50106 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

gear on board cannot possess more than 

a total of 1,000 hooks, and no more than 

750 hooks can be rigged for fishing at 

any given time. 

Industry representatives have 

indicated that a total of 1,000 hooks is 

not enough on long trips to compensate 

for hook losses due to sharks’ biting 

hooks off and other general reasons. 

Under the current total possession limit, 

if more than 250 hooks are lost, a vessel 

either has to fish with fewer than 750 

hooks or acquire additional hooks from 

other vessels to maintain the maximum 

number of hooks in the water. A third 

option is for the vessel to end the trip 

and return to port; however, that 

reduces the vessel landings. Observer 

data indicates an average of over 250 

hooks were lost per trip from 2011 

through 2016; however, despite the total 

hook limit and the average hook loss, 

average landings of reef fish per longline 

trip increased over that time. 

The proposed rule would allow a 

vessel with a longline endorsement to 

possess an unlimited number of hooks, 

but it would not change the maximum 

number that can be rigged for fishing. 

Any bottom longline vessel that would 

increase the total number of hooks it 

possesses beyond 1,000 would do so 

only if there were an economic benefit 

of doing so. Removing the limit on the 

number of unrigged hooks that can be 

onboard is expected to improve fishers’ 

ability to maintain the maximum 

number of rigged hooks over the 

duration of a trip. There is insufficient 

information to estimate the number of 

vessels that may benefit from possessing 

more than 1,000 hooks and the 

magnitude of such a benefit. 

NMFS expects this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities, and an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required and 

none has been prepared. 

No duplicative, overlapping, or 

conflicting Federal rules have been 

identified. In addition, no new 

reporting, record-keeping, or other 

compliance requirements are introduced 

by this proposed rule. Accordingly, this 

proposed rule does not implicate the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622 

Bottom longline gear, Fisheries, 

Fishing, Gulf of Mexico, Reef fish. 

Dated: October 24, 2017. 

Samuel D. Rauch, III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE 

CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND 

SOUTH ATLANTIC 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 622 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 622.35, revise the first sentence 

of paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 622.35 Gear restricted areas. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Within the Gulf EEZ east of 85°30′ 

W. long., a vessel for which a valid 

eastern Gulf reef fish bottom longline 

endorsement has been issued that is 

fishing bottom longline gear or has 

bottom longline gear on board cannot 

possess more than 750 hooks rigged for 

fishing at any given time. * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–23460 Filed 10–27–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 170627602–7602–01] 

RIN 0648–BG98 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 

Fisheries Off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; 

Pacific Whiting; Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Fishery Management Plan; 

Amendment 21–3; Trawl 

Rationalization Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes this interim 

measure to change the management of 

the Pacific whiting at-sea sectors’ (i.e., 

the Mothership (MS) and Catcher/ 

Processor (C/P) sectors) allocations for 

darkblotched rockfish and Pacific ocean 

perch (POP) by managing the allocations 

as set-asides rather than as total catch 

limits. This rule also proposes 

regulations in accordance with 

Amendment 21–3 to the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Fishery Management Plan 

(PCGFMP) (see electronic access under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION). The 

proposed action would revise 

regulations so that higher than 

anticipated harvest of darkblotched 

rockfish or POP that exceeds a sector’s 

initial distribution of those species 

would not require automatic closure of 

one or more of the Pacific whiting at-sea 

sectors. This action is intended to 

reduce the risk of those sectors not 

attaining their respective Pacific whiting 

allocations based on the incidental 

catch of darkblotched rockfish or POP, 

when allowing the sector(s) to remain 

open would not exceed their respective 

annual catch limit (ACLs). This action 

would not change or increase the risk of 

exceeding darkblotched rockfish or POP 

ACL, as the proposed rule would also 

allow NMFS to close one or both of the 

MS and C/P sectors via automatic action 

if the species-specific set-aside amounts 

plus the available reserve for unforeseen 

catch events, known colloquially as the 

‘‘buffer,’’ are anticipated to be exceeded. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received no later than 

November 27, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2017–0102 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017- 

0102, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Barry A. Thom, Regional 

Administrator, West Coast Region, 

NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 

Seattle, WA 98115–0070, Attn: Miako 

Ushio. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

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

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ 

A’’ in the required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 50107 

Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF 

file formats only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Miako Ushio, phone: 206–526–4644, or 

email: miako.ushio@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access 

This proposed rule is accessible via 

the Internet at the Office of the Federal 

Register Web site at https://

www.federalregister.gov. Background 

information and documents are 

available at the NMFS West Coast 

Region Web site at http://

www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

fisheries/groundfish/index.html and at 

the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council’s Web site at http://

www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/fisherymanagement-plan/groundfishamendments-in-development/. On 

September 27, 2017, NMFS published a 

notice of availability of Amendment 

21–3 to the PCGFMP (82 FR 44984). 

