Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07052006 PACAB Packet SEWARD PORT AND COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING July 5, 2006 Council Chambers Starts at 12:00 noon 1 SEWARD PORT AND COMMERCE ADVISORY BOARD Regular Meeting JUL Y 5, 2006 NOON COUNCIL CHAMBERS Deborah Altermatt Chair Term Expires 2007 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Karl Van Buskirk Vice Chair Term Expires 2007 3. ROLL CALL Jerry Waliezer Board Member Term Expires 2006 4. SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS D.J. Whitman Board Member Term Expires 2006 A. ARRC Representative Louis Bencardino B. KPB/EDD - City Councilmember VaIdatta Ron Long Board Member Term Expires 2008 C. Administrative Report Vacancy Board Member Term Expires 2007 5. Citizens' comments on any subject except those items scheduled for public hearing. [Those who have signed in will be given the first opportunity to speak Time is limited to 2 minutes per speaker and 30 minutes total time for this agenda item.} Vacancy Board Member Term Expires 2008 6. Approval of agenda and consent agenda [Approval of Consent Agenda passes all routine items indicated by asterisk Scott A. Ransom Harbormaster *June 7, 2006 regular meeting minutes Judi Sweeney Board Secretary 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Alternative Energy - Tidal Energy ~ B. Goals and Priorities - On-Going {O-lI q City of Seward, Alaska March 1,2006 3 Pacab Agenda Page 1 8. NEW BUSINESS A. P ACAB work session on July 19, 2006 Council Chambers to discuss Tidal Energy Source, David Sauers. 9. CORRESPONDENCE, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS (No action required) A. North Pacific Fishery Management Council News and Notes June 2006 r J-- - ~ 0 10. BOARD COMMENTS 11. CITIZENS' COMMENTS [5 minutes per individual - Each individual has one opportunity to speak] 12. BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENT 13 ADJO~NT City of Seward, Alaska March 1,2006 Pacab Agenda Page 2 4 City of Seward, Alaska June 7, 2006 Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes Volume 3, Page 220 CALL TO ORDER The regular June 7, 2006 meeting of the Seward Port and Commerce Advisory Board was called to order at 12:04 p.m. by Chair Altermatt. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Was led by Board member Martin. ROLL CALL There were present: Deborah AItermatt, presiding, and D. J. Whitman Jerry Waliezer Bruce Martin Ron Long Absent: Karl VaD Buskirk Comprising a quorum of the Board; and Scott A. Ransom, Harbonnaster Robert Valdatta, Councilmember/KPB/EDD Representative Louis Bencardino, Alaska Railroad Corporation Representative Judi Sweeney, PACAB Secretary SPECIAL ORDERS, PRESENTATIONS AND REPORTS Louis Bencardino, ARRC Representative reported that business is good and has nearly doubled. He said they are upgrading the tracks from Fairbanks to Seward. The Navy ship u.S.S.Chaffee was in port for the last few days. He said they were happy with their visit to Seward and presented a picture to the American Legion. He thanked the City for providing sewer service to the ship. He mentioned that a special roof coating was applied to the building and has a ten-year guarantee. He reported on a meeting with Totem Ocean Trailer Enterprises, (T.O.T.E.). discussing the logistics of loading and unloading freight from barges and ships. He spoke in favor ofthe Coal-fired generation plant saying that the Railroad would like see a contract signed by the City before they commit to a land lease. They are supportive of the coal plant. 5 City of Seward. Alaska June 7. 2006 Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes Volume 3. Page 220 Robert Valdatta, Council representative on EDD, said he did not have anything to report concerning EDD at this time. He said that the fish weir (Cook Inlet Aquaculture) facility had 45,000 red salmon return to date. Harbormaster Ransom reported on the May 24 work session with the full Council, three from the U.S. Army Corps, Kim Nielsen from TNH, Ron Long and three Congressional representatives via telephone. He said it was a very productive session. He said the Corps admitted they made a mistake on the design of the breakwater and they have a willingness to resolve the issue. Ransom said the Corps visited the City's rock quarry and felt it was organized well enough to do the project. Kim Nielsen, TNH Engineer gave a report on the progress of the harbor project. She said the final inspection with Lash Construction is scheduled and the projected closeout should be by the end ofthe month. She said they are working on float water, sewer and the design of the uplands. CITIZEN'S COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS NOT SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARING: NONE APPROV AL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA MOTION (LonglWaliezer) Approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda including the minutes of May 3, 2006. Motion passed by unanimous consent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Alternative Energy Ransom said there had been a good turnout for the (May 29) work session held with Council. Mark Marlow, Seward Co-Generation suggested that a five-member committee be formed consisting of the following: one P ACAB member, Marlow, Resurrection Bay Conservation group member, a council member and a member of administration. Altermatt said she would be giving a presentation to Council per their request for information on other avenues of alternative energy options and asked if anyone from the board had any information they would like to share with her. Long will be the P ACAB representative with Waliezer and Martin as alternates. Goals and Priorities - on going list mention that the Corps is about to sign off on the upland. NO CHANGES NEW BUSINESS Seward Economic Development Plan Altermatt explained that this was just an on the agenda for discussion. Long gave an overview of the Seward Economic Development Plan booklet and the figures and charts were taken from the KPB' s of the third and fourth quarter of last year showing values rather than permits. He explained that (building) permits are required for things that never used to require permits like inside structural improvements. Fish Head Processing Plant Ransom explained this is a group from Korea that is interested in buying fish heads. Ransom said he made some phone calls and was waiting for a reply. 6 City of Seward, Alaska June 7, 2006 Port and Commerce Advisory Board Minutes Volume 3, Page 220 Modular Housing Martin explained that this group is just inquiring about manufacturing modular homes in Seward. He said they would be meeting with A VTEC on Tuesday, June 13,2006. The interested party liked how Seward is the railhead, deep-water port and can get material from anywhere to here. CORRESPONDENCE, INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND REPORTS: NONE BOARD COMMENTS: Following discussion, Waliezer volunteered to give the presentation regarding alternative energy to the Council. CITIZENS COMMENTS: Willard Dunham asked about the plans for the upland area created by the harbor expansion. Harbormaster Ransom said that there was an opinion paper written by City attorney, Brad Meyen with suggestions for the land use of the upland area. Dunham commented the plan is strictly up to us (Council) and we are not going to rush this plan through. BOARD AND ADMINISTRATION RESPONSE TO CITIZENS' COMMENTS: ADJOURNMENT The work session ended at 1:30 p.m. Judi Sweeney Board Secretary Deborah Altennatt Chairman (City Seal) 7 C 0::: <( o aI >- 0::: 0'1;; U):::i >- CUCO .....Q)O - 0'0 W...N UD...,; 0::: C) ~ Wc- :E .- ::I :E~'" O' u5 c z <( I- 0:: o Q. w ~ w 0 < ~ c en l- S; en w .> ~ w 0:: <( w 0 u Q w :E z ~ ~ w w 0 U) a. .> ....J U) 0:: en w e> w w <( 0:: Z I W l- I e> Ci I- ~ Z ell Z Z 0:: 0:: w ~ ijj <( 0 u a. 0 0:: lD a. 0:: e> 0 X m <( U) Z u. ~ W I :J: Z e> l- I I- 0 ~ W Z u en z l- I- e> ~ w Z 0 0 Z I- ~ a it: ....J ::E <( 0 0 u ~ ,.... 