[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8298-8312]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3910]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 000211039-0039-01; I.D. 111899A]


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of 
Alaska; Final 2000 Harvest Specifications for Groundfish

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final 2000 harvest specifications for groundfish and associated 
management measures.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS announces final 2000 harvest specifications, reserves, 
allocations, and apportionments for groundfish, Pacific halibut 
prohibited species catch (PSC) limits, and assumed Pacific halibut 
mortality rates for the groundfish fisheries of the Gulf of Alaska 
(GOA). This action is necessary to establish harvest specifications for 
GOA groundfish for the 2000 fishing year and to conserve and manage the 
groundfish resources in the GOA, and is intended to implement the goals 
and objectives contained in the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish 
of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP).

DATES: The final 2000 harvest specifications are effective at noon on 
February 15, 2000 through 2400 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), 
December 31, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Environmental Assessment (EA), the Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) prepared for this action, and 
the Final Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation Report (SAFE report), 
dated November 1999, are available from the North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council, 605 West 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 
99501-2252, or by calling 907-271-2809.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Pearson, 907-481-1780, fax 907-
481-1781, or [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679 implement the FMP and govern 
the groundfish fisheries in the GOA. The North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP and NMFS approved it 
under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens

[[Page 8299]]

Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). General 
regulations that also pertain to the U.S. fisheries appear at 50 CFR 
part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
    NMFS announces for the 2000 fishing year: (1) Specifications of 
total allowable catch (TAC) amounts for each groundfish species 
category in the GOA, and reserves; (2) apportionments of reserves; (3) 
allocations of the sablefish TAC to vessels using hook-and-line and 
trawl gear; (4) apportionments of pollock TAC among regulatory areas, 
seasons, and allocations for processing between inshore and offshore 
components; (5) allocations for processing of Pacific cod TAC between 
inshore and offshore components; (6) Pacific halibut PSC limits; (7) 
fishery and seasonal apportionments of the Pacific halibut PSC limits; 
and (8) Pacific halibut assumed discard mortality rates. A discussion 
of each of these measures follows.
    Regulations implementing the FMP establish the process of 
determining TACs for groundfish species in the GOA. Pursuant to 
Sec. 679.20(a)(2), the sum of the TACs for all species must fall within 
the combined optimum yield (OY) range of 116,000-800,000 metric tons 
(mt) established for these species at Sec. 679.20(a)(1)(ii).
    The Council met from October 12 through 18, 1999, and developed 
recommendations for proposed 2000 TAC specifications for each species 
category of groundfish on the basis of the best available scientific 
information. The Council also recommended associated management 
measures pertaining to the 2000 fishing year. The Council proposed 
rolling over all the 1999 final specifications for 2000, pending an 
update of the preliminary 1999 SAFE report to include new information 
collected during 1999 and revised stock assessments to be incorporated 
in the final SAFE report. Pursuant to Sec. 679.20(c)(1)(ii), the 
proposed 2000 harvest specifications for the GOA groundfish fishery 
were published in the Federal Register on December 13, 1999 (64 FR 
69457), and comments were accepted through January 12, 2000. NMFS 
received one letter of comment on the proposed 2000 GOA specifications, 
which is responded to in the following text. Interim TAC and PSC 
amounts equal to one-fourth of the proposed amounts were published in 
the Federal Register on January 3, 2000 (65 FR 65). The interim TACs 
for pollock subsequently were revised by an emergency interim rule 
effective January 20, 2000 (65 FR 3892, January 25, 2000), that 
implemented revised final reasonable and prudent alternatives (RFRPAs) 
to avoid the likelihood the pollock fisheries off Alaska will 
jeopardize the continued existence of the western population of Steller 
sea lions or adversely modify its critical habitat. The emergency 
interim rule implements three types of management measures for the 
pollock fisheries of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management 
Area (BSAI) and GOA: (1) Measures to temporally disperse fishing 
effort, (2) measures to spatially disperse fishing effort, and (3) 
measures to provide full protection from pollock fisheries that compete 
with Steller sea lions for prey in waters immediately adjacent to 
rookeries and important haulouts.
    The interim TACs were revised further under a second emergency 
interim rule effective January 20, 2000 (65 FR 4520, January 28, 2000), 
that established GOA groundfish and PSC limits for specified catcher 
vessels authorized to harvest BSAI pollock under the American Fisheries 
Act (AFA).
    With the exception of the pollock harvest specifications 
implementing the RFRPAs and the AFA harvest limits, the final 2000 
groundfish harvest specifications and PSC limits contained in this 
action supersede the interim 2000 specifications.
    The Council met December 7 through 12, 1999, to review the best 
available scientific information concerning groundfish stocks, and to 
consider public testimony regarding 2000 groundfish fisheries. The best 
available scientific information is contained in the current SAFE 
report, dated November 1999. The SAFE report includes the most recent 
information concerning the status of groundfish stocks based on the 
most recent catch data, survey data, and biomass projections using 
alternative modeling approaches or assumptions. The Council's GOA Plan 
Team prepared the SAFE report and presented it to the Council and the 
Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) and Advisory Panel 
(AP) at the December 1999 Council meeting. The Plan Team's 
recommendations for acceptable biological catch (ABC) levels and 
overfishing levels (OFL) are contained in the SAFE report along with 
the rationale supporting those recommendations.
    For establishment of the ABCs and TACs, the Council considered the 
ecological, socioeconomic, and ecosystem information in the SAFE 
report, recommendations from its SSC and AP, as well as public 
testimony. The SSC adopted the OFL recommendations from the Plan Team, 
which were provided in the SAFE report, for all groundfish species 
categories. The SSC also adopted the ABC recommendations from the Plan 
Team, which were provided in the SAFE report, for all of the groundfish 
species categories, except pollock in the combined Western, Central, 
West Yakutat (W/C/WYK) area.
    The SSC did not adopt the Plan Team's recommendation of ABC for 
pollock in the W/C/WYK area of the GOA. The Plan Team's recommendation 
was to roll over the 1999 ABCs for the area in consideration of: (1) 
The pollock stock biomass level is in a downward trend, (2) projected 
year 2000 biomass will be at an all time low, and (3) high variability 
about the 1999 trawl survey abundance estimate. The SSC shared these 
concerns with the Plan Team, but recommended that the year 2000 ABC be 
explicitly based on the current stock assessment. The SSC recommended 
setting the 2000 ABC for the W/C/WYK area at an adjusted F45 percent 
exploitation strategy, resulting in an ABC of 93,540 mt for the area.
    The Council adopted the SSC's ABC and AP's TAC recommendations for 
all species except sablefish. The SSC's ABC recommendation for 
sablefish area apportionments were based on the Plan Team's 5-year 
weighted average of hook- and-line survey relative abundance. The AP's 
recommendations were to set TAC equal to ABC in these areas. The 
Council recommended ABCs and TACs based on an alternative model for 
apportionment of ABC among management areas, which includes commercial 
fishery as well as survey data. The fishery and survey data were 
combined by computing a weighted average of the survey and fishery 
estimates, with the weight inversely proportional to the variability of 
each data source. The Council's recommendation for sablefish area 
apportionments also takes into account the prohibition on the use of 
trawl gear in the Southeast Outside (SEO) District of the Eastern GOA 
and makes available 5 percent of the combined Eastern GOA ABCs to trawl 
gear for use as incidental catch in other directed groundfish fisheries 
in the West Yakutat (WYK) District.
    NMFS agrees with the Council's approach for the 2000 harvest 
specifications. NMFS stock assessment scientists believe that the use 
of unbiased commercial fishery data reflecting catch-per-unit effort 
provides a desirable input for stock distribution assessments. The use 
of commercial fishery data would need to be evaluated annually to 
assure that unbiased

[[Page 8300]]

information is included in stock distribution models.
    As in previous years the Plan Team, SSC, and Council recommended 
that total removals of Pacific cod from the GOA not exceed ABC 
recommendations. Accordingly, the Council recommended that the TACs be 
adjusted downward from the ABCs by amounts equal to the 2000 guideline 
harvest levels (GHL) established for Pacific cod by the State of Alaska 
(State) for a State-managed fishery in State waters. The effect of the 
State's GHL on the Pacific cod TAC is discussed in greater detail 
below.
    The Council's recommended ABCs, listed in Table 1, reflect harvest 
amounts that are less than the specified overfishing amounts. The sum 
of 2000 ABCs for all groundfish is 448,010 mt, which is lower than the 
1999 ABC total of 532,590 mt.

