[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81248-81293]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32873]



[[Page 81247]]

Vol. 76

Tuesday,

No. 248

December 27, 2011

Part VI





Department of Commerce





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





National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration





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





50 CFR Part 679





Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish of the 
Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 76 , No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2011 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 81248]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 110314196-1725-02]
RIN 0648-BA97


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish 
of the Gulf of Alaska; Amendment 88

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations implementing Amendment 88 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA FMP). 
Amendment 88 is the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program (Rockfish 
Program). These regulations allocate exclusive harvest privileges to a 
specific group of license limitation program license holders who used 
trawl gear to target Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf rockfish, and 
northern rockfish during particular qualifying years. The Rockfish 
Program retains the conservation, management, safety, and economic 
gains realized under the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Pilot Program 
(Pilot Program) and resolves identified issues in the management and 
viability of the rockfish fisheries. This action is necessary to 
replace particular Pilot Program regulations that are scheduled to 
expire at the end of 2011. This action is intended to promote the goals 
and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act, the GOA FMP, and other applicable law.

DATES: Effective on December 27, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of Amendment 88, the final Environmental 
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) prepared for the Central Gulf of 
Alaska Rockfish Program are available from the NMFS Alaska Region Web 
site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. The proposed rule to implement 
Amendment 88 also may be accessed at this Web site.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gwen Herrewig, (907) 586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fisheries in the exclusive 
economic zone of Alaska are managed under the GOA FMP and the Fishery 
Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 
Management Area (BSAI FMP). The North Pacific Fishery Management 
Council (Council) prepared both FMPs under the authority of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), 16 
U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations implementing the FMPs appear at 50 CFR 
part 679. General regulations governing U.S. fisheries also appear at 
50 CFR part 600. This final rule implements Amendment 88, the Rockfish 
Program, to manage the rockfish fisheries in the Central GOA, which 
covers an area from 147[deg] W. long. to 159[deg] W. long.

Background

    Prior to 2007, the Central GOA rockfish fisheries were managed 
under the License Limitation Program (LLP). The LLP required harvesters 
to hold an LLP license to participate in GOA fisheries, but did not 
provide specific exclusive harvest privileges to LLP license holders. 
Harvesters with LLP licenses competed with each other in a ``race for 
fish'' to harvest the total allowable catch (TAC) assigned to the 
fishery. Processors also competed with each other. The competition 
created economic inefficiencies and incentives to increase harvesting 
and processing capacity. Harvesters increased the fishing capacity of 
their vessels and accelerated their rate of fishing to outcompete other 
vessels. Similarly, processors increased their processing capacity to 
outcompete other processors. The rapid pace of fishing reduced the 
ability of harvesters and processors to improve product quality and 
extract more value from the fishery by producing high-value products 
that require additional processing time.
    Since 2007, NMFS has managed the rockfish fisheries under the Pilot 
Program. Under the Pilot Program, NMFS allocated exclusive harvesting 
and processing privileges for a specific set of rockfish species and 
for associated species harvested incidentally to those rockfish in the 
Central GOA. A detailed description of the Pilot Program is provided in 
the preamble to the Pilot Program's proposed rule (71 FR 33040; June 7, 
2006).
    The Pilot Program was designed to enhance resource conservation and 
improve economic efficiency in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries by 
establishing cooperatives that receive exclusive harvest privileges. 
Section 802 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (Section 
802, Pub. L. 108-199) required that the Secretary of Commerce 
(Secretary), in consultation with the Council, establish a program for 
the rockfish fisheries that recognized the historical participation of 
fishing vessels and fish processors in the Central GOA rockfish 
fisheries. Following extensive public comment, the Council recommended 
the Pilot Program to the Secretary on June 6, 2005. NMFS published 
regulations implementing Amendment 68 and the Pilot Program on November 
20, 2006 (71 FR 67210). Fishing began under the Pilot Program on May 1, 
2007. It created a structure for fishery participants to form 
cooperatives to efficiently manage harvesting activities. The 
allocation of cooperative quota (CQ), which is the annual catch limit 
that may be harvested by rockfish cooperatives, removes the incentives 
to maximize catch rates to capture a share of the available catch. As a 
result, vessel operators make operational choices to improve fishing 
practices.
    The Council adopted the proposed Central GOA Rockfish Program on 
June 14, 2010, to replace the existing Pilot Program that will expire 
December 31, 2011. The Pilot Program and the Rockfish Program are a 
type of a limited access privilege program (LAPP) developed to enhance 
resource conservation and improve economic efficiency in the Central 
GOA rockfish fisheries. LAPPs, also called catch share programs, are 
limited access systems in which Federal permits are issued to harvest a 
quantity of fish representing a portion of the TAC. As noted earlier, 
the Pilot Program was authorized under 2004 appropriations legislation. 
Since that time, the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSRA) (Pub. L. 109-479) was 
enacted. The MSRA amended the MSA to include a new section 303A 
describing requirements for LAPPs initiated after January 12, 2007. The 
Council designed the Rockfish Program to meet the requirements of 
section 303A.
    The Rockfish Program implemented by this final rule includes 
similar implementation, management, monitoring, and enforcement 
measures to those developed under the Pilot Program. For example, the 
Rockfish Program will (1) continue to assign rockfish quota share (QS) 
and CQ to participants for rockfish primary and secondary species; (2) 
allow a participant holding an LLP license with rockfish QS to form a 
rockfish cooperative with other persons; (3) allow holders of catcher/
processor LLP licenses to opt-out of rockfish cooperatives each year; 
(4) include an entry level longline fishery; (5) establish sideboard 
limits, which are limits designed to prevent participants in the 
Rockfish Program from increasing their historical effort in other GOA

[[Page 81249]]

groundfish fisheries; and (6) include monitoring and enforcement 
provisions.
    After considering management issues identified under the Pilot 
Program, and new program requirements to ensure the Rockfish Program 
complies with section 303A of the MSA, the Council recommended a 
Rockfish Program that includes modified provisions of the Pilot Program 
as well as new provisions. This recommendation was based on the 
analysis of rockfish management under the LLP, the Pilot Program, and 
anticipated changes under the Rockfish Program. The rationale 
underlying the Council's decision and details of this analysis are 
briefly discussed in this preamble and are contained in the Analysis 
prepared for this action (see ADDRESSES).

Key Differences Between the Pilot Program and the Rockfish Program

    Table 1 outlines some key differences between the Pilot Program and 
the Rockfish Program. In summary, the Rockfish Program will, in 
contrast to the Pilot Program:
     Change the qualifying years for eligibility for QS;
     Use a different suite of years to determine sideboard 
limits and the allocation of QS;
     Assign to rockfish cooperatives a specific portion of the 
Central GOA TAC of species historically harvested in the rockfish 
fisheries;
     Assign a specific amount of halibut prohibited species 
catch (PSC) to cooperatives and conserve a portion of the halibut that 
will remain unallocated;
     Restrict the entry level fishery to longline gear only;
     Relax the requirements to form a cooperative;
     Specify the location where harvesters in cooperatives must 
deliver rockfish;
     Remove the requirement that harvesters in a catcher vessel 
cooperative deliver to a specific processor;
     Discontinue the limited access fishery;
     Simplify sideboards, and slightly modify sideboards for 
catcher/processors;
     Implement a cost recovery program for all participants 
except for opt-out vessels and the entry level longline fishery;
     Establish a catch monitoring and control plan (CMCP) 
specialist staff position; and
     Be authorized for 10 years, from January 1, 2012, until 
December 31, 2021.

   Table 1--Key Differences Between the Pilot Program and the Rockfish
                                 Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Management provision          Pilot program       Rockfish program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eligibility to receive QS...  Participants must     Participants must
                               have made targeted    have made targeted
                               legal landings of     legal landings of
                               rockfish primary      rockfish primary
                               species during the    species during the
                               qualifying years      qualifying years
                               1996-2002.            2000-2006, or
                                                     participated in the
                                                     Pilot Program entry
                                                     level trawl fishery
                                                     in 2007, 2008, or
                                                     2009.
 Voluntary exclusion  May not apply for or  LLP license holder
 from the Rockfish Program.    receive initial       may forgo QS and be
                               allocation of QS,     exempted from
                               but may still have    specific sideboard
                               sideboard             limits if legal
                               limitations.          landings were made
                                                     both in 2000-2006
                                                     and in the entry
                                                     level trawl fishery
                                                     during 2007, 2008,
                                                     or 2009. Must apply
                                                     for exclusion
                                                     during initial
                                                     application
                                                     process.
Initial QS Allocations......  Based on landings     97.5% of the initial
                               (best 5 of 7) years   allocation is based
                               between 1996 and      on landings (best 5
                               2002.                 of 7 years) between
                                                     2000 and 2006.
 Entry level trawl    N/A.................  Participants in the
 ``transition'' QS                                   Pilot Program entry
 allocation.                                         level trawl fishery
                                                     will be transferred
                                                     into catch share
                                                     management whereby
                                                     2.5% of the
                                                     allocation will be
                                                     given to licenses
                                                     that participated
                                                     in the Pilot
                                                     Program entry level
                                                     trawl fishery in
                                                     2007, 2008, 2009.
Rockfish Cooperatives.......  Yes.................  Yes.
 Forming a catcher    May only form         May only form a
 vessel (CV) cooperative.      cooperatives with     cooperative with
                               other CVs and the     other CVs with an
                               processor to whom     association with
                               they historically     any shoreside
                               delivered catch       processor located
                               from 1996-2000. No    within the
                               minimum number of     geographic
                               LLP licenses          boundaries of the
                               required for CVs to   City of Kodiak. No
                               form a cooperative.   minimum number of
                                                     LLP licenses
                                                     required.
 Annual CV
 allocation of CQ:
    Primary.................  Based on member QS..  Based on member QS.
    Secondary...............   Pacific cod   3.81% of
                               based on QS.          Pacific cod TAC.
                               Sablefish     6.7% of
                               based on QS.          sablefish TAC.
                               Rougheye/     7.84% of
                               shortraker maximum    thornyhead TAC.
                               retainable amount     Rougheye/
                               (MRA), may not        shortraker MRA may
                               exceed 9.72% of TAC.  not exceed 9.72% of
                               Thornyhead    TAC.
                               based on QS.
    Halibut PSC.............  Based on member QS.   Based on member QS.
                               Calculation based     Calculation based
                               on 1996-2002 data.    on 2000-2006 data
                                                     with a 12.5%
                                                     reduction. 117.3 mt
                                                     to cooperatives.
                                                     16.8 mt remains
                                                     unallocated and
                                                     stays ``in the
                                                     water.''
 Forming a catcher/   May join a            May join a
 processor (C/P) cooperative.  cooperative with      cooperative with
                               other C/Ps. Minimum   other C/Ps. No
                               of 2 LLP licenses     minimum number of
                               required for C/Ps.    LLP licenses
                                                     required.
 Annual C/P
 allocation of CQ
    Primary.................  Amount based on       Amount based on
                               member QS.            member QS.
    Secondary...............   Pacific cod   Pacific cod
                               MRA.                  MRA.
                               Sablefish     3.51% of
                               based on QS.          sablefish TAC.
                               30.03% of     40% of
                               shortraker TAC.       shortraker TAC.
                               58.87% of     58.87% of
                               rougheye TAC.         rougheye TAC.
                               Thornyhead    26.50% of
                               based on QS.          thornyhead TAC.

[[Page 81250]]

 
    Halibut PSC.............  Based on member QS.   Amount based on
                               Calculation based     member QS.
                               on 1996-2002 data.    Calculation based
                                                     on 2000-2006 data
                                                     with a 12.5%
                                                     reduction.
                                                    74.1 mt allocated.
                                                    10.6 mt remains in
                                                     the water.
Transfer of CQ..............   C/P may       C/P may
                               transfer to C/P or    transfer to C/P or
                               CV.                   CV, except no
                               CV may        shortraker or
                               transfer to CV        rougheye may
                               only. No minimum      transfer from C/P
                               number of LLP         to CV.
                               licenses required     CV may
                               to transfer CQ.       transfer to CV only
                                                     Minimum of
                                                     2 LLP licenses in
                                                     each cooperative
                                                     required to
                                                     transfer CQ.
Limited access fishery......  Yes.................  None.
Opt-out option for C/Ps.....  Yes, but subject to   Yes, but subject to
                               opt-out sideboards.   opt-out sideboards.
Halibut PSC % rollover of     100% of unused CQ     55% of unused CQ
 unused CQ.                    halibut PSC will be   halibut PSC will be
                               added to the last     added to the last
                               seasonal              seasonal
                               apportionment         apportionment
                               during the current    during the current
                               fishing year.         fishing year.
                                                     Resulting 45% of
                                                     unused CQ halibut
                                                     PSC remains in the
                                                     water.
Use caps for rockfish         A person may not      A person may not
 primary species.              hold or use more      hold or use more
                               than:                 than:
                                  5% of         4% of
                                  the QS assigned       the QS assigned
                                  to the CV sector.     to the CV sector
                                  20% of        40% of
                                  the QS assigned       the QS assigned
                                  to the C/P            to the C/P
                                  sector.               sector.
                              CV cooperative may    CV cooperative may
                               not hold or use       not hold or use
                               more CQ than:         more CQ than:
                                  30% QS        30% QS
                                  assigned to CV        assigned to CV
                                  sector.               sector.
                              A vessel may not      A vessel may not
                               harvest more than:    harvest more than:
                                  60% CQ     8% CQ
                                  issued to the C/   issued to the CV
                                  P sector.          sector.
                                                     60% CQ
                                                     issued to the C/P
                                                     sector.
                              Processors may not    Processors may not
                               receive or process    receive or process
                               more than:            more than:
                                  30% CQ        30% CQ
                                  issued to CV          issued to CV
                                  sector (rockfish      sector (rockfish
                                  primary species       primary species,
                                  only).                Pacific cod, and
                                                        sablefish).
Sideboards (in effect July 1- Yes.................  Yes.
 31).
 Catcher vessel.....  Exemption from        Exemptions from
                               sideboard limits:     sideboard limits:
                               (1) Any American     (1) Any AFA CVs not
                               Fisheries Act (AFA)   exempt under AFA
                               CVs not exempt        regulations;
                               under AFA            (2) vessels that
                               regulations.          have been selected
                                                     as being
                                                     voluntarily
                                                     excluded from the
                                                     Rockfish Program;
                                                     and
                                                    (3) any vessels
                                                     assigned an LLP
                                                     license that has
                                                     been selected as
                                                     being voluntarily
                                                     excluded from the
                                                     Rockfish Program.
                               Prohibited   Prohibited fishing
                               from fishing in the   restrictions:
                               BSAI groundfish       West
                               fisheries and         Yakutat District/
                               limits on Pacific     Western GOA
                               cod.                  (rockfish primary
                               Prohibited    species).
                               from fishing in the   Deep-water
                               West Yakutat/         complex--arrowtooth
                               Western GOA (for      flounder, deep
                               rockfish).            water flatfish, rex
                               Deep and      sole.
                               shallow water
                               complex halibut PSC.
 C/P................   Prohibited    West
                               from fishing in the   Yakutat/Western GOA
                               BSAI groundfish       limitation
                               fisheries and non-    (rockfish primary
                               program groundfish    species).
                               fisheries in the      Deep and
                               GOA.                  shallow water
                               Deep and      halibut PSC limit.
                               shallow water         Prohibited
                               halibut PSC limit.    from fishing
                                                     rockfish primary
                                                     species in the
                                                     Western GOA and
                                                     West Yakutat
                                                     District for non-
                                                     Amendment 80
                                                     vessels.
                             -------------------------------------------
 C/P Opt-out vessels    Subject to sideboards and receives the
                                portion of each rockfish sideboard limit
                                 not assigned to rockfish cooperatives.
                             -------------------------------------------
                              Prevents directed      Prevents
                               fishing in GOA        directed fishing in
                               groundfish            GOA groundfish
                               fisheries without     fisheries without
                               previous              previous
                               participation in      participation in
                               1996-2002.            2000-2006.
                                                     Prohibit
                                                     directed fishing
                                                     for rockfish
                                                     primary species in
                                                     Western GOA and
                                                     West Yakutat for
                                                     non-Amendment 80
                                                     vessels.
Entry level fishery.........  Yes, trawl and        Yes, longline gear
                               longline gear.        only.
 Annual application.  Yes. Processor        None. May deliver to
                               affirmation           any shoreside
                               required.             processing facility
                                                     in the GOA.
 TAC................  5% of the rockfish    Annual set aside of
                               primary species TAC   the TAC increases
                               goes to the entry     annually, to a
                               level fishery,        predetermined cap,
                               divided equally       if the fishery
                               between trawl         harvests >= 90% of
                               (2.5%) and longline   their allocation of
                               gear (2.5%).          a species in the
                                                     previous year.
Monitoring and enforcement..  Observer coverage:
                                  100% CV    100% CV
                                  in July and when   when checked-in.
                                  checked-in.
                               200% C/P
                               cooperative for CQ
                               or sideboards, and
                               100% C/P
                               opt-out vessels in
                               July only.
                             -------------------------------------------
 Shoreside/            Catch Monitoring and Control Plan (CMCP)
 stationary processors:          is required except for the entry level
                                           longline fishery.
                             -------------------------------------------

[[Page 81251]]

 
                              Notify the observer   In the CMCP,
                               at least one hour     describe how the
                               prior to offloading   CMCP specialist
                               of each delivery of   will be notified of
                               groundfish            deliveries.
                               harvested in a
                               Pilot Program
                               fishery. An
                               observer must be
                               available to
                               monitor each
                               delivery.
Cost recovery...............  None................  Yes, fee liability
                                                     payment is a
                                                     maximum of 3% of
                                                     the ex-vessel value
                                                     of rockfish primary
                                                     and secondary
                                                     species. Payment
                                                     due on February 15
                                                     of the following
                                                     year. No fees for
                                                     the entry level
                                                     longline fishery.
Duration....................  5 years.............  10 years.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rockfish Program Overview

    A detailed review of the provisions of Amendment 88 and its 
implementing rule is provided in the preamble to the proposed rule (76 
FR 52148, August 19, 2011), and is not repeated here. The proposed rule 
is available from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site (see ADDRESSES). The 
following section provides a brief overview of the Rockfish Program.
    The rockfish fisheries are conducted in Federal waters near Kodiak, 
Alaska, primarily by trawl vessels, and to a lesser extent by longline 
vessels. Exclusive harvesting privileges are allocated under the 
Rockfish Program for rockfish primary and secondary species. The 
rockfish primary species are northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, 
and pelagic shelf rockfish. The rockfish secondary species include 
Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker rockfish, sablefish, and 
thornyhead rockfish. The Rockfish Program also allocates halibut PSC, 
which is a portion of the total GOA halibut mortality limit annually 
specified under Sec.  679.21. Halibut PSC is allocated to participants 
based on historic halibut mortality rates in the primary rockfish 
species fisheries.

Eligibility for Rockfish QS

    The Rockfish Program allocates harvest privileges to holders of LLP 
groundfish licenses with a history of Central GOA rockfish legal 
landings associated with those licenses (Rockfish legal landings are 
groundfish caught and retained in compliance with state and Federal 
regulations). The allocation of legal landings to an LLP license allows 
the holder of that LLP license to participate in the Rockfish Program 
and receive an exclusive harvest privilege under certain conditions. 
The Rockfish Program assigns QS to LLP licenses for rockfish primary 
and secondary species based on legal landings associated with that LLP. 
LLP license holders are eligible to receive rockfish QS if the LLP 
license was used to make legal landings of rockfish primary species 
during the qualifying years 2000 through 2006, or participated in the 
Pilot Program entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009. An 
application to receive rockfish QS must be submitted to NMFS by 5 p.m. 
on January 17, 2012, or be postmarked by that date. Rockfish QS that is 
assigned to a specific LLP license cannot be divided or transferred 
separately from that LLP license, unless the QS is in excess of a use 
cap specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2).
    LLP licenses that receive initial allocations based on legal 
landings (best 5 of 7 years) between 2000 and 2006 are given 97.5 
percent of the total allowable catch (TAC). While selecting qualifying 
years, and in balancing the interests of historic and recent 
participants, the Council considered fishing patterns over the 11-year 
period before the Pilot Program, from 1996 through 2006. The Council 
also considered how modifying the Pilot Program's 1996 through 2002 
qualifying years might potentially affect rockfish Pilot Program QS 
holders under the new Rockfish Program. The Council explained 
throughout the development of the Rockfish Program that, given the 
limited duration of the Pilot Program established by Congress, the 
Council could use different qualifying years to allocate rockfish QS 
under a new program. Ultimately, the Council selected the qualifying 
years of 2000 through 2006 after (1) considering both historic and more 
recent fishing patterns; (2) changes in the management of the fishery 
with the implementation of the LLP in 2000; and (3) the fishing 
patterns of catcher/processor vessels beginning in 2000.
    LLP licenses used to make rockfish legal landings in the Pilot 
Program entry level trawl fishery, in 2007, 2008, or 2009, will receive 
an initial allocation of 2.5 percent of the TAC under the Rockfish 
Program. In the Pilot Program, the entry level trawl fishery had a 
small amount of TAC. The Council chose to eliminate the entry level 
trawl fishery in the Rockfish Program due to concerns about the 
potential for more than a limited number of participants to register 
for, and participate in, the entry level trawl fishery. Given the small 
amount of TAC assigned to the entry level trawl fishery in the Pilot 
Program, NMFS may need to close the fishery as a precautionary measure 
to avoid exceeding the entry level trawl allocation if more than two or 
three vessels participated in the fishery. As recommended by the 
Council, the final rule eliminates the entry level trawl fishery but 
provides an opportunity for LLP license holders who participated in the 
Pilot Program entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 to 
receive rockfish QS. The Council determined that assigning rockfish QS 
to participants in the Pilot Program entry level trawl fishery will 
reduce the need for NMFS to establish and manage a separate ``race for 
fish'' fishery. The potential fishing effort in such a fishery could 
exceed the limited allocation available to the fishery. The Rockfish 
Program assigns rockfish QS to the Pilot Program entry level trawl 
fishery participants to ensure that those participants benefit from 
catch share management under the Rockfish Program.
    LLP license holders who made rockfish legal landings in both of the 
specified seasons--2000 through 2006 and in the entry level trawl 
fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009--can choose to forgo rockfish QS and 
avoid specific sideboard limitations. The Council recommended this 
provision to address a situation in which a limited number of LLP 
license holders, possibly no more than one, would prefer to have the 
option to forego an allocation of rockfish QS in order to continue to 
participate in the West Yakutat District and Western GOA rockfish 
fisheries consistent with recent participation patterns. An LLP license 
holder must apply for the voluntary exclusion during the initial 
application process.

[[Page 81252]]

Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota

    Rockfish QS may only be harvested through cooperative membership. 
No minimum number of LLP licenses is required to form a cooperative. On 
an annual basis, an LLP holder will assign the LLP license and rockfish 
QS for use in a rockfish cooperative. Catcher/processors may only form 
a cooperative with other catcher/processors. Catcher vessels may only 
form a cooperative with other catcher vessels in association with any 
shoreside processor located within the geographic boundaries of the 
City of Kodiak. The Council included the port delivery requirement to 
address industry concern that harvesters participating in the Rockfish 
Program continue to deliver catch to the traditional port of Kodiak. 
The association requirement between the catcher vessel cooperative and 
the shoreside processor only indicates that a processor may be willing 
to take delivery of the catch. The association requirement does not 
limit a catcher vessel cooperative to only one processor, and it does 
not obligate the cooperative to deliver catch to that specific 
processor. See Eligibility for Processors below for more information on 
the association between a catcher vessel cooperative and shoreside 
processors.
    The designated representative of a rockfish cooperative must submit 
a timely application to NMFS each fishing year. The annual application 
for cooperative fishing quota is due to March 15, 2012, for the first 
year of the program, and then March 1 for all subsequent years. Each 
rockfish cooperative will receive an annual CQ, which is an amount of 
rockfish primary and secondary species, and halibut PSC that may be 
harvested by that rockfish cooperative in that fishing year. NMFS will 
base rockfish CQ on the collective rockfish QS of the LLP licenses held 
by the cooperative members. To reduce total halibut mortality in the 
Rockfish Program, NMFS will allocate halibut PSC to each sector based 
on an 87.5 percent reduction of the average total halibut PSC used from 
2000 through 2006. The Council considered a range of alternative 
approaches to reduce the total halibut PSC CQ assigned to each sector. 
Ultimately, the Council recommended reducing the amount to 87.5 percent 
of the 2000 through 2006 average annual usage. This decision balances 
the need to provide adequate halibut PSC for use by rockfish 
cooperatives, while recognizing patterns of reduced halibut PSC use 
once exclusive harvest privileges are established, and meeting broader 
goals to reduce halibut mortality. The Council combined this reduction 
in the amount of halibut CQ initially available to rockfish 
cooperatives with other measures detailed later in this preamble to 
reduce the amount of halibut PSC that may be reassigned to non-Rockfish 
Program fisheries. The fishing season for vessels participating in a 
rockfish cooperative is authorized each year from May 1 through 
November 15.
    Rockfish cooperatives may transfer all or part of their CQ to other 
rockfish cooperatives, with some restrictions. A minimum of 2 LLP 
licenses in each cooperative is required to transfer CQ. Transfer of CQ 
would be valid only during the calendar year of the transfer. All post-
delivery transfers must be completed by December 31 of the calendar 
year of the transfer. Halibut PSC CQ is not available for transfer 
after November 15 of each year, or after a cooperative termination of 
fishing declaration has been submitted to NMFS.

Eligibility for Processors

    Processors are not required to meet historical eligibility 
requirements to receive primary or secondary species fish harvested by 
rockfish cooperatives. The Council recommended that a catcher vessel 
cooperative may only form if a ``rockfish processor'' is an 
``associate'' of the rockfish cooperative and is designated on the 
application for CQ. A rockfish processor is any shoreside processor 
with a Federal processor permit that receives groundfish harvested 
under the authority of a rockfish CQ permit. In order to receive 
rockfish CQ, the shorebased processor must be located within the 
boundaries of the City of Kodiak and have an approved CMCP. Any 
processor may qualify to receive CQ and is not required to be in 
business at the effective date of this rule. The association 
requirement is intended to encourage harvesters and processors to 
discuss and possibly coordinate fishing plans as part of the 
application process to form a rockfish cooperative, but without the 
specific mandate established under the Pilot Program. Membership 
agreements must specify that processor affiliated cooperative members 
cannot participate in price setting negotiations except as permitted by 
antitrust laws.
    The Council also sought to address concerns raised by processors 
that allocation of exclusive harvest privileges would provide an undue 
competitive advantage for harvesters and could reduce the incentive for 
harvesters to continue to deliver to the traditional port of Kodiak. As 
a result, this final rule requires harvesters to deliver all rockfish 
primary and secondary species CQ in the catcher vessel sector to a 
shorebased processor operating within the geographic boundaries of the 
City of Kodiak. The port delivery requirement is intended to protect 
the fishing community of Kodiak and the traditional shorebased 
processors from changes in the location of shorebased processing 
activities that could occur under the Rockfish Program. This provision 
ensures that Kodiak processors and the community continue to benefit 
from the fishery. During the 2000 through 2006 period, all catch was 
delivered within Kodiak to shorebased processors; therefore, this 
provision does not represent a change from traditional harvest 
patterns. NMFS defines the boundaries of the City of Kodiak using the 
boundary specified by the State of Alaska on the date this final rule 
is published.
    During the development of the Rockfish Program the Council reviewed 
and considered a range of options to address concerns raised by 
shorebased processors about potential consolidation of processing 
capacity under catch share management and the effects of catch share 
allocations on processing operations. The Council considered management 
measures that included the linkage between shorebased processors and 
catcher vessel cooperatives required under the Pilot Program, regional 
landing requirements, allocating harvest shares to processors, an 
annual cooperative/processor association (that may be changed, without 
penalty or forfeiture), and caps on the amount of landings that may be 
processed by any single processor. Ultimately, the Council recommended 
a specific landing requirement within the City of Kodiak and processing 
caps to preserve flexibility for harvesters to deliver to multiple 
markets. The purpose of the port landing requirement is to maintain the 
traditional shorebased processing activity within Kodiak and limit the 
consolidation of processing effort among rockfish processors that may 
be detrimental to existing processors and harvesters.
    Overall, the purposes of the Rockfish Program are to stabilize the 
processing work force, increase shoreside deliveries of rockfish, and 
remove processing conflicts with GOA salmon production. The Council 
determined that fixed linkages between harvesters and processors that 
require a harvester to deliver to a particular processor, or allocating 
harvest quota to processors, were not necessary or appropriate to meet 
the overall goals and purposes of the Council for the Rockfish Program.

[[Page 81253]]

The Council and NMFS expect cooperatives to coordinate with processors 
under the Rockfish Program as they have under the Pilot Program. These 
relationships have reduced processing capacity conflicts between the 
rockfish fishery and the salmon fishery, which is active during summer 
months; and have provided a stable processing workforce by ensuring 
rockfish deliveries during months when other fisheries are less active. 
Section 2.4.6 of the EA/RIR/IRFA describes the likely benefits to 
processing operations under the Rockfish Program.

Reassignment of Halibut PSC CQ to the Last Seasonal Apportionment

    In an effort to reduce halibut mortality and provide incentives for 
participants in rockfish cooperatives to continue to operate in ways to 
minimize halibut mortality, the Council recommended reducing the amount 
of halibut PSC CQ that NMFS may add to the last seasonal apportionment 
during the current fishing year. The last seasonal apportionment is 
October 1 through December 31 of each year. Some of the participants 
eligible for the Rockfish Program are also active in a number of 
flatfish trawl fisheries that occur after November 1. Vessel operators 
that are active in rockfish cooperatives and these flatfish trawl 
fisheries have consistently undertaken efforts to conserve their 
halibut PSC CQ while fishing in a rockfish cooperative in order to 
provide additional halibut PSC during the latter portion of the year. 
The Council recognized the importance of reassigning halibut PSC to 
provide additional harvest opportunities in these flatfish trawl 
fisheries. The Council recommended that NMFS add 55 percent of unused 
halibut PSC CQ to the last seasonal apportionment during the current 
fishing year. In the interest of reducing halibut bycatch in these 
fisheries, the remaining 45 percent of halibut PSC CQ will not be 
available for the last season apportionment, or for transfer, or for 
the commercial halibut IFQ fishery. This amount of halibut is conserved 
and contributes to the halibut biomass. The Rockfish Program limits 
halibut mortality both by limiting the amount of halibut PSC that is 
initially allocated as halibut PSC CQ and by limiting the amount of 
halibut PSC that may be reassigned.

Opt-Out Vessels

    Each fishing year, catcher/processors may opt-out of participating 
in rockfish cooperative. Participants that choose to ``opt-out'' forgo 
the opportunity to fish rockfish primary species. NMFS will assume a 
rockfish eligible harvester has opted-out of participating in a 
rockfish cooperative if their LLP license with assigned rockfish QS is 
not named on a timely Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota. 
Catcher/processor opt-out vessels are subject to opt-out sideboards and 
will receive the portion of each rockfish sideboard limit not assigned 
to rockfish cooperatives.

Use Caps

    The Rockfish Program applies four types of use caps to limit the 
amount of rockfish QS and CQ that may be harvested by harvesters and 
processors: (1) A cap on the amount of QS an eligible rockfish 
harvester may hold; (2) a cap on the amount of rockfish primary species 
CQ that a rockfish cooperative may hold; (3) a cap on the amount of 
rockfish primary species CQ that a vessel may harvest; and (4) a limit 
on the amount of rockfish primary species an eligible rockfish 
processor may receive and process. The intent of the use caps under the 
Rockfish Program is to limit the degree of consolidation that could 
occur in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries. The Rockfish Program 
includes grandfather provisions that will allow persons to retain 
amounts of initial allocations of rockfish QS in excess of the use 
caps. Grandfather provisions apply to persons that held QS in excess of 
the use caps prior to the date of final Council action, June 14, 2010.

Sideboard Limitations

    Sideboards limit the ability of rockfish harvesters to expand their 
participation into other fisheries during the month of July when the 
Central GOA rockfish fishery was traditionally open. Sideboards apply 
to Federally-permitted vessels fishing in Federal waters and waters 
adjacent to the Central GOA when the harvest of rockfish primary 
species by that vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC. They limit 
both the LLP license with rockfish QS assigned to it, and the vessel 
used for the legal landings that generated the rockfish QS. Sideboard 
limitations fall into two broad categories: (1) A limit that constrains 
the amount of harvest in specific regions and fisheries during July; 
and (2) directed fishery closures that prohibit fishing in specific 
fisheries and regions during July. The catcher vessel and catcher/
processor sectors as well as catcher/processor opt-out vessels are all 
subject to sideboards.

Monitoring and Enforcement

    Monitoring and enforcement provisions will ensure that harvesters 
maintain catches within annual allocations and do not exceed sideboard 
limits. NMFS uses 5 primary tools for monitoring participants in the 
Rockfish Program. Specifically, NMFS:
    1. Requires observers aboard vessels that are operating in a 
rockfish cooperative or a rockfish sideboard fishery to adequately 
account for catch and bycatch in the fishery;
    2. Requires that vessels participating in a rockfish cooperative or 
a rockfish sideboard fishery carry and use a NMFS-approved vessel 
monitoring system (VMS) transmitter;
    3. Requires that catcher/processors in a rockfish cooperative or 
rockfish sideboard fishery follow specified catch handling procedures 
prior to processing;
    4. Requires the weighing of all catch from rockfish cooperatives on 
NMFS or State approved scales; and
    5. Requires that shoreside processors receiving rockfish CQ operate 
under a NMFS approved Catch Monitoring and Control Plan (CMCP).