0 w en 0 0:: C Z 0 0:: :E 0:: ....J a. z m ,.... 0 it: e> <( :::> 0:: 0 C\/ 0:: X Z U en a.- 0 en en 0 0:: 0 0:: ....J 0:: ....J U en w C\/ (jj 0 Z en z 0 ~ w z z > 0:: 0 u. z <( 0 f? ....J 0 0 0 u. e> u. ~ en u ~ en en 0 en Z 0 Z w ~ co U. I- Z en C\/ en en ;:: 0 I- % b a. 0 I 0:: 0 ~ ~ en en :::> I- 0 I ~ :::> :::> w w 0 w u t- ~ w ~ U co ~ U U u en :::> w w u W 0:: en en I- ~ 0 0 en en ::!: z z -. 3: en >- w Ci <( 0 .... Ci Ci w 0 e> 0 I- >- en I- C\/ Z 0:: :::> w z :::> 0:: w U ~ a: 0 en 0 <( z z ~ e> z <( w e> e> 0:: ~ a. 0 0 e> w z >- 0 0 w 0:: Z ....J 0:: e> z z 0:: ~ I- Z en ~ ....J e> 0 5 <( ;:: w ~ 5 5 a. u ....J ::!: w <( 0 ....J U. ~ en u. :::> lD ....J 0:: ~ W <( :I: I- ~ Z 0 en ....J ~ :::> z z ~ a: w 0 0 -I :::> I- z ;:: 0 ;:: a. z 0 0 ;:: ;:: <( l- I- Z W Q.. Z :::> ~ ....J ....J Z 0 ~ en 0:: u Z z a: u en z ~ in :E z 0 :::> w 0 0:: w 0 z 0 0 <( <( 0 a. 0 <( en e> ::!: :I: U a. I- 0:: ~ W U U U z ::!: u lD ~ (,) w U) m U) 0:: W l- I- :;:) ,~ z U I- C2 W ~ u ::E W :::> 0 w w .., U 0:: U > 0 W I- m C2 0 -, ~ w ~ 0:: 0::: 0 u 11. a.. 11. 0:: Z 0:: op z ::E a.. 0 u. :;:) 0 :E w :::: I- ~ <( I- a.. ~ 0 m a:: z z Z ;:: I- m I- w W <( 0 W m z z >- z ~ ~ w w w to;' ::E 0:: a:: I 0 U ~ W C) en z ::E ...J 0 :;:) a:: I- 0:: z ::E 0 0:: w ...J ~ > I- ~ ~ w 0 w en w ~ u: w 0 :;:) =>> ::E .> ~ > z Z 0:: Z u. U 0 ::E w 0 ~ w 0:: ~ w 0 0:: w ~ I- 0:: >< 0:: 0:: 0:: W 0:: z U ~ W 0 a.. ~ w a.. ~ ..J u. j :i 0 u z 0 ~ U >< > :! ~ w ~ ::i C) 1:0 ~ 3: 3: I- 0 W ~ 0 al ~ Z a.. m 0 m 0:: 0 I- ~ :::> w 0:: J: I- ;:: f? w W I- W II. Z a > z 0:: 0:: < z 0:: 0 J: 0:: 3: u: 0 J: W W Z ~ 1:0 Ii: ::i ~ 0 1:0 I- 0 ...J ~ W ~ 0 U I ~ a.. w J: U 3: en ~ :::> a.. "3 ~ II) 0 en I- z a.. <( :i en 0 i: ~ C) 0 w 12 0 0:: w 0 ii2 ::::J W m 0 u: I z m i: 0:: z a.. J: m ct u ::E > 0:: a.. '-- 9 Ocean Renewable Power Company rage 1 Ul 1 1...1 About ORPC >> QCGen™ Projects ,-. i..! Technological Innovation r--;"'\ Our Approoch Tidal Current Project Sites: '- ,..i Development Plan ORPC is assessing the development of tidal current projects at sites in the upper Cook Inlet adjacent to Anchorage, AK, in Resurrection Bay adjacent to Seward, AK and in the Western Passage adjacent to Eastport, ME "'I OCGeri'" Projects . ;:lrc1clyp!::! CCCf:!r' n:-('I!;::!L~::': . Applications for Preliminary Permits for all three site areas have been submitted to FERC . c,,~:t::.a ,.' (~'f;l t c_'-r ~__~; f_~j ':/TX:.: :Yl.':;":';_ .;';.-.1;:31.))!Tt:!' j~ ..f:'-: ;..:-" l. _ 4 _ _ -' . All the site areas will accommodate the development of projects consisting of a large arrays of OCGen 1M modules . (~urf1fPen...-.ioi ()C:;CiBf! Pn.:;€ci.:::; )- C)c:e;:H-~ ~'.d~Tent ~rc:.l~(;t :l:~U:;' .. C:),~;C:'.:::H-~ :".;j(i"(;lit (J1':'~ec.:I:;'''f-' .. . C~!Ce:cH'; -_~_urr~nt ~,d~ i nZ:-~p'::, . The Western Passage site area in Maine was studied by EPRI and determine to have a very high potential for tidal energy development .. 'rd~'!i ,>:rrw.,-.,te:, . ,',hi ,',I!TC'''' p..'d""""" ,;'j".: .".:d::,i ,~::"ilTO;>"f~ sih-~ r-~-~1~)~~ . Projects developed within the Alaska site areas will be connected to the electrical grid which serves the Anchorage area and Kenai Peninsula . Projects developed within the Maine site area will be connected to the electrical grid in Maine through Bangor Hydro >> Technological Innovation . Tidal currents at both Alaska site areas are under study to determine specific project sites with the best tidal current velocities . Additional studies are underway to find additional tidal sites in Alaska (Prince William Sound and Southeast Alaska), British Columbia, Maine and Canada Competitively priced power from an endless natural resource with no gas or liquid discharges to the environment. an renewable power company generating emission-free electricity from the boundless energy of ple ocean :, \:~\:~':_':' .j,t.:&: _._ ____._n___~_.,.....,.......__--,_ ,._-,--~~---~....--- ,._n._,'" ,..,. -. : .--- -cC".--- ..,._n_c_..,.._.._ ,. ~ _' n._' _'-_'_'..'_ ._.~ _._..._.____ __._______.------'-'"___ ...---,.,.-'~___ ,__..~n____.'.__ __.._-.,_._~_._..__._n___ ,.... _..-. __.."'- . _",'. _ '" _- .,_. .. ,'. 'n ..... '.'" C,,'... ~.__.,.-.'..-.._._. ,.....,-..,.. - .. - .... . " -- - ,-' -- - -- '. ; -'. -. "-.- -. ",'" " .__--..:--..__.-,-.,---,. ._~-o-.,......._--_. Copynght 2006-'2007 Ocean Re~ablepower comp~ny, 'lLc',AII ttghts reserVed. Site Is Designed, developed and powered by Nt;TUTRV (A 1arlka GroOp Company) lttp:1 /www.oceanrenewablepower.com/ocgenproj ect _ cOl11l11ercial_ tidalsites. htl11 1 0 _..n'.." ........ ... -..-.. ...-.-'..- .......-- ..-...--'-' .... ..... ..... .-. ....,. ... ....... .- ........ -...... -.-....---...,--.----..---..----'''.--- ..-.....,--..-.. ..-............ ..... ........ _. ......- ....... -''' ....,. ..'--...-- 6/15/2006 )cean ~enewable Power Company Page 1 of I ! ;.-: About ORPC >> DeGen 1M Projects It... (;rpc ..,-~*",..,,~ r ... 'I Technologicallnnovatlon "- '-", ! .. lOur Approach Tidal current Prototype Project : '-'-. i~ I Development Plan In conjunction with companies and state agencies in Alaska, ORPC will design, engineer, fabricate, assemble, install, operate and monitor a prototype OCGen™ module at a tidal current site in the Cook Inlet near Anchorage, AK r"i OCGan"" Projects . PrUlCl:'lpe ()CCtf:!f1 Prajec~s .. ()t.:ei:ip :,::,urrent prolcfy'pe[}.r-c~'fel~.: . r'dal curren pro:o!,',:.!:! ;)rC1!i:!'::! · The prototype site will be in the main channel of the upper Cook Inlet either off Fire Island or just to the north of the Port of Anchorage · CO(f1rn~tc.ial aGGen Projects .. C\~ef.,n ~:urrent P,.o~~oct :t:jps . ()ce;:}!i ;::.urrent t:H"IJ(t?ct 5j~:f:' T1fl.-" . f)ce3n cutr~n1 3it~ rn3f..:L:'; I> -;-", d a~ ell rre.;o' 1 r=p"OJ 8C.L sHi:;S . Tidal 1.:;.HT(l;....~! ~1foject site info .. Tidal c~urrt;ntt site; n"::):t:)~ · A submersible platform or foundation structure will be designed and built to provide structural support and stability for the OCGen ™ module · The submersible support system will allow for lowering and anchoring the OCGen m module in the water, securing it into position at a prescribed depth Contact Us · All require environmental and other permits and approvals will be obtained prior to installation of the prototype OCGen™ module Technological Innovation · The OCGen ™ module will be field assembled at an appropriate port facility (Port of Anchorage) and installed at the prototype site · The prototype module will be operated, tested and monitored for a period of 12 months, during which relevant data will be collected, including current characteristics (flow rate, direction) and marine environment (noise, fish, etc.) · The prototype will be used to prove and improve the design of the OCGen™ module and support platform and develop final design, installation and O&M criteria for future projects to be installed in tidal ocean currents Competitively priced power from an endless natural resource with no gas or liquid discharges to the environment. n renewablepovver company generating emission-free from the boundless energy ocean p:/ /www.oceanrenewablepower.com/ocgenproject_prototype_tidal.htm 1 1 6/15/2006 North pacific Fishery Management Council Ne1NS and Notes Stephanie Madsen. Chair Chris Oliver. Executive Director GOA Groundfish Rationalization On June 6th, the Council held a public hearing to receive input on alternatives, elements, and options under consideration to rationalize the Gulf of Alaska groundfish fisheries. The Council heard testimony from nearly 100 people representing a broad range of interests, including vessel owners, processors, captains, crew, communities, and support industries. The Council extended the public comment period into Wednesday morning, delaying the start of its meeting, to accommodate all people wishing to testify. Gulf rationalization will next be on the Council's agenda at its December 2006 meeting in