27498 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THEFT RATES FOR MODEL YEAR 2007 PASSENGER MOTOR VEHICLES STOLEN IN CALENDAR

YEAR 2007—Continued 

Manufacturer Make/model (line) Thefts 2007 Production 

(Mfr’s) 2007 

2007 

Theft rate 

(per 1,000 

vehicles 

produced) 

194 .......................... FERRARI ..................................... 612 SCAGLIETTI ......................... 0 66 0.0000 

195 .......................... FERRARI ..................................... 430 ............................................... 0 1382 0.0000 

196 .......................... GENERAL MOTORS ................... CADILLAC LIMOUSINE .............. 0 648 0.0000 

197 .......................... JAGUAR ...................................... XJ8/XJ8L ...................................... 0 1645 0.0000 

198 .......................... JAGUAR ...................................... XJR .............................................. 0 221 0.0000 

199 .......................... LAMBORGHINI ............................ MURCIELAGO ............................. 0 164 0.0000 

200 .......................... LAMBORGHINI ............................ GALLARDO ................................. 0 558 0.0000 

201 .......................... MASERATI ................................... QUATTROPORTE ....................... 0 2176 0.0000 

202 .......................... SAAB ........................................... 9–5 ............................................... 0 4084 0.0000 

203 .......................... SPYKER ...................................... C8 ................................................ 0 7 0.0000 

204 .......................... VOLVO ......................................... V70 ............................................... 0 3899 0.0000 

Issued on: June 4, 2009. 

Stephen R. Kratzke, 

Associate Administrator for Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. E9–13530 Filed 6–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 090218204–9956–03] 

RIN 0648–AX71 

Fisheries of the United States 

Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; 

Fisheries of the Arctic Management 

Area; Bering Sea Subarea 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule 

that would implement the Fishery 

Management Plan for Fish Resources of 

the Arctic Management Area (Arctic 

FMP) and Amendment 29 to the Fishery 

Management Plan for Bering Sea/ 

Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs 

(Crab FMP). The Arctic FMP and 

Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP, if 

approved, would establish sustainable 

management of commercial fishing in 

the Arctic Management Area and move 

the northern boundary of the Crab FMP 

out of the Arctic Management Area 

south to Bering Strait. This action is 

necessary to establish a management 

framework for commercial fishing and 

to provide consistent management of 

fish resources in the Arctic Management 

Area before the potential onset of 

unregulated commercial fishing in the 

area. This action is intended to promote 

the goals and objectives of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, the 

FMPs, and other applicable laws. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by July 27, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 

Salveson, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: 

Ellen Sebastian. You may submit 

comments, identified for this action by 

0648–AX71 (PR), by any one of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal website at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

• Mail: P. O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802. 

• Fax: (907) 586–7557. 

• Hand delivery to the Federal 

Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 

420A, Juneau, AK. 

All comments received are a part of 

the public record and will generally be 

posted to http://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All Personal Identifying 

Information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

fields, if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

portable document file (pdf) formats 

only. 

Copies of the Arctic FMP, 

Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP, maps 

of the action area and essential fish 

habitat, and the Environmental 

Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/ 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(EA/RIR/IRFA) for this action may be 

obtained from the Alaska Region at the 

mailing address above or from the 

Alaska Region website at http:// 

www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melanie Brown, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands King 

and Tanner crab fisheries are managed 

under the Crab FMP. The Arctic 

Management Area fisheries would be 

managed under the Arctic FMP. The 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) prepared the Crab 

FMP and has developed and adopted 

the proposed Arctic FMP under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

Regulations implementing the FMPs 

appear at 50 CFR parts 679 and 680. 

General regulations governing U.S. 

fisheries also appear at 50 CFR part 600. 

The Council submitted the Arctic 

FMP and Amendment 29 to the Crab 

FMP for review by the Secretary of 

Commerce, and a notice of availability 

of the Arctic FMP and Amendment 29 

was published in the Federal Register 

on Mary 26, 2009 (74 FR 24757), with 

comments on the Arctic FMP and 

Amendment 29 invited through July 27, 

2009. Comments may address the Arctic 

FMP, Amendment 29, the proposed 

rule, or all actions, but must be received 

by July 27, 2009, to be considered in the 

approval/disapproval decision on the 

Arctic FMP and Amendment 29. All 

comments received by that time, 

whether specifically directed to the 

Arctic FMP, to Amendment 29, or to the 

proposed rule, will be considered in the 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27499 

approval/disapproval decision on the 

Arctic FMP and Amendment 29. 

Background 

If approved by NMFS, the Arctic FMP 

and Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP 

would provide for sustainable 

management of commercial fishing in 

the Arctic Management Area and 

eliminate management authority over 

the Arctic Management Area from the 

Crab FMP. The Arctic FMP would 

establish a management framework to 

sustainably manage future commercial 

fishing in the Arctic Management Area 

and would initially prohibit commercial 

fishing until new information regarding 

Arctic fish resources allows for 

authorization of a sustainable 

commercial fishery in the area. 

Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP would 

ensure consistent management of all 

crab species in the Arctic Management 

Area under the Arctic FMP. 

In February 2009, the Council 

recommended the adoption of the Arctic 

FMP to implement a management 

framework that will protect the fish 

resources of the Arctic Management 

Area against the potential onset of 

unregulated commercial fishing by 

initially prohibiting commercial fishing 

until sufficient information is available 

to enable a sustainable commercial 

fishery to proceed, consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act . Global climate 

change is reducing the extent of sea ice 

in the Arctic Ocean, providing greater 

access to Arctic marine resources and 

increasing human activity in this 

sensitive marine environment of the 

U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). 

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

(section 306(a)(3)), the State of Alaska 

may regulate commercial fishing in the 

adjacent EEZ waters if no FMP is in 

place. No FMP is yet in place for the 

Arctic Management Area, and the State 

does not allow state licensed vessels to 

commercially fish in the Arctic 

Management Area. However, the state 

authority for management in the EEZ 

pertains only to vessels registered under 

the law of the State of Alaska. Thus, 

absent an FMP, it is possible that 

unregistered vessels could commercially 

fish in the Arctic Management Area 

without any limitation or regulatory 

oversight. The Council chose to prevent 

this from occurring in the future; the 

proposed Arctic FMP would eliminate 

the potential for unregulated 

commercial fishing in the Arctic 

Management Area. This action would 

prevent potential adverse effects on the 

Arctic marine environment from 

unregulated commercial fishing. The 

Arctic FMP would be a precautionary, 

ecosystem-based approach to fisheries 

management in the Arctic Management 

Area. 

The proposed Arctic FMP contains all 

required provisions and appropriate 

discretionary provisions for an FMP 

contained in sections 303(a), 303(b), and 

313 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The 

conservation and management 

provisions in the Arctic FMP were 

developed in consideration of the 

National Standard guidelines. The 

following provides a summary of the 

main provisions of the proposed Arctic 

FMP that provide the authority for 

conservation and management of fish 

resources and for the provisions in this 

proposed rule. 

The Arctic FMP would apply to 

commercial harvests of most fish 

resources in the waters of the Arctic 

Management Area (Figure 24 in this 

proposed rule). The geographic extent of 

the Arctic Management Area would be 

all marine waters in the U.S. EEZ of the 

Chukchi and Beaufort Seas from 3 

nautical miles off the coast of Alaska or 

its baseline to 200 nautical miles 

offshore, north of Bering Strait (from 

Cape Prince of Wales to Cape Dezhneva) 

and westward to the 1990 U.S./Russia 

maritime boundary line and eastward to 

the U.S./Canada maritime boundary. 

This proposed rule will not affect 

non-commercial fishing in the Arctic 

Management Area or commercial 

harvest of certain species that are 

managed pursuant to other legal 

authorities. This action would have no 

effect on subsistence harvest of marine 

resources in the Arctic Management 

Area. It also would have no effect on the 

commercial harvest of Pacific salmon 

and Pacific halibut. The commercial 

harvest of Pacific salmon in the Arctic 

Management Area is managed under the 

FMP for Salmon Fisheries in the EEZ off 

the Coast of Alaska (Salmon FMP), 

which prohibits commercial salmon 

fishing in the Arctic Management Area. 

Pacific halibut commercial fishing is 

managed by the International Pacific 

Halibut Commission (IPHC), which does 

not allow harvest of Pacific halibut in 

the Arctic Management Area. 

The proposed Arctic FMP would 

establish two categories of species: 

target species and ecosystem component 

species. Target species are those that are 

most likely to be targeted in a 

foreseeable commercial fishery based on 

potential markets and available biomass 

in the Arctic Management Area. Arctic 

cod (Boreogadus saida), saffron cod 

(Eleginus gracilis), and snow crab 

(Chionoecetes opilio) are target species 

in the proposed Arctic FMP. The 

remainder of fish occurring in the Arctic 

Management Area are classified as 

ecosystem component species. As used 

in the FMP, fish are defined by section 

3 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act as 

finfish, mollusks, crustaceans, and all 

other forms of marine plant and animal 

life other than marine mammals and 

birds. 

The proposed Arctic FMP would 

provide the maximum sustainable yield 

(MSY) and optimum yield (OY) for 

commercial fishing for each target 

species. MSY is specified for each target 

species using the MSY control rule 

described in the proposed Arctic FMP. 