2000 Harvest Specifications

Specifications of TAC and Reserves

    The Council recommended TACs equal to ABCs for pollock, deep-water 
flatfish, rex sole, sablefish, shortraker and rougheye rockfish, other 
slope rockfish, northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf 
rockfish, thornyhead rockfish, demersal shelf rockfish, and Atka 
mackerel. The Council recommended TACs less than the ABC for Pacific 
cod, flathead sole, shallow-water flatfish, and arrowtooth flounder 
(Table 1).
    The TAC for pollock has decreased in the combined W/C/WYK areas of 
the GOA from 94,590 mt in 1999 to 93,540 mt in 2000. It has increased 
from 6,330 mt in 1999 to 6,460 mt in 2000 in the SEO District of the 
Eastern GOA. The apportionment of TAC in the W/C/WYK area of the GOA 
reflects the current biomass distribution.
    Under the January 25, 2000, emergency interim rule implementing the 
RFRPAs for Steller sea lions (65 FR 3892), the annual pollock TAC in 
the Western and Central GOA is divided into four seasonal 
apportionments. Thirty percent of the annual TAC in the Western and 
Central Regulatory Areas in the GOA is apportioned to the A season 
(January 20 through March 1) in the Western GOA, Shelikof Strait, and 
Statistical Areas 620 and 630 (outside of Shelikof Strait) in the 
Central GOA (Sec. 679.20(a)(5)(ii)); 15 percent to the B season (March 
15 through May 31) in the Western GOA, Shelikof Strait, and Statistical 
Areas 620 and 630 (outside of Shelikof Strait) in the Central GOA; 30 
percent to the C season (August 20 through September 15) in the Western 
GOA and Statistical Areas 620 and 630 in the Central GOA; and 25 
percent to the D season (October 1 through November 1) in the Western 
GOA and Statistical Areas 620 and 630 in the Central GOA 
(Sec. 679.23(d)(3)(i) through (iv)). The Shelikof area (defined at 
Sec. 679.22(a)(3)(iii)(B)) apportionments during the A and B seasons 
are derived from the estimate of pollock biomass (489,900 mt) in the 
critical habitat of the Shelikof Strait divided by the pollock biomass 
(933,000 mt) estimated for the entire GOA multiplied by the A and B 
seasonal apportionments of pollock TAC (i.e., 30 percent of the annual 
TACs (27,361 mt) in the A season and 15 percent of the annual TACs in 
the B season (13,680 mt) in the GOA (Sec. 679.22(a)(3)(iii)(C))). These 
specifications under the emergency rule expire July 19, 2000. NMFS 
anticipates that a final rule permanently implementing these management 
measures will be in effect prior to the expiration of the emergency 
rule. This final rule would revise the annual specifications to 
establish pollock harvest specifications for the remainder of 2000 
consistent with the RFRPAs.
    NMFS has concluded that these harvest specifications are not an 
irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources that has the 
effect of foreclosing the formulation or implementation of reasonable 
and prudent alternatives that might be developed as part of the 
biological opinion that is currently under development for the BSAI and 
GOA groundfish fishery management plans. This conclusion is based on 
the best scientific and commercial data available on population 
dynamics, fish stock dynamics, fishery management measures, the 
population dynamics of groundfish stocks in the Aleutian Islands, 
Bering Sea, and Gulf of Alaska, and interactions between these 
fisheries and the endangered western population of Steller sea lions. 
In reaching the conclusion that the year 2000 groundfish fisheries in 
the BSAI and GOA can proceed as approved at the levels contained in the 
final harvest specifications for the BSAI and GOA, and as dictated by 
the groundfish FMPs for the BSAI and GOA, NMFS considered factors 
pertinent to section 7(d) of the ESA.
    Our concerns about the effect of these groundfish fisheries on the 
Steller sea lions' likelihood of survival and recovery in the wild has 
resulted from apparent competition between some of the fisheries and 
sea lions when and where sea lions forage. The total number or biomass 
of the groundfish species (e.g., pollock, Pacific cod, Atka mackerel, 
and flatfish) has not been, and does not appear to be, an issue with 
these fish stocks: the high recruitment rates, relatively short life-
histories, and migratory patterns of these species throughout the BSAI 
and GOA should allow these species to recover relatively quickly. The 
substantial basis for this assumption comes from the scientific 
literature on sustainable harvest rates (e.g., Beddington and Cooke, 
1983; Clarke, 1991; Sissenwine and Shepard, 1987). The issue is whether 
the way these fisheries are managed allows the fish stocks to recover 
and become available again to foraging Steller sea lions before the 
fishery can compete with the sea lions.
    The spatial and temporal distribution of the groundfish fisheries, 
as opposed to the allowable catch, has been the essence of concern for 
Steller sea lions, which was also expressed by the National Research 
Council in its 1996 review of these issues in the Bering Sea (National 
Research Council, Committee on the Bering Sea Ecosystem: The Bering Sea 
Ecosystem, 1996). The need for spatial and temporal distribution has 
also been the foundation for the development and implementation of 
management measures that avoid competition between the fisheries and 
foraging Steller sea lions.
    The TAC-setting process, specified in the FMPs, is very 
conservative with respect to harvest rate by internationally accepted 
scientific standards (e.g., Precautionary Approach to Capture Fisheries 
and Species Introductions, FAO, 1996; Code of Conduct for Responsible 
Fisheries, FAO, 1995). Harvesting of the TACs established by this 
process is not expected to deplete groundfish resources. Conducting a 
fishery in 2000 should not irreversibly or irretrievably alter the 
ability of these groundfish species to recover from the proposed 
harvest. A fishery in 2000 would not alter recruitment rates for any of 
these species and it would not alter their ability to redistribute 
throughout the area of concern in a way that would reduce their 
availability for foraging Steller sea lions. While the biological 
opinion will examine the TAC setting process, we do not believe that 
the 2000 TAC specifications will threaten the survival and recovery of 
Steller sea lions or diminish the value of designated critical habitat 
for sea lions. Groundfish species should be able to recover quickly 
enough after the 2000 harvest to effect reasonable and prudent 
alternatives that avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing Steller sea 
lions or adversely modifying critical habitat designated for them.
    The conduct of this fishery, therefore, would not foreclose any of 
our options to develop and implement reasonable

[[Page 8301]]

and prudent alternatives that avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the 
sea lions. NMFS intends to complete the comprehensive biological 
opinion, which will evaluate all activities that govern the groundfish 
fisheries authorized and managed under the current fishery management 
plans, prior to the start of the 2001 fisheries. These same activities 
are also being evaluated in the programmatic supplemental environmental 
impact statement that we currently are drafting.
    The 2000 Pacific cod TAC is affected by the State's developing 
fishery for Pacific cod in State waters in the Central and Western GOA, 
as well as Prince William Sound. The SSC, AP, and Council recommended 
that the sum of all State and Federal water Pacific cod removals should 
not exceed the ABC. Accordingly the Council recommended that Pacific 
cod TAC be reduced from ABC levels to account for State GHLS in each 
regulatory area of the GOA so that the TAC for: (1) The Eastern GOA be 
lower than the ABC by 1,340 mt, (2) the Central GOA be lower than the 
ABC by 8,385 mt, and (3) the Western GOA be lower than the ABC by 6,875 
mt.
    Subsequent to the Council's December 1999 meeting, harvests of 
Pacific cod in State waters of the Kodiak District in the Central GOA 
increased to over 90 percent of the 1999 GHL for the area. This results 
in an unanticipated increase in the 2000 GHL for the Kodiak District 
(i.e., from 10 percent to 12.5 percent of the Central GOA ABC for a 
total of 21.75 percent of the Central GOA ABC). NMFS is adjusting the 
Council's recommended Pacific cod TAC downward for the Central GOA from 
35,615 mt to 34,080 mt to reflect the increased 2000 GHLs in the 
Central GOA. These amounts reflect the increased percentages the State 
has established for GHLs in these areas. In the Western GOA, the State 
Pacific cod GHL has increased from 20 percent in 1999, to 25 percent in 
2000. The Pacific cod GHL in the Central GOA has increased from 19.25 
percent in 1999 to 21.75 percent in 2000. The State's Pacific cod GHL 
of 1,340 mt for PWS is based on 25 percent of the 2000 Eastern GOA ABC.
    The FMP specifies that the amount for the ``other species'' 
category is calculated as 5 percent of the combined TAC amounts for 
target species. The GOA-wide ``other species'' TAC is 14,215 mt, which 
is 5 percent of the sum of the combined TAC amounts for the target 
species. The sum of the TACs for all GOA groundfish is 298,510 mt, 
which is within the OY range specified by the FMP. The sum of the TACs 
is lower than the 1999 TAC sum of 306,535 mt. NMFS has reviewed the 
Council's recommended TAC specifications and apportionments and hereby 
approves these specifications under Sec. 679.20(c)(3)(ii). The 2000 
ABCs, TACs, and OFLs are shown in Table 1. The initial TAC amounts 
shown for Pacific cod reflect the reserve of 20 percent of the TACs in 
this fishery.

