[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 34 (Friday, February 18, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8282-8297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3912]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 000211040-0040-01; I.D. 111899B]


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea 
and Aleutian Islands; Final 2000 Harvest Specifications for Groundfish

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

ACTION: Final 2000 specifications for groundfish and associated 
management measures; apportionment of reserves; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces final 2000 harvest specifications, prohibited 
species bycatch allowances, and associated management measures for the 
groundfish fishery of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area (BSAI). 
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 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 
Management Area (FMP). The intended effect of this action is to 
conserve and manage the groundfish resources in the BSAI.

DATES: The final 2000 harvest specifications and associated 
apportionment of reserves are effective at 1200 hrs, Alaska local time 
(A.l.t.), February 15, 2000 through 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 
2000. Comments on the apportionment of reserves must be received by 
March 6, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the apportionment of reserves may be sent to Sue 
Salveson, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668, 
Attn: Lori Gravel, or delivered to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th 
Street, Juneau, AK. Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-
mail or Internet.
    Copies of the Final Environmental Assessment (EA) and Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) prepared for this action and the 
Final 2000 Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) report, dated 
November 1999, are available from the North Pacific Fishery Management 
Council, West 4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99510-2252 (907-271-
2809).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shane Capron, 907-586-7228 or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background for the 2000 Final Harvest Specifications

    Federal regulations at 50 CFR part 679 that implement the FMP 
govern the groundfish fisheries in the BSAI. The Council prepared the 
FMP, and NMFS approved it under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act. General regulations governing U.S. 
fisheries also appear at 50 CFR part 600.
    The FMP and its implementing regulations require NMFS, after 
consultation with the Council, to specify annually the total allowable 
catch (TAC) for each target species and for the ``other species'' 
category, the sum of which must be within the optimum yield range of 
1.4 million to 2.0 million metric tons (mt) (Sec. 679.20(a)(1)(i)). 
Regulations at Sec. 679.20(c)(3) further require NMFS to consider 
public comments received on proposed annual TACs and apportionments 
thereof and on proposed prohibited species catch (PSC) allowances and 
to publish final specifications in the Federal Register. The final 
specifications set forth in Tables 1 through 8 of this action satisfy 
these requirements. For 2000, the sum of TACs is 2 million mt.
    The proposed BSAI groundfish specifications and prohibited species 
bycatch allowances for the groundfish fishery of the BSAI were 
published in the Federal Register on December 13, 1999 (64 FR 69464). 
Comments were invited and accepted through January 12, 2000. NMFS 
received one letter of comment on the proposed specifications. This 
comment is

[[Page 8283]]

summarized and responded to in the Response to Comments section. Public 
consultation with the Council occurred during the December 1999 Council 
meeting in Anchorage, AK. After considering public comments received, 
as well as biological and economic data that were available at the 
Council's December meeting, NMFS is implementing the final 2000 
groundfish specifications as recommended by the Council.
    In accordance with regulations at Sec. 679.20(c)(2)(ii), NMFS 
established interim amounts of each proposed initial TAC (ITAC), and 
allocations thereof, and proposed PSC allowances established under 
Sec. 679.21 that become available at 0001 hours Alaska local time 
(A.l.t.), January 1, and remain available until superseded by the final 
specifications. NMFS published the interim 2000 groundfish harvest 
specifications in the Federal Register on January 3, 2000 (65 FR 60). 
The interim TACs for pollock subsequently were revised by an emergency 
interim rule effective January 20, 2000 (65 FR 3892; January 25, 2000). 
Regulations at Sec. 679.20(c)(2)(ii) do not provide for an interim 
specification for either the hook-and-line and pot gear sablefish CDQ 
reserve or for sablefish managed under the Individual Fishing Quota 
management plan.
    With the exception of the sideboard provisions for groundfish and 
prohibited species under the American Fisheries Act (AFA), the final 
2000 groundfish harvest specifications and prohibited species bycatch 
allowances contained in this action supersede the interim 2000 
groundfish harvest specifications. The emergency interim rule 
implementing AFA cooperative harvest limit provisions (65 FR 4520; 
January 28, 2000) specified allocations of inshore pollock between 
cooperative and vessels not participating in cooperatives, as well as 
harvest amounts and PSC limits for AFA catcher/processors and catcher 
vessels. These specifications will remain effective for the duration of 
the AFA emergency interim rule or until superseded by completion of a 
notice and comment rulemaking to implement the AFA.

Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) and TAC Specifications

    The final ABC levels are based on the best available scientific 
information, including projected biomass trends, information on assumed 
distribution of stock biomass, and revised technical methods used to 
calculate stock biomass. The FMP specifies the formulas, or tiers, to 
be used in computing ABCs and overfishing levels. The formulas 
applicable to a particular stock or stock complex are determined by the 
level of reliable information available to fishery scientists. This 
information is categorized into a successive series of six tiers.
    At its December 1999 meeting, the Council's Scientific and 
Statistical Committee (SSC), the Council's Advisory Panel (AP), and 
Council itself reviewed current biological information about the 
condition of groundfish stocks in the BSAI. This information was 
compiled by the Council's Plan Team and is presented in the final 2000 
SAFE report for the BSAI groundfish fisheries, dated November 1999. The 
SAFE report contains a review of the latest scientific analyses and 
estimates of each species' biomass and other biological parameters, as 
well as summaries of the available information on the BSAI ecosystem 
and the economic condition of groundfish fisheries off Alaska. From 
these data and analyses, the Plan Team estimates an ABC for each 
species or species category.
    In December 1999, the SSC, AP, and Council reviewed the Plan Team's 
recommendations. Except for pollock and the ``other species'' category, 
the SSC, AP, and Council endorsed the Plan Team's ABC recommendations. 
Based on the best available information, the SSC recommended slightly 
higher ABCs for pollock and ``other species'' than the Plan Team 
recommended. For pollock, the maximum ABC under the overfishing 
definition results in an amount of 1.2 million mt. The Plan Team 
recommended using a lower fishing mortality to account for 
uncertainties in recruitment because there is a limited range of age-
classes supporting the fishery. The SSC agreed with the Plan Team's 
rationale, but disagreed with the extent of the decrease in the fishing 
mortality rate. The SSC adopted a mortality rate lower than the maximum 
permissible, but higher than the Plan Team's, resulting in an ABC of 
1.139 million mt. For ``other species'', the Plan Team recommended an 
ABC based on mean catch since 1977. The SSC disagreed with this 
approach and recommended using a Tier 5 approach under the FMP. For all 
species, the AP endorsed the ABCs recommended by the SSC, and the 
Council adopted them. The final ABCs, as adopted by the Council, are 
listed in Table 1.
    The final TAC recommendations were based on the ABCs as adjusted 
for other biological and socioeconomic considerations, including 
maintaining the total TAC within the required OY range of 1.4 million 
to 2.0 million mt. The Council adopted the AP's TAC recommendations. 
None of the Council's recommended TACs for 2000 exceeds the final ABC 
for any species category. NMFS finds that the recommended TACs are 
consistent with the biological condition of groundfish stocks as 
described in the 2000 SAFE document and approved by the Council.
    Table 1 lists the 2000 ABC, TAC, ITAC and Community Development 
Quota (CDQ) reserve amounts, overfishing levels, and initial 
apportionments of groundfish in the BSAI. The apportionment of TAC 
amounts among fisheries and seasons is discussed in the following 
sections.

