[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 234 (Friday, December 5, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67998-68002]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-30284]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 031125288-3288-01; I.D. 110303A]
RIN 0648-AR35


Fisheries Off West Coast States and in the Western Pacific; 
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Amendment 16-2

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement Amendment 16-2 to 
the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Amendment 
16-2 amends the FMP to include overfished species rebuilding plans for 
lingcod, canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, and Pacific ocean 
perch (POP) within the FMP. Amendment 16-2 is intended to address the 
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) to protect and rebuild overfished 
species managed under a Federal FMP. Amendment 16-2 is also intended to 
partially respond to a Court order, in which NMFS was ordered to 
provide Pacific Coast groundfish rebuilding plans as FMPs, FMP 
amendments, or regulations, per the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing by January 5, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments on Amendment 16-2 or supporting documents should be 
sent to D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, Sand 
Point Way NE., BIN C15700, Seattle, WA 98115-0070. Attn: Becky Renko.
    Copies of Amendment 16-2 and its associated environmental impact 
statement/regulatory impact analysis/initial regulatory flexibility 
analysis (EIS/RIR/IRFA) are available from Donald McIsaac, Executive 
Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, 
Portland, OR 97220, phone: 503-820-2280.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Renko (Northwest Region, NMFS), 
phone: 206-526-6150; fax: 206-526-6736 and; e-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 67999]]

Electronic Access

    This Federal Register document is also accessible via the internet 
at the website of the Office of the Federal Register's website at: 
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html.
    Amendment 16-2 revises the FMP to include overfished species 
rebuilding plans for lingcod, canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, 
and POP and adds specific rebuilding parameters to the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 660.370, for each overfished species. This 
rulemaking is necessary to implement the rebuilding plans specified by 
Amendment 16-2.
    Amendment 16-2 address the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act) to protect and rebuild overfished species managed under a Federal 
FMP. Amendment 16-2 is also intended to partially respond to a Court 
order in Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Evans, 168 F. Supp. 
2d 1149 (N.D. Cal 2001,), in which NOAA Fisheries was ordered to 
provide Pacific Coast groundfish rebuilding plans as FMPs, FMP 
amendments, or regulations, per the Magnuson-Stevens Act. A Notice of 
Availability for Amendment 16-2 was published on November 7, 2003 (68 
FR 63053).
    This proposed rule is based on recommendations of the Council, 
under the authority of the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP and the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Background information and the Council's 
recommendations are summarized below. Further detail appears in the 
EIS/RIR/IRFA prepared by Council staff for Amendment 16-2.