Table 1.--2000 ABCs, TACs, Initial TACs (Pacific Cod Only) and Overfishing Levels of Groundfish for the Western/
 Central/West Yakutat (W/C/WYK), Western (W), Central (C), Shelikof Strait, Eastern (E) Regulatory Areas, and in
       the West Yakutat (WYK), Southeast Outside (SEO), and Gulf-Wide (GW) Districts of the Gulf of Alaska
                                           [Values are in metric tons]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Species                  Area 1          ABC          TAC        Initial        TAC      Overfishing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollock: 2
    Shumagin...................           (610)       29,290       29,290  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Chirikof...................           (620)       17,430       17,430  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Kodiak.....................           (630)       22,930       22,930  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Shelikof...................  ..............       21,550       21,550  ...........  ...........  ...........
    WYK........................           (640)        2,340        2,340  ...........  ...........  ...........
Subtotal.......................         W/C/WYK       93,540       93,540  ...........  ...........      130,760
    SEO........................           (650)        6,460        6,460  ...........  ...........        8,610
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
          Total................  ..............      100,000      100,000  ...........  ...........      139,370
                                                ================================================================
Pacific cod: 3
                                              W       27,500       20,625       16,500  ...........  ...........
                                              C       43,550       34,080       27,264  ...........  ...........
                                              E        5,350        4,010        3,208  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............       76,400       58,715       46,972  ...........      102,000
                                                ================================================================
Flatfish 4 (deep-water)........               W          280          280  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C        2,710        2,710  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK        1,240        1,240  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        1,070        1,070  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        5,300        5,300  ...........  ...........        6,980
                                                ================================================================
Rex sole 4.....................               W        1,230        1,230  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C        5,660        5,660  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK        1,540        1,540  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        1,010        1,010  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        9,440        9,440  ...........  ...........       12,300
                                                ================================================================
Flathead sole..................               W        8,490        2,000  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C       15,720        5,000  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK        1,440        1,440  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO          620          620
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 8302]]

 
      Total....................  ..............       26,270        9,060  ...........  ...........       34,210
                                                ================================================================
Flatfish 5 (shallow-water).....               W       19,510        4,500  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C       16,400       12,950  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK          790          790  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        1,160        1,160  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............       37,860       19,400  ...........  ...........       45,330
                                                ================================================================
Arrowtooth flounder............               W       16,160        5,000  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C       97,710       25,000  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK       23,770        2,500  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        7,720        2,500  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............      145,360       35,000  ...........  ...........      173,910
                                                ================================================================
Sablefish 6....................               W        1,840        1,840  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C        5,730        5,730  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK        2,207        2,207  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        3,553        3,553
Subtotal.......................               E        5,760        5,760  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............       13,330       13,330  ...........  ...........       16,660
                                                ================================================================
Pacific 7 ocean perch..........               W        1,240        1,240  ...........  ...........        1,460
                                              C        9,240        9,240  ...........  ...........       10,930
                                            WYK          840          840  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        1,700        1,700  ...........  ...........  ...........
Subtotal.......................               E  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........        3,000
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............       13,020       13,020  ...........  ...........       15,390
                                                ================================================================
Short raker/rougheye 8.........               W          210          210  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C          930          930  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              E          590          590  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        1,730        1,730  ...........  ...........        2,510
                                                ================================================================
Other rockfish  10.............               W           20           20  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C          740          740  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK          250          250  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO        3,890        3,890  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        4,900        4,900  ...........  ...........        6,390
                                                ================================================================
Northern Rockfish  12..........               W          630          630  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C        4,490        4,490  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              E          N/A          N/A  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        5,120        5,120  ...........  ...........        7,510
                                                ================================================================
Pelagic shelf rockfish 13......               W          550          550  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C        4,080        4,080  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            WYK          580          580  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                            SEO          770          770  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        5,980        5,980  ...........  ...........        9,040
                                                ================================================================
Thornyhead rockfish............               W          430          430  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              C          990          990  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                              E          940          940  ...........  ...........  ...........
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  ..............        2,360        2,360  ...........  ...........        2,820
                                                ================================================================
Demersal shelf rockfish 11.....             SEO          340          340  ...........  ...........          420
Atka mackerel..................              GW          600          600  ...........  ...........        6,200
Other 14 species...............              GW       15 N/A       14,215  ...........  ...........          N/A
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 8303]]

 
      Total 16.................  ..............      448,010      298,510  ...........  ...........     581,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Regulatory areas and districts are defined at Sec.  679.2.
2 Under the emergency interim rule (65 FR 3892, January 25, 2000) pollock is apportioned in the Western/Central
  Regulatory areas to the Shelikof Strait conservation area (defined at Sec.  679.22(b)(2)(iii)(B)) in the A and
  B seasons only (Sec.  679.22(b)(2)(iii)) in accordance with Sec.  679.22(b)(2)(iii)(C) and the remainder to
  the three statistical areas in the combined Western/Central Regulatory Area outside the Shelikof Strait based
  on the relative distribution of pollock biomass at 42 percent, 25 percent, and 33 percent in Regulatory areas
  610, 620, and 630 respectively. During the C and D seasons pollock is apportioned based on the relative
  distribution of pollock biomass at 42 percent, 25 percent, and 33 percent in Regulatory Areas 610, 620, and
  630 respectively. These seasonal apportionments are shown in Tables 3 and 4. In the Eastern Regulatory Area,
  pollock is not divided into seasonal allowances.
3 Pacific cod is allocated 90 percent for processing by the inshore component and 10 percent for processing by
  the offshore component. Component allocations of the initial TACs are shown in Table 5.
4 ``Deep-water flatfish'' means Dover sole, Greenland turbot, and deepsea sole.
5 ``Shallow-water flatfish'' means flatfish not including ``deep-water flatfish,'' flathead sole, rex sole, or
  arrowtooth flounder.
6 Sablefish is allocated to trawl and hook-and-line gears (Table 2).
7 ``Pacific ocean perch'' means Sebastes alutus.
8 ``Shortraker/rougheye rockfish'' means Sebastes borealis (shortraker) and S. aleutianus (rougheye).
9 ``Other rockfish'' in the Western and Central Regulatory Areas and in the West Yakutat District means slope
  rockfish and demersal shelf rockfish. The category ``other rockfish'' in the Southeast Outside District means
  Slope rockfish.
10 ``Slope rockfish'' means Sebastes aurora (aurora), S. melanostomus (blackgill), S. paucispinis (bocaccio), S.
  goodei (chilipepper), S. crameri (darkblotch), S. elongatus (greenstriped), S. variegatus (harlequin), S.
  wilsoni (pygmy), S. babcocki (redbanded), S. proriger (redstripe), S. zacentrus (sharpchin), S. jordani
  (shortbelly), S. brevispinis (silvergrey), S. diploproa (splitnose), S. saxicola (stripetail), S. miniatus
  (vermilion), and S. reedi (yellowmouth). In the Eastern GOA only, ``slope rockfish'' also includes northern
  rockfish, S. polyspinous.
11 ``Demersal shelf rockfish'' means Sebastes pinniger (canary), S. nebulosus (china), S. caurinus (copper), S.
  maliger (quillback), S. helvomaculatus (rosethorn), S. nigrocinctus (tiger), and S. ruberrimus (yelloweye).
12 ``Northern rockfish'' means Sebastes polyspinis.
13 ``Pelagic shelf rockfish'' means Sebastes ciliatus (dusky), S. entomelas (widow), and S. flavidus
  (yellowtail).
14 ``Other species'' means sculpins, sharks, skates, squid, and octopus. The TAC for ``other species'' equals 5
  percent of the TACs of target species.
15 N/A means not applicable.
16 The total ABC is the sum of the ABCs for target species.

Apportionment of Reserves

    Regulations implementing the FMP require 20 percent of each TAC for 
pollock, Pacific cod, flatfish, and the ``other species'' category be 
set aside in reserves for possible apportionment at a later date 
(Sec. 679.20(b)(2)). For the preceding 12 years, including 1999, NMFS 
reapportioned all of the reserves in the final harvest specifications 
except for Pacific cod. Beginning in 1997, NMFS retained the Pacific 
cod reserve. NMFS proposed reapportionment of all reserves for 2000, 
except for Pacific cod, in the proposed GOA groundfish specifications 
published in the Federal Register on December 13, 1999 (64 FR 69457). 
NMFS received no public comments on the proposed reapportionments. For 
2000, NMFS has reapportioned all of the reserve for pollock, flatfish, 
and ``other species.'' NMFS is retaining the Pacific cod reserve at 
this time to provide for a management buffer to account for excessive 
fishing effort and/or incomplete or late catch reporting. In recent 
years, unpredictable increases in fishing effort and harvests, 
uncertainty of incidental catch needs in other directed fisheries 
throughout the year, and untimely submission and revision of weekly 
processing reports have resulted in early and late closures of the 
Pacific cod fishery. NMFS believes that retention of the Pacific cod 
reserve to provide for TAC management difficulties later in the year is 
a conservative approach that will lead to a more orderly fishery and 
provide greater assurance that incidental catch of Pacific cod may be 
retained throughout the year. Specifications of TAC shown in Table 1 
reflect apportionment of reserve amounts for pollock, flatfish species, 
and ``other species.'' Table 1 also lists the initial TACs for Pacific 
cod, which reflect the withholding of the Pacific cod TAC reserve.

Allocations of the Sablefish TACs to Vessels Using Hook-and-Line 
and Trawl Gear

    Under Sec. 679.20(a)(4)(i) and (ii), sablefish TACs for each of the 
regulatory areas and districts are allocated to hook-and-line and trawl 
gear. In the Western and Central Regulatory Areas, 80 percent of each 
TAC is allocated to hook-and-line gear and 20 percent of each TAC is 
allocated to trawl gear. In the Eastern Regulatory Area, 95 percent of 
the TAC is allocated to hook-and-line gear and 5 percent is allocated 
to trawl gear. The trawl gear allocation in the Eastern Regulatory Area 
may only be used to support incidental catch of sablefish in directed 
fisheries for other target species. In recognition of the trawl ban in 
the SEO District of the Eastern Regulatory Area, the Council 
recommended that 5 percent of the combined Eastern GOA sablefish be 
allocated to trawl gear in the WYK District and the remainder to 
vessels using hook-and-line gear. In the SEO District, 100 percent of 
the sablefish TAC is allocated to vessels using hook-and-line gear. 
This recommendation results in an allocation of 288 mt to trawl gear 
and 1,919 mt to hook-and-line gear in the WYK District. Table 2 shows 
the allocations of the 2000 sablefish TACs between hook-and-line gear 
and trawl gear.

