Rule2025-12558
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Halibut Recreational Quota Entity Program Fee Collection
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 7, 2025
Effective
January 1, 2026
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
This final rule authorizes fee collection for the Recreational Quota Entity (RQE) Program. A charter halibut stamp (stamp) is required under this final rule for every charter vessel angler, 18 years of age or older, for each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day, or each calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days, who intends to catch and retain halibut on a charter vessel in International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) regulatory areas 2C in Southeast Alaska and 3A in South Central Alaska. Persons who hold charter halibut permits (CHPs) must purchase electronic stamps from NMFS. Charter vessel guides are required to validate a stamp for each adult charter vessel angler intending to catch and retain halibut on a charter vessel fishing trip. This final rule is necessary to promote stability and economic viability in the charter halibut fishery and is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act), and other applicable laws.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 127 (Monday, July 7, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 127 (Monday, July 7, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29774-29792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12558]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 300 and 679
[Docket No. 250630-0116]
RIN 0648-BN18
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Pacific
Halibut Recreational Quota Entity Program Fee Collection
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule authorizes fee collection for the Recreational
Quota Entity (RQE) Program. A charter halibut stamp (stamp) is required
under this final rule for every charter vessel angler, 18 years of age
or older, for each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day,
or each calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans
multiple days, who intends to catch and retain halibut on a charter
vessel in International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) regulatory
areas 2C in Southeast Alaska and 3A in South Central Alaska. Persons
who hold charter halibut permits (CHPs) must purchase electronic stamps
from NMFS. Charter vessel guides are required to validate a stamp for
each adult charter vessel angler intending to catch and retain halibut
on a charter vessel fishing trip. This final rule is necessary to
promote stability and economic viability in the charter halibut fishery
and is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act),
the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act), and other
applicable laws.
DATES: This rule is effective on January 1, 2026.
ADDRESSES:
Electronic copies of the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) and the
Categorical Exclusion (CE) prepared for this action are available at:
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> or from the NMFS Alaska Region website.
Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this
final rule may be submitted to NMFS at the Alaska Region website and
at: <a href="https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain">https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain</a>. Find this particular
information collection by selecting ``Currently under
[[Page 29775]]
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Duncan, 907-586-7228,
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#33575c46541d57465d50525d735d5c52521d545c45"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6e0a011b09400a1b000d0f002e00010f0f40090118">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule authorizes an RQE Program
fee collection. NMFS published the proposed rule in the Federal
Register to authorize an RQE Program fee collection on October 31, 2024
(89 FR 86772). The comment period on the proposed rule ended on
December 2, 2024. NMFS received 129 comment letters on the proposed
rule. NMFS considered all comments submitted on or before December 2,
2024 in the development of this final rule. A summary of the comments
and NMFS' responses are provided in the Comments and Responses section
of this preamble. All public comment letters submitted during the
comment period may be obtained at: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. A
detailed review of the rationale for these regulations is provided in
the preamble to the proposed rule (89 FR 86772, October 31, 2024).
Due to the complications of implementing this RQE fee collection
program mid-season, this final rule will be effective on January 1,
2026.
Authority for Action
In December 2022, through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2023 (Pub. L. 117-328), the U.S. Congress (Congress) enacted the
Driftnet Modernization and Bycatch Reduction Act (Act). Public Law 117-
328, 136 Stat. 4459, 5260-61 (Dec. 29, 2022). Section 106 of the Act
authorizes the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) to
recommend, and the Secretary of Commerce to approve, ``regulations
necessary for the collection of fees from charter vessel operators who
guide recreational anglers who retain Pacific halibut in IPHC
regulatory areas 2C and 3A.'' Under the section 106 of the Act, any
fees collected shall be available for financing administrative costs of
the RQE Program; the purchase of halibut Quota Share (QS) in areas 2C
and 3A by the RQE; halibut conservation and research; and promotion of
the halibut resource by the RQE. This final rule implements section 106
of the Act.
The IPHC and NMFS manage fishing for Pacific halibut (halibut,
Hippoglossus stenolepis) through regulations established under
authority of the Halibut Act. The IPHC adopts regulations governing the
halibut fishery under the Convention between the United States and
Canada for the Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the North Pacific
Ocean and Bering Sea (Convention), signed at Ottawa, Ontario, on March
2, 1953, as amended by a Protocol Amending the Convention (signed at
Washington, DC, on March 29, 1979). For the United States, regulations
developed by the IPHC are subject to acceptance by the Secretary of
State with concurrence from the Secretary of Commerce. After acceptance
by the Secretary of State and concurrence from the Secretary of
Commerce, NMFS publishes notice of the efficacy of the IPHC regulations
in the Federal Register. On March 18, 2024, NMFS published the IPHC
regulations for the 2024 fishing year (i.e., 0001 hours, Alaska local
time, on January 1, through 2400 hours, Alaska local time, on December
31). IPHC regulations affecting sport fishing for halibut and vessels
in the charter halibut fishery in IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A may
be found in that final rule (89 FR 19275, March 18, 2024).
