[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 67 (Monday, April 9, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17469-17474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6643]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 070323069-7069-01;I.D. 031907A]
RIN 0648-AV46


Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY:  NMFS issues a proposed rule to establish catch accounting 
requirements for persons who receive, buy, or accept Pacific whiting 
(whiting) deliveries of 4,000 pounds (lb) (1.18 mt) or more from 
vessels using mid-water trawl gear during the primary whiting season. 
This action would improve NMFS's ability to effectively monitor the 
whiting fishery such that catch of whiting and incidentally caught 
species, including overfished groundfish species, do not result in a 
species' optimum yield (OY), harvest guideline, allocations, or bycatch 
limits being exceeded. This action would also provide for timely 
reporting of Chinook salmon take as specified in the Endangered Species 
Act (ESA) Section 7 Biological Opinion for Chinook salmon catch in the 
Pacific groundfish fishery. This action is consistent with the 
conservation goals and objectives of the Pacific Coast Groundfish 
Fishery Management Plan (FMP).

DATES:  Comments must be received by April 24, 2007.

ADDRESSES:  You may submit comments, identified by I.D. 031907A by any 
of the following methods:
     E-mail: [email protected]: Include I.D 031907A 
in the subject line of the message.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax: 206-526-6736, Attn: Becky Renko
     Mail: D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest Region, 
NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, Attn: Becky Renko
    Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this 
action may be obtained from the Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point 
Way N.E., BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070. Written comments 
regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-
of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be 
submitted to the Northwest Region (see Addresses) and by e-mail to 
[email protected], or fax to (202) 395-7285 Send comments on 
collection-of-information requirements to the NMFS address above and to 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), Washington DC 20503 (Attn: NOAA Desk 
Officer).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Renko, phone: 206-526-6110, fax: 
206-526-6736, or e-mail: [email protected].
    Electronic Access: This proposed rule is accessible via the 
Internet at the Office of the Federal Register's Web site at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html. Background information 
and documents are available at the NMFS Northwest Region Web site at 
http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-Fishery-Management/index.cfmand at the Council's Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is to provide for 
electronic catch accounting and other monitoring improvements for the 
shore-based sector of the whiting fishery. The proposed action defines 
requirements for recordkeeping, reporting, catch sorting, and scale use 
for persons who receive, buy, or accept unsorted deliveries (generally 
processors or transporters) of 4,000 lb (1.8 mt) or more of whiting 
from vessels using midwater trawl gear during the primary season for 
the shore-based sector. This action is intended to address difficulties 
that occurred during the 2006 whiting season that could compromise the 
ability to account for the catch of target, incidental and prohibited 
species, and which could compromise the ability to manage groundfish 
species OYs, trip limits, bycatch limits, and Chinook salmon take in 
relation to Biological Opinion specifications.
    The shore-based whiting fishery needs to have a catch reporting 
system in place that: provides timely reporting of catch data so that 
whiting, overfished species and Chinook salmon can be adequately 
monitored and accounted for inseason; and, specifies catch sorting and 
weight requirements necessary to maintain the integrity of fish ticket 
values used to manage groundfish species OYs, trip limits, and bycatch

[[Page 17470]]