The OY for each target species is 

determined by reductions from MSY 

based on uncertainty, economic 

considerations, and ecosystem 

considerations. The MSYs for Arctic 

cod, saffron cod, and snow crab would 

be reduced by 100 percent based on 

economic costs of fishing. Uncertainty 

would reduce the MSY for each target 

species by an amount ranging from 36 

to 61 percent. MSYs for Arctic cod and 

saffron cod also would be reduced based 

on ecosystem considerations. Arctic cod 

is a keystone species in the Arctic 

marine environment, with many higher 

trophic level predators (i.e., certain 

marine mammals and seabirds) 

dependent on Arctic cod as a principal 

prey species. The harvest of saffron cod 

likely would result in very high levels 

of Arctic cod bycatch (two tons of Arctic 

cod for each ton of saffron cod); 

therefore, the harvest of saffron cod 

likely would result in impacts on Arctic 

cod and on those species that depend on 

Arctic cod as prey. Because of the 

importance of Arctic cod to the Arctic 

food web, the lack of knowledge of the 

Arctic cod biomass needed to support 

commercial fishing and Arctic 

predators, and the potential high levels 

of bycatch of Arctic cod in a saffron cod 

fishery, the MSYs for Arctic cod and 

saffron cod would be reduced 100 

percent based on ecosystem concerns. 

Based on these reductions of the 

MSYs for the target species, the OY for 

commercial fishing in the Arctic 

Management Area for each target 

species is proposed to be zero. With an 

OY of zero for each target species, no 

quantity of target species is available for 

commercial harvest. The proposed 

Arctic FMP specifies the OY for each 

target species as the lowest amount of 

catch sufficient to allow for bycatch of 

Arctic cod, saffron cod, and snow crab 

in subsistence fisheries for other 

species. 

Because the OYs for commercial 

fisheries for each target species are zero 

and because of the lack of information 

to manage sustainable fisheries for 

ecosystem component species, the 

Arctic FMP would prohibit commercial 

fishing on target and ecosystem 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
27500 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

component species, except Pacific 

salmon and Pacific halibut for which 

other authorities prohibit commercial 

fishing, as explained above. Prohibiting 

commercial harvest of ecosystem 

component species would prevent 

adverse effects on the Arctic marine 

ecosystem, including the target species, 

that may result from unregulated 

commercial fishing on any ecosystem 

component species. This prohibition is 

a precautionary approach to fisheries 

management because little information 

is available to NMFS to determine either 

the ability of these species to support 

commercial fishing or the potential 

impacts from such fishing on the Arctic 

marine environment, including the 

target species. 

Consistent with the Council’s stated 

management policy and objectives, the 

proposed Arctic FMP includes nontarget species in the ecosystem 

component category to ensure that the 

Arctic marine ecosystem is adequately 

protected and out of concern that 

unregulated commercial fishing for 

these species could detrimentally affect 

the target fishery. The inclusion of all 

non-target species in the Arctic 

Management Area in the ecosystem 

component category is consistent with 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act which: 

recognizes the increased importance of 

habitat conservation; calls for 

development of conservation and 

management measures to avoid 

irreversible or long-term adverse effects 

to the marine environment and to 

minimize bycatch to the extent 

practicable; permits inclusion in an 

FMP of management measures to 

conserve non-target species and 

habitats, considering the variety of 

ecological factors affecting fishery 

populations; and requires consideration 

of ecological factors and protection of 

the marine ecosystem in setting OY for 

stocks in the fishery. The National 

Standard 1 guidelines (50 CFR 

600.310(d)(5)(i)) further encourage an 

ecosystem-based approach to 

management of fisheries, providing the 

Council and NMFS with broad 

discretion to determine whether stocks 

should be classified and included in an 

FMP as ecosystem component species 

for a series of reasons, including 

specifying OY and developing 

conservation and management measures 

for the associated fishery to address 

other ecosystem issues and to protect 

their associated role in the ecosystem 

with which the fishery interacts. Due to 

the lack of commercial fishing in the 

Arctic, these species are non-target 

species and are not generally retained 

for sale or for personal use. Moreover, 

these species are not likely to be 

overfished or be subject to overfishing 

in the absence of commercial fishing or 

conservation and management 

measures. 

The Council’s decision to create an 

ecosystem component category that 

includes all fish species in the Arctic 

Management Area, except the potential 

target species, and to prohibit 

commercial fishing for such species 

other than Pacific salmon and Pacific 

halibut, is based on ecosystem 

considerations and is intended to 

conserve target and non-target species 

and their habitats. The stated 

management objectives of the Arctic 

FMP provide a benchmark for NMFS’ 

evaluation of the Council’s proposed 

management measures. These objectives 

include a ‘‘Biological Conservation 

Objective’’ that seeks to ensure the longterm viability of fish populations by, 

among other things, preventing 

unregulated fishing and ‘‘incorporating 

ecosystem-based considerations into 

fishery management decisions, as 

appropriate . . . .’’ The prohibition on 

commercial fishing for ecosystem 

component species reflects such 

appropriate ecosystem-based 

considerations and does not constitute 

required conservation and management 

for purposes of including such species 

in the fishery. 