 Table 1.--2000 ABC, Total Allowable Catch (TAC), Initial TAC (ITAC), CDQ Reserve Allocation, and Overfishing Levels of Groundfish in the Bering Sea and
                                                            Aleutian Islands Area (BSAI) \1\
                                                            [All amounts are in metric tons]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Overfishing
                Species                                Area                    level            ABC             TAC          ITAC \2\       CDQ reserve
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\3\-----
Pollock \4\............................  Bering Sea (BS)................       1,680,000       1,139,000       1,139,000         973,845         113,900
                                         Aleutian Islands (AI)..........          31,700          23,800           2,000           1,800             200
                                         Bogoslof District..............          30,400          22,300           1,000             900             100
Pacific cod............................  BSAI...........................         240,000         193,000         193,000         164,050          14,475
Sablefish \5\..........................  BS.............................           1,750           1,470           1,470             624             202
                                         AI.............................           3,090           2,430           2,430             516             410
Atka mackerel..........................  Total..........................         119,000          70,800          70,800          60,180           5,309
                                         Western AI.....................  ..............          29,700          29,700          25,245           2,227
                                         Central AI.....................  ..............          24,700          24,700          20,995           1,852
                                         Eastern AI/BS..................  ..............          16,400          16,400          13,940           1,230

[[Page 8284]]

 
Yellowfin sole.........................  BSAI...........................         226,000         191,000         123,262         104,773           9,244
Rock sole..............................  BSAI...........................         273,000         230,000         134,760         114,546          10,107
Greenland turbot.......................  Total..........................          42,000           9,300           9,300           7,906             697
                                         BS.............................  ..............           6,231           6,231           5,297             467
                                         AI.............................  ..............           3,069           3,069           2,609             230
Arrowtooth flounder....................  BSAI...........................         160,000         131,000         131,000         111,350           9,825
Flathead sole..........................  BSAI...........................          90,000          73,500          52,652          44,755           3,948
Other flatfish \6\.....................  BSAI...........................         141,000         117,000          83,813          71,242           6,285
Pacific ocean perch....................  BS.............................           3,100           2,600           2,600           2,210             195
                                         AI Total.......................          14,400          12,300          12,300          10,456             922
                                         Western AI.....................  ..............           5,670           5,670           4,820             425
                                         Central AI.....................  ..............           3,510           3,510           2,984             263
                                         Eastern AI.....................  ..............           3,120           3,120           2,652             234
Other red rockfish \7\.................  BS.............................             259             194             194             165              14
Sharpchin/Northern.....................  AI.............................           6,870           5,150           5,150           4,378             386
Shortraker/rougheye....................  AI.............................           1,180             885             885             753              66
Other rockfish \8\.....................  BS.............................             492             369             369             314              27
                                         AI.............................             913             685             685             583              51
Squid..................................  BSAI...........................           2,620           1,970           1,970           1,675             147
Other species \9\......................  BSAI...........................          71,500          31,360          31,360          26,656           2,352
                                                                         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................    .............................       3,139,274       2,260,113       2,000,000       1,703,677        178,862
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Amounts are in metric tons. These amounts apply to the entire Bering Sea (BS) and Aleutian Islands (AI) subarea unless otherwise specified. With the
  exception of pollock, and for the purpose of these specifications, the Bering Sea subarea includes the Bogoslof District.
\2\ Except for pollock and the portion of the sablefish TAC allocated to hook-and-line and pot gear, 15 percent of each TAC is put into a reserve. The
  ITAC for each species is the remainder of the TAC after the subtraction of these reserves.
\3\ Except for pollock and the hook-and-line or pot gear allocation of sablefish, one half of the amount of the TACs placed in reserve, or 7.5 percent
  of the TACs, is designated as a CDQ reserve for use by CDQ participants (see Sec.  679.31(a)(1)). Fifteen percent of the groundfish CDQ reserve
  established for arrowtooth flounder and ``other species'' is allocated to a non-specific CDQ reserve found at Sec.  679.31(g).
\4\ The AFA requires that 10 percent of the annual pollock TAC be allocated as a directed fishing allowance for the CDQ sector. Then, NMFS is
  subtracting 5 percent of the remainder as an incidental catch allowance for pollock, which is not apportioned by season or area. The remainder of this
  amount is further allocated by sector as follows: inshore, 50 percent; catcher/processor, 40 percent; and motherships, 10 percent. NMFS, under
  regulations at Sec.  679.20(a)(5)(i)(B), allocates zero mt of pollock for directed fishing by vessels using nonpelagic trawl gear. This action is
  based on Council intent to prohibit the use of nonpelagic trawl gear in the directed pollock fishery in 2000 because of concerns of unnecessary
  incidental catch with bottom trawl gear in the pollock fishery.
\5\ Regulations at Sec.  679.20(b)(1) do not provide for the establishment of an ITAC for the hook-and-line and pot gear allocation for sablefish. The
  ITAC for sablefish reflected in Table 1 is for trawl gear only. Twenty percent of the sablefish TAC allocated to hook-and-line gear or pot gear is
  reserved for use by CDQ participants (see Sec.  679.31(c)).
\6\ ``Other flatfish'' includes all flatfish species, except for Pacific halibut (a prohibited species), flathead sole, Greenland turbot, rock sole,
  yellowfin sole, and arrowtooth flounder.
\7\ ``Other red rockfish'' includes shortraker, rougheye, sharpchin, and northern rockfish.
\8\ ``Other rockfish'' includes all Sebastes and Sebastolobus species except for Pacific ocean perch, sharpchin, northern, shortraker, and rougheye
  rockfish.
\9\ ``Other species'' includes sculpins, sharks, skates and octopus. Forage fish, as defined at Sec.  679.2 are not included in the ``other species''
  category.

