[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 73 (Tuesday, April 16, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15566-15579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07179]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 181015951-9259-01]
RIN 0648-BI53
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Halibut Deck
Sorting Monitoring Requirements for Trawl Catcher/Processors Operating
in Non-Pollock Groundfish Fisheries off Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement catch handling and
monitoring requirements to allow Pacific halibut (halibut) bycatch to
be sorted on the deck of trawl catcher/processors and motherships
participating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries off Alaska.
Halibut bycatch is required to be discarded and returned to the sea
with a minimum of injury in the directed groundfish fisheries in the
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) and Gulf of Alaska (GOA)
management areas. This action includes additional minor regulatory
changes that will improve consistency and clarity of existing
regulations, remove unnecessary and outdated regulations, and update
cross references to reflect these proposed regulations. This action is
intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Groundfish of the GOA (GOA FMP), the
FMP for Groundfish of the BSAI Management Area (BSAI FMP), and other
applicable law.
DATES: Submit comments on or before May 16, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0122,
by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to
[[Page 15567]]
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0122, click the
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or
attach your comments.
Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region
NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802-1668.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information,
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of the Regulatory Impact Review (referred to as
the ``Analysis'') and the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this
proposed rule may be obtained from http://www.regulations.gov or from
the NMFS Alaska Region website at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
proposed rule may be submitted to NMFS at the above address; by email
to [email protected]; or by fax to 202-395-5806.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Krieger, 907-586-7228 or
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority for Action
NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic
zone under the GOA FMP and under the BSAI FMP. The North Pacific
Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared these FMPs under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMPs
groundfish of the GOA and BSAI appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
II. Background
Pacific halibut (Hippoglossus stenolepis) is fully utilized in
Alaska as a target species in subsistence, personal use, recreational
(sport), and commercial halibut fisheries. Halibut has significant
social, cultural, and economic importance to fishery participants and
fishing communities throughout the geographical range of the resource.
Halibut is also incidentally taken as bycatch in groundfish fisheries.
The Magnuson-Stevens Act defines bycatch as ``fish which are harvested
in a fishery, but which are not sold or kept for personal use, and
includes economic discards and regulatory discards. The term does not
include fish released alive under a recreational catch and release
fishery management program.'' 16 U.S.C 1802 3(2).
The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) and NMFS manage
halibut fisheries through regulations established under the authority
of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act) (16 U.S.C.
773-773k). The IPHC adopts regulations governing the target fishery for
halibut under the Convention between the United States and Canada for
the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the North Pacific Ocean and
Bering Sea (Convention), signed at Ottawa, Ontario, on March 2, 1953,
as amended by a Protocol Amending the Convention (signed at Washington,
DC, on March 29, 1979). For the United States, regulations governing
the fishery for Pacific halibut developed by the IPHC are subject to
acceptance by the Secretary of State with concurrence from the
Secretary of Commerce. After acceptance by the Secretary of State and
the Secretary of Commerce, NMFS publishes the IPHC regulations in the
Federal Register as annual management measures pursuant to 50 CFR
300.62. The final rule implementing IPHC regulations for 2019 published
on March 14, 2019 (84 FR 9243).
Section 773c(c) of the Halibut Act also provides the Council with
authority to develop regulations that are in addition to, and not in
conflict with, approved IPHC regulations. The Council has exercised
this authority in the development of Federal regulations for the
halibut fishery such as (1) subsistence halibut fishery management
measures, codified at Sec. 300.65; (2) the limited access program for
charter vessels in the guided sport fishery, codified at Sec. 300.67;
and (3) the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program for the commercial
halibut and sablefish fisheries, codified at 50 CFR part 679, under the
authority of section 773c(c) of the Halibut Act and section 303(b) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
NMFS has implemented regulations that limit the amount of halibut
bycatch in the directed groundfish fisheries in the BSAI and GOA.
Regulations establish specific limits on the amount of halibut bycatch,
PSC limits, in specific groundfish fisheries in the BSAI and GOA. These
PSC limits are based on the amount of halibut discard mortality
estimated under specific monitoring procedures. NMFS has implemented
halibut PSC limits consistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act to minimize bycatch to the extent practicable while
achieving, on a continuing basis, optimum yield from the groundfish
fisheries.
In recent years, catch limits for the commercial halibut fishery in
the BSAI and GOA have declined in response to changing halibut stock
conditions. Most recently, NMFS implemented Amendment 111 to the BSAI
FMP (81 FR 24714, April 27, 2016), and Amendment 95 to the GOA FMP (79
FR 9625, February 20, 2014), to further reduce PSC limits for Pacific
halibut in the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries.
NFMS proposes regulations to implement catch handling and
monitoring requirements to allow halibut bycatch to be sorted on the
deck of trawl catcher/processors (CPs) and motherships when operating
in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries off Alaska. The monitoring
requirements included in this action have been developed and tested on
vessels participating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries. The
harvest of non-pollock groundfish fisheries may be limited by existing
halibut PSC limits and participating vessels are operationally
different than vessels participating in pollock fisheries. As such, the
scope of this action is limited to vessels participating in the non-
pollock groundfish fisheries. This proposed rule would not modify
existing halibut PSC limits, but it would allow halibut to be discarded
faster than current monitoring requirements allow which could reduce
halibut discard mortality. Reducing halibut discard mortality could
maximize prosecution of the directed non-pollock groundfish fisheries
that otherwise might be constrained by restrictive halibut PSC limits,
and may also benefit vessels participating in the directed halibut
fishery by returning more live halibut to the water.
This proposed rule would allow three categories of CPs and
motherships to participate in deck sorting in the non-pollock
groundfish fisheries. This proposed rule would allow deck sorting for:
(1) Vessels operating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries in the
BSAI and GOA under the Amendment 80 Program (72 FR 52667, September 14,
2007), also referred to as the Amendment 80 sector, (2) vessels
harvesting non-pollock groundfish in
[[Page 15568]]
the BSAI under the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program
(CDQ Program, also referred to as the CDQ Sector), and (3) CPs and
motherships harvesting non-pollock groundfish in the BSAI trawl limited
access sector (TLAS). The term ``mothership'' is defined in regulation
at Sec. 679.2, and it includes vessels that receive catch from other
vessels. See section 3 of the Analysis for a detailed description of
the affected fisheries. The following sections provide descriptions of
(1) the affected fisheries and halibut PSC management; (2) current
monitoring requirements; (3) the need for this action; and (4) the
proposed rule.
III. The Affected Fisheries and Halibut PSC Management
This action would be applicable to CPs and motherships using trawl
gear in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries off Alaska. This includes
vessels participating in the Amendment 80 sector, BSAI TLAS, and the
CDQ Sector. Existing monitoring requirements such as observer coverage,
video monitoring systems, and other requirements for the affected
vessels are described at Sec. Sec. 679.28, 679.32, 679.51, 679.63,
679.84, and 679.93. The following section describes the affected
fisheries and halibut PSC management.
A. The Affected Fisheries
1. Amendment 80 Sector
The BSAI non-pollock groundfish fishery has been prosecuted mostly
by a fleet of trawl CPs. These CPs are managed under the Amendment 80
Program. The Amendment 80 Program is a catch share program that
allocates several BSAI non-pollock trawl species among fishing sectors,
and facilitates the formation of harvesting cooperatives in the non-
American Fisheries Act (AFA) trawl CP sector. The AFA is a limited
access program for Bering Sea pollock implemented by statute in 1998
(Pub. L. 105-277, 16 U.S.C. 1851 statutory note).
The Amendment 80 sector is composed of 28 CPs with history of
harvesting non-pollock groundfish in the BSAI. Species allocated to the
Amendment 80 sector include: Aleutian Islands Pacific ocean perch, BSAI
Atka mackerel, BSAI flathead sole, BSAI Pacific cod, BSAI rock sole,
and BSAI yellowfin sole. In addition, the Amendment 80 cooperatives and
vessels receive allocations of Pacific halibut and crab PSC limits for
use while fishing in the BSAI to constrain bycatch, or unintended take,
of these species while harvesting groundfish. Amendment 80 allocates
the six target species and five prohibited species in the BSAI to the
CP sector and allows qualified vessels to form cooperatives. These
voluntary harvest cooperatives coordinate use of the target
allocations, incidental catch allowances, and prohibited species
allocations among active member vessels. Detailed information on the
Amendment 80 Program is available in the final rule implementing the
program (72 FR 52667, September 14, 2007), and at the Alaska Region
website: (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/amendment-80).
Some Amendment 80 vessels also participate in the Central GOA
Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program). This rule proposes that these
vessels would be able to deck sort halibut PSC while participating in
the Rockfish Program. The Rockfish Program is a limited access
privilege program established under section 303A of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act (76 FR 81248, December 27, 2011). As described later in
this preamble, some of the provisions in this proposed rule would also
affect monitoring provisions applicable to CPs participating in the
Rockfish Program. Detailed information on the Rockfish Program is
available in the final rule implementing the program (76 FR 81248,
December 27, 2011), and at the Alaska Region website: (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/central-goa-rockfish-program).