Consistent with requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), NMFS must 

make a decision to approve, disapprove, 

or partially approve the amendment by 

December 26, 2017. Comments on the 

approvability of the amendment must be 

submitted to NMFS by November 26, 

2017. 

Background: Fishery 

Bycatch of rockfish species in the 

Pacific whiting fishery occurs at very 

low rates, but sporadically and 

unpredictably. Regulations at 50 CFR 

660.55 address the allocation of these 

groundfish. Darkblotched rockfish and 

POP are caught almost exclusively by 

vessels in the shorebased Individual 

Fishing Quota (IFQ) and at-sea Pacific 

whiting sectors of the groundfish 

fishery. NMFS declared both species 

overfished in 2000 and 1999, 

respectively, and both stocks are 

currently managed under rebuilding 

plans as a result. Populations of both 

species have shown dramatic 

improvement in recent years. 

Darkblotched rockfish was declared 

rebuilt in June 2017, and a draft 2017 

stock assessment indicates that POP 

may be rebuilt. They are currently 

managed as allocations, and NMFS 

automatically closes a fishery sector 

when it has reached its allocation of 

either species. 

In recent years, both at-sea sectors of 

the Pacific whiting fishery have 

exceeded their initial annual allocation 

of darkblotched rockfish (C/P sector in 

2011, and the MS sector in 2014). The 

latter resulted in an emergency Pacific 

Fishery Management Council (Council) 

meeting in order to re-open the fishery. 

The risk of an inseason closure of these 

sectors remains high, although the 

rebuilding ACLs of these rockfish are far 

from being reached. For example: The 

most recent fishing mortality estimates 

by NMFS’ Northwest Fisheries Science 

Center indicate that 44 and 38 percent 

of the darkblotched rockfish and POP 

ACLs, respectively, were caught in 

2015. While harvest of these species at 

a level below the ACL may rebuild 

stocks more quickly, there is a negative 

socioeconomic impact from preventing 

harvest of Pacific whiting, as intended 

in the PCGFMP. 

Background: Current Allocations Under 

Amendment 21 

The Council established allocations of 

darkblotched rockfish and POP for the 

at-sea sectors in Amendment 21 to the 

PCGFMP. When the Council considered 

allocation of these species, the analysis 

only incorporated data on catch through 

2005, and took the overfished status of 

the species into account when they set 

up the allocation structure. Ten years of 

additional data on bycatch in the at-sea 

sectors are now available. Additionally, 

six full years of the Shorebased IFQ 

Program (which was implemented in 

2011, 75 FR 60868) fishery information 

is available. This new information 

indicates that the stocks of both species 

are currently much healthier than they 

were at the time Amendment 21 was 

implemented. 

The Council’s Amendment 21 

allocation recommendation was based, 

in part, on the idea that the C/P and MS 

sectors could avoid early closures by 

moving to areas of lower rockfish 

encounter rates if they were 

approaching a bycatch allocation. 

However, experience has shown that 

this assumption was likely too 

simplistic. Despite the mitigating 

measures enacted by the C/P and MS 

coops, darkblotched rockfish bycatch 

remains particularly variable with the 

potential for rapid accumulation. The 

2014 closure of the MS sector provides 

an illustration; closure occurred after six 

hauls caught 4.5 mt of darkblotched 

rockfish, nearly 75 percent of their 2014 

allocation, with the bulk coming from 

three of the hauls. Some of the largest 

hauls were delivered to motherships so 

closely in time that feedback on the size 

of the catches from observers came too 

late for the MS coop to effectively 

respond. Prior to this ‘‘lightning strike’’ 

event, the sector had made 969 hauls 

and caught only 2.5 mt of darkblotched 

rockfish. After the sector was re-opened 

by an emergency meeting of the 

Council, the sector made 330 additional 

hauls that brought in over 14,500 mt of 

Pacific whiting and only 0.1 mt of 

additional darkblotched rockfish. The 

C/P sector has experienced even more 

rapid accumulations of darkblotched 

rockfish bycatch, and would have been 

closed late in the 2011 season if unused 

allocation had not been available from 

the MS sector, which had already 

completed fishing. These events 

indicate that the current management 

structure may be adversely impacting 

the at-sea sectors to a greater degree 

than was anticipated when the Council 

adopted the current allocation structure 

under Amendment 21, due to 

unpredictability and high volume of 

bycatch events. 