Reserves and the Incidental Catch Allowance (ICA) for Pollock

    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(i) require that 15 percent of the 
TAC for each target species or species group, except for the hook-and-
line and pot gear allocation of sablefish, be placed in a non-specified 
reserve. The AFA supersedes this provision for pollock by requiring 
that the 2000 TAC for this species be fully allocated among the CDQ 
program, the ICA, inshore, catcher/processor, and mothership directed 
fishery allowances.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii) require that one-half of each 
TAC amount placed in the non-specified reserve be allocated to the 
groundfish CDQ reserve and that 20 percent of the hook-and-line and pot 
gear allocation of sablefish be allocated to the fixed gear sablefish 
CDQ reserve. Section 206(a) of the AFA requires that 10 percent of the 
pollock TAC be allocated to the pollock CDQ reserve. With the exception 
of the hook-and-line and pot gear sablefish CDQ reserve, the 
regulations do not further apportion the CDQ reserves by gear. 
Regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i) also require that 7.5 percent of 
each PSC limit, with the exception of herring, be withheld as a 
prohibited species quota (PSQ) reserve for the CDQ fisheries. 
Regulations governing the management of the CDQ and PSQ reserves are 
set forth at Secs. 679.30 and 679.31.
    Pursuant to section 206(b) of the AFA, NMFS allocates a pollock ICA 
of 5 percent of the pollock TAC after subtraction of the 10-percent CDQ 
reserve. This allowance is based on an examination of the incidental 
catch of pollock in non-pollock target fisheries from 1996 through 
1999. During this 4-year period, the incidental catch of pollock ranged 
from a low of 3 percent in 1998 to a high of about 6 percent in 1997, 
with a 4-year average of 5 percent.
    The regulations do not designate the remainder of the non-specified 
reserve by species or species group, and any amount of the reserve may 
be reapportioned to a target species or to the ``other species'' 
category during the year, providing that such reapportionments do not 
result in overfishing. The Regional Administrator has determined that 
the ITACs specified for the species listed in Table 2 need to be 
supplemented from the non-specified

[[Page 8285]]

reserve because U.S. fishing vessels have demonstrated the capacity to 
harvest their full TAC allocations. Therefore, in accordance with 
Sec. 679.20(b)(3), NMFS is apportioning the amounts shown in Table 2 
from the nonspecified reserve to increase the ITAC to an amount that is 
equal to the TAC minus the CDQ reserve.

         Table 2.--Apportionment of Reserves to ITAC Categories
                    [All amounts are in metric tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Species--area or subarea          Reserve amount    Final ITAC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atka mackerel--Western Aleutian Islands.           2,227          27,472
Atka mackerel--Central Aleutian Islands.           1,852          22,847
Atka mackerel--Eastern Aleutian Is. &              1,230          15,170
 Bering Sea subarea.....................
Pacific ocean perch--Western Aleutian                425           5,245
 Islands................................
Pacific ocean perch--Central Aleutian                263           3,247
 Islands................................
Pacific ocean perch--Eastern Aleutian                234           2,886
 Islands................................
Pacific cod--BSAI.......................          14,475         178,525
Shortraker/rougheye rockfish--Aleutian                66             819
 Islands................................
Sharpchin/Northern rockfish--Aleutian                386           4,764
 Islands................................
Greenland turbot--Bering Sea subarea....             467           5,764
Greenland turbot--Aleutian Islands......             230           2,839
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................          21,855         269,578
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apportionment of Pollock TAC to Vessels Using Nonpelagic Trawl Gear

    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(a)(5)(i)(B) authorize NMFS, in 
consultation with the Council, to limit the amount of pollock that may 
be taken in the directed fishery for pollock using nonpelagic trawl 
gear. In June 1998, the Council adopted management measures that, if 
approved by NMFS, would prohibit the use of nonpelagic trawl gear in 
the directed fishery for pollock and reduce specified prohibited 
species bycatch limits by amounts equal to anticipated savings in 
bycatch or bycatch mortality that would be expected from this 
prohibition. These measures could be effective by mid-2000. Therefore, 
NMFS allocates zero mt of pollock to non-pelagic trawl gear.

Pollock Allocations Under the AFA

    Section 206(a) of the AFA requires the allocation of 10 percent of 
the BSAI pollock TAC as a directed fishing allowance to the CDQ 
program. The remainder of the BSAI pollock TAC, after the subtraction 
of an allowance for the incidental catch of pollock by vessels, 
including CDQ vessels, harvesting other groundfish species, must be 
allocated as follows: 50 percent to catcher vessels harvesting pollock 
for processing by the inshore component, 40 percent to catcher/
processors and catcher vessels harvesting pollock for processing by 
catcher/processors in the offshore component, and 10 percent to catcher 
vessels harvesting pollock for processing by motherships in the 
offshore component. These amounts are listed in Table 3.
    The AFA also contains several specific requirements concerning 
pollock and pollock allocations. First, paragraph 210(c) of the AFA 
requires that not less than 8.5 percent of the pollock allocated to 
vessels for processing by offshore catcher/processors be available for 
harvest by offshore catcher vessels listed in section 208(b) harvesting 
pollock for processing by offshore catcher/processors listed in 
paragraph 208(e). Second, paragraph 208(e)(21) of the AFA specifies 
that catcher/processors eligible to fish for pollock under such 
paragraph are prohibited from harvesting in the aggregate a total of 
more than one-half of a percent (0.5) of the pollock allocated to 
vessels for processing by offshore catcher/processors. Other provisions 
of the AFA, including inshore pollock cooperative allocations, AFA 
catcher vessel harvest limitations, and excessive harvest and 
processing shares as well as their rationale are described in the 
emergency interim rule that implements the AFA (65 FR 4520; January 28, 
2000). Table 3 lists the 2000 allocations of pollock TAC as described 
by the AFA.