Anchorage. The Council has elected to remove the item fi:om 'the agenda .of its October meeting in Dutch Harbor to better facilitate public input from Gulf-based participants. Staff contact is Mark Fina. Charter Halibut The Council reviewed three issues related to management of charter halibut fisheries. First. the Council included three options to include communities in a proposed interim limited entry program (moratorium), after receiving Charter Halibut Stakeholder Committee, Advisory Panel, . and staff recommendations. The Council could decide to allow..community quota entities as already defined in regulations to: n ,purchase existing moratorium permits, 2) be awarded new permits; and/or 3) be reissUed non-renewed permits. These options are not mutually exclusive. A preliminary review of the moratorium package' is scheduled for the October 2006 Council meeting. The Council-also revised some other issues and options for clarity and deleted an option that would not require moratorium permit renewals. The revised text is posted on the Council web site. Initial review of the overall moratorium package is tentatively scheduled for December 2006, with final action in February 2007.. Implementation likely would not occur until the 2009 charter fishery season. 605 West 4th Avenue. Ste 306 Anchorage. AK 99501-2252 Phone (907) 271-2809 Fax (907) 271-2817 Halibut Commission staff and streamlined the fixed percentage allocation option, so that it would be based on a combined charter/commercial catchy limit as set by the IPHC each year. The Council also clarified the language for an option to allow communities to purchase permits and made several additions: 1) an option under the allocation and quota share alternatives that allocations would be set between sub-areas (yet to be identified); 2) development of local area and sub-area management plans; and 3) elements contained within the Kodiak Association of Charter-boat Operators plan, which were not already included in Committee recommendations. The Council tasked staff with developing discussion papers on the suite of alternatives, elements, and options for review in October. Third, the Council discussed a letter by NOAA Fisheries, . '. which reported that current Federal and State laws do not allow the use of State reporting documents by Federal enforcement personnel for the Council's preferred alternative to implement a 5-fish annual limit for charter anglers in Area 2C. Instead of State reporting documen~ NOAA determined that the proposed limit would require a Federal charter vessel halibut angler permit and a charter vessel halibut logbook. The costs for implementing Federal reporting could be substantial, and redundant to State reporting requirements. NOAA Fisheries recommended that the Council reconsider this action once these costs have been more fully evaluated. NOAA Fisheries will provide additional information for review at the October meeting. Thanks for your help! Our Council meeting this June in (partly) sunny Kodiak was a great success, thanks to the gracious hospitality of the Kodiak Inn and the Kodiak community, and in large part to the extra efforts of Jeff Stephan, his wife Karen, and the Unit~d Fisherman's Marketing Association in facilitating meetmg room arrangements and numerous other logistics during the week. Thanks again for all your help Jeff! Second, the Council reviewed Committee recommendations for three draft alternatives for a "permanent solution" to allocate halibut between the charter and commercial sectors: 1) Status quo; 2) Allocation to the charter sector; 3) Quota share program The Council ado ted recommendations by International Pacific North Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 1 1 2 I HalibutlSableflsh IFQ The Council took final action on four proposed amendments to the commercial halibut and sablefish IFQ program. The Council's preferred alternatives would allow: (I) non-IFQ species to be frozen onboard while directed fishing for halibut when any amount of IFQ halibut resulting from quota share assigned to vessel categories B, C, or D are held by fishennen on board a vessel in the Gulf of Alaska, Bering Sea, and Aleutian Islands; (2) use of pot longline gear in the Bering Sea IFQ and CDQ sablefish fisheries during June; (3) withdrawal ofhaIibut and sablefish QS from initial recipients who have never fished any of those shares across all regulatory areas and allow a lottery for halibut only if the amount of QS available for a lottery is more than the number of QS units equivalent to 50,000 Ib for all IPHC regulatory areas in the year of the lottery (never used QS will not be withdrawn if the holder notifies NOAA Fisheries that slhe wishes to retain those QS); and (4) temporary transfer of IFQs held by activated reservists who are not otherwise authorized to hire a skipper. Three years after implementation of Action I, the Council also will review a report that will examine whether retention of cod and rockfish and total amount of halibut QS fished on vessels using category "An (freezer) QS has increased as a result of the proposed regulatory change. Staff contact on halibut issues is Jane DiCosimo. Trawl CV LLP changes The Council received a staff report on a proposed BSA1/GOA trawl cv LLP amendment Following staff presentations and reviewing recommendations from the SSC and AP, the Council decided to proceed with an analysis of the amendment The tentative schedule for initial pubic review of the amendment is October 2006. The draft problem statement adopted by the Council notes that vessels in the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries that have made significant investments, had long catch histories and are dependent on the groundfish resources from these areas may need protection wm vessels that could enter the fisheries in the future, including those holding unutilized lLPs. The Council approved analysis of a license-based LIP threshold eligibility for vessels meeting a mininmm catch criteria of at least one landing or two landings (two options) over a qualification period. LLPs not meeting these rninimmll catch criteria will have endorsements in the management area removed of all area (BOO & GOA) or subarea (BS, AI, WG and CG) depending upon the option selected by the Council. The participation periods (recency criteria) to be analyzed are 2000-2005 and 1995-2005. The analysis will apply to LIPs held by BSAI trawl catcher vessels as well as ILPs held by GOA trawl catcher vessels and catcher processors. The Council requested staff provide the number of LLPs for vessels under 60 feet potentially eliminated under the eligibility criteria. The analysis will examine several options for the program, including: alternatives for dealing with multiple (stacked) LLPs on a single vessel, options to exclude LLPs held by AF A vessel owners and LLPs used for eligibility in Amendment 80. Options for harvest during the qualification period include trawl groundfish harvests and groundfish harvests taken by trawl and fixed. The analysis will also address options for vessels with a catch history in the parallel waters or state waters Aleutian Island fishery. The Council's draft problem statement and complete elements of the LLP limitation program are listed on the Council web site. Staff contact is Jim Richardson. , Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the AI The Council initiated development of a Fishery Ecosystem Plan (FEP) for the Aleutian Islands ecosystem area. The FEP will be a strategic policy and planning document, to guide the Council in its management actions relating to the Aleutian Islands. The FEP document, and its associated process, is anticipated to be evolutionary in nature, and its purposes are intended to be achieved over time. The purposes of the FEP are: a. to integrate information from across the FMPs with regard to the Aleutian Islands, using existing analyses and reports such as the