Cost Recovery

    The Rockfish Program is established under the provisions of section 
303A of the MSA. Section 303A requires that NMFS collect fees for 
limited access programs to recover the actual costs directly related to 
the management, data collection and analysis, and enforcement 
activities. NMFS will use a portion of the cost recovery fees collected 
under the Rockfish Program to hire personnel to monitor rockfish 
landings. The rockfish CMCP specialist will monitor program deliveries 
to ensure compliance with the CMCP by any processor receiving program 
landings, assist processors with rockfish species identification to 
ensure accurate catch sorting and quota accounting, and report the 
findings to NMFS. Section 304(d)(2) of the MSA also limits the cost 
recovery fee so that it may not exceed 3 percent of the ex-vessel value 
of the fish harvested under the Rockfish Program. NMFS will assess fees 
on the ex-vessel value of rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species CQ harvested by rockfish cooperatives in the Central 
GOA and waters adjacent to the Central GOA when rockfish primary 
species caught by that vessel are deducted from the Federal TAC. The 
cost recovery fees will not apply to halibut PSC CQ since that halibut 
cannot be retained for sale and, therefore, does not have an ex-vessel 
value. The cost recovery fees will not apply to the entry level 
longline fishery and opt-out vessels because those participants do not 
receive rockfish CQ.

Entry Level Longline Fishery

    The entry level fishery is available for harvesters who are fishing 
for rockfish

[[Page 81254]]

primary species using longline gear only. The entry level longline 
fishery did not create the same level of concern under the Pilot 
Program as the entry level trawl fishery because longline harvests 
never exceeded one percent of the TAC for any of the rockfish primary 
species during the qualifying years. Therefore, the entry level 
longline fishery will continue under the Rockfish Program and the 
season is from January 1 to November 15 of each year. A participant is 
not required to submit an application to NMFS. Participants in the 
entry level longline fishery may deliver their harvest to any 
shorebased processing facility in any community in the GOA. The annual 
set aside of the TAC for the entry level longline fishery will increase 
annually, to a predetermined cap as specified in Table 28e to Part 679, 
if the fishery harvests at least 90 percent of their allocation of a 
species in the previous year. The smaller TAC allocation is more in 
line with historical catch rates among the longline sector in the entry 
level fishery, since the sector has had minimal participation in the 
entry level fisheries.

Rockfish Program Duration and Review

    The Rockfish Program is authorized for 10 years, from January 1, 
2012, until December 31, 2021. The Council will conduct a formal review 
of the Rockfish Program 3 years after implementation to assess whether 
the program is achieving the goals of the MSA and the problem 
statement, as identified in the Analysis (ADDRESS). All permits will 
expire after 10 years and will not be renewed unless the Council and 
the Secretary take action to continue the Rockfish Program. Section 
303A(f)(1) of the MSA states that permits are renewable unless revoked, 
limited, or modified. If the Council does not recommend continuing the 
Rockfish Program, all Rockfish Program permits will expire 10 years 
after the implementation of the Rockfish Program and will not be 
renewed.

Anticipated Changes in the Pelagic Shelf Rockfish Complex

    The Rockfish Program allocates QS based on harvests of all three 
species in the pelagic shelf rockfish (PSR) complex--dusky, widow, and 
yellowtail rockfish. At the October 2011 meeting, the Council 
recommended the removal of widow and yellowtail rockfish from the PSR 
species group and the placement of these two species in the ``other 
rockfish'' species group. Extensive GOA trawl survey data and other 
information now exist that indicate dusky rockfish does not generally 
share the same geographic distribution and habitat with the other two 
PSR species, yellowtail and widow rockfish. Upon the removal of widow 
and yellowtail rockfish, the PSR species group would then consist of a 
single species, dusky rockfish. NMFS intends to propose GOA FMP and 
regulatory amendments to dissolve the PSR species group and substitute 
a description of the dusky rockfish target fishery, and revise the 
description of the ``other rockfish'' fishery in the GOA FMP. If 
approved by the Secretary, NMFS would change every occurrence of 
``pelagic shelf rockfish'' that appears in the Rockfish Program 
regulations and tables to ``dusky rockfish.'' The management measures 
associated with PSR and dusky rockfish would be identical. NMFS noted 
in the Rockfish Program proposed rule (76 FR 52148, August 19, 2011) 
that this action would not affect, or change, QS eligibility for 
rockfish primary species in the Rockfish Program.

Removal of the Limited Access Fishery

    The Council recommended eliminating the limited access fishery for 
the catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish Program because the EA/
RIR/IRFA showed the limited access fishery created incentives for the 
catcher/processor sector to avoid joining a cooperative. The Central 
GOA limited access fishery under the Pilot Program opened in the 
beginning of July, and then closed when NMFS estimated that 
participants fully harvested the target rockfish allocations in that 
fishery. Participants with small allocations of rockfish QS could 
choose to fish in the limited access fishery and harvest rockfish in an 
amount greater than their individual historical allocation. 
Additionally, NMFS could not predict participation in the limited 
access fishery from year to year. The Council recognized the 
possibility of a ``race for the fish'' that could result in the fishery 
exceeding the TAC before the fishery could be closed. Ultimately, the 
Council decided to discontinue the limited access fishery. NMFS 
published a notice of availability for Amendment 88 on July 28, 2011 
(76 FR 45217). The public comment period on Amendment 88 ended on 
September 26, 2011, and the Secretary approved Amendment 88 on October 
26, 2011. On August 19, 2011, NMFS published a proposed rule to 
implement Amendment 88 (76 FR 52148). The public comment period ended 
on September 19, 2011. Additional information on this action was 
provided in the preamble of the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
    NMFS received 13 comment letters from 11 unique individuals 
regarding Amendment 88 and the proposed rule. These letters contained a 
total of 55 unique comments. These comments are addressed below.

Response to Comments

    Comment 1: The definitions for the catcher vessel sector and 
catcher/processor sector at Sec.  679.2 are wrong. The catcher vessel 
sector statement ``those rockfish eligible harvesters who hold an LLP 
without a catcher/processor designation'' would preclude catcher/
processor LLP licenses that have generated legal rockfish landings but 
have only operated as a catcher vessel. The catcher/processor sector 
definition does not separate out the issue of catcher/processor LLP 
licenses operating as catcher vessels, but appears to lump all catcher/
processor licenses together. The Pilot Program definitions were a 
better fit.
    Response: NMFS agrees. The definitions in the proposed rule were 
based on an initial review of rockfish legal landings data. NMFS did 
not anticipate that any catcher/processor LLP licenses generated 
rockfish legal landings while operating as catcher vessels, but the 
definition should allow for such a circumstance. Under the Rockfish 
sector definition, at Sec.  679.2, NMFS has replaced the proposed 
definitions for catcher vessel sector and the catcher/processor sector 
with the definitions used in the Pilot Program for the reasons 
indicated above.
    Comment 2: Rockfish CQ accounts should not be set to zero for 
rockfish primary or secondary species after a cooperative submits a 
Declaration of Termination of Fishing to NMFS as suggested in the 
preamble text on page 52178. CQ should be available for transfer until 
the end of the calendar year as specified in the proposed regulatory 
text at Sec.  679.4(n)(1)(ii) and (iv). Additionally, halibut PSC CQ 
may need to be available for transfer to cover cooperative overages. 
Observer data can change after debriefing and a halibut CQ overage 
could occur if no halibut PSC is available for transfer.
    Response: NMFS agrees, in part. The preamble text to the proposed 
rule is incorrect and does not accurately explain the proposed 
regulations for a termination of fishing declaration, as specified in 
Sec.  679.4(n)(2). In addition, some of the proposed regulatory text is 
conflicting. The cooperative rockfish CQ accounts for rockfish primary 
and secondary species will not be set to zero upon a party's submission 
of a Declaration of Termination of Fishing. A cooperative may transfer 
rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary species CQ until the 
end of the calendar

[[Page 81255]]

year, even after submitting a Declaration of Termination of Fishing. 
However, halibut PSC CQ may not be used for transfer after a 
termination of fishing declaration is submitted to NMFS, or after 
November 15 of each year. The Council recommended that 55 percent of 
the halibut PSC would be reassigned and made available for vessels 
fishing during the last halibut PSC apportionment period, which is 
October 1 through December 31 of each year. However, in the interest of 
reducing halibut bycatch in these fisheries, the remaining 45 percent 
halibut PSC CQ will not be available for the last season apportionment 
or for transfer. If a halibut PSC overage occurs after a cooperative 
submits a termination of fishing declaration, the adjustment will be 
made in the amount of halibut PSC reassigned for the last halibut PSC 
apportionment. In the case of an overage, the halibut PSC reassignment 
would be reduced.
    NMFS made a number of regulatory changes in the final rule in 
response to this comment. NMFS deleted proposed text at Sec.  
679.4(n)(2)(iii) through (v) instead of only paragraph (n)(2)(v), to 
clarify that rockfish CQ accounts will not be set to zero for rockfish 
primary and secondary species after a rockfish cooperative termination 
of fishing declaration is submitted to NMFS. To clarify and remove 
duplicate provisions, NMFS moved regulatory language from Sec.  679.4 
regarding the reapportionment of halibut PSC and the transfer of CQ to 
Sec. Sec.  679.21 and 679.81 of the final rule. Provisions at Sec.  
679.4(n)(1)(iv)(A) and (B) are specific to limitations on transfers of 
CQ after November 15, or upon approval of a rockfish cooperative 
termination of fishing declaration. NMFS has determined that this is 
more appropriately covered under Sec.  679.81(i)(4)(ii)(H), which is 
the section regulating transfers of CQ between cooperatives. Provisions 
at Sec.  679.4(n)(1)(iv)(C) duplicate regulatory text proposed at Sec.  
679.21(d)(5)(iii)(B); therefore, paragraph (n)(1)(iv)(C) has been 
removed from the final rule. Section 679.4(n)(1)(iv)(D) is specific to 
the reallocation of prohibited species bycatch management under the 
Rockfish Program. Such reallocation is covered in regulations on 
prohibited species bycatch management at Sec.  679.21; therefore, 
paragraph (n)(1)(iv)(D) has been moved to Sec.  679.21(d)(5)(iii)(C).
    Comment 3: The 48-hour check-in requirement, as specified in Sec.  
679.5(r)(8)(i)(A) and (B), is operationally very difficult for catcher/
processors when a vessel is changing areas from the Rockfish Program to 
Central GOA fishing, or vice versa. Perhaps the 48-hour requirement is 
a good management tool for the catcher vessel sector, but since the 
catcher/processor sector submits the check-ins electronically, the 48-
hour delay seems unnecessary and does not seem worth the operational 
cost. We recommend eliminating this requirement altogether, or at least 
reducing the lead time from 48 hours to 12 hours.
    Response: NMFS agrees. NMFS reduced the 48-hour check-in 
requirement for catcher/processor cooperatives, to a one hour check-in 
requirement, as specified in Sec.  679.5(r)(8)(i)(A)(2). This one hour 
check-in requirement will still provide adequate time for NMFS to 
properly track and account for catch against a cooperative CQ permit. 
Catcher vessel cooperatives are still subject to the 48-hour check-in 
requirement, as specified in Sec.  679.5(r)(8)(i)(A)(1).
    Comment 4: The proposed rule is confusing regarding check-out 
requirements for the catcher/processor sector. Check-out notification 
is required within 6 hours after the last haul of rockfish CQ, but does 
not take effect at the end of a weekly reporting period or offload, 
whichever comes first. With two observers on board and real-time 
reporting, the check-out should take effect upon submission of the 
notice itself.
    Response: NMFS agrees. The effective date for check-out 
designations in the catcher/processor sector, as specified in Sec.  
679.5(r)(8)(i)(B), has been changed to be effective upon submission of 
the check-out designation to NMFS. Catcher/processors are encouraged to 
retain the submission receipt to ensure that the check-out designation 
was received by NMFS.
    Comment 5: In Sec.  679.5(r)(8)(ii), the captain of the vessel 
should be able to submit the check-in and check-out designations, 
instead of the cooperative designated representative, because a vessel 
may want to check-out at midnight when the representative is 
unavailable or unaware that the vessel decided to finish. The vessel 
also might have an operational reason where they had to check-out 
unplanned.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The cooperative designated representative 
must coordinate fishing plans with their members. This is because the 
cooperative designated representative is responsible for ensuring that 
once a vessel is checked in, it is used to harvest fish under the CQ 
permit, and once a vessel is checked-out it can no longer be used to 
fish for that cooperative's CQ unless checked in again. Cooperative 
managers should be able to coordinate fishing schedules with their 
members to avoid subjecting them to monitoring and enforcement 
requirements beyond those required to effectively manage the Rockfish 
Program. No change to this provision has been made.
    Comment 6: NMFS should clarify the resulting difference between 
someone who timely submits an application affirming their exclusion 
from the Rockfish Program and someone who does not apply for rockfish 
QS by the regulatory deadline.
    Response: The voluntary exclusion from the Rockfish Program, as 
specified under Sec.  679.80(d)(4)(ii), is available only during the 
initial QS application process for a person who holds an LLP license 
that made rockfish legal landings during the specified seasons from 
2000 to 2006 and during the entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 
2009. If a person eligible for the exclusion submits a timely 
Application for Rockfish QS to NMFS, and that application is approved, 
that person will be permanently excluded from the Rockfish Program, and 
ineligible for rockfish QS from that time forward. A person excluded 
from the Rockfish Program will not receive rockfish QS and sideboards 
will not apply to the applicant's LLP license or vessel. If a person 
fails to submit a timely Application for Rockfish QS, then the LLP 
license and vessel that made rockfish legal landings during the 
qualifying years will not receive Rockfish QS, but will still be 
subject to applicable sideboard limitations as specified in Sec.  
679.82. NMFS made no changes to this provision.
    Comment 7: An LLP license holder with a catcher vessel designation 
who chooses to be excluded from the Rockfish Program should still be 
held to the sideboard fisheries so that his or her participation is 
limited to those fisheries in which the license holder had history. It 
is unclear why a vessel being excluded from the entire program upon 
initial allocation is not subject to the same catcher/processor 
sideboards in the opt-out provisions, as specified in Sec.  
679.82(e)(7), (8), (10), and (11).
    Response: The Council recommended specific provisions, based on 
public testimony, to allow a particular LLP license with a history of 
fishing in the West Yakutat District, to forgo rockfish QS and be 
exempt from sideboards in order to continue fishing in the West Yakutat 
District. This is a fishery in which this LLP license had history, but 
would be sideboarded and thus excluded from under the Rockfish Program. 
This LLP license not only has history in the West Yakutat District, but 
also made rockfish legal landings in both 2000 through 2006 and the 
entry

[[Page 81256]]

level trawl fishery in 2008, 2008, or 2009. NMFS anticipates that this 
LLP license is eligible to be excluded from the Rockfish Program. The 
LLP license holder has a one-time opportunity to be excluded and must 
submit a timely Application for Rockfish QS affirming his or her 
exclusion from the Rockfish Program.
    Comment 8: The season dates are incorrect in Table 28b to Part 
679--Qualifying Season Dates for Central GOA Rockfish Primary Species. 
The season dates should read as follows: Pacific ocean perch: May 1-May 
17; July 1-Aug. 1 (2007), July 1-27 (2008), July 1-Nov. 15 (2009). 
Pelagic shelf rockfish: Sept. 1-Nov. 15 (2007), Sept. 1-Nov. 15 (2008), 
Sept. 1-Nov. 15 (2009). Northern rockfish: Sept. 1-Nov. 8 (2007), Sept. 
1-Nov. 15 (2008), Sept. 1-Nov. 15 (2009).
    Response: NMFS agrees. Table 28b to Part 679 has been corrected to 
reflect the qualifying season dates above. NMFS also corrected all 
landed by dates in the table to 7 days after the close of the season.
    Comment 9: Some commenters expressed uncertainty about how QS is 
redistributed during the initial application process if a rockfish 
eligible harvester chooses to be voluntarily excluded from the Rockfish 
Program. Others believe that the catch history from that LLP license 
should flow back into the catcher vessel and catcher/processor pool, as 
indicated in the Council motion, and not into the 2.5 percent entry 
level trawl pool. Another commenter asserts that the real conflict is 
in the Council motion, and that Council intent is for the catch history 
to be divided among the remaining entry level trawl transition LLP 
licenses, to ensure the entry level trawl pool remains at 2.5 percent 
of the rockfish primary species total qualified catch. The commenter 
then suggests that Council intent could be directly altered by another 
section of the Council motion that appears to indicate that the catch 
history should be divided among all the other catcher vessels and 
catcher/processors.
    Response: As recommended by the Council, rockfish QS will be 
available to the catcher/processor and catcher vessel sectors in 
proportion to individual license holders' QS holdings if a rockfish 
eligible harvester chooses to be voluntarily excluded from the Rockfish 
Program. The rockfish QS will not be divided among the remaining entry 
level trawl transition LLP licenses. NMFS addresses how rockfish QS and 
CQ is calculated in Comment 10. A discussion of QS redistribution on 
page 52161 of the preamble to the proposed rule refers to a different 
circumstance during the initial application process where a rockfish 
eligible harvester does not submit a timely Application for Rockfish QS 
based on rockfish legal landings during the entry level trawl fishery 
in 2007, 2008, or 2009. In this case, the rockfish QS that would have 
been assigned to that LLP license will be available to all other 
eligible LLP licenses held by persons who applied to receive rockfish 
QS based on rockfish legal landings during the entry level trawl 
fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009. No change to this provision has been 
made.
    Comment 10: If NMFS does not receive an Application for Rockfish QS 
from a rockfish eligible harvester for an initial allocation of QS in 
the Rockfish Program, is the catch history reallocated to other 
Rockfish Program participants? Do sideboards still apply to both the 
vessel and the LLP license for the rockfish eligible harvester who did 
not apply for QS?
    Response: If NMFS does not receive a timely Application for 
Rockfish QS from a rockfish eligible harvester who qualifies for the 
Rockfish Program with landings between 2000 and 2006, the catch history 
is reallocated to other program participants by distributing the entire 
annual sector pound allocation to cooperatives as CQ, and not by adding 
additional QS units during initial allocations of QS. (This is because 
the initial QS award calculation, as specified in Sec.  679.80(e), is 
based on the highest 5 years per species per license rather than a 
percentage of the rockfish QS pool, whereas the allocation of rockfish 
primary species CQ to rockfish cooperatives, as specified in Sec.  
679.81(b), is based on the sector's TAC and is calculated with the 
rockfish QS pool.) However, the calculation for initial allocation of 
QS for the entry level trawl transition fishery is based on a 
percentage of the total entry level trawl transition fishery rockfish 
QS pool. For the entry level trawl transition fishery, the QS is 
redistributed within the 2.5 percent allocation in proportion to the 
number of years the participant made deliveries to an entry level 
processor from 2007 to 2009. For both quota and entry level sectors, 
the sideboards still apply to both the vessel and the LLP license if a 
rockfish eligible harvester does not submit a timely Application for 
Rockfish QS for an initial allocation.
    Comment 11: Would it be possible for NMFS to release new 
denominators to account for interim license and entry level allocations 
for eligible participants to evaluate NMFS' Rockfish Program official 
record?
    Response: No. Restricted Access Management (RAM) will mail each 
rockfish eligible harvester an Application for Rockfish QS along with 
an estimated summary of eligibility during the initial application 
process. Rockfish QS is based on the highest five years for each LLP 
license. NMFS does not use a denominator to determine rockfish QS 
issuance, except in the issuance of QS in the entry level trawl 
transition fishery. For more information on the calculation of initial 
allocations of rockfish QS, see comment 12. A list of eligible 
harvesters issued rockfish QS and the initial rockfish QS pool will be 
posted after February 14, 2012 at www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
    Comment 12: The calculations for allocating catcher/processor QS 
and CQ are quite confusing. We would like to confirm that Council 
intent was not to change the underlying methodology for calculating 
each LLP and each sector QS. The years for qualification changed, but 
the harvest history of each primary species is based on best 5 of 7 
years at the individual LLP and at the sector level.
    Response: The underlying methodology to calculate initial 
allocations of rockfish QS is similar to the methodology in the Pilot 
Program, but it is not based on a percent of the rockfish QS pool. In 
the Rockfish Program, the initial allocation of QS, per species, is 
based on the harvest history of the applicant's best 5 of 7 years 
between 2000 and 2006. Specifically, the calculation to allocate 
rockfish QS, as specified in Sec.  679.80(e)(2), sums rockfish legal 
landings to determine the Rockfish Total Catch for each eligible LLP 
license for each year, per rockfish primary species (the seasons are 
established in Table 28a). The highest 5 years of the Rockfish Total 
Catch is then summed for each eligible LLP license, per rockfish 
primary species. This amount is equal to the number of rockfish QS 
units for that LLP license per rockfish primary species. Each sector 
will receive a percentage of the cooperative TAC for each rockfish 
primary species, as specified in Sec.  679.81(b). The percentage of the 
cooperative TAC is equal to the sum of the rockfish QS units assigned 
to all LLP licenses that receive rockfish QS in that sector divided by 
the rockfish QS pool for that rockfish primary species. Although this 
response clarifies the underlying methodology for calculating initial 
allocations of rockfish QS, the comment does not require a change to 
the regulations.
    Comment 13: The qualifying years to receive initial rockfish QS in 
the Rockfish Program, 2000 to 2006, are a logical representation of the 
past and present dependence on the Central GOA rockfish fisheries.

[[Page 81257]]

    Response: NMFS agrees. The rationale for allocating Rockfish QS 
based on legal landings from 2000 through 2006 and to the entry level 
trawl participants is described briefly in the Rockfish Program 
Overview of this preamble and in detail in the preamble to the proposed 
rule and is not repeated here (See ADDRESSES).
    Comment 14: The concept of distributing qualified catch to entry 
level trawl LLP licenses based on deliveries made ``to an entry level 
processor'' from 2007 to 2009, appears to be completely missing in the 
proposed rule. Requiring delivery of entry level fish harvested by 
entry level trawlers to an entry level processor was an integral part 
of the Pilot Program, and was a regulatory requirement. The Council 
recognized that requirement and made it an element of their motion as 
one of the means of distribution of qualified catch. We request this 
element of the motion be reflected in the preamble and the regulatory 
language in the final rule, by adding the proportional calculation in 
every reference to the distribution process.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The Pilot Program defined a rockfish 
entry level processor as a person who is authorized by NMFS to receive 
and process fish harvested under the rockfish entry level fishery, and 
who is not an eligible rockfish processor. The definition for entry 
level processor has been removed from Rockfish Program regulations 
because participants in the entry level longline fishery may deliver to 
any shoreside processing facility in the GOA. The Council intent to 
require the delivery of entry level fish to an entry level processor, 
as described above, was already captured in the proposed regulatory 
text at Sec.  679.80(e)(1)(ii), and (e)(3)(i). Specifically, an entry 
level trawl participant was required to deliver all harvested fish in 
the entry level fishery to an entry level processor in order to 
generate rockfish legal landings, which are used to assign rockfish QS 
in the regulatory text.
    As specified in Sec.  679.80(e)(1)(ii), NMFS proposed that rockfish 
QS be distributed to entry level trawl applicants based on the number 
of years during which a person made a rockfish legal landing under the 
authority of an LLP license in the entry level trawl fishery during 
2007, 2008, or 2009. Proposed regulatory text at Sec.  679.80(e)(3)(i), 
also captured the Council intent by assigning ``one Rockfish Landing 
Unit to an LLP license for each year a rockfish legal landing of any 
rockfish primary species was made to an entry level processor under the 
authority of an LLP license during the season dates for the entry level 
trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 as established in Table 28b to 
this part.'' Adding the phrase ``to an entry level processor'' to 
regulatory text at Sec.  679.80(e)(1)(ii), and (e)(3)(i), would be 
redundant and unnecessary because the use of ``rockfish legal 
landings'' already encompasses deliveries made to an entry level 
processor and would not change the distribution of rockfish QS to entry 
level trawl participants. NMFS made no changes to these provisions.
    Comment 15: Some commenters support the elimination of the entry 
level trawl fishery in the Rockfish Program and believe that assigning 
the entry level trawl participants 2.5 percent of the rockfish primary 
species total qualified catch is fairly accurate for the entry level 
fleet.
    Response: NMFS agrees. No changes in the regulations are required. 
This comment is consistent with the Council's recommendation and the 
proposed rule.
    Comment 16: The maximum retainable amount (MRA) limits that apply 
to non-rockfish primary and secondary species, under Sec.  
679.81(h)(4)(i) and (h)(5), and in the preamble on page 52168, are 
described as a percentage of the total allocated rockfish primary 
species and rockfish secondary species onboard the vessel. It should be 
clarified that the rockfish secondary species are only those that are 
allocated as QS under the Rockfish Program. They do not include species 
that are not allocated under the Rockfish Program.
    Response: NMFS agrees. When a cooperative is checked-in and fishing 
under a CQ permit only rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary 
species allocated as CQ can be used as basis species to calculate an 
MRA for non-allocated species. For both the catcher/processor and 
catcher vessel sector the rockfish primary species are dusky rockfish, 
northern rockfish, and Pacific ocean perch. For the catcher/processor 
sector the rockfish secondary species that can be used as a basis 
species to calculate MRAs are sablefish, thornyhead, rougheye, and 
shortraker rockfish. For the catcher vessel sector the rockfish 
secondary species that can be used as a basis species to calculate MRAs 
are sablefish, thornyhead, and Pacific cod. This clarification does not 
require changes to the regulations. Rockfish primary and secondary 
species are defined for the catcher vessel and catcher/processor sector 
at Sec.  679.2.
    Comment 17: The preamble to the proposed rule states on page 52156 
that ``LLP license holders would be eligible to receive rockfish QS if 
they demonstrate participation in the Central GOA entry level trawl 
fishery during the first 3 years of the Pilot Program (1996,1997,1998) 
and prior to the Council's final action (2007, 2008 or 2009).'' But it 
should read: ``LLP license holders would be eligible to receive 
rockfish QS if they demonstrate participation in the Central GOA entry 
level trawl fishery during the first 3 years of the Pilot Program 
(2007, 2008, or 2009) and prior to the Council's final action.''
    Response: NMFS agrees. The dates provided in the preamble to the 
proposed rule for the first three years of the Pilot Program and the 
Council's final action were incorrect and the sentence should have been 
written as the commenter indicated above. All regulatory text is 
correct and, therefore, no changes were made to regulations.
    Comment 18: The deadline for the Application for Rockfish 
Cooperative Fishing Quota, as specified at Sec.  679.81(f)(3), should 
be extended to April 1, 2012, for the first year, and then March 1 for 
all subsequent years to allow participants more time to organize under 
the new Rockfish Program. After the January 3, 2012, deadline for the 
initial Application for Rockfish QS, actual allocations will not be 
known for some time. The organization of cooperatives will not be fully 
understood until a list of LLP licenses with QS is released by NMFS. 
The processing and harvesting sectors will need to define their 
associations under the new program, which will take some negotiation.
    Response: The March 1 deadline for the Application for Rockfish 
Cooperative Fishing Quota in the first year of the Rockfish Program is 
consistent with requirements in the first year under the Pilot Program, 
when participants were in similar circumstances. However, NMFS changed 
the deadline for the Application for Rockfish QS to January 17, 2012. 
This change will provide potential participants additional time to 
prepare their applications after the effective date of this rule. To 
ensure rockfish cooperatives are allotted the same amount of time to 
apply for CQ as indicated in the proposed rule, NMFS changed the 
deadline for the Application for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota, as 
specified at Sec.  679.81(f)(3), to March 15, 2012, for the first year 
and then March 1 for all subsequent years. This change will allow 30 
days for Rockfish Program participants to prepare for the fishing 
season, join rockfish cooperatives, and apply for CQ after NMFS revises 
and distributes LLP licenses.

[[Page 81258]]

    Comment 19: What happens to the rockfish QS for LLP license holders 
that are not designated on a timely Application for Cooperative Fishing 
Quota?
    Response: When an LLP license with assigned rockfish QS is not 
named on an Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota, as 
specified in Sec.  679.81(b), the QS associated with that LLP license 
is not included in the calculation of the percentage of TAC assigned to 
each cooperative. Therefore, the percentage of the TAC for each 
cooperative is greater because the total rockfish QS assigned to the 
cooperatives is smaller.
    Comment 20: Since cooperative formation is voluntary and multiple 
cooperatives may form under the proposed cooperative formation rules, 
can a cooperative refuse membership to an eligible QS holder even if 
they agree to the same conditions as other members?
    Response: Yes. A rockfish cooperative may refuse membership to an 
eligible QS holder, even if that holder is willing to agree to the same 
conditions as other members of the rockfish cooperative. The reason is 
that multiple cooperatives with a varying number of members may form 
under the Rockfish Program, including a cooperative of one member. 
Cooperative formation is voluntary.
    Comment 21: Can any trawl vessel with a Central GOA endorsed LLP 
license harvest rockfish QS for a cooperative?
    Response: A Central GOA LLP license must be assigned to a 
cooperative and assigned rockfish QS to harvest rockfish for that 
cooperative. Additionally, as specified in Sec.  679.7(n)(1), a person 
may not operate a vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative in any 
other rockfish cooperative other than the rockfish cooperative to which 
that vessel was initially assigned for that fishing year. The rockfish 
cooperative contract agreed upon among the members determines which 
members of the rockfish cooperative may harvest the rockfish CQ, as 
specified in Sec.  679.81(i)(3)(xvi).
    Comment 22: It is unclear why an Application to Opt-out of Rockfish 
Cooperative, as described at Sec.  679.81(e)(2), is needed in the new 
Rockfish Program. If no Application for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing 
Quota is received by NMFS, then the default appears to be the same as 
opting-out. Are the observer coverage and monitoring requirements 
identical for both the opt-out vessels and participants that do not 
submit a timely application? Please explain. If there is no difference, 
then the opt-out application seems unnecessary.
    Response: NMFS agrees and has removed the Application to Opt-out of 
Rockfish Cooperative for the catcher/processor sector from all 
regulatory text in the final rule in Sec. Sec.  679.81 and 679.82. 
Instead, a catcher/processor vessel that would like to opt-out of the 
Rockfish Program for any given year is not required to submit an 
Application to Opt-out of Rockfish Cooperative to NMFS. The Application 
to Opt-out of Rockfish Cooperative had a purpose in the Pilot Program 
where catcher/processors could choose between three participation 
options: (1) Join a rockfish cooperative; (2) participate in the 
limited access fishery; or (3) opt-out of the Pilot Program. The 
Council did not recommend the limited access fishery in the Rockfish 
Program, so it was not included in the proposed rule. Two options are 
available for catcher/processors: (1) join a rockfish cooperative; or 
(2) opt-out of the rockfish cooperative. Therefore, NMFS will consider 
that a catcher/processor has opted-out of participating in a rockfish 
cooperative if their LLP license with assigned rockfish QS is not named 
on an Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota. No changes were 
made to observer coverage and monitoring requirements for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels.
    Comment 23: The processor association for a catcher vessel 
cooperative does not create stability for processors. Each delivery 
could depend on who is willing to pay the highest ex-vessel price on 
any particular day, which offers no stability for the processor. With a 
30 percent use cap, it is possible for four processors to process the 
entire fishery and exclude processors that have historically been in 
the rockfish fishery. Processors need an annualized delivery 
requirement to meet market obligations for products and to provide 
employment and stability for their workforce.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. As discussed in the preamble to the 
proposed rule, the association between a catcher vessel cooperative and 
processor is a requirement in order to form a rockfish cooperative as 
part of the application process. This association encourages harvesters 
and processors to discuss and possibly coordinate fishing plans for the 
upcoming season. The Council considered an annual delivery requirement 
whereby a cooperative would be required to deliver to a specific 
processor during its development of alternatives for the Rockfish 
Program but did not advance the measure for analysis. The Council 
discussed that the existing Pilot Program requires that a cooperative 
associate with the processor to which the catcher vessel delivered the 
most pounds in a specified qualifying period. In developing the 
Rockfish Program alternatives, the Council considered that structure as 
well as other structures that could qualify catcher vessels for 
specific cooperatives and establish penalties or forfeitures payable on 
changing cooperatives and processor associations. The Council 
recognized that these associations could be used to protect processor 
and community interests by recognizing historical relationships in the 
fishery. The Council considered incorporating these or similar 
structures into its alternatives. However, due to requirements of 
section 303A of the MSA the Council elected to consider other measures 
to protect community and processor interests in the Rockfish Program, 
including possible regional landing requirements, allocations of 
harvest shares to processors, annual cooperative/processor associations 
that may be changed without penalty or forfeiture, and caps on the 
amount of landings that may be processed by any single processor. 
Section 303A of the MSA and the Council's recommendation for shoreside 
processors is addressed in Comment 49.
    The Council ultimately recommended the port delivery requirement 
implemented by this final rule. The requirement is intended to protect 
the fishing community of Kodiak and traditional shorebased processors 
from changes in delivery location under the Rockfish Program. In 
addition, the processing cap the commenter notes limits the possible 
degree of consolidation among processors. These clear limits will 
reduce the potential instability to processing operations if no limits 
were established. As noted in the preamble to the proposed rule, the 
Council considered and rejected a number of measures to constrain 
processing operations.
    Comment 24: It wasn't the Council's intent at final motion to 
create additional barriers to the transferability of American Fisheries 
Act (AFA) derived LLP licenses. The non-severability provision could 
diminish the value of an AFA vessel as well as its AFA fishing rights, 
and limits an entity's opportunity to acquire AFA pollock harvest 
shares up to the limit specified at Sec.  679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). The 
lack of severability of the rockfish QS from the LLP license for the 
purpose of transferring an AFA derived LLP license has significant 
negative consequences: (1) It limits the pool of potential purchasers 
who would otherwise be