Implementation of Steller Sea Lion Conservation Measures

    In an emergency interim rule published January 25, 2000 (65 FR 
3892), NMFS implemented revised final reasonable and prudent 
alternatives (RFRPAs) to avoid the likelihood that 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 BSAI and GOA: (1) 
Measures to temporally disperse fishing effort, (2) measures to 
spatially disperse fishing effort, and (3) measures to provide 
sufficient protection from competition with pollock fisheries for prey 
in waters immediately adjacent to rookeries and important haulouts.
    The emergency rule established a Steller Sea Lion Conservation Area 
(SCA) to facilitate regulation of total removals of pollock in an area 
considered to be critical to the recovery of the endangered western 
population of Steller sea lions. This area was referred to as the 
Critical Habitat/Catcher Vessel Operational Area (CH/CVOA) in previous 
emergency rulemaking and in the 1999 specifications. The emergency rule 
restricts pollock harvests within the SCA to a percentage of each 
sector's seasonal allocation as recommended by the Council. The 
seasonal apportionments and SCA limits described in Table 3 are 
consistent with the requirements of the RFRPAs in order to avoid 
jeopardy and adverse modification of critical habitat.
    Additionally, directed fishing for pollock is prohibited within the 
Aleutian Islands subarea. The amounts of pollock specified are for 
incidental catch only. NMFS determined that this region is especially 
sensitive to the recovery of the western population of Steller sea 
lions because of the significant reductions in the population over the 
past 20 years. The emergency rule also implements fishing closures or 
partial closures for 25 sites in the Bering Sea subarea. These fishing 
closures alleviate competition for pollock prey resources in critical 
foraging areas around Steller sea lion rookeries and haulouts.
    NMFS has concluded that these harvest specifications are not an 
irreversible or irretrievable commitment

[[Page 8286]]

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, we 
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 our 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 our development and 
implementation of management measures that avoid competition between 
the fisheries and foraging Stellar 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 
Stellar 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 and prudent 
alternatives that avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the sea lions. 
We intend 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.

[[Page 8287]]



      Table 3.--Allocations of the Pollock TAC and Directed Fishing Allowance to the Inshore, Catcher/Processor, Mothership, and CDQ Components \1\
                                                            [All amounts are in metric tons]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          A/B Season                           C/D Season \2\
                       Area and sector                           2000 DFA  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              A/B DFA    A SCA limit  B SCA Limit    C/D DFA    C SCA Limit  D SCA Limit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bering Sea subarea                                               1,139,000      440,794      166,751       55,497      646,951       48,210       80,142
    CDQ......................................................      113,900       45,560       28,247        9,339       68,340        9,567       15,718
    ICA \3\..................................................       51,257  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    AFA Inshore..............................................      486,922      194,769       81,802       27,267      292,153       39,440       65,734
    AFA C/Ps \4\.............................................      389,537      155,815       38,564       12,854      233,722            0            0
        Catch by C/Ps........................................      356,426      142,570  ...........  ...........      213,855  ...........  ...........
        Catch by CVs \4\.....................................       33,111       13,245  ...........  ...........       19,867  ...........  ...........
        Restricted C/P cap \5\...............................        1,848          779  ...........  ...........        1,069  ...........  ...........
    AFA Motherships..........................................       97,384       38,954       14,607        4,869       58,430            0            0
    Excessive shares cap \6\.................................      170,442  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
Aleutian Islands
    ICA \7\..................................................        2,000  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
Bogoslof District
    ICA \7\..................................................        1,000  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ After subtraction for the CDQ reserve and the incidental catch allowance, the pollock TAC is allocated as follows: inshore component--50 percent,
  catcher/processor component--40 percent, and mothership component--10 percent. Under paragraph 206(a) of the AFA, the CDQ reserve for pollock is 10
  percent. NMFS, under regulations at Sec.  679.20(a)(5)(i)(B), allocates zero mt of pollock to nonpelagic trawl gear. This action is based on Council
  intent to prohibit the use of nonpelagic trawl gear in 2000 because of concerns of unnecessary incidental catch with bottom trawl gear in the pollock
  fishery.
\2\ Emergency interim regulations (65 FR 3892; January 25, 2000) for pollock in the BS subarea which specify A/B and C/D season dates and SCA
  limitations, expire on July 19, 2000, before the C/D season is scheduled to begin. Therefore, the C/D season is not authorized unless either the
  emergency interim rule is extended, or proposed and final rulemaking is completed.
\3\ The pollock incidental catch allowance for the BS subarea is 5 percent of the TAC after subtraction of the CDQ reserve.
\4\ Subsection 210(c) of the AFA requires that not less than 8.5 percent of the directed fishing allowance allocated to listed catcher/processors (C/Ps)
  shall be available for harvest only by eligible catcher vessels (CVs) delivering to listed catcher/processors.
\5\ The AFA requires that vessels described in section 208(e)(21) be prohibited from exceeding a harvest amount of one-half of 1 percent of the directed
  fishing allowance allocated to vessels for processing by AFA catcher/processors.
\6\ Paragraph 210(e)(1) of the AFA specifies that ``No particular individual, corporation, or other entity may harvest, through a fishery cooperative or
  otherwise, a total of more than 17.5 percent of the pollock available to be harvested in the directed pollock fishery.''
\7\ Consistent with the revised final RPAs, the Aleutian Islands subarea and the Bogoslof District are closed to directed fishing for pollock. The
  amounts specified are for incidental catch amounts only, and are not apportioned by season or sector.


