. Nine other 

permit owners indicated that they were 

large ‘‘companies.’’ Almost all of these 

companies are associated with the 

shorebased and mothership whiting 

fisheries. The remaining 134 limited 

entry trawl permits are projected to be 

held by ‘‘small’’ companies. Three of the 

six mothership processors are ‘‘large’’ 

companies. Within the 14 shorebased 

whiting first receivers/processors, there 

are four ‘‘large’’ companies. Including 

the shorebased whiting first receivers, in 

2008, there were 75 first receivers that 

purchased limited entry trawl 

groundfish. There were 36 small 

purchasers (less than $150,000); 26 

medium purchasers (purchases equal to 

or greater than $150,000 but less than 

$1,000,000); and 13 large purchasers 

(purchases equal to or greater than $1.0 

million). Because of the costs of 

obtaining a ‘‘processor site license’’, 

procuring and scheduling a catch 

monitor, and installing and using the 

electronic fish ticket software, these 

‘‘small’’ purchasers will likely opt out of 

buying groundfish, or make 

arrangements to purchase fish from 

another company that has obtained a 

processing site license. 

NMFS received one comment specific 

to the RIR/IRFA. This comment 

concerned the potential benefits to 

harvesters concerning price negotiations 

with processors from the perspective of 

moving from 2-month cumulative 

landings limits to IFQs. This comment 

is summarized above as Comment 50. 

NMFS responded that the summary of 

the IRFA contained in the preamble of 

the proposed rule was inconsistent with 

Chapter 4 of the DEIS and with the draft 

RIR/IRFA that was included with the 

DEIS, NMFS will correct the summary 

appropriately. The full response to this 

comment is described above in the 

response to Comment 50. 

Although not specifically addressed 

to RIR/IRFA, comments were received 

that relate to the impacts on small 

businesses. In particular, concerns were 

raised about ‘‘negative impacts on 

smaller boats, deckhands, and smaller 

boats (Comment 19), ‘‘program costs to 

fishermen, including the costs of 

entering the fishery and the costs of 

observers and monitoring are too high’’ 

(Comments 22 and 24), ‘‘observer rules 

need to change for trawl and small boats 

to reflect the vastly different bycatch 

which occurs when mistakes are made.’’ 

(Comment 23); ‘‘impact of the allocation 

formulas on Fort Bragg fishermen 

(Comment 32); ‘‘concern that average 

fishermen will not be able to afford to 

participate and that this will lead to 

increased consolidation and leave many 

ports no longer viable’’ (Comment 34); 

and ‘‘negative impacts on processors, 

that small processors will be driven out 

of business due to consolidation * * * 

will eliminate the ‘‘mom and pop 

businesses’’ (Comment 49). 

NMFS has responded to these 

comments above in detail and these 

responses will not be repeated here. 

However, as discussed in the response 

to Comments 19 (small harvesters) and 

49 (small processors) the overall general 

nature of these responses is the 

following. In terms of impacts on small 

businesses, the trawl rationalization 

program is intended to increase net 

economic benefits, create economic 

stability, provide full utilization of the 

trawl sector allocation, consider 

environmental impacts, and promote 

conservation through individual 

accountability for catch and bycatch. 

The allocations of quota under the new 

program do not differ significantly from 

status quo allocations made biennially 

in terms of total allocations. However, 

instead of fleetwide quotas, there will 

now be individual allocations of quota 

shares and quota pounds to permit 

owners. Allocations of overfished 

species constrain all groundfish 

fishermen, for both large and small 

operations. In some cases, smaller 

operators may be constrained to a 

greater extent. This was recognized in 

development of the program, and 

operators are encouraged to work 

together cooperatively, through 

mechanisms like combining and sharing 

quota amounts. The program provides 

for leasing of additional quota as needed 

to facilitate operations. The proposed 

action includes provisions that would 

have a beneficial impact on small 

entities. It would create a management 

program under which most recent 

participants in the Pacific Coast 

groundfish limited entry trawl fishery 

(many of which are small entities) 

would be eligible to continue 

participating in the fishery and under 

which the fishery itself would 

experience an increase in economic 

profitability. Small entities choosing to 

exit the fishery should receive financial 

compensation from selling their permit 

or share of the resource. To prevent a 

particular individual, corporation, or 

other entity from acquiring an excessive 

share of the total harvest privileges in 

the program, accumulation limits would 

restrict the amount of harvest privileges 

that can be held, acquired, or used by 

individuals and vessels. In addition, for 

the shoreside sector of the fishery, an 

AMP was created to mitigate any 

adverse impacts, including impacts on 

small entities and communities that 

might result from the proposed action. 

It is expected that the TIQ will lead 

to consolidation and this may affect 

small processors, particularly if they are 

in disadvantaged ports. Chapter 4 of the 

FEIS analyzed the effects on processors 

from various perspectives: The 

distribution of landings across west 

coast ports may change as a result of 

fleet consolidation, industry 

agglomeration, and the comparative 

advantage of ports (a function of bycatch 

rates in the waters constituting the 

operational area for the port, differences 

in infrastructure, and other factors). In 

particular, the Council analysis 

indicated that processors associated 

with disadvantaged communities may 

see trawl groundfish volumes decline. 

The analysis highlights that those 

processors receiving landings from 

Central California or Neah Bay may see 

a reduction in trawl caught groundfish 

if the market is able to redirect activity 

toward more efficient and advantaged 

ports. However, in addition to increased 

landings that are expected to result from 

the TIQ program, small processors and 

disadvantaged communities may benefit 

from the control limits, vessel limits, 

and adaptive management policies. 

Control limits will limit the ability of 

large processors to obtain shares of the 

fisheries while the adaptive 

management processes will allow the 

Council to consider the impacts on 

small processors, and disadvantaged 

communities when allocating the 

adaptive management quota (10 percent 

of the total non-whiting trawl quotas). 

Although vessel accumulation limits 

tend to lower economic efficiency and 

restrict profitability for the average 

vessel, they could help retain vessels in 

communities because more vessels 

would remain. 

Another process by which small 

processors and disadvantaged 

communities may benefit from will be 

the future establishment of regulations 

and policies that allow CFAs to be 

formed. Some of the potential benefits 

of CFAs include: ensuring access to the 

fishery resource in a particular area or 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60896 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

community to benefit the local fishing 

economy; enabling the formation of risk 

pools and sharing monitoring and other 

costs; ensuring that fish delivered to a 

local area will benefit local processors 

and businesses; providing a local source 

of QSs for new entrants and others 

wanting to increase their participation 

in the fishery; increasing local 

accountability and responsibility for the 

resource; and benefiting other providers 

and users of local fishery infrastructure. 

The development of CFAs could have a 

positive impact on the culture of fishing 

communities. Although little research 

has been done on the effect of CFAs on 

culture, it seems likely that CFAs could 

strengthen a community’s cultural 

associations with fishing by 

contributing to a unique sense of 

identity, increasing accountability for 

both natural and cultural resources, and 

building and strengthening connections 

among community members. 

In summary, as stated in the RIR/ 

IRFA, the major impacts of this rule 

appear to be on three groups: Shoreside 

processors which are a mix of large and 

small processors; and shore-based 

trawlers which are also a mix of large 

and small companies. The non-whiting 

shore-based trawlers are currently 

operating at a loss or at best are 

‘‘breaking even.’’ The new 

rationalization program would lead to 

profitability, but only with a reduction 

of about 50 percent of the fleet. This 

program would lead to major changes in 

the fishery. To help mitigate against 

these changes, as discussed above, the 

agency has announced its intent, subject 

to available Federal funding, that 

participants would initially be 

responsible for 10 percent of the cost of 

hiring observers and catch monitors. 

The industry proportion of the costs of 

hiring observers and catch monitors 

would be increased every year so that by 

2014, once the fishery has transitioned 

to the rationalization program, the 

industry would be responsible for 100 

percent of the cost of hiring the 

observers and catch monitors. NMFS 

believes that an incrementally reduced 

subsidy to industry funding would 

enhance the observer and catch monitor 

program’s stability, ensure 100 percent 

observer and catch monitor coverage, 

and facilitate the industries’ successful 

transition to the new quota system. In 

addition, to help mitigate against the 

negative impacts of this program, the 

Council has adopted an Adaptive 

Management Program where starting in 

year 3 of the program, 10 percent of 

non-whiting QS would be set aside 

every year to address community 

impacts and industry transition needs. 

After reviewing the initial effects of ITQ 

programs in other parts of the world, the 

council had placed a short term QS 

trading prohibition so that fishermen 

can learn from their experiences and not 

make premature sales of their QS. The 

Council is also envisioning future 

regulatory processes that would allow 

community fisheries associations to be 

established to help aid communities and 

fishermen. 

Small Entity Compliance Guide 

Section 212 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 states that, for each rule or group 

of related rules for which an agency is 

required to prepare a FRFA, the agency 

shall publish one or more guides to 

assist small entities in complying with 

the rule, and shall designate such 

publications as ‘‘small entity compliance 

guides.’’ The agency shall explain the 

actions a small entity is required to take 

to comply with a rule or group of rules. 

Copies of this final rule are available 

from the Northwest Regional Office, and 

the small entity compliance guide will 

be sent to the following: (1) ‘‘Prequalified’’ limited entry trawl permit 

owners, (2) ‘‘pre-qualified’’ shorebased 

processors of Pacific whiting, (3) Pacific 

whiting license owners, (4) owners of 

vessels registered to limited entry trawl 

permits, and (5) members of the 

groundfish public notice e-mail list. The 

guide and this final rule are also 

available on the NMFS Northwest 

Region Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/ 

Groundfish-Fishery-Management/TrawlProgram/index.cfm) and upon request. 

This final rule contains a collectionof-information requirement subject to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and 

which has been approved by the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) 

under control number 0648–0611. 

Public reporting burden for the QS 

Initial Issuance/QS Permit Application 

is estimated to average 6 hours per 

response (180 responses). Public 

reporting burden for the MS Permit 

Application is estimated to average 1 

hour per response (6 responses). Public 

reporting burden for the MS/CV 

Endorsement Application is estimated 

to average 2 hours per response (30 

responses). Public reporting burden for 

the C/P Endorsement Application is 

estimated to average 30 minutes per 

response (10 responses). Public 

reporting burden for the Ownership 

Interest form is estimated to average 30 

minutes per response (216 responses). 

Public reporting burden for the Appeals 

is estimated to average 6 hours per 

response (100 responses). These 

estimates include the time for reviewing 

instructions, searching existing data 

sources, gathering and maintaining the 

data needed, and completing and 

reviewing the collection information. 

No comments were received on the PRA 

during the proposed rule comment 

period. Send comments regarding these 

burden estimates or any other aspect of 

this data collection, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, to 

NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by e-mail to 

OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov, or fax 

to 202–395–7285. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, and no person shall be 

subject to penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

NMFS issued Biological Opinions 

under the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) on August 10, 1990, November 

26, 1991, August 28, 1992, September 

27, 1993, May 14, 1996, and December 

15, 1999, pertaining to the effects of the 

Pacific Coast groundfish FMP fisheries 

on Chinook salmon (Puget Sound, 

Snake River spring/summer, Snake 

River fall, upper Columbia River spring, 

lower Columbia River, upper Willamette 

River, Sacramento River winter, Central 

Valley spring, California coastal), coho 

salmon (Central California coastal, 

southern Oregon/northern California 

coastal), chum salmon (Hood Canal 

summer, Columbia River), sockeye 

salmon (Snake River, Ozette Lake), and 

steelhead (upper, middle and lower 

Columbia River, Snake River Basin, 

upper Willamette River, central 

California coast, California Central 

Valley, south/central California, 

northern California, southern 

California). These biological opinions 

have concluded that implementation of 

the FMP for the Pacific Coast groundfish 

fishery was not expected to jeopardize 

the continued existence of any 

endangered or threatened species under 

the jurisdiction of NMFS, or result in 

the destruction or adverse modification 

of critical habitat. 

NMFS reinitiated a formal section 7 

consultation under the ESA in 2005 for 

both the Pacific whiting midwater trawl 

fishery and the groundfish bottom trawl 

fishery. The December 19, 1999, 

Biological Opinion had defined an 

11,000 Chinook incidental take 

threshold for the Pacific whiting fishery. 

During the 2005 Pacific whiting season, 

the 11,000 fish Chinook incidental take 

threshold was exceeded, triggering 

reinitiation. Also in 2005, new data 

from the West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program became available, 

allowing NMFS to complete an analysis 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60897 

of salmon take in the bottom trawl 

fishery. 

NMFS prepared a Supplemental 

Biological Opinion dated March 11, 

2006, which addressed salmon take in 

both the Pacific whiting midwater trawl 

and groundfish bottom trawl fisheries. 

In its 2006 Supplemental Biological 

Opinion, NMFS concluded that catch 

rates of salmon in the 2005 whiting 

fishery were consistent with 

expectations considered during prior 

consultations. Chinook bycatch has 

averaged about 7,300 fish over the last 

15 years and has only occasionally 

exceeded the reinitiation trigger of 

11,000 fish. 

Since 1999, annual Chinook bycatch 

has averaged about 8,450 fish. The 

Chinook ESUs most likely affected by 

the whiting fishery has generally 

improved in status since the 1999 

section 7 consultation. Although these 

species remain at risk, as indicated by 

their ESA listing, NMFS concluded that 

the higher observed bycatch in 2005 

does not require a reconsideration of its 

prior ‘‘no jeopardy’’ conclusion with 

respect to the fishery. For the 

groundfish bottom trawl fishery, NMFS 

concluded that incidental take in the 

groundfish fisheries is within the 

overall limits articulated in the 

Incidental Take Statement of the 1999 

Biological Opinion. The groundfish 

bottom trawl limit from that opinion 

was 9,000 fish annually. NMFS will 

continue to monitor and collect data to 

analyze take levels. NMFS also 

reaffirmed its prior determination that 

implementation of the Groundfish FMP 

is not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of any of the affected ESUs. 

Lower Columbia River coho (70 FR 

37160, June 28, 2005) were recently 

listed and Oregon Coastal coho (73 FR 

7816, February 11, 2008) were recently 

relisted as threatened under the ESA. 

The 1999 biological opinion concluded 

that the bycatch of salmonids in the 

Pacific whiting fishery were almost 

entirely Chinook salmon, with little or 

no bycatch of coho, chum, sockeye, and 

steelhead. The Southern Distinct 

Population Segment (DPS) of green 

sturgeon (71 FR 17757, April 7, 2006) 

and the southern DPS of Pacific 

eulachon (75 FR 13012, March 18, 2010) 

were also recently listed as threatened 

under the ESA. As a consequence, 

NMFS has reinitiated its Section 7 

consultation on the Groundfish FMP. 

After reviewing the available 

information, NMFS concluded that, 

consistent with Sections 7(a)(2) and 7(d) 

of the ESA, the implementation of this 

final rule would not result in any 

irreversible or irretrievable commitment 

of resources that would have the effect 

of foreclosing the formulation or 

implementation of any reasonable and 

prudent alternative measures. 

Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP 

were developed after meaningful 

consultation and collaboration, through 

the Council process, with the tribal 

representative on the Council. The 

Amendments have no direct effect on 

tribes; the reorganization of the 

groundfish regulations includes 

regulations that address tribal fishing; 

these sections were deemed by the 

Council as ‘‘necessary or appropriate’’ to 

implement the FMP as amended. 

List of Subjects 

15 CFR Part 902 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

50 CFR Part 660 

Fisheries, Fishing, and Indian 

fisheries. 

Dated: September 13, 2010. 

John Oliver, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Operations, National Marine Fisheries 

Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 15 CFR Chapter IX and 50 

CFR Chapter VI are amended as follows: 

15 CFR Chapter IX 

PART 902—NOAA INFORMATION 

COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER 

THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: 

OMB CONTROL NUMBERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 902 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 902.1(b), in the table under the 

entry ‘‘50 CFR’’: 

■ a. Remove the entries and 

corresponding OMB numbers for 

660.303, 660.305, 660.322, 660.323, 

660.333, and 660.337. 

■ b. Add new entries and corresponding 

OMB numbers for 660.20, 660.25, 

660.113, 660.219, and 660.319. 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned 

pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

CFR part or section where 

the information collection 

requirement is located 

Current OMB 

control number 

(all numbers 

begin with 

0648¥) 

* * * * * 

50 CFR 

CFR part or section where 

the information collection 

requirement is located 

Current OMB 

control number 

(all numbers 

begin with 

0648¥) 

* * * * * 

660.20 ........................... ¥0355 

660.25 ........................... ¥0203 

660.113 ......................... ¥0271 

660.219 ......................... ¥0352 

660.319 ......................... ¥0352 

* * * * * 

50 CFR Chapter VI 

PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 660 

continues to read as follows: 

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

U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 

■ 4. Add subparts C through F to read 

as follows: 

Subpart C—West Coast Groundfish 

Fisheries 

Sec. 

660.10 Purpose and scope. 

660.11 General definitions. 

660.12 General groundfish prohibitions. 

660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting. 

660.14 Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) 

requirements. 

660.15 Equipment requirements. 

660.16 Groundfish observer program. 

660.17 Catch monitors and catch monitor 

service providers [Reserved]. 

660.18 Certification and decertification 

procedures for observers, catch monitors, 

catch monitor providers and observer 

providers. 

660.20 Vessel and gear identification. 

660.24 Limited entry and open access 

fisheries 

660.25 Permits. 

660.26 Pacific whiting vessel licenses. 

660.30 Compensation with fish for 

collecting resource information—EFPs. 

660.40 Overfished species rebuilding plans. 

660.50 Pacific coast treaty Indian fisheries. 

660.55 Allocations. 

660.60 Specifications and management 

measures. 

660.65 Groundfish harvest specifications. 

Table 1a to Part 660, Subpart C—2009, 

Specifications of ABCs, OYs, and HGs, 

by Management Area (weights in metric 

tons) 

Table 1b to Part 660, Subpart C—2009, 

Harvest Guidelines for Minor Rockfish 

by Depth Sub-groups (weights in metric 

tons) 

Table 1c to Part 660, Subpart C—2009, Open 

Access and Limited Entry Allocations by 

Species or Species Group (weights in 

metric tons) 

Table 1d to Part 660, Subpart C— At-Sea 

Whiting Fishery Annual Set-Asides, 

2011 and 2012. 

Table 2a to Part 660, Subpart C—2010, 

Specifications of ABCs, OYs, and HGs, 

by Management Area (weights in metric 

tons) 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60898 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Table 2b to Part 660, Subpart C—2010, and 

Beyond, Harvest Guidelines for Minor 

Rockfish by Depth Sub-groups (weights 

in metric tons) 

Table 2c to Part 660, Subpart C—2010, and 

Beyond, Open Access and Limited Entry 

Allocations by Species or Species Group 

(weights in metric tons) 

Subpart D–West Coast Groundfish—Limited 

Entry Trawl Fisheries 

660.100 Purpose and scope. 

660.111 Trawl fishery—definitions. 

660.112 Trawl fishery—prohibitions. 

660.113 Trawl fishery—recordkeeping and 

reporting 

660.116 Trawl fishery—observer 

requirements. 

660.120 Trawl fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

660.130 Trawl fishery—management 

measures. 

660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. 

660.150 Mothership (MS) Coop Program. 

660.160 Catcher/processor (C/P) Coop 

Program. 

Table 1 (North) to Part 660, Subpart D—2010 

Trip Limits for Limited Entry Trawl Gear 

North of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Table 1 (South) to Part 660, Subpart D—2010 

Trip Limits for Limited Entry Trawl Gear 

South of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Figure 1 to Part 660, Subpart D—Diagram of 

Selective Flatfish Trawl 

Subpart E—West Coast Groundfish— 

Limited Entry Fixed Gear Fisheries 

660.210 Purpose and scope. 

660.211 Fixed gear fishery—definitions. 

660.212 Fixed gear fishery—prohibitions. 

660.213 Fixed gear fishery—recordkeeping 

and reporting. 

660.216 Fixed gear fishery—observer 

requirements. 

660.219 Fixed gear identification and 

marking. 

660.220 Fixed gear fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

660.230 Fixed gear fishery—management 

measures. 

660.231 Limited entry fixed gear primary 

fishery for sablefish. 

660.232 Limited entry daily trip limit (DTL) 

fishery for sablefish 

Table 2 (North) to Part 660, Subpart E—2010 

Trip Limits for Limited Entry Fixed Gear 

North of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Table 2 (South) to Part 660, Subpart E—2010 

Trip Limits for Limited Entry Fixed Gear 

South of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Subpart F—West Coast Groundfish—Open 

Access Fisheries 

660.310 Purpose and scope. 

660.311 Open access fishery—definitions. 

660.312 Open access fishery—prohibitions. 

660.313 Open access fishery— 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

660.316 Open access fishery—observer 

requirements. 

660.319 Open access fishery gear 

identification and marking. 

660.320 Open access fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

660.330 Open access fishery—management 

measures. 

660.332 Open access daily trip limit (DTL) 

fishery for sablefish. 

660.333 Open access non-groundfish trawl 

fishery—management measures. 

Table 3 (North) to Part 660, Subpart F—2010 

Trip Limits for Open Access Gears North 

of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Table 3 (South) to Part 660, Subpart F—2010 

Trip Limits for Open Access Gears South 

of 40°10′ N. Lat. 

Subpart C—West Coast Groundfish 

Fisheries 

§ 660.10 Purpose and scope. 

(a) Subparts C through G of this part 

implement the Pacific Coast Groundfish 

Fishery Management Plan (PCGFMP) 

developed by the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council. Subparts C 

through G govern fishing vessels of the 

U.S. in the EEZ off the coasts of 

Washington, Oregon, and California. All 

weights are in round weight or roundweight equivalents, unless specified 

otherwise. 

(b) Any person fishing subject to 

subparts C through G of this part is 

bound by the international boundaries 

described in this section, 

notwithstanding any dispute or 

negotiation between the U.S. and any 

neighboring country regarding their 

respective jurisdictions, until such time 

as new boundaries are established or 

recognized by the U.S. 

§ 660.11 General definitions. 

These definitions are specific to the 

fisheries covered in subparts C through 

G of this part. 

Active sampling unit means the 

portion of the groundfish fleet in which 

an observer coverage plan is being 

applied. 

Address of Record means the business 

address a person has provided to NMFS 

for NMFS use in providing notice of 

agency actions and other business with 

that person. 

Allocation. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

Base permit, with respect to a limited 

entry permit stacking program, means a 

limited entry permit described at 

§ 660.25(b)(3)(i), subpart C registered for 

use with a vessel that meets the permit 

length endorsement requirements 

appropriate to that vessel, as described 

at § 660.25(b)(3)(iii), subpart C. 

Biennial fishing period means a 24- 

month period beginning at 0001 local 

time on January 1 and ending at 2400 

local time on December 31 of the 

subsequent year. 

BMSY means the biomass level that 

produces maximum sustainable yield 

(MSY), as stated in the PCGFMP at 

Section 4.2. 

Calendar day means the day 

beginning at 0001 hours local time and 

continuing for 24 consecutive hours. 

Calendar year. (see ‘‘fishing year’’) 

Catch, take, harvest. (See § 600.10 of 

this chapter) 

Catch monitor means an individual 

that is certified by NMFS, is deployed 

to a first receiver, and whose primary 

duties include: monitoring and 

verification of the sorting of fish relative 

to federal requirements defined in 

§ 660.60, subpart C; documentation of 

the weighing of fish relative to the 

requirements of § 660.13, subpart C; and 

verification of first receivers reporting 

relative to the requirements defined in 

§ 660.113, subpart D. 

Change in partnership or corporation 

means the addition of a new 

shareholder or partner to the corporate 

or partnership membership. This 

definition of a ‘‘change’’ will apply to 

any person added to the corporate or 

partnership membership since 

November 1, 2000, including any family 

member of an existing shareholder or 

partner. A change in membership is not 

considered to have occurred if a 

member dies or becomes legally 

incapacitated and a trustee is appointed 

to act on his behalf, nor if the ownership 

of shares among existing members 

changes, nor if a member leaves the 

corporation or partnership and is not 

replaced. Changes in the ownership of 

publicly held stock will not be deemed 

changes in ownership of the 

corporation. 

Closure or closed means, when 

referring to closure of a fishery or a 

closed fishery, that taking and retaining, 

possessing, or landing the particular 

species or species group covered by the 

fishing closure is prohibited. Unless 

otherwise announced in the Federal 

Register or authorized in this subpart, 

offloading must begin before the closure 

time. 

Commercial fishing means: 

(1) Fishing by a person who possesses 

a commercial fishing license or is 

required by law to possess such license 

issued by one of the states or the Federal 

Government as a prerequisite to taking, 

landing and/or sale of fish; or 

(2) Fishing that results in or can be 

reasonably expected to result in sale, 

barter, trade or other disposition of fish 

for other than personal consumption. 

Commercial harvest guideline or 

commercial quota means the fishery 

harvest guideline minus the estimated 

recreational catch. Limited entry and 

open access allocations are derived from 

the commercial harvest guideline or 

quota. 

Conservation area(s) means either a 

Groundfish Conservation Area (GCA), 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60899 

an Essential Fish Habitat Conservation 

Area (EFHCA), or both. 

(1) Groundfish Conservation Area or 

GCA means a geographic area defined 

by coordinates expressed in degrees 

latitude and longitude, wherein fishing 

by a particular gear type or types may 

be prohibited. GCAs are created and 

enforced for the purpose of contributing 

to the rebuilding of overfished West 

Coast groundfish species. Regulations at 

§ 660.70, Subpart C define coordinates 

for these polygonal GCAs: Yelloweye 

Rockfish Conservation Areas, Cowcod 

Conservation Areas, waters encircling 

the Farallon Islands, and waters 

encircling the Cordell Banks. GCAs also 

include Rockfish Conservation Areas or 

RCAs, which are areas closed to fishing 

by particular gear types, bounded by 

lines approximating particular depth 

contours. RCA boundaries may and do 

change seasonally according to the 

conservation needs of the different 

overfished species. Regulations at 

§§ 660.70 through 660.74, subpart C 

define RCA boundary lines with 

latitude/longitude coordinates; 

regulations at Tables 1 (North) and 1 

(South) of subpart D, Tables 2 (North) 

and 2 (South) of subpart E, and Tables 

3 (North) and 3 (South) of subpart F set 

RCA seasonal boundaries. Fishing 

prohibitions associated with GCAs are 

in addition to those associated with EFH 

Conservation Areas. 

(2) Essential Fish Habitat 

Conservation Area or EFHCA means a 

geographic area defined by coordinates 

expressed in degrees latitude and 

longitude, wherein fishing by a 

particular gear type or types may be 

prohibited. EFHCAs are created and 

enforced for the purpose of contributing 

to the protection of West Coast 

groundfish essential fish habitat. 

Regulations at §§ 660.75, through 

660.79, Subpart C define EFHCA 

boundary lines with latitude/longitude 

coordinates. Fishing prohibitions 

associated with EFHCAs, which are 

found at § 660.12, subpart C, are in 

addition to those associated with GCAs. 

Continuous transiting or transit 

through means that a fishing vessel 

crosses a groundfish conservation area 

or EFH conservation area on a constant 

heading, along a continuous straight 

line course, while making way by means 

of a source of power at all times, other 

than drifting by means of the prevailing 

water current or weather conditions. 

Corporation means a legal, business 

entity, including incorporated (INC) and 

limited liability corporations (LLC). 

Council means the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, including its 

Groundfish Management Team (GMT), 

Scientific and Statistical Committee 

(SSC), Groundfish Advisory Subpanel 

(GAP), and any other advisory body 

established by the Council. 

Date of landing means the date on 

which the transfer of fish or offloading 

of fish from any vessel to a processor or 

other first receiver begins. 

Direct financial interest means any 

source of income to or capital 

investment or other interest held by an 

individual, partnership, or corporation 

or an individual’s spouse, immediate 

family member or parent that could be 

influenced by performance or nonperformance of observer or catch 

monitor duties. 

Electronic fish ticket means a software 

program or data files meeting data 

export specifications approved by 

NMFS that is used to send landing data 

to the Pacific States Marine Fisheries 

Commission. Electronic fish tickets are 

used to collect information similar to 

the information required in state fish 

receiving tickets or landing receipts, but 

do not replace or change any state 

requirements. 

Electronic Monitoring System or EMS 

means a data collection tool that uses a 

software operating system connected to 

an assortment of electronic components, 

including video recorders, to create a 

collection of data on vessel activities. 

Endorsement means an additional 

specification affixed to the limited entry 

permit that further restricts fishery 

participation or further specifies a 

harvest privilege, and is non-severable 

from a limited entry permit. 

Entity. (See ‘‘Person’’) 

Essential Fish Habitat or EFH. (See 

§ 600.10 of this chapter) 

First Receiver means a person who 

receives, purchases, or takes custody, 

control, or possession of catch onshore 

directly from a vessel. 

Fish. (See § 600.10 of this chapter) 

Fishery (See § 600.10 of this chapter) 

Fishery harvest guideline means the 

harvest guideline or quota after 

subtracting from the OY any allocation 

for the Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribes, 

projected research catch, deductions for 

fishing mortality in non-groundfish 

fisheries, as necessary, and set-asides for 

EFPs. 

Fishery management area means the 

EEZ off the coasts of Washington, 

Oregon, and California between 3 and 

200 nm offshore, and bounded on the 

north by the Provisional International 

Boundary between the U.S. and Canada, 

and bounded on the south by the 

International Boundary between the 

U.S. and Mexico. The inner boundary of 

the fishery management area is a line 

coterminous with the seaward 

boundaries of the States of Washington, 

Oregon, and California (the ‘‘3–mile 

limit’’). The outer boundary of the 

fishery management area is a line drawn 

in such a manner that each point on it 

is 200 nm from the baseline from which 

the territorial sea is measured, or is a 

provisional or permanent international 

boundary between the U.S. and Canada 

or Mexico. All groundfish possessed 

between 0–200 nm offshore or landed in 

Washington, Oregon, or California are 

presumed to have been taken and 

retained from the EEZ, unless otherwise 

demonstrated by the person in 

possession of those fish. 

Fishing. (See § 600.10 of this chapter) 

Fishing gear includes the following 

types of gear and equipment: 

(1) Bottom contact gear means fishing 

gear designed or modified to make 

contact with the bottom. This includes, 

but is not limited to, beam trawl, bottom 

trawl, dredge, fixed gear, set net, 

demersal seine, dinglebar gear, and 

other gear (including experimental gear) 

designed or modified to make contact 

with the bottom. Gear used to harvest 

bottom dwelling organisms (e.g. by 

hand, rakes, and knives) are also 

considered bottom contact gear for 

purposes of this subpart. 

(2) Demersal seine means a net 

designed to encircle fish on the seabed. 

The demersal seine is characterized by 

having its net bounded by leadweighted ropes that are not encircled 

with bobbins or rollers. Demersal seine 

gear is fished without the use of steel 

cables or otter boards (trawl doors). 

Scottish and Danish Seines are demersal 

seines. Purse seines, as defined at 

§ 600.10 of this chapter, are not 

demersal seines. Demersal seine gear is 

included in the definition of bottom 

trawl gear in paragraph (11)(i) of this 

definition. 

(3) Dredge gear means a gear 

consisting of a metal frame attached to 

a holding bag constructed of metal rings 

or mesh. As the metal frame is dragged 

upon or above the seabed, fish are 

pushed up and over the frame, then into 

the mouth of the holding bag. 

(4) Entangling nets include the 

following types of net gear: 

(i) Gillnet. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

(ii) Set net means a stationary, 

buoyed, and anchored gillnet or 

trammel net. 

(iii) Trammel net means a gillnet 

made with two or more walls joined to 

a common float line. 

(5) Fixed gear (anchored nontrawl 

gear) means the following gear types: 

longline, trap or pot, set net, and 

stationary hook-and-line (including 

commercial vertical hook-and-line) 

gears. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60900 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(6) Hook-and-line means one or more 

hooks attached to one or more lines. It 

may be stationary (commercial vertical 

hook-and-line) or mobile (troll). 

(i) Bottom longline means a 

stationary, buoyed, and anchored 

groundline with hooks attached, so as to 

fish along the seabed. It does not 

include pelagic hook-and-line or troll 

gear. 

(ii) Commercial vertical hook-and-line 

means commercial fishing with hookand-line gear that involves a single line 

anchored at the bottom and buoyed at 

the surface so as to fish vertically. 

(iii) Dinglebar gear means one or more 

lines retrieved and set with a troll gurdy 

or hand troll gurdy, with a terminally 

attached weight from which one or more 

leaders with one or more lures or baited 

hooks are pulled through the water 

while a vessel is making way. 

(iv) Troll gear means a lure or jig 

towed behind a vessel via a fishing line. 

Troll gear is used in commercial and 

recreational fisheries. 

(7) Mesh size means the opening 

between opposing knots. Minimum 

mesh size means the smallest distance 

allowed between the inside of one knot 

to the inside of the opposing knot, 

regardless of twine size. 

(8) Nontrawl gear means all legal 

commercial groundfish gear other than 

trawl gear. 

(9) Spear means a sharp, pointed, or 

barbed instrument on a shaft. 

(10) Trap or pot See § 600.10 of this 

chapter, definition of ‘‘trap’’. These 

terms are used as interchangeable 

synonyms. 

(11) Trawl gear means a cone or 

funnel-shaped net that is towed through 

the water, and can include a pair trawl 

that towed simultaneously by two boats. 

For the purpose of this definition, trawl 

gear includes groundfish and nongroundfish trawl. See definitions for 

groundfish trawl and non-groundfish 

trawls (previously called ‘‘exempted 

trawl’’). 

(i) Bottom trawl means a trawl in 

which the otter boards or the footrope 

of the net are in contact with the seabed. 

It includes demersal seine gear, and pair 

trawls fished on the bottom. Any trawl 

not meeting the requirements for a 

midwater trawl in § 660.130(b), subpart 

D is a bottom trawl. 

(A) Beam trawl gear means a type of 

trawl gear in which a beam is used to 

hold the trawl open during fishing. 

Otter boards or doors are not used. 

(B) Large footrope trawl gear means a 

bottom trawl gear with a footrope 

diameter larger than 8 inches (20 cm,) 

and no larger than 19 inches (48 cm) 

including any rollers, bobbins, or other 

material encircling or tied along the 

length of the footrope. 

(C) Small footrope trawl gear means a 

bottom trawl gear with a footrope 

diameter of 8 inches (20 cm) or smaller, 

including any rollers, bobbins, or other 

material encircling or tied along the 

length of the footrope. Selective flatfish 

trawl gear that meets the gear 

component requirements in 

§ 660.130(b), subpart D is a type of small 

footrope trawl gear. 

(ii) Midwater (pelagic or off-bottom) 

trawl means a trawl in which the otter 

boards and footrope of the net remain 

above the seabed. It includes pair trawls 

if fished in midwater. A midwater trawl 

has no rollers or bobbins on any part of 

the net or its component wires, ropes, 

and chains. For additional midwater 

trawl gear requirements and restrictions, 

see § 660.130(b), subpart D. 

(iii) Trawl gear components include: 

(A) Breastline means a rope or cable 

that connects the end of the headrope 

and the end of the trawl fishing line 

along the edge of the trawl web closest 

to the towing point. 

(B) Chafing gear means webbing or 

other material attached to the codend of 

a trawl net to protect the codend from 

wear. 

(C) Codend. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

(D) Double-bar mesh means webbing 

comprised of two lengths of twine tied 

into a single knot. 

(E) Double-walled codend means a 

codend constructed of two walls (layers) 

of webbing. 

(F) Footrope means a chain, rope, or 

wire attached to the bottom front end of 

the trawl webbing forming the leading 

edge of the bottom panel of the trawl 

net, and attached to the fishing line. 

(G) Headrope means a chain, rope, or 

wire attached to the trawl webbing 

forming the leading edge of the top 

panel of the trawl net. 

(H) Rollers or bobbins means devices 

made of wood, steel, rubber, plastic, or 

other hard material that encircle the 

trawl footrope. These devices are 

commonly used to either bounce or 

pivot over seabed obstructions, in order 

to prevent the trawl footrope and net 

from snagging on the seabed. 

(I) Single-walled codend means a 

codend constructed of a single wall of 

webbing knitted with single or doublebar mesh. 

(J) Trawl fishing line means a length 

of chain, rope, or wire rope in the 

bottom front end of a trawl net to which 

the webbing or lead ropes are attached. 

(K) Trawl riblines means a heavy rope 

or line that runs down the sides, top, or 

underside of a trawl net from the mouth 

of the net to the terminal end of the 

codend to strengthen the net during 

fishing. 

Fishing or Calendar year means the 

year beginning at 0001 local time on 

January 1 and ending at 2400 local time 

on December 31 of the same year. There 

are two fishing years in each biennial 

fishing period. 

Fishing trip means a period of time 

between landings when fishing is 

conducted. 

Fishing vessel. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

Grandfathered or first generation, 

when referring to a limited entry 

sablefish-endorsed permit owner, means 

those permit owners who owned a 

sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit 

prior to November 1, 2000, and are, 

therefore, exempt from certain 

requirements of the sablefish permit 

stacking program within the parameters 

of the regulations at § 660.25(b), subpart 

C and § 660.231, subpart E. 

Groundfish means species managed 

by the PCGFMP, specifically: 

(1) Sharks: Leopard shark, Triakis 

semifasciata; soupfin shark, 

Galeorhinus zyopterus; spiny dogfish, 

Squalus acanthias. 

(2) Skates: Big skate, Raja binoculata; 

California skate, R. inornata; longnose 

skate, R. rhina. 

(3) Ratfish: Ratfish, Hydrolagus 

colliei. 

(4) Morids: Finescale codling, 

Antimora microlepis. 

(5) Grenadiers: Pacific rattail, 

Coryphaenoides acrolepis. 

(6) Roundfish: Cabezon, 

Scorpaenichthys marmoratus; kelp 

greenling, Hexagrammos decagrammus; 

lingcod, Ophiodon elongatus; Pacific 

cod, Gadus macrocephalus; Pacific 

whiting, Merluccius productus; 

sablefish, Anoplopoma fimbria. 

(7) Rockfish: In addition to the species 

below, longspine thornyhead, S. 

altivelis, and shortspine thornyhead, S. 

alascanus, ‘‘rockfish’’ managed under 

the PCGFMP include all genera and 

species of the family Scorpaenidae that 

occur off Washington, Oregon, and 

California, even if not listed below. The 

Scorpaenidae genera are Sebastes, 

Scorpaena, Scorpaenodes, and 

Sebastolobus. Where species below are 

listed both in a major category 

(nearshore, shelf, slope) and as an areaspecific listing (north or south of 40°10’ 

N. lat.) those species are considered 

‘‘minor’’ in the geographic area listed. 

(i) Nearshore rockfish includes black 

rockfish, Sebastes melanops and the 

following minor nearshore rockfish 

species: 

(A) North of 40°10′ N. lat.: Black and 

yellow rockfish, S. chrysomelas; blue 

rockfish, S. mystinus; brown rockfish, S. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60901 

auriculatus; calico rockfish, S. dalli; 

China rockfish, S. nebulosus; copper 

rockfish, S. caurinus; gopher rockfish, S. 

carnatus; grass rockfish, S. rastrelliger; 

kelp rockfish, S. atrovirens; olive 

rockfish, S. serranoides; quillback 

rockfish, S. maliger; treefish,. S. 

serriceps. 

(B) South of 40°10′ N. lat., nearshore 

rockfish are divided into three 

management categories: 

(1) Shallow nearshore rockfish 

consists of black and yellow rockfish, S. 

chrysomelas; China rockfish, S. 

nebulosus; gopher rockfish, S. carnatus; 

grass rockfish, S. rastrelliger; kelp 

rockfish, S. atrovirens. 

(2) Deeper nearshore rockfish consists 

of black rockfish, S. melanops; blue 

rockfish, S. mystinus; brown rockfish, S. 

auriculatus; calico rockfish, S. dalli; 

copper rockfish, S. caurinus; olive 

rockfish, S. serranoides; quillback 

rockfish, S. maliger; treefish, S. 

serriceps. 

(3) California scorpionfish, Scorpaena 

guttata. 

(ii) Shelf rockfish includes bocaccio, 

Sebastes paucispinis; canary rockfish, S. 

pinniger; chilipepper, S. goodei; 

cowcod, S. levis; shortbelly rockfish, S. 

jordani; widow rockfish, S. entomelas; 

yelloweye rockfish, S. ruberrimus; 

yellowtail rockfish, S. flavidus and the 

following minor shelf rockfish species: 

(A) North of 40°10′ N. lat.: 

Bronzespotted rockfish, S. gilli; 

bocaccio, S. paucispinis; chameleon 

rockfish, S. phillipsi; chilipepper, S. 

goodei; cowcod, S. levis; dusky rockfish, 

S. ciliatus; dwarf-red, S. rufianus; flag 

rockfish, S. rubrivinctus; freckled, S. 

lentiginosus; greenblotched rockfish, S. 

rosenblatti; greenspotted rockfish, S. 

chlorostictus; greenstriped rockfish, S. 

elongatus; halfbanded rockfish, S. 

semicinctus; harlequin rockfish, S. 

variegatus; honeycomb rockfish, S. 

umbrosus; Mexican rockfish, S. 

macdonaldi; pink rockfish, S. eos; 

pinkrose rockfish, S. simulator; pygmy 

rockfish, S. wilsoni; redstripe rockfish, 

S. proriger; rosethorn rockfish, S. 

helvomaculatus; rosy rockfish, S. 

rosaceus; silvergray rockfish, S. 

brevispinis; speckled rockfish, S. ovalis; 

squarespot rockfish, S. hopkinsi; starry 

rockfish, S. constellatus; stripetail 

rockfish, S. saxicola; swordspine 

rockfish, S. ensifer; tiger rockfish, S. 

nigrocinctus; vermilion rockfish, S. 

miniatus. 

(B) South of 40°10′ N. lat.: 

Bronzespotted rockfish, S. gilli; 

chameleon rockfish, S. phillipsi; dusky 

rockfish, S. ciliatus; dwarf-red rockfish, 

S. rufianus; flag rockfish, S. 

rubrivinctus; freckled, S. lentiginosus; 

greenblotched rockfish, S. rosenblatti; 

greenspotted rockfish, S. chlorostictus; 

greenstriped rockfish, S. elongatus; 

halfbanded rockfish, S. semicinctus; 

harlequin rockfish, S. variegatus; 

honeycomb rockfish, S. umbrosus; 

Mexican rockfish, S. macdonaldi; pink 

rockfish, S. eos; pinkrose rockfish, S. 

simulator; pygmy rockfish, S. wilsoni; 

redstripe rockfish, S. proriger; rosethorn 

rockfish, S. helvomaculatus; rosy 

rockfish, S. rosaceus; silvergray 

rockfish, S. brevispinis; speckled 

rockfish, S. ovalis; squarespot rockfish, 

S. hopkinsi; starry rockfish, S. 

constellatus; stripetail rockfish, S. 

saxicola; swordspine rockfish, S. 

ensifer; tiger rockfish, S. nigrocinctus; 

vermilion rockfish, S. miniatus; 

yellowtail rockfish, S. flavidus. 

(iii) Slope rockfish includes 

darkblotched rockfish, S. crameri; 

Pacific ocean perch, S. alutus; splitnose 

rockfish, S. diploproa; and the following 

minor slope rockfish species: 

(A) North of 40°10′ N. lat.: Aurora 

rockfish, Sebastes aurora; bank rockfish, 

S. rufus; blackgill rockfish, S. 

melanostomus; redbanded rockfish, S. 

babcocki; rougheye rockfish, S. 

aleutianus; sharpchin rockfish, S. 

zacentrus; shortraker rockfish, S. 

borealis; splitnose rockfish, S. 

diploproa; yellowmouth rockfish, S. 

reedi. 

(B) South of 40°10′ N. lat.: Aurora 

rockfish, Sebastes aurora; bank rockfish, 

S. rufus; blackgill rockfish, S. 

melanostomus; Pacific ocean perch, S. 

alutus; redbanded rockfish, S. babcocki; 

rougheye rockfish, S. aleutianus; 

sharpchin rockfish, S. zacentrus; 

shortraker rockfish, S. borealis; 

yellowmouth rockfish, S. reedi. 

(8) Flatfish: Arrowtooth flounder 

(arrowtooth turbot), Atheresthes 

stomias; butter sole, Isopsetta isolepis; 

curlfin sole, Pleuronichthys decurrens; 

Dover sole, Microstomus pacificus; 

English sole, Parophrys vetulus; flathead 

sole, Hippoglossoides elassodon; Pacific 

sanddab, Citharichthys sordidus; petrale 

sole, Eopsetta jordani; rex sole, 

Glyptocephalus zachirus; rock sole, 

Lepidopsetta bilineata; sand sole, 

Psettichthys melanostictus; starry 

flounder, Platichthys stellatus. Where 

regulations of subparts C through G of 

this part refer to landings limits for 

‘‘other flatfish,’’ those limits apply to all 

flatfish cumulatively taken except for 

those flatfish species specifically listed 

in Tables 1a and 2a of this subpart. (i.e., 

‘‘other flatfish’’ includes butter sole, 

curlfin sole, flathead sole, Pacific 

sanddab, rex sole, rock sole, and sand 

sole.) 

(9) ‘‘Other fish’’: Where regulations of 

subparts C through G of this part refer 

to landings limits for ‘‘other fish,’’ those 

limits apply to all groundfish listed here 

in paragraphs (1) through (8) of this 

definition except for the following: 

Those groundfish species specifically 

listed in Tables 1a and 2a of this subpart 

with an ABC for that area (generally 

north and/or south of 40°10′ N. lat.); and 

Pacific cod and spiny dogfish 

coastwide. (i.e., ‘‘other fish’’ may include 

all sharks (except spiny dogfish), skates, 

ratfish, morids, grenadiers, and kelp 

greenling listed in this section, as well 

as cabezon in the north.) 

(10) ‘‘DTS complex’’: Where 

regulations of subparts C through G of 

this part refer to ‘‘DTS complex’’ species, 

that group of species includes Dover 

sole, shortspine thornyhead, longspine 

thornyhead, and sablefish. 

Groundfish trawl means trawl gear 

that is used under the authority of a 

valid limited entry permit issued under 

subparts C and D of this part endorsed 

for trawl gear and which meets the gear 

requirements specified in subpart D of 

this part. It does not include any type 

of trawl gear listed as non-groundfish 

trawl gear (previously called ‘‘exempted 

gear’’). 

Harvest guideline means a specified 

numerical harvest objective that is not a 

quota. Attainment of a harvest guideline 

does not require closure of a fishery. 

Incidental catch or incidental species 

means groundfish species caught while 

fishing for the primary purpose of 

catching a different species. 

Initial Administrative Determination 

(IAD) means a formal, written 

determination made by NMFS on an 

application or permit request, that is 

subject to an appeal within NMFS. 

Land or landing means to begin 

transfer of fish, offloading fish, or to 

offload fish from any vessel. Once 

transfer of fish begins, all fish aboard 

the vessel are counted as part of the 

landing. 

Legal fish means fish legally taken 

and retained, possessed, or landed in 

accordance with the provisions of 50 

CFR part 660, subparts C through G, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, any document 

issued under part 660, and any other 

regulation promulgated or permit issued 

under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Length overall or LOA (with respect to 

a vessel) means the length overall set 

forth in the Certificate of Documentation 

(CG–1270) issued by the USCG for a 

documented vessel, or in a registration 

certificate issued by a state or the USCG 

for an undocumented vessel; for vessels 

that do not have the LOA stated in an 

official document, the LOA is the LOA 

as determined by the USCG or by a 

marine surveyor in accordance with the 

USCG method for measuring LOA. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60902 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

License owner means a person who is 

the owner of record with NMFS, SFD, 

Permits Office of a License issued under 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

Limited entry fishery means the 

fishery composed of vessels registered 

for use with limited entry permits. 

Limited entry gear means longline, 

trap (or pot), or groundfish trawl gear 

used under the authority of a valid 

limited entry permit affixed with an 

endorsement for that gear. 

Limited entry permit means: 

(1) The Federal permit required to fish 

in the limited entry ‘‘A’’-endorsed 

fishery, and includes any gear, size, or 

species endorsements affixed to the 

permit, or 

(2) The Federal permit required to 

receive and process fish as a mothership 

processor. 

Maximum Sustainable Yield or MSY. 

(See § 600.310 of this chapter) 

Mobile transceiver unit means a vessel 

monitoring system or VMS device, as set 

forth at § 660.14, subpart C installed on 

board a vessel that is used for vessel 

monitoring and transmitting the vessel’s 

position as required by subpart C. 

Non-groundfish fishery means any 

fishing using non-groundfish trawl gear 

or nontrawl gear when targeting salmon, 

HMS, CPS, crab, prawn, or any other 

species not managed under the 

PCGFMP. Non-groundfish fishery is 

sometimes referred to as the incidental 

open access fishery in which groundfish 

could be encountered with the gear 

used, regardless of whether groundfish 

is retained. 

Non-groundfish trawl (previously 

‘‘exempted’’ trawl) means any trawl gear 

other than the Pacific Coast groundfish 

trawl gear that is authorized for use with 

a valid groundfish limited entry permit 

endorsed for trawl gear. Non-groundfish 

trawl gear includes trawl gear used to 

fish for pink shrimp, ridgeback prawn, 

California halibut south of Pt. Arena, 

and sea cucumbers south of Pt. Arena. 

Nontrawl fishery means 

(1) For the purpose of allocations at 

§ 660.55, subpart C, nontrawl fishery 

means the limited entry fixed gear 

fishery, the open access fishery, and the 

recreational fishery. 

(2) For the purposes of all other 

management measures in subparts C 

through G of this part, nontrawl fishery 

means fishing with any legal limited 

entry fixed gear or open access nontrawl groundfish gear other than trawl 

gear (groundfish trawl gear and nongroundfish trawl gear), but does not 

include the recreational fishery. 

North-South management area means 

the management areas defined in 

paragraph (1) of this definition, or 

defined and bounded by one or more or 

the commonly used geographic 

coordinates set out in paragraph (2) of 

this definition for the purposes of 

implementing different management 

measures in separate geographic areas of 

the U.S. West Coast. 

(1) Management areas. 

(i) Vancouver. 

(A) The northeastern boundary is that 

part of a line connecting the light on 

Tatoosh Island, WA, with the light on 

Bonilla Point on Vancouver Island, 

British Columbia (at 48°35.73′ N. lat., 

124°43.00′ W. long.) south of the 

International Boundary between the 

U.S. and Canada (at 48°29.62′ N. lat., 

124°43.55′ W. long.), and north of the 

point where that line intersects with the 

boundary of the U.S. territorial sea. 

(B) The northern and northwestern 

boundary is a line connecting the 

following coordinates in the order 

listed, which is the provisional 

international boundary of the EEZ as 

shown on NOAA/NOS Charts 18480 

and 18007: 

Point N. Lat. W. Long. 

1 ........................ 48°29.62′ 124°43.55′ 

2 ........................ 48°30.18′ 124°47.22′ 

3 ........................ 48°30.37′ 124°50.35′ 

4 ........................ 48°30.23′ 124°54.87′ 

5 ........................ 48°29.95′ 124°59.23′ 

6 ........................ 48°29.73′ 125°00.10′ 

7 ........................ 48°28.15′ 125°05.78′ 

8 ........................ 48°27.17′ 125°08.42′ 

9 ........................ 48°26.78′ 125°09.20′ 

10 ...................... 48°20.27′ 125°22.80′ 

11 ...................... 48°18.37′ 125°29.97′ 

12 ...................... 48°11.08′ 125°53.80′ 

13 ...................... 47°49.25′ 126°40.95′ 

14 ...................... 47°36.78′ 127°11.97′ 

15 ...................... 47°22.00′ 127°41.38′ 

16 ...................... 46°42.08′ 128°51.93′ 

17 ...................... 46°31.78′ 129°07.65′ 

(C) The southern limit is 47°30′ N. lat. 

(ii) Columbia. 

(A) The northern limit is 47°30′ N. lat. 

(B) The southern limit is 43°00′ N. lat. 

(iii) Eureka. 

(A) The northern limit is 43°00′ N. lat. 

(B) The southern limit is 40°30′ N. lat. 

(iv) Monterey. 

(A) The northern limit is 40°30′ N. lat. 

(B) The southern limit is 36°00′ N. lat. 

(v) Conception. 

(A) The northern limit is 36°00′ N. lat. 

(B) The southern limit is the U.S.- 

Mexico International Boundary, which 

is a line connecting the following 

coordinates in the order listed: 

Point N. lat. W. long. 

1 ........................ 32°35.37′ 117°27.82′ 

2 ........................ 32°37.62′ 117°49.52′ 

3 ........................ 31°07.97′ 118°36.30′ 

4 ........................ 30°32.52′ 121°51.97′ 

(2) Commonly used geographic 

coordinates. 

(i) Cape Alava, WA—48°10.00′ N. lat. 

(ii) Queets River, WA—47°31.70′ N. 

lat. 

(iii) Pt. Chehalis, WA—46°53.30′ N. 

lat. 

(iv) Leadbetter Point, WA—46°38.17′ 

N. lat. 

(v) Washington/Oregon border— 

46°16.00′ N. lat. 

(vi) Cape Falcon, OR—45°46.00′ N. 

lat. 

(vii) Cape Lookout, OR—45°20.25′ N. 

lat. 

(viii) Cascade Head, OR—45°03.83′ N. 

lat. 

(ix) Heceta Head, OR—44°08.30′ N. 

lat. 

(x) Cape Arago, OR—43°20.83′ N. lat. 

(xi) Cape Blanco, OR—42°50.00′ N. 

lat. 

(xii) Humbug Mountain—42°40.50′ N. 

lat. 

(xiii) Marck Arch, OR—42°13.67′ N. 

lat. 

(xiv) Oregon/California border— 

42°00.00′ N. lat. 

(xv) Cape Mendocino, CA—40°30.00′ 

N. lat. 

(xvi) North/South management line— 

40°10.00′ N. lat. 

(xvii) Point Arena, CA—38°57.50′ N. 

lat. 

(xviii) Point San Pedro, CA— 

37°35.67′ N. lat. 

(xix) Pigeon Point, CA—37°11.00′ N. 

lat. 

(xx) Ano Nuevo, CA—37°07.00′ N. lat. 

(xxi) Point Lopez, CA—36°00.00′ N. 

lat. 

(xxii) Point Conception, CA— 

34°27.00′ N. lat. [Note: Regulations that 

apply to waters north of 34°27.00′ N. lat. 

are applicable only west of 120°28.00′ 

W. long.; regulations that apply to 

waters south of 34°27.00′ N. lat. also 

apply to all waters both east of 

120°28.00′ W. long. and north of 

34°27.00′ N. lat.] 

Observer. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter—U.S. Observer or Observer) 

Observer Program or Observer 

Program Office means the West Coast 

Groundfish Observer Program (WCGOP) 

Office of the Northwest Fishery Science 

Center, National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Seattle, Washington. 

Office of Law Enforcement or OLE 

refers to the National Marine Fisheries 

Service, Office of Law Enforcement, 

Northwest Division. 

Open access fishery means the fishery 

composed of commercial vessels using 

open access gear fished pursuant to the 

harvest guidelines, quotas, and other 

management measures governing the 

harvest of open access allocations 

(detailed in § 660.55 and Tables 1c and 

2c of subpart C of this part) or governing 

the fishing activities of open access 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60903 

vessels (detailed in subpart F of this 

part). Any commercial vessel that is not 

registered to a limited entry permit and 

which takes and retains, possesses or 

lands groundfish is a participant in the 

open access groundfish fishery. 

Open access gear means all types of 

fishing gear except: 

(1) Longline or trap (or pot) gear 

fished by a vessel that has a limited 

entry permit affixed with a gear 

endorsement for that gear. 

(2) Groundfish trawl. 

Operate a vessel means any use of a 

vessel, including, but not limited to, 

fishing or drifting by means of the 

prevailing water current or weather 

conditions. 

Operator. (See § 600.10) 

Optimum yield or OY means the 

amount of fish that will provide the 

greatest overall benefit to the Nation, 

particularly with respect to food 

production and recreational 

opportunities, and, taking into account 

the protection of marine ecosystems, is 

prescribed as such on the basis of the 

MSY from the fishery, as reduced by 

any relevant economic, social, or 

ecological factor; and, in the case of an 

overfished fishery, provides for 

rebuilding to a level consistent with 

producing the MSY in such fishery. OY 

may be expressed numerically (as a 

harvest guideline, quota, or other 

specification) or non-numerically. 

Overage means the amount of fish 

harvested by a vessel in excess of: 

(1) The applicable trip limit for any 

fishery to which a trip limit applies; 

(2) The amount authorized by the 

applicable permit for trawl fisheries at 

subpart D of this part; 

(3) The amount authorized by the 

applicable sablefish-endorsed permits 

for fixed gear sablefish fisheries at 

subpart E of this part. 

Ownership interest means 

participation in ownership of a 

corporation, partnership, or other entity: 

(1) For sablefish-endorsed permits, 

ownership interest means participation 

in ownership of a corporation, 

partnership, or other entity that owns a 

sablefish-endorsed permit. Ownership 

interest does not mean owning stock in 

a publicly owned corporation. 

(2) For the limited entry trawl fishery 

in subpart D of this part, ownership 

interest means participation in 

ownership of a corporation, partnership, 

or other entity that owns a QS permit, 

vessel account, MS permit, or an MS/ 

CV-endorsed limited entry permit. 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan or PCGFMP means 

the Fishery Management Plan for the 

Washington, Oregon, and California 

Groundfish Fishery developed by the 

Pacific Fishery Management Council 

and approved by the Secretary on 

January 4, 1982, and as it may be 

subsequently amended. 

Partnership is two or more 

individuals, partnerships, or 

corporations, or combinations thereof, 

who have ownership interest in a 

permit, including married couples and 

legally recognized trusts and 

partnerships, such as limited 

partnerships (LP), general partnerships 

(GP), and limited liability partnerships 

(LLP). 

Permit holder means a vessel owner 

as identified on the USCG form 1270 or 

state motor vehicle licensing document 

and as registered on a limited entry 

permit issued under Subparts C through 

E of this part. 

Permit owner means a person who is 

the owner of record with NMFS, SFD, 

Permits Office of a limited entry permit. 

For first receiver site licenses, see 

definition for ‘‘license owner.’’ 

Person, as it applies to limited entry 

and open access fisheries conducted 

under 50 CFR part 660, Subparts C 

through G, means any individual, 

corporation, partnership, association or 

other entity (whether or not organized 

or existing under the laws of any state), 

and any Federal, state, or local 

government, or any entity of any such 

government that is eligible to own a 

documented vessel under the terms of 

46 U.S.C. 12102(a). 

Processing or to process means the 

preparation or packaging of groundfish 

to render it suitable for human 

consumption, retail sale, industrial uses 

or long-term storage, including, but not 

limited to, cooking, canning, smoking, 

salting, drying, filleting, freezing, or 

rendering into meal or oil, but does not 

mean heading and gutting unless 

additional preparation is done. (Also see 

an exception to certain requirements at 

§ 660.131(a), subpart D pertaining to 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessels 75-ft 

(23-m) or less LOA that, in addition to 

heading and gutting, remove the tails 

and freeze catch at sea.) 

(1) At-sea processing means 

processing that takes place on a vessel 

or other platform that floats and is 

capable of being moved from one 

location to another, whether shorebased 

or on the water. 

(2) Shorebased processing or 

processing means processing that takes 

place at a facility that is permanently 

fixed to land. (Also see the definition for 

shoreside processing at § 660.140, 

subpart D which defines shoreside 

processing for the purposes of 

qualifying for a Shorebased IFQ Program 

QS permit.) 

Processor means person, vessel, or 

facility that engages in processing; or 

receives live groundfish directly from a 

fishing vessel for retail sale without 

further processing. (Also see the 

definition for processors at § 660.140, 

subpart D which defines processor for 

the purposes of qualifying for a 

Shorebased IFQ Program QS permit.) 

Prohibited species means those 

species and species groups whose 

retention is prohibited unless 

authorized by provisions of this section 

or other applicable law. The following 

are prohibited species: Any species of 

salmonid, Pacific halibut, Dungeness 

crab caught seaward of Washington or 

Oregon, and groundfish species or 

species groups under the PCGFMP for 

which quotas have been achieved and/ 

or the fishery closed. 

Quota means a specified numerical 

harvest objective, the attainment (or 

expected attainment) of which causes 

closure of the fishery for that species or 

species group. 

Recreational fishing means fishing 

with authorized recreational fishing gear 

for personal use only, and not for sale 

or barter. 

Regional Administrator means the 

Administrator, Northwest Region, 

NMFS. 

Reserve means a portion of the harvest 

guideline or quota set aside at the 

beginning of the fishing year or biennial 

fishing period to allow for uncertainties 

in preseason estimates. 

Round weight. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter). Round weight does not 

include ice, water, or slime. 

Sale or sell. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

Scientific research activity. (See 

§ 600.10 of this chapter) 

Secretary. (See § 600.10 of this 

chapter) 

Specification is a numerical or 

descriptive designation of a 

management objective, including but 

not limited to: Acceptable biological 

catch; optimum yield; harvest guideline; 

quota; limited entry or open access 

allocation; a set-aside or allocation for a 

recreational or treaty Indian fishery; an 

apportionment of the above to an area, 

gear, season, fishery, or other 

subdivision. 

Spouse means a person who is legally 

married to another person as recognized 

by state law (i.e., one’s wife or husband). 

Stacking is the practice of registering 

more than one limited entry permit for 

use with a single vessel (See 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(iii), subpart C). 

Sustainable Fisheries Division or SFD 

means the Chief, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Northwest Regional Office, 

NMFS, or a designee. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60904 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Target fishing means fishing for the 

primary purpose of catching a particular 

species or species group (the target 

species). 

Tax-exempt organization means an 

organization that received a 

determination letter from the Internal 

Revenue Service recognizing tax 

exemption under 26 CFR part 1 

(§§ 1.501 to 1.640). 

Totally lost means the vessel being 

replaced no longer exists in specie, or is 

absolutely and irretrievably sunk or 

otherwise beyond the possible control of 

the owner, or the costs of repair 

(including recovery) would exceed the 

value of the vessel after repairs. 

Trawl fishery means 

(1) For the purpose of allocations at 

§ 660.55, subpart C, trawl fishery means 

the groundfish limited entry trawl 

fishery. 

(2) For the purposes of all other 

management measures in subparts C 

through G of this part, trawl fishery 

means any fishery using trawl gear as 

defined under the definition of fishing 

gear in this section. 

Trip. (See § 600.10 of this chapter) 

Trip limits. Trip limits are used in the 

commercial fishery to specify the 

maximum amount of a fish species or 

species group that may legally be taken 

and retained, possessed, or landed, per 

vessel, per fishing trip, or cumulatively 

per unit of time, or the number of 

landings that may be made from a vessel 

in a given period of time, as follows: 

(1) A per trip limit is the total 

allowable amount of a groundfish 

species or species group, by weight, or 

by percentage of weight of legal fish on 

board, that may be taken and retained, 

possessed, or landed per vessel from a 

single fishing trip. 

(2) A daily trip limit is the maximum 

amount of a groundfish species or 

species group that may be taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed per vessel 

in 24 consecutive hours, starting at 0001 

hours local time. Only one landing of 

groundfish may be made in that 24-hour 

period. Daily trip limits may not be 

accumulated during multiple day trips. 

(3) A weekly trip limit is the 

maximum amount of a groundfish 

species or species group that may be 

taken and retained, possessed, or landed 

per vessel in 7 consecutive days, 

starting at 0001 hours local time on 

Sunday and ending at 2400 hours local 

time on Saturday. Weekly trip limits 

may not be accumulated during 

multiple week trips. If a calendar week 

falls within two different months or two 

different cumulative limit periods, a 

vessel is not entitled to two separate 

weekly limits during that week. 

(4) A cumulative trip limit is the 

maximum amount of a groundfish 

species or species group that may be 

taken and retained, possessed, or landed 

per vessel in a specified period of time 

without a limit on the number of 

landings or trips, unless otherwise 

specified. The cumulative trip limit 

periods for limited entry and open 

access fisheries, which start at 0001 

hours local time and end at 2400 hours 

local time, are as follows, unless 

otherwise specified: 

(i) The 2-month or ‘‘major’’ cumulative 

limit periods are: January 1–February 

28/29, March 1–April 30, May 1–June 

30, July 1–August 31, September 1– 

October 31, and, November 1–December 

31. 

(ii) One month means the first day 

through the last day of the calendar 

month. 

(iii) One week means 7 consecutive 

days, Sunday through Saturday. 

Vessel manager means a person or 

group of persons whom the vessel 

owner has given authority to oversee all 

or a portion of groundfish fishing 

activities aboard the vessel. 

Vessel monitoring system or VMS 

means a vessel monitoring system or 

mobile transceiver unit as set forth in 

§ 660.14, subpart C and approved by 

NMFS for use on vessels that take 

(directly or incidentally) species 

managed under the PCGFMP, as 

required by this subpart. 

Vessel of the United States or U.S. 

vessel. (See § 600.10) 

Vessel owner or owner of a vessel, as 

used in subparts C through G of this 

part, means a person identified as the 

current owner in the Certificate of 

Documentation (CG–1270) issued by the 

USCG for a documented vessel, or in a 

registration certificate issued by a state 

or the USCG for an undocumented 

vessel. 

§ 660.12 General groundfish prohibitions. 

In addition to the general prohibitions 

specified in § 600.725 of this chapter, it 

is unlawful for any person to: 

(a) General. (1) Retain any prohibited 

species (defined in § 660.11, subpart C 

and restricted in § 660.60(e), subpart C) 

caught by means of fishing gear 

authorized under this subpart, unless 

authorized by part 600 or part 300 of 

this chapter. Prohibited species must be 

returned to the sea as soon as 

practicable with a minimum of injury 

when caught and brought on board. 

(2) Falsify or fail to affix and maintain 

vessel and gear markings as required by 

§ 660.20 or § 660.219, subpart E or 

§ 660.319, subpart F. 

(3) Fish for groundfish in violation of 

any terms or conditions attached to an 

EFP under § 600.745 of this chapter or 

§ 660.30, subpart C of this part. 

(4) Fish for groundfish using gear not 

authorized in subparts C through G of 

this part or in violation of any terms or 

conditions attached to an EFP under 

§ 660.30, subpart C of this part or part 

600 of this chapter. 

