[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 92 (Wednesday, May 12, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26320-26324]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-10782]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 040223064-4136-02; I.D. 020404F]


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Gulf of 
Alaska; Final 2004 Harvest Specifications for Skates

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

ACTION: Final 2004 harvest specifications for skates and associated 
management measures; closures.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS announces final 2004 harvest specifications for skates 
and associated management measures for the skate fishery of the Gulf of 
Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary to establish harvest limits and 
associated management measures for skates during the 2004 fishing year 
and to accomplish the goals and objectives of the Fishery Management 
Plan for Groundfish of the GOA (FMP). The intended effect of this 
action is to conserve and manage the skate resources in the GOA in 
accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

DATES: Effective at 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), June 11, 
2004, through 2400 hrs, A.l.t, December 31, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Environmental Assessment (EA) and Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) prepared for this action and the 
Final 2003 Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) report, dated 
November 2003, are available from NMFS, Alaska Region, P.O. Box 21668, 
Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Lori Durall.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Pearson, 907-481-1780 or e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background for the Final 2004 Skate Harvest Specifications

    NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic 
zone (EEZ) of the GOA under the FMP. The North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council (Council) prepared the FMP under the authority of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801, et seq. Regulations governing 
U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 
679.
    In October 2003, the Council made final recommendations on 
Amendment 63 to the FMP and submitted it for review by the Secretary of 
Commerce (Secretary) in November 2003. The Council proposed Amendment 
63 to move skates from the ``other species'' category to the target 
species category in the FMP. By establishing skates as a target 
species, a directed fishery for skates in the GOA could be managed to 
reduce the potential of overfishing skates while providing an 
opportunity for achieving a long term sustainable yield from the skate 
resource in the GOA. NMFS published a Notice of Availability for 
Amendment 63 on December 2, 2003 (68 FR 67390) and a proposed rule to 
implement Amendment 63 on January 6, 2004 (69 FR 614). The Secretary 
approved Amendment 63 on February 27, 2004.
    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 (OY) range 
of 116,000 to 800,000 metric tons (mt) (see Sec.  679.20(a)(1)(ii)). 
Regulations at Sec.  679.20(c)(3)(i) further require NMFS to publish 
annually the final annual TAC. NMFS published the final 2004 groundfish 
harvest specifications in the Federal Register on February 27, 2004 (69 
FR 9261). The final 2004 harvest specifications for skates in the GOA 
and associated management measures contained in this action amend the 
final 2004 groundfish harvest specifications.
    The proposed harvest specifications for skates in the GOA were 
published in the Federal Register on March 4, 2004 (69 FR 10190). 
Comments were invited and accepted through March 19, 2004. NMFS 
received one letter of comment on the proposed specifications. This 
letter of comment is summarized and responded to in this document under 
the heading Response to Comments. Public consultation with the Council 
occurred during its December 2003 meeting in Anchorage, AK. After 
considering public comments, as well as biological and economic data 
that were available at the Council's December meeting, the Council 
recommended, and NMFS approved, the final 2004 harvest specifications 
for skates set forth in Table 1 of this action. No changes were made 
from the proposed to the final harvest specifications for skates. For 
2004, the sum of skate TAC amounts is 6,993 mt.

Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) and TAC Specifications

    The final ABC and TAC levels for each species group are based on 
the best available biological and socioeconomic information, including 
methods used to calculate stock biomass, assumed distribution of stock 
biomass, and estimated incidental catch in other directed groundfish 
fisheries. In December 2003, the Council, its Advisory Panel (AP), and 
its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) reviewed current 
biological and harvest information about the condition of groundfish 
stocks in the GOA. Most of this information was compiled initially by 
the Council's GOA Plan Team and is presented in the final 2003 SAFE 
report for the GOA groundfish fisheries, dated November 2003. The Plan 
Team annually produces such a document as the first step in the process 
of specifying TACs. 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 GOA ecosystem and the economic condition of the 
groundfish fisheries off Alaska. From these data and analyses, the Plan 
Team estimates an ABC for each species category.
    The Plan Team recommended a single gulfwide overfishing level (OFL) 
for all skate species, a single gulfwide ABC for ``other skates'' 
(Genus Bathyraja), and ABCs for Big and Longnose skates (Raja 
binoculata and Raja rhina, respectively) combined in the Western, 
Central, and Eastern Regulatory Areas of the GOA. Additionally, the 
Plan Team recommended that the TAC for Big and Longnose skates in the 
Central Regulatory Area not exceed the calculated OFL for Big skates in 
that area (3,284 mt). The SSC concurred with the Plan Team's 
recommendation for a single gulfwide OFL for all skate species but 
recommended a separate ABC for Big and Longnose skates only in the 
Central Regulatory Area. The SSC believes that this breakout would be a 
better method to address the immediate management concerns in the 
Central Regulatory Area given the current data limitations, which 
include a lack of skate species composition data in the retained and 
discarded catch in previous years. The AP and Council concurred with 
the SSC's ABC recommendations which are presented in Table 1. The AP 
and the Council concurred with the Plan Team's TAC recommendation of 
3,284 mt for Big and Longnose skates combined in the Central Regulatory 
Area. The AP and

[[Page 26321]]

Council recommended that the TAC for all skates, excluding Big and 
Longnose skates in the Central Regulatory Area, be set at the ABC level 
of 3,709 mt. These amounts are presented in Table 1.

 Table 1.--Final 2004 ABCs, TACs, and OFL for Skates in the Western (W), Central (C), Eastern (E), and Gulfwide
                          (GW) Areas of the Gulf of Alaska. (Values are in metric tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Species/Area                            ABC                          TAC              Overfishing
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big and Longnose skate\1\/W and E and      3,709......................  3,709......................  ...........
 ``Other'' skates\2\/GW..................
Big and Longnose skate/C.................  4,435......................  3,284......................  ...........
Total/GW.................................  8,144......................  6,993......................       10,859
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Big skate means Raja binoculata and Longnose skate means Raja rhina.
\2\ ``Other'' skates means Bathyraja spp.

    With respect to the final 2004 harvest specifications for the 
groundfish fishery of the GOA, published on February 27, 2004 (69 FR 
9261), this action would: (1) raise the gulfwide total OFL levels by 
10,859 mt, from 649,460 mt to 660,319 mt, (2) raise the gulfwide total 
ABC levels by 8,144 mt, from 498,948 mt to 507,092 mt, (3) raise the 
``other species'' TAC by 350 mt (5 percent of 6,993 mt), from 12,592 mt 
to 12,942 mt, (4) raise the gulfwide total TAC levels by 7,343 mt 
(6,993 mt + 350 mt), from 264,433 mt to 271,776 mt, which is within the 
required OY range of 116,000 mt to 800,000 mt, and (5) raise the non-
exempt AFA catcher vessel ``other species'' sideboard limitation 
gulfwide total by 3 mt, from 113 mt to 116 mt.

Additional Management Measures

    NMFS is adopting 4 management measures for skates that currently 
apply to ``other species.'' First, NMFS published a proposed rule 
implementing Amendment 63 to the FMP on January 6, 2004 (69 FR 614) 
which proposed to establish the maximum retainable amount of incidental 
catch for skates equal to that for ``other species'' (Table 10 to part 
679--Gulf of Alaska Retainable Percentages). These management measures 
will be implemented by the final rule for Amendment 63, which will be 
published separately in the Federal Register in the near future. The 
other management measures were published in the proposed specifications 
for skates on March 4, 2004 (69 FR 10190).
    Second, halibut bycatch mortality in the directed trawl fishery 
targeting skates will accrue to PSC limits established for the shallow-
water complex, and bycatch mortality in the directed hook-and-line 
fishery targeting skates will accrue to the limits established for 
hook-and-line gear other than demersal shelf rockfish.
    Third, the halibut discard mortality rates will be based on those 
for ``other species'' i.e., 13 percent for hook-and-line gear, 61 
percent for trawl gear, and 17 percent for pot gear.
    Finally, the sideboard limitations for non-exempt AFA catcher 
vessels for skates gulfwide will be based on the ratio of 1995-1997 
non-exempt AFA catcher vessel catch of ``other species'' to 1995-1997 
``other species'' TAC, which is 0.9 percent. These amounts are 33 mt 
(3,709 mt x 0.009) for all skates gulfwide, except Big and Longnose 
skates in the Central Regulatory Area, and 30 mt (3,284 mt x 0.009) for 
Big and Longnose skates in the Central Regulatory Area. Based on these 
sideboard limitations, and in accordance with Sec.  679.20(d)(1)(iii), 
NMFS has established a directed fishing allowance of 0 mt for these 
targets. Therefore, NMFS is closing directed fishing for all skates 
gulfwide for the duration of the 2004 fishing year by non-exempt AFA 
catcher vessels.