The OY for each of the three potential 

target fisheries is de minimis and 

sufficient only to support subsistence 

fishing. NMFS shares the Council’s 

concern that if the target species are 

caught as bycatch during unregulated 

commercial fishing for other species, 

removal of those target species could 

surpass OY. Similarly, NMFS shares the 

Council’s concern that unregulated 

commercial fishing for ecosystem 

component species may affect the Arctic 

marine ecosystem in ways that are 

detrimental to the potential target 

fishery as well as non-target species and 

their habitats. For example, large-scale 

removal of biomass of important prey 

species for one or more target species, 

or removal of species that are otherwise 

ecologically connected to one or more 

target species, could adversely affect the 

target fishery populations. At present, 

the scientific understanding of the 

interdependence and trophic 

relationships between particular species 

in the Arctic marine ecosystem is 

rudimentary, relative to other marine 

ecosystems, as is the knowledge of 

particular habitats in the region that 

may be important to the continued 

health of the ecosystem and its various 

species. In particular, NMFS is 

concerned about the potential adverse 

effects of unregulated commercial 

fishing for non-target species on Arctic 

cod, which is found throughout the 

Arctic Management Area and is a 

keystone species that provides a crucial 

trophic link between the sea ice food 

web and marine mammals and birds. 

These limitations on NMFS’ 

understanding of ecological processes in 

the Arctic are compounded by the 

ongoing climatic changes in the region 

and physical changes in the marine 

environment. Global climate change is 

anticipated to continue altering the 

Arctic environment in fundamental 

ways, and before long may lead to a 

seasonally ice-free Arctic Ocean. As a 

result, there is great uncertainty 

regarding the ways in which current 

ecological relationships may change, 

irrespective of fishing pressure. 

Consistent with the Council’s 

ecosystem-based management policy, 

NMFS believes it is appropriate to adopt 

management measures that will 

maximize the resilience of the target 

species and afford the greatest 

protection to the integrity of the Arctic 

ecosystem in the face of a changing 

climate. The prohibition on commercial 

fishing for ecosystem component 

species represents such a management 

measure. 

Although there is uncertainty as to 

whether commercial fishing for 

ecosystem component species would 

diminish target fishery populations to 

an unacceptable degree, either due to 

bycatch of target species or impacts on 

the ecosystem, NMFS has determined 

that the Council appropriately adopted 

a precautionary approach that proposes 

prohibiting commercial fishing for any 

species of Arctic fish in the Arctic 

Management Area. Given the limited 

knowledge of ecological relationships 

and considerable uncertainty regarding 

the future, this will ensure that fishing 

does not interfere with important 

ecological relationships in the Arctic 

marine environment and thereby avoids 

the risk of harm to the potential target 

species, the broader ecosystem, and the 

habitat of fish species that may 

otherwise result from unregulated 

commercial fishing for ecosystem 

component species. NMFS will 

periodically review the status of 

ecosystem component species based on 

the best available scientific information 

to determine whether or not such 

species should be classified for active 

conservation and management as 

species or stocks in the fishery. 

The proposed Arctic FMP prescribes 

the process the Council will follow and 

the criteria it will evaluate before 

authorizing a future commercial fishery. 

Consideration of a future commercial 

fishery would include the Council’s 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27501 

review of an analysis of the biological 

information on the potential target 

species and potential impacts from 

commercial fishing on the Arctic marine 

environment and on communities. An 

Arctic FMP amendment would be 

required to authorize a commercial 

fishery in the Arctic Management Area 

and to implement the specific 

conservation and management measures 

for the fishery. 

If a commercial fishery is authorized 

in the Arctic Management Area, the 

proposed Arctic FMP would provide the 

general conservation and management 

measures to ensure sustainable fishing 

and to prevent overfishing of any target 

species. Determination criteria for 

overfishing levels (OFL) and acceptable 

biological catch levels (ABC) would be 

based on the type and quantity of 

information available. 

The OFLs and ABCs would guide the 

Council and NMFS in setting harvest 

specifications for fishery management in 

the Arctic Management Area. The 

process for specifying OFLs, ABCs, and 

total allowable catch amounts (TACs) 

would include the development of a 

Stock Assessment and Fishery 

Evaluation report for the Council’s 

consideration in recommending OFLs, 

ABCs, and TACs to the Secretary. At the 

time a commercial fishery is authorized 

by the amended Arctic FMP, the harvest 

specification regulations under § 679.20 

would be revised to include the Arctic 

Management Area. This would ensure 

the latest method of determining harvest 

specifications would be used at the time 

the Arctic Management Area 

commercial fishery is authorized. 

The National Standard 1 guidelines 

(74 FR 3178, January 16, 2009) require 

accountability measures and 

mechanisms to prevent overfishing. 

Because the proposed Arctic FMP 

initially prohibits commercial fishing in 

the Arctic Management Area, the 

prohibition on commercial fishing that 

would be implemented by this proposed 

rule would satisfy this requirement. If a 

commercial fishery is authorized in the 

future, the FMP would be amended to 

include specific accountability 

measures and mechanisms to prevent 

overfishing. 

The process and criteria for issuing 

exempted fishing permits (EFPs) that 

would be implemented by this proposed 

rule will be found at 50 CFR part 679. 