Background: Amendment 21–3 

The Council has discussed a variety of 

solutions to reducing the risk of closure 

of the Pacific whiting at-sea sectors 

prior to attainment of their Pacific 

whiting allocations, such as allowing 

transfer of rockfish quota between 

sectors, but it determined that those 

solutions are too complex to be 

analyzed and implemented in a timely 

manner. At its September 2016 meeting, 

the Council recommended the interim 

measure of amending the PCGFMP and 

implementing revised regulations, so 

that the amounts of darkblotched 

rockfish and POP allocated to the C/P 

and MS sectors are managed as setasides rather than as total catch limits. 

The Council also recommended giving 

NMFS inseason authority to 

automatically close one or both of the 

C/P and MS sectors in the event the 

species-specific set-aside amounts plus 

the available reserve for unforeseen 

catch events, known colloquially as the 

‘‘buffer,’’ are anticipated to be exceeded. 

This action would not revise 

allocations between sectors, which were 

set by Amendment 21 to the PCGFMP, 

and is intended to be an interim 

solution to address the immediate needs 

of the C/P and MS sectors. Long-term 

solutions are being reviewed by a 

Council-appointed Community 

Advisory Board as part of the 5-year 

review of the trawl rationalization 

program. A long-term solution to 

address the needs of the C/P and MS 

sectors will focus specifically on fairly 

and equitably revising the allocation 

between the trawl sectors, and among 

all the groundfish fishery sectors, while 

leaving any applicable stock rebuilding 

plans unaffected. 

Intent of the Action 

This proposed action is intended to 

substantially reduce the risk of the 

Pacific whiting at-sea sectors not 

attaining their respective Pacific whiting 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
50108 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

allocations based on the incidental 

catch of darkblotched rockfish or POP, 

when allowing the sector(s) to remain 

open would not exceed ACLs for these 

rebuilding stocks. It would revise 

regulations so that higher than 

anticipated harvest of darkblotched 

rockfish or POP that exceeds the initial 

distribution of those species to the atsea sectors will not require automatic 

closure of one or more of the at-sea 

sectors. 

The proposed rule would also allow 

NMFS to close one or both of the C/P 

and MS sectors of the Pacific whiting 

fishery via automatic action when the 

set-aside for that sector, plus the 

available reserve for unforeseen catch 

events, is reached or is expected to be 

reached for either darkblotched rockfish 

or POP. Because of near real-time 

monitoring by the C/P and MS Coop 

Programs, and the ability of those 

programs to respond quickly to 

changing fishery conditions, closures 

would occur before allocations to other 

fisheries or the ACLs are reached, thus 

limiting the potential effects and 

precluding potential negative biological 

and socioeconomic impacts of the 

proposed action. 

Classification 

Pursuant to section 304 (b)(1)(A) of 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS has 

preliminarily determined that this 

proposed rule is consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law, subject to further 

consideration after public comment. In 

making its final determination, NMFS 

will take into account the complete 

record, including the data, views, and 

comments received during the comment 

period. 

NMFS has determined that the 

proposed action would not have a 

significant effect, individually or 

cumulatively, on the human 

environment and does not involve any 

extraordinary circumstances listed in 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) Policy and 

Procedures for Compliance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act and 

Related Authorities (NOAA 

Administrative Order (NAO) 216–6A 

and the Companion Manual for NAO 

216–6A). For purposes of review under 

the National Environmental Protection 

Act, the proposed action is not part of 

any larger action, and can be reviewed 

independently. Furthermore, NMFS 

determined that the proposed action 

may appropriately be categorically 

excluded from the requirement to 

prepare either an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement, in accordance with the 

Companion Manual for NAO 216–6A. 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA), an agency does not need to 

conduct an Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Act Analysis or Final Regulatory 

Flexibility Act Analysis if a certification 

can be made that the proposed rule, if 

adopted, will not have a significant 

adverse economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, as 

defined below (5 U.S.C. 601). The Chief 

Counsel for Regulation of the 

Department of Commerce certified to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration that this 

proposed rule, if adopted, would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities as 

described in this document. 