limits. This proposed rule is part of an ongoing process to develop a 
maximized retention program for the shoreside whiting sector. The rule 
is intended to address shoreside monitoring that will be implemented in 
2007 in conjunction with the issuance of exempted fishing permits 
(EFPs) to vessels. At its April 2007 meeting, the Council will consider 
recommending a rulemaking for 2008 and beyond for a related action 
titled ``A Maximized Retention and Monitoring Program for the Whiting 
Shoreside Fishery.''
    Each year since 1992, EFPs have been issued to vessels in the 
whiting shoreside fishery to allow unsorted catch to be retained and 
landed at shoreside processing facilities. The EFPs have specified the 
terms and conditions that participating vessels must follow to be 
included in the EFP program. The EFPs have routinely required vessels 
to deliver EFP catch to state-designated processors. Designated 
processors were identified by each of the states and were processors 
that had signed written agreements that specified the standards and 
procedures they agreed to follow when receiving EFP catch.
    The whiting fishery is managed under a ``primary'' season structure 
where vessels harvest whiting until the sector allocation is reached 
and the fishery is closed. This is different from most West Coast 
groundfish fisheries, which are managed under a ``trip limit'' 
structure, where catch limits are specified by gear type and species 
(or species group) and vessels can land catch up to the specified 
limits. Incidental catch of groundfish in the whiting fishery, however, 
is managed under a trip limit structure. Vessels fishing under the 
whiting EFPs are allowed to land unsorted catch at shoreside processing 
facilities, including species in excess of the trip limits and species 
such as salmon that would otherwise be illegal to have on board the 
vessel. Without an EFP, groundfish regulations at 50 CFR 660.306(a)(2) 
and (a)(6) require vessels to sort their catch at sea and discard as 
soon as practicable all prohibited species (including salmon and 
halibut), protected species, and groundfish species in excess of 
cumulative limits at sea.
    Overall management of the salmon and groundfish fisheries has 
significantly changed since the early 1990's, when EFPs were first used 
in the whiting fishery. Since the beginning of the shore-based whiting 
fishery in 1992, new salmon Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESUs) have 
been listed under the ESA, and several groundfish species that are 
incidentally taken in the whiting fishery have been declared 
overfished. In addition, ``bycatch limit'' management of overfished 
species has been used to allow the whiting fishery full access to the 
whiting OY. With the bycatch limit management approach, a bycatch limit 
amount is specified for an overfished species and the whiting fishery 
is allowed incidental catch of that species up to that amount. If a 
bycatch limit for any one of the species limits is reached before the 
whiting allocations are attained, all non-tribal commercial sectors of 
the whiting fishery must be closed.
    The Shoreside Whiting Observation Program (SHOP), a coordinated 
monitoring effort by the States of Oregon, Washington, and California, 
was established to provide catch data from vessels fishing under the 
EFPs. Although the program's structure and priorities have changed over 
the years, the SHOP has had the primary responsibility of monitoring 
the shore-based whiting fishery and providing catch data to NMFS for 
management of the fishery. In 2006, SHOP experienced ongoing 
difficulties in obtaining timely catch reports from some designated 
processors. Delays in catch reports can compromise the ability to 
adequately monitor the catch of whiting, bycatch limits, and in 
particular the bycatch limits for the overfished species that are most 