EFPs provide exemptions to fishing 

regulations to allow commercial fishing 

in a manner not otherwise authorized. 

EFPs are granted for the purpose of 

allowing studies that provide 

information useful to the management 

of fisheries and are effective for a 

limited time. More information 

regarding EFPs is available from the 

NMFS Alaska Region website at http:// 

www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ram/ 

efp.htm. 

Essential fish habitat (EFH) is 

described for each target species in the 

proposed Arctic FMP. Once EFH is 

established, NMFS must be consulted 

on any federal action that may adversely 

impact EFH (Magnuson-Stevens Act 

section 305(b)(2)). The proposed EFH 

description for Arctic cod includes 

waters of the entire Arctic Management 

Area. Proposed EFH locations for snow 

crab and saffron cod are primarily in the 

Chukchi Sea. A description of nonfishing impacts on EFH is appended to 

the proposed Arctic FMP. This 

appendix describes potential adverse 

impacts of a variety of human activities 

that may occur in the Arctic 

Management Area and identifies 

possible mitigation measures to reduce 

such impacts. 

To assist in the ecosystem approach to 

fisheries management, the proposed 

Arctic FMP includes habitat 

descriptions for several ecosystem 

component species. The species 

selected for habitat descriptions 

represent forage species and potential 

future target species based on Bering 

Sea commercial fishing. 

The proposed Arctic FMP includes 

the latest information on the Arctic 

ecosystem and Chukchi and Beaufort 

Seas survey data. This information 

provides the basis for the MSY and OY 

specifications and informed the 

Council’s decision to recommend 

adoption of the Arctic FMP. 

Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP 

would move the northern boundary of 

the Crab FMP management area to 

Bering Strait. The Crab FMP northern 

boundary is currently located at Point 

Hope, north of Bering Strait and within 

the Arctic Management Area (Figure 24 

in this proposed rule). This change in 

the Crab FMP northern boundary would 

allow the management of all crab 

species in the Arctic Management Area 

to be under the Arctic FMP. This change 

in the geographic scope of management 

authority under the Crab FMP would 

ensure consistent management authority 

and application of the conservation and 

management measures in the Arctic 

FMP to crab throughout the Arctic 

Management Area. The Crab FMP defers 

crab management to the State of Alaska 

with federal oversight. The management 

of crab stocks in the Bering Sea is based 

on survey and catch information, which 

is not available in the Arctic 

Management Area. The Arctic FMP’s 

conservation and management measures 

were designed to address the unique 

Arctic marine environment and the 

paucity of information available for 

sustainable crab fisheries management. 

Proposed Regulatory Amendments 

The Council recommended, and the 

Secretary proposes, the following 

regulatory changes and additions to 50 

CFR part 679 to implement the Arctic 

FMP. 

1. Section 679.1 would be revised to 

add the title of the Arctic FMP and to 

describe the scope of the FMP as 

governing commercial fishing for Arctic 

fish in the Arctic Management Area by 

vessels of the United States. This 

addition would be necessary to expand 

the scope of the 50 CFR part 679 

regulations to include implementation 

of the Arctic FMP. 

2. Section 679.2 would be amended to 

add and revise definitions for the Arctic 

FMP and for Amendment 29 to the Crab 

FMP. A definition for ‘‘Arctic fish’’ 

would be added to distinguish in 

regulations the species under the 

authority of the Arctic FMP. The Arctic 

fish definition would include all fish as 

defined by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 

excluding Pacific halibut and Pacific 

salmon. The Magnuson-Stevens Act 

defines ‘‘fish’’ as finfish, mollusks, 

crustaceans, and all other forms of 

marine animal and plant life other than 

marine mammals and birds. Commercial 

fishing for Pacific halibut and Pacific 

salmon in the EEZ off Alaska is 

authorized by the IPHC and under the 

Salmon FMP, respectively, and would 

not be managed under the Arctic FMP. 

Creating this definition would allow for 

the initial prohibition of commercial 

fishing for Arctic fish, as would be 

prescribed by the Arctic FMP. 

A definition for the ‘‘Arctic 

Management Area’’ as described by the 

Arctic FMP would be added. The area 

would be described by text and would 

refer to Figure 24 in part 679. This 

definition is necessary to define the area 

within which the proposed Arctic FMP 

will manage commercial fishing. 

The definition for the ‘‘Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands Area’’ for the purposes 

of king and Tanner crab management 

would be revised. This revision would 

implement Amendment 29 to the Crab 

FMP by moving the northern boundary 

of the Crab FMP fishery management 

area from Point Hope southward to 

Bering Strait. This revision is necessary 

to eliminate management authority in 

the Arctic Management Area from the 

Crab FMP so that all crab that occur 

within the Arctic Management Area 

would be managed under the Arctic 

FMP. 