Groundfish PSEIS, the EFH EIS, and the Ecosystem Considerations chapter (note, this integration should be user-friendly, i.e., short, simple, and avoiding redundancy) b. to identifY a set of indicators for the Aleutian Islands to evaluate the status of the ecosystem over time c. to provide a focal point to develop and refine tools, such as ecosystem models, to evaluate the indicators d. to identifY sources of uncertainty and use them to determine research and data needs e. to assist the Council in setting management goals and objectives, and in understanding the cumulative effects of management actions The Council also agreed to form a technical AI Ecosystem Team to assist Council. staff in developing the FEP. The SSC is providing advice on the appropriate membership of the team. Staff contact is Diana Evans. . Crab Management The Council concurred with the revised State/FederaJ Action Plan for commercial king and Tanner crab fisheries of the Bering Sea. and Aleutian Islands. The primary difference in the revised action plan (from the previous 1993 version) is in the timeline provided for data exchange between ADF&G and NMFS. The Council also received a report from the Pacific Northwest Crab Industry Advisory Committee (pNCIAC) covering issues discussed in a recent meeting of that committee. Among the primary issues discussed at the PNCIAC meeting were their concerns with highgrading reported in recent crab fisheries, and their efforts to work within the industry to address this serious issue. The Council was apprised of progress made towards an amendment to revise the existing overfishing definitions for BSAI crab stocks. A discussion paper outlining the proposed alternatives for the EA and detailing the review process as it relates to the determination of overfishing for these stocks will be reviewed by the Crab Plan Team at their September plan team meeting and by the Council at the October meeting. Staff contact is Diana Stram. North Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 Page 2 Crab PSC Improved Retentionl Utilization The Council completed final action on Amendment 80 at this meeting. Below is a brief summary of the preferred alternative. A complete copy of the June 2006 final action is available on the Council's website. CDO Groundfish Allocations 10% of Amendment 80 species and secondary species (except Pacific cod) taken incidental in the primary trawl fisheries. Non-AFA Trawl CP Groundfish Allocation YFS ITAC (mt) H&GlLimited Access < = 87,500 93% /7% 87,500 - 95,000 87.5% /12.5% 95,000 - 102,500 82% / 18% 102,500 - 110,000 76.5% / 23.5% 110,000-117,500 71% / 29% 117,500 - 125,000 65.5% / 34.5% > 125,000 60% / 40% (AF A Sideboards removed) Rock Sole 100% Flathead Sole 100% Atka Mackerel 98% in 541/EBS and 542, in the first year of the program, decreasing by 2% increments over 4-yr period to 90%. 100% in 543. AI POP 95% in 541 and 542 in the first year of the program, decreasing to 90% in the second year of the program. 98% in 543, These allocationS' would be managed as a hard cap. The . remaining portion of the Amendment 80 species would be allocated to the trawl limited access fishery. Prior to the allocation of the Amendment 80 species, an ICA would be taken off the top to accommodate incidental catch by the fixed-gear vessels and the trawl limited access sectors. AF A vessel sideboards amounts will be determined after COO reserve amounts are deducted from TAC. Unutilized groundfish, PSC, and ICA allocations shall be rolled over to the Non-AF A Trawl CP cooperative participants. Any PSC rollover will be discounted 5%, which will remain in the water. PSO Allocation to CDO Prolmlm Increase PSQ reserves allocated to the CDQ program (except herring, halibut, and Chinook salmon) to levels proportional to the CDQ allocation of primary species under Component 2. Non-AFA Trawl CP PSC Allocation Halibut and crab PSC levels shall be reviewed by the Council during the fifth year of the program and adjusted as necessary (through the normal amendment process). Halibut PSC BSAI Trawl limited access sector: 875 mt Non-AF A Trawl CP sector: 2525 mt initial allocation with a 50 mt reduction in the second, third, fourth and fifth year after program implementation. In the sixth year and subsequent years, the allocation would be 2325mt unless adjusted. In the third year :mly, the 50 mt reduction would be reallocation to the CDQ/PSQ ,eserve program. /IIorth Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 Allocation of crab PSC to the non-AF A Trawl CP secto; shall be based on the % of historic usage of crab PSC in all groundfish fisheries from 2000-2002 for red king crab (62.48%) and from 1995 to 2002 for opilio (61.44%) and bairdi (zone I: 52.64% and zone 2: 29.59%) (resulting percentages are reported in the far right column in Table 3- 43 May 5, 2006 ENRIRJIRF A). The initial allocation will be reduced by 5% per year starting in the second year until the Non-AF A Trawl CP sector is at 80% of their initial allocation. Trawl limited access sectors shall receive an allowance of the sum of the combined AF A CY/CP sideboards. Cooperative Formation To form a cooperative, membership must be comprised of at least 3 separate entities and must have at least 30% of the eligible vessels, including LLP licenses with associated catch history for an eligible vessel that has been transferred to that LLP license;. Groundfish and PSC Allocation Within the Non-AF A Trawl CP Sector Allocations will be based on total catch using 1998-2004 year combination. In the Atka mackerel fishery, each vessel will receive its 1998-2004 catch history based all subareas combined. For non-mackerel vessels (less than 200' in length having less than 2% of the sector's history of Atka mackerel), their allocation would be distributed by area according to the vessel's catch distribution. After the deduction of the non-mackerel vessel allocation, the remaiDing amount will be allocated to the mackerel vessels (greater than 200' in length and have more than 2% if the sector's mackerel allocation) based on each vessel's respective catch history distributed equa11y in each area. AI POP will be allocated equally in each subarea. Excessive Share Caps and Vessel Use Caps Excessive share cap would be applied on an aggregate basis at 30% of the sector's allocation. Vessel use caps would be 20% of the entire Non-AF A Trawl CP sector allocation. Persons or vessels that are over the initially allocation will be grandfathered based on catch history held at the time of fmal Council action. Sideboards BSAl In the BSAI, management of unallocated groundfish species would remain as status quo. GOA Non-AFA Trawl CP vessels having weekly participation greater than 10 weeks in the flatfish fishery during 1998- 2004, will be eligible to participate in the GOA flatfish fisheries. Non-AF A Trawl CP vessel(s) that fished 80% of their weeks in the GOA flatfish fisheries from 2000 to 2003 will be exempt from GOA halibut sideboards. Exempt vessels will be prohibited from directed fishing for all other sideboard sideboard species in the GOA (rockfish, Pacific cod, and Pollock). In addition, exempt vessels may lease their BSAI Amendment 80 history. 0... ____.__.._..__...._ ..._" _ __.._.. --.-- .u - -- ----.---....--... -.. ----..... 