2. BSAI TLAS (Trawl Limited Access Sector)
When the Amendment 80 Program was implemented, it allocated
specific amounts of non-pollock Amendment 80 species, including PSC
species, to non-Amendment 80 vessels that that comprise the BSAI TLAS.
The BSAI TLAS includes AFA CPs, AFA catcher vessels (CVs), and other
non-AFA CVs. The BSAI TLAS comprises all the trawl vessels in the BSAI
except the Amendment 80 CPs. The BSAI TLAS fishery provides harvesting
opportunities of some Amendment 80 species by non-Amendment 80 vessels.
Each year, NMFS allocates an amount of each Amendment 80 target
species available for harvest, called the initial allowable catch, and
crab and halibut PSC to the Amendment 80 sector and the BSAI TLAS
sector, with the TLAS allocations representing a small proportion of
overall allocation of Amendment 80 species. NMFS apportions the BSAI
TLAS sector's PSC limit into PSC allowances among the following trawl
fishery categories: (1) Yellowfin sole fishery, (2) rock sole/flathead
sole/ ``other flatfish'' fishery, (3) Greenland turbot/arrowtooth
flounder/Kamchatka flounder/sablefish fishery, (4) rockfish fishery,
(5) Pacific cod fishery, and (6) pollock/Atka mackerel/``other
species'' fishery, which includes the midwater pollock fishery.
Under this proposed rule, AFA vessels would not be eligible to
participate in halibut deck sorting when operating in pollock
fisheries. However, vessels participating in the BSAI TLAS fishery--
which may include AFA vessels--may choose to participate in halibut
deck sorting when operating in non-pollock fisheries in the BSAI TLAS.
Detailed information on the BSAI TLAS is available in the final rule
implementing the Amendment 80 Program (72 FR 52667, September 14,
2007), and at the Alaska Region website: (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/amendment-80).
3. The CDQ Sector
The CDQ sector includes all trawl and non-trawl vessels that
harvest groundfish under the CDQ Program. The CDQ Program consists of
six different non-profit managing organizations (CDQ groups)
representing different geographical regions in Alaska. The CDQ Program
receives annual allocations of TAC for a variety of commercially
valuable species in the BSAI groundfish, crab, and halibut fisheries,
which are then allocated among the CDQ groups. The halibut PSC limit is
divided among the six CDQ groups by established percentages (71 FR
51804, August 31, 2006). Each CDQ group receives an apportionment of
this halibut PSC limit as halibut prohibited species quota (PSQ), which
is a specific amount of halibut that vessels fishing for that CDQ group
may use in a year. The CDQ group manages the use of its halibut PSQ
apportionment. The CDQ group has the responsibility to ensure that the
vessels fishing its CDQ groundfish allocation do not use halibut PSQ in
excess of the amount of the CDQ group's halibut PSQ. This limit is
enforced at Sec. 679.7(d)(3), which prohibits a CDQ group from
exceeding its apportionment of halibut PSQ. Detailed information on the
CDQ Program is at the Alaska Region website: (https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/fisheries/cdq).
B. Halibut PSC Management
Table 2b to 50 CFR part 679 and Sec. 679.2 define halibut caught
incidentally to directed fishing for groundfish as PSC. Halibut PSC in
the directed groundfish fisheries of the GOA and BSAI are regulated
under Sec. 679.21. These regulations require that all vessels minimize
catch of prohibited species and that all vessels discard PSC with a
minimum of injury after allowing for
[[Page 15569]]
sampling by an observer. NMFS established requirements to discard
halibut caught with trawl gear in 1977 (42 FR 9297, February 15, 1977).
These requirements are intended to minimize the incidental catch of
halibut in the trawl fisheries, as well as minimize the mortality of
discarded halibut. NMFS requirements are also consistent with long-
standing regulations adopted by the IPHC that prohibit the retention of
halibut by trawl (see 2018 Annual Management Measures found at: https://iphc.int/uploads/pdf/regs/iphc-2018-regs.pdf).
Although participants in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries are
under an obligation to avoid halibut, all halibut cannot be avoided.
The groundfish fisheries cannot be prosecuted without some amount of
halibut PSC because groundfish and halibut occur in the same areas at
the same times and because no fishing gear or technique has been
developed that can avoid all halibut PSC. NMFS manages halibut PSC in
the BSAI groundfish fisheries by (1) establishing halibut PSC limits
for trawl and non-trawl fisheries; (2) apportioning those halibut PSC
limits among groundfish sectors, fishery categories, and seasons; and
(3) managing groundfish fisheries to prevent halibut PSC use from
exceeding the established limits.
While halibut is taken as bycatch by vessels using all types of
gear (trawl, hook-and-line, pot, and jig), halibut bycatch in the BSAI
primarily occurs in the groundfish fisheries using hook-and-line and
trawl gear. Though halibut bycatch occurs in both the GOA and the BSAI,
the greatest portion by weight of halibut bycatch occurs in the BSAI.
To monitor halibut PSC limits and apportionments, the Regional
Administrator uses observer data on halibut incidental catch rates,
halibut discard mortality rates (DMRs), and estimates of groundfish
catch to project when a fishery's halibut PSC limit or seasonal
apportionment is reached. Halibut incidental catch rates (weight of
halibut caught per weight of groundfish total catch) are based on
estimates derived from observer data of halibut incidental catch in the
groundfish fisheries. DMRs are estimates of the proportion of
incidentally caught halibut that will not survive after being returned
to the sea with values ranging from 0% (all halibut survived) to 100%
(no halibut survived). DMRs are calculated annually on a fleet-wide
basis using methodology developed by NMFS, the IPHC, and in
consultation with the Council. DMRs are published in harvest
specification tables in the Federal Register. For a given haul, the
appropriate DMR is applied based on gear, sector, and year. The
cumulative halibut mortality that accrues to a particular halibut PSC
limit is the product of a DMR multiplied by the estimated halibut PSC.
See section 1.3.2 of the Analysis for additional detail about the DMR
estimation process.
To minimize halibut mortality, NMFS requires that all halibut must
be returned to the sea as soon as possible after they have been sampled
by observers. However, current regulations require observers onboard
trawl CPs and motherships to complete data collection duties in the
factory of the vessel after the unsorted catch has been weighed on a
motion compensated at-sea flow scale (flow scale). Halibut mortality
increases with increased handling and time out of water (see section
1.3.5 of the Analysis for additional detail). In the non-pollock
groundfish fisheries most of the halibut are typically out of the water
for long periods of time, such as 3 to 4 hours in some cases, and are
usually dead or in poor viability condition at the time of discard
after weighing and sorting in the factory. This results in high halibut
DMRs for the non-pollock groundfish fishery, which in turn, results in
high halibut PSC mortality estimates.
Current Monitoring Requirements
NMFS uses observer data to provide reliable estimates of allocated
species in catch share and reliable estimates of total catch and
bycatch in non-catch share fisheries. Since 1999 with the
implementation of the CDQ Program, closely followed by the
implementation of AFA Program in 2002, NMFS has consistently imposed
additional monitoring requirements on vessels participating in
groundfish catch share programs. These monitoring requirements are
necessary because of the unique incentives to misreport catch that are
created by the act of assigning quota and therefore accountability to
individual entities (cooperatives or vessels). Vessels affected by this
action participate in catch share and non-catch share fisheries
including Amendment 80 Program, BSAI TLAS, and the groundfish CDQ
fisheries. Observer information is used in the NMFS Catch Accounting
System to monitor catch of target and bycatch species on a daily basis.
Current monitoring requirements for CPs and motherships participating
in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries off Alaska vary, depending upon
the specific fishery in which the vessel is participating. Each catch
share program includes monitoring requirements designed to ensure that
observer data produce reliable catch and bycatch estimates of allocated
species. Catch monitoring regulations applicable to vessels
participating in the non-pollock groundfish directed fisheries are
found at Sec. Sec. 679.28, 679.32, 679.51, 679.63, 679.84, and 679.93,
and are summarized in the following sections of this preamble.
A. Monitoring and Enforcement Tools
1. Observer Coverage
Observers have sampled catch in the Alaska Federal groundfish
fisheries since the early 1990s and have routinely collected lengths,
weights, and viability metrics of the sampled catch. Amendment 80 CPs,
CPs acting as motherships, and CPs managed under the Rockfish Program
are required to carry two observers, one of which must have a lead
level 2 endorsement for a CP using trawl gear or mothership. The
current workload restriction defined at 679.51(a)(2)(iii) state that an
observer's workload may not exceed 12 consecutive hours in a 24-hour
period. If vessel operations require an observer to work more than 12
consecutive hours to complete sampling and data entry duties,
additional observers are required. Motherships and CPs fishing in the
BSAI TLAS must also meet these same observer coverage requirements.