[[Page 81259]]

eligible to purchase an AFA qualified catcher vessel operation; and (2) 
it limits the pool of AFA qualified catcher vessels that are available 
for purchase by someone that already holds some rockfish QS. The 
current pool of catcher vessel sector rockfish Pilot Program 
participants includes a number of AFA qualified catcher vessels with 
AFA derived LLPs. An AFA derived LLP may only be transferred to an AFA 
qualified vessel, thus limiting the pool of transferees to someone who 
owns an AFA qualified vessel but needs an AFA derived LLP (unlikely), 
or someone who wishes to purchase the transferor's AFA operation 
including the AFA qualified vessel and AFA fishing rights (the usual 
circumstance). Under the proposed regulations, an AFA derived LLP with 
rockfish QS attached to it could not be transferred if the transfer 
would cause the transferee to exceed the proposed 4% use cap. NMFS 
should revise the proposed regulations to allow for the severability or 
suppression of rockfish QS from an AFA derived LLP license, when 
necessary, to allow an LLP transfer that would otherwise be legal 
except for the non-severability of all or part of the rockfish QS.
    Response: The Council motion does not provide for severability or 
surrender of rockfish QS, except as provided for under Sec.  
679.80(f)(2), and this is reflected in the Rockfish Program 
regulations. The proposed rule did not consider such a provision. The 
commenter may approach the Council with suggestions for future 
regulatory amendments to the Rockfish Program. No change has been made 
to the final rule.
    Comment 25: The non-severability of QS from LLP licenses forces 
inefficiencies and cumbersome leasing agreements within the Rockfish 
Program. Many vessels have allocations too small to be fished 
effectively and much of the QS remains unharvested. This is contrary to 
National Standard 1, which requires managing each fishery to achieve 
optimum yield.
    Response: The Council recommended the non-severability of rockfish 
QS from LLP licenses, except as provided for under Sec.  679.80(f)(2). 
This is consistent with Pilot Program provisions. LLP license 
endorsements are typically non-severable from LLP licenses under other 
NMFS programs. As specified under the provisions to transfer an LLP 
license in Sec.  679.4(k)(7)(viii), area/species endorsements are not 
severable from the license and must be transferred with the license. 
Non-severability is consistent with the Council's intent to limit 
effort. Part of what makes the LLP effective is that a vessel may 
concentrate on only one gear, area, and fishery at a time. If an LLP 
license's endorsements could be severed, owners of other vessels could 
maximize use of each endorsement, potentially vastly increasing effort 
in many areas, fisheries, and with numerous gears. NMFS does not have a 
system to manage endorsements separately from LLP licenses. The only 
exception to this provision is with Aleutian Island area endorsements 
on a groundfish license with a trawl gear designation issued under the 
provisions of Sec.  679.4(k)(4)(ix)(A). This exception was intended to 
increase effort in the Aleutian Island area to support the development 
of fisheries.
    Small allocations of Rockfish QS to specific LLP licenses should 
not result in unharvested CQ under cooperative management. As with the 
Pilot Program, LLP license holders with rockfish QS join rockfish 
cooperatives and the cooperative members can assign specific harvesting 
responsibilities to specific members of the cooperative. In the 
Rockfish Program as in the Pilot Program, LLP license holders will not 
be required to forgo harvesting the CQ derived from relatively small QS 
allocations. National Standard 1 states that ``conservation and 
management measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a 
continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery for the United 
States fishing industry.'' NMFS has determined that this final rule 
meets the MSA national standards, including National Standard 1. 
Additionally, the final EA/RIR addresses issues related to the national 
standards.
    Comment 26: The Secretary should disapprove two elements of the 
Rockfish Program that restrict consolidation in the Rockfish Program: 
(1) The inability to sever QS history from the LLP license; and (2) the 
low ownership use cap of 4 percent for the catcher vessel sector. The 
ideal program would allow LLP license holders to sweep-up QS that are 
severable from an LLP license so that participants remaining in the 
fishery are economically sound. The 5 percent ownership use cap for the 
catcher vessel sector in place for the Pilot Program was more 
appropriate because it was more appropriate to increase efficiency in 
the fishery.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The inability to sever QS history from 
the LLP license was addressed in Comment 25. The 4 percent vessel use 
cap in the catcher vessel sector, as recommended by the Council, limits 
consolidation to a reasonable level determined by the Council. The use 
caps help balance the Rockfish Program goals to improve economic 
efficiency, maintain employment opportunities for vessel crew, and 
provide financially affordable access opportunities for new 
participants. The Council acknowledged that allowing the fleet to 
consolidate may enable the remaining companies to operate more 
efficiently. However, the Council also recognized that harvests may be 
liberally redistributed among vessels in cooperatives, and it is likely 
that gains in efficiency may be achieved without further ownership 
concentration of share in the fishery. As specified in the Analysis, in 
section 2.4.2, on page 124, the vessel use cap ensures that harvest 
activity does not exceed the threshold, specified by the Council, so 
that a certain minimum number of vessels remain active in the rockfish 
fisheries; under a 4 percent cap, this number is 25 vessels. The 
Council noted that under the 4 percent use cap, up to 5 LLP license 
holders would be grandfathered at a higher level and be able to 
continue to harvest rockfish consistent with their current harvesting 
practices.
    Comment 27: Please explain how a QS use cap assignment based on a 
percentage of the initial pool works, and the difference between the 
two following statements in the preamble to the proposed rule: (1) 
Pages 52170 and 52171, ``These QS use caps would be based on the 
aggregate initial QS pool assigned to each sector * * *. NMFS would 
establish a QS use cap that would not fluctuate with the changes in the 
QS pool that could occur due to the resolution of appeals * * *.'' and 
(2) page 52171 ``The QS use cap would be based on a percentage of the 
initial QS pool.''
    Response: These two statements make the same point. The QS use cap 
for a sector is a fixed percentage of the initial QS pool assigned to a 
sector. The initial rockfish QS pool is based on the Rockfish Program 
official record on February 14, 2012. As an example, the use cap for 
the catcher/processor sector is equal to 40 percent of the initial QS 
pool assigned to that sector. No changes to the regulations are 
required.
    Comment 28: Several commenters asked for clarification on language 
in the preamble to the proposed rule that suggested use caps will be 
unaffected by the resolution of appeals or other operations of law. The 
proposed rule provided rationale that this will bring stability to QS 
holders. The commenters believe this process will affect the value of 
the LLP licenses since the use cap and the actual tonnage allocation 
will be different after any appeals are won. One commenter requested 
responses to two hypothetical situations that would help clarify the 
practical impacts of such an approach.

[[Page 81260]]

    1. QS pool. Based on applications received for Rockfish Program 
participation in the catcher/processor sector, RAM determines that 100 
total QS units should be awarded to that sector. Applicant A is given 
credit for 40 QS units, and B is given credit for 10 QS units. RAM 
denies B credit for certain contested landings data, and B appeals to 
the National Appeals Office (NAO). NAO agrees with B and awards B an 
additional 10 QS units. We note that if the QS pool remains at 100 QS 
units, A's percentage of the pool would stand at the maximum 40 
percent, notwithstanding B's successful appeal that might otherwise 
have increased the number of QS units in the QS pool and thus decreased 
A's percentage to 36 percent (40 QS units out of 110 QS units).
    2. CQ Calculation. What is the impact of B's successful appeal on 
calculating CQ each year? Is the total QS pool for purposes of annually 
determining CQ for each Rockfish Program participant 100 QS units 
(before B's appeal) or 110 QS units (after B's appeal)? How many QS 
units do A and B have for purposes of calculating CQ--is it 40 QS units 
for A and 20 QS units for B?
    Response: NMFS has established use caps based on a percentage of a 
fixed QS pool (typically, the initial pool) for all of its catch share 
programs, including the Pilot Program and the Rockfish Program. NMFS 
has established this procedure to resolve several problems that may 
result if the QS use cap fluctuates over time. Most catch share 
participants have sought a clear and fixed definition of QS use caps to 
ensure that they can plan business operations that transfer QS. 
Additionally, establishing a use cap based on a proportion of a QS pool 
that decreases would result in a QS holder who is at or slightly below 
the QS use cap to exceed the limit once the use cap percentage is 
calculated against this new QS pool. This result could require a QS 
holder to divest of QS due to actions taken by NMFS to withdraw QS 
through the resolution of an appeal, or other operation of law. Under 
this scenario, a QS holder would be adversely affected by actions taken 
by NMFS outside of his or her control. Therefore, NMFS has established 
use caps based on the initial QS pool to ensure that all QS holders are 
subject to a cap that will not vary over time and create conditions 
that could result in forced divestiture of QS.
    NMFS does not anticipate that appeals will result in a change to 
the QS pool. Under the Pilot Program, NMFS did not receive any appeal 
to adjust a QS holder's allocation. As the commenter notes, there are a 
limited number of potentially eligible LLP licenses under the Rockfish 
Program. NMFS has carefully reviewed landings data from those 
participants, particularly in the catcher/processor sector. NMFS does 
not believe that there are unique conditions within the Rockfish 
Program that require deviation from well-established use cap 
calculation procedures. However, should such a situation occur, it will 
not result in changes to the Initial Quota Share Pool used for use cap 
purposes but could change the calculation of annual CQ. This is because 
the additional QS would be included in the annual CQ calculation if the 
person holding that CQ joins a cooperative. Therefore, the amount of QS 
assigned to all cooperatives in each sector could be affected by the 
issuance of additional QS through the appeals process. In hypothetical 
situation 1 provided by the commenter, if the initial QS pool is 100 
units, and the use cap is 40 percent of the initial QS pool (i.e., 40 
units), then the QS use cap would not vary if subsequent appeals 
resulted in the issuance of more QS. That is, the QS use cap would not 
increase if more QS is issued to a participant, but the amount of QS 
assigned to the sector for purposes of calculating the annual CQ would 
change.
    In response to hypothetical situation 2, NMFS notes that although 
the QS use cap is fixed based on the initial QS pool, the total annual 
QS pool can vary as appeals or other operations of law occur. The 
annual QS pool for each sector is the total amount of QS assigned to 
rockfish cooperatives each year, based on rockfish cooperative 
applications. The annual QS pool may fluctuate if additional rockfish 
QS is issued as a result of an appeal, revoked by another action, or if 
an LLP license holder does not apply to be part of a rockfish 
cooperative. This may result in the QS of an individual cooperative 
member effectively generating more or less CQ as the annual QS pool 
fluctuates. If the annual QS pool were to increase due to the 
resolution of an appeal in favor of an appellant, NMFS would 
recalculate the annual QS pool in the year following the adjudication 
of the appeal. Each cooperative would then receive slightly less CQ per 
QS unit compared to the previous year. Conversely, if the annual QS 
pool decreased during a year, the following year, each cooperative 
would receive slightly more CQ per QS unit compared to the previous 
year. No changes in the regulations are required.
    Comment 29: In the preamble to the proposed rule on page 52172, 
Table 8--Eligibility Criteria for a Grandfather Provision appears to 
inaccurately describe the grandfather provisions for the Rockfish 
Program. The 30 percent catcher vessel harvester cooperative cap and 
the 30 percent processor cap apply no matter what; that is, there are 
no grandfather provisions for the two caps in the new Rockfish Program. 
Cooperative formation is voluntary, so staying within the 30 percent 
catcher vessel harvester cooperative cap is achievable. Additionally, 
no Kodiak processor processed more than 30 percent of the catcher 
vessel rockfish harvest during the qualifying time period 2000 to 2006. 
As the preamble notes, the processing caps were imposed to prevent 
processor consolidation.
    Response: NMFS agrees. The use cap exemptions, as specified in 
Sec.  679.82(a)(6), apply only to rockfish eligible harvesters and 
catcher/processor vessels, and not to catcher vessel rockfish 
cooperatives or shoreside processors. Table 8 in the preamble to the 
proposed rule does not accurately reflect the grandfather provisions 
under the Rockfish Program because the table indicates that eligibility 
criteria for grandfather provisions apply to catcher vessel rockfish 
cooperatives and shoreside processors. The processor cap and the 
catcher vessel cooperative cap apply without grandfather provisions. 
The regulatory text is correct, and therefore, no change to this final 
rule is required.
    Comment 30: Three commenters asked for clarification on a 
requirement explained in the preamble, on page 52176, under Management 
of the Sideboards, which states that all vessels subject to a sideboard 
limit must retain ``all rockfish caught during July 1 through July 31 
in the Western GOA and the West Yakutat District. NMFS would require 
vessels to retain rockfish regardless of the specified target 
fishery.'' The commenters assert that this requirement would result in 
either a violation of the bycatch MRAs, or violation of this 
requirement to retain all rockfish. ``All rockfish'' includes minor 
species, which do not count against any allocation or sideboard and may 
not be marketable. The final rule should be corrected to clarify that 
full retention only applies to target rockfish species, as defined in 
the Rockfish Program, and that MRA regulations trump the retention 
requirement. In other words, retention requirements apply only to 
rockfish sideboarded species in the Western GOA and West Yakutat 
District, with 100 percent retention required if the sideboarded 
species is open to directed fishing and

[[Page 81261]]

retention up to the MRA if the species is on bycatch status.
    Response: NMFS agrees that vessel operators will be required to 
retain rockfish primary species subject to a rockfish sideboard limit: 
(1) When that rockfish primary species in the Western GOA or West 
Yakutat District is open to directed fishing; or, (2) if it can be 
retained up to the MRA for that species if the species is on a bycatch 
status. Retention will not be required for species not subject to a 
rockfish sideboard limit, or if the species cannot be retained (i.e., 
retention will cause the vessel operator to exceed the MRA for that 
species, or if the species is placed on PSC status and cannot be 
retained). This clarification to the description of the management of 
rockfish sideboard limits on page 52176 of the proposed rule does not 
require modification of the regulatory text.
    Comment 31: As specified in Sec.  679.82(e)(9)(iii), a rockfish 
cooperative may not exceed any deep-water or shallow-water halibut PSC 
sideboard limit assigned to that cooperative. NMFS has determined that 
deep-water halibut sideboards pertain to deep-water flatfish and the 
deep-water halibut PSC in the Pilot Program could be harvested in 
excess of the deep-water halibut PSC sideboard. The commenter raises 
three questions related to the application of the deep-water halibut 
complex halibut PSC sideboard. First, is the method for applying deep-
water halibut PSC limits changing in the Rockfish Program? Second, are 
Western GOA rockfish sideboard harvesters going to be held to the deep-
water halibut sideboard when harvesting in the rockfish sideboard 
fishery? And third, what is the rationale for not limiting halibut PSC 
use in the rockfish fishery.
    Response: NMFS is clarifying Sec.  679.7(n)(6)(iv) in response to 
this comment to note that a rockfish cooperative in the catcher/
processor sector is prohibited from exceeding any rockfish sideboard 
limit. The reference to ``any sideboard limit'' has been removed to 
avoid potential confusion about the application of a halibut PSC 
sideboard limit. Section 679.82(e)(9)(iii), which addresses cooperative 
deep-water and shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limits, has not been 
modified. Therefore, once a halibut PSC sideboard limit is reached by a 
rockfish cooperative, that cooperative is prohibited from directed 
fishing in the shallow-water flatfish complex if the shallow-water 
halibut PSC limit is reached, or is prohibited from directed fishing in 
the deep-water flatfish complex if the deep-water flatfish PSC limit is 
reached. If a cooperative uses halibut PSC fishing for rockfish in the 
Western GOA or the West Yakutat District, any halibut PSC used will be 
debited from the deep-water complex halibut PSC limit assigned to that 
cooperative. Once a cooperative reaches its deep-water halibut PSC 
sideboard limit, it will be able to continue to fish for rockfish in 
the Western GOA or West Yakutat District. This clarification to Sec.  
679.7(n)(6)(iv) ensures that catcher/processor cooperatives that have 
historically fished rockfish in the Western GOA or the West Yakutat 
District will not be foreclosed from fishing for rockfish by a halibut 
PSC sideboard limit. The Council intended to limit the ability of 
cooperatives to expand their harvests of deep-water flatfish beyond an 
amount that could be supported by the proportion of the halibut PSC 
historically used by a cooperative during 2000 through 2006.
    Comment 32: The regulatory text at Sec.  679.82(d) indicates that 
sideboards are applied to both the vessel and LLP license. Is that a 
correct interpretation?
    Response: Yes. Sideboards are applied to both the vessel and the 
LLP license derived from that vessel.
    Comment 33: Three commenters identified a mistake in the halibut 
PSC allocation in Table 1 of the preamble to the proposed rule and the 
same mistake again in the text on page 52169.
    Response: NMFS agrees. Halibut PSC allocations between the catcher 
vessel and catcher/processor sectors were incorrectly switched in the 
preamble to the proposed rule, but correctly represented in the 
proposed regulations. NMFS corrected the halibut PSC allocations in 
Table 1 of the final rule to 117.3 mt with 16.8 mt not allocated (i.e., 
``left in the water'') for the catcher vessel sector, and 74.1 mt with 
10.6 mt not allocated for the catcher/processor sector. No regulatory 
changes were made.
    Comment 34: Three commenters assert that limiting 55 percent of the 
unused halibut PSC to be reassigned (i.e., ``rolled over'') to the 
fifth seasonal trawl PSC apportionment does not provide incentive for 
participants in rockfish cooperatives to operate in ways that minimize 
halibut mortality. The commenters believe that in making the decision 
to reduce the halibut PSC limits, the Council mistakenly interpreted 
efforts by participants to reduce halibut PSC as a lack of need for 
halibut PSC during the fifth season by the trawl fleet operating during 
the fifth season.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The Council considered reducing the 
halibut PSC rollover from 100 percent of the unused halibut PSC 
allowances to as low as 25 percent. The Council understood that 
eliminating the halibut PSC rollover would result in the greatest 
savings of halibut PSC, but that reducing the amount of halibut PSC 
available for rollover dramatically would reduce the incentive for 
participants to minimize halibut mortality. Some Rockfish Program 
participants have more incentive than others to minimize halibut 
mortality because those participants are also active in a number of 
flatfish trawl fisheries that occur after November 1 of each year. As 
discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, the Council assessed 
the amount of halibut PSC that is typically used after November 1 and 
concluded that even with the 55 percent rollover reduction of halibut 
PSC, the fleet would continue to have an incentive to conserve halibut 
PSC CQ and have additional harvest opportunities in flatfish fisheries.
    Comment 35: The Secretary should disapprove the portion of the FMP 
that establishes halibut PSC reductions because the impact was not 
analyzed in the RIR/EA/IRFA and the public was not allowed to comment 
on the 12.5 percent halibut PSC reduction the Council recommended 
before halibut PSC CQ is allocated to cooperatives. It was unclear that 
the decision directly penalizes the catcher vessel trawl sector with 
virtually no penalty to the catcher/processor sector. Because halibut 
PSC allocations within the Pilot Program are not overly restrictive, 
cooperative members' relationships and cooperation are not compromised. 
Under the new Rockfish Program there is no way to understand this 
dynamic with the halibut PSC reduction.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. As discussed in the preamble to the 
proposed rule, the Council considered a range of alternative approaches 
that would have reduced total halibut PSC CQ assigned to each sector. 
The Council accepts public comment on agenda items at every meeting and 
the allocation of halibut PSC was discussed at a number of meetings 
during Council deliberation on the Rockfish Program. The Council sought 
to balance the need to provide adequate halibut PSC for use by rockfish 
cooperatives, recognize patterns of reduced halibut PSC use once 
exclusive harvest privileges are established, and meet broader goals to 
reduce halibut mortality. In the Analysis, the Council addressed 
halibut PSC reductions, on page 100, in section 2.4.1, under the 
Analysis of the alternatives. The Council considered each sector's use 
of halibut PSC during the qualifying years. The Analysis recognizes 
that a reduction of the

[[Page 81262]]

halibut PSC rollover could cause cooperatives to place less emphasis on 
halibut PSC reductions in their cooperative agreements. It also noted 
that reductions might also affect trawlers that have benefitted from 
the halibut PSC rollover during the fifth season in the shallow-water 
flatfish, rex sole, arrowtooth flounder, flathead sole, and Pacific cod 
fisheries. Ultimately, halibut PSC reductions are meant to limit 
halibut mortality both by limiting the amount of halibut PSC that is 
initially allocated as halibut PSC CQ and by limiting the amount of 
halibut PSC that may be reassigned.
    Comment 36: The Secretary should disapprove halibut PSC sections of 
the proposed rule because the Council will address halibut bycatch 
caps, both allocations and structures, in the GOA, holistically through 
a different amendment package.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The Council recommended specific halibut 
PSC provisions for the Rockfish Program. The Council will take the 
Rockfish Program halibut PSC reductions into account during 
deliberations on any future GOA halibut PSC amendment packages. Whether 
the Council should, or will, address halibut PSC through a different 
amendment package is outside the scope of this action.
    Comment 37: The preamble to the proposed rule states on page 52170 
under the section Reassignment of Halibut PSC to Non-Rockfish Program 
Fisheries that, ``NMFS would allow a portion of the halibut PSC CQ that 
was assigned to that rockfish cooperative to become available to trawl 
and non-trawl vessels during the last halibut PSC apportionment period 
of the year. * * *'' This statement is incorrect because reassignment 
of halibut PSC only goes to trawl vessels, and not non-trawl vessels.
    Response: NMFS agrees. Reassignment of halibut PSC goes to trawl 
vessels in the fifth season trawl allocation, which begins on October 1 
of each year. No change was made to the regulations.
    Comment 38: Since the Pilot Program will no longer exist, and a new 
Rockfish Program will be in its place, the Amendment 80 sideboards will 
need to be adjusted according to the new catcher/processer halibut CQ. 
Under the Rockfish Program, the catcher/processor sector will be 
allocated 84.7 mt of halibut PSC, which is less than under the Pilot 
Program, based on the new suite of qualifying years. The Council did 
not discuss any revisions to Amendment 80 as a result of the Rockfish 
Program.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The Council did not recommend any 
modifications to the Amendment 80 sideboard limits. The Amendment 80 
halibut PSC sideboard limits were established through regulations that 
implemented the Amendment 80 Program and not through the Pilot Program 
or the Rockfish Program. The halibut PSC sideboards established under 
Amendment 80 are outside of the scope of this action. The Council could 
choose to amend the Amendment 80 halibut PSC sideboard limits through a 
separate action.
    Comment 39: Under the calculation of rockfish and halibut PSC 
sideboard limits, as specified at Sec.  679.82(e)(3)(i), it is 
difficult to know whether the denominator is all catcher/processors, 
all Rockfish Program catcher/processors, or split between Rockfish 
Program catcher/processors for (i) and all catcher/processors for (ii) 
and (iii).
    Response: The denominator is split between Rockfish Program 
catcher/processors and all GOA-endorsed LLP licenses in the catcher/
processor sector. As specified in Sec.  679.82(e)(3)(i), the 
denominator for each rockfish sideboard fishery is the total retained 
catch by vessels operating under the authority of all eligible LLP 
licenses in the catcher/processor sector. The denominator for the deep-
water and shallow-water halibut PSC as specified in Sec.  
679.82(e)(3)(ii) and (iii), is the total halibut PSC used by vessels 
operating under the authority of all LLP licenses. No changes were made 
to the regulations.
    Comment 40: The Council motion and intent was for the calculation 
of rockfish and deep-water/shallow-water halibut sideboards to remain 
the same as in the Pilot Program. The intended calculation is that each 
LLP license and cooperative receives its pro-rata share of Western GOA 
and West Yakutat District rockfish and deep-water/shallow-water halibut 
history of the sector. The description in the preamble on page 52175, 
and as specified under Sec.  679.82(e)(3)(i) through (iii), reflects 
the rockfish halibut QS and secondary species QS calculation, which 
states the amount assigned is based on the amount of primary rockfish 
QS as a percent of the sector's primary rockfish aggregate QS. This is 
incorrect. The sideboard history is the LLP license and cooperative's 
historic usage.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. Page 52175 of the preamble to the 
proposed rule and Sec.  679.82(e)(3)(i) through (iii) establish a 
method to assign a portion of a rockfish sideboard limit or halibut PSC 
limit to a rockfish cooperative based on the proportion of the rockfish 
catch or halibut PSC used under the authority of an LLP license 
compared to the total rockfish catch or halibut PSC use by all eligible 
LLP licenses in the catcher/processor sector. This method is the same 
method that was used in the Pilot Program.
    Comment 41: When NMFS publishes the 2011 Rockfish Pilot Program 
Catcher/Processor Sideboard Limits, please carry the catcher/processer 
sideboard out to the thousandths decimal, as that is how the 
information is presented on LLP licenses and CQ permits. Rounding up 
the numbers shows some allocations as higher than they really are.
    Response: The sideboard percentages posted in the 2011 Rockfish 
Pilot Program Catcher/Processor Sideboard Limits currently display 
decimals to the tenths to make the spreadsheet easier to read, but the 
full number is available when a cell is selected. To avoid confusion in 
the future, NMFS will post the Rockfish Program Catcher/Processor 
Sideboard Limits with sideboard percentages carried out to the 
thousandths decimal to match percentages listed on the LLP licenses and 
CQ permits. NMFS can provide this additional information online at 
http://www.alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, without any change to the 
regulations.
    Comment 42: The Pilot Program language stipulated that the waters 
adjacent to the Western GOA and West Yakutat District were those waters 
``open by the State of Alaska.'' Should this be included in this 
program's language under Sec.  679.82(d)(3) and (4), and (e)(2) for 
clarification?
    Response: In the Rockfish Program regulations, NMFS replaced the 
language ``waters adjacent to the Western GOA and West Yakutat District 
were those waters open by the State of Alaska'' with ``in waters 
adjacent to the Western GOA and West Yakutat District when northern 
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish by that 
vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC as specified under Sec.  
679.20.'' NMFS would like to avoid incorporating State of Alaska 
regulations by reference to avoid triggering a Federal requirement 
based on a State of Alaska action. Instead, under this final rule the 
regulation becomes effective when fish are caught and subsequently 
subtracted from the Federal TAC. That can only happen after the State 
of Alaska has made the choice to open the parallel fishery. Thus, the 
new language preserves the State of Alaska authority, but bases the 
trigger on a Federal action. No changes were made to the regulations.
    Comment 43: Several commenters oppose the proposed Cost Recovery

[[Page 81263]]

regulations at Sec.  679.85 that require the rockfish cooperative 
representative to collect and submit up to a 3 percent cost recovery 
fee for the members of the cooperative. The commenters also opposed the 
provisions that require NMFS to withhold all forthcoming CQ for all 
cooperative members, if the cooperative fails to pay the fee liability 
in full. Commenters assert that the individual QS holders should be 
responsible for the portion of fee liability associated with the amount 
of QS assigned to the cooperative by each QS holder. The commenters 
expressed the following reason for their position on this issue:
     The payment schedule creates logistical issues. There is a 
very real possibility that the paying (or even new) members of a 
cooperative could be subject to a financial burden if a member of a 
cooperative did not submit adequate payments according to the 
cooperative contract during the prior year. This may result in costly 
lawsuits.
     QS holders will be subject to the performance of another 
entity. For example, if a rockfish vessel with QS wants to move to a 
different cooperative associated with a different processor the 
following year, the original cooperative can withhold fee payment and 
prevent issuance of CQ to the new cooperative.
     It is burdensome and creates accounting, reporting, and 
tax liability not analyzed by the proposed rule. The five primary 
catcher vessel rockfish harvesting cooperatives are currently 
classified as non-profit entities under state and Federal law. This 
requirement will result in the generation of more than $5,000 in gross 
receipts for each cooperative, which will, in turn, require each to 
seek formal approval as a non-profit by filing an application for 
recognition with the Internal Revenue Service. Significant and 
unnecessary accounting and reporting obligations will be created as 
well. These consequences were neither contemplated nor analyzed, either 
as part of the Council action or in connection with this rulemaking 
process.
     By shifting responsibility for cost recovery to 
cooperatives, as opposed to individual harvesters, the proposed 
regulations simultaneously increase cooperative liability and limit the 
ability of cooperatives to recover those costs from their members. The 
proposed rule frees harvesters to change cooperative and processor 
affiliations on an annual basis, which hinders the ability for 
cooperatives to enforce their membership agreements on a multi-season 
basis. The withholding of CQ from all members is a disincentive to form 
cooperatives with other QS holders.
    Response: MSA section 304(d)(2) requires NMFS to collect fees for 
the Rockfish Program equal to the actual costs directly related to the 
management, enforcement, and data collection. This fee may not exceed 3 
percent of ex-vessel value of fish harvested under the Rockfish 
Program. The analysis noted in section 2.4.18 that a cost recovery fee 
would be collected by NMFS and that any participant granted a limited 
access privilege (a Federal permit) would be responsible for the 
payment of cost recovery fees. This means that NMFS collects the fee 
from the person who is authorized to fish under the authority of the 
permit. The person authorized to receive the Rockfish Program annual 
permit is the rockfish cooperative.
    Assigning a fee to the members who hold QS in the rockfish 
cooperative poses considerable administrative challenges. QS holders do 
not receive a permit authorizing the harvest of a specific portion of 
the TAC, and therefore, NMFS does not have a method for determining the 
specific pounds or timing of landings that should be assigned to each 
individual QS holder within the rockfish cooperative. Additionally, 
NMFS may not develop a method for determining specific pounds or timing 
of landings based on the amount of fish each QS holder harvested on the 
cooperative report, because the Council intended for CQ permits to be 
assigned to the rockfish cooperative and not to specific QS holders. 
Even if NMFS had a method for determining the specific pounds or timing 
of landings, NMFS would not have a mechanism to effectively determine 
which specific landings should be assigned to each QS holder. This is 
because there is no requirement for QS holders to actually make the 
legal landings for their QS associated with the CQ permit. For example, 
a QS holder could be a member of a rockfish cooperative and another 
member of that rockfish cooperative could harvest the amount of CQ 
derived from that individual QS holder.
    In order to facilitate the internal administration of fee 
collection within the rockfish cooperative, this rule requires that 
each rockfish cooperative describe how the rockfish cooperative will 
collect fees from its members in its contract submitted to NMFS each 
year. The Council was clear under the development of the Rockfish 
Program that the responsibility of monitoring catch by its members 
rests with the rockfish cooperative. In the preamble to the proposed 
rule, given the small size of the Rockfish Program relative to the 
administrative costs, NMFS noted it is likely the cost will exceed 3 
percent. Each rockfish cooperative may want to ensure that 3 percent of 
all landings are set aside for future cost recovery fees.
    Ultimately, the CQ permit holder (the cooperative) is responsible 
for paying the fee. Accounting, reporting, and tax liability for 
rockfish cooperatives were not specifically addressed in the analysis 
because the Council left the method by which cost recovery fees are 
collected to be established within the agreement for each individual 
rockfish cooperative. Cost recovery fees could be collected in a number 
of ways. For example, each vessel operator could be required to set 
aside 3 percent of the ex-vessel landings and then reassign that money 
to the rockfish cooperative at the end of the fishing year. This would 
not require each rockfish cooperative to have separate holdings, and 
other alternative methods are available for rockfish cooperatives to 
hold fees.
    Almost all participants in the Rockfish Program have extensive 
experience establishing contractual arrangements to fish within a 
cooperative structure under the Pilot Program, AFA, or Amendment 80 
Program. These programs have operated successfully in the North Pacific 
fisheries for over a decade. The Council specifically chose to develop 
the Rockfish Program based in part on the success of cooperative 
management in other catch share programs. Given their extensive 
experience establishing contractual relationships, rockfish cooperative 
members are well-suited to establish agreements to ensure the timely 
collection of fees from its members. Adherence to tax regulations as 
either for-profit or a non-profit corporation is established by the 
IRS. These matters are well outside the scope of this action and beyond 
the responsibility and authority of NMFS. No changes were made to the 
regulations in response to this comment.
    Comment 44: In Sec.  679.85(b)(2), establishing a complex and 
onerous system to create standardized values to use as a basis for 
determining cost recovery fees may unfairly and inaccurately impact 
crewmembers on all vessels. Cost recovery fees resulting from this 
program will be treated as a ``cost of doing business'' by most vessels 
and subtracted from gross revenues before crews are paid. NMFS should 
use fish tickets instead of standard ex-vessel values to clearly and 
simply establish the value of deliveries made by a vessel.
    Response: NFMS disagrees. NMFS does not anticipate that cost 
recovery fees will unfairly or inaccurately impact

