[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 171 (Friday, September 2, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54888-54916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22311]



[[Page 54887]]

Vol. 76

Friday,

No. 171

September 2, 2011

Part III





 Department of Commerce





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





 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration





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





50 CFR Part 660





Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 
Management Plan; Trawl Rationalization Program; Program Improvement and 
Enhancement; Amendment 21-1; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 171 / Friday, September 2, 2011 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 54888]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 110616336-1501-01]
RIN 0648-BB13


Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 
Management Plan; Trawl Rationalization Program; Program Improvement and 
Enhancement; Amendment 21-1

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: This proposed action would implement revisions to the Pacific 
coast groundfish trawl rationalization program (program), a catch share 
program, and includes regulations that affect all commercial sectors 
(limited entry trawl, limited entry fixed gear, and open access) 
managed under the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan 
(FMP). This action includes regulatory amendments to further implement 
Amendments 20 and 21 to the FMP and an FMP amendment to further revise 
Amendment 21 (called Amendment 21-1). This action includes, but is not 
limited to: revisions to the Pacific halibut trawl bycatch mortality 
limit, clarification that Amendment 21 supersedes limited entry/open 
access allocations for certain groundfish species, revisions to the 
observer coverage requirement while a vessel is in port and before the 
offload is complete, revisions to the electronic fish ticket reporting 
requirements, revisions to the first receiver site license requirement, 
further clarification on moving between limited entry and open access 
fisheries, a process for end-of-the-year vessel account reconciliation, 
and an exemption from processing at sea for qualified participants in 
the Shorebased Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received no later than 
October 14, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by 
NOAA-NMFS-2011-0201, by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal, at http://www.regulations.gov. To submit comments via the e-Rulemaking Portal, 
first click the ``submit a comment'' icon, then enter NOAA-NMFS-2011-
0201 in the keyword search. Locate the document you wish to comment on 
from the resulting list and click on the ``Submit a Comment'' icon on 
the right of that line.
     Fax: 206-526-6736; Attn: Jamie Goen.
     Mail: William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional Administrator, 
Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-
0070; Attn: Jamie Goen.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without 
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, 
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly 
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or 
otherwise sensitive or protected information. NMFS will accept 
anonymous comments (if submitting comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking 
portal, enter ``N/A'' in the relevant required fields if you wish to 
remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted 
in Microsoft Word or Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats 
only.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection of information requirements contained in this 
final rule may be submitted to William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional 
Administrator, Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., 
Seattle, WA 98115-0070, and to OMB by e-mail to [email protected], or fax to 202-395-7285.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jamie Goen, 206-526-4656; (fax) 206-
526-6736; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In January 2011, NMFS implemented a trawl rationalization program, 
a catch share program, for the Pacific coast groundfish fishery's trawl 
fleet. The program was adopted through Amendment 20 to the FMP and 
consists of an IFQ program for the shorebased trawl fleet (including 
whiting and non-whiting fisheries); and cooperative (coop) programs for 
the at-sea mothership (MS) and catcher/processor (C/P) trawl fleets 
(whiting only). Allocations to the limited entry trawl fleet for 
certain species were developed through a parallel process with 
Amendment 21 to the FMP.
    On May 12, 2010 (75 FR 26702), NMFS published a notice of 
availability of Amendments 20 and 21, and--consistent with requirements 
of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA)--
made its decision to partially approve the amendments on August 9, 
2010. Because of the complexity of Amendments 20 and 21, NMFS 
implemented them through multiple rulemakings. Over 2010, NMFS 
published three rulemakings related to the trawl rationalization 
program. The first was a final rule to collect ownership information 
from all potential participants in the program and to notify them of 
the databases that would be used for initial issuance and the date by 
which to make any changes to those databases (75 FR 4684, January 29, 
2010). The second was a final rule to restructure the Pacific coast 
groundfish regulations, establish the allocations set forth under 
Amendment 21, and establish procedures for the initial issuance of 
permits, endorsements, quota share, and catch history assignments under 
the IFQ and coop programs (75 FR 60868, October 1, 2010; correction 
published 75 FR 67032, November 1, 2010). The third was a final rule to 
establish several of the program components required for implementation 
of the rationalized trawl fishery in January 2011, including IFQ gear 
switching provisions, details of observer requirements and first 
receiver catch monitor programs, first receiver site licenses, 
equipment requirements, catch weighing requirements, retention 
requirements in the Shorebased IFQ Program, quota share (QS) accounts, 
vessel accounts for use of quota pounds, requirements for coop permits 
and coop agreements, further tracking and monitoring components, and 
economic data collection requirements (75 FR 78344, December 15, 2010).
    The regulations implementing the program became effective January 
1, 2011; however, necessary tracking systems to make the program 
operational did not become active until January 11, 2011, the date 
fishing began under the new program. Since that time, the Pacific 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS have been addressing 
implementation issues as they arise, some of which are the subject of 
this proposed rule. This proposed rule also includes items that are 
further revisions and refinements to the program to further implement 
Amendments 20 and 21, and corrects errors or old regulatory language 
that need to be corrected, revised, or made consistent with other 
sections of the regulations. Additionally, the Council took final 
action at its June 2011

[[Page 54889]]

meeting on some trailing actions for the program that are also included 
in this proposed rule. The trailing actions include an FMP amendment 
stating that Amendment 21 trawl/non-trawl allocations supersede the 
limited entry and open access allocations originally established in 
Amendment 6 for species listed in Amendment 21; an FMP amendment to 
revise the calculation of the Pacific halibut trawl bycatch mortality 
limit; a regulatory amendment to provide an exemption from the 
prohibition on processing groundfish at-sea for qualified participants 
in the Shorebased IFQ Program; a regulatory amendment for the adaptive 
management program (AMP) to extend the ``pass-through'' of non-whiting 
quota pounds through 2014 or until an AMP quota pound allocation 
process is established, whichever is earlier; and a regulatory 
amendment to allow a change in registration of a mothership catcher 
vessel (MS/CV) endorsement and its associated catch history assignment 
from one limited entry trawl endorsed permit to another. These trailing 
actions are discussed in more detail later in the preamble. Additional 
rulemakings would follow in the future and include other operational 
components of the catch share program, such as the requirements for new 
observer provider certification and an adaptive management program. 
NMFS is also planning a future ``cost recovery'' rule based on a 
recommended methodology currently under development by the Council.
    The Council discussed the items included in this proposed rule over 
its March, April and June 2011 meetings, with some preliminary 
discussions occurring at the September and November 2010 Council 
meetings.
    In addition to this proposed rule, NMFS is in the process of 
publishing a correction to regulations for the trawl program to update 
erroneous cross references, outdated terms, and duplicate regulatory 
entries. The correction is expected to publish in August or September 
2011.
    Some of the provisions in this proposed rule may affect all sectors 
of the commercial groundfish fishery (limited entry trawl, limited 
entry fixed gear, and open access), some provisions apply to several or 
all of the trawl programs (i.e., Shorebased IFQ Program, MS Coop 
Program, C/P Coop Program), while other details only affect one 
program, as discussed below.
Changes Applicable to All Commercial Groundfish Sectors

Moving Between Limited Entry and Open Access Fisheries

    Since implementation of the trawl catch share program, there has 
been interest in the rules and restrictions concerning movement between 
limited entry and open access fisheries or even between sectors within 
the limited entry trawl fishery. NMFS developed a matrix, or table, to 
guide participants on the requirements (see NMFS' public notice dated 
January 19, 2011, and the small entity compliance guide revised 
February 25, 2011). In general, current groundfish regulations had been 
interpreted to allow all limited entry fishermen (trawl and fixed gear) 
to move between limited entry and open access fisheries with no permit 
action by simply changing their fishery declaration between fishing 
trips, with 3 exceptions (non-groundfish trawl gear for California 
halibut, ridgeback prawn, and sea cucumber). Under this interpretation 
moving between the IFQ fishery and open access fishery is distinct from 
``gear switching'' under the Shorebased IFQ Program. Under gear 
switching, all catch is covered by quota pounds regardless of gear 
used. However, while quota pounds cover catch in the IFQ fishery, trip 
limits cover catch in the open access fishery.
    In discussing this issue with Council staff, NMFS realized that the 
current groundfish regulations only partially match the Council's 
action from Amendment 20. Amendment 20 requires quota pounds for catch 
of IFQ species by vessels registered to a limited entry trawl permit, 
regardless of gear used unless that gear is exempted. Thus, in order 
for a vessel registered to a limited entry trawl permit to participate 
in another fishery without being required to cover catch of IFQ species 
with quota pounds, the vessel would need to remove the limited entry 
trawl permit, unless it were using one of the exempted gears. In other 
words, only vessels using certain gears would be able to move between 
the limited entry trawl and open access fisheries by changing their 
declaration without requiring a corresponding change to remove their 
limited entry trawl permit so that it is no longer registered to the 
vessel. As specified in current regulations at Sec.  660.140(e)(1)(i), 
these exempted gears are: Non-groundfish trawl; gear types defined in 
the coastal pelagic species FMP; gear types defined in the highly 
migratory species FMP; salmon troll; crab pot; and limited entry fixed 
gear when the vessel also has a limited entry permit endorsed for fixed 
gear and has declared that they are fishing in the limited entry fixed 
gear fishery (i.e., a dual-endorsed permit). This rule proposes 
language that makes explicit the requirement to remove the limited 
entry trawl permit, unless using exempt gear. New regulatory language 
is proposed at Sec.  660.60(h)(7)(ii)(B).
    This rule also proposes further revisions to Sec.  660.140(e)(1)(i) 
to clarify that limited entry permitted vessels are subject to the open 
access fishery regulations when declared in to an open access fishery. 
This rule also proposes changes to Sec.  660.333(b), (c), and (d) in 
the open access fishery regulations to reflect changes from Amendment 
20 which no longer require the limited entry permit to be removed from 
vessels participating in the non-groundfish trawl fisheries for 
ridgeback prawn, California halibut, and sea cucumber fisheries. No 
changes are needed for the non-groundfish trawl fishery for pink shrimp 
because regulations do not specify a requirement to remove the limited 
entry permit from the vessel to participate.
    Since 2004, regulations have stated that a vessel participating in 
the ridgeback prawn, sea cucumber, or California halibut trawl fishery 
must not have a Federal limited entry groundfish permit registered to 
the vessel. Amendment 20 added a gear exception that included the non-
groundfish trawl fleet and provided them more flexibility. The result 
is that a vessel registered to a limited entry trawl permit may 
participate in the IFQ fishery or the non-groundfish trawl fishery by 
simply changing their vessel declaration.
    In addition, to clarify that ridgeback prawn, California halibut, 
and sea cucumber are open access fisheries, NMFS intends to add the 
words ``open access, non-groundfish trawl'' to those regulations. This 
would distinguish the open access, non-groundfish trawl gear used for 
those fisheries from other gear that may be used for those fisheries.
    These proposed regulations would be more narrow than the January 
19th public notice and would only allow a subset of vessels to do so 
(i.e., those subject to the gear exception listed above and at Sec.  
660.140(e)(1)(i) and those in the limited entry fixed gear fishery). 
These proposed changes do not affect the limited entry fixed gear 
fisheries. Any limited entry vessel could also move to the open access 
fishery by removing the limited entry permit from the vessel and then 
declaring in to the open access fishery.
    NMFS and the Council will continue to review the regulations on 
this issue for future refinements. NMFS solicits

[[Page 54890]]

public comment on these proposed changes and other sections of the 
regulations which may need further revisions to provisions regarding 
vessels moving between limited entry and open access fisheries.

Crossover Provisions

    Crossover provisions apply to two activities: (1) Fishing on 
different sides of a management line, or (2) fishing in both the 
limited entry and open access fisheries during a two-month cumulative 
limit period. The crossover provisions were structured for trip limit 
fisheries. In some places, the current regulations do not fully 
implement the trawl rationalization program adopted under Amendment 20.
    NMFS proposes some revisions to the language in the crossover 
provisions to more accurately reflect the changes in the groundfish 
fishery since implementation of the trawl rationalization program. NMFS 
is revising regulations on crossover provisions for the groundfish 
fishery overall in subpart C, and is removing duplicate regulatory text 
in the sector regulations for the limited entry trawl fishery, limited 
entry fixed gear, and open access fisheries (subparts D through F, 
respectively). These sector regulations will reference the overall 
groundfish fishery crossover provisions and any sector specific 
crossover provisions. NMFS is also proposing to change the term 
``operate'' in the crossover provisions to ``fishing'' to more 
accurately reflect the applicable regulated activity. NMFS is proposing 
revisions to the crossover provisions in the following regulations: 
Sec.  660.60(h)(7) for the general groundfish fishery, Sec. Sec.  
660.120 and 660.130(c) for the limited entry trawl fishery, Sec.  
660.220 for the limited entry fixed gear fishery, and Sec.  660.320 for 
the open access fishery. Regulations at Sec. Sec.  660.120, 660.220, 
and 660.320 would be revised to remove duplicative language that is 
covered in Sec.  660.60(h)(7) for the general groundfish fishery. 
Regulations at 660.130(c) would be revised to update limited entry 
trawl fishery management measures under the trawl rationalization 
program. NMFS is soliciting public comment on these proposed revisions 
and any implications they may have, especially for dual-endorsed 
limited entry permits.

Corrections/Consistency

    NMFS proposes to clarify the regulations to be more specific 
regarding permit actions for changes in permit ownership and vessel 
registrations. NMFS would replace the word ``transfer,'' where 
appropriate, and use terms such as ``change in permit ownership'' or 
``change in vessel registration.'' NMFS is making this change to avoid 
confusion because the term ``transfer'' is susceptible to more than one 
meaning. The following regulations would be revised: Sec.  
660.12(d)(2); Sec.  660.14(d)(4)(iii) and (vii); Sec.  
660.25(b)(1)(iii) and (v), (b)(3)(i), (b)(3)(iv)(A)(1) and (2), 
(b)(3)(iv)(C)(4) and (5), (b)(3)(vii), (b)(4)(iv)(C), (b)(4)(v)(C) and 
(D), (b)(4)(vi)(B), (b)(4)(vii) introductory text, (b)(4)(vii)(F), 
(b)(4)(viii), (b)(4)(ix), and (f); Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(iv); Sec.  
660.140(d)(3)(ii)(A), (d)(4)(v), and (f)(7); Sec.  
660.150(d)(1)(iii)(A)(1)(vi), (f)(2)(i), (f)(3)(i), (g)(1)(iii), and 
(g)(3)(i); Sec.  660.160(d)(1)(iii)(A)(1)(iv), (e)(1)(i), (e)(2)(i); 
and Sec.  660.231(b)(4)(i) and (b)(4)(ii)(A).
    NMFS proposes to clarify regulations regarding what constitutes a 
change in ownership for all limited entry permits (limited entry trawl, 
limited entry fixed gear and MS permits), for QS permits, and for 
vessel accounts. Changing the legal, registered name of the limited 
entry permit owner, the QS permit owner, or the vessel account owner is 
considered a change in ownership and must be reported to NMFS to ensure 
the agency has accurate records. In other words, adding or removing an 
individual or entity from the legal, registered name on the permit or 
vessel account is a change in ownership and would require a change in 
permit ownership form and any other required forms (i.e., ownership 
interest form) or documentation. NMFS must have accurate records to 
track any required ownership or accumulation limits. The following 
regulations would be revised: Sec.  660.25(b)(4)(iv)(A) for limited 
entry permits, Sec.  660.140(d)(3)(ii)(A) for QS permits and accounts 
and Sec.  660.140(e)(3)(ii) for vessel accounts.
    NMFS proposes to clarify regulatory titles on size limits and 
weight conversions to more accurately reflect the regulatory language 
within those sections. The title to paragraph Sec.  660.60 (h)(5)(i) 
should be specific to length measurements, while (h)(5)(ii) should be 
specific to weight conversions and size limits.

Changes Applicable to All Trawl Programs

Amendment 21 Supersedes Limited Entry/Open Access Allocations for 
Amendment 21 Species

    Amendment 21 to the FMP established allocations to the limited 
entry trawl fishery participants. As part of Amendment 21, allocations 
were established between the trawl and non-trawl sectors for certain 
groundfish species (called Amendment 21 species). In a letter to the 
Council dated August 9, 2010, NMFS disapproved part of Amendment 21 
because the FMP language available to the public and to the Council 
during the Council's decision making did not clearly state that the 
Amendment 21 allocations for certain species supersede the previous 
limited entry/open access allocations originally established under 
Amendment 6 to the FMP, which established the limited entry fishery. In 
other words, the partial disapproval of Amendment 21 was because of a 
concern over the public record and procedural issues regarding the 
record. This issue has since been addressed through the Council process 
by providing FMP and regulatory language at the Council's March, April, 
and June 2011 meetings.
    This action includes an FMP amendment (called Amendment 21-1) and 
proposed revisions to regulatory language at Sec.  660.55(a) and (e)(2) 
implementing Amendment 21 explicitly stating that, for Amendment 21 
species, allocations decided under Amendment 21 supersede allocations 
previously decided between limited entry and open access fisheries.
    NMFS published a notice of availability for this FMP amendment, 
Amendment 21-1, on August 15, 2011 (76 FR 50449). Consistent with 
requirements of the MSA, NMFS must make a decision to approve, 
disapprove, or partially approve the amendment by November 13, 2011. 
Comments on whether the amendment should be approved must be submitted 
to NMFS by October 14, 2011.

Halibut Trawl Bycatch Mortality Limit

    Amendment 21 to the FMP established a trawl bycatch mortality limit 
for Pacific halibut. The trawl bycatch mortality limit for halibut 
under Amendment 21 set a total catch limit of Pacific halibut in the 
limited entry trawl fishery for the trawl rationalization program to 
reduce trawl bycatch of halibut in future fisheries in order to provide 
more yield to directed Area 2A (Washington, Oregon, and California) 
halibut fisheries (i.e., primary use of halibut is to provide fish for 
the directed Tribal, commercial, and recreational fisheries). However, 
before the start date of the trawl rationalization program, new 
scientific information was released indicating that the total catch of 
halibut (legal+sublegal) was higher than previously considered by the 
Council and that the formula previously adopted under Amendment 21 did 
not fit the intended reduction. The Council had intended a 50 percent 
reduction in trawl

[[Page 54891]]

bycatch mortality from historical levels, but the formula applied to 
the new information result in approximately a 66 percent reduction. In 
response, NMFS implemented interim measures for the 2011 groundfish 
fishery which interpreted the trawl bycatch mortality limit described 
in Amendment 21 to be legal halibut totaling no more than 130,000 lb 
net weight. ``Legal'' refers to halibut over 32 inches in length, as 
opposed to sublegal; ``net weight'' refers to the weight of a halibut 
with its head attached but entrails removed, as opposed to round 
weight. In contrast, Amendment 21 stated that the trawl bycatch 
mortality limit legal and sub-legal halibut set at 15 percent of the 
International Pacific Halibut Commission's (IPHC's) constant 
exploitation yield (CEY, composed of legal halibut only) not to exceed 
130,000 lbs annually for the first four years and not to exceed 100,000 
lbs annually beginning in the fifth year. For NMFS management purposes, 
the interim measure resulted in calculation of the trawl bycatch 
mortality limit by converting from net weight to round weight and by 
converting legal sized halibut to legal and sublegal sized halibut. 
This calculation reflects the difference between the total constant 
exploitation yield (TCEY) established by the IPHC (net weight, legal-
sized fish) and NMFS management of groundfish and halibut (round 
weight, legal and sublegal-sized fish). The interim measure also 
removed the 15 percent cap and established the 2011 trawl bycatch 
mortality limit at 130,000 lbs. It also noted that the 10 mt set-aside 
for the at-sea trawl sectors and the shorebased sector south of 
40[deg]10' N. lat was for legal and sublegal sized halibut, round 
weight.
    Because the interim measures expire at the end of 2011, the Council 
has recommended a long term solution by making further revisions to 
Amendment 21 for calculation of the halibut trawl bycatch mortality 
limit. For 2012 and beyond, the Council recommended amending the FMP to 
(1) Specify that the trawl bycatch mortality limit would be calculated 
by converting to total round weight of legal and sublegal sized 
halibut, (2) base the trawl bycatch mortality limit on the best 
estimate of TCEY from the IPHC (i.e., preliminary IPHC estimate from 
their interim meeting of TCEY), and (3) clarify that the 10 mt set 
aside is for legal and sublegal, round weight. These revisions require 
an amendment to the FMP and the implementing regulations to change 
provisions related to the amount of Pacific halibut bycatch mortality 
for which the limited entry trawl fishery will be managed.
    NMFS published a notice of availability for this FMP amendment, 
Amendment 21-1, on August 15, 2011 (76 FR 50449). Consistent with 
requirements of the MSA, NMFS must make a decision to approve, 
disapprove, or partially approve the amendment by November 13, 2011. 
Comments on whether the amendment should be approved must be submitted 
to NMFS by October 14, 2011.
    This preamble provides information about the implementing 
regulations that would result from this FMP amendment. Regulations at 
Sec. Sec.  660.55(m) and 660.140(d)(1)(ii)(C) regarding the Pacific 
halibut trawl bycatch mortality limit would be revised to reflect these 
changes. NMFS also recognizes that if Pacific halibut IBQ pounds are 
subject to the carryover provisions in the Shorebased IFQ Program, it 
is not clear what effect it would have on the calculation of the trawl 
bycatch mortality limit in a subsequent year, and NMFS specifically 
requests public comment to address this issue.