(5) Take and retain, possess, or land 

more groundfish than specified under 

§ 660.50, § 660.55, § 660.60 of subpart C, 

or subpart D through G of this part, or 

under an EFP issued under § 660.30, 

subpart C of this part, or part 600 of this 

chapter. 

(6) Take, retain, possess, or land more 

than a single cumulative limit of a 

particular species, per vessel, per 

applicable cumulative limit period, 

except for sablefish taken in the primary 

limited entry, fixed gear sablefish 

season from a vessel authorized to fish 

in that season, as described at § 660.231, 

subpart E. 

(7) Take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish in excess of the landing limit 

for the open access fishery without 

having a valid limited entry permit for 

the vessel affixed with a gear 

endorsement for the gear used to catch 

the fish. 

(8) Fail to sort, prior to the first 

weighing after offloading, those 

groundfish species or species groups for 

which there is a trip limit, size limit, 

scientific sorting designation, quota, 

harvest guideline, or OY, if the vessel 

fished or landed in an area during a 

time when such trip limit, size limit, 

scientific sorting designation, quota, 

harvest guideline, or OY applied; except 

as specified at § 660.131, subpart C for 

vessels participating in the Pacific 

whiting at-sea sectors. 

(9) When requested or required by an 

authorized officer, refuse to present 

fishing gear for inspection, refuse to 

present fish subject to such persons 

control for inspection; or interfere with 

a fishing gear or marine animal or plant 

life inspection. 

(10) Transfer fish to another vessel at 

sea unless a vessel is participating in the 

primary Pacific whiting fishery as part 

of the mothership or catcher/processor 

sectors. 

(11) Fish with dredge gear (defined in 

§ 660.11, subpart C) anywhere within 

EFH within the EEZ. For the purposes 

of regulation, EFH within the EEZ is 

described at § 660.75, subpart C. 

(12) Fish with beam trawl gear 

(defined in § 660.11, subpart C) 

anywhere within EFH within the EEZ. 

For the purposes of regulation, EFH 

within the EEZ is described at § 660.75, 

subpart C. 

(13) During times or in areas where atsea processing is prohibited, take and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60905 

retain or receive Pacific whiting, except 

as cargo or fish waste, on a vessel in the 

fishery management area that already 

has processed Pacific whiting on board. 

An exception to this prohibition is 

provided if the fish are received within 

the tribal U&A from a member of a 

Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribe fishing 

under § 660.50, subpart C. 

(b) Reporting and Recordkeeping. (1) 

Falsify or fail to make and/or file, retain 

or make available any and all reports of 

groundfish landings, containing all data, 

and in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable State law, as specified in 

§ 660.13, subpart C, provided that 

person is required to do so by the 

applicable state law. 

(2) Fail to retain on board a vessel 

from which groundfish is landed, and 

provide to an authorized officer upon 

request, copies of any and all reports of 

groundfish landings, or receipts 

containing all data, and made in the 

exact manner required by the applicable 

state law throughout the cumulative 

limit period during which such landings 

occurred and for 15 days thereafter. 

(c) Limited entry fisheries. (1) Carry 

on board a vessel, or deploy, limited 

entry gear when the limited entry 

fishery for that gear is closed, except 

that a vessel may carry on board limited 

entry groundfish trawl gear as provided 

in § 660.112(a)(1), subpart D. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(d) Limited entry permits. 

(1) If a limited entry permit is 

registered for use with a vessel, fail to 

carry that permit onboard the vessel 

registered for use with the permit. A 

photocopy of the permit may not 

substitute for the original permit itself. 

(2) Make a false statement on an 

application for issuance, renewal, 

transfer, vessel registration, replacement 

of a limited entry permit, or a 

declaration of ownership interest in a 

limited entry permit. 

(e) Groundfish observer program. (1) 

Forcibly assault, resist, oppose, impede, 

intimidate, harass, sexually harass, 

bribe, or interfere with an observer. 

(2) Interfere with or bias the sampling 

procedure employed by an observer 

including either mechanically or 

manually sorting or discarding catch 

before sampling. 

(3) Tamper with, destroy, or discard 

an observer’s collected samples, 

equipment, records, photographic film, 

papers, or personal effects without the 

express consent of the observer. 

(4) Harass an observer by conduct 

that: 

(i) Has sexual connotations, 

(ii) Has the purpose or effect of 

interfering with the observer’s work 

performance, and/or 

(iii) Otherwise creates an 

intimidating, hostile, or offensive 

environment. In determining whether 

conduct constitutes harassment, the 

totality of the circumstances, including 

the nature of the conduct and the 

context in which it occurred, will be 

considered. The determination of the 

legality of a particular action will be 

made from the facts on a case-by-case 

basis. 

(5) Fish for, land, or process fish 

without observer coverage when a 

vessel is required to carry an observer 

under subparts C through G of this part. 

(6) Require, pressure, coerce, or 

threaten an observer to perform duties 

normally performed by crew members, 

including, but not limited to, cooking, 

washing dishes, standing watch, vessel 

maintenance, assisting with the setting 

or retrieval of gear, or any duties 

associated with the processing of fish, 

from sorting the catch to the storage of 

the finished product. 

(7) Fail to provide departure or cease 

fishing reports specified at § 660.116, 

subpart D, § 660.216, subpart E, or 

§ 660.316, subpart F. 

(8) Fail to meet the vessel 

responsibilities specified at § 660.116, 

subpart D, § 660.216, subpart E, or 

§ 660.316, subpart F. 

(f) Vessel Monitoring Systems. (1) Use 

any vessel required to operate and 

maintain a VMS unit under § 660.14(b) 

unless that vessel carries a NMFS OLE 

type-approved mobile transceiver unit 

and complies with all the requirements 

described at § 660.14(c). 

(2) Fail to install, activate, repair or 

replace a mobile transceiver unit prior 

to leaving port as specified at § 660.14. 

(3) Fail to operate and maintain a 

mobile transceiver unit on board the 

vessel at all times as specified at 

§ 660.14. 

(4) Tamper with, damage, destroy, 

alter, or in any way distort, render 

useless, inoperative, ineffective, or 

inaccurate the VMS, mobile transceiver 

unit, or VMS signal required to be 

installed on or transmitted by a vessel 

as specified at § 660.14. 

(5) Fail to contact NMFS OLE or 

follow NMFS OLE instructions when 

automatic position reporting has been 

interrupted as specified at § 660.14. 

(6) Register the same VMS transceiver 

unit to more than one vessel at the same 

time. 

(7) Falsify any VMS activation report 

or VMS exemption report that is 

authorized or required, as specified at 

§ 660.14. 

(8) Falsify any declaration report that 

is required, as specified at § 660.13. 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting. 

(a) This subpart recognizes that catch 

and effort data necessary for 

implementing the PCGFMP are 

collected by the States of Washington, 

Oregon, and California under existing 

state data collection requirements. 

(b) Any person who is required to do 

so by the applicable state law must 

make and/or file, retain, or make 

available any and all reports (i.e., 

logbooks, state landing receipts, etc.) of 

groundfish harvests and landings 

containing all data, and in the exact 

manner, required by the applicable state 

law. 

(c) Any person landing groundfish 

must retain on board the vessel from 

which groundfish is landed, and 

provide to an authorized officer upon 

request, copies of any and all reports of 

groundfish landings containing all data, 

and in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

cumulative limit period during which a 

landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

(d) Declaration reporting 

requirements—(1) Declaration reports 

for vessels registered to limited entry 

permits. The operator of any vessel 

registered to a limited entry permit must 

provide NMFS OLE with a declaration 

report, as specified at paragraph 

(d)(5)(iv) of this section, before the 

vessel leaves port on a trip in which the 

vessel is used to fish in U.S. ocean 

waters between 0 and 200 nm offshore 

of Washington, Oregon, or California. 

(2) Declaration reports for all vessels 

using non-groundfish trawl gear. The 

operator of any vessel that is not 

registered to a limited entry permit and 

which uses non-groundfish trawl gear to 

fish in the EEZ (3–200 nm offshore), 

must provide NMFS OLE with a 

declaration report, as specified at 

paragraph (d)(5)(iv) of this section, 

before the vessel leaves port to fish in 

the EEZ. 

(3) Declaration reports for open access 

vessels using non trawl gear (all types of 

open access gear other than nongroundfish trawl gear). The operator of 

any vessel that is not registered to a 

limited entry permit, must provide 

NMFS with a declaration report, as 

specified at paragraph (d)(5)(iv) of this 

section, before the vessel leaves port on 

a trip in which the vessel is used to take 

and retain or possess groundfish in the 

EEZ or land groundfish taken in the 

EEZ. 

(4) Declaration reports for tribal 

vessels using trawl gear. The operator of 

any tribal vessel using trawl gear must 

provide NMFS with a declaration 

report, as specified at paragraph 

(d)(5)(iv) of this section, before the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60906 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

vessel leaves port on a trip in which 

fishing occurs within the trawl RCA. 

(5) Declaration reports. (i) The 

operator of a vessel specified in 

paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) of 

this section must provide a declaration 

report to NMFS OLE prior to leaving 

port on the first trip in which the vessel 

meets the requirement specified at 

§ 660.14(b) to have a VMS. 

(ii) The vessel operator must send a 

new declaration report before leaving 

port on a trip in which a gear type that 

is different from the gear type most 

recently declared for the vessel will be 

used. A declaration report will be valid 

until another declaration report revising 

the existing gear declaration is received 

by NMFS OLE. 

(iii) During the period of time that a 

vessel has a valid declaration report on 

file with NMFS OLE, it cannot fish with 

a gear other than a gear type declared by 

the vessel. 

(iv) Declaration reports will include: 

The vessel name and/or identification 

number, and gear type (as defined in 

paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A) of this section). 

Upon receipt of a declaration report, 

NMFS will provide a confirmation code 

or receipt to confirm that a valid 

declaration report was received for the 

vessel. Retention of the confirmation 

code or receipt to verify that a valid 

declaration report was filed and the 

declaration requirement was met is the 

responsibility of the vessel owner or 

operator. Vessels using non trawl gear 

may declare more than one gear type, 

however, vessels using trawl gear may 

only declare one of the trawl gear types 

listed in paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A) of this 

section on any trip and may not declare 

non trawl gear on the same trip in 

which trawl gear is declared. 

(A) One of the following gear types 

must be declared: 

(1) Limited entry fixed gear, 

(2) [Reserved] 

(3) Limited entry mid water trawl, 

non-whiting, 

(4) Limited entry mid water trawl, 

Pacific whiting shore based sector, 

(5) Limited entry mid water trawl, 

Pacific whiting catcher/processor sector, 

(6) Limited entry mid water trawl, 

Pacific whiting mother ship sector, 

(7) Limited entry bottom trawl, not 

including emerald trawl, 

(8) Limited entry emerald trawl, 

(9) Non-groundfish trawl gear for pink 

shrimp, 

(10) Non-groundfish trawl gear for 

ridgeback prawn, 

(11) Non-groundfish trawl gear for 

California halibut, 

(12) Non-groundfish trawl gear for sea 

cucumber, 

(13) Open access longline gear for 

groundfish, 

(14) Open access Pacific halibut 

longline gear, 

(15) Open access groundfish trap or 

pot gear, 

(16) Open access Dungeness crab trap 

or pot gear, 

(17) Open access prawn trap or pot 

gear, 

(18) Open access sheephead trap or 

pot gear, 

(19) Open access line gear for 

groundfish, 

(20) Open access HMS line gear, 

(21) Open access salmon troll gear, 

(22) Open access California Halibut 

line gear, 

(23) Open access net gear, 

(24) Other gear, or 

(25) Tribal trawl. 

(B) [Reserved] 

§ 660.14 Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) 

requirements. 

(a) What is a VMS? A VMS consists 

of a NMFS OLE type-approved mobile 

transceiver unit that automatically 

determines the vessel’s position and 

transmits it to a NMFS OLE typeapproved communications service 

provider. The communications service 

provider receives the transmission and 

relays it to NMFS OLE. 

(b) Who is Required to Have a VMS? 

The following vessels are required to 

install a NMFS OLE type-approved 

mobile transceiver unit and to arrange 

for a NMFS OLE type-approved 

communications service provider to 

receive and relay transmissions to 

NMFS OLE prior to fishing: 

(1) Any vessel registered for use with 

a limited entry permit that fishes in 

state or Federal waters seaward of the 

baseline from which the territorial sea is 

measured off the States of Washington, 

Oregon or California (0–200 nm 

offshore). 

(2) Any vessel that uses nongroundfish trawl gear to fish in the EEZ. 

(3) Any vessel that uses open access 

gear to take and retain, or possess 

groundfish in the EEZ or land 

groundfish taken in the EEZ. 

(c) How are Mobile Transceiver Units 

and Communications Service Providers 

Approved by NMFS OLE? 

(1) NMFS OLE will publish typeapproval specifications for VMS 

components in the Federal Register or 

notify the public through other 

appropriate media. 

(2) Mobile transceiver unit 

manufacturers or communication 

service providers will submit products 

or services to NMFS OLE for evaluation 

based on the published specifications. 

(3) NMFS OLE may publish a list of 

NMFS OLE type-approved mobile 

transceiver units and communication 

service providers for the Pacific Coast 

groundfish fishery in the Federal 

Register or notify the public through 

other appropriate media. As necessary, 

NMFS OLE may publish amendments to 

the list of type-approved mobile 

transceiver units and communication 

service providers in the Federal 

Register or through other appropriate 

media. A list of VMS transceivers that 

have been type-approved by NMFS OLE 

may be mailed to the permit owner’s 

address of record. NMFS will bear no 

responsibility if a notification is sent to 

the address of record and is not received 

because the applicant’s actual address 

has changed without notification to 

NMFS, as required at 

§ 660.25(b)(4)(i)(B). 

(d) What are the Vessel Owner’s 

Responsibilities? If you are a vessel 

owner that must participate in the VMS 

program, you or the vessel operator 

must: 

(1) Obtain a NMFS OLE typeapproved mobile transceiver unit and 

have it installed on board your vessel in 

accordance with the instructions 

provided by NMFS OLE. You may 

obtain a copy of the VMS installation 

and operation instructions from the 

NMFS OLE Northwest, VMS Program 

Manager upon request at 7600 Sand 

Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115– 

6349, phone: (206) 526–6133. 

(2) Activate the mobile transceiver 

unit, submit an activation report at least 

72 hours prior to leaving port on a trip 

in which VMS is required, and receive 

confirmation from NMFS OLE that the 

VMS transmissions are being received 

before participating in a fishery 

requiring the VMS. Instructions for 

submitting an activation report may be 

obtained from the NMFS, Northwest 

OLE VMS Program Manager upon 

request at 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115–6349, phone: (206) 

526–6133. An activation report must 

again be submitted to NMFS OLE 

following reinstallation of a mobile 

transceiver unit or change in service 

provider before the vessel may be used 

to fish in a fishery requiring the VMS. 

(i) Activation reports. If you are a 

vessel owner who must use VMS and 

you are activating a VMS transceiver 

unit for the first time or reactivating a 

VMS transceiver unit following a 

reinstallation of a mobile transceiver 

unit or change in service provider, you 

must fax NMFS OLE an activation 

report that includes: Vessel name; vessel 

owner’s name, address and telephone 

number, vessel operator’s name, address 

and telephone number, USCG vessel 

documentation number/state 

registration number; if applicable, the 

groundfish permit number the vessel is 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60907 

registered to; VMS transceiver unit 

manufacturer; VMS communications 

service provider; VMS transceiver 

identification; identifying if the unit is 

the primary or backup; and a statement 

signed and dated by the vessel owner 

confirming compliance with the 

installation procedures provided by 

NMFS OLE. 

(ii) Transferring ownership of VMS 

unit. Ownership of the VMS transceiver 

unit may be transferred from one vessel 

owner to another vessel owner if all of 

the following documents are provided 

to NMFS OLE: A new activation report, 

which identifies that the transceiver 

unit was previously registered to 

another vessel; a notarized bill of sale 

showing proof of ownership of the VMS 

transceiver unit; documentation from 

the communications service provider 

showing proof that the service 

agreement for the previous vessel was 

terminated and that a service agreement 

was established for the new vessel. 

(3) Transceiver unit operation. 

Operate and maintain the mobile 

transceiver unit in good working order 

continuously, 24 hours a day 

throughout the fishing year, unless such 

vessel is exempted under paragraph 

(d)(4) of this section. The mobile 

transceiver unit must transmit a signal 

accurately indicating the vessel’s 

position at least once every hour, 24 

hours a day, throughout the year unless 

a valid exemption report, as described 

in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, has 

been received by NMFS OLE. Less 

frequent position reporting at least once 

every four hours is authorized when a 

vessel remains in port for an extended 

period of time, but the mobile 

transceiver unit must remain in 

continuous operation at all times unless 

the vessel is exempted under this 

section. 

(4) VMS exemptions. A vessel that is 

required to operate and maintain the 

mobile transceiver unit continuously 24 

hours a day throughout the fishing year 

may be exempted from this requirement 

if a valid exemption report, as described 

at paragraph (d)(4)(vii) of this section, is 

received by NMFS OLE and the vessel 

is in compliance with all conditions and 

requirements of the VMS exemption 

identified in this section and specified 

in the exemption report. 

(i) Haul out exemption. When it is 

anticipated that a vessel will be 

continuously out of the water for more 

than 7 consecutive days and a valid 

exemption report has been received by 

NMFS OLE, electrical power to the VMS 

mobile transceiver unit may be removed 

and transmissions may be discontinued. 

Under this exemption, VMS 

transmissions can be discontinued from 

the time the vessel is removed from the 

water until the time that the vessel is 

placed back in the water. 

(ii) Outside areas exemption. When 

the vessel will be operating seaward of 

the EEZ off Washington, Oregon, or 

California continuously for more than 7 

consecutive days and a valid exemption 

report has been received by NMFS OLE, 

the VMS mobile transceiver unit 

transmissions may be reduced or 

discontinued from the time the vessel 

leaves the EEZ off the coasts of 

Washington, Oregon or California until 

the time that the vessel re-enters the 

EEZ off the coasts of Washington, 

Oregon or California. Under this 

exemption, the vessel owner or operator 

can request that NMFS OLE reduce or 

discontinue the VMS transmissions after 

receipt of an exemption report, if the 

vessel is equipped with a VMS 

transceiver unit that NMFS OLE has 

approved for this exemption. 

(iii) Permit transfer exemption. If the 

limited entry permit has been 

transferred from a vessel (for the 

purposes of this section, this includes 

permits placed into ‘‘unidentified’’ 

status) the vessel may be exempted from 

VMS requirements providing the vessel 

is not used to fish in state or Federal 

waters seaward of the baseline from 

which the territorial sea is measured off 

the States of Washington, Oregon or 

California (0–200 nm offshore) for the 

remainder of the fishing year. If the 

vessel is used to fish in this area for any 

species of fish at any time during the 

remaining portion of the fishing year 

without being registered to a limited 

entry permit, the vessel is required to 

have and use VMS. 

(iv) Long-term departure exemption. 

A vessel participating in the open access 

fishery that is required to have VMS 

under paragraph (b)(3) of this section 

may be exempted from VMS provisions 

after the end of the fishing year in 

which it fished in the open access 

fishery, providing the vessel submits a 

completed exemption report signed by 

the vessel owner that includes a 

statement signed by the vessel owner 

indicating that the vessel will not be 

used to take and retain or possess 

groundfish in the EEZ or land 

groundfish taken in the EEZ during the 

new fishing year. 

(v) Emergency exemption. Vessels 

required to have VMS under paragraph 

(b) of this section may be exempted 

from VMS provisions in emergency 

situations that are beyond the vessel 

owner’s control, including but not 

limited to: Fire, flooding, or extensive 

physical damage to critical areas of the 

vessel. A vessel owner may apply for an 

emergency exemption from the VMS 

requirements specified in paragraph (b) 

of this section for his/her vessel by 

sending a written request to NMFS OLE 

specifying the following information: 

The reasons for seeking an exemption, 

including any supporting documents 

(e.g., repair invoices, photographs 

showing damage to the vessel, insurance 

claim forms, etc.); the time period for 

which the exemption is requested; and 

the location of the vessel while the 

exemption is in effect. NMFS OLE will 

issue a written determination granting 

or denying the emergency exemption 

request. A vessel will not be covered by 

the emergency exemption until NMFS 

OLE issues a determination granting the 

exemption. If an exemption is granted, 

the duration of the exemption will be 

specified in the NMFS OLE 

determination. 

(vi) Submission of exemption reports. 

Signed long-term departure exemption 

reports must be submitted by fax or by 

emailing an electronic copy of the actual 

report. In the event of an emergency in 

which an emergency exemption request 

will be submitted, initial contact with 

NMFS OLE must be made by telephone, 

fax or email within 24 hours from when 

the incident occurred. Emergency 

exemption requests must be requested 

in writing within 72 hours from when 

the incident occurred. Other exemption 

reports must be submitted through the 

VMS or another method that is 

approved by NMFS OLE and announced 

in the Federal Register. Submission 

methods for exemption requests, except 

long-term departures and emergency 

exemption requests, may include email, 

facsimile, or telephone. NMFS OLE will 

provide, through appropriate media, 

instructions to the public on submitting 

exemption reports. Instructions and 

other information needed to make 

exemption reports may be mailed to the 

vessel owner’s address of record. NMFS 

will bear no responsibility if a 

notification is sent to the address of 

record for the vessel owner and is not 

received because the vessel owner’s 

actual address has changed without 

notification to NMFS. Owners of vessels 

required to use VMS who do not receive 

instructions by mail are responsible for 

contacting NMFS OLE during business 

hours at least 3 days before the 

exemption is required to obtain 

information needed to make exemption 

reports. NMFS OLE must be contacted 

during business hours (Monday through 

Friday between 0800 and 1700 Pacific 

Time). 

(vii) Valid exemption reports. For an 

exemption report to be valid, it must be 

received by NMFS at least 2 hours and 

not more than 24 hours before the 

exempted activities defined at 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60908 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through (iv) of this 

section occur. An exemption report is 

valid until NMFS receives a report 

canceling the exemption. An exemption 

cancellation must be received at least 2 

hours before the vessel re-enters the EEZ 

following an outside areas exemption; at 

least 2 hours before the vessel is placed 

back in the water following a haul out 

exemption; at least 2 hours before the 

vessel resumes fishing for any species of 

fish in state or Federal waters off the 

States of Washington, Oregon, or 

California after it has received a permit 

transfer exemption; or at least 2 hours 

before a vessel resumes fishing in the 

open access fishery after a long-term 

departure exemption. If a vessel is 

required to submit an activation report 

under paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section 

before returning to fish, that report may 

substitute for the exemption 

cancellation. Initial contact must be 

made with NMFS OLE not more than 24 

hours after the time that an emergency 

situation occurred in which VMS 

transmissions were disrupted and 

followed by a written emergency 

exemption request within 72 hours from 

when the incident occurred. If the 

emergency situation upon which an 

emergency exemption is based is 

resolved before the exemption expires, 

an exemption cancellation must be 

received by NMFS at least 2 hours 

before the vessel resumes fishing. 

(5) When aware that transmission of 

automatic position reports has been 

interrupted, or when notified by NMFS 

OLE that automatic position reports are 

not being received, contact NMFS OLE 

at 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 

98115–6349, phone: (206) 526–6133 and 

follow the instructions provided to you. 

Such instructions may include, but are 

not limited to, manually communicating 

to a location designated by NMFS OLE 

the vessel’s position or returning to port 

until the VMS is operable. 

(6) After a fishing trip during which 

interruption of automatic position 

reports has occurred, the vessel’s owner 

or operator must replace or repair the 

mobile transceiver unit prior to the 

vessel’s next fishing trip. Repair or 

reinstallation of a mobile transceiver 

unit or installation of a replacement, 

including change of communications 

service provider shall be in accordance 

with the instructions provided by NMFS 

OLE and require the same certification. 

(7) Make the mobile transceiver units 

available for inspection by NMFS OLE 

personnel, USCG personnel, state 

enforcement personnel or any 

authorized officer. 

(8) Ensure that the mobile transceiver 

unit is not tampered with, disabled, 

destroyed, operated, or maintained 

improperly. 

(9) Pay all charges levied by the 

communication service provider as 

necessary to ensure continuous 

operation of the VMS transceiver units. 

§ 660.15 Equipment requirements. 

(a) Applicability. This section 

contains the equipment and operational 

requirements for scales used to weigh 

catch at sea, scales used to weigh catch 

at IFQ first receivers, computer 

hardware for electronic fish ticket 

software and computer hardware for 

electronic logbook software. 

(b) Performance and technical 

requirements for scales used to weigh 

catch at sea. [Reserved] 

(c) Performance and technical 

requirements for scales used to weigh 

catch at IFQ first receivers. [Reserved] 

(d) Electronic fish tickets. Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receivers using 

the electronic fish ticket software 

provided by Pacific States Marine Fish 

Commission are required to meet the 

hardware and software requirements 

below. Those Pacific whiting shoreside 

first receivers who have NMFSapproved software compatible with the 

standards specified by Pacific States 

Marine Fish Commission for electronic 

fish tickets are not subject to any 

specific hardware or software 

requirements. 

(1) Hardware and software 

requirements. (i) A personal computer 

with Pentium 75-MHz or higher. 

Random Access Memory (RAM) must 

have sufficient megabyte (MB) space to 

run the operating system, plus an 

additional 8 MB for the software 

application and available hard disk 

space of 217 MB or greater. A CD–ROM 

drive with a Video Graphics Adapter 

(VGA) or higher resolution monitor 

(super VGA is recommended). 

(ii) Microsoft Windows 2000 (64 MB 

or greater RAM required), Windows XP 

(128 MB or greater RAM required) or 

later operating system. 

(iii) Microsoft Access 2003 or newer. 

(2) NMFS approved software 

standards and Internet access. The first 

receiver is responsible for obtaining, 

installing and updating electronic fish 

tickets software either provided by 

Pacific States Marine Fish Commission, 

or compatible with the data export 

specifications specified by Pacific States 

Marine Fish Commission and for 

maintaining Internet access sufficient to 

transmit data files via e-mail. Requests 

for data export specifications can be 

submitted to: Attn: Frank Lockhart, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Northwest Region Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115, or via e-mail to 

frank.lockhart@noaa.gov. 

(3) Maintenance. The Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver is responsible for 

ensuring that all hardware and software 

required under this subsection are fully 

operational and functional whenever 

the Pacific whiting primary season 

deliveries are accepted. 

(4) Improving data quality. Vessel 

owners and operators, Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receivers, or shoreside 

processor owners, or managers may 

contact NMFS in writing to request 

assistance in improving data quality and 

resolving issues. Requests may be 

submitted to: Attn: Frank Lockhart, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Northwest Region Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115, or via e-mail to 

frank.lockhart@noaa.gov. 

§ 660.16 Groundfish observer program. 

(a) General. Vessel owners, operators, 

and managers are jointly and severally 

responsible for their vessels’ compliance 

with observer requirements specified in 

this section and within § 660.116, 

subpart D, § 660.216, subpart E, 

§ 660.316, subpart F, or subpart G. 

(b) Purpose. The purpose of the 

Groundfish Observer Program is to 

collect fisheries data deemed by the 

Northwest Regional Administrator, 

NMFS, to be necessary and appropriate 

for management, compliance 

monitoring, and research in the 

groundfish fisheries and for the 

conservation of living marine resources 

and their habitat. 

(c) Catcher vessels. For the purposes 

of observer coverage requirements the 

term ‘‘catcher vessel’’ includes the 

vessels described in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(3) of this section. The term 

‘‘catcher vessel’’ does not include: 

Catcher/processor or mothership 

vessels, Pacific whiting shoreside 

vessels that sort catch at sea, or 

recreational vessels. 

(1) Any vessel registered for use with 

a Pacific Coast groundfish limited entry 

permit that fishes in state or Federal 

waters seaward of the baseline from 

which the territorial sea is measured off 

the States of Washington, Oregon or 

California (0–200 nm offshore). 

(2) Any vessel other than a vessel 

described in paragraph (c)(1) of this 

section that is used to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish in or from 

the EEZ. 

(3) Any vessel that is required to take 

a Federal observer by the applicable 

State law. 

(d) Observer coverage requirements. 

The following table provides references 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60909 

to the regulatory sections with the 

observer coverage requirements. 

West Coast Groundfish Fishery/Program Regulation subpart and 

section 

Catcher Vessels in the Trawl Fishery, and Pacific Whiting Shoreside Vessels that Sort Catch At Sea ...................... subpart D, § 660.116. 

Mothership Processors ................................................................................................................................................... subpart D, § 660.116. 

Catcher/Processors ........................................................................................................................................................ subpart D, § 660.116. 

Catcher Vessels in the Fixed Gear Fisheries ................................................................................................................ subpart E, § 660.216. 

Catcher Vessels in the Open Access Fisheries ............................................................................................................. subpart F, § 660.316. 

(e) NMFS-certified Observer 

Certification and Observer 

Responsibilities—(1) Observer 

Certification—(i) Applicability. 

Observer certification authorizes an 

individual to fulfill duties as specified 

in writing by the NMFS Observer 

Program Office while under the employ 

of a NMFS-permitted observer provider 

and according to certification 

endorsements as designated under 

paragraph (e)(3) of this section. 

(ii) Certification requirements. NMFS 

will certify individuals who: 

(A) Are employed by an observer 

provider company permitted pursuant 

to 50 CFR 679.50 at the time of the 

issuance of the certification; 

(B) Have provided, through their 

observer provider: 

(1) Information identified by NMFS at 

50 CFR 679.50(i)(2)(x)(A)(1)(iii) and (iv); 

and 

(2) Information identified by NMFS at 

50 CFR 679.50(i)(2)(x)(C) regarding the 

observer candidate’s health and 

physical fitness for the job; 

(C) Meet all education and health 

standards as specified in 50 CFR 

679.50(i)(2)(i)(A) and (i)(2)(x)(C), 

respectively; and 

(D) Have successfully completed 

NMFS-approved training as prescribed 

by the Observer Program. 

(1) Successful completion of training 

by an observer applicant consists of 

meeting all attendance and conduct 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training; meeting all performance 

standards issued in writing at the start 

of training for assignments, tests, and 

other evaluation tools; and completing 

all other training requirements 

established by the Observer Program. 

(2) If a candidate fails training, he or 

she will be notified in writing on or 

before the last day of training. The 

notification will indicate: The reasons 

the candidate failed the training; 

whether the candidate can retake the 

training, and under what conditions, or 

whether, the candidate will not be 

allowed to retake the training. If a 

determination is made that the 

candidate may not pursue further 

training, notification will be in the form 

of an IAD denying certification, as 

specified under paragraph (e)(2)(i) of 

this section. 

(E) Have not been decertified as 

specified in § 660.18(b), or pursuant to 

50 CFR 679.50. 

(2) Agency determinations on 

observer certification—(i) Issuance of an 

observer certification. An observer 

certification will be issued upon 

determination by the observer 

certification official (see § 660.18, 

subpart C) that the candidate has 

successfully met all requirements for 

certification as specified in paragraph 

(e)(1)(ii) of this section. 

(ii) Denial of a certification. The 

NMFS observer certification official (see 

§ 660.18, subpart C) will issue a written 

IAD denying observer certification when 

the observer certification official 

determines that a candidate has 

unresolvable deficiencies in meeting the 

requirements for certification as 

specified in § 660.18, subpart C. The 

IAD will identify the reasons 

certification was denied and what 

requirements were deficient. 

(iii) Appeals. A candidate who 

receives an IAD that denies his or her 

certification may appeal pursuant to 

§ 660.18, subpart C. A candidate who 

appeals the IAD will not be issued an 

interim observer certification, and will 

not receive a certification unless the 

final resolution of that appeal is in the 

candidate’s favor. 

(3) Endorsements. The following 

endorsements must be obtained, in 

addition to observer certification, in 

order for an observer to deploy. 

(i) Certification training endorsement. 

A certification training endorsement 

signifies the successful completion of 

the training course required to obtain 

observer certification. This endorsement 

expires when the observer has not been 

deployed and performed sampling 

duties as required by the Observer 

Program Office for a period of time, 

specified by the Observer Program, after 

his or her most recent debriefing. The 

observer can renew the endorsement by 

successfully completing certification 

training once more. 

(ii) Annual general endorsements. 

Each observer must obtain an annual 

general endorsement to their 

certification prior to his or her first 

deployment within any calendar year 

subsequent to a year in which a 

certification training endorsement is 

obtained. To obtain an annual general 

endorsement, an observer must 

successfully complete the annual 

briefing, as specified by the Observer 

Program. All briefing attendance, 

performance, and conduct standards 

required by the Observer Program must 

be met. 

(iii) Deployment endorsements. Each 

observer who has completed an initial 

deployment after certification or annual 

briefing must receive a deployment 

endorsement to their certification prior 

to any subsequent deployments for the 

remainder of that year. An observer may 

obtain a deployment endorsement by 

successfully completing all pre-cruise 

briefing requirements. The type of 

briefing the observer must attend and 

successfully complete will be specified 

in writing by the Observer Program 

during the observer’s most recent 

debriefing. 

(iv) Pacific whiting fishery 

endorsements. A Pacific whiting fishery 

endorsement is required for purposes of 

performing observer duties aboard 

vessels that process groundfish at sea in 

the Pacific whiting fishery. A Pacific 

whiting fishery endorsement to an 

observer’s certification may be obtained 

by meeting the following requirements: 

(A) Be a prior NMFS-certified 

observer in the groundfish fisheries off 

Alaska or the Pacific Coast, unless an 

individual with this qualification is not 

available; 

(B) Receive an evaluation by NMFS 

for his or her most recent deployment (if 

any) that indicated that the observer’s 

performance met Observer Program 

expectations for that deployment; 

(C) Successfully complete a NMFSapproved observer training and/or 

Pacific whiting briefing as prescribed by 

the Observer Program; and 

(D) Comply with all of the other 

requirements of this section. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60910 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(4) Standards of observer conduct—(i) 

Standards of behavior. Observers must 

avoid any behavior that could adversely 

affect the confidence of the public in the 

integrity of the Observer Program or of 

the government, including but not 

limited to the following: 

(A) Observers must perform their 

assigned duties as described in the 

Observer Manual or other written 

instructions from the Observer Program 

Office. 

(B) Observers must accurately record 

their sampling data, write complete 

reports, and report accurately any 

observations of suspected violations of 

regulations relevant to conservation of 

marine resources or their environment. 

(C) Observers must not disclose 

collected data and observations made on 

board the vessel or in the processing 

facility to any person except the owner 

or operator of the observed vessel or 

processing facility, an authorized 

officer, or NMFS. 

(D) Observers must refrain from 

engaging in any illegal actions or any 

other activities that would reflect 

negatively on their image as 

professional scientists, on other 

observers, or on the Observer Program 

as a whole. This includes, but is not 

limited to: 

(1) Violating the drug and alcohol 

policy established by and available from 

the Observer Program; 

(2) Engaging in the use, possession, or 

distribution of illegal drugs; or 

(3) Engaging in physical sexual 

contact with personnel of the vessel or 

processing facility to which the observer 

is assigned, or with any vessel or 

processing plant personnel who may be 

substantially affected by the 

performance or non-performance of the 

observer’s official duties. 

§ 660.17 Catch monitors and catch 

monitor service providers. [Reserved] 

§ 660.18 Certification and decertification 

procedures for observers, catch monitors, 

catch monitor providers, and observer 

providers. 

(a) Observer certification official. The 

Regional Administrator (or a designee) 

will designate a NMFS observer 

certification official who will make 

decisions for the Observer Program 

Office on whether to issue or deny 

observer certification pursuant to the 

regulations at § 660.16(e), subpart C. 

(b) Observer suspension and 

decertification. 

(1) Suspension and decertification 

review official. The Regional 

Administrator (or a designee) will 

designate a suspension and 

decertification review official(s), who 

will have the authority to review 

certifications and issue initial 

administrative determinations of 

certification suspension and/or 

decertification. 

(2) Causes for suspension or 

decertification. The suspension/ 

decertification official may initiate 

suspension or decertification 

proceedings against an observer: 

(i) When it is alleged that the observer 

has committed any acts or omissions of 

any of the following: 

(A) Failed to satisfactorily perform the 

duties of observers as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

or 

(B) Failed to abide by the standards of 

conduct for observers as prescribed 

under § 660.16(e)(4), subpart C. 

(ii) Upon conviction of a crime or 

upon entry of a civil judgment for: 

(A) Commission of fraud or other 

violation in connection with obtaining 

or attempting to obtain certification, or 

in performing the duties as specified in 

writing by the NMFS Observer Program; 

(B) Commission of embezzlement, 

theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or 

destruction of records, making false 

statements, or receiving stolen property; 

(C) Commission of any other offense 

indicating a lack of integrity or honesty 

that seriously and directly affects the 

fitness of observers. 

(D) Conflict of interest as specified at 

§ 660.18 (d) of this section. 

(3) Issuance of initial administrative 

determination. Upon determination that 

suspension or decertification is 

warranted under § 660.18(b) of this 

section the suspension/decertification 

official will issue a written IAD to the 

observer and send it via certified mail 

to the observer’s most current address of 

record as provided to NMFS. The IAD 

will identify whether a certification is 

suspended or revoked and will identify 

the specific reasons for the action taken. 

If the IAD issues a suspension of a 

certification, the terms of the 

suspension will be specified. 

Suspension or decertification is 

effective immediately as of the date of 

issuance, unless the suspension/ 

decertification official notes a 

compelling reason for maintaining 

certification for a specified period and 

under specified conditions. 

(4) Appeals. A certified observer who 

receives an IAD that suspends or 

revokes certification may appeal 

pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. 

(c) Appeals process—(1) Decisions. 

Decisions on appeals of initial 

administrative decisions denying 

certification to, or suspending, or 

decertifying, will be made by the 

Regional Administrator (or designated 

official). Appeals decisions shall be in 

writing and shall state the reasons 

therefore. 

(2) Filing an appeal of the 

determination. An appeal must be filed 

with the Regional Administrator within 

30 days of the initial administrative 

determination denying, suspending, or 

revoking the certification. 

(3) Content of an appeal. The appeal 

must be in writing, and must allege facts 

or circumstances to show why the 

certification should be granted, or 

should not be suspended or revoked, 

under the criteria in this section. 

(4) Decision on an appeal. Absent 

good cause for further delay, the 

Regional Administrator (or designated 

official) will issue a written decision on 

the appeal within 45 days of receipt of 

the appeal. The Regional 

Administrator’s decision is the final 

decision of the Regional Administrator 

acting on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce as of the date of the decision. 

(d) Limitations on conflict of 

interest—(1) Limitations on conflict of 

interest for observers: (i) Must not have 

a direct financial interest, other than the 

provision of observer or catch monitor 

services, in a North Pacific fishery 

managed pursuant to an FMP for the 

waters off the coast of Alaska, Alaska 

state waters, or in a Pacific Coast fishery 

managed by either the state or Federal 

governments in waters off Washington, 

Oregon, or California, including but not 

limited to: 

(A) Any ownership, mortgage holder, 

or other secured interest in a vessel, 

shorebased or floating stationary 

processor facility involved in the 

catching, taking, harvesting or 

processing of fish, 

(B) Any business involved with 

selling supplies or services to any 

vessel, shorebased or floating stationary 

processing facility; or 

(C) Any business involved with 

purchasing raw or processed products 

from any vessel, shorebased or floating 

stationary processing facilities. 

(ii) Must not solicit or accept, directly 

or indirectly, any gratuity, gift, favor, 

entertainment, loan, or anything of 

monetary value from anyone who either 

conducts activities that are regulated by 

NMFS or has interests that may be 

substantially affected by the 

performance or nonperformance of the 

observers’ official duties. 

(iii) May not serve as observer on any 

vessel or at any shoreside or floating 

stationary processing facility owned or 

operated where a person was previously 

employed. 

(iv) May not solicit or accept 

employment as a crew member or an 

employee of a vessel, shoreside 

processor, or stationary floating 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60911 

processor while employed by an 

observer or catch monitor provider. 

(2) Provisions for remuneration of 

observers or catch monitors under this 

section do not constitute a conflict of 

interest. 

(3) Limitations on conflict of interest 

for catch monitors. [Reserved] 

(4) Limitations on conflict of interest 

for catch monitors providers. [Reserved] 

§ 660.20 Vessel and gear identification. 

(a) Vessel identification—(1) Display. 

The operator of a vessel that is over 25 

ft (7.6 m) in length and is engaged in 

commercial fishing for groundfish must 

display the vessel’s official number on 

the port and starboard sides of the 

deckhouse or hull, and on a weather 

deck so as to be visible from above. The 

number must contrast with the 

background and be in block Arabic 

numerals at least 18 inches (45.7 cm) 

high for vessels over 65 ft (19.8 m) long 

and at least 10 inches (25.4 cm) high for 

vessels between 25 and 65 ft (7.6 and 

19.8 m) in length. The length of a vessel 

for purposes of this section is the length 

set forth in USCG records or in state 

records, if no USCG record exists. 

(2) Maintenance of numbers. The 

operator of a vessel engaged in 

commercial fishing for groundfish must 

keep the identifying markings required 

by paragraph (a)(1) of this section 

clearly legible and in good repair, and 

must ensure that no part of the vessel, 

its rigging, or its fishing gear obstructs 

the view of the official number from an 

enforcement vessel or aircraft. 

(3) Commercial passenger vessels. 

This section does not apply to vessels 

carrying fishing parties on a per-capita 

basis or by charter. 

(b) Gear identification. Gear 

identification requirements specific to 

fisheries using fixed gear (limited entry 

and open access) are described at 

§ 660.219, subpart E and § 660.319, 

subpart F. 

§ 660.24 Limited entry and open access 

fisheries. 

(a) General. All commercial fishing 

for groundfish must be conducted in 

accordance with the regulations 

governing limited entry and open access 

fisheries, except such fishing by treaty 

Indian tribes as may be separately 

provided for. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 660.25 Permits. 

(a) General. Each of the permits or 

licenses in this section has different 

conditions or privileges as part of the 

permit or license. The permits or 

licenses in this section confer a 

conditional privilege of participating in 

the Pacific coast groundfish fishery, in 

accordance with Federal regulations in 

50 CFR part 660, subparts C through G. 

(b) Limited entry permit—(1) 

Eligibility and registration—(i) General. 

In order for a vessel to be used to fish 

in the limited entry fishery, the vessel 

owner must hold a limited entry permit 

and, through SFD, must register that 

vessel for use with a limited entry 

permit. When participating in the 

limited entry fishery, a vessel is 

authorized to fish with the gear type 

endorsed on the limited entry permit 

registered for use with that vessel, 

except that the MS permit does not have 

a gear endorsement. There are three 

types of gear endorsements: Trawl, 

longline, and pot (or trap). All limited 

entry permits, except the MS permit, 

have size endorsements; a vessel 

registered for use with a limited entry 

permit must comply with the vessel size 

requirements of this subpart. A sablefish 

endorsement is also required for a vessel 

to be used to fish in the primary season 

for the limited entry fixed gear sablefish 

fishery, north of 36° N. lat. Certain 

limited entry permits will also have 

endorsements required for participation 

in a specific fishery, such as the MS/CV 

endorsement and the C/P endorsement. 

(A) Until the trawl rationalization 

program is implemented, a catcher 

vessel participating in either the Pacific 

whiting shorebased or mothership 

sector must, in addition to being 

registered for use with a limited entry 

permit, be registered for use with a 

sector-appropriate Pacific whiting vessel 

license under § 660.26, subpart C. A 

vessel participating in the Pacific 

whiting catcher/processor sector must, 

in addition to being registered for use 

with a limited entry permit, be 

registered for use with a sectorappropriate Pacific whiting vessel 

license under § 660.26, subpart C. 

Although a mothership vessel 

participating in the Pacific whiting 

mothership sector is not required to be 

registered for use with a limited entry 

permit, such vessel must be registered 

for use with a sector-appropriate Pacific 

whiting vessel license under § 660.26, 

subpart C. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(ii) Eligibility. Only a person eligible 

to own a documented vessel under the 

terms of 46 U.S.C. 12113 (a) may be 

issued or may hold a limited entry 

permit. 

(iii) Registration. Limited entry 

permits will normally be registered for 

use with a particular vessel at the time 

the permit is issued, renewed, 

transferred, or replaced. If the permit 

will be used with a vessel other than the 

one registered on the permit, the permit 

owner must register that permit for use 

with the new vessel through the SFD. 

The reissued permit must be placed on 

board the new vessel in order for the 

vessel to be used to fish in the limited 

entry fishery. 

(A) For all limited entry permits, 

including MS permits, MS/CV-endorsed 

permits, and C/P-endorsed permits 

when they are not fishing in the at-sea 

whiting fisheries, registration of a 

limited entry permit to be used with a 

new vessel will take effect no earlier 

than the first day of the next major 

limited entry cumulative limit period 

following the date SFD receives the 

transfer form and the original permit. 

(B) For MS permits, MS/CV-endorsed 

permits, and C/P-endorsed permits 

when they are fishing in the at-sea 

whiting fisheries, registration of a 

limited entry permit to be used with a 

new vessel will take effect on the date 

NMFS approves and issuance of the 

transferred permit. 

(iv) Limited entry permits indivisible. 

Limited entry permits may not be 

divided for use by more than one vessel. 

(v) Initial administrative 

determination. SFD will make an IAD 

regarding permit endorsements, 

renewal, replacement, and change in 

vessel registration. SFD will notify the 

permit owner in writing with an 

explanation of any determination to 

deny a permit endorsement, renewal, 

replacement, or change in vessel 

registration. The SFD will decline to act 

on an application for permit 

endorsement, renewal, transfer, 

replacement, or registration of a limited 

entry permit if the permit is subject to 

sanction provisions of the MagnusonStevens Act at 16 U.S.C. 1858 (a) and 

implementing regulations at 15 CFR part 

904, subpart D, apply. 

(2) Mothership (MS) permit. The MS 

permit conveys a conditional privilege 

for the vessel registered to it,, to 

participate in the MS fishery by 

receiving and processing deliveries of 

groundfish in the Pacific whiting 

mothership sector. An MS permit is a 

type of limited entry permit. An MS 

permit does not have any endorsements 

affixed to the permit, as listed in 

paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The 

provisions for the MS permit, including 

eligibility, renewal, change of permit 

ownership, vessel registration, fees, and 

appeals are described at § 660.150, 

subpart D. 

(3) Endorsements—(i) ‘‘A’’ 

endorsement. A limited entry permit 

with an ‘‘A’’ endorsement entitles the 

vessel registered to the permit to fish in 

the limited entry fishery for all 

groundfish species with the type(s) of 

limited entry gear specified in the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60912 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

endorsement, except for sablefish 

harvested north of 36° N. lat. during 

times and with gears for which a 

sablefish endorsement is required. See 

paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section for 

provisions on sablefish endorsement 

requirements. An ‘‘A’’ endorsement is 

transferable with the limited entry 

permit to another person, or to a 

different vessel under the same 

ownership under paragraph (b)(4) of this 

section. An ‘‘A’’ endorsement expires on 

failure to renew the limited entry permit 

to which it is affixed. An MS permit is 

not considered a limited entry ‘‘A’’- 

endorsed permit. 

(ii) Gear endorsement. There are three 

types of gear endorsements: Trawl, 

longline and pot (trap). When limited 

entry ‘‘A’’-endorsed permits were first 

issued, some vessel owners qualified for 

more than one type of gear endorsement 

based on the landings history of their 

vessels. Each limited entry ‘‘A’’- 

endorsed permit has one or more gear 

endorsement(s). Gear endorsement(s) 

assigned to the permit at the time of 

issuance will be permanent and shall 

not be modified. While participating in 

the limited entry fishery, the vessel 

registered to the limited entry ‘‘A’’- 

endorsed permit is authorized to fish 

the gear(s) endorsed on the permit. 

While participating in the limited entry, 

fixed gear primary fishery for sablefish 

described at § 660.231, subpart E, a 

vessel registered to more than one 

limited entry permit is authorized to 

fish with any gear, except trawl gear, 

endorsed on at least one of the permits 

registered for use with that vessel. 

During the limited entry fishery, permit 

holders may also fish with open access 

gear, except that vessels fishing against 

primary sablefish season cumulative 

limits described at § 660.231, subpart E, 

may not fish with open access gear 

against those limits. An MS permit does 

not have a gear endorsement. 

(iii) Vessel size endorsements—(A) 

General. Each limited entry ‘‘A’’- 

endorsed permit will be endorsed with 

the LOA for the size of the vessel that 

initially qualified for the permit, except 

when permits are combined into one 

permit to be registered for use with a 

vessel requiring a larger size 

endorsement, the new permit will be 

endorsed for the size that results from 

the combination of the permits. 

(B) Limitations of size endorsements. 

(1) A limited entry permit may be 

registered for use with a vessel up to 5 

ft (1.52 m) longer than, the same length 

as, or any length shorter than, the size 

endorsed on the existing permit without 

requiring a combination of permits or a 

change in the size endorsement. 

(2) The vessel harvest capacity rating 

for each of the permits being combined 

is that indicated in Table 3 of subpart 

C for the LOA (in feet) endorsed on the 

respective limited entry permit. Harvest 

capacity ratings for fractions of a foot in 

vessel length will be determined by 

multiplying the fraction of a foot in 

vessel length by the difference in the 

two ratings assigned to the nearest 

integers of vessel length. The length 

rating for the combined permit is that 

indicated for the sum of the vessel 

harvest capacity ratings for each permit 

being combined. If that sum falls 

between the sums for two adjacent 

lengths on Table 3 of subpart C, the 

length rating shall be the higher length. 

(C) Size endorsement requirements for 

sablefish-endorsed permits. 

Notwithstanding paragraphs 

(b)(3)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section, 

when multiple permits are ‘‘stacked’’ on 

a vessel, as described in paragraph 

(b)(4)(iii), at least one of the permits 

must meet the size requirements of 

those sections. The permit that meets 

the size requirements of those sections 

is considered the vessel’s ‘‘base’’ permit, 

as defined in § 660.11, subpart C. If 

more than one permit registered for use 

with the vessel has an appropriate 

length endorsement for that vessel, 

NMFS SFD will designate a base permit 

by selecting the permit that has been 

registered to the vessel for the longest 

time. If the permit owner objects to 

NMFS’ selection of the base permit, the 

permit owner may send a letter to 

NMFS SFD requesting the change and 

the reasons for the request. If the permit 

requested to be changed to the base 

permit is appropriate for the length of 

the vessel, NMFS SFD will reissue the 

permit with the new base permit. Any 

additional permits that are stacked for 

use with a vessel participating in the 

limited entry fixed gear primary 

sablefish fishery may be registered for 

use with a vessel even if the vessel is 

more than 5 ft (1.5 m) longer or shorter 

than the size endorsed on the permit. 

(iv) Sablefish endorsement and tier 

assignment—(A) General. Participation 

in the limited entry fixed gear sablefish 

fishery during the primary season north 

of 36° N. lat., described in § 660.231, 

Subpart E, requires that an owner of a 

vessel hold (by ownership or lease) a 

limited entry permit, registered for use 

with that vessel, with a longline or trap 

(or pot) endorsement and a sablefish 

endorsement. Up to three permits with 

sablefish endorsements may be 

registered for use with a single vessel. 

Limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements are assigned to one of 

three different cumulative trip limit 

tiers, based on the qualifying catch 

history of the permit. 

(1) A sablefish endorsement with a 

tier assignment will be affixed to the 

permit and will remain valid when the 

permit is transferred. 

(2) A sablefish endorsement and its 

associated tier assignment are not 

separable from the limited entry permit, 

and therefore may not be transferred 

separately from the limited entry 

permit. 

(B) Issuance process for sablefish 

endorsements and tier assignments. No 

new applications for sablefish 

endorsements will be accepted after 

November 30, 1998. All tier assignments 

and subsequent appeals processes were 

completed by September 1998. 

(C) Ownership requirements and 

limitations. (1) No partnership or 

corporation may own a limited entry 

permit with a sablefish endorsement 

unless that partnership or corporation 

owned a limited entry permit with a 

sablefish endorsement on November 1, 

2000. Otherwise, only individual 

human persons may own limited entry 

permits with sablefish endorsements. 

(2) No individual person, partnership, 

or corporation in combination may have 

ownership interest in or hold more than 

3 permits with sablefish endorsements 

either simultaneously or cumulatively 

over the primary season, except for an 

individual person, or partnerships or 

corporations that had ownership 

interest in more than 3 permits with 

sablefish endorsements as of November 

1, 2000. The exemption from the 

maximum ownership level of 3 permits 

only applies to ownership of the 

particular permits that were owned on 

November 1, 2000. An individual 

person, or partnerships or corporations 

that had ownership interest in 3 or more 

permits with sablefish endorsements as 

of November 1, 2000, may not acquire 

additional permits beyond those 

particular permits owned on November 

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

individual person, partnership, or 

corporation that owned more than 3 

permits as of November 1, 2000, sells or 

otherwise permanently transfers (not 

holding through a lease arrangement) 

some of its originally owned permits, 

such that they then own fewer than 3 

permits, they may then acquire 

additional permits, but may not have 

ownership interest in or hold more than 

3 permits. 

(3) A partnership or corporation will 

lose the exemptions provided in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(iv)(C)(1) and (2) of this 

section on the effective date of any 

change in the corporation or partnership 

from that which existed on November 1, 

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

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60913 

corporation is defined at § 660.11, 

subpart C. A change in the partnership 

or corporation must be reported to SFD 

within 15 calendar days of the addition 

of a new shareholder or partner. 

(4) Any partnership or corporation 

with any ownership interest in or that 

holds a limited entry permit with a 

sablefish endorsement shall document 

the extent of that ownership interest or 

the individuals that hold the permit 

with the SFD via the Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form sent to the 

permit owner through the annual permit 

renewal process and whenever a change 

in permit owner, permit holder, and/or 

vessel registration occurs as described at 

paragraph (b)(4)(iv) and (v) of this 

section. SFD will not renew a sablefishendorsed limited entry permit through 

the annual renewal process described at 

paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section, or 

approve a change in permit owner, 

permit holder, and/or vessel registration 

unless the Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form has been completed. 

Further, if SFD discovers through 

review of the Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that an 

individual person, partnership, or 

corporation owns or holds more than 3 

permits and is not authorized to do so 

under paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C)(2) of this 

section, the individual person, 

partnership or corporation will be 

notified and the permits owned or held 

by that individual person, partnership, 

or corporation will be void and reissued 

with the vessel status as ‘‘unidentified’’ 

until the permit owner owns and/or 

holds a quantity of permits appropriate 

to the restrictions and requirements 

described in paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C)(2) of 

this section. If SFD discovers through 

review of the Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that a 

partnership or corporation has had a 

change in membership since November 

1, 2000, as described in paragraph 

(b)(3)(iv)(C)(3) of this section, the 

partnership or corporation will be 

notified, SFD will void any existing 

permits, and reissue any permits owned 

and/or held by that partnership or 

corporation in ‘‘unidentified’’ status 

with respect to vessel registration until 

the partnership or corporation is able to 

transfer those permits to persons 

authorized under this section to own 

sablefish-endorsed limited entry 

permits. 

(5) A person, partnership, or 

corporation that is exempt from the 

owner-on-board requirement may sell 

all of their permits, buy another 

sablefish-endorsed permit within up to 

a year from the date the last permit was 

approved for transfer, and retain their 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements. An individual person, 

partnership or corporation could only 

obtain a permit if it has not added or 

changed individuals since November 1, 

2000, excluding individuals that have 

left the partnership or corporation or 

that have died. 

(D) Sablefish at-sea processing 

prohibition and exemption. Vessels are 

prohibited from processing sablefish at 

sea that were caught in the primary 

sablefish fishery without sablefish at-sea 

processing exemptions. The sablefish atsea processing exemption has been 

issued to a particular vessel and that 

permit and vessel owner who requested 

the exemption. The exemption is not 

part of the limited entry permit. The 

exemption is not transferable to any 

other vessel, vessel owner, or permit 

owner for any reason. The sablefish atsea processing exemption will expire 

upon transfer of the vessel to a new 

owner or if the vessel is totally lost, as 

defined at § 660.11, subpart C. 

(v) MS/CV endorsement. An MS/CV 

endorsement on a trawl limited entry 

permit conveys a conditional privilege 

that allows a vessel registered to it to 

fish in either the coop or non-coop 

fishery in the MS Coop Program 

described at § 660.150, subpart D. The 

provisions for the MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit, including 

eligibility, renewal, change of permit 

ownership, vessel registration, 

combinations, accumulation limits, fees, 

and appeals are described at § 660.150, 

subpart D. 

(vi) C/P endorsement. A C/P 

endorsement on a trawl limited entry 

permit conveys a conditional privilege 

that allows a vessel registered to it to 

fish in the C/P Coop Program described 

at § 660.160, subpart D. The provisions 

for the C/P-endorsed limited entry 

permit, including eligibility, renewal, 

change of permit ownership, vessel 

registration, combinations, fees, and 

appeals are described at § 660.160, 

subpart D. 

(vii) Endorsement and exemption 

restrictions. ‘‘A’’ endorsements, gear 

endorsements, sablefish endorsements 

and sablefish tier assignments, MS/CV 

endorsements, and C/P endorsements 

may not be transferred separately from 

the limited entry permit. Sablefish atsea processing exemptions are 

associated with the vessel and not with 

the limited entry permit and may not be 

transferred at all. 

(4) Limited entry permit actions— 

renewal, combination, stacking, change 

of permit ownership or permit 

holdership, and transfer—(i) Renewal of 

limited entry permits and gear 

endorsements. (A) Limited entry 

permits expire at the end of each 

calendar year, and must be renewed 

between October 1 and November 30 of 

each year in order to remain in force the 

following year. 

(B) Notification to renew limited entry 

permits will be issued by SFD prior to 

September 1 each year to the permit 

owner’s most recent address in the SFD 

record. The permit owner shall provide 

SFD with notice of any address change 

within 15 days of the change. 

(C) Limited entry permit renewal 

requests received in SFD between 

November 30 and December 31 will be 

effective on the date that the renewal is 

approved. A limited entry permit that is 

allowed to expire will not be renewed 

unless the permit owner requests 

reissuance by March 31 of the following 

year and the SFD determines that failure 

to renew was proximately caused by 

illness, injury, or death of the permit 

owner. 

(D) Limited entry permits with 

sablefish endorsements, as described at 

paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section, will 

not be renewed until SFD has received 

complete documentation of permit 

ownership as required under paragraph 

(b)(3)(iv)(C)(4) of this section. 

(E) Limited entry permits with an 

MS/CV endorsement or an MS permit, 

will not be renewed until SFD has 

received complete documentation of 

permit ownership as required under 

§ 660.150(g) and § 660.150(f) of subpart 

D, respectively. 

(ii) Combining limited entry ‘‘A’’ 

permits. Two or more limited entry 

permits with ‘‘A’’ gear endorsements for 

the same type of limited entry gear may 

be combined and reissued as a single 

permit with a larger size endorsement as 

described in paragraph (b)(3)(iii) of this 

section. 

(A) Sablefish-endorsed permit. With 

respect to limited entry permits 

endorsed for longline and pot (trap) 

gear, a sablefish endorsement will be 

issued for the new permit only if all of 

the permits being combined have 

sablefish endorsements. If two or more 

permits with sablefish endorsements are 

combined, the new permit will receive 

the same tier assignment as the tier with 

the largest cumulative landings limit of 

the permits being combined. 

(B) MS/CV-endorsed permit. When an 

MS/CV-endorsed permit is combined 

with another non-C/P-endorsed permit 

(including unendorsed permits), the 

resulting permit will be MS/CVendorsed. If an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

is combined with a C/P-endorsed 

permit, the MS/CV endorsement and 

catch history assignment will not be 

reissued on the combined permit. 

(C) C/P-endorsed permit. A C/Pendorsed permit that is combined with 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60914 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

a limited entry trawl permit that is not 

C/P-endorsed will result in a single 

C/P-endorsed permit with a larger size 

endorsement. An MS/CV endorsement 

on one of the permits being combined 

will not be reissued on the resulting 

permit. 

(iii) Stacking limited entry permits. 

‘‘Stacking’’ limited entry permits, as 

defined at § 660.11, subpart C, refers to 

the practice of registering more than one 

sablefish-endorsed permit for use with a 

single vessel. Only limited entry permits 

with sablefish endorsements may be 

stacked. Up to 3 limited entry permits 

with sablefish endorsements may be 

registered for use with a single vessel 

during the primary sablefish season 

described at § 660.231, subpart E. 

Privileges, responsibilities, and 

restrictions associated with stacking 

permits to fish in the primary sablefish 

fishery are described at § 660.231, 

subpart E and at paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of 

this section. 

(iv) Changes in permit ownership and 

permit holder. (A) General. The permit 

owner may convey the limited entry 

permit to a different person. The new 

permit owner will not be authorized to 

use the permit until the change in 

permit ownership has been registered 

with and approved by the SFD. The SFD 

will not approve a change in permit 

ownership for a limited entry permit 

with a sablefish endorsement that does 

not meet the ownership requirements 

for such permit described at paragraph 

(b)(3)(iv)(C) of this section. The SFD 

will not approve a change in permit 

ownership for a limited entry permit 

with an MS/CV endorsement that does 

not meet the ownership requirements 

for such permit described at 

§ 660.150(g)(3), subpart D. Change in 

permit owner and/or permit holder 

applications must be submitted to SFD 

with the appropriate documentation 

described at paragraph (b)(4)(vii) of this 

section. 

(1) During the initial issuance 

application period for the trawl 

rationalization program, NMFS will not 

review or approve any request for a 

change in limited entry trawl permit 

owner at any time during the 

application period, as specified at 

§ 660.140(d)(8)(viii) for QS applicants, 

at § 660.150(g)(6)(vii) for MS/CV 

endorsement applicants, and at 

§ 660.160(d)(7)(vi) for C/P endorsement 

applicants. The initial issuance 

application period for the trawl 

rationalization program will begin on 

either November 1, 2010 or the date 

upon which the application is received 

by NMFS, whichever occurs first. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(B) Effective date. The change in 

ownership of the permit or change in 

the permit holder will be effective on 

the day the change is approved by SFD, 

unless there is a concurrent change in 

the vessel registered to the permit. 

Requirements for changing the vessel 

registered to the permit are described at 

paragraph (e) of this section. 

(C) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a 

permit owner submits an application to 

transfer a sablefish-endorsed limited 

entry permit to a new permit owner or 

holder (transferee) during the primary 

sablefish season described at § 660.231, 

subpart E (generally April 1 through 

October 31), the initial permit owner 

(transferor) must certify on the 

application form the cumulative 

quantity, in round weight, of primary 

season sablefish landed against that 

permit as of the application signature 

date for the then current primary 

season. The transferee must sign the 

application form acknowledging the 

amount of landings to date given by the 

transferor. This certified amount should 

match the total amount of primary 

season sablefish landings reported on 

state landing receipts. As required at 

§ 660.12(b), subpart C, any person 

landing sablefish must retain on board 

the vessel from which sablefish is 

landed, and provide to an authorized 

officer upon request, copies of any and 

all reports of sablefish landings from the 

primary season containing all data, and 

in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

primary sablefish season during which 

a landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

(v) Changes in vessel registrationtransfer of limited entry permits and 

gear endorsements—(A) General. A 

permit may not be used with any vessel 

other than the vessel registered to that 

permit. For purposes of this section, a 

permit transfer occurs when, through 

SFD, a permit owner registers a limited 

entry permit for use with a new vessel. 

Permit transfer applications must be 

submitted to SFD with the appropriate 

documentation described at paragraph 

(b)(4)(vii) of this section. Upon receipt 

of a complete application, and following 

review and approval of the application, 

the SFD will reissue the permit 

registered to the new vessel. 

Applications to transfer limited entry 

permits with sablefish endorsements 

will not be approved until SFD has 

received complete documentation of 

permit ownership as described at 

paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C)(4) of this section 

and as required under paragraph 

(b)(4)(vii) of this section. 

(B) Application. A complete 

application must be submitted to SFD in 

order for SFD to review and approve a 

change in vessel registration. At a 

minimum, a permit owner seeking to 

transfer a limited entry permit shall 

submit to SFD a signed application form 

and his/her current limited entry permit 

before the first day of the cumulative 

limit period in which they wish to fish. 

If a permit owner provides a signed 

application and current limited entry 

permit after the first day of a cumulative 

limit period, the permit will not be 

effective until the succeeding 

cumulative limit period. SFD will not 

approve a change in vessel registration 

(transfer) until it receives a complete 

application, the existing permit, a 

current copy of the USCG 1270, and 

other required documentation. 

(C) Effective date. Changes in vessel 

registration on permits will take effect 

no sooner than the first day of the next 

major limited entry cumulative limit 

period following the date that SFD 

receives the signed permit transfer form 

and the original limited entry permit. 

No transfer is effective until the limited 

entry permit has been reissued as 

registered with the new vessel. 

(D) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a 

permit owner submits an application to 

register a sablefish-endorsed limited 

entry permit to a new vessel during the 

primary sablefish season described at 

§ 660.231, subpart E (generally April 1 

through October 31), the initial permit 

owner (transferor) must certify on the 

application form the cumulative 

quantity, in round weight, of primary 

season sablefish landed against that 

permit as of the application signature 

date for the then current primary 

season. The new permit owner or holder 

(transferee) associated with the new 

vessel must sign the application form 

acknowledging the amount of landings 

to date given by the transferor. This 

certified amount should match the total 

amount of primary season sablefish 

landings reported on state landing 

receipts. As required at § 660.12(b), 

subpart C, any person landing sablefish 

must retain on board the vessel from 

which sablefish is landed, and provide 

to an authorized officer upon request, 

copies of any and all reports of sablefish 

landings from the primary season 

containing all data, and in the exact 

manner, required by the applicable state 

law throughout the primary sablefish 

season during which a landing occurred 

and for 15 days thereafter. 