[[Page 8304]]



 Table 2.--2000 Sablefish TAC Specifications in the Gulf of Alaska and Allocations Thereof to Hook-and-Line and
                                                   Trawl Gear
                                           [Values are in metric tons]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Hook-and-line          Trawl
                     Area/district                              TAC           apportionment      apportionment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western................................................              1,840              1,472                368
Central................................................              5,730              4,584              1,146
West Yakutat...........................................              2,207              1,919                288
Southeast Outside......................................              3,553              3,553                  0
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................             13,330             11,528              1,802
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apportionments of Pollock TAC Among Seasons and Regulatory Areas, 
and Allocations for Processing by Inshore and Offshore Components

    In the GOA, pollock is apportioned by season and area, and is 
further allocated for processing by inshore and offshore components. 
Under the emergency interim rule published January 25, 2000 (65 FR 
3892), implementing the RFRPAs, the annual pollock TAC specified for 
the Western and Central Regulatory Areas of the GOA is apportioned into 
four seasonal allowances of 30, 15, 30, and 25 percent, respectively 
(Sec. 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(B)). As established by Sec. 679.23(d)(2), the A, 
B, C, and D season allowances are available from January 20 through 
March 1, from March 15 through May 31, from August 20 through September 
15, and from October 1 through November 1 respectively.
    To prevent localized depletions of pollock outside the Shelikof 
Strait conservation area (defined at Sec. 679.20(b)(2)(iii)(B)), the 
emergency rule also establishes seasonal TACs of pollock within 
Shelikof Strait during the A and B seasons. The derivation of these 
harvest limits is explained here and listed in Tables 1 and 3.
    The remainder of the A and B seasonal allowances of pollock TAC in 
the Western and Central Regulatory Areas are apportioned among 
statistical area 610, and statistical areas 620 and 630 outside 
Shelikof Strait conservation area in proportion to the distribution of 
pollock biomass as determined by the four most recent NMFS surveys. 
Pollock TACs in the Western and Central Regulatory Areas in the C and D 
seasons are apportioned among statistical areas 610, 620, and 630 in 
proportion to the distribution of pollock biomass as determined by the 
four most recent NMFS surveys. Within any fishing year, underage or 
overage of a seasonal allowance may be added to or subtracted from 
subsequent seasonal allowances in a manner to be determined by the 
Regional Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, provided that a revised 
seasonal allowance does not exceed 30 percent of the annual TAC 
apportionment (Sec. 679.20(a)(5)(ii)(C)). The WYK and SEO District 
pollock TACs of 2,340 mt and 6,460 mt, respectively, are not allocated 
seasonally.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(a)(6)(ii) require that 100 percent of 
the pollock TAC in all regulatory areas and all seasonal allowances 
thereof be allocated to vessels catching pollock for processing by the 
inshore component after subtraction of amounts that are projected by 
the Regional Administrator to be caught by, or delivered to, the 
offshore component incidental to directed fishing for other groundfish 
species. The amount of pollock available for harvest by vessels 
harvesting pollock for processing by the offshore component is that 
amount actually taken as bycatch during directed fishing for groundfish 
species other than pollock, up to the maximum retainable bycatch 
amounts allowed under regulations at Sec. 679.20(e) and (f). At this 
time, these bycatch amounts are unknown and will be determined during 
the fishing year.
    The biomass distribution of pollock in the Western and Central GOA, 
area apportionments, and seasonal apportionments for the A and B 
seasons are summarized in Table 3 and for the C and D seasons in Table 
4, except that amounts of pollock for processing by the inshore and 
offshore component are not shown.

 Table 3.--Distribution of Pollock in the Western and Central Regulatory Areas of the Gulf of Alaska (W/C GOA);
Biomass Distribution, Area Apportionments, and Seasonal Allowances of Annual TAC for the A and B Seasons in 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Seasonal allowances of annual
                                                      Biomass       2000 annual                 TAC
                Statistical area                      percent           TAC      -------------------------------
                                                                                      A (30%)         B (15%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shelikof........................................            52.5          21,550          14,366           7,183
Shumagin (610)..................................            11.9          29,290           5,465           2,732
Chirikof \1\ (620)..............................            20.0          17,430           3,252           1,626
Kodiak \1\ (630)................................            15.6          22,930           4,278           2,139
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................           100.0          91,200          27,361         13,680
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A and B seasonal allowances in the Chirikof and Kodiak Districts are outside the Shelikof Strait defined at
  Sec.  679.20(b)(2)(iii)(B).


[[Page 8305]]


 Table 4.--Distribution of Pollock in the Western and Central Regulatory Areas of the Gulf of Alaska (W/C GOA);
Biomass Distribution, Area Apportionments, and Seasonal Allowances of Annual TAC for the C and D Seasons in 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Seasonal allowances of annual
                                                      Biomass       2000 annual               TAC \1\
                Statistical area                      percent           TAC      -------------------------------
                                                                                      C (30%)         D (25%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shelikof........................................  ..............          21,550          Not Apportioned
Shumagin (610)..................................              25          29,290          11,506           9,588
Chirikof (620)..................................              42          17,430           6,847           5,706
Kodiak (630)....................................              33          22,930           9,008           7,506
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................             100          91,200          27,361         22,800
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emergency interim regulations (65 FR 3892; January 25, 2000) for pollock in the GOA which specify A and B
  season dates and harvest limitations, expire July 19, 2000, before the C and D seasons are scheduled to begin.
  Therefore, the C and D seasons are not authorized unless either the emergency rule is extended, or proposed
  and final rulemaking is completed.

Allocations for Processing of Pacific Cod TAC Between Inshore and 
Offshore Components

    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(a)(6)(iii) require that the TAC 
apportionment of Pacific cod in all regulatory areas be allocated to 
vessels catching Pacific cod for processing by the inshore and offshore 
components. Ninety percent of the Pacific cod TAC in each regulatory 
area is allocated to vessels catching Pacific cod for processing by the 
inshore component. The remaining 10 percent of the TAC is allocated to 
vessels catching Pacific cod for processing by the offshore component. 
These allocations of the Pacific cod initial TAC for 2000 are shown in 
Table 5. The Pacific cod reserves are not included in Table 5.

  Table 5.--2000 Allocation (Metric Tons) of Pacific Cod Initial TAC Amounts in the Gulf of Alaska; Allocations
                              for Processing by the Inshore and Offshore Components
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Component allocation
                   Regulatory area                        Initial TAC    --------------------------------------
                                                                            Inshore (90%)      Offshore (10%)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western..............................................             16,500             14,850              1,650
Central..............................................             27,264             24,538              2,726
Eastern..............................................              3,208              2,887                321
      Total..........................................             46,972             42,275              4,697
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pacific Halibut PSC Mortality Limits

    Under Sec. 679.21(d), annual Pacific halibut PSC limits are 
established and apportioned to trawl and hook-and-line gear and may be 
established for pot gear.
    As in 1999, the Council recommended that pot gear, jig gear, and 
the hook-and-line sablefish fishery be exempted from the non trawl 
halibut limit for 2000. The Council recommended these exemptions 
because of the low halibut bycatch mortality experienced in the pot 
gear fisheries (41 mt in 1999) and because of the 1995 implementation 
of the sablefish and halibut Individual Fishing Quota program, which 
allows legal-sized halibut to be retained in the sablefish fishery. 
Halibut mortality for the jig gear fleet cannot be estimated because 
these vessels do not carry observers. However, halibut mortality is 
assumed to be very low given the small amount of fish harvested by this 
gear type (186 mt in 1999) and the assumed high survival rate of any 
halibut that are incidentally taken and discarded.
    As in 1999, the Council recommended a hook-and-line halibut PSC 
mortality limit of 300 mt. Ten mt of this limit are apportioned to the 
demersal shelf rockfish fishery in the Southeast Outside District. The 
fishery is defined at Sec. 679.21(d)(3) and historically has been 
apportioned this amount in recognition of its small scale harvests. 
Observer data are not available to verify actual bycatch amounts given 
most vessels are less than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA and are exempt from 
observer coverage. The remainder of the PSC limit is seasonally 
apportioned among the non-sablefish hook-and-line fisheries as shown in 
Table 6.
    The Council continued to recommend a trawl halibut PSC mortality 
limit of 2,000 mt. The PSC limit has remained unchanged since 1989. 
Regulations at Sec. 679.21(d)(3)(iii) authorize separate apportionments 
of the trawl halibut PSC limit between trawl fisheries for deep-water 
and shallow-water species. Regulations at Sec. 679.21(d)(5) authorize 
seasonal apportionments of halibut PSC limits. For 2000, the Council 
recommended delaying the release of the third seasonal apportionment of 
trawl halibut PSC limits to July 4 to facilitate inseason management of 
directed trawl fisheries, particularly rockfish.
    NMFS concurs in the Council's recommendations described and listed 
in Table 6. The following types of information as presented in, and 
summarized from, the current SAFE report, or as otherwise available 
from NMFS, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, the International 
Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC), or public testimony, were 
considered:

(A) Estimated Halibut Bycatch in Prior Years

    The best available information on estimated halibut bycatch is data 
collected by observers during 1999. The calculated halibut bycatch 
mortality by trawl, hook-and-line, and pot gear through December 25, 
1999, is 2,127 mt, 348 mt, and 41 mt, respectively, for a total halibut 
mortality of 2,516 mt.
    Halibut bycatch restrictions seasonally constrained trawl gear 
fisheries during all quarters of the 1999 fishing year. Trawling for 
the deep-water fishery complex was closed for the first quarter on 
March 24 (64 FR 14840, March 29, 1999), for the second

[[Page 8306]]

quarter on April 25 (64 FR 22815, April 28, 1999), for the third 
quarter on July 21 (64 FR 40293, July 26, 1999), and for the fourth 
quarter on October 16, 1999 (64 FR 56473, October 20, 1999). The 
shallow-water fishery complex was closed for the first quarter on March 
20 (64 FR 14155, March 24, 1999), for the second quarter on April 1 (64 
FR 16654, April 6, 1999), for the third quarter on July 4 (64 FR 35080, 
June 30, 1999), and for the fourth quarter on October 16, 1999 (64 FR 
56473, October 20, 1999). The three seasonal apportionments of the 
hook-and-line halibut bycatch mortality limit resulted in closures of 
hook-and-line fisheries for groundfish other than sablefish and 
demersal shelf rockfish on April 24 (64 FR 22814, April 28, 1999), May 
18 (64 FR 27476, May 20, 1999), and on September 1 (64 FR 46317, August 
25, 1999).