The Small Business Administration 

has established the following size 

criteria for entities classified under 

North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS). Standards are 

expressed either in number of 

employees or annual receipts in 

millions of dollars. The number of 

employees or annual receipts indicates 

the maximum allowed for a concern and 

its affiliates to be considered small (13 

CFR 121.201). A fish and seafood 

merchant wholesaler primarily engaged 

in servicing the fishing industry is a 

small business if it employs 100 or 

fewer persons, on a full-time, part-time, 

temporary, or other basis, at all its 

affiliated operations worldwide (NAICS 

424460). A business primarily engaged 

in seafood product preparation and 

packaging is a small business if it is 

independently owned and operated, not 

dominant in its field of operation, and 

employs 750 or fewer persons on a full 

time, part time, temporary, or other 

basis, at all its affiliated operations 

worldwide (NAICS 311710). For 

purposes of this action, NMFS West 

Coast Region is applying the seafood 

processor standard to C/Ps and MS 

processor ships, which earn the majority 

of their revenue from selling processed 

seafood product. Under SBA size 

standards, a nonprofit organization is 

determined to be a small entity if (1) it 

is not dominant in its field of operation; 

and (2) for environmental, conservation, 

or professional organizations if 

combined annual receipts are $15 

million or less (NAICS 813312, 813920), 

and for other organizations if combined 

annual receipts are $7.5 million or less 

(NAICS 813319, 813410, 813910, 

813930, 813940, 813990). For RFA 

purposes only, NMFS has established a 

small business size standard for 

businesses, including their affiliates, 

whose primary industry is commercial 

fishing; a business primarily engaged in 

commercial fishing (NAICS 11411) is 

classified as a small business if it is 

independently owned and operated, is 

not dominant in its field of operation 

(including affiliates), and has combined 

annual receipts not in excess of $11 

million for all its affiliated operations 

worldwide (50 CFR 200.2). 

For the purposes of the RFA, small 

governmental jurisdictions such as 

governments of cities, counties, towns, 

townships, villages, school districts, or 

special districts are considered small 

jurisdictions if their populations are less 

than 50,000 (5 U.S.C. 601). 

A description and estimate of the 

number of small entities to which the 

rule applies and economic impacts on 

small entities, by entity size and 

industry. 

Four companies own seven permitted 

mothership vessels. Each year, three to 

six MS vessels participate in the Pacific 

whiting fishery. The average number of 

crew on each MS vessel is 104 

individuals. When considering 

operations in Alaska, none of the MSs 

would be considered small businesses. 

The 17 catcher vessels that 

participated in the mothership coop 

spend about 30 percent of their total 

annual fishing days processing in the 

Pacific whiting fishery. The majority of 

their time is spent in the Alaska Pollock 

fishery. Almost 90 percent of the overall 

round weight taken by these vessels is 

taken in Alaska, and approximately 11 

percent is taken in the Pacific whiting 

fishery. 

Three companies own nine permitted 

C/P fleet vessels. C/Ps are large vessels 

with an average crew of 131 individuals. 

Vessels in the C/P fleet spend about 

20 percent of their total days fishing in 

the Pacific whiting fishery and 80 

percent in the Alaska Pollock fishery. 

About 90 percent of the total round 

weigh taken by the C/Ps is taken in 

Alaska, and approximately 10 percent is 

taken in the Pacific whiting fishery. 

When considering operations from 

Alaska, none of the C/Ps would be 

considered small businesses. 

An explanation of the criteria used to 

evaluate whether the rule would impose 

‘‘significant impacts’’ on small entities. 

The proposed action is primarily 

administrative in nature, as it does not 

change the ACLs for either the Pacific 

whiting at-sea sectors or the allocations 

levels of darkblotched rockfish and 

POP. This action is not expected to 

significantly reduce profit for a 

substantial number of small entities, 

because there are no associated 

compliance requirements or costs. 

An explanation of the criteria used to 

evaluate whether the rule would impose 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 50109 

impacts on‘‘a substantial number’’ of 

small entities. 

Two MS permit/processor owning 

companies self-identified on the most 

recent (2016) permit renewal as small 

businesses, and the other two identified 

as not being small businesses. All three 

companies owning C/P permits and 

vessels responded as not being small 

entities on the most recent (2016) permit 

renewal form. Of the 35 MS catcher 

vessel permits, 34 were registered to 

vessels with the MS catcher vessel 

endorsement. 27 MS catcher vessel 

endorsed permits were owned by 22 

companies that self-identified as small 

entities, and the other 8 were owned by 

5 companies that self-identified as not 

being small entities. 

A description of, and an explanation 

of the basis for, assumptions used. 

Data collected from the trawl 

rationalization program Economic Data 

Collection was used for this analysis. 