Process To Issue Interim Allocations

    NMFS is aware of the management possibility of having to provide 
allocations before harvest specifications and management measures are 
final, as was the case in 2011 for the Shorebased IFQ Program. Should 
this event occur in the future, NMFS is proposing a framework approach 
to provide NMFS the implementation authority to issue interim 
allocations for any of the trawl rationalization program sectors 
(Shorebased IFQ Program, MS Coop Program, and C/P Coop Program). This 
approach is consistent with existing regulations for the Pacific 
whiting allocation in the Shorebased IFQ Program where the final 
whiting harvest specifications are not effective until spring each 
year. It provides a parallel process should the situation occur for 
non-whiting groundfish or Pacific halibut in the Shorebased IFQ Program 
and for any allocated species in the MS or C/P Coop Programs. NMFS 
proposes changes to the regulations at Sec.  660.140(d)(1)(ii)(A) and 
(C) for the Shorebased IFQ Program, at Sec.  660.150(c)(2)(i)(A) and 
(B) for the MS Coop Program, and at Sec.  660.160(c)(2) and (3) for the 
C/P Coop Program to establish a process to issue interim allocations.

Threshold Rules for Annual Issuance of Allocation

    During the annual issuance of individual allocations of quota 
pounds (QP) to QS permits in the Shorebased IFQ Program or to MS coops 
or the non-coop fishery in the MS Coop Program, NMFS endeavors to 
ensure that the individual allocations total 100 percent of the sector 
allocation. However, because of rounding rules, calculations may not 
add up to 100 percent. For example, if several QS permits have similar 
percentages, the rounding rules may cause the calculation to never 
quite reach 100 percent.
    Accordingly, NMFS proposes to set a threshold above which it would 
not need to continue to run iterations redistributing the allocation. 
Regulations at Sec.  660.140(d)(1)(ii) for the Shorebased IFQ Program 
and at Sec.  660.150(c)(2) for the MS Coop Program would state that 
NMFS' annual allocations must be equal to or greater than 99.99 
percent, but not to exceed 100 percent.
    While the language in this proposed regulation follows the Council 
motion on this issue, NMFS solicits public comment on an alternate 
approach that would state, ``Rounding rules may affect distribution of 
the entire shorebased trawl allocation [or allocations to the 
mothership coop or non-coop fisheries]; NMFS will distribute such 
allocations to the maximum extent practicable, not to exceed the total 
allocation.'' NMFS suggests this alternative language to account for 
circumstances where despite NMFS' best efforts, it is unable to 
distribute allocations equal to or greater than 99.99 percent but no 
more than 100 percent. Such a circumstance may occur, for instance, for 
quota pound distributions of IFQ species that have a very small 
shorebased trawl allocation, especially since quota pound distributions 
must be made in one pound increments. In any event, under the alternate 
language suggested here, NMFS would still endeavor to distribute as 
much of the allocation as possible.

Fishery Declarations

    NMFS proposes to change some open access fishery declarations in 
regulations to be more specific to the types of open access net gears 
available to target different species. At Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), 
NMFS would replace ``open access net gear'' with the following two 
declarations: (1) Open access CPS net gear; (2) open access CA gillnet 
complex gear. This change is consistent with the reporting categories 
available on the declaration worksheet.

Corrections/Consistency

    NMFS proposes to delete regulatory language referring to the 
effective date of the trawl rationalization program because it is no 
longer needed. The sentence was included with the October

[[Page 54892]]

1, 2010, final rule (75 FR 60868) to make it clear that while these 
paragraphs were effective for initial issuance of new permits and 
endorsements, the overall program did not begin until January 1, 2011. 
Because the program is already implemented, these sentences would be 
removed from Sec. Sec.  660.140(a), 660.150(a), and 660.160(a).

Changes Applicable to the Shorebased IFQ Program

Observer and Catch Monitor Coverage at Offload

    Because Amendment 20 to the FMP required 100 percent observer 
coverage, NMFS implemented a requirement for the observer to remain 
onboard the vessel until all IFQ species are offloaded, as specified at 
Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xiii) and 660.140(h)(1)(i). NMFS and the Council 
have received feedback from the industry that this requirement is 
overly restrictive, a burden on the industry, and a concern for the 
observer providers. In response to the Council's discussion on allowing 
the observer to depart the vessel upon return to port and for the catch 
monitor to conduct the hold inspection at the end of the offload, the 
following changes are being proposed to allow this action while 
ensuring catch accountability (especially for overfished species).
    For bocaccio, yelloweye rockfish, canary rockfish, cowcod, and 
other species, as deemed necessary by the Council or NMFS, if an 
observer is to leave the vessel after arriving in port and prior to the 
offloading, the observer will document the weight and number of these 
retained species on a form. A copy of the form will be retained by the 
observer and the vessel operator, and would be made available to the 
catch monitor. The West Coast Groundfish Observer Program (WCGOP) will 
develop protocols for dealing with any discrepancies. For example, if 
the discrepancy is due to a disagreement on the species identification, 
the observer would take a picture. If the vessel operator does not 
agree with the documentation on the observer program form, the vessel 
operator could have the discrepancy noted on the observer program form 
and the observer could leave the vessel once in port or the vessel 
operator could request that the observer not submit the form and the 
vessel operator would be required to maintain observer (or catch 
monitor) coverage while in port and until all IFQ species have been 
offloaded.
    If upon offload the number of species recorded on the catch 
monitor's form and observed by the catch monitor is less than that 
recorded by the observer on the observer form, the catch monitor will 
use the number and weight of the species recorded by the observer in 
the catch monitor's offload report submitted for catch accounting. This 
would be the only time that the information from this observer form 
documenting the weight and number of these retained species is used in 
catch accounting.
    NMFS proposes to revise regulations at Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xiii) 
and Sec.  660.140(h)(1)(i) to allow an exemption from the requirement 
to maintain observer coverage until final offload of the catch as long 
as the observer has documented specified IFQ species on the observer 
program form and has submitted that form to the catch monitor.
    NMFS also proposes to designate any changes to the list of IFQ 
species reported on the observer form as a ``routine management 
measure.'' Under the PCGFMP and implementing regulations at Sec.  
660.60(c)(1), NMFS can designate management measures as ``routine,'' 
meaning that they can be adjusted on a biennial or more frequent basis, 
addressed at a single Council meeting, and announced through a single 
notification in the Federal Register. To initially designate a 
management measure as routine, it must first be addressed during at 
least two Council meetings. Flexibility for the Council or NMFS to 
modify the list of IFQ species reported on the observer form was 
addressed at both the April and June 2011 Council meetings. Since it 
has been addressed at two Council meetings, this rule proposes to 
designate modification of the list of IFQ species as a routine 
management measure. New regulations are being proposed to be added at 
Sec.  660.60(c)(1)(iv), in addition to revising regulations at Sec.  
660.112(b)(1)(xiii) and Sec.  660.140(h)(1)(i) to address this issue.
    Additionally, the term ``catch monitor'' would be included in 
regulations at Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xiii) and Sec.  660.140(h)(1)(i). 
Adding the term ``catch monitor'' to these regulations allows the catch 
monitor to maintain coverage of the vessel in lieu of the observer 
while the vessel is in port. It would also allow catch monitors to 
complete functions such as hold inspections in lieu of the observer to 
ensure that all IFQ species have been offloaded.
    This change may also require a change in the insurance coverage 
provided by catch monitor providers for the catch monitors as specified 
at Sec.  660.17(e)(1)(vii)(C) to provide adequate coverage while the 
catch monitors are on the vessel. Because NMFS is uncertain whether 
such insurance is available or necessary, NMFS solicits public comment 
on whether this change would require catch monitor providers to have 
the increased insurance coverage provided by Maritime Liability 
insurance to cover ``seamen's'' claims under the Merchant Marine Act 
(Jones Act) and General Maritime Law ($1 million minimum) or whether 
current coverage required by regulation is sufficient. The regulations 
at Sec.  660.17(e)(1)(vii)(C) currently require the following 
certificates of insurance: (1) Coverage under the U.S. Longshore and 
Harbor Workers' Compensation Act ($1 million minimum); (2) States 
Worker's Compensation as required; and (3) Commercial General 
Liability.

New Process for IFQ First Receivers and Catch Monitors To Address 
Trucking/Transport

    Since implementation of the program in January 2011, there have 
been some procedural issues with the prohibition upon IFQ first 
receivers transporting, or trucking, catch away from the point of 
landing until the catch has been sorted, weighed, and recorded for 
submittal on the electronic fish ticket (e-ticket). Current regulations 
at Sec.  660.112(b)(2)(iv) state that it is prohibited to: ``Transport 
catch away from the point of landing before that catch has been sorted 
and weighed by Federal groundfish species or species group, and 
recorded for submission on an electronic fish ticket. (If fish will be 
transported to a different location for processing, all sorting and 
weighing to Federal groundfish species groups must occur before 
transporting the catch away from the point of landing).'' In addition, 
e-tickets must be submitted within 24 hours of the date of receipt of 
the fish as specified at Sec.  660.113(b)(4)(ii)(D). These regulations 
do not specify that the e-ticket must be filled out at the offload site 
nor do they specify that the e-ticket must be submitted before the 
catch is transported or trucked away from the offload site. They do 
state that the information that will be used to fill out the e-ticket 
must be recorded before the catch is transported away from the offload 
site. No changes are being proposed to these regulations with this 
rulemaking.
    NMFS interprets these regulations to mean that the e-ticket can be 
filled out and submitted at a different location, but the recording of 
information that will be used for the e-ticket must be done prior to 
transport. For example, the e-ticket could be filled out and submitted 
20 hours or more after the vessel offload at another facility in the 
port, but the fish must not be trucked

[[Page 54893]]

away from the point of landing until the information that will be used 
to fill out the e-ticket has been recorded.
    NMFS proposes to add some additional regulations outlining the 
reporting requirements for IFQ first receivers and catch monitors 
whether transporting fish away from the offload site or not, to add 
additional required fields for e-tickets (explained below in the 
preamble under ``additional e-ticket fields''), and to add additional 
requirements for catch monitoring plans. These changes were developed 
in close consultation with the Council and its constituents and were 
recommended by the Council at its June 2011 meeting. These changes 
should better align the regulations with industry business practices 
while at the same time maintaining accurate catch accounting and 
supporting implementation of the trawl rationalization program. In 
addition, these changes should further facilitate state adoption of the 
Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission's (PSMFC) e-ticket format.
    The additional reporting requirements for IFQ first receivers and 
catch monitors are outlined below and differ depending on whether the 
catch is being processed at the offload site or whether it is being 
trucked or transported away for processing at a different location. In 
addition, NMFS is proposing language in addition to the Council 
recommendation, and included in the process described below in this 
preamble, to specify which process must be followed in cases where fish 
will be transported away for processing at a different location, but 
for which an electronic fish ticket must be recorded prior to 
transport. NMFS is proposing this addition to accommodate any more 
restrictive state reporting requirements. All existing e-ticket 
recording and submittal regulations would remain in place with the 
modifications outlined below.
    The following process is proposed for offloading at an IFQ first 
receiver where the fish will be processed at the offload site or if an 
electronic fish ticket is recorded prior to transport:
    1. The first receiver will communicate the e-ticket number to the 
catch monitor.
    2. After completing the offload, the e-ticket information will be 
recorded immediately.
    3. Prior to submittal of the e-ticket, the information recorded for 
the e-ticket will be reviewed by the catch monitor and the vessel 
operator who delivered the fish.
    4. After review, the first receiver and the vessel operator will 
sign a printed hard copy of the e-ticket or the original dock ticket if 
the delivery occurs outside of business hours.
    5. Three copies of the signed e-ticket will then be produced by the 
first receiver with the following distribution: One copy retained by 
the vessel operator, one copy retained by the first receiver, and one 
copy sent to the state of origin if required by state regulations.
    6. After review and signature, the e-ticket will be submitted 
within 24 hours of the completion of the offload.
    For offloading at a first receiver where the fish will be 
transported or trucked for processing at a different location if an 
electronic fish ticket is not recorded prior to transport, the 
following process is being proposed:
    1. The first receiver will communicate the e-ticket number to the 
catch monitor at the beginning of the offload.
    2. The vessel name and the e-ticket number will be recorded on each 
dock ticket related to that delivery. The term ``dock ticket,'' as used 
here, means a form generally accepted by the state to record the 
landing, receipt, purchase, or transfer of fish.
    3. Upon completion of the dock ticket, but prior to transfer of the 
offload to another location, the dock ticket information that will be 
used to complete the e-ticket will be reviewed by the catch monitor and 
the vessel operator who delivered the fish.
    4. After review, the first receiver and the vessel operator will 
sign the original copy of each dock ticket related to that delivery.
    5. Three copies of the signed dock ticket will then be produced by 
the first receiver with the following distribution: One copy retained 
by the vessel operator, one copy retained by the first receiver, and 
one copy sent to the state of origin if required by state regulations.
    6. Based on the information contained in the signed dock ticket, 
the e-ticket will be completed and submitted within 24 hours of the 
completion of the offload.
    7. To facilitate monitoring and catch tracking, original dock 
tickets must be retained by the first receiver submitting the e-ticket 
as required by state and Federal regulations.
    8. Upon submittal of the e-ticket, three copies of the e-ticket 
will be produced by the first receiver with the following distribution: 
One copy retained by the vessel operator, one copy retained by the 
first receiver, and one copy sent to the state of origin if required by 
state regulations.
    It is NMFS' understanding that transport requires supporting 
documentation per state regulations and that this process would support 
the state regulation by allowing dock tickets with e-ticket numbers or 
printed e-tickets to accompany the transported catch. The term ``dock 
ticket'' means a form accepted by the state to record the landing, 
receipt, purchase, or transfer of fish. The states may use different 
terms for this document.
    The States of Washington, Oregon, and California retain the option 
to address areas of Federal regulations with more specific and 
restrictive state regulations. For example, it is NMFS' understanding 
that the state of Washington may require the e-ticket or state fish 
receiving ticket to be submitted before the catch is transported out of 
the state of Washington.
    In addition to the reporting and process changes outlined above, 
the catch monitoring plan requirements as part of the first receiver 
site license application will be revised to add an additional 
requirement detailing how the e-ticket submittal requirements will be 
met. As with other aspects of the catch monitoring plans, e-ticket 
submittal proposals will be evaluated and accepted or rejected by NMFS.
    These changes are being proposed by revisions and additions to the 
following regulations: Sec. Sec.  660.11 for definitions; 660.113(a)(2) 
and (b)(4)(i) and (ii) for recordkeeping and reporting of e-tickets; 
and 660.140(f)(3)(iii)(C) for the catch monitoring plan requirements. 
NMFS is not proposing changes to the regulations at Sec.  
660.112(b)(2)(iv) on prohibitions, described above in the preamble, 
because those regulations do not restrict the process and changes 
outlined here. NMFS solicits public comment on these proposed changes, 
especially on the proposed changes at Sec.  660.113(b)(4)(ii)(E) and 
(F) regarding the process and submittal requirements for dock tickets 
and e-tickets.

Additional e-Ticket Fields

    NMFS proposes several new fields to be added to electronic fish 
tickets and is making it mandatory to complete the existing ex-vessel 
value field on e-tickets. Many of these new fields are being added to 
further facilitate state adoption of the PSMFC's e-ticket format. These 
new fields include: (1) A field to type the name of the vessel 
operator; (2) a signature block for the vessel operator's written 
signature for printed documents; (3) a signature block for first 
receiver's written signature for printed documents; and (4) a drop down 
box titled ``Inside/Outside State Waters,'' containing the following: 
Caught outside 3 miles, caught inside 3 miles, or both.
    The additional e-ticket field to document whether the fish were 
caught

[[Page 54894]]

in state waters, Federal waters, or both will aid enforcement. Federal 
jurisdiction over the Pacific coast groundfish fishery under the MSA 
applies only to fishing in the exclusive economic zone, beyond three 
miles from shore, and to some extent also on the high seas beyond the 
exclusive economic zone. In a MSA groundfish enforcement case, part of 
the burden is to prove the illegal fish were caught in Federal waters, 
i.e., beyond three miles. It is NMFS' understanding that the Washington 
state fish ticket form includes three boxes to check, including ``fish 
caught outside 3 miles.'' The burden of proof for enforcement cases can 
also be met in other ways, such as logbook entries or statements by the 
skipper, but a check box would make the burden of proof clearer for 
both state and Federal enforcement cases.
    While a field for ex-vessel value already exists on the e-ticket, 
NMFS has had mixed reporting of the ex-vessel value on the e-ticket 
because it is not currently listed in the ``required information'' 
section of the regulations. Regulations at Sec.  660.113(b)(4)(i) 
require first receivers to complete certain fields on an e-ticket. 
These regulations also have a clause that the Regional Administrator 
may deem other information as required to be completed by the IFQ first 
receiver on the e-ticket. In a memo dated April 4, 2011, NMFS's 
Northwest Regional Administrator determined that the ex-vessel value of 
the landing is a mandatory field that must be completed by the IFQ 
first receiver.
    NMFS has determined that the ex-vessel value of the landing is a 
mandatory reporting requirement for several reasons. In order for the 
states to have the option of adopting the Federal e-ticket to cover 
their state reporting requirements, the e-ticket must include the items 
required to be reported on the state fish tickets. The ex-vessel prices 
are a state reporting requirement for the state to be able to collect 
excise taxes and fees. The ex-vessel value will be also used in the 
cost recovery program that is currently being developed by the Council 
and NMFS. The ex-vessel value is not collected through the economic 
data collection program forms and is necessary information for that 
program to measure the economic changes in the fishery for the 5-year 
review of the program and beyond. The ex-vessel value may also be used 
by NMFS in required regulatory flexibility analyses for rulemakings.
    NMFS expects and requires that the information reported by IFQ 
first receivers on the e-ticket is true and accurate. If any of the 
information on the e-ticket changes after it has been submitted, 
including the ex-vessel value of the landing, then the e-ticket should 
be revised. For example, if the price of Pacific whiting is not known 
until after the e-ticket has been submitted, then the initial e-ticket 
would report the best estimate of the ex-vessel value and would be 
revised once the ex-vessel value is known. Because ex-vessel value as 
reported on the e-ticket may change after sorting or marketing, the 
first receiver or processor must either edit the e-ticket or submit a 
revised e-ticket according to state requirements. Similarly, other 
information on an e-ticket, such as the species and weight in an 
offload, may change after the original e-ticket has been submitted due 
to new information from cutting and processing the offload. However, 
the gross weight of the sorted offload, as observed by the catch 
monitor should not change, except for the rare occurrence of a data 
entry error not found upon review prior to e-ticket submittal.
    State requirements for editing and revising fish tickets vary (e.g. 
up to 6 years for Oregon versus California which doesn't allow edits 
but allows tickets to be voided and new tickets entered). In addition, 
the state regulations can be more conservative than Federal regulation. 
Because state requirements vary and state regulation can be more 
conservative, NMFS decided a timeframe for editing or revising e-
tickets would be more appropriate in state regulation and is not 
necessary in Federal regulation.
    NMFS has added the ex-vessel value of the landing as a mandatory 
field to be completed on the e-ticket through the April 4, 2011 memo 
and corresponding public notice. This rulemaking would update the 
regulations at Sec.  660.113(b)(4)(i) with language to reflect this 
mandatory requirement. In addition, this rulemaking proposes to add the 
new fields listed above to e-tickets.

Updated e-Ticket Hardware/Software Requirements

    Current hardware and software requirements for e-tickets, specified 
in regulations at Sec.  660.15(d), are insufficient and incorrect. NMFS 
is proposing to update the hardware and software requirements for e-
tickets to reflect more current computer operating systems and the 
minimum requirements necessary to run the software for e-tickets.