However, CPs that choose to opt out of the Rockfish Program and
Amendment 80 CPs fishing under sideboards in the GOA are required to
carry only one observer. This observer follows a random sampling table
to determine which hauls to sample.
2. Observer Access to Catch
Before catch is sorted or discarded on any trawl vessel, at-sea
observers must collect data necessary to estimate halibut and
groundfish catch amounts. Regulations in 50 CFR part 679 are designed
to ensure that observer data result in reliable estimates of halibut
and groundfish catch, and that potential bias is minimized. For
example, NMFS requires fishing vessels to make all catch available for
sampling by an observer; prohibits vessel crew from tampering with
observer samples; prohibits vessel crew from removing halibut from a
codend, bin, or conveyance system prior to being observed and counted
by an at-sea observer; and prohibits fish (including halibut) from
remaining on deck unless an observer is present.
Current halibut discard requirements state that an observer must
first have access to sample the catch prior to sorting and discard. The
specific point of discard and catch handling procedures may vary
depending on each vessel's deck configuration. However,
[[Page 15570]]
since the implementation of monitoring requirements for the Amendment
80 Program and the Rockfish Program, vessels are generally allowed only
one operational line for the mechanized movement of fish from the flow
scale used to weigh catch and the location where the observer collects
species composition samples.
Observers sample the species composition of catch and NMFS
estimates the ratio of halibut to groundfish from each haul sampled and
applies it to the official total catch of groundfish for each sampled
haul. NMFS applies a consistent process to determine which halibut
catch rates apply to which hauls based on vessel type, whether sampled
hauls occurred on the same vessel, processing sector, nearness in time,
trip target, gear type, FMP area, reporting area, special areas,
management program, and observer sampling method. These factors are
applied to algorithms to give a rate of incidentally caught halibut to
every haul. This rate is then applied to the official total catch of
each haul. Once the estimated halibut catch for every haul is
calculated, DMRs are applied to calculate the amount of halibut PSC
mortality accrued. See sections 1.3.2 and 4.1 of the Analysis for more
detail on DMR estimation and observer coverage requirements.
3. Pre-Cruise Meeting
Vessel owners and operators of Amendment 80 CPs are required to
notify the North Pacific Observer Program (Observer Program) at least
24 hours prior to departure on a trip with an observer who has not
deployed on that vessel in the last 12 months. This allows the Observer
Program to schedule a pre-cruise meeting between the observer and
vessel operator or manager and adequately prepare the observer(s) to
successfully collect the high quality data necessary for fisheries
management.
Pre-cruise meetings provide an opportunity for vessel crew and
observers to discuss sampling and vessel operations prior to embarking
on a trip. Pre-cruise meetings can help improve data quality, reduce
conflicts between observers and vessel crew, and can assist vessel
operators and managers to comply with observer related regulations.
B. Equipment Requirements
1. Motion Compensated At-Sea Flow Scale and Observer Sampling Station
Flow scales are required to be used in the Amendment 80 and CDQ
Program fisheries, and on motherships and CPs in the BSAI TLAS fishery.
Typically, flow scales are installed in the vessel's fish processing
area, below the deck. Flow scales allow all catch to be weighed.
Because observer samples are extrapolated to the entire haul, catch
from each haul is weighed separately on the scale. To facilitate
separate weighing, catch from each haul cannot be mixed with other
hauls.
Vessels are also required to provide an observer sampling station
where an observer can work safely and effectively. Stations must meet
specifications for size and location and must be equipped with a
motion-compensated platform scale, a table, adequate lighting, floor
grating, and running water. Additionally, the observer sampling station
must have room to store at least ten observer sampling baskets. These
vessels must also have only one operational line for the mechanized
movement of catch to ensure that the observer has access to the entire
catch to collect species composition samples.
Vessels subject to Amendment 80 sideboards in the GOA as specified
at 679.92(b), as well as those vessels that opt out of the Rockfish
Program, are not required to use a flow scale or have an observer
sampling station. These vessels are prohibited from mixing hauls
(combine the catch of two or more individual hauls) and must only have
one operational line for the mechanized movement of catch. This is to
ensure that observer data collected is appropriately attributed to each
haul. However, most vessels subject to the sideboards in the GOA do
continue to use the flow scale and make the observer sampling station
available for use by the observer.
2. Video Monitoring
All CPs and motherships required to use a flow scale must have a
video monitoring system that shows all areas where catch moves across
the flow scale, any access point to the scale that may be adjusted by
vessel crew, and the scale display and fault light. These vessels are
also required to have a video monitor available to NMFS observer.
CPs and motherships participating in Amendment 80 fisheries may
choose video monitoring of the inside of fish bins as one method of
ensuring that catch is not selectively sorted inside the bins prior to
observer sampling. This video is used to ensure that fish, including
halibut, are not pre-sorted from the catch prior to observer sampling.
These vessels are required to have a video monitor available at the
observer sampling station.
AFA CPs and motherships that participate in the BSAI TLAS are
required to have video monitoring of all areas where salmon are sorted
from the catch, of all crew actions in these areas, and provide a view
of the salmon storage container. The video is used to ensure that all
salmon are available to the observer to conduct a census of salmon at
the end of each haul. These vessels are also required to have a monitor
available in the observer sampling station. System specifications for
video monitoring requirements are detailed at Sec. 679.28(e).
IV. Need for This Action
Amendment 111 to the BSAI FMP, published on April 27, 2016 (81 FR
24714), reduced halibut PSC limits in the BSAI groundfish fisheries in
four groundfish sectors: The Amendment 80 sector; the BSAI TLAS (all
non-Amendment 80 trawl fishery participants); the non-trawl sector
(primarily hook-and-line CPs); and the CDQ Program. The purpose of
Amendment 111 was to decrease BSAI halibut PSC to the extent
practicable by the BSAI groundfish fisheries while continually
achieving optimum yield from the BSAI groundfish fisheries. Although
halibut bycatch is not believed to have significant impact on halibut
stock status since most incidentally caught halibut from the BSAI
Groundfish fisheries are relatively small (under 26 inches), the loss
of many small individuals does impact the future number of larger
halibut (over 26 inches) that are available to the directed halibut
fishery (80 FR 71649, November 16, 2015).
Similarly, Amendment 95 to the GOA FMP, published on March 24, 2014
(79 FR 9625), reduced halibut PSC limits in the GOA groundfish
fisheries in three sectors: The hook-and-line CP sector, the hook-and-
line catcher vessel (CV) sector, and the trawl sector. The purpose of
Amendment 95 was to minimize halibut bycatch in the GOA in the extent
practicable, while at the same time achieving optimum yield from the
GOA groundfish fishery.
By reducing halibut PSC, the final rules for Amendment 111 and
Amendment 95 aimed to increase harvest opportunities for the directed
halibut fisheries. However, these reductions increased the potential
for the halibut PSC limit to constrain the harvest of allocated species
in groundfish fisheries, thereby potentially reducing the overall
economic benefit of the fisheries if the directed fisheries would be
closed prior to harvesting all the allocated species.
Under current monitoring requirements for most vessels
participating in the non-pollock
[[Page 15571]]
groundfish fisheries, all halibut must be weighed along with the rest
of the unsorted catch and made available for sampling by an observer
prior to discard. This means that all halibut enter the fish bin and
are weighed in the factory prior to observer data collection and
discard, resulting in high DMRs. For several years, experiments
conducted through Exempted Fishing Permits (EFPs) have tested
procedures to reduce halibut discard mortality by sorting, collecting
observer data, and discarding halibut from the deck of trawl CPs and
motherships. The data collected during EFP fishing showed that the
practice of deck sorting reduces halibut discard mortality. Results
from these EFPs suggest that substantial amounts of halibut can be
returned to the water and provide for additional harvest opportunity
for the directed halibut fisheries. See section 1.3.5 of the Analysis
for additional detail on halibut deck sorting EFPs.
In order to accurately account for halibut sorted on deck during
EFP fishing, additional catch handling and monitoring requirements were
necessary to ensure that an observer has access to all halibut sorted
on deck as well as all other catch in the factory for the collection of
data and sampling. These requirements were necessary to ensure that
observer data resulted in reliable estimates of catch and bycatch as
well as mitigated safety risks due to additional time spent on deck.
NMFS also considered the costs and benefits of not implementing
formal halibut deck sorting regulations. Under this alternative
measure, current fisheries management and operation would remain
unchanged. Halibut deck sorting could still be permitted under an EFP,
provided that participating vessels adhered to the additional
monitoring requirements required under the EFP. However, the purpose of
an EFP is not to provide long-term management solutions. Rather, EFPs
are meant to be short-term and to facilitate exploration of innovative
or novel practices that may benefit fishery management practice. Deck
sorting EFP renewals and annual reauthorizations are not guaranteed and
it is unlikely that the deck sorting EFP could continue indefinitely.