Section 5 of the Halibut Act provides the Secretary of Commerce
with general responsibility to carry out the Convention and the Halibut
Act. In adopting regulations that may be necessary to carry out the
purposes and objectives of the Convention and the Halibut Act, the
Secretary of Commerce is directed to consult with the Secretary of the
department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating, which is
currently the Department of Homeland Security.
Section 5 of the Halibut Act also provides the Council with
authority to develop regulations for waters off Alaska, including
limited access regulations that are in addition to, and not in conflict
with, approved IPHC regulations. Regulations developed by the Council
may be implemented by NMFS only after approval by the Secretary of
Commerce. The Council exercised this authority in the development of
halibut fishery management measures, codified at 50 CFR 300.65 through
300.67 and 50 CFR part 600. The Council also developed the Individual
Fishing Quota (IFQ) Program for the commercial halibut and sablefish
fisheries, codified at 50 CFR part 679. Management of halibut in the
IFQ Program is authorized under section 5 of the Halibut Act.
Background
Summary Background on Management of the Charter Halibut Fishery
The proposed rule for this action provides a comprehensive history
of management of the guided sport fishery for halibut off Alaska (also
referred to herein as the ``charter fishery'') (89 FR 86772, October
31, 2024). The proposed rule also provides detailed background on the
commercial halibut and sablefish IFQ Program and how the IFQ Program
intersects with management of the charter fishery, primarily through
the Catch Sharing Plan (CSP) that establishes allocations of halibut
between the commercial halibut IFQ and charter sectors.
The proposed rule describes the history and development of annual
management measures for the charter fishery, including the current
annual management processes. The proposed rule also provides a summary
of the development of the Charter Halibut Limited Access Program that
established CHPs and provides details on the Guided Angler Fish (GAF)
Program and the RQE Program. The proposed rule also describes the
Military Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) and Community Quota
Entity (CQE) programs that issue military charter halibut permits and
community charter halibut permits that are also subject to the same
annual management measures and many of the same regulations as other
CHP holders. The RQE Program fee collection and associated stamp apply
to the MWR and CQE.
Recreational Quota Entity (RQE) Program
This action implements regulations that focus on the already
established RQE Program. The RQE Program was implemented in 2018 as
part of the IFQ Program in IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A. More
details on the RQE Program are provided in the proposed rule (82 FR
46016, October 3, 2017) and final rule (83 FR 47819, September 21,
2018).
The program allows the RQE designated by NMFS to purchase and hold
a limited amount of commercial halibut QS that would yield pounds of
Recreational Fishing Quota (RFQ). RFQ is the pounds of halibut issued
to an RQE on an annual basis to supplement the amount of halibut
allocated to the charter halibut fishery (83 FR 47819, September 21,
2018). The RQE Program therefore provides a mechanism for the RQE to
purchase a portion of commercial halibut QS for use by the charter
fishery, which may result in less restrictive annual management
measures for the charter fishery or help maintain existing management
measures if there are continued reductions in halibut abundance.
In March 2020, NMFS approved the application of the Catch
Accounting Through Compensated Halibut (CATCH) Association to serve as
the RQE. CATCH
[[Page 29776]]
is currently eligible to purchase and permanently hold halibut QS, but,
to date, CATCH has not purchased any halibut QS, as there was
previously no funding mechanism in place.
Guided Angler Fish (GAF) Program
As part of the 2014 CSP, NMFS implemented the GAF Program to
authorize limited annual transfers of commercial halibut IFQ as GAF to
qualified individual CHP holders. The GAF Program is described in more
detail in the proposed rule for the CSP (78 FR 39122, June 28, 2013).
To use GAF, qualified CHP holders seek a GAF permit from NMFS,
which authorizes them to lease commercial halibut IFQ for the purpose
of offering charter vessel anglers the opportunity to retain halibut up
to the limit for unguided anglers. For example, if charter management
regulations in IPHC regulatory area 2C restrict charter vessel anglers
to a 1-halibut daily bag limit, a charter vessel angler could use GAF
to retain a second halibut, bringing the angler's total retained amount
to 2 halibut--the same daily bag limit that applies to unguided
anglers. Similarly, GAF also allows charter vessel anglers to retain
halibut on days that are otherwise closed to halibut retention by
charter vessel anglers by the annual management measures published
pursuant to Sec. 300.62.