The definition of ‘‘commercial 

fishing’’ would be revised to include the 

catch of Arctic fish which is or is 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
27502 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

intended to be sold or bartered, 

excluding subsistence fishing. This 

revision is necessary to manage, and 

initially prohibit, commercial fishing for 

Arctic fish and to ensure subsistence 

fishing is not affected by such 

management of commercial fishing. 

The definition of ‘‘management area’’ 

would be revised to add the Arctic 

Management Area. This revision is 

necessary to list the Arctic Management 

Area with the Bering Sea and Aleutian 

Islands Management Area and the Gulf 

of Alaska. This revision would allow for 

fishery management within the scope of 

the regulations at § 679.1. 

The definition of ‘‘optimum yield’’ 

would be revised by adding Arctic fish 

and referencing § 679.20(a)(1) where the 

optimum yield for target species 

identified in the Arctic FMP would be 

specified. This revision is necessary to 

establish the optimum yield for the 

target species and to support the 

prohibition on commercial fishing of 

target species. 

The definition of ‘‘subsistence 

fishing’’ would be added to describe 

subsistence harvests in the Arctic 

Management Area of Arctic fish and 

Pacific salmon. Subsistence in terms of 

Pacific halibut is defined under 

regulations at 50 CFR 300.61 and would 

not be changed by this proposed 

definition. Subsistence fishing in the 

Arctic would be the harvest of Arctic 

fish and Pacific salmon for noncommercial, long-term, customary and 

traditional use necessary to maintain the 

life of the taker or those who depend 

upon the taker to provide them with 

such subsistence. This definition is 

consistent with the definition of 

subsistence in the Marine Mammal 

Protection Act. Adding this definition to 

50 CFR part 679 would allow the 

subsistence harvest practices to be 

differentiated from commercial harvest 

practices, which would be prohibited. 

This addition is necessary to ensure the 

continued subsistence harvest of Arctic 

fish and Pacific salmon in the Arctic 

Management Area while differentiating 

such activity from commercial fishing. 

NMFS is requesting comments specific 

to this definition and any suggestions on 

how subsistence fishing may be better 

defined. 

3. The introductory paragraph to 

§ 679.6 addressing EFPs would be 

revised to add Arctic fish. EFPs 

currently are available for only 

groundfish exempted fishing. Because 

the Arctic FMP includes species other 

than groundfish and the Council 

intended that EFPs may be available for 

any type of fish resource occurring in 

the Arctic Management Area, the 

application of EFPs would be revised to 

include Arctic fish. 

4. In § 679.7, a prohibition would be 

added to prevent commercial fishing for 

Arctic fish in the Arctic Management 

Area. A prohibition on commercial 

fishing for Arctic fish would be 

necessary to implement the Arctic FMP 

prohibition on commercial fishing on 

either target or ecosystem component 

species. NMFS currently works with the 

U.S. Coast Guard in surveillance of 

vessel activities in the Arctic 

Management Area. U.S. fishing vessels 

transiting Canadian waters are required 

to stow gear in a manner that makes the 

gear not readily available for fishing and 

easily visible during surveillance flights. 

NMFS may, in the future, consider this 

or other procedures that could facilitate 

enforcement of the commercial fishing 

prohibition in the Arctic Management 

Area and is interested in any public 

comment on possible future 

enforcement procedures. 

5. In § 679.20(a), the OY for 

commercial fishing for Arctic 

Management Area target species would 

be added. The OY for commercial 

fishing would be set at zero mt for each 

of the target species, as provided in the 

Arctic FMP. This revision is necessary 

to implement the OYs specified in the 

Arctic FMP. 

6. Figure 24 to part 679 would be 

added to show the Arctic Management 

Area as established by the Arctic FMP. 

This addition is necessary to clarify in 

the regulations the location of the Arctic 

Management Area and to differentiate 

the boundary of the Arctic Management 

Area from the Bering Sea and Aleutian 

Islands Management Area boundary 

shown in Figure 1 to part 679. The 

Chukchi Sea statistical area 400 would 

remain with the Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands statistical and 

reporting areas in Figure 1 to part 679 

until the Arctic FMP is amended to 

authorize a commercial fishery in the 

Arctic Management Area. The Council 

recommended not establishing subareas 

for fisheries management in the Arctic 

Management Area at this time due to the 

lack of information to inform the 

boundaries of such subareas. 

Classification 

Pursuant to sections 304(b)(1)(A) and 

305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 

NMFS Acting Assistant Administrator 

has determined that this proposed rule 

is consistent with and necessary to 

implement the Arctic FMP, and 

Amendment 29 to the Crab FMP, and in 

accordance with other provisions of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law, subject to further 

consideration after public comment. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

NMFS prepared an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis (IRFA), as required 

by section 603 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA 

describes the economic impact this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would have 

on small entities. Descriptions of the 

action, the reasons it is under 

consideration, and its objectives and 

legal basis, are contained at the 

beginning of this section in the 

preamble and in the SUMMARY section 

of the preamble. A summary of the 

analysis follows. A copy of this analysis 

is available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

This action would regulate 

commercial fishing for fish resources 

and not regulate subsistence, 

recreational, or personal use fishing in 

the action area. There is only one 

unverified, small, and poorly 

documented commercial fishery for red 

king crab in a portion of the Arctic 

Management Area in Kotzebue Sound. 