Background

    In the fall of 2000, NMFS had approved the first three rebuilding 
plans for lingcod, boccacio, and POP (September 5, 2000, 65 FR 53646). 
Subsequently, requirements for developing overfished species rebuilding 
plans were addressed in Amendment 12 to the FMP, which were submitted 
for public review (September 8, 2000, 65 FR 54475) and approved by NMFS 
on December 7, 2000.
    During NMFS's review of Amendment 12, the agency considered whether 
the three previously approved rebuilding plans met the requirements of 
Amendment 12 and concluded that the plans did not. As a result, NMFS 
instructed the Council to re-submit the rebuilding plans for lingcod, 
boccacio, and POP. The final rule to implement Amendment 12 describes 
NMFS's revocation of the lingcod, boccacio, and POP rebuilding plans 
(December 29, 2000, 65 FR 82947). In the absence of final rebuilding 
plans approved by NMFS, the groundfish fishery has continued to operate 
under interm rebuilding measures for these species.
    While NMFS and the Council were developing rebuilding plans that 
were consistent with the requirements of Amendment 12, NMFS notified 
the Council that canary rockfish and cowcod were overfished and that 
Council must submit rebuilding plans for these species (On January 4, 
2000 65 FR 221). On January 11, 2001 (66 FR 2338), NMFS notified the 
Council that darkblotched and widow rockfish were overfished and that 
Council must submit rebuilding plans for these species.
    On August 20, 2001, a Federal magistrate ruled in National 
Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Evans (N.D. Cal. 2001) that 
rebuilding plans under the FMP must be in the form of a plan amendment 
or proposed regulations as specified by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 
U.S.C. 1854 (e)(3). In accordance with the Court ruling, the magistrate 
issued an order setting aside those portions of Amendment 12 dealing 
with rebuilding plans (Amendment 12 provided a framework for rebuilding 
plans that were not themselves plan amendments or proposed 
regulations). As a result of the magistrate's decision, the Council was 
required to amend the FMP to make rebuilding plans consistent with the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    On January 11, 2002 (67 FR 1555), NMFS notified the Council that 
yelloweye rockfish was overfished and that the Council must submit a 
rebuilding plan. On April 15, 2002 (67 FR 18117), NMFS notified the 
Council that Pacific whiting was overfished and that the Council must 
submit a rebuilding plan.
    Amendment 16-1 was prepared in part to respond to the court order. 
Amendment 16 1 establishes a process for and standards by which the 
Council will specify rebuilding plans for groundfish stocks that are 
declared overfished. Amendment 16-1 also amends the FMP to require that 
Pacific Coast groundfish overfished species rebuilding plans be added 
into the FMP via FMP amendment, and implemented through Federal 
regulations. Amendment 16 1 is intended to ensure that overfished 
species rebuilding plans meet the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, in particular National Standard 1 on overfishing and section 
304(e), which addresses rebuilding of overfished fisheries. NMFS 
approved Amendment 16-1 on November 14, 2003. A proposed rule to codify 
provisions of Amendment 16-1 was published in the Federal Register on 
September 5, 2003 (68 FR 52732).
    For each approved overfished species rebuilding plan, the following 
parameters will be specified in the FMP: estimates of unfished biomass 
(B0) and target biomass (BMSY), the year the 
stock would be rebuilt in the absence of fishing (TMIN), the 
year the stock would be rebuilt if the maximum time period permissible 
under National Standard Guidelines were applied (TMAX) and 
the target year in which the stock would be rebuilt under the adopted 
rebuilding plan (TTarget). Other relevant information listed 
in Amendment 16-1 will also be included in the FMP, including the 
probability of the stock attaining BMSY by TMAX 
(PMAX). These estimated rebuilding parameters will serve as 
management benchmarks in the FMP and the FMP will not be amended if the 
values for these parameters change after new stock assessments are 
completed, as is likely to happen.
    As required by the standards established by Amendment 16-1, the 
rebuilding plans being adopted under Amendment 16-2 for lingcod, canary 
rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, and POP include B0, 
BMSY, TMIN, TMAX, and TTarget 
for each species. If adopted, Amendment 16-2 would add these parameters 
to section 4.5.4. of the FMP. Other relevant information on each of 
these overfished stocks, such as stock distribution, fishery 
interaction, and the rebuilding strategy would also be added to section 
4.5.4 of the FMP if the rebuilding plans proposed under Amendment 16-2 
are adopted.
    Amendment 16-1 specified two rebuilding parameters that are to be 
codified in Federal regulations for individual species rebuilding 
plans. This proposed rule adds these rebuilding parameters to the Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 660.370. These parameters are 
the target year for rebuilding and the harvest control rule that is to 
be used during the rebuilding period. The target rebuilding year is the 
year in which there is a 50 percent likelihood that the stock will have 
been rebuilt with a given mortality rate. The harvest control rule 
expresses a given fishing mortality rate that is to be used over the 
course of rebuilding. These parameters would be used to establish the 
annual optimum yields (OYs). Conservation and management goals defined 
in the FMP require the Council and NMFS to manage to the appropriate 
harvest levels for a species or species groups, including those harvest 
levels established for rebuilding overfished species.
    If, after a new stock assessment, the Council and NMFS conclude 
that either

[[Page 68000]]