In addition, participation in the halibut deck sorting and monitoring
activities outlined in this proposed regulation is voluntary, allowing
industry the flexibility to assess economic conditions and to conduct
halibut deck sorting when the benefits of reduced mortality provide
valuable fishing opportunity that outweigh the operational cost of
halibut deck sorting.
V. The Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would implement catch handling and monitoring
requirements to allow halibut PSC to be sorted on the deck of trawl CPs
and motherships participating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries
off Alaska. NMFS and EFP participants worked together to develop the
monitoring and enforcement requirements required during EFP fishing and
included in this proposed rule. These requirements build upon existing
monitoring and enforcement requirements (described in the Current
Monitoring Requirements section of this proposed rule), and are
designed to allow halibut to be returned to the sea more quickly while
also ensuring that observer data continue to result in reliable
estimates of halibut incidental catch rate and viability. This proposed
rule draws on the lessons learned from halibut deck sorting EFP
activities to develop monitoring requirements and observer sampling
protocols for halibut deck sorting (See sections 2.2 and 4.1 of the
Analysis for additional detail). Participation in halibut deck sorting
would be voluntary. However, any vessel choosing to participate in
halibut deck sorting would be required to comply with all applicable
monitoring requirements.
This proposed rule would add subpart K, Sec. 679.120--Halibut Deck
Sorting, to part 679 to specify halibut deck sorting catch handling and
monitoring requirements. Additionally, existing catch handling and
monitoring regulations would be modified as necessary to be consistent
with the catch handling and monitoring requirements included in this
proposed rule. The catch handling and monitoring requirement included
in this proposed rule were developed and tested under halibut deck
sorting EFPs since 2009 (see section 1.3.5 of the Analysis for
additional detail). In addition to the primary action, this would also
make changes to observer sampling station inspection requirements in
Federal groundfish fisheries and minor changes to bin monitoring
requirements in the Amendment 80 fleet. The proposed rule would also
make minor changes in terminology, reorganize regulatory text, and make
other technical changes.
A. Halibut Deck Sorting
This proposed rule would define the term ``Halibut Deck Sorting''
at Sec. 679.2. The term ``Halibut Deck Sorting'' is used to specify
the activity of separating or removing halibut from the catch on deck,
prior to fish entering the fish bin.
1. Monitoring and Enforcement Tools
a. Observer Coverage
This proposed rule would specify observer coverage requirements for
vessels participating in halibut deck sorting at Sec.
679.51(a)(2)(vi)(F). Vessels would be required to carry on board at
least two observers at all times when participating in halibut deck
sorting. One of these observers must be endorsed as a lead level 2
observer and additional observers would be required if an observer's
workload restriction would otherwise preclude sampling as required.
Although this level of observer coverage is already a requirement for
most vessels participating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries,
this proposed rule would require all vessels choosing to participate in
halibut deck sorting to maintain this level of observer coverage. This
requirement is necessary to ensure at least one experienced observer is
deployed on a vessel when halibut deck sorting due to added difficulty
and increase in observer duties associated with halibut deck sorting.
b. Observer Access to Catch
This proposed rule would establish prohibitions specific to halibut
deck sorting at Sec. 679.7(e). These regulations would specify that
when a vessel participates in halibut deck sorting, fish must not be
spilled from the codend, halibut must not be sorted, discarded, or
weighed on a NMFS-approved scale unless an observer is present on deck
and the vessel is in compliance with the requirements of Sec. 679.120,
which describe the vessel, crew, and catch handling and monitoring
requirements for participation in halibut deck sorting. In addition,
Sec. 679.7(e) would prohibit catch from being weighed on flow scales
when the observer is monitoring halibut deck sorting, unless three or
more observers are present on the vessel and at least two observers are
on duty. In these circumstances, one observer would monitor deck-
sorting while another observer would monitor the flow scale in the
factory. These regulations are necessary to ensure that an observer has
access to all catch to complete data collection duties on deck and in
the factory as specified in the Observer Sampling Manual.
c. Pre-Cruise Meeting
Vessel owners and operators who choose to halibut deck sort would
be required to notify the Observer Program to schedule a pre-cruise
meeting when they have an observer onboard who has not previously been
onboard within the last 12 months. This meeting must
[[Page 15572]]
minimally include the vessel operator or manager and any observer(s)
assigned to the vessel. The pre-cruise meeting is intended to
familiarize the observer(s) with key vessel crew, discuss vessel
operations, and talk through sample locations, as well as to get
answers to sampling questions from NFMS staff before the vessel gets
under way. In addition, the pre-cruise meeting would provide an
opportunity to discuss any issues with Deck Safety Plans (described
below) and the vessel crew's reasonable assistance necessary to allow
an observer to sample halibut prior to departing on a trip.
d. Deck Safety Plan
This proposed rule would add requirements at Sec. 679.120(d) to
establish a Deck Safety Plan. Vessel owners and operators would be
required to develop an approved Deck Safety Plan prior to participating
in halibut deck sorting. This Deck Safety Plan would be approved
annually by NMFS. If the vessel owner or operator wished change an
existing Deck Safety Plan, the vessel owner or operator would be
required to be submit proposed changes in writing and any changes would
have to be approved by NMFS. Mandatory components of this Deck Safety
Plan would include: A description of safe routes for the observer to
access and/or leave the deck sampling station during gear retrieval and
movement; description of hazardous areas and potentially hazardous
conditions on deck the observer should be aware of; a list of personal
protective equipment that must be worn by the observer while on deck;
and a description of communication procedures to inform the observer
when it is safe to access the deck, in order to ensure that the
observer remains safe while working on the deck.
Vessel owners and operators would also be required to provide
observers with a copy of the NMFS-approved Deck Safety Plan and conduct
a deck sorting safety meeting prior to embarking on a trip when any one
of the following--observer, vessel operator, or key crew member that
will be responsible for providing notification or reasonable assistance
during halibut deck sorting--boards the vessel. All elements of the
vessel's Deck Safety Plan would be reviewed with the observer during
this meeting.
If NMFS disapproves a Deck Safety Plan, the vessel owner and
operator may resubmit a revised Deck Safety Plan or file an
administrative appeal as set forth under the administrative appeals
procedures set out at 15 CFR part 906.
e. Vessel Operator Requirements
Proposed regulations at Sec. 679.120 would require vessel
operators to notify the observer on duty at least 15 minutes prior to
bringing fish on board that halibut deck sorting will occur. From the
time the vessel operator notifies the observer that halibut deck
sorting will occur until the codend from that haul is opened on deck,
the vessel operator may choose not to engage in halibut deck sorting.
In this way, the vessel operator can choose in real time if weather or
vessel conditions are suitable to engage in halibut deck sorting on a
particular haul. Halibut could only be sorted on deck if an observer is
present, and all halibut would be required to be transported to the
observer deck sampling station via a single pathway. The single pathway
from which catch is conveyed to the observer will ensure that the
observer has access to all halibut removed from the catch during deck
sorting activities. Catch in the factory would not be weighed during
halibut deck sorting activities unless, as explained above, an
additional observer is available to complete data collection duties in
the factory. Vessels would be required to devise and use a visual
signal to communicate to the crew when catch may not be weighed during
deck sorting activities.
Each vessel's Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report would
indicate the time limit for halibut deck sorting activities. The time
limit may be vessel specific and would be based on factors including,
but not limited to, deck space and configuration, and the best
available halibut viability information. For example, a total of 30
minutes could be established for halibut deck sorting activities, which
may reflect the amount of time when halibut viability is maximized.
This time would begin when the codend is opened and conclude once the
time limit is reached. This time limit would not exceed the time
indicated on the Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report. After the
time limit for halibut deck sorting is reached, all halibut not sampled
by the observer on deck must be transferred to the live tank(s) and
passed over the flow scale in the factory. In the future, the time
limit may change in order to account for changes in vessel
configuration, sampling technologies, and as new information on halibut
viability becomes available. Observer Sampling Station Inspection
Reports would be issued annually by NMFS.
This proposed rule would add Sec. 679.51(e)(1)(viii)(G) to require
vessel operators to provide reasonable assistance to observers during
halibut deck sorting. When halibut deck sorting, vessel operators and
crewmen would be required to provide halibut sorted on the deck to the
observer (upon request by the observer), in order to facilitate timely
sampling by the observer and reduce delays in onboard factory
processing of fish.
2. Equipment Requirements
a. Motion Compensated At-Sea Flow Scale and Observer Sampling Station
This proposed rule would modify existing catch weighing and data
sources requirements at Sec. Sec. 679.32(c)(3)(i)(C)(4), 679.63(a),
679.84(c)(1), and 679.93(c)(1) to add catch weighing requirements for
CPs and motherships participating in halibut deck sorting in the
Amendment 80 sector, BSAI TLAS, CDQ sector, and the Rockfish Program
fisheries. These modifications would remove the requirement for halibut
sorted on deck to be weighed on a NMFS-approved flow scale prior to
discard. Because deck-sorted halibut are discarded from the deck and
are not moved to the factory, there is no opportunity for weighing on a
flow scale. Thus, under these circumstances, this requirement is
unnecessary.