1 4 Page 3 Gulf wide halibut sideboards for deep and shallow water complex - fisheries would be established based on actual usage from 1998- 2004. That calculation results in the following percentages, less the percentage attributed to GOA PSC sideboard exempt vessel: precedence. Fina. )Ill aggregate sideboard limit for each sideboard species will be established for all qualified vessels subject to sideboards. Socioeconomic Data Collection Program The Council included a data collection program in the action. The program will collect economic data from the non- AF A trawl CP sector on a periodic basis. The purpose of the data collection program is to understand the economic effects of the Amendment 80 program on vessels or entities regulated by this action, and to inform future management actions. Data will be used by Council and agency staff, recognizing that confidentiality is of extreme importance. In addition, the Council also requested a discussion paper be prepared on issues surrounding collecting socioeconomic data for all North Pacific fisheries. GOA Halibut PSC Sideboard Limits for Non-AFA Trawl CP Sector (as percent of GOA total sideboard limit, ie, 2,OOOmt in 2006) Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4 Season 5 Total Deep 2.84% 11.92% 11.60% nfa Combined 26.36 Water wfshallow Trawl water Fisheries Shallow 0.85% 1.92% 2.06% 1.73% 5.15% 11.71 % Water Trawl Fisheries Note: The FN Golden Fleece data still needs to be deducted from the above table GOA pollock, Pacific cod, and directed rockfish species sideboards would be established based on catch history from 1998-2004. While CGOA rockfish demonstration program is in place, the CGOA rockfish demonstration program takes MRA accounting period. At its June 2006 meeting, the Council conducted an initial review of an analysis of alternatives to modify the accounting period for the maximum retainable allowance (MRA) for the non-AF A trawl catcher processor sector. MRAs limit the. amount of each non-directed species catch that may be retained to a percentage of directed species catch. Under current regulations, accounting is instantaneous. So, a vessel must be in compliance with the MRA at all times during a fishing trip. This action would modi1}t the MRA accounting period for certain species to the end of a fishing trip or until an offload. A fishing trip ends on the earliest of: a directed fishing closure, an offload, entering or leaving an area subject to a directed fishing closure. changing fishing gear, and end of a weekly reporting period. Prior to this meeting, the analysis considered changes only for yellowfin sole, rock sole, flathead sole, other flatfish, and arrowtooth flounder, with options to include Aleutian Islands Pacific ocean perch, Atka mackerel, Greenland turbot, and other rockfish. At this meeting, the Council added options to consider application of new adjustment periods for Pacific cod and Bering Sea Pacific ocean perch. The Council also removed options for applying the modified accounting period for Greenland turbot and other rockfish, but requested that staff include analysis of effects of the action with respect to other rockfish. The change in accounting would be all of the non-AF A trawl catcher processor sector prior to the implementation of the Amendment 80 cooperative program. After implementation of Amendment 80, the change would apply only to participants in the non-AFA catcher processor limited access fishery (and not to cooperative fishing). The Council requested staff to evaluate the implications of relaxing the MRA accounting period on incentives for cooperatives formation and membership. Staff contact is Mark Fina. North Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 Staff contact is Jon McCracken. Exempted Fishing Permit The Council approved an exempted fishing permit for testing a halibut excluder designated to reduce halibut bycatch rates on trawl catcher vessels targeting P. Cod in the Gulf of Alaska. The permit was submitted by the Marine Conservation Alliance Foundation with John Gauvin as the principal investigator. The following performance goals will be used to measure the ability of the EFP to meet the stated objective: (1) compared to an unmodified trawl, the excluder device should result in at least a 40 percent reduction in the halibut bycatch rate (kilogram of halibut per metric ton of allocated groundfish); (2) compared to an unmodified trawl. the excluder device should not reduce the target species catch by more than 10 percent; and (3) the excluder must be functional for a typical GOAtrawl vessel which has limited deck space and may have only aft reels. The EFP will contain the following regulatory exemptions: trawl closures in the Central GOA for reasons other than overfishing concerns; PSC limits for halibut (limited to 90mt); and observer requirements while the EFP is being prosecuted. The total amount of groundfish allowed to be harvested annually is 1,300 mt, of which 950 mt will likely be Pacific cod. Regulations describing maximum retainable (MRA) amounts apply; however, Pacific cod is designated as the basis species from which retainable amounts are to be calculated The permit will be effective for 1 year August I, 2006 _ August 31, 2006, but may be eligible for an extension for 2007. Staff contact is Diana Stram 15 Page 4 ......-- ..n "._---. - ---'--.-___.. _. ..._..___... --"'-_____"'___'_h _...____.._ ........4.. ..__.._.. ._. '." ._ _.__,_ Observer Program The Council reviewed the analysis for BSAI Amendment 86/GOA Amendment 76 to modify the funding and deployment mechanism in the North Pacific Groundfish Observer Program. The Federal regulations authorizing the current program expire after December 31, 2007. The five primary alternatives under consideration included: no action; extension of the existing program; and three alternatives to restructure the program such that NMFS would contract directly with observer providers for observer coverage. Observer coverage under the restructuring alternatives would be funded by a user fee and/or Federal funding. The problem statement identifies the data quality and disproportionate cost issues resulting from the current program structure, as well as the fundamental need for an observer program beyond 2007. The Council also reviewed a letter from NMFS recommending Alternative 2 (extension of the current program) at this time. This recommendation was based on the fact that: 1) Congressional authority necessary to implement any of the fee-based alternatives has not yet occurred, 2) it is not possible to estimate costs associated with the fee-based alternatives until overtime pay issues are clarified by the Department of Labor or in statute; and 3) the current observer program expires on December 31, 2007. The Observer Advisory Committee (OAC) also reviewed this letter at its January 2006 meeting and recommended that the Council select Alternative 2, given the need for continuing the program in the short-term and the lack of control over the Congressional authority and cost issues. In June, the Council selected Alternative 2 as its preferred alternative, recognizing that while this alternative does not meet the majority of the issues identified in the problem statement, it meets the short-term need of preventing the expiration of the observer program. The Council anticipates initiating a new amendment package for a restructured program at such time that the Congressional authority and cost issues are resolved to the extent that an analysis can be completed. Broad authority to collect fees to pay for observer coverage is included in several proposed bills to amend the Magnuson Stevens Act. A letter was also sent from NMFS to the Department of Labor earlier this year requesting clarification on the application of overtime pay rules in , the North Pacific observer program. The restructuring alternatives evaluated in Amendments 86/76 would provide a starting point for a new amendment package, at such time that these issues are resolved. Finally, the Council reviewed a discussion paper prepared by NMFS on video monitoring and its potential for large scale implementation in the North Pacific fisheries. Video is becoming an increasingly viable technology for monitoring some types of fishing activity or enhancing the ability of observers to gather data. The paper stressed that the implementation approach for electronic monitoring will depend on the monitoring questions being asked in different fisheries and programs, and that the regulatory process needed to implement this approach is not well suited to a rapidly