or both of the parameters defined in regulation should be revised, the 
revision will be implemented through the Federal rulemaking process, 
and the updated values codified in the Federal regulation. Generally, 
the target year should only be changed in unusual circumstances. Two 
such unusual circumstances include (1) if, it is determined, based on 
new information, that the existing target year is later that the 
maximum rebuilding time (TMAX), (2) or if the harvest 
control rule calculated from the new information is estimated to result 
in such a low OY as to cause substantial socio-economic impacts. Any 
change to a harvest control rule must be fully supported by a 
corresponding analysis and updated through the Federal rulemaking 
process which would include opportunity for public notice and comment.
    An approved rebuilding plan will be implemented through setting OYs 
and establishing management measures necessary to maintain the fishing 
mortality within the OYs to achieve objectives related to rebuilding 
requirements.
    At the Council's June 2003 meeting, rebuilding plans for lingcod, 
canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish, and POP were adopted and 
include the parameters listed below. When making the recommendation to 
implement these rebuilding plans, the Council sought to balance the 
rebuilding risks to each stock with the short and long-term socio-
economic costs borne by groundfish buyers, commercial harvesters, and 
recreational operators as a result of constraining the fisheries to 
reduce total mortality of these overfished species.
    Amendment 16-2 will be followed by Amendment 16-3. A notice of 
intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was published 
on September 12, 2003 (68 FR 53712) for Amendment 16-3. If approved, 
Amendment 16-3 will contain rebuilding plans for bocaccio, cowcod, 
widow rockfish and yelloweye rockfish. The Council is scheduled to take 
final action on the Amendment 16-3 rebuilding plans at its April 2004 
meeting. A Draft EIS is scheduled for publication in June 2004.

Lingcod

    Lingcod are irregularly distributed coastwide in hard bottom areas 
and around rocky reefs and are encountered in a variety of commercial 
and recreational fisheries. Lingcod is also an important recreational 
species coastwide. North of 40[deg]10' N. lat., limited entry trawl and 
limited entry fixed gear vessels have historically landed a substantial 
portion of the lingcod landings in that area. The open access sector, 
which is comprised of many types of fixed gear and uses a variety of 
strategies, has also accounted for a substantial portion of the lingcod 
mortality.
    Date declared overfished: March 3, 1999.
    Status of the stock when declared overfished: In 1999 the biomass 
was believed to be at 10 percent of its unfished biomass level. A 
coastwide assessment was conducted in 2000 and confirmed that the stock 
was overfished coastwide.
    B0: 22,882 mt north and 20,971 mt south
    BMSY: 9,153 mt north and 8,389 south
    TMIN: 2007
    TMAX: 2009
    PMAX: 60 percent
    TTARGET: 2009
    Harvest control rule: F=0.00531 north and F=0.061 south
    Rebuilding strategy at the time of rebuilding plan adoption: 
Management measures intended to limit bycatch of lingcod include the 
use of Rockfish Conservation Areas (RCAs) to restrict fishing in areas 
where overfished species are most likely to occur, and the use of 
cumulative trip limits. Small trip limits are allowed in the trawl 
fishery to accommodate true incidental catch. Lingcod landings by the 
limited entry fixed gear and open access fisheries are severely limited 
during the summer months and have been prohibited during the winter 
months. Lingcod are vulnerable to these gears during the winter nesting 
period, but have a high rate of survival when released alive. In 
addition to recreational bag limits, similar season restrictions have 
been used in the California and Washington recreational fisheries 
during the winter months.

Canary rockfish

    Canary rockfish prefer rocky areas on the continental shelf (shelf) 
and are encountered in a wide variety of commercial and recreational 
fisheries. Limited entry vessels targeting flatfish and arrowtooth 
flounder have accounted for a large portion of the landed catch north 
of 40[deg]10' N. lat. Smaller amounts are taken during the primary 
whiting season and DTS (Dover sole-thornyhead-sablefish complex) trawl 
fishery, as well as by fixed gear vessels targeting groundfish on the 
shelf. Recreational vessels, mainly off the coast of northern 
California, account for most of the recreational catch of canary 
rockfish.
    Date declared overfished: January 4, 2000 (65 FR 221)
    Status of the stock when declared overfished: 22 percent of its 
unfished biomass level north of Cape Blanco and 8 percent of its 
unfished biomass level south of Cape Blanco.
    B0: 31,550 mt
    BMSY: 12,620 mt
    TMIN: 2057
    TMAX: 2076
    PMAX: 60 percent
    TTARGET: 2074
    Harvest control rule: F=0.022
    Rebuilding strategy at the time of rebuilding plan adoption: 
Management measures intended to limit bycatch of canary rockfish 
include the use of RCAs and cumulative trip limits. Bottom trawling is 
prohibited in the trawl RCA, which covers depths where canary rockfish 
have been most frequently caught. Cumulative limits are structured to 
discourage targeting while allowing very low levels of incidental take 
to be landed. In addition, differential trip limits have been used for 
large and small footrope trawl gear. By allowing greater limits for 
large footrope gear and prohibiting its use in nearshore areas, there 
is an incentive for vessels to fish in deeper waters, beyond the range 
of canary rockfish.
    Recreational fisheries are managed through bag limits, size limits 
and seasons. As necessary, seasons can be shortened and bag limits 
reduced to stay within the OY.
    Darkblotched rockfish
    Darkblotched rockfish occurs on the outer shelf and continental 
slope (slope), mainly north of Point Reyes (38[deg] N. lat.). Because 
of their deeper distribution, they are caught exclusively by commercial 
vessels. Most landings have been made by bottom trawl vessels targeting 
flatfish on the shelf, and rockfish and the DTS species on the slope.
    Date declared overfished: January 11, 2001 (66 FR 2338)
    Status of the stock when declared overfished: following a 2000 
stock assessment the coastwide stock was believed to be at 22 percent 
of its unfished biomass level.
    B0: 29,044 mt
    BMSY: 11,618 mt
    TMIN: 2014
    TMAX: 2047
    PMAX: 80 percent
    TTARGET: 2030
    Harvest control rule: F=0.027
    Rebuilding strategy at the time of rebuilding plan adoption: 
Management measures intended to limit bycatch of darkblotched rockfish 
include the use of RCAs and cumulative trip limits. The boundaries of 
the RCAs vary by season and fishing sector and may be modified in 
response to new information about

