[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 67 (Monday, April 9, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17469-17474]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-6643]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 660
[Docket No. 070323069-7069-01;I.D. 031907A]
RIN 0648-AV46
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule to establish catch accounting
requirements for persons who receive, buy, or accept Pacific whiting
(whiting) deliveries of 4,000 pounds (lb) (1.18 mt) or more from
vessels using mid-water trawl gear during the primary whiting season.
This action would improve NMFS's ability to effectively monitor the
whiting fishery such that catch of whiting and incidentally caught
species, including overfished groundfish species, do not result in a
species' optimum yield (OY), harvest guideline, allocations, or bycatch
limits being exceeded. This action would also provide for timely
reporting of Chinook salmon take as specified in the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) Section 7 Biological Opinion for Chinook salmon catch in the
Pacific groundfish fishery. This action is consistent with the
conservation goals and objectives of the Pacific Coast Groundfish
Fishery Management Plan (FMP).
DATES: Comments must be received by April 24, 2007.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by I.D. 031907A by any
of the following methods:
E-mail: [email protected]: Include I.D 031907A
in the subject line of the message.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 206-526-6736, Attn: Becky Renko
Mail: D. Robert Lohn, Administrator, Northwest Region,
NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115-0070, Attn: Becky Renko
Copies of the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this
action may be obtained from the Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point
Way N.E., BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0070. Written comments
regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-
of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be
submitted to the Northwest Region (see Addresses) and by e-mail to
[email protected], or fax to (202) 395-7285 Send comments on
collection-of-information requirements to the NMFS address above and to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Washington DC 20503 (Attn: NOAA Desk
Officer).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Becky Renko, phone: 206-526-6110, fax:
206-526-6736, or e-mail: [email protected].
Electronic Access: This proposed rule is accessible via the
Internet at the Office of the Federal Register's Web site at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html. Background information
and documents are available at the NMFS Northwest Region Web site at
http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Groundfish-Halibut/Groundfish-Fishery-Management/index.cfmand at the Council's Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is to provide for
electronic catch accounting and other monitoring improvements for the
shore-based sector of the whiting fishery. The proposed action defines
requirements for recordkeeping, reporting, catch sorting, and scale use
for persons who receive, buy, or accept unsorted deliveries (generally
processors or transporters) of 4,000 lb (1.8 mt) or more of whiting
from vessels using midwater trawl gear during the primary season for
the shore-based sector. This action is intended to address difficulties
that occurred during the 2006 whiting season that could compromise the
ability to account for the catch of target, incidental and prohibited
species, and which could compromise the ability to manage groundfish
species OYs, trip limits, bycatch limits, and Chinook salmon take in
relation to Biological Opinion specifications.
The shore-based whiting fishery needs to have a catch reporting
system in place that: provides timely reporting of catch data so that
whiting, overfished species and Chinook salmon can be adequately
monitored and accounted for inseason; and, specifies catch sorting and
weight requirements necessary to maintain the integrity of fish ticket
values used to manage groundfish species OYs, trip limits, and bycatch
[[Page 17470]]
limits. This proposed rule is part of an ongoing process to develop a
maximized retention program for the shoreside whiting sector. The rule
is intended to address shoreside monitoring that will be implemented in
2007 in conjunction with the issuance of exempted fishing permits
(EFPs) to vessels. At its April 2007 meeting, the Council will consider
recommending a rulemaking for 2008 and beyond for a related action
titled ``A Maximized Retention and Monitoring Program for the Whiting
Shoreside Fishery.''
Each year since 1992, EFPs have been issued to vessels in the
whiting shoreside fishery to allow unsorted catch to be retained and
landed at shoreside processing facilities. The EFPs have specified the
terms and conditions that participating vessels must follow to be
included in the EFP program. The EFPs have routinely required vessels
to deliver EFP catch to state-designated processors. Designated
processors were identified by each of the states and were processors
that had signed written agreements that specified the standards and
procedures they agreed to follow when receiving EFP catch.
The whiting fishery is managed under a ``primary'' season structure
where vessels harvest whiting until the sector allocation is reached
and the fishery is closed. This is different from most West Coast
groundfish fisheries, which are managed under a ``trip limit''
structure, where catch limits are specified by gear type and species
(or species group) and vessels can land catch up to the specified
limits. Incidental catch of groundfish in the whiting fishery, however,
is managed under a trip limit structure. Vessels fishing under the
whiting EFPs are allowed to land unsorted catch at shoreside processing
facilities, including species in excess of the trip limits and species
such as salmon that would otherwise be illegal to have on board the
vessel. Without an EFP, groundfish regulations at 50 CFR 660.306(a)(2)
and (a)(6) require vessels to sort their catch at sea and discard as
soon as practicable all prohibited species (including salmon and
halibut), protected species, and groundfish species in excess of
cumulative limits at sea.