(B) Expected Changes in Groundfish Stocks

    At its December 1999 meeting, the Council adopted higher ABCs for 
rex sole, flathead sole, sablefish, shortraker and rougheye rockfish, 
northern rockfish, pelagic shelf rockfish, and thornyhead rockfish than 
those established for 1999. The Council adopted lower ABCs for pollock, 
Pacific cod, deep-water flatfish, shallow-water flatfish, arrowtooth 
flounder, Pacific ocean perch, other rockfish, and demersal shelf 
rockfish than those established for 1999. More information on these 
changes is included in the final SAFE report (November 1999) and in the 
Council and SSC minutes.

(C) Expected Changes in Groundfish Catch

    The total of the 2000 TACs for the GOA is 298,510 mt, a decrease of 
3 percent from the 1999 TAC total of 306,535 mt. Those fisheries for 
which the 2000 TACs are lower than in 1999 are pollock (decreased to 
100,000 mt from 100,920 mt), Pacific cod (decreased to 58,715 mt from 
67,835 mt), deep-water flatfish (decreased to 5,300 mt from 6,050 mt), 
other rockfish (decreased to 4,900 mt from 5,270 mt), demersal shelf 
rockfish (decreased to 340 mt from 560 mt), and other species 
(decreased to 14,215 mt from 14,600 mt). Those species for which the 
2000 TACs are higher than in 1999 are rex sole (increased to 9,440 mt 
from 9,150 mt), flathead sole (increased to 9,060 mt from 9,040 mt), 
shallow-water flatfish (increased to 19,400 mt from 18,770 mt), 
sablefish (increased to 13,330 mt from 12,700 mt), Pacific ocean perch 
(increased to 13,020 mt from 12,590 mt), shortraker and rougheye 
rockfish (increased to 1,730 mt from 1,590 mt), northern rockfish 
(increased to 5,120 mt from 4,990 mt), pelagic shelf rockfish 
(increased to 5,980 mt from 4,880 mt), and thornyhead rockfish 
(increased to 2,360 mt from 1,990 mt).

(D) Current Estimates of Halibut Biomass and Stock Condition

    The stock assessment for 1999 conducted by the IPHC indicates total 
exploitable biomass estimates of Pacific halibut in the BSAI and GOA 
management areas together to be 135,172 mt using an age-specific 
estimate for 2000. In the age-specific estimate, the assumption is that 
the selection of fish by the survey is based primarily on the age of 
the fish and reflects the availability of fish of different ages on the 
grounds.
    New information used in the stock assessment in 1999 includes 
updated assessment methods and results, IPHC hook-and-line surveys, 
NMFS trawl survey catches of halibut, and updated information on 
removals of halibut from all sources. The only significant change to 
the assessment in 1999 was introducing an increase in the hook-and-line 
survey catchability, beginning with the 1993 survey data, to account 
for a change in bait used between the 1980s and 1990s. Estimates of 
exploitable biomass for 2000 are substantially lower than last year's 
(227,366 mt) because of the allowance for increased catchability, lower 
mean weights at age, and recent declines in recruitment. In IPHC 
management areas 2C and 3A the cumulative effect is a 35-and 40-percent 
reduction, respectively.
    Recruitment has declined from the high levels of the 1985 to 1995 
period, and size at age continues to decline. Numerical abundance is 
still quite high relative to the levels of 1975 or 1985, but biomass 
levels are not as high and the prospect is for a continuing decline as 
relatively strong year-classes pass out of the stock and relatively 
weak ones enter (and grow more slowly). Additional information on the 
Pacific halibut stock assessment may be found in the final SAFE report 
(November 1999).

(E) Other Factors

    Potential impacts of expected fishing for groundfish on halibut 
stocks, as well as methods available for, and costs of, reducing 
halibut bycatch in the groundfish fisheries were discussed in the 
proposed 2000 specifications (64 FR 69457, December 13, 1999). That 
discussion is not repeated here.

Fishery and Seasonal Apportionments of the Halibut PSC Limits

    Under Sec. 679.21(d)(5), NMFS seasonally apportions the halibut PSC 
limits based on recommendations from the Council. The FMP requires that 
the following information be considered by the Council in recommending 
seasonal apportionments of halibut PSC limits: (a) Seasonal 
distribution of halibut; (b) seasonal distribution of target groundfish 
species relative to halibut distribution; (c) expected halibut bycatch 
needs on a seasonal basis relative to changes in halibut biomass and 
expected catches of target groundfish species; (d) expected bycatch 
rates on a seasonal basis; (e) expected changes in directed groundfish 
fishing seasons; (f) expected actual start of fishing effort; and (g) 
economic effects of establishing seasonal halibut allocations on 
segments of the target groundfish industry.
    The publication of the final 1999 groundfish and PSC specifications 
(64 FR 12094, March 11, 1999) summarizes Council findings with respect 
to each of the FMP considerations set forth here. The Council 
reiterated its findings with respect to these FMP considerations and 
recommended no change from the 1999 seasonal apportionments. Pacific 
halibut PSC limits, and apportionments thereof, are presented in Table 
6. Regulations at Sec. 679.21(d)(5)(iii) and (iv) specify that any 
overages or shortfalls in a seasonal apportionment of a PSC limit will 
be deducted from or added to the next respective seasonal apportionment 
within the 2000 season.

[[Page 8307]]



  Table 6.--Final 2000 Pacific Halibut PSC Limits, Allowances, and Apportionments. The Pacific Halibut PSC Limit for Hook-and-Line Gear is Allocated to
                                         the Demersal Shelf Rockfish (DSR) Fishery and Fisheries Other Than DSR
                           [Values are in metric tons. The hook-and-line sablefish fishery is exempt from halibut PSC limits.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Trawl gear                                                               Hook-and-line gear
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Other than DSR                                      DSR
                 Dates                         Amount      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Dates                  Amount                  Dates                  Amount
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan. 1-Mar. 31.........................        600   (30%)  Jan. 1-May 17.............        250   (86%)  Jan. 1-Dec. 31............         10  (100%)
Apr. 1-July 3..........................        400   (20%)  May 18-Aug. 31............         15    (5%)  ..........................  .................
July 4-Sept. 30........................        600   (30%)  Sept. 1-Dec. 31...........         25    (9%)  ..........................  .................
Oct. 1-Dec. 31.........................        400   (20%)  ..........................  .................  ..........................  .................
      Total............................      2,000  (100%)  ..........................        290  (100%)  ..........................         10  (100%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulations at Sec. 679.21(d)(3)(iii) authorize apportionments of 
the trawl halibut PSC limit to a deep-water species complex, comprised 
of sablefish, rockfish, deep-water flatfish, rex sole and arrowtooth 
flounder; and a shallow-water species complex, comprised of pollock, 
Pacific cod, shallow-water flatfish, flathead sole, Atka mackerel, and 
``other species.'' The apportionment for these two fishery complexes is 
presented in Table 7.

Table 7.--Final 2000 Apportionment of Pacific Halibut PSC Trawl Limits Between the Trawl Gear Deep-Water Species
                                  Complex and the Shallow-Water Species Complex
                                           [Values are in metric tons]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Season                               Shallow-water        Deep-water        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jan. 20-Mar. 31..............................................                500                100          600
Apr. 1-July 3................................................                100                300          400
July 4-Sept. 30..............................................                200                400          600
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
Subtotal:
  Jan. 20-Sept. 30...........................................                800                800        1,600
  Oct. 1-Dec. 31.............................................  .................  .................          400
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total................................................  .................  .................       2,000
No apportionment between shallow-water and deep-water fishery complexes during the 4th quarter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Halibut Discard Mortality Rates

    The Council recommended that the revised halibut discard mortality 
rates recommended by the IPHC be adopted for purposes of monitoring 
halibut bycatch mortality limits established for the 2000 groundfish 
fisheries. NMFS concurs in the Council's recommendation. Most of the 
IPHC's assumed halibut mortality rates were based on an average of 
mortality rates determined from NMFS observer data collected during 
1997 and 1998. Rates for 1997 and 1998 were lacking for some fisheries, 
so rates from the most recent years were used. For fisheries where 
insufficient mortality data are available, the mortality rate of 
halibut caught in the Pacific cod fishery for that gear type was 
recommended as a default rate. The majority of the assumed mortality 
rates recommended for 2000 differ slightly from those used in 1999, 
except for the pot gear groundfish fisheries discard mortality rate 
that increased to 14 percent for 2000 from 6 percent in 1999. The 
Council recommended that a single discard mortality rate be used in 
2000 for the catcher vessel and the catcher/processor vessel fleets in 
the trawl flathead sole fishery. The recommended rates for hook-and-
line targeted fisheries range from 11 to 17 percent, an increase from 
1999. The recommended rates for most trawl targeted fisheries are 
unchanged or lower than those used in 1999 and range from 53 to 75 
percent. The 2000 assumed halibut mortality rates are listed in Table 
8.