A survey of the Alaska Department of 

Fish and Game fish ticket database back 

to 1985 identified a single fish ticket for 

this fishery. The ticket was for a very 

small amount of red king crab delivered 

in the summer of 2005. However, to the 

extent that fishing has occurred, 

landings in this fishery may not always 

have been reported on official state 

landings records (i.e., not legally 

recorded). The waters in which this 

fishery may have occurred were set 

apart from other waters for reporting 

purposes in 2005. From 2005 to 2007, 

three or four persons acquired the State 

of Alaska K09X permits that are 

required to fish commercially in this 

area. With the exception of the single 

anomalous fish ticket cited above, there 

have been no commercial fish tickets 

from the action area during 2005 

through 2007. Thus, the number of 

permit holders, rather than the number 

of operations with fish tickets, is 

assumed to best represent the potential 

number of entities directly regulated by 

this action. All of these operations are 

believed to be small entities with annual 

gross revenues under $4 million. 

The Council considered four 

alternatives and three options for this 

proposed action. The options have no 

effect on directly regulated small 

entities as the options are limited to 

different scientific and administrative 

processes for developing management 

measures for fisheries. Each option 

resulted in the same effect, because each 

would implement a management 

framework that initially prohibits 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27503 

commercial fishing in the Arctic 

Management Area. 

Alternative 1 is the status quo which 

would allow for the potential for 

unregulated commercial fishing to occur 

in the Arctic Management Area. 

Alternative 1 does not meet the 

objectives of the action to sustainably 

manage commercial fisheries in the 

Arctic Management Area. 

Alternatives 3 and 4 would provide 

different mechanisms to provide for 

sustainable management of fish 

resources in the Arctic Management 

Area, but each alternative would 

exclude the small red king crab fishery 

in Kotzebue Sound from Arctic FMP 

management. Alternative 3 would have 

exempted the red king crab fishery from 

the Arctic FMP and from the Crab FMP 

while Alternative 4 would have 

provided for the continued management 

of the small red king crab fishery under 

the Crab FMP. Neither Alternative 3 nor 

Alternative 4 were chosen based on the 

lack of evidence of a currently existing 

small red king crab fishery in the 

Kotzebue Sound area and on the lack of 

information to ensure sustainable 

management of the potential red king 

crab stock in the Kotzebue Sound while 

not affecting subsistence use of the 

resource. Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 have 

no known impacts on directly regulated 

small entities. 

Alternative 2 was chosen as the 

preferred alternative as it fully meets the 

objective to provide sustainable 

management for all fish resources of the 

Arctic Management Area. Alternative 2, 

which implements a management 

framework that initially prohibits all 

commercial fishing in the Arctic 

Management Area, initially would 

prohibit future crab fishing that may 

otherwise take place in the small and 

poorly documented fishery in Kotzebue 

Sound, until stocks have been assessed 

and harvest specifications (e.g., OFL, 

ABC, TAC) are established. At that time, 

an amendment to the Arctic FMP could 

be proposed to authorize commercial 

fishing. Based on permit issuance, it is 

possible that two to four small entities 

may fish in the small red king crab 

fishery in Kotzebue Sound in a year. 

Permit issuance does not necessarily 

indicate fishing activity, and only one 

fish ticket exists from this fishery since 

1985. Income from this fishery is likely 

to be small. 

This regulation does not impose new 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements on the regulated small 

entities. 

The IRFA did not reveal any federal 

rules that duplicate, overlap, or conflict 

with the proposed action. 

Executive Order (E.O.) 13175 of 

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

the Executive Memorandum of April 29, 

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

American Indian and Alaska Native 

Policy of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce (March 30, 1995) outline the 

responsibilities of NMFS in matters 

affecting tribal interests. Section 161 of 

Public Law (P.L.) 108–199 (188 Stat. 

452), as amended by section 518 of P.L. 

109–447 (118 Stat. 3267), extends the 

consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 

to Alaska Native corporations. NMFS 

will contact tribal governments and 

Alaska Native corporations which may 

be affected by the proposed action, 

provide them with a copy of this 

proposed rule, and offer them an 

opportunity to consult. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679 

Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements. 

Dated: June 5, 2009. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Assistant Administrator For Regulatory 

Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

For reasons set out in the preamble, 

NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 

679 as follows: 

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA 

1. The authority citation for part 679 

continues to read as follows: 

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

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

2. In § 679.1, add paragraph (l) to read 

as follows: 

§ 679.1 Purpose and scope. 

* * * * * 

(l) Fishery Management Plan for Fish 

Resources of the Arctic Management 

Area. Regulations in this part govern 

commercial fishing for Arctic fish in the 

Arctic Management Area by vessels of 

the United States (see this subpart and 

subpart B of this part). 