(vi) Restriction on frequency of 

transfers—(A) General. A permit owner 

may designate the vessel registration for 

a permit as ‘‘unidentified,’’ meaning that 

no vessel has been identified as 

registered for use with that permit. No 

vessel is authorized to use a permit with 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60915 

the vessel registration designated as 

‘‘unidentified.’’ A vessel owner who 

removes a permit from his vessel and 

registers that permit as ‘‘unidentified’’ is 

not exempt from VMS requirements at 

§ 660.14, subpart C unless specifically 

authorized by that section. When a 

permit owner requests that the permit’s 

vessel registration be designated as 

‘‘unidentified,’’ the transaction is not 

considered a ‘‘transfer’’ for purposes of 

this section. Any subsequent request by 

a permit owner to change from the 

‘‘unidentified’’ status of the permit in 

order to register the permit with a 

specific vessel will be considered a 

change in vessel registration (transfer) 

and subject to the restriction on 

frequency and timing of changes in 

vessel registration (transfer). 

(B) Limited entry fixed gear and trawlendorsed permits (without MS/CV or 

C/P endorsements). Limited entry fixed 

gear and trawl-endorsed permits 

(without MS/CV or C/P endorsements) 

permits may not be registered for use 

with a different vessel (transfer) more 

than once per calendar year, except in 

cases of death of a permit holder or if 

the permitted vessel is totally lost as 

defined in § 660.11, subpart C. The 

exception for death of a permit holder 

applies for a permit held by a 

partnership or a corporation if the 

person or persons holding at least 50 

percent of the ownership interest in the 

entity dies. 

(C) Limited entry MS permits and 

limited entry permits with MS/CV or 

C/P endorsements. Limited entry MS 

permits and limited entry permits with 

MS/CV or C/P endorsements may be 

registered to another vessel up to two 

times during the fishing season as long 

as the second transfer is back to the 

original vessel. The original vessel is 

either the vessel registered to the permit 

as of January 1, or if no vessel is 

registered to the permit as of January 1, 

the original vessel is the first vessel to 

which the permit is registered after 

January 1. After the original vessel has 

been established, the first transfer 

would be to another vessel, but any 

second transfer must be back to the 

original vessel. 

(vii) Application and supplemental 

documentation. Permit holders may 

request a transfer (change in vessel 

registration) and/or change in permit 

ownership or permit holder by 

submitting a complete application form. 

In addition, a permit owner applying for 

renewal, replacement, transfer, or 

change of ownership or change of 

permit holder of a limited entry permit 

has the burden to submit evidence to 

prove that qualification requirements 

are met. The following evidentiary 

standards apply: 

(A) For a request to change a vessel 

registration and/or change in permit 

ownership or permit holder, the permit 

owner must provide SFD with a current 

copy of the USCG Form 1270 for vessels 

of 5 net tons or greater, or a current copy 

of a state registration form for vessels 

under 5 net tons. 

(B) For a request to change a vessel 

registration and/or change in permit 

ownership or permit holder for 

sablefish-endorsed permits with a tier 

assignment for which a corporation or 

partnership is listed as permit owner 

and/or holder, an Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form must be 

completed and included with the 

application form. 

(C) For a request to change permit 

ownership for an MS permit or for a 

request to change a vessel registration 

and/or change in permit ownership or 

permit holder for an MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry trawl permit, an 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form must be completed and included 

with the application form. 

(D) For a request to change the vessel 

registration to a permit, the permit 

owner must submit to SFD a current 

marine survey conducted by a certified 

marine surveyor in accordance with 

USCG regulations to authenticate the 

length overall of the vessel being newly 

registered with the permit. Marine 

surveys older than 3 years at the time 

of the request for change in vessel 

registration will not be considered 

‘‘current’’ marine surveys for purposes of 

this requirement. 

(E) For a request to change a permit’s 

ownership where the current permit 

owner is a corporation, partnership or 

other business entity, the applicant 

must provide to SFD a corporate 

resolution that authorizes the 

conveyance of the permit to a new 

owner and which authorizes the 

individual applicant to request the 

conveyance on behalf of the 

corporation, partnership, or other 

business entity. 

(F) For a request to change a permit’s 

ownership that is necessitated by the 

death of the permit owner(s), the 

individual(s) requesting conveyance of 

the permit to a new owner must provide 

SFD with a death certificate of the 

permit owner(s) and appropriate legal 

documentation that either: specifically 

transfers the permit to a designated 

individual(s); or, provides legal 

authority to the transferor to convey the 

permit ownership. 

(G) For a request to change a permit’s 

ownership that is necessitated by 

divorce, the individual requesting the 

change in permit ownership must 

submit an executed divorce decree that 

awards the permit to a designated 

individual(s). 

(H) Such other relevant, credible 

documentation as the applicant may 

submit, or the SFD or Regional 

Administrator may request or acquire, 

may also be considered. 

(viii) Application forms available. 

Application forms for the change in 

vessel registration (transfer) and change 

of permit ownership or permit holder of 

limited entry permits are available from 

the SFD (see part 600 for address of the 

Regional Administrator). Contents of the 

application, and required supporting 

documentation, are specified in the 

application form. 

(ix) Records maintenance. The SFD 

will maintain records of all limited 

entry permits that have been issued, 

renewed, transferred, registered, or 

replaced. 

(5) Small fleet. (i) Small limited entry 

fisheries fleets that are controlled by a 

local government, are in existence as of 

July 11, 1991, and have negligible 

impacts on the groundfish resource, 

may be certified as consistent with the 

goals and objectives of the limited entry 

program and incorporated into the 

limited entry fishery. Permits issued 

under this subsection will be issued in 

accordance with the standards and 

procedures set out in the PCGFMP and 

will carry the rights explained therein. 

(ii) A permit issued under this section 

may be registered only to another vessel 

that will continue to operate in the same 

certified small fleet, provided that the 

total number of vessels in the fleet does 

not increase. A vessel may not use a 

small fleet limited entry permit for 

participation in the limited entry fishery 

outside of authorized activities of the 

small fleet for which that permit and 

vessel have been designated. 

(c) Quota share (QS) permit. A QS 

permit conveys a conditional privilege 

to a person to own QS or IBQ for 

designated species and species groups 

and to fish in the Shorebased IFQ 

Program described § 660.140, subpart D. 

A QS permit is not a limited entry 

permit. The provisions for the QS 

permit, including eligibility, renewal, 

change of permit ownership, 

accumulation limits, fees, and appeals 

are described at § 660.140, subpart D. 

(d) First receiver site license. The first 

receiver site license conveys a 

conditional privilege to a first receiver 

to receive, purchase, or take custody, 

control or possession of landings from 

the Shorebased IFQ Program. The first 

receiver site license is issued for a 

person and a unique physical site 

consistent with the terms and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60916 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

conditions required to account for and 

weigh the landed species. A first 

receiver site license is not a limited 

entry permit. The provisions for the 

First Receiver Site License, including 

eligibility, registration, change of 

ownership, fees, and appeals are 

described at § 660.140(f), subpart D. 

(e) Coop permit. [Reserved] 

(1) MS coop permit. [Reserved] 

(2) C/P coop permit. [Reserved] 

(f) Permit fees. The Regional 

Administrator is authorized to charge 

fees to cover administrative expenses 

related to issuance of permits including 

initial issuance, renewal, transfer, vessel 

registration, replacement, and appeals. 

The appropriate fee must accompany 

each application. 

(g) Permit appeals process—(1) 

General. For permit actions, including 

issuance, renewal, change in vessel 

registration, change in permit owner or 

permit holder, and endorsement 

upgrade, the Assistant Regional 

Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries 

will make an initial administrative 

determination (IAD) on the action. In 

cases where the applicant disagrees 

with the IAD, the applicant may appeal 

that decision. Final decisions on 

appeals of IADs regarding issuance, 

renewal, change in vessel registration, 

change in permit owner or permit 

holder, and endorsement upgrade, will 

be made in writing by the Regional 

Administrator acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce and will state 

the reasons therefore. This section 

describes the procedures for appealing 

the IAD on permit actions made in this 

title under subparts C through G of part 

660. Additional information regarding 

appeals of an IAD related to the trawl 

rationalization program is contained in 

the specific program sections under 

subpart D of part 660. 

(2) Who May Appeal? Only a person 

who received an IAD that disapproved 

any part of their application may file a 

written appeal. For purposes of this 

section, such person will be referred to 

as the ‘‘applicant.’’ 

(3) Submission of appeals. (i) The 

appeal must be in writing, must allege 

credible facts or circumstances to show 

why the criteria in this subpart have 

been met, and must include any 

relevant information or documentation 

to support the appeal. 

(ii) Appeals must be mailed or faxed 

to: National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Northwest Region, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, ATTN: Appeals, 7600 Sand 

Point Way NE., Seattle, WA, 98115; Fax: 

206–526–6426; or delivered to National 

Marine Fisheries Service at the same 

address. 

(4) Timing of appeals. (i) If an 

applicant appeals an IAD, the appeal 

must be postmarked, faxed, or hand 

delivered to NMFS no later than 30 

calendar days after the date on the IAD. 

If the applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 30 calendar days, the IAD 

becomes the final decision of the 

Regional Administrator acting on behalf 

of the Secretary of Commerce. 

(ii) The time period to submit an 

appeal begins with the date on the IAD. 

If the last day of the time period is a 

Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, 

the time period will extend to the close 

of business on the next business day. 

(5) Address of record. For purposes of 

the appeals process, NMFS will 

establish as the address of record, the 

address used by the applicant in initial 

correspondence to NMFS. Notifications 

of all actions affecting the applicant 

after establishing an address of record 

will be mailed to that address, unless 

the applicant provides NMFS, in 

writing, with any changes to that 

address. NMFS bears no responsibility if 

a notification is sent to the address of 

record and is not received because the 

applicant’s actual address has changed 

without notification to NMFS. 

(6) Decisions on appeals. (i) For the 

appeal of an IAD related to the 

application and initial issuance process 

for the trawl rationalization program 

listed in subpart D of part 660, the 

Regional Administrator shall appoint an 

appeals officer. After determining there 

is sufficient information and that all 

procedural requirements have been met, 

the appeals officer will review the 

record and issue a recommendation on 

the appeal to the Regional 

Administrator, which shall be advisory 

only. The recommendation must be 

based solely on the record. Upon 

receiving the findings and 

recommendation, the Regional 

Administrator shall issue a final 

decision on the appeal acting on behalf 

of the Secretary of Commerce in 

accordance with paragraph (g)(6)(ii) of 

this section. 

(ii) Final decision on appeal. The 

Regional Administrator will issue a 

written decision on the appeal which is 

the final decision of the Secretary of 

Commerce. 

(7) Status of permits pending appeal. 

(i) For all permit actions, except those 

actions related to the application and 

initial issuance process for the trawl 

rationalization program listed in subpart 

D of part 660, the permit registration 

remains as it was prior to the request 

until the final decision has been made. 

(ii) For permit actions related to the 

application and initial issuance process 

for the trawl rationalization program 

listed in subpart D of part 660, the status 

of permits pending appeal is as follows: 

(A) For permit and endorsement 

qualifications and eligibility appeals 

(i.e., QS permit, MS permit, MS/CV 

endorsement, C/P endorsement), any 

permit or endorsement under appeal 

after December 31, 2010 may not be 

used to fish in the Pacific Coast 

groundfish fishery until a final decision 

on the appeal has been made. If the 

permit or endorsement will be issued, 

the permit or endorsement will be 

effective upon approval, except for QS 

permits, which will be effective at the 

start of the next fishing year. 

(B) For a QS or IBQ amount for 

specific IFQ management unit species 

under appeal, the QS or IBQ amount for 

the IFQ species under appeal will 

remain as the amount assigned to the 

associated QS permit in the IAD). The 

QS permit may be used to fish in the 

Pacific Coast groundfish fishery with 

the QS or IBQ amounts assigned to the 

QS permit in the IAD. Once a final 

decision on the appeal has been made 

and if a revised QS or IBQ amount for 

a specific IFQ species will be assigned 

to the QS permit, the additional QS or 

IBQ amount associated with the QS 

permit will be effective at the start of the 

next calendar year following the final 

decision. 

(C) For a Pacific whiting catch history 

assignment associated with an MS/CV 

endorsement under appeal, the catch 

history assignment will remain as that 

previously assigned to the associated 

MS/CV-endorsed limited entry permit 

in the IAD). The MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit may be used to fish 

in the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery 

with the catch history assigned to the 

MS/CV-endorsed permit in the IAD. 

Once a final decision on the appeal has 

been made, and if a revised catch 

history assignment will be issued, the 

additional Pacific whiting catch history 

assignment associated with the MS/CV 

endorsement will be effective at the start 

of the next calendar year following the 

final decision. 

(h) Permit sanctions. (1) All permits 

and licenses issued or applied for under 

Subparts C through G are subject to 

sanctions pursuant to the MagnusonStevens Act at 16 U.S.C. 1858(g) and 15 

CFR part 904, subpart D. 

(2) All Shorebased IFQ Program 

permits (QS permit, first receiver site 

license), QS accounts, vessel accounts, 

and MS Coop Program permits (MS 

permit, MS/CV-endorsed permit, and 

MS coop permit), and C/P Coop 

Program permits (C/P-endorsed permit, 

C/P coop permit) issued under subpart 

D: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60917 

(i) Are considered permits for the 

purposes of 16 U.S.C. 1857, 1858, and 

1859; 

(ii) May be revoked, limited, or 

modified at any time in accordance with 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, including 

revocation if the system is found to have 

jeopardized the sustainability of the 

stocks or the safety of fishermen; 

(iii) Shall not confer any right of 

compensation to the holder of such 

permits, licenses, and accounts if it is 

revoked, limited, or modified; 

(iv) Shall not create, or be construed 

to create, any right, title, or interest in 

or to any fish before the fish is harvested 

by the holder; and 

(v) Shall be considered a grant of 

permission to the holder of the permit, 

license, or account to engage in 

activities permitted by such permit, 

license, or account. 

§ 660.26 Pacific whiting vessel licenses. 

(a) General. After May 11, 2009, 

participation in the Pacific whiting 

seasons described in § 660.131(b), 

subpart D requires: 

(1) An owner of any vessel that 

catches Pacific whiting must own a 

limited entry permit, registered for use 

with that vessel, with a trawl gear 

endorsement; and, a Pacific whiting 

vessel license registered for use with 

that vessel and appropriate to the sector 

or sectors in which the vessel intends to 

fish; 

(2) An owner of any mothership 

vessel that processes Pacific whiting to 

hold a Pacific whiting vessel license 

registered for use with that vessel and 

appropriate to the sector or sectors in 

which the vessel intends to fish. 

(b) In combination with a limited 

entry permit. Pacific whiting vessel 

licenses are separate from limited entry 

permits and do not license a vessel to 

harvest Pacific whiting in the primary 

Pacific whiting season unless that vessel 

is also registered for use with a limited 

entry permit with a trawl gear 

endorsement. 

(c) Pacific whiting vessel license 

qualifying criteria—(1) Qualifying catch 

and/or processing history. Vessel catch 

and/or processing history will be used 

to determine whether that vessel meets 

the qualifying criteria for a Pacific 

whiting vessel license and to determine 

the sectors for which that vessel may 

qualify. Vessel catch and/or processing 

history includes only the catch and/or 

processed product of that particular 

vessel, as identified in association with 

the vessel’s USCG number. Only Pacific 

whiting regulated 50 CFR part 660, 

subparts C and D that was taken with 

midwater (or pelagic) trawl gear will be 

considered for the Pacific whiting vessel 

license. Pacific whiting harvested or 

processed by a vessel that has since 

been totally lost, scrapped, or is rebuilt 

such that a new U.S.C.G. documentation 

number would be required will not be 

considered for this license. Pacific 

whiting harvested or processed illegally 

or landed illegally will not be 

considered for this license. Catch and/ 

or processing history associated with a 

vessel whose permit was purchased by 

the Federal Government through the 

Pacific Coast groundfish fishing 

capacity reduction program, as 

identified at 68 FR 62435 (November 4, 

2003), does not qualify a vessel for a 

Pacific whiting vessel license and no 

vessel owner may apply for or receive 

a Pacific whiting vessel license based on 

catch and/or processing history from 

one of those buyback vessels. The 

following sector-specific license 

qualification criteria apply: 

(i) For catcher/processor vessels, the 

qualifying criteria for a Pacific whiting 

vessel license is evidence of having 

caught and processed any amount of 

Pacific whiting during a primary 

catcher/processor season during the 

period January 1, 1997 through January 

1, 2007. 

(ii) For mothership at-sea processing 

vessels, the qualifying criteria for a 

Pacific whiting vessel license is 

documentation of having received and 

processed any amount of Pacific whiting 

during a primary mothership season 

during the period January 1, 1997 

through January 1, 2007. 

(iii) For catcher vessels delivering 

Pacific whiting to at-sea mothership 

processing vessels, the qualifying 

criteria for a Pacific whiting vessel 

license is documentation of having 

delivered any amount of Pacific whiting 

to a mothership processor during a 

primary mothership season during the 

period January 1, 1997, through January 

1, 2007. 

(iv) For catcher vessels delivering 

Pacific whiting to Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receivers, the qualifying 

criteria for a Pacific whiting vessel 

license is documentation of having 

made at least one landing of Pacific 

whiting taken with midwater trawl gear 

during a primary shorebased season 

during the period January 1, 1994, 

through January 1, 2007, and where the 

weight of Pacific whiting exceeded 50 

percent of the total weight of the 

landing. 

(2) Documentation and burden of 

proof. A vessel owner applying for a 

Pacific whiting vessel license has the 

burden to submit documentation that 

qualification requirements are met. An 

application that does not include 

documentation of meeting the 

qualification requirements during the 

qualifying years will be considered 

incomplete and will not be reviewed. 

The following standards apply: 

(i) A certified copy of the current 

vessel document (USCG or State) is the 

best documentation of vessel ownership 

and LOA. 

(ii) A certified copy of a State fish 

receiving ticket is the best 

documentation of a landing at a Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receiver, and of 

the type of gear used. 

(iii) For participants in the at-sea 

Pacific whiting fisheries, documentation 

of participation could include, but is not 

limited to: A final observer report 

documenting a particular catcher vessel, 

mothership, or catcher/processor’s 

participation in the Pacific whiting 

fishery in an applicable year and during 

the applicable primary season, a bill of 

lading for Pacific whiting from an 

applicable year and during the 

applicable primary season, a catcher 

vessel receipt from a particular 

mothership known to have fished in the 

Pacific whiting fishery during an 

applicable year, a signed copy of a Daily 

Receipt of Fish and Cumulative 

Production Logbook (mothership sector) 

or Daily Fishing and Cumulative 

Production Logbook (catcher/processor 

sector) from an applicable year during 

the applicable primary season. 

(iv) Such other relevant, credible 

documentation as the applicant may 

submit, or the SFD or the Regional 

Administrator request or acquire, may 

also be considered. 

(d) Issuance process for Pacific 

whiting vessel licenses. (1) SFD will 

mail, to the most recent address 

provided to the SFD, Permits Office, a 

Pacific whiting vessel license 

application to all current and prior 

owners of vessels that have been 

registered for use with limited entry 

permits with trawl endorsements, 

excluding owners of those vessels 

whose permits were purchased through 

the Pacific Coast groundfish fishing 

capacity reduction program. NMFS will 

also make license applications available 

online at: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ 

Groundfish-Halibut/GroundfishPermits/index.cfm. A vessel owner who 

believes that his/her vessel may qualify 

for the Pacific whiting vessel license 

will have until May 11, 2009, to submit 

an application with documentation 

showing how his/her vessel has met the 

qualifying criteria described in this 

section. NMFS will not accept 

applications for Pacific whiting vessel 

licenses received after May 11, 2009. 

(2) After receipt of a complete 

application, NMFS will notify 

applicants by letter of its determination 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60918 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

whether their vessels qualify for Pacific 

whiting vessel licenses and the sector or 

sectors to which the licenses apply. 

Vessels that have met the qualification 

criteria will be issued the appropriate 

licenses at that time. After May 11, 

2009, NMFS will publish a list of 

vessels that qualified for Pacific whiting 

vessel licenses in the Federal Register. 

(3) If a vessel owner files an appeal 

from the determination under paragraph 

(d)(2) of this section, the appeal must be 

filed with the Regional Administrator 

within 30 calendar days of the issuance 

of the letter of determination. The 

appeal must be in writing and must 

allege facts or circumstances, and 

include credible documentation 

demonstrating why the vessel qualifies 

for a Pacific whiting vessel license. The 

appeal of a denial of an application for 

a Pacific whiting vessel license will not 

be referred to the Council for a 

recommendation, nor will any appeals 

be accepted by NMFS after June 15, 

2009. 

(4) Absent good cause for further 

delay, the Regional Administrator will 

issue a written decision on the appeal 

within 30 calendar days of receipt of the 

appeal. The Regional Administrator’s 

decision is the final decision of the 

Regional Administrator acting on behalf 

of the Secretary of Commerce as of the 

date of the decision. 

(e) Notification to NMFS of changes to 

Pacific whiting vessel license 

information. The owner of a vessel 

registered for use with a Pacific whiting 

vessel license must provide a written 

request to NMFS to change the name or 

names of vessel owners provided on the 

vessel license, or to change the licensed 

vessel’s name. The request must detail 

the names of all new vessel owners as 

registered with U.S. Coast Guard, a 

business address for the vessel owner, 

business phone and fax number, tax 

identification number, date of birth, 

and/or date of incorporation for each 

individual and/or entity, and a copy of 

the vessel documentation (USCG 1270) 

to show proof of ownership. NMFS will 

reissue a new vessel license with the 

names of the new vessel owners and/or 

vessel name information. The Pacific 

Whiting vessel license is considered 

void if the name of the vessel or vessel 

owner is changed from that given on the 

license. In addition, the vessel owner 

must report to NMFS any change in 

address for the vessel owner within 15 

days of that change. Although the name 

of an individual vessel registered for use 

with a Pacific whiting vessel license 

may be changed, the license itself may 

not be registered to any vessel other 

than the vessel to which it was 

originally issued, as identified by that 

vessel’s United States Coast Guard 

documentation number. 

§ 660.30 Compensation with fish for 

collecting resource information—EFPs. 

In addition to the reasons stated in 

§ 600.745(b)(1) of this chapter, an EFP 

may be issued under this subpart C for 

the purpose of compensating the owner 

or operator of a vessel for collecting 

resource information according to a 

protocol approved by NMFS. NMFS 

may issue an EFP allowing a vessel to 

retain fish as compensation in excess of 

trip limits or to be exempt from other 

specified management measures for the 

Pacific coast groundfish fishery. 

(a) Compensation EFP for vessels 

under contract with NMFS to conduct a 

resource survey. NMFS may issue an 

EFP to the owner or operator of a vessel 

that conducted a resource survey 

according to a contract with NMFS. A 

vessel’s total compensation from all 

sources (in terms of dollars or amount 

of fish, including fish from survey 

samples or compensation fish) will be 

determined through normal Federal 

procurement procedures. The 

compensation EFP will specify the 

maximum amount or value of fish the 

vessel may take and retain after the 

resource survey is completed. 

(1) Competitive offers. NMFS may 

initiate a competitive solicitation 

(request for proposals or RFP) to select 

vessels to conduct resource surveys that 

use fish as full or partial compensation, 

following normal Federal procurement 

procedures. 

(2) Consultation and approval. At a 

Council meeting, NMFS will consult 

with the Council and receive public 

comment on upcoming resource surveys 

to be conducted if groundfish could be 

used as whole or partial compensation. 

Generally, compensation fish would be 

similar to surveyed species, but there 

may be reasons to provide payment with 

healthier, more abundant, less restricted 

stocks, or more easily targeted species. 

For example, NMFS may decline to pay 

a vessel with species that are, or are 

expected to be, overfished, or that are 

subject to overfishing, or that are 

unavoidably caught with species that 

are overfished or subject to overfishing. 

NMFS may also consider levels of 

discards, bycatch, and other factors. If 

the Council does not approve providing 

whole or partial compensation for the 

conduct of a survey, NMFS will not use 

fish, other than fish taken during the 

scientific research, as compensation for 

that survey. For each proposal, NMFS 

will present: 

(i) The maximum number of vessels 

expected or needed to conduct the 

survey, 

(ii) An estimate of the species and 

amount of fish likely to be needed as 

compensation, 

(iii) When the survey and 

compensation fish would be taken, and 

(iv) The year in which the 

compensation fish would be deducted 

from the ABC before determining the 

optimum yield (harvest guideline or 

quota). 

(3) Issuance of the compensation EFP. 

Upon successful completion of the 

survey, NMFS will issue a 

‘‘compensation EFP’’ to the vessel if it 

has not been fully compensated. The 

procedures in § 600.745(b)(1) through 

(b)(4) of this chapter do not apply to a 

compensation EFP issued under this 

subpart for the Pacific coast groundfish 

fishery (50 CFR part 660, subparts C 

through G). 

(4) Terms and conditions of the 

compensation EFP. Conditions for 

disposition of bycatch or any excess 

catch, for reporting the value of the 

amount landed, and other appropriate 

terms and conditions may be specified 

in the EFP. Compensation fishing must 

occur during the period specified in the 

EFP, but no later than the end of 

September of the fishing year following 

the survey, and must be conducted 

according to the terms and conditions of 

the EFP. 

(5) Reporting the compensation catch. 

The compensation EFP may require the 

vessel owner or operator to keep 

separate records of compensation 

fishing and to submit them to NMFS 

within a specified period of time after 

the compensation fishing is completed. 

(6) Accounting for the compensation 

catch. As part of the harvest 

specifications process, as described at 

§ 660.60, subpart C, NMFS will advise 

the Council of the amount of fish 

authorized to be retained under a 

compensation EFP, which then will be 

deducted from the next harvest 

specifications (ABCs) set by the Council. 

Fish authorized in an EFP too late in the 

year to be deducted from the following 

year’s ABCs will be accounted for in the 

next management cycle where it is 

practicable to do so. 

(b) Compensation for commercial 

vessels collecting resource information 

under a standard EFP. NMFS may issue 

an EFP to allow a commercial fishing 

vessel to take and retain fish in excess 

of current management limits for the 

purpose of collecting resource 

information (§ 600.745(b) of this 

chapter). The EFP may include a 

compensation clause that allows the 

participating vessel to be compensated 

with fish for its efforts to collect 

resource information according to 

NMFS’ approved protocol. If 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60919 

compensation with fish is requested in 

an EFP application, or proposed by 

NMFS, the following provisions apply 

in addition to those at § 600.745(b) of 

this chapter. 

(1) Application. In addition to the 

requirements in § 600.745(b) of this 

chapter, application for an EFP with a 

compensation clause must clearly state 

whether a vessel’s participation is 

contingent upon compensation with 

groundfish and, if so, the minimum 

amount (in metric tons, round weight) 

and the species. As with other EFPs 

issued under § 600.745 of this chapter, 

the application may be submitted by 

any individual, including a state fishery 

management agency or other research 

institution. 

(2) Denial. In addition to the reasons 

stated in § 600.745(b)(3)(iii) of this 

chapter, the application will be denied 

if the requested compensation fishery, 

species, or amount is unacceptable for 

reasons such as, but not limited to, the 

following: NMFS concludes the value of 

the resource information is not 

commensurate with the value of the 

compensation fish; the proposed 

compensation involves species that are 

(or are expected to be) overfished or 

subject to overfishing, fishing in times 

or areas where fishing is otherwise 

prohibited or severely restricted, or 

fishing for species that would involve 

unavoidable bycatch of species that are 

overfished or subject to overfishing; or 

NMFS concludes the information can 

reasonably be obtained at a less cost to 

the resource. 

(3) Window period for other 

applications. If the Regional 

Administrator or designee agrees that 

compensation should be considered, 

and that more than a minor amount 

would be used as compensation, then a 

window period will be announced in 

the Federal Register during which 

additional participants will have an 

opportunity to apply. This notification 

would be made at the same time as 

announcement of receipt of the 

application and request for comments 

required under § 600.745(b). If there are 

more qualified applicants than needed 

for a particular time and area, NMFS 

will choose among the qualified vessels, 

either randomly, in order of receipt of 

the completed application, or by other 

impartial selection methods. If the 

permit applicant is a state, university, or 

Federal entity other than NMFS, and 

NMFS approves the selection method, 

the permit applicant may choose among 

the qualified vessels, either randomly, 

in order of receipt of the vessel 

application, or by other impartial 

selection methods. 

(4) Terms and conditions. The EFP 

will specify the amounts that may be 

taken as scientific samples and as 

compensation, the time period during 

which the compensation fishing must 

occur, management measures that 

NMFS will waive for a vessel fishing 

under the EFP, and other terms and 

conditions appropriate to the fishery 

and the collection of resource 

information. NMFS may require 

compensation fishing to occur on the 

same trip that the resource information 

is collected. 

(5) Accounting for the catch. Samples 

taken under this EFP, as well as any 

compensation fish, count toward the 

current year’s catch or landings. 

§ 660.40 Overfished species rebuilding 

plans. 

For each overfished groundfish stock 

with an approved rebuilding plan, this 

section contains the standards to be 

used to establish annual or biennial 

OYs, specifically the target date for 

rebuilding the stock to its MSY level 

and the harvest control rule to be used 

to rebuild the stock. The harvest control 

rule is expressed as a ‘‘Spawning 

Potential Ratio’’ or ‘‘SPR’’ harvest rate. 

(a) Bocaccio. The target year for 

rebuilding the southern bocaccio stock 

to BMSY is 2026. The harvest control rule 

to be used to rebuild the southern 

bocaccio stock is an annual SPR harvest 

rate of 77.7 percent. 

(b) Canary rockfish. The target year 

for rebuilding the canary rockfish stock 

to BMSY is 2021. The harvest control rule 

to be used to rebuild the canary rockfish 

stock is an annual SPR harvest rate of 

88.7 percent. 

(c) Cowcod. The target year for 

rebuilding the cowcod stock south of 

Point Conception to BMSY is 2072. The 

harvest control rule to be used to 

rebuild the cowcod stock is an annual 

SPR harvest rate of 82.1 percent. 

(d) Darkblotched rockfish. The target 

year for rebuilding the darkblotched 

rockfish stock to BMSY is 2028. The 

harvest control rule to be used to 

rebuild the darkblotched rockfish stock 

is an annual SPR harvest rate of 62.1 

percent. 

(e) Pacific Ocean Perch (POP). The 

target year for rebuilding the POP stock 

to BMSY is 2017. The harvest control rule 

to be used to rebuild the POP stock is 

an annual SPR harvest rate of 86.4 

percent. 

(f) Widow rockfish. The target year for 

rebuilding the widow rockfish stock to 

BMSY is 2015. The harvest control rule 

to be used to rebuild the widow rockfish 

stock is an annual SPR harvest rate of 

95.0 percent. 

(g) Yelloweye rockfish. The target year 

for rebuilding the yelloweye rockfish 

stock to BMSY is 2084. The harvest 

control rule to be used to rebuild the 

yelloweye rockfish stock is an annual 

SPR harvest rate of 66.3 percent in 2009 

and in 2010. Yelloweye rockfish is 

subject to a ramp-down strategy where 

the harvest level has been reduced 

annually from 2007 through 2009. 

Yelloweye rockfish will remain at the 

2009 level in 2010. Beginning in 2011, 

yelloweye rockfish will be subject to a 

constant harvest rate strategy with a 

constant SPR harvest rate of 71.9 

percent. 

§ 660.50 Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

fisheries. 

(a) Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribes 

have treaty rights. Pacific Coast treaty 

Indian tribes have treaty rights to 

harvest groundfish in their usual and 

accustomed fishing areas in U.S. waters. 

In 1994, the United States formally 

recognized that the four Washington 

coastal treaty Indian tribes (Makah, 

Quileute, Hoh, and Quinault) have 

treaty rights to fish for groundfish in the 

Pacific Ocean, and concluded that, in 

general terms, the quantification of 

those rights is 50 percent of the 

harvestable surplus of groundfish that 

pass through the tribes U&A fishing 

areas. 

(b) Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribes. 

For the purposes of this part, Pacific 

Coast treaty Indian tribes means the 

Hoh, Makah, and Quileute Indian Tribes 

and the Quinault Indian Nation. 

(c) Usual and accustomed fishing 

areas (U&A). The Pacific Coast treaty 

Indian tribes’ U&A fishing areas within 

the fishery management area (FMA) are 

set out below in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (c)(4) of this section. 

Boundaries of a tribe’s fishing area may 

be revised as ordered by a Federal court. 

(1) Makah. That portion of the FMA 

north of 48°02.25′ N. lat. (Norwegian 

Memorial) and east of 125°44′ W. long. 

(2) Quileute. That portion of the FMA 

between 48°07.60′ N. lat. (Sand Point) 

and 47°31.70′ N. lat. (Queets River) and 

east of 125°44′ W. long. 

(3) Hoh. That portion of the FMA 

between 47°54.30′ N. lat. (Quillayute 

River) and 47°21′ N. lat. (Quinault 

River) and east of 125°44′ W. long. 

(4) Quinault. That portion of the FMA 

between 47°40.10′ N. lat. (Destruction 

Island) and 46°53.30′ N. lat. (Point 

Chehalis) and east of 125°44′ W. long. 

(d) Procedures. The rights referred to 

in paragraph (a) of this section will be 

implemented by the Secretary, after 

consideration of the tribal request, the 

recommendation of the Council, and the 

comments of the public. The rights will 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60920 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

be implemented either through an 

allocation or set-aside of fish that will 

be managed by the tribes, or through 

regulations in this section that will 

apply specifically to the tribal fisheries. 

(1) Tribal allocations, set-asides, and 

regulations. An allocation, set-aside or a 

regulation specific to the tribes shall be 

initiated by a written request from a 

Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribe to the 

Regional Administrator, prior to the first 

Council meeting in which biennial 

harvest specifications and management 

measures are discussed for an upcoming 

biennial management period. The 

Secretary generally will announce the 

annual tribal allocations at the same 

time as the announcement of the harvest 

specifications. 

(2) Co-management. The Secretary 

recognizes the sovereign status and comanager role of Indian tribes over 

shared Federal and tribal fishery 

resources. Accordingly, the Secretary 

will develop tribal allocations and 

regulations under this paragraph in 

consultation with the affected tribe(s) 

and, insofar as possible, with tribal 

consensus. 

(e) Fishing by a member of a Pacific 

Coast treaty Indian tribe. A member of 

a Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribe fishing 

under this section and within their U&A 

fishing area is not subject to the 

provisions of other sections of subparts 

C through G of this part. 

(1) Identification. A valid treaty 

Indian identification card issued 

pursuant to 25 CFR part 249, subpart A, 

is prima facie evidence that the holder 

is a member of the Pacific Coast treaty 

Indian tribe named on the card. 

(2) Permits. A limited entry permit 

described under § 660.25, subpart C is 

not required for a member of a Pacific 

Coast treaty Indian tribe to fish in a 

tribal fishery described in paragraph (d) 

of this section. 

(3) Federal and tribal laws and 

regulations. Any member of a Pacific 

Coast treaty Indian tribe must comply 

with this section, and with any 

applicable tribal law and regulation, 

when participating in a tribal 

groundfish fishery described in this 

section. 

(4) Fishing outside the U&A or 

without a groundfish allocation. Fishing 

by a member of a Pacific Coast treaty 

Indian tribe outside the applicable 

Indian tribe’s usual and accustomed 

fishing area, or for a species of 

groundfish not covered by an allocation, 

set-aside, or regulation under this 

section, is subject to the regulations in 

the other sections of subpart C through 

subpart G of this part. Treaty fisheries 

operating within tribal allocations are 

prohibited from operating outside U&A 

fishing areas. 

(f) Pacific Coast treaty Indian fisheries 

allocations and harvest guidelines. The 

tribal harvest guideline for black 

rockfish is provided in paragraph (f)(1) 

of this section. Tribal fishery allocations 

for sablefish are provided in paragraph 

(f)(2) of this section, and Pacific whiting 

are provided in paragraph (f)(4) of this 

section. Trip limits for certain species 

were recommended by the tribes and 

the Council and are specified here with 

the tribal allocations. 

(1) Black rockfish. (i) Harvest 

guidelines for commercial harvests of 

black rockfish by members of the Pacific 

Coast Indian tribes using hook and line 

gear will be established biennially for 

two subsequent one-year periods for the 

areas between the U.S.-Canadian border 

and Cape Alava (48°09.50′ N. lat.) and 

between Destruction Island (47°40′ N. 

lat.) and Leadbetter Point (46°38.17′ N. 

lat.), in accordance with the procedures 

for implementing harvest specifications 

and management measures. Pacific 

Coast treaty Indians fishing for black 

rockfish in these areas under these 

harvest guidelines are subject to the 

provisions in this section, and not to the 

restrictions in other sections of subparts 

C through G of this part. 

(ii) For the commercial harvest of 

black rockfish off Washington State, a 

treaty Indian tribes’ harvest guideline is 

set at 30,000 lb (13,608 kg) for the area 

north of Cape Alava, WA (48°09.50′ N. 

lat) and 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) for the area 

between Destruction Island, WA (47°40′ 

N. lat.) and Leadbetter Point, WA 

(46°38.17′ N. lat.). This harvest 

guideline applies and is available to the 

Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribes. There 

are no tribal harvest restrictions for 

black rockfish in the area between Cape 

Alava and Destruction Island. 

(2) Sablefish. (i) The sablefish 

allocation to Pacific coast treaty Indian 

tribes is 10 percent of the sablefish total 

catch OY for the area north of 36° N. lat. 

This allocation represents the total 

amount available to the treaty Indian 

fisheries before deductions for discard 

mortality. 

(ii) The tribal allocation is 694 mt per 

year. This allocation is, for each year, 10 

percent of the Monterey through 

Vancouver area (North of 36° N. lat.) 

OY, less 1.6 percent estimated discard 

mortality. 

(3) Lingcod. Lingcod taken in the 

treaty fisheries are subject to an overall 

expected total lingcod catch of 250 mt. 

(4) Pacific whiting. The tribal 

allocation for 2010 is 49,939 mt. 

(5) Pacific cod. There is a tribal 

harvest guideline of 400 mt of Pacific 

cod. The tribes will manage their 

fisheries to stay within this harvest 

guideline. 

(g) Washington coastal tribal fisheries 

management measures—(1) Rockfish. 

The tribes will require full retention of 

all overfished rockfish species and all 

other marketable rockfish species during 

treaty fisheries. 

(2) Thornyheads. The tribes will 

manage their fisheries to the limited 

entry trip limits in place at the 

beginning on the year for both 

shortspine and longspine thornyheads 

as follows: 

(i) Trawl gear. (A) Shortspine 

thornyhead cumulative trip limits are as 

follows: 

(1) Small and large footrope trawl 

gear—17,000-lb (7,711-kg) per 2 months. 

(2) Selective flatfish trawl gear— 

3,000-lb (1,361-kg) per 2 months. 

(3) Multiple bottom trawl gear—3,000- 

lb (1,361-kg) per 2 months. 

(B) Longspine thornyhead cumulative 

trip limits are as follows: 

(1) Small and large footrope trawl 

gear—22,000-lb (9,979-kg) per 2 months. 

(2) Selective flatfish trawl gear— 

5,000-lb (2,268-kg) per 2 months. 

(3) Multiple bottom trawl gear—5,000- 

lb (2,268-kg) per 2 months. 

(ii) Fixed gear. (A) Shortspine 

thornyhead cumulative trip limits are 

2,000-lb (907-kg) per 2 months. 

(B) Longspine thornyhead cumulative 

trip limits are 10,000-lb (4,536-kg) per 2 

months. 

(3) Canary rockfish—are subject to a 

300-lb (136-kg) trip limit. 

(4) Yelloweye rockfish—are subject to 

a 100-lb (45-kg) trip limit. 

(5) Yellowtail and widow rockfish. 

The Makah Tribe will manage the 

midwater trawl fisheries as follows: 

Yellowtail rockfish taken in the directed 

tribal mid-water trawl fisheries are 

subject to a cumulative limit of 180,000- 

lb (81,647 kg) per 2 month period for the 

entire fleet. Landings of widow rockfish 

must not exceed 10 percent of the 

weight of yellowtail rockfish landed, for 

a given vessel, throughout the year. 

These limits may be adjusted by the 

tribe inseason to minimize the 

incidental catch of canary rockfish and 

widow rockfish, provided the average 2- 

month cumulative yellowtail rockfish 

limit does not exceed 180,000-lb (81,647 

kg) for the fleet. 

(6) Other rockfish. Other rockfish, 

including minor nearshore, minor shelf, 

and minor slope rockfish groups are 

subject to a 300-lb (136-kg) trip limit per 

species or species group, or to the nontribal limited entry trip limit for those 

species if those limits are less restrictive 

than 300-lb (136 kg) per trip. 

(7) Flatfish and other fish. Treaty 

fishing vessels using bottom trawl gear 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60921 

are subject to the limits applicable to the 

non-tribal limited entry trawl fishery for 

Dover sole, English sole, rex sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, and other flatfish 

in place at the beginning of the season. 

For Dover sole and arrowtooth flounder, 

the limited entry trip limits in place at 

the beginning of the season will be 

combined across periods and the fleet to 

create a cumulative harvest target. The 

limits available to individual vessels 

will then be adjusted inseason to stay 

within the overall harvest target as well 

as estimated impacts to overfished 

species. For petrale sole, treaty fishing 

vessels are restricted to a 50,000-lb 

(22,680 kg) per 2 month limit for the 

entire year. Trawl vessels are restricted 

to using small footrope trawl gear. 

(8) Pacific whiting. Tribal whiting 

processed at-sea by non-tribal vessels, 

must be transferred within the tribal 

U&A from a member of a Pacific Coast 

treaty Indian tribe fishing under this 

section. 

(9) Spiny dogfish. The tribes will 

manage their spiny dogfish fishery 

within the limited entry trip limits for 

the non-tribal fisheries. 

(10) Groundfish without a tribal 

allocation. Makah tribal members may 

use midwater trawl gear to take and 

retain groundfish for which there is no 

tribal allocation and will be subject to 

the trip landing and frequency and size 

limits applicable to the limited entry 

fishery. 

(11) EFH. Measures implemented to 

minimize adverse impacts to groundfish 

EFH, as described in § 660.12 of this 

subpart, do not apply to tribal fisheries 

in their U&A fishing areas. 

§ 660.55 Allocations. 

(a) General. An allocation is the 

apportionment of a harvest privilege for 

a specific purpose, to a particular 

person, group of persons, or fishery 

sector. The opportunity to harvest 

Pacific Coast groundfish is allocated 

among participants in the fishery when 

the OYs for a given year are established 

in the biennial harvest specifications. 

For any stock that has been declared 

overfished, any formal allocation may 

be temporarily revised for the duration 

of the rebuilding period. For certain 

species, primarily trawl-dominant 

species, beginning with the 2011–2012 

biennial specifications process, separate 

allocations for the trawl fishery and 

nontrawl fishery (which for this purpose 

includes limited entry fixed gear, open 

access, and recreational fisheries) will 

be established biennially or annually 

using the standards and procedures 

described in Chapter 6 of the PCGFMP. 

Chapter 6 of the PCGFMP provides the 

allocation structure and percentages for 

species allocated between the trawl and 

nontrawl fisheries. Also, separate 

allocations for the limited entry and 

open access fisheries may be established 

using the procedures described in 

Chapters 6 and 11 of the PCGFMP and 

this subpart. Allocation of sablefish 

north of 36° N. lat. is described in 

paragraph (h) of this section and in the 

PCGFMP. Allocation of Pacific whiting 

is described in paragraph (i) of this 

section and in the PCGFMP. Allocation 

of black rockfish is described in 

paragraph (l) of this section. Allocation 

of Pacific halibut bycatch is described in 

paragraph (m) of this section. 

Allocations not specified in the 

PCGFMP are established in regulation 

through the biennial harvest 

specifications and are listed in Tables 1 

a through d and Tables 2 a through d of 

this subpart. 

(b) Fishery harvest guidelines and 

reductions made prior to fishery 

allocations. Beginning with the 2011– 

2012 biennial specifications process and 

prior to the setting of fishery allocations, 

the OY is reduced by the Pacific Coast 

treaty Indian tribal harvest (allocations, 

set-asides, and estimated harvest under 

regulations at § 660.50); projected 

scientific research catch of all 

groundfish species, estimates of fishing 

mortality in non-groundfish fisheries 

and, as necessary, set-asides for EFPs. 

The remaining amount after these 

deductions is the fishery harvest 

guideline or quota. (Note: recreational 

estimates are not deducted here). 

(1) Pacific Coast treaty Indian tribal 

allocations, set-asides, and regulations 

are specified during the biennial harvest 

specifications process and are found at 

§ 660.50 and in Tables 1a and 2a of this 

subpart. 

(2) Scientific research catch results 

from scientific research activity as 

defined in regulations at § 600.10. 

(3) Estimates of fishing mortality in 

non-groundfish fisheries are based on 

historical catch and projected fishing 

activities. 

(4) EFPs are authorized and governed 

by § 660.60(f). 

(c) Trawl/nontrawl allocations. (1) 

Beginning with the 2011–2012 biennial 

specifications process, the fishery 

harvest guideline or quota, may be 

divided into allocations for groundfish 

trawl and nontrawl (limited entry fixed 

gear, open access, and recreational) 

fisheries. IFQ species not listed in the 

table below will be allocated between 

the trawl and nontrawl fisheries through 

the biennial harvest specifications 

process. Species/species groups and 

areas allocated between the trawl and 

nontrawl fisheries listed in Chapter 6, 

Table 6–1 of the PCGFMP are allocated 

based on the percentages that follow: 

ALLOCATION PERCENTAGES FOR LIMITED ENTRY TRAWL AND NON-TRAWL SECTORS SPECIFIED FOR FMP GROUNDFISH

STOCKS AND STOCK COMPLEXES

Stock or complex All non-treaty LE trawl sectors 

% 

All non-treaty non-trawl sectors 

% 

Lingcod ............................................................................................... 45 ................................................ 55 

Pacific Cod ......................................................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

Sablefish S. of 36° N. lat. .................................................................. 42 ................................................ 58 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH ................................................................. 95 ................................................ 5 

WIDOW .............................................................................................. 91 ................................................ 9 

Chilipepper S. of 40°10′ N. lat. .......................................................... 75 ................................................ 25 

Splitnose S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ............................................................. 95 ................................................ 5 

Yellowtail N. of 40°10′ N. lat. ............................................................. 88 ................................................ 12 

Shortspine N. of 34°27′ N. lat. ........................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

Shortspine S. of 34°27′ N. lat. ........................................................... 50 mt ........................................... Remaining Yield 

Longspine N. of 34°27′ N. lat. ........................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

DARKBLOTCHED .............................................................................. 95 ................................................ 5 

Minor Slope RF North of 40°10′ N. lat. ............................................. 81 ................................................ 18 

Minor Slope RF South of 40°10′ N. lat. ............................................. 63 ................................................ 37 

Dover Sole ......................................................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

English Sole ....................................................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

Petrale Sole ....................................................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60922 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

ALLOCATION PERCENTAGES FOR LIMITED ENTRY TRAWL AND NON-TRAWL SECTORS SPECIFIED FOR FMP GROUNDFISH

STOCKS AND STOCK COMPLEXES—Continued 

Stock or complex All non-treaty LE trawl sectors 

% 

All non-treaty non-trawl sectors 

% 

Arrowtooth Flounder .......................................................................... 95 ................................................ 5 

Starry Flounder .................................................................................. 50 ................................................ 50 

Other Flatfish ..................................................................................... 90 ................................................ 10 

(i) Trawl fishery allocation. The 

allocation for the limited entry trawl 

fishery is derived by applying the trawl 

allocation percentage by species/species 

group and area as specified in paragraph 

(c) of this section and as specified 

during the biennial harvest 

specifications process to the fishery 

harvest guideline for that species/ 

species group and area. For IFQ species 

other than darkblotched rockfish, 

Pacific Ocean Perch, and widow 

rockfish, the trawl allocation will be 

further subdivided among the trawl 

sectors (MS, C/P, and IFQ) as specified 

in §§ 660.140, 660.150, and 660.160 of 

subpart D. For darkblotched rockfish, 

Pacific Ocean Perch, and widow 

rockfish, the trawl allocation is further 

subdivided among the trawl sectors 

(MS, C/P, and IFQ) as follows: 

(A) Darkblotched rockfish. Allocate 9 

percent or 25 mt, whichever is greater, 

of the total trawl allocation of 

darkblotched rockfish to the whiting 

fisheries (MS, C/P, and IFQ combined). 

The distribution of the whiting trawl 

allocation of darkblotched to each sector 

(MS, C/P, and IFQ) will be done pro rata 

relative to the sectors’ whiting 

allocation. After deducting allocations 

for the whiting fisheries, allocate the 

remainder of the trawl allocation to the 

nonwhiting fishery. 

(B) Pacific Ocean Perch (POP). 

Allocate 17 percent or 30 mt, whichever 

is greater, of the total trawl allocation of 

Pacific ocean perch to the whiting 

fisheries (MS, C/P, and IFQ combined). 

The distribution of the whiting trawl 

allocation of POP to each sector (MS, C/ 

P, and IFQ) will be done pro rata 

relative to the sectors’ whiting 

allocation. After deducting allocations 

for the whiting fisheries, allocate the 

remainder of the trawl allocation to the 

nonwhiting fishery. 

(C) Widow rockfish. Allocate 52 

percent of the total trawl allocation of 

widow rockfish to the whiting sectors if 

the stock is under rebuilding or 10 

percent of the total trawl allocation or 

500 mt of the trawl allocation to the 

whiting sectors, whichever is greater, if 

the stock is rebuilt. The latter allocation 

scheme automatically kicks in when 

widow rockfish is declared rebuilt. The 

distribution of the whiting trawl 

allocation of widow to each sector (MS, 

C/P, and IFQ) will be done pro rata 

relative to the sectors’ whiting 

allocation. After deducting allocations 

for the whiting fisheries, allocate the 

remainder of the trawl allocation to the 

nonwhiting fishery. 

(ii) Nontrawl fishery allocation. The 

allocation for the nontrawl fishery is the 

fishery harvest guideline minus the 

allocation of the species/species group 

and area to the trawl fishery. These 

amounts will equal the nontrawl 

allocation percentage or amount by 

species for species listed in paragraph 

(c) of this section and the nontrawl 

allocation percentage from the biennial 

harvest specifications for other IFQ 

species. The nontrawl allocation will be 

shared between the limited entry fixed 

gear, open access, and recreational 

fisheries as specified through the 

biennial harvest specifications process 

and consistent with allocations in the 

PCGFMP. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(d) Commercial harvest guidelines. 

Beginning with the 2011–2012 biennial 

specifications process, to derive the 

commercial harvest guideline, the 

fishery harvest guideline is further 

reduced by the recreational set-asides. 

The commercial harvest guideline is 

then allocated between the limited entry 

fishery (both trawl and fixed gear) and 

the directed open access fishery, as 

appropriate. 

(e) Limited entry (LE)/open access 

(OA) allocations—(1) LE/OA allocation 

percentages. The allocations between 

the limited entry and open access 

fisheries are based on standards from 

the PCGFMP. 

(2) Species with LE/OA allocations. 

For species with LE/OA allocations, the 

allocation between the limited entry 

(both trawl and fixed gear) and the open 

access fisheries is determined by 

applying the percentage for those 

species with a LE/OA allocation to the 

commercial harvest guideline plus the 

amount set-aside for the non-groundfish 

fisheries. 

(i) Limited entry allocation. The 

allocation for the limited entry fishery is 

the commercial harvest guideline minus 

any allocation to the directed open 

access fishery. 

(ii) Open access allocation. The 

allocation for the open access fishery is 

derived by applying the open access 

allocation percentage to the annual 

commercial harvest guideline or quota 

plus the non-groundfish fishery (i.e., 

incidental open access fishery) amount 

described in paragraph (b) of this 

section. The result is the total open 

access allocation. The portion that is 

set-aside for the non-groundfish 

fisheries is deducted and the remainder 

is the directed open access portion. For 

management areas or stocks for which 

quotas or harvest guidelines for a stock 

are not fully utilized, no separate 

allocation will be established for the 

open access fishery until it is projected 

that the allowable catch for a species 

will be reached. 

(A) Open access allocation 

percentage. For each species with a 

harvest guideline or quota, the initial 

open access allocation percentage is 

calculated by: 

(1) Computing the total catch for that 

species during the window period (July 

11, 1984 through August 1, 1988) for the 

limited entry program by any vessel that 

did not initially receive a limited entry 

permit. 

(2) Dividing that amount by the total 

catch during the window period by all 

gear. 

(3) The guidelines in this paragraph 

apply to recalculation of the open access 

allocation percentage. Any recalculated 

allocation percentage will be used in 

calculating the following biennial 

fishing period’s open access allocation. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(f) Catch accounting. Catch 

accounting refers to how the catch in a 

fishery is monitored against the 

allocations described in this section. For 

species with trawl/nontrawl allocations, 

catch of those species are counted 

against the trawl/nontrawl allocations as 

explained in paragraph (f)(1) of this 

section. For species with limited entry/ 

open access allocations in a given 

biennial cycle, catch of those species are 

counted against the limited entry/open 

access allocations as explained in 

paragraph (f)(2) of this section. 

(1) Between the trawl and nontrawl 

fisheries—(i) Catch accounting for the 

trawl allocation. Any groundfish caught 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60923 

by a vessel registered to a limited entry 

trawl-endorsed permit will be counted 

against the trawl allocation while they 

are declared in to a groundfish limited 

entry trawl fishery and while the 

applicable trawl fishery listed in subpart 

D of this part for that vessel’s limited 

entry permit is open. 

(ii) Catch accounting for the nontrawl 

allocation. All groundfish caught by a 

vessel not registered to a limited entry 

permit and not fishing in the nongroundfish fishery will be counted 

against the nontrawl allocation. All 

groundfish caught by a vessel registered 

to a limited entry permit when the 

fishery for a vessel’s limited entry 

permit has closed or they are not 

declared in to a limited entry fishery, 

will be counted against the nontrawl 

allocation, unless they are declared in to 

a non-groundfish fishery. Catch by 

vessels fishing in the non-groundfish 

fishery, as defined at § 660.11, will be 

accounted for in the estimated mortality 

in the non-groundfish fishery that is 

deducted from the OY. 

(2) Between the limited entry and 

open access fisheries. Any groundfish 

caught by a vessel with a limited entry 

permit will be counted against the 

limited entry allocation while the 

limited entry fishery for that vessel’s 

limited entry gear is open. When the 

fishery for a vessel’s limited entry gear 

has closed, groundfish caught by that 

vessel with open access gear will be 

counted against the open access 

allocation. All groundfish caught by 

vessels without limited entry permits 

will be counted against the open access 

allocation. 

(g) Recreational fisheries. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish is outside the 

scope of, and not affected by, the 

regulations governing limited entry and 

open access fisheries. Certain amounts 

of groundfish will be set aside for the 

recreational fishery during the biennial 

specifications process. These amounts 

will be estimated prior to dividing the 

commercial harvest guideline between 

the limited entry and open access 

fisheries. 

(h) Sablefish Allocations (north of 36° 

N. lat.). The allocations of sablefish 

north of 36° N. lat. described in 

paragraph (h) of this section are 

specified in Chapter 6 of the PCGFMP. 

(1) Tribal/nontribal allocation. The 

sablefish allocation to Pacific coast 

treaty Indian tribes is identified at 

§ 660.50(f)(2), subpart C. The remainder 

is available to the nontribal fishery 

(limited entry, open access (directed 

and incidental), and research). 

(2) Between the limited entry and 

open access fisheries. The allocation of 

sablefish after tribal deductions is 

further reduced by the estimated total 

mortality of sablefish in research and 

incidental catch in non-groundfish 

fisheries (incidental open access); the 

remaining yield (nontribal share) is 

divided between open access and 

limited entry fisheries. The limited 

entry fishery allocation is 90.6 percent 

and the open access allocation is 9.4 

percent. 

(3) Between the limited entry trawl 

and limited entry fixed gear fisheries. 

The limited entry sablefish allocation is 

further allocated 58 percent to the trawl 

fishery and 42 percent to the limited 

entry fixed gear (longline and pot/trap) 

fishery. 

(4) Between the limited entry fixed 

gear primary season and daily trip limit 

fisheries. Within the limited entry fixed 

gear fishery allocation, 85 percent is 

reserved for the primary season 

described in § 660.231, subpart E, 

leaving 15 percent for the limited entry 

daily trip limit fishery described in 

§ 660.232, subpart E. 

(5) Ratios between tiers for sablefishendorsed limited entry permits. The 

Regional Administrator will biennially 

or annually calculate the size of the 

cumulative trip limit for each of the 

three tiers associated with the sablefish 

endorsement such that the ratio of limits 

between the tiers is approximately 

1:1.75:3.85 for Tier 3:Tier 2:Tier 1, 

respectively. The size of the cumulative 

trip limits will vary depending on the 

amount of sablefish available for the 

primary fishery and on estimated 

discard mortality rates within the 

fishery. The size of the cumulative trip 

limits for the three tiers in the primary 

fishery will be announced in 

§ 660.231(b)(3), subpart E. 

(i) Pacific whiting allocation. The 

allocation structure and percentages for 

Pacific whiting are described in the 

PCGFMP. 

(1) Annual treaty tribal Pacific 

whiting allocations are provided in 

§ 660.50, subpart C. 

(2) The commercial harvest guideline 

for Pacific whiting is allocated among 

three sectors, as follows: 34 percent for 

the catcher/processor sector; 24 percent 

for the mothership sector; and 42 

percent for the Shorebased IFQ Program. 

No more than 5 percent of the 

shorebased allocation may be taken and 

retained south of 42° N. lat. before the 

start of the primary Pacific whiting 

season north of 42° N. lat. Specific 

sector allocations for a given calendar 

year are found in Tables 1a and 2a of 

this subpart. Set asides for other species 

for the at-sea whiting fishery for a given 

calendar year are found in Tables 1d 

and 2d of this subpart. 

(j) Fishery set-asides. Annual setasides are not formal allocations but 

they are amounts which are not 

available to the other fisheries during 

the fishing year. For the catcher/ 

processor and mothership sectors of the 

at-sea Pacific whiting fishery, set-asides 

will be deducted from the limited entry 

trawl fishery allocation. Set-aside 

amounts will be specified in Tables 1a 

through 2d of this subpart and may be 

adjusted through the biennial harvest 

specifications and management 

measures process. 

(k) Exempted fishing permit setasides. Annual set-asides for EFPs 

described at § 660.60(f), will be 

deducted from the OY. Set-aside 

amounts will be adjusted through the 

biennial harvest specifications and 

management measures process. 

(l) Black rockfish harvest guideline. 

The commercial tribal harvest guideline 

for black rockfish off Washington State 

is specified at § 660.50(f)(1), subpart C. 

(m) Pacific halibut bycatch allocation. 

The Pacific halibut fishery off 

Washington, Oregon and California 

(Area 2A in the halibut regulations) is 

managed under regulations at 50 CFR 

part 300, subpart E. Beginning with the 

2011–2012 biennial specifications 

process, the PCGFMP sets a trawl 

mortality bycatch limit for legal and 

sublegal halibut at 15 percent of the 

Area 2A constant exploitation yield 

(CEY) for legal size halibut, not to 

exceed 130,000 pounds for the first four 

years of trawl rationalization and not to 

exceed 100,000 pounds starting in the 

fifth year. This total bycatch limit may 

be adjusted downward or upward 

through the biennial specifications and 

management measures process. Part of 

the overall total catch limit is a set-aside 

of 10 mt of Pacific halibut, to 

accommodate bycatch in the at-sea 

Pacific whiting fishery and in the 

shoreside trawl fishery south of 40°10′ 

N lat (estimated to be approximately 5 

mt each). 

§ 660.60 Specifications and management 

measures. 

(a) General. NMFS will establish and 

adjust specifications and management 

measures biennially or annually and 

during the fishing year. Management of 

the Pacific Coast groundfish fishery will 

be conducted consistent with the 

standards and procedures in the 

PCGFMP and other applicable law. The 

PCGFMP is available from the Regional 

Administrator or the Council. 

Regulations under this subpart may be 

promulgated, removed, or revised 

during the fishing year. Any such action 

will be made according to the 

framework standards and procedures in 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60924 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

the PCGFMP and other applicable law, 

and will be published in the Federal 

Register. 

(b) Biennial actions. The Pacific Coast 

Groundfish fishery is managed on a 

biennial, calendar year basis. Harvest 

specifications and management 

measures will be announced biennially, 

with the harvest specifications for each 

species or species group set for two 

sequential calendar years. In general, 

management measures are designed to 

achieve, but not exceed, the 

specifications, particularly optimum 

yields (harvest guidelines and quotas), 

fishery harvest guidelines, commercial 

harvest guidelines and quotas, limited 

entry and open access allocations, or 

other approved fishery allocations, and 

to protect overfished and depleted 

stocks. Management measures will be 

designed to take into account the cooccurrence ratios of target species with 

overfished species, and will select 

measures that will minimize bycatch to 

the extent practicable. 

(c) Routine management measures. In 

addition to the catch restrictions in 

subparts D through G of this part, other 

catch restrictions that are likely to be 

adjusted on a biennial or more frequent 

basis may be imposed and announced 

by a single notification in the Federal 

Register if good cause exists under the 

APA to waive notice and comment, and 

if they have been designated as routine 

through the two-meeting process 

described in the PCGFMP. Routine 

management measures that may be 

revised during the fishing year via this 

process are implemented in paragraph 

(h) of this section, and in subparts D 

through G of this part, including Tables 

1 (North) and 1 (South) of subpart D, 

Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) of 

subpart E, Tables 3 (North) and 3 

(South) of subpart F. Most trip, bag, and 

size limits, and area closures in the 

groundfish fishery have been designated 

‘‘routine,’’ which means they may be 

changed rapidly after a single Council 

meeting. Council meetings are held in 

the months of March, April, June, 

September, and November. Inseason 

changes to routine management 

measures are announced in the Federal 

Register pursuant to the requirements of 

the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA). Changes to trip limits are 

effective at the times stated in the 

Federal Register. Once a change is 

effective, it is illegal to take and retain, 

possess, or land more fish than allowed 

under the new trip limit. This means 

that, unless otherwise announced in the 

Federal Register, offloading must begin 

before the time a fishery closes or a 

more restrictive trip limit takes effect. 

The following catch restrictions have 

been designated as routine: 

(1) Commercial Limited Entry and 

Open Access Fisheries. (i) Trip landing 

and frequency limits, size limits, all 

gear. Trip landing and frequency limits 

have been designated as routine for the 

following species or species groups: 

Widow rockfish, canary rockfish, 

yellowtail rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, 

yelloweye rockfish, black rockfish, blue 

rockfish, splitnose rockfish, chilipepper 

rockfish, bocaccio, cowcod, minor 

nearshore rockfish or shallow and 

deeper minor nearshore rockfish, shelf 

or minor shelf rockfish, and minor slope 

rockfish; DTS complex which is 

composed of Dover sole, sablefish, 

shortspine thornyheads, and longspine 

thornyheads; petrale sole, rex sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, Pacific sanddabs, 

and the flatfish complex, which is 

composed of those species plus any 

other flatfish species listed at § 660.11, 

subpart C; Pacific whiting; lingcod; 

Pacific cod; spiny dogfish; and ‘‘other 

fish’’ as a complex consisting of all 

groundfish species listed at § 660.11, 

subpart C and not otherwise listed as a 

distinct species or species group. Size 

limits have been designated as routine 

for sablefish and lingcod. Trip landing 

and frequency limits and size limits for 

species with those limits designated as 

routine may be imposed or adjusted on 

a biennial or more frequent basis for the 

purpose of keeping landings within the 

harvest levels announced by NMFS, and 

for the other purposes given in 

paragraphs (c)(1)(i)(A) and (B) of this 

section. 

(A) Trip landing and frequency limits. 

To extend the fishing season; to 

minimize disruption of traditional 

fishing and marketing patterns; to 

reduce discards; to discourage target 

fishing while allowing small incidental 

catches to be landed; to protect 

overfished species; to allow small 

fisheries to operate outside the normal 

season; and, for the open access fishery 

only, to maintain landings at the 

historical proportions during the 1984– 

88 window period. 

(B) Size limits. To protect juvenile 

fish; to extend the fishing season. 

(ii) Differential trip landing limits and 

frequency limits based on gear type, 

closed seasons, and bycatch limits. Trip 

landing and frequency limits that differ 

by gear type and closed seasons may be 

imposed or adjusted on a biennial or 

more frequent basis for the purpose of 

rebuilding and protecting overfished or 

depleted stocks. To achieve the 

rebuilding of an overfished or depleted 

stock, bycatch limits may be established 

and adjusted to be used to close the 

primary season for any sector of the 

Pacific whiting fishery described at 

§ 660.131(b), before the sector’s Pacific 

whiting allocation is achieved if the 

applicable bycatch limit is reached. 

Bycatch limit amounts are specified at 

§ 660.131(b)(5), subpart D. 

(iii) Type of limited entry trawl gear 

on board. Limits on the type of limited 

entry trawl gear on board a vessel may 

be imposed on a biennial or more 

frequent basis. Requirements and 

restrictions on limited entry trawl gear 

type are found at § 660.130, subpart D. 

(2) Recreational fisheries all gear 

types. Routine management measures 

for all groundfish species, separately or 

in any combination, include bag limits, 

size limits, time/area closures, boat 

limits, hook limits, and dressing 

requirements. All routine management 

measures on recreational fisheries are 

intended to keep landings within the 

harvest levels announced by NMFS, to 

rebuild and protect overfished or 

depleted species, and to maintain 

consistency with State regulations, and 

for the other purposes set forth in this 

section. 

(i) Bag limits. To spread the available 

catch over a large number of anglers; to 

protect and rebuild overfished species; 

to avoid waste. 

(ii) Size limits. To protect juvenile 

fish; to protect and rebuild overfished 

species; to enhance the quality of the 

recreational fishing experience. 

(iii) Season duration restrictions. To 

spread the available catch over a large 

number of anglers; to protect and 

rebuild overfished species; to avoid 

waste; to enhance the quality of the 

recreational fishing experience. 

(3) All fisheries, all gear types, depthbased management measures. Depthbased management measures, 

particularly the setting of closed areas 

known as Groundfish Conservation 

Areas, may be implemented in any 

fishery that takes groundfish directly or 

incidentally. Depth-based management 

measures are set using specific 

boundary lines that approximate depth 

contours with latitude/longitude 

waypoints found at § 660.70 through 

660.74. Depth-based management 

measures and the setting of closed areas 

may be used: to protect and rebuild 

overfished stocks, to prevent the 

overfishing of any groundfish species by 

minimizing the direct or incidental 

catch of that species, to minimize the 

incidental harvest of any protected or 

prohibited species taken in the 

groundfish fishery, to extend the fishing 

season; for the commercial fisheries, to 

minimize disruption of traditional 

fishing and marketing patterns; for the 

recreational fisheries, to spread the 

available catch over a large number of 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60925 

anglers; to discourage target fishing 

while allowing small incidental catches 

to be landed; and to allow small 

fisheries to operate outside the normal 

season. 