   Table 8.--2000 Assumed Pacific Halibut Mortality Rates for Vessels
                      Fishing in the Gulf of Alaska
    [Listed values are percent of halibut bycatch assumed to be dead]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Mortality
                      Gear and target                            rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line:
    Pacific cod............................................           17
    Rockfish...............................................           11
    Other species..........................................           17
Trawl:
    Midwater pollock.......................................           75
    Rockfish...............................................           66
    Shallow-water flatfish.................................           69
    Pacific cod............................................           63
    Deep-water flatfish....................................           56
    Flathead sole..........................................           57
    Rex sole...............................................           53
    Bottom pollock.........................................           61
    Arrowtooth Flounder....................................           55
    Atka mackerel..........................................           57
    Sablefish..............................................           71
    Other species..........................................           66
Pot:
    Pacific cod............................................           14
    Other species..........................................           14
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Small Entity Compliance Guide

    The following information satisfies the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, which requires a plain language guide 
to assist small entities in complying with this rule. This rule's 
primary management measures are to announce final 2000 harvest 
specifications and

[[Page 8308]]

prohibited species bycatch allowances for the groundfish fishery of the 
GOA. This action is necessary to establish harvest limits and 
associated management measures for groundfish during the 2000 fishing 
year and to accomplish the goals and objectives of the Fishery 
Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Gulf of Alaska. This 
action affects all fishermen who participate in the GOA fishery. NMFS 
will announce closures of directed fishing in the Federal Register and 
in information bulletins released by the Alaska Region. Affected 
fishermen should keep themselves informed of such closures.

Response to Comments

    NMFS received one letter commenting on the 2000 specifications. 
This comment contained multiple issues that are paraphrased and 
responded to separately in the following text.
    Comment 1. NMFS did not follow specified procedures in its 
regulations for promulgating the annual harvest specifications. 
Specifically, NMFS proposes 2000 harvest specifications based on a 
``roll over'' from the year previous that are merely a place holder to 
start the fishery, implements interim specifications on the ``roll 
over'' TACs without prior notice and comment, and has failed to 
promulgate final harvest specifications before the start of the 2000 
calender year. The process is convoluted, promotes distrust in the 
government, and violates the law.
    Response. The ABC and TAC for each species are based on the best 
available biological and socioeconomic information. The Council, its 
AP, and its SSC review current biological information about the 
condition of groundfish stocks in the BSAI and GOA at their October and 
December meetings. This information is compiled by the Council's BSAI 
Groundfish Plan Team and is presented in the proposed SAFE report for 
both groundfish FMPs in September and in a final SAFE report in 
November.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(c) require NMFS to publish the proposed 
harvest specifications ``as soon as practicable after consultation with 
the Council * * *. The proposed specifications will reflect as 
accurately as possible the projected changes in U.S. harvesting and 
processing capacity and the extent to which U.S. harvesting and 
processing will occur during the coming year.'' On December 13, 1999, 
NMFS published the proposed specifications in the Federal Register (64 
FR 69464). These specifications were based on the best available 
scientific information after consultation with the Council in October 
1999. NMFS acknowledges that these were the same specifications as 
established for 1999. Although new surveys had been performed in 1999, 
the stock assessment data had not been analyzed and no new information 
was available that indicated any of the target species' ABC should be 
changed for conservation reasons.
    NMFS published interim TAC specifications and PSC limits to 
authorize the fisheries from January 1 until they are superseded by the 
final specifications. The implementing regulations at Sec. 679.20(c)(2) 
authorize one-fourth of each proposed initial total allowable catch 
(ITAC) and apportionment thereof, one-fourth of each PSC allowance, and 
the first seasonal allowance of pollock (and Atka mackerel in the BSAI) 
to be in effect on January 1 on an interim basis and to remain in 
effect until superseded by final specifications. NMFS published the 
interim specifications for the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries in the 
Federal Register on January 3, 2000 (65 FR 60 and 65 FR 65, 
respectively).
    The Council recommended final groundfish harvest specifications to 
NMFS in mid-December 1999 that were based on the new information 
contained in the November 1999 SAFE report. In order for NMFS to 
complete notice-and-comment rulemaking before January 1, as the 
commenter suggested. NMFS seeks to provide as much opportunity for 
comment as possible and therefore must publish proposed specifications 
earlier than the final SAFE report becomes available. NMFS relies on 
the best information available when publishing the proposed 
specifications. NMFS must publish proposed specifications earlier than 
the final SAFE report becomes available. Therefore NMFS relies on the 
best information available at the time of the proposed specifications. 
Although the existing procedures condense the annual harvest 
specification process into a short period of time at the end of the 
year, procedures include multiple Plan Team meetings open to the public 
and multiple Council meetings in which public comment is solicited and 
provides adequate opportunity for the public to comment and participate 
effectively.
    NMFS agrees that the process should be improved and has explored 
different options including changing the calendar dates of the fishing 
year or creating a framework process that would not require proposed or 
interim rulemaking. NMFS plans to explore other options for the 
development of a new process, in consultation with the Council, as soon 
as practicable.
    Comment 2. The proposed annual harvest specifications are based on 
the default harvest control rule set forth in Amendments 56/56 to the 
fishery management plans for the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries. 
These amendments violate national standard 1 and other overfishing 
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act by allowing stocks that have 
declined below the biomass consistent with maximum sustainable yield 
(MSY) to remain indefinitely at the depleted biomass level. 
Furthermore, the agency must set the minimum stock size threshold 
(MSST) equal to the stock size consistent with MSY, so as to achieve 
the long-term OY. Because the annual harvest specifications do not 
reflect any MSST the agency should withdraw the proposed 
specifications.
    Response. NMFS disagrees that promulgation of the proposed harvest 
specifications violate national standard 1 or other provisions of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. The control rules set forth in Amendments 56/56 
(64 FR 10952; March 8, 1999) define OFL and constrain ABC for stocks 
managed under the FMPs for BSAI and GOA groundfish. In approving 
Amendments 56/56, NMFS considered public comments submitted on the 
proposed amendments and determined that these control rules are in 
compliance with national standard 1 and all other provisions of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Comment 2 appears to presume that harvest control 
rules can, by themselves, force stock biomass to increase. In fact, 
harvest control rules are rules used to control harvest, not biomass. 
All harvest control rules ``allow'' a depleted stock to remain at a low 
abundance level indefinitely, because no harvest control rule can 
control the size of incoming year classes. However, the control rules 
adopted in Amendments 56/56 are explicitly designed to be 
precautionary, especially in the context of managing stocks whose 
biomass have fallen below reference levels.
    For a stock that has been identified as overfished, the definition 
of optimum yield contained in section 3(28) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
states that the rebuilding target should be ``a level consistent with 
producing the maximum sustainable yield.'' The question then becomes 
whether the rebuilding target, the biomass level to which a stock must 
be rebuilt once the stock is identified as being overfished, must equal 
the MSST, the biomass level at which a stock is identified as being 
overfished in the first place. The

[[Page 8309]]