Response to Comments

    NMFS received one letter of comment in response to the proposed 
2004 harvest specifications for skates in the GOA (69 FR 10190, March 
4, 2004) and the Environmental Assessment/Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (EA/IRFA) for a Revision to the Skate Harvest 
Specifications for the Year 2004, implemented under the authority of 
the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska. The 
letter contained four separate comments concerning the proposed 2004 
harvest specifications for skates and their effect on the ``other 
species'' category TAC in the GOA that are summarized and responded to 
below. The letter also incorporated by reference comments that were 
submitted on the notice of availability for Amendment 63 (68 FR 67390, 
December 2, 2003). Those comments are summarized and responded to in 
the final rule implementing Amendment 63.
    Comment 1. Due to the sensitive life history of skates (slow 
growth, late maturity, long life, and low fecundity) NMFS should adopt 
an exceptionally cautious management approach as frameworked in Option 
3 (with suboption 1) analyzed in the EA/IRFA. The proposed 2004 skates 
harvest specifications are risk-prone and fail to prevent directed 
fishing for skates, fail to prevent localized depletion (especially of 
Big and Longnose skates), and fail to prevent the skate stocks from 
being depleted to levels considered near extinction.
    Response. Option 3 was analyzed in the EA prepared for this action 
and considered by the GOA Plan Team, the Council, and its SSC, and AP. 
Option 3 would create separate OFLs, ABCs, and TACs for three skate 
targets (Big skates, Longnose skates, and other skates) in three 
separate management areas (Eastern, Central, and Western) in the GOA. 
Of all the options considered, the EA acknowledged that Option 3 would 
provide the most protection for skates in the GOA. Pacific ocean perch 
(POP) in the GOA is managed in this manner. The rationale for the 
management of POP in this manner is that they are long lived, slow to 
mature, and could be subject to localized depletion. These observations 
are just as relevant for skates. However, no evidence is available to 
show that localized depletion of any skate species has occurred or is 
occurring. The estimated skate biomass, based on NMFS trawl surveys, 
has increased from 13,575 mt in 1984 to 25,953 mt in 2003 in the 
Eastern GOA, from 23,534 mt in 1984 to 75,628 mt in 2003 in the Central 
Regulatory Area, and from 4,067 mt in 1984 to 15,089 mt in 2003 in the 
Western Regulatory Area. However, given the sensitive life history of 
skates, Option 3 is a viable management option and should continue to 
be considered in the future as more information on the biology and 
condition of the skate stocks becomes available or if directed 
fisheries for skates in other areas begin to be developed in the 
future.
    Based on the lack of information available regarding skates, the 
SSC recommended that a single gulfwide

[[Page 26322]]