No Federal rules have been identified 

that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with 

this action. There are no reporting, 

recordkeeping or other compliance 

requirements in the proposed rule. 

Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, 

this proposed rule was developed after 

meaningful consultation and 

collaboration with tribal officials from 

the area covered by the PCGFMP. 

Consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(b)(5)), one of the 

voting members of the Pacific Council is 

a representative of an Indian tribe with 

Federally recognized fishing rights from 

the area of the Council’s jurisdiction. 

This proposed rule would not alter 

the effects on species listed under the 

Endangered Species Act, or on marine 

mammals, over what has already been 

considered for the regulations governing 

the fishery. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 

Fisheries, Fishing, Indian Fisheries. 

Dated: October 24, 2017. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 660–-FISHERIES OFF WEST 

COAST STATES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 660 

continues to read as follows: 

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

U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 660.55, (c)(1)(i) introductory 

text, and (c)(1)(i)(A) and (B) are revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 660.55 Allocations. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(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. Distribute 

9 percent or 25 mt, whichever is greater, 

of the total trawl allocation of 

darkblotched rockfish to the Pacific 

whiting fishery (MS sector, C/P sector, 

and Shorebased IFQ sectors). The 

distribution of allocation of 

darkblotched rockfish to each of these 

sectors will be done pro rata relative to 

the sector’s allocation of the commercial 

harvest guideline for Pacific whiting. 

Darkblotched rockfish distributed to the 

MS sector and C/P sector are managed 

as set-asides at Table 2d, subpart C. The 

allocation of darkblotched rockfish to 

the Pacific whiting IFQ fishery 

contributes to the Shorebased IFQ 

allocation. After deducting allocations 

for the Pacific whiting fishery, the 

remaining trawl allocation is allocated 

to the Shorebased IFQ Program. 

(B) Pacific Ocean Perch (POP). 

Distribute 17 percent or 30 mt, 

whichever is greater, of the total trawl 

allocation of POP to the Pacific whiting 

fishery (MS sector, C/P sector, and 

Shorebased IFQ sector). The distribution 

of POP to each sector will be done pro 

rata relative to the sector’s allocation of 

the commercial harvest guideline for 

Pacific whiting. POP distributed to the 

MS sector and C/P sector are managed 

as set-asides, at Table 2d, subpart C. The 

allocation of POP to the Pacific whiting 

IFQ fishery contributes to the 

Shorebased IFQ allocation. After 

deducting allocations for the Pacific 

whiting fishery, the remaining trawl 

allocation is allocated to the Shorebased 

IFQ Program. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 660.60, add paragraph 

(d)(1)(vii) to read as follows: 

§ 660.60 Specifications and management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(vii) Close one or both the MS or 

C/P sector when the set-aside for that 

sector, described in Table 2d, subpart C, 

plus the available reserve for unforeseen 

catch events, described in Table 2a, 

subpart C, combined, is reached or is 

expected to be reached for either 

darkblotched rockfish or Pacific ocean 

perch. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 660.150, revise paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) and (ii) to read as follows: 

§ 660.150 Mothership (MS) Coop Program. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) Species with formal allocations to 

the MS Coop Program are Pacific 

whiting, canary rockfish and widow 

rockfish; 

(ii) Species with set-asides for the MS 

and C/P Coop Programs, as described in 

Table 2d, subpart C. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 660.160, revise paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i) and (ii) to read as follows: 

§ 660.160 Catcher/processor (C/P) Coop 

Program. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) Species with formal allocations to 

the C/P Coop Program are Pacific 

whiting, canary rockfish, and widow 

rockfish; 

(ii) Species with set-asides for the MS 

and C/P Programs, as described in Table 

2d, subpart C. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 660 Subpart C, revise Tables 2b 

and 2d to read as follows: 

* * * * * 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS
50110 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALSEP30OC17.000</GPH>

Table 2b. to Part 660, Subpart C - 2018, and Beyond, Allocations by Species or Species 

Group (Weight in Metric Tons) 

Species Area Fishery HG Trawl Non-trawl 

or ACT Percent Mt Percent Mt 

BOCACCIO a/ S. of 40°10' N. lat. 725.6 39 283.3 61 442.3 

COW COD alb/ S. of 40°10' N. lat. 4.0 36 1.4 64 2.6 

DARKBLOTCHED ROCKFISH c/ Coastwide 575.8 95 547.0 5 28.8 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH d/ N. of 40°10' N. lat. 231.6 95 220.0 5 11.6 