[[Page 81264]]

crewmembers on all vessels. The Rockfish Program retains the economic 
gains realized under the Pilot Program. Participants in the Rockfish 
Program, including crew members, receive the benefits of catch share 
management under the program. Participants benefit by avoiding a 
competitive and potentially wasteful race for fish, and tailoring 
fishing operations to specific catch limits to improve economic 
efficiency. The MSA requires that NMFS collect cost recovery fees for 
limited access programs but limits those fees so that it may not exceed 
3 percent of the ex-vessel value of the fish harvested under the 
program.
    NMFS uses standardized ex-vessel values instead of fish tickets 
because the State of Alaska does not require the reporting of prices on 
fish tickets. In cases where price is reported on fish tickets they do 
not necessarily reflect complete price information and are not intended 
to be used as an indication of the ex-vessel value of Alaska's 
fisheries. No change was made to the regulations.
    Comment 45: Using the rockfish standard ex-vessel value by month 
for each rockfish primary and secondary species to determine cost 
recovery fee percentages, as described under Sec.  679.85(b)(2), is 
overly complicated. The ex-vessel value for low-value, high-volume 
species has not fluctuated by month within the Pilot Program, and no 
price fluctuations are expected under the new Rockfish Program. 
Processors should report an annual price for each rockfish species 
instead of a rockfish standard ex-vessel value by month.
    Response: NMFS disagrees in part. A review of past landings from 
fish ticket prices confirms that the ex-vessel value by month has 
remained reasonably stable within the Pilot Program. However, NMFS 
received comments asserting that the new terms of the catcher vessel 
cooperative processor association, which allows catcher vessels to 
deliver to any shoreside processor in the City of Kodiak, may change 
the relationship between the catcher vessel sector and shoreside 
processors in Kodiak. See comment 23. NMFS also does not anticipate a 
great degree of price fluctuation under the Rockfish Program, but 
acknowledges that catcher vessels may choose to deliver to a different 
processor, instead of the processor associated with the catcher vessel 
cooperative, if a higher price is offered. Therefore, NMFS will 
continue to collect the rockfish standard ex-vessel value by month from 
shoreside processors to account for any variation in prices. NMFS may 
revisit this matter in the future if prices remain stable under the 
Rockfish Program. No change was made to the regulations.
    Comment 46: There should be a mechanism for an appeal of the ex-
vessel price used to determine cost recovery fee percentages. It would 
be prudent to have the option to provide supporting documentation, such 
as product invoices, if there is a discrepancy between market values 
since the Rockfish Program cost recovery fees will be based on 
shorebased values. Catcher/processors might encounter different values.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. As detailed in the preamble to the 
proposed rule, an appeal of the ex-vessel price is rarely used under 
existing cost recovery programs and has not proven to be an obstacle 
for industry to pay fees, particularly in the halibut and sablefish IFQ 
program, where IFQ holders may use either standard ex-vessel prices 
generated by NMFS or actual ex-vessel prices. The BSAI crab fee 
collection program does not provide for the use of actual ex-vessel 
price. The use of an actual ex-vessel price would require that the 
rockfish CQ holder document all landings and prices. NMFS has used the 
standard ex-vessel prices estimated from shorebased deliveries to 
assign an ex-vessel value to catcher/processor vessels in its other 
cost recovery programs and will continue to do the same under the 
Rockfish Program. The data used to determine the cost recovery fee are 
based on the data required to be provided to NMFS from each rockfish 
processor receiving rockfish CQ. No change was made to the regulations.
    Comment 47: The Secretary should disapprove the 10-year duration of 
the Rockfish Program because the limited duration indicates that the 
program is inherently unstable. Additionally, it does not encourage 
long-term stewardship of the resource, but instead a view centered on 
short-term gains. Since participation in the rockfish fisheries is 
unlikely to change, the permits should automatically renew at the end 
of the 10-year duration unless revoked, limited, or modified by NMFS.
    Response: Section 303A(f)(1) of the MSA limits permits under LAPPs 
established after the date of enactment of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006 to 10 years. 
Permits are renewable unless revoked, limited, or modified. All 
Rockfish Program permits will expire after 10 years, and can be renewed 
only if the Council and Secretary take action to continue the Rockfish 
Program. By its terms, the Rockfish Program will expire after 10 years. 
The Council did consider options that would have extended the Rockfish 
Program beyond 10 years. However, the Council recommended limiting the 
duration of the Rockfish Program to provide additional opportunities 
for review and reconsideration. The Council considered the substantial 
improvements in redistributing harvest throughout the year and reducing 
conflicts with processors under the limited duration Pilot Program 
before recommending to limit the duration of the Rockfish Program.
    Comment 48: A commenter provided opinions on QS allocations and the 
Federal Government's general management of fish populations and other 
marine resources.
    Response: This comment is outside the scope of this action.
    Comment 49: Two commenters expressed concern about the role of 
processors in the proposed Rockfish Program compared with that in the 
Pilot Program. The commenters stated that the Council did not engage in 
a full analysis of the Pilot Program as an alternative in the 
development of the Rockfish Program. The Pilot Program requires 
harvesters in the catcher vessel sector to deliver their catch to the 
same processor they historically delivered their catch to. Both 
commenters stated that the Council eliminated from further analysis the 
alternative to extend the existing Pilot Program after a NOAA General 
Counsel (GC) opinion was presented to the Council stating that the 
existing program could not be extended. They also suggested that the 
Council did not have enough time to fully explore the options due to 
pressure to make a recommendation to the Secretary in time to meet the 
December 31, 2011, sunset date of the Pilot Program.
    One commenter stated that the Pilot Program was a reasonable 
alternative to be considered in the analysis, that the Pilot Program 
alternative was required by the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA), and legal uncertainty or concerns about staff time are not 
excuses to discontinue consideration of an alternative. The commenter 
claims that after the Council eliminated the Pilot Program alternative 
from the analysis, the only option remaining to include processors in a 
LAPP for the rockfish fisheries was to allocate harvesting quota 
directly to processors, and that approach did not have the broad 
support among stakeholders that the processor linkage under the Pilot 
Program had. The commenter requested that the Secretary disapprove the 
Council's recommended proposed regulations to implement Amendment 88 to 
the GOA FMP because the Council violated NEPA by not considering the

[[Page 81265]]

management system under the Pilot Program as an alternative.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. It was reasonable not to include as an 
alternative in the EA the Pilot Program and its processor linkage 
structure because (1) that option was not consistent with the Council's 
Problem Statement and its focus on protecting communities and sectors, 
not individual processors; and (2) the Magnuson Stevens Act does not 
authorize allocation of onshore processing privileges. An EA must 
include a reasonable range of alternatives, but it does not require 
consideration of alternatives that do not satisfy that need for the 
proposed action, or ones that require legislative action that is remote 
or speculative.
    In developing a new program to take the place of the Pilot Program, 
the Council recognized the limited duration of the Pilot Program in the 
Problem Statement (purpose and need statement) developed for the 
action. The Council indicated in its Problem Statement that the 
``intent of this action is to retain the conservation, management, 
safety, and economic gains created by the Rockfish Pilot Program to the 
extent practicable, while also considering the goals and limitations of 
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act LAPP 
provisions. The existing CGOA Rockfish Pilot Program (RPP) will sunset 
after 2011. Consequently, if the management, economic, safety and 
conservation gains enjoyed under the RPP are to be continued, the 
Council must act to create a long term CGOA rockfish LAPP.'' The 
Problem Statement also recognized that the ``the rockfish fishery 
dependent community in the CGOA and the shorebased processing sector 
have benefited from stabilization of the work force, more shoreside 
deliveries of rockfish, additional non-rockfish deliveries with the 
[Pilot Program] halibut savings, and increased rockfish quality and 
diversity of rockfish products. Moreover, the CGOA fishermen, and the 
shorebased processing sector have benefited from the removal of 
processing conflicts with GOA salmon production.''
    After reviewing a range of options to address program requirements 
as well as concerns raised by Pilot Program participants, the Council 
included some modified aspects of the Pilot Program in the new Rockfish 
Program to ensure that Amendment 88 complies with section 303A of the 
MSA and meets the Council's goals and objectives. The Council 
considered the processor linkage structure under the Pilot Program, but 
did not advance that option for detailed analysis. Instead, the Council 
decided that other alternatives for the new program would better 
address the interests of harvesters, communities, and processors and be 
consistent with the Council's Problem Statement and goals and 
objectives for this action.
    Two of the four alternatives that were advanced for analysis for 
the catcher vessel sector looked at the role of the processing sector 
relative to the Council's goals and objectives and meeting the action's 
purpose and need. For example, Alternative 3 considered a rockfish 
cooperative program where harvesting allocations would have been 
divided between historical harvesters and processing participants, and 
Alternative 4 considered a cooperative program where a harvester would 
be required to join in association with a processor where associations 
were severable. The Council selected Alternative 4 because the Council 
found, and NMFS agreed, that it best meets the purpose and need of the 
action and complies with statutory and national standard requirements, 
including consideration of employment in the harvesting and processing 
sectors and policies to promote the sustained participation of small 
owner-operated fishing vessels and fishing communities that depend on 
the fisheries.
    It was also reasonable for the Council not to advance the Pilot 
Program for detailed analysis in the EA because the MSA does not 
authorize the continuation of the Pilot Program or the establishment of 
a processor linkage structure like that under the Program. By its 
terms, the special authority for the Pilot Program expires at the end 
of 2011, so the Council could not ``extend'' the Program, but would 
need to develop a new program under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act. Section 303A of the Magnuson-Stevens Act sets out the 
requirements for limited access privilege programs to harvest fish. The 
Act defines a limited access privilege to mean a Federal permit to 
harvest a quantity of fish, including an individual fishing quota. 
Section 303A therefore authorizes the allocation of individual fishing 
quotas but does not authorize onshore processing privileges. Nor does 
the Act generally authorize the allocation of onshore processing 
privileges, based on the agency's long-standing interpretation of the 
definition of ``fishing'' and related provisions under the Act. Thus, 
absent a legislative change, the Council and agency therefore could not 
include in the Rockfish Program a provision similar to the Pilot 
Program's requirement that harvesters in the catcher vessel sector 
deliver their catch to the same processor to whom they historically 
delivered their catch. Given the exceedingly remote and speculative 
possibility that Congress would further extend the Pilot Program or 
otherwise amend the Act to authorize allocation of onshore processing 
privileges, this alternative was reasonably excluded from further 
analysis for this reason as well.
    Comment 50: The Council should have chosen a preliminary preferred 
alternative (PPA), or several, before taking final action on issues 
such as processor association to allow the analysis to focus on the 
impacts, to fully understand cumulative impacts, and to allow the 
public to engage with the multiple policies and decisions that needed 
to be made.
    Response: The Council is not required to identify a PPA before 
taking final action. The Council may do so to help facilitate the 
review and analysis of specific policy and technical issues. However, 
the lack of a PPA does not mean the Council neglected to consider the 
effects of its actions in its analysis or at the time of final action. 
Over several meetings and several versions of the analytical documents 
the Council considered numerous alternatives that include processors 
within the Rockfish Program. The alternatives considered but not 
advanced for detailed analysis are summarized in the Analysis for this 
action in section 2.2.3, on page 26. Two of the four alternatives that 
were advanced for analysis for the catcher vessel sector included a 
mechanism to include the processing sector and is discussed in Comment 
49. The Analysis of Alternatives for this action is summarized in the 
analysis for this action in section 2.4.
    Comment 51: A commenter requested that the Secretary disapprove 
Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP and the proposed rule because the commenter 
views specific regulatory language pertaining to one particular vessel 
as discriminatory. The commenter also asserts that the Council's 
analysis of the entry level trawl transition allocation methodology is 
incomplete. The commenter made the following three main points in the 
letter. (1) The Council discriminated against the commenter because he 
is the only Rockfish Program applicant who is not entitled to his 
entire catch history. The commenter holds the only LLP license to 
qualify for an initial allocation from rockfish legal landings made in 
both 2000 through 2006 and in the entry level trawl fishery, with 
participation in 2007, 2008, or 2009. A rockfish eligible harvester may 
apply for an initial allocation of QS based on landings made in 2000 
through 2006, or the entry

[[Page 81266]]

level trawl fishery, but not both. Therefore the commenter is not 
eligible to receive an initial allocation based on the entire catch 
history of the LLP license. (2) The commenter believes he should not be 
subject to sideboards under the Rockfish Program that would prevent him 
from fishing in the West Yakutat District in July. He did not qualify 
for the Pilot Program and depended on the rockfish fisheries in the 
West Yakutat District as well as the Central GOA during the Rockfish 
Program qualifying years. (3) The allocation for the entry level trawl 
transition is based on years of participation instead of the amount of 
pounds landed during a period of time. The commenter views this 
structure as a new methodology of allocation that was not completely 
analyzed by the Council and does not meet National Standard 4 of the 
MSA under which one entity should not receive an excess allocation, in 
this case, 60 percent.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the three points made in the comment 
letter. In response to the commenter's first point, and after NMFS' 
review of the record, NMFS concludes that the Council did not 
discriminate against any of the LLP license holders in its decision to 
limit an applicant to an initial allocation of rockfish QS either from 
legal landings in 2000 through 2006 or the entry level trawl fishery, 
with participation in 2007, 2008, or 2009. In terms of qualifying 
years, the Council considered a range of alternatives for eligibility 
to receive initial QS allocations for participants in the Rockfish 
Program. Ultimately, the Council recommended specific eligibility 
provisions to limit a Rockfish Program applicant to QS derived from 
legal landings in 2000 through 2006, or the entry level trawl fishery 
under which a participant fished in 2007, 2008, or 2009, but not both. 
The Council believed it would not be fair and equitable to allow an LLP 
license holder eligibility for both QS allocations because this would 
amount to a disproportionate allocation. This determination is 
consistent with National Standard 4, which requires that allocations be 
fair and equitable. The initial QS allocation for legal landings in 
2000 through 2006 is assigned to applicants based on rockfish legal 
landings made during the rockfish primary fisheries during 2000 through 
2006. The initial QS allocation for the entry level trawl transition is 
based on a different methodology, which allocates 2.5 percent of the 
total rockfish QS to entry level trawl fishery applicants, who will 
proportionally divide the 2.5 percent. This allocation is consistent 
with the proportion of the TAC that was initially assigned to entry 
level trawl vessels during the Pilot Program.
    In response to the commenter's second point, all rockfish eligible 
harvesters with QS in the Rockfish Program are subject to sideboards 
under the Rockfish Program. Sideboards are designed to prevent LLP 
license holders with exclusive QS privileges from further expanding 
their effort into fisheries that remain open access. However, based on 
public testimony, the Council recommended provisions to allow an LLP 
license holder to forgo rockfish QS and be exempt from sideboards in 
order to continue fishing in the West Yakutat District. These 
provisions allow a rockfish eligible harvester that does not want to be 
subject to sideboards to be permanently excluded from the Rockfish 
Program. An LLP license holder is eligible for the exclusion if it made 
rockfish legal landings in both 2000 through 2006 and the entry level 
trawl fishery in 2008, 2008, or 2009. The LLP license holder must 
submit a timely Application for Rockfish QS affirming his or her 
exclusion from the Rockfish Program.
    In response to the commenter's third point, the allocation for the 
entry level trawl fishery is based on years of participation, rather 
than the amount landed during a period of time, so that each person 
will receive an equitable share of catch. The MSA does not require that 
QS be distributed based on catch history. The Council considered 
alternative methodologies for allocating catch in the entry level trawl 
transition fishery, which included allocations based on catch shares as 
well as years of participation. Due to a pending law enforcement 
investigation indicating that some catch in the Pilot Program entry 
level trawl fishery may have been illegally harvested, and so the 
landings history could be unreliable, the Council chose a method for QS 
allocation based on years of participation, instead of the amount of 
pounds landed during a period of time. In this decision, the Council 
also considered the relative allocations of QS assigned to the fishery 
overall, including within the entry level trawl transition fishery, but 
was limited in its ability to consider the allocation available to 
specific vessels due to MSA data confidentiality requirements. The 
Council allocated 2.5 percent of the TAC to the entry level trawl 
transition vessels, which is consistent with the proportion of TAC 
initially assigned to the entry level trawl fishery during the Pilot 
Program.
    Comment 52: A commenter asserts that the Council does not support 
LAPPs as a market-based approach for fishery management. The Council 
wanted to capture the benefits of the Pilot Program but demonstrated 
lack of vision in their action to develop a long-term plan that creates 
stability for participants or that encourages investment and change 
within the Central GOA rockfish fisheries. This is demonstrated in many 
statements in the preamble that describe the Council's action. For 
example, (1) on page 52154, the Council did not use the term ``quota 
share'' in describing the Rockfish Program; (2) on page 52184, the 
Council decided on a 10-year limited duration; (3) on page 52170, the 
Council believed that consolidation through leasing is acceptable but 
consolidation through ownership is unacceptable; and (4) on page 52171, 
the Council recognized that lower ownership caps will restrict 
ownership changes.
    Response: The Council developed the Rockfish Program under section 
303A of the MSA, which lays out the requirements for LAPPs. The 
Rockfish Program is a LAPP, which is a market-based approach to fishery 
management that provides exclusive harvesting privileges to harvest 
fish. Previously, competition under the LLP created economic 
inefficiencies and incentives to increase harvesting and processing 
capacity. NMFS anticipates the Rockfish Program will retain the 
conservation, management, safety, and economic gains realized under the 
Pilot Program. The Council has the authority and discretion to develop 
LAPPs, such as the Rockfish Program, in a manner in which it deems 
necessary to manage the fisheries. The Council considered a range of 
alternatives, deliberated over the options, suboptions, and public 
testimony over of multiple meetings, and ultimately recommended the 
elements and option defining the Rockfish Program alternatives at final 
action.
    The Council does not always use the same language as NMFS during 
the regulatory process to describe the multi-year exclusive harvest 
privileges, as indicated in the commenter's first point. The fact that 
the Council used the terms ``qualifying catch'' and ``catch history'' 
instead of ``quota share'' to describe the harvest privilege that is 
linked to historic harvests attributed to an LLP license does not mean 
that the Council discourages the use of quota share in LAPPs. While 
implementing this program, NMFS determined that the use of the term 
``quota share'' does not alter the original intent of the Council.

[[Page 81267]]

    The ten year limited duration of the Rockfish Program is not 
intended to discourage investments or stability for participants as 
indicated in the commenter's second point. The ten year limited 
duration and formal review is intended to ensure that the program is 
achieving the goals of the MSA and the problem statement as identified 
in the EA/RIR/IRFA (ADDRESS). The Council considered the various 
consequences that a sunset date could have on the Rockfish Program and 
recommended the 10 year duration to allow for the opportunity to 
reevaluate the program's effectiveness after an adequate amount of time 
has passed to gain and compare results. The Council's review allows for 
a full evaluation of the program's successes or challenges, and 
provides the Council with details on unanticipated consequences. The 
duration of the Rockfish Program is 5 years longer than the duration of 
the Pilot Program.
    The commenter's third and fourth points regarding consolidation 
through ownership and ownership use caps were addressed in Comments 25 
and 26.
    Comment 53: If there is a non-catcher/processor sector component 
that the Secretary cannot approve or promulgate, then the Secretary 
should not let that prevent the implementation of the Rockfish Program 
for the catcher/processor sector as outlined in the Council motion.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment. Upon publication of the 
final rule, the Secretary has determined that the provisions in this 
rule that implement the Rockfish Program are consistent with the 
national standards of the MSA and other applicable laws for the catcher 
vessel and catcher/processor sectors. The Secretary approved the full 
Amendment on December 6, 2011.
    Comment 54: The proposed Rockfish Program, which incorporates more 
recent qualifying years, results in an overall decrease in both target 
and secondary species and PSC allocations to the catcher/processor 
sector. We nonetheless believe that the Rockfish Program should be 
enacted to ensure the operational gains resulting from the program are 
retained.
    Response: NMFS notes the comment, and agrees that the Rockfish 
Program extends many of the operational gains realized under the Pilot 
Program. No changes in the regulations are required.
    Comment 55: The commenter supports changes from the Pilot Program 
that will benefit conservation and reduce regulatory discards such as 
(1) allowing for retention of incidental catches using all CQ species 
as basis species for determining MRAs and not just rockfish CQ; and (2) 
determining qualifications for opt-out catcher/processor participation 
in GOA flatfish fisheries during July based on past participation 
during the first two weeks of July by deep-water complex instead of 
each individual species. The commenter also supports other changes that 
improve efficiencies, reduce costs, and increase flexibility for the 
industry such as (1) simplifying sideboard rules for the catcher vessel 
sector by closing fisheries where minimal historical participation has 
occurred (West Yakutat District and Western GOA rockfish) and removing 
unnecessary monitoring and sideboards in other fisheries (GOA shallow-
water flatfish, BSAI cod, and BSAI flatfish fisheries); (2) removing 
limits on the number of check-ins and check-outs for the fishery due to 
the efficiencies of the new electronic system; and (3) introducing a 
CMCP specialist instead of requiring 100 percent observer coverage for 
shoreside processors every 12-hours.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the technical fixes mentioned above 
improve the functionality of the Rockfish Program relative to the Pilot 
Program. No changes in the regulations are required.

Summary of Regulation Changes in Response to Public Comments

    This section summarizes the changes made to the final rule in 
response to public comments on the proposed rule. All of the specific 
changes, and the reasons for making these changes, are contained under 
Response to Comments above. The changes are described by regulatory 
section.
    In Sec.  679.2, NMFS clarified definitions under Rockfish sector 
for the catcher vessel sector and the catcher/processor sector, as 
indicated in Comment 1, to include the catcher/processor LLP licenses 
that have generated rockfish legal landings but have only operated as 
catcher vessels.
    In Sec.  679.4, NMFS clarified that rockfish cooperative CQ 
accounts will not be set to zero for rockfish primary and secondary 
species after a rockfish cooperative termination of fishing declaration 
is submitted to NMFS. The reason for this change is discussed in 
Comment 2. Rockfish primary and secondary species will be available for 
transfer after November 15, or upon approval of a rockfish cooperative 
termination of fishing declaration. NMFS also moved regulatory language 
from Sec.  679.4 regarding the reapportionment of halibut PSC and the 
transfer of CQ to Sec. Sec.  679.21 and 679.81 to better clarify 
regulations and reduce duplicative language.
    In Sec.  679.5, NMFS changed the check-in requirement for the 
catcher/processor sector to one hour prior to the time the catcher/
processor begins a fishing trip to fish under a CQ permit.. The reason 
for this change is discussed in Comment 3. The 48-hour check-in 
requirement is still in place for the catcher vessel sector only. 
Additionally, the catcher/processor sector check-out designation 
effective date is effective upon the submission of the designation to 
NMFS, as indicated in Comment 4.
    In Sec.  679.7, NMFS clarified that catcher/processors may not 
exceed a ``rockfish'' sideboard limit assigned to a rockfish 
cooperative in the catcher/processor sector in response to Comment 31. 
This change is necessary to avoid potential confusion about the 
application of a halibut PSC sideboard limit.
    In Sec.  679.21, NMFS relocated provisions from Sec.  
679.4(n)(1)(iv)(D), specific to the reapportionment of halibut PSC to 
clarify and reduce duplication of provisions, as indicated in Comment 
2.
    In Sec.  679.80, NMFS clarified that rockfish QS will be assigned 
if rockfish legal landings were made ``to an entry level processor'' 
under the authority of an LLP license in the entry level trawl fishery 
during 2007, 2008, or 2009. This clarification was made in paragraphs 
(e)(1) and (e)(3), in response to Comment 14.
    In Sec.  679.81, NMFS made several changes. NMFS removed the 
requirement to submit the Application to Opt-out of Rockfish 
Cooperative for catcher/processor vessels. As discussed earlier in 
Comment 22, NMFS determined this application is unnecessary. All 
references to the Application to Opt-out of Rockfish Cooperative have 
been removed in the regulatory text. In Sec.  679.81(f)(3), NMFS 
changed the deadline for the Application for Rockfish Cooperative 
Fishing Quota from March 1 each year, to March 15, 2012, for the first 
year of the program, and to March 1 for all subsequent years to ensure 
rockfish cooperatives are allotted 30 days to apply for rockfish CQ, as 
discussed in Comment 18. NMFS also relocated provisions regarding the 
transfer of CQ from Sec.  679.4(n)(1)(iv)(A) and (B), to Sec.  
679.81(i)(4)(ii)(H), because these provisions are specific to 
limitations on transfers of CQ and are more appropriately covered in 
Sec.  679.81, as discussed earlier in Comment 2. Further, NMFS also 
clarified that a rockfish cooperative may transfer rockfish primary and 
secondary species

[[Page 81268]]

CQ after November 15, or after NMFS has approved a rockfish cooperative 
termination of fishing declaration for that rockfish cooperative in 
response to Comment 2.
    In Sec.  679.82(b), NMFS clarified that an opt-out vessel is any 
vessel named on an LLP license that is not named on a timely-submitted 
and approved Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota. As 
discussed earlier in response to Comment 22, NMFS will determine that a 
catcher/processor is opting-out if NMFS does not receive an Application 
for Cooperative Fishing Quota from that holder. This change is 
necessary because NMFS removed the Application to Opt-out of Rockfish 
Cooperative.
    In Table 28b to Part 679--Qualifying Season Dates for Central GOA 
Rockfish Primary Species, and as discussed earlier in comment 8, NMFS 
corrected the qualifying season dates for Pacific ocean perch and 
pelagic shelf rockfish.

Additional Changes From the Proposed Rule

    NMFS made the following changes from the proposed rule to the final 
rule to clarify provisions and correct typographical errors, including 
numerous errors in capitalization and in grammar.
    In Sec.  679.4(a)(1), NMFS clarified that more information on CQ 
permits may be found in paragraph (n) of this section. The previous 
paragraph reference did not exist.
    In Sec.  679.4(b)(6)(iii), NMFS removed language about rockfish 
legal landings to clarify that NMFS will reissue a Federal fisheries 
permit to any person who holds a Federal fisheries permit issued for a 
vessel if that vessel is subject to sideboard provisions. This change 
simplifies the provision and does not change the intent of the proposed 
language.
    In Sec.  679.7, NMFS clarified the paragraph redesignation 
instructions. These changes are administrative in nature. All 
regulatory text remains the same, unless noted below.
    In Sec.  679.7(n)(1)(i) and (iii), NMFS removed the word ``other'' 
because its use was repetitive in these paragraphs.
    In Sec.  679.7(n)(2)(iii), NMFS changed a reference for opt-out 
vessels to Sec.  679.81(e)(2) from 679.81(f)(5) as a result of changes 
made in response to Comment 22 to remove the Application to Opt-out of 
a Rockfish Cooperative.
    In Sec.  679.7(n)(8)(v), NMFS corrected a typographical error and 
removed the word ``he,'' which was erroneously placed in the paragraph.
    In Sec.  679.20(e)(3)(iv), NMFS corrected a typographical error to 
remove the number ``4'' from the word CQ in the paragraph.
    NMFS clarified the revision instructions for Subpart G to ensure 
that all section titles in the instructions match the section titles in 
the proposed regulations. These changes are administrative in nature. 
All regulatory text remains the same, unless noted below.
    In Sec.  679.80(a)(3), NMFS notes that the fishing seasons are 
subject to other provisions of this part. The rockfish cooperative 
fishing season, as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii), ends on November 
15 of each year, however; as specified in Sec.  679.23(d)(3)(ii)(B), 
trawl vessels may not directed fish for Pacific cod after November 1 of 
each year. This means that vessels that have rockfish CQ onboard would 
be in violation of seasonal provisions if that vessel is directed 
fishing for Pacific cod after November 1 of each year. A review of 
available data indicates that this clarification would not impact the 
fishery. No changes in the regulations are required.
    In Sec.  679.80(d)(3), NMFS changed the Application for Rockfish QS 
deadline to January 17, 2012, from January 3, 2012. NMFS anticipates 
the final rule will publish on or about December 15, 2011. This change 
will allow potential participants at least 30 days to submit 
applications for initial allocations of rockfish QS.
    In Sec.  679.80(f)(2)(i), NMFS reworded a sentence to clarify that 
the use cap specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2), applies to the receiving 
LLP license in a transfer of rockfish QS. This change simplifies the 
provision and does not change the intent of the proposed language.
    In Sec.  679.80(f)(2)(ii), NMFS corrected the paragraph reference 
for transferring rockfish QS in excess of the use cap to paragraph 
(f)(2)(i) rather than paragraph (f)(1)(i), which does not exist.
    In Sec.  679.80(e)(4), and Table 29 to Part 679--Initial Rockfish 
QS Pools, NMFS changed the date to establish the Rockfish Program 
official record from January 31, 2012, to February 14, 2012. The 
Application for Rockfish QS deadline is January 17, 2012, and NMFS 
requires approximately 30 days to process applications and finalize the 
official record used to determine initial rockfish QS pools.
    In Sec.  679.81(a), NMFS clarified that sector and LLP license 
allocations of rockfish primary species will be assigned as described 
in paragraph (b) of this section.
    In Sec.  679.81(e)(2) and (f)(1), NMFS clarified that to receive a 
CQ permit, a cooperative representative must submit a complete and 
timely Application for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota that is 
approved by NMFS. This clarification is necessary to determine whether 
a catcher/processor has opted-out of participating in a rockfish 
cooperative.
    In Sec.  679.81(g)(2), NMFS clarified that a designated 
representative must log in to the ``NMFS' online system'' rather than 
an ``online system.''
    In Sec.  679.82, NMFS corrected several typographical errors in 
paragraph references. In paragraph (e)(7), NMFS clarified that the 
provision is for holders of catcher/processor designated ``LLP 
licenses'' rather than ``LLP'' only.
    In Sec.  679.84, NMFS clarified in paragraph (g)(4) that all 
halibut PSC in the GOA used by a catcher/processor vessel, except 
halibut PSC used by a vessel fishing under a CQ permit in the Central 
GOA, will be debited against the sideboard limit established for the 
rockfish cooperative or catcher/processor opt-out vessel.

Classification

    The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, has determined 
this rule is consistent with Amendment 88 to the Fishery Management 
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska, the MSA, and other 
applicable laws.

Executive Order 12866

    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), NOAA finds good cause to waive the 
30-day delay in effectiveness for this final rule. The 30-day delay in 
effectiveness is unnecessary and contrary to the public interest. 
Amendment 88 is necessary to replace the Central GOA Rockfish Pilot 
Program (Pilot Program), scheduled to expire December 31, 2011. If NMFS 
fails to implement Amendment 88 to take the place of Pilot Program 
regulations, the fishery will return to management under the LLP 
Program, thus undermining the purpose of this rule and of the MSA. 
Moreover, reverting to the LLP Program will remove the benefits to the 
fish stock that this rule would put in place.
    NMFS requires approximately 170 days to prepare for the management 
of the rockfish fisheries under Amendment 88 before fishing begins on 
May 1, 2012. Delaying the effective date of Amendment 88 until after 
mid-December, 2011, will reduce the amount of time available for 
participants to review and submit applications to NMFS under the new 
program requirements. It will also reduce the time available for NMFS 
to prepare and mail permits to program participants. Immediate 
effectiveness will ensure the final rule is effective in time to 
initiate

[[Page 81269]]

the permit application processes for Amendment 88 as Pilot Program 
regulations expire, and thus ensure the highest level of participation 
in the Rockfish Program and therefore the greatest benefit to the 
public. Additional time is required for the two permit application 
periods prior to the start of fishing.
    The first application period is for Rockfish QS, which must be 
submitted to NMFS by a rockfish eligible harvester by January 17, 2012. 
Typically, this application period opens 30 days prior to the 
application deadline. Immediate effectiveness will enable NMFS to open 
the application period on or about December 15, 2011, in order to allow 
applicants enough time to apply for initial QS allocations. After the 
first application deadline, NMFS requires one month to process 
applications and assign QS to LLP licenses so that participants may 
join rockfish cooperatives. NMFS is unable to calculate QS allocations 
until all timely applications are submitted. The Rockfish Program 
official record for initial rockfish QS pools is established February 
14, 2012.
    The second application period is for the annual CQ, which must be 
submitted by rockfish cooperatives by March 15 of the first year of the 
program. Immediate effectiveness of this rule will provide 30 days to 
rockfish eligible harvesters to join rockfish cooperatives and prepare 
for the fishing season after the revised LLP licenses are distributed 
by NMFS. The processing and harvesting sectors must have time after the 
issuance of rockfish QS to establish new associations under Amendment 
88 before the rockfish cooperative is required to submit the annual CQ 
application to NMFS. Waiving the 30-day delay in effectiveness ensures 
that these processes can be completed in a timely manner. NMFS then 
requires 47 days to calculate, issue, and mail out rockfish CQ permits 
after the March 15 application deadline. NMFS anticipates extra time 
will be needed to verify that the CQ calculations generated by the 
database under the new program are correct. Immediate effectiveness of 
the Amendment 88 final rule will give the fishing industry the earliest 
possible opportunity to prepare and apply for participation under 
Amendment 88 before the fishing season begins, and thus will help 
maximize participation in the Rockfish Program. A 30-day delay in 
effectiveness would disrupt the initial and annual application 
processes, which may create confusion and frustration in the industry 
if NMFS is unable to allow sufficient time for applicants to apply for 
participation under new program requirements.
    Because the only immediate regulatory effect is the enhancement and 
increased opportunity to prepare and submit applications, immediate 
effectiveness will not harm or prejudice any Amendment 88 participants 
or applicants. This rule improves an applicant's opportunity to 
participate under new program requirements and does not require any 
party to come into immediate compliance with any measures. Immediate 
effectiveness of Amendment 88 will allow NMFS and industry to better 
prepare for the upcoming fishing season, which does not begin until May 
1, 2012. This timeframe allows participants ample time to organize and 
adjust to the new management criteria under Amendment 88 before the 
fishing season begins. Therefore, immediate effectiveness of this 
provision will not create a burden for the affected industry. Immediate 
effectiveness will benefit the industry and allow sufficient time for 
applicants to prepare for participation under new program requirements. 
For these reasons, NMFS finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in 
effectiveness under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    This final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) incorporates the 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), a summary of the 
significant issues raised by the public comments, NMFS' responses to 
those comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to support the 
action. NMFS published the proposed rule on August 19, 2011 (76 FR 
52148) with comments invited through September 19, 2011. An IRFA was 
prepared and summarized in the ``Classification'' section of the 
preamble to the proposed rule. The description of this action, its 
purpose, and its legal basis are described in the preamble to the 
proposed rule and are summarized below. The impacts on small entities, 
which are defined in the IRFA for this action, are not repeated here. 
Analytical requirements for the FRFA are described in the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 604(a)(1) through (5), and summarized 
below.
    The FRFA must contain:
    1. A succinct statement of the need for, and objectives of, the 
rule;
    2. A summary of the significant issues raised by the public 
comments in response to the IRFA, a summary of the assessment of the 
agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made in the 
proposed rule as a result of such comments;
    3. A description of and an estimate of the number of small entities 
to which the rule will apply or an explanation of why no such estimate 
is available;
    4. A description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and 
other compliance requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the 
classes of small entities which will be subject to the requirement and 
the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report 
or record; and
    5. A description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the 
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the 
stated objectives of applicable statutes, including a statement of the 
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative 
adopted in the final rule and why each one of the other significant 
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the 
impact on small entities was rejected.
    The ``universe'' of entities to be considered in a FRFA generally 
includes only those small entities that can reasonably be expected to 
be directly regulated by the proposed action. If the effects of the 
rule fall primarily on a distinct segment of the industry, or portion 
thereof (e.g., user group, gear type, geographic area), that segment 
would be considered the universe for purposes of this analysis.
    In preparing a FRFA, an agency may provide either a quantifiable or 
numerical description of the effects of a rule (and alternatives to the 
rule), or more general descriptive statements, if quantification is not 
practicable or reliable.