[[Page 68001]]

geographical and seasonal distribution of bycatch. The seaward boundary 
of the trawl RCA was set at a depth that was likely to keep fishing 
effort in deeper waters and away from areas where the bycatch of 
darkblotched rockfish was highest. During the winter months, 
modifications to the line allow for the harvest of flatfish while 
minimizing the impacts on darkblotched rockfish.
    Cumulative limits for the minor slope rockfish species (the complex 
that darkblotched rockfish is managed under) north of 40[deg]10' N. 
lat. and splitnose rockfish were lowered to reduce the potential take 
of darkblotched rockfish. As needed, trip limits for other co-occurring 
species may be adjusted to reduce darkblotched rockfish bycatch.

POP

    POP tend to occur in similar depths as darkblotched rockfish, 
although they have a more northern geographic distribution. POP are 
caught in similar fisheries as darkblotched rockfish north of 
40[deg]10' N. lat. Limited entry trawl vessels targeting flatfish, 
including petrale sole and arrowtooth flounder, account for more than 
90 percent of all POP landings. POP are not an important component of 
the recreational fisheries.
    Date declared overfished: March 3, 1999
    Status of the stock when declared overfished: following a 1998 
stock assessment of POP in the Vancouver and Columbia area, the stock 
was believed to be at 13 percent of unfished biomass level.
    B0: 60,212 units of spawning output
    BMSY: 24,084 units of spawning output
    TMIN: 2012
    TMAX: 2042
    PMAX: 70 percent
    TTARGET: 2027
    Harvest control rule: F=0.0082
    Rebuilding strategy at the time of rebuilding plan adoption: 
Management measures intended to limit the bycatch of POP include the 
use of RCAs to restrict fishing in areas where overfished species are 
found and cumulative trip limits. Because POP co-occur with 
darkblotched rockfish, measures to reduce the incidental catch of 
darkblotched rockfish benefit POP. These measures include seaward trawl 
RCA boundaries that are established to keep fishing effort in deeper 
water where POP are less abundant, and cumulative limits for POP and 
minor slope rockfish that are intended to discourage targeting while 
allowing low levels of incidental catch to be landed. As needed, trip 
limits for other co-occurring species may be adjusted to reduce 
darkblotched rockfish bycatch.