frequently encountered in the whiting fishery. Having the ability to 
closely monitor bycatch limits and close the whiting fishery if a limit 
is reached prevents the whiting fishery from affecting the other 
groundfish fisheries and reduces the risk of exceeding overfished 
species OYs.
    In 2007, the shore-based whiting fishery will be managed under an 
EFP, similar to what was in place in 2006. Therefore, NMFS believes 
that it is necessary to implement this rule to prevent catch accounting 
difficulties experienced in 2006. During 2007, NMFS and the Council 
will continue to develop the Maximized Retention and Monitoring Program 
for the whiting Shoreside Fishery, which is intended to be implemented 
by regulation before the 2008 fishery.
    This proposed rule would require persons called ``first receivers'' 
who receive, buy, or accept whiting deliveries of 4,000 lb (1.8 mt) or 
more from vessels using mid-water trawl gear during the primary whiting 
season (generally, these are whiting shoreside processing facilities, 
but also include entities that truck whiting to other facilities) to 
have and use a NMFS-approved electronic fish ticket program and to send 
daily catch reports to the Pacific States Marine Fish Commission 
(PSMFC). The electronic fish tickets are used to collect information 
similar to the information currently required in state fish receiving 
tickets or landing receipts (state fish tickets). The daily reports 
would be used to track catch allocations, bycatch limits and prohibited 
species catch. First receivers would provide the computer hardware, 
software (Microsoft Office with Access 2003 or later,) and internet 
access necessary to support the electronic fish ticket program and 
daily e-mail transmissions. Electronic fish tickets must be submitted 
within 24 hours from the date the catch is received upon landing. 
Because 2007 will be the first year that the electronic fish ticket 
program will be used, the proposed action includes waiver provisions 
and defines alternative means for submitting fish tickets to meet the 
daily reporting needs of the fishery, should there be performance 
issues with software or other system failures beyond a receiver's 
control.
    Federal regulations would not replace any state recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements. Regulations at 50 CFR 660.303 would continue to 
require vessels to make and/or file, retain, or make available any and 
all reports (i.e., logbooks, fish tickets, etc.) of groundfish harvests 
and landings as required by the applicable state law. At this time, 
only the State of Oregon allows printed and signed copies of the 
electronic fish tickets to be submitted as the official state fish 
ticket. The States of Washington and California could continue to 
require the submission of paper forms as issued by the state.
    In addition to the sorting requirements specified at Sec. Sec.  
660.306(a)(7) and 660.370(h)(6)(i), sorting requirements would be 
specified for whiting catch received by first receivers, since these 
deliveries may contain groundfish in excess of trip limits, 
unmarketable groundfish, prohibited species, and protected species that 
are not addressed by current groundfish regulations. In addition, 
Federal groundfish regulations would be revised to require that 
deliveries from vessels participating in the whiting shoreside fishery 
must be adequately sorted by species or species group and the catch 
weighed following offloading from the vessel and prior to transporting 
the catch. If sorting and weighing requirements specified in Federal 
regulation are more specific than state fish ticket requirements, the 
first receivers would be required to record the species that are sorted 
and weighed on all electronic fish ticket submissions.
    First receivers would be required to report, on electronic fish 
tickets, actual