(d) Automatic actions. Automatic 

management actions may be initiated by 

the NMFS Regional Administrator 

without prior public notice, opportunity 

to comment, or a Council meeting. 

These actions are nondiscretionary, and 

the impacts must have been taken into 

account prior to the action. Unless 

otherwise stated, a single notice will be 

published in the Federal Register 

making the action effective if good cause 

exists under the APA to waive notice 

and comment. 

(1) Automatic actions are used in the 

Pacific whiting fishery to: 

(i) Close sectors of the fishery or to 

reinstate trip limits in the shorebased 

fishery when a whiting harvest 

guideline, commercial harvest 

guideline, or a sector’s allocation is 

reached, or is projected to be reached; 

(ii) Close all sectors or a single sector 

of the fishery when a bycatch limit is 

reached or projected to be reached; 

(iii) Reapportion unused Pacific 

whiting allocation to other sectors of the 

fishery; 

(iv) Reapportion unused bycatch limit 

species to other sectors of the Pacific 

whiting fishery. 

(v) Implement the Ocean Salmon 

Conservation Zone, described at 

§ 660.131(c)(3), subpart D, when NMFS 

projects the Pacific whiting fishery may 

take in excess of 11,000 Chinook within 

a calendar year. 

(vi) Implement Pacific Whiting 

Bycatch Reduction Areas, described at 

§ 660.131(c)(4) Subpart D, when NMFS 

projects a sector-specific bycatch limit 

will be reached before the sector’s 

whiting allocation. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(e) Prohibited species. Groundfish 

species or species groups under the 

PCGFMP for which quotas have been 

achieved and/or the fishery closed are 

prohibited species. In addition, the 

following are prohibited species: 

(1) Any species of salmonid. 

(2) Pacific halibut. 

(3) Dungeness crab caught seaward of 

Washington or Oregon. 

(f) Exempted fishing permits (EFP). (1) 

The Regional Administrator may issue 

EFPs under regulations at § 660.30, 

subpart C, for compensation with fish 

for collecting resource information. 

Such EFPs may include the collecting of 

scientific samples of groundfish species 

that would otherwise be prohibited for 

retention. 

(2) The Regional Administrator may 

also issue EFPs under regulations at 50 

CFR part § 600.745 for limited testing, 

public display, data collection, 

exploratory, health and safety, 

environmental cleanup, and/or hazard 

removal purposes, the target or 

incidental harvest of species managed 

under an FMP or fishery regulations that 

would otherwise be prohibited. 

(3) U.S. vessels operating under an 

EFP are subject to restrictions in 

§§ 660.10 through 660.79, unless 

otherwise provided in the permit. 

(g) Applicability. Groundfish species 

harvested in the territorial sea (0–3 nm) 

will be counted toward the catch 

limitations in Tables 1a through 2d of 

this subpart, and those specified in 

subparts D through G, including Tables 

1 (North) and 1 (South) of subpart D, 

Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) of 

subpart E, Tables 3 (North) and 3 

(South) of subpart F. 

(h) Fishery restrictions—(1) 

Commercial trip limits and recreational 

bag and boat limits. Commercial trip 

limits and recreational bag and boat 

limits defined in Tables 1a through 2d 

of this subpart, and those specified in 

subparts D through G of this part, 

including Tables 1 (North) and 1 (South) 

of subpart D, Tables 2 (North) and 2 

(South) of subpart E, Tables 3 (North) 

and 3 (South) of subpart F must not be 

exceeded. 

(2) Landing. As stated at § 660.11, 

subpart C (in the definition of 

‘‘Landing’’), once the offloading of any 

species begins, all fish aboard the vessel 

are counted as part of the landing and 

must be reported as such. Transfer of 

fish at sea is prohibited under § 660.12, 

subpart C, unless a vessel is 

participating in the primary whiting 

fishery as part of the mothership or 

catcher/processor sectors, as described 

at § 660.131(a), subpart D. 

(3) Fishing ahead. Unless the fishery 

is closed, a vessel that has landed its 

cumulative or daily limit may continue 

to fish on the limit for the next legal 

period, so long as no fish (including, but 

not limited to, groundfish with no trip 

limits, shrimp, prawns, or other 

nongroundfish species or shellfish) are 

landed (offloaded) until the next legal 

period. Fishing ahead is not allowed 

during or before a closed period. 

(4) Weights and percentages. All 

weights are round weights or roundweight equivalents unless otherwise 

specified. Percentages are based on 

round weights, and, unless otherwise 

specified, apply only to legal fish on 

board. 

(5) Size limits, length measurement, 

and weight limits. (i) Size limits and 

length measurement. Unless otherwise 

specified, size limits in the commercial 

and recreational groundfish fisheries 

apply to the ‘‘total length,’’ which is the 

longest measurement of the fish without 

mutilation of the fish or the use of force 

to extend the length of the fish. No fish 

with a size limit may be retained if it is 

in such condition that its length has 

been extended or cannot be determined 

by these methods. For conversions not 

listed here, contact the state where the 

fish will be landed. Washington state 

regulations require all fish with a size 

limit landed into Washington to be 

landed with the head on. 

(A) Whole fish. For a whole fish, total 

length is measured from the tip of the 

snout (mouth closed) to the tip of the 

tail in a natural, relaxed position. 

(B) ‘‘Headed’’ fish. For a fish with the 

head removed (‘‘headed’’), the length is 

measured from the origin of the first 

dorsal fin (where the front dorsal fin 

meets the dorsal surface of the body 

closest to the head) to the tip of the 

upper lobe of the tail; the dorsal fin and 

tail must be left intact. 

(C) Filets. A filet is the flesh from one 

side of a fish extending from the head 

to the tail, which has been removed 

from the body (head, tail, and backbone) 

in a single continuous piece. Filet 

lengths may be subject to size limits for 

some groundfish taken in the 

recreational fishery off California (see 

subpart G of this part). A filet is 

measured along the length of the longest 

part of the filet in a relaxed position; 

stretching or otherwise manipulating 

the filet to increase its length is not 

permitted. 

(ii) Weight limits and conversions. 

The weight limit conversion factor 

established by the state where the fish 

is or will be landed will be used to 

convert the processed weight to round 

weight for purposes of applying the trip 

limit. Weight conversions provided 

herein are those conversions currently 

in use by the States of Washington, 

Oregon and California and may be 

subject to change by those states. 

Fishery participants should contact 

fishery enforcement officials in the state 

where the fish will be landed to 

determine that state’s official conversion 

factor. To determine the round weight, 

multiply the processed weight times the 

conversion factor. 

(iii) Sablefish. The following 

conversion applies to both the limited 

entry and open access fisheries when 

trip limits are in effect for those 

fisheries. For headed and gutted 

(eviscerated) sablefish the weight 

conversion factor is 1.6 (multiply the 

headed and gutted weight by 1.6 to 

determine the round weight). 

(iv) Lingcod. The following 

conversions apply in both limited entry 

and open access fisheries. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60926 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(A) North of 42° N. lat., for lingcod 

with the head removed, the minimum 

size limit is 18 inches (46 cm), which 

corresponds to 22 inches (56 cm) total 

length for whole fish. 

(B) South of 42° N. lat., for lingcod 

with the head removed, the minimum 

size limit is 19.5 inches (49.5 cm), 

which corresponds to 24 inches (61 cm) 

total length for whole fish. 

(C) The weight conversion factor for 

headed and gutted lingcod is 1.5. The 

conversion factor for lingcod that has 

only been gutted with the head on is 

1.1. 

(6) Sorting. Trawl fishery sorting 

requirements are specified at 

§ 660.130(d), subpart D. Limited entry 

fixed gear fishery sorting requirements 

are specified at § 660.230(c), subpart E, 

and Open access fishery sorting 

requirements are specified at 

§ 660.330(c), subpart F. 

(7) Crossover provisions. NMFS uses 

different types of management areas for 

West Coast groundfish management. 

One type of management area is the 

north-south management area, a large 

ocean area with northern and southern 

boundary lines wherein trip limits, 

seasons, and conservation areas follow a 

single theme. Within each north-south 

management area, there may be one or 

more conservation areas, defined at 

§ 660.11 and §§ 660.60 through 660.74, 

subpart C. The provisions within this 

paragraph apply to vessels operating in 

different north-south management areas. 

Crossover provisions also apply to 

vessels that fish in both the limited 

entry and open access fisheries, or that 

use open access non-trawl gear while 

registered to limited entry fixed gear 

permits. Fishery specific crossover 

provisions can be found in subparts D 

through F of this part. 

(i) Operating in north-south 

management areas with different trip 

limits. Trip limits for a species or a 

species group may differ in different 

north-south management areas along the 

coast. The following crossover 

provisions apply to vessels operating in 

different geographical areas that have 

different cumulative or ‘‘per trip’’ trip 

limits for the same species or species 

group. Such crossover provisions do not 

apply to species that are subject only to 

daily trip limits, or to the trip limits for 

black rockfish off Washington, as 

described at § 660.230(d), subpart E and 

§ 660.330(e), subpart F. 

(A) Going from a more restrictive to a 

more liberal area. If a vessel takes and 

retains any groundfish species or 

species group of groundfish in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies before fishing in an area where 

a more liberal trip limit (or no trip limit) 

applies, then that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(B) Going from a more liberal to a 

more restrictive area. If a vessel takes 

and retains a groundfish species or 

species group in an area where a higher 

trip limit or no trip limit applies, and 

takes and retains, possesses or lands the 

same species or species group in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies, that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(C) Operating in two different areas 

where a species or species group is 

managed with different types of trip 

limits. During the fishing year, NMFS 

may implement management measures 

for a species or species group that set 

different types of trip limits (for 

example, per trip limits versus 

cumulative trip limits) for different 

areas. If a vessel fishes for a species or 

species group that is managed with 

different types of trip limits in two 

different areas within the same 

cumulative limit period, then that vessel 

is subject to the most restrictive overall 

cumulative limit for that species, 

regardless of where fishing occurs. 

(D) Minor rockfish. Several rockfish 

species are designated with speciesspecific limits on one side of the 40°10′ 

N. lat. management line, and are 

included as part of a minor rockfish 

complex on the other side of the line. 

A vessel that takes and retains fish from 

a minor rockfish complex (nearshore, 

shelf, or slope) on both sides of a 

management line during a single 

cumulative limit period is subject to the 

more restrictive cumulative limit for 

that minor rockfish complex during that 

period. 

(1) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land splitnose rockfish 

up to its cumulative limit south of 

40°10′ N. lat., even if splitnose rockfish 

were a part of the landings from minor 

slope rockfish taken and retained north 

of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(2) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish south of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land POP up to its 

cumulative limit north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

even if POP were a part of the landings 

from minor slope rockfish taken and 

retained south of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(ii) Operating in both limited entry 

and open access fisheries. Open access 

trip limits apply to any fishing 

conducted with open access gear, even 

if the vessel has a valid limited entry 

permit with an endorsement for another 

type of gear. A vessel that operates in 

both the open access and limited entry 

fisheries is not entitled to two separate 

trip limits for the same species. If a 

vessel has a limited entry permit and 

uses open access gear, but the open 

access limit is smaller than the limited 

entry limit, the open access limit may 

not be exceeded and counts toward the 

limited entry limit. If a vessel has a 

limited entry permit and uses open 

access gear, but the open access limit is 

larger than the limited entry limit, the 

smaller limited entry limit applies, even 

if taken entirely with open access gear. 

§ 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications. 

Fishery specifications include ABCs, 

the designation of OYs (which may be 

represented by harvest guidelines (HGs) 

or quotas for species that need 

individual management,) and the 

allocation of fishery HGs between the 

trawl and nontrawl segments of the 

fishery, and the allocation of 

commercial HGs between the open 

access and limited entry segments of the 

fishery. These specifications include 

fish caught in state ocean waters (0–3 

nm offshore) as well as fish caught in 

the EEZ (3–200 nm offshore). Harvest 

specifications are provided at Tables 1a 

through 2d of this subpart. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60927 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.000</GPH>
60928 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60929 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.002</GPH>
60930 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

aABCs apply only to the U.S. portion of the 

Vancouver area. bOptimum Yields (OYs) and Harvest 

Guidelines (HGs) are specified as total catch 

values. A harvest guideline is a specified 

harvest target and not a quota. The use of this 

term may differ from the use of similar terms 

in state regulation. cLingcod—A coastwide lingcod stock 

assessment was prepared in 2005. The 

lingcod biomass was estimated to be at 64 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2005. The ABC of 5,278 mt was calculated 

using an FMSY proxy of F45%. Because the 

stock is above B40%coastwide, the coastwide 

OY was set equal to the ABC. The tribal 

harvest guideline is 250 mt. d ‘‘Other species’’—these species are neither 

common nor important to the commercial 

and recreational fisheries in the areas 

footnoted. Accordingly, these species are 

included in the harvest guidelines of ‘‘other 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60931 

fish’’, ‘‘other rockfish’’ or ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’. ePacific Cod—The 3,200 mt ABC for the 

Vancouver-Columbia area is based on 

historical landings data. The 1,600 mt OY is 

the ABC reduced by 50 percent as a 

precautionary adjustment. A tribal harvest 

guideline of 400 mt is deducted from the OY 

resulting in a commercial OY of 1,200 mt. fPacific whiting—The most recent stock 

assessment was prepared in February 2009. 

The stock assessment base model estimated 

the Pacific whiting biomass to be at 32 

percent (50th percentile estimate of 

depletion) of its unfished biomass in 2009. 

The U.S Canada coastwide ABC is 253,582 

mt, the U.S. share of the ABC is 187,346 mt 

(73.88 percent of the coastwide ABC). The 

U.S.-Canada coastwide OY is 184,000 mt 

with a corresponding U.S. OY of 135,939 mt. 

The tribal set aside is 50,000 mt. The amount 

estimated to be taken as research catch and 

in non-groundfish fisheries is 4,000 mt. The 

commercial OY is 81,939 mt. Each sector 

receives a portion of the commercial OY, 

with the catcher/processors getting 34 

percent (27,859 mt), motherships getting 24 

percent (19,665 mt), and the shore-based 

sector getting 42 percent (34,414 mt). The 

allocation for the fishery south of 42°N. lat. 

is 1,721 mt. gSablefish—A coastwide sablefish stock 

assessment was prepared in 2007. The 

sablefish biomass was estimated to be at 38.3 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2007. The 

coastwide ABC of 9,914 mt was based on the 

new stock assessment with a FMSY proxy of 

F45%. The 40–10 harvest policy was applied 

to the ABC then apportion between the 

northern and southern areas with 72 percent 

going to the area north of 36° N. lat. and 28 

percent going to the area south of 36° N. lat. 

The OY for the area north of 36° N. lat. is 

7,052 mt. When establishing the OY for the 

area south of 36° N. lat. a 50 percent 

reduction was made resulting in a 

Conception area OY of 1,371 mt. The 

coastwide OY of 8,423 mt is the sum of the 

northern and southern area OYs. The tribal 

allocation for the area north of 36° N. lat. is 

705 mt (10 percent of the OY north of 36° N. 

lat.), which is further reduced by 1.6 percent 

(11 mt) to account for discard mortality. The 

tribal landed catch value is 694 mt. hCabezon south of 42° N. lat. was assessed 

in 2005. The Cabezon stock was estimated to 

be at 40 percent of its unfished biomass north 

of 34° 27′N. lat. and 28 percent of its 

unfished biomass south of 34° 27′N. lat. in 

2005. The ABC of 106 mt is based on the 

2005 stock assessment with a harvest rate 

proxy of F45%. The OY of 69 mt is consistent 

with the application of a 60–20 harvest rate 

policy specified in the California Nearshore 

Fishery Management Plan. i Dover sole north of 34° 27’ N. lat. was 

assessed in 2005. The Dover sole biomass 

was estimated to be at 59.8 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2005 and was projected 

to be increasing. The ABC of 29,453 mt is 

based on the results of the 2005 assessment 

with an FMSY proxy of F40%. Because the 

stock is above B40%coastwide, the OY could 

be set equal to the ABC. The OY of 16,500 

mt is less than the ABC. The OY is set at the 

MSY harvest level which is considerably 

larger than the coastwide catches in any 

recent years. 

jA coastwide English sole stock assessment 

was prepared in 2005 and updated in 2007. 

The stock was estimated to be at 116 percent 

of its unfished biomass in 2007. The stock 

biomass is believed to be declining. The ABC 

of 14,326 mt is based on the results of the 

2007 assessment update with an FMSY proxy 

of F40%. Because the stock is above B40%, 

the OY was set equal to the ABC. kA petrale sole stock assessment was 

prepared for 2005. In 2005 the petrale sole 

stock was estimated to be at 32 percent of its 

unfished biomass coastwide (34 percent in 

the northern assessment area and 29 percent 

of in the southern assessment area). The ABC 

of 2,811 mt is based on the 2005 stock 

assessment with a F40%FMSYproxy. To 

derive the OY, the 40–10 harvest policy was 

applied to the ABC for both the northern and 

southern assessment areas. As a 

precautionary measure, an additional 25 

percent reduction was made in the OY 

contribution for the southern area due 

assessment uncertainty. The coastwide OY is 

2,433 mt in 2009. lArrowtooth flounder was assessed in 2007 

and was estimated to be at 79 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2007. Because the stock 

is above B40%, the OY is set equal to the 

ABC. m Starry Flounder was assessed for the first 

time in 2005 and was estimated to be above 

40 percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. 

However, the stock was projected to decline 

below 40 percent in both the northern and 

southern areas after 2008. The starry flounder 

assessment was considered to be a data-poor 

assessment relative to other groundfish 

assessments. For 2009, the coastwide ABC of 

1,509 mt is based on the 2005 assessment 

with a FMSY proxy of F40%. To derive the 

OY (1,004 mt), the 40–10 harvest policy was 

applied to the ABC for both the northern and 

southern assessment areas then an additional 

25 percent reduction was made due to 

assessment uncertainty. n ‘‘Other flatfish’’ are those flatfish species 

that do not have individual ABC/OYs and 

include butter sole, curlfin sole, flathead 

sole, Pacific sand dab, rex sole, rock sole, and 

sand sole. The other flatfish ABC is based on 

historical catch levels. The ABC of 6,731 mt 

is based on the highest landings for sanddabs 

(1995) and rex sole (1982) for the 1981–2003 

period and on the average landings from the 

1994–1998 period for the remaining other 

flatfish species. The OY of 4,884 mt is based 

on the ABC with a 25 percent precautionary 

adjustment for sanddabs and rex sole and a 

50 percent precautionary adjustment for the 

remaining species. oA POP stock assessment was prepared in 

2005 and was updated in 2007. The stock 

assessment update estimated the stock to be 

at 27.5 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The ABC of 1,160 mt for the Vancouver 

and Columbia areas is based on the 2007 

stock assessment update with an FMSY 

proxy of F50%. The OY of 189 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2017 and an SPR harvest rate of 

86.4 percent. The OY is reduced by 2.0 mt 

for the amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity and 0.14 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. 

p Shortbelly rockfish remains an 

unexploited stock and is difficult to assess 

quantitatively. To understand the potential 

environmental determinants of fluctuations 

in the recruitment and abundance of an 

unexploited rockfish population in the 

California Current ecosystem, a nonquantitative assessment was conducted in 

2007. The results of the assessment indicated 

the shortbelly stock was healthy with an 

estimated spawning stock biomass at 67 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC and OY are being set at 6,950 mt which 

is 50 percent of the 2008 ABC and OY values. 

The stock is expected to remain at its current 

equilibrium with these harvest specifications. qWidow rockfish was assessed in 2005 and 

an update was prepared in 2007. The stock 

assessment update estimated the stock to be 

at 36.2 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2006. The ABC of 7,728 mt is based on the 

stock assessment update with an 

F50%FMSYproxy. The OY of 522 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2015 and an SPR harvest rate of 

95 percent. To derive the commercial harvest 

guideline of 460.4 mt the OY is reduced by 

1.1 mt for the amount anticipated to be taken 

during research activity, 45.5 mt for the tribal 

set-aside, 7.2 mt the amount estimated to be 

taken in the recreational fisheries, 0.4 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken incidentally 

in non-groundfish fisheries, and 7.4 mt for 

the amount projected to be taken during EFP 

fishing. The following are the sector specific 

bycatch limits established for the Pacific 

whiting fishery: 85.0 mt for catcher/ 

processors, 60.0 mt for motherships, and 

105.0 mt for shore-based. rCanary rockfish—A canary rockfish stock 

assessment was completed in 2007 and the 

stock was estimated to be at 32.7 percent of 

its unfished biomass coastwide in 2007. The 

coastwide ABC of 937 mt based on the 2007 

rebuilding plan. The OY of 105 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2021 and a SPR harvest rate of 88.7 

percent. To derive the commercial harvest 

guideline of 42.3 mt, the OY is reduced by 

8.0 mt for the amount anticipated to be taken 

during research activity, 7.3 mt the tribal setaside, 43.8 mt the amount estimated to be 

taken in the recreational fisheries, 0.9 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken incidentally 

in non-groundfish fisheries, and 2.7 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken during EFP 

fishing. The following harvest guidelines are 

being specified for catch sharing in 2009: 

19.7 mt for limited entry Non-Whiting Trawl, 

18.0 mt for limited entry Whiting Trawl, 2.2 

mt for limited entry fixed gear, 2.5 mt for 

directed open access, 4.9 mt for Washington 

recreational, 16.0 mt for Oregon recreational, 

and 22.9 mt for California recreational. sChilipepper rockfish was assessed in 2007 

and the stock was estimated to be at 71 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2007. The ABC of 3,037 mt is based on a 

FMSY proxy of F50%. Because the unfished 

biomass is estimated to be above 40 percent 

the unfished biomass, the default OY could 

be set equal to the ABC. However, the OY of 

2,885 mt was the ABC reduced by 5 percent 

as a precautionary measure for uncertainty in 

the stock assessment. Open access is 

allocated 44.3 percent (1,278 mt) of the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60932 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

commercial HG and limited entry is allocated 

55.7 percent (1,607 mt) of the commercial 

HG. tA bocaccio stock assessment and a 

rebuilding analysis were prepared in 2007. 

The bocaccio stock was estimated to be at 

13.8 percent of its unfished biomass in 2007. 

The ABC of 793 mt for the MontereyConception area is based on the new 

assessment with an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

The OY of 288 mt is based on a rebuilding 

plan with a target year to rebuild of 2026 and 

a SPR harvest rate of 77.7 percent. To derive 

the commercial harvest guideline of 206.4 

mt, the OY is reduced by 2.0 mt for the 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity, 67.3 mt for the amount 

estimated to be taken in the recreational 

fisheries, 1.3 mt for the amount expected to 

be taken incidentally in non-groundfish 

fisheries, and 11.0 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. u Splitnose rockfish—The ABC is 615 mt in 

the Monterey-Conception area. The 461 mt 

OY for the area reflects a 25 percent 

precautionary adjustment because of the less 

rigorous stock assessment for this stock. In 

the north (Vancouver, Columbia and Eureka 

areas), splitnose is included within the minor 

slope rockfish OY. Because the harvest 

assumptions used to forecast future harvest 

were likely overestimates, carrying the 

previously used ABCs and OYs forward into 

2009 was considered to be conservative and 

based on the best available data. v Yellowtail rockfish—A yellowtail 

rockfish stock assessment was prepared in 

2005 for the Vancouver, Columbia, Eureka 

areas. Yellowtail rockfish was estimated to be 

above 40 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2005. The ABC of 4,562 mt is based on the 

2005 stock assessment with the FMSY proxy 

of F50%. The OY of 4,562 mt was set equal 

to the ABC, because the stock is above the 

precautionary threshold of B40%. w Shortspine thornyhead was assessed in 

2005 and the stock was estimated to be at 63 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC of 2,437 mt is based on a 

F50%FMSYproxy. For that portion of the 

stock (66 percent of the biomass) north of 

Point Conception (34°27′N. lat.), the OY of 

1,608 mt was set at equal to the ABC because 

the stock is estimated to be above the 

precautionary threshold. For that portion of 

the stock south of 34°27′N. lat. (34 percent of 

the biomass), the OY of 414 mt was the 

portion of the ABC for the area reduced by 

50 percent as a precautionary adjustment due 

to the short duration and amount of survey 

data for that area. xLongspine thornyhead was assessed 

coastwide in 2005 and the stock was 

estimated to be at 71 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2005. The coastwide ABC of 3,766 

mt is based on a F50%FMSYproxy. The OY 

is set equal to the ABC because the stock is 

above the precautionary threshold. Separate 

OYs are being established for the areas north 

and south of 34°27′N. lat. (Point Conception). 

The OY of 2,231 mt for that portion of the 

stock in the northern area (79 percent) the 

ABC reduced by 25 percent as a 

precautionary adjustment. For that portion of 

the stock in the south of 34°27′N. lat. (21 

percent), the OY of 395 mt was the portion 

of the ABC for the area reduced by 50 percent 

as a precautionary adjustment due to the 

short duration and amount of survey data for 

that area. yCowcod in the Conception area was 

assessed in 2007 and the stock was estimated 

to be between 3.4 to 16.3 percent of its 

unfished biomass. The ABC for the area 

south of 36°N. lat., the Conception and 

Monterey areas, is 13 mt and is based on the 

2007 rebuilding analysis in which the 

Conception area stock assessment projection 

was doubled to account for both areas. A 

single OY of 4 mt is being set for both areas. 

The OY of 4 mt is based on a rebuilding plan 

with a target year to rebuild of 2072 and an 

SPR rate of 82.1 percent. The amount 

anticipated to be taken during research 

activity is 0.2 mt and the amount expected 

to be taken during EFP activity is 0.24 mt. z Darkblotched rockfish was assessed in 

2007 and a rebuilding analysis was prepared. 

The new stock assessment estimated the 

stock to be at 22.4 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2007. The ABC is projected to be 

437 mt and is based on the 2007 stock 

assessment with an FMSYproxy of F50%. 

The OY of 285 mt is based on a rebuilding 

plan with a target year to rebuild of 2028 and 

an SPR harvest rate of 62.1 percent. The 

commercial OY of 282.05 mt is the OY 

reduced by 2.0 mt for the amount anticipated 

to be taken during research activity and 0.95 

mt for the amount projected to be taken 

during EFP activity. aa Yelloweye rockfish was fully assessed in 

2006 and an assessment update was 

completed in 2007. The 2007 stock 

assessment update estimated the spawning 

stock biomass in 2006 to be at 14 percent of 

its unfished biomass coastwide. The 31 mt 

coastwide ABC was derived from the base 

model in the new stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50%. The 17 mt OY is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2084 and an SPR harvest rate of 

66.3 percent in 2009 and 2010 and an SPR 

harvest rate of 71.9 percent for 2011 and 

beyond. The OY is reduced by 2.8 mt for the 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity, 2.3 mt the amount 

estimated to be taken in the tribal fisheries 

and 0.3 mt for the amount expected to be 

taken incidentally in non-groundfish 

fisheries. The catch sharing harvest 

guidelines for yelloweye rockfish in 2009 are: 

limited entry non-whiting trawl 0.6 mt, 

limited entry whiting 0.0 mt, limited entry 

fixed gear 1.4 mt, directed open access 1.1 

mt, Washington recreational 2.7 mt, Oregon 

recreational 2.4 mt, California recreational 

2.8 mt, and 0.3 mt for exempted fishing. bbCalifornia Scorpionfish south of 34°27′N. 

lat. was assessed in 2005 and was estimated 

to be above 40 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2005. The ABC of 175 mt is based 

on the new assessment with a harvest rate 

proxy of F50%. Because the stock is above 

B40%coastwide, the OY is set equal to the 

ABC. ccNew assessments were prepared for 

black rockfish south of 45°56.00 N. lat. (Cape 

Falcon, Oregon) and for black rockfish north 

of Cape Falcon. The ABC for the area north 

of 46°16′N. lat. (Washington) is 490 mt (97 

percent) of the 505 mt ABC contribution from 

the northern assessment area. The ABC for 

the area south of 46°16′N. lat. (Oregon and 

California) is 1,469 mt which is the sum of 

a contribution of 15 mt (3 percent) from the 

northern area assessment, and 1,454 mt from 

the southern area assessment. The ABCs were 

based on the results of the new assessment 

and derived using an FMSYproxy of F50%. 

Because both portions of the stock are above 

40 percent, the OYs could be set equal to the 

ABCs. For the area north of 46°16′N. lat., the 

OY of 490 mt is set equal to the ABC. The 

following tribal harvest guidelines are being 

set: 20,000 lb (9.1 mt) north of Cape Alava, 

WA (48°09.50′N. lat.) and 10,000 lb (4.5 mt) 

between Destruction Island, WA (47°40′N. 

lat.) and Leadbetter Point, WA (46°38.17′N. 

lat.) The OY for the area south of 46°16′N. lat. 

is being set at 1,000 mt which is a constant 

harvest level. The black rockfish OY in the 

area south of 46°16′N. lat., is subdivided with 

separate HGs being set for the area north of 

42° N. lat. (580 mt/58 percent) and for the 

area south of 42° N. lat. (420 mt/42 percent). ddMinor rockfish north includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Vancouver, Columbia, and 

Eureka areas combined. These species 

include ‘‘remaining rockfish’’, which 

generally includes species that have been 

assessed by less rigorous methods than stock 

assessments, and ‘‘other rockfish’’, which 

includes species that do not have 

quantifiable stock assessments. Blue rockfish 

has been removed from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

and added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC of 3,678 mt is the sum of the individual 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other 

rockfish’’ ABCs. The remaining rockfish 

ABCs continue to be reduced by 25 percent 

(F = 0.75M) as a precautionary adjustment. 

To obtain the total catch OY of 2,283 mt, the 

remaining rockfish ABCs were further 

reduced by 25 percent and other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure to address limited 

stock assessment information. eeMinor rockfish south includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Monterey and Conception 

areas combined. These species include 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ which generally 

includes species that have been assessed by 

less rigorous methods than stock assessment, 

and ‘‘other rockfish’’ which includes species 

that do not have quantifiable stock 

assessments. Blue rockfish has been removed 

from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ and added to the 

remaining rockfish. The ABC of 3,384 mt is 

the sum of the individual ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

ABCs. The remaining rockfish ABCs continue 

to be reduced by 25 percent (F = 0.75M) as 

a precautionary adjustment. The remaining 

rockfish ABCs are further reduced by 25 

percent, with the exception of blackgill 

rockfish (see footnote gg). The other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure due to limited stock 

assessment information. The resulting minor 

rockfish OY is 1,990 mt. ffBank rockfish—The ABC is 350 mt which 

is based on a 2000 stock assessment for the 

Monterey and Conception areas. This stock 

contributes 263 mt towards the minor 

rockfish OY in the south. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60933 

ggBlackgill rockfish in the Monterey and 

Conception areas was assessed in 2005 and 

is estimated to be at 49.9 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2008. The ABC of 292 

mt for the Monterey and Conception areas is 

based on the 2005 stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50%and is the two year 

average ABC for the 2007 and 2008 periods. 

This stock contributes 292 mt towards minor 

rockfish south. hh ‘‘Other rockfish’’ includes rockfish 

species listed in 50 CFR 660.302. A new 

stock assessment was conducted for blue 

rockfish in 2007. As a result of the new stock 

assessment, the blue rockfish contribution to 

the other rockfish group, of 30 mt in the 

north and 232 mt in the south, are removed. 

A new contribution of 28 mt contribution in 

the north and 202 mt contribution in the 

south is added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC for the remaining species is based on 

historical data from a 1996 review landings 

and includes an estimate of recreational 

landings. Most of these species have never 

been assessed quantitatively. iiLongnose skate was fully assessed in 2006 

and an assessment update was completed in 

2007. The ABC of 3,428 is based on the 2007 

with an FMSYproxy of F45%. Longnose 

skate was previously managed as part of the 

Other Fish complex. The 2009 OY of 1,349 

mt is a precautionary OY based on historical 

total catch increased by 50 percent. 

jj ‘‘Other fish’’ includes sharks, skates, rays, 

ratfish, morids, grenadiers, kelp greenling, 

and other groundfish species noted above in 

footnote d/. The longnose skate contribution 

is being removed from this complex. kkSablefish allocation north of 36° N. lat.— 

The limited entry allocation is further 

divided with 58 percent allocated to the 

trawl fishery and 42 percent allocated to the 

fixed-gear fishery. llSpecific open access/limited entry 

allocations specified in the FMP have been 

suspended during the rebuilding period as 

necessary to meet the overall rebuilding 

target while allowing harvest of healthy 

stocks. 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60934 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60935 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.005</GPH>
60936 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60937 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.007</GPH>
60938 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60939 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.009</GPH>
60940 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

aABCs apply only to the U.S. portion of the 

Vancouver area. bOptimum Yields (OYs) and Harvest 

Guidelines (HGs) are specified as total catch 

values. A harvest guideline is a specified 

harvest target and not a quota. The use of this 

term may differ from the use of similar terms 

in state regulation. cLingcod—A coastwide lingcod stock 

assessment was prepared in 2005. The 

lingcod biomass was estimated to be at 64 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2005. The ABC of 4,829 mt was calculated 

using an FMSY proxy of F45%. Because the 

stock is above B40%coastwide, the coastwide 

OY was set equal to the ABC. The tribal 

harvest guideline is 250 mt. d ‘‘Other species’’—these species are neither 

common nor important to the commercial 

and recreational fisheries in the areas 

footnoted. Accordingly, these species are 

included in the harvest guidelines of ‘‘other 

fish’’, ‘‘other rockfish’’ or ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’. ePacific Cod—The 3,200 mt ABC for the 

Vancouver-Columbia area is based on 

historical landings data. The 1,600 mt OY is 

the ABC reduced by 50 percent as a 

precautionary adjustment. A tribal harvest 

guideline of 400 mt is deducted from the OY 

resulting in a commercial OY of 1,200 mt. fPacific whiting—The most recent stock 

assessment was prepared in January 2010. 

The stock assessment base model estimated 

the Pacific whiting biomass to be at 31 

percent (50th percentile estimate of 

depletion) of its unfished biomass in 2010. 

The U.S.-Canada coastwide ABC is 455,550 

mt, the U.S. share of the ABC is 336,560 mt 

(73.88 percent of the coastwide ABC). The 

U.S.-Canada coastwide Pacific whiting OY is 

262,500 mt, with a corresponding U.S. OY of 

193,935 mt. The tribal allocation is 49,939 

mt. The amount estimated to be taken as 

research catch and in non-groundfish 

fisheries is 3,000 mt. The commercial OY is 

140,996 mt. Each sector receives a portion of 

the commercial OY, with the catcher/ 

processors getting 34 percent (47,939 mt), 

motherships getting 24 percent (33,839 mt), 

and the shore-based sector getting 42 percent 

(59,218 mt). No more than 2,961 mt (5 

percent of the shore-based allocation) may be 

taken in the fishery south of 42° N. lat. prior 

to the start of the primary season for the 

shorebased fishery north of 42° N. lat. gSablefish—A coastwide sablefish stock 

assessment was prepared in 2007. The 

coastwide sablefish biomass was estimated to 

be at 38.3 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The coastwide ABC of 9,217 mt was 

based on the new stock assessment with a 

FMSY proxy of F45%. The 40–10 harvest 

policy was applied to the ABC then 

apportion between the northern and southern 

areas with 72 percent going to the area north 

of 36* N. lat. and 28 percent going to the area 

south of 36* N. lat. The OY for the area north 

of 36* N. lat. is 6,471 mt. When establishing 

the OY for the area south of 36* N. lat. a 50 

percent reduction was made resulting in a 

Conception area OY of 1,258 mt. The 

Coastwide OY of 7,729 mt is the sum of the 

northern and southern area OYs. The tribal 

allocation for the area north of 36* N. lat. is 

647 mt (10 percent of the OY north of 36* 

N. lat.), which is further reduced by 1.6 

percent (10 mt) to account for discard 

mortality. The tribal landed catch value is 

637 mt. hCabezon south of 42* N. lat. was assessed 

in 2005. The Cabezon stock was estimated to 

be at 40 percent of its unfished biomass north 

of 34* 27 ′N. lat. and 28 percent of its 

unfished biomass south of 34* 27 ′N. lat. in 

2005. The ABC of 111 mt is based on the 

2005 stock assessment with a harvest rate 

proxy of F45%. The OY of 79 mt is consistent 

with the application of a 60–20 harvest rate 

policy specified in the California Nearshore 

Fishery Management Plan. i Dover sole north of 34* 27′ N. lat. was 

assessed in 2005. The Dover sole biomass 

was estimated to be at 59.8 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2005 and was projected 

to be increasing. The ABC of 28,582 mt is 

based on the results of the 2005 assessment 

with an FMSY proxy of F40%. Because the 

stock is above B40%coastwide, the OY could 

be set equal to the ABC. The OY of 16,500 

mt is less than the ABC. The OY is set at the 

MSY harvest level which is considerably 

larger than the coastwide catches in any 

recent years. 

jA coastwide English sole stock assessment 

was prepared in 2005 and updated in 2007. 

The stock was estimated to be at 116 percent 

of its unfished biomass in 2007. The stock 

biomass is believed to be declining. The ABC 

of 9,745 mt is based on the results of the 2007 

assessment update with an FMSY proxy of 

F40%. Because the stock is above B40%, the 

OY was set equal to the ABC. kA petrale sole stock assessment was 

prepared for 2005. In 2005 the petrale sole 

stock was estimated to be at 32 percent of its 

unfished biomass coastwide (34 percent in 

the northern assessment area and 29 percent 

in the southern assessment area). The 2010 

ABC of 2,751 mt is based on the 2005 

assessment with a F40% FMSY proxy. To 

derive the 2010 OY, the 40 10 harvest policy 

was applied to the ABC for both the northern 

and southern assessment areas. As a 

precautionary measure, an additional 25 

percent reduction was made in the OY 

contribution for the southern area due to 

assessment uncertainty. As another 

precautionary measure, an additional 1,193 

mt reduction was made in the coastwide OY 

due to preliminary results of the more 

pessimistic 2009 stock assessment. The 

coastwide OY is 1,200 mt in 2010. lArrowtooth flounder was assessed in 2007 

and was estimated to be at 79 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2007. Because the stock 

is above B40%, the OY is set equal to the 

ABC. m Starry Flounder was assessed for the first 

time in 2005 and was estimated to be above 

40 percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. 

However, the stock was projected to decline 

below 40 percent in both the northern and 

southern areas after 2008. For 2010, the 

coastwide ABC of 1,578 mt is based on the 

2005 assessment with a FMSY proxy of 

F40%. To derive the OY of 1,077 mt, the 40– 

10 harvest policy was applied to the ABC for 

both the northern and southern assessment 

areas then an additional 25 percent reduction 

was made due to assessment uncertainty. n ‘‘Other flatfish’’ are those flatfish species 

that do not have individual ABC/OYs and 

include butter sole, curlfin sole, flathead 

sole, Pacific sanddab, rex sole, rock sole, and 

sand sole. The other flatfish ABC is based on 

historical catch levels. The ABC of 6,731 mt 

is based on the highest landings for sanddabs 

(1995) and rex sole (1982) for the 1981–2003 

period and on the average landings from the 

1994–1998 period for the remaining other 

flatfish species. The OY of 4,884 mt is based 

on the ABC with a 25 percent precautionary 

adjustment for sanddabs and rex sole and a 

50 percent precautionary adjustment for the 

remaining species. oA POP stock assessment was prepared in 

2005 and was updated in 2007. The stock 

assessment update estimated the stock to be 

at 27.5 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2007. The ABC of 1,173 mt for the Vancouver 

and Columbia areas is based on the 2007 

stock assessment update with an FMSY 

proxy of F50%. The OY of 200 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2017 and an SPR harvest rate of 

86.4 percent. The OY is reduced by 2.0 mt 

for the amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity and 0.14 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. p Shortbelly rockfish remains an 

unexploited stock and is difficult to assess 

quantitatively. To understand the potential 

environmental determinants of fluctuations 

in the recruitment and abundance of an 

unexploited rockfish population in the 

California Current ecosystem, a nonquantitative assessment was conducted in 

2007. The results of the assessment indicated 

the shortbelly stock was healthy with an 

estimated spawning stock biomass at 67 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC and OY are being set at 6,950 mt which 

is 50 percent of the 2008 ABC and OY values. 

The stock is expected to remain at its current 

equilibrium with these harvest specifications. qWidow rockfish was assessed in 2005, 

and an update was prepared in 2007. The 

stock assessment update estimated the stock 

to be at 36.2 percent of its unfished biomass 

in 2006. The ABC of 6,937 mt is based on the 

stock assessment update with an F50% 

FMSY proxy. The OY of 509 mt is based on 

a rebuilding plan with a target year to rebuild 

of 2015 and an SPR harvest rate or 95 

percent. To derive the commercial harvest 

guideline of 447.4 mt, the OY is reduced by 

1.1 mt for the amount anticipated to be taken 

during research activity, 45.5 mt for the tribal 

set-aside, 7.2 mt the amount estimated to be 

taken in the recreational fisheries, 0.4 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken incidentally 

in non-groundfish fisheries, and 7.4 mt for 

EFP fishing activities. rCanary rockfish—A canary rockfish stock 

assessment was completed in 2007 and the 

stock was estimated to be at 32.7 percent of 

its unfished biomass coastwide in 2007. The 

coastwide ABC of 940 mt is based on a FMSY 

proxy of F50%. The OY of 105 mt is based 

on a rebuilding plan with a target year to 

rebuild of 2021 and a SPR harvest rate of 88.7 

percent. To derive the commercial harvest 

guideline of 42.3 mt, the OY is reduced by 

8.0 mt for the amount anticipated to be taken 

during research activity, 7.3 mt the tribal setaside, 43.8 mt the amount estimated to be 

taken in the recreational fisheries, 0.9 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken incidentally 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60941 

in non-groundfish fisheries, and 2.7 mt for 

the amount expected to be taken during EFP 

fishing. The following harvest guidelines are 

being specified for catch sharing in 2009: 

19.7 mt for limited entry Non-Whiting Trawl, 

18.0 mt for limited entry Whiting Trawl, 2.2 

mt for limited entry fixed gear, 2.5 mt for 

directed open access, 4.9 mt for Washington 

recreational, 16.0 mt for Oregon recreational, 

and 22.9 mt for California recreational. sChilipepper rockfish was assessed in 2007 

and the stock was estimated to be at 71 

percent of its unfished biomass coastwide in 

2007. The ABC of 2,576 mt is based on the 

new assessment with an FMSY proxy of 

F50%. Because the unfished biomass is 

estimated to be above 40 percent of the 

unfished biomass, the default OY could be 

set equal to the ABC. However, the OY of 

2,447 mt was the ABC reduced by 5 percent 

as a precautionary measure. Open access is 

allocated 44.3 percent (1,084 mt) of the 

commercial HG and limited entry is allocated 

55.7 percent (1,363 mt) of the commercial 

HG. tA bocaccio stock assessment and a 

rebuilding analysis were prepared in 2007. 

The bocaccio stock was estimated to be at 

13.8 percent of its unfished biomass in 2007. 

The ABC of 793 mt for the MontereyConception area is based on the new stock 

assessment with an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

The OY of 288 is based on a rebuilding plan 

with a target year to rebuild of 2026 and a 

SPR harvest rate of 77.7 percent. To derive 

the commercial harvest guideline of 206.4 

mt, the OY is reduced by 2.0 mt for the 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

research activity, 67.3 mt for the amount 

estimated to be taken in the recreational 

fisheries, 1.3 mt for the amount expected to 

be taken incidentally in non-groundfish 

fisheries, and 11.0 mt for the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP fishing. u Splitnose rockfish—The ABC is 615 mt in 

the Monterey-Conception area. The 461 mt 

OY for the area reflects a 25 percent 

precautionary adjustment because of the less 

rigorous stock assessment for this stock. In 

the north (Vancouver, Columbia and Eureka 

areas), splitnose is included within the minor 

slope rockfish OY. Because the harvest 

assumptions used to forecast future harvest 

were likely overestimates, carrying the 

previously used ABCs and OYs forward into 

2010 was considered to be conservative and 

based on the best available data. v Yellowtail rockfish—A yellowtail 

rockfish stock assessment was prepared in 

2005 for the Vancouver, Columbia, Eureka 

areas. Yellowtail rockfish was estimated to be 

above 40 percent of its unfished biomass in 

2005. The ABC of 4,562 mt is based on the 

2005 stock assessment with the FMSY proxy 

of F50%. The OY of 4,562 mt was set equal 

to the ABC, because the stock is above the 

precautionary threshold of B40%. w Shortspine thornyhead was assessed in 

2005 and the stock was estimated to be at 63 

percent of its unfished biomass in 2005. The 

ABC of 2,411 mt is based on a 

F50%FMSYproxy. For that portion of the 

stock (66 percent of the biomass) north of 

Point Conception (34°27′ N. lat.), the OY of 

1,591 mt was set at equal to the ABC because 

the stock is estimated to be above the 

precautionary threshold. For that portion of 

the stock south of 34°27′ N. lat. (34 percent 

of the biomass), the OY of 410 mt was the 

portion of the ABC for the area reduced by 

50 percent as a precautionary adjustment due 

to the short duration and amount of survey 

data for that area. xLongspine thornyhead was assessed 

coastwide in 2005 and the stock was 

estimated to be at 71 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2005. The coastwide ABC of 3,671 

mt is based on a F50%FMSYproxy. The OY 

is set equal to the ABC because the stock is 

above the precautionary threshold. Separate 

OYs are being established for the areas north 

and south of 34°27′ N. lat. (Point 

Conception). The OY of 2,175 mt for that 

portion of the stock in the northern area (79 

percent) was the ABC reduced by 25 percent 

as a precautionary adjustment. For that 

portion of the stock in the southern area (21 

percent), the OY of 385 mt was the portion 

of the ABC for the area reduced by 50 percent 

as a precautionary adjustment due to the 

short duration and amount of survey data for 

that area. yCowcod in the Conception area was 

assessed in 2007 and the stock was estimated 

to be between 3.4 to 16.3 percent of its 

unfished biomass. The ABC for the Monterey 

and Conception areas is 14 mt and is based 

on the 2007 rebuilding analysis in which the 

Conception area stock assessment projection 

was doubled to account for both areas. A 

single OY of 4 mt is being set for both areas. 

The OY of 4 mt is based on the need to 

conform the 2010 cowcod harvest 

specifications to the Court’s Order in Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. Locke, Civil 

Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The amount 

anticipated to be taken during scientific 

research activity is 0.2 mt and the amount 

expected to be taken during EFP activity is 

0.24 mt. z Darkblotched rockfish was assessed in 

2007 and a rebuilding analysis was prepared. 

The new stock assessment estimated the 

stock to be at 22.4 percent of its unfished 

biomass in 2007. The ABC is projected to be 

440 mt and is based on the 2007 stock 

assessment with an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

The OY of 330 mt is based on the need to 

conform the 2010 darkblotched rockfish 

harvest specifications to the Court’s Order in 

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Locke, 

Civil Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The amount 

anticipated to be taken during scientific 

research activity is 2.0 mt and the amount 

anticipated to be taken during EFP activity is 

0.95 mt. aa Yelloweye rockfish was fully assessed in 

2006 and an assessment update was 

completed in 2007. The 2007 stock 

assessment update estimated the spawning 

stock biomass in 2006 to be at 14 percent of 

its unfished biomass coastwide. The 32 mt 

coastwide ABC was derived from the base 

model in the new stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50%. The 14 mt OY is based 

on the need to conform the 2010 yelloweye 

rockfish harvest specifications to the Court’s 

Order in Natural Resources Defense Council 

v. Locke, Civil Action No. C 01–0421 JL. The 

amount anticipated to be taken during 

scientific research activity is 1.3 mt, the 

amount anticipated to be taken in the tribal 

fisheries is 2.3 mt, and the amount 

anticipated to be taken incidentally in nongroundfish fisheries is 0.3 mt. The catch 

sharing harvest guidelines for yelloweye 

rockfish in 2010 are: Limited entry nonwhiting trawl 0.3 mt, limited entry whiting 

0.0 mt, limited entry fixed gear 0.8 mt, 

directed open access 1.2 mt, Washington 

recreational 2.6 mt, Oregon recreational 2.3 

mt, California recreational 2.7 mt, and 0.2 mt 

for exempted fishing. bbCalifornia Scorpionfish south of 34°27′N. 

lat. (point Conception) was assessed in 2005 

and was estimated to be above 40 percent of 

its unfished biomass in 2005. The ABC of 155 

mt is based on the new assessment with a 

harvest rate proxy of F50%. Because the 

stock is above B40% coastwide, the OY is set 

equal to the ABC. ccNew assessments were prepared for 

black rockfish south of 45°56.00 N. lat. (Cape 

Falcon, Oregon) and for black rockfish north 

of Cape Falcon. The ABC for the area north 

of 46°16′N. lat. (Washington) is 464 mt (97 

percent) of the 478 mt ABC contribution from 

the northern assessment area. The ABC for 

the area south of 46°16′N. lat. (Oregon and 

California) is 1,317 mt which is the sum of 

a contribution of 14 mt (3 percent) from the 

northern area assessment, and 1,303 mt from 

the southern area assessment. The ABCs were 

derived using an FMSY proxy of F50%. 

Because both portions of the stock are above 

40 percent, the OYs could be set equal to the 

ABCs. For the area north of 46°16′N. lat., the 

OY of 490 mt is set equal to the ABC. The 

following tribal harvest guidelines are being 

set: 30,000 lb (13.6 mt) north of Cape Alava, 

WA (48°09.50′N. lat.) and 10,000 lb (4.5 mt) 

between Destruction Island, WA (47°40′N. 

lat.) and Leadbetter Point, WA (46°38.17′N. 

lat.) For the area south of 46°16′N. lat., the 

OY of 1,000 mt is a constant harvest level. 

The black rockfish OY in the area south of 

46°16′N. lat., is subdivided with separate 

HGs being set for the area north of 42° N. lat. 

(580 mt/58 percent) and for the area south of 

42° N. lat. (420 mt/42 percent). 

ddMinor rockfish north includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Vancouver, Columbia, and 

Eureka areas combined. These species 

include ‘‘remaining rockfish’’, which 

generally includes species that have been 

assessed by less rigorous methods than stock 

assessments, and ‘‘other rockfish’’, which 

includes species that do not have 

quantifiable stock assessments. Blue rockfish 

has been removed from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

and added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC of 3,678 mt is the sum of the individual 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other 

rockfish’’ ABCs. The remaining rockfish 

ABCs continue to be reduced by 25 percent 

(F = 0.75M) as a precautionary adjustment. 

To obtain the total catch OY of 2,283 mt, the 

remaining rockfish ABCs were further 

reduced by 25 percent and other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure to address limited 

stock assessment information. eeMinor rockfish south includes the 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ and ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

categories in the Monterey and Conception 

areas combined. These species include 

‘‘remaining rockfish’’ which generally 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60942 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

includes species that have been assessed by 

less rigorous methods than stock assessment, 

and ‘‘other rockfish’’ which includes species 

that do not have quantifiable stock 

assessments. Blue rockfish has been removed 

from the ‘‘other rockfish’’ and added to the 

remaining rockfish. The ABC of 3,382 mt is 

the sum of the individual ‘‘remaining 

rockfish’’ ABCs plus the ‘‘other rockfish’’ 

ABCs. The remaining rockfish ABCs continue 

to be reduced by 25 percent (F = 0.75M) as 

a precautionary adjustment. The remaining 

rockfish ABCs are further reduced by 25 

percent, with the exception of blackgill 

rockfish (see footnote gg). The other rockfish 

ABCs were reduced by 50 percent. This was 

a precautionary measure due to limited stock 

assessment information. The resulting minor 

rockfish OY is 1,990 mt. ffBank rockfish—The ABC is 350 mt which 

is based on a 2000 stock assessment for the 

Monterey and Conception areas. This stock 

contributes 263 mt towards the minor 

rockfish OY in the south. ggBlackgill rockfish in the Monterey and 

Conception areas was assessed in 2005 and 

is estimated to be at 49.9 percent of its 

unfished biomass in 2008. The ABC of 292 

mt for the Monterey and Conception areas is 

based on the 2005 stock assessment with an 

FMSY proxy of F50%and is the two year 

average ABC for the 2007 and 2008 periods. 

This stock contributes 292 mt towards minor 

rockfish south. hh ‘‘Other rockfish’’ includes rockfish 

species listed in 50 CFR 660.302. A new 

stock assessment was conducted for blue 

rockfish in 2007. As a result of the new stock 

assessment, the blue rockfish contribution to 

the other rockfish group, of 30 mt in the 

north and 232 mt in the south, are removed. 

A new contribution of 28 mt contribution in 

the north and 202 mt contribution in the 

south is added to the remaining rockfish. The 

ABC for the remaining species is based on 

historical data from a 1996 review landings 

and includes an estimate of recreational 

landings. Most of these species have never 

been assessed quantitatively. iiLongnose skate was fully assessed in 

2006 and an assessment update was 

completed in 2007. The ABC of 3,428 is 

based on the 2007 with an FMSY proxy of 

F45%. Longnose skate was previously 

managed as part of the Other Fish complex. 

The 2009 OY of 1,349 mt is a precautionary 

OY based on historical total catch increased 

by 50 percent. 

jj ‘‘Other fish’’ includes sharks, skates, rays, 

ratfish, morids, grenadiers, kelp greenling, 

and other groundfish species noted above in 

footnote d/. The longnose skate contribution 

is being removed from this complex. kkSablefish allocation north of 36* N. 

lat.—The limited entry allocation is further 

divided with 58 percent allocated to the 

trawl fishery and 42 percent allocated to the 

fixed-gear fishery. llSpecific open access/limited entry 

allocations specified in the FMP have been 

suspended during the rebuilding period as 

necessary to meet the overall rebuilding 

target while allowing harvest of healthy 

stocks. 

Subpart D—West Coast Groundfish— 

Limited Entry Trawl Fisheries 

§ 660.100 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart covers the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish limited entry trawl fishery. 

Under the trawl rationalization program, 

the limited entry trawl fishery consists 

of the Shorebased IFQ Program, the MS 

Coop Program, and the C/P Coop 

Program. 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery—definitions. 

These definitions are specific to the 

limited entry trawl fisheries covered in 

this subpart. General groundfish 

definitions are found at § 660.11, 

subpart C. 

Catch history assignment means a 

percentage of the mothership sector 

allocation of Pacific whiting based on a 

limited entry permit’s qualifying history 

and which is specified on the MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit. 

Catcher/processor coop or C/P coop 

means a harvester group that includes 

all eligible catcher/processor at-sea 

Pacific whiting endorsed permit owners 

who voluntarily form a coop and who 

manage the catcher/processor-specified 

allocations through private agreements 

and contracts. 

Catcher/Processor Coop Program or 

C/P Coop Program means the C/P Coop 

Program described at § 660.160, subpart 

D. 

Coop agreement means a private 

agreement between a group of MS/CVendorsed limited entry permit owners or 

C/P-endorsed permit owners that 

contains all information specified at 

§§ 660.150 and 660.160, subpart D. 

Coop member means a permit owner 

of an MS/CV-endorsed permit for the 

MS Coop Program that is a party to an 

MS coop agreement, or a permit owner 

of a C/P-endorsed permit for the C/P 

Coop Program that is legally obligated to 

the C/P coop. 

Coop permit means a Federal permit 

required to participate as a Pacific 

whiting coop in the catcher/processor or 

mothership sectors. 

Designated coop manager means an 

individual appointed by a permitted 

coop that is identified in the coop 

agreement and is responsible for actions 

described at §§ 660.150 (for an MS coop) 

or 660.160 (for a C/P coop), subpart D. 

IBQ pounds means the quotas, 

expressed in round weight of fish, that 

are issued annually to each QS permit 

owner in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

based on the amount of IBQ they own 

and the amount of allowable bycatch 

mortality allocated to the Shorebased 

IFQ Program. IBQ pounds have the same 

species/species group and area 

designations as the IBQ from which they 

are issued. 

IFQ first receivers mean persons who 

first receive, purchase, or take custody, 

control, or possession of catch onshore 

directly from a vessel that harvested the 

catch while fishing under the 

Shorebased IFQ Program described at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

IFQ landing means an offload of fish 

harvested under the Shorebased IFQ 

Program described at § 660.140, subpart 

D. 

Individual bycatch quota (IBQ) means 

the amount of bycatch quota for an 

individual species/species group and 

area expressed as a percentage of the 

annual allocation of allowable bycatch 

mortality to the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. IBQ is used as the basis for the 

annual calculation and allocation of a 

QS permit owner’s IBQ pounds in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. Both IBQ and 

QS may be listed on a QS permit and 

in the associated QS account. Species 

for which IBQ will be issued for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program are listed at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

Individual fishing quota (IFQ) means 

a Federal permit to harvest a quantity of 

fish, expressed as a percentage of the 

total allowable catch of a fishery that 

may be received or held for exclusive 

use by a person. An IFQ is a harvest 

privilege that may be revoked at any 

time in accordance with the MagnusonStevens Act. IFQ species for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program are listed at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

Inter-coop means two or more 

permitted coops that have submitted an 

accepted inter-coop agreement to NMFS 

that specifies a coordinated strategy for 

harvesting pooled allocations of Pacific 

whiting and non-whiting groundfish. 

Inter-coop agreement means a written 

agreement between two or more 

permitted mothership coops and which 

contains private contractual 

arrangements for sharing catch and/or 

bycatch with one another. 

Material change means, for the 

purposes of a coop agreement, a change 

to any of the required components of the 

coop agreement, defined at §§ 660.150 

and 660.160, subpart D, which was 

submitted to NMFS during the 

application process for the coop permit. 

Mothership coop or MS coop means a 

group of MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

permit owners that are authorized by 

means of a coop permit to jointly 

harvest and process from a single coop 

allocation. 

Mothership Coop Program or MS 

Coop Program means the MS Coop 

Program described at § 660.150, subpart 

D, and includes both the coop and noncoop fisheries. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60943 

Mutual agreement exception means, 

for the purpose of § 660.150, subpart D, 

an agreement that allows the owner of 

an MS/CV-endorsed limited entry 

permit to withdraw the permit’s 

obligation of its catch history 

assignment to a permitted mothership 

processor, when mutually agreed to 

with the mothership processor, and to 

obligate to a different permitted 

mothership processor. 

Pacific halibut set-aside means an 

amount of Pacific halibut annually set 

aside for the at-sea whiting fisheries 

(mothership and C/P sectors) and which 

is based on the trawl allocation of 

Pacific whiting. 

Pacific whiting IFQ fishery means a 

trip in which a vessel registered to a 

trawl-endorsed limited entry permit 

uses legal midwater groundfish trawl 

gear with a valid declaration for limited 

entry midwater trawl, Pacific whiting 

IFQ, as specified at § 660.13(d)(5), 

subpart C, during the dates what the 

midwater Pacific whiting season is 

open. 

Pacific whiting shoreside first 

receivers means persons who first 

receive, purchase, or take custody, 

control, or possession of Pacific whiting 

onshore directly from a Pacific whiting 

shoreside vessel. 

Pacific whiting shoreside or 

shorebased fishery means Pacific 

whiting shoreside vessels and Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receivers. 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessel 

means any vessel that fishes using 

midwater trawl gear to take, retain, 

possess and land 4,000-lb (1,814 kg) or 

more of Pacific whiting per fishing trip 

from the Pacific whiting shorebased 

sector allocation for delivery to a Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receiver during 

the primary season. 

Processor obligation means an annual 

requirement for an MS/CV-endorsed 

limited entry permit to assign the 

amount of catch available from the 

permit’s catch history assignment to a 

particular MS permit. 

Quota pounds (QP) means the quotas, 

expressed in round weight of fish, that 

are issued annually to each QS permit 

owner in the Shorebased IFQ Program 

based on the amount of QS they own 

and the amount of fish allocated to the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. QP have the 

same species/species group and area 

designations as the QS from which they 

are issued. 

Quota share (QS) means the amount 

of fishing quota for an individual 

species/species group and area 

expressed as a percentage of the annual 

allocation of fish to the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. The QS is used as the basis for 

the annual calculation and allocation of 

a QS permit owner’s QP in the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. Both QS and 

IBQ may be listed on a QS permit and 

in the associated QS account. Species 

for which QS will be issued for the 

Shorebased IFQ Program are listed at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

Shorebased IFQ Program means the 

Shorebased IFQ Program described at 

§ 660.140, subpart D. 

Vessel account means an account 

held by the vessel owner where QP and 

IBQ pounds are registered for use by a 

vessel in the Shorebased IFQ Program. 

Vessel limits means the maximum 

amount of QP or IBQ pounds a vessel 

owner can hold, acquire, and/or use 

during a calendar year. Vessel limits 

specify the maximum amount of QP or 

IBQ pounds that may be registered to a 

single vessel account during the year 

(QP Vessel Limit) and, for some species, 

the maximum amount of unused QP or 

IBQ pounds registered to a vessel 

account at any one time (Unused QP 

Vessel Limit). 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery—prohibitions. 

These prohibitions are specific to the 

limited entry trawl fisheries. General 

groundfish prohibitions are defined at 

§ 660.12, subpart C. In addition to the 

general prohibitions specified in 

§ 600.725 of this chapter, it is unlawful 

for any person or vessel to: 

(a) General—(1) Trawl gear 

endorsement. Fish with groundfish 

trawl gear, or carry groundfish trawl 

gear on board a vessel that also has 

groundfish on board, unless the vessel 

is registered for use with a valid limited 

entry permit with a trawl gear 

endorsement, with the following 

exception. 

(i) The vessel is in continuous transit 

from outside the fishery management 

area to a port in Washington, Oregon, or 

California; 

(ii) The vessel is registered to a 

limited entry MS permit with a valid 

mothership fishery declaration, in 

which case trawl nets and doors must be 

stowed in a secured and covered 

manner, and detached from all towing 

lines, so as to be rendered unusable for 

fishing. 

(2) Sorting. [Reserved] 

(3) Recordkeeping and reporting. (i) 

Fail to comply with all recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements at § 660.13, 

subpart C; including failure to submit 

information, submission of inaccurate 

information, or intentionally submitting 

false information on any report required 

at § 660.13(d), subpart C. 

(ii) Falsify or fail to make and/or file, 

retain or make available any and all 

reports of groundfish landings, 

containing all data, and in the exact 

manner, required by the regulation at 

§ 660.13, subpart C, or § 660.113, 

subpart D. 

(4) Fishing in conservation areas with 

trawl gear. (i) Operate any vessel 

registered to a limited entry permit with 

a trawl endorsement and trawl gear on 

board in a applicable GCA (defined at 

§ 660.11, subpart C and § 660.130(e), 

subpart D), except for purposes of 

continuous transiting, with all 

groundfish trawl gear stowed in 

accordance with § 660.130(e)(4), subpart 

D or except as authorized in the 

groundfish management measures 

published at § 660.130, subpart D. 

(ii) Fish with bottom trawl gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C) 

anywhere within EFH seaward of a line 

approximating the 700-fm (1280-m) 

depth contour, as defined in § 660.76, 

subpart C. For the purposes of 

regulation, EFH seaward of 700-fm 

(1280-m) within the EEZ is described at 

§ 660.75, subpart C. 

(iii) Fish with bottom trawl gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C) with a 

footrope diameter greater than 19 inches 

(48 cm) (including rollers, bobbins or 

other material encircling or tied along 

the length of the footrope) anywhere 

within EFH within the EEZ. For the 

purposes of regulation, EFH within the 

EEZ is described at § 660.75, subpart C. 

(iv) Fish with bottom trawl gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C) with a 

footrope diameter greater than 8 inches 

(20 cm) (including rollers, bobbins or 

other material encircling or tied along 

the length of the footrope) anywhere 

within the EEZ shoreward of a line 

approximating the 100-fm (183-m) 

depth contour (defined at § 660.73, 

subpart C). 

(v) Fish with bottom trawl gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C), within 

the EEZ in the following areas (defined 

at §§ 660.77 and 660.78, Subpart C): 

Olympic 2, Biogenic 1, Biogenic 2, 

Grays Canyon, Biogenic 3, Astoria 

Canyon, Nehalem Bank/Shale Pile, 

Siletz Deepwater, Daisy Bank/Nelson 

Island, Newport Rockpile/Stonewall 

Bank, Heceta Bank, Deepwater off Coos 

Bay, Bandon High Spot, Rogue Canyon. 

(vi) Fish with bottom trawl gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C), other 

than demersal seine, unless otherwise 

specified in this section or § 660.381, 

within the EEZ in the following areas 

(defined at § 660.79, subpart C): Eel 

River Canyon, Blunts Reef, Mendocino 

Ridge, Delgada Canyon, Tolo Bank, 

Point Arena North, Point Arena South 

Biogenic Area, Cordell Bank/Biogenic 

Area, Farallon Islands/Fanny Shoal, 

Half Moon Bay, Monterey Bay/Canyon, 

Point Sur Deep, Big Sur Coast/Port San 

Luis, East San Lucia Bank, Point 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60944 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Conception, Hidden Reef/Kidney Bank 

(within Cowcod Conservation Area 

West), Catalina Island, Potato Bank 

(within Cowcod Conservation Area 

West), Cherry Bank (within Cowcod 

Conservation Area West), and Cowcod 

EFH Conservation Area East. 

(vii) Fish with bottom contact gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C) within 

the EEZ in the following areas (defined 

at §§ 660.78 and 660.79, subpart C): 

Thompson Seamount, President Jackson 

Seamount, Cordell Bank (50–fm (91-m) 

isobath), Harris Point, Richardson Rock, 

Scorpion, Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. 

(viii) Fish with bottom contact gear 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C), or any 

other gear that is deployed deeper than 

500-fm (914-m), within the Davidson 

Seamount area (defined at § 660.79, 

subpart C). 

(b) Shorebased IFQ Program. 

[Reserved] 

(c) MS and C/P Coop Programs. 

