Purpose and Need

The BSAI and GOA Plan Teams first proposed streamlining the groundfish specifications process in 1996. The Council initiated Amendments 48 to the BSAI and GOA FMPs in December 1996 to address administrative and public notice issues. The Council’s preferred action to rollover harvest specifications from one year to the next was approved in June 1998. ABCs, TACs, and PSC amounts would remain unchanged from year to year until revised in a final rule. In July 1999, the NMFS Regional Administrator notified the Council that the Council’s preferred alternative was not in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the Regulatory Flexibility Act. As a result, Amendment 48 needed to be revised to meet the requirements set forth in NEPA, APA, and RFA, extending deliberations for four years until the Council approved new annual harvest specifications in October 2003. Despite the initial setback in 1999, the Council and NMFS acknowledged the continuing need to revise the existing TAC specification process to meet the following objectives: 

1) manage fisheries based on the best available information;

 2) make adjustments to TAC amounts to respond to new information or conservation concerns;

 3) comply with NEPA, ESA, and RFA provisions while minimizing unnecessary disruption to fisheries; 

4) provide adequate opportunity for public review and comment on new information leading to annual TAC recommendations; and

 5) promote administrative efficiency while minimizing public confusion regarding proposed and interim specifications.

 In October 2003, the Council approved a new annual harvest specification process for the Alaska groundfish fisheries to:

 1) eliminate the publication of proposed and possibly misleading information in proposed and interim specifications;

 2) enhance the ability of NMFS to adjust the TAC and PSC amounts inseason;

 3) remove obsolete references to foreign and joint venture management measures. 

Analysis

A 186-page analysis evaluated four action alternatives and three stand-alone options. A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was also prepared by NMFS for this action. An earlier analysis concluded that the existing specification process could be improved. Proposed specifications may be outdated by the time they are published for public review. Interested parties realize that those numbers will change, sometimes considerably, after release of the final SAFE reports and December Council meeting. The Federal Register publication of proposed specifications, therefore, may no longer serve a useful purpose. One rejected alternative was scheduling the Council and Plan Team meetings to occur earlier in the year to allow more time to publish proposed and final specifications; interim specifications would be unnecessary. A limiting factor to the specification process is the time needed by the Plan Teams to analyze data and produce final SAFE documents. Survey data is not available until late summer or early fall, and it is unlikely that assessments of the fisheries could be made any earlier. The Plan Teams and the Council prefer to base their recommendations on the most current possible information. A minimum of two weeks is needed between the November Plan Team meeting and the December Council meeting for the SAFE reports to be released for public review. It would be impracticable, therefore, for the specification process to occur any earlier in the year.

Regulation Summary

Amendment 48 revised the title of the BSAI FMP to “The Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area.” Sections 679.20 and 679.21 were revised to implement the new administrative process for harvest specifications that allowed for proposed and final harvest to remain in effect for up to two years. This provides flexibility for harvest specifications to be effective for more than 12 months, allowing time to comply with APA rulemaking requirements and ensuring that management is based on the best available scientific information. Amendment 48 also gave NMFS the authority to specify a comment period based on the circumstances present when the proposed specifications are published, rescinded provisions for interim harvest specifications, revised species listed for seasonal allowances for the final harvest specifications, and revised §679.20(c)(5), 679.20(c)(6), and 679.62(a)(3) to remove references to interim harvest specifications.

Results

Amendment 48 revised some administrative procedures associated with the harvest specifications process that are still in use today.