Classification

    At this time, NMFS has not determined whether Amendment 16-2, which 
this proposed 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.
    The Council prepared a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
that discusses the effects on the environment as a result of this 
action. A notice of availability was published on September 19, 2003 
(68 FR 54900). A copy of the EIS is available from the Council office. 
(see ADDRESSES)
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Council has prepared an IRFA, as required by section 603 of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The IRFA describes the economic impact this 
proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A copy of the 
full analysis is available from the Council office (see ADDRESSES). A 
summary of the analysis follows.
    The purpose of this proposed action is to implement rebuilding 
plans for four overfished species, lingcod, canary rockfish, 
darkblotched rockfish and POP. This action is necessary to meet the 
Magnuson-Seven Act requirements for overfished stocks which are defined 
in the National Standard Guidelines (50 CFR 600.310). National Standard 
1 requires that remedial action be taken by preparing an FMP, FMP 
amendment or proposed regulation to end overfishing if it is occurring, 
rebuild overfished stocks to the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) level 
within an appropriate time frame, and to prevent stocks from becoming 
overfished if they are approaching an overfished threshold. The 
objective of this proposed rule is to implement rebuilding parameters 
that will result in lingcod, canary rockfish, darkblotched rockfish and 
POP stocks returning to their MSY biomass levels.
    There are no recordkeeping, reporting, or other compliance issues 
forthcoming from this proposed rule. This proposed rule does not 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules.
    The EIS/RIR/IRFA for this rule defines six alternative actions that 
were considered for each of the four overfished species. The 
alternatives present a range of rebuilding strategies in terms of 
rebuilding probabilities for each species. The no action alternative 
would be based on the ``40-10 harvest policy'', which is the default 
rebuilding policy for setting OYs. Under the 40-10 harvest policy, 
stocks with biomass levels below B40% have OYs set in relation to the 
biomass level. At B40%, an OY may be set equal to the ABC. However, if 
a stock's spawning biomass declines below B40%, the OY is scaled 
downward until at 10 percent (B10%) the harvest OY is set at zero 
unless modified for a species-specific rebuilding plan. In comparison 
to the other alternatives, (except the maximum conservation 
alternative) the 40-10 policy can result in lower OYs in the short 
term, when a stock is at a low biomass level, but allow greater 
harvests when a stock is at higher biomass levels. For further 
information on the 40-10 policy see the preamble for the annual 
specifications and management measures published on January 8, 1999 (64 
FR 1316) or Section 5.3 of the FMP. The 40-10 policy alternative could 
require short-term reductions in OYs for stocks at lower biomass levels 
than would be required under the other alternatives, except the maximum 
conservation alternative. Such reductions could result in reduced 
profits, income, and employment in a wide range of groundfish fisheries 
over a longer period of time than would occur with the other 
alternatives.
    The maximum conservation alternative, based on a harvest mortality 
rate of zero, would be in place for each stock until the individual 
stock was rebuilt, resulting in the target rebuilding period for each 
stock being equal to TMIN. Each stock could be expected to rebuild 
fastest under this alternative, but at considerable socioeconomic cost. 
Because canary and darkblotched rockfish are caught in a wide range of 
other fisheries, a zero harvest mortality rate would likely result in 
the closure of other fisheries. The rebuilding of these stocks, even in 
the absence of fishing, is likely to result in many current 
participants in the commercial recreational fisheries as well as 
supporting businesses going out of business.
    The maximum harvest alternative for each overfished species was 
based on a 50 percent probability of rebuilding the stocks to their MSY 
biomass levels by TMAX. This alternative would delay 
rebuilding for the longest period of time with the intent of keeping 
harvests at the highest allowable levels for the duration of 
rebuilding. As a result, this alternative would have the least 
socioeconomic impact, in the short-term. Delaying the rebuilding period 
under the maximum harvest alternative

[[Page 68002]]

