[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 60 (Friday, March 28, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15144-15145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-7516]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 030320066-3066-01; I.D. 022103D]
RIN 0648-AQ78


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Delay of 
Full Retention and Utilization Requirements for Rock Sole and Yellowfin 
Sole

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement Amendment 75 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the Bering Sea 
and Aleutian Islands Area (FMP). This amendment would delay the 
effective date of requirements for 100-percent retention and 
utilization requirements of rock sole and yellowfin sole from January 
1, 2003, until June 1, 2004. The North Pacific Fishery Management 
Council (Council) submitted Amendment 75 to provide the Council and the 
affected industry with additional time to develop and assess 
alternatives to address groundfish discards in the groundfish fisheries 
of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI). This 
action is designed to be consistent with the the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Management and Conservation Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the 
FMP, and other applicable laws.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received on or before May 
12, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional 
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, NMFS, Alaska Region, 
P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668, Attn: Lori Durall, or delivered 
to NMFS, Alaska Region, 709 West 9th Street, Room 453, Juneau, AK, 
99801-1668, and marked Attn: Lori Durall. Comments also may be sent via 
facsimile (fax) to (907) 586-7557. Comments will not be accepted if 
submitted via e-mail or the Internet. Copies of the Environmental 
Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for Amendment 75 may be obtained from 
NMFS at the above address or by calling the Sustainable Fisheries 
Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, at (907) 586-7228.

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS manages the groundfish fishery in the 
exclusive economic zone of the BSAI under the FMP. The Council 
prepared, and NMFS approved, the FMP under the authority of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). Regulations implementing 
the FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General regulations governing U.S. 
fisheries also appear at 50 CFR part 600.
    The Council has submitted Amendment 75 for Secretarial review and a 
Notice of Availability of the FMP amendment was published in the 
Federal Register on February 28, 2003, with comments on the FMP 
amendment invited through April 29, 2003. Comments may address the FMP 
amendment, the proposed rule, or both, but must be received by April 
29, 2003, to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the 
FMP amendment. All comments received by April 29, 2003, whether 
specifically directed to the FMP amendment or the proposed rule, will 
be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the FMP 
amendment.

Purpose and Need for Amendment 75

    In 1997, the Council adopted a regulatory program to reduce the 
amount of groundfish discards in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska. 
This program, known as the Improved Retention/Improved Utilization (IR/
IU) Program, was adopted as Amendment 49 to the FMP for the Groundfish 
Fishery of the BSAI and Amendment 49 to the FMP for Groundfish of the 
Gulf of Alaska (GOA) (Amendments 49/49). The IR/IU program requires 
that vessels fishing for groundfish in Alaska retain all pollock and 
Pacific cod beginning in 1998 when directed fishing for those species 
is open. On January 1, 2003, the program expanded to include all rock 
sole and yellowfin sole in the BSAI, and all shallow water flatfish in 
the GOA.
    These requirements were set out in the final rule to implement 
Amendment 49 for the BSAI (62 FR 63880, December 3, 1997), and the 
final rule to implement Amendment 49 for the GOA (62 FR 65379, December 
12, 1997).
    In the EA/RIR/IRFA prepared for BSAI Amendment 49, NMFS assessed 
the biological, economic and social impacts of improved retention and 
utilization. This analysis found that the proposed actions could result 
in significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, including a significant number of relatively small catcher/
processor vessels that use trawl gear. Because of their size, these 
vessels are limited to freezing headed and gutted products.
    To mitigate some of the effects that IR/IU regulations could have, 
the Council delayed implementation of the rules on the most negatively 
affected fisheries (i.e., those groundfish fisheries in which rock 
sole, yellowfin sole and shallow-water flatfish are caught and 
discarded) for a period of 5 years.
    The Council recognized the need to conduct an assessment of the 
impacts of IR/IU regulations on small entities to determine whether a 
modification of the IR/IU regulations would minimize such impacts and 
continue to meet the Council's objectives. These objectives include 
ensuring healthy fisheries, reducing bycatch and waste, and improving 
utilization of fish resources with minimum negative effects of 
regulations on small entities.
    To this end, the Council began an analysis in early 2002, to 
examine alternative approaches to current 100-percent retention 
requirements for rock sole and yellowfin sole that could achieve the 
Council's objectives of reducing bycatch but that would have less 
negative effects on industry. The analysis concluded that some entities 
currently participating in the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI might 
discontinue their participation due to the economic burden the existing 
rules could place on their operation.
    In June 2002, therefore, the Council revised its IR/IU problem 
statement to state that 100-percent retention of rock sole and 
yellowfin sole would result in severe economic losses to certain 
participants in the fishery, while less than 100-percent retention of 
only those species would not be enforceable. The Council also began an 
analysis of a variety of alternative regulatory approaches that would 
provide for reductions in groundfish discards in a less burdensome 
manner.
    In October 2002, the Council concluded that while several 
alternative proposals under analysis showed merit, they were not 
sufficiently developed and analyzed in a manner that would allow for 
implementation on January 1, 2003. Therefore, the Council adopted

