[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regulations, remove unnecessary and outdated regulations, and update 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