can also be expressed as the level of risk to the overfished stocks. 
Further delay in rebuilding could have a greater socioeconomic impact 
than the other alternatives, if currently healthy stocks were 
overfished.
    Intermediate alternatives were defined for each overfished species 
and were based on 60-,70-and 80-percent probabilities of rebuilding the 
stocks to their MSY biomass by TMAX. The socio-economic 
impacts of the intermediate values fall within the range of the other 
alternatives that were fully analyzed in EIS analysis. Quantifying the 
differences between these alternatives is difficult given the lack of 
detailed socio-economic data.
    The mixed stock exception alternative would allow higher harvests 
of canary rockfish and could be combined with any of alternatives 
(except the no action alternative). Since the demands of rebuilding 
canary rockfish will affect a range of fisheries, (because it 
constrains stocks), relaxing this constraint under any of the 
alternatives would allow a higher harvest level in some fisheries. 
However, fisheries with little or no canary rockfish bycatch, but with 
bycatch of other overfished species, would not necessarily benefit. 
This alternative was not considered for POP or lingcod, since they do 
not constrain stocks in fisheries where they are targeted or 
incidentally caught.
    The last set of alternatives considered were the Council's 
preferred alternatives for each species and are as follows: lingcod - 
60 percent probability of rebuilding the stock to its MSY biomass by 
Tmax with a TTARGET of 2009 and a harvest rate of 
0.0531 in the North and 0.0610 in the south; canary rockfish - 60 
percent probability of rebuilding the stock to its MSY biomass by 
TMAX with a TTARGET of 2074 and a harvest rate of 
0.0220, darkblotched rockfish - 80-percent probability of rebuilding 
the stock to its MSY biomass by TMAX with a TTARGET 
of 2030 and a harvest rate of 0.027, and POP - 70-percent probability 
of rebuilding the stock to its MSY biomass by TMAX with a 
TTARGET of 2027 and a harvest rate of 0.0082. The Council's 
preferred alternatives, were taken from the range of intermediate 
alternatives for each species.
    A fish-harvesting business is considered a ``small'' business by 
the Small Business Administration (SBA) if it has annual receipts not 
in excess of $3.5 million. The economic impacts of implementing these 
rebuilding plans will be shared among the participants. Approximately 
1,560 vessels participate in the West Coast groundfish fisheries. Of 
those, about 410 vessels are registered to limited entry permits issued 
for either trawl, longline, or pot gear. About 1,150 vessels land 
groundfish against open access limits while either directly targeting 
groundfish or taking groundfish incidentally in fisheries directed at 
non-groundfish species. All but 10-20 of those vessels are considered 
small businesses by the SBA. Of the 450 groundfish buyers that 
regularly purchase groundfish, 38 buyers purchased groundfish product 
in excess of $1,000,000 in 2002. In the 2001 recreational fisheries, 
there were 106 Washington charter vessels engaged in salt water fishing 
outside of Puget Sound, 232 charter vessels active on the Oregon coast 
and 415 charter vessels active on the California coast. NMFS does not 
know the proportion of recreational charter vessel operations that 
would be considered large businesses, but the agency believes that the 
majority of these businesses would be considered ``small'' businesses 
by the SBA. This proposed rule is not expected to yield 
disproportionate economic impacts between those small and large 
entities.
    Implementation of specific rebuilding plans may entail substantial 
economic impacts on some groundfish buyers, commercial harvesters, and 
recreational operators. The Council preferred rebuilding alternatives 
specify annual OY levels for the overfished species that are sufficient 
to mitigate some of the adverse economic impacts on these entities, 
while not compromising the statutory requirement for timely rebuilding. 
NMFS welcomes comments on this issue (see ADDRESSES) and will notify 
the public of its final determination as to whether the action will 
result in a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities and will advise the SBA in the final rule for this action.
    This action was developed after meaningful consultation and 
collaboration with tribal representatives on the Council who have 
agreed with the provisions that apply to tribal vessels and is, 
therefore, compliant with Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and 
coordination with Indian tribal governments).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, 
Fishing, Guam, Hawaiian Natives, Indians, Northern Mariana Islands, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 2, 2003.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES AND IN THE WESTERN 
PACIFIC

    l. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
    2. Section 660.370, ``Overfished species rebuilding plans'' is 
added to read as follows:


Sec.  660.370  Overfished species rebuilding plans.

    (a) Canary rockfish. The target date for rebuilding the canary 
rockfish stock to BMSY is 2074. The harvest control rule to 
be used to rebuild the canary rockfish stock is an annual harvest rate 
of F=0.022.
    (b) Darkblotched rockfish. The target year for rebuilding the 
darkblotched rockfish stock to BMSY is 2030. The harvest 
control rule to be used to rebuild the darkblotched rockfish stock is 
an annual harvest rate of F=0.027.
    (c) Lingcod. The target year for rebuilding the lingcod stock to 
BMSY is 2009. The harvest control rule to be used to rebuild 
the lingcod stock is an annual harvest rate of F=0.0531 in the area 
north of 40[deg]10 N. lat. and F=0.061 for the area south of 40[deg]10 
N. lat.
    (d) Pacific ocean perch (POP). The target year for rebuilding the 
POP stock to BMSY is 2027. The harvest control rule to be 
used to rebuild the POP stock is an annual harvest rate of F=0.0082.
[FR Doc. 03-30284 Filed 12-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S