Need for and Objectives of This Final Action

    The Rockfish Program is a long-term program designed to replace the 
short-term Pilot Program that is scheduled to expire December 31, 2011. 
Recognizing the management, economic, safety, and conservation gains 
created by the Pilot Program, the Council developed a problem statement 
defining the purpose for development of the Rockfish Program, as 
described in Section 2.1 of the Analysis. The Rockfish Program is 
intended to continue the success of the Pilot Program by continuing to 
improve economic efficiency, reduce incentives for bycatch, encourage 
PSC avoidance, reduce unnecessary physical risk when fishing conditions 
are hazardous, and address a range of social concerns.
    The legal basis for this action is the MSA. One of the stated 
purposes of the MSA is to promote domestic commercial fishing under 
sound conservation and management

[[Page 81270]]

principles and to achieve and maintain the optimum yield from each 
fishery. The MSA also requires that conservation and management 
measures take into account the importance of fishery resources to 
fishing communities in order to (A) provide for the sustained 
participation of such communities; and (B) to the extent practicable, 
minimize adverse economic impacts on such communities.

Summary of Significant Issues Raised during Public Comment

    The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on August 
19, 2011 (76 FR 52148). NMFS received one comment related to the IRFA. 
The commenter stated that halibut PSC reductions were not addressed in 
the Analysis, and NMFS did not make any changes to the rule as a result 
of the comment. See Comment 35 in the section above titled ``Comments 
and Responses.''
    NMFS also received comments on the general economic impacts of the 
Rockfish Program on different sectors of the industry. These comments 
are included in the ``Comments and Responses'' section above.

Number and Description of Directly Regulated Small Entities

    For purposes of a FRFA, the U.S. Small Business Administration has 
established that a business involved in fish harvesting is a small 
business if it is independently owned and operated, not dominant in its 
field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual 
gross receipts not in excess of $4.0 million for all its affiliated 
operations worldwide. This final action directly affects catcher/
processors and catcher vessels that participate in the Central GOA 
rockfish fisheries. None of the 12 catcher/processors eligible for the 
Rockfish Program and regulated by this action are estimated to be small 
entities, as defined by the RFA. Thirty-two catcher vessels eligible 
for the Rockfish Program were either members of cooperatives and, as 
such, are not considered small entities for the purpose of the RFA, or 
had annual gross revenues of at least $4 million. The remaining 14 
eligible catcher vessels are all considered small entities. It is 
likely that some of the eligible 14 catcher vessels are affiliated 
through partnerships with other entities, and would be considered large 
entities for the purpose of this action, but in the absence of complete 
ownership information, these affiliations cannot be definitively 
determined.
    In addition to the main program, this action also creates an 
``entry level'' fishery for the longline sector. Since participation in 
that fishery is voluntary, the number of small entities participating 
cannot be predicted. It is likely that a substantial portion of the 
entry level longline fishery participants will be small entities. These 
impacts are analyzed in the RIR prepared for this action (see 
ADDRESSES).

Recordkeeping and Reporting

    Implementation of the Rockfish Program continues the overall 
reporting structure and recordkeeping requirements of the Pilot Program 
for participants in the Central GOA rockfish fisheries. The regulations 
proposed are not expected to increase the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements for small entities in the rockfish fisheries.

Description of Significant Alternatives to the Final Action

    The Council considered an extensive and elaborate series of 
alternatives, options, and suboptions as it designed and evaluated the 
potential for the continued rationalization of the Central GOA rockfish 
fisheries, including the ``no action'' alternative. The RIR presents 
the complete set of alternatives, in various combinations with the 
complex suite of options. Three alternatives for the entry level 
fisheries were considered: Status Quo/No Action (Alternative 1); 
current entry level management under the Pilot Program (Alternative 2); 
and an entry level fishery for longline gear only (Alternative 3). The 
third alternative was selected. Three alternatives for catcher/
processors also were considered: Status Quo/No Action (Alternative 1); 
a rockfish cooperative program where allocations are based on harvest 
history of sector members (Alternative 2); and the existing Pilot 
Program management (Alternative 3). Alternative 2 was selected. Four 
alternatives for the catcher vessel sector were considered: Status Quo/
No Action (Alternative 1); a rockfish cooperative program where 
allocations are based on harvest history of sector members (Alternative 
2); a rockfish cooperative program where allocations are divided 
between historical harvesters and processing participants (Alternative 
3); and a cooperative program where a harvester must join in 
association with a processor where associations are severable 
(Alternative 4). Alternative 4 was selected.
    These alternatives constitute the suite of ``significant 
alternatives'' under this action for purposes of the RFA. Based upon 
the best available scientific data, and consideration of the objectives 
of this action, it appears that there are no alternatives to this 
action that have the potential to accomplish the stated objectives of 
the MSA and any other applicable statutes and that have the potential 
to minimize any significant adverse economic impact of this action on 
small entities. After public process, the Council concluded that its 
preferred alternative for the Rockfish Program would best accomplish 
the stated objectives articulated in the problem statement and 
applicable statutes, and minimize to the extent practicable adverse 
economic impacts on the universe of directly regulated small entities.
    The Council and NMFS have taken several steps to minimize the 
burden on directly regulated small entities. The Council developed the 
alternatives from a list of elements and options, beginning with the 
elements of the Pilot Program, and proposed changes of stakeholders, 
the public, and the Council's Advisory Panel. The Council used an 
iterative process for defining alternatives, deliberating the specific 
provisions, after receiving staff discussion papers and public 
testimony, over the course of several meetings.
    This action establishes an entry level fishery for the longline 
sector only. Any longline vessel exempt from CGOA LLP requirements or 
any holder of a CGOA longline LLP license may enter a longline vessel 
in the entry level fishery. To improve entry into these fisheries, no 
application is necessary to participate. The Council determined that 
vessels should not be prevented from entering the fishery mid-season 
because of a missed application deadline.
    The preferred alternative defined for the catcher/processor sector, 
which establishes a cooperative only structure for the rockfish 
fisheries, allows catcher/processors to join a cooperative or opt-out 
of the Rockfish Program for the year. One annual application is 
required to be submitted before the application deadline to participate 
in a cooperative. Whether some or all of these catcher/processor 
vessels would choose not to join a cooperative and opt-out of the 
Rockfish Program cannot be predicted, and depends on their 
opportunities in other fisheries. The preferred catcher/processor 
alternative appears to minimize negative economic impacts on small 
entities to a greater extent than alternative 3, which allows sector 
participants to annually choose whether to fish in a cooperative, opt-
out of the fishery, or participate in the limited access fishery. The 
limited access fishery has the potential to lead participants into a 
``race for fish'' if too many participants register.

[[Page 81271]]

    The fourth alternative defined for the catcher vessel sector, which 
establishes a cooperative program with annual, severable processor 
associations, was selected as the preferred alternative. The preferred 
catcher vessel alternative appears to minimize negative economic 
impacts on small entities to a greater extent than alternatives 2 and 
3. NMFS and the Council anticipates that catcher vessels under this 
alternative may realize substantial improvements in harvest sector 
efficiency due to the ability to coordinate harvest activity, and a 
relative improvement in bargaining strength as a result of no processor 
allocations.
    The Council and Secretary considered a no-action alternative, but 
this was rejected because it would not accomplish the objective of this 
action to retain the conservation, management, safety, and economic 
gains created by the Pilot Program to the extent practicable, while 
also considering the goals and limitations of the MSA LAPP provisions. 
The Council also considered structures similar to the Pilot Program in 
its alternatives, some of which were advanced for analysis and others 
were not as the Council opted to consider other structures that better 
met program goals.

Collection-of-Information Requirements

    This rule contains collection-of-information requirements subject 
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), and which have been approved by 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The collections are listed below 
by OMB control number.

OMB Control No. 0206

    The Federal Fisheries Permit and Federal Processor Permit are 
mentioned in this rule; however, the public reporting burden for this 
collection-of-information is not directly affected by this rule.

OMB Control No. 0213

    Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 30 
minutes for Catcher/processor Trawl Gear Daily Cumulative Production 
Logbook; 35 minutes for Catcher/processor trawl gear electronic 
logbook.

OMB Control No. 0330

    Scale, catch weighing, and monitoring requirements are mentioned in 
this rule; however, the public reporting burden for this collection-of-
information is not directly affected by this rule.

OMB Control No. 0334

    LLP requirements are mentioned in this rule; however, the public 
reporting burden for this collection-of-information is not directly 
affected by this rule.

OMB Control No. 0445

    The vessel monitoring system requirements are mentioned in this 
rule; however, the public reporting burden for this collection-of-
information is not directly affected by this rule.

OMB Control No. 0515

    eLandings is mentioned in this rule; however, the public reporting 
burden for this collection-of-information is not directly affected by 
this rule.

OMB Control No. 0545

    Public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 2 
hours for Application for Rockfish Cooperative Quota; 15 minutes for 
Cooperative Termination of Fishing Declaration; 2 hours for Application 
for Rockfish Limited Access Fishery (this application is removed with 
this action); 30 minutes for Rockfish Cooperative Vessel Check-in and 
Check-out Report; 2 hours for Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value 
Report; 4 hours for appeal of a NMFS decision; 2 hours for Application 
for Rockfish Quota Share; 2 hours for Application to Transfer Rockfish 
Quota Share; 2 hours for Application for Inter-cooperative Transfer of 
Rockfish Cooperative Quota; 2 hours for Application for Rockfish Entry 
Level Longline Fishery; and 4 hours for the annual Rockfish Cooperative 
Report.
    Public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing 
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information. Send comments regarding these burden 
estimates, or any other aspect of these data collections, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by 
email to [email protected], or fax to (202) 395-7285.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a 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.

Small Entity Compliance Guide

    Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for 
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish 
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule, 
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance 
guides.'' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is 
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. NMFS has 
posted a small entity compliance guide on its Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/ to satisfy the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 requirement for a plain language guide 
to assist small entities in complying with this rule.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 19, 2011.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is amended 
as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., 1801 et seq., 3631 et seq.; 
and Pub. L. 108-447.


0
2. In Sec.  679.2,
0
a. Remove the definitions for ``Affiliation for the purpose of defining 
AFA entities'', ``Eligible rockfish harvester'', ``Eligible rockfish 
processor'', ``Halibut PSC sideboard limit'', ``Initial rockfish QS 
pool'', ``Legal rockfish landing for purposes of qualifying for the 
Rockfish Program'', ``Official Rockfish Program record'', ``Opt-out 
fishery'', ``Primary rockfish species'', ``Rockfish entry level 
fishery'', ``Rockfish entry level processor'', ``Rockfish limited 
access fishery'', ``Secondary species'', ``Sector for purposes of the 
Rockfish Program'', ``Sideboard limit for purposes of the Rockfish 
Program'', and ``Ten percent or greater direct or indirect ownership 
interest for purposes of the Amendment 80 Program and the Rockfish 
Program'';
0
b. Revise the definitions of ``Affiliates'', ``Basis species'', 
``Cooperative quota (CQ)'', ``Rockfish cooperative'', ``Rockfish entry 
level harvester'', ``Rockfish Program'', ``Rockfish Program 
fisheries'', ``Rockfish Program species'', ``Rockfish quota share 
(QS)'', ``Rockfish QS pool'', ``Rockfish QS unit'', and ``Rockfish 
sideboard fisheries''; and
0
c. Add definitions for ``Affiliation for the purpose of defining AFA 
and the Rockfish Program'', ``Rockfish (Catch Monitoring Control Plan) 
CMCP

[[Page 81272]]

specialist'', ``Rockfish CQ'', ``Rockfish CQ equivalent pound(s)'', 
``Rockfish eligible harvester'', ``Rockfish entry level longline 
fishery'', ``Rockfish entry level trawl fishery'', ``Rockfish fee 
liability'', ``Rockfish fee percentage'', ``Rockfish legal landings'', 
``Rockfish processor'', ``Rockfish Program official record'', 
``Rockfish sector'', ``Rockfish sideboard limit'', ``Rockfish sideboard 
ratio'', ``Rockfish standard ex-vessel value'', ``Rockfish standard 
price'', and ``Ten percent or greater direct or indirect ownership 
interest for purposes of the Amendment 80 Program'' in alphabetical 
order to read as follows:


Sec.  679.2.  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Affiliates, for purposes of subparts E and H to this part, means 
business concerns, organizations, or individuals are affiliates of each 
other if, directly or indirectly, either one controls or has the power 
to control the other, or a third party controls or has the power to 
control both. Indicators of control include, but are not limited to: 
Interlocking management or ownership; identity of interests among 
family members; shared facilities and equipment; common use of 
employees; or a business entity organized following the 
decertification, suspension, or proposed decertification of an observer 
provider that has the same or similar management, ownership, or 
principal employees as the observer provider that was decertified, 
suspended, or proposed for decertification.
    Affiliation for the purpose of defining AFA and the Rockfish 
Program means a relationship between two or more individuals, 
corporations, or other business concerns in which one concern directly 
or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in another, exerts 
control over another, or has the power to exert control over another; 
or a third individual, corporation, or other business concern directly 
or indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater interest in both, exerts 
control over both, or has the power to exert control over both.
    (1) What is 10 percent or greater ownership? For the purpose of 
determining affiliation, 10 percent or greater ownership is deemed to 
exist if an individual, corporation, or other business concern directly 
or indirectly owns 10 percent or greater interest in a second 
corporation or other business concern.
    (2) What is an indirect interest? An indirect interest is one that 
passes through one or more intermediate entities. An entity's 
percentage of indirect interest in a second entity is equal to the 
entity's percentage of direct interest in an intermediate entity 
multiplied by the intermediate entity's direct or indirect interest in 
the second entity.
    (3) What is control? For the purpose of determining affiliation, 
control is deemed to exist if an individual, corporation, or other 
business concern has any of the following relationships or forms of 
control over another individual, corporation, or other business 
concern:
    (i) Controls 10 percent or more of the voting stock of another 
corporation or business concern;
    (ii) Has the authority to direct the business of the entity that 
owns the fishing vessel or processor. The authority to direct the 
business of the entity does not include the right to simply participate 
in the direction of the business activities of an entity that owns a 
fishing vessel or processor;
    (iii) Has the authority in the ordinary course of business to limit 
the actions of or to replace the chief executive officer, a majority of 
the board of directors, any general partner or any person serving in a 
management capacity of an entity that holds 10 percent or greater 
interest in a fishing vessel or processor. Standard rights of minority 
shareholders to restrict the actions of the entity are not included in 
this definition of control provided they are unrelated to day-to-day 
business activities. These rights include provisions to require the 
consent of the minority shareholder to sell all or substantially all 
the assets, to enter into a different business, to contract with the 
major investors or their affiliates, or to guarantee the obligations of 
majority investors or their affiliates;
    (iv) Has the authority to direct the transfer, operation, or 
manning of a fishing vessel or processor. The authority to direct the 
transfer, operation, or manning of a vessel or processor does not 
include the right to simply participate in such activities;
    (v) Has the authority to control the management of or to be a 
controlling factor in the entity that holds 10 percent or greater 
interest in a fishing vessel or processor;
    (vi) Absorbs all the costs and normal business risks associated 
with ownership and operation of a fishing vessel or processor;
    (vii) Has the responsibility to procure insurance on the fishing 
vessel or processor, or assumes any liability in excess of insurance 
coverage;
    (viii) Has the authority to control a fishery cooperative through 
10 percent or greater ownership or control over a majority of the 
vessels in the cooperative, has the authority to appoint, remove, or 
limit the actions of or replace the chief executive officer of the 
cooperative, or has the authority to appoint, remove, or limit the 
actions of a majority of the board of directors of the cooperative. In 
such instance, all members of the cooperative are considered affiliates 
of the individual, corporation, or other business concern that exerts 
control over the cooperative; or
    (ix) Has the ability through any other means whatsoever to control 
the entity that holds 10 percent or greater interest in a fishing 
vessel or processor.
* * * * *
    Basis species means any species or species group that is open to 
directed fishing that the vessel is authorized to harvest (see Tables 
10, 11, and 30 to this part).
* * * * *
    Cooperative quota (CQ):
    (1) For purposes of the Amendment 80 Program means:
    (i) The annual catch limit of an Amendment 80 species that may be 
caught by an Amendment 80 cooperative while fishing under a CQ permit;
    (ii) The amount of annual halibut and crab PSC that may be used by 
an Amendment 80 cooperative while fishing under a CQ permit.
    (2) For purposes of the Rockfish Program means:
    (i) The annual catch limit of a rockfish primary species or 
rockfish secondary species that may be harvested by a rockfish 
cooperative while fishing under a CQ permit;
    (ii) The amount of annual halibut PSC that may be used by a 
rockfish cooperative in the Central GOA while fishing under a CQ permit 
(see rockfish halibut PSC in this section).
* * * * *
    Rockfish (Catch Monitoring Control Plan) CMCP specialist, for 
purposes of subpart H to this part, means a designee authorized by the 
Regional Administrator to monitor compliance with catch monitoring and 
control plans or for other purposes of conservation and management of 
marine resources as specified by the Regional Administrator.
    Rockfish cooperative means a group of rockfish eligible harvesters 
who have chosen to form a rockfish cooperative under the requirements 
in Sec.  679.81 in order to combine and harvest fish collectively under 
a CQ permit issued by NMFS.
    Rockfish CQ (See CQ)
    Rockfish CQ equivalent pound(s) means the weight recorded in 
pounds, for a rockfish CQ landing and calculated as round weight.

[[Page 81273]]

    Rockfish eligible harvester means a person who is permitted by NMFS 
to hold rockfish QS.
    Rockfish entry level harvester means a person who is harvesting 
fish in the rockfish entry level longline fishery.
    Rockfish entry level longline fishery means the longline gear 
fisheries in the Central GOA conducted under the Rockfish Program by 
rockfish entry level harvesters.
    Rockfish entry level trawl fishery means the trawl gear fisheries 
in the Central GOA conducted under the Rockfish Program by rockfish 
entry level harvesters during 2007 through 2011 only.
    Rockfish fee liability means that amount of money for Rockfish 
Program cost recovery, in U.S. dollars, owed to NMFS by a CQ permit 
holder as determined by multiplying the appropriate standard ex-vessel 
value of his or her rockfish landing(s) by the appropriate rockfish fee 
percentage.
    Rockfish fee percentage means that positive number no greater than 
3 percent (0.03) determined by the Regional Administrator and 
established for use in calculating the rockfish fee liability for a CQ 
permit holder.
* * * * *
    Rockfish legal landings means groundfish caught and retained in 
compliance with state and Federal regulations in effect at that time 
unless harvested and then processed as meal, and--
    (1) For catcher vessels: The harvest of groundfish from the Central 
GOA regulatory area that is offloaded and recorded on a State of Alaska 
fish ticket during the directed fishing season for that rockfish 
primary species as established in Tables 28a and 28b to this part.
    (2) For catcher/processors: The harvest of groundfish from the 
Central GOA regulatory area that is recorded on a weekly production 
report based on harvests during the directed fishing season for that 
rockfish primary species as established in Table 28a to this part.
    Rockfish processor means a shoreside processor with a Federal 
processor permit that receives groundfish harvested under the authority 
of a CQ permit.
    Rockfish Program means the program implemented under subpart G to 
this part to manage Rockfish Program fisheries.
    Rockfish Program fisheries means one of following fisheries under 
the Rockfish Program:
    (1) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor sector;
    (2) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher vessel sector; and
    (3) The rockfish entry level longline fishery.
    Rockfish Program official record means information used by NMFS 
necessary to determine eligibility to participate in the Rockfish 
Program and assign specific harvest privileges or limits to Rockfish 
Program participants.
    Rockfish Program species means the following species that are 
managed under the authority of the Rockfish Program:
    (1) Rockfish primary species means northern rockfish, Pacific ocean 
perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish in the Central GOA regulatory area.
    (2) Rockfish secondary species means the following species in the 
Central GOA regulatory area:
    (i) Sablefish not allocated to the IFQ Program;
    (ii) Thornyhead rockfish;
    (iii) Pacific cod for the catcher vessel sector;
    (iv) Rougheye rockfish for the catcher/processor sector; and
    (v) Shortraker rockfish for the catcher/processor sector.
    (3) Rockfish non-allocated species means all groundfish species 
other than Rockfish Program species.
    Rockfish quota share (QS) means a permit expressed in numerical 
units, the amount of which is based on rockfish legal landings for 
purposes of qualifying for the Rockfish Program and that are assigned 
to an LLP license.
    Rockfish QS pool means the sum of rockfish QS units established for 
the Rockfish Program fishery based on the Rockfish Program official 
record.
    Rockfish QS unit means a measure of QS based on rockfish legal 
landings.
    Rockfish sector means:
    (1) Catcher/processor sector: Those rockfish eligible harvesters 
who hold an LLP license with a catcher/processor designation and who 
are eligible to receive rockfish QS that may result in CQ that may be 
harvested and processed at sea.
    (2) Catcher vessel sector: Those rockfish eligible harvesters who 
hold an LLP license who are eligible to receive rockfish QS that may 
result in CQ that may not be harvested and processed at sea.
    Rockfish sideboard fisheries means fisheries that are assigned a 
rockfish sideboard limit that may be harvested by participants in the 
Rockfish Program.
    Rockfish sideboard limit means:
    (1) The maximum amount of northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, 
and pelagic shelf rockfish that may be harvested in the Rockfish 
Program as specified in the sideboard provisions under Sec.  679.82(e), 
as applicable; and
    (2) The maximum amount of halibut PSC that may be used in the 
Rockfish Program as specified in the sideboard provisions under Sec.  
679.82(e), as applicable.
    Rockfish sideboard ratio means a portion of a rockfish sideboard 
limit for a groundfish fishery that is assigned as specified under 
Sec.  679.82(e).
    Rockfish standard ex-vessel value means the total U.S. dollar 
amount of rockfish CQ groundfish landings as calculated by multiplying 
the number of landed rockfish CQ equivalent pounds by the appropriate 
rockfish standard price determined by the Regional Administrator.
    Rockfish standard price means a price, expressed in U.S. dollars 
per rockfish CQ equivalent pound, for landed rockfish CQ groundfish 
determined annually by the Regional Administrator.
* * * * *
    Ten percent or greater direct or indirect ownership interest for 
purposes of the Amendment 80 Program means a relationship between two 
or more persons in which one directly or indirectly owns or controls a 
10 percent or greater interest in, or otherwise controls, another 
person; or a third person which directly or indirectly owns or 
controls, or otherwise controls a 10 percent or greater interest in 
both. For the purpose of this definition, the following terms are 
further defined:
    (1) Person. A person is a person as defined in this section.
    (2) Indirect interest. An indirect interest is one that passes 
through one or more intermediate persons. A person's percentage of 
indirect interest in a second person is equal to the person's 
percentage of direct interest in an intermediate person multiplied by 
the intermediate person's direct or indirect interest in the second 
person.
    (3) Controls a 10 percent or greater interest. A person controls a 
10 percent or greater interest in a second person if the first person:
    (i) Controls a 10 percent ownership share of the second person; or
    (ii) Controls 10 percent or more of the voting or controlling stock 
of the second person.
    (4) Otherwise controls. A person otherwise controls another person, 
if the first person has:
    (i) The right to direct, or does direct, the business of the other 
person;
    (ii) The right in the ordinary course of business to limit the 
actions of, or replace, or does limit or replace, the chief executive 
officer, a majority of the board of directors, any general partner, or 
any person serving in a management capacity of the other person;

[[Page 81274]]

    (iii) The right to direct, or does direct, the Rockfish Program 
fishery processing activities of the other person;
    (iv) The right to restrict, or does restrict, the day-to-day 
business activities and management policies of the other person through 
loan covenants;
    (v) The right to derive, or does derive, either directly, or 
through a minority shareholder or partner, and in favor of the other 
person, a significantly disproportionate amount of the economic benefit 
from the processing of fish by that other person;
    (vi) The right to control, or does control, the management of, or 
to be a controlling factor in, the other person;
    (vii) The right to cause, or does cause, the purchase or sale of 
fish processed by the other person;
    (viii) Absorbs all of the costs and normal business risks 
associated with ownership and operation of the other person; or
    (ix) Has the ability through any other means whatsoever to control 
the other person.
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  679.4,
0
a. Remove paragraphs (a)(1)(xii)(C) and (D), (n)(2)(iii) through (v), 
and (n)(3); and
0
b. Revise paragraphs (a)(1)(xii)(A) and (B), (b)(6)(iii), (k)(12)(i), 
(n)(1)(i), (n)(1)(ii), and (n)(2)(i) and (ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.4  Permits.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Permit is in effect        For more
  If program permit or card      from issue date    information, see . .
          type is:             through the end of:            .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
(xii) * * *
(A) Rockfish QS.............  Indefinite..........  Sec.   679.80(a).
(B) CQ......................  Until expiration      Paragraph (n) of
                               date shown on         this section.
                               permit.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (iii) NMFS will reissue a Federal fisheries permit to any person 
who holds a Federal fisheries permit issued for a vessel if that vessel 
is subject to sideboard provisions as described under Sec.  679.82(d) 
through (f).
* * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (12) * * *
    (i) General. In addition to other requirements of this part, a 
license holder must have rockfish QS assigned to his or her groundfish 
LLP license to conduct directed fishing for rockfish primary species 
and rockfish secondary species with trawl gear.
* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) A CQ permit is issued annually to a rockfish cooperative if the 
members of that rockfish cooperative have submitted a complete and 
timely application for CQ as described in Sec.  679.81(f) that is 
approved by the Regional Administrator. A CQ permit authorizes a 
rockfish cooperative to participate in the Rockfish Program. The CQ 
permit will indicate the amount of rockfish primary species and 
rockfish secondary species that may be harvested by the rockfish 
cooperative, and the amount of rockfish halibut PSC that may be used by 
the rockfish cooperative. The CQ permit will list the members of the 
rockfish cooperative, the vessels that are authorized to fish under the 
CQ permit for that rockfish cooperative, and the rockfish processor 
with whom that rockfish cooperative is associated, if applicable.
    (ii) A CQ permit is valid only until the end of the calendar year 
for which the CQ permit is issued;
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (i) A rockfish cooperative may choose to terminate its CQ permit 
through a declaration submitted to NMFS.
    (ii) This declaration may only be submitted to NMFS electronically. 
The rockfish cooperative's designated representative must log into the 
online system and create a request for termination of fishing 
declaration as indicated on the computer screen. By using the rockfish 
cooperative's NMFS ID and password, and submitting the termination of 
fishing declaration request, the designated representative certifies 
that all information is true, correct, and complete.
* * * * *

0
4. In Sec.  679.5,
0
a. Remove paragraphs (r)(4), (r)(7), and (r)(10)(iv);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (r)(5) as (r)(4), (r)(6) as (r)(5), and 
(r)(8) through (r)(10) as (r)(6) through (r)(8), respectively;
0
c. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (r)(4), (r)(5), (r)(6)(i), 
(r)(8)(i)(A) and (B), and (r)(8)(ii);
0
d. Revise paragraphs (r)(1) through (3); and
0
e. Add paragraphs (a)(1)(iii)(F), (r)(9), and (r)(10) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  679.5  Recordkeeping and reporting (R&R).