Overall management of the salmon and groundfish fisheries has
significantly changed since the early 1990's, when EFPs were first used
in the whiting fishery. Since the beginning of the shore-based whiting
fishery in 1992, new salmon Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESUs) have
been listed under the ESA, and several groundfish species that are
incidentally taken in the whiting fishery have been declared
overfished. In addition, ``bycatch limit'' management of overfished
species has been used to allow the whiting fishery full access to the
whiting OY. With the bycatch limit management approach, a bycatch limit
amount is specified for an overfished species and the whiting fishery
is allowed incidental catch of that species up to that amount. If a
bycatch limit for any one of the species limits is reached before the
whiting allocations are attained, all non-tribal commercial sectors of
the whiting fishery must be closed.
The Shoreside Whiting Observation Program (SHOP), a coordinated
monitoring effort by the States of Oregon, Washington, and California,
was established to provide catch data from vessels fishing under the
EFPs. Although the program's structure and priorities have changed over
the years, the SHOP has had the primary responsibility of monitoring
the shore-based whiting fishery and providing catch data to NMFS for
management of the fishery. In 2006, SHOP experienced ongoing
difficulties in obtaining timely catch reports from some designated
processors. Delays in catch reports can compromise the ability to
adequately monitor the catch of whiting, bycatch limits, and in
particular the bycatch limits for the overfished species that are most
frequently encountered in the whiting fishery. Having the ability to
closely monitor bycatch limits and close the whiting fishery if a limit
is reached prevents the whiting fishery from affecting the other
groundfish fisheries and reduces the risk of exceeding overfished
species OYs.
In 2007, the shore-based whiting fishery will be managed under an
EFP, similar to what was in place in 2006. Therefore, NMFS believes
that it is necessary to implement this rule to prevent catch accounting
difficulties experienced in 2006. During 2007, NMFS and the Council
will continue to develop the Maximized Retention and Monitoring Program
for the whiting Shoreside Fishery, which is intended to be implemented
by regulation before the 2008 fishery.
This proposed rule would require persons called ``first receivers''
who receive, buy, or accept whiting deliveries of 4,000 lb (1.8 mt) or
more from vessels using mid-water trawl gear during the primary whiting
season (generally, these are whiting shoreside processing facilities,
but also include entities that truck whiting to other facilities) to
have and use a NMFS-approved electronic fish ticket program and to send
daily catch reports to the Pacific States Marine Fish Commission
(PSMFC). The electronic fish tickets are used to collect information
similar to the information currently required in state fish receiving
tickets or landing receipts (state fish tickets). The daily reports
would be used to track catch allocations, bycatch limits and prohibited
species catch. First receivers would provide the computer hardware,
software (Microsoft Office with Access 2003 or later,) and internet
access necessary to support the electronic fish ticket program and
daily e-mail transmissions. Electronic fish tickets must be submitted
within 24 hours from the date the catch is received upon landing.
Because 2007 will be the first year that the electronic fish ticket
program will be used, the proposed action includes waiver provisions
and defines alternative means for submitting fish tickets to meet the
daily reporting needs of the fishery, should there be performance
issues with software or other system failures beyond a receiver's
control.
Federal regulations would not replace any state recordkeeping or
reporting requirements. Regulations at 50 CFR 660.303 would continue to
require vessels to make and/or file, retain, or make available any and
all reports (i.e., logbooks, fish tickets, etc.) of groundfish harvests
and landings as required by the applicable state law. At this time,
only the State of Oregon allows printed and signed copies of the
electronic fish tickets to be submitted as the official state fish
ticket. The States of Washington and California could continue to
require the submission of paper forms as issued by the state.
In addition to the sorting requirements specified at Sec. Sec.