First Receiver Site License

    NMFS proposes several changes that would affect the first receiver 
site license requirements. First, NMFS proposes revisions to who is 
required to have a first receiver site license to require only buyers 
of fish from vessels making an IFQ landing to have a first receiver 
site license for each physical location at which they receive, 
purchase, or take custody, control, or possession of an IFQ landing. 
The buyer, as represented on the e-ticket, would be required to be the 
first receiver in all cases.
    There has been some confusion regarding the state licensed buyer, 
as reported on the e-ticket, and the associated first receiver, which 
is not specifically designated on the e-ticket. In some cases to date, 
the buyer has not held a first receiver site license. For example, an 
IFQ first receiver with a site license (Bob) has been contracted by the 
buyer (Joe) to receive, sort, account for the IFQ groundfish, and fill 
out the e-ticket in the name of the buyer (Joe). Using this example 
with the proposed changes to the first receiver site license 
requirements, Joe would be the one required to have the first receiver 
site license; Bob would act as an agent for Joe and would report Joe's 
buyer name and identification number on the e-ticket, but Bob would not 
be required to have a first receiver site license for this offload. Joe 
could also fill out the e-ticket himself if so chooses. Either way, 
Joe's buyer name and identification number would be reported on the e-
ticket.
    This would help align the state paper fish ticket system with the 
Federal e-ticket system. It would continue to allow the state buyer to 
be reported on the ticket for revenue and tax purposes as required by 
the states. Even though the first receiver site license number would 
not appear on the e-ticket, the Federal requirement would associate a 
buyer on an e-ticket as the buyer registered to a Federal first 
receiver site license.
    NMFS acknowledges that this would require some additional buyers to 
apply for a first receiver site license(s), possibly for multiple 
locations. It would also require some existing buyers to apply for a 
first receiver site licenses at additional locations, and to pay the 
application fee(s). NMFS does not expect this to increase community 
impacts because many buyers already have their first receiver site 
licenses and the application fee is $50. In addition, for buyers 
sharing a physical location, the catch monitoring plan could be shared 
among the applicants, reducing the paperwork burden.
    NMFS proposes to revise the following regulations to reflect these 
changes: Prohibitions at Sec.  660.112(b)(2)(i), first receiver site

[[Page 54895]]

license requirements at Sec.  660.140(f)(1), (f)(2), (f)(3), and 
(j)(1).
    Second, NMFS proposes to revise the application process for a first 
receiver site license so that it does not require a separate written 
request for site inspection. Currently, the regulations require a 
separate written request for a site inspection that must be included 
with the application for the first receiver site license. This 
requirement is redundant. NMFS proposes to revise the regulations at 
Sec.  660.140(f)(3)(iii)(B) to state that NMFS will contact applicants 
to arrange an inspection after receiving a complete first receiver site 
license application, including the proposed catch monitoring plan. In 
addition, NMFS solicits public comment on a reasonable timeframe 
between an application for a first receiver site license and NMFS 
conducting the site inspection. To reduce the costs of running the 
program, NMFs is considering whether to adopt a policy of batching the 
site inspections to only conduct inspections in a particular state once 
a month or within 60 days of receiving an application, and requests 
comment to assist its consideration of such policy.
    Third, NMFS proposes some revisions to merge the effective date 
language for first receiver site license in to one paragraph. 
Regulations at Sec.  660.140(f)(2), (f)(5), and (f)(6) would be 
revised.
    Fourth, as described in the above preamble under the section 
titled, ``new process for first receivers and catch monitors to address 
trucking/transport,'' NMFS also proposes to add a requirement to the 
catch monitoring plan as part of the first receiver site license 
application to require the IFQ first receiver to detail in the catch 
monitoring plan how the e-ticket submittal requirements will be met.

Conflict of Interest Regulations for Catch Monitor and Catch Monitor 
Providers

    The current conflict of interest regulations for catch monitors and 
catch monitor providers apply to any interest in a business involving 
vessels and shorebased or floating stationary processor facility. These 
regulations should have also included ``first receivers'' for the same 
reason it included processors. This was an inadvertent omission and 
NMFS proposes to revise the regulations at Sec.  660.18(c)(1) and (d) 
to add ``first receivers'' to the list of businesses.

Catch Monitor Training and Certification

    The regulations at Sec.  660.17(e)(14) list items and 
responsibilities of the catch monitor regarding training and 
certification, but are listed under the catch monitor provider section 
of the regulations. NMFS proposes moving paragraph (e)(14) to the 
appropriate place under Sec.  660.17(a).

Sorting/Weighing Requirements for Non-Whiting IFQ Species

    The groundfish regulations for the sorting and weighing 
requirements for non-whiting IFQ species are inconsistent. The 
prohibitions at Sec.  660.112(b)(2)(ii) makes it unlawful to fail to 
sort fish received from a IFQ landing prior to first weighing after 
offloading, except the vessels declared in to the limited entry 
midwater trawl, Pacific whiting shorebased IFQ may weigh catch on a 
bulk scale before sorting. The regulations on sorting requirements at 
Sec.  660.130(d)(2)(i) make a similar statement. The regulations at 
Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(ix) on catch weighing requirements state that for 
all other IFQ landings (except for Pacific whiting as mentioned above) 
a belt or automatic hopper scale may be used to weigh all of the catch 
prior to sorting. All but the predominant species must then be 
reweighed.
    The prohibition at Sec.  660.112(b)(2)(ii) and the sorting 
requirements at Sec.  660.130(d)(2)(i) restricts what Sec.  
660.140(j)(2)(ix)(A) allows for non-whiting groundfish. The activity 
listed in Sec.  660.140(j)(2) has occurred in the past in Washington 
and may still be occurring. The state laws on this have differed, so 
Sec.  660.140(j)(2) was to allow groundfish to be weighed in a hopper 
scale, then sorted by species, and each species (or group) weighed back 
and deducted from original total weight, if it was allowed by state 
law. This activity has also been previously allowed under an exempted 
fishing permit for both whiting and non-whiting groundfish.
    Therefore, NMFS proposes to revise regulations Sec.  
660.112(b)(2)(ii) and Sec.  660.130(d)(2)(i) to make them consistent 
with Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(ix)(A).

QS Permits and Vessel Accounts

    NMFS proposes several changes that affect QS permits and their 
corresponding QS accounts and vessel accounts. First, NMFS proposes to 
add a prohibition at Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xvi) against fraudulent use of 
QS accounts or vessel accounts. NMFS originally proposed this addition 
as part of a suite of proposals presented to the Council for its 
consideration at its June 2011 meeting, and the change was included as 
part of the Council's recommendations for this rule. On further 
consideration, NMFS questions whether this prohibition is needed, and 
solicits public comment on the need for or any concerns about this 
prohibition.
    Second, NMFS proposes a process for end-of-the-year vessel account 
reconciliation, especially with regard to implementing the carryover 
provision for a surplus in a vessel account (unused QP at the end of 
the year). This is a database and accounting issue to address a fishery 
that is open year round and setting up a time to reconcile vessel 
accounts. At its June 2011 meeting, the Council recommended against a 
proposal that fishing be prohibited for a period of time to address 
end-of-the-year vessel account reconciliation. Instead, the Council 
recommended that NMFS populate QS accounts with the next year's 
available QP or IBQ pounds on or near January 1. After populating QS 
accounts, QP or IBQ pounds could then be transferred to vessel accounts 
and any QP or IBQ pound deductions made to vessel accounts for using 
the carryover provision to cover a deficit in the previous year. Vessel 
accounts must be cleared of any deficit from the previous year within 
30 days of NMFS issuance of QP or IBQ pounds to QS accounts. Then, 
later in the year once data are available, NMFS would calculate any 
surplus carryover in each vessel account from the previous year and add 
that amount to the vessel account. NMFS proposes these end-of-the-year 
vessel account reconciliation regulations at Sec.  660.140(e)(5)(i).
    Third, NMFS proposes to remove references to designating an account 
manager from the regulations for QS and vessel accounts. In an effort 
to reduce the paperwork and regulatory burden, NMFS intends to remove 
the optional requirement for business entities to designate an account 
manager with NMFS. No later than 2012, account owners will have the 
capability to designate individuals to have certain roles and 
associated privileges within their online IFQ system under an ``account 
information'' tab. For example, account owners would be able to 
designate whether an individual can initiate or accept/reject 
transfers, while others would be designated to only view account 
balances. The regulations at Sec.  660.140(d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i)(D), 
(e)(2)(ii), and (e)(3)(i)(D) would be revised to remove the reference 
to designating an account manager.
    Fourth, NMFS proposes to revise the regulations at Sec.  
660.112(b)(1)(iv) to consistently use the term ``deficit''

[[Page 54896]]

instead of ``overage'' in regards to vessel accounts.
    Fifth, NMFS proposes to revise regulations at Sec.  
660.140(e)(4)(i) regarding annual and daily vessel limits. Language at 
Sec.  660.140(e)(4)(i) would be expanded to describe what values in a 
vessel account contribute to the calculation of a vessel limit. The QP 
Vessel Limit (Annual Limit) is calculated as unused available QPs plus 
used QPs (landings and discards) plus any pending outgoing transfer of 
QPs. The Unused QP Vessel Limits (Daily Limit) is calculated as unused 
available QPs plus any pending outgoing transfer of QPs. These changes 
would clarify the calculation and allow tracking of pass through QP. 
For example, QP that are transferred into vessel account 1 and 
subsequently transferred to vessel account 2 would not be counted 
towards compliance with vessel limits in vessel account 1 once 
transferred to the vessel account 2 (i.e., pass through QP). 
Regulations would be revised to specify these calculations.
    Finally, NMFS proposes clarifications to the regulations on changes 
in ownership for QS permits/account and vessel accounts as described 
earlier in the preamble under ``Corrections/consistency'' for all 
commercial groundfish sectors.

Adaptive Management Program

    The trawl catch share program allocated 10 percent of the 
nonwhiting QS for an adaptive management program (AMP). For the first 
two years of the program, the annually issued QP derived from this 
allocation is passed through to the other QS owners in proportion to 
their QS. The catch share program specifies that the Council will 
develop alternative criteria for distribution of the AMP QP beginning 
in year three of the program. The Council considered that such 
alternative criteria may not be ready by 2013 and that no procedure 
existed for distribution of the AMP QP should this occur, and 
recommended extending the pass through of AMP QP through 2014 in the 
event that the AMP distribution criteria are not finalized before then. 
Accordingly, this regulation would extend the pass-through to 2014, 
unless implementation occurs sooner. In addition, this rule proposes to 
cross reference the AMP language in the section of the regulations at 
Sec.  660.140(d)(1) that explains the annual allocation for the 
Shorebased IFQ Program. Regulatory sections 660.140(d)(1)(ii)(A) and 
(l)(2) would be affected by this rule.

Any Size Halibut Counts Against IBQ

    For Pacific halibut caught north of 40[deg]10' N. latitude, halibut 
of any size (greater than, equal to, or less than 32 inches) counts 
against the individual bycatch quota (IBQ) pounds. This is not a change 
from existing regulations, but NMFS proposes to further clarify this at 
Sec.  660.140(d)(1)(ii)(C).

Exemption From Prohibition on Processing at Sea

    In January 2011, NMFS implemented a prohibition on processing at-
sea for the IFQ fishery with some exceptions, as specified at Sec.  
660.112(b)(1)(xii). Processing is defined in groundfish regulations at 
Sec.  660.11 as ``* * * the preparation or packaging of groundfish to 
render it suitable for human consumption, retail sale, industrial uses 
or long-term storage, including, but not limited to, cooking, canning, 
smoking, salting, drying, filleting, freezing, or rendering into meal 
or oil, but does not mean heading and gutting unless additional 
preparation is done. * * * (1) At-sea processing means processing that 
takes place on a vessel or other platform that floats and is capable of 
being moved from one location to another, whether shore-based or on the 
water * * *''
    The prohibition on processing at sea in the Shorebased IFQ Program 
was described in the preamble to the proposed rule dated August 31, 
2010 (75 FR 53380). The previous regulations before the trawl 
rationalization program was implemented did not include a general 
prohibition on processing all groundfish at-sea for non-whiting trawl 
vessels landing groundfish at shorebased processors. In other words, 
previously, the non-whiting trawl vessels were not prohibited from 
processing non-whiting catch. The Shorebased IFQ Program envisioned 
that participants would not process their catch at sea and that all 
catch was delivered to shorebased processors for further processing. 
This was intended to maintain the character of the fleet and the 
coastal communities that relied on this fleet delivering their catch to 
processors on land. During the Council's review of the draft 
regulations over 2010 and its regulatory deeming process, the Council 
specified that processing at sea should be prohibited under the 
Shorebased IFQ Program with two exceptions. The two exceptions were for 
processing that was already allowed in the groundfish fishery before 
the trawl rationalization program and included exemptions for the 
following: (1) Any vessel that is 75-ft (23-m) or less length overall 
that harvests whiting and, in addition to heading and gutting, cuts the 
tail off and freezes the whiting, is not considered to be a catcher/
processor nor is it considered to be processing fish, and (2) a vessel 
that has a sablefish at-sea processing exemption, defined at Sec.  
660.25(b)(3)(iv)(D), may process sablefish at-sea in both the limited 
entry fixed gear primary sablefish fishery or in the Shorebased IFQ 
Program.
    At the Council's March, April and June 2011 meetings, in response 
to public testimony, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) 
requested that the Council consider an exemption from the prohibition 
on processing at sea in the Shorebased IFQ Program (see Agenda Item 
H.2.c, ODFW Report 2, March 2011; Agenda Item E.6.b, ODFW Letter 
(excerpt), June 2011). The public testimony disclosed that some 
participants in the shorebased non-whiting fishery had invested in 
processing equipment and developed markets for non-whiting groundfish 
glazed (frozen) at sea while the trawl rationalization program was 
still under development.
    At its June 2011 meeting, the Council decided that it had not 
intended to negatively impact any at-sea non-whiting processing 
operations that existed prior to the announcement of the prohibition on 
processing at sea in the Shorebased IFQ Program. The Council 
recommended an exemption from the prohibition on processing at sea for 
select participants in the Shorebased IFQ Program that could prove they 
had legally processed groundfish other than Pacific whiting at sea 
before the trawl rationalization program was implemented. To qualify 
under the Council's recommendation, vessels registered to a limited 
entry trawl permit must have legally processed groundfish other than 
Pacific whiting at sea prior to July 20, 2010, as verified by fish 
tickets, dock receiving tickets, landing receipts, or other official 
documents. This exemption would only apply to the vessel while 
operating under the Shorebased IFQ Program regardless of the type of 
gear used. The Council recommended the date of July 20, 2010, as the 
cut-off date for qualification to ensure that processing-prohibition 
exemptions would be provided only to individuals that had been 
processing at-sea without prior knowledge of the upcoming prohibition. 
Accordingly, this proposed rule incorporates that cut-off date. 
However, the regulation to prohibit processing at sea for the 
Shorebased IFQ Program was proposed and published in the Federal 
Register for the first time on August 31, 2010 (75 FR 53380). NMFS is 
considering whether to adjust the cut-off

[[Page 54897]]

date for qualification to August 31, 2010, and specifically requests 
comment on the implications of such a change from the Council motion.
    The Council expressed its intent to structure the exemption from 
the prohibition on processing at sea in the Shorebased IFQ Program in a 
manner similar to the previous exemption that was created under 
Amendment 14 for the sablefish permit stacking program and implemented 
in a rule that published March 2, 2006 (71 FR 10614). Thus, similar to 
the existing exemption for sablefish at sea processing specified at 
Sec.  660.25(b)(3)(iv)(D), the at-sea processing exemption for non-
whiting groundfish in the Shorebased IFQ Program would be open to 
applicants during a one-time application process during early 2012. It 
would be issued to the particular vessel and the permit and/or vessel 
owner who requests the exemption and meets the qualifying requirements. 
The exemption would not be part of the limited entry permit and would 
not be transferable to any other vessel, vessel owner, or permit owner 
for any reason. The non-whiting at-sea processing exemption would 
expire upon registration of the vessel to a new owner or if the vessel 
is totally lost. After NMFS conducts an application and appeals process 
(expected to be finished in spring/summer of 2012) and issues any 
resulting exemptions, processing at sea by qualified participants would 
be allowed.
    To propose this new exemption from the prohibition on processing 
non-whiting groundfish at sea for the Shorebased IFQ Program and the 
one-time application and appeals process for the exemption, NMFS 
proposes revisions to the regulations at Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xii) on 
prohibitions, and a new paragraph at Sec.  660.25(b)(6) on the 
exemption and application process.
    In addition, the Council's motion from its June 2011 meeting 
included a statement that ``Regulatory language should also include an 
appropriate conversion factor and/or an appropriate process for 
calculating a conversion factor for glazed groundfish.'' In a letter to 
the Council (Agenda Item E.6.b, ODFW Letter (excerpt), June 2011), ODFW 
recommended a weight conversion factor as well as a process for 
calculating a conversion factor as follows: ``The following conversion 
applies to vessels landing sorted catch that is frozen (glazed) in the 
Shorebased IFQ Program. A conversion factor of 0.95 must be applied 
when there are fewer than 60 individuals of any species or species 
group in a single landing. Conversion factors must be calculated for 
each landing for each species or species group when there are 60 or 
greater individuals in a category (=species or species group) in a 
single landing as follows: Weigh a sample of at least 20 glazed fish to 
obtain the glazed weight; Completely remove glaze from individual fish 
making up the sample; Re-weigh the sample to obtain the non-glazed 
weight; Divide the non-glazed weight by the glazed weight to obtain the 
conversion factor; A separate conversion factor may be calculated for 
each size grade of a species, but may only be applied to landings of 
that size grade; documentation of this calculation must be retained 
with the dock receiving ticket.''
    When NMFS implemented weight conversion factors for the Shorebased 
IFQ Program, NMFS stated that the weight conversion factors used on 
electronic fish tickets (a Federal reporting requirement) must be a 
consistent coastwide value. In the preamble to the proposed rule 
published on August 31, 2010 (75 FR 53380), NMFS stated the reasons why 
a consistent coastwide value was necessary, including providing 
consistency in catch estimates between states, preventing artificial 
influences on individual landings choices, and benefiting NMFS's 
ability to track landings values. NMFS based the Federal weight 
conversion factors on published values. The weight conversions for 
dressed IFQ species were derived from an Alaska Sea Grant College 
Program publication titled, ``Recoveries and Yields from Pacific Fish 
and Shellfish'' (Marine Advisory Bulletin number 37, 2004). For Pacific 
whiting that has been dressed (headed and gutted) with tails removed, 
the weight conversion was derived from the value for pollock as 
published at Sec.  679 for the Alaska groundfish fishery. These values 
are codified at Sec.  660.60(h)(5)(ii)(B).
    ODFW's proposed conversion factor is not a consistent value by 
species and, potentially, is not a consistent value within a species 
for different size grades or volumes of fish. Because the online IFQ 
system automatically applies the weight conversion factor depending on 
the species condition code reported on the electronic fish ticket, a 
variable conversion factor is not practical. In addition, NMFS is not 
aware of published values for glazed groundfish species nor of a 
consistent coastwide value used by the states for glazed groundfish 
species. Therefore, NMFS is not proposing a Federal weight conversion 
factor for freezing or glazing non-whiting groundfish species at this 
time. The weight reported on the electronic fish ticket for glazed non-
whiting groundfish should be the actual scale weight with no conversion 
factor applied. The states may continue to have a state weight 
conversion factor for freezing and glazing on their state fish ticket. 
NMFS is aware of the need to develop conversion factors for freezing 
and glazing and to review existing Federal weight conversion factors 
specified in the groundfish regulations. NMFS brought this issue 
forward as a potential future Council action at the Council's April and 
June 2011 meetings (Agenda Item E.6.b, NMFS Report 1, June 2011). 
However, due to workload, this has not been a priority for NMFS or the 
Council. NMFS specifically requests public comment on this issue.