question is answered by the statutory definition of OY, which clearly 
allows OY to be set as high as MSY unless relevant economic, social, or 
ecological factors warrant a lower level. If the law allows OY to be 
set as high as MSY in some cases, then setting an MSST equal to the MSY 
level would mean that natural variability alone will cause such stocks 
to be identified as ``overfished'' approximately 50 percent of the time 
even if OY were achieved exactly each year. National standard 1 
reflects Congress' belief that it is possible to prevent overfishing 
while achieving OY. Equating MSST to the MSY level would imply the 
exact opposite.
    Currently, the best scientific information available indicates that 
no stock managed under the BSAI or GOA groundfish FMPs is being 
subjected to an inappropriate harvest rate, and that no stock managed 
under these FMPs is overfished. The annual specifications reflect the 
correct use of MSSTs and NMFS finds no reason to prepare new 
specifications.
    Comment 3. Even if the agency's current interpretation of national 
standard 1 is accepted and MSSTs do not have to be set at MSY stock 
sizes, the proposed annual harvest specifications are inconsistent with 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Standard Guidelines because 
the specifications do not identify MSSTs at all for individual stocks.
    Response. NMFS disagrees. Every stock managed under Tiers 1-3 of 
the BSAI and GOA groundfish fishery management plans was evaluated with 
respect to its MSST in the most recent SAFE report dated November 1999. 
NMFS believes the proposed harvest specifications are consistent with 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Standard Guidelines, neither 
of which requires that MSSTs be identified in the final TAC 
specifications themselves. MSSTs are used in the process of developing 
the final TAC specifications and the TAC specifications use harvest 
control rules that are demonstrably related to the MSY-based management 
required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The control rules used to define 
OFL and the maximum permissible ABC restrict fishing at all stock 
sizes, not just at stock sizes below 5 percent of the MSY level. Not 
only is fishing restricted at all stock sizes, it is restricted in a 
conservative manner. Furthermore, in the event that a stock declines 
below its BMSY level (Tiers 1-2) or B40% (Tier 
3), the level of conservatism increases directly with the magnitude of 
the decline.
    Comment 4. Rather than identifying MSY and OY for individual fish 
stocks, as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the BSAI and GOA 
groundfish FMPs manage stocks through default rules that are not 
related to MSY-based management. Because this management system is 
incompatible with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS must disapprove the 
proposed annual harvest specifications.
    Response. NMFS disagrees. The Magnuson-Stevens Act does not require 
that MSY and OY be identified for individual fish stocks. The Magnuson-
Stevens Act does require (paragraph 303(a)(3)) that each FMP ``assess 
and specify the present and probable future condition of, and the 
maximum sustainable yield and optimum yield from, the fishery* * *,'' 
where ``fishery'' is defined (section (3)(13)) as ``(A) one or more 
stocks of fish which can be treated as a unit for purposes of 
conservation and management and which are identified on the basis of 
geographical, scientific, technical, recreational, and economic 
characteristics; and (B) any fishing for such stocks.''
    A good estimate of the MSY for all stocks combined is not 
necessarily provided if MSY is determined for a single stock without 
regard to the effect that such fishing may have on other stocks. If, 
instead, MSY is determined for a stock assemblage with due regard to 
the effect that fishing on individual stocks may have on the other 
members of the assemblage, then it is irrelevant whether all of the 
individual stocks are simultaneously producing their individual MSYs. 
Such an ``assemblage'' MSY will necessarily be associated with an 
equilibrium level of abundance for each of the component stocks, and 
these abundance levels would inform the fishery manager as to whether 
individual stocks are being over- or underfished.
    Further, the control rules specified in the BSAI and GOA groundfish 
fishery management plans are expressly related to MSY-based management. 
In Tiers 1 and 2, all of the reference points are defined in terms of 
MSY. In Tiers 3 through 6, proxies for MSY-related reference points are 
based on the scientific literature, the National Standard Guidelines, 
and the Technical Guidance report. In approving Amendment 56/56, NMFS 
has already determined that use of the present control rules does not 
violate the Magnuson-Stevens Act. NMFS believes that it has fully 
complied with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and that the proposed groundfish 
harvest specifications should not be disapproved.
    Comment 5. The proposed annual harvest specifications are 
inconsistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the National Standard 
Guidelines because the OYs established for the groundfish fisheries do 
not take into account ecological factors and the protection of marine 
ecosystems in setting the annual TAC. To obey the statute, NMFS must 
identify the economic, social, and ecological factors relevant to a 
fishery, then evaluate them to determine the amount by which OY should 
be reduced below MSY. Because the proposed specifications do not 
document any consideration by NMFS of these factors in setting the TACs 
for the fisheries, the TACs should be reevaluated to consider these 
factors and modified if appropriate.
    Response. The requirement to consider any relevant economic, 
social, or ecological factor in specifying OY has been in place since 
the Council adopted and NMFS approved Amendment 1 to the BSAI 
groundfish fishery management plan and Amendment 15 to the GOA 
groundfish fishery management plan (1981 and 1984, respectively). In 
approving these amendments, NMFS determined that any relevant economic, 
social, or ecological factors had been duly considered in specifying 
OY.
    Amendment 1 to the Bering Sea groundfish fishery management plan 
established the 1.4 to 2.0 million mt OY range. The amendment states 
that, ``The groundfish complex and its fishery are a distinct 
management unit of the Bering Sea. * * *. This complex forms a large 
subsystem of the Bering Sea ecosystem with intricate interrelationships 
between predators and prey, between competitors, and between those 
species and their environment. Therefore, the productivity and MSY of 
groundfish should be conceived for the groundfish complex as a unit 
rather than for many individual species groups.'' When recommending the 
OY level, the Council considered the results of ecosystem simulations 
that included numerous ecosystem components (e.g., mammals, birds, 
demersal fish, semi-demersal fish, pelagic fish, squid, crabs, and 
benthos). The model considered their fluctuations in abundance caused 
by predation, natural mortality, environmental anomalies, and fishing. 
The simulations showed that the minimum sustainable exploitable biomass 
may have been higher than 2.0 million mt.
    Under Amendment 15 to the GOA groundfish fishery management plan, 
the GOA OY is specified also as a range, 116,000-800,000 mt. The lower 
end of

[[Page 8310]]

the GOA OY range is equal to the lowest historical groundfish catch 
during the 21-year period 1965-1985. The upper end of the range is 
approximately equal to 97 percent of the mean MSY from the years 1983-
1987.
    In addition, in 1989 the Council began including a separate 
ecosystem consideration section in the annual SAFE document. In 1993 
this section was expanded and devoted to both marine mammals and 
ecosystem consideration. In 1994, this section was expanded into a 
separate chapter of the SAFE and entitled ``Ecosystem Considerations.'' 
NMFS further expanded the ecological advice given for the 2000 
specification process by enhancing the document to include status and 
trend information on key ecosystem components in the BSAI and the GOA.
    Recent examples of inclusion of ecosystem considerations in the 
2000 SAFE Report are provided by the pollock and Atka mackerel 
chapters. The pollock chapter was modified to include a spatial and 
temporal analysis of the pollock fishery to facilitate discussion of 
its possible effects on Steller sea lions. The Atka mackerel chapter 
authors, adhering to advice supplied by Congress' Ecosystem Principles 
Advisory Panel and recognizing the importance of this species in the 
diet of Steller sea lions, explored alternative harvest strategies to 
determine an ABC that, in their view, was consistent with the Panel's 
advocated precautionary approach.
    This information is used to identify stocks or ecosystem elements 
that may be at risk. The SSC uses this information to recommend 
adjustments to harvest strategies and alternative management measures 
in order to protect the marine environment. Furthermore, the EA 
accompanying the specifications outlines the impacts of fishing on the 
environment and describes mitigation measures incorporated in the 
specifications. NMFS believes that it has evaluated the marine 
environment using the best available scientific information and does 
not believe that the specifications should be reevaluated.
    Comment 6. The annual harvest specifications allow overfishing to 
continue on overfished crab stocks because the proposed specifications 
promulgate a ``roll over'' from the 1999 harvest specifications.
    Response. Overfishing is defined as any rate of fishing mortality 
in excess of the maximum fishing mortality threshold. Three Bering Sea 
crab stocks have been declared overfished: Bering Sea Tanner crab, 
Bering Sea Snow crab, and St. Matthews Blue King crab. All other crab 
FMP stocks are not overfished or their status is unknown. Overfishing 
is not occurring for any Bering Sea crab stock that has been declared 
overfished. The maximum fishing mortality rate (MFMT) for all species 
of King crab is 0.2 and for all Chionoecetes species (including Tanner 
and Snow crab) the MFMT is 0.3. The St. Matthews Island Blue King crab 
and Eastern Bering Sea Tanner crab stocks are closed to directed 
commercial fishing. The current PSC limits on Bering Sea Tanner crab 
are 0.005 multiplied by the most recent survey abundance (numbers) with 
a cap of 1,000,000 crab in Zone 1 and 0.012 times the most recent 
survey abundance (numbers) with a cap of 3,000,000 crab in Zone 2. 
These bycatch caps are far below the maximum fishing mortality rate 
that defines overfishing. The 2000 GHL for Snow crab is 28.5 million lb 
(12,927.6 mt) or 10 percent of the mature biomass, which represents 
about 23.75 million crabs. The 2000 PSC limit is 4.5 million Snow crab 
for the entire year. A harvest in excess of about three times the 2000 
GHL, or about 71.25 million crabs, would constitute overfishing. The 
2000 GHL plus the PSC limit is about 28.25 million crabs, well below 
the overfishing level. Furthermore, the actual catch levels in Zones 1 
and 2 are well below the caps.
    It is true that NMFS proposed to ``roll over'' the 1999 PSC levels 
for the year 2000. However, it is incorrect to conclude that the action 
fails to recognize that many crab stocks are overfished or approaching 
an overfished condition. NMFS recognized that it is unlikely that the 
``roll over'' would result in overfishing of any crab stock.
    Comment 7. NMFS prepared an EA for this action that specifically 
``tiers off'' the legally inadequate discussion of impacts and 
alternatives of the 1998 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 
(SEIS). Furthermore, the existence of a previous programmatic EIS does 
not eliminate the requirement to prepare another, action-specific EIS, 
if the impacts of the specific action are significant. The 2000 TAC 
specification have potentially significant environmental impacts that 
must be addressed in an EIS and an EA is therefore inadequate.
    Response. NMFS recognizes that in a July 8, 1999, order, amended on 
July 13, 1999, the Court in Greenpeace v. NMFS Civ No. 98-0492 (W.D. 
Wash.) held that the 1998 SEIS did not adequately address aspects of 
the GOA and BSAI groundfish FMPs other than TAC setting, and therefore 
was insufficient in scope under the National Environmental Policy Act. 
In response to the Court's order, NMFS is currently preparing a 
programmatic SEIS for the GOA and BSAI groundfish FMPs plans.
    Notwithstanding the less expansive scope of the 1998 SEIS, NMFS 
believes that the discussion and analysis of impacts and alternatives 
in the 1998 SEIS, which focused on the issue of TAC setting, is 
directly applicable to the EA prepared in support of this action, the 
setting of TACs for the 2000 fishery. Consequently, the EA adopts the 
discussion and analysis in the 1998 SEIS.
    Finally, NMFS believes that the 1998 SEIS's extensive discussion 
and analysis of the environmental impacts associated with various 
levels of TACs, coupled with the EA's additional discussion, provides 
ample support for its determination that the 2000 specifications will 
not have significant environmental impacts.
    Comment 8. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that conservation and 
management measures contained in fishery management plans shall, to the 
extent practicable, minimize bycatch and the mortality of bycatch that 
cannot be avoided. The annual harvest specifications fail to take any 
steps to minimize bycatch and must contain a full analysis of bycatch 
minimization, must minimize bycatch to the extent practicable, and must 
establish an adequate standardized bycatch reporting methodology.
    Response. NMFS disagrees that the annual harvest specifications are 
the proper venue for meeting statutory requirements to minimize bycatch 
and bycatch mortality to the extent practicable. The annual 
specifications rely on a frameworked process that does not involve 
changes to regulations. Changes to regulations that promote reduction 
in bycatch must be accomplished through separate fishery management 
plan amendments and/or regulatory amendments and are outside the scope 
of the 2000 harvest specifications. The annual harvest specifications 
do implement existing regulations intended to limit or reduce 
prohibited species incidental catch in that annual prohibited species 
limits and seasonal fishery bycatch allowances are specified with the 
intent to optimize the amount of groundfish harvest relative to 
available incidental catch constraints.
    Comment 9. The existing groundfish fishery management plans do not 
comply with Magnuson-Stevens Act mandates to minimize bycatch to the 
extent practicable, or to minimize the mortality of bycatch that is 
unavoidable. Existing bycatch avoidance programs implemented prior to 
the passage of