This proposed rule would modify regulations specifying methods used
for CDQ catch estimation on CPs and motherships using trawl gear at
Sec. 679.32(c)(3)(ii)(C) to accurately describe catch accounting data
sources including when halibut deck sorting occurs during groundfish
CDQ fishing.
This proposed rule would modify Sec. 679.28(d)(9) to outline and
define requirements for an observer deck sampling station that must be
onboard motherships and CPs participating in halibut deck sorting
described at Sec. 679.120. The observer deck sampling station would be
located on deck and would be required in addition to the observer
sampling station in the factory. The observer deck sampling station
must meet the same specifications and requirements as the observer
sampling station, with the exception that the proposed rule would
require vessels participating in halibut deck sorting to have only a
single pathway for halibut to be conveyed to an observer at an observer
deck sampling station, as well as, a single point of discard after each
work table that is visible to the observer collecting the data on
discarded halibut.
b. Video Monitoring
This proposed rule would add video monitoring requirements specific
for vessels operating in halibut deck sorting at Sec. 679.28(l).
Vessels would be required
[[Page 15573]]
to record and retain video for the entire trip where halibut deck
sorting may occur for no less than 120 days after the date the video is
recorded unless otherwise notified by NMFS. Vessels would also be
required to maintain full video coverage of all areas where halibut may
be sorted from the catch and/or discarded on deck. The number of
required cameras will vary depending on vessel configuration. These
additional video monitoring requirements are needed to ensure that all
halibut collected from an individual haul can be tracked and accounted
for once on the vessel.
B. Additional Regulatory Changes
This proposed rule would modify regulations at Sec. 679.28(i)(1)
to remove a monitoring provision known as Option 2--line of sight
option for bin monitoring standards. This monitoring option facilitated
an observer's view of fish holding bins, but is no longer used in this
fishery, thus making this regulation unnecessary.
This proposed rule would modify regulations at Sec. Sec.
679.28(d)(10) and 679.28(i)(5) to remove an unnecessary restriction on
the duration of an observer sampling station and bin monitoring
inspection and associated reports. NMFS proposes that it is not
necessary to restrict the inspection to within 12 months of the date of
the last inspection. Removing the requirement that restricts the
validity of these inspection reports to 12 months from the date of the
inspection would allow additional flexibility for the Observer Program
to determine the exact length of the approval and potentially
synchronize sampling station and bin monitoring inspections with other
applicable equipment inspection requirements. This change could reduce
the need for vessels to schedule multiple in-person inspections at
different times of the year, thereby potentially reducing costs of
complying with regulations.
This proposed rule would also make a number of regulatory edits to
improve clarity, consistency and to remove unnecessary or out of date
regulations. These modifications would have no impact on vessel
operations. Paragraph Sec. 679.28(b)(5)(v) would be removed since it
describes calibration and log requirement regulations for printed
reports from the fault log that were applicable to 2015 only. This
proposed rule would add the word ``views'' when describing display
requirements for cameras at Sec. Sec. 679.28(e)(1)(vii) and
(e)(1)(viii)(A), and would also update the website address for the NMFS
Alaska Region in paragraph Sec. 679.28(e)(2).
VI. Classification
Pursuant to section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS
Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is
consistent with the BSAI and GOA FMPs, other provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further
consideration of comments received during the public comment period.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)
An RIR was prepared to assess the costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS
(see ADDRESSES). NMFS is recommending the regulatory revisions in this
proposed rule based on those measures that maximize net benefits to the
Nation. Specific aspects of the economic analysis related to the impact
of this proposed rule on small entities are discussed below in the
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis section.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
This IRFA was prepared for this proposed rule, as required by
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 603), to
describe the economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have
on small entities. An IRFA describes why this action is being proposed;
the objectives and legal basis for the proposed rule; the number of
small entities to which the proposed rule would apply; any projected
reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements of the
proposed rule; any overlapping, duplicative, or conflicting Federal
rules; and any significant alternatives to the proposed rule that would
accomplish the stated objectives, consistent with applicable statutes,
and that would minimize any significant adverse economic impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities. Descriptions of this proposed rule,
its purpose, and the legal basis are contained earlier in this preamble
and are not repeated here.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by This Proposed
Rule
This proposed rule would directly regulate the owners and operators
of trawl CPs and motherships when operating in the non-pollock
groundfish fisheries in the BSAI or GOA who voluntarily choose to sort
halibut PSC on deck. In addition, the proposed rule would directly
regulate the owners and operators of CPs and motherships subject to
requirements for bin monitoring and observer sampling stations.
In 2017, the most recent complete year of data, there were 37
fishing vessels that participated in the groundfish fisheries in the
BSAI or GOA and have sufficient deck configurations to participate in
halibut deck sorting. Of these, 35 are CPs that participated in either
the pollock or non-pollock groundfish fisheries, or in both, and two
are AFA motherships. All of these vessels would be eligible to deck
sort halibut as proposed under this proposed rule if they operated as a
CP or mothership in a non-pollock groundfish fishery in the future.
Eight of the 35 CPs also operated as motherships at some time during
2017 and two of the AFA motherships operated in the pollock fishery but
not in non-pollock groundfish fisheries in 2017. One AFA mothership did
not operate in 2017 but did operate in 2016 and plans to operate in
2019. Thus, these 38 vessels, and their operators, are entities that
are potentially directly regulated by this proposed rule.
In addition to these 38 vessels that are presently operating or
planning to operate in the BSAI or GOA groundfish fisheries, there are
four AFA permitted CPs, and one Amendment 80 permitted CP that are not
presently operating in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska; however,
they could possibly be used in the future. Therefore, these five
vessels also are entities potentially directly regulated by this
proposed rule. Any of these 40 CPs (35 presently operating, five not
operating) and three AFA motherships could choose to participate in
halibut deck sorting under this proposed rule if they met all of the
permitting requirements for the non-pollock groundfish fisheries and
the catch monitoring and handling requirements for deck sorting.
One additional CP has been identified as being eligible to
participate in halibut deck sorting. This CP is somewhat unique in
several ways. First, it is Amendment 80 eligible but is not currently
participating in the Amendment 80 Program. Secondly, due to limited
holding capacity, this vessel pre-sorts all catch on deck prior to
processing. This is in contrast to the practice of other CPs that hold
fish in a bin below deck before delivery to the factory where sorting
will then occur. This means that all halibut are presently deck sorted
and discarded and do not enter the factory. In addition, this CP
[[Page 15574]]
has very limited deck space within which to accommodate the deck
sorting equipment required by this action and such modifications may
not be possible. Therefore, due to its configuration and operational
practices, it is unlikely that this CP will choose to deck sort halibut
PSC. Therefore, this vessel is not considered as a directly regulated
entity under this proposed rule.
Three questions must be considered in classifying CPs and
motherships to determine if they are small entities under the RFA.
First, are the individual vessels independently owned and operated and
not dominant in their field of operation, or are these vessels
affiliated with any other business entities worldwide? Second, which
industry classification is appropriate to use for the CPs that conduct
both fish harvesting and fish processing and for the three motherships
that process groundfish, but do not conduct any fishing activities
themselves? Third, which income or employment threshold should be
applied to identify the small entities among the universe of directly
regulated entities in each of these entity categories?
The thresholds applied to determine if an entity or group of
entities are ``small'' under the RFA depend on the industry
classification for the entity or entities. Businesses classified as
primarily engaged in commercial fishing are considered small entities
if they have combined annual gross receipts not in excess of $11.0
million for all affiliated operations worldwide (81 FR 4469; January
26, 2016). Businesses classified as primarily engaged in fish
processing are considered small entities if they employ 750 or fewer
persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis, at all
affiliated operations worldwide.
CPs engage in both fish harvesting and fish processing activities.
The eight CPs that operate as motherships during some part of the year
operate primarily as CPs throughout the year, so they will be
considered CPs for purposes of classification under this IRFA. Since at
least 1993, NMFS Alaska Region has considered CPs to be predominantly
engaged in fish harvesting rather than fish processing. Under this
classification, the threshold of $11.0 million in annual gross receipts
is the appropriate threshold to apply to identify any CPs that are
small entities. Because the AFA motherships only process groundfish and
do not conduct any fishing activities themselves, they are classified
as fish processors, and the threshold of 750 employees is the
appropriate threshold to apply to identify any motherships that are
small entities under the RFA.