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   If harvest made under . . . program         Record the . . .             For more information, see . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(F) Rockfish Program....................  Cooperative number........  subpart H to this part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (r) * * *
    (1) General. The owners and operators of catcher vessels, catcher/
processors, and shoreside processors authorized as participants in the 
Rockfish Program must comply with the applicable recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements of this section and must assign all catch to a 
rockfish cooperative or rockfish sideboard fishery, as applicable at 
the time of catch or receipt

[[Page 81275]]

of groundfish. All owners of catcher vessels, catcher/processors, and 
shoreside processors authorized as participants in the Rockfish Program 
must ensure that their designated representatives or employees comply 
with all applicable recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
    (2) Logbook--(i) DFL. Operators of catcher vessels equal to or 
greater than 60 ft (18.3 m) LOA participating in a Rockfish Program 
fishery and using trawl gear must maintain a daily fishing logbook for 
trawl gear as described in paragraphs (a) and (c) of this section.
    (ii) ELB. Operators of catcher/processors permitted in the Rockfish 
Program must use a combination of NMFS-approved catcher/processor trawl 
gear ELB and eLandings to record and report groundfish and PSC 
information as described in paragraph (f) of this section to record 
Rockfish Program landings and production.
    (3) eLandings. Managers of shoreside processors that receive 
rockfish primary species or rockfish secondary species in the Rockfish 
Program must use eLandings or NMFS-approved software as described in 
paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, instead of a logbook and WPR, 
to record Rockfish Program landings and production.
    (4) Production reports. Operators of catcher/processors that are 
authorized as processors in the Rockfish Program must submit a 
production report as described in paragraphs (e)(9) and (10) of this 
section.
    (5) Product transfer report (PTR), processors. Operators of 
catcher/processors and managers of shoreside processors that are 
authorized as processors in the Rockfish Program must submit a PTR as 
described in paragraph (g) of this section.
    (6) * * *
    (i) Applicability. A rockfish cooperative permitted in the Rockfish 
Program (see Sec.  679.4(n)(1)) annually must submit to the Regional 
Administrator an annual rockfish cooperative report detailing the use 
of the cooperative's CQ.
* * * * *
    (8) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Vessel check-in. The designated representative of a rockfish 
cooperative must designate any vessel that is authorized to fish under 
the rockfish cooperative's CQ permit before that vessel may fish under 
that CQ permit through a check-in procedure. The designated 
representative for a rockfish cooperative must submit to NMFS, in 
accordance with (8)(ii), a check-in designation for a vessel:
    (1) At least 48 hours prior to the time the catcher vessel begins a 
fishing trip to fish under a CQ permit; or
    (2) At least 1 hour prior to the time the catcher/processor begins 
a fishing trip to fish under a CQ permit; and
    (3) A check-in designation is effective at the beginning of the 
first fishing trip after the designation has been submitted.
    (B) Vessel check-out. The designated representative of a rockfish 
cooperative must designate any vessel that is no longer fishing under a 
CQ permit for that rockfish cooperative through a check-out procedure. 
A check-out report must be submitted to NMFS, in accordance with 
(8)(ii), within 6 hours after the effective date and time the rockfish 
cooperative ends the vessel's authority to fish under the CQ permit.
    (1) If the vessel is fishing under a CQ permit for a catcher vessel 
cooperative, a check-out designation is effective at the end of a 
complete offload;
    (2) If the vessel is fishing under a CQ permit for a catcher/
processor cooperative, a check-out designation is effective upon 
submission to NMFS.
    (ii) Submittal. The designated representative of the rockfish 
cooperative must submit a vessel check-in or check-out report 
electronically. The rockfish cooperative's designated representative 
must log into the online system and create a vessel check-in or vessel 
check-out request as indicated on the computer screen. By using the 
NMFS ID password and submitting the transfer request, the designated 
representative certifies that all information is true, correct, and 
complete.
* * * * *
    (9) Rockfish CQ cost recovery fee submission (See Sec.  679.85).
    (10) Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report--(i) Applicability. 
A rockfish processor that receives and purchases landings of rockfish 
CQ groundfish must submit annually to NMFS a complete Rockfish Ex-
vessel Volume and Value Report, as described in this paragraph (r)(10), 
for each reporting period for which the rockfish processor receives 
rockfish CQ groundfish.
    (ii) Reporting period. The reporting period of the Rockfish Ex-
vessel Volume and Value Report shall extend from May 1 through November 
15 of each year.
    (iii) Due date. A complete Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value 
Report must be received by the Regional Administrator not later than 
December 1 of the year in which the rockfish processor received the 
rockfish CQ groundfish.
    (iv) Information required. (A) The rockfish processor must log in 
using the rockfish processor's password and NMFS person ID to submit a 
Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report. The NMFS software autofills 
the rockfish processor's name. The User must review the autofilled 
cells to ensure that they are accurate. A completed application must 
contain the information specified on the Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and 
Value Report with all applicable fields accurately filled-in.
    (B) Certification. By using the rockfish processor NMFS ID and 
password and submitting the report, the rockfish processor certifies 
that all information is true, correct, and complete to the best of his 
or her knowledge and belief.
    (v) Submittal. The rockfish processor must complete and submit 
online by electronic submission to NMFS the Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume 
and Value Report available at https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec.  679.7,
0
a. Remove paragraphs (n)(1)(iv) through (viii), (n)(2)(iv), (n)(3)(ii) 
and (iv), and (n)(6);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (n)(3)(iii) as (n)(3)(ii), (n)(7) as (n)(6), 
and (n)(8) as (n)(7);
0
c. Redesignate newly redesignated paragraphs (n)(6)(i) through (vi) as 
(n)(6)(iii) through (viii);
0
d. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (n)(3)(ii), and (n)(6)(iii) 
through (vii);
0
e. Revise paragraphs (n)(1)(i) through (iii), (n)(2)(i) through (iii), 
(n)(4), and (n)(5); and
0
f. Add paragraphs (n)(6)(i), (ii), (ix), and (x), and (n)(8) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  679.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (n) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Use an LLP license assigned to a rockfish cooperative in any 
rockfish cooperative other than the rockfish cooperative to which that 
LLP license was initially assigned for that fishing year.
    (ii) Use an LLP license that was excluded from the Rockfish Program 
or that opted out of the Rockfish Program in any rockfish cooperative 
for that calendar year.
    (iii) Operate a vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative in any 
rockfish cooperative other than the rockfish cooperative to which that 
vessel was initially assigned for that fishing year.
    (2) * * *
    (i) Operate a vessel that is assigned to a rockfish cooperative and 
fishing under

[[Page 81276]]

a CQ permit and fail to follow the catch monitoring requirements 
detailed in Sec.  679.84(c) through (e).
    (ii) Operate a vessel that is subject to a sideboard limit detailed 
in Sec.  679.82(e), as applicable, and fail to follow the catch 
monitoring requirements detailed in Sec.  679.84(c) from July 1 until 
July 31, if that vessel is harvesting fish in the West Yakutat 
District, Central GOA, or Western GOA management areas.
    (iii) Operate a catcher/processor opt-out vessel, under Sec.  
679.81(e)(2), that is subject to sideboard provisions detailed in Sec.  
679.82(e) and (f), as applicable, and fail to follow the catch 
monitoring requirements detailed in Sec.  679.84(d) from July 1 until 
July 31, if that vessel is harvesting fish in the West Yakutat 
District, Central GOA, or Western GOA management areas.
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Operate a vessel that is subject to a sideboard limit detailed 
in Sec.  679.82(e) and fail to use functioning VMS equipment as 
described in Sec.  679.28(f) at all times when operating in a reporting 
area off Alaska from July 1 until July 31.
    (4) Catcher/processor vessels that opt-out. Operate a vessel that 
has opted-out of participating in a rockfish cooperative to directed 
fish for northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, or pelagic shelf 
rockfish in the Central GOA.
    (5) Rockfish processors. (i) Take deliveries of, or process, 
groundfish harvested by a catcher vessel fishing under the authority of 
a rockfish CQ permit unless operating as a shoreside processor.
    (ii) Process any groundfish delivered by a catcher vessel fishing 
under the authority of a CQ permit not weighed on a scale approved by 
the State of Alaska. The scale must meet the requirements specified in 
Sec.  679.28(c).
    (iii) Take deliveries of, or process, groundfish caught by a vessel 
fishing under the authority of a rockfish CQ permit without following 
an approved CMCP as described in Sec.  679.28(g). A copy of the CMCP 
must be maintained at the facility and made available to authorized 
officers or NMFS-authorized personnel upon request.
    (iv) Take deliveries of, or process, groundfish harvested by a 
catcher vessel fishing under the authority of a rockfish CQ permit 
outside of the geographic boundaries of the City of Kodiak as those 
boundaries are established by the State of Alaska on December 27, 2011.
    (v) Fail to submit a timely and complete Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume 
and Value Report as required under Sec.  679.5(r)(10)
    (6) * * *
    (i) Fail to retain any rockfish primary species or rockfish 
secondary species caught by a vessel when that vessel is fishing under 
the authority of a CQ permit.
    (ii) Harvest rockfish primary species, rockfish secondary species, 
or use halibut PSC assigned to a rockfish cooperative in the Central 
GOA without a valid CQ permit.
    (iii) Begin a fishing trip for any Rockfish Program species with 
any vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative if the total amount of 
unharvested CQ that is currently held by that rockfish cooperative is 
zero or less for any species for which CQ is assigned.
    (iv) Exceed a rockfish sideboard limit assigned to a rockfish 
cooperative in the catcher/processor sector.
    (v) Operate a vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative to fish 
under a CQ permit unless the rockfish cooperative has notified NMFS 
that the vessel is fishing under a CQ permit as described under Sec.  
679.5(r)(8).
    (vi) Operate a vessel fishing under the authority of a CQ permit in 
the catcher vessel sector and to have any Pacific ocean perch, pelagic 
shelf rockfish, northern rockfish, sablefish, Pacific cod, or 
thornyhead rockfish aboard the vessel unless those fish were harvested 
under the authority of a CQ permit.
    (vii) Catch and process onboard a vessel any rockfish primary 
species or rockfish secondary species harvested under the authority of 
a CQ permit issued to the catcher vessel sector.
* * * * *
    (ix) Deliver rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary 
species harvested under the authority of a CQ permit to any processor 
other than a shoreside processor located within the geographic 
boundaries of the City of Kodiak as those boundaries are established by 
the State of Alaska on December 27, 2011.
    (x) Fail to submit a timely and complete rockfish CQ cost recovery 
fee submission form as required under Sec.  679.5(r)(9).
* * * * *
    (8) Rockfish entry level longline fishery--(i) Take deliveries of, 
or process, groundfish caught by a catcher vessel directed fishing in 
the rockfish entry level longline fishery unless operating as a 
shoreside processor.
    (ii) Deliver groundfish caught by a catcher vessel directed fishing 
in the rockfish entry level longline fishery to any processor other 
than a shoreside processor.
    (iii) Use any gear other than longline gear to directed fish for a 
rockfish primary species in the rockfish entry level longline fishery.
    (iv) Catch and process onboard a vessel any rockfish primary 
species harvested while directed fishing in the rockfish entry level 
longline fishery.
    (v) Deliver groundfish caught by a catcher vessel directed fishing 
in the rockfish entry level longline fishery fishing after NMFS has 
closed directed fishing to the rockfish entry level longline fishery or 
November 15 of each calendar year, whichever occurs first.
* * * * *

0
6. In Sec.  679.20, add paragraph (e)(3)(iv) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.20  General limitations.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) The maximum retainable amount for groundfish harvested in the 
Central GOA by a catcher/processor vessel fishing under a rockfish CQ 
permit is calculated at the end of each weekly reporting period, and is 
based on the basis species defined in Table 30 harvested since the 
previous weekly reporting period, or for any portion of a weekly 
reporting period that vessel was designated under a vessel check-in as 
specified in Sec.  679.5(r)(8).
* * * * *

0
7. In Sec.  679.21,
0
a. Revise paragraphs (d)(5)(iii)(B) introductory text and 
(d)(5)(iii)(B)(2); and
0
b. Add paragraph (d)(5)(iii)(C) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.21  Prohibited species bycatch management.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) An amount not greater than 55 percent of the halibut PSC that 
had been allocated as CQ and that has not been used by a rockfish 
cooperative will be added to the last seasonal apportionment for trawl 
gear during the current fishing year:
* * * * *
    (2) After the effective date of a termination of fishing 
declaration according to the provisions set out in Sec.  679.4(n)(2), 
whichever occurs first.
    (C) The amount of unused halibut PSC not reapportioned under the 
provisions described in Sec.  679.21(d)(5)(iii)(B) will not be 
available for use as halibut PSC by any person for the remainder of 
that calendar year.
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec.  679.28,
0
a. Revise paragraph (g)(2)(iii); and
0
b. Add paragraph (g)(7)(xi) to read as follows:

[[Page 81277]]

Sec.  679.28  Equipment and operational requirements.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Rockfish Program, unless those fish are harvested under the 
rockfish entry level longline fishery as described under Sec.  679.83.
* * * * *
    (7) * * *
    (xi) CMCP specialist notification. For shoreside processors 
receiving deliveries of groundfish harvested under the authority of a 
rockfish CQ permit, describe how the CMCP specialist will be notified 
of deliveries of groundfish harvested under the authority of a rockfish 
CQ permit.
* * * * *

0
9. In Sec.  679.50,
0
a. Remove paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(B) and (d)(7);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(C) through (F) as (c)(7)(i)(B) 
through (E), respectively;
0
c. Revise paragraphs (a)(4), (c)(7)(i) heading, (c)(7)(i)(A) 
introductory text, and (c)(7)(ii);
0
d. Revise newly redesignated paragraphs (c)(7)(i)(B) and (c)(7)(i)(E); 
and
0
e. Add paragraph (c)(7)(iii) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.50  Groundfish observer program.

    (a) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Shoreside and
                                                                                                  stationary
             Program               Catcher/processor    Catcher vessels       Motherships          floating
                                                                                                  processors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(4) Rockfish Program............  (c)(7)(i).........  (c)(7)(ii)........  N/A...............  (d)(1) through
                                                                                               (4).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (7) * * *
    (i) Catcher/processor--(A) Rockfish cooperative. A catcher/
processor that is named on an LLP license that is assigned to a 
rockfish cooperative and is fishing under the authority of a CQ permit 
must have at least two NMFS-certified observers onboard for each day 
that the vessel is used to harvest or process in the Central GOA from 
May 1 through the earlier of:
* * * * *
    (B) Rockfish sideboard fishery for catcher/processors in a rockfish 
cooperative. A catcher/processor that is subject to a sideboard limit 
as described under Sec.  679.82(e) must have at least two NMFS-
certified observers onboard for each day that the vessel is used to 
harvest or process fish in the West Yakutat District, Central GOA, or 
Western GOA management areas from July 1 through July 31.
* * * * *
    (E) Sideboard fishery for catcher/processors not in a rockfish 
cooperative. A catcher/processor vessel that is subject to a sideboard 
limit as described under Sec.  679.82(e) and (f), must have at least 
one NMFS-certified observer onboard for each day that the vessel is 
used to harvest or process in the West Yakutat District, Central GOA, 
or Western GOA management areas from July 1 through July 31.
    (ii) Catcher vessels--rockfish cooperative. A catcher vessel that 
is named on an LLP license that is assigned to a rockfish cooperative 
and fishing under the authority of a CQ permit must have a NMFS-
certified observer onboard at all times the vessel is used to harvest 
fish in the Central GOA from May 1 through the earlier of:
    (A) November 15; or
    (B) The effective date and time of an approved rockfish cooperative 
termination of fishing declaration.
    (iii) Observer coverage limitations. Observer coverage requirements 
under paragraph (c)(7) of this section are in addition to observer 
coverage requirements in other fisheries. Observer coverage of 
groundfish harvested by vessels described under paragraph (c)(7) of 
this section are not counted for purposes of meeting minimum observer 
coverage requirements applicable to any groundfish fishery described 
under paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of this section.
* * * * *

0
10. Subpart G is revised to read as follows:
Subpart G--Rockfish Program
Sec.
679.80 Allocation and transfer of rockfish QS.
679.81 Rockfish Program annual harvester privileges.
679.82 Rockfish Program use caps and sideboard limits.
679.83 Rockfish Program entry level longline fishery.
679.84 Rockfish Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring, and 
catch accounting.
679.85 Cost recovery.

Subpart G--Rockfish Program


Sec.  679.80  Allocation and transfer of rockfish QS.

    Additional regulations that implement specific portions of the 
Rockfish Program are set out under: Sec.  679.2 Definitions, Sec.  
679.4 Permits, Sec.  679.5 Recordkeeping and reporting, Sec.  679.7 
Prohibitions, Sec.  679.20 General limitations, Sec.  679.21 Prohibited 
species bycatch management, Sec.  679.28 Equipment and operational 
requirements, and Sec.  679.50 Groundfish Observer Program.
    (a) Applicable areas and duration--(1) Applicable areas. The 
Rockfish Program applies to Rockfish Program fisheries in the Central 
GOA Regulatory Area.
    (2) Duration. The Rockfish Program authorized under this part 679 
expires on December 31, 2021.
    (3) Seasons. The following fishing seasons apply to fishing under 
this subpart subject to other provisions of this part:
    (i) Rockfish entry level longline fishery. Fishing by vessels 
participating in the rockfish entry level longline fishery is 
authorized from 0001 hours, A.l.t., January 1 through 1200 hours, 
A.l.t., November 15.
    (ii) Rockfish cooperative. Fishing by vessels participating in a 
rockfish cooperative is authorized from 1200 hours, A.l.t., May 1 
through 1200 hours, A.l.t., November 15.
    (b) Rockfish legal landings--(1) Eligible LLP licenses. NMFS will 
assign rockfish legal landings to an LLP license only if a vessel made 
those landings:
    (i) Under the authority of a permanent fully transferable LLP 
license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish with a trawl gear 
designation during the season dates for a rockfish primary species as 
established in Table 28a to this part;
    (ii) Under the authority of an interim LLP license endorsed for 
Central GOA groundfish with a trawl gear designation during the season 
dates for that rockfish

[[Page 81278]]

primary species as established in Table 28a to this part; provided 
that:
    (A) NMFS has determined that an interim LLP license is ineligible 
to receive a designation as a permanent LLP license endorsed for 
Central GOA groundfish with a trawl gear designation; and
    (B) A permanent fully transferable LLP license endorsed for Central 
GOA groundfish with a trawl gear designation was assigned to the vessel 
that made legal rockfish landings under the authority of an interim LLP 
license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish prior to December 31, 2003, 
and was continuously assigned to that vessel through June 14, 2010; or
    (iii) Under the authority of a permanent fully transferable LLP 
license endorsed for Central GOA groundfish with a trawl gear 
designation during the season dates for the entry level trawl fishery 
in 2007, 2008, or 2009 for a rockfish primary species as established in 
Table 28b to this part.
    (2) Assigning rockfish legal landings to an LLP license. (i) NMFS 
will assign rockfish legal landings to an LLP license only if the 
holder of the LLP license with those landings submits a timely 
application for Rockfish QS, in paragraph (d) of this section, that is 
approved by NMFS.
    (ii) NMFS will assign rockfish legal landings made under the 
authority of an interim LLP license that meets the requirements in 
paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section, to the permanent fully 
transferable LLP license specified in paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) of this 
section. NMFS will not assign any legal rockfish landings made under 
the authority of the permanent fully transferable LLP license specified 
in paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(B) of this section prior to the date that 
permanent fully transferable LLP license was assigned to the vessel 
that made legal rockfish landings under the authority of an interim LLP 
license specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
    (3) Rockfish landings assigned to the catcher/processor sector. A 
rockfish legal landing for a rockfish primary species is assigned to 
the catcher/processor sector if:
    (i) The rockfish legal landings of that rockfish primary species 
were harvested and processed onboard a vessel during the season dates 
for that rockfish primary species as established in Table 28a to this 
part; and
    (ii) The rockfish legal landings were made under the authority of 
an eligible LLP license that is endorsed for Central GOA groundfish 
fisheries with trawl gear with a catcher/processor designation.
    (4) Rockfish legal landings assigned to the catcher vessel sector. 
A rockfish legal landing for a rockfish primary species is assigned to 
the catcher vessel sector if:
    (i) The rockfish legal landings of that rockfish primary species 
were harvested and not processed onboard a vessel during the season 
dates for that rockfish primary species as established under Table 28a 
or 28b to this part; and
    (ii) The rockfish legal landings were made under the authority of 
an eligible LLP license that is endorsed for Central GOA groundfish 
fisheries with trawl gear.
    (c) Rockfish Program official record --(1) Use of the Rockfish 
Program official record. The Rockfish Program official record will 
contain information used by the Regional Administrator to determine:
    (i) The amount of rockfish legal landings assigned to an LLP 
license;
    (ii) The amount of rockfish QS resulting from rockfish legal 
landings assigned to an LLP license held by a rockfish eligible 
harvester;
    (iii) Rockfish sideboard ratios assigned to an LLP license;
    (iv) Eligibility to participate in the Rockfish Program and assign 
specific harvest privileges to Rockfish Program participants.
    (2) Presumption of correctness. The Rockfish Program official 
record is presumed to be correct. An applicant to participate in the 
Rockfish Program has the burden to prove otherwise. For the purposes of 
creating the Rockfish Program official record, the Regional 
Administrator will presume the following:
    (i) An LLP license has been used onboard the same vessel from which 
that LLP license was derived during the calendar years 2000 and 2001, 
unless clear and unambiguous written documentation is provided that 
establishes otherwise.
    (ii) If more than one person is claiming the same rockfish legal 
landing, then each LLP license for which the rockfish legal landing is 
being claimed will receive an equal division of credit for the landing 
unless the applicants can provide written documentation that 
establishes an alternative means for distributing the catch history to 
the LLP licenses.
    (3) Documentation. Only rockfish legal landings, as defined in 
Sec.  679.2, shall be used to establish an allocation of rockfish QS.
    (4) Non-severability of rockfish legal landings. Rockfish legal 
landings are non-severable from the LLP license to which those rockfish 
legal landings are assigned according to the Rockfish Program official 
record.
    (d) Application for rockfish QS--(1) Submission of application for 
rockfish QS. A person who wishes to receive rockfish QS to participate 
in the Rockfish Program as a rockfish eligible harvester must submit a 
timely and complete Application for Rockfish Quota Share. This 
application may only be submitted to NMFS using the methods described 
on the application.
    (2) Forms. Forms are available through the Internet on the NMFS 
Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, or by 
contacting NMFS at (800) 304-4846, Option 2.
    (3) Deadline. (i) A completed Application for Rockfish Quota Share 
must be received by NMFS no later than 1700 hours, A.l.t., on January 
17, 2012, or if sent by U.S. mail, postmarked by that time. For 
applications delivered by hand delivery or carrier only, the receiving 
date of signature by NMFS staff is the date the application was 
received. If the application is submitted by facsimile, the receiving 
date of the application is the date stamped received by NMFS.
    (ii) Objective written evidence of timely application will be 
considered proof of a timely application.
    (4) Contents of application. A completed application must contain 
the information specified on the Application for Rockfish Quota Share 
identifying the applicant and LLP license numbers, with all applicable 
fields accurately filled-in and all required documentation attached.
    (i) Additional documentation. (A) Vessel names, ADF&G vessel 
registration numbers, and USCG documentation numbers of all vessels 
that fished under the authority of each LLP license, including dates 
when landings were made under the authority of an LLP license for 2000 
and 2001;
    (B) Indicate (YES or NO) if the applicant is applying to 
participate in the Rockfish Program based on rockfish legal landings 
made during the rockfish entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 
2009; and,
    (C) For an applicant who holds an LLP license that made rockfish 
legal landings during the fishery seasons established in Table 28a to 
this part and during the entry level trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, 
or 2009 established in Table 28b to this part, indicate whether you 
wish to receive rockfish QS based on rockfish legal landings during the 
fishery seasons established in Table 28a or Table 28b to this part.
    (ii) Exclusion from Rockfish Program for LLP licenses with rockfish 
legal

[[Page 81279]]

landings. A person who holds an LLP license that made rockfish legal 
landings during the fishery seasons established in Table 28a to this 
part and during the entry level trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, or 
2009 established in Table 28b to this part may choose to be excluded 
from the Rockfish Program and not receive rockfish QS. A person must 
submit an Application for Rockfish QS affirming exclusion from the 
Rockfish Program and forgo all rockfish QS.
    (iii) Applicant signature and certification. The applicant must 
sign and date the application certifying that all information is true, 
correct, and complete to the best of his or her knowledge and belief. 
If the application is completed by a designated representative, then 
explicit authorization signed by the applicant must accompany the 
application.
    (5) Application evaluation. The Regional Administrator will 
evaluate applications received as specified in paragraph (d)(4) of this 
section and compare all claims in an application with the information 
in the Rockfish Program official record. Application claims that are 
consistent with information in the Rockfish Program official record 
will be approved by the Regional Administrator. Application claims that 
are inconsistent with the Rockfish Program official record, unless 
verified by sufficient documentation, will not be approved. An 
applicant who submits inconsistent claims, or an applicant who fails to 
submit the information specified in paragraph (d)(4) of this section, 
will be provided a single 30-day evidentiary period to submit the 
specified information, submit evidence to verify his or her 
inconsistent claims, or submit a revised application with claims 
consistent with information in the Rockfish Program official record. An 
applicant who submits claims that are inconsistent with information in 
the Rockfish Program official record has the burden of proving that the 
submitted claims are correct. Any claims that remain inconsistent or 
that are not accepted after the 30-day evidentiary period will be 
denied, and the applicant will be notified by an initial administrative 
determination (IAD) of his or her appeal rights under Sec.  679.43.
    (6) Appeals. If an applicant is notified by an IAD that claims made 
by the applicant have been denied, that applicant may appeal that IAD 
under the provisions in Sec.  679.43.
    (e) Assigning rockfish QS--(1) General. The Regional Administrator 
will assign rockfish QS only to a person who submits a timely 
application for rockfish QS that is approved by NMFS based on:
    (i) The amount of rockfish legal landings assigned to an LLP 
license as established in paragraph (e)(2) of this section; or
    (ii) The number of years during which a person made a rockfish 
legal landing under the authority of an LLP license in the entry level 
trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009 as established in paragraph 
(e)(3) of this section.
    (2) Calculation of rockfish QS allocation for LLP licenses. Based 
on the Rockfish Program official record, the Regional Administrator 
shall determine the initial allocation of rockfish QS for each rockfish 
primary species assigned to each LLP license indicated on a timely and 
complete Application for Rockfish QS that is approved by NMFS, and that 
qualifies for an allocation of QS based on rockfish legal landings from 
2000 to 2006 (and that is not assigned rockfish QS under the entry 
level trawl fishery transition allocation under the provisions in 
paragraph (e)(3) of this section), according to the following 
procedure:
    (i) Sum the rockfish legal landings for each rockfish primary 
species ``s'' for each eligible LLP license ``l'' for each year during 
the fishery seasons established in Table 28a to this part. For purposes 
of this calculation, the Regional Administrator will not assign any 
amount of rockfish legal landings to an LLP license that is assigned 
rockfish QS under the provisions in paragraph (e)(3) of this section. 
This yields the Rockfish Total Catch for each rockfish primary species 
for each year.
    (ii) For each rockfish primary species, sum the highest 5 years of 
Rockfish Total Catch for each eligible LLP license described under 
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section. This yields the Highest 5 
Yearsls. This amount is equal to the number of rockfish QS 
units for that LLP license for that rockfish primary species.
    (iii) Sum the Highest 5 Yearsls in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) 
of this section of all eligible LLP licenses for each rockfish primary 
species. The result is the [sum]Highest 5 Yearsls (or All 
Highest 5 Yearss).
    (3) Calculation of rockfish QS allocation for LLP licenses that 
receive rockfish QS under the entry level trawl fishery transition 
allocation. Based on the Rockfish Program official record, the Regional 
Administrator shall determine the initial allocation of rockfish QS for 
each rockfish primary species assigned to each LLP license indicated on 
a timely and complete Application for Rockfish QS that is approved by 
NMFS, that qualifies for an allocation of QS based on rockfish legal 
landings from 2007, 2008, or 2009 under the entry level trawl fishery 
transition allocation (and that is not assigned rockfish QS under the 
provisions in paragraph (e)(2) of this section), according to the 
following procedure:
    (i) Assign one Rockfish Landing Unit to an LLP license for each 
year a rockfish legal landing of any rockfish primary species was made 
under the authority of an LLP license during the season dates for the 
entry level trawl fishery in 2007, 2008, or 2009 as established in 
Table 28b to this part. This yields the Rockfish Landing 
Unitsl. For purposes of this calculation, the Regional 
Administrator will not assign any Rockfish Landing Units to an LLP 
license that is assigned rockfish QS under the provisions in paragraph 
(e)(2) of this section.
    (ii) Sum the Rockfish Landing Units of all eligible LLP licenses.
    (iii) Divide the Rockfish Landing Unitsl in paragraph 
(e)(3)(i) of this section for an LLP license by the sum of all Rockfish 
Landing Unitsl of all eligible LLP licenses in paragraph 
(e)(3)(ii) of this section. The result is the Percentage of the Total 
Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS Pooll as 
presented in the following equation:

Rockfish Landing Unitsl/[Sigma] Rockfish Landing 
Unitsl = Percentage of the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery 
Transition Rockfish QS pooll.

    (iv) Determine the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition 
Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish primary species ``s'' as presented 
in the following equation:

([Sigma] All Highest 5 Yearss/0.975) -[Sigma] All Highest 5 
Yearss (as calculated in paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this 
section) = Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery Transition Rockfish QS 
pools.

    (v) Multiply the Percentage of the Total Entry Level Trawl Fishery 
Transition Rockfish QS pool for each LLP license, as calculated in 
paragraph (e)(3)(iii) of this section, by the Total Entry Level Trawl 
Fishery Transition Rockfish QS pool for each rockfish primary species, 
as calculated in paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this section. This yields the 
number of rockfish QS units for that LLP license for that rockfish 
primary species.
    (vi) All rockfish QS units calculated in paragraph (e)(3)(v) of 
this section are assigned to the catcher vessel sector.
    (4) Rockfish initial QS pool. The rockfish initial QS pool for each 
rockfish primary species, and for each sector, is equal to the sum of 
all QS units assigned to LLP licenses, and in

[[Page 81280]]

each sector, as calculated under paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(3) of this 
section as of February 14, 2012.
    (5) Non-severability of rockfish QS from an LLP license. Rockfish 
QS assigned to an LLP license is non-severable from that LLP license, 
except as provided for under Sec.  679.80(f)(2).
    (f) Transfer of rockfish QS--(1) Transfer of rockfish QS. A person 
may transfer an LLP license, and any rockfish QS assigned to that LLP 
license under the provisions in Sec.  679.4(k)(7), provided that the 
LLP license is not assigned rockfish QS in excess of the use cap 
specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2) at the time of transfer.
    (2) Transfer of rockfish QS assigned to LLP licenses that exceeds 
rockfish QS use caps. (i) If an LLP license is assigned an initial 
allocation of aggregate rockfish QS that exceeds a use cap specified in 
Sec.  679.82(a)(2), the LLP license holder may transfer rockfish QS in 
excess of the use cap specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2) separate from 
that LLP license and assign it to one or more LLP licenses. However, a 
transfer may not be approved by NMFS if that transfer would cause the 
receiving LLP license to exceed a use cap specified in Sec.  
679.82(a)(2).
    (ii) Prior to the transfer of an LLP license that is assigned an 
initial allocation of aggregate rockfish QS that exceeds a use cap 
specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2), the LLP license holder must transfer 
the rockfish QS that is in excess of the use cap specified in Sec.  
679.82(a)(2), separate from that LLP license, and assign it to one or 
more LLP licenses under paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section. On 
completion of the transfer of QS, the LLP license that was initially 
allocated an amount of aggregate rockfish QS in excess of the use cap 
may not exceed the use cap specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2).
    (iii) Any rockfish QS associated with the LLP license that is in 
excess of the use cap may be transferred only if Block C of the 
Application for Transfer License Limitation Program Groundfish/Crab 
License is filled out entirely.
    (iv) Rockfish QS may only be transferred to an LLP license that has 
been assigned rockfish QS with the same sector designation as the 
rockfish QS to be transferred.
    (v) Rockfish QS that is transferred from an LLP license that was 
initially allocated an amount of aggregate rockfish QS in excess of the 
use cap specified in Sec.  679.82(a)(2) and assigned to another LLP 
license may not be severed from the receiving LLP license.


Sec.  679.81  Rockfish Program annual harvester privileges.

    (a) Sector and LLP license allocations of rockfish primary 
species--(1) General. Each calendar year, the Regional Administrator 
will determine the tonnage of rockfish primary species that will be 
assigned to participants in a rockfish cooperative. This amount will be 
assigned to rockfish cooperatives as described in paragraph (b) of this 
section.
    (2) Calculation. (i) The amount of rockfish primary species ``s'' 
allocated to the Rockfish Program is calculated by deducting the 
incidental catch allowance the Regional Administrator determines is 
required on an annual basis in other non-target fisheries from the TAC. 
The remaining TAC for that rockfish primary species (TACs) 
is assigned for use by the rockfish entry level longline fishery and 
rockfish cooperatives.
    (ii) The allocation of TACs for each rockfish primary 
species to the rockfish entry level longline fishery is established in 
Table 28e to this part.
    (iii) The allocation of TACs to rockfish cooperatives is 
equal to the amount remaining after allocation to the rockfish entry 
level longline fishery (cooperative TACs).
    (b) Allocations of rockfish primary species CQ to rockfish 
cooperatives--(1) Rockfish primary species TACs assigned to 
the catcher/processor and catcher vessel sector. Cooperative 
TACs assigned for a rockfish primary species will be divided 
between the catcher/processor sector and the catcher vessel sector. 
Each sector will receive a percentage of cooperative TACs 
for each rockfish primary species equal to the sum of the rockfish QS 
units assigned to all LLP licenses that receive rockfish QS in that 
sector divided by the rockfish QS pool for that rockfish primary 
species. Expressed algebraically for each rockfish primary species 
``s'' in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section:
    (i) Catcher/Processor Sector TACs = [(Cooperative 
TACs) x (Rockfish QS Units in the Catcher/Processor 
Sectors/Rockfish QS Pools)].
    (ii) Catcher Vessel Sector TACs = [(Cooperative 
TACs) x (Rockfish QS Units in the Catcher Vessel 
Sectors/Rockfish QS Pools)].
    (2) Allocations of rockfish primary species to rockfish 
cooperatives. TAC is assigned to each rockfish cooperative based on the 
rockfish QS assigned to that fishery in each sector according to the 
following procedures:
    (i) Catcher vessel sector rockfish cooperatives. The amount of 
TACs for each rockfish primary species assigned to a catcher 
vessel rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of rockfish QS units 
assigned to that rockfish cooperative divided by the total rockfish QS 
assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the catcher vessel sector 
multiplied by the catcher vessel TACs. Once TACs 
for a rockfish primary species is assigned to a catcher vessel rockfish 
cooperative, it is issued as CQ specific to that rockfish cooperative. 
The amount of CQ for each rockfish primary species that is assigned to 
a rockfish cooperative is expressed algebraically as follows:

CQs = [(Catcher Vessel Sector TACs) x (Rockfish 
QS assigned to that rockfish cooperatives/Rockfish QS Units 
assigned to all rockfish cooperatives in the Catcher Vessel 
Sectors)].

    (ii) Catcher/processor sector rockfish cooperatives. The amount of 
TACs for each rockfish primary species assigned to a 
catcher/processor rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of 
rockfish QS units assigned to that rockfish cooperative divided by the 
sum of the rockfish QS units assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the 
catcher/processor sector multiplied by the catcher/processor 
TACs. Once TAC for a rockfish primary species is assigned to 
a catcher/processor rockfish cooperative, it is issued as CQ specific 
to that rockfish cooperative.
    The amount of CQ for each rockfish primary species that is assigned 
to a rockfish cooperative is expressed algebraically as follows:

CQ = [(Catcher/Processor Sector TACs) x (Rockfish QS Units 
assigned to that rockfish cooperative/Rockfish QS Units assigned to all 
rockfish cooperatives in the Catcher/Processor Sector)].

    (c) Allocations of rockfish secondary species CQ to rockfish 
cooperatives--(1) General. Each calendar year, the Regional 
Administrator will determine the tonnage of rockfish secondary species 
that may be assigned to the rockfish cooperatives as rockfish CQ. This 
amount will be assigned to the rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/
processor sector and the catcher vessel sector.
    (2) Amount of rockfish secondary species tonnage assigned. The 
amount of rockfish secondary species tonnage that may be assigned to 
the catcher/processor sector and the catcher vessel sector is specified 
in Table 28c to this part.
    (3) Assignment of rockfish secondary species. Rockfish secondary 
species will be assigned only to rockfish cooperatives.