[[Page 8311]]

these mandates cannot be used to satisfy the bycatch provisions of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Response. This comment is outside the scope of the annual harvest 
specifications. Notwithstanding that fact, NMFS disagrees that FMP 
measures to reduce bycatch or bycatch mortality that were implemented 
prior to the passage of these statutory provisions cannot be considered 
when assessing overall compliance of an FMP with the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act. Further, the Council and NMFS continue to assess, develop, and 
implement reasonable approaches to reduce bycatch to the extent 
practicable. This standard is not static and will continue to support 
the evolution of bycatch avoidance programs as the fishery and 
associated management measure changes.
    Comment 10. The annual harvest specifications fail to prevent takes 
of endangered short-tailed albatross.
    Response. NMFS disagrees. Regulations at Sec. 679.24(e) and 
Sec. 679.42(b)(2) contain specific seabird avoidance measures required 
for vessels using hook-and-line gear. Under terms of the 1999 
biological opinion and incidental take statement prepared by the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, a take of up to four endangered short-tailed 
albatross is allowed during the 2-year period from 1999 through 2000 
for the BSAI and GOA hook-and-line groundfish fisheries. To date, there 
have been no reported takes of endangered short-tailed albatross in 
this time period.
    In February 1999, NMFS presented an analysis on seabird mitigation 
measures to the Council that investigated possible revisions to the 
currently required seabird avoidance methods that could be employed by 
the hook-and-line fleet to further reduce the take of seabirds. The 
Council took final action at its April 1999 meeting to revise the 
existing requirements for seabird avoidance measures. These revised 
seabird avoidance measures are expected to be effective as soon in 
2000.

Classification

    This action is authorized under 50 CFR 679.20 and is exempt from 
review under E.O. 12866.
    Pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, NMFS has 
completed a consultation on the effects of the 1999 through 2002 
pollock and Atka mackerel fisheries on listed species, including the 
Steller sea lion, and designated critical habitat. The Biological 
Opinion prepared for this consultation, dated December 3, 1998, 
concluded that the Atka mackerel fisheries in the BSAI are not likely 
to jeopardize the continued existence of the western population of 
Steller sea lions or adversely modify its critical habitat. However, 
the Biological Opinion concluded that the pollock fisheries in the BSAI 
and the GOA would cause jeopardy and adverse modification of designated 
critical habitat.
    The Biological Opinion, and subsequent revised documents, require 
that a suite of revised final RPAs be implemented to mitigate the 
adverse impacts of the pollock fisheries on the western population of 
Steller sea lions and its critical habitat. The revised final RPAs were 
implemented by NMFS through emergency rulemaking effective on January 
20, 2000 and published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2000 (65 
FR 3892). As discussed above, these final specifications are consistent 
with the RFRPAs as required by the Biological Opinion.
    NMFS also completed consultations on the effects of the 2000 BSAI 
groundfish fisheries on listed species, including the Steller sea lion 
and salmon, and on designated critical habitat. These consultations 
were completed on December 23, 1999, and concluded that the proposed 
fisheries were not likely to cause jeopardy or adverse modification to 
designated critical habitat. However, in an order dated January 25, 
2000, the District Court for the Western District of Washington 
concluded that NMFS must consult pursuant to section 7 of the ESA on 
the fishery management plans for the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI 
and GOA. Greenpeace v. NMFS, Civ. No. 98-49ZZ (W.D. Wash). Prior to the 
issuance of the court's order, NMFS had begun consultation to evaluate 
the cumulative effects of the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries over a 
multi-year period on candidate and listed species and critical habitat. 
NMFS is currently reviewing this ongoing consultation for compliance 
with the court's January 25, 2000, order and will continue 
consultation. NMFS has determined that publication of these fishery 
specifications will not result in an irreversible or irretrievable 
commitment of resources which would have the effect of foreclosing the 
formulation or implementation of any reasonable or prudent alternative 
measures which may be necessary.
    A Biological Opinion on the BSAI hook-and-line groundfish fishery 
and the BSAI trawl groundfish fishery for the ESA listed short-tailed 
albatross was issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in March 
1999. The conclusion continued the no jeopardy determination and the 
incidental take statement expressing the requirement to immediately re-
initiate consultations if incidental takes exceed four short-tailed 
albatross over 2 years' time (1999-2000).
    NMFS has prepared a final EA for this action, which describes the 
impact on the human environment that would result from implementation 
of the final harvest specifications. In December 1998, NMFS issued an 
SEIS on the groundfish TAC specifications and PSC limits under the BSAI 
and GOA groundfish FMPs. In July 1999, the District Court for the 
Western District of Washington held that the 1998 SEIS did not 
adequately address aspects of the BSAI and GOA FMPs. Notwithstanding 
the deficiencies the court noted in the 1998 SEIS, NMFS believes that 
the discussion of impacts and alternatives in the 1998 SEIS is directly 
applicable to this action. The final EA for the 2000 harvest 
specifications incorporates by reference the 1998 SEIS. Additionally, 
given the foregoing conclusions that publication of the final 
specifications for the 2000 Alaska groundfish fisheries will not amount 
to an irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources which would 
have the effect of foreclosing the formulation or implementation of any 
reasonable and prudent alternative measures for the Alaska groundfish 
fisheries, NMFS finds that it is unnecessary to revise, amend, or 
supplement the environmental assessment and ``finding of no significant 
impact'' prepared for publication of the final specifications for the 
2000 fisheries.
    NMFS prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) 
pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act that describes the impact 
the 2000 harvest specifications may have on small entities. The IRFA 
considered the impacts of a range of alternative harvest levels that 
included no action (i.e., no harvest in 2000) and harvest levels equal 
to those proposed. NMFS solicited public comment on the IRFA. Although 
NMFS did not receive any public comments directly addressing the IRFA, 
NMFS and the Council have considered additional information on the 
fishery that became available in December. Based on that information, 
the Council recommended and NMFS hereby establishes final harvest 
specifications that have been revised from the preferred alternative 
identified in the proposed rule. NMFS has prepared an FRFA which 
analyzes the new TAC levels, recommended by the Council in December 
1999, and based on updated survey and stock assessment information, for 
the final 2000 specifications. A copy of this analysis is

[[Page 8312]]

available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). This action authorizes the BSAI 
groundfish fisheries to continue under final specifications set at 2000 
levels until the TAC is harvested or until the fishery is closed due to 
attainment of a PSC limit, or for other management reasons. The 2000 
TACs are based on the most recent scientific information as reviewed by 
the Plan Teams, SSC, AP, and Council and which were commented on 
through public testimony and comment from the October and December 
Council meetings and those comments sent to NMFS on the proposed 
specifications. This action also achieves OY while preventing 
overfishing. Small entities would receive the maximum benefits under 
this alternative, in that they will be able to harvest target species 
and species groups at the highest available level based on stock status 
and ecosystem concerns.
    Based on 1998 data, NMFS estimates that 1,122 vessels harvesting 
groundfish in the GOA operate as small entities.
    The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements 
or timetables, and the use of performance rather than design standards, 
or exempting affected small entities from any part of this action would 
not be appropriate because of the nature of this action.
    This action is necessary to establish harvest limits for the GOA 
groundfish fisheries for the 2000 fishing year. The groundfish 
fisheries in the GOA are governed by Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 
679 that require NMFS, after consultation with the Council, to publish 
and solicit public comments on proposed annual TACs, PSC allowances, 
and seasonal allowances of the TACs. No recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements are implemented with this final action. NMFS is not aware 
of any other Federal rules which duplicate, overlap or conflict with 
the final specifications.
    This action is not subject to a 30-day delay in effectiveness 
because it relieves a restriction as contemplated under 5 USC 
553(d)(1). This rule allows fishing to continue. Without this rule, 
fishermen who are already on the fishing grounds fishing on interim TAC 
would have to stop fishing and return to port.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., and 
3631 et seq.

    Dated: February 14, 2000.
Gary C. Matlock,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 00-3910 Filed 2-15-00; 2:49 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P