Analysis of fish harvesting revenue at the ex-vessel level for each
of the 35 potentially directly regulated CPs that made landings in 2017
reveals that several individual vessels did not exceed the $11.0
million threshold. However, a review of ownership affiliations, and
resulting aggregate revenue, reveals that the combined revenue of all
co-owned CPs in each of the 10 fishing corporations that own these CPs
exceeded the $11.0 threshold and are, thus, considered large entities
for RFA purposes.
Additionally, four of the five permitted CPs that are not presently
participating in the affected fisheries but are permitted to do so are
affiliated through ownership with other CPs that are presently
operating in the groundfish fisheries off Alaska. These corporations
are a subset of the 10 corporations having ownership of the 35
participating CPs and have been determined to be large entities based
on aggregate revenue. The one remaining permitted CP that is not
presently participating has not maintained required Federal vessel
documentation since 2004 and the owner corporation is inactive
according to Washington State corporate records.
One directly regulated CP has annual gross ex-vessel revenue below
the $11.0 million threshold. Thus, based on revenue analysis of the
individual CPs, combined with ownership affiliation analysis, all but
one of the 40 potentially directly regulated CP entities operating in
the affected fishery are large entities for RFA purposes.
As noted above, three AFA motherships also could potentially deck
sort halibut if they participated as a mothership in a non-pollock
groundfish fishery in the BSAI or GOA. Motherships that only process
groundfish are classified as fish processors and the threshold of 750
employees is the appropriate threshold to apply to identify if any of
these motherships are small entities. NMFS does not have any
information that establishes whether any of the three motherships are
affiliated through ownership with other business entities worldwide, so
they are considered as individual entities for this analysis. In
addition, NMFS does not have access to firm level employment data for
these mothership firms; however, given the size of the motherships it
is unlikely that firm level employment exceeds the 750 employee
threshold. Therefore, NMFS has determined that these three motherships
also are small entities for RFA purposes.
Although one CP potentially directly regulated by this action is a
small entity under the RFA, its participation in the formal deck
sorting program is doubtful given current operations and constraints.
However, if this CP did choose to sort halibut PSC on deck in the
future, they would do so voluntarily and only if the benefits of
accounting for reduced halibut mortality outweigh the costs of
compliance with program requirements. This statement is also true for
the three motherships that are potentially directly regulated small
entities by this action. Thus, any impact on the one CP or the three
motherships would not be a significant adverse economic impact.
The proposed rule also would directly regulate the owners and
operators of CPs and motherships subject to requirements for bin
monitoring and observer sampling stations. Revisions to the bin
monitoring regulations to remove Option 2 (the line of sight option)
would affect some of the same CPs that are potentially directly
regulated by the halibut deck sorting action. This element of the
proposed rule would not affect the one CP that is a small entity
because unsorted fish are not held below deck in bins on this vessel.
As described above, none of the potentially directly regulated CPs that
use fish bins subject to the bin monitoring requirements are small
entities. In addition, none of these vessels have used Option 2 since
2011, and then only in conjunction with other still available options.
Therefore, removing Option 2 would not impose any additional costs or
restrictions or create any impacts that would be considered significant
adverse economic impacts on small entities.
Revisions to the timing of the observer sampling station and bin
monitoring inspection reports would affect any CP using trawl, hook-
and-line, or pot gear and any mothership subject to these regulations.
Some of these CPs may be small entities. However, the proposed
revisions increase flexibility for the time between inspections, so do
not impose any additional costs or constraints on the vessel owners or
operatives. The added flexibility constitutes a slight relaxation of
regulations. Therefore, although this element of the proposed rule may
affect some small entities, it would not impose any adverse economic
impacts.
Although NMFS identified only one small entity CP and potentially
three small entity motherships that could be directly regulated by the
deck sorting elements of this proposed rule, NMFS believes that it is
very unlikely that this action would impose a significant
[[Page 15575]]
adverse impact. However, NMFS has prepared this IRFA, which provides
potentially affected small entities an opportunity to provide comments
on this IRFA. NMFS will evaluate any comments received on the IRFA and
may consider certifying under section 605 of the RFA (5 U.S.C. 605)
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities prior to publication of the final
rule.
Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
This proposed rule would implement additional reporting,
recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements for the owners and
operators of trawl CPs and motherships who choose to sort halibut PSC
on deck when operating in the non-pollock groundfish fisheries off
Alaska. As noted earlier in the preamble to this proposed rule, these
requirements include an observer deck sampling station, video
monitoring, an approved Deck Safety Plan, prior approval by NMFS of the
plan, a meeting onboard the vessel to review the plan, observer
coverage and experience requirements, and other catch handling and
monitoring requirements. In addition, the vessel owner or operator must
notify the Observer Program by phone at least 24 hours prior to
departure when a vessel will carry an observer who has not deployed on
that vessel in the past 12 months, and participate in a pre-cruise
meeting if NMFS requests such a meeting. Vessel operators also must
notify the observer at least 15 minutes prior to fish being brought on
board during trips when the vessel participates in halibut deck sorting
activities.
No specific recordkeeping, reporting, or other compliance
requirements are associated with the revisions to requirements for bin
monitoring and observer sampling stations. These revisions would remove
an option for providing observers visual access to the fish bins and
provide additional flexibility for the timing of annual bin and
observer sampling station inspections and reports. These revisions
would not change the existing requirements for requesting bin and
sampling station inspections and the equipment, operational, and
documentation requirements associated with these inspection programs.
No small entity is subject to reporting requirements that are in
addition to or different from the requirements that apply to all
directly regulated entities. No unique professional skills are needed
for the vessel operators to comply with any of the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements associated with this proposed rule.
Description of Significant Alternatives That Minimize Adverse Impacts
on Small Entities
No significant alternatives were identified that would accomplish
the stated objectives for implementing a halibut deck sorting program
via regulation, are consistent with applicable statutes, and that would
minimize costs to potentially affected small entities more than the
proposed rule. NMFS considered two alternatives for action in this
proposed rule. Alternative 1 is the no action alternative. This
alternative would continue to allow halibut deck sorting under an EFP;
however, EFPs are not intended to continue indefinitely. Thus, under
the no action alternative halibut deck sorting that is currently
occurring under the EFP may not be an option in the future. The
uncertainty of the EFP makes Alternative 1 potentially costly to
vessels that would opt to continue halibut deck sorting, but would not
be allowed to if the EFP was discontinued.
Alternative 2, along with Options 1 and 2, provide the greatest
economic benefits. The primary economic benefit of this proposed rule
is to reduce halibut mortality and allow program participants greater
potential to harvest all allocations of target species at all levels of
future halibut abundance and PSC limits. NMFS's administrative burden
of managing the EFP process will also be reduced as will industry
management and implementation costs that are presently born by the EFP
applicants and the EFP manager. The economic effects on fishery
participants that are affected by this proposed action are considered
to be beneficial. Participants will enter the program voluntarily and
only if the benefits of accounting for reduced halibut mortality
outweigh the costs of compliance with program requirements.
Collection-of-Information Requirements
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval under Control Number 0648-0318
(North Pacific Observer Program) and Control Number 0648-0330 (Alaska
Region, Scale and Catch Weighing Requirements). The public reporting
burden for the collection-of-information requirements in this proposed
rule includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing
data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing
and reviewing the collection of information.
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). These requirements have
been submitted to OMB for approval under Control Number 0648-0318
(North Pacific Observer Program) and Control Number 0648-0330 (Alaska
Region, Scale and Catch Weighing Requirements). The public reporting
burden for the collection-of-information requirements in this proposed
rule includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing
data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing
and reviewing the collection of information.
OMB Control No. 0648-0318
Vessel owners or operators of trawl CPs and motherships who choose
to sort halibut PSC on deck must have a NMFS-approved Deck Safety Plan
prior to participating in halibut deck sorting. When this action takes
effect, 24 vessels will have participated in halibut deck sorting with
a fully developed Deck Safety Plan. NMFS estimates approximately one
new vessel annually in this program. Public reporting burden for the
development of a new Deck Safety Plan during the first (initial) year a
vessel participates in halibut deck sorting is estimated to average 12
hours. After the first year, the public reporting burden for a
respondent to modify or renew an existing Deck Safety Plan is estimated
to be one hour.
For vessel owners or operators of trawl CPs and motherships who
choose to sort halibut PSC on deck, the public reporting burden per
response to notify the Observer Program by phone is estimated to be
five minutes, the burden to notify the observer is estimated at two
minutes, and appeal of a disapproved Deck Safety Plan is estimated at 4
hours.
OMB Control No. 0648-0330
When this action takes effect, 24 vessels will have participated in
halibut deck sorting with installed deck video monitoring systems and
observer deck sampling stations in compliance with regulations. NMFS
estimates approximately one new vessel annually in this program. Vessel
owners or operators of trawl CPs and motherships who choose to sort
halibut PSC on deck must install an observer sampling station on deck
for use by the observer when deck sorting halibut. Public reporting
burden for the installation of the observer deck sampling station
[[Page 15576]]
during the first (initial) year a vessel participates is halibut deck
sorting is estimated to average 12 hours. After the first year, annual
maintenance of observer sampling stations both in the factory and on
deck would be expected to be minimal and would likely be done with
other factory modifications initiated by the vessel to improve
processing efficiency. Annual public reporting burden after the first
year is estimated at one minute.