[[Page 8288]]

Allocation of the Atka Mackerel TAC

    Due to concerns about the potential impact of the Atka mackerel 
fishery on Steller sea lions and their critical habitat, NMFS issued 
regulations that implement temporal and spatial dispersion of fishing 
effort in the Atka mackerel fisheries. Regulations at 50 CFR 
679.20(a)(8)(ii) apportion the Atka mackerel ITAC into two equal 
seasonal allowances. The first allowance is made available for directed 
fishing from January 1 to April 15 (A season), and the second seasonal 
allowance is made available from September 1 to November 1 (B season) 
as shown in Table 4. According to Sec. 679.22(a)(8), fishing with trawl 
gear in areas defined as Steller sea lion critical habitat (see Figure 
4 of 50 CFR part 226) within the Western and Central Aleutian Islands 
subareas, is prohibited during each Atka mackerel season after 
specified percentages of the TAC are harvested within designated 
critical habitat areas. In 2000, the specified percentage of each 
seasonal allowance within critical habitat is 57 percent in the Western 
Aleutian Islands and 67 percent in the Central Aleutian Islands 
(Sec. 679.22(a)(8)(iii)(B)). A Steller sea lion critical habitat 
closure to fishing with trawl gear within an area will remain in effect 
until NMFS closes Atka mackerel to directed fishing within the same 
area. The regulations do not establish critical habitat closures based 
on Atka mackerel catch percentages inside critical habitat areas for 
the Eastern Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea subarea.
    Under Sec. 679.20(a)(8)(i), up to 2 percent of the Eastern Aleutian 
Islands district and the Bering Sea subarea Atka mackerel ITAC may be 
allocated to the jig gear fleet. The Council determines the amount of 
this allocation annually, based on several criteria including the 
anticipated harvest capacity of the jig gear fleet. At its December 
1999 meeting, the Council recommended that 1 percent of the Atka 
mackerel TAC in the Eastern Aleutian Islands district/Bering Sea 
subarea be allocated to the jig gear fleet based on historic harvest 
capacity of the fleet. NMFS finds that this is consistent with the 
status of the stock and with the regulatory framework stated earlier in 
this document. Based on an ITAC of 15,170 mt, the jig gear allocation 
is 152 mt.

[[Page 8289]]



                        Table 4.--Seasonal and Spatial Apportionments, Gear Shares, and CDQ Reserve of the BSAI ATKA Mackerel TAC
                                                            [All amounts are in metric tons]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                    Seasonal apportionment
                                                                                                     ---------------------------------------------------
                    Subarea and Component                          TAC      CDQ reserve      ITAC            A Season 2                B Season 3
                                                                                                     ---------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         Total      CH Limit 4     Total      CH Limit 4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Aleutian Islands.....................................       29,700        2,227       27,473       13,736        7,829       13,736        7,829
Central Aleutian Islands.....................................       24,700        1,852       22,848       11,424        7,654       11,424        7,654
Eastern AI/BS subarea5.......................................       16,400        1,230       15,170
    Jig (1%)6................................................                                    152
    Other gear (99%).........................................                                 15,018        7,509                     7,509  ...........
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total................................................       70,800        5,309       65,491       32,669                   32,669
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 The reserves have been released for Atka mackerel see (Table 2).
1 The seasonal apportionment of Atka mackerel is 50 percent in the A season and 50 percent in the B season.
2 January 1 through April 15.
3 September 1 through November 1.
4 Critical habitat (CH) allowance refers to the amount of each seasonal allowance that is available for fishing inside critical habitat (Figure 4 of 50
  CFR part 226). In 2000, the percentage of each seasonal allowance available for fishing inside critical habitat is 57 percent in the Western AI and 67
  percent in the Central AI. When these critical habitat allowances are reached, critical habitat areas will be closed to trawling until NMFS closes
  Atka mackerel to directed fishing within the same district.
5 Eastern Aleutian Islands District and Bering Sea subarea.
6 Regulations at Sec.  679.20 (a)(8) require that up to 2 percent of the Eastern AI area ITAC be allocated to the Jig gear fleet. The amount of this
  allocation is 1 percent and was determined by the Council based on anticipated harvest capacity of the jig gear fleet. The jig gear allocation is not
  apportioned by season.


[[Page 8290]]

Allocation of the Pacific Cod TAC

    Under Sec. 679.20(a)(7), 2 percent of the Pacific cod ITAC is 
allocated to vessels using jig gear, 51 percent to vessels using hook-
and-line or pot gear, and 47 percent to vessels using trawl gear. Under 
Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(b), the portion of the Pacific cod TAC allocated to 
trawl gear is further allocated 50 percent to catcher vessels and 50 
percent to catcher/processors. In December 1999, the Council 
recommended seasonal allowances for the portion of the Pacific cod TAC 
allocated to the hook-and-line and pot gear fisheries. The seasonal 
allowances are authorized under Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iv) and are based on 
the criteria set forth at Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(B). They are intended 
to provide for the harvest of Pacific cod when flesh quality and market 
conditions are optimum and when Pacific halibut bycatch rates are low. 
Table 5 lists the 2000 allocations and seasonal apportionments of the 
Pacific cod ITAC. Consistent with Sec. 679.20(a)(7)(iv)(C), any portion 
of the first seasonal allowance of the hook-and-line and pot gear 
allocation that is not harvested by the end of the first season will 
become available on September 1, the beginning of the third season.

                  Table 5.--Gear Shares and Seasonal Apportionments of the BSAI Pacific Cod TAC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      Seasonal apportionment
                         Gear                           Percent    Share of ITAC -------------------------------
                                                        of ITAC        (mt)1           Date         Amount (mt)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jig..................................................          2           3,571    Jan 1-Dec 31           3,571
Hook-and-line/pot gear...............................         51          91,048  2 Jan 1-Apr 30          65,000
                                                                                    May 1-Aug 31               0
                                                                                   Sept 1-Dec 31          26,048
Trawl gear...........................................         47          83,905    Jan 1-Dec 31          83,905
    Catcher vessels (50%)............................  .........          41,953
    Catcher/processors (50%).........................  .........          41,953  ..............  ..............
        Total........................................        100        178,525
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 For Pacific cod in the BSAI, the reserve has been released (see Table 2).
2 Any unused portion of the first seasonal Pacific cod allowance specified for the Pacific cod hook-and-line or
  pot gear fishery will be reapportioned to the third seasonal allowance.