OFL be established for skates in 2004, and that a single ABC should be 
established for skates gulfwide with the exception of Big and Longnose 
skates in the Central Regulatory Area. The SSC noted that Big and 
Longnose skates in the Central Regulatory Area require additional 
protection at this time, since the 2003 directed fishery for skates 
preferentially targeted these two species and fishing effort was 
concentrated in the Central Regulatory Area. The Council and its 
committees also sought to avoid having to establish finely divided 
target fisheries with small regional quotas, which if unexpectedly 
reached, could have detrimental impacts on other more fully developed 
fisheries. The Plan Team recognized that landings of skates in the 
Central Regulatory Area were comprised mostly of Big skates and made a 
TAC recommendation for Big and Longnose skates in the Central 
Regulatory Area (3,284 mt) below the ABC level (4,435 mt) to prevent 
reaching the OFL for Big skates in this area. The AP and Council 
concurred with this recommendation, and it is incorporated into the 
final 2004 skate harvest specifications for the GOA.
    Each option for the management of skates analyzed in the EA 
prepared for this action considered two suboptions. Suboption 1 would 
set TACs at the ABC level or a lower level sufficient to meet 
anticipated incidental catch needs in other directed fisheries during 
the fishing year. Suboption 1 would have the effect of prohibiting 
directed fishing for skates throughout the year. Suboption 2 would set 
TACs at ABC levels, allowing the Regional Administrator, after 
deducting anticipated incidental catch needs, to establish a directed 
fishing allowance for skates. The Council recommended Suboption 2. In 
either case, the retention of skates would be prohibited once TAC 
levels are reached. The Council's recommended TACs would allow for a 
modest directed fishery of about 1,000 mt in each of two specified 
skate fisheries. When this directed fishing allowance is reached, 
skates would be placed on bycatch status and directed fishing would be 
prohibited. The Council recommended, and NMFS is establishing, TACs for 
skates (totaling 6,993 mt) that are below ABC levels (totaling 8,144 
mt) and substantially below the 2003 TAC for ``other species'' (11,260 
mt) in the GOA.
    These skate specifications do not constitute a risk-prone 
management approach. OFL and ABC levels are calculated using a risk-
adverse tier 5 assessment where the OFL is set at the level estimated 
to be the natural mortality rate multiplied by the biomass estimate of 
skates. The ABC is set at 75 percent of that amount. The directed 
fishing allowances are set at conservative levels which include for the 
first time, estimates of incidental catch in the halibut fishery. 
Finally, NMFS assumes that the mortality of all groundfish, including 
skates, discarded at sea is 100 percent. This is a conservation 
assumption because skates are robust fish, with mortality rates that 
could be similar to or better than those of halibut released at sea in 
similar conditions. In the unlikely event that the entire TAC for 
skates were harvested, the conservative basis for setting the TACs 
would prevent the skate stocks from being depleted to levels considered 
near extinction.
    Comment 2. We are concerned that once the TAC for Big and Longnose 
skates is reached in the Central GOA, fishing effort may shift and over 
exploit these and other skate species in other regions.
    Response. Because the skate TACs are set conservatively, over 
exploitation of skate stocks is unlikely. Almost two thirds of the 
skate TACs have been reserved for incidental catch in other fisheries, 
including for the first time, the halibut fishery. Over the past 15 
years, total skate catch has varied from 1 mt to 110 mt annually in the 
Eastern GOA and from 0 mt to 263 mt in the Western GOA. At this time no 
processors purchase skates in either the Eastern or Western GOA. The 
vessels currently participating in the skate fishery are mostly small 
hook-and-line vessels for which travel back and forth to fishing 
grounds in other management areas would not be feasible. The 
implementation of these specifications will reduce the total catch of 
skates during 2004 in the GOA compared to 2003 levels.
    Comment 3. We are concerned that this action will raise the TAC for 
the ``other species'' category by 350 mt, rather than lowering it as we 
strongly advocate. This action will increase the allowable catches for 
such vulnerable species as sharks in the ``other species'' category.
    Response. NMFS does not set ABCs for separate species in the 
``other species'' category as stock assessments are not prepared for 
these species. Rather, the FMP set the TAC for the ``other 
species''category at 5 percent of the total sum of TACs of groundfish 
for which stock assessments have been prepared. The suggested change to 
lower the ``other species'' TAC will require an FMP amendment. At this 
time, species in the ``other species'' category are not targeted in the 
GOA and the catch of these species is incidental to directed fisheries 
targeting other species. While this action does raise the TAC for 
``other species'' by 350 mt, this action will not necessarily result in 
an increased catch of ``other species'' in the GOA because these 
species are not presently targeted by any fishery in the GOA.
    In instances where directed fisheries have developed rapidly for 
species in the ``other species'' category, the Council has recommended, 
and NMFS has implemented, FMP amendments to remove those targeted 
species from the ``other species'' category so that they can be managed 
separately. This was the case in 1992, when the Council recommended, 
and NMFS implemented, Amendment 31 which removed Atka mackerel from the 
``other species'' category, and more recently, when the Council 
recommended Amendment 63 in 2003 which removed skates from the ``other 
species'' category. If a single species, such as sharks, in the ``other 
species'' category was targeted to the exclusion of other species in 
the category at levels up to the ``other species'' TAC, then such 
harvest levels probably would be unsustainable and detrimental to the 
targeted fish stock and the Council and NMFS likely would act to manage 
such harvests at sustainable levels.
    Rather than approach concerns about ``other species'' in a 
piecemeal fashion, the Council is developing an FMP amendment with a 
more comprehensive approach toward the management of nontarget species. 
An ad hoc committee has suggested that one management approach could be 
to place the newly formed nontarget species category on bycatch status 
year round and prohibit directed fishing for these species until an 
adequate stock assessment for the species could be prepared that 
demonstrated what (if any) directed fishing activities would be 
sustainable. Species that could be considered for inclusion in the 
nontarget species categories are: (1) all the species currently in the 
``other species'' category, such as sharks, (2) species for which stock 
assessments are currently poor, such as Atka mackerel in the GOA, (3) 
species that are a very minor component of a larger category, such as 
deep water sole in the deep water flatfish category, (4) species that 
are uncommon in the GOA or at the edge of their geographic range, such 
as several species in the other slope rockfish category, (5) all forage 
fish, and (6) nonspecified species such as grenadiers, wrymouths, 
prowfish, etc.
    Comment 4. If a reduction of the ``other species'' TAC is not 
possible under the current FMP, we strongly urge