Changes Applicable to the At-Sea Whiting Fisheries (MS Coop Program and 
C/P Coop Program)

Severability of MS/CV Endorsements (MS Coop Program Only)

    With implementation of the trawl rationalization program, an MS/CV 
endorsement was issued to each limited entry trawl permit that met 
specified qualification requirements for participation in the 
mothership sector of the whiting fishery. These endorsements included a 
whiting catch history assignment (CHA) based on the catch history of 
the individual permits during the allocation period. There are some 
permits that during the qualifying period participated primarily in the 
shoreside fishery but had some relatively minor amounts of catch 
history in the at-sea whiting mothership fishery. These permits 
received MS/CV endorsements with small amounts of whiting CHA. For the 
small amounts of mothership whiting catch history that some permits 
received, the burden (transaction costs) of joining a coop may not be 
worth the benefits that permit's CHA would bring to the coop's 
allocation. These permit owners could sell their limited entry trawl 
permits to mothership whiting fishery participants; however, they might 
not want to because they need a limited entry trawl permit to 
participate in the Shorebased IFQ Program. If permit owners with small 
amounts of CHA join coops each year, there may be transaction costs 
that offset the benefits of the small CHA, reducing the overall 
efficiency and benefits from the trawl rationalization program. If 
permits with small CHA amounts do not join a coop, their CHA would 
automatically be assigned to the non-coop fishery where it may go 
unharvested. If all other MS/CV-endorsed permits have joined coops and 
the owners of the permits with small CHAs do not have interest in 
gearing up

[[Page 54898]]

for the mothership whiting fishery or incurring the burden associated 
with joining a coop, it may contribute toward an incentive for MS/CV-
endorsed permits to enter the non-coop fishery instead of joining a 
coop, decreasing the effectiveness of the trawl rationalization 
program. In order to address these concerns, the Council took final 
action at their June 2011 meeting to allow MS/CV-endorsed permit owners 
to change the registration of the MS/CV endorsement and its associated 
CHA from one limited entry trawl permit to another (called severability 
in Council documents).
    Under the Council's recommendation, each MS/CV endorsement would be 
permanently linked with its CHA as originally issued by NMFS and could 
not be divided or registered separately to two different limited entry 
trawl permits. In addition to being linked together, an MS/CV 
endorsement and CHA would only be able to be registered to a limited 
entry trawl permit, as required in current regulations, and any change 
in registration of an MS/CV endorsement and CHA would be required to be 
to another limited entry trawl permit. Ownership of an MS/CV 
endorsement and associated CHA would be required to be the same as the 
owner of the limited entry trawl permit to which the endorsement is 
registered. Multiple MS/CV endorsements and associated CHA would be 
allowed to be registered to a single limited entry trawl permit. If 
multiple endorsements are registered to a single limited entry trawl 
permit, the whiting CHA amount (expressed as a percent) would remain in 
the amount that it was originally issued by NMFS and would not be 
combined to a single larger CHA, unless two or more MS/CV-endorsed 
permits were to be combined for purposes of increasing the size 
endorsement, as specified at Sec.  660.25(b)(4)(ii)(B). Because of 
this, NMFS would establish a unique identifier for each individual MS/
CV endorsement and associated CHA listed on a limited entry trawl 
permit for tracking purposes. If this requirement is implemented, NMFS 
would need to reissue all MS/CV-endorsed permits with these unique 
endorsement identifier numbers attached to the permits.
    With this proposed action, MS/CV-endorsed limited entry trawl 
permit owners would have the following three alternative permit 
arrangements available to them:
    (1) Change registration of an MS/CV endorsement and associated CHA 
from one limited entry trawl permit to another. This is the new 
proposed option and could result in the receiving permit having two or 
more MS/CV endorsements and associated CHAs listed on the permit.
    (2) Combine two limited entry trawl permits to get a single limited 
entry trawl permit with a larger size endorsement. If, for example, 
both of the limited entry trawl permits have an MS/CV endorsement on 
them, the single resulting limited entry trawl permit would have a 
single MS/CV endorsement and a single larger CHA. This requirement is 
in existing regulations at Sec.  660.150(g)(2)(iv) on combining 
permits.
    (3) Follow number (1) above and then combine two limited entry 
trawl permits to get a single limited entry trawl permit with a larger 
size endorsement. This is a mix of the new proposed option and the 
existing regulations on combining permits and results in a single 
limited entry trawl permit with a larger size endorsement and multiple 
MS/CV endorsements and associated CHAs listed on the permit (i.e., not 
combined into a single MS/CV endorsement and larger CHA).
    As outlined in the three permit arrangements described above, 
combining limited entry trawl permits would not require combining 
endorsements associated with those permits. For MS/CV-endorsed permit 
owners that have already combined permits before January 1, 2012, a 
window of time would be provided to change that permit arrangement by 
sending a letter to NMFS. Regulations for this opportunity are proposed 
at Sec.  660.150(g)(2)(vi).
    With regards to the timing of a change in endorsement registration, 
the MS/CV endorsement and associated CHA can only be registered to 
another limited entry trawl permit during the limited entry permit 
renewal period, from September 1 through December 31 each year, and 
effective the following year. The first time that a change in 
endorsement registration would be permitted would be during the permit 
renewal period from September 1 through December 31, 2012, to be 
effective in 2013.
    Under the proposed rule, a limited entry trawl permit owner with 
more than one MS/CV endorsement may join more than one coop, or join 
both a coop and the non-coop fishery; however, each endorsement and its 
associated CHA may only be assigned to one coop or the non-coop 
fishery. Additionally, each coop would also continue to be required to 
include at least 20 percent of all MS/CV-endorsed permits as members.
    Regulatory sections Sec.  660.25(b)(3)(v), (b)(4)(ii)(B), and 
(b)(4)(iv)(D), and Sec.  660.150(c)(2)(i)(A), (d)(1)(iii) introductory 
text, (g)(1)(iii), (g)(2)(iv) through (vi) would be affected by this 
proposed rule.

Responsibility for Daily Testing of At-Sea Scales (MS Coop Program and 
C/P Coop Program)

    NMFS proposes regulations to make it more clear who is responsible 
for the daily testing of at-sea scales. NMFS interprets current 
regulations to require the vessel operator to ensure that the vessel 
crew performs the daily testing of at-sea scales, including both belt 
scales and platform scales. The regulations at Sec.  660.15(b)(3) would 
be revised accordingly to make this interpretation explicit.

Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the MSA, the NMFS Assistant 
Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with 
the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP, other provisions of the MSA, and 
other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public 
comment.
    The Council prepared a final environmental impact statement (EIS) 
for Amendment 20 and Amendment 21 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP; 
a notice of availability for each of these final EISs was published on 
June 25, 2010 (75 FR 36386). An environmental assessment (EA) has been 
prepared for the following trailing actions: (1) An allocation of 
Pacific halibut bycatch to the trawl fishery, and (2) an exemption from 
the prohibition on processing at sea for qualified participants in the 
Shorebased IFQ Program. The Amendments 20 and 21 EISs and the draft EA 
are available on the Council's Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org/or 
on NMFS' Web site at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-Fishery-Management/Trawl-Program/index.cfm. The remaining 
regulatory changes in this proposed rule either required no further 
analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or were 
categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare a NEPA analysis.
    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 Regulatory Flexibility Act (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

[[Page 54899]]

SUMMARY section of the preamble. A copy of the IRFA is available from 
NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and a summary of the IRFA, per the requirements of 
5 U.S.C. 603(a) follows:
    As of August 2011, there are 176 limited entry trawl permits and 6 
mothership processor permits. The limited entry trawl permits are 
associated with three groups of trawlers. Some trawlers (132) deliver 
to shorebased processing plants. Some of these trawlers as well as 
other trawlers (total = 36) deliver to mothership processors (6). Some 
trawlers are catcher-processors (10)--vessels that both trawl and 
process fish. In January 2011, NMFS and the Pacific Fishery Management 
Council set up a new management program called the trawl 
rationalization program. This program significantly changes how two of 
these groups work. Shore trawlers now fish under their own set of 
individual species quotas by vessel. In prior years, there were 
different rules for shore trawlers depending on their target catch. 
Nonwhiting trawlers fished under common trip limits while whiting 
trawlers fished under a common quota without trip limits. In prior 
years, the mothership fishery consisted of independent at-sea 
processors each receiving catch from several trawlers. Now the 
mothership fishery works as a coop where catcher-vessels and 
motherships work together collectively. The catcher-processor fleet 
continues as a single coop.
    A specific set of groundfish species and bycatch of Pacific halibut 
are managed under the trawl rationalization program. Human observation 
and electronic reporting tools account for all catch of these species. 
Computer programs match the catch against individual species quotas 
(quota pounds or QP) or coop allocations. All vessels must carry 
observers who watch and measure the harvests and discards of these 
groundfish. All shore plants must have catch monitors to watch all 
vessel offloads and record the species and amounts landed. In the 
shorebased fishery, online accounting programs issue and track quota 
shares, quota pounds, and catch by species. Computer programs compare 
fish tickets to catch monitor reports and calculate the quota pounds 
landed by an individual vessel. Observer reports are used to account 
for the vessel's discards. An online ``banking system'' is used to 
debit landings and discards against the vessel's quota pounds. Quota 
pounds are deposited to a vessel's account based on a transfer from a 
quota share account or from another vessel account.
    As discussed in the summary above, this proposed rule would revise 
the Pacific coast groundfish trawl rationalization program. These 
revisions would affect not only limited entry trawl fisheries but also 
other fisheries including the limited entry fixed gear and open access 
fisheries. Discussed above are revisions that would address the 
movement between limited entry and open access fisheries. Other 
revisions concern vessels fishing in different management areas within 
one trip. Rules about permit ownership and transfer have been edited. 
The regulations would clarify the relationship of Amendment 21 to 
previous amendments concerning how certain species are allocated 
between the limited entry and open access sectors. Participants in the 
fishery would find the regulations easier to comply with and easier to 
understand. There would also be less confusion as to how fish are 
allocated.
    The proposed actions would establish new or modified processes 
concerning how much fish can be allocated and harvested. A new process 
involving the use of interim allocations should the biennial management 
and specification process not be completed in a timely way would be 
established based on similar processes used by emergency rule making 
for 2011. This would reduce the potential delay in the annual 
allocation of quota pounds. The ``carry-over'' process would be 
modified so that there is no need to close the fishery in December for 
end-of-the-year account reconciliation. The Adaptive Management pass-
through of quota pounds process would be extended through 2014 or the 
implementation of the Adaptive Management Program details, whichever is 
earlier. These actions would provide benefits as they avoid major shut 
downs of the fishery and they would facilitate multi-year planning.
    Offload monitoring procedures would be revised. There would also be 
new procedures associated with electronic fish ticket reporting when 
trawlers land fish at one site but the fish are trucked to another site 
for processing. These procedures would also apply when the fish ticket 
is completed in another office as compared to the landing site. The 
electronic fish ticket format would be revised to better match the 
state paper fish ticket requirements. These revised procedures and 
changes to the fish ticket format and completion process would provide 
benefits by reducing the monitoring burden on fishermen and processors. 
They would provide flexibility to first receivers and fish buyers. They 
would also aid adoption of the electronic fish ticket by the states and 
would increase the potential that redundant data collection systems are 
reduced. Most importantly, they would improve the timeliness and 
accuracy of the data reported.
    The proposed action would expand the list of exemptions to the 
prohibition on processing at sea. Fishermen who could show that they 
were legally processing nonwhiting groundfish prior to the 
implementation of Amendment 20 would be able to apply for an exemption 
to continue processing at sea. This exemption would address the Council 
intent not to negatively impact these operations.
    Revising the halibut trawl bycatch mortality limit formulas would 
provide benefits to the trawl fishery as they provide slightly higher 
catch compared to the existing regulations while continuing to provide 
increased halibut opportunities for non-trawl fisheries. It is 
recognized that increased halibut mortality by trawlers would mean less 
halibut for other commercial and recreational fisheries. However these 
revisions would move the trawl fishery closer to the Council's original 
goal of 50 percent reduction of halibut mortality by the trawl fleet.
    To participate in the mothership fishery, harvesting vessels must 
have an endorsed permit. The endorsement has an associated catch 
history amount, called a catch history assignment in regulations. 
Vessels wishing to sell their catch history to a coop must sell both 
their limited entry trawl permit and MS/CV endorsement. The proposed 
regulations would ``sever'' the MS/CV endorsement with its catch 
history assignment from the associated limited entry permit. Under the 
revised regulations, fishermen could sell or assign their MS/CV 
endorsements and associated catch history assignments while keeping 
their permits so they could continue to fish in other limited entry 
fisheries. This change would aid coop formation and may minimize the 
costs of joining a coop for fishermen.
    The following provides some perspective on the economic dimensions 
of the fisheries. Over the years 2005-2009, the limited entry trawl 
fishery has averaged annual inflation adjusted revenues of about $57 
million and total landings of about 215,000 tons. Pacific whiting ex-
vessel revenues have averaged about $25 million. However, differences 
between years have varied greatly. Whiting trawlers harvested about 
216,000 tons of whiting worth about $51 million in ex-vessel revenues 
in 2008. Revenues were high because of high landings and high prices. 
Ex-vessel prices of $235 per ton were the highest

[[Page 54900]]

on record. In comparison, the 2007 fishery harvested about 214,000 tons 
worth $29 million at an average ex-vessel price of about $137 per ton. 
The 2009 fishery harvested about 99,000 tons worth about $12 million at 
a price of $120 per ton.
    While the Pacific whiting fishery has grown in importance in recent 
years, harvests in the non-whiting component of the limited entry trawl 
fishery have declined steadily since the 1980s. Non-whiting trawl ex-
vessel revenues in the fishery peaked in the mid-1990s at about $40 
million. Following the passage of the Sustainable Fisheries Act (1996) 
and the listing of several species as overfished, harvests became 
increasingly restricted and landings and revenues declined steadily 
until 2002. Over the years 2005 to 2009, non-whiting groundfish ex-
vessel revenues have averaged $27 million annually. These revenues have 
ranged from $24 million (2005) to $32 million (2008). The 2009 fishery 
earned $30 million in ex-vessel revenues. Total shorebased revenues 
(whiting and non-whiting) have averaged about $36 million annually over 
the last five years. (Note: Ex-vessel revenues are just one indicator 
of ``revenue''; they understate the wholesale, export, and retail 
revenues earned from the fishery. Data on these other indicators is 
either incomplete or unavailable.)
    This proposed rule would regulate businesses that harvest 
groundfish and processors that wish to process limited entry trawl 
groundfish. Under the RFA, the term ``small entities'' includes small 
businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. 
For small businesses, the SBA has established size criteria for all 
major industry sectors in the U.S., including fish harvesting and fish 
processing businesses. A business involved in fish harvesting is a 
small business if it is independently owned and operated and not 
dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates) and if it 
has combined annual receipts not in excess of $4.0 million for all its 
affiliated operations worldwide. 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 
worldwide. A business involved in both the harvesting and processing of 
seafood products is a small business if it meets the $4.0 million 
criterion for fish harvesting operations. A wholesale business 
servicing the fishing industry is a small business if it employs 100 or 
fewer persons on a full time, part time, temporary, or other basis, at 
all its affiliated operations worldwide. For marinas and charter/party 
boats, a small business is one with annual receipts not in excess of 
$7.0 million. The RFA defines a small organization as any nonprofit 
enterprise that is independently owned and operated and is not dominant 
in its field. The RFA defines small governmental jurisdictions as 
governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school 
districts, or special districts with populations of less than 50,000.
    NMFS makes the following conclusions based primarily on analyses 
associated with fish ticket data and limited entry permit data, 
available employment data provided by processors, information on the 
charterboat and Tribal fleets, and available industry responses to 
ongoing surveys on ownership. The non-trawl businesses are the 
following fleets: Limited entry fixed gear (approximately 150 
companies), open access groundfish (1,100), charterboats (465), and the 
Tribal fleet (four Tribes with 66 vessels). Available information on 
average revenue per vessel suggests that all the entities in this group 
can be considered small. In addition, the proposed rules would change 
requirements associated with catch monitors and observers that are 
currently being supplied to the fishery by five companies. Based on 
analysis done on observer issues by the NMFS Alaska Regional Office, 
these five companies are also small companies.
    For the trawl sector, there are 177 permit owners. Nine limited 
entry trawl permits are attached to catcher-processing vessels and are 
considered ``large'' companies. Of the remaining 168 limited entry 
permits, 25 limited entry trawl permits are either owned or closely 
associated with a ``large'' shorebased processing company or with a 
non-profit organization who considers itself a ``large'' organization. 
Nine other permit owners indicated that they were large ``companies.'' 
Almost all of these companies are associated with the shorebased and 
mothership whiting fisheries. The remaining 134 limited entry trawl 
permits are projected to be held by ``small'' companies. Three of the 
six mothership processors are ``large'' companies. Within the 14 
shorebased whiting first receivers/processors, there are four ``large'' 
companies. Including the shorebased whiting first receivers, in 2008, 
there were 75 first receivers that purchased limited entry trawl 
groundfish. There were 36 small purchasers (less than $150,000); 26 
medium purchasers (purchases greater than $150,000 but less than 
$1,000,000); and 13 large purchasers (purchases greater than $1.0 
million). These regulations also affect the five companies that provide 
observer and catch monitor services to the industry. Based on analyses 
and conclusions undertaken for these companies by the NMFS Alaska 
Regional Office, these companies are considered small companies.
    As indicated above, the actions proposed by this rule would be 
generally beneficial to the various sectors of the fishery. The only 
explicit cost impact is the expansion of the requirement that all fish 
buyers obtain a $50 first receiver site license. Therefore, negative 
impacts to the industry, if any, appear to be minimal and do not favor 
large entities over small entities.
    No Federal rules have been identified that duplicate, overlap, or 
conflict with the alternatives. Public comment is hereby solicited, 
identifying such rules. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS 
(see ADDRESSES).
    This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements 
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). These requirements have 
been submitted to OMB for approval. OMB control number 0648-0611, 
Rationalization of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Trawl Limited Entry 
Fishery, would be revised to include an application for an exemption 
from the prohibition on processing nonwhiting groundfish at sea in the 
Shorebased IFQ Program. Public reporting burden for the revised OMB 
control number 0648-0611 is estimated to average 3 hours per response 
(543 responses). OMB control number 0648-0619, Northwest Region 
Groundfish Trawl Fishery Monitoring and Catch Accounting Program, would 
be revised to include the additional reporting requirements for IFQ 
first receivers on electronic fish tickets, updated hardware and 
software requirements for electronic fish tickets, and an updated 
process for first receivers and catch monitors to address offload and 
trucking issues. Public reporting burden for the revised OMB control 
number 0648-0619 is estimated to average 30 minutes per response (6,059 
responses). OMB control number 0648-0620, Pacific Coast Groundfish 
Trawl Rationalization Program Permit and License Information 
Collection, would be revised to include a form for changing the 
registration of MS/CV endorsements and associated catch history 
assignments from one limited entry trawl permit to another and changes 
to the first receiver site license application requirements. Public

[[Page 54901]]

reporting burden for the revised OMB control number 0648-0620 are 
estimated to average 30 minutes per response (1,955 responses). These 
estimates include 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 NMFS, 
Northwest Region, at the ADDRESSES section above; and to OMB 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.
    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 Pacific 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 
Pacific whiting fishery. During the 2005 Pacific 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 Pacific 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 
fish over the last 15 years and has only occasionally exceeded the 
reinitiation trigger of 11,000 fish.
    Since 1999, annual Chinook bycatch has averaged about 8,450 fish. 
The Chinook ESUs most likely affected by the whiting fishery has 
generally improved in status since the 1999 section 7 consultation. 
Although these species remain at risk, as indicated by their ESA 
listing, NMFS concluded that the higher observed bycatch in 2005 does 
not require a reconsideration 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 is not likely 
to jeopardize the continued existence of any of the affected ESUs.
    Lower Columbia River coho (70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005) were 
recently listed and Oregon Coastal coho (73 FR 7816, February 11, 2008) 
were recently relisted as threatened under the ESA. The 1999 biological 
opinion concluded that the bycatch of salmonids in the Pacific whiting 
fishery were almost entirely Chinook salmon, with little or no bycatch 
of coho, chum, sockeye, and steelhead.
    The Southern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of green sturgeon 
was listed as threatened under the ESA (71 FR 17757, April 7, 2006). 
The southern DPS of Pacific eulachon was listed as threatened on March 
18, 2010, under the ESA (75 FR 13012). NMFS has reinitiated 
consultation on the fishery, including impacts on green sturgeon, 
eulachon, marine mammals, and turtles.
    After reviewing the available information, NMFS has concluded that, 
consistent with sections 7(a)(2) and 7(d) of the ESA, the action would 
not jeopardize any listed species, would not adversely modify any 
designated critical habitat, and 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.
    This proposed rule was developed after meaningful consultation and 
collaboration, through the Council process, with the Tribal 
representative on the Council. The FMP Amendment and these proposed 
regulations have no direct effect on the Tribes; these proposed 
regulations were deemed by the Council as ``necessary or appropriate'' 
to implement the FMP as amended.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660

    Fisheries, Fishing, and Indian fisheries.

    Dated: August 26, 2011.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 50 CFR chapter VI is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

50 CFR Chapter VI

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., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 
U.S.C. 7001 et seq.

    2. In Sec.  660.11, add the definition for ``Dock ticket'' in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  660.11  General definitions.