    In October 1999, the Council also adopted an FMP amendment that 
would further allocate the hook-and-line and pot gear allocation among 
different sectors of the fixed gear fleet. If NMFS approves this 
amendment, after public notice and comment, the 2000 harvest 
specifications would be revised accordingly.

Allocation of the Shortraker and Rougheye Rockfish TAC

    Under Sec. 679.20(a)(9), the ITAC of shortraker rockfish and 
rougheye rockfish specified for the Aleutian Islands subarea is 
allocated 30 percent to vessels using non-trawl gear and 70 percent to 
vessels using trawl gear. Based on a 2000 ITAC of 819 mt, the trawl 
allocation would be 573 mt and the non-trawl allocation would be 246 
mt.

Sablefish Gear Allocation

    Regulations at Sec. 679.20(a)(4) (iii) and (iv) require that 
sablefish TACs for the BSAI subareas be allocated between trawl and 
hook-and-line or pot gear types. Gear allocations of TACs for the 
Bering Sea subarea are 50 percent for trawl gear and 50 percent for 
hook-and-line/pot gear and for the Aleutian Islands subarea, 25 percent 
for trawl gear, 75 percent for hook-and-line/pot gear. Regulations at 
Sec. 679.20(b)(1)(iii)(B) require that 20 percent of the hook-and-line 
and pot gear allocation of sablefish be reserved as sablefish CDQ. 
Additionally, regulations at Sec. 679.20(b)(iii)(A) require that 7.5 
percent of the trawl gear allocation of sablefish (one half of the 
reserve) be reserved as groundfish CDQ. Gear allocations of the 
sablefish TAC and CDQ reserve amounts are specified in Table 6.

                           Table 6.--Gear Shares and CDQ Reserve of BSAI Sablefish TAC
                                        [All amounts are in metric tons]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Percent    Share of                CDQ
                          Subarea and Gear                              of TAC      TAC      ITAC \1\   reserve
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bering Sea
    Trawl \2\.......................................................         50        735        624         55
    Hook-&-line/pot gear \3\........................................         50        735        N/A        147
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
    Total...........................................................        100      1,470        624        202
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
Aleutian Islands
    Trawl \2\.......................................................         25        607        515         45
    Hook-&-line/pot gear\3\.........................................         75      1,823        N/A        364
    Total...........................................................        100      2,430        515        409
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Except for the sablefish hook-and-line and pot gear allocation, 15 percent of TAC is apportioned to reserve.
  The ITAC is the remainder of the TAC after the subtraction of these reserves.
\2\ For the portion of the sablefish TAC allocated to vessels using trawl gear, one half of the reserve (7.5
  percent of the specified TAC) is reserved for the multi-species CDQ program.
\3\ For the portion of the sablefish TAC allocated to vessels using hook-and-line or pot gear, 20 percent of the
  allocated TAC is reserved for use by CDQ participants. Regulations in Sec.  679.20(b)(1) do not provide for
  the establishment of an ITAC for sablefish allocated to hook-and-line or pot gear.


[[Page 8291]]

Allocation of Prohibited Species Catch (PSC) Limits for Halibut, 
Crab, and Herring