[[Page 26323]]

NMFS not to implement Amendment 63 and to prohibit directed fishing for 
skates until harvests of both skates and ``other species'' combined 
will not exceed the catch of ``other species'' in 2003.
    Response. Failure to implement Amendment 63 and these 2004 harvest 
specifications for skates would mean that conservation and management 
measures needed for skates would not be available. No additional 
protection would be provided for ``other species'' because the TAC for 
``other species'' is not reached. With the implementation of these 
harvest specifications for skates in 2004, the total, combined catch of 
skates and ``other species'' in 2004 likely will be lower than the 2003 
``other species'' catch. A significant increase or decrease in the 
incidental catch of the species remaining in the ``other species'' 
category is not likely. Also, the 2004 management measures include 
setting the skate directed fishing allowances at lower levels than the 
skate directed fishing catch in 2003. Therefore, a reduction in the 
total catch of skates (including Big and Longnose skates in the Central 
GOA) is likely in 2004, compared to 2003.
    Not implementing Amendment 63 would place skate species at risk of 
overfishing. The implementation of Amendment 63 will improve the 
protection for skates, and will not adversely impact the species in the 
``other species'' category because of the lack of interest in a 
directed fishery on these species. NMFS will carefully monitor the 
harvest of ``other species'' to determine if a directed fishery 
develops on any of the species in this complex and to determine what 
appropriate steps may be needed to prevent overfishing.

Classification

    The Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator), 
has determined that this final specification is necessary for the 
conservation and management of the groundfish fisheries of the BSAI and 
GOA. The Regional Administrator also has determined that this final 
specification is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other 
applicable laws. No relevant Federal rules exist that may duplicate, 
overlap, or conflict with this action.
    A FRFA was prepared for the final 2004 harvest specifications for 
skates to address the statutory requirements of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory 
Fairness Act of 1996.

Issues Raised by Public Comments on the IRFA

    The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on March 4, 
2004 (69 FR 10190). An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 
was prepared for the proposed rule, and described in the Classification 
section of the preamble to that rule. The public comment period ended 
on March 19, 2004. No comments were received on the IRFA or regarding 
the economic impact of this rule.