* * * * *
    Dock ticket means a form accepted by the state to record the 
landing, receipt, purchase, or transfer of fish.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  660.12, revise paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows:

[[Page 54902]]

Sec.  660.12  General groundfish prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) Make a false statement on an application for issuance, renewal, 
permit registration, vessel registration, replacement of a limited 
entry permit, or a declaration of ownership interest in a limited entry 
permit.
* * * * *
    4. In Sec.  660.13, revise paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A)(23) and add 
paragraph (d)(5)(iv)(A)(26) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.13  Recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (23) Open access Coastal Pelagic Species net gear,
* * * * *
    (26) Open access California gillnet complex gear.
* * * * *
    5. In Sec.  660.14, revise paragraph (d)(4)(iii) and (vii) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  660.14  Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) Permit exemption. If the limited entry permit had a change in 
vessel registration so that it is no longer registered to the vessel 
(for the purposes of this section, this includes permits placed into 
``unidentified'' status), the vessel may be exempted from VMS 
requirements providing the vessel is not used to fish in state or 
Federal waters seaward of the baseline from which the territorial sea 
is measured off the States of Washington, Oregon or California (0-200 
nm offshore) for the remainder of the fishing year. If the vessel is 
used to fish in this area for any species of fish at any time during 
the remaining portion of the fishing year without being registered to a 
limited entry permit, the vessel is required to have and use VMS.
* * * * *
    (vii) Valid exemption reports. For an exemption report to be valid, 
it must be received by NMFS at least 2 hours and not more than 24 hours 
before the exempted activities defined at paragraphs (d)(4)(i) through 
(iv) of this section occur. An exemption report is valid until NMFS 
receives a report canceling the exemption. An exemption cancellation 
must be received at least 2 hours before the vessel re-enters the EEZ 
following an outside areas exemption; at least 2 hours before the 
vessel is placed back in the water following a haul out exemption; at 
least 2 hours before the vessel resumes fishing for any species of fish 
in state or Federal waters off the States of Washington, Oregon, or 
California after it has received a permit exemption; or at least 2 
hours before a vessel resumes fishing in the open access fishery after 
a long-term departure exemption. If a vessel is required to submit an 
activation report under paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section before 
returning to fish, that report may substitute for the exemption 
cancellation. Initial contact must be made with NMFS OLE not more than 
24 hours after the time that an emergency situation occurred in which 
VMS transmissions were disrupted and followed by a written emergency 
exemption request within 72 hours from when the incident occurred. If 
the emergency situation upon which an emergency exemption is based is 
resolved before the exemption expires, an exemption cancellation must 
be received by NMFS at least 2 hours before the vessel resumes fishing.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec.  660.15, revise paragraphs (b)(3), and (d)(1) through 
(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.15  Equipment requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Daily testing. The vessel operator must ensure that the vessel 
crew test each required scale daily and ensure that each scale meets 
the maximum permissible error (MPE) requirements described at paragraph 
(b)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Hardware and software requirements. A personal computer system 
with the following minimum requirements:
    (i) Processor: 500-megahertz (MHz) or higher processor;
    (ii) Random Access Memory (RAM): 256 megabytes (MB) or higher;
    (iii) Hard disk space:
    (A) If already have MS Access 2007 or 2010, 200 MB available disk 
size.
    (B) If loading the MS Access 2007 runtime, then 700 MB available 
disk size.
    (iv) Monitor: 1024 x 768 or higher display resolution;
    (v) Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP with Service Pack (SP) 
2, Windows Server 2003 with SP1, or later operating system such as 
Windows Vista or Windows 2007;
    (vi) Software: Microsoft Access 2007 or Microsoft Access 2010, or a 
runtime version provided by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries 
Commission.
    (2) NMFS-approved software standards and Internet access. The IFQ 
first receiver is responsible for obtaining, installing, and updating 
electronic fish tickets software either provided by Pacific States 
Marine Fisheries Commission, or compatible with the data export 
specifications specified by Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission 
and for maintaining Internet access sufficient to transmit data files. 
Requests for data export specifications can be submitted to: Attn: 
Electronic Fish Ticket Monitoring, National Marine Fisheries Service, 
Northwest Region, Sustainable Fisheries Division, 7600 Sand Point Way, 
NE., Seattle, WA 98115.
    (3) Maintenance. The IFQ first receiver is responsible for ensuring 
that all hardware and software required under this subsection are fully 
operational and functional whenever they receive, purchase, or take 
custody, control, or possession of an IFQ landing. ``Functional'' means 
that the software requirements and minimum hardware requirements 
described at paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section are met and data 
transmissions to Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission can be 
executed effectively by the equipment.
* * * * *
    7. In Sec.  660.17, revise paragraph (a) and remove paragraph 
(e)(14) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.17  Catch monitors and catch monitor service providers.

    (a) Catch monitor program training and certification. Catch monitor 
certification authorizes an individual to fulfill duties as specified 
by NMFS while under the employ of a certified catch monitor provider.
    (1) A training certification signifies the successful completion of 
the training course required to obtain catch monitor certification. 
This endorsement expires when the catch monitor has not been deployed 
and performed sampling duties as required by the catch monitor program 
office for a period of time, specified by the catch monitor program, 
after his or her most recent debriefing. The catch monitor can renew 
the certification by successfully completing training once more.
    (2) Catch monitor program annual briefing. Each catch monitor must 
attend an annual briefing prior to his or her first deployment within 
any calendar year subsequent to a year in which a training 
certification is obtained. To maintain certification, a catch monitor 
must successfully complete the annual briefing, as specified by the 
catch monitor program. All briefing attendance, performance, and 
conduct

[[Page 54903]]

standards required by the catch monitor program must be met.
    (3) Maintaining the validity of a catch monitor certification. 
After initial issuance, a catch monitor must keep their certification 
valid by meeting all of the following requirements specified below:
    (i) Successfully perform their assigned duties as described in the 
Catch Monitor Manual or other written instructions from the catch 
monitor program.
    (ii) Accurately record their data, write complete reports, and 
report accurately any observations of suspected violations of 
regulations relevant to conservation of marine resources or their 
environment.
    (iii) Not disclose collected data and observations made on board 
the vessel or in the first receiver facility to any person except the 
owner or operator of the observed vessel, first receiver management or 
an authorized officer or NMFS.
    (iv) Successfully complete NMFS-approved annual briefings as 
prescribed by the catch monitor program.
    (v) Successful completion of a briefing by a catch monitor consists 
of meeting all attendance and conduct standards issued in writing at 
the start of training; meeting all performance standards issued in 
writing at the start of training for assignments, tests, and other 
evaluation tools; and completing all other briefing requirements 
established by the catch monitor program.
    (vi) Successfully meet all expectations in all debriefings 
including reporting for assigned debriefings.
    (vii) Submit all data and information required by the catch monitor 
program within the program's stated guidelines.
* * * * *
    8. In Sec.  660.18, revise paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (iii) and 
(d)(1) through (3) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.18  Certification and decertification procedures for catch 
monitors and catch monitor providers.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Any ownership, mortgage holder, or other secured interest in a 
vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating stationary processor 
facility involved in the catching, taking, harvesting or processing of 
fish,
    (ii) Any business involved with selling supplies or services to any 
vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating stationary processing 
facility; or
    (iii) Any business involved with purchasing raw or processed 
products from any vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating 
stationary processing facilities.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Any ownership, mortgage holder, or other secured interest in a 
vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating stationary processor 
facility involved in the catching, taking, harvesting or processing of 
fish,
    (2) Any business involved with selling supplies or services to any 
vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating stationary processing 
facility; or
    (3) Any business involved with purchasing raw or processed products 
from any vessel, first receiver, shorebased or floating stationary 
processing facilities.
* * * * *
    9. In Sec.  660.25,
    a. Remove paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(D);
    b. Revise paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (v), (b)(3)(i), 
(b)(3)(iv)(A)(1) and (2), (b)(3)(iv)(C)(4) and (5), (b)(3)(v), 
(b)(3)(vii), (b)(4)(ii)(B), (b)(4)(iv)(A) and (C), (b)(4)(v)(C) and 
(D), (b)(4)(vi)(B), (b)(4)(vii) introductory text, (b)(4)(vii)(F), 
(b)(4)(viii), (b)(4)(ix) and (f);
    c. Add paragraphs (b)(4)(iv)(D) and (b)(6) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.25  Permits.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Registration. Limited entry permits will normally be 
registered for use with a particular vessel at the time the permit is 
issued, renewed, or replaced. If the permit will be used with a vessel 
other than the one registered on the permit, the permit owner must 
register that permit for use with the new vessel through the SFD. The 
reissued permit must be placed on board the new vessel in order for the 
vessel to be used to fish in the limited entry fishery.
    (A) For all limited entry permits, including MS permits, MS/CV-
endorsed permits, and C/P-endorsed permits when they are not fishing in 
the at-sea whiting fisheries, registration of a limited entry permit to 
be used with a new vessel will take effect no earlier than the first 
day of the next major limited entry cumulative limit period following 
the date SFD receives the change in vessel registration form and the 
original permit.
    (B) For MS permits, MS/CV-endorsed permits, and C/P-endorsed 
permits when they are fishing in the at-sea whiting fisheries, 
registration of a limited entry permit to be used with a new vessel 
will take effect on the date NMFS approves and issues the permit.
* * * * *
    (v) Initial administrative determination. SFD will make a 
determination regarding permit endorsements, renewal, replacement, 
change in permit ownership and change in vessel registration. SFD will 
notify the permit owner in writing with an explanation of any 
determination to deny a permit endorsement, renewal, replacement, 
change in permit ownership or change in vessel registration. The SFD 
will decline to act on an application for permit endorsement, renewal, 
replacement, or change in registration of a limited entry permit if the 
permit is subject to sanction provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act at 
16 U.S.C. 1858(a) and implementing regulations at 15 CFR part 904, 
subpart D, apply.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) ``A'' endorsement. A limited entry permit with an ``A'' 
endorsement entitles the vessel registered to the permit to fish in the 
limited entry fishery for all groundfish species with the type(s) of 
limited entry gear specified in the endorsement, except for sablefish 
harvested north of 36[deg] N. lat. during times and with gears for 
which a sablefish endorsement is required. See paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of 
this section for provisions on sablefish endorsement requirements. An 
``A'' endorsement is affixed to the limited entry permit. The limited 
entry permit with an ``A'' endorsement may be registered to another 
person (i.e., change in permit ownership), or to a different vessel 
(i.e., change in vessel registration) under paragraph (b)(4) of this 
section. An ``A'' endorsement expires on failure to renew the limited 
entry permit to which it is affixed. An MS permit is not considered a 
limited entry ``A''-endorsed permit.
* * * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (1) A sablefish endorsement with a tier assignment will be affixed 
to the permit and will remain valid when the permit is registered to 
another permit owner (i.e., change in permit ownership) or to another 
vessel (i.e., change in vessel registration).
    (2) A sablefish endorsement and its associated tier assignment are 
not separable from the limited entry permit, and therefore, may not be 
registered to another permit owner (i.e., change in permit ownership) 
or to another vessel (i.e., change in vessel registration) separately 
from the limited entry permit.
* * * * *
    (C) * * *

[[Page 54904]]

    (4) Any partnership or corporation with any ownership interest in 
or that holds a limited entry permit with a sablefish endorsement shall 
document the extent of that ownership interest or the individuals that 
hold the permit with the SFD via the Identification of Ownership 
Interest Form sent to the permit owner through the annual permit 
renewal process and whenever a change in permit owner, permit holder, 
and/or vessel registration occurs as described at paragraph (b)(4)(iv) 
and (v) of this section. SFD will not renew a sablefish-endorsed 
limited entry permit through the annual renewal process described at 
paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this section, or approve a change in permit 
owner, permit holder, and/or vessel registration unless the 
Identification of Ownership Interest Form has been completed. Further, 
if SFD discovers through review of the Identification of Ownership 
Interest Form that an individual person, partnership, or corporation 
owns or holds more than 3 permits and is not authorized to do so under 
paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C)(2) of this section, the individual person, 
partnership or corporation will be notified and the permits owned or 
held by that individual person, partnership, or corporation will be 
void and reissued with the vessel status as ``unidentified'' until the 
permit owner owns and/or holds a quantity of permits appropriate to the 
restrictions and requirements described in paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C)(2) 
of this section. If SFD discovers through review of the Identification 
of Ownership Interest Form that a partnership or corporation has had a 
change in membership since November 1, 2000, as described in paragraph 
(b)(3)(iv)(C)(3) of this section, the partnership or corporation will 
be notified, SFD will void any existing permits, and reissue any 
permits owned and/or held by that partnership or corporation in 
``unidentified'' status with respect to vessel registration until the 
partnership or corporation is able to register ownership of those 
permits to persons authorized under this section to own sablefish-
endorsed limited entry permits.
    (5) A person, partnership, or corporation that is exempt from the 
owner-on-board requirement may sell all of their permits, buy another 
sablefish-endorsed permit within one year of the date of approval of 
the last change in permit ownership, and retain their exemption from 
the owner-on-board requirements. An individual person, partnership or 
corporation could only obtain a permit if it has not added or changed 
individuals since November 1, 2000, excluding individuals that have 
left the partnership or corporation or that have died.
* * * * *
    (v) MS/CV endorsement. An MS/CV endorsement on a trawl limited 
entry permit conveys a conditional privilege that allows a vessel 
registered to it to fish in either the coop or non-coop fishery in the 
MS Coop Program described at Sec.  660.150. The provisions for the MS/
CV-endorsed limited entry permit, including eligibility, renewal, 
change of permit ownership, vessel registration, combinations, 
accumulation limits, fees, and appeals are described at Sec.  660.150. 
Each MS/CV endorsement has an associated catch history assignment (CHA) 
that is permanently linked as originally issued by NMFS and which 
cannot be divided or registered separately to another limited entry 
trawl permit. Regulations detailing this process and MS/CV-endorsed 
permit combinations are outlined in Sec.  660.150(g)(2).
* * * * *
    (vii) Endorsement and exemption restrictions. ``A'' endorsements, 
gear endorsements, sablefish endorsements and sablefish tier 
assignments, MS/CV endorsements, and C/P endorsements may not be 
registered to another permit owner (i.e., change in permit ownership) 
or to another vessel (i.e., change in vessel registration) separately 
from the limited entry permit. At-sea processing exemptions, specified 
at paragraph (b)(6) of this section, are associated with the vessel and 
not with the limited entry permit and may not be registered to another 
permit owner or to another vessel without losing the exemption.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (B) MS/CV-endorsed permit. When an MS/CV-endorsed permit is 
combined with another MS/CV-endorsed permit or with another limited 
entry trawl permit with no MS/CV or C/P endorsement, the resulting 
permit will be MS/CV-endorsed with the associated CHA as specified at 
Sec.  660.150(g)(2)(iv) and (v). If an MS/CV-endorsed permit is 
combined with a C/P-endorsed permit, the MS/CV endorsement and CHA will 
not be reissued on the combined permit.
* * * * *
    (iv) * * *
    (A) General. The permit owner may convey the limited entry permit 
to a different person. The new permit owner will not be authorized to 
use the permit until the change in permit ownership has been registered 
with and approved by the SFD. The SFD will not approve a change in 
permit ownership for a limited entry permit with a sablefish 
endorsement that does not meet the ownership requirements for such 
permit described at paragraph (b)(3)(iv)(C) of this section. The SFD 
will not approve a change in permit ownership for a limited entry 
permit with an MS/CV endorsement or an MS permit that does not meet the 
ownership requirements for such permit described at Sec.  
660.150(g)(3), and Sec.  660.150(f)(3), respectively. Change in permit 
owner and/or permit holder applications must be submitted to SFD with 
the appropriate documentation described at paragraph (b)(4)(vii) of 
this section. NMFS considers the following as a change in permit 
ownership that would require registering with and approval by SFD, 
including but not limited to: Selling the permit to another individual 
or entity; adding an individual or entity to the legal name on the 
permit; or removing an individual or entity from the legal name on the 
permit.
* * * * *
    (C) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a permit owner submits an 
application to register a sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit to a 
new permit owner or holder during the primary sablefish season 
described at Sec.  660.231 (generally April 1 through October 31), the 
initial permit owner must certify on the application form the 
cumulative quantity, in round weight, of primary season sablefish 
landed against that permit as of the application signature date for the 
then current primary season. The new permit owner or holder must sign 
the application form acknowledging the amount of landings to date given 
by the initial permit owner. This certified amount should match the 
total amount of primary season sablefish landings reported on state 
landing receipts. As required at Sec.  660.12(b), any person landing 
sablefish must retain on board the vessel from which sablefish is 
landed, and provide to an authorized officer upon request, copies of 
any and all reports of sablefish landings from the primary season 
containing all data, and in the exact manner, required by the 
applicable state law throughout the primary sablefish season during 
which a landing occurred and for 15 days thereafter.
    (D) Change in MS/CV endorsement registration. The requirements for 
a change in MS/CV endorsement registration between limited entry trawl 
permits are specified at Sec.  660.150(g)(2)(iv).
* * * * *

[[Page 54905]]

    (v) * * *
    (C) Effective date. Changes in vessel registration on permits will 
take effect no sooner than the first day of the next major limited 
entry cumulative limit period following the date that SFD receives the 
signed permit change in vessel registration form and the original 
limited entry permit, except that changes in vessel registration on MS 
permits and C/P-endorsed permits will take effect immediately upon 
reissuance to the new vessel, and a change in vessel registration on 
MS/CV-endorsed permits will take effect immediately upon reissuance to 
the new vessel only on the second change in vessel registration for the 
year. No change in vessel registration is effective until the limited 
entry permit has been reissued as registered with the new vessel.
    (D) Sablefish-endorsed permits. If a permit owner submits an 
application to register a sablefish-endorsed limited entry permit to a 
new vessel during the primary sablefish season described at Sec.  
660.231 (generally April 1 through October 31), the initial permit 
owner must certify on the application form the cumulative quantity, in 
round weight, of primary season sablefish landed against that permit as 
of the application signature date for the then current primary season. 
The new permit owner or holder associated with the new vessel must sign 
the application form acknowledging the amount of landings to date given 
by the initial permit owner. This certified amount should match the 
total amount of primary season sablefish landings reported on state 
landing receipts. As required at Sec.  660.12(b), any person landing 
sablefish must retain on board the vessel from which sablefish is 
landed, and provide to an authorized officer upon request, copies of 
any and all reports of sablefish landings from the primary season 
containing all data, and in the exact manner, required by the 
applicable state law throughout the primary sablefish season during 
which a landing occurred and for 15 days thereafter.
* * * * *
    (vi) * * *
    (B) Limited entry fixed gear and trawl-endorsed permits (without 
MS/CV or C/P endorsements). Limited entry fixed gear and trawl-endorsed 
permits (without MS/CV or C/P endorsements) permits may not be 
registered for use with a different vessel more than once per calendar 
year, except in cases of death of a permit holder or if the permitted 
vessel is totally lost as defined in Sec.  660.11. The exception for 
death of a permit holder applies for a permit held by a partnership or 
a corporation if the person or persons holding at least 50 percent of 
the ownership interest in the entity dies.
* * * * *
    (vii) Application and supplemental documentation. Permit owners may 
request a change in vessel registration and/or change in permit 
ownership by submitting a complete application form. In addition, a 
permit owner applying for renewal, replacement, or change in permit 
ownership or change in vessel registration of a limited entry permit 
has the burden to submit evidence to prove that qualification 
requirements are met. The following evidentiary standards apply: * * *
* * * * *
    (F) For a request to change a permit's ownership that is 
necessitated by the death of the permit owner(s), the individual(s) 
requesting conveyance of the permit to a new owner must provide SFD 
with a death certificate of the permit owner(s) and appropriate legal 
documentation that either: Specifically registers the permit to a 
designated individual(s); or, provides legal authority to the 
transferor to convey the permit ownership or to request a change in 
vessel registration.
* * * * *
    (viii) Application forms available. Application forms for a change 
in vessel registration and a change in permit ownership of limited 
entry permits are available from the SFD at: NMFS Northwest Region, 
Sustainable Fisheries Division, Attn: Applications, 7600 Sand Point 
Way, NE., Seattle, WA 98115; or http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-Permits/index.cfm. Contents of the application, and 
required supporting documentation, are specified in the application 
form.
* * * * *
    (ix) Records maintenance. The SFD will maintain records of all 
limited entry permits that have been issued, renewed, registered, or 
replaced.
* * * * *
    (6) At-sea processing exemptions--(i) Sablefish at-sea processing 
exemption. As specified at Sec. Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xii) and at 
660.212(d)(3), vessels are prohibited from processing sablefish at sea 
that were caught in the primary sablefish fishery without a sablefish 
at-sea processing exemption. The sablefish at-sea processing exemption 
has been issued to a particular vessel and that permit and vessel owner 
who requested the exemption. The exemption is not part of the limited 
entry permit. The exemption cannot be registered with any other vessel, 
vessel owner, or permit owner for any reason. The sablefish at-sea 
processing exemption will expire upon registration of the vessel to a 
new owner or if the vessel is totally lost, as defined at Sec.  660.11.
    (ii) Non-whiting at-sea processing exemption. As specified at Sec.  
660.112(b)(1)(xii), vessels are prohibited from processing non-whiting 
groundfish at sea that were caught in the Shorebased IFQ Program 
without a non-whiting at-sea processing exemption. A permit and/or 
vessel owner may get an exemption to this prohibition by applying for 
the exemption as provided in paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(B) of this section 
and if his/her vessel meets the exemption qualifying criteria provided 
in paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(A) of this section. The non-whiting at-sea 
processing exemption is issued to a particular vessel and that permit 
and/or vessel owner who requested the exemption. The exemption is not 
part of the limited entry permit. The exemption is not transferable to 
any other vessel, vessel owner, or permit owner for any reason. The 
non-whiting at-sea processing exemption will expire upon registration 
of the vessel to a new owner or if the vessel is totally lost, as 
defined at Sec.  660.11.
    (A) Qualifying criteria. A non-whiting at-sea processing exemption 
will be issued to any vessel registered for use with a limited entry 
trawl permit that meets the non-whiting at-sea processing exemption 
qualifying criteria and for which the vessel owner submits a timely and 
complete application. The qualifying criteria for a non-whiting at-sea 
processing exemption are that the vessel must have been registered to a 
limited entry trawl permit, the vessel must have legally processed non-
whiting groundfish at sea prior to July 20, 2010, and that the vessel 
landed that processed catch at a shorebased processor or buyer. The 
best evidence of a vessel having met these qualifying criteria will be 
receipts of processed product from shorebased processors, buyers, or 
exporters, accompanied by the state fish tickets or landings receipts 
appropriate to the processed product. Documentation showing investment 
in freezer equipment without also showing evidence of landing processed 
product is not sufficient evidence to qualify a vessel for a non-
whiting at-sea processing exemption. All landings of processed non-
whiting groundfish must have been harvested in waters managed under 
this part. Non-whiting groundfish taken in Tribal fisheries or taken 
outside of the fishery management area, as defined at Sec.  660.10, 
does not meet the qualifying criteria.