660.306(a)(7) and 660.370(h)(6)(i), sorting requirements would be
specified for whiting catch received by first receivers, since these
deliveries may contain groundfish in excess of trip limits,
unmarketable groundfish, prohibited species, and protected species that
are not addressed by current groundfish regulations. In addition,
Federal groundfish regulations would be revised to require that
deliveries from vessels participating in the whiting shoreside fishery
must be adequately sorted by species or species group and the catch
weighed following offloading from the vessel and prior to transporting
the catch. If sorting and weighing requirements specified in Federal
regulation are more specific than state fish ticket requirements, the
first receivers would be required to record the species that are sorted
and weighed on all electronic fish ticket submissions.
First receivers would be required to report, on electronic fish
tickets, actual
[[Page 17471]]
and accurate weights derived from scales. Though there are considerable
differences in the requirements between states, each state has
requirements for scale performance and testing established by state
agencies for weights and measures. How these requirements apply to
seafood processors varies between states.
Classification
NMFS has determined that the proposed rule is consistent with the
FMP and has preliminarily determined that the rule is consistent with
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other
applicable laws.
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
An initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as
required by section 603 of the RFA (RFA). The IRFA describes the
economic impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small
entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and
the legal basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this
section in the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. A
copy of the IRFA is available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of
the analysis follows:
The whiting shoreside fishery has been managed under an EFPs since
1992. However, an EFP is supposed to be a short-term, temporary and
exploratory response to issues that potentially should be addressed by
permanent regulations. The proposed action (Alternative 2) would be the
first step towards replacing the EFP with permanent regulations as it
would put in place new Federal catch accounting requirements. Although
EFPs will continue to be issued in 2007, the proposed regulations are
intended to supplement EFP activities with regulations that mainly
affect the processors or other first receivers of whiting EFP catch.
The proposed regulations will require the submission of electronic fish
tickets within 24 hours of landing, the sorting of catch at time of
offload and prior to transporting catch from the port of fish landing,
the use of state approved scales with appropriate accuracy ranges for
the amount of fish being weighed, and that all weights reported on the
electronic fish tickets be from such scales. The proposed Federal
regulations mirror or enhance existing state regulations and associated
paper-based fish ticket systems or put into Federal regulation
provisions associated with current EFP management. This action is
expected to provide more timely reporting and improved estimates of the
catch of whiting, ESA listed salmon species, and overfished groundfish
species. The whiting shoreside fishery needs to have a catch reporting
system in place to: adequately track the incidental take of Chinook
salmon as required in the ESA Section 7 Biological Opinion for Chinook
salmon catch in the whiting fishery; and to track the catch of target
and overfished groundfish species such that the fishing industry is not
unnecessarily constrained and that the sector allocation and bycatch
limits are not exceeded. This action is intended to address catch
accounting concerns that occurred during the 2006 season that
compromised the ability to account for the catch of target, incidental
and prohibited species.
In 2006 there were 23 processors that purchased whiting from
fishermen with ten of these processors purchasing from 4 lb (2 kg) to
8,000 lb (3,629 kg) of whiting. The other thirteen processors all
processed at least 1 million lb (454 mt) of whiting each. During 2006
these thirteen processors purchased 280 million lb (127,007 mt) of
whiting worth $17.4 million ex-vessel, and 110 million lb (49,896 mt)
of other fish and shellfish worth $78.5 million. Over the 2000-2006
period there were seventeen different facilities that processed at
least 1 million lb (454 mt) in any one year. These processors can be
classified into ``Main'' and ``Other'' plants. Over this period there
were eight ``Main'' processors that processed 1 million lb (454 mt) in
at least seven of the eight years during this period. Because of entry
and exit of the processors, the composition of the ``Other'' processor
group changes significantly in most years. In 2005, there were no
``Other'' processors while in 2006, five new processors entered, only
one of which had operated before. Over the 2000-2006 period, the
``Main'' processors typically harvest 90 to 100 percent of the whiting.
The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size
criteria for all major industry sectors in the U.S. including fish
harvesting entities, for-hire entities, fish processing businesses, and
fish dealers. A business involved in fish harvesting is a small
business if it is independently owned and operated and not dominant in
the field of operation (including its affiliates) and if it has
combined annual receipts not in excess of $3.5 million for all its
affiliated operations worldwide. For-hire vessels are considered small
entities, if they have annual receipts not in excess of $6 million. A
seafood processor is a small business if it is independently owned and
operated, not dominant in its field of operation, and employs 500 or
fewer persons on a full-time, part-time, temporary, or other basis, at
all its affiliated operations world wide. Finally, a wholesale business
servicing the fishing industry (fish dealer) is a small business if it
employs 100 or few persons on a full time, part-time, temporary, or
other basis, at all its affiliated operations worldwide.