[[Page 17471]]

and accurate weights derived from scales. Though there are considerable 
differences in the requirements between states, each state has 
requirements for scale performance and testing established by state 
agencies for weights and measures. How these requirements apply to 
seafood processors varies between states.

Classification

    NMFS has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the 
FMP and has preliminarily determined that the rule is consistent with 
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other 
applicable laws.
    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as 
required by section 603 of the RFA (RFA). The IRFA describes the 
economic impact 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 at the beginning of this 
section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A 
copy of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of 
the analysis follows:
    The whiting shoreside fishery has been managed under an EFPs since 
1992. However, an EFP is supposed to be a short-term, temporary and 
exploratory response to issues that potentially should be addressed by 
permanent regulations. The proposed action (Alternative 2) would be the 
first step towards replacing the EFP with permanent regulations as it 
would put in place new Federal catch accounting requirements. Although 
EFPs will continue to be issued in 2007, the proposed regulations are 
intended to supplement EFP activities with regulations that mainly 
affect the processors or other first receivers of whiting EFP catch. 
The proposed regulations will require the submission of electronic fish 
tickets within 24 hours of landing, the sorting of catch at time of 
offload and prior to transporting catch from the port of fish landing, 
the use of state approved scales with appropriate accuracy ranges for 
the amount of fish being weighed, and that all weights reported on the 
electronic fish tickets be from such scales. The proposed Federal 
regulations mirror or enhance existing state regulations and associated 
paper-based fish ticket systems or put into Federal regulation 
provisions associated with current EFP management. This action is 
expected to provide more timely reporting and improved estimates of the 
catch of whiting, ESA listed salmon species, and overfished groundfish 
species. The whiting shoreside fishery needs to have a catch reporting 
system in place to: adequately track the incidental take of Chinook 
salmon as required in the ESA Section 7 Biological Opinion for Chinook 
salmon catch in the whiting fishery; and to track the catch of target 
and overfished groundfish species such that the fishing industry is not 
unnecessarily constrained and that the sector allocation and bycatch 
limits are not exceeded. This action is intended to address catch 
accounting concerns that occurred during the 2006 season that 
compromised the ability to account for the catch of target, incidental 
and prohibited species.
    In 2006 there were 23 processors that purchased whiting from 
fishermen with ten of these processors purchasing from 4 lb (2 kg) to 
8,000 lb (3,629 kg) of whiting. The other thirteen processors all 
processed at least 1 million lb (454 mt) of whiting each. During 2006 
these thirteen processors purchased 280 million lb (127,007 mt) of 
whiting worth $17.4 million ex-vessel, and 110 million lb (49,896 mt) 
of other fish and shellfish worth $78.5 million. Over the 2000-2006 
period there were seventeen different facilities that processed at 
least 1 million lb (454 mt) in any one year. These processors can be 
classified into ``Main'' and ``Other'' plants. Over this period there 
were eight ``Main'' processors that processed 1 million lb (454 mt) in 
at least seven of the eight years during this period. Because of entry 
and exit of the processors, the composition of the ``Other'' processor 
group changes significantly in most years. In 2005, there were no 
``Other'' processors while in 2006, five new processors entered, only 
one of which had operated before. Over the 2000-2006 period, the 
``Main'' processors typically harvest 90 to 100 percent of the whiting.
    The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size 
criteria for all major industry sectors in the U.S. including fish 
harvesting entities, for-hire entities, fish processing businesses, and 
fish dealers. A business involved in fish harvesting is a small 
business if it is independently owned and operated and not dominant in 
the field of operation (including its affiliates) and if it has 
combined annual receipts not in excess of $3.5 million for all its 
affiliated operations worldwide. For-hire vessels are considered small 
entities, if they have annual receipts not in excess of $6 million. A 
seafood processor is a small business if it is independently owned and 
operated, not dominant in its field of operation, and employs 500 or 
fewer persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis, at 
all its affiliated operations world wide. Finally, a wholesale business 
servicing the fishing industry (fish dealer) is a small business if it 
employs 100 or few persons on a full time, part-time, temporary, or 
other basis, at all its affiliated operations worldwide.
    The SBA has established ``principles of affiliation'' to determine 
whether a business concern is ``independently owned and operated.'' In 
general, business concerns are affiliates of each other when one 
concern controls or has the power to control the other, or a third 
party controls or has the power to control both. The SBA considers 
factors such as ownership, management, previous relationships with or 
ties to another concern, and contractual relationships, in determining 
whether affiliation exists. Individuals or firms that have identical or 
substantially identical business or economic interests, such as family 
members, persons with common investments, or firms that are 
economically dependent through contractual or other relationships, are 
treated as one party with such interests aggregated when measuring the 
size of the concern in question. The SBA counts the receipts or 
employees of the concern whose size is at issue and those of all its 
domestic and foreign affiliates, regardless of whether the affiliates 
are organized for profit, in determining the concern's size.
    Based on the SBA criteria and a review of West Coast processor 
company websites, state employment websites, newspaper articles, 
personal communications, and the ``Research Group'' publications 
(2006), it appears that the thirteen major whiting processors can be 
grouped into nine businesses under the SBA criteria based on analysis 
of affiliates. Three of the nine businesses generated at least $500 
million in sales in 2003. One of these businesses reported employing 
4,000 people, and it is presumed that the other two companies have 
employment levels much higher than 500 employees. Four of the nine 
businesses have employment estimates that range from 100-250 employees, 
while the remainder appear to be in the 50-100 range (because of 
missing data, one of these relatively small businesses may have less 
than 50 employees). In terms of the SBA size standard of 500 employees, 
there are six ``small'' businesses that participated in the shorebased 
whiting processing sector in 2006. Annual sales information for these 
``small'' businesses is