    PSC limits for halibut are set forth in regulations at 
Sec. 679.21(e). For the BSAI trawl fisheries, the limit is 3,775 mt 
mortality of Pacific halibut. For non-trawl fisheries, the limit is 900 
mt mortality. PSC limits for crab and herring are specified annually 
based on abundance and spawning biomass.
    The criteria for determining the PSC limits for red king crab in 
zone 1 are set forth at Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(ii). For 2000, the PSC limit 
of red king crab in Zone 1 for trawl vessels is 100,000 animals. The 
number of mature female red king crab was estimated in 1999 to be above 
the threshold of 8.4 million animals, and the effective spawning 
biomass is estimated to be 47.1 million pounds (21,364 mt), which is 
less than the 55 million pound (24,948 mt) threshold level. Based on 
the criteria set out at Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(ii)(B), the limit is 100,000 
animals.
    The criteria for determining the PSC limits for C. bairdi crabs are 
set forth in Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(iii). The 2000 C. bairdi PSC limit for 
trawl gear is 900,000 animals in Zone 1 and 2,550,000 animals in Zone 
2. These limits are based on survey data from 1999. In Zone 1, C. 
bairdi abundance was estimated to be greater than 270 million and less 
than 400 million animals. In Zone 2, C. bairdi abundance was estimated 
to be greater than 290 million animals and less than 400 million 
animals.
    Under Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(iv), the PSC limit for C. opilio is based 
on total abundance as indicated by the NMFS annual bottom trawl survey. 
The C. opilio PSC limit is set at 0.1133 percent of the Bering Sea 
abundance index, with a minimum PSC of 4.5 million animals and a 
maximum PSC of 13 million animals. Based on the 1999 survey estimate of 
1.4 billion animals, the calculated limit would be 1,586,000 animals. 
Because this limit falls below the minimum level of 4.5 million, under 
Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(iv)(B), the 2000 C. opilio PSC limit is 4.5 million 
animals.
    Under Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(vi), the PSC limit of Pacific herring 
caught while conducting any trawl operation for groundfish in the BSAI 
is 1 percent of the annual eastern Bering Sea herring biomass. NMFS' 
best estimate of 2000 herring biomass is 185,300 mt. This amount was 
derived using 1999 survey data and an age-structured biomass projection 
model developed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G). 
Therefore, the herring PSC limit for 2000 is 1,853 mt.
    Under Sec. 679.21(e)(1)(i), 7.5 percent of each PSC limit specified 
for crab and halibut is reserved as a PSQ reserve for use by the 
groundfish CDQ program. Regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(3) require the 
apportionment of each trawl PSC limit into PSC bycatch allowances for 
seven specified fishery categories. Regulations at 
Sec. 679.21(e)(4)(ii) authorize the apportionment of the non-trawl 
halibut PSC limit among five fishery categories. The fishery bycatch 
allowances for the trawl and non-trawl fisheries are listed in Table 7.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B) establish criteria by which 
NMFS must specify an annual red king crab bycatch limit for the Red 
King Crab Savings Subarea (RKCSS). The regulations limit the RKCSS to 
35 percent of the trawl bycatch allowance specified for the rock sole/
flathead sole/``other flatfish'' fishery category and must be based on 
the need to optimize the groundfish harvest relative to red king crab 
bycatch. The Council recommended and NMFS is approving a red king crab 
bycatch limit of 35 percent within the RKCSS in order to maximize the 
harvest of groundfish relative to red king crab bycatch.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(4)(ii) authorize exemption of 
specified non-trawl fisheries from the halibut PSC limit. As in past 
years, NMFS after consultation with the Council, is exempting pot gear, 
jig gear, and the sablefish IFQ hook-and-line gear fishery categories 
from halibut bycatch restrictions because these fisheries use selective 
gear types that take few halibut compared to other gear types such as 
nonpelagic trawl. In 1999, total groundfish catch for the pot gear 
fishery in the BSAI was approximately 17,082 mt with an associated 
halibut bycatch mortality of about 3 mt. The 1999 groundfish jig gear 
fishery harvested about 172 mt of groundfish. Most vessels in the jig 
gear fleet are less than 60 ft (18.3 m) length overall and are exempt 
from observer coverage requirements. As a result, observer data are not 
available on halibut bycatch in the jig gear fishery. However, NMFS 
assumes a negligible amount of halibut bycatch mortality because of the 
selective nature of this gear type and the likelihood that halibut 
caught with jig gear have a high survival rate when released.
    As in past years, the Council recommended that the sablefish IFQ 
fishery be exempt from halibut bycatch restrictions because of the 
sablefish and halibut IFQ program (subpart D of 50 CFR part 679). The 
sablefish IFQ program requires legal-sized halibut to be retained by 
vessels using hook-and-line gear if a halibut IFQ permit holder is 
aboard and is holding unused halibut IFQ. NMFS is approving the 
Council's recommendation. This action results in less halibut discard 
in the sablefish fishery. In 1995, about 36 mt of halibut discard 
mortality was estimated for the sablefish IFQ fishery. A similar 
estimate for 1996 through 1999 has not been calculated, but NMFS has no 
information indicating that it would be significantly different.
    Regulations at Sec. 679.21(e)(5) authorize NMFS, after consultation 
with the Council, to establish seasonal apportionments of PSC amounts 
in order maximize the ability of the fleet to harvest the available 
groundfish TAC and to minimize bycatch. The factors to be considered 
are (1) seasonal distribution of prohibited species, (2) seasonal 
distribution of target groundfish species, (3) PSC bycatch needs on a 
seasonal basis relevant to prohibited species biomass, (4) expected 
variations in bycatch rates throughout the year, (5) expected start of 
fishing effort, and (6) economic effects of seasonal PSC apportionments 
on industry sectors. At its December meeting, the Council's AP 
recommended seasonal PSC apportionments in order to maximize harvest 
among gear types, fisheries, and seasons while minimizing bycatch of 
PSC based upon the above factors. NMFS is approving the PSC 
apportionments specified in Table 7.
    The trawl PSC limits for Pacific halibut and crab are subject to 
change in 2000 pending approval by NMFS of a proposed prohibition of 
non-pelagic trawl gear in the BSAI directed pollock fishery and 
associated downward adjustments to the halibut and crab PSC limits. A 
proposed rule implementing these adjustments was published December 29, 
1999 (64 FR 73003). Under the proposed rule, the 2000 halibut and crab 
PSC limits for the BSAI trawl fisheries would be as follows: Halibut, 
3,675 mt; Zone 1 red king crab, 97,000 animals; C. opilio, 4,350,000 
animals; C. bairdi Zone 1, 830,000; and

[[Page 8292]]

C. bairdi Zone 2, 2,520,000 animals. If approved by NMFS, these PSC 
limits would be established as part of the final rule implementing the 
non-pelagic trawl prohibition and the 2000 PSC specifications would be 
amended accordingly.

                              Table 7.--Prohibited Species Bycatch Allowances for the BSAI Trawl and Non-Trawl Fisheries \1\
                                                            [All amounts are in metric tons]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Prohibited Species and Zone
                                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Halibut                                                  C. bairdi (animals) \2\
                                                                    mortality   Herring    Red King Crab     C. opilio   -------------------------------
                                                                     (mt) BSA  (mt) BSAI  (animals) Zone     (animals)
                                                                       \2\                     1 \2\       COBLZ \2\ \3\      Zone 1          Zone 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Trawl Fisheries
Yellowfin sole....................................................        910        169          12,015       2,975,771         295,708       1,532,715
    January 20-March 31...........................................        269  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    April 1-May 20................................................        201  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    May 21-July 3.................................................         50  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    July 4-December 31............................................        390  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Rocksole/oth.flat/flat sole \4\...................................        800         24          43,392         899,932         316,780         510,905
    January 20-March 31...........................................        460  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    April 1-July 3................................................        168  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    July 4-December 31............................................        172  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Turbot/sablefish/arrowtooth \5\...................................  .........         11  ..............          42,458  ..............  ..............
Rockfish (July 4-December 31) \6\.................................         71          9  ..............          42,458  ..............          10,143
Pacific cod.......................................................      1,473         24          12,016         127,789         158,587         279,041
Pollock/Atka/other \7\............................................        238      1,616           1,711          74,092          15,175          25,946
RKC savings subarea \4\...........................................  .........  .........          23,366  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total Trawl PSC...........................................      3,492      1,853          92,500       4,162,500         786,250       2,358,750
                                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Non-Trawl Fisheries
Pacific cod--Total................................................        748  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    Jan. 1-April 30 \8\...........................................        457  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    May 1-August 31...............................................          0  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Sept. 1-Dec. 31...................................................        291  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Other non-trawl Total.............................................         84  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
May 1-December 31.................................................         84  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Groundfish pot & jig..............................................     Exempt  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Sablefish hook-&-line.............................................     Exempt  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
        Total Non-Trawl...........................................        833  .........  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
                                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        PSQ Reserve \9\...........................................        351  .........           7,500         337,500          63,750         191,250
                                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Grand Total...............................................      4,675      1,853         100,000       4,500,000         850,000      2,550,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Refer to Sec.  679.2 for definitions of areas.
\2\ On December 29, 1999, NMFS published a proposed rule in the Federal Register (64 FR 73003), that if adopted, would reduce the overall PSC limits by
  the following amounts: halibut mortality 100 mt, red king crabs 3,000 animals, C. bairdi crabs 50,000 animals, and C. opilio crabs 150,000 animals.
  NMFS would implement these reductions in the final rule.
\3\ C. opilioBycatch Limitation Zone. Boundaries are defined at Sec.  679.21 (e)(7)(iv)(B).
\4\ The Council, at its December 1999 meeting, limited red king crab for trawl fisheries within the RKCSS to 35 percent of the total allocation to the
  rock sole, flathead sole, and other flatfish fishery category (Sec.  679.21(e)(3)(ii)(B)).
\5\ Greenland turbot, arrowtooth flounder, and sablefish fishery category.
\6\ The Council, at its December 1999 meeting, apportioned the rockfish PSC amounts from July 4-December 31, to prevent fishing for rockfish before July
  4, 2000.
\7\ Pollock, Atka mackerel, and ``other species fishery category.
\8\ Any unused halibut PSC from the first trimester may be rolled over into the third trimester.
\9\ With the exception of herring, 7.5 percent of each PSC limit is allocated to the multi-species CDQ program as PSQ reserve. The PSQ reserve is not
  allocated by fishery, gear, or season.