[[Page 15145]]

BSAI Amendment 75 to delay implementing the 100-percent retention 
requirements for rock sole and yellowfin sole in the BSAI until June 1, 
2004, to provide the Council and industry with additional time to 
develop alternative regulatory proposals. Also in October 2002, the 
Council considered whether to delay 100-percent retention requirements 
for shallow water flatfish in the GOA groundfish fisheries. The Council 
concluded, however, that full retention of shallow water flatfish in 
the GOA is practicable and would not result in the same economic burden 
as would the same requirement for rock sole and yellowfin sole in the 
BSAI groundfish fisheries. Therefore, the Council decided not to delay 
100-percent retention requirements for shallow water flatfish in the 
GOA.

Elements of the Proposed Rule

    This proposed rule would delay the effective date for IR/IU 
retention and utilization requirements for rock sole and yellowfin sole 
in the BSAI until June 1, 2004. No other regulatory actions are 
contained in this proposed rule.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not determined that the FMP amendment that 
this rule would implement is consistent with the national standards of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making 
that determination, will take into account the data, views, and 
comments received during the comment period.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Council prepared an IRFA that describes the economic impact 
that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A 
description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal 
basis for this action are contained in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section of the preamble. This proposed rule does not duplicate, 
overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules. There are no new 
reporting or recordkeeping requirements contained in any of the 
alternatives considered for this action.
    There are 176 small entities (all catcher vessels) and 34 large 
entities (6 catcher vessels, 24 head and gut catcher processors, and 4 
surimi catcher processors) active in these fisheries. Since per vessel 
costs are not available for these vessels, individual vessel 
profitability could not be estimated. Therefore, changes in gross 
revenue of the 176 vessels are used as a proxy for changes in 
individual vessel profitability. Furthermore, assumptions are made that 
revenues losses and gains are shared equally among these vessels and 
discards represent a displacement of revenue tonnage if hold space is 
limited. There are no economic impacts resulting from disproportionate 
sizes of vessels in the fishery.
    A copy of the complete analysis can be obtained from the NMFS (see 
ADDRESSES) or via the Internet at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/.
    A summary of the analysis follows:
    The preferred alternative would delay implementation of IR/IU 
flatfish regulations in the BSAI fisheries until June 2004. The 
economic impact of the preferred alternative on individual vessels is 
expected to be minimal.
    Alternative 1, which represents a 100-percent retention 
requirement, would lead to decreases in gross revenue for the affected 
fisheries and could yield substantial decreases in gross revenue 
associated with rock sole in the Pacific cod fishery. Alternative 2 
would allow some discards of the IR/IU flatfish species. The percent 
retention requirement would be set independently for each species and 
would range from 50-percent to 90-percent. The analysis of the effects 
of alternative retention requirements on catcher vessels shows that 
virtually 100-percent of the catch of rock sole and yellow sole is 
discarded in all the fisheries in which rock sole and yellow sole are 
caught. Consequently, any retention requirement for rock sole or yellow 
sole would be expected to result in adverse economic and operational 
impacts. A full retention requirement for rock sole would have the 
greatest effect, and this requirement would result in less than a five 
percent displacement in revenue tonnage for all catcher vessel classes.
    Alternative 3 would delay implementation of IR/IU flatfish rules 
for up to 3 years. Delaying implementation will postpone the severe 
economic consequences discussed under Alternatives 1 and 2. Alternative 
4 exempts fisheries from IR/IU flatfish regulations if flatfish 
discards are less than 5 percent of total groundfish catch. Discards 
exceed 5 percent in most flatfish fisheries and in Pacific cod trawl 
fisheries in the BSAI. The revenue reductions of this alternative are 
similar to those of Alternative 1. A copy of the IRFA is available from 
NMFS (see ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

    Dated: March 24, 2003.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

    1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., and 3631 et 
seq.; Title II of Division C, Pub. L. 105-277; Sec. 3027, Pub. L. 
106-31, 113 Stat. 57.
    2. In Sec.  679.27, paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4) are revised to 
read as follows:


Sec.  679.27  Improved Retention/Improved Utilization Program.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Rock sole in the BSAI (beginning June 1, 2004).
    (4) Yellowfin sole in the BSAI (beginning June 1, 2004).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-7516 Filed 3-27-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S