3. In § 679.2, add in alphabetical order 

definitions for ≥Arctic fish’’, ‘‘Arctic 

Management Area’’, and ‘‘Subsistence 

fishing’’ and revise the definitions for 

the ‘‘Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Area’’, ‘‘Management area’’, and 

paragraph (2) of the definition of 

‘‘Optimum yield’’ and paragraph (3) to 

the definition of ‘‘Commercial fishing’’ 

to read as follows: 

§ 679.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Arctic fish means finfish, mollusks, 

crustaceans, and all other forms of 

marine animal and plant life other than 

marine mammals, birds, Pacific salmon, 

and Pacific halibut. 

Arctic Management Area, for 

purposes of regulations governing the 

Arctic Management Area fisheries, 

means all marine waters in the U.S. EEZ 

of the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas from 

3 nautical miles off the coast of Alaska 

or its baseline to 200 nautical miles 

offshore, north of Bering Strait (from 

Cape Prince of Wales to Cape Dezhneva) 

and westward to the 1990 U.S./Russia 

maritime boundary line and eastward to 

the U.S./Canada maritime boundary (see 

Figure 24 to this part). 

* * * * * 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area, 

for purposes of regulations governing 

the commercial king and Tanner crab 

fisheries in part 680 of this Chapter, 

means those waters of the EEZ off the 

west coast of Alaska lying south of the 

Chukchi Sea statistical area as described 

in the coordinates listed for Figure 1 to 

this part, and extending south of the 

Aleutian Islands for 200 nm west of 

Scotch Cap Light (164° 44′36′′ W. long). 

* * * * * 

Commercial fishing means: 

* * * * * 

(3) For purposes of Arctic fish, the 

resulting catch of fish in the Arctic 

Management Area which either is, or is 

intended to be, sold or bartered but does 

not include subsistence fishing for 

Arctic fish, as defined in this 

subsection. 

* * * * * 

Management area means any district, 

regulatory area, subpart, part, or the 

entire GOA, BSAI, or Arctic 

Management Area. 

* * * * * 

Optimum yield means: 

* * * * * 

(2) With respect to the groundfish and 

Arctic fisheries, see § 679.20(a)(1). 

* * * * * 

Subsistence fishing for purposes of 

fishing in the Arctic Management Area 

means the harvest of Arctic fish and 

Pacific salmon for non-commercial, 

long-term, customary and traditional 

use necessary to maintain the life of the 

taker or those who depend upon the 

taker to provide them with such 

subsistence. 

* * * * * 

4. In § 679.6, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 679.6 Exempted fisheries. 

(a) General. For limited experimental 

purposes, the Regional Administrator 

may authorize, after consulting with the 

Council, fishing for groundfish or 

fishing for Arctic fish in the Arctic 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1
27504 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Management Area in a manner that 

would otherwise be prohibited. No 

exempted fishing may be conducted 

unless authorized by an exempted 

fishing permit issued by the Regional 

Administrator to the participating vessel 

owner in accordance with the criteria 

and procedures specified in this section. 

Exempted fishing permits will be issued 

without charge and will expire at the 

end of a calendar year unless otherwise 

provided for under paragraph (e) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

5. In § 679.7, add paragraph (p) to 

read as follows: 

§ 679.7 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(p) Arctic Management Area. Conduct 

commercial fishing for any Arctic fish in 

the Arctic Management Area. 

6. In § 679.20, revise the introductory 

paragraph and paragraph (a)(1) to read 

as follows: 

§ 679.20 General limitations. 

This section applies to vessels 

engaged in directed fishing for 

groundfish in the GOA and/or the BSAI 

and to vessels engaged in commercial 

fishing for Arctic fish in the Arctic 

Management Area. 

(a) * * * 

(1) OY (i) BSAI and GOA. The OY for 

BSAI and GOA target species and the 

‘‘other species’’ category is a range or 

specific amount that can be harvested 

consistently with this part, plus the 

amounts of ‘‘nonspecified species’’ 

taken incidentally to the harvest of 

target species and the ‘‘other species’’ 

category. The species categories are 

defined in Table 1 of the specifications 

as provided in paragraph (c) of this 

section. 

(A) The OY for groundfish in the 

BSAI regulated by this section and by 

part 600 of this chapter is 1.4 million to 

2.0 million mt. 

(B) The OY for groundfish in the GOA 

regulated by this section and by part 600 

of this chapter is 116,000 to 800,000 mt. 

(ii) Arctic Management Area. The OY 

for each target fish species identified in 

the Fishery Management Plan for Fish 

Resources of the Arctic Management 

Area regulated by this section and by 

part 600 of this chapter is 0 mt. 

* * * * * 

7. Figure 24 is added to part 679 to 

read as follows: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

[FR Doc. E9–13628 Filed 6–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 


erowe on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS-1EP10jn09.030</GPH>