The SBA has established ``principles of affiliation'' to determine
whether a business concern is ``independently owned and operated.'' In
general, business concerns are affiliates of each other when one
concern controls or has the power to control the other, or a third
party controls or has the power to control both. The SBA considers
factors such as ownership, management, previous relationships with or
ties to another concern, and contractual relationships, in determining
whether affiliation exists. Individuals or firms that have identical or
substantially identical business or economic interests, such as family
members, persons with common investments, or firms that are
economically dependent through contractual or other relationships, are
treated as one party with such interests aggregated when measuring the
size of the concern in question. The SBA counts the receipts or
employees of the concern whose size is at issue and those of all its
domestic and foreign affiliates, regardless of whether the affiliates
are organized for profit, in determining the concern's size.
Based on the SBA criteria and a review of West Coast processor
company websites, state employment websites, newspaper articles,
personal communications, and the ``Research Group'' publications
(2006), it appears that the thirteen major whiting processors can be
grouped into nine businesses under the SBA criteria based on analysis
of affiliates. Three of the nine businesses generated at least $500
million in sales in 2003. One of these businesses reported employing
4,000 people, and it is presumed that the other two companies have
employment levels much higher than 500 employees. Four of the nine
businesses have employment estimates that range from 100-250 employees,
while the remainder appear to be in the 50-100 range (because of
missing data, one of these relatively small businesses may have less
than 50 employees). In terms of the SBA size standard of 500 employees,
there are six ``small'' businesses that participated in the shorebased
whiting processing sector in 2006. Annual sales information for these
``small'' businesses is
[[Page 17472]]
unavailable. Total ex-vessel revenues (the value of the fish purchased
from fisherman) is available. In 2006, these six businesses purchased
approximately $40 million in whiting and other fish and shellfish from
West Coast fishermen. This compares to the $60 million in whiting and
other fish and shellfish purchased by the three large businesses.
In sizing up all the potential impacts, implementation of these
rules will require firms to bear minimal costs in reporting data
electronically that they already are required to report on paper. In
terms of equipment purchases, it is expected that there will be few if
any instances where processors have to purchase computers or software
because this is equipment that most business already have. It is also
not expected that processors will need to purchase scale equipment as
the presumption about this rule is that it enhances existing state
regulations that already require processors to use scales in conducting
their businesses but may not specifically require the use of scale
weights in reporting fisheries data to state agencies. There may be
some interest by a few small processors to weigh and count fish at
locations other than the point of first landing, but these instances
appear to be few.
In light of the recent economic improvement going on in the whiting
fisheries, the proposed regulations are reasonable and affordable and
do not appear to place small businesses at a competitive disadvantage
to large businesses. The major benefits of this program from a
conservation and management context is an allowance for more liberal
management to obtain better and quicker data for use in quota
monitoring and a potential reduction in costs of monitoring, and to
move management measures for monitoring whiting from a temporary
``EFP'' to formal regulations. In the short term, from an industry and
fishing community perspective, better management of the whiting
shoreside fishery minimizes the risk that sector quotas and bycatch
limits are not exceeded in ways that may lead to closure of other
fisheries thus affecting other small businesses. In the medium term,
the proposed rule will aid development of an Individual Fishing Quota
(IQ) catch accounting system. IQs are expected to increase
profitability in the fishing industry and improve the sustainability of
fishing communities. In the long term, the entire fishing industry and
its communities including associated small businesses will benefit by
reducing the risk of overfishing and increasing the potential that the
rebuilding schedules for the overfished species are maintained, thus
increasing the chances that current levels of groundfish ex-vessel
revenues of $70 million can be restored to levels above $100 million
which were consistently seen in the early to mid 1990's. There were no
other alternatives to the proposed action that would have accomplish
the stated objectives. Under Status Quo, general catch sorting
requirements and prohibited actions would continue to be specified for
limited entry trawl vessel; each state would continue to specify
requirements for landing reports.
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
approved under OMB control number 0648-0203, as well as a new
collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been
submitted to OMB for approval. Public reporting burden for preparing
and submitting electronic fish tickets is estimated to average ten
minutes per individual response for whiting shoreside processors/first
receivers in the states of California and Washington, and two minutes
per individual response for whiting shoreside processors/first
receivers in the State of Oregon, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection information. Public comment is sought regarding: whether
this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden
estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send
comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information
to the Northwest Region at the ADDRESSES above, and by e-mail to
[email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285.