NMFS issues GAF in whole numbers of halibut to individual CHP
holders with GAF permits based on a conversion factor from IFQ pounds.
Conversion factors are based on the average net weights of GAF retained
in the applicable IPHC regulatory area during the previous year. The
GAF Program has restrictions on transfers and use of GAF that are
intended to prevent a particular individual, corporation, or other
entity from acquiring an excessive share of halibut fishing privileges
as GAF.
Final Rule
Summary of the Final Rule
Starting January 1, 2026, this final rule requires CHP holders to
purchase an electronic stamp for $20 each for all charter vessel
anglers, 18 years of age or older, for each charter vessel fishing trip
in a given calendar day, or each calendar day during a charter vessel
fishing trip that spans multiple days, that the charter vessel angler
intends to catch and retain halibut on a charter vessel fishing trip in
IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A. However, this stamp requirement does
not apply if a charter vessel angler retains halibut as GAF on days
that are otherwise closed to halibut retention by the annual management
measures published pursuant to Sec. 300.62.
NMFS will transfer the collected stamp fees to a specific fund in
the Federal Treasury, currently referred to as the RQE Fund, which has
been created by Congress. From this account, Congress may make the
money available to NMFS, to be used for the four purposes as specified
in the Act and described above. For the promotion of the halibut
resource and the purchase of IFQ shares in IPHC regulatory areas 2C and
3A, NMFS intends to issue funds to the RQE through periodic grants.
Congress also authorized NMFS to use monies collected from this fee
program to pay for RQE Program administrative costs and to support
halibut conservation and research.
Charter Halibut Permit Holders Purchase Stamps
This final rule requires that CHP holders obtain the stamps from
NMFS and pay applicable fees for all stamps validated for their CHP in
a given fishing year. All CHP holders are subject to these regulations,
including CQEs and MWR programs holding any type of CHP. A CHP holder
may log in to their CHP holder eFISH account to purchase stamps at any
time and in any quantity. After the CHP holder purchases stamps, they
are held in secure, individual CHP holder accounts within eFISH that
are maintained by NMFS, as discussed below in the ``Charter Halibut
Permit Holder Accounts'' section. Stamps reside in the account
indefinitely until a charter vessel guide, as defined at Sec. 300.61,
using the CHP debits (i.e., uses) the stamp by the stamp validation
process discussed below under ``Charter Halibut Stamp Validation.'' CHP
holders commonly lease their CHPs. As such, the charter vessel guide
who leases, or otherwise uses the CHP, might not be the person who
holds (i.e., owns) the CHP. This final rule specifies that the CHP
holder is the person responsible for purchasing an adequate number of
stamps to cover the number of stamp validations that are made by the
charter vessel guide. If the CHP is sold, CHP holders are responsible
for fees for stamp validations that occurred during their respective
periods of CHP ownership.
Section 6 of the Act authorizes the development of regulations
``for the collection of fees from charter vessel operators.'' We do not
interpret this provision so restrictively to mean that only a charter
vessel operator can be required to purchase stamps. The CHP holder
would otherwise be indirectly responsible for the failure to purchase
stamps and is in a better position to directly carry the burden of
purchasing them. This rulemaking therefore imposes that obligation on
the CHP holder, consistent with Congress' intent, purpose, and plain
meaning of the Act. Indeed, under longstanding regulations at Sec.
300.67(a)(1), every CHP holder is obligated to ensure that associated
charter vessel operators and charter vessel guides comply with all
applicable regulatory requirements. Further, CHP holders commonly are
the charter vessel operators themselves.
There are also additional reasons to impose the obligation to
purchase stamps on CHP holders. If NMFS were to impose that duty on
charter vessel operators, the costs of administering this program would
increase markedly.
Charter vessel guides and charter vessel operators are often
employees of the CHP holder and they have no durable link to NMFS or
the charter halibut regulatory programs. Conversely, CHP holders
already have established an annual administrative relationship with
NMFS. As a result, if charter vessel operators were required to
purchase stamps, many new administrative accounts would have to be
created. Ultimately, this would mean that there would be a much higher
number of eFISH users, the number of eFISH users could change
significantly each year, and the technical support that NMFS would need
to provide to maintain this system would significantly increase costs.
Because the Act authorizes the deduction of administrative costs from
the fees collected, this would reduce the benefits of the RQE Program,
which would be at odds with Congress's intent and purpose in passing
the Act. The requirements for CHP holders in the RQE Program are also
consistent with other NMFS regulations that obligate persons or
business entities who hold exclusive fishing rights to ensure
regulatory compliance for most of the actions associated with their
permits (e.g., Sec. 679.85(a)(1)).
Finally, collecting fees from CHP holders will make the RQE fee
collection provisions more readily enforceable than collecting fees
from charter vessel operators. In the event of a stamp deficiency,
NMFS's only remedy would be to pursue collections against charter
vessel operators, who are not otherwise required to register with NMFS.