[[Page 81281]]

    (4) Determining the amount of rockfish secondary species CQ 
assigned to a rockfish cooperative. The amount of CQ for each rockfish 
secondary species that is assigned to each rockfish cooperative is 
determined according to the following procedures:
    (i) CQ assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/processor 
sector. The CQ for a rockfish secondary species that is assigned to a 
catcher/processor rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of that 
rockfish secondary species allocated to the catcher/processor sector in 
the Rockfish Program as specified in Table 28c to this part, multiplied 
by the sum of the rockfish QS units for all rockfish primary species 
assigned to that catcher/processor rockfish cooperative divided by the 
sum of the rockfish QS units assigned to rockfish cooperatives for all 
rockfish primary species in the catcher/processor sector. Expressed 
algebraically in the following equation:

CQ for that Secondary Species = Amount of that rockfish secondary 
species allocated to the catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish 
Program x ([Sigma] Rockfish QS units for all rockfish primary 
species assigned to that rockfish cooperative/[Sigma] Rockfish QS 
units for all rockfish primary species assigned to all rockfish 
cooperatives in the catcher/processor sector).

    (ii) CQ assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the catcher vessel 
sector. The CQ for a rockfish secondary species that is assigned to a 
catcher vessel rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of that 
rockfish secondary species allocated to the catcher vessel sector in 
the Rockfish Program as specified in Table 28c to this part, multiplied 
by the sum of the rockfish QS units for all rockfish primary species 
assigned to that catcher vessel rockfish cooperative divided by the sum 
of the rockfish QS units assigned to rockfish cooperatives for all 
rockfish primary species in the catcher vessel sector. Expressed 
algebraically in the following equation:

CQ for that Secondary Species = Amount of that rockfish secondary 
species allocated to the catcher vessel sector in the Rockfish 
Program x ([Sigma] Rockfish QS units for all rockfish primary 
species assigned to that rockfish cooperative/[Sigma] Rockfish QS 
units assigned to all rockfish cooperatives for all rockfish primary 
species in the catcher vessel sector).

    (d) Allocations of rockfish halibut PSC CQ to rockfish 
cooperatives--(1) General. Each calendar year, the Regional 
Administrator will determine the tonnage of rockfish halibut PSC that 
will be assigned to the Rockfish Program. This amount will be allocated 
appropriately to the catcher/processor sector and the catcher vessel 
sector. The tonnage of rockfish halibut PSC assigned to a sector will 
be further assigned as CQ only to rockfish cooperative(s) within that 
sector.
    (2) Amount of halibut PSC that may be assigned. (i) The amount of 
halibut PSC that may be assigned to the catcher vessel and catcher/
processor sectors is specified in Table 28d to this part.
    (ii) The amount of halibut PSC that is not assigned to the catcher 
vessel and catcher/processor sectors as specified in Table 28d to this 
part will not be assigned for use as halibut PSC or as halibut IFQ.
    (3) Use of rockfish halibut PSC by a rockfish eligible harvester. 
(i) Rockfish halibut PSC assigned to a sector will be assigned only to 
rockfish cooperatives within that sector.
    (ii) Rockfish halibut PSC specified in Table 28d is not assigned to 
rockfish opt-out vessels.
    (iii) Rockfish halibut PSC specified in Table 28d is not assigned 
to the rockfish entry level longline fishery.
    (4) Determining the amount of rockfish halibut PSC CQ assigned to a 
rockfish cooperative. The amount of rockfish halibut PSC CQ that is 
assigned to each rockfish cooperative is determined according to the 
following procedures:
    (i) CQ assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/processor 
sector. The CQ for halibut PSC that is assigned to a catcher/processor 
rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of halibut PSC allocated to 
the catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish Program as specified in 
Table 28d to this part, multiplied by the sum of the rockfish QS units 
for all rockfish primary species assigned to that catcher/processor 
rockfish cooperative divided by the sum of the rockfish QS units 
assigned to rockfish cooperatives for all rockfish primary species in 
the catcher/processor sector. This is expressed algebraically in the 
following equation:

CQ for rockfish halibut PSC = Amount halibut PSC allocated to the 
catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish Program x ([Sigma] Rockfish 
QS units assigned to that rockfish cooperative/[Sigma] Rockfish QS 
units assigned to all rockfish cooperatives in the catcher/processor 
sector).

    (ii) CQ assigned to rockfish cooperatives in the catcher vessel 
sector. The CQ for halibut PSC that is assigned to a catcher vessel 
rockfish cooperative is equal to the amount of halibut PSC allocated to 
the catcher vessel sector in the Rockfish Program as specified in Table 
28d to this part, multiplied by the sum of the rockfish QS units for 
all rockfish primary species assigned to that catcher vessel rockfish 
cooperative divided by the sum of the rockfish QS units assigned to 
rockfish cooperatives for all rockfish primary species in the catcher 
vessel sector. This is expressed algebraically in the following 
equation:

CQ for rockfish halibut PSC = Amount halibut PSC allocated to the 
catcher vessel sector in the Rockfish Program x ([Sigma] Rockfish QS 
units assigned to that rockfish cooperative/[Sigma] Rockfish QS 
units assigned to all rockfish cooperatives in the catcher vessel 
sector).

    (e) Assigning rockfish QS to a rockfish cooperative--(1) General. 
Each calendar year, a person that is participating in the Rockfish 
Program may assign an LLP license and the rockfish QS assigned to that 
LLP license to a Rockfish cooperative. A rockfish eligible harvester 
assigns rockfish QS to a rockfish cooperative on a complete application 
for CQ that is approved by NMFS and that meets the requirements of 
paragraph (f) of this section.
    (i) An LLP license and rockfish QS may be assigned to a catcher 
vessel cooperative if that rockfish QS is derived from legal rockfish 
landings assigned to the catcher vessel sector.
    (ii) An LLP license and rockfish QS may be assigned to a catcher/
processor cooperative if that rockfish QS is derived from rockfish 
legal landings assigned to the catcher/processor sector.
    (2) Catcher/Processor opt-out. Each calendar year, a person holding 
an LLP license assigned rockfish QS in the catcher/processor sector may 
opt-out of participating in a rockfish cooperative. NMFS will presume a 
person has opted-out of participating in a rockfish cooperative if that 
person and LLP license with rockfish QS is not named on a timely 
submitted Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota. A person 
may not assign an LLP license assigned rockfish QS in the catcher/
processor sector to both a rockfish cooperative and opt-out of 
participating in a rockfish cooperative.
    (f) Annual Application for the Rockfish Program--(1) Application 
for Rockfish Cooperative Fishing Quota (CQ). If a designated rockfish 
cooperative representative submits a complete and timely application 
that is approved by NMFS, the cooperative will receive a CQ permit. The 
CQ permit will list the amount of CQ, by rockfish primary species, 
rockfish secondary species, and halibut PSC held by the rockfish 
cooperative, the members of the rockfish cooperative, LLP licenses 
assigned to that rockfish cooperative, and the vessels that are 
authorized to harvest fish under that CQ permit. This application may 
only be submitted to

[[Page 81282]]

NMFS using the methods described on the application.
    (2) Application forms. Application forms are available on the NMFS 
Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov, or by 
contacting NMFS at (800) 304-4846, Option 2.
    (3) Deadline. (i) A completed application must be received by NMFS 
no later than 1700 hours, A.l.t., on March 15, 2012, for the first year 
of the program and March 1 for all subsequent years, or if sent by U.S. 
mail, the application must be postmarked by that time. For applications 
delivered by hand delivery or carrier only, the receiving date of 
signature by NMFS staff is the date the application was received. If 
the application is submitted by facsimile, the receiving date of the 
application is the date stamped received by NMFS.
    (ii) Objective written evidence of timely application will be 
considered as proof of a timely application.
    (4) Contents of the Application. A completed application must 
contain the information specified on the Application for Rockfish 
Cooperative Fishing Quota identifying the rockfish cooperative, members 
of the cooperative, and processor associate of a catcher vessel 
rockfish cooperative, with all applicable fields accurately filled-in 
and all required documentation attached.
    (i) Additional documentation. For the cooperative application to be 
considered complete, the following documents must be attached to the 
application:
    (A) A copy of the business license issued by the state in which the 
rockfish cooperative is registered as a business entity;
    (B) A copy of the articles of incorporation or partnership 
agreement of the rockfish cooperative;
    (C) Provide the names of all persons, to the individual level, 
holding an ownership interest in the LLP license and the percentage 
ownership each person and individual holds in the LLP license;
    (D) A copy of the rockfish cooperative agreement signed by the 
members of the rockfish cooperative (if different from the articles of 
incorporation or partnership agreement of the rockfish cooperative) 
that includes terms that specify that:
    (1) Rockfish QS holders affiliated with rockfish processors cannot 
participate in price setting negotiations except as permitted by 
general antitrust law;
    (2) The rockfish cooperative must establish a monitoring program 
sufficient to ensure compliance with the Rockfish Program;
    (3) The proposed fishing plan to be used by members of the 
cooperative, including any proposed cooperative specific monitoring 
procedures and any voluntary codes of conduct that apply to the members 
of the cooperative, if applicable; and
    (4) Terms and conditions to specify the obligations of rockfish QS 
holders who are members of the rockfish cooperative to ensure the full 
payment of rockfish cost recovery fees that may be due.
    (ii) Applicant signature and certification. The applicant, 
including the processor associate of the rockfish cooperative, must 
sign and date the application certifying that all information is true, 
correct, and complete to the best of his or her knowledge and belief. 
If the application is completed by a designated representative, then 
explicit authorization signed by the applicant must accompany the 
application.
    (5) Issuance of CQ. NMFS will not issue a CQ permit if an 
application is not complete and approved by NMFS. Issuance by NMFS of a 
CQ permit is not a determination that the rockfish cooperative is 
formed or is operating in compliance with antitrust law.
    (6) LLP licenses and rockfish QS not designated on a timely and 
complete application for rockfish CQ. NMFS will prohibit any LLP 
licenses with rockfish QS assigned to that LLP license from fishing in 
the directed rockfish primary fisheries in the Central GOA for a 
calendar year if that LLP license is not designated on a timely and 
complete application for CQ for that calendar year that is approved by 
NMFS. Rockfish sideboard provisions described in Sec.  679.82 shall 
apply to that LLP license, as applicable.
    (g) Application for inter-cooperative transfer of cooperative quota 
(CQ)--(1) Completed application. NMFS will process an application for 
inter-cooperative transfer of CQ provided that an electronic online 
transfer application is completed by the transferor and transferee, 
with all applicable fields accurately filled-in.
    (2) Certification of transferor. (i) The transferor's designated 
representative must log into NMFS' online system and create a transfer 
request as indicated on the computer screen. By using the transferor's 
NMFS ID, password, and Transfer Key and submitting the transfer 
request, the designated representative certifies that all information 
is true, correct, and complete.
    (ii) The transferee's designated representative must log into the 
online system and accept the transfer request. By using the 
transferee's NMFS ID, password, and Transfer Key, the designated 
representative certifies that all information is true, correct, and 
complete.
    (h) Maximum retainable amount (MRA) limits--(1) Rockfish 
cooperative. A vessel assigned to a rockfish cooperative and fishing 
under a CQ permit may harvest groundfish species not allocated as CQ up 
to the amounts of the MRAs for those species as established in Table 30 
to this part.
    (2) Opt-out vessels. A rockfish eligible harvester who opted-out of 
participating in a rockfish cooperative is subject to MRAs for rockfish 
primary species and rockfish secondary species as established in Table 
10 to this part.
    (3) Rockfish entry level longline fishery. A person directed 
fishing in the rockfish entry level longline fishery may harvest 
groundfish species other than rockfish primary species up to amounts of 
the MRAs for those species as established in Table 10 to this part.
    (4) Maximum retainable amount (MRA) calculation and limits--catcher 
vessels. (i) The MRA for an incidental catch species for vessels 
fishing under the authority of a CQ permit is calculated as a 
proportion of the total allocated rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species on board the vessel in round weight equivalents using 
the retainable percentage in Table 30 to this part; except that--
    (ii) Once the amount of shortraker rockfish harvested in the 
catcher vessel sector is equal to 9.72 percent of the shortraker 
rockfish TAC in the Central GOA regulatory area, then shortraker 
rockfish may not be retained by any participant in the catcher vessel 
sector while fishing under the authority of a CQ permit.
    (5) Maximum retainable amount (MRA) calculation and limits--
catcher/processor vessels. The MRA for an incidental catch species for 
vessels fishing under the authority of a CQ permit is calculated as a 
proportion of the total allocated rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species on board the vessel in round weight equivalents using 
the retainable percentage in Table 30 to this part as determined under 
Sec.  679.20(e)(3)(iv).
    (i) Rockfish cooperative--(1) General. This section governs the 
formation and operation of rockfish cooperatives. The regulations in 
this section apply only to rockfish cooperatives that have formed for 
the purpose of fishing with CQ issued annually by NMFS.
    (i) Members of rockfish cooperatives should consult legal counsel 
before commencing any activity if the members are uncertain about the 
legality under

[[Page 81283]]

the antitrust laws of the rockfish cooperative's proposed conduct.
    (ii) Membership in a rockfish cooperative is voluntary. No person 
may be required to join a rockfish cooperative.
    (iii) Members may leave a rockfish cooperative, but any CQ 
contributed by the rockfish QS held by that member remains assigned to 
that rockfish cooperative for the remainder of the calendar year.
    (iv) An LLP license or vessel that has been assigned to a rockfish 
cooperative and that leaves the rockfish cooperative continues to be 
subject to the sideboard provisions established for that rockfish 
cooperative under Sec.  679.82(d) and (e), as applicable, for that 
calendar year.
    (v) If a person becomes the holder of an LLP license that had been 
previously assigned to a rockfish cooperative, then that person may 
join that rockfish cooperative upon receipt of that LLP license, but 
may not assign that LLP license to another rockfish cooperative during 
that calendar year.
    (2) Legal and organizational requirements. A rockfish cooperative 
must meet the following legal and organizational requirements before it 
is eligible to receive CQ:
    (i) Each rockfish cooperative must be formed as a partnership, 
corporation, or other legal business entity that is registered under 
the laws of one of the 50 states or the District of Columbia;
    (ii) Each rockfish cooperative must appoint an individual as 
designated representative to act on the rockfish cooperative's behalf 
and serve as contact point for NMFS for questions regarding the 
operation of the rockfish cooperative. The designated representative 
must be an individual, and may be a member of the rockfish cooperative, 
or some other individual designated by the rockfish cooperative;
    (iii) Each rockfish cooperative must submit a complete and timely 
application for CQ.
    (3) General requirements. The following table describes the 
requirements to form a rockfish cooperative in the catcher vessel or 
catcher/processor sector.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Catcher/processor
        Requirement         Catcher vessel sector          sector
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Who may join a          Only persons who hold rockfish QS may join a
 rockfish cooperative?                  rockfish cooperative.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(ii) What is the minimum               No minimum requirement.
 number of LLP licenses
 that must be assigned to
 form a rockfish
 cooperative?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(iii) Is an association     Yes, a rockfish QS     No.
 with a rockfish processor   holder may only be a
 required?                   member of a rockfish
                             cooperative formed
                             in association with
                             a rockfish
                             processor. The
                             rockfish cooperative
                             may not receive
                             rockfish CQ unless a
                             shoreside processor
                             eligible to receive
                             rockfish CQ has
                             indicated that it
                             may be willing to
                             receive rockfish CQ
                             from that
                             cooperative in the
                             application for CQ,
                             as described under
                             Sec.   679.81, that
                             is submitted by that
                             cooperative.
(iv) Is a rockfish          No...................  N/A.
 cooperative member
 required to deliver catch
 to the rockfish processor
 with whom the rockfish
 cooperative is
 associated?
(v) Is there a minimum      No...................  No.
 amount of rockfish QS
 that must be assigned to
 a rockfish cooperative
 for it to be allowed to
 form?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(vi) What is allocated to     CQ for rockfish primary species, rockfish
 the rockfish cooperative?     secondary species, and rockfish halibut
                              PSC, based on the rockfish QS assigned to
                              all of the LLP licenses that are assigned
                                         to the cooperative.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(vii) Is this CQ an         Yes, the members of the rockfish cooperative
 exclusive harvest              have an exclusive harvest privilege to
 privilege?                        collectively catch this CQ, or a
                              cooperative may transfer all or a portion
                             of this CQ to another rockfish cooperative.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(viii) Is there a season    Yes, any vessel designated to catch CQ for a
 during which designated     rockfish cooperative is limited to catching
 vessels may catch CQ?          CQ during the season beginning on 1200
                             hours, A.l.t., on May 1 through 1200 hours,
                                       A.l.t., on November 15.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(ix) Can any vessel catch      No, only vessels that are named on the
 a rockfish cooperative's        application for CQ for that rockfish
 CQ?                           cooperative may catch the CQ assigned to
                              that rockfish cooperative.A vessel may be
                              assigned to only one rockfish cooperative
                                         in a calendar year.
                           ---------------------------------------------
 Can a member of a               No, only the rockfish cooperative's
 rockfish cooperative             designated representative, and not
 transfer CQ individually     individual members, may transfer its CQ to
 to another rockfish            another rockfish cooperative. Any such
 cooperative without the         transfer must be approved by NMFS as
 approval of the other        established under paragraph (i)(4)(ii) of
 members of the rockfish                     this section
 cooperative?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xi) Can a rockfish         N/A..................  No, a sideboard limit
 cooperative in the                                 assigned to a
 catcher/processor sector                           rockfish cooperative
 transfer its sideboard                             in the catcher/
 limit?                                             processor sector is
                                                    a limit applicable
                                                    to a specific
                                                    rockfish
                                                    cooperative, and may
                                                    not be transferred
                                                    between rockfish
                                                    cooperatives.
                           ---------------------------------------------

[[Page 81284]]

 
(xii) Is there a hired        No, there is no hired master requirement.
 master requirement?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xiii) Can an LLP license    No, an LLP license may only be assigned to
 be assigned to more than       one rockfish cooperative in a calendar
 one rockfish cooperative        year. A person holding multiple LLP
 in a calendar year?           licenses with associated rockfish QS may
                              assign different LLP licenses to different
                              rockfish cooperatives subject to any other
                                     restrictions that may apply.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xiv) Can a rockfish        Yes..................  N/A
 processor be associated
 with more than one
 rockfish cooperative?
(xv) Can an LLP license be  N/A..................  No, each calendar
 assigned to a rockfish                             year an LLP license
 cooperative and opt-out                            must either be
 of participating in a                              assigned to a
 rockfish cooperative?                              rockfish cooperative
                                                    or opt-out.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xvi) Which members may          That is determined by the rockfish
 harvest the rockfish        cooperative contract signed by its members.
 cooperative's CQ?              Any violations of this contract by one
                              cooperative member may be subject to civil
                               claims by other members of the rockfish
                                             cooperative.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xvii) Does a rockfish         Yes, a rockfish cooperative must have a
 cooperative need a             membership agreement or contract that
 contract?                      specifies how the rockfish cooperative
                              intends to harvest its CQ. A copy of this
                              agreement or contract must be submitted to
                             NMFS with the cooperative's application for
                                                 CQ.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xviii) What happens if      A rockfish cooperative is not authorized to
 the rockfish cooperative    catch fish in excess of its CQ and must not
 exceeds its CQ amount?         exceed its CQ amount at the end of the
                                  calendar year. Exceeding a CQ is a
                                  violation of the Rockfish Program
                               regulations. Each member of the rockfish
                             cooperative is jointly and severally liable
                              for any violations of the Rockfish Program
                              regulations while fishing under authority
                              of a CQ permit. This liability extends to
                                any persons who are hired to catch or
                                  receive CQ assigned to a rockfish
                                cooperative. Each member of a rockfish
                               cooperative is responsible for ensuring
                                   that all members of the rockfish
                               cooperative comply with all regulations
                               applicable to fishing under the Rockfish
                                               Program.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xix) Is there a limit on   Yes, see Sec.   679.82(a) for the provisions
 how much CQ a rockfish                      that apply.
 cooperative may hold or
 use?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xx) Is there a limit on    Yes, see Sec.   679.82(a) for the provisions
 how much CQ a vessel may                    that apply.
 harvest?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxi) Is there a              Yes, see Sec.   679.85 for the provisions
 requirement that a                          that apply.
 rockfish cooperative pay
 rockfish cost recovery
 fees?
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxii) When does catch      Any vessel fishing checked-in (and therefore
 count against my CQ          fishing under the authority of a CQ permit
 permit?                       must count any catch of rockfish primary
                               species, rockfish secondary species, or
                              rockfish halibut PSC against that rockfish
                              cooperative's CQ from May 1 until November
                                 15, or until the effective date of a
                             rockfish cooperative termination of fishing
                                declaration that has been approved by
                                                NMFS).
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxiii) If my vessel is         No. If you are fishing in a directed
 checked-out and fishing       flatfish fishery and checked-out of the
 in a directed flatfish        Rockfish Program fisheries, you are not
 fishery in the Central      fishing under the authority of a CQ permit.
 GOA and I catch               Groundfish harvests would not be debited
 groundfish and halibut         against the rockfish cooperative's CQ
 PSC, does that count         permit. In this case, any catch of halibut
 against the rockfish           would be attributed to the halibut PSC
 cooperative's CQ?            limit for that directed target fishery and
                                gear type and any applicable sideboard
                                                limit.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxiv) Can my rockfish       The rockfish cooperatives formed under the
 cooperative negotiate         Rockfish Program are intended to conduct
 prices for me?              and coordinate harvest activities for their
                             members. Rockfish cooperatives formed under
                                 the Rockfish Program are subject to
                              existing antitrust laws. Collective price
                              negotiation by a rockfish cooperative must
                               be conducted in accordance with existing
                                           antitrust laws.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxv) Are there any          Yes, each year a rockfish cooperative must
 special reporting              submit an annual rockfish cooperative
 requirements?               report to NMFS by December 15 of that year.
                               See Sec.   679.5(r)(6) for the reporting
                                            requirements.
                           ---------------------------------------------
(xxvi) What is required in  The annual rockfish cooperative report must
 the annual rockfish         include at a minimum:
 cooperative report?        (A) The rockfish cooperative's CQ, sideboard
                             limit (if applicable), and any rockfish
                             sideboard fishery harvests made by the
                             vessels in the rockfish cooperative on a
                             vessel-by-vessel basis;
                            (B) The rockfish cooperative's actual
                             retained and discarded catch of CQ, and
                             sideboard limit on an area-by-area and
                             vessel-by-vessel basis;
                            (C) A description of the method used by the
                             rockfish cooperative to monitor fisheries
                             in which rockfish cooperative vessels
                             participated; and
                            (D) A description of any civil actions taken
                             by the rockfish cooperative in response to
                             any members that exceeded their allowed
                             catch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 81285]]

    (4) Additional requirements--(i) Restrictions on fishing CQ 
assigned to a rockfish cooperative. A person fishing CQ assigned to a 
rockfish cooperative must maintain a copy of the CQ permit onboard any 
vessel that is being used to harvest any rockfish primary species, or 
rockfish secondary species, or that uses any rockfish halibut PSC CQ.
    (ii) Transfer of CQ between rockfish cooperatives. Rockfish 
cooperatives may transfer CQ during a calendar year with the following 
restrictions:
    (A) A rockfish cooperative may only transfer CQ to another rockfish 
cooperative;
    (B) A rockfish cooperative may only receive CQ from another 
rockfish cooperative;
    (C) A rockfish cooperative may transfer or receive rockfish CQ only 
if that cooperative has been assigned at least two LLP licenses with 
rockfish QS assigned to those LLP licenses;
    (D) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher vessel sector may not 
transfer any CQ to a rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor 
sector;
    (E) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor sector may not 
transfer any rougheye rockfish CQ or shortraker rockfish CQ to a 
rockfish cooperative in the catcher vessel sector.
    (F) A rockfish cooperative receiving rockfish primary species CQ by 
transfer must assign that rockfish primary species CQ to a member(s) of 
the rockfish cooperative for the purposes of applying the use caps 
established under Sec.  679.82(a). NMFS will not approve a transfer if 
that member would exceed the use cap as a result of the transfer. 
Rockfish secondary species or halibut PSC CQ is not assigned to a 
specific member of a rockfish cooperative;
    (G) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor sector may not 
transfer any sideboard limit assigned to it; and
    (H) After November 15 of the year for which the CQ permit is 
issued, or upon approval of a rockfish cooperative termination of 
fishing declaration described in Sec.  679.4(n)(2):
    (1) A cooperative may only use rockfish primary species and 
rockfish secondary species CQ for transfer;
    (2) A cooperative may not transfer halibut PSC CQ;
    (5) Use of CQ. (i) A rockfish cooperative in the catcher vessel 
sector may not use a rockfish primary species CQ in excess of the 
amounts specified in Sec.  679.82(a).
    (ii) For purposes of CQ use cap calculation, the total amount of CQ 
held or used by a person is equal to all tons of CQ derived from the 
rockfish QS held by that person and assigned to the rockfish 
cooperative and all tons of CQ assigned to that person by the rockfish 
cooperative from approved transfers.
    (iii) The amount of rockfish QS held by a person, and CQ derived 
from that rockfish QS is calculated using the individual and collective 
use cap rule established in Sec.  679.82(a).
    (6) Successors-in-interest. If a member of a rockfish cooperative 
dies (in the case of an individual) or dissolves (in the case of a 
business entity), the LLP license(s) and associated rockfish QS held by 
that person will be transferred to the legal successor-in-interest 
under the procedures described in Sec.  679.4(k)(6)(iv)(A). However, 
the CQ derived from that rockfish QS and assigned to the rockfish 
cooperative for that year from that person remains under the control of 
the rockfish cooperative for the duration of that calendar year. Each 
rockfish cooperative is free to establish its own internal procedures 
for admitting a successor-in-interest during the fishing season to 
reflect the transfer of an LLP license and associated rockfish QS.


Sec.  679.82  Rockfish Program use caps and sideboard limits.

    (a) Use caps --(1) General. (i) Use caps limit the amount of 
rockfish QS that may be held or used by a rockfish eligible harvester 
and the amount of CQ that may be held or used by a rockfish 
cooperative, harvested by a vessel, or received or processed by a 
rockfish processor.
    (ii) Use caps do not apply to halibut PSC CQ.
    (iii) Use caps may not be exceeded unless the entity subject to the 
use cap is specifically allowed to exceed a cap according to the 
criteria established under this paragraph (a), or by an operation of 
law.
    (iv) All rockfish QS use caps are based on the aggregate rockfish 
primary species initial rockfish QS pool established by NMFS in Table 
29 to this part.
    (v) Sablefish and Pacific cod CQ processing use caps are based on 
the amount of CQ assigned to the catcher vessel sector during a 
calendar year.
    (2) Rockfish QS use cap. A person may not individually or 
collectively hold or use more than:
    (i) Four (4.0) percent of the aggregate rockfish primary species QS 
initially assigned to the catcher vessel sector and resulting CQ unless 
that rockfish eligible harvester qualifies for an exemption to this use 
cap under paragraph (a)(6) of this section;
    (ii) Forty (40.0) percent of the aggregate rockfish primary species 
QS initially assigned to the catcher/processor sector and resulting CQ 
unless that rockfish eligible harvester qualifies for an exemption to 
this use cap under paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
    (3) Catcher vessel cooperative rockfish CQ use cap. A catcher 
vessel rockfish cooperative may not hold or use an amount of rockfish 
primary species CQ during a calendar year that is greater than an 
amount resulting from 30.0 percent of the aggregate rockfish primary 
species QS initially assigned to the catcher vessel sector.
    (4) Vessel use cap. (i) A catcher vessel may not harvest an amount 
of rockfish primary species CQ greater than 8.0 percent of the 
aggregate rockfish primary species CQ issued to the catcher vessel 
sector during a calendar year.
    (ii) A catcher/processor vessel may not harvest an amount of 
rockfish primary species CQ greater than 60.0 percent of the aggregate 
rockfish primary species CQ issued to the catcher/processor sector 
during a calendar year.
    (5) Use cap for rockfish processors. (i) A rockfish processor may 
not receive or process an amount of rockfish primary species harvested 
with CQ assigned to the catcher vessel sector greater than 30.0 percent 
of the aggregate rockfish primary species CQ assigned to the catcher 
vessel sector during a calendar year.
    (ii) A rockfish processor may not receive or process an amount of 
Pacific cod harvested with CQ assigned to the catcher vessel sector 
greater than 30.0 percent of Pacific cod CQ issued to the catcher 
vessel sector during a calendar year.
    (iii) A rockfish processor may not receive or process an amount of 
sablefish harvested with CQ assigned to the catcher vessel sector 
greater than 30.0 percent of sablefish CQ issued to the catcher vessel 
sector during a calendar year.
    (iv) The amount of aggregate rockfish primary species, Pacific cod, 
or sablefish CQ assigned to the catcher vessel sector that is received 
by a rockfish processor is calculated based on the sum of all landings 
made with CQ received or processed by that rockfish processor and the 
CQ received or processed by any person affiliated with that rockfish 
processor as that term is defined in Sec.  679.2.
    (6) Use cap exemptions--(i) Rockfish QS. A rockfish QS holder may 
receive an initial allocation of aggregate rockfish QS in excess of the 
use cap in that sector only if that rockfish QS is assigned to LLP 
license(s) held by that rockfish eligible harvester prior to June 14, 
2010,

[[Page 81286]]

and continuously through the time of application for rockfish QS.
    (ii) Transfer limitations. A rockfish eligible harvester that 
receives an initial allocation of aggregate rockfish QS that exceeds 
the use cap listed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall not 
receive any rockfish QS by transfer (except by operation of law) unless 
and until that harvester's holdings of aggregate rockfish QS in that 
sector are reduced to an amount below the use cap specified in 
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (b) Opt-out. Any vessel named on an LLP license that is not named 
on an approved Annual Application for Cooperative Fishing Quota, may 
not fish with any vessel named on the opted-out LLP license during that 
fishing year in any directed fishery for any rockfish primary species 
in the Central GOA and waters adjacent to the Central GOA when the 
rockfish primary species caught by that vessel is deducted from the 
Federal TAC specified under Sec.  679.20.
    (c) Sideboard limitations--General. The regulations in this section 
restrict the vessels and holders of LLP licenses with rockfish legal 
landings that could generate rockfish QS from using the increased 
flexibility provided by the Rockfish Program to expand their level of 
participation in other GOA groundfish fisheries. These limitations are 
commonly known as ``sideboards.''
    (1) Classes of sideboard restrictions. Three types of sideboard 
restrictions apply under the Rockfish Program:
    (i) Catcher vessel sideboard restrictions as described under 
paragraph (d) of this section;
    (ii) Catcher/processor rockfish sideboard restrictions as described 
under paragraph (e) of this section; and,
    (iii) Opt-out sideboard restrictions as described under paragraphs 
(e) and (f) of this section.
    (2) Notification of affected vessel owners and LLP license holders. 
After NMFS determines which vessels and LLP licenses may be subject to 
sideboard limitations as described in paragraphs (d) through (f) of 
this section, NMFS will inform each vessel owner and LLP license holder 
in writing of the type of rockfish sideboard limitation and issue a 
revised Federal Fisheries Permit and/or LLP license that displays the 
sideboard limitation(s) that may apply to that FFP or LLP on its face.
    (3) Appeals. A vessel owner or LLP license holder who believes that 
NMFS has incorrectly identified his or her vessel or LLP license as 
meeting the criteria for a sideboard limitation, or who disagrees with 
the specific sideboard ratio assigned to that LLP license, may make a 
contrary claim and provide evidence to NMFS. All claims must be 
submitted in writing with any documentation or evidence supporting the 
request within 30 days of being notified by NMFS of the sideboard 
limitation. NMFS will provide instructions for submitting such claims 
with the sideboard notification. An applicant must submit any 
documentation or evidence supporting a claim within 30 days of being 
notified by NMFS of the sideboard limitation. If NMFS finds the claim 
is unsupported, the claim will be denied in an Initial Administrative 
Determination (IAD). The affected persons may appeal this IAD using the 
procedures described in Sec.  679.43.
    (4) Duration of sideboard limits. Unless otherwise specified, all 
sideboard limitations established under paragraph (e) of this section 
only apply from July 1 through July 31 of each year.
    (d) Sideboard provisions for catcher vessels--(1) Vessels subject 
to catcher vessel sideboard limits. Any vessel not specified in 
paragraph (d)(2) of this section that NMFS has determined meets any of 
the following criteria is subject to the provisions under this 
paragraph (d):
    (i) Any vessel whose rockfish legal landings could be used to 
generate rockfish QS for the catcher vessel sector; and,
    (ii) Any vessel named on an LLP license under whose authority 
rockfish legal landings were made that could be used to generate 
rockfish QS for the catcher vessel sector.
    (2) Applicability of sideboard provisions for specific catcher 
vessels. The following vessels are exempt from the sideboard limits in 
paragraph (d) of this section:
    (i) Any AFA catcher vessel that is not exempt from GOA groundfish 
sideboards under the AFA as specified under Sec.  679.64(b)(2)(ii);
    (ii) Any vessel that made rockfish legal landings during the 
fishery seasons established in Table 28a to this part and during the 
entry level trawl fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009 established in 
Table 28b to this part and that is designated on an approved 
application for rockfish QS as being excluded from the Rockfish Program 
as specified under Sec.  679.80(d)(4)(ii); and
    (iii) Any vessel named on an LLP license under whose authority 
rockfish legal landings were made during the fishery seasons 
established in Table 28a to this part and during the entry level trawl 
fishery during 2007, 2008, or 2009 established in Table 28b to this 
part if that LLP license is designated on an approved application for 
rockfish QS as being excluded from the Rockfish Program as specified 
under Sec.  679.80(d)(4)(ii).
    (3) Prohibition for directed fishing in the Western GOA and West 
Yakutat District rockfish fishery during July. Vessels subject to the 
provisions in this paragraph (d) may not participate in directed 
fishing in the Western GOA and West Yakutat District for northern 
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish (or in waters 
adjacent to the Western GOA and West Yakutat District when northern 
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish by that 
vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC as specified under Sec.  
679.20) from July 1 through July 31.
    (4) Prohibition for directed fishing in the specific GOA flatfish 
fisheries during July. Vessels subject to the provisions in this 
paragraph (d) may not participate in directed fishing for arrowtooth 
flounder, deep-water flatfish, and rex sole in the GOA (or in waters 
adjacent to the GOA when arrowtooth flounder, deep-water flatfish, and 
rex sole caught by that vessel is deducted from the Federal TAC as 
specified under Sec.  679.20) from July 1 through July 31.
    (e) Rockfish and halibut PSC sideboard provisions for catcher/
processor vessels--(1) Vessels subject to catcher/processor sideboard 
limits. Any vessel that NMFS has determined meets any of the following 
criteria is subject to the provisions under this paragraph (e):
    (i) Any vessel whose rockfish legal landings could be used to 
generate rockfish QS for the catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish 
Program; or
    (ii) Any vessel named on an LLP license under whose authority 
rockfish legal landings were made that could be used to generate 
rockfish QS for the catcher/processor sector in the Rockfish Program.
    (2) Prohibition for directed rockfish fishing in the Western GOA 
and West Yakutat District by non-Amendment 80 vessels assigned to the 
catcher/processor sector. Any vessel that meets the criteria 
established in paragraph (e)(1) of this section and that is not an 
Amendment 80 vessel is prohibited from directed fishing for northern 
rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish in the 
Western GOA and West Yakutat District (or in waters adjacent to the 
Western GOA and West Yakutat District when northern rockfish, Pacific 
ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish by that vessel is deducted from 
the Federal TAC as specified under Sec.  679.20) from July 1 through 
July 31.
    (3) Calculation of rockfish and halibut PSC sideboard limits 
assigned to each

