Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 2, January 5, 2009, Pages 201-392 Page: 257
vi, 191, ii p. ; 28 cm.View a full description of this periodical.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Federal Register/Vol. 74, No. 2/Monday, January 5, 2009 /Proposed Rules
reduced through post-delivery transfers.
Based on public testimony received
during Council deliberations and
NMFS' review of overage rates in the
Rockfish Program and Amendment 80
Program described in the RIR/IRFAs
prepared for this proposed action (see
ADDRESSES), it is unlikely that
harvesters will have excessive overages
by unreasonable reliance on the
provision for post-delivery transfers.
The available data indicate that overages
are rare currently, and would likely
continue to be in the future. This
proposed action would benefit
cooperatives and the members of
cooperatives fishing under a
cooperative's CQ permit.
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Requirements
The NMFS Restricted Access
Management Program (RAM) would
continue to oversee share accounts and
share usage. At the time of landing,
RAM would maintain a record of any
overage, but instead of reporting
overages to NOAA OLE immediately,
RAM would defer reporting until
December 31 of the calendar year for
which the CQ permit was issued. RAM
would use the same process for
processing post-delivery inter-
cooperative transfer requests as is
currently used to process inter-
cooperative transfers under regulations
at 679.81 for the Rockfish Program,
and at 679.91 for the Amendment 80
Program.
Summary of Regulatory Changes
This action proposes the following
changes to the existing regulatory text at
50 CFR part 679:
* Add two new paragraphs to define
the term "fishing trip" at 679.2;
* Modify the existing prohibitions at
679.7(n)(7)(i) for the Rockfish Program
and 679.7(o)(4)(v) for the Amendment
80 Program to clarify that a person
cannot begin a fishing trip with a vessel
assigned to a Rockfish Program
cooperative or Amendment 80 Program
cooperative, if that Amendment 80 or
Rockfish cooperative does not hold
unused CQ for all species for which CQ
is assigned; and
* Add prohibitions at 679.7(n)(7)(vi)
for the Rockfish Program and
679.7(o)(4)(vi) for the Amendment 80
Program to prohibit a person from
having a negative balance in a CQ
account for any species after the end of
the calendar year for which that CQ
permit was issued.
Classification
The Assistant Administrator forFisheries, NOAA, has determined that
this proposed rule is consistent with
Amendments 90 and 78, the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, and other applicable
laws, subject to further consideration
after public comment.
This proposed rule has been
determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
IRFAs were prepared for Amendment
90 and Amendment 78 that describe the
impact this proposed rule would have
on small entities. Copies of the RIR/
IRFAs prepared for this proposed rule
are available from NMFS (see
ADDRESSES). The RIR/IRFAs prepared
for this proposed rule incorporate by
reference extensive RIR/IRFAs prepared
for Amendment 68 to the GOA FMP that
implemented the Rockfish Program, and
Amendment 80 to the BSAI FMP that
implemented the Amendment 80
Program. The RIR/IRFAs prepared for
Amendment 68 and Amendment 80
detailed the impacts of those LAPPs on
small entities. These analyses are
available from the NMFS Alaska Region,
Records Office, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau,
AK 99802, e-mail
Records.fakr@noaa.gov, and on the
Alaska Region Web site at http://
alaskafisheries.n oa a.gov.
The IRFAs for this proposed action
describe the action, why this action is
being proposed, the objectives and legal
basis for the proposed rule, the type and
number of small entities to which the
proposed rule would apply, and
projected reporting, recordkeeping, and
other compliance requirements of the
proposed rule. The IRFAs identify any
overlapping, duplicative, or conflicting
federal rules and describes any
significant alternatives to the proposed
rule that accomplish the stated
objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act
and other applicable statutes, and that
would minimize any significant adverse
economic impact of the proposed rule
on small entities. The description of the
proposed action, its purpose, and its
legal basis are described in the preamble
and are not repeated here.
This action directly regulates holders
of CQ who might use post-delivery
transfers to cover overages. Estimates of
the number of small entities holding CQ
are based on estimates of gross
revenues. Landings data from the most
recent season for which data are
available are used to make these
estimates. In the Rockfish Program,
seven cooperatives formed in the first
year (2007). Estimates of the number of
these cooperatives that are small entities
are based on estimates of gross revenues
from the most recent year for which
complete data are available (2005).Since rockfish prices vary from year to
year, the gross revenues of participants
are difficult to predict. Of the seven
cooperatives that received CQ in the
first year of the Rockfish Program, five
are estimated to be large entities and
two are estimated to be small entities. In
the Amendment 80 Program, estimates
of the number of these cooperatives that
are small entities are based on estimates
of gross revenues from the most recent
year for which complete data are
available (2007). In the first year of the
Amendment 80 Program (2007), one
cooperative formed. This cooperative is
estimated to be a large entity.
Any cooperative wishing to cover an
overage will be required to engage in a
transfer of CQ. The required reporting
and recordkeeping for a post-delivery
transfer would be the same as for any
other transfer of CQ.
All of the directly regulated
individuals would be expected to
benefit from this action relative to the
status quo alternative because the
proposed action would allow greater
flexibility and a longer time period over
which to account for overages. Holders
of CQ would be expected to benefit the
most because the proposed action
would provide CQ holders greater
flexibility to maximize the harvest of
their allocation without risking
overages. Non-cooperative members
would not be expected to benefit from
this action because those persons do not
receive an exclusive annual harvest
privilege. This action would not be
expected to have any effect on non-
cooperative members. Among the three
alternatives considered, the proposed
action would best minimize potential
adverse economic impacts on the
directly regulated entities. Under the
status quo, no post-delivery transfers
would be allowed and small entities
would continue to be penalized for
overages. A third alternative for both
Amendment 78 and Amendment 90
would have allowed post-delivery
transfers, but with more limitations and
restrictions than the preferred
alternative. The preferred alternative
gives small entities the most flexibility
to account for overages.
Allowing post-delivery transfers
should reduce the number of overages
that result in forfeiture of catch and
other penalties.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Recordkeeping and
Reporting Requirements.257
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Periodical.
United States. Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, Volume 74, Number 2, January 5, 2009, Pages 201-392, periodical, January 5, 2009; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc132864/m1/64/: accessed March 28, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.