This contrasts with program enforcement for CHP holders, who are
limited in number and have greater incentives to timely pay any stamp
deficiency and, therein, ensure their CHPs are current and active.
Indeed, a CHP is an important asset that a holder
[[Page 29777]]
has a vested interest in maintaining, and it must be approved by NMFS
annually before use. NMFS can require payment of outstanding fees
before renewing a CHP.
Charter Halibut Permit Holder Accounts
Under this final rule, NMFS administers the fee collection and
issues stamps to CHP holders through a NMFS-approved system. Currently,
the NMFS-approved system is a secure online platform, eFISH, that is
accessed by Alaska fishery participants for a variety of purposes,
including the annual registration of CHPs, recording the retention of
GAF, and paying business fishery fees.
Each CHP holder, who holds one or more CHPs, will be required under
this final rule to create an eFISH online account and ensure that fees
are paid for purchased stamps. All CHPs held by a CHP holder will be
included in a single eFISH account, allowing stamps to be used freely
across all CHPs on that account. For military charter halibut permits,
the MWR is considered to be the CHP holder. For community charter
halibut permits, the CQE is considered to be the CHP holder.
Stamps remain in the account until they are validated and debited
from the account (i.e., until they are used) by a charter vessel guide,
by the stamp validation process discussed below under ``Charter Vessel
Guides Validate Stamps.'' The stamps are not year-specific and do not
expire. If stamps are not used in a given fishing year, they carry over
to the next fishing year.
CHP holders are responsible for ensuring that the number of
validated stamps tied to their CHP does not exceed the number of stamps
that have been purchased in a given fishing year. If a CHP holder is
uncertain of how many stamps they may need to purchase for a given
season, they may use their eFISH account to monitor stamp validations
and to purchase stamps in small increments throughout the fishing year
as needed. CHP holders with a non-transferable CHP who are uncertain as
to how much longer their CHP is valid may do the same to avoid
purchasing more stamps than they need.
If the number of stamp validations exceeds the number of stamps
purchased on a CHP holder account, NMFS will notify the CHP holder and
give them the opportunity to reconcile the account prior to the annual
charter halibut stamp reconciliation deadline. If an uncorrected
deficit of stamps exists from the previous fishing year for one or more
CHPs, all associated CHPs in that eFISH account are then considered to
be delinquent.
Should a CHP holder disagree that their account reflects a stamp
purchase and validation imbalance, they have the right to request a
hearing and at such a hearing to present evidence to support their
position. If NMFS ultimately determines that an account purchase and
validation imbalance has not been reconciled for the previous fishing
year, NMFS may issue an Initial Administrative Determination (IAD) and
suspend the use and transfer of any CHPs associated with the CHP holder
account until the outstanding fees are paid in full. The CHP holder may
appeal and have the IAD reviewed by NOAA's National Appeals Office.
Charter Vessel Guides Validate Stamps
This final rule requires that charter vessel guides validate stamps
before each charter vessel fishing trip begins. Stamp validation
requires the charter vessel guide to record the number of stamps that
are required for a particular charter vessel fishing trip in the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) Saltwater Sport Fishing Charter
Trip Logbook (ADF&G logbook). A charter vessel guide must validate one
stamp for each charter vessel angler, 18 years of age or older, for
each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day, or each
calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple
days, that the charter vessel angler intends to catch and retain
halibut on the charter vessel in IPHC regulatory area 2C or 3A, unless
that charter vessel angler retains halibut as GAF on a day that is
otherwise closed to halibut retention by the annual management measures
published pursuant to Sec. 300.62.
A charter vessel fishing trip, as defined at Sec. 300.61, begins
with the first deployment of fishing gear into the water from a charter
vessel by a charter vessel angler. Charter vessel guides must use the
ADF&G logbook to validate the number of stamps that are needed for that
charter trip before this time, or prior to the first deployment of
fishing gear on each calendar day of a charter vessel fishing trip that
spans multiple days. This timing is consistent with Federal regulations
that require charter vessel guides to enter the name and sport fishing
license number of each charter vessel angler in a properly assigned
ADF&G logbook before a charter vessel fishing trip begins (Sec.
300.65(d)(4)(ii)(B)(6)). This means that if weather, or other reasons,
forces a charter vessel to return to port before fishing begins no
stamp needs to be validated for that day.