YELLOWEYE ROCKFISH a/ Coastwide 14.0 NA 1.1 NA 12.9 

Arrowtooth flounder Coastwide 11,644.9 95 11,062.6 5 582.2 

Big skate a/ Coastwide 436.6 95 414.8 5 21.8 

Canary rockfish a/e/ Coastwide 1,466.6 NA 1,060.1 NA 406.5 

Chilipepper S. of 40°10' N. lat. 2,461.1 75 1,845.8 25 615.3 

Dover sole Coastwide 48,406.3 95 45,986.0 5 2,420.3 

English sole Coastwide 7,324.2 95 6,958.0 5 366.2 

Lingcod N. of 40°10' N. lat. 2,831.8 45 1,274.3 55 1,557.5 

Lingcod S. of 40°10' N. lat. 1,135.0 45 510.8 55 624.3 

Longnose skate a/ Coastwide 1,853.0 90 1,667.7 10 185.3 

Longspine thomyhead N. of34"27' N. lat. 2,700.2 95 2,565.2 5 135.0 

Pacific cod Coastwide 1,091.0 95 1,036.4 5 54.5 

Pacific whiting Coastwide TBD 100 TBD 0 TBD 

P etrale sole Coastwide 2,772.1 95 2,633.5 5 138.6 

Sable fish N. of36°N. lat. N/A See Table 2c 

Sable fish S. of 36° N. lat. 1,939.0 42 814.4 58 1,124.6 

Shortspine thomyhead N. of34"27' N. lat. 1,639.0 95 1,557.0 5 81.9 

Shortspine thomyhead S. of 34"27' N. lat. 855.7 NA 50.0 NA 805.7 

Splitnose rockfish S. of 40°10' N. lat. 1,750.3 95 1,662.8 5 87.5 

Stary flounder Coastwide 1,271.7 50 635.9 50 635.9 

Widow rockfish f/ Coastwide 12,437.3 91 11,317.9 9 1,119.4 

Yellowtail rockfish N. of 40°10' N. lat. 4,972.1 88 4,375.4 12 596.6 

Minor Shelf Rockfish a/ N. of 40°10' N. lat. 1,963.2 60 1,181.8 40 781.4 

Minor Slope Rockfish N. of 40°10' N. lat. 1,688.9 81 1,368.0 19 320.9 

Minor Shelf Rockfish a/ S. of 40°10' N. lat. 1,576.8 12 192.37 88 1,384.4 

Minor Slope Rockfish S. of 40°10' N. lat. 688.8 63 433.9 37 254.9 

Other Flatfish Coastwide 7,077.0 90 6,369.3 10 707.7 

a/ Allocations decided through the biennial specification process. 

b/ The cowcod fishery harvest guideline is further reduced to an ACT of 4.0 mt. 

c/ Consistent with regulations at §660.55(c), 9 percent (49.2 mt) of the total trawl allocation for darkblotched rockfish is allocated to 

the Pacific whiting fishery, as follows: 20.7 mt for the Shorebased IFQ Program, 11.8 mt is managed as a set-aside for the MS sector, 

and 16.7 mt is managed as a set-aside for the C/P sector. The tonnage calculated here for the Pacific whiting IFQ fishery contributes 

to the total shore based trawl allocation, which is found at §660.140(d)(1)(ii)(D). 

d/ Consistent with regulations at §660.55(c), 17 percent (37.4 mt) of the total trawl allocation for POP is allocated to the Pacific 

whiting fishery, as follows: 15.7 mt for the Shorebased IFQ Program, 9.0 mt is managed as a set-aside the MS sector, and 12.7 mt is 

managed as a set-aside for the C/P sector. The tonnage calculated here for the Pacific whiting IFQ fishery contributes to the total 

shorebased trawl allocation, which is found at §660.140(d)(1)(ii)(D). 

e/ Canary rockfish is allocated approximately 72 percent to trawl and 28 percent to non-trawl. 46 mt of the total trawl allocation of 

canary rockfish is allocated to the MS and C/P sectors, as follows: 30 mt for the MS sector, and 16 mt for the C/P sector. 

f/ Consistent with regulations at §660.55(c), 10 percent (1,131.8 mt) of the total trawl allocation for widow rockfish is allocated to the 

Pacific whiting fishery, as follows: 475.4 mt for the Shorebased IFQ Program, 271.6 mt for the MS sector, and 384.8 mt for the C/P 

sector. The tonnage calculated here for the Pacific whiting IFQ fishery contributes to the total shore based trawl allocation, which is 

found at §660.140(d)(1)(ii)(D). 
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 50111 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALSEP30OC17.001</GPH>