evolving technology. It is expected that the current technology could be used to enhance human observers for routine monitoring functions, for example, to determine whether a discard occurred and quantification of that discard. Species identification re uires further develo ment. NMFS has formed an internal technoloi:.. .Norking group to explore the ongoing issues associated with electronic monitoring and to prioritize future research projects. . The public review draft of Amendments 86/76 and the video monitoring paper are on the Council's website. Note that the OAC was reconstituted in February, and the membership list is also posted on the Council's website. Staff contact is Nicole Kimball. Salmon Excluder Research John Gauvin (North Pacific Fisheries Research Foundation) and John Grover (United Catcher Boats) provided a progress report to the Council on the on-going EFP to test a salmon excluder device in the pollock trawl fishery. This on-going EFP has been working to develop behaviorally- based avoidance device configurations placed within the intermediate of the trawl net which allow salmon to escape without harm prior to being captured in the pollock trawl cod end. The report provided updates from the fall 2005 and winter 2006 evaluation of various excluder device configurations on the ability to reduce chum and Chinook salmon bycatch in the pollock trawl fishery. The report indicated positive results to date on Chinook escapement after changing placement and size of the excluder and time of slowdowns. Future research includes focusing on maximizing the escapement at slowdown through the use of a . flap that opens when tow speed decreases. Staff contact is Diana Stram FMP Consultation The Council received an update on the FMP consultation process. NMFS Sustainable Fisheries (SF) Division has submitted to the Protected Resources (PR) Division a Biological Assessment document that summarizes SF's assessment of effects of the groundfish fisheries on ESA- listed species. Submission of the BA initiates the consultation process. In addition, the Council's Steller Sea Lion Mitigation Committee has met several times to review new information on SSLs to prepare itself for tracking the consultation process and to review proposals for regulatory changes (see Call for Proposals in this newsletter). The Committee is also working on a process for evaluating proposals and plans to use a "trade-off tool" for comparing proposals; a subcommittee of the SSLMC meets June 26 to work on the trade off tool that will then be presented to the full committee for further refinement. The SSC recommended that the SSLMC include in the development of a trade off tool a procedure for making decisions with multiple objectives. The Council asked that the Conunittee investigate this further and periodically brief members of the SSC on progress in development of the trade off tool. The full SSLMC meets June 27-30. Both meetings are at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center in Seattle. The announcements and agendas for these meetings are posted on the Council's web site. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. North P_cific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 1 6 Page 5 ."."___._~_,..__._.__,__.._~____--:-,...._. _,,_.-. _._........,....__.,.._~_._ ._._,_...__ ____n_._..__.___.___.,.. .. _._~~___._.__.._'_n_....n . C~II for Proposals: SSL Protection Measures The Council requested that the SSL Mitigation Committee issue a Call for Proposals for changes in SSL protection measures in the Pacific cod, pollock, and Atka mackerel fisheries in the GOA or BSAI. This newsletter announces that Call for Proposals. The public is invited to submit proposals using the format that is posted on the Protected Resources page of the Council's web site The SSL Mitigation Committee will receive proposals until August 18. The Committee will then start a review process, eventually leading to a package of recommended regulatory changes for Council review and further analysis. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. SSL Literature The Council received a briefing from Dr. Jack Tagart on the compendium of SSL literature produced by Dr. Tagart and Dr. Tom Loughlin. The Compendium is an annotated bibliography of Steller sea lion related research and includes summaries of research and relevant publications produced since 2000 in eleven thematic categories: SSL life history, foraging, vital rates, fishe!}' effects, ecosystem effects, other anthropogenic effects, predation, disease, contaminants, management, and communications. The Compendium will be an important part of the record for the new FMP consultation and a source document to inform NMFS, the Council, the SSL Mitigation Committee, and the public as the consultation proceeds. The Compendium is available on the Council's web site. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. SSL Recovery Plan The Council received a presentation on the draft SSL Recove!}' Plan :from Mr. Shane Capron, NMFS, Protected Resources Division. The draft Plan was released for a 60 day public review on May 24, 2006. The SSC received this presentation as well, and recommended that the Council request an extension of the comment period so that the Council and SSC could review further the draft Recove!}' Plan and prepare detailed comments. The Council requested that NMFS extend the comment period until September 1 to allow adequate time for review and comment on this important issue. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. Fur Seal Plan The Council received a report that NMFS recently released for public review its draft Conservation Plan for the northern fur seal. Since the comment period for the review ends August 4, 2006, the Council asked staff to review the plan and convene the fur seal committee if substantial issues are found, and comments appear to be warranted. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. Seabird Interactions Ed Melvin and Michelle Wainstein with the. Washington Sea Grant Program and Sunny Rice with the University of Alaska Marine Advisory Program presented new information to the Council on seabird interactions with small vessels. Dr. Melvin presented information on seabird distribution in inside waters of Southeast Alaska and Prince William Sound, noting that the lack of albatrosses and related species suggests that seabird avoidance measures for all vessels in these waters might be relaxed. Ms. Rice reported on trials of new seabird deterrent devices appropriate for various kinds of smalllongline vessels. The Council initiated an analysis of new regulations for seabird avoidance in inside waters and for small vessels. A copy of the motion is available on the Council's website. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. Cook Inlet Belugas The Council received a briefing on the status of beluga whales in Cook Inlet. This population has declined in recent years, and although subsistence harvest was thought to have caused the decline, this harvest has been greatly restricted in recent years yet the beluga abundance has not rebounded. Some are concerned that shipping, pollution, commercial fishing, and other factors could contribute to further declines in its population. Trustees for Alaska has filed . a petition with the Secretary of Commerce to list the Cook Inlet beluga whale under the Endangered Species Act and that its critical habitat be designated. Some groups, including the State of Alaska. have filed letters with the Secretary urging that the Cook Inlet beluga not be listed at this time. The Council is concerned over potential effects of an ESA listing on Cook Inlet fisheries, and the Council asked to receive additional information on this species at future Cbuncil meetings. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. Essential Fish Habitat The Council will initiate a regulato!