[Reserved] 

(d) MS Coop Program (coop and noncoop fisheries). [Reserved] 

(e) C/P Coop Program. [Reserved] 

(f) Pacific Whiting Fisheries—(1) 

Pacific whiting vessel license 

requirements prior to trawl 

rationalization. Fish in any of the 

sectors of the whiting fishery described 

at § 660.131(a), subpart D, after May 11, 

2009 using a vessel that is not registered 

for use with a sector-appropriate Pacific 

whiting vessel license under § 660.26, 

subpart C. After May 11, 2009, vessels 

are prohibited from fishing, landing, or 

processing primary season Pacific 

whiting with a catcher/processor, 

mothership or mothership catcher 

vessel that has no history of 

participation within that specific sector 

of the whiting fishery during the period 

from January 1, 1997, through January 1, 

2007, or with a shoreside catcher vessels 

that has no history of participation 

within the shorebased sector of the 

whiting fishery during the period from 

January 1, 1994 through January 1, 2007, 

as specified in § 660.26(c), subpart C. 

For the purpose of this paragraph, 

‘‘historic participation’’ for a specific 

sector is the same as the qualifying 

criteria listed in § 660.26(c), subpart C. 

(i) If a Pacific whiting vessel license 

is registered for use with a vessel, fail 

to carry that license onboard the vessel 

registered for use with the license at any 

time the vessel is licensed. A photocopy 

of the license may not substitute for the 

license itself. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Process whiting in the fishery 

management area during times or in 

areas where at-sea processing is 

prohibited for the sector in which the 

vessel participates, unless: 

(i) The fish are received from a 

member of a Pacific Coast treaty Indian 

tribe fishing under § 660.50, subpart C; 

(ii) The fish are processed by a wasteprocessing vessel according to 

§ 660.131(j), subpart D; or 

(iii) The vessel is completing 

processing of whiting taken on board 

during that vessel’s primary season. 

(3) During times or in areas where atsea processing is prohibited, take and 

retain or receive whiting, except as 

cargo or fish waste, on a vessel in the 

fishery management area that already 

has processed whiting on board. An 

exception to this prohibition is provided 

if the fish are received within the tribal 

U&A from a member of a Pacific Coast 

treaty Indian tribe fishing under 

§ 660.50, subpart C. 

(4) Fish as a mothership if that vessel 

operates in the same calendar year as a 

catcher/processor in the whiting fishery, 

according to § 660.131, subpart D. 

(5) Operate as a waste-processing 

vessel within 48 hours of a primary 

season for whiting in which that vessel 

operates as a catcher/processor or 

mothership, according to § 660.131(j), 

subpart D. 

(6) On a vessel used to fish for 

whiting, fail to keep the trawl doors on 

board the vessel, when taking and 

retention is prohibited under 

§ 660.131(f), subpart D. 

(7) Sort or discard any portion of the 

catch taken by a catcher vessel in the 

mothership sector prior to the catch 

being received on a mothership, and 

prior to the observer being provided 

access to the unsorted catch, with the 

exception of minor amounts of catch 

that are lost when the codend is 

separated from the net and prepared for 

transfer. 

(8) Pacific whiting shoreside first 

receivers. (i) [Reserved] 

(ii) Fail to sort fish received from a 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessel prior to 

first weighing after offloading as 

specified at § 660.131(k)(2), subpart D 

for the Pacific whiting fishery. 

(iii) Process, sell, or discard any 

groundfish received from a Pacific 

whiting shoreside vessel that has not 

been weighed on a scale that is in 

compliance with requirements at 

§ 660.131 (k)(1)(i), subpart D, and 

accounted for on an electronic fish 

ticket with the identification number for 

the Pacific whiting shoreside vessel that 

delivered the fish. 

(iv) Fail to weigh fish landed from a 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessel prior to 

transporting any fish from that landing 

away from the point of landing. 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery—recordkeeping 

and reporting. 

General groundfish recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements are defined at 

§ 660.13, subpart C. The following 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements are in addition to those 

and are specific to the limited entry 

trawl fisheries. 

(a) Shorebased IFQ Program. 

[Reserved] 

(b) MS Coop Program (coop and noncoop fisheries). [Reserved] 

(c) C/P Coop Program. [Reserved] 

(d) Participants in the Pacific whiting 

shoreside fishery prior to trawl 

rationalization. Reporting requirements 

defined in the following section are in 

addition to reporting requirements 

under applicable state law and 

requirements described at § 660.13, 

subpart C. 

(1) Reporting requirements for any 

Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver. 

(i) Responsibility for compliance. The 

Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver 

is responsible for compliance with all 

reporting requirements described in this 

paragraph. 

(ii) General requirements. All records 

or reports required by this paragraph 

must: Be maintained in English, be 

accurate, be legible, be based on local 

time, and be submitted in a timely 

manner as required in paragraph 

(d)(1)(iv)(E) of this section. 

(iii) Required information. All Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receivers must 

provide the following types of 

information: Date of landing, Pacific 

whiting shoreside vessel that made the 

delivery, gear type used, first receiver, 

round weights of species landed listed 

by species or species group including 

species with no value, number of 

salmon by species, number of Pacific 

halibut, and any other information 

deemed necessary by the Regional 

Administrator as specified on the 

appropriate electronic fish ticket form. 

(iv) Electronic fish ticket submissions. 

The Pacific whiting shoreside first 

receiver must: 

(A) Sort all fish, prior to first 

weighing, by species or species groups 

as specified at § 660.131(l)(2)(ii), subpart 

D. 

(B) Include as part of each electronic 

fish ticket submission, the actual scale 

weight for each groundfish species as 

specified by requirements at 

§ 660.131(l)(i), subpart D, and the 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessel 

identification number. 

(C) Use for the purpose of submitting 

electronic fish tickets, and maintain in 

good working order, computer 

equipment as specified at § 660.15(d), 

subpart C; 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60945 

(D) Install, use, and update as 

necessary, any NMFS-approved 

software described at § 660.15(d), 

subpart C; 

(E) Submit a completed electronic fish 

ticket for every landing that includes 

4,000-lb (1,814 kg) or more of Pacific 

whiting (round weight equivalent) no 

later than 24 hours after the date the fish 

are received, unless a waiver of this 

requirement has been granted under 

provisions specified below at paragraph 

(d)(1)(vii) of this section. 

(v) Revising a submitted electronic 

fish ticket submission. In the event that 

a data error is found, electronic fish 

ticket submissions may be revised by 

resubmitting the revised form. 

Electronic fish tickets are to be used for 

the submission of final data. 

Preliminary data, including estimates of 

fish weights or species composition, 

shall not be submitted on electronic fish 

tickets. 

(vi) Retention of Records. [Reserved] 

(vii) Waivers for submission of 

electronic fish tickets upon written 

request. On a case-by-case basis, a 

temporary written waiver of the 

requirement to submit electronic fish 

tickets may be granted by the Assistant 

Regional Administrator or designee if 

he/she determines that circumstances 

beyond the control of a Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver would result in 

inadequate data submissions using the 

electronic fish ticket system. The 

duration of the waiver will be 

determined on a case-by-case basis. 

(viii) Reporting requirements when a 

temporary waiver has been granted. 

Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers 

that have been granted a temporary 

waiver from the requirement to submit 

electronic fish tickets must submit on 

paper the same data as is required on 

electronic fish tickets within 24 hours of 

the date received during the period that 

the waiver is in effect. Paper state 

landing receipts must be sent by 

facsimile to NMFS, Northwest Region, 

Sustainable Fisheries Division, 206– 

526–6736 or by delivering it in person 

to 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115. The requirements for 

submissions of paper tickets in this 

paragraph are separate from, and in 

addition to existing state requirements 

for landing receipts or fish receiving 

tickets. 

(2) [Reserved] 

§ 660.116 Trawl fishery—observer 

requirements. 

(a) Observer coverage requirements— 

(1) NMFS-certified observers. 

(i) A catcher/processor or mothership 

125-ft (38.1-m) LOA or longer must 

carry two NMFS-certified observers, and 

a catcher/processor or mothership 

shorter than 125-ft (38.1-m) LOA must 

carry one NMFS-certified observer, each 

day that the vessel is used to take, 

retain, receive, land, process, or 

transport groundfish. 

(ii) A Pacific whiting shoreside vessel 

that sorts catch at sea must carry one 

NMFS-certified observer, from the time 

the vessel leaves port on a trip in which 

the catch is sorted at sea to the time that 

all catch from that trip has been 

offloaded. 

(2) Catcher vessels. When NMFS 

notifies the owner, operator, permit 

holder, or the manager of a catcher 

vessel, specified at § 660.16(c), Subpart 

C of any requirement to carry an 

observer, the catcher vessel may not be 

used to fish for groundfish without 

carrying an observer. 

(i) Notice of departure—basic rule. At 

least 24 hours (but not more than 36 

hours) before departing on a fishing trip, 

a vessel that has been notified by NMFS 

that it is required to carry an observer, 

or that is operating in an active 

sampling unit, must notify NMFS (or its 

designated agent) of the vessel’s 

intended time of departure. Notice will 

be given in a form to be specified by 

NMFS. 

(A) Optional notice—weather delays. 

A vessel that anticipates a delayed 

departure due to weather or sea 

conditions may advise NMFS of the 

anticipated delay when providing the 

basic notice described in paragraph 

(a)(2)(i) of this section. If departure is 

delayed beyond 36 hours from the time 

the original notice is given, the vessel 

must provide an additional notice of 

departure not less than 4 hours prior to 

departure, in order to enable NMFS to 

place an observer. 

(B) Optional notice—back-to-back 

fishing trips. A vessel that intends to 

make back-to-back fishing trips (i.e., 

trips with less than 24 hours between 

offloading from one trip and beginning 

another), may provide the basic notice 

described in paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this 

section for both trips, prior to making 

the first trip. A vessel that has given 

such notice is not required to give 

additional notice of the second trip. 

(ii) Cease fishing report. Within 24 

hours of ceasing the taking and retaining 

of groundfish, vessel owners, operators, 

or managers must notify NMFS or its 

designated agent that fishing has ceased. 

This requirement applies to any vessel 

that is required to carry an observer, or 

that is operating in a segment of the fleet 

that NMFS has identified as an active 

sampling unit. 

(b) Waiver. The Northwest Regional 

Administrator may provide written 

notification to the vessel owner stating 

that a determination has been made to 

temporarily waive coverage 

requirements because of circumstances 

that are deemed to be beyond the 

vessel’s control. 

(c) Procurement of observer services 

by catcher/processors, motherships, and 

Pacific whiting shoreside vessels that 

sort at sea. Owners of vessels required 

to carry observers under provisions at 

paragraph (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section 

must arrange for observer services from 

an observer provider permitted by the 

North Pacific Groundfish Observer 

Program under 50 CFR 679.50(i), except 

that: 

(1) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

when NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or an individual authorized 

by NMFS in lieu of an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(2) Vessels are required to procure 

observer services directly from NMFS 

and a permitted observer provider when 

NMFS has determined and given 

notification that the vessel must carry 

NMFS staff or individuals authorized by 

NMFS, in addition to an observer 

provided by a permitted observer 

provider. 

(d) Vessel responsibilities. An 

operator of a vessel required to carry 

one or more observer(s) must provide: 

(1) Accommodations and food. 

Provide accommodations and food that 

are: 

(i) At-sea processors. Equivalent to 

those provided for officers, engineers, 

foremen, deck-bosses or other 

management level personnel of the 

vessel. 

(ii) Catcher vessels. Equivalent to 

those provided to the crew. 

(2) Safe conditions. Maintain safe 

conditions on the vessel for the 

protection of observer(s) including 

adherence to all USCG and other 

applicable rules, regulations, or statutes 

pertaining to safe operation of the 

vessel, and provisions at §§ 600.725 and 

600.746 of this chapter. 

(3) Observer communications. 

Facilitate observer communications by: 

(i) Observer use of equipment. 

Allowing observer(s) to use the vessel’s 

communication equipment and 

personnel, on request, for the entry, 

transmission, and receipt of workrelated messages, at no cost to the 

observer(s) or the U.S. or designated 

agent. 

(ii) Functional equipment. Ensuring 

that the vessel’s communications 

equipment, used by observers to enter 

and transmit data, is fully functional 

and operational. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60946 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(iii) Hardware and software. Pacific 

whiting vessels that are required to 

carry one or more NMFS-certified 

observers under provisions at 

paragraphs (a)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section 

must provide hardware and software 

pursuant to regulations at 50 CFR 

679.50(g)(1)(iii)(B) and 50 CFR 

679.50(g)(2)(iii), as follows: 

(A) Providing for use by the observer 

a personal computer in working 

condition that contains a full Pentium 

120 Mhz or greater capacity processing 

chip, at least 32 megabytes of RAM, at 

least 75 megabytes of free hard disk 

storage, a Windows 9x or NT compatible 

operating system, an operating mouse, 

and a 3.5-inch (8.9 cm) floppy disk 

drive. The associated computer monitor 

must have a viewable screen size of at 

least 14.1 inches (35.8 cm) and 

minimum display settings of 600 x 800 

pixels. The computer equipment 

specified in this paragraph (A) must be 

connected to a communication device 

that provides a modem connection to 

the NMFS host computer and supports 

one or more of the following protocols: 

ITU V.22, ITU V.22bis, ITU V.32, ITU 

V.32bis, or ITU V.34. Processors that use 

a modem must have at least a 28.8kbs 

Hayes-compatible modem. The abovespecified hardware and software 

requirements do not apply to processors 

that do not process groundfish. 

(B) NMFS-supplied software. 

Ensuring that each vessel that is 

required to carry a NMFS-certified 

observer obtains the data entry software 

provided by the NMFS for use by the 

observer. 

(4) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to, and the use of, the vessel’s 

navigation equipment and personnel, on 

request, to determine the vessel’s 

position. 

(5) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working decks, holding 

bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, 

weight scales, cargo holds, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish or fish 

products at any time. 

(6) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board, or fish and 

fish products are transferred from the 

vessel, to allow sampling the catch or 

observing the transfer, unless the 

observer specifically requests not to be 

notified. 

(7) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any state or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(8) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(i) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(ii) Providing the observer(s) with a 

safe work area. 

(iii) Collecting bycatch when 

requested by the observer(s). 

(iv) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish when requested by the observer(s). 

(v) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(vi) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(9) At-sea transfers to or from 

processing vessels. Processing vessels 

must: 

(i) Ensure that transfers of observers at 

sea via small boat or raft are carried out 

during daylight hours, under safe 

conditions, and with the agreement of 

observers involved. 

(ii) Notify observers at least 3 hours 

before observers are transferred, such 

that the observers can collect personal 

belongings, equipment, and scientific 

samples. 

(iii) Provide a safe pilot ladder and 

conduct the transfer to ensure the safety 

of observers during transfers. 

(iv) Provide an experienced crew 

member to assist observers in the small 

boat or raft in which any transfer is 

made. 

(e) Sample station and operational— 

(1) Observer sampling station. This 

paragraph contains the requirements for 

observer sampling stations. The vessel 

owner must provide an observer 

sampling station that complies with this 

section so that the observer can carry 

out required duties. 

(i) Accessibility. The observer 

sampling station must be available to 

the observer at all times. 

(ii) Location. The observer sampling 

station must be located within 4 m of 

the location from which the observer 

samples unsorted catch. Unobstructed 

passage must be provided between the 

observer sampling station and the 

location where the observer collects 

sample catch. 

(iii) Minimum work space aboard atsea processing vessels. The observer 

must have a working area of 4.5 square 

meters, including the observer’s 

sampling table, for sampling and storage 

of fish to be sampled. The observer must 

be able to stand upright and have a work 

area at least 0.9 m deep in the area in 

front of the table and scale. 

(iv) Table aboard at-sea processing 

vessels. The observer sampling station 

must include a table at least 0.6 m deep, 

1.2 m wide and 0.9 m high and no more 

than 1.1 m high. The entire surface area 

of the table must be available for use by 

the observer. Any area for the observer 

sampling scale is in addition to the 

minimum space requirements for the 

table. The observer’s sampling table 

must be secured to the floor or wall. 

(v) Diverter board aboard at-sea 

processing vessels. The conveyor belt 

conveying unsorted catch must have a 

removable board (diverter board) to 

allow all fish to be diverted from the 

belt directly into the observer’s 

sampling baskets. The diverter board 

must be located downstream of the scale 

used to weigh total catch. At least 1 m 

of accessible belt space, located 

downstream of the scale used to weigh 

total catch, must be available for the 

observer’s use when sampling. 

(vi) Other requirement for at-sea 

processing vessels. The sampling station 

must be in a well-drained area that 

includes floor grating (or other material 

that prevents slipping), lighting 

adequate for day or night sampling, and 

a hose that supplies fresh or sea water 

to the observer. 

(vii) Observer sampling scale. The 

observer sample station must include a 

NMFS-approved platform scale 

(pursuant to requirements at 50 CFR 

679.28(d)(5)) with a capacity of at least 

50 kg located within 1 m of the 

observer’s sampling table. The scale 

must be mounted so that the weighing 

surface is no more than 0.7 m above the 

floor. 

(2) [Reserved] 

§ 660.120 Trawl fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

(a) General. In addition to the General 

provisions listed at § 660.60, subpart C, 

the crossover provisions of this section 

apply to vessels operating in the limited 

entry trawl fishery. 

(b) Operating in north-south 

management areas with different trip 

limits—(1) Minor Rockfish. 

(i) If a trawl vessel takes and retains 

minor shelf rockfish south of 40°10′N. 

lat., that vessel is also permitted to take 

and retain, possess, or land yellowtail 

rockfish up to its cumulative limits 

north of 40°10′N. lat., even if yellowtail 

rockfish is part of the landings from 

minor shelf rockfish taken and retained 

south of 40°10′N. lat. Widow rockfish is 

included in overall shelf rockfish limits 

for all gear groups. 

(ii) If a trawl vessel takes and retains 

minor shelf rockfish north of 40°10′N. 

lat., that vessel is also permitted to take 

and retain, possess, or land chilipepper 

rockfish up to its cumulative limits 

south of 40°10′ N. lat., even if 

chilipepper rockfish is part of the 

landings from minor shelf rockfish 

taken and retained north of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(2) DTS complex. Differential trawl 

trip limits for the ‘‘DTS complex’’ north 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60947 

and south of latitudinal management 

lines may be specified in trip limits, 

Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) of 

this subpart. Vessels operating in the 

limited entry trawl fishery are subject to 

the crossover provisions in this 

paragraph when making landings that 

include any one of the four species in 

the ‘‘DTS complex.’’ 

(3) Flatfish complex. There are often 

differential trip limits for the flatfish 

complex (butter, curlfin, English, 

flathead, petrale, rex, rock, and sand 

soles, Pacific sanddab, and starry 

flounder) north and south of latitudinal 

management lines. Vessels operating in 

the limited entry trawl fishery are 

subject to the crossover provisions in 

this paragraph when making landings 

that include any one of the species in 

the flatfish complex. 

§ 660.130 Trawl fishery—management 

measures. 

(a) General. Limited entry trawl 

vessels include those vessels registered 

to a limited entry permit with a trawl 

endorsement. Most species taken in 

limited entry trawl fisheries will be 

managed with cumulative trip limits 

(see trip limits in Tables 1 (North) and 

1 (South) of this subpart), size limits 

(see § 660.60(h)(5), subpart C), seasons 

(see Pacific whiting at § 660.131(b), 

subpart D), gear restrictions (see 

paragraph (b) of this section) and closed 

areas (see paragraph (e) of this section 

and §§ 660.70 through 660.79, subpart 

C). The trawl fishery has gear 

requirements and trip limits that differ 

by the type of trawl gear on board and 

the area fished. Cowcod retention is 

prohibited in all fisheries and 

groundfish vessels operating south of 

Point Conception must adhere to CCA 

restrictions (see paragraph (e)(1) of this 

section and § 660.70, subpart C). The 

trip limits in Tables 1 (North) and 1 

(South) of this subpart apply to vessels 

participating in the limited entry 

groundfish trawl fishery and may not be 

exceeded. Federal commercial 

groundfish regulations are not intended 

to supersede any more restrictive state 

commercial groundfish regulations 

relating to federally-managed 

groundfish. 

(b) Trawl gear requirements and 

restrictions. Trawl nets may be fished 

with or without otter boards, and may 

use warps or cables to herd fish. 

(1) Codends. Only single-walled 

codends may be used in any trawl. 

Double-walled codends are prohibited. 

(2) Mesh size. Groundfish trawl gear 

must meet the minimum mesh size 

requirements in this paragraph. Mesh 

size requirements apply throughout the 

net. Minimum trawl mesh sizes are: 

Bottom trawl, 4.5 inches (11.4 cm); 

midwater trawl, 3.0 inches (7.6 cm). 

Minimum trawl mesh size requirements 

are met if a 20-gauge stainless steel 

wedge, less one thickness of the metal 

wedge, can be passed with only thumb 

pressure through at least 16 of 20 sets 

of two meshes each of wet mesh. 

(3) Chafing gear. Chafing gear may 

encircle no more than 50 percent of the 

net’s circumference. No section of 

chafing gear may be longer than 50 

meshes of the net to which it is 

attached. Chafing gear may be used only 

on the last 50 meshes, measured from 

the terminal (closed) end of the codend. 

Except at the corners, the terminal end 

of each section of chafing gear on all 

trawl gear must not be connected to the 

net. (The terminal end is the end 

farthest from the mouth of the net.) 

Chafing gear must be attached outside 

any riblines and restraining straps. 

There is no limit on the number of 

sections of chafing gear on a net. 

(4) Large footrope trawl gear. Large 

footrope gear is bottom trawl gear with 

a footrope diameter larger than 8 inches 

(20 cm) (including rollers, bobbins or 

other material encircling or tied along 

the length of the footrope). Fishing with 

bottom trawl gear with a footrope 

diameter greater than 19 inches (48 cm) 

(including rollers, bobbins, or other 

material encircling or tied along the 

length of the footrope) is prohibited 

anywhere in EFH within the EEZ, as 

defined by latitude/longitude 

coordinates at § 660.75, subpart C. 

(5) Small footrope trawl gear. Small 

footrope gear is bottom trawl gear with 

a footrope diameter of 8 inches (20 cm) 

or smaller (including rollers, bobbins or 

other material encircling or tied along 

the length of the footrope). Other lines 

or ropes that run parallel to the footrope 

may not be augmented with material 

encircling or tied along their length 

such that they have a diameter larger 

than 8 inches (20 cm). For enforcement 

purposes, the footrope will be measured 

in a straight line from the outside edge 

to the opposite outside edge at the 

widest part on any individual part, 

including any individual disk, roller, 

bobbin, or any other device. 

(i) Selective flatfish trawl gear. 

Selective flatfish trawl gear is a type of 

small footrope trawl gear. The selective 

flatfish trawl net must be a two-seamed 

net with no more than two riblines, 

excluding the codend. The breastline 

may not be longer than 3 ft (0.92 m) in 

length. There may be no floats along the 

center third of the headrope or attached 

to the top panel except on the riblines. 

The footrope must be less than 105 ft 

(32.26 m) in length. The headrope must 

be not less than 30 percent longer than 

the footrope. An explanatory diagram of 

a selective flatfish trawl net is provided 

as Figure 1 of part 660, subpart D. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(6) Midwater (or pelagic) trawl gear. 

Midwater trawl gear must have 

unprotected footropes at the trawl 

mouth, and must not have rollers, 

bobbins, tires, wheels, rubber discs, or 

any similar device anywhere on any 

part of the net. The footrope of 

midwater gear may not be enlarged by 

encircling it with chains or by any other 

means. Ropes or lines running parallel 

to the footrope of midwater trawl gear 

must be bare and may not be suspended 

with chains or any other materials. 

Sweep lines, including the bottom leg of 

the bridle, must be bare. For at least 20 

ft (6.15 m) immediately behind the 

footrope or headrope, bare ropes or 

mesh of 16-inch (40.6-cm) minimum 

mesh size must completely encircle the 

net. A band of mesh (a ‘‘skirt’’) may 

encircle the net under transfer cables, 

lifting or splitting straps (chokers), but 

must be: over riblines and restraining 

straps; the same mesh size and coincide 

knot-to-knot with the net to which it is 

attached; and no wider than 16 meshes. 

(c) Cumulative trip limits and 

prohibitions by limited entry trawl gear 

type. Management measures may vary 

depending on the type of trawl gear (i.e., 

large footrope, small footrope, selective 

flatfish, or midwater trawl gear) used 

and/or on board a vessel during a 

fishing trip, cumulative limit period, 

and the area fished. Trawl nets may be 

used on and off the seabed. For some 

species or species groups, Table 1 

(North) and Table 1 (South) of this 

subpart provide cumulative and/or trip 

limits that are specific to different types 

of trawl gear: large footrope, small 

footrope (including selective flatfish), 

selective flatfish, midwater, and 

multiple types. If Table 1 (North) and 

Table 1 (South) of this subpart provide 

gear specific limits for a particular 

species or species group, it is unlawful 

to take and retain, possess or land that 

species or species group with limited 

entry trawl gears other than those listed. 

(1) Fishing with large footrope trawl 

gear. It is unlawful for any vessel using 

large footrope gear to fish for groundfish 

shoreward of the RCAs defined at 

paragraph (e)(4) of this section and at 

§§ 660.70 through 660.74, subpart C. 

The use of large footrope gear is 

permitted seaward of the RCAs 

coastwide. 

(2) Fishing with small footrope trawl 

gear. North of 40°10′ N. lat., it is 

unlawful for any vessel using small 

footrope gear (except selective flatfish 

gear) to fish for groundfish or have small 

footrope trawl gear (except selective 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60948 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

flatfish gear) onboard while fishing 

shoreward of the RCA defined at 

paragraph (d) of this section and at 

§§ 660.70 through 660.74, subpart C. 

South of 40°10′ N. lat., small footrope 

gear is required shoreward of the RCA. 

Small footrope gear is permitted 

seaward of the RCA coastwide. 

(i) North of 40°10′ N. lat., selective 

flatfish gear is required shoreward of the 

RCA defined at paragraph (d) of this 

section and at §§ 660.70, through 

660.74, subpart C. South of 40°10′N. lat., 

selective flatfish gear is permitted, but 

not required, shoreward of the RCA. The 

use of selective flatfish trawl gear is 

permitted seaward of the RCA 

coastwide. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) Fishing with midwater trawl gear. 

North of 40°10′ N. lat., midwater trawl 

gear is permitted only for vessels 

participating in the primary Pacific 

whiting fishery (for details on the 

Pacific whiting fishery see § 660.131, 

subpart D.) South of 40°10′ N. lat., the 

use of midwater trawl gear is prohibited 

shoreward of the RCA and permitted 

seaward of the RCA. 

(4) More than one type of trawl gear 

on board. The cumulative trip limits in 

Table 1 (North) or Table 1 (South) of 

this subpart must not be exceeded. 

(i) The following restrictions apply to 

vessels operating north of 40°10′ N. lat.: 

(A) A vessel may not have both 

groundfish trawl gear and nongroundfish trawl gear onboard 

simultaneously. A vessel may not have 

both bottom trawl gear and midwater 

trawl gear onboard simultaneously. A 

vessel may have more than one type of 

limited entry bottom trawl gear on 

board, either simultaneously or 

successively, during a cumulative limit 

period. 

(B) If a vessel fishes exclusively with 

large or small footrope trawl gear during 

an entire cumulative limit period, the 

vessel is subject to the small or large 

footrope trawl gear cumulative limits 

and that vessel must fish seaward of the 

RCA during that limit period. 

(C) If a vessel fishes exclusively with 

selective flatfish trawl gear during an 

entire cumulative limit period, then the 

vessel is subject to the selective flatfish 

trawl gear-cumulative limits during that 

limit period, regardless of whether the 

vessel is fishing shoreward or seaward 

of the RCA. 

(D) If more than one type of bottom 

trawl gear (selective flatfish, large 

footrope, or small footrope) is on board, 

either simultaneously or successively, at 

any time during a cumulative limit 

period, then the most restrictive 

cumulative limit associated with the 

bottom trawl gear on board during that 

cumulative limit period applies for the 

entire cumulative limit period, 

regardless of whether the vessel is 

fishing shoreward or seaward of the 

RCA. 

(E) If a vessel fishes both north and 

south of 40°10′ N. lat. with any type of 

small footrope gear onboard the vessel 

at any time during the cumulative limit 

period, the most restrictive trip limit 

associated with the gear on board 

applies for that trip and will count 

toward the cumulative trip limit for that 

gear (See crossover provisions at 

§ 660.120, subpart D.) 

(F) Midwater trawl gear is allowed 

only for vessels participating in the 

primary whiting season. 

(ii) The following restrictions apply to 

vessels operating south of 40°10′ N. lat.: 

(A) A vessel may not have both 

groundfish trawl gear and nongroundfish trawl gear onboard 

simultaneously. A vessel may not have 

both bottom trawl gear and midwater 

trawl gear onboard simultaneously. A 

vessel may not have small footrope 

trawl gear and any other type of bottom 

trawl gear onboard simultaneously. 

(B) For vessels using more than one 

type of trawl gear during a cumulative 

limit period, limits are additive up to 

the largest limit for the type of gear used 

during that period. (Example: If a vessel 

harvests 300-lb (136 kg) of chilipepper 

rockfish with small footrope-gear, it may 

harvest up to 11,700–lb (5,209 kg) of 

chilipepper rockfish with large footrope 

gear during the July and August 

cumulative period, because the largest 

cumulative limit for chilipepper 

rockfish during that period is 12,000–lb 

(5,443 kg) for large footrope gear.) 

(C) If a vessel fishes both north and 

south of 40°10′ N. lat. with any type of 

small footrope gear onboard the vessel 

at any time during the cumulative limit 

period, the most restrictive trip limit 

associated with the gear on board 

applies for that trip and will count 

toward the cumulative trip limit for that 

gear (See crossover provisions at 

§ 660.120, subpart D.) 

(d) Sorting. Under § 660.12 (a)(8), 

subpart C, it is unlawful for any person 

to ‘‘fail to sort, prior to the first weighing 

after offloading, those groundfish 

species or species groups for which 

there is a trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY, if the vessel fished or 

landed in an area during a time when 

such trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY applied.’’ The States of 

Washington, Oregon, and California 

may also require that vessels record 

their landings as sorted on their state 

landing receipt. 

(1) Coastwide. Widow rockfish, 

canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, 

yelloweye rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, 

black rockfish, blue rockfish, minor 

nearshore rockfish, minor shelf rockfish, 

minor slope rockfish, shortspine and 

longspine thornyhead, Dover sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, petrale sole, starry 

flounder, English sole, other flatfish, 

lingcod, sablefish, Pacific cod, spiny 

dogfish, other fish, longnose skate, and 

Pacific whiting; 

(2) North of 40°10′ N. lat. POP, 

yellowtail rockfish; 

(3) South of 40°10′ N. lat. Minor 

shallow nearshore rockfish, minor 

deeper nearshore rockfish, California 

scorpionfish, chilipepper rockfish, 

bocaccio rockfish, splitnose rockfish, 

Pacific sanddabs, cowcod, 

bronzespotted rockfish and cabezon. 

(e) Groundfish conservation areas 

(GCAs) applicable to trawl vessels. A 

GCA, a type of closed area, is a 

geographic area defined by coordinates 

expressed in degrees of latitude and 

longitude. The latitude and longitude 

coordinates of the GCA boundaries are 

specified at §§ 660.70 through 660.74, 

subpart C. A vessel that is fishing within 

a GCA listed in this paragraph (d) with 

trawl gear authorized for use within a 

GCA may not have any other type of 

trawl gear on board the vessel. The 

following GCAs apply to vessels 

participating in the limited entry trawl 

fishery. Additional closed areas that 

specifically apply to the Pacific whiting 

fisheries are described at § 660.131(c), 

subpart D. 

(1) Cowcod conservation areas 

(CCAs). Vessels using limited entry 

trawl gear are prohibited from fishing 

within the CCAs. See § 660.70 for the 

coordinates that define the CCAs. 

Limited entry trawl vessels may transit 

through the Western CCA with their 

gear stowed and groundfish on board 

only in a corridor through the Western 

CCA bounded on the north by the 

latitude line at 33°00.50′ N. lat., and 

bounded on the south by the latitude 

line at 32°59.50′ N. lat. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish within the CCAs, except as 

authorized in this paragraph, when 

those waters are open to fishing. 

(2) Farallon islands. Under California 

law, commercial fishing for all 

groundfish is prohibited between the 

shoreline and the 10 fm (18 m) depth 

contour around the Farallon Islands. 

(See § 660.70, subpart C) 

(3) Cordell Banks. Commercial fishing 

for groundfish is prohibited in waters of 

depths less than 100-fm (183-m) around 

Cordell Banks as defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.70, subpart C. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60949 

(4) Trawl rockfish conservation areas. 

The trawl RCAs are closed areas, 

defined by specific latitude and 

longitude coordinates which are 

specified at §§ 660.70 through 660.74, 

subpart C. Boundaries for the trawl 

RCAs applicable to groundfish trawl 

vessels throughout the year are provided 

in the header to Table 1 (North) and 

Table 1 (South) of this subpart and may 

be modified by NMFS inseason 

pursuant to § 660.60(c), subpart C. 

(i) It is unlawful to operate a vessel 

with trawl gear onboard within the 

trawl RCA, except for the purpose of 

continuous transiting, or when the use 

of trawl gear is authorized in this 

section. It is lawful to fish with 

groundfish trawl gear within the trawl 

RCA only under the following 

conditions: vessels fishing with 

midwater trawl gear on Pacific whiting 

trips during the primary whiting season, 

provided a valid declaration report has 

been filed with NMFS OLE, as required 

at § 660.12(d), subpart C; and vessels 

fishing with demersal seine gear 

between 38° N. lat. and 36° N. lat. 

shoreward of a boundary line 

approximating the 100 fm (183 m) depth 

contour as defined at § 660.73, subpart 

C, provided a valid declaration report 

has been filed. 

(ii) Trawl vessels may transit through 

an applicable GCA, with or without 

groundfish on board, provided all 

groundfish trawl gear is stowed either: 

below deck; or if the gear cannot readily 

be moved, in a secured and covered 

manner, detached from all towing lines, 

so that it is rendered unusable for 

fishing; or remaining on deck uncovered 

if the trawl doors are hung from their 

stanchions and the net is disconnected 

from the doors. These restrictions do not 

apply to vessels fishing with midwater 

trawl gear for whiting during a primary 

season. 

(iii) It is unlawful to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

limited entry trawl gear within the trawl 

RCA, unless otherwise authorized in 

this section. 

(iv) If a vessel fishes in the trawl RCA, 

it may not participate in any fishing on 

that trip that is prohibited within the 

trawl RCA. [For example, if a vessel 

fishes in the pink shrimp fishery within 

the RCA, the vessel cannot on the same 

trip fish in the DTS fishery seaward of 

the RCA.] Nothing in these Federal 

regulations supersedes any state 

regulations that may prohibit trawling 

shoreward of the fishery management 

area (3–200 nm). 

(5) Essential fish habitat conservation 

areas. An EFHCA, a type of closed area, 

is a geographic area defined by 

coordinates expressed in degrees of 

latitude and longitude at §§ 660.75 

through 660.79, subpart C, where 

specified types of fishing are prohibited 

in accordance with § 660.12, subpart C. 

EFHCAs apply to vessels using bottom 

trawl gear or to vessels using ‘‘bottom 

contact gear,’’ which is defined at 

§ 660.11, subpart C, to include bottom 

trawl gear, among other gear types. 

(i) The following EFHCAs apply to 

vessels operating within the West Coast 

EEZ with bottom trawl gear: 

(A) Seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 700-fm (1280-m) 

depth contour. Fishing with bottom 

trawl gear is prohibited in waters of 

depths greater than 700 fm (1280 m) 

within the EFH, as defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.75 and 660.76, subpart C. 

(B) Shoreward of a boundary line 

approximating the 100-fm (183-m) 

depth contour. Fishing with bottom 

trawl gear with a footrope diameter 

greater than 8 inches (20 cm) is 

prohibited in waters shoreward of a 

boundary line approximating the 100-fm 

(183-m) depth contour, as defined by 

specific latitude and longitude 

coordinates at § 660.73, subpart C. 

(C) EFHCAs for all bottom trawl gear. 

Fishing with bottom trawl gear is 

prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.77 through 660.78, subpart C: 

Olympic 2, Biogenic 1, Biogenic 2, 

Grays Canyon, Biogenic 3, Astoria 

Canyon, Nehalem Bank/Shale Pile, 

Siletz Deepwater, Daisy Bank/Nelson 

Island, Newport Rockpile/Stonewall 

Bank, Heceta Bank, Deepwater off Coos 

Bay, Bandon High Spot, Rogue Canyon. 

(D) EFHCAs for all bottom trawl gear, 

except demersal seine gear. Fishing 

with bottom trawl gear except demersal 

seine gear (defined at § 660.11, subpart 

C) is prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.79, subpart C: Eel River Canyon, 

Blunts Reef, Mendocino Ridge, Delgada 

Canyon, Tolo Bank, Point Arena North, 

Point Arena South Biogenic Area, 

Cordell Bank/Biogenic Area, Farallon 

Islands/Fanny Shoal, Half Moon Bay, 

Monterey Bay/Canyon, Point Sur Deep, 

Big Sur Coast/Port San Luis, East San 

Lucia Bank, Point Conception, Hidden 

Reef/Kidney Bank (within Cowcod 

Conservation Area West), Catalina 

Island, Potato Bank (within Cowcod 

Conservation Area West), Cherry Bank 

(within Cowcod Conservation Area 

West), and Cowcod EFH Conservation 

Area East. 

(ii) EFHCAs for bottom contact gear, 

which includes bottom trawl gear. 

Fishing with bottom contact gear, 

including bottom trawl gear is 

prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.75 through 660.79, subpart C: 

Thompson Seamount, President Jackson 

Seamount, Cordell Bank (50 fm (91 m) 

isobath), Harris Point, Richardson Rock, 

Scorpion, Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. Fishing with 

bottom contact gear is also prohibited 

within the Davidson Seamount EFH 

Area, which is defined with specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.75, subpart C. 

§ 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

(a) Sectors. In order for a vessel to fish 

in a particular whiting fishery sector 

after May 11, 2009, that vessel must be 

registered for use with a sector-specific 

Pacific whiting vessel license under 

§ 660.26, subpart C. 

(1) The catcher/processor sector is 

composed of catcher/processors, which 

are vessels that harvest and process 

whiting during a calendar year. 

(2) The mothership sector is 

composed of motherships and catcher 

vessels that harvest whiting for delivery 

to motherships. Motherships are vessels 

that process, but do not harvest, whiting 

during a calendar year. 

(3) The shorebased sector is composed 

of vessels that harvest whiting for 

delivery to Pacific whiting shoreside 

first receivers. Notwithstanding the 

other provisions of 50 CFR part 660, 

subpart C or D, a vessel that is 75 feet 

or less LOA that harvests whiting and, 

in addition to heading and gutting, cuts 

the tail off and freezes the whiting, is 

not considered to be a catcher/processor 

nor is it considered to be processing 

fish. Such a vessel is considered a 

participant in the shorebased whiting 

sector, and is subject to regulations and 

allocations for that sector. 

(b) Pacific whiting seasons. 

(1) Primary seasons. The primary 

seasons for the whiting fishery are: 

(i) For the shorebased sector, the 

period(s) when the large-scale target 

fishery is conducted (when trip limits 

under paragraph (b) of this section are 

not in effect); 

(ii) For catcher/processors, the 

period(s) when at-sea processing is 

allowed and the fishery is open for the 

catcher/processor sector; and 

(iii) For vessels delivering to 

motherships, the period(s) when at-sea 

processing is allowed and the fishery is 

open for the mothership sector. 

(2) Before and after the primary 

seasons. Before and after the primary 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60950 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

seasons, trip landing or frequency limits 

may be imposed under § 660.60(c). The 

sectors are defined at § 660.60(a). 

(3) Different primary season start 

dates. North of 40°30′ N. lat., different 

starting dates may be established for the 

catcher/processor sector, the mothership 

sector, catcher vessels delivering to 

shoreside processors north of 42° N. lat., 

and catcher vessels delivering to 

shoreside processors between 42° N. lat. 

through 40°30′ N. lat. 

(i) Procedures. The primary seasons 

for the whiting fishery north of 40°30′ N. 

lat. generally will be established 

according to the procedures of the 

PCGFMP for developing and 

implementing harvest specifications and 

apportionments. The season opening 

dates remain in effect unless changed, 

generally with the harvest specifications 

and management measures. 

(ii) Criteria. The start of a primary 

season may be changed based on a 

recommendation from the Council and 

consideration of the following factors, if 

applicable: Size of the harvest 

guidelines for whiting and bycatch 

species; age/size structure of the whiting 

population; expected harvest of bycatch 

and prohibited species; availability and 

stock status of prohibited species; 

expected participation by catchers and 

processors; environmental conditions; 

timing of alternate or competing 

fisheries; industry agreement; fishing or 

processing rates; and other relevant 

information. 

(iii) Primary whiting season start 

dates and duration. After the start of a 

primary season for a sector of the 

whiting fishery, the season remains 

open for that sector until the quota is 

taken or a bycatch limit is reached and 

the fishery season for that sector is 

closed by NMFS. The starting dates for 

the primary seasons for the whiting 

fishery are as follows: 

(A) Catcher/processor sector—May 15. 

(B) Mothership sector—May 15. 

(C) Shorebased sector 

(1) North of 42° N. lat.—June 15; 

(2) Between 42°–40°30′ N. lat.—April 

1; and 

(3) South of 40°30′ N. lat.—April 15. 

(4) Trip limits in the whiting fishery. 

The ‘‘per trip’’ limit for whiting before 

and after the regular (primary) season 

for the shorebased sector is announced 

in Table 1 of this subpart, and is a 

routine management measure under 

§ 660.60(c). This trip limit includes any 

whiting caught shoreward of 100-fm 

(183-m) in the Eureka, CA area. The ‘‘per 

trip’’ limit for other groundfish species 

before, during, and after the regular 

(primary) season are announced in 

Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) of 

this subpart and apply as follows: 

(i) During the groundfish cumulative 

limit periods both before and after the 

primary whiting season, vessels may use 

either small and/or large footrope gear, 

but are subject to the more restrictive 

trip limits for those entire cumulative 

periods. 

(ii) If, during a primary whiting 

season, a whiting vessel harvests a 

groundfish species other than whiting 

for which there is a midwater trip limit, 

then that vessel may also harvest up to 

another footrope-specific limit for that 

species during any cumulative limit 

period that overlaps the start or end of 

the primary whiting season. 

(5) Bycatch limits in the whiting 

fishery. The bycatch limits for the 

whiting fishery may be established, 

adjusted, and used inseason to close a 

sector or sectors of the whiting fishery 

to achieve the rebuilding of an 

overfished or depleted stock. These 

limits are routine management measures 

under § 660.60(c), subpart C, and, as 

such, may be adjusted inseason or may 

have new species added to the list of 

those with bycatch limits. Closure of a 

sector or sectors when a bycatch limit is 

projected to be reached is an automatic 

action under § 660.60(d), subpart C. 

(i) The whiting fishery bycatch limit 

is apportioned among the sectors 

identified in paragraph (a) of this 

section based on the same percentages 

used to allocate whiting among the 

sectors, established in § 660.55(i)(2), 

subpart C. The sector specific bycatch 

limits are: For catcher/processors 4.8 mt 

of canary rockfish, 95 mt of widow 

rockfish, and 8.5 mt of darkblotched 

rockfish; for motherships 3.3 mt of 

canary rockfish, 67 mt of widow 

rockfish, and 6.0 mt of darkblotched 

rockfish; and for shorebased 5.9 mt of 

canary rockfish, 117 mt of widow 

rockfish, and 10.5 mt of darkblotched 

rockfish. 

(ii) The Regional Administrator may 

make available for harvest to the other 

sectors of the whiting fishery identified 

in § 660.131(a) of this subpart, the 

amounts of a sector’s bycatch limit 

species remaining when a sector is 

closed because its whiting allocation or 

a bycatch limit has been reached or is 

projected to be reached. The remaining 

bycatch limit species shall be 

redistributed in proportion to each 

sector’s initial whiting allocation. When 

considering redistribution of bycatch 

limits between the sectors of the whiting 

fishery, the Regional Administrator will 

take into consideration the best 

available data on total projected fishing 

impacts on the bycatch limit species, as 

well as impacts on other groundfish 

species. 

(iii) If a bycatch limit is reached or is 

projected to be reached, the following 

action, applicable to the sector may be 

taken. 

(A) Catcher/processor sector. Further 

taking and retaining, receiving, or at-sea 

processing of whiting by a catcher/ 

processor is prohibited. No additional 

unprocessed whiting may be brought on 

board after at-sea processing is 

prohibited, but a catcher/processor may 

continue to process whiting that was on 

board before at-sea processing was 

prohibited. 

(B) Mothership sector. Further 

receiving or at-sea processing of whiting 

by a mothership is prohibited. No 

additional unprocessed whiting may be 

brought on board after at-sea processing 

is prohibited, but a mothership may 

continue to process whiting that was on 

board before at-sea processing was 

prohibited. Whiting may not be taken 

and retained, possessed, or landed by a 

catcher vessel participating in the 

mothership sector. 

(C) Shorebased sector. Whiting may 

not be taken and retained, possessed, or 

landed by a catcher vessel participating 

in the shorebased sector except as 

authorized under a trip limit specified 

under § 660.60(c), subpart C. 

(iv) The Regional Administrator will 

announce in the Federal Register when 

a bycatch limit is reached, or is 

projected to be reached, specifying the 

action being taken as specified under 

paragraph (b)(5) of this section. The 

Regional Administrator will announce 

in the Federal Register any 

reapportionment of bycatch limit 

species. In order to prevent exceeding 

the bycatch limits or to avoid 

underutilizing the Pacific whiting 

resource, prohibitions against further 

taking and retaining, receiving, or at-sea 

processing of whiting, or 

reapportionment of bycatch limits 

species may be made effective 

immediately by actual notice to fishers 

and processors, by e-mail, Internet 

(http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/GroundfishHalibut/Groundfish-FisheryManagement/Whiting-Management/ 

index.cfm), phone, fax, letter, press 

release, and/or USCG Notice to Mariners 

(monitor channel 16 VHF), followed by 

publication in the Federal Register. 

(6) Pacific whiting allocation 

attainment and inseason allocation 

reapportionment. (i) Reaching an 

allocation. If the whiting harvest 

guideline, commercial harvest 

guideline, or a sector’s allocation is 

reached, or is projected to be reached, 

the following action(s) for the applicable 

sector(s) may be taken as provided 

under paragraph (b)(6)(iv) of this section 

and will remain in effect until 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60951 

additional amounts are made available 

the next calendar year or under 

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

(A) Catcher/processor sector. Further 

taking and retaining, receiving, or at-sea 

processing of whiting by a catcher/ 

processor is prohibited. No additional 

unprocessed whiting may be brought on 

board after at-sea processing is 

prohibited, but a catcher/processor may 

continue to process whiting that was on 

board before at-sea processing was 

prohibited. 

(B) Mothership sector. Further 

receiving or at-sea processing of whiting 

by a mothership is prohibited. No 

additional unprocessed whiting may be 

brought on board after at-sea processing 

is prohibited, but a mothership may 

continue to process whiting that was on 

board before at-sea processing was 

prohibited. Whiting may not be taken 

and retained, possessed, or landed by a 

catcher vessel participating in the 

mothership sector. 

(C) Shore-based sector coastwide. 

Whiting may not be taken and retained, 

possessed, or landed by a catcher vessel 

participating in the shore-based sector 

except as authorized under a trip limit 

specified under § 660.60(c). 

(D) Shore-based south of 42° N. lat. If 

5 percent of the shore-based allocation 

for whiting is taken and retained south 

of 42° N. lat. before the primary season 

for the shore-based sector begins north 

of 42° N. lat., then a trip limit specified 

under § 660.60(c) may be implemented 

south of 42° N. lat. until the northern 

primary season begins, at which time 

the southern primary season would 

resume. 

(ii) Reapportionments. That portion of 

a sector’s allocation that the Regional 

Administrator determines will not be 

used by the end of the fishing year shall 

be made available for harvest by the 

other sectors, if needed, in proportion to 

their initial allocations, on September 

15 or as soon as practicable thereafter. 

NMFS may release whiting again at a 

later date to ensure full utilization of the 

resource. Whiting not needed in the 

fishery authorized under § 660.50 may 

also be made available. 

(iii) Estimates. Estimates of the 

amount of whiting harvested will be 

based on actual amounts harvested, 

projections of amounts that will be 

harvested, or a combination of the two. 

Estimates of the amount of Pacific 

whiting that will be used by shore-based 

processors by the end of the calendar 

year will be based on the best 

information available to the Regional 

Administrator from state catch and 

landings data, the testimony received at 

Council meetings, and/or other relevant 

information. 

(iv) Announcements. The Regional 

Administrator will announce in the 

Federal Register when a harvest 

guideline, commercial harvest 

guideline, or an allocation of whiting is 

reached, or is projected to be reached, 

specifying the appropriate action being 

taken under paragraph (b)(6)(i) of this 

section. The Regional Administrator 

will announce in the Federal Register 

any reapportionment of surplus whiting 

to others sectors on September 15, or as 

soon as practicable thereafter. In order 

to prevent exceeding the limits or to 

avoid underutilizing the resource, 

prohibitions against further taking and 

retaining, receiving, or at-sea processing 

of whiting, or reapportionment of 

surplus whiting may be made effective 

immediately by actual notice to fishers 

and processors, by e-mail, internet 

(http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/GroundfishHalibut/Groundfish-FisheryManagement/Whiting-Management/ 

index.cfm), phone, fax, letter, press 

release, and/or USCG Notice to Mariners 

(monitor channel 16 VHF), followed by 

publication in the Federal Register, in 

which instance public comment will be 

sought for a reasonable period of time 

thereafter. 

(c) Closed areas. Pacific whiting may 

not be taken and retained in the 

following portions of the fishery 

management area: 

(1) Klamath river salmon conservation 

zone. The ocean area surrounding the 

Klamath River mouth bounded on the 

north by 41°38.80′ N. lat. 

(approximately 6 nm north of the 

Klamath River mouth), on the west by 

124°23′ W. long. (approximately 12 nm 

from shore), and on the south by 

41°26.80′ N. lat. (approximately 6 nm 

south of the Klamath River mouth). 

(2) Columbia river salmon 

conservation zone. The ocean area 

surrounding the Columbia River mouth 

bounded by a line extending for 6 nm 

due west from North Head along 46°18′ 

N. lat. to 124°13.30′ W. long., then 

southerly along a line of 167 True to 

46°11.10′ N. lat. and 124°11′ W. long. 

(Columbia River Buoy), then northeast 

along Red Buoy Line to the tip of the 

south jetty. 

(3) Ocean salmon conservation zone. 

All waters shoreward of a boundary line 

approximating the 100 fm (183 m) depth 

contour. Latitude and longitude 

coordinates defining the boundary line 

approximating the 100 fm (183 m) depth 

contour are provided at § 660.73, 

subpart C. This closure will be 

implemented through automatic action, 

defined at § 660.60(d), subpart C, when 

NMFS projects the Pacific whiting 

fishery may take in excess of 11,000 

Chinook within a calendar year. 

(4) Pacific whiting bycatch reduction 

areas (BRAs). Vessels using limited 

entry midwater trawl gear during the 

primary whiting season may be 

prohibited from fishing shoreward of a 

boundary line approximating the 75-fm 

(137-m), 100-fm (183-m) or 150-fm (274- 

m) depth contours. Latitude and 

longitude coordinates for the boundary 

lines approximating the depth contours 

are provided at § 660.73, subpart C. 

Closures may be implemented inseason 

for a sector(s) through automatic action, 

defined at § 660.60(d), subpart C, when 

NMFS projects that a sector will exceed 

a bycatch limit specified for that sector 

before the sector’s whiting allocation is 

projected to be reached. 

(d) Eureka area trip limits. Trip 

landing or frequency limits may be 

established, modified, or removed under 

§ 660.60, subpart C, or § 660.131, 

subpart D, specifying the amount of 

Pacific whiting that may be taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed by a 

vessel that, at any time during a fishing 

trip, fished in the fishery management 

area shoreward of the 100 fathom (183 

m) contour (as shown on NOAA Charts 

18580, 18600, and 18620) in the Eureka 

area (from 43 00′ to 40 30′ N. lat.). 

Unless otherwise specified, no more 

than 10,000-lb (4,536 kg) of whiting may 

be taken and retained, possessed, or 

landed by a vessel that, at any time 

during a fishing trip, fished in the 

fishery management area shoreward of 

the 100 fm (183 m) contour (as shown 

on NOAA Charts 18580, 18600, and 

18620) in the Eureka management area 

(defined at § 660.11, subpart C). 

(e) At-sea processing. Whiting may 

not be processed at sea south of 42°00′ 

N. lat. (Oregon-California border), 

unless by a waste-processing vessel as 

authorized under paragraph (i) of this 

section. 

(f) Time of day. Pacific whiting may 

not be taken and retained by any vessel 

in the fishery management area south of 

42°00′ N. lat. between 0001 hours to 

one-half hour after official sunrise (local 

time). During this time south of 42°00′ 

N. lat., trawl doors must be on board 

any vessel used to fish for whiting and 

the trawl must be attached to the trawl 

doors. Official sunrise is determined, to 

the nearest 5° lat., in The Nautical 

Almanac issued annually by the 

Nautical Almanac Office, U.S. Naval 

Observatory, and available from the U.S. 

Government Printing Office. 

(g) Additional restrictions on catcher/ 

processors. (1) A catcher/processor may 

receive fish from a catcher vessel, but 

that catch is counted against the 

catcher/processor allocation unless the 

catcher/processor has been declared as 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60952 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

a mothership under paragraph (g)(3) of 

this section. 

(2) A catcher/processor may not also 

act as a catcher vessel delivering 

unprocessed whiting to another 

processor in the same calendar year. 

(3) When renewing its limited entry 

permit each year under § 660.25, 

subpart C, the owner of a catcher/ 

processor used to take and retain 

whiting must declare if the vessel will 

operate solely as a mothership in the 

whiting fishery during the calendar year 

to which its limited entry permit 

applies. Any such declaration is binding 

on the vessel for the calendar year, even 

if the permit is transferred during the 

year, unless it is rescinded in response 

to a written request from the permit 

holder. Any request to rescind a 

declaration must be made by the permit 

holder and granted in writing by the 

Regional Administrator before any 

unprocessed whiting has been taken on 

board the vessel that calendar year. 

(h) Pacific whiting first receivers. (1) 

Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers 

and processors may receive groundfish 

species, other than Pacific Whiting, that 

is in excess of trip limits from a Pacific 

whiting shoreside vessel that is fishing 

under an EFP that authorizes the vessel 

to possess the catch. 

(i) Bycatch reduction and full 

utilization program for at-sea processors 

(optional). If a catcher/processor or 

mothership in the whiting fishery 

carries more than one NMFS-approved 

observer for at least 90 percent of the 

fishing days during a cumulative trip 

limit period, then groundfish trip limits 

may be exceeded without penalty for 

that cumulative trip limit period, if the 

conditions in paragraph (h)(2) of this 

section are met. For purposes of this 

program, ‘‘fishing day’’ means a 24-hour 

period, from 0001 hours through 2400 

hours, local time, in which fishing gear 

is retrieved or catch is received by the 

vessel, and will be determined from the 

vessel’s observer data, if available. 

Changes to the number of observers 

required for a vessel to fish under in the 

bycatch reduction program will be 

announced prior to the start of the 

fishery, generally concurrent with the 

harvest specifications and management 

measures. Groundfish consumed on 

board the vessel must be within any 

applicable trip limit and recorded as 

retained catch in any applicable logbook 

or report. [Note: For a mothership, nonwhiting groundfish landings are limited 

by the cumulative landings limits of the 

catcher vessels delivering to that 

mothership.] 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Conditions. Conditions for 

participating in the voluntary full 

utilization program are as follows: 

(i) All catch must be made available 

to the observers for sampling before it is 

sorted by the crew. 

(ii) Any retained catch in excess of 

cumulative trip limits must either be: 

Converted to meal, mince, or oil 

products, which may then be sold; or 

donated to a bona fide tax-exempt 

hunger relief organization (including 

food banks, food bank networks or food 

bank distributors), and the vessel 

operator must be able to provide a 

receipt for the donation of groundfish 

landed under this program from a taxexempt hunger relief organization 

immediately upon the request of an 

authorized officer. 

(iii) No processor or catcher vessel 

may receive compensation or otherwise 

benefit from any amount in excess of a 

cumulative trip limit unless the overage 

is converted to meal, mince, or oil 

products. Amounts of fish in excess of 

cumulative trip limits may only be sold 

as meal, mince, or oil products. 

(iv) The vessel operator must contact 

the NMFS enforcement office nearest to 

the place of landing at least 24 hours 

before landing groundfish in excess of 

cumulative trip limits for distribution to 

a hunger relief agency. Cumulative trip 

limits and a list of NMFS enforcement 

offices are found on the NMFS, 

Northwest Region homepage at http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov. 

(v) If the meal plant on board the 

whiting processing vessel breaks down, 

then no further overages may be 

retained for the rest of the cumulative 

trip limit period unless the overage is 

donated to a hunger relief organization. 

(vi) Prohibited species may not be 

retained. 

(vii) Donation of fish to a hunger relief 

organization must be noted in the 

transfer log (Product Transfer/ 

Offloading Log (PTOL)), in the column 

for total value, by entering a value of ‘‘0’’ 

or ‘‘donation,’’ followed by the name of 

the hunger relief organization receiving 

the fish. Any fish or fish product that is 

retained in excess of trip limits under 

this rule, whether donated to a hunger 

relief organization or converted to meal, 

must be entered separately on the PTOL 

so that it is distinguishable from fish or 

fish products that are retained under 

trip limits. The information on the 

Mate’s Receipt for any fish or fish 

product in excess of trip limits must be 

consistent with the information on the 

PTOL. The Mate’s Receipt is an official 

document that states who takes 

possession of offloaded fish, and may be 

a Bill of Lading, Warehouse Receipt, or 

other official document that tracks the 

transfer of offloaded fish or fish product. 

The Mate’s Receipt and PTOL must be 

made available for inspection upon 

request of an authorized officer 

throughout the cumulative limit period 

during which such landings occurred 

and for 15 days thereafter. 

(j) Processing fish waste at sea. A 

vessel that processes only fish waste (a 

‘‘waste-processing vessel’’) is not 

considered a whiting processor and 

therefore is not subject to the 

allocations, seasons, or restrictions for 

catcher/processors or motherships while 

it operates as a waste-processing vessel. 

However, no vessel may operate as a 

waste-processing vessel 48 hours 

immediately before and after a primary 

season for whiting in which the vessel 

operates as a catcher/processor or 

mothership. A vessel must meet the 

following conditions to qualify as a 

waste-processing vessel: 

(1) The vessel makes meal (ground 

dried fish), oil, or minced (ground flesh) 

product, but does not make, and does 

not have on board, surimi (fish paste 

with additives), fillets (meat from the 

side of the fish, behind the head and in 

front of the tail), or headed and gutted 

fish (head and viscera removed). 

(2) The amount of whole whiting on 

board does not exceed the trip limit (if 

any) allowed under § 660.60(c), subpart 

C, or Tables 1 (North) or 1 (South) in 

subpart D. 

(3) Any trawl net and doors on board 

are stowed in a secured and covered 

manner, and detached from all towing 

lines, so as to be rendered unusable for 

fishing. 

(4) The vessel does not receive 

codends containing fish. 

(5) The vessel’s operations are 

consistent with applicable state and 

Federal law, including those governing 

disposal of fish waste at sea. 

(k) Additional requirements for 

participants in the Pacific whiting 

shoreside fishery—(1) Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver responsibilities— 

(i) Weights and measures. All 

groundfish weights reported on 

electronic fish tickets must be recorded 

from scales with appropriate weighing 

capacity that ensures accuracy for the 

amount of fish being weighed. For 

example: amounts of fish less than 

1,000-lb (454 kg) should not be weighed 

on scales that have an accuracy range of 

1,000-lb to 7,000-lb (454—3,175 kg) and 

are therefore not capable of accurately 

weighing amounts less than 1,000-lb 

(454 kg). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Sorting requirements for the 

Pacific whiting shoreside fishery. Fish 

delivered to Pacific whiting shoreside 

first receivers (including shoreside 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60953 

processing facilities and buying stations 

that intend to transport catch for 

processing elsewhere) must be sorted, 

prior to first weighing after offloading 

from the vessel and prior to transport 

away from the point of landing, to the 

species groups specified in 

§ 660.60(h)(6), subpart C, for vessels 

with limited entry permits. Prohibited 

species must be sorted according to the 

following species groups: Dungeness 

crab, Pacific halibut, Chinook salmon, 

Other salmon. Non-groundfish species 

must be sorted as required by the state 

of landing. 

§ 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. 

(a) General. The Shorebased IFQ 

Program requirements in § 660.140 will 

be effective beginning January 1, 2011, 

except for paragraphs (d)(4), (d)(6), and 

(d)(8) of this section, which are effective 

immediately. The Shorebased IFQ 

Program applies to qualified 

participants in the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish fishery and includes a 

system of transferable QS for most 

groundfish species or species groups, 

IBQ for Pacific halibut, and trip limits 

or set-asides for the remaining 

groundfish species or species groups. 

The IFQ Program is subject to area 

restrictions (GCAs, RCAs, and EFHCAs) 

listed at §§ 660.70 through 660.79, 

subpart C. The Shorebased IFQ Program 

may be restricted or closed as a result 

of projected overages within the 

Shorebased IFQ Program, the MS Coop 

Program, or the C/P Coop Program. As 

determined necessary by the Regional 

Administrator, area restrictions, season 

closures, or other measures will be used 

to prevent the trawl sector in aggregate 

or the individual trawl sectors 

(Shorebased IFQ, MS Coop, or C/P 

Coop) from exceeding an OY, or formal 

allocation specified in the PCGFMP or 

regulation at § 660.55, subpart C, or 

§§ 660.140, 660.150, or 660.160, subpart 

D. 

(b) Participation requirements. 

[Reserved] 

(1) QS permit owners. [Reserved] 

(2) IFQ vessels. [Reserved] 

(c) IFQ species and allocations. 

(1) IFQ species. IFQ species are those 

groundfish species and Pacific halibut 

in the exclusive economic zone or 

adjacent state waters off Washington, 

Oregon and California, under the 

jurisdiction of the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, for which QS and 

IBQ will be issued. QS and IBQ will 

specify designations for the species/ 

species groups and area to which it 

applies. QS and QP species groupings 

and area subdivisions will be those for 

which OYs are specified in the Tables 

1a through 2d, subpart C, and those for 

which there is an area-specific 

precautionary harvest policy. QS for 

remaining minor rockfish will be 

aggregated for the shelf and slope depth 

strata (nearshore species are excluded). 

The following are the IFQ species: 

IFQ SPECIES

Roundfish 

Lingcod. 

Pacific cod. 

Pacific whiting. 

Sablefish north of 36° N. lat. 

Sablefish south of 36° N. lat. 

Flatfish 

Dover sole. 

English sole. 

Petrale sole. 

Arrowtooth flounder. 

Starry flounder. 

Other Flatfish stock complex. 

Pacific halibut (IBQ) north of 40°10′. 

Rockfish 

Pacific ocean perch. 

Widow rockfish. 

Canary rockfish. 

Chilipepper rockfish. 

Bocaccio. 

Splitnose rockfish. 

Yellowtail rockfish. 

Shortspine thornyhead north of 34°27′ N. lat. 

Shortspine thornyhead south of 34°27′ N. lat. 

Longspine thornyhead north of 34°27′ N. lat. 

Cowcod. 

Darkblotched. 

Yelloweye. 

Minor Rockfish North slope species complex. 

Minor Rockfish North shelf species complex. 

Minor Rockfish South slope species complex. 

Minor Rockfish South shelf species complex. 

(2) IFQ program allocations. 

Allocations for the Shorebased IFQ 

Program are determined for IFQ species 

as follows: 

(i) For Pacific whiting, the Shorebased 

IFQ Program allocation is specified at 

§ 660.55(i)(2), subpart C, 42 percent. 

(ii) For Sablefish N. of 36° N. lat., the 

Shorebased IFQ Program allocation is 

the limited entry trawl allocation 

specified at § 660.55(h), subpart C, 

minus any set-asides for the mothership 

and C/P sectors for that species. 

(iii) For IFQ species listed in the 

trawl/nontrawl allocation table, 

specified at § 660.55(c), subpart C, 

allocations are determined by applying 

the trawl column percent to the fishery 

harvest guideline minus any set-asides 

for the mothership and C/P sectors for 

that species and minus allocations for 

darkblotched rockfish, POP, and widow 

rockfish. 

(iv) The remaining IFQ species 

(canary rockfish, bocaccio, cowcod, 

yelloweye rockfish, minor shelf rockfish 

N. of 40°10′ N. lat., and minor shelf 

rockfish S. of 40°10′ N. lat., and minor 

slope rockfish S. of 40°10′ N. lat.) are 

allocated through the biennial 

specifications and management 

measures process minus any set-asides 

for the mothership and C/P sectors for 

that species. 

(v) For Pacific halibut N. of 40°10′ N. 

lat., the Shorebased IFQ Program 

allocation is specified at 660.55(m). 

(vi) Annual sub-allocations of IFQ 

species to individual QS permits and 

QS accounts are based on the percent of 

QS or IBQ registered to the account and 

the amount of fish or bycatch mortality 

allocated to the Shorebased IFQ 

Program. 

(d) QS permits and QS accounts—(1) 

General. In order to obtain QS or IBQ, 

a person must apply for a QS permit. 

NMFS will determine if the applicant is 

eligible to acquire QS or IBQ in 

compliance with the accumulation 

limits found at paragraph (d)(4) of this 

section. For those persons that are found 

to be eligible for a QS permit, NMFS 

will issue QS or IBQ and establish a QS 

account. QP or IBQ pounds will be 

issued annually at the start of the 

calendar year to a QS account based on 

the percent of QS or IBQ registered to 

the account and the amount of fish or 

bycatch mortality allocated to the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. QP or IBQ 

pounds will be issued to the nearest 

whole pound using standard rounding 

rules (i.e. decimal amounts from zero up 

to 0.5 round down and 0.5 up to 1.0 

round up), except that issuance of QP 

for overfished species greater than zero 

but less than one pound will be rounded 

up to one pound in the first year of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. QS or IBQ 

owners must transfer their QP or IBQ 

pounds from their QS account to a 

vessel account in order for those QP or 

IBQ pounds to be fished. QP or IBQ 

pounds must be transferred in whole 

pounds (i.e. no fraction of a QP or IBQ 

pound can be transferred). All QP or 

IBQ pounds in a QS account must be 

transferred to a vessel account by 

September 1 of each year. 