In addition, these vessels must install a deck sorting video
monitoring system on deck. Public reporting burden for the installation
of the video monitoring system is estimated to average 12 hours. After
the first year, annual maintenance of the video monitoring system,
including routine inspection and time required to call out for any
needed repair, is estimated at one minute.
Public reporting burden for the Inspection Request for Observer
Sampling Station, At-sea Scales, Video Monitoring Deck Sampling
Station, and Deck Video Monitoring is estimated at 8 minutes.
Public comment is sought regarding (1) whether this proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the burden estimate; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information, including through the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on
these or any other aspects of the collection of information to NMFS
Alaska Region (see ADDRESSES), and to OIRA by email to
[email protected] or by fax to 202-395-5806.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA
collections of information may be viewed at http://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Pacific halibut, Recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
Dated: April 5, 2019.
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
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.
0
2. In Sec. 679.2, add the definition for ``Halibut Deck Sorting'' in
alphabetical order to read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Halibut Deck Sorting means the authorized sorting of halibut on
deck pursuant to Sec. 679.120.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 679.7:
0
a. Amend paragraph (d)(4)(i)(B) by removing Sec. 679.28(d)(8) and
adding in its place Sec. 679.28(d)(10);
0
b. Revise paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(e) Halibut Deck Sorting. (1) Conduct halibut deck sorting without
notifying the observer at least 15 minutes prior to bringing fish
onboard as described in Sec. 679.120(e)(2).
(2) For any haul for which the notification at Sec. 679.120(e)(2)
is provided, allow fish to be spilled from the codend without an
observer being present to monitor halibut deck sorting.
(3) Sort halibut from the catch prior to weighing except in
compliance with requirements at Sec. 679.120.
(4) Sort halibut on deck without an observer present to monitor
halibut deck sorting.
(5) Discard halibut sorted on deck prior to the observer's
completion of data collection for each halibut.
(6) Sort or discard any species other than halibut during halibut
deck sorting.
(7) Conduct halibut deck sorting past the time limit set by NMFS in
the vessel's Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report.
(8) Conduct halibut deck sorting without complying with the
observer deck sampling station requirements at Sec. 679.28(d)(9).
(9) Fail to have an approved Deck Safety Plan before conducting
halibut deck sorting.
(10) Fail to notify the Observer Program for purposes of the pre-
cruise meeting when required by Sec. 679.120(c).
(11) Weigh catch on a NMFS-approved scale that complies with the
requirements at Sec. 679.28(b) when halibut deck sorting unless three
or more observers are present on the vessel and an observer has been
notified and is available to complete data collection duties in the
factory.
(12) Sort halibut without a video monitoring system meeting
requirements at Sec. 679.28(l).
(13) Fail to comply with any other requirement or restriction
specified in this part or violate any provision of this part.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 679.28,
0
a. Remove paragraph (b)(5)(v);
0
b. Redesignate paragraph (d)(9) as (d)(10);
0
c. Add new paragraph (d)(9);
0
d. Revise newly redesignated paragraph (d)(10) introductory text and
(d)(10)(iii);
0
e. In newly redesignated paragraph (d)(10)(i) remove http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and add in its place https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov;
0
f. Revise paragraphs (e)(1)(vii), (e)(1)(viii)(A);
0
g. In paragraph (e)(2) remove http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and add
in its place https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov;
0
h. Revise paragraph (i)(1) introductory text;
0
i. Redesignate paragraph (i)(1)(iii) as (i)(1)(ii) and revise newly
redesignated paragraph (i)(1)(ii);
0
j. Revise paragraphs (i)(2) and (i)(5);
0
k. In paragraph (i)(3) remove http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and add
in its place https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov; and
0
l. Add paragraph (l).
The revisions and additions to read as follows:
Sec. 679.28 Equipment and operational requirements.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(9) Observer deck sampling station. Motherships and catcher/
processors subject to Sec. 679.120 must be equipped with a deck
sampling station that meets the following requirements:
(i) Accessibility. All equipment required for an observer deck
sampling station must be available to the observer at all times when
halibut deck sorting.
(ii) Location. The observer deck sampling station must be located
adjacent to the point of discard.
(iii) Work space. The observer must be able to stand upright in
front of the table.
[[Page 15577]]
(iv) Table--(A) Size. The observer deck sampling station must
include a table at least 0.6 m deep, 1.2 m wide, and 0.9 m high, and no
more than 1.1 m high. The entire surface area of the table must be
available for use by the observer. The table must be secured to the
deck when halibut deck sorting. The table must be constructed to
prevent fish from sliding off.
(B) Length measuring device. The table must have a NMFS-approved
length measuring device secured to the surface of the table.
(v) Single pathway. There must be a single pathway for halibut to
be conveyed to the observer deck sampling station. All halibut sorted
on deck must pass over the observer table. There must be a single point
of discard after the observer deck sampling station visible to the
observer. Halibut too large to be lifted to the table may be measured
on deck.
(10) Inspection of the observer sampling station. Each observer
sampling station must be inspected and approved by NMFS prior to its
use for the first time and then once each year within 12 months of the
most recent inspection with the following exceptions: If the observer
sampling station is moved or if the space or equipment available to the
observer is reduced or removed when use of the observer sampling
station is required, the Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report
issued under this section is no longer valid, and the observer sampling
station must be reinspected and approved by NMFS. Inspection of the
observer sampling station is in addition to inspection of the at-sea
scales by an authorized scale inspector required at paragraph (b)(2) of
this section.
* * * * *
(iii) Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report. An Observer
Sampling Station Inspection Report will be issued by NMFS to the vessel
owner if the observer sampling station meets the requirements in this
paragraph (d). The vessel owner must maintain a current Observer
Sampling Station Inspection Report on board the vessel at all times
when the vessel is required to provide an observer sampling station
approved for use under this paragraph (d). The Observer Sampling
Station Inspection Report must be made available to the observer, NMFS
personnel, or to an authorized officer upon request.
(A) Deck Sorting. An Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report
issued to the owner of a vessel participating in halibut deck sorting
as described at Sec. 679.120 will indicate the time limit for halibut
deck sorting activities. Considerations used by NMFS to determine the
time limit for halibut deck sorting include, but are not limited to,
deck space and configuration,, and best available halibut viability
information.
(B) [Reserved].
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(1) Bin monitoring standards. The vessel owner or operator must
comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this
section unless the vessel owner or operator has requested, and NMFS has
approved, the video monitoring option described at paragraph (i)(1)(ii)
of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) Option 2--Video monitoring system option. A vessel owner and
operator must provide and maintain a NMFS-approved video monitoring
system as specified in paragraph (e) of this section. Additionally, the
vessel owner and operator must ensure that the system:
(A) Records and retains all video for all periods when fish are
inside the bin; and
(B) Provides sufficient resolution and field of view to see crew
activities from any location within the tank where crew could be
located.
(2) Who must have a bin monitoring option inspection? A vessel
owner or operator choosing to operate under the video option (option 2)
in paragraph (i)(1)(ii) of this section must receive an annual bin
monitoring option inspection.
* * * * *
(5) Bin monitoring option inspection report. A bin monitoring
option inspection report will be issued to the vessel owner if the bin
monitoring option meets the requirements of paragraph (i)(1)(ii) of
this section. The vessel owner must maintain a current bin option
inspection report on board the vessel at all times the vessel is
required to provide an approved bin monitoring option under this
paragraph (i)(5). The bin monitoring option inspection report must be
made available to the observer, NMFS personnel, or to an authorized
officer upon request.
* * * * *
(l) Video monitoring for halibut deck sorting. The owner and
operator of a mothership or catcher/processor subject to Sec. 679.120
must provide and maintain a video monitoring system approved under
paragraph (e) of this section when the vessel is halibut deck sorting.
Additionally, the system must--
(1) Record and retain video for an entire trip when halibut deck
sorting may occur; and
(2) Provide sufficient resolution and field of view to monitor all
areas on deck where halibut may be sorted from the catch and discarded,
and all crew actions in these areas.
0
5. In Sec. 679.32, revise paragraphs (c)(3)(i)(C)(4) and (c)(3)(ii)(C)
to read as follows:
Sec. 679.32 Groundfish and halibut CDQ catch monitoring.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) * * *
(4) The operator of a mothership taking deliveries of unsorted
codends from catcher vessels must weigh all catch, except halibut
sorted on deck by vessels participating in halibut deck sorting
described at Sec. 679.120, on a scale that complies with the
requirements of Sec. 679.28(b). Catch must not be sorted before it is
weighed, unless a provision for doing so is approved by NMFS for the
vessel. Each CDQ haul must be sampled by an observer for species
composition and the vessel operator must allow observers to use any
scale approved by NMFS to weigh partial CDQ haul samples.