Table 2d. To Part 660, Subpart C-At-Sea Whiting Fishery Annual Set-Asides, 2018 and 

Beyond 

Species or Species Complex Area Set Aside (mt) 

BOCACCIO S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

COW COD S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

DARKBLOTCHED ROCKFISH a/ Coastwide 28.5 

PACIFIC OCEAN PERCH b/ N. of40°10N lat 21.7 

YELLOWEYE ROCKFISH Coastwide 0 

Arrowtooth flounder Coastwide 70 

Canary rockfish c/ Coastwide Allocation 

Chilipepper S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Dover sole Coastwide 5 

English sole Coastwide 5 

Lingcod N. of 40°10 N. lat. 15 

Lingcod S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Longnose skate Coastwide 5 

Longspine thomyhead N. of34°27 N. lat. 5 

Longspine thomyhead S. of34°27N.lat. NA 

Minor Nearshore Rockfish N. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Minor Nearshore Rockfish S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Minor Shelf Rockfish N. of 40°10 N. lat. 35 

Minor Shelf RockfiSh S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Minor Slope RockfiSh N. of 40°10 N. lat. 100 

Minor Slope RockfiSh S. of 40°10 N. lat. NA 

Other Fish Coastwide NA 

Other Flatfish Coastwide 20 

Pacific cod Coastwide 5 

Pacific Halibut d/ Coastwide 10 

Pacific Whiting Coastwide Allocation 

Petrale sole Coastwide 5 

Sable fish N. of36° N. lat. 50 

Sable fiSh S. of36° N. lat. NA 

Shortspine thomyhead N. of34°27 N. lat. 20 

Shortspine thomyhead S. of34°27N.lat. NA 

Starry flounder Coastwide 5 

Widow RockfiSh c/ Coastwide Allocation 

Yellowtail rockfiSh N. of 40°10 N. lat. 300 

a/ Darkblotched rockfiSh will be managed as set-asides for the MS and C/P sectors based on prorata distribution described at §660.55(c)(l)(i)(A), resuhing in a set-aside of ll.8 mt for the MS 

sector, and a set-aside of and 16.7 mt for C/P sector. 

b/ POP will be managed as set-asides for the MS and C/P sectors based on pro-rata distribution 

described at §660.55(c)(l)(i)(B), resuhing in a set-aside of 9.0 mt for the MS sector, and a setaside of and 12.7 mt for the C/P sector. 

c/ See Table l.b., to Subpart C, tor the at-sea whiting allocations tor these species. 

d/ As stated in §660.55 (m), the Pacific halibut set-aside is 10 mt, to acconunodate bycatch in the 

at-sea Pacific whiting fisheries and in the shore based trawl sector south of 40°10 N. lat. (estimated 

to be approximately 5 mt each). 
50112 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 208 / Monday, October 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–23456 Filed 10–27–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 665 

[Docket No. 170120106–7999–01] 

RIN 0648–XF186 

Pacific Island Fisheries; 2017 Annual 

Catch Limits and Accountability 

Measures 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed specifications; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes annual catch 

limits (ACLs) for Pacific Island 

crustacean, precious coral, and 

territorial bottomfish fisheries, and 

accountability measures (AMs) to 

correct or mitigate any overages of catch 

limits. The proposed ACLs and AMs 

would be effective for fishing year 2017. 

The proposed ACLs and AMs support 

the long-term sustainability of fishery 

resources of the U.S. Pacific Islands. 

DATES: NMFS must receive comments 

by November 14, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2017–0012, by either of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/ 

#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017- 

0012, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

• Mail: Send written comments to 

Michael D. Tosatto, Regional 

Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands 

Region (PIR), 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg. 

176, Honolulu, HI 96818. 

Instructions: NMFS may not consider 

comments sent by any other method, to 

any other address or individual, or 

received after the end of the comment 

period. All comments received are a 

part of the public record and will 

generally be posted for public viewing 

on www.regulations.gov without change. 

All personal identifying information 

(e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential 

business information, or otherwise 

sensitive information submitted 

voluntarily by the sender will be 

publicly accessible. 

NMFS prepared environmental 

analyses that describe the potential 

impacts on the human environment that 

would result from the proposed ACLs 

and AMs. Copies of the environmental 

analyses and other supporting 

documents are available at 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Ellgen, NMFS PIR Sustainable 

Fisheries, 808–725–5173. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fisheries 

in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone 

(EEZ, or Federal waters) around the U.S. 