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB control number. There are no Federal rules that
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule.
NMFS issued Biological Opinions under the ESA on August 10, 1990,
November 26, 1991, August 28, 1992, September 27, 1993, May 14, 1996,
and December 15, 1999 pertaining to the effects of the Pacific Coast
groundfish FMP fisheries on Chinook salmon (Puget Sound, Snake River
spring/summer, Snake River fall, upper Columbia River spring, lower
Columbia River, upper Willamette River, Sacramento River winter,
Central Valley spring, California coastal), coho salmon (Central
California coastal, southern Oregon/northern California coastal), chum
salmon (Hood Canal summer, Columbia River), sockeye salmon (Snake
River, Ozette Lake), and steelhead (upper, middle and lower Columbia
River, Snake River Basin, upper Willamette River, central California
coast, California Central Valley, south/central California, northern
California, southern California). These biological opinions have
concluded that implementation of the FMP for the Pacific Coast
groundfish fishery was not expected to jeopardize the continued
existence of any endangered or threatened species under the
jurisdiction of NMFS, or result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
NMFS reinitiated a formal section 7 consultation under the ESA in
2005 for both the whiting midwater trawl fishery and the groundfish
bottom trawl fishery. The December 19, 1999 Biological Opinion had
defined an 11,000 Chinook incidental take threshold for the whiting
fishery. During the 2005 whiting season, the 11,000 fish Chinook
incidental take threshold was exceeded, triggering reinitiation. Also
in 2005, new data from the West Coast Groundfish Observer Program
became available, allowing NMFS to complete an analysis of salmon take
in the bottom trawl fishery.
NMFS prepared a Supplemental Biological Opinion dated March 11,
2006, which addressed salmon take in both the whiting midwater trawl
and groundfish bottom trawl fisheries. In its 2006 Supplemental
Biological Opinion, NMFS concluded that catch rates of salmon in the
2005 whiting fishery were consistent with expectations considered
during prior consultations. Chinook bycatch has averaged about 7,300
over the last 15 years and has only occasionally exceeded the
reinitiation trigger of 11,000. Since 1999, annual Chinook bycatch has
averaged about 8,450. The Chinook ESUs most likely affected by the
whiting fishery have generally improved in status since the 1999
section 7 consultation. Although these species remain at risk, as
[[Page 17473]]
indicated by their ESA listing, NMFS concluded that the higher observed
bycatch in 2005 does not require a revision of its prior ``no
jeopardy'' conclusion with respect to the fishery. For the groundfish
bottom trawl fishery, NMFS concluded that incidental take in the
groundfish fisheries is within the overall limits articulated in the
Incidental Take Statement of the 1999 Biological Opinion. The
groundfish bottom trawl limit from that opinion was 9,000 fish
annually. NMFS will continue to monitor and collect data to analyze
take levels. NMFS also reaffirmed its prior determination that
implementation of the Groundfish FMP, including this current action, is
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any of the affected
ESUs.
Lower Columbia River coho (70 FR 37160, June 28, 2005) and the
Southern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of green sturgeon (71 FR
17757, April 7, 2006) were recently listed as threatened under the ESA.
As a consequence, NMFS has reinitiated its Section 7 consultation on
the PFMC's Groundfish FMP. After reviewing the available information,
NMFS concluded that, in keeping with Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA, the
proposed action would not result in any irreversible or irretrievable
commitment of resources that would have the effect of foreclosing the
formulation or implementation of any reasonable and prudent alternative
measures.
Pursuant to Executive Order 13175, this proposed rule was developed
after meaningful consultation and collaboration with tribal officials
from the area covered by the FMP. At the Council=s September and
November 2006 meetings, NMFS informed the Council, which includes a
tribal representative, of the intent to evaluate and implement catch
accounting requirements for whiting shoreside processors. This action
does not alter the treaty allocation of whiting, nor does it affect the
prosecution of the tribal fishery.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660
Fisheries, Fishing, Indian fisheries.
Dated: April 3, 2007.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 660--FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES
1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 660.302, the definitions for ``Electronic Monitoring
System,'' ``Pacific whiting shoreside or shore-based fishery,''
``Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver,'' and ``Pacific whiting
shoreside vessel'' are added to read as follows:
Sec. 660.302 Definitions.