}' FMP amendment to adjust boundaries within the Aleutian Islands Habitat Conservation Areas (AIHCA). The AIHCA was adopted under the EFH action taken by the Council in February 2005 and will be into the regulations by August 2006. The changes are to include one historically fished area identified near Aggattu Island that was not included in the current regulations as an open area and to remove one area near Buldir Reef that has not been historically fished and is considered open. The Council initiated this amendment process after receiving public comment from the fishing industry. The regulatory language within the FMP for EFH includes latitude and longitude boundaries for the open and closed areas in the AICHA. Some of these latitude and longitude positions once groundtruthed with fishing charts need to be modified to represent the intent of the action. Staff contact is Cathy Coon. North Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 Page 6 1 7 "--'-'~,-",---- ... - . -......----.. _..---'---.__.,....._..-.__._-_.-.._.~---_. . ~_.-~,--__.._ _._..____ n...,-_., ...._..__ Bering Sea Haoitat Conservation The Council received a report on two discussion papers on Bering Sea habitat conservation during the June meeting. The purpose of these two discussion papers was to provide background information to assist the Council in formulating a reasonable range of alternatives to minimize (to the extent practicable) the effects of fishing on EFH in the Bering Sea. The first discussion paper provided a framework of alternatives for the upcoming Bering Sea habitat conservation analysis based on the problem statement adopted by the Council in December 2005. The Council intends to evaluate potential new fishery management measures to further conserve benthic habitat in the Bering Sea. The analysis will tier off of the 2005 EFH Environmental Impact Statement and will consider as alternatives open and closed areas and gear modifications. The purpose of the analysis is to consider practicable and precautionary management measures to reduce the potential adverse effects of fishing on EFH and to support the continued productivity of managed fish species. The Council adopted alternatives for the analysis (the motion is available on the Council's website). An update on current gear modification research will be available in December. The second discussion paper provided information on St. Matthew blue king crab and Bering Sea snow crab (Opilio) stocks. No new information warrants additional habitat protections for these crab species within the current rebuilding plans however thenf may beiricreased fishery interactions with the locations of the crab stocks due to the northward expansion at the trawl fleet. At this meeting the Council requested the crab plan team meet to consider additional crab. protection areas for St. Matthew blue king crab and Bering Sea OpiIio crab, and make recommendations to the Council at the October meeting. Based on these recommendations, the Council may consider changes to the 'open area' alternatives or possible designation as HAPC in the future. The Council also discussed the need for the evaluation of the current pelagic trawl gear performance standards within the Bering Sea habitat conservation analysis. The Council noted that the current standards seem to be working. Re-evaluation of pelagic trawl performance standards will not included in the Bering Sea Habitat Conservation analysis, but may be addressed separately. Staff contact is Cathy Coon. Upcoming Meetings Crab Plan Team meeting: Sept. 13-15, Anchorage location TBA Groundfish Plan Team: September 19-22, AFSC Seattle SSLMC meeting: June 27-30, AFSC, Seattle coa Program · In April, the Council received a presentation from the State of Alaska on its draft 2006 - 2008 CDQ allocation recom~~ndations. No Council action was required, recogOlzmg that Federal regulations require the State to consult with the Council on its allocation recommendations. For all CDQ and prohibited species, except for halibut and crab, the State's draft recommendations are as follows: APICDA - 15%; BBEDC - 19%; CBSFA - 8%; CVRF- 22%; NSEDC - 20%; and YDFDA - 16%. The State has not yet submitted these recommendations to NMFS, and has extended the comment period for the CDQ groups to June 30. The current CDQ allocations have been in place since 2003, per a NMFS action that made the 2003 - 2005 allocations effective until they are replaced by a future final agency action or Congressional action. The current (2006) CDQ pollock allocations are as follows: APICDA - 14%; BBEDC - 21 %; CBSFA - 5%; CVRF - 24%; NSEDC - 22%; and YDFDA - 14%. The U.S. Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006. (H.R. 889) currently being considered in Congress contains amendments to the CDQ Program section of the Ma.gnu.son-Stevens Act (MSA), including provisions that maJD~JD the current allocations to each CDQ group until such tIme that they are adjusted (starting in 2012 and then every ten years). In addition, this legislation would address among other issues: overall allocations to the CoQ Program; whether some allocations are modified to represent directed fishing allowances or continue as total allocations; eligible communities; administration of the program; and the oversight roles of NMFS and the State of Alaska. The conference committee biJJ and report were released on April 6, but this bill has not yet been approved by Congress. Controversy over a section of the biJJ unrelated to the CDQ provisions appears to be delayina formal consideration by the House and Senate. C i i j N~te that in r><:cember 2005, the Council adopted three pnmary alternatIves and several options for analysis of BSAI Amendment 71, many of which would be determined and/or affected by the proposed legislation described above. However, regulatory and FMP amendments would still be necessary to implement the MSA amendments. Staff will continue to wait for the outcome of the Coast Guard bill before doing further work on the Amendment 71 analysis. Some. of the provisions of the current biJJ are relatively comphcated and will require significant analysis and/or legal interpretation from NOAA GC. Should the biJJ pass over the summer, staff will provide a detailed report at the October 2006 Council meeting on the implications for the CDQ Program and non-CDQ fisheries. The Council would hav.e a~ oppoftuni.ty in October to assess the impacts and revIse Its alternatIves and options for analysis in BSAI Amendment 71. The current suite of alternatives for Amendment 71, as well as a preliminary summary of the alternatives that would be affected by the bill, are provided on the Council website. Staff contact is Nicole Kimball. ~ I torth Pacific Fishery Management Council, June 2006 Page 7 ..a/./._...........'