Pacific Islands are managed under 

archipelagic fishery ecosystem plans 

(FEPs) for American Samoa, Hawaii, the 

Pacific Remote Islands, and the Mariana 

Archipelago (Guam and the 

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands (CNMI)). A fifth FEP covers 

pelagic fisheries. The Western Pacific 

Fishery Management Council (Council) 

developed the FEPs, and NMFS 

implemented them under the authority 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). 

Each FEP contains a process for the 

Council and NMFS to specify ACLs and 

AMs; that process is codified at Title 50, 

Code of Federal Regulations, Section 

665.4 (50 CFR 665.4). The regulations 

require NMFS to specify, every fishing 

year, an ACL for each stock and stock 

complex of management unit species 

(MUS) in an FEP, as recommended by 

the Council and considering the best 

available scientific, commercial, and 

other information about the fishery. If a 

fishery exceeds an ACL, the regulations 

require the Council to take action, 

which may include reducing the ACL 

for the subsequent fishing year by the 

amount of the overage, or other 

appropriate action. 

NMFS proposes to specify ACLs for 

the crustacean and precious corals MUS 

in American Samoa, Guam, the CNMI, 

and Hawaii, and the bottomfish MUS in 

American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI 

for fishing year 2017. The fishing year 

for each fishery began on January 1 and 

ends on December 31, except for 

precious coral fisheries, which began 

July 1 and ends on June 30 next year. 

In this action, NMFS is not proposing 

to specify 2017 ACLs for Hawaii Kona 

crab and non-Deep 7 bottomfish, or 

coral reef ecosystem MUS in all island 

areas. This is because NMFS has new 

information for those MUS that may 

require additional environmental 

analyses to support the Council’s 

recommendations. NMFS would 

propose those ACL specifications in a 

separate action(s). In addition, NMFS 

specified the 2017–2018 ACL and AM 

for Hawaii Deep 7 bottomfish in June 

2017 (82 FR 29778, June 30, 2017). 

NMFS based the proposed 

specifications for crustacean, precious 

coral, and territorial bottomfish MUS on 

recommendations from the Council at 

its 164th meeting held October 21–22, 

2015, its 166th meeting held June 6–10, 

2016, and its 170th meeting held June 

19–22, 2017. For this action, the Council 

recommended 36 ACLs: Seven each in 

American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI, 

and 15 in Hawaii. The Council also 

recommended that NMFS specify multiyear ACLs and AMs in fishing years 

2015–2018. NMFS proposes to 

implement the specifications for each 

year separately, prior to each fishing 

year. NMFS previously implemented 

the 2016 specifications for bottomfish, 

crustacean, precious coral, and coral 

reef ecosystem MUS (82 FR 18716, April 

21, 2017). All of the proposed 2017 

ACLs in this action would be the same 

as those specified in 2016 (82 FR 18716, 

April 21, 2017). NMFS also proposes to 

specify the same AMs as it did in 2016. 

Data from these fisheries for fishing 

year 2016 indicate that catches from 

each fishery in 2016 did not exceed the 

fishery’s ACL, with the exception of the 

CNMI slipper lobsters. NMFS proposes 

to specify an ACL of 60 lb for CNMI 

slipper lobsters, which is the same ACL 

that NMFS implemented in 2016, even 

though the average three-year catch for 

this fishery exceeded the ACL. For 

CNMI slipper lobsters, there is no OFL 

or maximum sustainable yield (MSY) 

estimate. Prior to 2016, there were only 

three years (2007–2009) of available 

catch information for slipper lobsters in 

the CNMI. Therefore, in 2014, at its 

116th meeting, the SSC recommended a 

proxy for calculating the ACL for the 

CNMI slipper lobster stock complex. 

Using a catch-to-habitat-based proxy 

comparing data from the Hawaii slipper 

lobster fishery (the only area that has 

specifically documented harvesting of 

slipper lobster), the Council 

recommended setting an ACL for the 

CNMI slipper lobsters for 2016–2018 at 

a level equal to ABC, that is, 60 lb. 

In 2015, NOAA started a pilot 

program to improve commercial vendor 

reporting in the CNMI. The Territory 

Science Initiative was designed to 

improve the data vendors submit to 

commercial receipt books, which track, 

among other stocks, the slipper lobster 

fishery. NMFS staff trained vendors to 

complete receipt books and incorporate 

the process into their day-to-day 

business routines. The program proved 

to be effective, and in 2016, the CNMI 

commercial receipt book program 

documented 304 lb of slipper lobsters 

sold by local fishermen. In comparison, 


nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with PROPOSALS