[[Page 54906]]

    (B) Application and issuance process for non-whiting at-sea 
processing exemptions.
    (1) The SFD will mail non-whiting at-sea processing exemption 
applications to all current trawl permit holders and will make the 
application available online at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-Permits/index.cfm. Permit holders will have until 
February 15, 2012 to submit applications. A permit holder who believes 
that their vessel may qualify for the non-whiting at-sea processing 
exemption must submit evidence with their application showing how their 
vessel has met the qualifying criteria described at paragraph 
(b)(6)(ii)(A) of this section. Paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(C) of this section 
sets out the relevant evidentiary standards and burden of proof. 
Applications must be postmarked or hand-delivered no later than close 
of business February 15, 2012, to NMFS at: NMFS Northwest Region, 
Sustainable Fisheries Division, ATTN: Fisheries Permit Office--
Processing Exemption, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE., Seattle, WA 98115.
    (2) After receipt of a complete application, the SFD will notify 
applicants by letter of initial administrative determination (IAD) 
whether their vessel qualifies for the non-whiting at-sea processing 
exemption. A person who has been notified by the SFD that their vessel 
qualifies for a non-whiting at-sea processing exemption will be issued 
an exemption letter by SFD that must be onboard the vessel at all 
times.
    (3) If an applicant chooses to file an appeal of the IAD letter 
under paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(B)(2) of this section, the applicant must 
follow the appeals process outlined at paragraph (g) of this section 
and, for the timing of the appeals, at paragraph (g)(4)(ii) of this 
section.
    (C) Evidence and burden of proof. A permit and/or vessel owner 
applying for issuance of a non-whiting at-sea processing exemption has 
the burden to submit evidence to prove that qualification requirements 
are met. The following evidentiary standards apply:
    (1) A copy of the current vessel documentation or registration 
(USCG or state) is the best evidence of vessel ownership.
    (2) A copy of a state fish receiving ticket is the best evidence of 
a landing and of the type of gear used.
    (3) A copy of a state fish receiving ticket, dock receiving ticket, 
landing receipt, or other written receipt indicating the name of their 
buyer, the date, and a description of the product form and the name and 
amount of non-whiting groundfish landed is the best evidence of the 
commercial transfer of processed product (including glazing).
    (4) A copy of a sales receipt is the best evidence of the purchase 
of freezing equipment.
    (5) Such other relevant, credible evidence as the applicant may 
submit, or the SFD or the Regional Administrator request or acquire, 
may also be considered.
* * * * *
    (f) Permit fees. The Regional Administrator is authorized to charge 
fees to cover administrative expenses related to issuance of permits 
including initial issuance, renewal, permit registration, vessel 
registration, replacement, and appeals. The appropriate fee must 
accompany each application.
* * * * *
    10. In Sec.  660.55, revise paragraphs (a), (e)(2) introductory 
text, and (m) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.55  Allocations.

    (a) General. An allocation is the apportionment of a harvest 
privilege for a specific purpose, to a particular person, group of 
persons, or fishery sector. The opportunity to harvest Pacific Coast 
groundfish is allocated among participants in the fishery when the ACLs 
for a given year are established in the biennial harvest 
specifications. For any stock that has been declared overfished, any 
formal allocation may be temporarily revised for the duration of the 
rebuilding period. For certain species, primarily trawl-dominant 
species, beginning with the 2011-2012 biennial specifications process, 
separate allocations for the trawl and nontrawl fishery (which for this 
purpose includes limited entry fixed gear, directed open access, and 
recreational fisheries) will be established biennially or annually 
using the standards and procedures described in Chapter 6 of the 
PCGFMP. Chapter 6 of the PCGFMP provides the allocation structure and 
percentages for species allocated between the trawl and nontrawl 
fisheries. Also, for those species not subject to the trawl and 
nontrawl allocations specified under Amendment 21 and in paragraph 
(c)(1) of this section, separate allocations for the limited entry and 
open access fisheries may be established using the procedures described 
in Chapters 6 and 11 of the PCGFMP and this subpart. Allocation of 
sablefish north of 36[deg] N. lat. is described in paragraph (h) of 
this section and in the PCGFMP. Allocation of Pacific whiting is 
described in paragraph (i) of this section and in the PCGFMP. 
Allocation of black rockfish is described in paragraph (l) of this 
section. Allocation of Pacific halibut bycatch is described in 
paragraph (m) of this section. Allocations not specified in the PCGFMP 
are established in regulation through the biennial harvest 
specifications and are listed in Tables 1a through d and Tables 2a 
through d of this subpart.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Species with LE/OA allocations. For species with LE/OA 
allocations that are not subject to Amendment 21 allocations, the 
allocation between the limited entry (both trawl and fixed gear) and 
the open access fisheries is determined by applying the percentage for 
those species with a LE/OA allocation to the commercial harvest 
guideline plus the amount set-aside for the non-groundfish fisheries.
* * * * *
    (m) Pacific halibut bycatch allocation. The Pacific halibut fishery 
off Washington, Oregon and California (Area 2A in the halibut 
regulations) is managed under regulations at 50 CFR part 300, subpart 
E. The PCGFMP sets the trawl bycatch mortality limit at 15 percent of 
the Area 2A total constant exploitation yield (TCEY) for legal size 
halibut (net weight), not to exceed 130,000 pounds annually for legal 
size halibut (net weight) for 2012 through 2014 and, beginning in 2015, 
not to exceed 100,000 pounds annually for legal size halibut (net 
weight). The TCEY used for these calculations will be the best estimate 
of the TCEY available from the International Pacific Halibut Commission 
at the time of the calculation. To determine the trawl bycatch 
mortality limit, the pounds of halibut available to the trawl fleet 
will be expanded from the legal sized halibut mortality (net weight) to 
a round weight legal and sublegal sized amount. To convert from net 
weight to round weight, multiply by the conversion factor used by the 
International Pacific Halibut Commission at the time of calculation for 
net weight to round weight. To convert from legal sized halibut to 
legal and sublegal sized halibut, multiply by the conversion factor 
from the NMFS trawl fishery bycatch report as reported to the 
International Pacific Halibut Commission at the time of calculation for 
legal sized to legal and sublegal sized halibut. The bycatch allocation 
percent can be adjusted downward or upward through the biennial 
specifications and management measures process but the upper bound on 
the maximum pounds of allocation can only be changed though an FMP

[[Page 54907]]

amendment. Part of the overall total mortality limit is a set-aside of 
10 mt of Pacific halibut (legal and sublegal, round weight), to 
accommodate bycatch in the at-sea Pacific whiting fishery and in the 
shorebased trawl fishery south of 40[deg]10' N. lat. (estimated to be 
approximately 5 mt each). This set-aside can be adjusted through the 
biennial specifications and management measures process.
    11. In Sec.  660.60,
    a. Add paragraph (c)(1)(iv),
    b. Revise headings to paragraphs (h)(5), (h)(5)(i), and (h)(5)(ii); 
and
    c. Revise paragraph (h)(7), to read as follows:


Sec.  660.60  Specifications and management measures.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) List of IFQ species documented on observer form. As specified 
at Sec. Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xiii) and 660.140(h)(1)(i), observer or 
catch monitor coverage while in port depends on documentation of 
specified retained IFQ species while the vessel is at sea by the 
observer program on a form. The list of IFQ species documented on the 
observer program form may be modified on a biennial or more frequent 
basis.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (5) Size limits, length measurement, and weight conversions. * * *
    (i) Length measurement. * * *
    (ii) Weight conversions and size limits. * * *
* * * * *
    (7) Crossover provisions. Crossover provisions apply to two 
activities: fishing on different sides of a management line, or fishing 
in both the limited entry and open access fisheries. NMFS uses 
different types of management areas for West Coast groundfish 
management, such as the north-south management areas as defined in 
Sec.  660.11. Within a management area, a large ocean area with 
northern and southern boundary lines, trip limits, seasons, and 
conservation areas follow a single theme. Within each management area, 
there may be one or more conservation areas, defined at Sec.  660.11 
and Sec. Sec.  660.70 through 660.74. The provisions within this 
paragraph apply to vessels fishing in different management areas. 
Crossover provisions also apply to vessels that fish in both the 
limited entry and open access fisheries, or that use open access non-
trawl gear while registered to limited entry fixed gear permits. 
Fishery specific crossover provisions can be found in subparts D 
through F of this part.
    (i) Fishing in management areas with different trip limits. Trip 
limits for a species or a species group may differ in different 
management areas along the coast. The following crossover provisions 
apply to vessels fishing in different geographical areas that have 
different cumulative or ``per trip'' trip limits for the same species 
or species group, with the following exceptions. Such crossover 
provisions do not apply to: IFQ species defined at Sec.  660.140(c), 
for vessels that are declared into the Shorebased IFQ Program (see 
Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), for valid Shorebased IFQ Program 
declarations), species that are subject only to daily trip limits, or 
to the trip limits for black rockfish off Washington, as described at 
Sec.  660.230(e) and Sec.  660.330(e).
    (A) Going from a more restrictive to a more liberal area. If a 
vessel takes and retains any groundfish species or species group of 
groundfish in an area where a more restrictive trip limit applies 
before fishing in an area where a more liberal trip limit (or no trip 
limit) applies, then that vessel is subject to the more restrictive 
trip limit for the entire period to which that trip limit applies, no 
matter where the fish are taken and retained, possessed, or landed.
    (B) Going from a more liberal to a more restrictive area. If a 
vessel takes and retains a groundfish species or species group in an 
area where a higher trip limit or no trip limit applies, and takes and 
retains, possesses or lands the same species or species group in an 
area where a more restrictive trip limit applies, that vessel is 
subject to the more restrictive trip limit for the entire period to 
which that trip limit applies, no matter where the fish are taken and 
retained, possessed, or landed.
    (C) Fishing in two different areas where a species or species group 
is managed with different types of trip limits. During the fishing 
year, NMFS may implement management measures for a species or species 
group that set different types of trip limits (for example, per trip 
limits versus cumulative trip limits) for different areas. If a vessel 
fishes for a species or species group that is managed with different 
types of trip limits in two different areas within the same cumulative 
limit period, then that vessel is subject to the most restrictive 
overall cumulative limit for that species, regardless of where fishing 
occurs.
    (D) Minor rockfish. Several rockfish species are designated with 
species-specific limits on one side of the 40[deg]10' N. lat. 
management line, and are included as part of a minor rockfish complex 
on the other side of the line. A vessel that takes and retains fish 
from a minor rockfish complex (nearshore, shelf, or slope) on both 
sides of a management line during a single cumulative limit period is 
subject to the more restrictive cumulative limit for that minor 
rockfish complex during that period.
    (1) If a vessel takes and retains minor slope rockfish north of 
40[deg]10' N. lat., that vessel is also permitted to take and retain, 
possess or land splitnose rockfish up to its cumulative limit south of 
40[deg]10' N. lat., even if splitnose rockfish were a part of the 
landings from minor slope rockfish taken and retained north of 
40[deg]10' N. lat.
    (2) If a vessel takes and retains minor slope rockfish south of 
40[deg]10' N. lat., that vessel is also permitted to take and retain, 
possess or land POP up to its cumulative limit north of 40[deg]10' N. 
lat., even if POP were a part of the landings from minor slope rockfish 
taken and retained south of 40[deg]10' N. lat.
    (ii) Fishing in both limited entry and open access fisheries.
    (A) Fishing in limited entry and open access fisheries with 
different trip limits. Open access trip limits apply to any fishing 
conducted with open access gear, even if the vessel has a valid limited 
entry permit with an endorsement for another type of gear, except such 
provisions do not apply to IFQ species defined at Sec.  660.140(c), for 
vessels that are declared into the Shorebased IFQ Program (see Sec.  
660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A) for valid Shorebased IFQ Program declarations). A 
vessel that fishes in both the open access and limited entry fisheries 
is not entitled to two separate trip limits for the same species. If a 
vessel has a limited entry permit registered to it at any time during 
the trip limit period and uses open access gear, but the open access 
limit is smaller than the limited entry limit, the open access limit 
may not be exceeded and counts toward the limited entry limit. If a 
vessel has a limited entry permit registered to it at any time during 
the trip limit period and uses open access gear, but the open access 
limit is larger than the limited entry limit, the smaller limited entry 
limit applies, even if taken entirely with open access gear.
    (B) Limited entry permit restrictions for vessels fishing in the 
open access fishery.--(1) Vessel registered to a limited entry trawl 
permit. To participate in the open access fishery, described at part 
660, subpart F, with open access gear, defined at Sec.  660.11, a 
vessel registered to a limit entry trawl permit must make the 
appropriate fishery declaration, as specified at

[[Page 54908]]

Sec.  660.14(d)(5)(iv)(A). In addition, a vessel registered to a limit 
entry trawl permit must remove the permit from their vessel, as 
specified at Sec.  660.25(b)(4)(v), unless the vessel will be fishing 
in the open access fishery under one of the following declarations 
specified at Sec.  660.13(d):
    (i) Non-groundfish trawl gear for pink shrimp,
    (ii) Non-groundfish trawl gear for ridgeback prawn,
    (iii) Non-groundfish trawl gear for California halibut,
    (iv) Non-groundfish trawl gear for sea cucumber,
    (v) Open access Dungeness crab pot/trap gear,
    (vi) Open access HMS line gear,
    (vii) Open access salmon troll gear,
    (viii) Open access Coastal Pelagic Species net gear.
    (2) Vessel registered to a limited entry fixed gear permit. To 
participate with open access gear, defined at Sec.  660.11, subpart C, 
a vessel registered to a limit entry fixed gear permit must make the 
appropriate open access declaration, as specified at Sec.  
660.14(d)(5)(iv)(A).
    12. In Sec.  660.111, revise the definition for ``Catch history 
assignment'' to read as follows:


Sec.  660.111  Trawl fishery--definitions.

* * * * *
    Catch history assignment or CHA means a percentage of the 
mothership sector allocation of Pacific whiting based on a limited 
entry permit's qualifying history and which is specified on the MS/CV-
endorsed limited entry permit.
* * * * *
    13. In Sec.  660.112,
    a. Revise paragraphs (b)(1)(iv) and (b)(1)(xii)(B); and add 
paragraph (b)(1)(xii)(C);
    b. Revise paragraph (b)(1)(xiii), and add (b)(1)(xvi);
    c. Revise paragraphs (b)(2)(i) and (ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.112  Trawl fishery--prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) Register the limited entry trawl endorsed permit to another 
vessel or sell the limited entry trawl endorsed permit to another owner 
if the vessel registered to the permit has a deficit (negative balance) 
in their vessel account, until the deficit is covered, regardless of 
the amount of the deficit.
* * * * *
    (xii) * * *
    (B) A vessel that has a sablefish at-sea processing exemption, 
described at Sec.  660.25(b)(6)(i) may process sablefish at-sea.
    (C) A vessel that has a non-whiting at-sea processing exemption, 
described at Sec.  660.25(b)(6)(ii) may process non-whiting groundfish 
at sea.
* * * * *
    (xiii) Retain any IFQ species/species group onboard a vessel unless 
the vessel has observer coverage during the entire trip and observer or 
catch monitor coverage while in port until all IFQ species from the 
trip are offloaded, except for the following IFQ species: bocaccio, 
yelloweye rockfish, canary rockfish, and cowcod. If the observer makes 
available to the catch monitor an observer program form reporting the 
weight and number of each of the IFQ species that were retained onboard 
the vessel during that trip and noting any discrepancy in those species 
between the vessel operator and observer, the vessel would not need to 
maintain observer or catch monitor coverage on the vessel while in port 
and until the offload is complete. A vessel may deliver IFQ species/
species groups to more than one IFQ first receiver, but must maintain 
observer coverage onboard the vessel during any transit between 
delivery points. Once transfer of fish begins, all fish aboard the 
vessel are counted as part of the same landing as defined at Sec.  
660.11. Modifying the list of IFQ species to which this exception 
applies has been designated as a ``routine management measure'' and may 
be modified through an inseason action, as specified at Sec.  
660.60(c)(1)(iv).
* * * * *
    (xvi) Fraudulently use a QS account or vessel account.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Receive, purchase, or take custody, control, or possession of 
an IFQ landing from a vessel that harvested the catch while fishing 
under the Shorebased IFQ Program without a valid first receiver site 
license.
    (ii) Fail to sort fish received from a IFQ landing prior to first 
weighing after offloading as specified at Sec.  660.130(d)(2) for the 
Shorebased IFQ Program, with the following exception. Vessels declared 
in to the Shorebased IFQ Program at Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), may 
weigh catch on a bulk scale or automatic hopper scale before sorting as 
described at Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(viii), for Pacific whiting taken with 
midwater trawl gear, and at Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(ix)(A), for all other 
IFQ landings. For this exception, all but the predominant species must 
then be reweighed.
* * * * *
    14. In Sec.  660.113, revise paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(4)(i) and 
(ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.113  Trawl fishery--recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (2) Retention of records. All records used in the preparation of 
records or reports specified in this section or corrections to these 
reports must be maintained for a period of not less than three years 
after the date of landing and must be immediately available upon 
request for inspection by NMFS or authorized officers or others as 
specifically authorized by NMFS. Records used in the preparation of 
required reports specified in this section or corrections to these 
reports that are required to be kept include, but are not limited to, 
any written, recorded, graphic, electronic, or digital materials as 
well as other information stored in or accessible through a computer or 
other information retrieval system; worksheets; weight slips; 
preliminary, interim, and final tally sheets; receipts; checks; 
ledgers; notebooks; diaries; spreadsheets; diagrams; graphs; charts; 
tapes; disks; or computer printouts. All relevant records used in the 
preparation of electronic fish ticket reports or corrections to these 
reports, including dock tickets, must be maintained for a period of not 
less than three years after the date and must be immediately available 
upon request for inspection by NMFS or authorized officers or others as 
specifically authorized by NMFS.
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) Required information. All IFQ first receivers must provide the 
following types of information: Date of landing, vessel that made the 
delivery, vessel account number, name of the vessel operator, gear type 
used, catch area, first receiver, actual weights of species landed 
listed by species or species group including species with no value, 
condition landed, number of salmon by species, number of Pacific 
halibut, ex-vessel value of the landing by species, fish caught inside/
outside 3 miles or both, and any other information deemed necessary by 
the Regional Administrator as specified on the appropriate electronic 
fish ticket form.
    (ii) Submissions. The IFQ first receiver must:
    (A) Include as part of each electronic fish ticket submission, the 
actual scale weight for each groundfish species as specified by 
requirements at Sec.  660.15(c), and the vessel identification number.
    (B) Use for the purpose of submitting electronic fish tickets, and 
maintain in good working order, computer equipment as specified at 
Sec.  660.15(d);

[[Page 54909]]

    (C) Install, use, and update as necessary, any NMFS-approved 
software described at Sec.  660.15(d);
    (D) Submit a completed electronic fish ticket for every IFQ landing 
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 (b)(4)(iv) of this section.
    (E) Follow these process and submittal requirements for offloading 
at a first receiver site where the fish will be processed at the 
offload site or if an electronic fish ticket will be recorded prior to 
transport:
    (1) The IFQ first receiver must communicate the electronic fish 
ticket number to the catch monitor.
    (2) After completing the offload, the electronic fish ticket 
information must be recorded immediately.
    (3) Prior to submittal of the electronic fish ticket, the 
information recorded for the electronic fish ticket must be reviewed by 
the catch monitor and the vessel operator who delivered the fish.
    (4) After review, the IFQ first receiver and the vessel operator 
must sign a printed hard copy of the electronic fish ticket or, if the 
delivery occurs outside of business hours, the original dock ticket.
    (5) Prior to submittal, three copies of the signed electronic fish 
ticket must be produced by the IFQ first receiver and a copy provided 
to each of the following:
    (i) The vessel operator,
    (ii) The state of origin if required by state regulations, and
    (iii) The IFQ first receiver.
    (6) After review and signature, the electronic fish ticket must be 
submitted within 24 hours of the completion of the offload, as 
specified in paragraph (b)(4)(ii)(D) of this section.
    (F) Follow these process and submittal requirements for offloading 
at a first receiver site where the fish will be transported for 
processing at a different location if an electronic fish ticket is not 
recorded prior to transport:
    (1) The IFQ first receiver must communicate the electronic fish 
ticket number to the catch monitor at the beginning of the offload.
    (2) The vessel name and the electronic fish ticket number must be 
recorded on each dock ticket related to that delivery.
    (3) Upon completion of the dock ticket, but prior to transfer of 
the offload to another location, the dock ticket information that will 
be used to complete the electronic fish ticket must be reviewed by the 
catch monitor and the vessel operator who delivered the fish.
    (4) After review, the IFQ first receiver and the vessel operator 
must sign the original copy of each dock ticket related to that 
delivery.
    (5) Prior to submittal of the electronic fish ticket, three copies 
of the signed dock ticket must be produced by the IFQ first receiver 
and a copy provided to each of the following:
    (i) The vessel operator,
    (ii) The state of origin if required by state regulations, and
    (iii) The IFQ first receiver.
    (6) Based on the information contained in the signed dock ticket, 
the electronic fish ticket must be completed and submitted within 24 
hours of the completion of the offload, as specified in paragraph 
(b)(4)(ii)(D) of this section.
    (7) Three copies of the electronic fish ticket must be produced by 
the IFQ first receiver and a copy provided to each of the following:
    (i) The vessel operator,
    (ii) The state of origin if required by state regulations, and
    (iii) The IFQ first receiver.
* * * * *
    15. Revise Sec.  660.120 to read as follows:


Sec.  660.120  Trawl fishery--crossover provisions.