Number and Description of Small Entities Affected by the Rule

    The entities directly regulated by this action, if adopted, would 
be the fishing operations harvesting species in the ``other species'' 
complex in the GOA, using hook-and-line or trawl gear. These vessels 
may be targeting skates (the only species in the ``other species'' 
category currently fished as a target), or they may be harvesting 
skates and other species in the ``other species'' category incidental 
to other targeted fishing operations (e.g., fishing for Pacific cod or 
shallow-water flatfish). Since any hook-and-line or trawl operation in 
the GOA may harvest the ``other species'' complex, the universe of 
potentially affected operations includes all GOA hook-and-line and 
trawl vessels. Pot gear is not an effective gear for targeting skates 
because regulations limit the size of tunnel openings to no more than 
36 inches (91 cm) in circumference.
    In 2001, the universe of potentially affected vessels included 670 
hook-and-line vessels and 138 trawlers. Of these, 650 were small hook-
and-line catcher vessels, 15 were small hook-and-line catcher/
processors, 120 were small trawl catcher vessels, and 4 were small 
trawl catcher/processors. This size determination is based on operation 
revenues from groundfish fishing in Alaska. Moreover, the data are not 
available to take account of affiliations between fishing operations 
and associated processors, or other associated fishing operations. For 
these reasons, these counts may overstate the numbers of small entities 
potentially directly regulated by the proposed action. Average Alaska 
groundfish revenues, in 2001, for these small entities were $100,000 
for hook-and-line catcher vessels, $1.82 million for hook-and-line 
catcher/processors, $370,000 for trawl catcher vessels, and $1.80 
million for trawl catcher/processors. The directed skate fishery 
emerged in 2003; 77 hook-and-line catcher vessels, 53 trawl catcher 
vessels, 13 hook-and-line catcher/processors, and 10 trawl catcher/
processors, took part in the fishery in 2003, producing an estimated 
ex-vessel gross revenue of about $1.7 million. This suggests average 
revenues for these vessels were about $11,000.

Description of Other Alternatives Analyzed

    Alternative 1 creates a single GOA-wide OFL and ABC for all skate 
species. This alternative fails to protect the stocks. It provides no 
protection against localized depletion or against selective fishing for 
larger skates. The National Environmental Policy Act analysis 
determined that this alternative had a ``significantly adverse'' 
environmental impact.
    Alternative 2 creates three GOA-wide OFLs for skate species or 
species groups (Big skates, Longnose skates, and Other skates) and 
three GOA-wide ABCs for the same species or species groups. This 
alternative did not provide protection against spatial depletion of 
skate stocks, particularly those in the Central GOA.
    Alternative 3 creates a separate OFL and a separate ABC for each of 
the species and species groups defined under Option 2, in the Western, 
Central and Eastern management areas. This alternative provided the 
greatest level of protection for skate stocks, however, the 
multiplicity of relatively small OFLs under this alternative created 
the greatest potential for the closure of a fishery harvesting skates 
incidentally while targeting another species.
    Alternative 4 combines the Big skate and Longnose skate management 
area-specific OFLs and ABCs of Alternative 3, with the GOA-wide OFL and 
ABC for Other skates in Alternative 2. It therefore falls between these 
in terms of its adverse impacts on small entities. This alternative 
aggregates the ``Other skates'' OFLs across all three areas, but 
retains separate Big and Longnose skate OFLs in each of the three 
management areas (a total of six OFLs). These separate OFLs were a 
source of concern to industry.
    Alternative 5 creates a GOA-wide OFL for all species combined. ABCs 
would be established in each management area in the GOA for a Big/
Longnose skate grouping. A GOA-wide ABC would be established for 
``Other'' skates. In the Central GOA a TAC would be established for 
combined Big and Longnose skate catch. This TAC will equal 10 percent 
of the estimated biomass of Big skates in the Central Area (this would 
have been the OFL for Big skates in this area if such an OFL had been 
promulgated). This option was meant to be in place for one year, and to 
be reviewed at the end of 2004, in light of species-specific harvest 
data to be collected in 2004. This alternative

[[Page 26324]]

was explicitly crafted to protect skate stocks while imposing a 
relatively small burden on fishing operations. While it is less 
burdensome on small operations than Alternatives 2, 3, and 4, it has 
more separate TACs and ABCs than Alternative 6, the preferred 
alternative.

Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    The action does not impose new recordkeeping or reporting 
requirements on small entities. The analysis did not reveal any Federal 
rules that duplicate, overlap or conflict with the proposed action.
    This action is authorized under 50 CFR 679.20 and is exempt from 
review under Executive Order 12866.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., and 3631 et 
seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1540(f); Pub. L. 105 277, Title II of Division C; 
Pub L. 106 31, Sec. 3027; and Pub L. 106 554, Sec. 209.

    Dated: May 5, 2004.
Rebecca Lent,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 04-10782 Filed 5-11-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S