For a given charter vessel fishing trip, a stamp is valid from the
time that it is validated, Alaska local time, through 2400 on the
calendar day on which it was validated, Alaska local time, and is not
transferable between charter vessel anglers nor allowed to be used on
any other charter vessel fishing trip. For purposes of stamps, a
charter vessel excursion that spans more than one calendar day treats
each calendar day in which fishing occurs as an individual charter
vessel fishing trip, meaning that a stamp must be validated for each
charter vessel angler on each calendar day before first deployment of
gear. In the case of a charter vessel angler who goes on multiple
charter vessel fishing trips in one calendar day, a stamp is required
to be validated for that angler for each charter vessel fishing trip.
Current ADF&G regulations require charter vessel guides to upload
or otherwise send their completed ADF&G logbook information to ADF&G on
a regular schedule. The stamp validation information uploaded from
ADF&G logbooks will be shared with NMFS. NMFS will then compare stamp
validation information from the ADF&G logbook with the individual CHP
holder stamp accounts in eFISH periodically during the fishing season,
with a final update and comparison prior to December 31. In this way,
CHP holder stamp accounts will contain a record of stamp purchases and
validations. Due to the time lag between submitting the ADF&G logbooks
and NMFS receiving the ADF&G logbook information, it may take several
weeks for eFISH accounts to reflect validations. Charter halibut
fishery participants, who may not be the CHP holder, will also be able
to monitor validations through access to their ADF&G logbook data.
Additionally, this final rule includes flexibility in that stamp
validations may occur even if stamps have not been purchased yet. For
example, a CHP holder leasing their CHP may not know the exact number
of validations charter vessel guide(s) operating under their CHP have
used during the fishing year. The CHP holder has the option to buy any
additional stamps they need for a given fishing year after all
validations have occurred, with the only requirement that, within the
time period prescribed by Sec. 679.46(a)(1)(v), the CHP holder must
purchase enough stamps to cover the validations indicated in their
eFISH CHP holder account.
Charter Halibut Stamp Transferability
As discussed above, once purchased, stamps are linked to the eFISH
account of the CHP holder who purchased them and all CHPs held by a CHP
holder will be included in a single eFISH account, allowing stamps to
be used freely across
[[Page 29778]]
all CHPs on that account. Stamps do not expire and, if they have not
been validated by the end of the fishing year, they may be validated in
a future fishing year. If a CHP is revoked, transferred, or becomes
invalid, or if a community charter halibut permit or military charter
halibut permit is invalidated, the stamps remain linked to the account
that held that CHP. Should another valid CHP be transferred to the
person, or entity, associated with that eFISH account, the stamps will
be available for use by the holder of the valid CHP.
This final rule does not allow a CHP holder to transfer stamps to
another CHP holder. NMFS considered, but did not select options, to
allow for transfer or reimbursement of unused stamps. Given the
purchase-as-needed flexibility built into the RQE Program and the lack
of an expiration date for stamps that have not been validated (used),
NMFS determined that allowing stamp transfers and reimbursements would
serve limited purposes and materially increase the complexity and
administrative costs associated with the program, without proportionate
benefits. The proposed RQE Program fee collection allows CHP holders to
purchase stamps at any time during the season, allowing CHP holders to
maintain an operable amount of stamps without the need to stockpile
stamps, and to carry over unused stamps indefinitely.
The Fee for Charter Halibut Stamps
This final rule implements a $20 fee that will apply to each stamp
required for a charter vessel angler who intends to catch and retain
halibut. The $20 fee is expected to provide the RQE Program with
meaningful funding to benefit the entire charter halibut fishery and
halibut resource while limiting the cost burden experienced by the
individual CHP holders that would pay the fee. Before selecting the $20
stamp fee amount, NMFS considered a range of fee amounts and options,
which are further described in the preamble to the proposed rule, the
RIR, and below under ``Comments and Responses'' in the responses to
Comments 14 and 15.
Changes to the Fee
Under this final rule, the RQE may petition NMFS to increase or
decrease the fee for the stamp beginning in 2028. The fee for the stamp
may not increase by more than 10 percent of the fee in the previous
fishing year. Any fee increases or decreases will be implemented as
regulations through the rulemaking process. The RQE may petition NMFS
to suspend the fee at any time. NMFS will provide the Council with an
update on any fee increase, decrease, or suspension requests.
This final rule also allows for suspension of the stamp requirement
and fee collection, if necessary. These regulations authorize NMFS to
temporarily or permanently suspend fee collection if a petition from
the RQE is received. This allows NMFS to stop or reduce the fee once
the RQE has purchased all the QS it is authorized to hold, or for other
reasons.
Additionally, these regulations allow the Regional Administrator to
suspend the stamp requirement if the RQE is determined to be out of
compliance with regulations, the RQE's own by-laws, or other applicable
law; the Regional Administrator approves a petition by the RQE to
suspend the RQE fee collection; or Congress no longer provides
authorization for the Secretary of Commerce to collect and spend the
fees.