[[Page 81287]]

LLP license in the catcher/processor sector. NMFS will determine 
specific rockfish sideboard ratios for each LLP license assigned to the 
catcher/processor sector that could generate rockfish QS. These 
rockfish sideboard ratios will be noted on the face of an LLP license 
and will be calculated as follows:
    (i) For each rockfish sideboard fishery, divide the retained catch 
of that rockfish sideboard fishery from July 1 through July 31 in each 
year from 2000 through 2006 made under the authority of that LLP 
license, by the total retained catch of that rockfish sideboard fishery 
from July 1 through July 31 in each year from 2000 through 2006 by 
vessels operating under the authority of all eligible LLP licenses in 
the catcher/processor sector.
    (ii) For the deep-water halibut PSC sideboard limit, divide the 
halibut PSC used in the deep-water complex, except in the Central GOA 
rockfish fisheries, from July 1 through July 31 in each year from 2000 
through 2006 under the authority of that LLP license, by the total 
deep-water halibut PSC used from July 1 through July 31 in each year 
from 2000 through 2006 by vessels operating under the authority of all 
LLP licenses in the catcher/processor sector.
    (iii) For the shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limit, divide the 
halibut PSC used in the shallow-water complex from July 1 through July 
31 in each year from 2000 through 2006 under the authority of that LLP 
license, by the total shallow-water halibut PSC used from July 1 
through July 31 in each year from 2000 through 2006 by vessels 
operating under the authority of all LLP licenses in the catcher/
processor sector.
    (4) Western GOA and West Yakutat District rockfish sideboard 
ratios. The rockfish sideboard ratio for each rockfish fishery in the 
Western GOA and West Yakutat District is established in the following 
table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           In the directed fishery       The sideboard limit for the catcher/
  For the management area of the . . .            for . . .                   processor sector is . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Yakutat District..................  Pelagic shelf rockfish....  ** percent of the TAC.
                                         Pacific ocean perch.......  ** percent of the TAC.
Western GOA............................  Pelagic shelf rockfish....  72.3 percent of the TAC.
                                         Pacific ocean perch.......  50.6 percent of the TAC.
                                         Northern rockfish.........  74.3 percent of the TAC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     (5) GOA halibut PSC sideboard ratios. (i) The annual deep-water 
complex halibut PSC sideboard limit in the GOA is 2.5 percent of the 
annual halibut mortality limit.
    (ii) The annual shallow-water complex halibut PSC sideboard limit 
in the GOA is 0.1 percent of the annual halibut mortality limit.
    (6) Assigning a rockfish sideboard limit to a rockfish cooperative. 
Each rockfish cooperative in the catcher/processor sector will be 
assigned a portion of the rockfish sideboard limit for each rockfish 
species established in paragraph (e)(4) of this section according to 
the following formula.
    (i) For each rockfish sideboard fishery specified in paragraph 
(e)(4) of this section, sum the rockfish sideboard ratios of all LLP 
licenses as calculated under paragraph (e)(3) of this section assigned 
to that rockfish cooperative and multiply this result by the amount of 
TAC (in metric tons) assigned to that rockfish sideboard fishery.
    (ii) Once assigned, a catcher/processor rockfish cooperative may 
not exceed any rockfish sideboard limit assigned to that cooperative 
from July 1 through July 31.
    (7) Assigning a rockfish sideboard limit to catcher/processors that 
opt-out of participating in rockfish cooperatives. Holders of catcher/
processor designated LLP licenses that opt-out of participating in a 
rockfish cooperative will receive the portion of each rockfish 
sideboard limit established in paragraph (e)(3) of this section not 
assigned to rockfish cooperatives.
    (8) Management of a rockfish opt-out sideboard limit. (i) If the 
Regional Administrator determines that an annual rockfish sideboard 
limit for opt-out vessels is sufficient to support directed fishing for 
that rockfish sideboard fishery, the Regional Administrator may 
establish a directed fishing allowance applicable to holders of 
catcher/processor designated LLPs that have opted-out of participating 
in a rockfish cooperative.
    (ii) If the Regional Administrator determines that a sideboard 
limit is insufficient to support a directed fishing allowance for that 
rockfish sideboard fishery, then the Regional Administrator may not 
allow directed fishing and set the allowance to zero for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels from July 1 through July 31.
    (iii) Upon determining that a halibut PSC sideboard limit is or 
will be reached, the Regional Administrator will publish notification 
in the Federal Register prohibiting directed fishing for the rockfish 
sideboard fishery in the regulatory area or district for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels that will be effective from July 1 through 
July 31.
    (9) Assigning deep-water and shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard 
limits to a rockfish cooperative. Each rockfish cooperative in the 
catcher/processor sector will be assigned a percentage of the deep-
water and shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limits based on the 
following calculation:
    (i) Sum the deep-water ratios of all LLP licenses assigned to that 
rockfish cooperative and multiply this result by the amount set out in 
paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this section; and
    (ii) Sum the shallow-water ratios of all LLP licenses assigned to 
that rockfish cooperative and multiply this result by the amount set 
out in paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this section; and
    (iii) A rockfish cooperative may not exceed any deep-water or 
shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limit assigned to that cooperative.
    (10) Assigning a halibut PSC limit to catcher/processor opt-out 
vessels. Catcher/processor opt-out vessels will receive the portion of 
the deep-water and shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limit not 
assigned to catcher/processor rockfish cooperatives.
    (11) Management of halibut PSC limits assigned to catcher/processor 
opt-out vessels. (i) If the Regional Administrator determines that a 
halibut PSC sideboard limit for opt-out vessels is sufficient to 
support a directed fishing allowance for groundfish in the deep-water 
or shallow-water halibut PSC complex, then the Regional Administrator 
may establish a directed fishing allowance for that species or species 
group applicable to catcher/processor opt-out vessels.
    (ii) If the Regional Administrator determines that a sideboard 
limit is insufficient to support a directed fishing allowance for 
groundfish in the deep-water or shallow-water halibut PSC complex, then 
the Regional

[[Page 81288]]

Administrator may not allow directed fishing and set the allowance to 
zero for the deep-water or shallow-water halibut PSC complex for 
catcher/processor opt-out vessels from July 1 through July 31.
    (iii) Upon determining that a halibut PSC sideboard limit is or 
will be reached, the Regional Administrator will publish notification 
in the Federal Register prohibiting directed fishing for the species or 
species in that complex for catcher/processors opt-out vessels that 
will be effective from July 1 through July 31. The following specific 
directed fishing closures will be implemented if a halibut PSC 
sideboard limit is reached:
    (A) If the shallow-water halibut PSC sideboard limit for catcher/
processor opt-out vessels is or will be reached, then NMFS will close 
directed fishing in the GOA for:
    (1) Flathead sole; and
    (2) Shallow-water flatfish.
    (B) If the deep-water halibut PSC sideboard limit is or will be 
reached for catcher/processor opt-out vessels, then NMFS will close 
directed fishing in the GOA for:
    (1) Rex sole;
    (2) Deep-water flatfish; and
    (3) Arrowtooth flounder.
    (iv) Halibut PSC accounting. Any halibut mortality occurring under 
a CQ permit from July 1 through July 31 will not apply against the 
halibut PSC sideboard limits established in paragraph (e)(5) of this 
section.
    (f) Sideboard provisions--catcher/processor opt-out provisions--(1) 
Vessels subject to opt-out sideboard provisions. In addition to the 
sideboards for opt-out vessels in paragraphs (e)(7) and (e)(10) of this 
section, any catcher/processor opt-out vessel that NMFS has determined 
meets any of the following criteria is subject to the provisions under 
this paragraph (f):
    (i) Any vessel whose legal rockfish landings could be used to 
generate rockfish QS for the catcher/processor sector that is not 
assigned to a rockfish cooperative; or,
    (ii) Any vessel named on an LLP license under whose authority legal 
rockfish landings were made that could be used to generate rockfish QS 
for the catcher/processor sector and that is not assigned to a rockfish 
cooperative.
    (2) Prohibitions on directed fishing in GOA groundfish fisheries 
without previous participation. (i) Any vessel that is subject to the 
opt-out sideboard restriction under paragraph (f) of this section is 
prohibited from directed fishing in any groundfish fishery in the GOA 
and waters adjacent to the GOA when groundfish caught by that vessel is 
deducted from the Federal TAC specified under Sec.  679.20 (except 
sablefish harvested under the IFQ Program) from July 1 through July 14 
of each year if that vessel has not participated in that directed 
groundfish fishery in any 2 years from 2000 through 2006 during the 
following time periods:
    (A) July 9, 2000, through July 15, 2000;
    (B) July 1, 2001, through July 7, 2001;
    (C) June 30, 2002, through July 6, 2002;
    (D) June 29, 2003, through July 5, 2003;
    (E) July 4, 2004, through July 10, 2004;
    (F) July 3, 2005, through July 9, 2005; and
    (G) July 2, 2006, through July 8, 2006.
    (ii) For purposes of determining participation in a directed 
groundfish fishery for paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section, a vessel 
may participate:
    (A) In the flathead sole and shallow-water flatfish fisheries if 
that vessel participated in a directed groundfish fishery for either of 
these two fisheries during any 2 years during the 2000 through 2006 
qualifying period defined in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section; and
    (B) In the arrowtooth flounder, deep-water flatfish, and rex sole 
fisheries if that vessel participated in a directed groundfish fishery 
for any of these three fisheries during any 2 years during the 2000 
through 2006 qualifying period defined in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this 
section.


Sec.  679.83  Rockfish Program entry level longline fishery.

    (a) Rockfish entry level longline fishery--(1) Rockfish primary 
species allocations. Vessels participating in the rockfish entry level 
longline fishery may collectively harvest an amount not greater than 
the total allocation to the rockfish entry level longline fishery as 
described in Table 28e to this part.
    (2) Participation. Catcher vessels fishing under a CQ permit must 
first be checked-out of the Rockfish Program by the catcher vessel 
cooperative's designated representative to participate in the entry 
level longline fishery (see Sec.  679.5(r)(8)(i)(B) for check-out 
procedures).
    (3) Rockfish secondary species allocations. Rockfish secondary 
species shall not be allocated to the rockfish entry level longline 
fishery. Rockfish secondary species shall be managed based on an MRA 
for the target species as described in Table 10 to this part.
    (4) Opening of the rockfish entry level longline fishery. The 
Regional Administrator maintains the authority to not open the rockfish 
entry level longline fishery if he or she deems it appropriate for 
conservation or other management measures. Factors such as the total 
allocation, anticipated harvest rates, and number of participants will 
be considered in making any such decision.
    (b) [Reserved]


Sec.  679.84  Rockfish Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring, and 
catch accounting.

    (a) Recordkeeping and reporting. See Sec.  679.5(r).
    (b) Permits. See Sec.  679.4(n).
    (c) Catch monitoring requirements for catcher/processors assigned 
to a rockfish cooperative. The requirements under paragraphs (c)(1) 
through (10) of this section apply to any catcher/processor vessel 
assigned to a rockfish cooperative at all times when that vessel has 
groundfish onboard that were harvested under a CQ permit, or that were 
harvested by a vessel subject to a rockfish sideboard limit as 
described under Sec.  679.82(c) through (f), as applicable. The vessel 
owner or operator must ensure that:
    (1) Catch weighing. All catch is weighed on a NMFS-approved scale 
in compliance with the scale requirements at Sec.  679.28(b). Each haul 
must be weighed separately and all catch must be made available for 
sampling by a NMFS-certified observer.
    (2) Observer sampling station. An observer sampling station meeting 
the requirements at Sec.  679.28(d) is available at all times.
    (3) Observer coverage requirements. The vessel is in compliance 
with the observer coverage requirements described at Sec.  
679.50(c)(7)(i).
    (4) Operational line. The vessel has no more than one operational 
line or other conveyance for the mechanized movement of catch between 
the scale used to weigh total catch and the location where the observer 
collects species composition samples.
    (5) Fish on deck. No fish are allowed to remain on deck unless an 
observer is present, except for fish inside the codend and fish spilled 
from the codend during hauling and dumping. Fish spilled from the 
codend must be moved to the fish bin.
    (6) Sample storage. The vessel owner or operator provides 
sufficient space to accommodate a minimum of 10 observer sampling 
baskets. This space must be within or adjacent to the observer sample 
station.
    (7) Pre-cruise meeting. The Observer Program Office is notified by 
phone at 1-(907) 271-1702 at least 24 hours prior to departure when the 
vessel will be carrying an observer who had not previously been 
deployed on that vessel within the last 12 months. Subsequent

[[Page 81289]]

to the vessel's departure notification, but prior to departure, NMFS 
may contact the vessel to arrange for a pre-cruise meeting. The pre-
cruise meeting must minimally include the vessel operator or manager 
and any observers assigned to the vessel.
    (8) Belt and flow operations. The vessel operator stops the flow of 
fish and clears all belts between the bin doors and the area where the 
observer collects samples of unsorted catch when requested to do so by 
the observer.
    (9) Vessel crew in tanks or bins. The vessel owner or operator must 
comply with the bin monitoring standards specified in Sec.  679.28(i).
    (10) Mixing of hauls. Catch from an individual haul is not mixed 
with catch from another haul prior to sampling by a NMFS-certified 
observer;
    (d) Catch monitoring requirements for catcher/processors opt-out 
vessels. The requirements under paragraphs (c)(1) through (9) of this 
section apply to any catcher/processor opt-out vessels at all times 
when that vessel has groundfish onboard that were harvested by a vessel 
subject to a sideboard limit as described under Sec.  679.82(f), as 
applicable. The vessel owner or operator must ensure that:
    (1) Catch from an individual haul is not mixed with catch from 
another haul prior to sampling by a NMFS-certified observer;
    (2) All catch be made available for sampling by a NMFS-certified 
observer; and
    (3) The requirements in paragraphs (c)(3), (c)(4), (c)(5), (c)(8), 
and (c)(9) of this section are met.
    (e) Catch monitoring requirements for catcher vessels. The owner or 
operator of a catcher vessel must ensure the vessel complies with the 
observer coverage requirements described in Sec.  679.50(c)(7)(ii) at 
all times the vessel is participating in a rockfish cooperative.
    (f) Catch monitoring requirements for shoreside processors--(1) 
Catch monitoring and control plan (CMCP). The owner or operator of a 
shoreside processor receiving deliveries from a catcher vessel 
described in Sec.  679.50(c)(7)(ii) must ensure the shoreside processor 
complies with the CMCP requirements described in Sec.  679.28(g).
    (2) Catch weighing. All groundfish landed by catcher vessels 
described in Sec.  679.50(c)(7)(ii) must be sorted, weighed on a scale 
approved by the State of Alaska as described in Sec.  679.28(c), and be 
made available for sampling by an observer, NMFS staff, or any 
individual authorized by NMFS. Any of these persons must be allowed to 
test any scale used to weigh groundfish to determine its accuracy.
    (g) Catch accounting--(1) Rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species. All rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary 
species harvests (including harvests of those species in waters 
adjacent to the Central GOA that are deducted from the Federal TAC as 
specified under Sec.  679.20) of a vessel, that is named on an LLP 
license that is assigned to a rockfish cooperative and fishing under a 
CQ permit, will be debited against the CQ for that rockfish cooperative 
from May 1:
    (i) Until November 15; or
    (ii) Until that rockfish cooperative has submitted a rockfish 
cooperative termination of fishing declaration that has been approved 
by NMFS.
    (2) Rockfish halibut PSC. All halibut PSC in the Central GOA 
(including halibut PSC in the waters adjacent to the Central GOA when 
rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary species caught by that 
vessel are deducted from the Federal TAC specified under Sec.  679.20) 
used by a vessel, that is named on an LLP license that is assigned to a 
rockfish cooperative and fishing under a CQ permit, will be debited 
against the CQ for that rockfish cooperative from May 1,
    (i) Until November 15; or
    (ii) Until the designated representative of that rockfish 
cooperative has submitted a rockfish cooperative termination of fishing 
declaration that has been approved by NMFS.
    (3) Groundfish sideboard limits. All groundfish harvests (including 
harvests of those species in waters adjacent to the Central GOA that 
are deducted from the Federal TAC as specified under Sec.  679.20) of a 
catcher/processor vessel that is subject to a sideboard limit for that 
groundfish species as described under Sec.  679.82(e), except 
groundfish harvested by a vessel fishing under a CQ permit in the 
Central GOA, will be debited against the sideboard limit established 
for that sector or rockfish cooperative, as applicable.
    (4) Halibut sideboard limits. All halibut PSC in the GOA (including 
halibut PSC in the waters adjacent to the GOA when rockfish primary 
species and rockfish secondary species caught by that vessel are 
deducted from the Federal TAC specified under Sec.  679.20) used by a 
catcher/processor vessel, except halibut PSC used by a vessel fishing 
under a CQ permit in the Central GOA, will be debited against the 
sideboard limit established for the rockfish cooperative or catcher/
processor opt-out vessel, as applicable from July 1 until July 31.


Sec.  679.85  Cost recovery.

    (a) Cost recovery fees--(1) Responsibility. The person documented 
on the rockfish CQ permit as the permit holder at the time of a 
rockfish CQ landing must comply with the requirements of this section.
    (i) Subsequent transfer of rockfish CQ or rockfish QS held by 
rockfish cooperative members does not affect the rockfish CQ permit 
holder's liability for noncompliance with this section.
    (ii) Non-renewal of a rockfish CQ permit does not affect the CQ 
permit holder's liability for noncompliance with this section.
    (iii) Changes in the membership in a rockfish cooperative, such as 
members joining or departing during the relevant year, or changes in 
the amount of rockfish QS holdings of those members does not affect the 
rockfish CQ permit holder's liability for noncompliance with this 
section.
    (2) Fee collection. All rockfish CQ holders who receive rockfish CQ 
are responsible for submitting the cost recovery payment for all 
rockfish CQ landings made under the authority of their rockfish CQ 
permit.
    (3) Payment--(i) Payment due date. A rockfish CQ permit holder must 
submit any rockfish cost recovery fee liability payment(s) to NMFS at 
the address provided in paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section no later 
than February 15 of the year following the calendar year in which the 
rockfish CQ landings were made.
    (ii) Payment recipient. Make electronic payment payable to NMFS.
    (iii) Payment address. Submit payment and related documents as 
instructed on the fee submission form. Payments must be made 
electronically through the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. Instructions for electronic payment will be 
made available on both the payment Web site and a fee liability summary 
letter mailed to the CQ permit holder.
    (iv) Payment method. Payment must be made electronically in U.S. 
dollars by automated clearing house, credit card, or electronic check 
drawn on a U.S. bank account.
    (b) Rockfish standard ex-vessel value determination and use--(1) 
General. A CQ permit holder must use the rockfish standard ex-vessel 
value determined by NMFS under paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
    (2) Rockfish standard ex-vessel value--(i) General. Each year the 
Regional Administrator will publish rockfish standard ex-vessel values 
in the Federal Register during the first quarter of each calendar year. 
The standard prices will be described in U.S. dollars

[[Page 81290]]

per equivalent pound, for rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species landings made by rockfish CQ holders during the 
previous calendar year.
    (ii) Effective duration. The rockfish standard ex-vessel value 
published by NMFS shall apply to all rockfish primary species and 
rockfish secondary species landings made by a rockfish CQ holder during 
the previous calendar year.
    (iii) Determination. NMFS will calculate the rockfish standard ex-
vessel value to reflect, as closely as possible by month, the 
variations in the actual ex-vessel values of landings based on 
information provided in the Rockfish Ex-vessel Volume and Value Report 
as described in Sec.  679.5(r)(10). The Regional Administrator will 
base rockfish standard ex-vessel values on the following types of 
information:
    (A) Landed pounds by rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species landings and month;
    (B) Total ex-vessel value by rockfish primary species and rockfish 
secondary species landings and month; and
    (C) Price adjustments, including retroactive payments.
    (c) Rockfish fee percentage--(1) Established percentage. The 
rockfish fee percentage is the amount as determined by the factors and 
methodology described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. This amount 
will be announced by publication in the Federal Register in accordance 
with paragraph (c)(3) of this section. This amount must not exceed 3.0 
percent pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1854(d)(2)(B).
    (2) Calculating fee percentage value. Each year NMFS shall 
calculate and publish the fee percentage according to the following 
factors and methodology:
    (i) Factors. NMFS must use the following factors to determine the 
fee percentage:
    (A) The catch to which the rockfish cost recovery fee will apply;
    (B) The ex-vessel value of that catch; and
    (C) The costs directly related to the management, data collection, 
and enforcement of the Rockfish Program.
    (ii) Methodology. NMFS must use the following equations to 
determine the fee percentage:

100 x DPC/V

where:
DPC = the direct program costs for the Rockfish Program for the 
previous calendar year with any adjustments to the account from 
payments received in the previous year.
V = total of the standard ex-vessel value of the catch subject to 
the rockfish cost recovery fee liability for the current year.

    (3) Publication--(i) General. During the first quarter of the year 
following the calendar year in which the rockfish CQ landings were 
made, NMFS shall calculate the rockfish fee percentage based on the 
calculations described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
    (ii) Effective period. The calculated rockfish fee percentage is 
applied to rockfish CQ landings made in the previous calendar year.
    (4) Applicable percentage. The CQ permit holder must use the 
rockfish fee percentage applicable at the time a rockfish primary 
species and rockfish secondary species landing is debited from a 
rockfish CQ allocation to calculate the rockfish cost recovery fee 
liability for any retroactive payments for that rockfish primary 
species and rockfish secondary species.
    (5) Fee liability determination for a rockfish CQ holder. (i) All 
rockfish CQ holders will be subject to a fee liability for any rockfish 
primary species and rockfish secondary species CQ debited from a 
rockfish CQ allocation during a calendar year.
    (ii) The rockfish fee liability assessed to a rockfish CQ holder 
will be based on the proportion of the standard ex-vessel value of 
rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary species debited from a 
rockfish CQ holder relative to all rockfish CQ holders during a 
calendar year as determined by NMFS.
    (iii) NMFS will provide a fee liability summary letter to all CQ 
permit holders during the first quarter of the year following the 
calendar year in which the rockfish CQ landings were made. The summary 
will explain the fee liability determination including the current fee 
percentage, details of rockfish primary species and rockfish secondary 
species CQ pounds debited from rockfish CQ allocations by permit, 
species, date, and prices.
    (d) Underpayment of fee liability. (1) Pursuant to Sec.  679.81(f), 
no rockfish CQ holder will receive any rockfish CQ until the rockfish 
CQ holder submits a complete application. A complete application shall 
include full payment of an applicant's complete rockfish cost recovery 
fee liability.
    (2) If a rockfish CQ holder fails to submit full payment for 
rockfish cost recovery fee liability by the date described in paragraph 
(a)(3) of this section, the Regional Administrator may:
    (i) At any time thereafter send an IAD to the CQ permit holder 
stating that the CQ permit holder's estimated fee liability, as 
indicated by his or her own submitted information, is the rockfish cost 
recovery fee liability due from the CQ permit holder.
    (ii) Disapprove any application to transfer rockfish CQ to or from 
the CQ permit holder in accordance with Sec.  679.81(g).
    (3) If a rockfish CQ holder fails to submit full payment by the 
rockfish cost recovery fee liability payment deadline described at 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section:
    (i) No CQ permit will be issued to that rockfish CQ holder for that 
calendar year; and
    (ii) No rockfish CQ will be issued based on the rockfish QS held by 
the members of that rockfish cooperative to any other CQ permit for 
that calendar year.
    (4) Upon final agency action determining that a CQ permit holder 
has not paid his or her rockfish cost recovery fee liability, the 
Regional Administrator may continue to prohibit issuance of a CQ permit 
for any subsequent calendar years until NMFS receives the unpaid fees. 
If payment is not received by the 30th day after the final agency 
action, the agency may pursue collection of the unpaid fees.
    (e) Over payment. Upon issuance of final agency action, payment 
submitted to NMFS in excess of the rockfish cost recovery fee liability 
determined to be due by the final agency action will be returned to the 
CQ permit holder unless the permit holder requests the agency to credit 
the excess amount against the permit holder's future rockfish cost 
recovery fee liability. Payment processing fees may be deducted from 
any fees returned to the CQ permit holder.
    (f) Appeals. A CQ permit holder who receives an IAD for incomplete 
payment of a rockfish fee liability may appeal the IAD pursuant to 50 
CFR 679.43.

0
11. Remove Table 28 to part 679 and add Tables 28a through 28e to part 
679 to read as follows:

[[Page 81291]]



                                 Table 28a to Part 679--Qualifying Season Dates for Central GOA Rockfish Primary Species
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Year
   A Legal Rockfish Landing   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           includes                  2000              2001              2002              2003              2004             2005             2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern rockfish that were    July 4-July 26..  July 1-July 23..  June 30-July 21.  June 29-July 29.  July 4-July 25.  July 5-July 24.  July 1-July 21.
 harvested in the Central GOA                    and Oct. 1-Oct.
 between. . .                                     21.
and landed by................  Aug. 2..........  July 30 and Oct.  July 28.........  Aug. 5..........  Aug. 1.........  July 31........  July 28.
                                                  28,
                                                  respectively.
Pelagic shelf rockfish that    July 4-July 26..  July 1-July 23    June 30-July 21.  June 29-July 31.  July 4-July 25.  July 5-July 24,  July 1-July 21
 were harvested in the                            and Oct. 1-Oct.                                                        Sept. 1-Sept     and Oct. 2-
 Central GOA between. . .                         21.                                                                    4, and Sept. 8-  Oct. 8.
                                                                                                                         Sept. 10.
and landed by................  Aug. 2..........  July 30 and Oct.  July 28.........  Aug. 7..........  Aug. 1.........  July 31, Sept.   July 28 and
                                                  28,                                                                    11, and Sept.    Oct. 15,
                                                  respectively.                                                          17,              respectively.
                                                                                                                         respectively.
Pacific ocean perch that were  July 4-July 15..  July 1-July 12..  June 30-July 8..  June 29-July 8..  July 4-July 12.  July 5-July 14.  July 1-July 6.
 harvested in the Central GOA
 between. . .
and landed by................  July 22.........  July 19.........  July 15.........  July 15.........  July 19........  July 21........  July 13.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


             Table 28b to Part 679--Qualifying Season Dates for Central GOA Rockfish Primary Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Rockfish Legal Landing includes
              . . .                           2007                      2008                      2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern rockfish that were        Sept. 1-Nov. 8...........  Sept. 1-Nov. 15.........  Sept. 1-Nov. 15.
 harvested by vessels authorized
 to fish in the rockfish entry
 level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by....................  Nov. 15..................  Nov. 22.................  Nov. 22.
Pelagic shelf rockfish that were   Sept. 1-Nov. 15..........  Sept. 1-Nov. 15.........  Sept. 1-Nov. 15.
 harvested by vessels authorized
 to fish in the rockfish entry
 level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by....................  Nov. 22..................  Nov. 22.................  Nov. 22.
Pacific ocean perch that were      May 1-May 17; July 1-Aug.  July 1-July 27..........  July 1-Nov. 15.
 harvested by vessels authorized    1.
 to fish in the rockfish entry
 level trawl fishery between. . .
and landed by....................  Aug. 8...................  Aug. 3..................  Nov. 22.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         Table 28c to Part 679--Allocation of Rockfish Secondary Species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        The following percentage of the Central GOA TAC is allocated to rockfish
                                                                cooperatives as CQ . . .
 For the following rockfish secondary  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
             species . . .              For the catcher vessel sector . . .   For the catcher/processor sector .
                                                                                             . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pacific cod...........................  3.81%..............................  N/A
Sablefish.............................  6.78%..............................  3.51%
Rougheye rockfish.....................  N/A................................  58.87%
Shortraker rockfish...................  N/A................................  40.00%
Thornyhead rockfish...................  7.84%..............................  26.50%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


             Table 28d to Part 679--Allocation of Halibut PSC under the Central GOA Rockfish Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           The following amount
                                                                         To yield the        of halibut is not
   For the following rockfish       The following      Is multiplied   following amount    assigned as rockfish
         sectors . . .           amount of halibut .     by . . .       of halibut PSC      CQ, halibut PSC, or
                                         . .                              assigned as     halibut IFQ for use by
                                                                       rockfish CQ . . .     any person . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Catcher vessel sector..........  134.1 mt...........           0.875  117.3 mt..........  27.4 mt (16.8 mt from
                                                                                           the catcher vessel
                                                                                           sector and 10.6 mt
                                                                                           from the catcher/
                                                                                           processor sector).
Catcher/processor sector.......  84.7 mt............  ..............  74.1 mt...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 81292]]


                    Table 28e to Part 679--Rockfish Entry Level Longline Fishery Allocations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     If the catch of a
                                                                     rockfish primary         Except that the
                                                                     species during a      maximum amount of the
                                                                   calendar year exceeds    TAC assigned to the
                                                                     90 percent of the       Rockfish Program
   The allocation to the rockfish                                   allocation for that    (after deducting the
  entry level longline fishery for                                   rockfish primary        incidental catch
   the following rockfish primary       For 2012 will be . . .       species then the     allowance) that may be
           species . . .                                            allocation of that       allocated to the
                                                                     rockfish primary      rockfish entry level
                                                                      species in the       non-trawl fishery for
                                                                    following calendar     each rockfish primary
                                                                   year will increase by     species is . . .
                                                                           . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northern rockfish..................  5 mt.......................  5 mt..................  2 percent.
Pacific ocean perch................  5 mt.......................  5 mt..................  1 percent.
Pelagic shelf rockfish.............  30 mt......................  20 mt.................  5 percent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
17. Revise Tables 29 and 30 to part 679 to read as follows:

                                 Table 29 to Part 679--Initial Rockfish QS Pools
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Aggregate Primary
    Initial Rockfish QS Pool       Northern Rockfish     Pelagic Shelf       Pacific Ocean      Species Initial
                                                           Rockfish              Perch         Rockfish QS Pool
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Rockfish QS Pool........        Based on the Rockfish Program official record on February 14, 2012.
Initial Rockfish QS Pool for the
 Catcher/Processor Sector..
Initial Rockfish QS Pool for the
 Catcher Vessel Sector..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


             Table 30 to Part 679--Rockfish Program Retainable Percentages (in round wt. equivalent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          MRA as a percentage of
                                                                                         total retained rockfish
               Fishery                     Incidental Catch              Sector            primary species and
                                               Species                                      rockfish secondary
                                                                                                 species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels fishing   Pacific cod............  Catcher/Processor......  4.0 percent.
 under a Rockfish CQ permit.
                                       Shortraker/Rougheye      Catcher Vessel.........  2.0 percent.
                                        aggregate catch.
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                See rockfish non-allocated species for ``other species''
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rockfish non-allocated species for     Pollock................  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
 Rockfish Cooperative vessels fishing                            Catcher Vessel.
 under a Rockfish CQ permit.
                                       Deep-water flatfish....  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Rex sole...............  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Flathead sole..........  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Shallow-water flatfish.  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Arrowtooth flounder....  Catcher/Processor and    35.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Other rockfish.........  Catcher/Processor and    15.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Atka mackerel..........  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Aggregated forage fish.  Catcher/Processor and    2.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Skates.................  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
                                       Other species..........  Catcher/Processor and    20.0 percent.
                                                                 Catcher Vessel.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Longline gear Rockfish Entry Level                             See Table 10 to this part.
 Fishery.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opt-out vessels......................                          See Table 10 to this part.
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 81293]]

 
Rockfish Cooperative Vessels not                               See Table 10 to this part.
 fishing under a CQ permit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-32873 Filed 12-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P