* * * * *
Electronic Monitoring System (EMS) means a data collection tool
that uses a software operating system connected to an assortment of
electronic components, including video recorders, to create a
collection of data on vessel activities.
* * * * *
Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers means persons who
receive, purchase, take custody, control, or possession of Pacific
whiting onshore directly from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel.
Pacific whiting shoreside or shore-based fishery means Pacific
whiting shoreside vessels and Pacific whiting shoreside first
receivers.
Pacific whiting shoreside vessel means any vessel that fishes using
midwater trawl gear to take, retain, possess and land 4,000 lb (1,814
kg) or more of Pacific whiting per fishing trip from the Pacific
whiting shore-based sector allocation for delivery to a Pacific whiting
shoreside first receiver during the primary season.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 660.303, paragraph (a) is revised and paragraph (e) is
added to read as follows:
Sec. 660.303 Reporting and recordkeeping.
(a) This subpart recognizes that catch and effort datanecessary for
implementing the PCGFMP are collected by the States of Washington,
Oregon, and California under existing state data collection
requirements.
* * * * *
(e) Participants in the Pacific whiting shoreside fishery.
Reporting requirements defined in the following section are in addition
to reporting requirements under applicable state law and requirements
described at Sec. 660.303(b).
(1) Reporting requirements for any Pacific whiting shoreside first
receiver--(i) Responsibility for compliance. The Pacific whiting
shoreside first receiver is responsible for compliance with all
reporting requirements described in this paragraph.
(ii) General requirements. All records or reports required by this
paragraph must: be maintained in English, be accurate, be legible, be
based on local time, and be submitted in a timely manner as required in
paragraph (e)(1)(iv) of this section.
(iii) Required information. All Pacific whiting shoreside first
receivers must provide the following types of information: date of
landing, delivery vessel, gear type used, first receiver, round weights
of species landed listed by species or species group including species
catch with no value, number of salmon by species, number of Pacific
halibut, and any other information deemed necessary by the Regional
Administrator as specified on the appropriate electronic fish ticket
form.
(iv) Electronic fish ticket submissions. The Pacific whiting
shoreside first receiver must:
(A) Sort catch, prior to first weighing, by species or
species groups as specified at Sec. 660.370 (h)(6)(iii).
(B) Include as part of each electronic fish ticket submission, the
actual scale weight for each groundfish species as specified by
requirements at Sec. 660.373 (j)(2)(i) and the catcher vessel
identification number.
(C) Use for the purpose of submitting electronic fish tickets, and
maintain in good working order, computer equipment as specified at
Sec. 660.373 (j)(2)(ii)(A);
(D) Install, use, and update as necessary, any NMFS-approved
software described at Sec. 660.373 (j)(2)(ii)(B);
(E) Submit a completed electronic fish ticket for every landing
that includes 4,000 lb (1,814 kg) or more of Pacific whiting (round
weight equivalent) no later than 24 hours after the date the fish are
received, unless a waiver of this requirement has been granted under
provisions specified at paragraph (e)(1) (vii) of this section.
(v) Revising a submitted electronic fish ticket submission. In the
event that a data error is found, electronic fish ticket submissions
may be revised by resubmitting the revised form. Electronic fish
tickets are to be used for the submission of final catch data.
Preliminary data, including estimates of catch weights or species in
the catch, shall not be submitted on electronic fish tickets.
(vi) Retention of records. [Reserved]
(vii) Waivers for submission of electronic fish tickets. On a case-
by-case basis, a temporary waiver of the requirement to submit
electronic fish tickets may be granted by the Assistant Regional
Administrator or designee if he/she determines that circumstances
beyond the control of a Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver would
result in inadequate data submissions using the electronic fish ticket
system. The
[[Page 17474]]
duration of the waiver will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
(viii) Reporting requirements when a temporary waiver has been
granted. Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers that have been
granted a temporary waiver from the requirement to submit electronic
fish tickets must submit on paper the same data as is required on
electronic fish tickets within 24 hours of the date received during the
period that the waiver is in effect. Paper fish tickets must be sent by
facsimile to NMFS, Northwest Region, Sustainable Fisheries Division,
206-526-6736 or by delivering it in person to 7600 Sand Point Way NE,
Seattle, WA 98115. The requirements for submissions of paper tickets in
this paragraph are separate from, and in addition to existing state
requirements for landing receipts or fish receiving tickets.