Prohibitions
This final rule prohibits a charter vessel guide from using a
charter vessel to catch and retain halibut in IPHC regulatory area 2C
or 3A unless the charter vessel guide has completed a charter halibut
stamp validation for each charter vessel angler, 18 years of age or
older, for each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day, or
each calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans
multiple days, that the charter vessel angler intends to catch and
retain halibut. An exception to this prohibition is when a charter
vessel angler retains halibut as GAF on a day that is otherwise closed
to halibut retention by charter vessels by the annual management
measures published pursuant to Sec. 300.62.
Additionally, the final rule prohibits a charter vessel guide from
validating a stamp after the charter vessel fishing trip has begun, or
after the first deployment of fishing gear on each calendar day of a
charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days. The final rule
prohibits validating a stamp if the charter vessel guide does not have
a valid CHP on board the charter vessel per Sec. 300.67(a)(1). This
final rule prohibits a CHP holder from failing to purchase or hold a
number of charter halibut stamps equal to or greater than the number of
charter halibut stamp validations that were performed under their CHP
in a given fishing year.
Changes From the Proposed to Final Rule
This final rule includes the following substantive changes from the
proposed rule to address public comments, clarify regulatory language,
and to correct inadvertent errors in the proposed regulations.
Throughout the regulatory text, NMFS also made technical and grammar
edits to correct regulatory cross references, use consistent terms,
remove redundancy, and promote clarity.
At Sec. 300.61, NMFS added definitions with citations for the
terms ``Charter halibut permit holder,'' ``Charter halibut stamp,'' and
``Charter halibut stamp validation.'' This change is intended to direct
readers from Sec. 300.61 to Sec. 679.2, where the full definition may
be found.
NMFS corrected the title of the ADF&G Saltwater Sport Fishing
Charter Trip Logbook in the final rule at Sec. 300.65 for ``Charter
vessel guide requirements'' and at Sec. 679.2 for ``Charter halibut
stamp validation.''
NMFS revised Sec. 300.65(d)(4)(ii)(B)(11) to specify that the
validation of stamps must occur before the charter vessel fishing trip
begins, or prior to deployment of fishing gear on each calendar day of
a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days, consistent with
the definition at Sec. 679.2.
NMFS revised the definition of ``charter halibut stamp validation''
at Sec. 679.2 as well as regulations at Sec. Sec. 679.7(q)(2) and
679.46(a)(1)(i) to specify that validation of stamps must occur prior
to first deployment of gear on a given calendar day for a charter
vessel fishing trip that spans multiple calendar days. This
modification to the final rule is consistent with the intent of the
proposed rule that a stamp is required for each calendar day of a
charter vessel fishing trip, and this clarifies the required timing of
validation for charter vessel fishing trips that span multiple calendar
days.
The proposed rule stated that a stamp must be validated for each
charter vessel angler who is 18 years of age or older on board the
charter vessel and intends to catch and retain halibut for each charter
vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day, or each calendar day
during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days, that the
charter vessel angler intends to catch and retain halibut. In response
to comments, NMFS removed the requirement to validate a stamp for
charter vessel anglers who retain halibut landed as GAF on days that
are otherwise closed by regulation to halibut retention under the
annual management measures for the charter fishery (see the response to
comment 12 in the Comments and Responses section below). Halibut
retained as GAF are not included in the annual charter halibut
allocations and GAF represent halibut QS that has already been
transferred from the commercial halibut fishery to the
[[Page 29779]]
charter halibut fishery. This change is reflected in the revised
definition for ``charter halibut stamp'' at Sec. 679.2. NMFS also
revised the regulation at Sec. 679.46(a)(1) to match the definition
for ``charter halibut stamp'' and by adding a citation for GAF to
direct the reader to the correct description of GAF as described at
Sec. 300.65.
NMFS revised this final rule from the proposed rule at Sec. Sec.
679.7(q)(1), 679.46(a)(1)(ii), and 679.46(c)(2) to state that stamps
must be validated for charter vessel anglers as specified at Sec.
679.46(a)(1). NMFS notes that these changes do not extend to the use of
GAF on days that are open to halibut retention by charter vessel
anglers. On these open days, a stamp exemption for GAF would have the
potential to undermine both the GAF and RQE Program fee collection,
primarily due to the difficulty of accounting for, and enforcing, both
bag limits and stamp requirements when halibut landed as GAF are mixed
with non-GAF halibut onboard a charter vessel.
The proposed rule included a provision specifying that the RQE
could petition NMFS to increase, decrease, or suspend the RQE Program
fee collection beginning in 2028 as specified at Sec. 679.46(b)(2).
The regulations at Sec. 679.46(d) outline how the RQE would petition
NMFS to suspend the fee collection, which is not time-limited. The
final rule resolves this inconsistency by revising regulations at Sec.