\\ , .. , , r j \, .../ North Pacific Fishery Management Council 605 W 4th Ste 306 Anchorage, AK 9950 I PRSRT-STD US Postage PAID Anchorage, AK Permit #69 11.1, 11,1,"11",11" ,1111111111,111111,11,"11111,111,11,1,,1 CITY OF SEWARD HARBORMASTER PO BOX 167 SEWARD AK 99664-0167 T AC setting EIS The Council reviewed the suite of aItematives which NMFS is prq>osing to include in the Fnvironmental Impact Statement (EIS) to accompany our annual quota (fAQ specifications this faD. The alternatives pupa;ed by NMFS were similar to alternatives included in previous TAC setting docwnents, with one significant addition which originated from the public comment (scoping) period. The new AIt 4 JIqx>sed wa<> ac; follows: I. Set TACs for rockfish species in Tu 3 at Fm,. Set TACs for rockfish species in Tiel' 5 at F=OSM Set spatially explicit TACs for shortraker and rougheye rockfish in the BSAI. 2. Set T ACs at ~ for pollock. Pacific cod. and Atka mackerel (in the BSAI), unless totaJ TAC is below OY; in which case, set F",,;for these species that wouJd achieve the lower limit of OY. <., 3. Set T ACs for all othec species following Alternative 2. This alternative sets conservative harvest rates for important prey species (pollock. Atka mackerel, and Pacific cod) and sets conservative and spatially explicit TACs for rockfish species that are long-lived and late to mature species. The Council recolIllrended to NMFS deletion of Option 2 under this alternative. Primary reasons for this Council recommendation were that (J) reduction of harvest for these three species can already be accommodated as necessary under Alternative 2, the stanis quo process which incorporates ecosystem considerations; (2) there are numerous other prey species which may need to be accounted for, and singling out these three is not necessary or appropriate; and, (3) the currently ongoing IMP consultation and associated Biological Opinion relative to Steller sea lions will be specifically focusing on these three particular prey species. The draft EIS will be completed by NMFS this swnmer and available for further Council comment in October. ~t_-~ ;'/": SSL Permits Vacated 1be Humane Society and other plaintiffs have sued the Secretary of Conunerce, Conrad Lautenbacher, William Hogarth. and NMFS claiming violations of NEP A, the ESA, the ~A, and the APA by ~certain pennits that authonze research on the Steller sea Jioa On May 26, 2006 U.S. District Court (for the District of Columbia) Judge Ellen Segal HuvelJe ordered that the contested pennits that authorize research on SSLs be vacated. These research permits were issued by NMFS for SSL research for 2006 and subsequent years. The agency has initiated preparation of an EIS to explore and analyze potential impacts of the SSL (and northern fur seal) research activities and to explore alternative ways that 'this research might be conducted. But the plaintiffs claimed that the EIS should be completed before this research continues and the Court has agreed, claiming that the requirements of NEP A were not properly followed. In effect, the Court Order largely terminates nearly all SSL research currently being conducted by the National Marine Mammal Laboratory, the Alaska Sea Life Center, the North Pacific Universities Marine Mammal Research Consortium, the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Aleutians East Borough. The Council was informed that these research groups are working together to develop a list of research activities that are "non invasive" and might be allowed to continue, and hope to meet with the plaintiffs and the judge soon. Additional information on this new development will be provided to the Council in October. Staff contact is Bill Wilson. North Pacific Fishery Management Council, .lu,.e 2006 Page 8 .- I ~ ,.... c 8~ NCIl .00 ~-g :J 1lI ii'E CIl 0 u.0- U>> CO a N ii5 og ~ og D. ::J lil:: o o ~ I- :J o " z ti III ::& iii III a:: %: I- U ::& u.. lL Z I- u.. ~ o ~ :: ~ '" '" CD '" I.l '" CD . e: I.l '" . ",e:j::" e:"'-- o 1\1 e: ~c::o (,,)0':.;: C(;:1.l in~~ ~i::~ .c:. 0 .- U. ._ LL c a; .. o .9' f!:! c: ~ 0 .2 ::E 'fl m ~1lI =5.!B <II<IIC C.- - ou."O U ell .!:: e(~.e en(/)~ W(/)en IDllI 0"""- 0'" Nt-!1! .e( ~ . :Ol~ .em i~ 00 t3~ ~ :: := III > ~;: . 1\1 e: !: III Ii E: 1::0 .:::: e:.~a. 0..1!! 1i~1~ C(:!!a:li .iL. ~ ~i::~a: u..oe:.. c:1i":":~ o~l!-iii l5 :U~ ... ~ ().JII: J!~l!g :;lDlD_ .-ic15 c-- a. ou..og- Uell.!::e( e(~.gu.. (/)(/)lDO W(/)(/)CD j::" -- it CII 'S CII a: ~ S -0 o o ~ '13 III 0- '- .e a. '" o -0 CD <II < (/) CD j::" -- ~ CII 'S . a: ~ . S ~ I!! IL -0 8 o !fi III a. ,g - a. II) ~ lD II) < (/) CD .. . :} a. e: .e '" '" ;:, u .!! Q ~ o !E o ~ '- .e .. ~ C .2 ~. iU '- o -0 at <II < rn III .ll! ID'" om 0< N . ~~ CIl 1lI .g:x: t).c: O~ ::s o '" ~ ~~ .. i ",... "'. .. 1:: ~ C 0 c: ... ... Q. ",ee:.\!! ..CD_ e:itE. .0 -a E.i!: .l:-ao. I.l e: U U C(..-a&! ~.;;~ ::E.,itu.. U.OCIIW C a.'S ~ OeCllo C a. a: .c: .2 U i:i'!!! -=SOu.. J! -a .- """- :; C/) III 0 f!:! C/) '- g o~~~ U.! 0 """- e( > 1lI t'll (/)00"0 wa:(/)e( j::" -- E .= ~ .. 1\1 o '" ~ :: o U E ~ e: '" o '" e: e: .2 .2 t(j '" '" 'iii i:: C 0 u:;: .' .a E a 01... ::iE e: 'S ~ :!:! '" iUe ::l at 1:: III .c: U ~ '" '" '" CD j::"~ --e: E '" ;:, .. 'l:: e: o 0 !tl:t o .!!_ . E"''S ..."'. o~a: ~.!!t: .!Qo >..a. I!!~at _Ea:: ~.a>- 1:~~ -::S:J ~OUJ E~ at ~lDg -Siii! :9 Co"iii "iii lit'.g :x:(/)(/) '--- ~::>::s Iii:!:!:!:! .c:"iii"iii u:x::x: .. CD :} .. a. te: !. .a a ~ _ I.l =:6 ;:, U '" .!! ~ 'lJ;: E .. ;:, e oc: ! .s.. ~ a E:g -go 01'" ::E= :i~ :!:! .. iu e :x: CII liilL 1:: III .c: U ~ j::"= --: Ii ~ e: :} e: ~IL'" u e: .. C( .2 a .=1:; if~C( '" .. .!!ii5~ c:. .. ~ ~~~ 1i)>~ .2. 8 lii ~~~ C2~~ ::EUO ~ 1\1 '" '" CII U CD e: '" .. e: .2 t; C( E t'll C, e 0- lii ~ at <II .a o ~ .. '" '" CD I.l . C '" .. e: ~ u C( E l! CD e 0- lii ~ at <II .a o j::" -- e: .2 t; C( 'iii e: it: >. o C at o at a:: 0- ...J ...J ~ III f=. E: ~ CD 'S I!! - ~ S ~ at o at a:: a.. ~ ...J ~ l! I- E: ~ . 'S I!! ~ .. e: ~ e IL ~ C 8 at a:: 0- ...J ...J ~ t'll f=. E: ~ CII 'S CII a: - ~ :s ...- ,.... E e( o o U E: e: o 1:; C(~ ... ~= . E ~ l! e: CD'" o. ac: ~~ lD U >C( 8.. !~ ~~ 00 00 uu ~ . 'S . ~j::" '" -- ;e; Sa. E!. III e: 0,.2 e '" D.~ ~.~ >Q 8 .. !r: 'Iii E 8e( 00 00 uu ~ 1\1 '" '" . u CD C '" 1\1 C .2 t; oct i:: .2 iii .~ iu C .2 iii a:: c{ o (!) ~ .. . C ljj::" .. -- -a ~ C . .'S .!!! . .;~ .~ 1:_ . e: ~':": .. II) i:: S g. ,gEU CD:::: at ~ell) "iii a.:= C ~ . ~.!!: a::1II :> · .> e(a:.a o l! (!) U i:' -- .. . t a 'i '" ;:, I.l is i:: o n J! '8 1lI iii "0 to) 'E o C 8 CIl o '13 o (/) j::" -- C ~ U oct 'iii C it: in a. t'll U at <II :> "iii <II <II Q) > .e III U j::" -- ~ .~ CD a: ~ :s i:: .2 iii > lii <II C o U !ii :c III :x: (/) III III C ~ .. ~ ;; o E .. .. . tlIl I: o 1:: o ~ a: i:: .2 iii ~ Q) II) C o U i :c III ::I: (/) III -c- .. !. ~ I:: ~ '" ;:, U .'" Q in a. t'll U at III :> "iii III <II at > .a l!! U 1:: ~ 8.E: . I!! I: :E~ ~ II U "'~oct 'Oc:- I:: . . ~-.s .Q ~" ..8:; !~:e oct.Q.s li~i:! 8' ~ i:: en .2 :J ~ ~ Q) III ~ ~ o C t.) 0 !ii 8- :g < :x: :x: (/) u. III W 20 j::" -- ~ Q) 'S CD a: ~ '" .1:: E =e Q. -s .2 III l!! CD <II at '13 Q) a. en '- at .c: 5 E: ~ . '" '" . U . I: III . c: o 1:; C( :i .f! III at .Ii II) lD '0 at a. (/) lii :; o U' C/) ~ . I:: 'S ;:, o . .2 ~ .. I:: .. ~ . 'S CD a: 'S o """- t'll at .Ii <II Q) '13 Q) a. en '- at .c: o i:' -- ~ 1\1 '" '" CII U CII J:"l:: --III I:: III .2 l:: 1:; .0 C('B iiioct if ~ '" '" '" CD U CD I:: '" III I:: .2 1:; C( Ii: w u. < -E Q) i:: E <II Q) <0::01 """- III e ij i!:::E 1lI.c: o~ e("""- 00 C>~ J:" -- ~ . fit III . E:~ ~ III . . 'SC: . 0 a:;: .~ ~ .s CD ~ o .. 02 '" U CD ~ J!- I:: · ..s E_ Ea. ~8 .g .....C( 1110.. : ~ l! U . 0 .E~ I:: rJ :~!ij c:C/)lD o..a. ;:II)CI.I u~.c: C(I-c! ~'-'2 w.e::s u..(/)o <wC5 ~ CD i::E ~& is! o III '-~ i!:.c: III II) ~~ g~ ~ ~ ~ l: o ~ i:: "' ~ o e i!: III o c{ o (!) ~ ..... o ~ 02 '" lI: ~ ~ e -a 8: :: oct 0 -a C/) It i iiJ a. ~ ~...~ CD !II a. . .~ ~-a.g'S &;~IlII::C(&; ...! fit 0 .. 1;:>:==~-g 8.&; ~ · g Q. CIl I::ErJat a::i::IIIE...a:: W]!:8'~~ ~#o..a.e( (/) 0;: t3 (/) (/) .e~~c{-iiiE l!!rn..I-!6.!! t.)-O- '- c III <~w.e::s~ (/)(!)~~e8 III 0- e( w (!) w E: c: ~ U C( - . I: it "iii lD Q. CD a:: 0- s; E: ~ CD 'S . a: ~ :s iu Q) Q. Q) a:: 0- s; '" '" ;:, U .!! Q iIi -e III og c J! (/) CD U C III E .g CD a.. 'i l!! I- u a. III "iii 0- c: ~ U ~ Q -a I:: . ~ ~ ~ G) 01 t'll """- o t'll a. ~ ~ 1lI o >- III c o E iu (/) i:' -- c: .2 t; oct 'iii if in C Q) E l!! '5 c- at a:: (/) ::E > CI> lJ) &~ ~1i o c:: .c:c:c ~g.s ""-c" tIl,so .5...... ~ "g ....: gC\l__ --C'\INo) I ~c:iC\i"~ ~~'7~! 11I","",8E E't:CI>.S!~ &f~~8~ E: I:: ~ U oct . if ~ CD E l!! :; c- at a:: (/) ~ > ~ ::I o ji~ lL Q. .. og ..e.2ii.!! ~. ~ a.i ...~.!l.~(/). -0"1-'. ~ i.!!eii!8~!~ !!~~'5W5&~ c:o~t!~ec:~ :!'3~"i~-8= iC)(jjiliLoJi~ < . . . . . . . . (5.....1I1.Q..o<'- <C)~g~BmE E: ~ . 'S &; :; :!: .s ~ c Q) E l!! '5 c- CIl a:: (/) ::E > ~ .. c -g 0 lii 0 !! .ge i 'ijijl!ETI .c:'S~>~2'l!1ii gQ):>j:ctB'~ llI<O_~ _v. O-gc>l!l<>gll.J! ~lii~~i~~8. ~mii::r::<Elii(/) O(/)_CIl_::lU-g ~ OI~a~ Q).5~ fti'2~-8i~m:2 oJl'6:;:r::~rne ~ .5 c;> . ::l ~ ll. <I.J~II~ ~(/)o:r::<ll.ll.cn .--lD~Cl:r:::::l>ll.