(2) Eligibility and registration. 

[Reserved] 

(3) Renewal, change of permit 

ownership, and transfer. [Reserved] 

(4) Accumulation limits—(i) QS and 

IBQ control limits. QS and IBQ control 

limits are accumulation limits and are 

the amount of QS and IBQ that a person, 

individually or collectively, may own or 

control. QS and IBQ control limits are 

expressed as a percentage of the 

Shorebased IFQ Program’s allocation. 

(A) Control limits for individual 

species. No person may own or control, 

or have a controlling influence over, by 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60954 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

any means whatsoever an amount of QS 

or IBQ for any individual species that 

exceeds the Shorebased IFQ Program 

accumulation limits. 

(B) Control limit for aggregate 

nonwhiting QS holdings. To determine 

how much aggregate nonwhiting QS a 

person holds, NMFS will convert the 

person’s QS to pounds. This conversion 

will always be conducted using the 

trawl allocations applied to the 2010 

OYs, until such time as the Council 

recommends otherwise. Specifically, 

NMFS will multiply each person’s QS 

for each species by the shoreside trawl 

allocation for that species. The person’s 

pounds for all nonwhiting species will 

be summed and divided by the 

shoreside trawl allocation of all 

nonwhiting species to calculate the 

person’s share of the aggregate 

nonwhiting trawl quota. To determine 

the shoreside trawl allocation for the 

purpose of determining compliance 

with the aggregate nonwhiting control 

limit, for species that have specific trawl 

allocation percentages in Amendment 

21, NMFS will apply the Amendment 

21 trawl allocation percentages to (set 

forth at § 660.55) the 2010 OYs, and 

where applicable, will deduct the 

preliminary set-asides for the at-sea 

sectors from Amendment 21. For 

species that do not have specific trawl 

allocation percentages in Amendment 

21, NMFS will apply a percentage based 

on the Northwest Fishery Science 

Center final report on 2010 estimated 

total fishing mortality of groundfish by 

sector, or, if the final report for 2010 is 

not available, based on the most recent 

report available. 

(C) The Shorebased IFQ Program 

accumulation limits are as follows: 

Species category QS control limit 

(percent) 

Non-whiting Groundfish Species ................................................................................................................................................... 2.7 

Lingcod—coastwide ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2.5 

Pacific Cod ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 12.0 

Pacific whiting (shoreside) ............................................................................................................................................................. 10.0 

Sablefish: 

N. of 36° (Monterey north) ..................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 

S. of 36° (Conception area) ................................................................................................................................................... 10.0 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH ............................................................................................................................................................. 4.0 

WIDOW ROCKFISH ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5.1 

CANARY ROCKFISH .................................................................................................................................................................... 4.4 

Chilipepper Rockfish ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10.0 

BOCACCIO .................................................................................................................................................................................... 13.2 

Splitnose Rockfish ......................................................................................................................................................................... 10.0 

Yellowtail Rockfish ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5.0 

Shortspine Thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6.0 

S. of 34°27′ ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6.0 

Longspine Thornyhead: 

N. of 34°27′ ............................................................................................................................................................................ 6.0 

COWCOD ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 17.7 

DARKBLOTCHED ......................................................................................................................................................................... 4.5 

YELLOWEYE ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5.7 

Minor Rockfish North: 

Shelf Species ................................................................................................................................................................................. 5.0 

Slope Species ................................................................................................................................................................................ 5.0 

Minor Rockfish South: 

Shelf Species ................................................................................................................................................................................. 9.0 

Slope Species ................................................................................................................................................................................ 6.0 

Dover sole ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.6 

English Sole ................................................................................................................................................................................... 5.0 

Petrale Sole ................................................................................................................................................................................... 3.0 

Arrowtooth Flounder ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10.0 

Starry Flounder .............................................................................................................................................................................. 10.0 

Other Flatfish ................................................................................................................................................................................. 10.0 

Pacific Halibut (IBQ) N. of 40°10′ .................................................................................................................................................. 5.4 

(ii) Ownership—individual and 

collective rule. The QS or IBQ that 

counts toward a person’s accumulation 

limit will include: 

(A) The QS or IBQ owned by that 

person, and 

(B) That portion of the QS or IBQ 

owned by an entity in which that person 

has an economic or financial interest, 

where the person’s share of interest in 

that entity will determine the portion of 

that entity’s QS or IBQ that counts 

toward the person’s limit. 

(iii) Control. Control means, but is not 

limited to, the following: 

(A) The person has the right to direct, 

or does direct, in whole or in part, the 

business of the entity to which the QS 

or IBQ are registered; 

(B) The person has the right to limit 

the actions of or replace, or does limit 

the actions of or replace, the chief 

executive officer, a majority of the board 

of directors, any general partner, or any 

person serving in a management 

capacity of the entity to which the QS 

or IBQ are registered; 

(C) The person has the right to direct, 

or does direct, and/or the right to 

prevent or delay, or does prevent or 

delay, the transfer of QS or IBQ, or the 

resulting QP or IBQ pounds; 

(D) The person, through loan 

covenants or any other means, has the 

right to restrict, or does restrict, and/or 

has a controlling influence over the day 

to day business activities or 

management policies of the entity to 

which the QS or IBQ are registered; 

(E) The person, excluding banks and 

other financial institutions that rely on 

QS or IBQ as collateral for loans, 

through loan covenants or any other 

means, has the right to restrict, or does 

restrict, any activity related to QS or 

IBQ or QP or IBQ pounds, including, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60955 

but not limited to, use of QS or IBQ, or 

the resulting QP or IBQ pounds, or 

disposition of fish harvested under the 

resulting QP or IBQ pounds; 

(F) The person, excluding banks and 

other financial institutions that rely on 

QS or IBQ as collateral for loans, has the 

right to control, or does control, the 

management of, or to be a controlling 

factor in, the entity to which the QS or 

IBQ, or the resulting QP or IBQ pounds, 

are registered; 

(G) The person, excluding banks and 

other financial institutions that rely on 

QS or IBQ as collateral for loans, has the 

right to cause or prevent, or does cause 

or prevent, the sale, lease or other 

disposition of QS or IBQ, or the 

resulting QP or IBQ pounds; and 

(H) The person has the ability through 

any means whatsoever to control or 

have a controlling influence over the 

entity to which QS or IBQ is registered. 

(iv) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that owns a 

limited entry trawl permit and is 

applying for a QS permit shall 

document those persons that have an 

ownership interest in the limited entry 

trawl or QS permit greater than or equal 

to 2 percent. This ownership interest 

must be documented with SFD via the 

Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest Form. SFD will not issue a QS 

permit unless the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form has been 

completed. Further, if SFD discovers 

through review of the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form that a person owns or controls 

more than the accumulation limits and 

is not authorized to do so under 

paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section, the 

person will be notified and the QS 

permit will be issued up to the 

accumulation limit specified in the QS 

or IBQ control limit table from 

paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section. NMFS 

may request additional information of 

the applicant as necessary to verify 

compliance with accumulation limits. 

(v) Divestiture. Accumulation limits 

will be calculated by first calculating 

the aggregate nonwhiting QS limit and 

then the individual species QS or IBQ 

control limits. For QS permit owners 

(including any person who has 

ownership interest in the owner named 

on the permit) that are found to exceed 

the accumulation limits during the 

initial issuance of QS permits, an 

adjustment period will be provided after 

which they will have to completely 

divest of QS or IBQ in excess of the 

accumulation limits. QS or IBQ will be 

issued for amounts in excess of 

accumulation limits only for owners of 

limited entry permits transferred to 

them by November 8, 2008, if such 

transfers of ownership have been 

registered with NMFS by November 30, 

2008. The owner of any permit 

transferred after November 8, 2008, or if 

transferred earlier, not registered with 

NMFS by November 30, 2008, will only 

be eligible to receive an initial 

allocation for that permit of those QS or 

IBQ that are within the accumulation 

limits; any QS or IBQ in excess of the 

accumulation limits will be 

redistributed to the remainder of the 

initial recipients of QS or IBQ in 

proportion to each recipient’s initial 

allocation of QS or IBQ for each species. 

Any person that qualifies for an initial 

allocation of QS or IBQ in excess of the 

accumulation limits will be allowed to 

receive that allocation, but must divest 

themselves of the excess QS or IBQ 

during years three and four of the IFQ 

program. Holders of QS or IBQ in excess 

of the control limits may receive and 

use the QP or IBQ pounds associated 

with that excess, up to the time their 

divestiture is completed. At the end of 

year 4 of the IFQ program, any QS or 

IBQ held by a person (including any 

person who has ownership interest in 

the owner named on the permit) in 

excess of the accumulation limits will 

be revoked and redistributed to the 

remainder of the of the QS or IBQ 

owners in proportion to the QS or IBQ 

holdings in year 5. No compensation 

will be due for any revoked shares. 

(5) Appeals. [Reserved] 

(6) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with the 

issuance of a QS permit consistent with 

the provisions given at § 660.25(f), 

subpart C. 

(7) [Reserved] 

(8) Application requirements and 

initial issuance for QS permit and QS/ 

IBQ—(i) Additional definitions. The 

following definitions are applicable to 

paragraph (d)(8) of this section and 

apply to terms used for the purposes of 

application requirements and initial 

issuance of QS permits and QS/IBQ: 

(A) Nonwhiting trip means a fishing 

trip where less than 50 percent by 

weight of all fish reported on the state 

landing receipt is whiting. 

(B) PacFIN means the Pacific 

Fisheries Information Network of the 

Pacific States Marine Fisheries 

Commission. 

(C) Relative history means the 

landings history of a permit for a 

species, year, and area subdivision, 

divided by the total fleet history of the 

sector for that species, year, and area 

subdivision, as appropriate, or, in the 

case of shoreside processors, the annual 

sum of the shoreside processor’s 

whiting receipts divided by the 

aggregate annual sum of whiting 

received by all shoreside processors in 

that year. Relative history is expressed 

as a percent. 

(D) Shoreside processor means an 

operation, working on U.S. soil, that 

takes delivery of trawl caught 

groundfish that has not been processed; 

and that thereafter engages that fish in 

shoreside processing. Entities that 

received fish that have not undergone 

at-sea processing or shoreside 

processing and sell that fish directly to 

consumers shall not be considered a 

processor for purposes of QS 

allocations. Shoreside processing is 

defined as either of the following: 

(1) Any activity that takes place 

shoreside; and that involves: Cutting 

groundfish into smaller portions; or 

freezing, cooking, smoking, drying 

groundfish; or packaging that 

groundfish for resale into 100 pound 

units or smaller for sale or distribution 

into a wholesale or retail market. 

(2) The purchase and redistribution in 

to a wholesale or retail market of live 

groundfish from a harvesting vessel. 

(E) Whiting trip means a fishing trip 

where greater than or equal to 50 

percent by weight of all fish reported on 

the state landing receipt is whiting. 

(ii) Eligibility criteria for QS permit 

and QS/IBQ. Only the following persons 

are eligible to receive a QS permit or 

QS/IBQ: 

(A) The owner of a valid trawl limited 

entry permit is eligible to receive a QS 

permit and its associated QS or IBQ 

amount. Any past landings history 

associated with the current limited 

entry trawl permit accrues to the current 

permit owner. NMFS will not recognize 

any person as the limited entry permit 

owner other than the person listed as 

limited entry permit owner in NMFS 

permit database. If a limited entry 

permit has history on state landing 

receipts and has been combined with a 

permit that has received or will receive 

a C/P endorsement, the trawl limited 

entry permit does not qualify for QS or 

IBQ. 

(B) Shoreside processors that meet the 

recent participation requirement of 

having received deliveries of 1 mt or 

more of whiting from whiting trips in 

each of any two years from 1998 

through 2004 are eligible for an initial 

issuance of whiting QS. NMFS will 

initially identify shoreside processors 

by reference to Pacific whiting shoreside 

first receivers recorded on fish tickets in 

the relevant PacFIN dataset on July 1, 

2010, subject to correction as described 

in paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(G) of this section. 

(iii) Steps for QS and IBQ allocation 

formulas. The QS and IBQ allocation 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60956 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

formulas are applied in the following 

steps: 

(A) First, for each limited entry trawl 

permit owner, NMFS will determine a 

preliminary QS allocation for nonwhiting trips. 

(B) Second, for each limited entry 

trawl permit owner, NMFS will 

determine a preliminary QS allocation 

for whiting trips. 

(C) Third, for each limited entry trawl 

permit owner, NMFS will combine the 

amounts resulting from paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iii)(A) and (B) of this section. 

(D) Fourth, NMFS will reduce the 

results for limited entry trawl permit 

owners by 10 percent of non-whiting 

species as a set aside for Adaptive 

Management Program (AMP) and by 20 

percent of whiting for the initial 

issuance of QS allocated to qualifying 

shoreside processors. 

(E) Fifth, NMFS will determine the 

whiting QS allocation for qualifying 

shoreside processors from the 20 

percent of whiting QS allocated to 

qualifying shoreside processors at initial 

issuance of QS. 

(F) Sixth, for each limited entry trawl 

permit owner, NMFS will determine the 

Pacific halibut IBQ allocation. 

(G) Seventh, for limited entry trawl 

permits transferred after November 8, 

2008, or if transferred earlier, not 

registered with NMFS by November 30, 

2008, for which NMFS determines the 

owners of such permits would exceed 

the accumulation limits specified at 

paragraph (d)(4) of this section based on 

the previous steps, NMFS will 

redistribute the excess QS or IBQ to 

other qualified QS permit owners 

within the accumulation limits. 

(iv) Allocation formula for specific QS 

and IBQ amounts—(A) Allocation 

formula rules. Unless otherwise 

specified, the following rules will be 

applied to data for the purpose of 

calculating an initial allocation of QS 

and IBQ: 

(1) For limited entry trawl permit 

owners, a permit will be assigned catch 

history or relative history based on the 

landing history of the vessel(s) 

associated with the permit at the time 

the landings were made. 

(2) The relevant PacFIN dataset 

includes species compositions based on 

port sampled data and applied to data 

at the vessel level. 

(3) Only landings of IFQ species 

which are caught in the exclusive 

economic zone or adjacent state waters 

off Washington, Oregon and California 

will be used for calculation of allocation 

formulas. For the purpose of allocation 

of IFQ species for which the QS or IBQ 

will be subdivided by area, catch areas 

have been assigned to landings of IFQ 

species reported on state landing 

receipts based on port of landing. 

(4) History from limited entry permits 

that have been combined with a permit 

that may qualify for a C/P endorsement 

and which has shorebased permit 

history will not be included in the 

preliminary QS and IBQ allocation 

formula, other than in the determination 

of fleet history used in the calculation 

of relative history for permits that do 

not have a C/P endorsement. 

(5) History of illegal landings and 

landings made under non-whiting EFPs 

that are in excess of the cumulative 

limits in place for the non-EFP fishery 

will not count toward the allocation of 

QS or IBQ. 

(6) The limited entry permit’s 

landings history includes the landings 

history of permits that have been 

previously combined with that permit. 

(7) If two or more limited entry trawl 

permits have been simultaneously 

registered to the same vessel, NMFS will 

split the landing history evenly between 

all such limited entry trawl-endorsed 

permits during the time they were 

simultaneously registered to the vessel. 

(8) Unless otherwise noted, the 

calculation for QS or IBQ allocation 

under paragraph (d)(8) of this section 

will be based on state landing receipts 

(fish tickets) as recorded in the relevant 

PacFIN dataset on July 1, 2010. 

(9) For limited entry trawl permits, 

landings under provisional ‘‘A’’ permits 

that did not become ‘‘A’’ permits and ‘‘B’’ 

permits will not count toward the 

allocation of QS or IBQ, other than in 

the determination of fleet history used 

in the calculation of relative history for 

permits that do not have a C/P 

endorsement. 

(10) For limited entry trawl permits, 

NMFS will calculate initial issuance of 

QS separately based on whiting trips 

and non-whiting trips, and will weigh 

each calculation according to initial 

issuance allocations between whiting 

trips and non-whiting trips, which are 

one-time allocations necessary for the 

formulas used during the initial 

issuance of QS to create a single 

Shorebased IFQ Program. The initial 

issuance allocations between whiting 

and non-whiting trips for canary 

rockfish, bocaccio, cowcod, yelloweye 

rockfish, minor shelf rockfish N. of 

40°10′, minor shelf rockfish S. of 40°10′, 

and minor slope rockfish S. of 40°10′ 

will be determined through the biennial 

specifications process. The initial 

issuance allocations for the remaining 

IFQ species are as follows: 

Species 

Initial issuance allocation percentage 

Non-whiting Whiting 

Lingcod .................................................................................. 99.7% ........................ 0.3% 

Pacific Cod ............................................................................ 99.9% ........................ 0.1% 

Pacific Whiting ...................................................................... 0.1% .......................... 99.9% 

Sablefish N. of 36° N. lat. ..................................................... 98.2% ........................ 1.8% 

Sablefish S. of 36° N. lat. ..................................................... 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH .................................................... remaining ................... 17% or 30 mt, whichever is greater, to shorebased + atsea whiting. 

If under rebuilding, 52% to shorebased + at-sea whiting. 

WIDOW ................................................................................. remaining ................... If stock rebuilt, 10% or 500 mt, whichever is greater, to 

shorebased + at-sea whiting. 

Chilipepper S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ............................................. 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Splitnose S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................ 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Yellowtail N. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................ remaining ................... 300 mt. 

Shortspine N. of 34°27′ N. lat. .............................................. 99.9% ........................ 0.1% 

Shortspine S. of 34°27′ N. lat. .............................................. 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Longspine N. of 34°27′ N. lat. .............................................. 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

DARKBLOTCHED ................................................................. remaining ................... 9% or 25 mt, whichever is greater, to shorebased + at-sea 

whiting. 

Minor Slope Rockfish N. of 40°10′ N. lat ............................. 98.6% ........................ 1.4% 

Dover Sole ............................................................................ 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

English Sole .......................................................................... 99.9% ........................ 0.1% 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60957 

Species 

Initial issuance allocation percentage 

Non-whiting Whiting 

Petrale Sole .......................................................................... 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Arrowtooth Flounder ............................................................. 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Starry Flounder ..................................................................... 100.0% ...................... 0.0% 

Other Flatfish ........................................................................ 99.9% ........................ 0.1% 

(B) Preliminary QS allocation for 

nonwhiting trips. NMFS will calculate 

the non-whiting preliminary QS 

allocation differently for different 

species groups, Groups 1 through 3. 

(1) Allocation formula species groups. 

For the purposes of preliminary QS 

allocation, IFQ species will be grouped 

as follows: 

(i) Group 1 includes lingcod, Pacific 

cod, Pacific whiting, sablefish north of 

36° N. lat., sablefish south of 36° N. lat., 

Dover sole, English sole, petrale sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, starry flounder, 

other flatfish stock complex, chilipepper 

rockfish, splitnose rockfish, yellowtail 

rockfish, shortspine thornyhead north of 

34°27′ N. lat., shortspine thornyhead 

south of 34°27′ N. lat., longspine 

thornyhead north of 34°27′ N. lat., 

minor rockfish north slope species 

complex, minor rockfish south slope 

species complex, minor rockfish north 

shelf species complex, and minor 

rockfish south shelf species complex. 

(ii) Group 2 includes bocaccio, 

cowcod, darkblotched rockfish, Pacific 

ocean perch, widow rockfish, and 

yelloweye rockfish. 

(iii) Group 3 includes canary rockfish. 

(2) Group 1 species: The preliminary 

QS allocation process indicated in 

paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(A) of this section 

for Group 1 species follows a two-step 

process, one to allocate a pool of QS 

equally among all eligible limited entry 

permits and the other to allocate the 

remainder of the preliminary QS based 

on permit history. Through these two 

processes, preliminary QS totaling 100 

percent for each Group 1 species will be 

allocated. In later steps this amount will 

be adjusted and reduced as indicated in 

paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(C) and (D), to 

determine the QS allocation. 

(i) QS to be allocated equally. The 

pool of QS for equal allocation will be 

determined using the landings history 

from Federal limited entry groundfish 

permits that were retired through the 

Federal buyback program (i.e., buyback 

permit) (70 FR 45695, August 8, 2005). 

The QS pool associated with the 

buyback permits will be the buyback 

permit history as a percent of the total 

fleet history for the allocation period. 

The calculation will be based on total 

absolute pounds with no dropped years 

and no other adjustments. The QS pool 

will be divided equally among 

qualifying limited entry permits for all 

QS species/species groups and areas in 

Group 1. 

(ii) QS to be allocated based on each 

permit’s history. The pool for QS 

allocation based on limited entry trawl 

permit history will be the QS remaining 

after subtracting out the QS allocated 

equally. This pool will be allocated to 

each qualifying limited entry trawl 

permit based on the permit’s relative 

history from 1994 through 2003. For 

each limited entry trawl permit, NMFS 

will calculate a set of relative histories 

using the following methodology. First, 

NMFS will sum the permit’s landings by 

each year for each Group 1 species/ 

species group and area subdivision. 

Second, NMFS will divide each permit’s 

annual sum for a particular species/ 

species group and area subdivision by 

the shoreside limited entry trawl fleet’s 

annual sum for the same species/species 

group and area subdivision. NMFS will 

then calculate a total relative history for 

each permit by species/species group 

and area subdivision by adding all 

relative histories for the permit together 

and subtracting the three years with the 

lowest relative history for the permit. 

The result for each permit by species/ 

species group and areas subdivision will 

be divided by the aggregate sum of all 

total relative histories of all qualifying 

limited entry trawl permits for that 

species/species group and area 

subdivision. NMFS will then multiply 

the result from this calculation by the 

amount of QS in the pool to be allocated 

based on each permit’s history. 

(3) Group 2 species: The preliminary 

QS allocation step indicated in 

paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(A) of this section 

will be calculated for each limited entry 

trawl permit using a formula based on 

QS allocations for each limited entry 

trawl permit for 11 target species, areas 

of distribution of fishing effort as 

determined from 2003–2006 target 

species catch data from the PacFIN 

Coastwide Trawl Logbook Database, 

average bycatch ratios for each area as 

derived from West Coast Groundfish 

Observer Program (WCGOP) data from 

2003 through 2006, and the non-whiting 

initial issuance allocation of the limited 

entry trawl allocation amounts for 2011 

for each of the 11 target species. These 

data are used in a series of sequential 

steps to estimate the allocation of Group 

2 species to each limited entry trawl 

permit. Paragraphs (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(iii) to 

(vi) of this section estimate the permit’s 

total 2003–2006 target species by area. 

Paragraphs (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(vii) to (xii) of 

this section project Group 2 species 

bycatch amounts using 2003–2006 

WCGOP observer ratios and the initial 

issuance allocation applied to the 2011 

limited entry trawl allocation. 

Paragraphs (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xiv) to (xvii) 

of this section convert these amounts 

into QS. As with Group 1 species, 

preliminary QS totaling 100 percent for 

each Group 2 species unit will be 

allocated and the amount of the 

allocations will be adjusted and reduced 

as indicated in paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(C) 

and (D) of this section to determine the 

QS allocation. 

(i) The 11 target species are 

arrowtooth flounder, starry flounder, 

other flatfish, Dover sole, English sole, 

petrale sole, minor slope rockfish, 

shortspine thornyheads, longspine 

thornyheads, sablefish, and Pacific cod. 

(ii) The 8 areas of distribution of 

fishing effort are defined latitudinally 

and by depth. The latitudinal areas are 

(a) north of 47°40 N. lat.; (b) between 

47°40 N. lat. and 43°55′ N. lat.; (c) 

43°55′ N. lat. and 40°10′ N. lat.; and (d) 

south of 40°10′ N. lat. Each latitudinal 

area is further divided by depth into 

areas shoreward and seaward of the 

trawl Rockfish Conservation Area as 

defined at § 660.130(e)(4) of this 

subpart. 

(iii) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will review the permit 

logbook data for that permit and sum 

target species catch recorded for the 

years 2003–2006, resulting in total target 

species catch in each area for each 

permit for the years 2003 through 2006 

for all 11 target species in aggregate. 

(iv) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will also sum target 

species catch by area into total 

coastwide target species catch for each 

permit for the years 2003 through 2006 

for all 11 target species in aggregate. For 

practicability, seaward or shoreward of 

the RCA as identified in the logbook 

data is defined as being deeper than or 

shallower than 115 fathoms, 

respectively. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60958 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(v) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will divide logbook 

aggregate target species catch in each 

area (paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(iii) of 

this section) by the permit’s total 

coastwide target species catch 

(paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(iv) of this 

section) to create a set of 8 area catch 

ratios for each permit. (Note: The sum 

of all area catch ratios equals 1 for each 

permit). 

(vi) For limited entry trawl permits 

where the vessel registered to the permit 

did not submit logbooks showing any 

catch of the 11 target species for any of 

the years 2003 through 2006, NMFS will 

use the following formula to calculate 

area target catch ratios: (a) NMFS will 

sum by area all limited entry trawl 

permits’ total logbook area target catches 

from paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(iii) of 

this section, (b) NMFS will sum 

coastwide all limited entry trawl 

permits’ total logbook target catches 

across all areas from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(iv) of this section, and (c) 

NMFS will divide these sums (i.e., a/b) 

to create average permit logbook area 

target catch ratios. 

(vii) NMFS will calculate the 2011 

non-whiting short term allocation 

amount for each of the 11 target species 

by multiplying the limited entry trawl 

allocation amounts for 2011 for each by 

the corresponding initial issuance 

allocation percentage for the nonwhiting sector given in paragraph 

(d)(8)(iii)(A)(10) of this section or 

determined through the biennial 

specifications process, as applicable. 

(viii) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will obtain the 

percentage of the limited entry trawl 

permit initial QS allocation for each of 

the 11 target species resulting from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(2) of this section. 

(ix) NMFS will calculate each limited 

entry trawl permit’s projected nonwhiting sector quota pounds for 2011 by 

multiplying the 2011 non-whiting sector 

initial issuance allocation amounts for 

each of the 11 target species from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(vii) of this 

section by each permit’s target species 

QS allocation percentage from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(viii) of this 

section. 

(x) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will sum the projected 

quota pounds for the 11 target species 

from paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(ix) of this 

section to get a total projected weight of 

all 11 target species for the limited entry 

trawl permit. 

(xi) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will estimate the permit’s 

total incidental catch of Group 2 species 

by area by multiplying the projected 

2011 total weight of all 11 target species 

by the applicable area catch ratio for 

each area as calculated in either 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(v) of this 

section (permits with logbook data) or 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(vi) of this 

section (permits without logbook data). 

(xii) NMFS will apply WCGOP 

average bycatch ratios for each Group 2 

species (observed Group 2 species 

catch/total target species catch) by area. 

The WCGOP average bycatch ratios are 

as follows: 

Area Shoreward Seaward 

Bocaccio 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... ................................ ................................

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. ................................ ................................

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. ................................ ................................

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.019013759 0.001794203 

Cowcod 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... ................................ ................................

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. ................................ ................................

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. ................................ ................................

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.001285088 0.000050510 

Darkblotched 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.001560461 0.009950330 

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.002238054 0.018835786 

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.002184788 0.015025697 

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.000006951 0.004783988 

Pacific ocean perch 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.001069954 0.019848047 

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000110802 0.015831815 

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000148715 0.001367645 

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... ................................ ................................

Widow 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.000132332 0.000065291 

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000387346 0.000755163 

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000175128 0.000008118 

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.001049485 0.000676828 

Yelloweye 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.000334697 0.000006363 

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000083951 0.000010980 

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.000128942 0.000006300 

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.000094029 ................................

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60959 

(xiii) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will calculate projected 

Group 2 species amounts by area by 

multiplying the limited entry trawl 

permit’s projected 2011 total weight of 

all target species by area from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xi) of this section by the 

applicable average bycatch ratio for each 

Group 2 species and corresponding area 

of paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xii) of this 

section. 

(xiv) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will sum all area 

amounts for each Group 2 species from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xiii) of this 

section to calculate the total projected 

amounts of each Group 2 species for 

each limited entry trawl permit. 

(xv) NMFS will sum all limited entry 

trawl permits’ projected Group 2 species 

amounts from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xiv) of this section to 

calculate coastwide total projected 

amounts for each Group 2 species. 

(xvi) NMFS will estimate preliminary 

QS for each limited entry trawl permit 

for each Group 2 species by dividing 

each limited entry trawl permit’s total 

projected amount of each Group 2 

species from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xiv) of this section by the 

coastwide total projected amount for 

that species from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(B)(3)(xv) of this section. 

(4) Group 3 Species: (i) The 

preliminary QS allocation step 

indicated in paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(A) of 

this section will be performed in two 

calculations that result in the division of 

preliminary QS allocation into two 

pools, one to allocate QS equally among 

all eligible limited entry permits, using 

the approach identified for Group 1 

species in paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(2)(i) of 

this section, and the other to allocate QS 

using a formula based on QS allocations 

for target species and areas fished, using 

the approach identified for Group 2 

species in paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(3) of 

this section, using the following 

WCGOP average bycatch rates: 

CANARY

Area Shoreward Seaward 

N. of 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.008041898 0.000030522 

43°55′ N. lat. to 47°40′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.003081830 0.000142136 

40°10′ N. lat. to 43°55′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.008716148 0.000021431 

S. of 40°10′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.001581194 0.000009132 

(ii) Through these two processes, 

preliminary QS totaling 100 percent for 

each species will be allocated. In later 

steps, this amount will be adjusted and 

reduced as indicated in paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iii)(C) and (D) of this section to 

determine the QS allocation. In 

combining the two QS pools for each 

permit, the equal allocation portion is 

weighted according to the process in 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(2)(i) of this 

section, and the portion calculated 

based on allocations for target species 

and areas fished is weighted according 

to the process in (d)(8)(iv)(B)(2)(ii) of 

this section. 

(C) Preliminary QS allocation for 

whiting trips. The preliminary QS 

allocation based on whiting trips as 

indicated in paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(B) of 

this section for limited entry trawl 

permits follows a two step process, one 

to allocate a pool of QS equally among 

all eligible limited entry permits and the 

other to allocate the remainder of the 

preliminary QS based on permit history. 

Through these two processes, 

preliminary QS totaling 100 percent for 

each species will be allocated. In later 

steps, this amount will be adjusted and 

reduced, as indicated in paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iii)(C) and (D) of this section, to 

determine the QS allocation. 

(1) QS to be allocated equally. The 

pool of QS for equal allocation will be 

determined using the whiting trip 

landings history from Federal limited 

entry groundfish permits that were 

retired through the Federal buyback 

program (i.e., buyback permit) (70 FR 

45695, August 8, 2005). For each 

species, the whiting trip QS pool 

associated with the buyback permits 

will be the buyback permit history as a 

percent of the total fleet history for the 

allocation period. The calculation will 

be based on total absolute pounds with 

no dropped years and no other 

adjustments. The whiting trip QS pool 

associated with the buyback permits 

will be divided equally among all 

qualifying limited entry permits for each 

species. 

(2) QS to be allocated based on each 

permit’s history. The pool for QS 

allocation based on each limited entry 

trawl permit’s history will be the QS 

remaining after subtracting out the QS 

associated with the buyback permits 

allocated equally. 

(i) Whiting QS allocated based on 

each permit’s history. Whiting QS based 

on each limited entry trawl permit’s 

history will be allocated based on the 

permit’s relative history from 1994 

through 2003. For each limited entry 

trawl permit, NMFS will calculate a 

whiting relative history for each 

qualifying year, as follows. First, NMFS 

will sum the permit’s history of 

landings of whiting from whiting trips 

for each year. Second, NMFS will divide 

each permit’s annual sum of whiting 

from whiting trips by the shoreside 

limited entry trawl fleet’s annual sum of 

whiting. NMFS will then calculate a 

total relative history for each permit by 

adding all relative histories for the 

permit together and subtracting the two 

years with the lowest relative history. 

NMFS will then divide the result for 

each permit by the total relative history 

for whiting of all qualifying limited 

entry trawl permits. The result from this 

calculation will then be multiplied by 

the amount of whiting QS in the pool 

to be allocated based on each permit’s 

history. 

(ii) Other incidentally caught species 

QS allocation for eligible limited entry 

trawl permit owners. Other incidentally 

caught species from the QS remaining 

after subtracting out the QS associated 

with the buyback permits will be 

allocated pro-rata based on each limited 

entry trawl permit’s whiting QS from 

whiting trips. Pro-rata means a percent 

that is equal to the percent of whiting 

QS. 

(D) QS from limited entry permits 

calculated separately for non-whiting 

trips and whiting trips. NMFS will 

calculate the portion of QS for each 

species which a permit receives based 

on non-whiting trips and whiting trips 

separately and will weight each 

preliminary QS in proportion to the 

initial issuance allocation percentage 

between whiting trips and non-whiting 

trips for that species in paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(A)(10) of this section or 

determined through the biennial 

specifications process, as applicable. 

(1) Nonwhiting trips. To determine 

the amount of QS of each species for 

non-whiting trips for each limited entry 

trawl permit, NMFS will multiply the 

preliminary QS for the permit from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iii)(A) of this section 

for each species by the initial issuance 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60960 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

allocation percentage for that species for 

non-whiting trips. 

(2) Whiting trips. To determine the 

amount of QS of each species for 

whiting trips for each limited entry 

trawl permit, NMFS will multiply the 

preliminary QS from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iii)(B) of this section for each 

species by the initial issuance allocation 

percentage for that species for whiting 

trips. 

(E) QS for each limited entry trawl 

permit. For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will add the results for 

the permit from paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iv)(D)(1) and (D)(2) of this section 

in order to determine the total QS for 

each species on that permit. 

(F) Adjustment for AMP set-aside and 

shoreside processor initial issuance 

allocations. NMFS will reduce the nonwhiting QS allocation to each limited 

entry trawl permit by 10 percent, for a 

QS set-aside to AMP. NMFS will reduce 

the whiting QS allocation to each 

limited entry trawl permit by 20 percent 

for the initial QS allocation to shoreside 

processors. 

(G) Allocation of initial issuance of 

whiting QS for shoreside processors. 

NMFS will calculate the amount of 

whiting QS available to shoreside 

processors from the 20 percent 

adjustment of whiting QS allocations in 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(F) of this section. 

For each eligible shoreside processor, 

whiting QS will be allocated based on 

the eligible shoreside processor’s 

relative history from 1998 through 2004. 

Only the deliveries for which the 

shoreside processor is the first processor 

of the fish will be used in the 

calculation of whiting relative history. 

(1) For each shoreside processor 

which has received deliveries of at least 

1 mt of whiting from whiting trips in 

each of any two years from 1998 

through 2004, NMFS will calculate a 

whiting relative history for each 

qualifying year, as follows. First, NMFS 

will sum the shoreside processor’s 

receipts of whiting for each year. 

Second, NMFS will calculate the 

relative history for each year by dividing 

each shoreside processor’s annual sum 

of whiting receipts by the aggregate 

annual sum of whiting received by all 

shoreside processors in that year. NMFS 

will then calculate a total relative 

history for each shoreside processor by 

adding all relative histories for the 

shoreside processor together and 

subtracting the two years with the 

lowest relative history. NMFS will then 

divide the result for each shoreside 

processor by the aggregate sum of all 

total relative histories for whiting by all 

qualifying shoreside processors. The 

result from this calculation will then be 

multiplied by 20 percent to determine 

the shoreside processor’s whiting QS. 

(2) For purposes of making an initial 

issuance of whiting QS to a shoreside 

processor, NMFS will attribute landing 

history to the Pacific whiting shoreside 

first receiver reported on the landing 

receipt (the entity responsible for filling 

out the state landing receipt) as 

recorded in the relevant PacFIN dataset 

on July 1, 2010. History may be 

reassigned to a shoreside processor not 

on the state landings receipt as 

described at paragraph (d)(8)(vi)(B) of 

this section. 

(H) Allocation of Pacific halibut IBQ 

for each limited entry trawl permit. For 

each eligible limited entry trawl permit 

owner, NMFS will calculate Pacific 

halibut individual bycatch quota (IBQ) 

for the area north of 40°10′ N. lat. using 

a formula based on (a) QS allocations for 

each limited entry trawl permit for two 

target species, (b) areas of distribution of 

fishing effort as determined from 2003– 

2006 target species catch data from the 

PacFIN Coastwide Trawl Logbook 

Database, (c) average bycatch ratios for 

each area as derived from WCGOP data 

from 2003 through 2006, and (d) the 

non-whiting initial issuance allocation 

of the limited entry trawl allocation 

amounts for 2011 for arrowtooth and 

petrale sole. These data are used in a 

series of sequential steps to determine 

the allocation of IBQ to each limited 

entry trawl permit. Paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(3) to (6) of this section 

estimate the permit’s total 2003–2006 

target species by area. Paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(7) to (13) of this section 

project Pacific halibut bycatch amounts 

using 2003–2006 WCGOP observer 

ratios and the 2011 non-whiting initial 

issuance allocation of the limited entry 

trawl allocation amounts. Paragraphs 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(14) to (16) of this section 

convert these amounts into QS. 

(1) The target species are arrowtooth 

flounder and petrale sole. 

(2) The four bycatch areas are defined 

latitudinally and by depth. The 

latitudinal areas are (a) north of 47°30′ 

N. lat., and (b) between 40°10′ N. lat. 

and 47°30′ N. lat. Each latitudinal area 

is further divided by depth into areas 

shoreward and seaward of the trawl 

Rockfish Conservation Area as defined 

at § 660.130(e)(4), subpart D. 

(3) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will review the permit 

logbook data for that permit and sum 

target species catch recorded for the 

years 2003–2006, resulting in total target 

species catch in each of the four areas 

for each permit for the years 2003 

through 2006 for both target species in 

aggregate. For practicability, seaward or 

shoreward of the RCA as identified in 

the logbook data is defined as being 

deeper than or shallower than 115 

fathoms, respectively. 

(4) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will also sum the target 

species catch by area into total aggregate 

target species catch for each permit for 

the years 2003 through 2006. 

(5) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will divide logbook 

aggregate target species catch in each 

area (paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(3) of this 

section) by the sum of the permit’s catch 

of each target species in all four bycatch 

areas (paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(4) of this 

section) to create a set of area catch 

ratios for each permit. (Note: The sum 

of all four area catch ratios in aggregate 

equals 1 for each permit). 

(6) For limited entry trawl permits 

where the vessel registered to the permit 

did not submit logbooks showing any 

catch of either of the two target species 

for any of the years 2003 through 2006, 

NMFS will use the following formula to 

calculate area target catch ratios: NMFS 

will sum by area all limited entry trawl 

permits’ total logbook area target catches 

from paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(3) of this 

section, and sum all limited entry trawl 

permits’ total logbook target catches 

across all four areas from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(4) of this section; and 

divide these sums to create average 

permit logbook area target catch ratios. 

(7) NMFS will calculate the 2011 nonwhiting initial issuance allocation 

amount for each of the two target 

species by multiplying the limited entry 

trawl allocation amounts for 2011 for 

each by the corresponding initial 

issuance allocation percentage for the 

non-whiting sector given in paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(A)(10) of this section. 

(8) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will obtain the nonwhiting portion of each limited entry 

trawl permit’s initial QS allocations for 

each of the two target species resulting 

from paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(B)(2) of this 

section. 

(9) NMFS will calculate each limited 

entry trawl permit’s projected nonwhiting sector quota pounds for the two 

target species for 2011 by multiplying 

the 2011 non-whiting sector short term 

allocation amounts for each of the target 

species by the permit’s QS allocation 

percentage for the species from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(8) of this section. 

(10) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will sum the projected 

quota pounds for the two target species 

from paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(9) of this 

section to get a total projected weight of 

the two target species for the limited 

entry trawl permit. 

(11) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will multiply the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60961 

projected 2011 total weight of the two 

target species by the applicable area 

catch ratio for each area as calculated in 

either paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(5) of this 

section (permits with logbook data) or 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(6) of this section 

(permits without logbook data). 

(12) NMFS will apply WCGOP 

average halibut bycatch ratios (observed 

halibut catch/total of two target species 

catch) by area. The WCGOP average 

halibut bycatch ratios are as follows: 

PACIFIC HALIBUT

Area Shoreward Seaward 

N. of 47°30′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................................... 0.225737162 0.084214162 

40°10′ N. lat. to 47°30′ N. lat. ................................................................................................................. 0.086250913 0.033887839 

(13) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will calculate projected 

Pacific halibut amounts by area by 

multiplying the limited entry trawl 

permit’s projected 2011 total weight of 

the two target species by area from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(11) of this 

section by the average bycatch ratio for 

the corresponding area of paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(12) of this section. 

(14) For each limited entry trawl 

permit, NMFS will sum all area 

amounts from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(13) of this section to 

calculate the total projected Pacific 

halibut amount for each limited entry 

trawl permit. 

(15) NMFS will sum all limited entry 

trawl permits’ projected Pacific halibut 

amounts from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(14) of this section to 

calculate aggregate total amounts of 

Pacific halibut. 

(16) NMFS will estimate preliminary 

Pacific halibut IBQ for each limited 

entry trawl permit by dividing each 

limited entry trawl permit’s total 

projected Pacific halibut amount from 

paragraph (d)(8)(iv)(H)(14) of this 

section by the aggregate total amounts of 

Pacific halibut from paragraph 

(d)(8)(iv)(H)(15) of this section. 

(I) Redistribution of QS and IBQ. For 

each limited entry trawl permit 

transferred after November 8, 2008, or if 

transferred earlier, not registered with 

NMFS by November 30, 2008, for which 

NMFS determines that the owner of 

such permit would exceed the 

accumulation limits specified at 

paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section based 

on calculation of the preceding 

allocation formulas for all limited entry 

trawl permits owned by such owner 

using the individual and collective rule 

described at § 660.140(d)(4)(ii), NMFS 

will redistribute the excess QS or IBQ to 

other qualified QS permit owners 

within the accumulation limits. 

(v) QS application. Persons may apply 

for an initial issuance of QS and IBQ 

and a QS permit in one of two ways: 

Complete and submit a prequalified 

application received from NMFS, or 

complete and submit an application 

package. The completed application 

must be either postmarked or handdelivered within normal business hours 

no later than November 1, 2010. If an 

applicant fails to submit a completed 

application by the deadline date, they 

forgo the opportunity to receive 

consideration for initial issuance of QS 

and IBQ and a QS permit. 

(A) Prequalified application. A 

‘‘prequalified application’’ is a partially 

pre-filled application where NMFS has 

preliminarily determined the landings 

history that may qualify the applicant 

for an initial issuance of QS and IBQ. 

The application package will include a 

prequalified application (with landings 

history), a Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest form, and any other 

documents NMFS believes are necessary 

to aid the limited entry permit owner in 

completing the QS application. 

(1) For current trawl limited entry 

permit owners, NMFS will mail a 

prequalified application to all owners, 

as listed in the NMFS permit database 

at the time applications are mailed, that 

NMFS determines may qualify for QS or 

IBQ. NMFS will mail the application by 

certified mail to the current address of 

record in the NMFS permit database. 

The application will contain the basis of 

NMFS’ calculation of the permit 

owner’s QS and IBQ for each species/ 

species group or area. 

(2) For shoreside processors, NMFS 

will mail a prequalified application to 

those Pacific whiting shoreside first 

receivers with receipts of 1 mt or more 

of whiting from whiting trips in each of 

any two years from 1998 through 2004, 

as documented on fish tickets in the 

relevant PacFIN dataset on July 1, 2010. 

NMFS will mail the prequalified 

application by certified mail to the 

current address of record given by the 

state in which the entity is registered. 

For all qualified entities who meet the 

eligibility requirement at paragraph 

(d)(8)(ii)(B) of this section, the 

application will provide the basis of 

NMFS’ calculation of the initial 

issuance of Pacific whiting QS. 

(B) Request for an application. An 

owner of a current limited entry trawl 

permit or a Pacific whiting first receiver 

or shoreside processor that believes it is 

qualified for an initial issuance of QS 

and IBQ and does not receive a 

prequalified application, must complete 

an application package and submit the 

completed application to NMFS by the 

application deadline. Application 

packages are available on NMFS’ Web 

site (http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ 

Groundfish-Halibut/GroundfishPermits/index.cfm) or by contacting 

SFD. An application must include valid 

PacFIN data or other credible 

information that substantiates the 

applicant’s qualification for an initial 

issuance of QS and IBQ. 

(vi) Corrections to the application. If 

an applicant does not accept NMFS’ 

calculation in the prequalified 

application either in part or whole, the 

applicant must identify in writing to 

NMFS which parts the applicant 

believes to be inaccurate, and must 

provide specific credible information to 

substantiate any requested corrections. 

The completed application and specific 

credible information must be provided 

to NMFS in writing by the application 

deadline. Written communication must 

either be post-marked or hand-delivered 

within normal business hours no later 

than November 1, 2010. Requests for 

corrections may only be granted for the 

following reasons: 

(A) Errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of data, including: 

(1) Errors in NMFS’ use or application 

of landings data from PacFIN; 

(2) Errors in NMFS’ use or application 

of state logbook data from PacFIN; 

(3) Errors in NMFS’ application of the 

QS or IBQ allocation formula; 

(4) Errors in identification of the 

permit owner, permit combinations, or 

vessel registration as listed in NMFS 

permit database; 

(5) Errors in identification of 

ownership information for the first 

receiver or the processor that first 

processed the fish; and 

(6) Errors in NMFS’ use or application 

of ownership interest information. 

(B) Reassignment of Pacific whiting 

landings history for shoreside 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60962 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

processors. For shoreside processors, 

the landing history may be reassigned 

from the Pacific whiting shoreside first 

receive identified in the relevant PacFIN 

database to a shoreside processor that 

was in fact the first processor of the fish. 

In order for an applicant to request that 

landing history be reassigned, an 

authorized representative for the Pacific 

whiting shoreside first receiver 

identified on the state landing receipt 

must submit, by the application 

deadline date specified in paragraph 

(d)(8)(vii)(B) of this section for initial 

issuance of QS, a written request that 

the whiting landings history from the 

qualifying years be conveyed to a 

shoreside processor. The letter must be 

signed and dated by the authorized 

representative of the Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver named on the 

state landing receipt and signed and 

dated by the authorized representative 

of the shoreside processor to which the 

Pacific whiting landing history is 

requested to be reassigned. The letter 

must identify the dates of the landings 

history and the associated amounts that 

are requested to be reassigned, and 

include the legal name of the shoreside 

processor to which the Pacific whiting 

landing history is requested to be 

reassigned, their date of birth or tax 

identification number, business address, 

business phone number, fax number, 

and e-mail address. If any document 

exists that demonstrates that the 

shoreside processor to which the Pacific 

whiting landing history is requested to 

be reassigned was in fact the first 

processor of the fish, such 

documentation must be provided to 

NMFS. NMFS will review the 

information submitted and will make a 

determination as part of the IAD. 

(vii) Submission of the application 

and application deadline—(A) 

Submission of the application. 

Submission of the complete, certified 

application includes, but is not limited 

to, the following: 

(1) The applicant is required to sign 

and date the application and have the 

document notarized by a licensed 

Notary Public. 

(2) The applicant must certify that 

they qualify to own QS and IBQ. 

(3) The applicant must indicate they 

accept NMFS’ calculation of initial 

issuance of QS and IBQ provided in the 

prequalified application, or provide 

credible information that demonstrates 

their qualification for QS and IBQ. 

(4) The applicant is required to 

provide a complete Trawl Identification 

of Ownership Interest Form as specified 

at paragraph (d)(4)(iv) of this section. 

(5) Business entities may be required 

to submit a corporate resolution or other 

credible documentation as proof that the 

representative of the entity is authorized 

to act on behalf of the entity; and 

(6) NMFS may request additional 

information of the applicant as 

necessary to make an IAD on initial 

issuance of QS or IBQ. 

(B) Application deadline. A complete, 

certified application must be either 

postmarked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours to NMFS, 

Northwest Region, Permits Office, Bldg. 

1, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115, no later than November 1, 

2010. NMFS will not accept or review 

any applications received or postmarked 

after the application deadline. There are 

no hardship exemptions for this 

deadline. 

(viii) Permit transfer during 

application period. NMFS will not 

review or approve any request for a 

change in limited entry trawl permit 

owner at any time after either November 

1, 2010 or the date upon which the 

application is received by NMFS, 

whichever occurs first, until a final 

decision is made by the Regional 

Administrator on behalf of the Secretary 

of Commerce regarding the QS and IBQ 

to be issued for that permit. 

(ix) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of QS 

and IBQ, the applicant will receive a QS 

permit specifying the amounts of QS 

and IBQ for which the applicant has 

qualified and the applicant will be 

registered to a QS account. If NMFS 

disapproves or partially disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. As part of the IAD, NMFS will 

indicate whether the QS permit owner 

qualifies for QS or IBQ in amounts that 

exceed the accumulation limits and are 

subject to divestiture provisions given at 

paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section, or 

whether the QS permit owner qualifies 

for QS or IBQ that exceed the 

accumulation limits and does not 

qualify to receive the excess under 

paragraph (d)(4)(v) of this section. If the 

applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 30 calendar days of the date on 

the IAD, the IAD becomes the final 

decision of the Regional Administrator 

acting on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce. 

(x) Appeals. For QS permits and QS/ 

IBQ issued under this section, the 

appeals process and timelines are 

specified at § 660.25(g), subpart C. For 

the initial issuance of QS/IBQ and the 

QS permits, the bases for appeal are 

described in paragraph (d)(8)(vi) of this 

section. An additional basis for appeal 

for whiting QS based on shoreside 

processing is an allegation that the 

shoreside processor or Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver to which a QS 

permit and whiting QS have been 

assigned was not in fact the first 

processor of the fish included in the 

qualifying landings history. The 

appellant must submit credible 

information supporting the allegation 

that they were in fact the first shoreside 

processor for the fish in question. Items 

not subject to appeal include, but are 

not limited to, the accuracy of permit 

landings data or Pacific whiting 

shoreside first receiver landings data in 

the relevant PacFIN dataset on July 1, 

2010. 

(e) Vessel accounts. [Reserved] 

(f) First receiver site license. 

[Reserved] 

(g) Retention requirements (whiting 

and non-whiting vessels). [Reserved] 

(h) Observer requirements. [Reserved] 

(i) [Reserved] 

(j) Shoreside catch monitor 

requirements for IFQ first receivers. 

[Reserved] 

(k) Catch weighing requirements. 

[Reserved] 

(l) Gear switching. [Reserved] 

(m) Adaptive management program. 

[Reserved] 

§ 660.150 Mothership (MS) Coop Program. 

(a) General. The MS Coop Program 

requirements in this section will be 

effective beginning January 1, 2011, 

except for paragraphs (f)(3), (f)(5), (f)(6), 

(g)(3), (g)(5), and (g)(6) which are 

effective immediately. The MS Coop 

Program is a limited access program that 

applies to eligible harvesters and 

processors in the mothership sector of 

the Pacific whiting at-sea trawl fishery. 

Eligible harvesters and processors, 

including coop and non-coop fishery 

participants, must meet the 

requirements set forth in this section of 

the Pacific Coast groundfish regulations. 

In addition to the requirements of this 

section, the MS Coop Program is subject 

to the following groundfish regulations 

of subparts C and D: 

(1) Pacific whiting seasons 

§ 660.131(b), subpart D. 

(2) Area restrictions specified for 

midwater trawl gear used to harvest 

Pacific whiting fishery specified at 

§ 660.131(c), Subpart D for GCAs, RCAs, 

Salmon Conservation Zones, BRAs, and 

EFHCAs. 

(3) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart C: § 660.11 

Definitions, § 660.12 Prohibitions, 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting, 

§ 660.14 VMS requirements, § 660.15 

Equipment requirements, § 660.16 

Groundfish Observer Program, § 660.20 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60963 

Vessel and gear identification, § 660.25 

Permits, § 660.26 Pacific whiting vessel 

licenses, § 660.55 Allocations, § 660.60 

Specifications and management 

measures, § 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications, and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79 Closed areas. 

(4) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart D: 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery definitions, 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery prohibitions, 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery recordkeeping 

and reporting, § 660.116 Trawl fishery 

observer requirements, § 660.120 Trawl 

fishery crossover provisions, § 660.130 

Trawl fishery management measures, 

and § 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

(5) The MS Coop Program may be 

restricted or closed as a result of 

projected overages within the MS Coop 

Program, the C/P Coop Program, or the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. As 

determined necessary by the Regional 

Administrator, area restrictions, season 

closures, or other measures will be used 

to prevent the trawl sectors in aggregate 

or the individual trawl sector 

(Shorebased IFQ, MS Coop, or C/P 

Coop) from exceeding an OY, or formal 

allocation specified in the PCGFMP or 

regulation at § 660.55, subpart C, or 

§§ 660.140, 660.150, or 660.160, subpart 

D. 

(b) Participation requirements. 

[Reserved] 

(1) Mothership vessels. [Reserved] 

(2) Mothership catcher vessels. 

[Reserved] 

(3) MS Coop formation and failure. 

[Reserved] 

(c) Inter-coop agreement. [Reserved] 

(d) MS Coop Program species and 

allocations—(1) MS Coop Program 

species. MS Coop Program Species are 

as follows: 

(i) Species with formal allocations to 

the MS Coop Program are Pacific 

whiting, canary rockfish, darkblotched 

rockfish, Pacific Ocean perch, and 

widow rockfish; 

(ii) Species with set-asides for the MS 

and C/P Coop Programs combined, as 

described in Tables 1d and 2d, subpart 

C. 

(2) Annual mothership sector suballocations. [Reserved] 

(i) Mothership catcher vessel catch 

history assignments. [Reserved] 

(ii) Annual coop allocations. 

[Reserved] 

(iii) Annual non-coop allocation. 

[Reserved] 

(3) Reaching an allocation or suballocation. [Reserved] 

(4) Non-whiting groundfish species 

reapportionment. [Reserved] 

(5) Announcements. [Reserved] 

(6) Redistribution of annual 

allocation. [Reserved] 

(7) Processor obligation. [Reserved] 

(8) Allocation accumulation limits. 

[Reserved] 

(e) MS coop permit and agreement. 

[Reserved] 

(f) Mothership (MS) permit. 

(1) General. Any vessel that processes 

or receives deliveries as a mothership 

processor in the Pacific whiting fishery 

mothership sector must be registered to 

an MS permit. A vessel registered to an 

MS permit may receive fish from a 

vessel that fishes in an MS coop and/or 

may receive fish from a vessel that 

fishes in the non-coop fishery at the 

same time or during the same year. 

(i) Vessel size endorsement. An MS 

permit does not have a vessel size 

endorsement. The endorsement 

provisions at § 660.25(b)(3)(iii), subpart 

C, do not apply to an MS permit. 

(ii) Restriction on C/P vessels 

operating as motherships. Restrictions 

on a vessel registered to a limited entry 

permit with a C/P endorsement 

operating as a mothership are specified 

at § 660.160, subpart D. 

(2) Renewal, change of permit 

ownership, or vessel registration. 

[Reserved] 

(3) Accumulation limits. 

(i) MS permit usage limit. [Reserved] 

(ii) Ownership—individual and 

collective rule. The ownership that 

counts towards a person’s accumulation 

limit will include: 

(A) Any MS permit owned by that 

person, and 

(B) That portion of any MS permit 

owned by an entity in which that person 

has an economic or financial interest, 

where the person’s share of interest in 

that entity will determine the portion of 

that entity’s ownership that counts 

toward the person’s limit. 

(iii) [Reserved] 

(iv) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that is 

applying for an MS permit shall 

document those persons that have an 

ownership interest in the MS permit 

greater than or equal to 2 percent. This 

ownership interest must be documented 

with SFD via the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form. SFD will not 

issue an MS Permit unless the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form has been completed. NMFS may 

request additional information of the 

applicant as necessary to verify 

compliance with accumulation limits. 

(4) Appeals. [Reserved] 

(5) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for 

administrative costs associated with the 

issuance of an MS permit consistent 

with the provisions given at § 660.25(f), 

Subpart C. 

(6) Application requirements and 

initial issuance for MS permit—(i) 

Eligibility criteria for MS permit. Only 

the current owner of a vessel that 

processed Pacific whiting in the 

mothership sector in the qualifying 

years is eligible to receive initial 

issuance of an MS permit, except that in 

the case of bareboat charterers, the 

charterer of the bareboat may receive an 

MS permit instead of the vessel owner. 

As used in this section, ‘‘bareboat 

charterer’’ means a vessel charterer 

operating under a bareboat charter, 

defined as a complete transfer of 

possession, command, and navigation of 

a vessel from the vessel owner to the 

charterer for the limited time of the 

charter agreement. 

(ii) Qualifying criteria for MS permit. 

To qualify for initial issuance of an MS 

permit, a person must own, or operate 

under a bareboat charter, a vessel on 

which at least 1,000 mt of Pacific 

whiting was processed in the 

mothership sector in each year for at 

least two years between 1997 and 2003 

inclusive. 

(iii) MS permit application. Persons 

may apply for initial issuance of an MS 

permit in one of two ways: complete 

and submit a prequalified application 

received from NMFS, or complete and 

submit an application package. The 

completed application must be either 

postmarked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours no later than 

November 1, 2010. If an applicant fails 

to submit a completed application by 

the deadline date, they forgo the 

opportunity to receive consideration for 

initial issuance of an MS permit. 

(A) Prequalified application. A 

‘‘prequalified application’’ is a partially 

pre-filled application where NMFS has 

preliminarily determined the processing 

history that may qualify the applicant 

for an initial issuance of an MS permit. 

NMFS will mail prequalified 

application packages to the owners or 

bareboat charterer of vessels which 

NMFS determines may qualify for an 

MS permit. NMFS will mail the 

application by certified mail to the 

current address of record in the NMFS 

permit database. The application will 

contain the basis of NMFS’ calculation. 

The application package will include, 

but is not limited to: A prequalified 

application (with processing history), a 

Trawl Identification of Ownership 

Interest form, and any other documents 

NMFS believes are necessary to aid the 

owners of the vessel or charterer of the 

bareboat to complete the MS permit 

application. 

(B) Request for an application. Any 

current owner or bareboat charterer of a 

vessel that the owner or bareboat 

charterer believes qualifies for initial 

issuance of an MS permit that does not 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60964 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

receive a prequalified application must 

complete an application package and 

submit the completed application to 

NMFS by the application deadline. 

Application packages are available on 

NMFS’ Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/ 

Groundfish-Permits/index.cfm) or by 

contacting SFD. An application must 

include valid NORPAC data or other 

credible information that substantiates 

the applicant’s qualification for initial 

issuance of an MS permit. 

(iv) Corrections to the application. If 

the applicant does not accept NMFS’ 

calculation in the prequalified 

application either in part or whole, in 

order for NMFS to reconsider NMFS’ 

calculation, the applicant must identify 

in writing to NMFS which parts of the 

prequalified application that the 

applicant contends to be inaccurate, and 

must provide specific credible 

information to substantiate any 

requested corrections. The completed 

application and specific credible 

information must be provided to NMFS 

in writing by the application deadline. 

Written communication must be either 

post-marked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours no later than 

November 1, 2010. Requests for 

corrections may only be granted for 

errors in NMFS’ use or application of 

data, including: 

(A) Errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of data from NORPAC; 

(B) Errors in NMFS’ calculations; and 

(C) Errors in the vessel registration as 

listed in the NMFS permit database, or 

in the identification of the mothership 

owner or bareboat charterer. 

(v) Submission of the application and 

application deadline—(A) Submission 

of the Application. Submission of the 

complete, certified application includes, 

but is not limited to, the following: 

(1) The applicant is required to sign 

and date the application and have the 

document notarized by a licensed 

Notary Public. 

(2) The applicant must certify that 

they qualify to own an MS permit. 

(3) The applicant must indicate they 

accept NMFS’ calculation in the 

prequalified application, or provide 

credible information that demonstrates 

their qualification for an MS permit. 

(4) The applicant is required to 

provide a complete Trawl Identification 

of Ownership Interest Form as specified 

at paragraph (f)(3)(iv) of this section. 

(5) Business entities may be required 

to submit a corporate resolution or other 

credible documentation as proof that the 

representative of the entity is authorized 

to act on behalf of the entity; 

(6) A bareboat charterer must provide 

credible evidence that demonstrates it 

was chartering the mothership vessel 

under a private contract during the 

qualifying years; and 

(7) NMFS may request additional 

information of the applicant as 

necessary to make an IAD on initial 

issuance of an MS permit. 

(B) Application deadline. A complete, 

certified application must be either 

postmarked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours to NMFS, 

Northwest Region, Permits Office, Bldg. 

1, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115, no later than November 1, 

2010. NMFS will not accept or review 

any applications received or postmarked 

after the application deadline. There are 

no hardship provisions for this 

deadline. 

(vi) Initial administrative 

determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of an MS 

permit, the applicant will receive an MS 

permit. If NMFS disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. If the applicant does not appeal 

the IAD within 30 calendar days of the 

date on the IAD, the IAD becomes the 

final decision of the Regional 

Administrator acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce. 

(vii) Appeals. For MS permits issued 

under this section, the appeals process 

and timelines are specified at 

§ 660.25(g), subpart C. For the initial 

issuance of an MS permit, the bases for 

appeal are described in paragraph 

(f)(6)(iv) of this section. Items not 

subject to appeal include, but are not 

limited to, the accuracy of data in the 

relevant NORPAC dataset on August 1, 

2010. 

(g) Mothership catcher vessel (MS/ 

CV)-endorsed permit—(1) General. Any 

vessel that delivers whiting to a 

mothership processor in the Pacific 

whiting fishery mothership sector must 

be registered to an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit, except that a vessel registered to 

limited entry trawl permit without an 

MS/CV or C/P endorsement may fish for 

a coop with permission from the coop. 

Within the MS Coop Program, an MS/ 

CV-endorsed permit may participate in 

a coop or in the non-coop fishery. 

(i) Catch history assignment. NMFS 

will assign a catch history assignment to 

each MS/CV-endorsed permit. The catch 

history assignment is based on the catch 

history in the Pacific whiting 

mothership sector during the qualifying 

years of 1994 through 2003. The catch 

history assignment is expressed as a 

percentage of Pacific whiting of the total 

mothership sector allocation as 

described at paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this 

section. Catch history assignments will 

be issued to the nearest whole pound 

using standard rounding rules (i.e. 

decimal amounts from zero up to 0.5 

round down and 0.5 up to 1.0 round 

up). 

(ii) Pacific whiting mothership sector 

allocation. The catch history assignment 

allocation accrues to the coop to which 

the MS/CV-endorsed permit is tied 

through private agreement, or will be 

assigned to the non-coop fishery if the 

MS/CV-endorsed permit does not 

participate in the coop fishery. 

(iii) Non-severable. The MS/CV 

endorsement and its catch history 

assignment are not severable from the 

limited entry trawl permit. An MS/CV 

endorsement and its catch history 

assignment are permanently affixed to 

the original qualifying limited entry 

permit, and cannot be transferred 

separately from the original qualifying 

limited entry permit. 

(iv) Renewal. [Reserved] 

(v) Restrictions on processing by 

vessels registered to MS/CV-endorsed 

permits. A vessel registered to an MS/ 

CV-endorsed permit in a given year 

shall not engage in processing of Pacific 

whiting during that year. 

(2) Change of permit owner, vessel 

registration, vessel owner, or 

combination. [Reserved] 

(3) Accumulation limits—(i) MS/CVendorsed permit ownership limit. No 

person shall own MS/CV-endorsed 

permits for which the collective Pacific 

whiting allocation total is greater than 

20 percent of the total mothership sector 

allocation. For purposes of determining 

accumulation limits, NMFS requires 

that permit owners submit a complete 

trawl ownership interest form for the 

permit owner as part of annual renewal 

of an MS/CV-endorsed permit. An 

ownership interest form will also be 

required whenever a new permit owner 

obtains an MS/CV-endorsed permit as 

part of a permit transfer request. 

Accumulation limits will be determined 

by calculating the percentage of 

ownership interest a person has in any 

MS/CV-endorsed permit and the 

amount of the Pacific whiting catch 

history assignment given on the permit. 

Determination of ownership interest 

will be subject to the individual and 

collective rule. 

(A) Ownership—Individual and 

collective rule. The Pacific whiting 

catch history assignment that applies to 

a person’s accumulation limit will 

include: 

(1) The catch history assignment on 

any MS/CV-endorsed permit owned by 

that person, and 

(2) That portion of the catch history 

assignment on any MS/CV-endorsed 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60965 

permit owned by an entity in which that 

person has an economic or financial 

interest, where the person’s share of 

interest in that entity will determine the 

portion of that entity’s catch history 

assignment that counts toward the 

person’s limit. 

(B) [Reserved] 

(C) Trawl identification of ownership 

interest form. Any person that owns a 

limited entry trawl permit and is 

applying for an MS/CV endorsement 

shall document those persons that have 

an ownership interest in the permit 

greater than or equal to 2 percent. This 

ownership interest must be documented 

with the SFD via the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form. SFD will not issue an MS/CV 

endorsement unless the Trawl 

Identification of Ownership Interest 

Form has been completed. NMFS may 

request additional information of the 

applicant as necessary to verify 

compliance with accumulation limits. 

Further, if SFD discovers through 

review of the Trawl Identification of 

Ownership Interest Form that a person 

owns more than the accumulation 

limits, the person will be subject to 

divestiture provisions specified in 

paragraph (g)(3)(i)(D) of this section. 