(2) [Reserved]
4. In Sec. 660.306, paragraphs (b)(4) and (f)(6) are added to read
as follows:
Sec. 660.306 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Fail to comply with all requirements at Sec. 660.303 (d); or
to fail to submit, submit inaccurate information, or intentionally
submit false information on any report required at Sec. 660.303 (d)
when participating in the Pacific whiting shoreside fishery.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(6) Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers. (i) Receive for
transport or processing catch from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel
that does not have a properly functioning EMS system as required by
Federal regulation or by an EFP, unless a waiver for EMS coverage was
granted by NMFS for that trip.
(ii) Fail to sort catch from a Pacific whiting shoreside vessel
prior to first weighing after offloading as specified at Sec. 660.370
(h)(6)(iii) for the Pacific whiting fishery.
(iii) Process, sell, or discard groundfish catch that has not been
weighed on a scale that is in compliance with requirements at Sec.
660.373 (j)(1)(i) and accounted for on an electronic fish ticket with
the identification number for the catcher vessel that delivered the
catch.
(iv) Fail to weigh catch landed from a Pacific whiting shoreside
vessel prior to transporting any fish from that landing away from the
point of landing.
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 660.370, paragraph (h)(6)(iii) is added to read as
follows:
Sec. 660.370 Specifications and management measures.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(6) * * *
(iii) Sorting requirements for the Pacific whiting shoreside
fishery. Catch delivered to Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers
(including shoreside processing facilities and buying stations that
intend to transport catch for processing elsewhere) must be sorted,
prior to first weighing after offloading from the vessel and prior to
transport away from the point of landing, to the species groups
specified in paragraph (h)(6)(i)(A) of this section for vessels with
limited entry permits. Prohibited species must be sorted according to
the following species groups: Dungeness crab, Pacific halibut, Chinook
salmon, Other salmon. Non-groundfish species must be sorted as required
by the state of landing.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 660.373, paragraph (j) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 660.373 Pacific whiting (whiting) fishery management.
* * * * *
(j) Additional requirements for participants in the Pacific Whiting
Shoreside fishery--(1) Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver
responsibilities--(i) Weights and measures. All groundfish weights
reported on fish tickets must be recorded from scales with appropriate
weighing capacity that ensures accuracy for the amount of fish being
weighed. For example: amounts of fish less than 1,000 lb (454 kg)
should not be weighed on scales that have an accuracy range of 1,000
lb-7,000 lb (454 - 3,175 kg) and are therefore not capable of
accurately weighing amounts less than 1,000 lb (454 kg).
(ii) Electronic fish tickets--(A) Hardware and software
requirements. First receivers using the electronic fish ticket software
provided by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission are required to meet
the hardware and software requirements below. Those whiting first
receivers who have NMFS-approved software compatible with the standards
specified by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission for electronic fish
tickets are not subject to any specific hardware or software
requirements.
(1) A personal computer with Pentium 75-MHz or higher. Random
Access Memory (RAM) must have sufficient megabyte (MB) space to run the
operating system, plus an additional 8 MB for the software application
and available hard disk space of 217 MB or greater. A CD-ROM drive with
a Video Graphics Adapter(VGA) or higher resolution monitor (super VGA
is recommended).
(2) Microsoft Windows 2000 (64 MB or greater RAM required), Windows
XP (128 MB or greater RAM required) or later operating system.
(3) Microsoft Access 2003 or newer for.
(B) NMFS Approved Software Standards and Internet Access. The
Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver is responsible for obtaining,
installing and updating electronic fish tickets software either
provided by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission, or compatible with
the standards specified by Pacific States Marine Fish Commission and
for maintaining internet access sufficient to transmit data files via
email.
(C) Maintenance. The Pacific whiting shoreside first receiver is
responsible for ensuring that all hardware and software required under
this subsection are fully operational and functional whenever the
Pacific whiting primary season deliveries are accepted.
(2) Pacific whiting shoreside first receivers and processors that
receive groundfish species other than Pacific whiting in excess of trip
limits from Pacific whiting shoreside vessels fishing under an EFP
issued by the Assistant Regional Administrator are authorized to
possess the catch.
(3) Vessel owners and operators, or shoreside processor owners, or
managers may contact NMFS in writing to request assistance in improving
data quality and resolving monitoring issues. Requests may be submitted
to: Attn: Frank Lockhart,National Marine Fisheries Service, Northwest
Region Sustainable Fisheries Division, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, Seattle,
WA 98115, or via email to [email protected].
[FR Doc. E7-6643 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S