    The crossover provisions listed at Sec.  660.60(h)(7), apply to 
vessels fishing in the limited entry trawl fishery.
    16. In Sec.  660.130, remove paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(B) and 
redesignate paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(C) as paragraph (c)(4)(ii)(B), revise 
paragraph (c) introductory text, (c)(4) introductory text, (d) 
introductory text, and (d)(2)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.130  Trawl fishery--management measures.

* * * * *
    (c) Restrictions by limited entry trawl gear type. Management 
measures may vary depending on the type of trawl gear (i.e., large 
footrope, small footrope, selective flatfish, or midwater trawl gear) 
used and/or on board a vessel during a fishing trip, cumulative limit 
period, and the area fished. Trawl nets may be used on and off the 
seabed. For some species or species groups, Table 1 (North) and Table 1 
(South) of this subpart provide trip limits that are specific to 
different types of trawl gear: large footrope, small footrope 
(including selective flatfish), selective flatfish, midwater, and 
multiple types. If Table 1 (North) and Table 1 (South) of this subpart 
provide gear specific limits for a particular species or species group, 
it is unlawful to take and retain, possess or land that species or 
species group with limited entry trawl gears other than those listed.
* * * * *
    (4) More than one type of trawl gear on board. The trip limits in 
Table 1 (North) or Table 1 (South) of this subpart must not be 
exceeded.
* * * * *
    (d) Sorting. Under Sec.  660.12(a)(8), it is unlawful for any 
person to ``fail to sort, prior to the first weighing after offloading, 
those groundfish species or species groups for which there is a trip 
limit, size limit, scientific sorting designation, quota, harvest 
guideline, ACL or ACT or OY, if the vessel fished or landed in an area 
during a time when such trip limit, size limit, scientific sorting 
designation, quota, harvest guideline, ACL or ACT or OY applied.'' The 
States of Washington, Oregon, and California may also require that 
vessels record their landings as sorted on their state landing receipt. 
Sector specific sorting requirements and exceptions are listed at 
paragraphs (d)(2) and (d)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) First receivers. Fish landed at IFQ 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, with the following exception. Vessels 
declared in to the Shorebased IFQ Program at Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv)(A), 
may weigh catch on a bulk scale or automatic hopper scale before 
sorting as described at Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(viii), for Pacific whiting 
taken with midwater trawl gear, and at Sec.  660.140(j)(2)(ix)(A), for 
all other IFQ landings. For this exception, all but the predominant 
species must then be reweighed.
* * * * *
    17. In Sec.  660.140,
    a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text, paragraphs (d)(1)(ii) 
introductory text, (d)(1)(ii)(A) and (C), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(3)(i)(D), 
(d)(3)(ii)(A), (d)(4)(v), (e)(1)(i), (e)(2)(ii), (e)(3)(i)(D), 
(e)(3)(ii), (e)(4)(i) introductory text, (e)(5)(i), (f)(1) and (2), 
(f)(3) introductory text, (f)(3)(iii) introductory text, 
(f)(3)(iii)(B), (f)(5), (f)(6), (f)(7), (h)(1)(i), (j)(1), and (l)(2);
    b. Add paragraphs (f)(3)(ii)(D) and (f)(3)(iii)(C)(11) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  660.140  Shorebased IFQ Program.

    (a) General. The Shorebased IFQ Program applies to qualified 
participants in the Pacific Coast Groundfish fishery and includes a 
system of transferable QS for most groundfish species or species 
groups, IBQ for Pacific halibut, and trip limits or set-asides for the 
remaining groundfish species or species groups. NMFS will issue a QS 
permit to eligible

[[Page 54910]]

participants and will establish a QS account for each QS permit owner 
to track the amount of QS or IBQ and QP or IBQ pounds owned by that 
owner. QS permit owners may own QS or IBQ for IFQ species, expressed as 
a percent of the allocation to the Shorebased IFQ Program for that 
species. NMFS will issue QP or IBQ pounds to QS permit owners, 
expressed in pounds, on an annual basis, to be deposited in the 
corresponding QS account. NMFS will establish a vessel account for each 
eligible vessel owner participating in the Shorebased IFQ Program, 
which is independent of the QS permit and QS account. In order to use 
QP or IBQ pounds, a QS permit owner must transfer the QP or IBQ pounds 
from the QS account into the vessel account for the vessel to which the 
QP or IBQ pounds is to be assigned. Harvests of IFQ species may only be 
delivered to an IFQ first receiver with a first receiver site license. 
In addition to the requirements of this section, the Shorebased IFQ 
Program is subject to the following groundfish regulations of subparts 
C and D:
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Annual QP and IBQ pound allocations. QP and IBQ pounds will be 
deposited into QS accounts annually. QS permit owners will be notified 
of QP deposits via the IFQ Web site and their QS account. QP and IBQ 
pounds will be issued to the nearest whole pound using standard 
rounding rules (i.e. decimal amounts less than 0.5 round down and 0.5 
and greater round up), except that in the first year of the Shorebased 
IFQ Program, issuance of QP for overfished species greater than zero 
but less than one pound will be rounded up to one pound. After making 
best attempts to distribute 100 percent of the Shorebased IFQ Program 
allocations among individual QS accounts, NMFS may determine the QP or 
IBQ pounds allocations to individual permits that are equal to or 
greater than 99.99 percent, but do not exceed 100 percent, are 
considered fully allocated. QS permit owners must transfer their QP and 
IBQ pounds from their QS account to a vessel account in order for those 
QP and IBQ pounds to be fished. QP and IBQ pounds must be transferred 
in whole pounds (i.e. no fraction of a QP or IBQ pound can be 
transferred). All QP and IBQ pounds in a QS account must be transferred 
to a vessel account by September 1 of each year in order to be fished.
    (A) Nonwhiting QP annual sub-allocations. NMFS will issue QP for 
IFQ species other than Pacific whiting and Pacific halibut annually by 
multiplying the QS permit owner's QS for each such IFQ species by that 
year's shorebased trawl allocation for that IFQ species. Deposits to QS 
accounts for IFQ species other than Pacific whiting and Pacific halibut 
will be made on or about January 1 each year. Until the method for 
distributing the QP issued for adaptive management program QS, 
specified at paragraph (l) of this section, is developed and 
implemented or through 2014, whichever is earlier, the resulting AMP QP 
will be issued to all QS permit owners in proportion to their non-
whiting QS.
    (1) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are known 
by January 1, deposits to QS accounts for IFQ species will be made on 
or about January 1.
    (2) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are not 
known by January 1, NMFS will issue QP in two parts. On or about 
January 1, NMFS will deposit QP based on the shorebased trawl 
allocation multiplied by the lower end of the range of potential 
harvest specifications for that year. After the final harvest 
specifications are established later in the year, NMFS will deposit 
additional QP to the QS account.
* * * * *
    (C) Pacific halibut IBQ pounds annual allocation. NMFS will issue 
IBQ pounds for Pacific halibut annually by multiplying the QS permit 
owner's IBQ percent by the Shorebased IFQ Program component of the 
trawl bycatch mortality limit for that year. Deposits to QS accounts 
for Pacific halibut IBQ pounds will be made on or about January 1 each 
year. Mortality of any size Pacific halibut count against IBQ pounds.
    (1) In years where the Pacific halibut total constant exploitation 
yield is known by January 1, deposits to QS accounts will be made on or 
about January 1.
    (2) In years where the Pacific halibut total constant exploitation 
yield is not known by January 1, NMFS will issue QP in two parts. On or 
about January 1, NMFS will deposit QP based on some portion of the 
International Pacific Halibut Commission's staff recommended total 
constant exploitation yield from their interim meeting. After the final 
Pacific halibut total constant exploitation yield is established from 
the International Pacific Halibut Commission's annual meeting, NMFS 
will deposit additional QP to the QS account.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Registration. A QS account will be established by NMFS with 
the issuance of a QS permit. The administrative functions associated 
with the Shorebased IFQ Program (e.g., account registration, landing 
transactions, and transfers) are designed to be accomplished online; 
therefore, a participant must have access to a computer with Internet 
access and must set up online access to their QS account to 
participate. The computer must have Internet browser software installed 
(e.g., Internet Explorer, Netscape, Mozilla Firefox); as well as the 
Adobe Flash Player software version 9.0 or greater. NMFS will mail 
initial QS permit owners instructions to set up online access to their 
QS account. NMFS will use the QS account to send messages to QS permit 
owners; it is important for QS permit owners to monitor their online QS 
account and all associated messages.
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D) QS permits will not be renewed until SFD has received a 
complete application for a QS permit renewal, which includes payment of 
required fees, complete documentation of QS permit ownership on the 
Trawl Identification of Ownership Interest Form as required under 
paragraph (d)(4)(iv) of this section, a complete economic data 
collection form if required under Sec.  660.114. The QS permit renewal 
will be considered incomplete until the required information is 
submitted.
* * * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) Change in QS permit ownership. Ownership of a QS permit cannot 
be registered to another individual or entity. The QS permit owner 
cannot change or add additional individuals or entities as owners of 
the permit (i.e., cannot change the legal name of the permit owner(s) 
as given on the permit). Any change in ownership of the QS permit 
requires the new owner(s) to apply for a QS permit, and is subject to 
accumulation limits and approval by NMFS.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (v) Divestiture. Accumulation limits will be calculated by first 
calculating the aggregate nonwhiting QS limit and then the individual 
species QS or IBQ control limits. For QS permit owners (including any 
person who has ownership interest in the owner named on the permit) 
that are found to exceed the accumulation limits during the initial 
issuance of QS permits, an adjustment period will be provided after

[[Page 54911]]

which they will have to completely divest of QS or IBQ in excess of the 
accumulation limits. QS or IBQ will be issued for amounts in excess of 
accumulation limits only for owners of limited entry permits as of 
November 8, 2008, if such ownership has been registered with NMFS by 
November 30, 2008. The owner of any permit acquired after November 8, 
2008, or if acquired earlier, not registered with NMFS by November 30, 
2008, will only be eligible to receive an initial allocation for that 
permit of those QS or IBQ that are within the accumulation limits; any 
QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits will be redistributed to 
the remainder of the initial recipients of QS or IBQ in proportion to 
each recipient's initial allocation of QS or IBQ for each species. Any 
person that qualifies for an initial allocation of QS or IBQ in excess 
of the accumulation limits will be allowed to receive that allocation, 
but must divest themselves of the excess QS or IBQ during years three 
and four of the IFQ program. Holders of QS or IBQ in excess of the 
control limits may receive and use the QP or IBQ pounds associated with 
that excess, up to the time their divestiture is completed. At the end 
of year 4 of the IFQ program, any QS or IBQ held by a person (including 
any person who has ownership interest in the owner named on the permit) 
in excess of the accumulation limits will be revoked and redistributed 
to the remainder of the of the QS or IBQ owners in proportion to the QS 
or IBQ holdings in year 5. No compensation will be due for any revoked 
shares.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Gear exception. Vessels registered to a limited entry trawl 
permit using the following gears would not be required to cover 
groundfish catch with QP or Pacific halibut catch with IBQ pounds: Non-
groundfish trawl, gear types defined in the coastal pelagic species 
FMP, gear types defined in the highly migratory species FMP, salmon 
troll, crab pot, and limited entry fixed gear when the vessel also has 
a limited entry permit endorsed for fixed gear and has declared that it 
is fishing in the limited entry fixed gear fishery. Vessels using gears 
falling under this exception are subject to the open access fishery 
restrictions and limits when declared in to an open access fishery.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Registration. A vessel account must be registered with the 
NMFS SFD Permits Office. A vessel account may be established at any 
time during the year. An eligible vessel owner must submit a request in 
writing to NMFS to establish a vessel account. The request must include 
the vessel name; USCG vessel registration number (as given on USCG Form 
1270) or state registration number, if no USCG documentation; all 
vessel owner names (as given on USCG Form 1270, or on state 
registration, as applicable); and business contact information, 
including: Address, phone number, fax number, and e-mail. Requests for 
a vessel account must also include the following information: A 
complete economic data collection form as required under Sec.  
660.113(b), (c) and (d), and a complete Trawl Identification of 
Ownership Interest Form as required under paragraph (e)(4)(ii) of this 
section. The request for a vessel account will be considered incomplete 
until the required information is submitted. Any change specified at 
paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section, including a change in the legal 
name of the vessel owner(s), will require the new owner to register 
with NMFS for a vessel account. A participant must have access to a 
computer with Internet access and must set up online access to their 
vessel account to participate. The computer must have Internet browser 
software installed (e.g., Internet Explorer, Netscape, Mozilla 
Firefox); as well as the Adobe Flash Player software version 9.0 or 
greater. NMFS will mail vessel account owners instructions to set up 
online access to their vessel account. NMFS will use the vessel account 
to send messages to vessel owners in the Shorebased IFQ Program; it is 
important for vessel owners to monitor their online vessel account and 
all associated messages.
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (D) Vessel accounts will not be renewed until SFD has received a 
complete application for a vessel account renewal, which includes 
payment of required fees, a complete documentation of permit ownership 
on the Trawl Identification of Ownership Interest Form as required 
under (e)(4)(ii) of this section, and a complete economic data 
collection form as required under Sec.  660.114. The vessel account 
renewal will be considered incomplete until the required information is 
submitted.
* * * * *
    (ii) Change in vessel account ownership. Vessel accounts are non-
transferable and ownership of a vessel account cannot change (i.e., 
cannot change the legal name of the owner(s) as given on the vessel 
account). If the ownership of a vessel changes (as given on a USCG or 
state vessel registration documentation), then a new vessel account 
must be opened by the new owner in order for the vessel to participate 
in the Shorebased IFQ Program.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) Vessel limits. For each IFQ species or species group specified 
in this paragraph, vessel accounts may not have QP or IBQ pounds in 
excess of the QP Vessel Limit (Annual Limit) in any year, and, for 
species covered by Unused QP Vessel Limits (Daily Limit), may not have 
QP or IBQ pounds in excess of the Unused QP Vessel Limit at any time. 
The QP Vessel Limit (Annual Limit) is calculated as unused available 
QPs plus used QPs (landings and discards) plus any pending outgoing 
transfer of QPs. The Unused QP Vessel Limits (Daily Limit) is 
calculated as unused available QPs plus any pending outgoing transfer 
of QPs. These vessel limits are as follows:
* * * * *
    (5) * * *
    (i) Surplus QP or IBQ pounds. A vessel account with a surplus of QP 
or IBQ pounds (unused QP or IBQ pounds) for any IFQ species at the end 
of the fishing year may carryover for use in the immediately following 
year an amount of unused QP or IBQ pounds up to its carryover limit. 
The carryover limit for the surplus is calculated as 10 percent of the 
cumulative total QP or IBQ pounds (used and unused, less any transfers 
or any previous carryover amounts) in the vessel account at the end of 
the year. NMFS will credit the carryover amount to the vessel account 
in the immediately following year once NMFS has completed its end-of-
the-year account reconciliation. NMFS will notify vessel account owners 
through the online IFQ system of any additional QP or IBQ pounds 
resulting from a carryover of surplus pounds. If there is a decline in 
the OY between the base year and the following year in which the QP or 
IBQ pounds would be carried over, the carryover amount will be reduced 
in proportion to the reduction in the OY. Surplus QP or IBQ pounds may 
not be carried over for more than one year. Any amount of QP or IBQ 
pounds in a vessel account and in excess of the carryover amount will 
expire on December 31 each year and will not be available for any 
future use.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) General. The first receiver site license authorizes the holder 
to receive, purchase, or take custody, control, or

[[Page 54912]]

possession of an IFQ landing at a specific physical site onshore 
directly from a vessel. Each buyer of groundfish from a vessel making 
an IFQ landing must have a first receiver site license for each 
physical location where the IFQ landing is offloaded.
    (2) Issuance.--(i) First receiver site licenses will only be issued 
to a person registered to a valid license issued by the state of 
Washington, Oregon, or California, and that authorizes the person to 
receive fish from a catcher vessel.
    (ii) A separate first receiver site license will be issued for each 
IFQ first receiver for each specific physical location where the IFQ 
first receiver will receive, purchase or take custody, control, or 
possession of an IFQ landing from a vessel.
    (iii) An IFQ first receiver may apply for a first receiver site 
license at any time during the calendar year.
    (iv) IFQ first receivers must reapply for a first receiver site 
license as specified at paragraphs (f)(6) and (7) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Application process. Persons interested in being licensed as an 
IFQ first receiver for a specific physical location must submit a 
complete application for a first receiver site license to NMFS, 
Northwest Region, Permits Office, Attn: Catch Monitor Coordinator, 
Bldg. 1, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115. NMFS will only 
consider complete applications for approval. A complete application 
includes:
* * * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (D) The name and signature of the person submitting the application 
and the date of the application.
* * * * *
    (iii) A catch monitoring plan. All IFQ first receivers must prepare 
and operate under a NMFS-accepted catch monitoring plan for each 
specific physical location. A proposed catch monitoring plan detailing 
how the IFQ first receiver will meet each of the performance standards 
in paragraph (f)(3)(iii)(C) of this section must be included with the 
application. NMFS will not issue a first receiver site license to a 
person that does not have a current, NMFS-accepted catch monitoring 
plan.
* * * * *
    (B) Arranging an inspection. After receiving a complete application 
for a first receiver site license, including the proposed catch 
monitoring plan, NMFS will contact the applicant to schedule a site 
inspection.
* * * * *
    (C) * * *
    (11) Electronic fish ticket submittal. Describe how the electronic 
fish ticket submittal requirements specified at Sec.  660.113(b)(4)(ii) 
will be met.
* * * * *
    (5) Effective date. The first receiver site license is effective 
upon approval and issuance by NMFS and will be effective for one year 
from the date of NMFS issuance, or until the state license required by 
paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section is no longer effective, whichever 
occurs first.
    (6) Reissuance in subsequent years. Existing license holders must 
reapply annually. If the existing license holder fails to reapply, the 
first receiver's site license will expire as specified in paragraph 
(f)(5) of this section. The IFQ first receiver will not be authorized 
to receive IFQ species from a vessel if their first receiver site 
license has expired.
    (7) Change in ownership of an IFQ first receiver. If there are any 
changes to the owner of a first receiver registered to a first receiver 
site license during a calendar year, the first receiver site license is 
void. The new owner of the first receiver must apply to NMFS for a 
first receiver site license. A first receiver site license may not be 
registered to any other person.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Any vessel participating in the Shorebased IFQ Program must 
carry a NMFS-certified observer during any trip and must maintain 
observer or catch monitor coverage while in port until all fish from 
that trip have been offloaded, with the following exception. If the 
observer makes available to the catch monitor an observer program form 
reporting the weight and number of those overfished species identified 
in Sec.  660.112(b)(1)(xiii) that were retained onboard the vessel 
during that trip and noting any discrepancy in those species between 
the vessel operator and observer, the vessel would not need to maintain 
observer or catch monitor coverage on the vessel while in port and 
until the offload is complete. If a vessel delivers fish from an IFQ 
trip to more than one IFQ first receiver, the observer must remain 
onboard the vessel during any transit between delivery points.
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (1) Catch monitoring plan. All IFQ first receivers must operate 
under a NMFS-accepted catch monitoring plan for each specific physical 
location where IFQ landings will be received, purchased, or taken 
custody, control, or possession of.
* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (2) AMP QP pass through. The 10 percent of non-whiting QS will be 
reserved for the AMP, but the resulting AMP QP will be issued to all QS 
permit owners in proportion to their non-whiting QS through 2014 or 
until alternative criteria for distribution of the AMP QP is developed 
and implemented, whichever is earlier.
    18. In Sec.  660.150,
    a. Revise paragraph (a) introductory text, (c)(2)(i)(A), 
(d)(1)(iii) introductory text, (d)(1)(iii)(A)(1)(vi), (f)(2)(i), 
(f)(3)(i), (g)(1)(iii), (g)(2)(iv), and (g)(3)(i) introductory text;
    b. Add paragraphs (c)(2)(i)(B)(1)(i) and (ii), (c)(2)(i)(C), 
(c)(2)(ii)(C), (g)(2)(v) and (vi) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.150  Mothership (MS) Coop Program.