679.46(b)(2) and adding Sec. 679.46(b)(3) to clarify that the RQE may
petition NMFS to suspend the fee at any time.
The proposed rule included a provision specifying that stamps must
be obtained and applicable fees paid by persons who hold a CHP and a
valid ADF&G sport fishing guide registration at Sec. 679.46(c). This
final rule removes the provision at Sec. 679.46(c)(1) specifying that
a valid ADF&G sport fishing guide registration is required. Therefore,
under this final rule, any CHP holder, regardless of whether they hold
a valid ADF&G sport fishing guide registration, will be responsible for
obtaining stamps and paying applicable fees for the associated CHP.
NMFS made this change because there is no requirement that CHP holders
register as sport fishing guides. Therefore, to be consistent with the
Council's intent that this fee collection applies to all CHP holders,
NMFS removed the provision at Sec. 679.46(c)(1) of the proposed rule.
This final rule also revises Sec. 679.46(c)(2) by removing the phrase
``ensuring there is a charter halibut stamp that has received'' in
association with charter halibut stamp validation. This revision
clarifies that the charter vessel guide is responsible for stamp
validation but is not responsible for ensuring a stamp has been
purchased.
Throughout the regulatory text, NMFS replaced references to ``fee
liability'' with language better aligned with the stamp requirement
established by this final rule, including ``reconciliation,'' ``charter
halibut stamp deficit,'' and ``outstanding charter halibut stamps.''
NMFS also added the phrase ``before the charter vessel fishing trip
begins'' to further clarify the intent of regulations. These changes
are technical and do not modify any process or effect between the
proposed and final rules. These changes are intended to more precisely
describe the requirement that a stamp must be purchased for each stamp
validation that occurs in a year.
Comments and Responses
NMFS received 129 comment submissions on the proposed rule. The
comments were from individuals, sportfishing organizations, and fishing
guides. Several comment submissions were duplicates or addressed topics
outside the scope of the proposed rule. Overall, there was a mix of
support and opposition, with those comments opposing the rule
expressing concerns about the cost of stamps, the respective
responsibilities of CHP holders, charter vessel guides, charter vessel
operators, and charter vessel anglers, and the lack of transferability
or refunds for purchased halibut stamps. Some commenters expressed
concerns about the timing of the proposed and final rules with respect
to when the charter halibut fishery occurs. NMFS has summarized the
comment submissions and responded to 51 unique comments below.
Comments in General Support of This Action
Comment 1: The proposed rule captures the intent of the fee
collection program. This was the product of 15 years of public outreach
and the Council process at the request of charter halibut fishery
participants and trade organizations. This program will provide
benefits while not reducing public access to the resource or impacting
sustainability.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 2: The RQE Program fee collection of $20 per day is not a
cost that will prohibit or deter sport anglers. This is a small
financial burden that provides massive benefit to the charter halibut
fleet and is the appropriate amount to provide the RQE with purchasing
power while also allowing the CHP holders to pass the cost of the stamp
to the charter vessel anglers. This fee is also a smaller financial
burden on individual CHP holders than purchasing IFQ and utilizing the
GAF Program.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 3: Several commenters supported the concept of the RQE but
requested adjustments to improve the administrative efficiency of the
fee collection and to make it more user friendly.
Response: NMFS acknowledges these comments. NMFS has summarized and
responded to all of the requested adjustments in the following sections
of this response to comments. When appropriate, NMFS has modified the
final rule in response to requested adjustments. NMFS also explains
when a requested adjustment is not feasible and, therefore, NMFS did
not make the change. A complete list of all the changes from proposed
to final rule is in this preamble under ``Changes from Proposed to
Final Rule.''
Comment 4: Currently, the allocation to the charter sector is not
sufficient for reasonable opportunity to retain halibut at the current
abundance levels in IPHC regulatory area 2C. The RQE will increase
opportunities by utilizing the fee component to purchase halibut QS.
The RQE could result in less restrictive regulations for the charter
halibut fishery, despite the halibut resource being at a 30-year low.
The RQE Program fee collection is a good step towards shifting
allocation and creating a viable fishery without implementing a
permanent stamp fee that cannot be suspended or altered.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 5: This fee collection will allow the charter fleet to
compete with the self-guided fleet. Avoiding charter closure days and
increasing the size limits will create more equity with the self-guided
fleet, which is allowed to retain two halibut per person per day with
no size restrictions.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 6: The charter halibut fleet, and the idea of catching
halibut, brings many tourists to Alaska. As a result, local communities
benefit from various taxes and the money spent directly at local
establishments, which also supports local employment. The RQE Program
and associated fee collection help maintain the stability of the
charter fleet despite current allocations and dwindling stocks, keeping
more charter halibut fishery participants in business.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
[[Page 29780]]
Comment 7: Information received through email flyers and local
outreach meetings were useful in informing participants and directing
them to comment on the proposed rule.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comment 8: The charter sector should purchase their share of
halibut QS. This rule addresses that.