[[Page 17472]]

unavailable. Total ex-vessel revenues (the value of the fish purchased 
from fisherman) is available. In 2006, these six businesses purchased 
approximately $40 million in whiting and other fish and shellfish from 
West Coast fishermen. This compares to the $60 million in whiting and 
other fish and shellfish purchased by the three large businesses.
    In sizing up all the potential impacts, implementation of these 
rules will require firms to bear minimal costs in reporting data 
electronically that they already are required to report on paper. In 
terms of equipment purchases, it is expected that there will be few if 
any instances where processors have to purchase computers or software 
because this is equipment that most business already have. It is also 
not expected that processors will need to purchase scale equipment as 
the presumption about this rule is that it enhances existing state 
regulations that already require processors to use scales in conducting 
their businesses but may not specifically require the use of scale 
weights in reporting fisheries data to state agencies. There may be 
some interest by a few small processors to weigh and count fish at 
locations other than the point of first landing, but these instances 
appear to be few.
    In light of the recent economic improvement going on in the whiting 
fisheries, the proposed regulations are reasonable and affordable and 
do not appear to place small businesses at a competitive disadvantage 
to large businesses. The major benefits of this program from a 
conservation and management context is an allowance for more liberal 
management to obtain better and quicker data for use in quota 
monitoring and a potential reduction in costs of monitoring, and to 
move management measures for monitoring whiting from a temporary 
``EFP'' to formal regulations. In the short term, from an industry and 
fishing community perspective, better management of the whiting 
shoreside fishery minimizes the risk that sector quotas and bycatch 
limits are not exceeded in ways that may lead to closure of other 
fisheries thus affecting other small businesses. In the medium term, 
the proposed rule will aid development of an Individual Fishing Quota 
(IQ) catch accounting system. IQs are expected to increase 
profitability in the fishing industry and improve the sustainability of 
fishing communities. In the long term, the entire fishing industry and 
its communities including associated small businesses will benefit by 
reducing the risk of overfishing and increasing the potential that the 
rebuilding schedules for the overfished species are maintained, thus 
increasing the chances that current levels of groundfish ex-vessel 
revenues of $70 million can be restored to levels above $100 million 
which were consistently seen in the early to mid 1990's. There were no 
other alternatives to the proposed action that would have accomplish 
the stated objectives. Under Status Quo, general catch sorting 
requirements and prohibited actions would continue to be specified for 
limited entry trawl vessel; each state would continue to specify 
requirements for landing reports.
    This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements 
approved under OMB control number 0648-0203, as well as a new 
collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been 
submitted to OMB for approval. Public reporting burden for preparing 
and submitting electronic fish tickets is estimated to average ten 
minutes per individual response for whiting shoreside processors/first 
receivers in the states of California and Washington, and two minutes 
per individual response for whiting shoreside processors/first 
receivers in the State of Oregon, including the time for reviewing 
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection information. Public comment is sought regarding: whether 
this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper 
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the 
information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden 
estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the 
collection of information, including through the use of automated 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send 
comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information 
to the Northwest Region at the ADDRESSES above, and by e-mail to 
[email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for 
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. There are no Federal rules that 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.
    NMFS issued Biological Opinions under the ESA on August 10, 1990, 
November 26, 1991, August 28, 1992, September 27, 1993, May 14, 1996, 
and December 15, 1999 pertaining to the effects of the Pacific Coast 
groundfish FMP fisheries on Chinook salmon (Puget Sound, Snake River 
spring/summer, Snake River fall, upper Columbia River spring, lower 
Columbia River, upper Willamette River, Sacramento River winter, 
Central Valley spring, California coastal), coho salmon (Central 
California coastal, southern Oregon/northern California coastal), chum 
salmon (Hood Canal summer, Columbia River), sockeye salmon (Snake 
River, Ozette Lake), and steelhead (upper, middle and lower Columbia 
River, Snake River Basin, upper Willamette River, central California 
coast, California Central Valley, south/central California, northern 
California, southern California). These biological opinions have 
concluded that implementation of the FMP for the Pacific Coast 
groundfish fishery was not expected to jeopardize the continued 
existence of any endangered or threatened species under the 
jurisdiction of NMFS, or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat.
    NMFS reinitiated a formal section 7 consultation under the ESA in 
2005 for both the whiting midwater trawl fishery and the groundfish 
bottom trawl fishery. The December 19, 1999 Biological Opinion had 
defined an 11,000 Chinook incidental take threshold for the whiting 
fishery. During the 2005 whiting season, the 11,000 fish Chinook 
incidental take threshold was exceeded, triggering reinitiation. Also 
in 2005, new data from the West Coast Groundfish Observer Program 
became available, allowing NMFS to complete an analysis of salmon take 
in the bottom trawl fishery.
    NMFS prepared a Supplemental Biological Opinion dated March 11, 
2006, which addressed salmon take in both the whiting midwater trawl 
and groundfish bottom trawl fisheries. In its 2006 Supplemental 
Biological Opinion, NMFS concluded that catch rates of salmon in the 
2005 whiting fishery were consistent with expectations considered 
during prior consultations. Chinook bycatch has averaged about 7,300 
over the last 15 years and has only occasionally exceeded the 
reinitiation trigger of 11,000. Since 1999, annual Chinook bycatch has 
averaged about 8,450. The Chinook ESUs most likely affected by the 
whiting fishery have generally improved in status since the 1999 
section 7 consultation. Although these species remain at risk, as