    (a) General. The MS Coop Program is a general term to describe the 
limited access program that applies to eligible harvesters and 
processors in the mothership sector of the Pacific whiting at-sea trawl 
fishery. Eligible harvesters and processors, including coop and non-
coop fishery participants, must meet the requirements set forth in this 
section of the Pacific Coast groundfish regulations. Each year a vessel 
registered to an MS/CV-endorsed permit may fish in either the coop or 
non-coop portion of the MS Coop Program, but not both. In addition to 
the requirements of this section, the MS Coop Program is subject to the 
following groundfish regulations of subparts C and D of this part:
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Pacific whiting catch history assignment. Each MS/CV 
endorsement's associated catch history assignment of Pacific whiting 
will be annually allocated to a single permitted MS coop or to the non-
coop fishery. If multiple MS/CV endorsements and their associated CHAs 
are registered to a limited entry permit, that permit may be 
simultaneously registered to more than one MS coop or to both a coop(s) 
and non-coop fishery. Once assigned to a permitted MS coop or to the 
non-coop fishery, each MS/CV endorsement's catch history assignment 
remains with that permitted MS coop or non-coop fishery for that 
calendar year. When the mothership sector allocation is established, 
the information for the conversion of catch history assignment to 
pounds will be made available to the

[[Page 54913]]

public through a Federal Register announcement and/or public notice 
and/or the NMFS Web site. The amount of whiting from the catch history 
assignment will be issued to the nearest whole pound using standard 
rounding rules (i.e. less than 0.5 rounds down and 0.5 and greater 
rounds up).
    (1) In years where the Pacific whiting harvest specification is 
known by the start of the mothership sector primary whiting season 
specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(B), allocation for Pacific 
whiting will be made by the start of the season.
    (2) In years where the Pacific whiting harvest specification is not 
known by the start of the mothership sector primary whiting season 
specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(B), NMFS will issue Pacific 
whiting allocations in two parts. Before the start of the primary 
whiting season, NMFS will allocate Pacific whiting based on the MS Coop 
Program allocation percent multiplied by the lower end of the range of 
potential harvest specifications for Pacific whiting for that year. 
After the final Pacific whiting harvest specifications are established, 
NMFS will allocate any additional amounts of Pacific whiting to the MS 
Coop Program.
    (B) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are known 
by the start of the mothership sector primary whiting season specified 
at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(B), allocation of non-whiting groundfish 
species with an allocation will be made by the start of the season.
    (ii) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are not 
known by the start of the mothership sector primary whiting season 
specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(B), NMFS will issue allocations 
for non-whiting groundfish species with an allocation in two parts. 
Before the start of the whiting primary season, NMFS will allocate non-
whiting groundfish species with an allocation based on the MS Coop 
Program allocation percent multiplied by the lower end of the range of 
potential harvest specifications for those species for that year. After 
the final groundfish harvest specifications are established, NMFS will 
allocate any additional amounts of non-whiting groundfish species with 
an allocation to the MS Coop Program.
* * * * *
    (C) After making best attempts to distribute 100 percent of the MS 
Coop Program allocations among the catch history assignments for 
individual MS/CV-endorsed permits, NMFS may determine the allocations 
to individual permits that are equal to or greater than 99.99 percent, 
but do not exceed 100 percent, are considered fully allocated.
* * * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (C) If all MS/CV-endorsed permits are members of a single coop in a 
given year and there is not a non-coop fishery, then NMFS will allocate 
100 percent of the MS Coop Program allocation to that coop.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Application for MS coop permit. The designated coop manager, 
on behalf of the coop entity, must submit a complete application form 
and include each of the items listed in paragraph (d)(1)(iii)(A) of 
this section. Only complete applications will be considered for 
issuance of a MS coop permit. An application will not be considered 
complete if any required application fees and annual coop reports have 
not been received by NMFS. NMFS may request additional supplemental 
documentation as necessary to make a determination of whether to 
approve or disapprove the application. Application forms and 
instruction are available on the NMFS NWR Web site (http://www.nwr.noaa.gov) or by request from NMFS. The designated coop manager 
must sign the application acknowledging the responsibilities of a 
designated coop manager defined in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. 
For permit owners with more than one MS/CV endorsement and associated 
CHA, paragraph (g)(2)(iv)(D) of this section specifies how to join an 
MS coop(s).
    (A) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (vi) A clause stating that if a permit is registered to a new 
permit owner during the effective period of the coop agreement, any new 
owners of that member permit would be coop members required to comply 
with membership restrictions in the coop agreement.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Renewal. An MS permit must be renewed annually consistent with 
the limited entry permit regulations given at Sec.  660.25(b)(4). If a 
vessel registered to the MS permit will operate as a mothership in the 
year for which the permit is renewed, the permit owner must make a 
declaration as part of the permit renewal that while participating in 
the whiting fishery it will operate solely as a mothership during the 
calendar year to which its limited entry permit applies. Any such 
declaration is binding on the vessel for the calendar year, even if the 
permit is registered to a different permit owner during the year, 
unless it is rescinded in response to a written request from the permit 
owner. Any request to rescind a declaration must be made by the permit 
owner and granted in writing by the Regional Administrator before any 
unprocessed whiting has been taken on board the vessel that calendar 
year.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) MS permit usage limit. No person who owns an MS permit(s) may 
register the MS permit(s) to vessels that cumulatively process more 
than 45 percent of the annual mothership sector Pacific whiting 
allocation. For purposes of determining accumulation limits, NMFS 
requires that permit owners submit a complete trawl ownership interest 
form for the permit owner as part of annual renewal for the MS permit. 
An ownership interest form will also be required whenever a new permit 
owner obtains an MS permit as part of a request for a change in permit 
ownership. Accumulation limits will be determined by calculating the 
percentage of ownership interest a person has in any MS permit. 
Determination of ownership interest will subject to the individual and 
collective rule.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) MS/CV endorsement and CHA non-severable. Subject to the 
regulations at paragraphs (g)(2)(iv) and (v) of this section, an MS/CV 
endorsement and its associated CHA are permanently linked together as 
originally issued by NMFS and cannot be divided or registered 
separately to another limited entry trawl permit. An MS/CV endorsement 
and its associated CHA must be registered to a limited entry trawl 
permit and any change in endorsement registration must be to another 
limited entry trawl permit.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) Change in MS/CV endorsement registration. As specified at 
Sec.  660.25(b)(3)(v), each MS/CV endorsement has an associated CHA 
that is permanently linked as originally issued by NMFS and cannot be 
divided or registered separately to another limited entry trawl permit. 
An MS/CV endorsement and associated CHA must be registered to a limited 
entry trawl permit and any change in MS/CV endorsement registration 
must be to another limited entry trawl permit. Any

[[Page 54914]]

change in MS/CV endorsement registration will be registered separately 
on the limited entry trawl permit. An MS/CV endorsement and its 
associated CHA cannot be registered to any other person other than the 
specified owner of the limited entry trawl permit to which it is 
registered.
    (A) Multiple MS/CV endorsements on a limited entry trawl permit. 
Multiple MS/CV endorsements and associated CHAs may be registered to a 
single limited entry trawl permit. If multiple endorsements are 
registered to a single limited entry trawl permit, the whiting CHA 
amount (expressed as a percent) will remain in the amount that it was 
originally issued by NMFS and will not be combined as a single larger 
CHA, unless two or more MS/CV-endorsed permits are combined for 
purposes of increasing the size endorsement, as specified at Sec.  
660.25(b)(4)(ii)(B). Any change in MS/CV endorsement registration may 
be disapproved if the person owning the limited entry trawl permit has 
aggregate CHA amounts in excess of the accumulation limits specified at 
paragraph (g)(3) of this section.
    (B) Application. A request for a change in MS/CV endorsement 
registration must be made between September 1 and December 31 of each 
year. Any transfer of MS/CV endorsement and its associated CHA to 
another limited entry trawl permit must be requested using a change in 
permit ownership form and the permit owner or an authorized 
representative of the permit owner must certify that the application is 
true and correct by signing and dating the form. In addition, the form 
must be notarized, and the permit owner selling the MS/CV endorsement 
and CHA must provide the sale price of the MS/CV endorsement and its 
associated CHA. If any assets in addition to the MS/CV endorsement and 
its associated CHA are included in the sale price, those assets must be 
itemized and described.
    (C) Effective date. Any change in MS/CV endorsement registration 
from one limited entry trawl permit to another limited entry trawl 
permit will be effective on January 1 in the year following the 
application period.
    (D) A limited entry trawl permit with multiple MS/CV endorsement 
registrations may be simultaneously registered to more than one coop or 
to both a coop(s) and non-coop fishery. In such cases, as part of the 
coop permit application process, specified at paragraph (d)(iii) of 
this section, the permit owner must specify on the coop permit 
application form which MS/CV endorsement and associated CHA is 
specifically registered to a particular coop or to the non-coop 
fishery.
    (v) Combination. An MS/CV-endorsed permit may be combined with one 
or more other limited entry trawl permits; the resulting permit will be 
a single permit with an increased size endorsement. If the MS/CV-
endorsed permit is combined with another limited entry trawl-endorsed 
permit other than a C/P-endorsed permit, the resulting permit will be 
MS/CV-endorsed. If an MS/CV-endorsed permit is combined with a C/P-
endorsed permit, the resulting permit will be exclusively a C/P-
endorsed permit, and will not have an MS/CV endorsement. If an MS/CV-
endorsed permit is combined with another MS/CV-endorsed permit, the 
combined catch history assignment of the permit(s) will be added to the 
active permit (the permit remaining after combination) and the other 
permit will be retired. If a trawl permit has more than one MS/CV 
endorsements and it is combined with a non C/P-endorsed trawl permit 
with no such endorsements, the MS/CV endorsements on the resulting 
permit will be maintained as separate endorsements on the resulting 
permit. NMFS will not approve a permit combination if it results in a 
person exceeding the accumulation limits specified at paragraph (g)(3) 
of this section. Any request to combine permits is subject to the 
provision provided at Sec.  660.25(b), including the combination 
formula for resulting size endorsements.
    (vi) One-time request to undo a permit combination. If two or more 
MS/CV-endorsed permits have been combined before January 1, 2012 for 
purposes of increasing the vessel's size endorsement, a permit owner of 
the resulting combined permit will have until [Insert date 90 days 
after date of publication of the final rule in the FEDERAL REGISTER] to 
undo that permit combination. The permit owner must submit a letter to 
NMFS requesting such action. The letter must be postmarked or hand-
delivered to NMFS by the deadline.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) MS/CV-endorsed permit ownership limit. No person shall own MS/
CV-endorsed permits for which the collective Pacific whiting allocation 
total is greater than 20 percent of the total mothership sector 
allocation. For purposes of determining accumulation limits, NMFS 
requires that permit owners submit a complete trawl ownership interest 
form for the permit owner as part of annual renewal of an MS/CV-
endorsed permit. An ownership interest form will also be required 
whenever a new permit owner obtains an MS/CV-endorsed permit as part of 
a request for a change in permit ownership. Accumulation limits will be 
determined by calculating the percentage of ownership interest a person 
has in any MS/CV-endorsed permit and the amount of the Pacific whiting 
catch history assignment given on the permit. Determination of 
ownership interest will be subject to the individual and collective 
rule.
* * * * *
    19. In Sec.  660.160,
    a. Revise paragraphs (a) introductory text, (d)(1)(iii)(A)(1)(iv), 
(e)(1)(i), (e)(2)(i);
    b. Add paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii), and (c)(3)(i)(A) and (B) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  660.160  Catcher/processor (C/P) Coop Program.

    (a) General. The C/P Coop Program is a limited access program that 
applies to vessels in the C/P sector of the Pacific whiting at-sea 
trawl fishery and is a single voluntary coop. Eligible harvesters and 
processors must meet the requirements set forth in this section of the 
Pacific Coast groundfish regulations. In addition to the requirements 
of this section, the C/P Coop Program is subject to the following 
groundfish regulations:
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) In years where the Pacific whiting harvest specification is 
known by the start of the catcher/processor sector primary whiting 
season specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(A), allocation for Pacific 
whiting will be made by the start of the season.
    (ii) In years where the Pacific whiting harvest specification is 
not known by the start of the catcher/processor sector primary whiting 
season specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(A), NMFS will issue 
Pacific whiting allocations in two parts. Before the start of the 
primary whiting season, NMFS will allocate Pacific whiting based on the 
C/P Coop Program allocation percent multiplied by the lower end of the 
range of potential harvest specifications for Pacific whiting for that 
year. After the final Pacific whiting harvest specifications are 
established, NMFS will allocate any additional amounts of Pacific 
whiting to the C/P Coop Program.
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are known 
by the start of the catcher/processor sector primary whiting season 
specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(A), allocation of non-

[[Page 54915]]

whiting groundfish species with an allocation will be made by the start 
of the season.
    (B) In years where the groundfish harvest specifications are not 
known by the start of the catcher/processor sector primary whiting 
season specified at Sec.  660.131(b)(2)(iii)(A), NMFS will issue 
allocations for non-whiting groundfish species with an allocation in 
two parts. Before the start of the primary whiting season, NMFS will 
allocate non-whiting groundfish species with an allocation based on the 
C/P Coop Program allocation percent multiplied by the lower end of the 
range of potential harvest specifications for those species for that 
year. After the final groundfish harvest specifications are 
established, NMFS will allocate any additional amounts of non-whiting 
groundfish species with an allocation to the C/P Coop Program.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) A clause stating that if a permit is registered to a new 
permit owner during the effective period of the coop agreement, any new 
owners of that member permit would be coop members and are required to 
comply with membership restrictions in the coop agreement.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Non-severable. A C/P endorsement is not severable from the 
limited entry trawl permit, and therefore, the endorsement may not be 
registered to another permit owner or to another vessel separately from 
the limited entry trawl permit.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) Renewal. A C/P-endorsed permit must be renewed annually 
consistent with the limited entry permit regulations given at Sec.  
660.25(b)(4). If a vessel registered to the C/P-endorsed permit will 
operate as a mothership in the year for which the permit is renewed, 
the permit owner must make a declaration as part of the permit renewal 
that while participating in the whiting fishery they will operate 
solely as a mothership during the calendar year to which its limited 
entry permit applies. Any such declaration is binding on the vessel for 
the calendar year, even if the permit is registered to a different 
permit owner during the year, unless it is rescinded in response to a 
written request from the permit owner. Any request to rescind a 
declaration must be made by the permit owner and granted in writing by 
the Regional Administrator before any unprocessed whiting has been 
taken on board the vessel that calendar year.
* * * * *
    20. In Sec.  660.212, revise paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  660.212  Fixed gear fishery--prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) Process sablefish taken at-sea in the limited entry fixed gear 
sablefish primary fishery defined at Sec.  660.231, from a vessel that 
does not have a sablefish at-sea processing exemption, described at 
Sec.  660.25(b)(6)(i).
    21. Revise 660.220 to read as follows:


Sec.  660.220  Fixed gear fishery--crossover provisions.

    The crossover provisions listed at Sec.  660.60(h)(7), apply to 
vessels fishing in the limited entry fixed gear fishery.
    22. In Sec.  660.231, revise paragraph (b)(4)(i) and (b)(4)(ii)(A) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  660.231  Limited entry fixed gear sablefish primary fishery.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) The person, partnership or corporation had ownership interest 
in a limited entry permit with a sablefish endorsement prior to 
November 1, 2000. A person who has ownership interest in a partnership 
or corporation that owned a sablefish-endorsed permit as of November 1, 
2000, but who did not individually own a sablefish-endorsed limited 
entry permit as of November 1, 2000, is not exempt from the owner-on-
board requirement when he/she leaves the partnership or corporation and 
purchases another permit individually. A person, partnership, or 
corporation that is exempt from the owner-on-board requirement may sell 
all of their permits, buy another sablefish-endorsed permit within up 
to a year from the date the last change in permit ownership was 
approved, and retain their exemption from the owner-on-board 
requirements. Additionally, a person, partnership, or corporation that 
qualified for the owner-on-board exemption, but later divested their 
interest in a permit or permits, may retain rights to an owner-on-board 
exemption as long as that person, partnership, or corporation purchases 
another permit by March 2, 2007. A person, partnership or corporation 
could only purchase a permit if it has not added or changed individuals 
since November 1, 2000, excluding individuals that have left the 
partnership or corporation, or that have died.
    (ii) * * *
    (A) Evidence of death of the permit owner shall be provided to NMFS 
in the form of a copy of a death certificate. In the interim before the 
estate is settled, if the deceased permit owner was subject to the 
owner-on-board requirements, the estate of the deceased permit owner 
may send a letter to NMFS with a copy of the death certificate, 
requesting an exemption from the owner-on-board requirements. An 
exemption due to death of the permit owner will be effective only until 
such time that the estate of the deceased permit owner has registered 
the deceased permit owner's permit to a beneficiary or up to three 
years after the date of death as proven by a death certificate, 
whichever is earlier. An exemption from the owner-on-board requirements 
will be conveyed in a letter from NMFS to the estate of the permit 
owner and is required to be on the vessel during fishing operations.
* * * * *
    23. Revise 660.320 to read as follows:


Sec.  660.320  Open access fishery--crossover provisions.

    The crossover provisions listed at Sec.  660.60(h)(7), apply to 
vessels fishing in the open access fishery.
    24. In Sec.  660.333, revise paragraphs (b) through (d) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  660.333  Open access non-groundfish trawl fishery--management 
measures.

* * * * *
    (b) Participation in the ridgeback prawn fishery. A trawl vessel 
will be considered participating in the open access, non-groundfish 
trawl ridgeback prawn fishery if:
    (1) It is declared ``non-groundfish trawl gear for ridgeback 
prawn'' under Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv), regardless of whether it is 
registered to a Federal limited entry trawl-endorsed permit; and
    (2) The landing includes ridgeback prawns taken in accordance with 
California Fish and Game Code, section 8595, which states: ``Prawns or 
shrimp may be taken for commercial purposes with a trawl net, subject 
to Article 10 (commencing with Section 8830) of Chapter 3.''
    (c) Participation in the California halibut fishery. A trawl vessel 
will be considered participating in the open access, non-groundfish 
trawl California halibut fishery if:
    (1) It is declared ``non-groundfish trawl gear for California 
halibut'' under Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv), regardless of whether it is 
registered to a Federal limited entry trawl-endorsed permit;

[[Page 54916]]

    (2) All fishing on the trip takes place south of Pt. Arena, CA 
(38[deg]57.50' N. lat.); and
    (3) The landing includes California halibut of a size required by 
California Fish and Game Code section 8392, which states: ``No 
California halibut may be taken, possessed or sold which measures less 
than 22 in (56 cm) in total length, unless it weighs 4-lb (1.8144 kg) 
or more in the round, 3 and one-half lbs (1.587 kg) or more dressed 
with the head on, or 3-lbs (1.3608 kg) or more dressed with the head 
off. Total length means the shortest distance between the tip of the 
jaw or snout, whichever extends farthest while the mouth is closed, and 
the tip of the longest lobe of the tail, measured while the halibut is 
lying flat in natural repose, without resort to any force other than 
the swinging or fanning of the tail.''
    (d) Participation in the sea cucumber fishery. A trawl vessel will 
be considered to be participating in the open access, non-groundfish 
trawl sea cucumber fishery if:
    (1) It is declared ``non-groundfish trawl gear for sea cucumber'' 
under Sec.  660.13(d)(5)(iv), regardless of whether it is registered to 
a Federal limited entry trawl-endorsed permit;
    (2) All fishing on the trip takes place south of Pt. Arena, CA 
(38[deg]57.50' N. lat.); and
    (3) The landing includes sea cucumbers taken in accordance with 
California Fish and Game Code, section 8405, which requires a permit 
issued by the State of California.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-22311 Filed 9-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P