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) Catcher/processors and motherships using trawl gear. The weight
and numbers of CDQ and PSQ species will be determined by applying the
observer's sampling data to the total weight of the CDQ haul.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 679.51, add paragraphs (a)(2)(vi)(F) and (e)(1)(viii)(G) to
read as follows:
Sec. 679.51 Observer and Electronic Monitoring System requirements
for vessels and plants.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(vi) * * *
(F) Halibut deck sorting. Vessels subject to Sec. 679.120 must
have at least two observers aboard at all times when halibut deck
sorting may occur; one observer must be endorsed as a lead level 2
observer. More than two observers are required if the observer workload
restriction would otherwise preclude sampling as required.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
(viii) * * *
[[Page 15578]]
(G) During halibut deck sorting, providing halibut to the observer
on deck.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 679.63, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.63 Catch weighing requirements for vessels and processors.
(a) * * *
(1) Catch weighing. All groundfish landed by listed AFA catcher/
processors or received by AFA motherships must be weighed on a NMFS-
certified scale and made available for sampling by a NMFS certified
observer. The owner and operator of a listed AFA catcher/processor or
an AFA mothership must ensure that the vessel is in compliance with the
scale requirements described at Sec. 679.28(b), that each groundfish
haul is weighed separately, and that no sorting of catch, except
halibut sorted on deck by vessels participating in the halibut deck
sorting described at Sec. 679.120, takes place prior to weighing.
* * * * *
0
8. In Sec. 679.84, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows;
Sec. 679.84 Rockfish Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring, and
catch accounting.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Catch weighing. All catch, except halibut sorted on deck by
vessels participating in the halibut deck sorting described at Sec.
679.120, 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 an
observer.
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 679.93, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.93 Amendment 80 Program recordkeeping, permits, monitoring,
and catch accounting.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) Catch weighing. All catch, except halibut sorted on deck by
vessels participating in halibut deck sorting described at Sec.
679.120, are weighed on a NMFS-approved scale in compliance with the
scale requirements at Sec. 679.28(b). Each haul must be weighed
separately, all catch must be made available for sampling by a NMFS-
certified observer, and no sorting of catch, except halibut sorted on
deck by vessels participating in halibut deck sorting described at
Sec. 679.120, may take place prior to weighing.
* * * * *
0
10. Add subpart K, consisting of Sec. Sec. 679.120 and 679.121 to read
as follows:
Subpart K--Halibut Deck Sorting
Sec.
679.120 Halibut Deck Sorting
679.121 [Reserved]
Sec. 679.120 Halibut Deck Sorting.
(a) Applicability. The owner and operator of a mothership or
catcher/processor using trawl gear in the non-pollock groundfish
fisheries in the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Management Area must comply with the requirements of this section when
halibut deck sorting as defined at Sec. 679.2.
(b) Catch monitoring requirements. (1) Catch weighing. When halibut
deck sorting, all catch, except halibut sorted on deck, must be weighed
on a NMFS-approved scale in compliance with the scale requirements at
Sec. 679.28(b). Each haul must be weighed separately, all catch must
be made available for sampling by a NMFS-certified observer, and no
sorting of catch, except halibut sorted on deck, may take place prior
to weighing. When halibut deck sorting, no fish may be weighed on a
NMFS-approved scale used to weigh catch at sea unless two observers are
available to complete data collection duties, one on deck and one in
the factory. A visual signal, specified in paragraph (e)(8) of this
section, must be used to indicate when catch may not be weighed.
(2) Observer sampling station. An observer sampling station meeting
the requirements at Sec. 679.28(d) must be available at all times.
(3) Observer coverage requirements. Comply with the observer
coverage requirements at Sec. 679.51(a)(2).
(4) Sample storage. Provide a storage space sufficient to
accommodate a minimum of 10 observer sampling baskets. This space must
be within or adjacent to the observer sampling station.
(5) Vessel crew in tanks or bins. Comply with the bin monitoring
standards at Sec. 679.28(i)(1).
(6) Observer deck sampling station. An observer deck sampling
station meeting the requirements at Sec. 679.28(d)(9) must be
available at all times.
(7) Video monitoring. Comply with the video monitoring standards
specified at Sec. 679.28(l).
(c) Pre-cruise meeting. Notify the Observer Program by phone at 1
(907) 581-2060 (Dutch Harbor, AK) or 1 (907) 481-1770 (Kodiak, AK) at
least 24 hours prior to departure when the vessel will be carrying an
observer who has not previously been deployed on that vessel within the
last 12 months. Subsequent 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.
(d) Deck Safety Plan. Submit and have an approved Deck Safety Plan
prior to participating in halibut deck sorting. The owner and operator
must comply with all the requirements described in the NMFS-approved
Deck Safety Plan.
(1) Deck Safety Plan requirements. A Deck Safety Plan must:
(i) Describe the route for observers to safely access and leave the
deck sampling station and specify locations where observers may shelter
during gear retrieval and movement.
(ii) Describe hazardous areas and potentially hazardous conditions
that could be encountered on deck.
(iii) Describe communication procedures to inform the observer when
it is safe to access the deck. These procedures must identify who will
tell the observer it is safe to access the deck, how that communication
will happen, and how they will communicate with the observer if a new
safety hazard arises while on deck.
(iv) List personal protective equipment that must be worn by the
observer while on deck.
(v) List all personnel the observer may contact to report safety
issues, including safety hazards identified by the observer that are
not covered by the Deck Safety Plan, deviations from the Deck Safety
Plan, and any conditions that would require the suspension of halibut
deck sorting.
(vi) Provide procedures to ensure the observer's safety while
working in the deck sampling station.
(vii) Include a scale drawing showing the deck sampling station,
the routes to access and exit the deck sampling station, emergency
muster location, and safety hazards that could be encountered on deck.
(2) Approval. NMFS will approve a Deck Safety Plan if it meets the
requirements specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The vessel
must be inspected by NMFS prior to approval of the Deck Safety Plan to
ensure that the vessel conforms to the elements addressed in the Deck
Safety Plan. NMFS will normally complete its review of the Deck Safety
Plan within 14 working days of receiving a complete Deck Safety Plan
and conducting a Deck Safety Plan inspection. If NMFS disapproves a
Deck Safety Plan, the vessel owner and operator may resubmit
[[Page 15579]]
a revised Deck Safety Plan or file an administrative appeal as set
forth under the administrative appeals procedures set out at 15 CFR
part 906.
(3) Deck Safety Plan inspection. The vessel owner and operator must
submit a complete Deck Safety Plan to NMFS by fax (206-526-4066) or
email ([email protected]) at least 10 working days in
advance of the requested date of inspection.
(4) Location. Deck Safety Plan inspections will be conducted on
vessels tied up at docks in Kodiak, Alaska, Dutch Harbor, Alaska, and
in the Puget Sound area of Washington State.
(5) Changes to the Deck Safety Plan. The vessel owner and operator
may propose a change to the Deck Safety Plan by submitting a Deck
Safety Plan addendum to NMFS. NMFS may require a Deck Safety Plan
inspection described at paragraph (d)(3) of this section before
approving the addendum.
(e) Vessel operator responsibilities. The operator of a vessel
subject to this section must comply with the following:
(1) Deck sorting safety meeting. Provide the observer with a copy
of the NMFS-approved Deck Safety Plan and make available all other
applicable inspection reports described at Sec. 679.28. The deck
sorting safety meeting must be conducted prior to departing port and
must include the observer, vessel operator, and key crew member who
will be responsible for providing notification or reasonable assistance
during halibut deck sorting. All elements of the vessel's Deck Safety
Plan must be reviewed with the observer during this meeting.
(2) Observer notification. Before halibut deck sorting, notify the
observer at least 15 minutes prior to bringing fish on board.
(3) Observer present. Conduct halibut deck sorting only when an
observer is present in the deck sampling station.
(4) Time limit. Conduct halibut deck sorting only within the time
limit indicated on the Observer Sampling Station Inspection Report. The
time limit begins when the codend is opened on deck. When the time
limit is reached, all halibut deck sorting must stop.
(5) Single sorting pathway. Convey all halibut sorted on deck to
the observer deck sampling station via a single pathway.
(6) Careful handling. Handle all halibut sorted on deck with a
minimum of injury.
(7) Sorting pace. Do not pressure or rush the observer to move
halibut through the sampling process faster than the observer can
handle.
(8) Visual signal. Use a visual signal to indicate to vessel crew
when catch may not to be weighed on a NMFS-approved scale specified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section. The visual signal must be on the
conveyor belt adjacent to the flow scale and visible in the view of a
camera required at Sec. 679.28(b)(8).
Sec. 679.121 [Reserved].
[FR Doc. 2019-07179 Filed 4-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P