    To monitor halibut bycatch mortality allowances and apportionments, 
the Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), will 
use observed halibut bycatch rates, assumed mortality rates, and 
estimates of groundfish catch to project when a fishery's halibut 
bycatch mortality allowance or seasonal apportionment is reached. The 
Regional Administrator monitors a fishery's halibut bycatch mortality 
allowances using assumed mortality rates that are based on the best 
information available, including information contained in the annual 
SAFE report.
    The Council recommended, and NMFS concurs, that the assumed halibut 
mortality rates developed by staff of the International Pacific Halibut 
Commission (IPHC) for the 2000 BSAI groundfish fisheries, and set forth 
in Table 8, be adopted for purposes of monitoring halibut bycatch 
allowances established for 2000. The justification for these mortality 
rates is discussed in the final SAFE report dated November 1999.

Table 8.--Assumed Pacific Halibut Mortality Rates for the BSAI Fisheries
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Assumed
                           Fishery                             mortality
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hook-and-line gear fisheries:
    Rockfish.................................................         28
    Pacific cod..............................................         11

[[Page 8293]]

 
    Greenland turbot.........................................         20
    Sablefish................................................         23
    Other Species............................................         11
Trawl gear fisheries:
    Midwater pollock.........................................         87
    Non-pelagic pollock......................................         76
    Yellowfin sole...........................................         81
    Rock sole................................................         79
    Flathead sole............................................         64
    Other flatfish...........................................         75
    Rockfish.................................................         64
    Pacific cod..............................................         66
    Atka mackerel............................................         81
    Greenland turbot.........................................         81
    Sablefish................................................         23
    Other species............................................         66
Pot gear fisheries:
    Pacific cod..............................................          9
    Other species............................................          9
CDQ fisheries:
    Trawl midwater pollock...................................         90
    Trawl non-pelagic pollock................................         90
    Hook-and-line Pacific cod................................         10
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Small Entity Compliance Guide

    The following information is a plain language guide to assist small 
entities in complying with this rule as required by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This rule's primary 
management measures are to announce final 2000 harvest specifications 
and prohibited species bycatch allowances for the groundfish fishery of 
the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands management area. 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 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area. This 
action affects all fishermen who participate in the BSAI 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 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 which 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 superceded 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 Gulf of Alaska (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 and based on the best 
available scientific information. Unfortunately that information was 
not available in time for NMFS to complete a notice-and-comment 
rulemaking before January as the commenter suggested. 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, the procedures include 
multiple Plan Team meetings open to the public and multiple Council 
meetings in which public comment is solicited, and provide adequate 
opportunity for the public to comment and participate effectively.
    NMFS agrees that the process should be improved and has already 
spent considerable time exploring different options including changing 
the calendar dates of the fishing year or creating a framework process 
which 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 maximum sustainable 
yield, so as to achieve the long-term optimum yield. 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 violated 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

[[Page 8294]]

under the fishery management plans 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 question is answered by the 
statutory definition of optimum yield (OY), which clearly allows OY to 
be set as high as the 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 fishery management 
plans is being subjected to an inappropriate harvest rate, and that no 
stock managed under these fishery management plans is overfished (C. 
bairdi tanner crab, C. opilio snow crab, and St. Matthew blue king crab 
are considered overfished under a separate fishery management plan). 
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 
overfishing level (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 B MSY level (Tiers 1-2) or B 
40 (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 fishery management plans 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 (section 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

[[Page 8295]]

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, 
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 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 included 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 guideline harvest level (GHL) for 
Snow crab is 28.5 million pounds 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 crab, 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 fishery management plans 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 
fishery management 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' 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.

[[Page 8296]]

    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 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 fishery 
management plan 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 a fishery 
management plan 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 measures change.
    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 Executive Order 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

[[Page 8297]]

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 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 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 optimum yield 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.
    The six Community Development Quota (CDQ) groups are comprised of 
64 small governmental jurisdictions with direct involvement in 
groundfish CDQ fisheries that are within the RFA definition of small 
entities. Based on 1998 data, NMFS estimates less than 280 small 
entities harvest groundfish in the BSAI.
    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.
    This action is necessary to establish harvest limits for the BSAI 
groundfish fisheries for the 2000 fishing year. The groundfish 
fisheries in the BSAI 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 U.S.C. 
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. 00-3912 Filed 2-15-00; 2:50 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P