[[Page 17473]]

indicated by their ESA listing, NMFS concluded that the higher observed 
bycatch in 2005 does not require a revision of its prior ``no 
jeopardy'' conclusion with respect to the fishery. For the groundfish 
bottom trawl fishery, NMFS concluded that incidental take in the 
groundfish fisheries is within the overall limits articulated in the 
Incidental Take Statement of the 1999 Biological Opinion. The 
groundfish bottom trawl limit from that opinion was 9,000 fish 
annually. NMFS will continue to monitor and collect data to analyze 
take levels. NMFS also reaffirmed its prior determination that 
implementation of the Groundfish FMP, including this current action, is 
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any of the affected 
ESUs.
    Lower Columbia River coho (70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005) and the 
Southern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of green sturgeon (71 FR 
17757, April 7, 2006) were recently listed as threatened under the ESA. 
As a consequence, NMFS has reinitiated its Section 7 consultation on 
the PFMC's Groundfish FMP. After reviewing the available information, 
NMFS concluded that, in keeping with Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, the 
proposed action would not result in any irreversible or irretrievable 
commitment of resources that would have the effect of foreclosing the 
formulation or implementation of any reasonable and prudent alternative 
measures.
    Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, this proposed rule was developed 
after meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal officials 
from the area covered by the FMP. At the Council=s September and 
November 2006 meetings, NMFS informed the Council, which includes a 
tribal representative, of the intent to evaluate and implement catch 
accounting requirements for whiting shoreside processors. This action 
does not alter the treaty allocation of whiting, nor does it affect the 
prosecution of the tribal fishery.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Fisheries, Fishing, Indian fisheries.

    Dated: April 3, 2007.
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

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

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
    2. In Sec.  660.302, the definitions for ``Electronic Monitoring 
System,'' ``Pacific whiting shoreside or shore-based fishery,'' 
``Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver,'' and ``Pacific whiting 
shoreside vessel'' are added to read as follows:


Sec.  660.302  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Electronic Monitoring System (EMS) means a data collection tool 
that uses a software operating system connected to an assortment of 
electronic components, including video recorders, to create a 
collection of data on vessel activities.
* * * * *
    Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers means persons who 
receive, purchase, take custody, control, or possession of Pacific 
whiting onshore directly from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel.
    Pacific whiting shoreside or shore-based fishery means Pacific 
whiting shoreside vessels and Pacific whiting shoreside first 
receivers.
    Pacific whiting shoreside vessel means any vessel that fishes using 
midwater trawl gear to take, retain, possess and land 4,000 lb (1,814 
kg) or more of Pacific whiting per fishing trip from the Pacific 
whiting shore-based sector allocation for delivery to a Pacific whiting 
shoreside first receiver during the primary season.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  660.303, paragraph (a) is revised and paragraph (e) is 
added to read as follows:


Sec.  660.303  Reporting and recordkeeping.