(D) Divestiture. For MS/CV-endorsed 

permit owners that are found to exceed 

the accumulation limits during the 

initial issuance of MS/CV-endorsed 

permits, an adjustment period will be 

provided after which they will have to 

completely divest of ownership in 

permits that exceed the accumulation 

limits. Any person that NMFS 

determines, as a result of the initial 

issuance of MS/CV-endorsed permits, to 

own in excess of 20 percent of the total 

catch history assignment in the MS 

Coop Program applying the individual 

and collective rule described at 

§ 660.150(g)(3)(i)(A) will be allowed to 

receive such permit(s), but must divest 

themselves of the excess ownership 

during years one and two of the MS 

Coop Program. Owners of such permit(s) 

may receive and use the MS/CVendorsed permit(s), up to the time their 

divestiture is completed. At the end of 

year two of the MS Coop Program, any 

MS/CV-endorsed permits owned by a 

person (including any person who has 

ownership interest in the owner named 

on the permit) in excess of the 

accumulation limits will not be issued 

(renewed) until the permit owner 

complies with the accumulation limits. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(4) Appeals. [Reserved] 

(5) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge a fee for 

administrative costs associated with the 

issuance of an MS/CV-endorsed permit, 

as provided at § 660.25(f), subpart C. 

(6) Application requirements and 

initial issuance for MS/CV 

endorsement—(i) Eligibility criteria for 

MS/CV endorsement. Only a current 

trawl limited entry permit with a 

qualifying history of Pacific whiting 

deliveries in the MS Pacific whiting 

sector is eligible to receive an MS/CV 

endorsement. Any past catch history 

associated with the current limited 

entry trawl permit accrues to the permit. 

If a trawl limited entry permit is eligible 

to receive both a C/P endorsement and 

an MS/CV endorsement, the permit 

owner must choose which endorsement 

to apply for (i.e., the owner of such a 

permit may not receive both a C/P and 

an MS/CV endorsement). NMFS will not 

recognize any other person as permit 

owner other than the person listed as 

permit owner in NMFS permit database. 

(ii) Qualifying criteria for MS/CV 

endorsement. In order to qualify for an 

MS/CV endorsement, a qualifying trawlendorsed limited entry permit must 

have been registered to a vessel or 

vessels that caught and delivered a 

cumulative amount of at least 500 mt of 

Pacific whiting to motherships between 

1994 through 2003. The calculation will 

be based on the following: 

(A) To determine a permit’s qualifying 

catch history, NMFS will use 

documented deliveries to a mothership 

in Pacific whiting observer data as 

recorded in the relevant NORPAC 

dataset on August 1, 2010. 

(B) The qualifying catch history will 

include any deliveries of Pacific whiting 

to motherships by vessels registered to 

limited entry trawl-endorsed permits 

that were subsequently combined to 

generate the current permit. 

(C) If two or more limited entry trawl 

permits have been simultaneously 

registered to the same vessel, NMFS will 

divide the qualifying catch history 

evenly between all such limited entry 

trawl-endorsed permits during the time 

they were simultaneously registered to 

the vessel. 

(D) History of illegal deliveries will 

not be included in the qualifying catch 

history. 

(E) Deliveries made from Federal 

limited entry groundfish permits that 

were retired through the Federal 

buyback program will not be included 

in the qualifying catch history. 

(F) Deliveries made under provisional 

‘‘A’’ permits that did not become ‘‘A’’ 

permits and ‘‘B’’ permits will not be 

included in the qualifying catch history. 

(iii) Qualifying criteria for catch 

history assignment. A catch history 

assignment will be specified as a 

percent on the MS/CV-endorsed permit. 

The calculation will be based on the 

following: 

(A) For determination of a permit’s 

catch history, NMFS will use 

documented deliveries to a mothership 

in Pacific whiting observer data as 

recorded in the relevant NORPAC 

dataset on August 1, 2010. 

(B) NMFS will use relative history, 

which means the catch history of a 

permit for a year divided by the total 

fleet history for that year, expressed as 

a percent. NMFS will calculate relative 

history for each year in the qualifying 

period from 1994 through 2003 by 

dividing the total deliveries of Pacific 

whiting to motherships for the vessel(s) 

registered to the permit for each year by 

the sum of the total catch of Pacific 

whiting delivered to mothership 

vessel(s) for that year. 

(C) NMFS will select the eight years 

with the highest relative history of 

Pacific whiting, unless the applicant 

requests a different set of eight years 

during the initial issuance and appeals 

process, and will add the relative 

histories for these years to generate the 

permit’s total relative history. NMFS 

will then divide the permit’s total 

relative history by the sum of all 

qualifying permits’ total relative 

histories to determine the permit’s catch 

history assignment, expressed as a 

percent. 

(D) The total relative history will 

include any deliveries of Pacific whiting 

to motherships by vessels registered to 

limited entry trawl-endorsed permits 

that were subsequently combined to 

generate the current permit. 

(E) If two or more limited entry trawl 

permits have been simultaneously 

registered to the same vessel, NMFS will 

split the catch history evenly between 

all such limited entry trawl-endorsed 

permits during the time they were 

simultaneously registered to the vessel. 

(F) History of illegal deliveries will 

not be included in the calculation of a 

permit’s catch history assignment or in 

the calculation of relative history for 

individual years. 

(G) Deliveries made from Federal 

limited entry groundfish permits that 

were retired through the Federal 

buyback program will not be included 

in the calculation of a permit’s catch 

history assignment other than for the 

purpose of calculating relative history 

for individual years. 

(H) Deliveries made under provisional 

‘‘A’’ permits that did not become ‘‘A’’ 

permits and ‘‘B’’ permits will not be 

included in the calculation of a permit’s 

catch history assignment other than for 

the purpose of calculating relative 

history for individual years. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60966 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(iv) MS/CV endorsement and catch 

history assignment application. Persons 

may apply for an initial issuance of an 

MS/CV endorsement on a limited entry 

trawl permit and its associated catch 

history assignment in one of two ways: 

complete and submit a prequalified 

application received from NMFS, or 

complete and submit an application 

package. The completed application 

must be either postmarked or handdelivered within normal business hours 

no later than November 1, 2010. If an 

applicant fails to submit a completed 

application by the deadline date, they 

forgo the opportunity to receive 

consideration for an initial issuance of 

an MS/CV endorsement and associated 

catch history assignment. 

(A) Prequalified application. A 

‘‘prequalified application’’ is a partially 

pre-filled application where NMFS has 

preliminarily determined the catch 

history that may qualify the applicant 

for an initial issuance of an MS/CV 

endorsement and associated catch 

history assignment. NMFS will mail 

prequalified application packages to the 

owners of current limited entry trawl 

permits, as listed in the NMFS permit 

database at the time applications are 

mailed, which NMFS determines may 

qualify for an MS/CV endorsement and 

associated catch history assignment. 

NMFS will mail the application by 

certified mail to the current address of 

record in the NMFS permit database. 

The application will contain the basis of 

NMFS’ calculation. The application 

package will include, but is not limited 

to: a prequalified application (with 

landings history), a Trawl Identification 

of Ownership Interest form, and any 

other documents NMFS believes are 

necessary to aid the limited entry permit 

owner in completing the application. 

(B) Request for an application. Any 

owner of a current limited entry trawl 

permit that does not receive a 

prequalified application that believes 

the permit qualifies for an initial 

issuance of an MS/CV endorsement and 

associated catch history assignment 

must complete an application package 

and submit the completed application to 

NMFS by the application deadline. 

Application packages are available on 

the NMFS Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/ 

Groundfish-Permits/index.cfm) or by 

contacting SFD. An application must 

include valid NORPAC data, copies of 

NMFS observer data forms, or other 

credible information that substantiates 

the applicant’s qualification for an 

initial issuance of an MS/CV 

endorsement and associated catch 

history assignment. 

(v) Corrections to the application. If 

the applicant does not accept NMFS’ 

calculation in the prequalified 

application either in part or whole, in 

order for NMFS to reconsider NMFS’ 

calculation, the applicant must identify 

in writing to NMFS which parts of the 

application that the applicant contends 

to be inaccurate, and must provide 

specific credible information to 

substantiate any requested corrections. 

The completed application and specific 

credible information must be provided 

to NMFS in writing by the application 

deadline. Written communication must 

be either post-marked or hand-delivered 

within normal business hours no later 

than November 1, 2010. Requests for 

corrections may only be granted for 

changes to the selection of the eight 

years with the highest relative history of 

whiting and errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of data, including: 

(A) Errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of data from NORPAC; 

(B) Errors in NMFS’ calculations; 

(C) Errors in the identification of the 

permit owner, permit combinations, or 

vessel registration as listed in the NMFS 

permit database; and 

(D) Errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of ownership interest 

information. 

(vi) Submission of the application and 

application deadline—(A) Submission 

of the application. Submission of the 

complete, certified application includes, 

but is not limited to, the following: 

(1) The applicant is required to sign 

and date the application and have the 

document notarized by a licensed 

Notary Public. 

(2) The applicant must certify that 

they qualify to own an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit and associated catch history 

assignment. 

(3) The applicant must indicate they 

accept NMFS’ calculation of initial 

issuance of an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

and associated catch history assignment 

provided in the prequalified 

application, or provide credible 

information that demonstrates their 

qualification for an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit and associated catch history 

assignment. 

(4) The applicant is required to 

provide a complete Trawl Identification 

of Ownership Interest Form as specified 

at paragraph (g)(3)(i)(C) of this section. 

(5) Business entities may be required 

to submit a corporate resolution or other 

credible documentation as proof that the 

representative of the entity is authorized 

to act on behalf of the entity; and 

(6) NMFS may request additional 

information of the applicant as 

necessary to make an IAD on initial 

issuance of an MS/CV-endorsed permit 

and associated catch history assignment. 

(B) Application deadline. A complete, 

certified application must be either 

postmarked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours to NMFS, 

Northwest Region, Permits Office, Bldg. 

1, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115, no later than November 1, 

2010. NMFS will not accept or review 

any applications received or postmarked 

after the application deadline. There are 

no hardship provisions for this 

deadline. 

(vii) Permit transfer during 

application period. NMFS will not 

review or approve any request for a 

change in limited entry trawl permit 

owner at any time after either November 

1, 2010 or the date upon which the 

application is received by NMFS, 

whichever occurs first, until a final 

decision is made by the Regional 

Administrator on behalf of the Secretary 

of Commerce on that permit. 

(viii) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application for initial issuance of an 

MS/CV-endorsed permit and associated 

catch history assignment, the applicant 

will receive an MS/CV endorsement on 

a limited entry trawl permit specifying 

the amounts of catch history assignment 

for which the applicant has qualified. If 

NMFS disapproves an application, the 

IAD will provide the reasons. If known 

at the time of the IAD, NMFS will 

indicate if the owner of the MS/CVendorsed permit has ownership interest 

in catch history assignments that exceed 

the accumulation limits and are subject 

to divestiture provisions given at 

paragraph (g)(3)(i)(D) of this section. If 

the applicant does not appeal the IAD 

within 30 calendar days of the date on 

the IAD, the IAD becomes the final 

decision of the Regional Administrator 

acting on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce. 

(ix) Appeals. For an MS/CV-endorsed 

permit and associated catch history 

assignment issued under this section, 

the appeals process and timelines are 

specified at § 660.25(g), subpart C. For 

the initial issuance of an MS/CVendorsed permit and associated catch 

history assignment, the bases for appeal 

are described in paragraph (g)(6)(v) of 

this section. Items not subject to appeal 

include, but are not limited to, the 

accuracy of data in the relevant 

NORPAC dataset on August 1, 2010. 

(h) Non-coop fishery. [Reserved] 

(i) Retention requirements. [Reserved] 

(j) Observer requirements. [Reserved] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60967 

(k) Catch weighing requirements. 

[Reserved] 

(l) [Reserved] 

§ 660.160 Catcher/processor (C/P) Coop 

Program. 

(a) General. The C/P Coop Program 

requirements in § 660.160 will be 

effective beginning January 1, 2011, 

except for paragraphs (d)(5) and (d)(7) of 

this section, which are effective 

immediately. The C/P Coop Program is 

a limited access program that applies to 

vessels in the C/P sector of the Pacific 

whiting at-sea trawl fishery and is a 

single voluntary coop. Eligible 

harvesters and processors must meet the 

requirements set forth in this section of 

the Pacific Coast groundfish regulations. 

In addition to the requirements of this 

section, the C/P Coop Program is subject 

to the following groundfish regulations: 

(1) Pacific whiting seasons 

§ 660.131(b), subpart D. 

(2) Area restrictions specified for 

midwater trawl gear used to harvest 

Pacific whiting fishery specified at 

§ 660.131(c), subpart D for GCAs, RCAs, 

Salmon Conservation Zones, BRAs, and 

EFHCAs. 

(3) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart C: § 660.11 

Definitions, § 660.12 Prohibitions, 

§ 660.13 Recordkeeping and reporting, 

§ 660.14 VMS requirements, § 660.15 

Equipment requirements, § 660.16 

Groundfish Observer Program, § 660.20 

Vessel and gear identification, § 660.25 

Permits, § 660.26 Pacific whiting vessel 

licenses, § 660.55 Allocations, § 660.60 

Specifications and management 

measures, § 660.65 Groundfish harvest 

specifications, and §§ 660.70 through 

660.79 Closed areas. 

(4) Regulations set out in the 

following sections of subpart D: 

§ 660.111 Trawl fishery definitions, 

§ 660.112 Trawl fishery prohibitions, 

§ 660.113 Trawl fishery recordkeeping 

and reporting, § 660.116 Trawl fishery 

observer requirements, § 660.120 Trawl 

fishery crossover provisions, § 660.130 

Trawl fishery management measures, 

and § 660.131 Pacific whiting fishery 

management measures. 

(5) The C/P Coop Program may be 

restricted or closed as a result of 

projected overages within the MS Coop 

Program, the C/P Coop Program, or the 

Shorebased IFQ Program. As 

determined necessary by the Regional 

Administrator, area restrictions, season 

closures, or other measures will be used 

to prevent the trawl sectors in aggregate 

or the individual trawl sector 

(Shorebased IFQ, MS Coop, or C/P 

Coop) from exceeding an OY, or formal 

allocation specified in the PCGFMP or 

regulation at § 660.55, subpart C, or 

§§ 660.140, 660.150, or 660.160, subpart 

D. 

(b) C/P Coop Program species and 

allocations—(1) C/P Coop Program 

species. C/P Coop Program species are 

as follows: 

(i) Species with formal allocations to 

the C/P Coop Program are Pacific 

whiting, canary rockfish, darkblotched 

rockfish, Pacific Ocean perch, widow 

rockfish; 

(ii) Species with set-asides for the MS 

and C/P Programs combined, as 

described in Table 1d and 2d, subpart 

C. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(c) C/P coop permit and agreement. 

[Reserved] 

(d) C/P-endorsed permit—(1) General. 

Any vessel participating in the C/P 

sector of the non-tribal primary Pacific 

whiting fishery during the season 

described at § 660.131(b) of this subpart 

must be registered to a valid limited 

entry permit with a C/P endorsement. 

(i) Non-severable. A C/P endorsement 

is not severable from the limited entry 

trawl permit, and therefore, the 

endorsement may not be transferred 

separately from the limited entry trawl 

permit. 

(ii) Restriction on C/P vessel operating 

as a catcher vessel in the mothership 

sector. A vessel registered to a C/Pendorsed permit cannot operate as a 

catcher vessel delivering unprocessed 

Pacific whiting to a mothership 

processor during the same calendar year 

it participates in the C/P sector. 

(iii) Restriction on C/P vessel 

operating as mothership. A vessel 

registered to a C/P-endorsed permit 

cannot operate as a mothership during 

the same calendar year it participates in 

the C/P sector. 

(2) Eligibility and renewal for C/Pendorsed permit. [Reserved.] 

(3) Change in permit ownership, 

vessel registration, vessel owner, 

transfer or combination. [Reserved] 

(4) Appeals. [Reserved] 

(5) Fees. The Regional Administrator 

is authorized to charge fees for the 

administrative costs associated with 

review and issuance of a C/P 

endorsement consistent with the 

provisions at § 660.25(f), subpart C. 

(6) [Reserved] 

(7) Application requirements and 

initial issuance for C/P endorsement— 

(i) Eligibility criteria for C/P 

endorsement. Only current owners of a 

current limited entry trawl permit that 

has been registered to a vessel that 

participated in the C/P fishery during 

the qualifying period are eligible to 

receive a C/P endorsement. Any past 

catch history associated with the current 

limited entry trawl permit accrues to the 

current permit owner. NMFS will not 

recognize any other person as the 

limited entry permit owner other than 

the person listed as the limited entry 

permit owner in the NMFS permit 

database. 

(ii) Qualifying criteria for C/P 

endorsement. In order to qualify for a 

C/P endorsement, a vessel registered to 

a valid trawl-endorsed limited entry 

permit must have caught and processed 

any amount of Pacific whiting during a 

primary catcher/processor season 

between 1997 through 2003. The 

calculation will be based on the 

following: 

(A) Pacific Whiting Observer data 

recorded in the relevant NORPAC 

dataset on August 1, 2010, and NMFS 

permit data on limited entry trawlendorsed permits will be used to 

determine whether a permit meets the 

qualifying criteria for a C/P 

endorsement. 

(B) Only Pacific whiting regulated by 

this subpart that was taken with 

midwater (or pelagic) trawl gear will be 

considered for the C/P endorsement. 

(C) Permit catch and processing 

history includes only the catch/ 

processing history of Pacific whiting for 

a vessel when it was registered to that 

particular permit during the qualifying 

years. 

(D) History of illegal landings will not 

count. 

(E) Landings history from Federal 

limited entry groundfish permits that 

were retired through the Federal 

buyback program will not count. 

(F) Landings under provisional ‘‘A’’ 

permits that did not become ‘‘A’’ permits 

and ‘‘B’’ permits will not count. 

(iii) C/P endorsement application. 

Persons may apply for an initial 

issuance of a C/P endorsement in one of 

two ways: complete and submit a 

prequalified application received from 

NMFS, or complete and submit an 

application package. The completed 

application must be either postmarked 

or hand-delivered within normal 

business hours no later than November 

1, 2010. If an applicant fails to submit 

a completed application by the deadline 

date, they forgo the opportunity to 

receive consideration for initial issuance 

of a C/P endorsement. 

(A) Prequalified application. A 

‘‘prequalified application’’ is a partially 

pre-filled application where NMFS has 

preliminarily determined the catch 

history that may qualify the applicant 

for an initial issuance of a C/P 

endorsement. NMFS will mail a 

prequalified application to all owners of 

current trawl limited entry permits, as 

listed in NMFS permit database at the 

time applications are mailed, which 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60968 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

NMFS determines may qualify for a 

C/P endorsement. NMFS will mail the 

application by certified mail to the 

current address of record in the NMFS 

permit database. The application will 

contain the basis of NMFS’ calculation. 

The application package will include, 

but is not limited to: a prequalified 

application (with catch history) and any 

other documents NMFS believes are 

necessary to aid the limited entry permit 

owner in completing the application. 

(B) Request for an application. Any 

owner of a current limited entry trawl 

permit that does not receive a 

prequalified application that believes 

the permit qualifies for an initial 

issuance of a C/P endorsement must 

complete an application package and 

submit the completed application to 

NMFS by the application deadline. 

Application packages are available on 

the NMFS Web site (http:// 

www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/ 

Groundfish-Permits/index.cfm) or by 

contacting SFD. An application must 

include valid NORPAC data, copies of 

NMFS observer data forms, or other 

credible information that substantiates 

the applicant’s qualification for initial 

issuance of a C/P endorsement. 

(iv) Corrections to the application. If 

the applicant does not accept NMFS’ 

calculation in the prequalified 

application either in part or whole, in 

order for NMFS to reconsider NMFS’ 

calculation, the applicant must identify 

in writing to NMFS which parts of the 

application the applicant contends to be 

inaccurate, and must provide specific 

credible information to substantiate any 

requested corrections. The completed 

application and specific credible 

information must be provided to NMFS 

in writing by the application deadline. 

Written communication must be either 

post-marked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours no later than 

November 1, 2010. Requests for 

corrections may only be granted for 

errors in NMFS’ use or application of 

data, including: 

(A) Errors in NMFS’ use or 

application of data from NORPAC; 

(B) Errors in NMFS’ calculations; and 

(C) Errors in the identification of the 

permit owner, permit combinations, or 

vessel registration as listed in the NMFS 

permit database. 

(v) Submission of the application and 

application deadline—(A) Submission 

of the Application. Submission of the 

complete, certified application includes, 

but is not limited to, the following: 

(1) The applicant is required to sign 

and date the application and have the 

document notarized by a licensed 

Notary Public. 

(2) The applicant must certify that 

they qualify to own a C/P-endorsed 

permit. 

(3) The applicant must indicate they 

accept NMFS’ calculation of initial 

issuance of C/P endorsement provided 

in the prequalified application, or 

provide credible information that 

demonstrates their qualification for a 

C/P endorsement. 

(4) Business entities may be required 

to submit a corporate resolution or other 

credible documentation as proof that the 

representative of the entity is authorized 

to act on behalf of the entity; and 

(5) NMFS may request additional 

information of the applicant as 

necessary to make an IAD on initial 

issuance of a C/P endorsement. 

(B) Application deadline. A complete, 

certified application must be either 

postmarked or hand-delivered within 

normal business hours to NMFS, 

Northwest Region, Permits Office, Bldg. 

1, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, 

WA 98115, no later than November 1, 

2010. NMFS will not accept or review 

any applications received or postmarked 

after the application deadline. There are 

no hardship provisions for this 

deadline. 

(vi) Permit transfer during application 

period. NMFS will not review or 

approve any request for a change in 

limited entry trawl permit owner at any 

time after either November 1, 2010 or 

the date upon which the application is 

received by NMFS, whichever occurs 

first, until a final decision is made by 

the Regional Administrator on behalf of 

the Secretary of Commerce. 

(vii) Initial Administrative 

Determination (IAD). NMFS will issue 

an IAD for all complete, certified 

applications received by the application 

deadline date. If NMFS approves an 

application, the applicant will receive a 

C/P endorsement on a limited entry 

trawl permit. If NMFS disapproves an 

application, the IAD will provide the 

reasons. If the applicant does not appeal 

the IAD within 30 calendar days of the 

date on the IAD, the IAD becomes the 

final decision of the Regional 

Administrator acting on behalf of the 

Secretary of Commerce. 

(viii) Appeal. For a C/P-endorsed 

permit issued under this section, the 

appeals process and timelines are 

specified at § 660.25(g), subpart C. For 

the initial issuance of a C/P-endorsed 

permit, the bases for appeal are 

described in paragraph (d)(7)(iv) of this 

section. Items not subject to appeal 

include, but are not limited to, the 

accuracy of data in the relevant 

NORPAC dataset on August 1, 2010. 

(e) Retention requirements. [Reserved] 

(f) Observer requirements. [Reserved] 

(g) [Reserved] 

(h) Catch weighting requirements. 

[Reserved] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60969 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.010</GPH>
60970 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60971 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.012</GPH>
60972 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60973 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.014</GPH>
60974 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Subpart E—West Coast Groundfish— 

Limited Entry Fixed Gear Fisheries 

§ 660.210 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart covers the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish limited entry fixed gear 

fishery. 

§ 660.211 Fixed gear fishery—definitions. 

These definitions are specific to the 

limited entry fixed gear fisheries 

covered in this subpart. General 

groundfish definitions are found at 

§ 660.11, subpart C. 

Daily Trip Limit (DTL) Fishery means 

a sablefish fishery that occurs both 

north and south of 36° N. lat. that is 

subject to trip limit restrictions 

including daily and/or weekly and/or 

bimonthly trip limits. 

Limited entry fixed gear fishery means 

the fishery composed of vessels 

registered to limited entry permits with 

longline and pot/trap endorsements. 

Sablefish primary fishery or sablefish 

tier limit fishery means, for the limited 

entry fixed gear sablefish fishery north 

of 36° N. lat, the fishery where vessels 

registered to at least one limited entry 

permit with both a gear endorsement for 

longline or trap (or pot) gear and a 

sablefish endorsement fish up to a 

specified tier limit and when they are 

not eligible to fish in the DTL fishery. 

Sablefish primary season means, for 

the limited entry fixed gear sablefish 

fishery north of 36° N. lat, the period 

when vessels registered to at least one 

limited entry permit with both a gear 

endorsement for longline or trap (or pot) 

gear and a sablefish endorsement, are 

allowed to fish in the sablefish tier limit 

fishery described at § 660.231 of this 

subpart. 

Tier limit means a specified amount 

of sablefish that may be harvested by a 

vessel registered to a limited entry fixed 

gear permit(s) with a Tier 1, Tier 2, and/ 

or Tier 3 designation; a gear 

endorsement for longline or trap (or pot) 

gear; and a sablefish endorsement. 

§ 660.212 Fixed gear fishery—prohibitions. 

These prohibitions are specific to the 

limited entry fixed gear fisheries. 

General groundfish prohibitions are 

found at § 660.12, subpart C. In addition 

to the general groundfish prohibitions 

specified in § 660.12, subpart C, it is 

unlawful for any person to: 

(a) General. (1) Possess, deploy, haul, 

or carry onboard a fishing vessel subject 

to subparts C and E a set net, trap or pot, 

longline, or commercial vertical hookand-line as defined at § 660.11, subpart 

C, that is not in compliance with the 

gear restrictions in § 660.230, subpart E, 

unless such gear is the gear of another 

vessel that has been retrieved at sea and 

made inoperable or stowed in a manner 

not capable of being fished. The 

disposal at sea of such gear is prohibited 

by Annex V of the International 

Convention for the Prevention of 

Pollution From Ships, 1973 (Annex V of 

MARPOL 73/78). 

(2) Take, retain, possess, or land more 

than a single cumulative limit of a 

particular species, per vessel, per 

applicable cumulative limit period, 

except for sablefish taken in the limited 

entry, fixed gear sablefish primary 

season from a vessel authorized to fish 

in that season, as described at § 660.231, 

subpart E. 

(b) Recordkeeping and reporting. Fail 

to retain on board a vessel from which 

sablefish caught in the sablefish primary 

season is landed, and provide to an 

authorized officer upon request, copies 

of any and all reports of sablefish 

landings against the sablefish-endorsed 

permit’s tier limit, or receipts containing 

all data, and made in the exact manner 

required by the applicable state law 

throughout the sablefish primary season 

during which such landings occurred 

and for 15 days thereafter. 

(c) Fishing in conservation areas. (1) 

Operate a vessel registered to a limited 

entry permit with a longline or trap 

(pot) endorsement and longline and/or 

trap gear onboard in an applicable GCA 

(as defined at § 660.230(d)), except for 

purposes of continuous transiting, with 

all groundfish longline and/or trap gear 

stowed in accordance with § 660.212(a) 

or except as authorized in the 

groundfish management measures at 

§ 660.230. 

(2) Fish with bottom contact gear (as 

defined in § 660.11, subpart C) within 

the EEZ in the following areas (defined 

in §§ 660.78 and 660.79, subpart C): 

Thompson Seamount, President Jackson 

Seamount, Cordell Bank (50-fm (91-m) 

isobath), Harris Point, Richardson Rock, 

Scorpion, Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. 

(3) Fish with bottom contact gear (as 

defined in § 660.11, subpart C), or any 

other gear that is deployed deeper than 

500-fm (914-m), within the Davidson 

Seamount area (defined in § 660.75, 

subpart C). 

(d) Sablefish fisheries. (1) Take, 

retain, possess or land sablefish under 

the tier limits provided for the limited 

entry, fixed gear sablefish primary 

season, described in § 660.231(b), 

subpart E, from a vessel that is not 

registered to a limited entry permit with 

a sablefish endorsement. 

(2) Take, retain, possess or land 

sablefish in the sablefish primary 

season, described at § 660.231(b), 

subpart E, unless the owner of the 

limited entry permit registered for use 

with that vessel and authorizing the 

vessel to fish in the sablefish primary 

season is on board that vessel. 

Exceptions to this prohibition are 

provided at § 660.231(b)(4)(i) and (ii). 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.015</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60975 

(3) Process sablefish taken at-sea in 

the limited entry fixed gear sablefish 

primary fishery defined at § 660.231, 

subpart E, from a vessel that does not 

have a sablefish at-sea processing 

exemption, defined at 

§ 660.25(b)(3)(iv)(D), subpart C. 

§ 660.213 Fixed gear fishery— 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

(a) General. General reporting 

requirements specified at § 660.13 (a) 

through (c), subpart C, apply to limited 

entry fixed gear fishery vessels. 

(b) Declaration reports for limited 

entry fixed gear fishery vessels. 

Declaration reporting requirements for 

limited entry fixed gear fishery vessels 

are specified at § 660.13 (d), subpart C. 

(c) VMS requirements for limited 

entry fixed gear fishery vessels. VMS 

requirements for limited entry fixed gear 

fishery vessels are specified at § 660.14, 

subpart C. 

(d) Retention of records. (1) Any 

person landing groundfish must retain 

on board the vessel from which 

groundfish are landed, and provide to 

an authorized officer upon request, 

copies of any and all reports of 

groundfish landings containing all data, 

and in the exact manner, required by the 

applicable state law throughout the 

cumulative limit period during which a 

landing occurred and for 15 days 

thereafter. 

(2) For participants in the sablefish 

primary season, the cumulative limit 

period to which this requirement 

applies is April 1 through October 31 or, 

for an individual permit holder, when 

that permit holder’s tier limit is 

attained, whichever is earlier. 

§ 660.216 Fixed gear fishery—observer 

requirements. 

(a) Observer coverage requirements. 

When NMFS notifies the owner, 

operator, permit holder, or the manager 

of a catcher vessel, specified at 

§ 660.16(c), subpart C, of any 

requirement to carry an observer, the 

catcher vessel may not be used to fish 

for groundfish without carrying an 

observer. 

(b) Notice of departure basic rule. At 

least 24 hours (but not more than 36 

hours) before departing on a fishing trip, 

a vessel that has been notified by NMFS 

that it is required to carry an observer, 

or that is operating in an active 

sampling unit, must notify NMFS (or its 

designated agent) of the vessel’s 

intended time of departure. Notice will 

be given in a form to be specified by 

NMFS. 

(1) Optional notice—weather delays. 

A vessel that anticipates a delayed 

departure due to weather or sea 

conditions may advise NMFS of the 

anticipated delay when providing the 

basic notice described in paragraph (b) 

of this section. If departure is delayed 

beyond 36 hours from the time the 

original notice is given, the vessel must 

provide an additional notice of 

departure not less than 4 hours prior to 

departure, in order to enable NMFS to 

place an observer. 

(2) Optional notice—back-to-back 

fishing trips. A vessel that intends to 

make back-to-back fishing trips (i.e., 

trips with less than 24 hours between 

offloading from one trip and beginning 

another), may provide the basic notice 

described in paragraph (b) of this 

section for both trips, prior to making 

the first trip. A vessel that has given 

such notice is not required to give 

additional notice of the second trip. 

(c) Cease fishing report. Within 24 

hours of ceasing the taking and retaining 

of groundfish, vessel owners, operators, 

or managers must notify NMFS or its 

designated agent that fishing has ceased. 

This requirement applies to any vessel 

that is required to carry an observer, or 

that is operating in a segment of the fleet 

that NMFS has identified as an active 

sampling unit. 

(d) Waiver. The Northwest Regional 

Administrator may provide written 

notification to the vessel owner stating 

that a determination has been made to 

temporarily waive coverage 

requirements because of circumstances 

that are deemed to be beyond the 

vessel’s control. 

(e) Vessel responsibilities—(1) 

Accommodations and food. An operator 

of a vessel required to carry one or more 

observer(s) must provide 

accommodations and food that are 

Equivalent to those provided to the 

crew. 

(2) Safe conditions. Maintain safe 

conditions on the vessel for the 

protection of observer(s) including 

adherence to all USCG and other 

applicable rules, regulations, or statutes 

pertaining to safe operation of the 

vessel, and provisions at §§ 600.725 and 

600.746 of this chapter. 

(3) Observer communications. 

Facilitate observer communications by: 

(i) Observer use of equipment. 

Allowing observer(s) to use the vessel’s 

communication equipment and 

personnel, on request, for the entry, 

transmission, and receipt of workrelated messages, at no cost to the 

observer(s) or the U.S. or designated 

agent. 

(ii) Functional equipment. Ensuring 

that the vessel’s communications 

equipment, used by observers to enter 

and transmit data, is fully functional 

and operational. 

(4) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to, and the use of, the vessel’s 

navigation equipment and personnel, on 

request, to determine the vessel’s 

position. 

(5) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working decks, holding 

bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, 

weight scales, cargo holds, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish or fish 

products at any time. 

(6) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board, or fish and 

fish products are transferred from the 

vessel, to allow sampling the catch or 

observing the transfer, unless the 

observer specifically requests not to be 

notified. 

(7) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any state or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(8) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(i) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(ii) Providing the observer(s) with a 

safe work area. 

(iii) Collecting bycatch when 

requested by the observer(s). 

(iv) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish when requested by the observer(s). 

(v) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(vi) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(f) Sample station—(1) Observer 

sampling station. This paragraph 

contains the requirements for observer 

sampling stations. The vessel owner 

must provide an observer sampling 

station that complies with this section 

so that the observer can carry out 

required duties. 

(i) Accessibility. The observer 

sampling station must be available to 

the observer at all times. 

(ii) Location. The observer sampling 

station must be located within 4 m of 

the location from which the observer 

samples unsorted catch. Unobstructed 

passage must be provided between the 

observer sampling station and the 

location where the observer collects 

sample catch. 

(2) [Reserved] 

§ 660.219 Fixed gear identification and 

marking. 

(a) Gear identification. (1) Limited 

entry fixed gear (longline, trap or pot) 

must be marked at the surface and at 

each terminal end, with a pole, flag, 

light, radar reflector, and a buoy. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60976 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(2) A buoy used to mark fixed gear 

must be marked with a number clearly 

identifying the owner or operator of the 

vessel. The number may be either: 

(i) If required by applicable state law, 

the vessel’s number, the commercial 

fishing license number, or buoy brand 

number; or 

(ii) The vessel documentation number 

issued by the USCG, or, for an 

undocumented vessel, the vessel 

registration number issued by the state. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 660.220 Fixed gear fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

(a) Operating in both limited entry 

and open access fisheries. See 

provisions at § 660.60(h)(7), subpart C. 

(b) Operating in north-south 

management areas with different trip 

limits. NMFS uses different types of 

management areas for West Coast 

groundfish management. One type of 

management area is the north-south 

management area, a large ocean area 

with northern and southern boundary 

lines wherein trip limits, seasons, and 

conservation areas follow a single 

theme. Within each north-south 

management area, there may be one or 

more conservation areas, detailed in 

§§ 660.60(h)(7) and 660.70 through 

660.74, subpart C. The provisions 

within this paragraph apply to vessels 

operating in different north-south 

management areas. Trip limits for a 

species or a species group may differ in 

different north-south management areas 

along the coast. The following 

‘‘crossover’’ provisions apply to vessels 

operating in different geographical areas 

that have different cumulative or ‘‘per 

trip’’ trip limits for the same species or 

species group. Such crossover 

provisions do not apply to species that 

are subject only to daily trip limits, or 

to the trip limits for black rockfish off 

Washington (see § 660.230(d)). 

(1) Going from a more restrictive to a 

more liberal area. If a vessel takes and 

retains any groundfish species or 

species group of groundfish in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies before fishing in an area where 

a more liberal trip limit (or no trip limit) 

applies, then that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(2) Going from a more liberal to a 

more restrictive area. If a vessel takes 

and retains a groundfish species or 

species group in an area where a higher 

trip limit or no trip limit applies, and 

takes and retains, possesses or lands the 

same species or species group in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies, that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(3) Operating in two different areas 

where a species or species group is 

managed with different types of trip 

limits. During the fishing year, NMFS 

may implement management measures 

for a species or species group that set 

different types of trip limits (for 

example, per trip limits versus 

cumulative trip limits) for different 

areas. If a vessel fishes for a species or 

species group that is managed with 

different types of trip limits in two 

different areas within the same 

cumulative limit period, then that vessel 

is subject to the most restrictive overall 

cumulative limit for that species, 

regardless of where fishing occurs. 

(4) Minor rockfish. Several rockfish 

species are designated with speciesspecific limits on one side of the 40°10′ 

N. lat. management line, and are 

included as part of a minor rockfish 

complex on the other side of the line. 

A vessel that takes and retains fish from 

a minor rockfish complex (nearshore, 

shelf, or slope) on both sides of a 

management line during a single 

cumulative limit period is subject to the 

more restrictive cumulative limit for 

that minor rockfish complex during that 

period. 

(i) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land splitnose rockfish 

up to its cumulative limit south of 

40°10′ N. lat., even if splitnose rockfish 

were a part of the landings from minor 

slope rockfish taken and retained north 

of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(ii) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish south of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land POP up to its 

cumulative limit north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

even if POP were a part of the landings 

from minor slope rockfish taken and 

retained south of 40°10′ N. lat. 

§ 660.230 Fixed gear fishery-management 

measures. 

(a) General. Most species taken in 

limited entry fixed gear (longline and 

pot/trap) fisheries will be managed with 

cumulative trip limits (see trip limits in 

Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) of this 

subpart), size limits (see § 660.60(h)(5)), 

seasons (see trip limits in Tables 2 

(North) and 2 (South) of this subpart 

and sablefish primary season details in 

§ 660.231), gear restrictions (see 

paragraph (b) of this section), and closed 

areas (see paragraph (d) of this section 

and §§ 660.70 through 660.79, subpart 

C). Cowcod retention is prohibited in all 

fisheries, and groundfish vessels 

operating south of Point Conception 

must adhere to CCA restrictions (see 

paragraph (d)(10) of this section and 

§ 660.70, subpart C). Yelloweye rockfish 

and canary rockfish retention is 

prohibited in the limited entry fixed 

gear fisheries. Regulations governing 

and tier limits for the limited entry, 

fixed gear sablefish primary season 

north of 36° N. lat. are found in 

§ 660.231, subpart E. Vessels not 

participating in the sablefish primary 

season are subject to daily or weekly 

sablefish limits in addition to 

cumulative limits for each cumulative 

limit period. Only one sablefish landing 

per week may be made in excess of the 

daily trip limit and, if the vessel chooses 

to make a landing in excess of that daily 

trip limit, then that is the only sablefish 

landing permitted for that week. The 

trip limit for black rockfish caught with 

hook-and-line gear also applies, see 

§ 660.230(d). The trip limits in Table 2 

(North) and Table 2 (South) of this 

subpart apply to vessels participating in 

the limited entry groundfish fixed gear 

fishery and may not be exceeded. 

Federal commercial groundfish 

regulations are not intended to 

supersede any more restrictive state 

commercial groundfish regulations 

relating to federally-managed 

groundfish. 

(b) Gear restrictions—(1) Longline and 

pot or trap gear are authorized in the 

limited entry fixed gear fishery, 

providing the gear is in compliance with 

the restrictions set forth in this section, 

and gear marking requirements 

described in § 660.219 of this subpart. 

(2) Vessels participating in the limited 

entry fixed gear fishery may also fish 

with open access gear subject to the gear 

restrictions at § 660.330(b), subpart F, 

but will be subject to the most 

restrictive trip limits for the gear used 

as specified at § 660.60(h)(7), subpart C. 

(3) Limited entry fixed gear (longline, 

trap or pot gear) must be attended at 

least once every 7 days. 

(4) Traps or pots must have 

biodegradable escape panels 

constructed with 21 or smaller 

untreated cotton twine in such a manner 

that an opening at least 8 inches (20.3 

cm) in diameter results when the twine 

deteriorates. 

(c) Sorting Requirements. (1) Under 

§ 660.12(a)(8), subpart C, it is unlawful 

for any person to ‘‘fail to sort, prior to 

the first weighing after offloading, those 

groundfish species or species groups for 

which there is a trip limit, size limit, 

scientific sorting designation, quota, 

harvest guideline, or OY, if the vessel 

fished or landed in an area during a 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60977 

time when such trip limit, size limit, 

scientific sorting designation, quota, 

harvest guideline, or OY applied.’’ The 

States of Washington, Oregon, and 

California may also require that vessels 

record their landings as sorted on their 

state landing receipts. 

(2) For limited entry fixed gear, the 

following species must be sorted: 

(i) Coastwide—widow rockfish, 

canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, 

yelloweye rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, 

black rockfish, blue rockfish, minor 

nearshore rockfish, minor shelf rockfish, 

minor slope rockfish, shortspine and 

longspine thornyhead, Dover sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, petrale sole, starry 

flounder, English sole, other flatfish, 

lingcod, sablefish, Pacific cod, spiny 

dogfish, other fish, longnose skate, and 

Pacific whiting; 

(ii) North of 40°10′ N. lat.—POP, 

yellowtail rockfish; 

(iii) South of 40°10′ N. lat.—minor 

shallow nearshore rockfish, minor 

deeper nearshore rockfish, California 

scorpionfish, chilipepper rockfish, 

bocaccio rockfish, splitnose rockfish, 

Pacific sanddabs, cowcod, 

bronzespotted rockfish and cabezon. 

(d) Groundfish conservation areas 

applicable to limited entry fixed gear 

vessels. A GCA, a type of closed area, is 

a geographic area defined by 

coordinates expressed in degrees of 

latitude and longitude. The latitude and 

longitude coordinates of the GCA 

boundaries are specified at §§ 660.70 

through 660.74, subpart C. A vessel that 

is authorized by this paragraph to fish 

within a GCA (e.g. fishing for ‘‘other 

flatfish’’ using no more than 12 hooks, 

‘‘Number 2’’ or smaller), may not 

simultaneously have other gear on board 

the vessel that is unlawful to use for 

fishing within the GCA. The following 

GCAs apply to vessels participating in 

the limited entry fixed gear fishery. 

(1) North coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the North 

Coast Recreational Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

North Coast Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(2) North coast commercial yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the North 

Coast Commercial Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

Fishing with limited entry fixed gear is 

prohibited within the North Coast 

Commercial YRCA. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with limited entry 

fixed gear within the North Coast 

Commercial YRCA. Limited entry fixed 

gear vessels may transit through the 

North Coast Commercial YRCA with or 

without groundfish on board. 

(3) South coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the South 

Coast Recreational Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

South Coast Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(4) Westport offshore recreational 

YRCA. The latitude and longitude 

coordinates that define the Westport 

Offshore Recreational YRCA boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

Westport Offshore Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(5) Point St. George YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point St. George YRCA boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, Subpart C. 

Fishing with limited entry fixed gear is 

prohibited within the Point St. George 

YRCA, on dates when the closure is in 

effect. It is unlawful to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

limited entry fixed gear within the Point 

St. George YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

Point St. George YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. Limited entry fixed gear 

vessels may transit through the Point St. 

George YRCA, at any time, with or 

without groundfish on board. 

(6) South Reef YRCA. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the South 

Reef YRCA boundaries are specified at 

§ 660.70, subpart C. Fishing with 

limited entry fixed gear is prohibited 

within the South Reef YRCA, on dates 

when the closure is in effect. It is 

unlawful to take and retain, possess, or 

land groundfish taken with limited 

entry fixed gear within the South Reef 

YRCA, on dates when the closure is in 

effect. The closure is not in effect at this 

time, and commercial fishing for 

groundfish is open within the South 

Reef YRCA from January 1 through 

December 31. This closure may be 

imposed through inseason adjustment. 

Limited entry fixed gear vessels may 

transit through the South Reef YRCA, at 

any time, with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(7) Reading Rock YRCA. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the 

Reading Rock YRCA boundaries are 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. Fishing 

with limited entry fixed gear is 

prohibited within the Reading Rock 

YRCA, on dates when the closure is in 

effect. It is unlawful to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

limited entry fixed gear within the 

Reading Rock YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

Reading Rock YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. Limited entry fixed gear 

vessels may transit through the Reading 

Rock YRCA, at any time, with or 

without groundfish on board. 

(8) Point Delgada (North) YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point Delgada (North) YRCA 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. Fishing with limited entry 

fixed gear is prohibited within the Point 

Delgada (North) YRCA, on dates when 

the closure is in effect. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with limited entry 

fixed gear within the Point Delgada 

(North) YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

Point Delgada (North) YRCA from 

January 1 through December 31. This 

closure may be imposed through 

inseason adjustment. Limited entry 

fixed gear vessels may transit through 

the Point Delgada (North) YRCA, at any 

time, with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(9) Point Delgada (South) YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point Delgada (South) YRCA 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. Fishing with limited entry 

fixed gear is prohibited within the Point 

Delgada (South) YRCA, on dates when 

the closure is in effect. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with limited entry 

fixed gear within the Point Delgada 

(South) YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

Point Delgada (South) YRCA from 

January 1 through December 31. This 

closure may be imposed through 

inseason adjustment. Limited entry 

fixed gear vessels may transit through 

the Point Delgada (South) YRCA, at any 

time, with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(10) Cowcod Conservation Areas. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Cowcod Conservation Areas (CCAs) 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. It is unlawful to take and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60978 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

retain, possess, or land groundfish 

within the CCAs, except for species 

authorized in this paragraph caught 

according to gear requirements in this 

paragraph, when those waters are open 

to fishing. Commercial fishing vessels 

may transit through the Western CCA 

with their gear stowed and groundfish 

on board only in a corridor through the 

Western CCA bounded on the north by 

the latitude line at 33°00.50′ N. lat., and 

bounded on the south by the latitude 

line at 32°59.50′ N. lat. Fishing with 

limited entry fixed gear is prohibited 

within the CCAs, except as follows: 

(i) Fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted within the CCAs under the 

following conditions: When using no 

more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or 

smaller, which measure no more than 

11 mm (0.44 inches) point to shank, and 

up to two 1-lb (0.45 kg) weights per line; 

and provided a valid declaration report 

as required at § 660.13(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. 

(ii) Fishing for rockfish and lingcod is 

permitted shoreward of the 20 fm (37 m) 

depth contour within the CCAs when 

trip limits authorize such fishing, and 

provided a valid declaration report as 

required at § 660.13(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. 

(11) Nontrawl Rockfish Conservation 

Areas (RCA). The nontrawl RCAs are 

closed areas, defined by specific latitude 

and longitude coordinates (specified at 

§§ 660.70 through 660.74, subpart C) 

designed to approximate specific depth 

contours, where fishing for groundfish 

with nontrawl gear is prohibited. 

Boundaries for the nontrawl RCA 

throughout the year are provided in the 

header to Table 2 (North) and Table 2 

(South) of this subpart and may be 

modified by NMFS inseason pursuant to 

§ 660.60(c), subpart C. 

(i) It is unlawful to operate a vessel 

with limited entry nontrawl gear in the 

nontrawl RCA, except for the purpose of 

continuous transit, or when the use of 

limited entry nontrawl gear is 

authorized in this section. It is unlawful 

to take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with limited entry 

nontrawl gear within the nontrawl RCA, 

unless otherwise authorized in this 

section. 

(ii) Limited entry nontrawl vessels 

may transit through the nontrawl RCA, 

with or without groundfish on board, 

provided all groundfish nontrawl gear is 

stowed either: Below deck; or if the gear 

cannot readily be moved, in a secured 

and covered manner, detached from all 

lines, so that it is rendered unusable for 

fishing. 

(iii) The nontrawl RCA restrictions in 

this section apply to vessels registered 

to limited entry fixed gear permits 

fishing for species other than groundfish 

with nontrawl gear on trips where 

groundfish species are retained. Unless 

otherwise authorized in this section, a 

vessel may not retain any groundfish 

taken on a fishing trip for species other 

than groundfish that occurs within the 

nontrawl RCA. If a vessel fishes in a 

non-groundfish fishery in the nontrawl 

RCA, it may not participate in any 

fishing for groundfish on that trip that 

is prohibited within the nontrawl RCA. 

[For example, if a vessel fishes in the 

salmon troll fishery within the RCA, the 

vessel cannot on the same trip fish in 

the sablefish fishery outside of the 

RCA.] 

(iv) It is lawful to fish within the 

nontrawl RCA with limited entry fixed 

gear only under the following 

conditions: when fishing for ‘‘other 

flatfish’’ off California (between 42° N. 

lat. south to the U.S./Mexico border) 

using no more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 

2’’ or smaller, which measure no more 

than 11 mm (0.44 inches) point to 

shank, and up to two 1-lb (0.91 kg) 

weights per line when trip limits 

authorize such fishing, provided a valid 

declaration report as required at 

§ 660.13(d), subpart C, has been filed 

with NMFS OLE. 

(12) Farallon Islands. Under 

California law, commercial fishing for 

all groundfish is prohibited between the 

shoreline and the 10 fm (18 m) depth 

contour around the Farallon Islands. An 

exception to this prohibition is that 

commercial fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted around the Farallon Islands 

using no more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 

2’’ or smaller, which measure no more 

than 11 mm (0.44 inches) point to 

shank, and up to two 1-lb (0.45-kg) 

weights per line. (See Table 2 (South) of 

this subpart.) For a definition of the 

Farallon Islands, see § 660.70, subpart C. 

(13) Cordell Banks. Commercial 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited in 

waters of depths less than 100 fm (183 

m) around Cordell Banks, as defined by 

specific latitude and longitude 

coordinates at § 660.70, subpart C. An 

exception to this prohibition is that 

commercial fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted around Cordell Banks using 

no more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or 

smaller, which measure no more than 

11 mm (0.44 inches) point to shank, and 

up to two 1-lb (0.45-kg) weights per line. 

(14) Essential Fish Habitat 

Conservation Areas (EFHCA). An 

EFHCA, a type of closed area, is a 

geographic area defined by coordinates 

expressed in degrees of latitude and 

longitude at §§ 660.75 through 660.79, 

Subpart C, where specified types of 

fishing are prohibited in accordance 

with § 660.12, Subpart C. EFHCAs apply 

to vessels using ‘‘bottom contact gear,’’ 

which is defined at § 660.11, Subpart C 

to include limited entry fixed gear 

(longline and pot/trap,) among other 

gear types. Fishing with all bottom 

contact gear, including longline and 

pot/trap gear, is prohibited within the 

following EFHCAs, which are defined 

by specific latitude and longitude 

coordinates at §§ 660.75 through 660.79, 

subpart C: Thompson Seamount, 

President Jackson Seamount, Cordell 

Bank (50 fm (91 m) isobath), Harris 

Point, Richardson Rock, Scorpion, 

Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. Fishing with 

bottom contact gear is also prohibited 

within the Davidson Seamount EFH 

Area, which is defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.75, subpart C. 

(e) Black rockfish fishery 

management. The trip limit for black 

rockfish (Sebastes melanops) for 

commercial fishing vessels using hookand-line gear between the U.S.-Canada 

border and Cape Alava (48°09.50′ N. 

lat.), and between Destruction Island 

(47°40′ N. lat.) and Leadbetter Point 

(46°38.17′ N. lat.), is 100 lbs (45 kg) or 

30 percent, by weight of all fish on 

board, whichever is greater, per vessel 

per fishing trip. These per trip limits 

apply to limited entry and open access 

fisheries, in conjunction with the 

cumulative trip limits and other 

management measures in § 660.230, 

subpart E, and § 660.330, subpart F. The 

crossover provisions in § 660.60(h)(7), 

subpart C, do not apply to the black 

rockfish per-trip limits. 

§ 660.231 Limited entry fixed gear 

sablefish primary fishery. 

This section applies to the sablefish 

primary season for the limited entry 

fixed gear fishery north of 36° N. lat. 

Limited entry and open access fixed 

gear sablefish fishing outside of the 

sablefish primary season north of 36° N. 

lat. is governed by routine management 

measures imposed under §§ 660.230 and 

660.232, subpart E. 

(a) Sablefish endorsement. A vessel 

may not fish in the sablefish primary 

season for the limited entry fixed gear 

fishery, unless at least one limited entry 

permit with both a gear endorsement for 

longline or trap (or pot) gear and a 

sablefish endorsement is registered for 

use with that vessel. Permits with 

sablefish endorsements are assigned to 

one of three tiers, as described at 

§ 660.25(b)(3)(iv), subpart C. 

(b) Sablefish primary season for the 

limited entry fixed gear fishery—(1) 

Season dates. North of 36° N. lat., the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60979 

sablefish primary season for the limited 

entry, fixed gear, sablefish-endorsed 

vessels begins at 12 noon local time on 

April 1 and ends at 12 noon local time 

on October 31, or for an individual 

permit holder when that permit holder’s 

tier limit has been reached, whichever 

is earlier, unless otherwise announced 

by the Regional Administrator through 

the routine management measures 

process described at § 660.60, subpart C. 

(2) 

Gear type. During the season primary 

and when fishing against primary 

season cumulative limits, each vessel 

authorized to fish in that season under 

paragraph (a) of this section may fish for 

sablefish with any of the gear types, 

except trawl gear, endorsed on at least 

one of the permits registered for use 

with that vessel. 

(3) Cumulative limits. (i) A vessel 

participating in the primary season will 

be constrained by the sablefish 

cumulative limit associated with each of 

the permits registered for use with that 

vessel. During the primary season, each 

vessel authorized to fish in that season 

under paragraph (a) of this section may 

take, retain, possess, and land sablefish, 

up to the cumulative limits for each of 

the permits registered for use with that 

vessel (i.e., stacked permits). If multiple 

limited entry permits with sablefish 

endorsements are registered for use with 

a single vessel, that vessel may land up 

to the total of all cumulative limits 

announced in this paragraph for the 

tiers for those permits, except as limited 

by paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. 

Up to 3 permits may be registered for 

use with a single vessel during the 

primary season; thus, a single vessel 

may not take and retain, possess or land 

more than 3 primary season sablefish 

cumulative limits in any one year. A 

vessel registered for use with multiple 

limited entry permits is subject to per 

vessel limits for species other than 

sablefish, and to per vessel limits when 

participating in the daily trip limit 

fishery for sablefish under § 660.232, 

subpart E. In 2009, the following annual 

limits are in effect: Tier 1 at 61,296-lb 

(27,803 kg), Tier 2 at 27,862-lb (12,638 

kg), and Tier 3 at 15,921-lb (7,221 kg). 

For 2010 and beyond, the following 

annual limits are in effect: Tier 1 at 

56,081-lb (25,437 kg), Tier 2 at 25,492- 

lb (11,562 kg), and Tier 3 at 14,567-lb 

(6,648 kg). 

(ii) If a permit is registered to more 

than one vessel during the primary 

season in a single year, the second 

vessel may only take the portion of the 

cumulative limit for that permit that has 

not been harvested by the first vessel to 

which the permit was registered. The 

combined primary season sablefish 

landings for all vessels registered to that 

permit may not exceed the cumulative 

limit for the tier associated with that 

permit. 

(iii) A cumulative trip limit is the 

maximum amount of sablefish that may 

be taken and retained, possessed, or 

landed per vessel in a specified period 

of time, with no limit on the number of 

landings or trips. 

(iv) Incidental halibut retention north 

of Pt. Chehalis, WA (46° 53.30′ N. lat.). 

No halibut retention is allowed during 

the primary sablefish fishery in 2010. 

(4) Owner-on-board requirement. Any 

person who owns or has ownership 

interest in a limited entry permit with 

a sablefish endorsement, as described at 

§ 660.25(b)(3), subpart C, must be on 

board the vessel registered for use with 

that permit at any time that the vessel 

has sablefish on board the vessel that 

count toward that permit’s cumulative 

sablefish landing limit. This person 

must carry government issued photo 

identification while aboard the vessel. A 

permit owner is not obligated to be on 

board the vessel registered for use with 

the sablefish-endorsed limited entry 

permit during the sablefish primary 

season if: 

(i) The person, partnership or 

corporation had ownership interest in a 

limited entry permit with a sablefish 

endorsement prior to November 1, 2000. 

A person who has ownership interest in 

a partnership or corporation that owned 

a sablefish-endorsed permit as of 

November 1, 2000, but who did not 

individually own a sablefish-endorsed 

limited entry permit as of November 1, 

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

the partnership or corporation and 

purchases another permit individually. 

A person, partnership, or corporation 

that is exempt from the owner-on-board 

requirement may sell all of their 

permits, buy another sablefish-endorsed 

permit within up to a year from the date 

the last permit was approved for 

transfer, and retain their exemption 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

Additionally, a person, partnership, or 

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

their interest in a permit or permits, 

may retain rights to an owner-on-board 

exemption as long as that person, 

partnership, or corporation purchases 

another permit by March 2, 2007. A 

person, partnership or corporation 

could only purchase a permit if it has 

not added or changed individuals since 

November 1, 2000, excluding 

individuals that have left the 

partnership or corporation, or that have 

died. 

(ii) The person who owns or who has 

ownership interest in a sablefishendorsed limited entry permit is 

prevented from being on board a fishing 

vessel because the person died, is ill, or 

is injured. The person requesting the 

exemption must send a letter to NMFS 

requesting an exemption from the 

owner-on-board requirements, with 

appropriate evidence as described at 

paragraph (b)(4)(ii)(A) or (B) of this 

section. All emergency exemptions for 

death, injury, or illness will be 

evaluated by NMFS and a decision will 

be made in writing to the permit owner 

within 60 calendar days of receipt of the 

original exemption request. 

(A) Evidence of death of the permit 

owner shall be provided to NMFS in the 

form of a copy of a death certificate. In 

the interim before the estate is settled, 

if the deceased permit owner was 

subject to the owner-on-board 

requirements, the estate of the deceased 

permit owner may send a letter to 

NMFS with a copy of the death 

certificate, requesting an exemption 

from the owner-on-board requirements. 

An exemption due to death of the 

permit owner will be effective only until 

such time that the estate of the deceased 

permit owner has transferred the 

deceased permit owner’s permit to a 

beneficiary or up to three years after the 

date of death as proven by a death 

certificate, whichever is earlier. An 

exemption from the owner-on-board 

requirements will be conveyed in a 

letter from NMFS to the estate of the 

permit owner and is required to be on 

the vessel during fishing operations. 

(B) Evidence of illness or injury that 

prevents the permit owner from 

participating in the fishery shall be 

provided to NMFS in the form of a letter 

from a certified medical practitioner. 

This letter must detail the relevant 

medical conditions of the permit owner 

and how those conditions prevent the 

permit owner from being onboard a 

fishing vessel during the primary 

season. An exemption due to injury or 

illness will be effective only for the 

fishing year of the request for 

exemption, and will not be granted for 

more than three consecutive or total 

years. NMFS will consider any 

exemption granted for less than 12 

months in a year to count as one year 

against the 3-year cap. In order to 

extend an emergency medical 

exemption for a succeeding year, the 

permit owner must submit a new 

request and provide documentation 

from a certified medical practitioner 

detailing why the permit owner is still 

unable to be onboard a fishing vessel. 

An emergency exemption will be 

conveyed in a letter from NMFS to the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60980 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

permit owner and is required to be on 

the vessel during fishing operations. 

§ 660.232 Limited entry daily trip limit 

(DTL) fishery for sablefish. 

(a) Limited entry DTL fisheries both 

north and south of 36° N. lat.—(1) 

Before the start of the primary season for 

the sablefish tier limit fishery, all 

sablefish landings made by a vessel 

authorized by § 660.231(a) to fish in the 

primary season will be subject to the 

restrictions and limits of the limited 

entry daily and/or weekly trip limit 

(DTL) fishery for sablefish specified in 

this section and which is governed by 

routine management measures imposed 

under § 660.60(c), subpart C. 

(2) Following the start of the primary 

season, all landings made by a vessel 

authorized by § 660.231(a) of this 

subpart to fish in the primary season 

will count against the primary season 

cumulative limit(s) associated with the 

permit(s) registered for use with that 

vessel. A vessel that is eligible to fish in 

the sablefish primary season may fish in 

the DTL fishery for sablefish once that 

vessels’ primary season sablefish 

limit(s) have been taken, or after the end 

of the primary season, whichever occurs 

earlier. Any subsequent sablefish 

landings by that vessel will be subject 

to the restrictions and limits of the 

limited entry DTL fishery for sablefish 

for the remainder of the fishing year. 

(3) No vessel may land sablefish 

against both its primary season 

cumulative sablefish limits and against 

the DTL fishery limits within the same 

24 hour period of 0001 hours local time 

to 2400 hours local time. If a vessel has 

taken all of its tier limit except for an 

amount that is smaller than the DTL 

amount, that vessel’s subsequent 

sablefish landings are automatically 

subject to DTL limits. 

(4) Vessels registered for use with a 

limited entry, fixed gear permit that 

does not have a sablefish endorsement 

may fish in the limited entry, DTL 

fishery for as long as that fishery is open 

during the fishing year, subject to 

routine management measures imposed 

under § 660.60(c), Subpart C. DTL limits 

for the limited entry fishery north and 

south of 36° N. lat. are provided in 

Tables 2 (North) and 2 (South) of this 

subpart. 

(b) [Reserved] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60981 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.016</GPH>
60982 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.017</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60983 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.018</GPH>
60984 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

Subpart F—West Coast Groundfish— 

Open Access Fisheries 

§ 660.310 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart covers the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish open access fishery. The 

open access fishery, as defined at 

§ 660.11, Subpart C, is the fishery 

composed of commercial vessels using 

open access gear fished pursuant to the 

harvest guidelines, quotas, and other 

management measures specified for the 

harvest of open access allocations or 

governing the fishing activities of open 

access vessels. 

§ 660.311 Open access fishery— 

definitions. 

General definitions for the Pacific 

Coast groundfish fisheries are defined at 

§ 660.11, subpart C. The definitions in 

this subpart are specific to the open 

access fishery covered in this subpart 

and are in addition to those specified at 

§ 660.11, subpart C. 

Closely tended for the purposes of this 

subpart means that a vessel is within 

visual sighting distance or within 0.25 

nm (463 m) of the gear as determined by 

electronic navigational equipment. 

§ 660.312 Open access fishery— 

prohibitions. 

General groundfish prohibitions for 

the Pacific Coast groundfish fisheries 

are defined at § 660.12, subpart C. In 

addition to the general groundfish 

prohibitions, it is unlawful for any 

person to: 

(a) General. (1) Take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish in excess of 

the landing limit for the open access 

fishery without having a valid limited 

entry permit for the vessel affixed with 

a gear endorsement for the gear used to 

catch the fish. 

(2) Black rockfish fisheries. Have 

onboard a commercial hook-and-line 

fishing vessel (other than a vessel 

operated by persons under § 660.60 

(c)(1)(ii), subpart C), more than the 

amount of the trip limit set for black 

rockfish by § 660.330(e) while that 

vessel is fishing between the U.S.- 

Canada border and Cape Alava 

(48°09′30′′ N. lat.), or between 

Destruction Island (47°40′00′′ N. lat.) 

and Leadbetter Point (46°38′10′′ N. lat.). 

(b) Gear. (1) Possess, deploy, haul, or 

carry onboard a fishing vessel subject to 

this subpart a set net, trap or pot, 

longline, or commercial vertical hookand-line that is not in compliance with 

the gear restrictions in § 660.330(b), 

subpart F, unless such gear is the gear 

of another vessel that has been retrieved 

at sea and made inoperable or stowed in 

a manner not capable of being fished. 

The disposal at sea of such gear is 

prohibited by Annex V of the 

International Convention for the 

Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 

1973 (Annex V of MARPOL 73/78). 

(2) Fish with dredge gear (defined in 

§ 660.11) anywhere within EFH within 

the EEZ, as defined by latitude/ 

longitude coordinates at § 660.75. 

(3) Fish with beam trawl gear (defined 

in § 660.11) anywhere within EFH 

within the EEZ, as defined by latitude/ 

longitude coordinates at § 660.75. 

(4) Fish with bottom trawl gear with 

a footrope diameter greater than 19 

inches (48 cm) (including rollers, 

bobbins, or other material encircling or 

tied along the length of the footrope) 

anywhere in EFH within the EEZ, as 

defined by latitude/longitude 

coordinates at § 660.75. 

(c) Fishing in conservation areas with 

open access gears. (1) Operate a vessel 

with non-groundfish trawl gear onboard 

in any applicable GCA (as defined at 

§ 660.330(d)) except for purposes of 

continuous transiting, with all trawl 

gear stowed in accordance with 

§ 660.330(b), or except as authorized in 

the groundfish management measures 

published at § 660.330. 

(2) Operate a vessel in an applicable 

GCA (as defined at § 660.330(d) that has 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.019</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60985 

nontrawl gear onboard and is not 

registered to a limited entry permit on 

a trip in which the vessel is used to take 

and retain or possess groundfish in the 

EEZ, possess or land groundfish taken 

in the EEZ, except for purposes of 

continuous transiting, with all 

groundfish nontrawl gear stowed in 

accordance with § 660.330(b), or except 

as authorized in the groundfish 

management measures published at 

§ 660.330. 

(3) Fish with bottom contact gear (as 

defined in § 660.11, subpart C) within 

the EEZ in the following areas (defined 

in §§ 660.78 and 660.79): Thompson 

Seamount, President Jackson Seamount, 

Cordell Bank (50-fm (91-m) isobath), 

Harris Point, Richardson Rock, 

Scorpion, Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. 

(4) Fish with bottom contact gear (as 

defined in § 660.11, subpart C), or any 

other gear that is deployed deeper than 

500-fm (914-m), within the Davidson 

Seamount area (defined in § 660.75). 

§ 660.313 Open access fishery— 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

(a) General. General reporting 

requirements specified at § 660.13(a) 

through (c) of subpart C apply to open 

access fisheries. 

(b) Declaration reports for vessels 

using nontrawl gear. Declaration 

reporting requirements for open access 

vessels using nontrawl gear (all types of 

open access gear other than nongroundfish trawl gear) are specified at 

§ 660.13(d). 

(c) Declaration reports for vessels 

using non-groundfish trawl gear. 

Declaration reporting requirements for 

open access vessels using nongroundfish trawl gear are specified at 

§ 660.13(d). 

(d) VMS requirements for open access 

fishery vessels. VMS requirements for 

open access fishery vessels are specified 

at § 660.14, subpart C. 

(e) Retention of records. Any person 

landing groundfish must retain on board 

the vessel from which groundfish is 

landed, and provide to an authorized 

officer upon request, copies of any and 

all reports of groundfish landings 

containing all data, and in the exact 

manner, required by the applicable state 

law throughout the cumulative limit 

period during which a landing occurred 

and for 15 days thereafter. 

§ 660.316 Open access fishery—observer 

requirements. 

(a) Observer coverage requirements. 

When NMFS notifies the owner, 

operator, permit holder, or the manager 

of a catcher vessel, specified at 

§ 660.16(c), subpart C, of any 

requirement to carry an observer, the 

catcher vessel may not be used to fish 

for groundfish without carrying an 

observer. 

(b) Notice of departure—basic rule. At 

least 24 hours (but not more than 36 

hours) before departing on a fishing trip, 

a vessel that has been notified by NMFS 

that it is required to carry an observer, 

or that is operating in an active 

sampling unit, must notify NMFS (or its 

designated agent) of the vessel’s 

intended time of departure. Notice will 

be given in a form to be specified by 

NMFS. 

(1) Optional notice—weather delays. 

A vessel that anticipates a delayed 

departure due to weather or sea 

conditions may advise NMFS of the 

anticipated delay when providing the 

basic notice described in paragraph (b) 

of this section. If departure is delayed 

beyond 36 hours from the time the 

original notice is given, the vessel must 

provide an additional notice of 

departure not less than 4 hours prior to 

departure, in order to enable NMFS to 

place an observer. 

(2) Optional notice—back-to-back 

fishing trips. A vessel that intends to 

make back-to-back fishing trips (i.e., 

trips with less than 24 hours between 

offloading from one trip and beginning 

another), may provide the basic notice 

described in paragraph (b) of this 

section for both trips, prior to making 

the first trip. A vessel that has given 

such notice is not required to give 

additional notice of the second trip. 

(c) Cease fishing report. Within 24 

hours of ceasing the taking and retaining 

of groundfish, vessel owners, operators, 

or managers must notify NMFS or its 

designated agent that fishing has ceased. 

This requirement applies to any vessel 

that is required to carry an observer, or 

that is operating in a segment of the fleet 

that NMFS has identified as an active 

sampling unit. 

(d) Waiver. The Northwest Regional 

Administrator may provide written 

notification to the vessel owner stating 

that a determination has been made to 

temporarily waive coverage 

requirements because of circumstances 

that are deemed to be beyond the 

vessel’s control. 

(e) Vessel responsibilities—(1) 

Accommodations and food. An operator 

of a vessel required to carry one or more 

observer(s) must provide 

accommodations and food that are 

Equivalent to those provided to the 

crew. 

(2) Safe conditions. Maintain safe 

conditions on the vessel for the 

protection of observer(s) including 

adherence to all USCG and other 

applicable rules, regulations, or statutes 

pertaining to safe operation of the 

vessel, and provisions at §§ 600.725 and 

600.746 of this chapter. 

(3) Observer communications. 

Facilitate observer communications by: 

(i) Observer use of equipment. 

Allowing observer(s) to use the vessel’s 

communication equipment and 

personnel, on request, for the entry, 

transmission, and receipt of workrelated messages, at no cost to the 

observer(s) or the U.S. or designated 

agent. 

(ii) Functional equipment. Ensuring 

that the vessel’s communications 

equipment, used by observers to enter 

and transmit data, is fully functional 

and operational. 

(4) Vessel position. Allow observer(s) 

access to, and the use of, the vessel’s 

navigation equipment and personnel, on 

request, to determine the vessel’s 

position. 

(5) Access. Allow observer(s) free and 

unobstructed access to the vessel’s 

bridge, trawl or working decks, holding 

bins, processing areas, freezer spaces, 

weight scales, cargo holds, and any 

other space that may be used to hold, 

process, weigh, or store fish or fish 

products at any time. 

(6) Prior notification. Notify 

observer(s) at least 15 minutes before 

fish are brought on board, or fish and 

fish products are transferred from the 

vessel, to allow sampling the catch or 

observing the transfer, unless the 

observer specifically requests not to be 

notified. 

(7) Records. Allow observer(s) to 

inspect and copy any state or Federal 

logbook maintained voluntarily or as 

required by regulation. 

(8) Assistance. Provide all other 

reasonable assistance to enable 

observer(s) to carry out their duties, 

including, but not limited to: 

(i) Measuring decks, codends, and 

holding bins. 

(ii) Providing the observer(s) with a 

safe work area. 

(iii) Collecting bycatch when 

requested by the observer(s). 

(iv) Collecting and carrying baskets of 

fish when requested by the observer(s). 

(v) Allowing the observer(s) to collect 

biological data and samples. 

(vi) Providing adequate space for 

storage of biological samples. 

(f) Sample station—(1) Observer 

sampling station. This paragraph 

contains the requirements for observer 

sampling stations. The vessel owner 

must provide an observer sampling 

station that complies with this section 

so that the observer can carry out 

required duties. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60986 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(i) Accessibility. The observer 

sampling station must be available to 

the observer at all times. 

(ii) Location. The observer sampling 

station must be located within 4 m of 

the location from which the observer 

samples unsorted catch. Unobstructed 

passage must be provided between the 

observer sampling station and the 

location where the observer collects 

sample catch. 

§ 660.319 Open access fishery gear 

identification and marking. 

(a) Gear identification. (1) Open 

access fixed gear (longline, trap or pot, 

set net and stationary hook-and-line 

gear, including commercial vertical 

hook-and-line gear) must be marked at 

the surface and at each terminal end, 

with a pole, flag, light, radar reflector, 

and a buoy. 

(2) Open access commercial vertical 

hook-and-line gear that is closely tended 

as defined at § 660.311 of this subpart, 

may be marked only with a single buoy 

of sufficient size to float the gear. 

(3) A buoy used to mark fixed gear 

under paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this 

section must be marked with a number 

clearly identifying the owner or operator 

of the vessel. The number may be either: 

(i) If required by applicable state law, 

the vessel’s number, the commercial 

fishing license number, or buoy brand 

number; or 

(ii) The vessel documentation number 

issued by the USCG, or, for an 

undocumented vessel, the vessel 

registration number issued by the state. 

(b) [Reserved] 

§ 660.320 Open access fishery—crossover 

provisions. 

(a) Operating in both limited entry 

and open access fisheries. See 

provisions at § 660.60, subpart C. 

(b) Operating in north-south 

management areas with different trip 

limits. NMFS uses different types of 

management areas for West Coast 

groundfish management. One type of 

management area is the north-south 

management area, a large ocean area 

with northern and southern boundary 

lines wherein trip limits, seasons, and 

conservation areas follow a single 

theme. Within each north-south 

management area, there may be one or 

more conservation areas, detailed in 

§§ 660.11 and 660.70 through 660.74, 

subpart C. The provisions within this 

paragraph apply to vessels operating in 

different north-south management areas. 

Trip limits for a species or a species 

group may differ in different northsouth management areas along the coast. 

The following ‘‘crossover’’ provisions 

apply to vessels operating in different 

geographical areas that have different 

cumulative or ‘‘per trip’’ trip limits for 

the same species or species group. Such 

crossover provisions do not apply to 

species that are subject only to daily trip 

limits, or to the trip limits for black 

rockfish off Washington (see 

§ 660.330(e)). 

(1) Going from a more restrictive to a 

more liberal area. If a vessel takes and 

retains any groundfish species or 

species group of groundfish in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies before fishing in an area where 

a more liberal trip limit (or no trip limit) 

applies, then that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(2) Going from a more liberal to a 

more restrictive area. If a vessel takes 

and retains a groundfish species or 

species group in an area where a higher 

trip limit or no trip limit applies, and 

takes and retains, possesses or lands the 

same species or species group in an area 

where a more restrictive trip limit 

applies, that vessel is subject to the 

more restrictive trip limit for the entire 

period to which that trip limit applies, 

no matter where the fish are taken and 

retained, possessed, or landed. 

(3) Operating in two different areas 

where a species or species group is 

managed with different types of trip 

limits. During the fishing year, NMFS 

may implement management measures 

for a species or species group that set 

different types of trip limits (for 

example, per trip limits versus 

cumulative trip limits) for different 

areas. If a vessel fishes for a species or 

species group that is managed with 

different types of trip limits in two 

different areas within the same 

cumulative limit period, then that vessel 

is subject to the most restrictive overall 

cumulative limit for that species, 

regardless of where fishing occurs. 

(4) Minor rockfish. Several rockfish 

species are designated with speciesspecific limits on one side of the 40°10′ 

N. lat. management line, and are 

included as part of a minor rockfish 

complex on the other side of the line. 

A vessel that takes and retains fish from 

a minor rockfish complex (nearshore, 

shelf, or slope) on both sides of a 

management line during a single 

cumulative limit period is subject to the 

more restrictive cumulative limit for 

that minor rockfish complex during that 

period. 

(i) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land splitnose rockfish 

up to its cumulative limit south of 

40°10′ N. lat., even if splitnose rockfish 

were a part of the landings from minor 

slope rockfish taken and retained north 

of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(ii) If a vessel takes and retains minor 

slope rockfish south of 40°10′ N. lat., 

that vessel is also permitted to take and 

retain, possess or land POP up to its 

cumulative limit north of 40°10′ N. lat., 

even if POP were a part of the landings 

from minor slope rockfish taken and 

retained south of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(5) ‘‘DTS complex’’. There are often 

differential trawl trip limits for the ‘‘DTS 

complex’’ north and south of latitudinal 

management lines. Vessels operating in 

the limited entry trawl fishery are 

subject to the crossover provisions in 

paragraph (b) of this section when 

making landings that include any one of 

the four species in the ‘‘DTS complex.’’ 

§ 660.330 Open access fishery— 

management measures. 

(a) General. Groundfish species taken 

in open access fisheries will be managed 

with cumulative trip limits (see trip 

limits in Tables 3 (North) and 3 (South) 

of this subpart), size limits (see 

§ 660.60(h)(5)), seasons (see seasons in 

Tables 3 (North) and 3 (South) of this 

subpart), gear restrictions (see paragraph 

(b) of this section), and closed areas (see 

paragraph (d) of this section and 

§§ 660.70 through 660.79, subpart C). 

Unless otherwise specified, a vessel 

operating in the open access fishery is 

subject to, and must not exceed any trip 

limit, frequency limit, and/or size limit 

for the open access fishery. Cowcod 

retention is prohibited in all fisheries 

and groundfish vessels operating south 

of Point Conception must adhere to CCA 

restrictions (see paragraph (d)(11) of this 

section and § 660.70, subpart C). 

Retention of yelloweye rockfish and 

canary rockfish is prohibited in all open 

access fisheries. For information on the 

open access daily/weekly trip limit 

fishery for sablefish, see § 660.332 and 

the trip limits in Tables 3 (North) and 

3 (South) of this subpart. Open access 

vessels are subject to daily or weekly 

sablefish limits in addition to 

cumulative limits for each cumulative 

limit period. Only one sablefish landing 

per week may be made in excess of the 

daily trip limit and, if the vessel chooses 

to make a landing in excess of that daily 

trip limit, then that is the only sablefish 

landing permitted for that week. The 

trip limit for black rockfish caught with 

hook-and-line gear also applies, see 

paragraph (e) of this section. Open 

access vessels that fish with nongroundfish trawl gear or in the salmon 

troll fishery north of 40°10′ N. lat. are 

subject the cumulative limits and closed 

areas (except the pink shrimp fishery 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60987 

which is not subject to RCA restrictions) 

listed in Tables 3 (North) and 3 (South) 

of this subpart. Federal commercial 

groundfish regulations are not intended 

to supersede any more restrictive state 

commercial groundfish regulations 

relating to federally managed 

groundfish. 

(b) Gear restrictions. Open access gear 

includes longline, trap, pot, hook-andline (fixed or mobile), setnet (anchored 

gillnet or trammel net, which are 

permissible south of 38° N. lat. only), 

spear and non-groundfish trawl gear 

(trawls used to target non-groundfish 

species: pink shrimp or ridgeback 

prawns, and, south of Pt. Arena, CA 

(38°57.50’ N. lat.), California halibut or 

sea cucumbers). Restrictions for gears 

used in the open access fisheries are as 

follows: 

(1) Non-groundfish trawl gear. Nongroundfish trawl gear is generally trawl 

gear used to target pink shrimp, 

ridgeback prawn, California halibut and 

sea cucumber and is exempt from the 

limited entry trawl gear restrictions at 

§ 660.130(b). The following gear 

restrictions apply to non-groundfish 

trawl gear: 

(i) Bottom trawl gear with a footrope 

diameter greater than 19 inches (48 cm) 

(including rollers, bobbins, or other 

material encircling or tied along the 

length of the footrope) is prohibited 

anywhere in EFH within the EEZ, as 

defined by latitude/longitude 

coordinates at § 660.75. unless such gear 

is the gear of another vessel that has 

been retrieved at sea and made 

inoperable or stowed in a manner not 

capable of being fished. The disposal at 

sea of such gear is prohibited by Annex 

V of the International Convention for 

the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 

1973 (Annex V of MARPOL 73/78). 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(2) Fixed gear. (i) Fixed gear (longline, 

trap or pot, set net and stationary hookand-line gear, including commercial 

vertical hook-and-line gear) must be 

attended at least once every 7 days. 

(ii) Set nets. Fishing for groundfish 

with set nets is prohibited in the fishery 

management area north of 38°00.00’ N. 

lat. 

(iii) Traps or pots. Traps must have 

biodegradable escape panels 

constructed with 21 or smaller 

untreated cotton twine in such a manner 

that an opening at least 8 inches (20.3 

cm) in diameter results when the twine 

deteriorates. 

(iv) Spears. Spears may be propelled 

by hand or by mechanical means. 

(c) Sorting. Under § 660.12(a)(8), 

subpart C, it is unlawful for any person 

to ‘‘fail to sort, prior to the first weighing 

after offloading, those groundfish 

species or species groups for which 

there is a trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY, if the vessel fished or 

landed in an area during a time when 

such trip limit, size limit, scientific 

sorting designation, quota, harvest 

guideline, or OY applied.’’ The States of 

Washington, Oregon, and California 

may also require that vessels record 

their landings as sorted on their state 

landing receipts. For open access 

vessels, the following species must be 

sorted: 

(1) Coastwide—widow rockfish, 

canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, 

yelloweye rockfish, shortbelly rockfish, 

black rockfish, blue rockfish, minor 

nearshore rockfish, minor shelf rockfish, 

minor slope rockfish, shortspine and 

longspine thornyhead, Dover sole, 

arrowtooth flounder, petrale sole, starry 

flounder, English sole, other flatfish, 

lingcod, sablefish, Pacific cod, spiny 

dogfish, longnose skate, other fish, 

Pacific whiting, and Pacific sanddabs; 

(2) North of 40°10’ N. lat.—POP, 

yellowtail rockfish; 

(3) South of 40°10’ N. lat.—minor 

shallow nearshore rockfish, minor 

deeper nearshore rockfish, chilipepper 

rockfish, bocaccio rockfish, splitnose 

rockfish, cowcod, bronzespotted 

rockfish and cabezon. 

(d) Groundfish conservation areas 

affecting open access vessels. A GCA, a 

type of closed area, is a geographic area 

defined by coordinates expressed in 

degrees of latitude and longitude. A 

vessel that is authorized by this 

paragraph to fish within a GCA (e.g. 

fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ using no more 

than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or smaller), 

may not simultaneously have other gear 

on board the vessel that is unlawful to 

use for fishing within the GCA. The 

following GCAs apply to vessels 

participating in the open access 

groundfish fishery. 

(1) North coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the North 

Coast Recreational Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

North Coast Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(2) North coast commercial yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the North 

Coast Commercial Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

Fishing with open access gear is 

prohibited within the North Coast 

Commercial YRCA. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with open access gear 

within the North Coast Commercial 

YRCA. Open access vessels may transit 

through the North Coast Commercial 

YRCA with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(3) South coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the South 

Coast Recreational Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA) boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

South Coast Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(4) Westport offshore recreational 

YRCA. The latitude and longitude 

coordinates that define the Westport 

Offshore Recreational YRCA boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. The 

Westport Offshore Recreational YRCA is 

designated as an area to be avoided (a 

voluntary closure) by commercial fixed 

gear fishers. 

(5) Point St. George YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point St. George YRCA boundaries 

are specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

Fishing with open access gear is 

prohibited within the Point St. George 

YRCA, on dates when the closure is in 

effect. It is unlawful to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

open access gear within the Point St. 

George YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

Point St. George YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. Open access vessels may 

transit through the Point St. George 

YRCA, at any time, with or without 

groundfish on board. 

(6) South Reef YRCA. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the South 

Reef YRCA boundaries are specified at 

§ 660.70, subpart C. Fishing with open 

access gear is prohibited within the 

South Reef YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. It is unlawful to take 

and retain, possess, or land groundfish 

taken with open access gear within the 

South Reef YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and commercial 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

South Reef YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. Open access gear vessels 

may transit through the South Reef 

YRCA, at any time, with or without 

groundfish on board. 

(7) Reading Rock YRCA. The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the 

Reading Rock YRCA boundaries are 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60988 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. Fishing 

with open access gear is prohibited 

within the Reading Rock YRCA, on 

dates when the closure is in effect. It is 

unlawful to take and retain, possess, or 

land groundfish taken with open access 

gear within the Reading Rock YRCA, on 

dates when the closure is in effect. The 

closure is not in effect at this time, and 

commercial fishing for groundfish is 

open within the Reading Rock YRCA 

from January 1 through December 31. 

This closure may be imposed through 

inseason adjustment. Open access gear 

vessels may transit through the Reading 

Rock YRCA, at any time, with or 

without groundfish on board. 

(8) Point Delgada (North) YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point Delgada (North) YRCA 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. Fishing with open access gear 

is prohibited within the Point Delgada 

(North) YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. It is unlawful to take 

and retain, possess, or land groundfish 

taken with open access gear within the 

Point Delgada (North) YRCA, on dates 

when the closure is in effect. The 

closure is not in effect at this time, and 

commercial fishing for groundfish is 

open within the Point Delgada (North) 

YRCA from January 1 through December 

31. This closure may be imposed 

through inseason adjustment. Open 

access gear vessels may transit through 

the Point Delgada (North) YRCA, at any 

time, with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(9) Point Delgada (South) YRCA. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Point Delgada (South) YRCA 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. Fishing with open access gear 

is prohibited within the Point Delgada 

(South) YRCA, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. It is unlawful to take 

and retain, possess, or land groundfish 

taken with open access gear within the 

Point Delgada (South) YRCA, on dates 

when the closure is in effect. The 

closure is not in effect at this time, and 

commercial fishing for groundfish is 

open within the Point Delgada (South) 

YRCA from January 1 through December 

31. This closure may be imposed 

through inseason adjustment. Open 

access gear vessels may transit through 

the Point Delgada (South) YRCA, at any 

time, with or without groundfish on 

board. 

(10) Salmon Troll Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA). The latitude 

and longitude coordinates of the Salmon 

Troll YRCA boundaries are specified in 

the groundfish regulations at § 660.70, 

subpart C, and in the salmon regulations 

at § 660.405. Fishing with salmon troll 

gear is prohibited within the Salmon 

Troll YRCA. It is unlawful for 

commercial salmon troll vessels to take 

and retain, possess, or land fish taken 

with salmon troll gear within the 

Salmon Troll YRCA. Open access 

vessels may transit through the Salmon 

Troll YRCA with or without fish on 

board. 

(11) Cowcod Conservation Areas 

(CCAs). The latitude and longitude 

coordinates of the CCAs boundaries are 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. It is 

unlawful to take and retain, possess, or 

land groundfish within the CCAs, 

except for species authorized in this 

paragraph caught according to gear 

requirements in this paragraph, when 

those waters are open to fishing. 

Commercial fishing vessels may transit 

through the Western CCA with their 

gear stowed and groundfish on board 

only in a corridor through the Western 

CCA bounded on the north by the 

latitude line at 33°00.50’ N. lat., and 

bounded on the south by the latitude 

line at 32°59.50’ N. lat. Fishing with 

open access gear is prohibited in the 

CCAs, except as follows: 

(i) Fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted within the CCAs under the 

following conditions: when using no 

more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or 

smaller, which measure no more than 

11 mm (0.44 inches) point to shank, and 

up to two 1-lb (0.45 kg) weights per line; 

and provided a valid declaration report 

as required at § 660.12(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. 

(ii) Fishing for rockfish and lingcod is 

permitted shoreward of the 20 fm (37 m) 

depth contour within the CCAs when 

trip limits authorize such fishing, and 

provided a valid declaration report as 

required at § 660.12(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. 

(12) Nontrawl rockfish conservation 

areas for the open access fisheries. The 

nontrawl RCAs are closed areas, defined 

by specific latitude and longitude 

coordinates (specified at §§ 660.70 

through 660.74, subpart C) designed to 

approximate specific depth contours, 

where fishing for groundfish with 

nontrawl gear is prohibited. Boundaries 

for the nontrawl RCA throughout the 

year are provided in the open access trip 

limit tables, Table 3 (North) and Table 

3 (South) of this subpart and may be 

modified by NMFS inseason pursuant to 

§ 660.60(c). 

(i) It is unlawful to operate a vessel in 

the nontrawl RCA that has nontrawl 

gear onboard and is not registered to a 

limited entry permit on a trip in which 

the vessel is used to take and retain or 

possess groundfish in the EEZ, or land 

groundfish taken in the EEZ, except for 

the purpose of continuous transiting, or 

when the use of nontrawl gear is 

authorized in part 660. 

(ii) On any trip on which a groundfish 

species is taken with nontrawl open 

access gear and retained, the open 

access nontrawl vessel may transit 

through the nontrawl RCA only if all 

groundfish nontrawl gear is stowed 

either: Below deck; or if the gear cannot 

readily be moved, in a secured and 

covered manner, detached from all 

lines, so that it is rendered unusable for 

fishing. 

(iii) The nontrawl RCA restrictions in 

this section apply to vessels taking and 

retaining or possessing groundfish in 

the EEZ, or landing groundfish taken in 

the EEZ. Unless otherwise authorized by 

part 660, a vessel may not retain any 

groundfish taken on a fishing trip for 

species other than groundfish that 

occurs within the nontrawl RCA. If a 

vessel fishes in a non-groundfish fishery 

in the nontrawl RCA, it may not 

participate in any fishing for groundfish 

on that trip that is prohibited within the 

nontrawl RCA. [For example, if a vessel 

fishes in the salmon troll fishery within 

the RCA, the vessel cannot on the same 

trip fish in the sablefish fishery outside 

of the RCA.] 

(iv) Fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ off 

California (between 42° N. lat. south to 

the U.S./Mexico border) is permitted 

within the nontrawl RCA with fixed 

gear only under the following 

conditions: When using no more than 

12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or smaller, which 

measure no more than 11 mm (0.44 

inches) point to shank, and up to two 1- 

lb (0.91 kg) weights per line when trip 

limits authorize such fishing; and 

provided a valid declaration report as 

required at § 660.12(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. 

(13) Non-groundfish trawl rockfish 

conservation areas for the open access 

non-groundfish trawl fisheries. The nongroundfish trawl RCAs are closed areas, 

defined by specific latitude and 

longitude coordinates (specified at 

§§ 660.70 through 660.74, subpart C) 

designed to approximate specific depth 

contours, where fishing for groundfish 

with nontrawl gear is prohibited. 

Boundaries for the nontrawl RCA 

throughout the year are provided in the 

open access trip limit tables, Table 3 

(North) and Table 3 (South) of this 

subpart and may be modified by NMFS 

in season pursuant to § 660.60(c). 

(i) It is unlawful to operate a vessel in 

the non-groundfish trawl RCA with nongroundfish trawl gear onboard, except 

for the purpose of continuous transiting, 

or when the use of trawl gear is 

authorized in part 660. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with non-groundfish 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60989 

trawl gear within the nontrawl RCA, 

unless otherwise authorized in part 660. 

(ii) Non-groundfish trawl vessels may 

transit through the non-groundfish trawl 

RCA, with or without groundfish on 

board, provided all non-groundfish 

trawl gear is stowed either: Below deck; 

or if the gear cannot readily be moved, 

in a secured and covered manner, 

detached from all towing lines, so that 

it is rendered unusable for fishing; or 

remaining on deck uncovered if the 

trawl doors are hung from their 

stanchions and the net is disconnected 

from the doors. 

(iii) The non-groundfish trawl RCA 

restrictions in this section apply to 

vessels taking and retaining or 

possessing groundfish in the EEZ, or 

landing groundfish taken in the EEZ. 

Unless otherwise authorized by Part 

660, it is unlawful for a vessel to retain 

any groundfish taken on a fishing trip 

for species other than groundfish that 

occurs within the non-groundfish trawl 

RCA. If a vessel fishes in a nongroundfish fishery in the nongroundfish trawl RCA, it may not 

participate in any fishing on that trip 

that is prohibited within the nongroundfish trawl RCA. [For example, if 

a vessel fishes in the pink shrimp 

fishery within the RCA, the vessel 

cannot on the same trip fish in the DTS 

fishery seaward of the RCA.] Nothing in 

these Federal regulations supersedes 

any state regulations that may prohibit 

trawling shoreward of the fishery 

management area (3–200 nm). 

(iv) It is lawful to fish with nongroundfish trawl gear within the nongroundfish trawl RCA only under the 

following conditions: 

(A) Pink shrimp trawling is permitted 

in the non-groundfish trawl RCA when 

a valid declaration report as required at 

§ 660.12(d), subpart C, has been filed 

with NMFS OLE. Groundfish caught 

with pink shrimp trawl gear may be 

retained anywhere in the EEZ and are 

subject to the limits in Table 3 (North) 

and Table 3 (South) of this subpart. 

(B) When the shoreward line of the 

trawl RCA is shallower than 100 fm (183 

m), vessels using ridgeback prawn trawl 

gear south of 34°27.00′ N. lat. may 

operate out to the 100 fm (183 m) 

boundary line specified at § 660.73 

when a valid declaration report as 

required at § 660.12(d), subpart C, has 

been filed with NMFS OLE. Groundfish 

caught with ridgeback prawn trawl gear 

are subject to the limits in Table 3 

(North) and Table 3 (South) of this 

subpart. 

(14) Farallon Islands. Under 

California law, commercial fishing for 

all groundfish is prohibited between the 

shoreline and the 10 fm (18 m) depth 

contour around the Farallon Islands. An 

exception to this prohibition is that 

commercial fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted around the Farallon Islands 

using no more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 

2’’ or smaller, which measure no more 

than 11 mm (0.44 inches) point to 

shank, and up to two 1-lb (0.45 kg) 

weights per line. (See Table 2 (South) of 

this subpart.) For a definition of the 

Farallon Islands, see § 660.70, subpart C. 

(15) Cordell Banks. Commercial 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited in 

waters of depths less than 100-fm (183- 

m) around Cordell Banks, as defined by 

specific latitude and longitude 

coordinates at § 660.70, subpart C. An 

exception to this prohibition is that 

commercial fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted around Cordell Banks using 

no more than 12 hooks, ‘‘Number 2’’ or 

smaller, which measure no more than 

11 mm (0.44 inches) point to shank, and 

up to two 1-lb (0.45 kg) weights per line. 

(16) Essential fish habitat 

conservation areas (EFHCA). An 

EFHCA, a type of closed area, is a 

geographic area defined by coordinates 

expressed in degrees of latitude and 

longitude at §§ 660.76 through 660.79, 

where specified types of fishing are 

prohibited in accordance with § 660.12, 

subpart C. EFHCAs apply to vessels 

using bottom trawl gear and or vessels 

using ‘‘bottom contact gear,’’ which is 

defined at § 660.11, subpart C, and 

includes, but is not limited to: Beam 

trawl, bottom trawl, dredge, fixed gear, 

set net, demersal seine, dinglebar gear, 

and other gear (including experimental 

gear) designed or modified to make 

contact with the bottom. 

(i) The following EFHCAs apply to 

vessels operating within the EEZ off the 

coasts of Washington, Oregon, and 

California with bottom trawl gear: 

(A) Seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 700-fm (1280-m) 

depth contour. Fishing with bottom 

trawl gear is prohibited in waters of 

depths greater than 700 fm (1280 m) 

within the EFH, as defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.75 and 660.76. 

(B) Shoreward of a boundary line 

approximating the 100-m (183-m) depth 

contour. Fishing with bottom trawl gear 

with a footrope diameter greater than 8 

inches (20 cm) is prohibited in waters 

shoreward of a boundary line 

approximating the 100-fm (183-m) 

depth contour, as defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.73. 

(C) EFHCAs for all bottom trawl gear. 

Fishing with all bottom trawl gear is 

prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.77 through 660.78: Olympic 2, 

Biogenic 1, Biogenic 2, Grays Canyon, 

Biogenic 3, Astoria Canyon, Nehalem 

Bank/Shale Pile, Siletz Deepwater, 

Daisy Bank/Nelson Island, Newport 

Rockpile/Stonewall Bank, Heceta Bank, 

Deepwater off Coos Bay, Bandon High 

Spot, Rogue Canyon. 

(D) EFHCAs for all bottom trawl gear, 

except demersal seine gear. Fishing with 

all bottom trawl gear except demersal 

seine gear (defined at § 660.11, subpart 

C) is prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.79: Eel River Canyon, Blunts Reef, 

Mendocino Ridge, Delgada Canyon, 

Tolo Bank, Point Arena North, Point 

Arena South Biogenic Area, Cordell 

Bank/Biogenic Area, Farallon Islands/ 

Fanny Shoal, Half Moon Bay, Monterey 

Bay/Canyon, Point Sur Deep, Big Sur 

Coast/Port San Luis, East San Lucia 

Bank, Point Conception, Hidden Reef/ 

Kidney Bank (within Cowcod 

Conservation Area West), Catalina 

Island, Potato Bank (within Cowcod 

Conservation Area West), Cherry Bank 

(within Cowcod Conservation Area 

West), and Cowcod EFH Conservation 

Area East. 

(E) EFHCAs for bottom contact gear, 

which includes bottom trawl gear. 

Fishing with bottom contact gear is 

prohibited within the following 

EFHCAs, which are defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§§ 660.398–.399: Thompson Seamount, 

President Jackson Seamount, Cordell 

Bank (50-fm (91-m) isobath), Harris 

Point, Richardson Rock, Scorpion, 

Painted Cave, Anacapa Island, 

Carrington Point, Judith Rock, Skunk 

Point, Footprint, Gull Island, South 

Point, and Santa Barbara. Fishing with 

bottom contact gear is also prohibited 

within the Davidson Seamount EFH 

Area, which is defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.75, subpart C. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(e) Black rockfish fishery 

management. The trip limit for black 

rockfish (Sebastes melanops) for 

commercial fishing vessels using hookand-line gear between the U.S.-Canada 

border and Cape Alava (48°09.50′ N. 

lat.), and between Destruction Island 

(47°40′ N. lat.) and Leadbetter Point 

(46°38.17′ N. lat.), is 100-lbs (45 kg) or 

30 percent, by weight of all fish on 

board, whichever is greater, per vessel 

per fishing trip. These per trip limits 

apply to limited entry and open access 

fisheries, in conjunction with the 

cumulative trip limits and other 

management measures in §§ 660.230 

and 660.330. The crossover provisions 

in § 660.60(h)(7), subpart C, do not 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60990 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

apply to the black rockfish per-trip 

limits. 

§ 660.332 Open access daily trip limit 

(DTL) fishery for sablefish. 

(a) Open access DTL fisheries both 

north and south of 36° N. lat. Open 

access vessels may fish in the open 

access, daily trip limit fishery for as 

long as that fishery is open during the 

year, subject to the routine management 

measures imposed under § 660.60, 

subpart C. 

(b) Trip limits. (1) Daily and/or 

weekly trip limits for the open access 

fishery north and south of 36° N. lat. are 

provided in Tables 3 (North) and 3 

(South) of this subpart. 

(2) Trip and/or frequency limits may 

be imposed in the limited entry fishery 

on vessels that are not participating in 

the primary season under § 660.60, 

subpart C. 

(3) Trip and/or size limits to protect 

juvenile sablefish in the limited entry or 

open access fisheries also may be 

imposed at any time under § 660.60, 

subpart C. 

(4) Trip limits may be imposed in the 

open access fishery at any time under 

§ 660.60, subpart C. 

§ 660.333 Open access non-groundfish 

trawl fishery—management measures. 

(a) General. Groundfish taken with 

non-groundfish trawl gear by vessels 

engaged in fishing for pink shrimp, 

ridgeback prawns, California halibut, or 

sea cucumbers. Trip limits for 

groundfish retained in the ridgeback 

prawn, California halibut, or sea 

cucumber fisheries are in the open 

access trip limit table, Table 3 (South) 

of this subpart. Trip limits for 

groundfish retained in the pink shrimp 

fishery are in Tables 3 (North) and 3 

(South) of this subpart. The table also 

generally describes the RCAs for vessels 

participating in these fisheries. 

(b) Participation in the ridgeback 

prawn fishery. A trawl vessel will be 

considered participating in the 

ridgeback prawn fishery if: 

(1) It is not registered to a valid 

Federal limited entry groundfish permit 

issued under § 660.25(b) for trawl gear; 

and 

(2) The landing includes ridgeback 

prawns taken in accordance with 

California Fish and Game Code, section 

8595, which states: ‘‘Prawns or shrimp 

may be taken for commercial purposes 

with a trawl net, subject to Article 10 

(commencing with Section 8830) of 

Chapter 3.’’ 

(c) Participation in the California 

halibut fishery. (1) A trawl vessel will be 

considered participating in the 

California halibut fishery if: 

(i) It is not registered to a valid 

Federal limited entry groundfish permit 

issued under § 660. 25(b) for trawl gear; 

(ii) All fishing on the trip takes place 

south of Pt. Arena, CA (38°57.50’ N. 

lat.); and 

(iii) The landing includes California 

halibut of a size required by California 

Fish and Game Code section 8392, 

which states: ‘‘No California halibut may 

be taken, possessed or sold which 

measures less than 22 in (56 cm) in total 

length, unless it weighs 4-lb (1.8144 kg) 

or more in the round, 3 and one-half lbs 

(1.587 kg) or more dressed with the 

head on, or 3-lbs (1.3608 kg) or more 

dressed with the head off. Total length 

means the shortest distance between the 

tip of the jaw or snout, whichever 

extends farthest while the mouth is 

closed, and the tip of the longest lobe of 

the tail, measured while the halibut is 

lying flat in natural repose, without 

resort to any force other than the 

swinging or fanning of the tail.’’ 

(2) [Reserved] 

(d) Participation in the sea cucumber 

fishery. A trawl vessel will be 

considered to be participating in the sea 

cucumber fishery if: 

(1) It is not registered to a valid 

Federal limited entry groundfish permit 

issued under § 660. 25(b) for trawl gear; 

(2) All fishing on the trip takes place 

south of Pt. Arena, CA (38°57.50′ N. 

lat.); and 

(3) The landing includes sea 

cucumbers taken in accordance with 

California Fish and Game Code, section 

8405, which requires a permit issued by 

the State of California. 

(e) Groundfish taken with nongroundfish trawl gear by vessels engaged 

in fishing for pink shrimp. 

Notwithstanding § 660.60(h)(7), a vessel 

that takes and retains pink shrimp and 

also takes and retains groundfish in 

either the limited entry or another open 

access fishery during the same 

applicable cumulative limit period that 

it takes and retains pink shrimp (which 

may be 1 month or 2 months, depending 

on the fishery and the time of year), may 

retain the larger of the two limits, but 

only if the limit(s) for each gear or 

fishery are not exceeded when operating 

in that fishery or with that gear. The 

limits are not additive; the vessel may 

not retain a separate trip limit for each 

fishery. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60991 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.020</GPH>
60992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.021</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60993 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.022</GPH>
60994 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER01OC10.023</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60995 

■ 5. Redesignate §§ 660.390 through 

660.399, subpart G as §§ 660.70 through 

660.79, subpart C, as follows: 

Old section New section 

§ 660.390 § 660.70 

§ 660.391 § 660.71 

§ 660.392 § 660.72 

§ 660.393 § 660.73 

§ 660.394 § 660.74 

§ 660.395 § 660.75 

§ 660.396 § 660.76 

§ 660.397 § 660.77 

§ 660.398 § 660.78 

§ 660.399 § 660.79 

■ 6. In part 660, subpart K, redesignate 

Table 2 to part 660 as Table 3 to part 

660, in subpart C. 

■ 7. Remove Tables 1a through 2c and 

Tables 3 (North) through 5 (South) to 

part 660, subpart G. 

■ 8. Remove Figure 1 to subpart G of 

part 660. 

■ 9. Revise subpart G to part 660 to read 

as follows: 

Subpart G—West Coast Groundfish— 

Recreational Fisheries 

Sec. 

660.350 Purpose and scope. 

660.351 Recreational fishery—definitions. 

660.352 Recreational fishery—prohibitions. 

660.353 Recreational fishery— 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

660.360 Recreational fishery—management 

measures. 

Subpart G—West Coast Groundfish— 

Recreational Fisheries 

§ 660.350 Purpose and scope. 

This subpart covers the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish recreational fishery. 

§ 660.351 Recreational fishery— 

definitions. 

These definitions are specific to the 

recreational fisheries covered in this 

subpart. General groundfish definitions 

are defined at § 660.11, subpart C. 

Bag limit means the number of fish 

available to an angler. 

Boat limit means the number of fish 

available to for a vessel or boat. 

Hook limit means a limit on the 

number of hooks on any given fishing 

line. 

§ 660.352 Recreational fishery— 

prohibitions. 

These prohibitions are specific to the 

recreational fisheries. General 

groundfish prohibitions are found at 

§ 660.12, subpart C. In addition to the 

general groundfish prohibitions 

specified in § 600.12, subpart C, of this 

chapter, it is unlawful for any person to: 

(a) Sell, offer to sell, or purchase any 

groundfish taken in the course of 

recreational groundfish fishing. 

(b) Use fishing gear other than hookand-line or spear for recreational 

fishing. 

§ 660.353 Recreational fishery— 

recordkeeping and reporting. 

Recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements at § 660.13 (a) through (c), 

subpart C, apply to the recreational 

fishery. 

§ 660.360 Recreational fisherymanagement measures. 

(a) General. Federal recreational 

groundfish regulations are not intended 

to supersede any more restrictive state 

recreational groundfish regulations 

relating to federally-managed 

groundfish. The bag limits include fish 

taken in both state and Federal waters. 

(b) Gear restrictions. The only types of 

fishing gear authorized for recreational 

fishing are hook-and-line and spear. 

Spears may be propelled by hand or by 

mechanical means. More fisheryspecific gear restrictions may be 

required by state as noted in paragraph 

(c) of this section (e.g. California’s 

recreational ‘‘other flatfish’’ fishery). 

(c) State-specific recreational fishery 

management measures. Federal 

recreational groundfish regulations are 

not intended to supersede any more 

restrictive State recreational groundfish 

regulations relating to federallymanaged groundfish. Off the coast of 

Washington, Oregon, and California, 

boat limits apply, whereby each fisher 

aboard a vessel may continue to use 

angling gear until the combined daily 

limits of groundfish for all licensed and 

juvenile anglers aboard has been 

attained (additional state restrictions on 

boat limits may apply). 

(1) Washington. For each person 

engaged in recreational fishing off the 

coast of Washington, the groundfish bag 

limit is 15 groundfish per day, including 

rockfish and lingcod, and is open yearround (except for lingcod). In the Pacific 

halibut fisheries, retention of groundfish 

is governed in part by annual 

management measures for Pacific 

halibut fisheries, which are published in 

the Federal Register. South of 

Leadbetter Point, WA to the 

Washington/Oregon border, when 

Pacific halibut are onboard the vessel, 

no groundfish may be taken and 

retained, possessed or landed, except 

sablefish and Pacific cod. The following 

sublimits and closed areas apply: 

(i) Recreational groundfish 

conservation areas off Washington—(A) 

North coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish and halibut is 

prohibited within the North Coast 

Recreational Yelloweye Rockfish 

Conservation Area (YRCA). It is 

unlawful for recreational fishing vessels 

to take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with recreational gear 

within the North Coast Recreational 

YRCA. A vessel fishing in the North 

Coast Recreational YRCA may not be in 

possession of any groundfish. 

Recreational vessels may transit through 

the North Coast Recreational YRCA with 

or without groundfish on board. The 

North Coast Recreational YRCA is 

defined by latitude and longitude 

coordinates specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. 

(B) South coast recreational yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish and halibut is 

prohibited within the South Coast 

Recreational YRCA. It is unlawful for 

recreational fishing vessels to take and 

retain, possess, or land groundfish taken 

with recreational gear within the South 

Coast Recreational YRCA. A vessel 

fishing in the South Coast Recreational 

YRCA may not be in possession of any 

groundfish. Recreational vessels may 

transit through the South Coast 

Recreational YRCA with or without 

groundfish on board. The South Coast 

Recreational YRCA is defined by 

latitude and longitude coordinates 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

(C) Westport offshore recreational 

yelloweye rockfish conservation area. 

Recreational fishing for groundfish and 

halibut is prohibited within the 

Westport Offshore Recreational YRCA. 

It is unlawful for recreational fishing 

vessels to take and retain, possess, or 

land groundfish taken with recreational 

gear within the Westport Offshore 

Recreational YRCA. A vessel fishing in 

the Westport Offshore Recreational 

YRCA may not be in possession of any 

groundfish. Recreational vessels may 

transit through the Westport Offshore 

Recreational YRCA with or without 

groundfish on board. The Westport 

Offshore Recreational YRCA is defined 

by latitude and longitude coordinates 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

(D) Recreational rockfish conservation 

area. Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA. It is unlawful to 

take and retain, possess, or land 

groundfish taken with recreational gear 

within the recreational RCA. A vessel 

fishing in the recreational RCA may not 

be in possession of any groundfish. [For 

example, if a vessel fishes in the 

recreational salmon fishery within the 

RCA, the vessel cannot be in possession 

of groundfish while in the RCA. The 

vessel may, however, on the same trip 

fish for and retain groundfish shoreward 

of the RCA on the return trip to port.] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60996 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(1) Between the U.S. border with 

Canada and the Queets River, 

recreational fishing for groundfish is 

prohibited seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 20-fm (37-m) depth 

contour from May 21 through 

September 30, except on days when the 

Pacific halibut fishery is open in this 

area. Days open to Pacific halibut 

recreational fishing off Washington are 

announced on the NMFS hotline at 

(206) 526–6667 or (800) 662–9825. 

Coordinates for the boundary line 

approximating the 20-fm (37-m) depth 

contour are listed in § 660.71, subpart C. 

(2) Between the Queets River and 

Leadbetter Point, recreational fishing for 

groundfish is prohibited seaward of a 

boundary line approximating the 30-fm 

(55-m) depth contour from March 15 

through June 15, except that recreational 

fishing for sablefish and Pacific cod is 

permitted within the recreational RCA 

from May 1 through June 15, and on 

days that the primary halibut fishery is 

open lingcod may be taken, retained and 

possessed seaward of the boundary line 

approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth 

contour. Days open to Pacific halibut 

recreational fishing off Washington are 

announced on the NMFS hotline at 

(206) 526–6667 or (800) 662–9825. 

Retention of lingcod seaward of the 

boundary line approximating the 30-fm 

(55-m) depth contour south of 46°58′ N. 

lat. is prohibited on Fridays and 

Saturdays from July 1 through August 

31. For additional regulations regarding 

the Washington recreational lingcod 

fishery, see paragraph (c)(1)(iii) of this 

section. Coordinates for the boundary 

line approximating the 30-fm (55-m) 

depth contour are listed in § 660.71. 

(ii) Rockfish. In areas of the EEZ 

seaward of Washington that are open to 

recreational groundfish fishing, there is 

a 10 rockfish per day bag limit. Taking 

and retaining canary rockfish and 

yelloweye rockfish is prohibited. 

(iii) Lingcod. In areas of the EEZ 

seaward of Washington that are open to 

recreational groundfish fishing and 

when the recreational season for lingcod 

is open, there is a bag limit of 2 lingcod 

per day, which may be no smaller than 

22 in (56 cm) total length. The 

recreational fishing season for lingcod is 

open as follows: 

(A) Between the U.S./Canada border 

to 48°10′ N. lat. (Cape Alava) 

(Washington Marine Area 4), 

recreational fishing for lingcod is open, 

for 2009, from April 16 through October 

15, and for 2010, from April 16 through 

October 15. 

(B) Between 48°10′ N. lat. (Cape 

Alava) and 46°16′ N. lat. (Washington/ 

Oregon border) (Washington Marine 

Areas 1–3), recreational fishing for 

lingcod is open for 2009, from March 14 

through October 17, and for 2010, from 

March 13 through October 16. 

(2) Oregon—(i) Recreational 

groundfish conservation areas off 

Oregon—(A) Stonewall Bank yelloweye 

rockfish conservation area. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish and halibut is 

prohibited within the Stonewall Bank 

YRCA. It is unlawful for recreational 

fishing vessels to take and retain, 

possess, or land groundfish taken with 

recreational gear within the Stonewall 

Bank YRCA. A vessel fishing in the 

Stonewall Bank YRCA may not be in 

possession of any groundfish. 

Recreational vessels may transit through 

the Stonewall Bank YRCA with or 

without groundfish on board. The 

Stonewall Bank YRCA is defined by 

latitude and longitude coordinates 

specified at § 660.70, subpart C. 

(B) Recreational rockfish conservation 

area. Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA, a type of closed 

area or GCA. It is unlawful to take and 

retain, possess, or land groundfish taken 

with recreational gear within the 

recreational RCA. A vessel fishing in the 

recreational RCA may not be in 

possession of any groundfish. [For 

example, if a vessel fishes in the 

recreational salmon fishery within the 

RCA, the vessel cannot be in possession 

of groundfish while in the RCA. The 

vessel may, however, on the same trip 

fish for and retain groundfish shoreward 

of the RCA on the return trip to port.] 

Off Oregon, from April 1 through 

September 30, recreational fishing for 

groundfish is prohibited seaward of a 

recreational RCA boundary line 

approximating the 40 fm (73 m) depth 

contour. Coordinates for the boundary 

line approximating the 40 fm (73 m) 

depth contour are listed at § 660.71. 

(C) Essential fish habitat conservation 

areas. The Essential Fish Habitat 

Conservation Areas (EFHCAs) are closed 

areas, defined by specific latitude and 

longitude coordinates at §§ 660.76 

through 660.79, where specified types of 

fishing are prohibited. Prohibitions 

applying to specific EFHCAs are found 

at § 660.12. 

(ii) Seasons. Recreational fishing for 

groundfish is open from January 1 

through December 31, subject to the 

closed areas described in paragraph (c) 

of this section. 

(iii) Bag limits, size limits. The bag 

limits for each person engaged in 

recreational fishing in the EEZ seaward 

of Oregon are three lingcod per day, 

which may be no smaller than 22 in (56 

cm) total length; and 10 marine fish per 

day, which excludes Pacific halibut, 

salmonids, tuna, perch species, 

sturgeon, sanddabs, flatfish, lingcod, 

striped bass, hybrid bass, offshore 

pelagic species and baitfish (herring, 

smelt, anchovies and sardines), but 

which includes rockfish, greenling, 

cabezon and other groundfish species. 

The bag limit for all flatfish is 25 fish 

per day, which excludes Pacific halibut, 

but which includes all soles, flounders 

and Pacific sanddabs. In the Pacific 

halibut fisheries, retention of groundfish 

is governed in part by annual 

management measures for Pacific 

halibut fisheries, which are published in 

the Federal Register. Between the 

Oregon border with Washington and 

Cape Falcon, when Pacific halibut are 

onboard the vessel, groundfish may not 

be taken and retained, possessed or 

landed, except sablefish and Pacific cod. 

Between Cape Falcon and Humbug 

Mountain, during days open to the 

Oregon Central Coast ‘‘all-depth’’ sport 

halibut fishery, when Pacific halibut are 

onboard the vessel, no groundfish may 

be taken and retained, possessed or 

landed, except sablefish and Pacific cod. 

‘‘All-depth’’ season days are established 

in the annual management measures for 

Pacific halibut fisheries, which are 

published in the Federal Register and 

are announced on the NMFS halibut 

hotline, 1–800–662–9825. The 

minimum size limit for cabezon 

retained in the recreational fishery is 16- 

in (41-cm), and for greenling is 10-in 

(26-cm). Taking and retaining canary 

rockfish and yelloweye rockfish is 

prohibited at all times and in all areas. 

(3) California. Seaward of California, 

California law provides that, in times 

and areas when the recreational fishery 

is open, there is a 20 fish bag limit for 

all species of finfish, within which no 

more than 10 fish of any one species 

may be taken or possessed by any one 

person. [Note: There are some 

exceptions to this rule. The following 

groundfish species are not subject to a 

bag limit: Petrale sole, Pacific sanddab 

and starry flounder.] For groundfish 

species not specifically mentioned in 

this paragraph, fishers are subject to the 

overall 20–fish bag limit for all species 

of finfish and the depth restrictions at 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. 

Recreational spearfishing for all 

federally-managed groundfish, except 

lingcod during January, February, 

March, and December, is exempt from 

closed areas and seasons, consistent 

with Title 14 of the California Code of 

Regulations. This exemption applies 

only to recreational vessels and divers 

provided no other fishing gear, except 

spearfishing gear, is on board the vessel. 

California state law may provide 

regulations similar to Federal 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60997 

regulations for the following statemanaged species: Ocean whitefish, 

California sheephead, and all greenlings 

of the genus Hexagrammos. Kelp 

greenling is the only federally-managed 

greenling. Retention of cowcod, 

yelloweye rockfish, and canary rockfish 

is prohibited in the recreational fishery 

seaward of California all year in all 

areas. For each person engaged in 

recreational fishing in the EEZ seaward 

of California, the following closed areas, 

seasons, bag limits, and size limits 

apply: 

(i) Recreational groundfish 

conservation areas off California. A 

Groundfish Conservation Area (GCA), a 

type of closed area, is a geographic area 

defined by coordinates expressed in 

degrees latitude and longitude. The 

following GCAs apply to participants in 

California’s recreational fishery. 

(A) Recreational rockfish conservation 

areas. The recreational RCAs are areas 

that are closed to recreational fishing for 

groundfish. Fishing for groundfish with 

recreational gear is prohibited within 

the recreational RCA, except that 

recreational fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted within the recreational RCA 

as specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of 

this section. It is unlawful to take and 

retain, possess, or land groundfish taken 

with recreational gear within the 

recreational RCA, unless otherwise 

authorized in this section. A vessel 

fishing in the recreational RCA may not 

be in possession of any species 

prohibited by the restrictions that apply 

within the recreational RCA. [For 

example, if a vessel fishes in the 

recreational salmon fishery within the 

RCA, the vessel cannot be in possession 

of rockfish while in the RCA. The vessel 

may, however, on the same trip fish for 

and retain rockfish shoreward of the 

RCA on the return trip to port.] 

(1) Between 42° N. lat. (California/ 

Oregon border) and 40°10.00′ N. lat. 

(North Region), recreational fishing for 

all groundfish (except ‘‘other flatfish’’ as 

specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this 

section) is prohibited seaward of the 20- 

fm (37-m) depth contour along the 

mainland coast and along islands and 

offshore seamounts from May 15 

through September 15; and is closed 

entirely from January 1 through May 14 

and from September 16 through 

December 31 (i.e., prohibited seaward of 

the shoreline). 

(2) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 

38°57.50′ N. lat. (North-Central North of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for all groundfish (except ‘‘other 

flatfish’’ as specified in paragraph 

(c)(3)(iv) of this section) is prohibited 

seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts 

from May 15 through August 15; and is 

closed entirely from January 1 through 

May 14 and from August 16 through 

December 31 (i.e., prohibited seaward of 

the shoreline). 

(3) Between 38°57.50′ N. lat. and 

37°11′ N. lat. (North-Central South of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for all groundfish (except ‘‘other 

flatfish’’ as specified in paragraph 

(c)(3)(iv) of this section) is prohibited 

seaward of the boundary line 

approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts 

from June 13 through October 31; and is 

closed entirely from January 1 through 

June 12 and from November 1 through 

December 31 (i.e., prohibited seaward of 

the shoreline). Closures around the 

Farallon Islands (see paragraph 

(c)(3)(i)(C) of this section) and Cordell 

Banks (see paragraph (c)(3)(i)(D) of this 

section) also apply in this area. 

Coordinates for the boundary line 

approximating the 30-fm (55-m) depth 

contour are listed in § 660.71. 

(4) Between 37°11′ N. lat. and 36° N. 

lat. (Monterey South-Central Region), 

recreational fishing for all groundfish 

(except ‘‘other flatfish’’ as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) is 

prohibited seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 40-fm (73-m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts 

from May 1 through November 15; and 

is closed entirely from January 1 

through April 30 and from November 16 

through December 31 (i.e., prohibited 

seaward of the shoreline). Coordinates 

for the boundary line approximating the 

40-fm (73-m) depth contour are 

specified in § 660.71. 

(5) Between 36° N. lat. and 34°27′ N. 

lat. (Morro Bay South-Central Region), 

recreational fishing for all groundfish 

(except ‘‘other flatfish’’ as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) is 

prohibited seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 40-fm (73-m) depth 

contour along the mainland coast and 

along islands and offshore seamounts 

from May 1 through November 15; and 

is closed entirely from January 1 

through April 30 and from November 16 

through December 31 (i.e., prohibited 

seaward of the shoreline). Coordinates 

for the boundary line approximating the 

40-fm (73-m) depth contour are 

specified in § 660.71. 

(6) South of 34°27′ N. lat. (South 

Region), recreational fishing for all 

groundfish (except California 

scorpionfish as specified below in this 

paragraph and in paragraph (v) of this 

section and ‘‘other flatfish’’ as specified 

in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section) is 

prohibited seaward of a boundary line 

approximating the 60-fm (110-m) depth 

contour from March 1 through 

December 31 along the mainland coast 

and along islands and offshore 

seamounts, except in the CCAs where 

fishing is prohibited seaward of the 20- 

fm (37-m) depth contour when the 

fishing season is open (see paragraph 

(c)(3)(i)(B) of this section). Recreational 

fishing for all groundfish (except 

California scorpionfish and ‘‘other 

flatfish’’) is closed entirely from January 

1 through February 28 (i.e., prohibited 

seaward of the shoreline). Recreational 

fishing for California scorpionfish south 

of 34°27′ N. lat. is prohibited seaward of 

a boundary line approximating the 40- 

fm (73-m) depth contour from January 1 

through February 28, and seaward of the 

60-fm (110-m) depth contour from 

March 1 through December 31, except in 

the CCAs where fishing is prohibited 

seaward of the 20-fm (37-m) depth 

contour when the fishing season is 

open. Coordinates for the boundary line 

approximating the 40-fm (73-m) and 60- 

fm (110-m) depth contours are specified 

in §§ 660.71 and 660.72. 

(B) Cowcod conservation areas. The 

latitude and longitude coordinates of 

the Cowcod Conservation Areas (CCAs) 

boundaries are specified at § 660.70, 

subpart C. In general, recreational 

fishing for all groundfish is prohibited 

within the CCAs, except that fishing for 

‘‘other flatfish’’ is permitted within the 

CCAs as specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) 

of this section. However, recreational 

fishing for the following species is 

permitted shoreward of the 20 fm (37 m) 

depth contour when the season for those 

species is open south of 34°27′ N. lat.: 

Minor nearshore rockfish, cabezon, kelp 

greenling, lingcod, California 

scorpionfish, and ‘‘other flatfish’’ 

(subject to gear requirements at 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section 

during January–February). [Note: 

California state regulations also permit 

recreational fishing for California 

sheephead, ocean whitefish, and all 

greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos 

shoreward of the 20 fm (37 m) depth 

contour in the CCAs when the season 

for the RCG complex is open south of 

34°27′ N. lat.] It is unlawful to take and 

retain, possess, or land groundfish 

within the CCAs, except for species 

authorized in this section. 

(C) Farallon islands. Under California 

state law, recreational fishing for 

groundfish is prohibited between the 

shoreline and the 10-fm (18-m) depth 

contour around the Farallon Islands, 

except that recreational fishing for 

‘‘other flatfish’’ is permitted around the 

Farallon Islands as specified in 

paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this section. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

60998 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

(Note: California state regulations also 

prohibit the retention of other 

greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, 

California sheephead and ocean 

whitefish.) For a definition of the 

Farallon Islands, see § 660.70, subpart C. 

(D) Cordell Banks. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited in 

waters less than 100 fm (183 m) around 

Cordell Banks as defined by specific 

latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.70, subpart C, except that 

recreational fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is 

permitted around Cordell Banks as 

specified in paragraph (c)(3)(iv) of this 

section. [Note: California state 

regulations also prohibit fishing for all 

greenlings of the genus Hexagrammos, 

California sheephead and ocean 

whitefish.] 

(E) Point St. George yelloweye rockfish 

conservation area (YRCA). Recreational 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited 

within the Point St. George YRCA, as 

defined by latitude and longitude 

coordinates at § 660.70, subpart C, on 

dates when the closure is in effect. The 

closure is not in effect at this time, and 

recreational fishing for groundfish is 

open within the Point St. George YRCA 

from January 1 through December 31. 

This closure may be imposed through 

inseason adjustment. 

(F) South reef YRCA. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited 

within the South Reef YRCA, as defined 

by latitude and longitude coordinates at 

§ 660.70, subpart C, on dates when the 

closure is in effect. The closure is not in 

effect at this time, and recreational 

fishing for groundfish is open within the 

South Reef YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. 

(G) Reading Rock YRCA. Recreational 

fishing for groundfish is prohibited 

within the Reading Rock YRCA, as 

defined by latitude and longitude 

coordinates at § 660.70, subpart C, on 

dates when the closure is in effect. The 

closure is not in effect at this time, and 

recreational fishing for groundfish is 

open within the Reading Rock YRCA 

from January 1 through December 31. 

This closure may be imposed through 

inseason adjustment. 

(H) Point Delgada (North) YRCA. 

Recreational fishing for groundfish is 

prohibited within the Point Delgada 

(North) YRCA, as defined by latitude 

and longitude coordinates at § 660.70, 

subpart C, on dates when the closure is 

in effect. The closure is not in effect at 

this time, and recreational fishing for 

groundfish is open within the Point 

Delgada (North) YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. 

(I) Point Delgada (South) YRCA. 

Recreational fishing for groundfish is 

prohibited within the Point Delgada 

(South) YRCA, as defined by latitude 

and longitude coordinates at § 660.70, 

subpart C, on dates when the closure is 

in effect. The closure is not in effect at 

this time, and recreational fishing for 

groundfish is open within the Point 

Delgada (South) YRCA from January 1 

through December 31. This closure may 

be imposed through inseason 

adjustment. 

(J) Essential fish habitat conservation 

areas. The Essential Fish Habitat 

Conservation Areas (EFHCAs) are closed 

areas, defined by specific latitude and 

longitude coordinates at §§ 660.76 

through 660.79, subpart C where 

specified types of fishing are prohibited. 

Prohibitions applying to specific 

EFHCAs are found at § 660.12, subpart 

C. 

(ii) RCG complex. The California 

rockfish, cabezon, greenling complex 

(RCG Complex), as defined in state 

regulations (Section 1.91, Title 14, 

California Code of Regulations), 

includes all rockfish, kelp greenling, 

rock greenling, and cabezon. This 

category does not include California 

scorpionfish, also known as ‘‘sculpin’’. 

(A) Seasons. When recreational 

fishing for the RCG complex is open, it 

is permitted only outside of the 

recreational RCAs described in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. 

(1) Between 42 °N. lat. (California/ 

Oregon border) and 40°10′ N. lat. (North 

Region), recreational fishing for the RCG 

complex is open from May 15 through 

September 15 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through May 14 and from 

September 16 through December 31). 

(2) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 

38°57.50′ N. lat. (North Central North of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for the RCG Complex is open 

from May 15 through August 15 (i.e. it’s 

closed from January 1 through May 14 

and May 16 through December 31). 

(3) Between 38°57.50′ N. lat. and 

37°11′ N. lat. (North Central South of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for the RCG complex is open 

from June 13 through October 31 (i.e. it’s 

closed from January 1 through June 12 

and November 1 through December 31. 

(4) Between 37°11′ N. lat. and 36° N. 

lat. (Monterey South-Central Region), 

recreational fishing for the RCG 

complex is open from May 1 through 

November 15 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through April 30 and from 

November 16 through December 31). 

(5) Between 36′ N. lat. and 34°27′ N. 

lat. (Morro Bay South-Central Region), 

recreational fishing for the RCG 

Complex is open from May 1 through 

November 15 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through April 30 and from 

November 16 through December 31). 

(6) South of 34°27′ N. lat. (South 

Region), recreational fishing for the RCG 

Complex is open from March 1 through 

December 31 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through February 28. 

(B) Bag limits, hook limits. In times 

and areas when the recreational season 

for the RCG Complex is open, there is 

a limit of 2 hooks and 1 line when 

fishing for rockfish. The bag limit is 10 

RCG Complex fish per day coastwide. 

Retention of canary rockfish, yelloweye 

rockfish, bronzespotted and cowcod is 

prohibited. Within the 10 RCG Complex 

fish per day limit, no more than 2 may 

be bocaccio, no more than 2 may be 

greenling (kelp and/or other greenlings) 

and no more than 2 may be cabezon. 

Multi-day limits are authorized by a 

valid permit issued by California and 

must not exceed the daily limit 

multiplied by the number of days in the 

fishing trip. 

(C) Size limits. The following size 

limits apply: Bocaccio may be no 

smaller than 10 in (25 cm) total length; 

cabezon may be no smaller than 15 in 

(38 cm) total length; and kelp and other 

greenling may be no smaller than 12 in 

(30 cm) total length. 

(D) Dressing/filleting. Cabezon, kelp 

greenling, and rock greenling taken in 

the recreational fishery may not be 

filleted at sea. Rockfish skin may not be 

removed when filleting or otherwise 

dressing rockfish taken in the 

recreational fishery. The following 

rockfish filet size limits apply: Bocaccio 

filets may be no smaller than 5 in (12.8 

cm) and brown-skinned rockfish fillets 

may be no smaller than 6.5 in (16.6 cm). 

‘‘Brown-skinned’’ rockfish include the 

following species: Brown, calico, 

copper, gopher, kelp, olive, speckled, 

squarespot, and yellowtail. 

(iii) Lingcod—(A) Seasons. When 

recreational fishing for lingcod is open, 

it is permitted only outside of the 

recreational RCAs described in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. 

(1) Between 42 °N. lat. (California/ 

Oregon border) and 40°10.00′ N. lat. 

(North Region), recreational fishing for 

lingcod is open from May 15 through 

September 15 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through May 14 and from 

September 16 through December 31). 

(2) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 

38°57.50′ N. lat. (North Central North of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for lingcod is open from May 15 

through August 15 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through May 14 and May 16 

through December 31). 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 190 / Friday, October 1, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 60999 

(3) Between 38°57.50′ N. lat. and 

37°11′ N. lat. (North Central South of 

Point Arena Region), recreational 

fishing for lingcod is open from June 13 

through October 31 (i.e. it’s closed from 

January 1 through June 12 and 

November 1 through December 31. 

(4) Between 37°11′ N. lat. and 36 °N. 

lat. (Monterey South–Central Region), 

recreational fishing for lingcod is open 

from May 1 through November 15 (i.e. 

it’s closed from January 1 through April 

30 and from November 16 through 

December 31). 

(5) Between 36′ N. lat. and 34°27′ N. 

lat. (Morro Bay South-Central Region), 

recreational fishing for lingcod is open 

from May 1 through November 15 (i.e. 

it’s closed from January 1 through April 

30 and from November 16 through 

December 31). 

(6) South of 34°27′ N. lat. (South 

Region), recreational fishing for lingcod 

is open from April 1 through November 

30 (i.e. it’s closed from January 1 

through March 31 and from December 1 

through 31). 

(B) Bag limits, hook limits. In times 

and areas when the recreational season 

for lingcod is open, there is a limit of 

2 hooks and 1 line when fishing for 

lingcod. The bag limit is 2 lingcod per 

day. Multi-day limits are authorized by 

a valid permit issued by California and 

must not exceed the daily limit 

multiplied by the number of days in the 

fishing trip. 

(C) Size limits. Lingcod may be no 

smaller than 24 in (61 cm) total length. 

(D) Dressing/filleting. Lingcod filets 

may be no smaller than 16 in (41 cm) 

in length. 

(iv) ‘‘Other flatfish’’. Coastwide off 

California, recreational fishing for ‘‘other 

flatfish’’ is permitted both shoreward of 

and within the closed areas described in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. ‘‘Other 

flatfish’’ are defined at § 660.11, subpart 

C, and include butter sole, curlfin sole, 

flathead sole, Pacific sanddab, rex sole, 

rock sole, and sand sole. Recreational 

fishing for ‘‘other flatfish’’ is permitted 

within the closed areas. ‘‘Other flatfish,’’ 

except Pacific sanddab, are subject to 

the overall 20-fish bag limit for all 

species of finfish, of which there may be 

no more than 10 fish of any one species. 

There is no season restriction or size 

limit for ‘‘other flatfish;’’ however, it is 

prohibited to filet ‘‘other flatfish’’ at sea. 

(v) California scorpionfish. California 

scorpionfish predominately occur south 

of 40°10′ N. lat. 

(A) Seasons. When recreational 

fishing for California scorpionfish is 

open, it is permitted only outside of the 

recreational RCAs described in 

paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section. 

(1) Between 40°10′ N. lat. and 37°11′ 

N. lat. (North Central Region), 

recreational fishing for California 

scorpionfish is open from June 1 

through November 30 (i.e., it’s closed 

from January 1 through May 31 and 

from December 1 through December 31). 

(2) Between 37°11′ N. lat. and 36° N. 

lat. (Monterey South Central Region), 

recreational fishing for California 

scorpionfish is open from May 1 

through November 30 (i.e., it’s closed 

from January 1 through April 30 and 

from December 1 through December 31). 

(3) Between 36° N. lat. and 34°27′ N. 

lat. (Morro Bay South Central Region), 

recreational fishing for California 

scorpionfish is open from May 1 

through November 30 (i.e., it’s closed 

from January 1 through April 30 and 

from December 1 through December 31). 

(4) South of 34°27′ N. lat. (South 

Region), recreational fishing for 

California scorpionfish is open from 

January 1 through December 31. 

(B) Bag limits, hook limits. South of 

40°10.00′ N. lat., in times and areas 

where the recreational season for 

California scorpionfish is open, the bag 

limit is 5 California scorpionfish per 

day. California scorpionfish do not 

count against the 10 RCG Complex fish 

per day limit. Multi-day limits are 

authorized by a valid permit issued by 

California and must not exceed the daily 

limit multiplied by the number of days 

in the fishing trip. 

(C) Size limits. California scorpionfish 

may be no smaller than 10 in (25 cm) 

total length. 

(D) Dressing/Filleting. California 

scorpionfish filets may be no smaller 

than 5 in (12.8 cm) and must bear an 

intact 1 in (2.6 cm) square patch of skin. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23246 Filed 9–23–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2