    (a) This subpart recognizes that catch and effort datanecessary for 
implementing the PCGFMP are collected by the States of Washington, 
Oregon, and California under existing state data collection 
requirements.
* * * * *
    (e) Participants in the Pacific whiting shoreside fishery. 
Reporting requirements defined in the following section are in addition 
to reporting requirements under applicable state law and requirements 
described at Sec.  660.303(b).
    (1) Reporting requirements for any Pacific whiting shoreside first 
receiver--(i) Responsibility for compliance. The Pacific whiting 
shoreside first receiver is responsible for compliance with all 
reporting requirements described in this paragraph.
    (ii) General requirements. All records or reports required by this 
paragraph must: be maintained in English, be accurate, be legible, be 
based on local time, and be submitted in a timely manner as required in 
paragraph (e)(1)(iv) of this section.
    (iii) Required information. All Pacific whiting shoreside first 
receivers must provide the following types of information: date of 
landing, delivery vessel, gear type used, first receiver, round weights 
of species landed listed by species or species group including species 
catch with no value, number of salmon by species, number of Pacific 
halibut, and any other information deemed necessary by the Regional 
Administrator as specified on the appropriate electronic fish ticket 
form.
    (iv) Electronic fish ticket submissions. The Pacific whiting 
shoreside first receiver must:
    (A) Sort catch, prior to first weighing, by species or
    species groups as specified at Sec.  660.370 (h)(6)(iii).
    (B) Include as part of each electronic fish ticket submission, the 
actual scale weight for each groundfish species as specified by 
requirements at Sec.  660.373 (j)(2)(i) and the catcher vessel 
identification number.
    (C) Use for the purpose of submitting electronic fish tickets, and 
maintain in good working order, computer equipment as specified at 
Sec.  660.373 (j)(2)(ii)(A);
    (D) Install, use, and update as necessary, any NMFS-approved 
software described at Sec.  660.373 (j)(2)(ii)(B);
    (E) Submit a completed electronic fish ticket for every landing 
that includes 4,000 lb (1,814 kg) or more of Pacific whiting (round 
weight equivalent) no later than 24 hours after the date the fish are 
received, unless a waiver of this requirement has been granted under 
provisions specified at paragraph (e)(1) (vii) of this section.
    (v) Revising a submitted electronic fish ticket submission. In the 
event that a data error is found, electronic fish ticket submissions 
may be revised by resubmitting the revised form. Electronic fish 
tickets are to be used for the submission of final catch data. 
Preliminary data, including estimates of catch weights or species in 
the catch, shall not be submitted on electronic fish tickets.
    (vi) Retention of records. [Reserved]
    (vii) Waivers for submission of electronic fish tickets. On a case-
by-case basis, a temporary waiver of the requirement to submit 
electronic fish tickets may be granted by the Assistant Regional 
Administrator or designee if he/she determines that circumstances 
beyond the control of a Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver would 
result in inadequate data submissions using the electronic fish ticket 
system. The

[[Page 17474]]

duration of the waiver will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
    (viii) Reporting requirements when a temporary waiver has been 
granted. Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers that have been 
granted a temporary waiver from the requirement to submit electronic 
fish tickets must submit on paper the same data as is required on 
electronic fish tickets within 24 hours of the date received during the 
period that the waiver is in effect. Paper fish tickets must be sent by 
facsimile to NMFS, Northwest Region, Sustainable Fisheries Division, 
206-526-6736 or by delivering it in person to 7600 Sand Point Way NE, 
Seattle, WA 98115. The requirements for submissions of paper tickets in 
this paragraph are separate from, and in addition to existing state 
requirements for landing receipts or fish receiving tickets.
    (2) [Reserved]
    4. In Sec.  660.306, paragraphs (b)(4) and (f)(6) are added to read 
as follows:


Sec.  660.306  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Fail to comply with all requirements at Sec.  660.303 (d); or 
to fail to submit, submit inaccurate information, or intentionally 
submit false information on any report required at Sec.  660.303 (d) 
when participating in the Pacific whiting shoreside fishery.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (6) Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers. (i) Receive for 
transport or processing catch from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel 
that does not have a properly functioning EMS system as required by 
Federal regulation or by an EFP, unless a waiver for EMS coverage was 
granted by NMFS for that trip.
    (ii) Fail to sort catch from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel 
prior to first weighing after offloading as specified at Sec.  660.370 
(h)(6)(iii) for the Pacific whiting fishery.
    (iii) Process, sell, or discard groundfish catch that has not been 
weighed on a scale that is in compliance with requirements at Sec.  
660.373 (j)(1)(i) and accounted for on an electronic fish ticket with 
the identification number for the catcher vessel that delivered the 
catch.
    (iv) Fail to weigh catch landed from a Pacific whiting shoreside 
vessel prior to transporting any fish from that landing away from the 
point of landing.
* * * * *
    5. In Sec.  660.370, paragraph (h)(6)(iii) is added to read as 
follows:


Sec.  660.370  Specifications and management measures.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (iii) Sorting requirements for the Pacific whiting shoreside 
fishery. Catch delivered to Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers 
(including shoreside processing facilities and buying stations that 
intend to transport catch for processing elsewhere) must be sorted, 
prior to first weighing after offloading from the vessel and prior to 
transport away from the point of landing, to the species groups 
specified in paragraph (h)(6)(i)(A) of this section for vessels with 
limited entry permits. Prohibited species must be sorted according to 
the following species groups: Dungeness crab, Pacific halibut, Chinook 
salmon, Other salmon. Non-groundfish species must be sorted as required 
by the state of landing.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec.  660.373, paragraph (j) is added to read as follows:


Sec.  660.373  Pacific whiting (whiting) fishery management.

* * * * *
    (j) Additional requirements for participants in the Pacific Whiting 
Shoreside fishery--(1) Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver 
responsibilities--(i) Weights and measures. All groundfish weights 
reported on fish tickets must be recorded from scales with appropriate 
weighing capacity that ensures accuracy for the amount of fish being 
weighed. For example: amounts of fish less than 1,000 lb (454 kg) 
should not be weighed on scales that have an accuracy range of 1,000 
lb-7,000 lb (454 - 3,175 kg) and are therefore not capable of 
accurately weighing amounts less than 1,000 lb (454 kg).
    (ii) Electronic fish tickets--(A) Hardware and software 
requirements. First receivers using the electronic fish ticket software 
provided by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission are required to meet 
the hardware and software requirements below. Those whiting first 
receivers who have NMFS-approved software compatible with the standards 
specified by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission for electronic fish 
tickets are not subject to any specific hardware or software 
requirements.
    (1) A personal computer with Pentium 75-MHz or higher. Random 
Access Memory (RAM) must have sufficient megabyte (MB) space to run the 
operating system, plus an additional 8 MB for the software application 
and available hard disk space of 217 MB or greater. A CD-ROM drive with 
a Video Graphics Adapter(VGA) or higher resolution monitor (super VGA 
is recommended).
    (2) Microsoft Windows 2000 (64 MB or greater RAM required), Windows 
XP (128 MB or greater RAM required) or later operating system.
    (3) Microsoft Access 2003 or newer for.
    (B) NMFS Approved Software Standards and Internet Access. The 
Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver is responsible for obtaining, 
installing and updating electronic fish tickets software either 
provided by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission, or compatible with 
the standards specified by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission and 
for maintaining internet access sufficient to transmit data files via 
email.
    (C) Maintenance. The Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver is 
responsible for ensuring that all hardware and software required under 
this subsection are fully operational and functional whenever the 
Pacific whiting primary season deliveries are accepted.
    (2) Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers and processors that 
receive groundfish species other than Pacific whiting in excess of trip 
limits from Pacific whiting shoreside vessels fishing under an EFP 
issued by the Assistant Regional Administrator are authorized to 
possess the catch.
    (3) Vessel owners and operators, or shoreside processor owners, or 
managers may contact NMFS in writing to request assistance in improving 
data quality and resolving monitoring issues. Requests may be submitted 
to: Attn: Frank Lockhart,National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest 
Region Sustainable Fisheries Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, 
WA 98115, or via email to [email protected].
[FR Doc. E7-6643 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S