Response: NMFS acknowledges the comment.
Comments on Provisions of the Act Authorizing the Fee
Comment 9: The charter halibut stamp should function similarly to
the ADF&G king salmon stamp, meaning that it is purchased by the
charter vessel angler, not the CHP holder. Additionally, this fee
collection should apply to all anglers, including self-guided anglers,
and all non-resident anglers.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Congress, through the Act, authorized
regulations necessary for the collection of fees from charter vessel
operators who guide recreational anglers who retain halibut in IPHC
regulatory areas 2C and 3A. As such, NMFS is not authorized to collect
fees from charter vessel anglers, or any other individual anglers such
as self-guided anglers, nonresident anglers, or resident anglers for
charter halibut stamps.
Furthermore, funds collected under this action will benefit only
the charter halibut sector. Therefore, there is no equitable reason to
include anglers outside the charter halibut sector in this fee
collection, even if NMFS did have authorization to collect fees from
them.
Comment 10: Research and promotion of the halibut resource should
not be an authorized use of funds generated from the fee collection.
Response: Congress specified, through the Act, that any fees
collected shall be available for financing administrative costs of the
RQE Program; the purchase of halibut QS in areas 2C and 3A by the RQE;
halibut conservation and research; and promotion of the halibut
resource by the RQE. This action does not address authorized uses of
fees collected by this program. NMFS has no authority or discretion to
modify laws passed by Congress.
Comment 11: What is the estimated amount of funds that will be
available for purchasing QS, compared to the amount of funds for
administration, conservation, or promotion of the halibut resource?
Response: As discussed in response to comment 10, the Act allows
fees to be used for these purposes. The Act does not specify any
specific allocation of fees among the authorized uses of the collected
fees. It is expected that fees collected by this program will be
primarily used by the RQE to purchase halibut QS, consistent with the
intent of the RQE Program. Section 3.5.1.2 of the RIR discusses the
expected revenue amounts from this fee collection. The RIR indicates
that the estimated average annual revenue from stamp purchases would be
$1,788,687 from IPHC regulatory area 2C and $2,205,645 from area 3A.
NMFS anticipates issuing funds collected from this program to the RQE
as a grant. These grants will include NMFS oversight and may include
stipulations on the allowable use of funds.
Comments on GAF and the RQE Program Fee Collection
Comment 12: Stamps should not be required for charter vessel
anglers when the charter halibut fishery is closed to halibut retention
under the annual management measures for the charter fishery, but the
retention of GAF is still allowed. GAF constitutes a transfer of
halibut from the commercial IFQ sector and is not part of the annual
guided halibut allocation.
Response: NMFS agrees with this comment. NMFS changed this final
rule to remove the halibut stamp requirement for GAF users on days that
are otherwise closed to halibut retention under the annual management
measures for the charter fishery by revising the definition of
``charter halibut stamp'' at Sec. 679.2 to specify that the stamp does
not apply to charter vessel anglers who retain halibut as GAF, as
defined at Sec. 300.61, on days that are otherwise closed by the
annual management measures for the charter fishery to halibut
retention. NMFS also revised the regulation at Sec. 679.46(a)(1) to
match the definition for ``charter halibut stamp'' at Sec. 679.2. To
consolidate references to the applicability of stamps, NMFS revised
this final rule at Sec. Sec. 679.7(q)(1)(i), 679.46(a)(1)(ii), and
679.46(c)(2) to state that stamps must be validated for charter vessel
anglers as specified at Sec. 679.46(a)(1).
Annual charter halibut management measures in IPHC regulatory areas
2C and 3A often prohibit the retention of halibut by charter vessel
anglers on specific days of the week. However, as noted in this
comment, these prohibitions typically do not prohibit the retention of
GAF halibut on the closed days because halibut retained as GAF are not
included in the annual charter halibut allocations. In addition, GAF
represent halibut QS that have already been transferred from the
commercial halibut fishery to the charter halibut fishery. Additional
information about the GAF Program is in the preamble under ``Guided
Angler Fish (GAF) Program.''
NMFS determined these facts provide sound rationale to remove the
halibut stamp requirement for charter vessel anglers who retain only
GAF halibut on days that are otherwise closed by regulation to halibut
retention under the annual management measures for the charter fishery.
NMFS notes that this change does not extend to the use of GAF on
days that are not closed to halibut retention. On these open days, a
stamp exemption for GAF has the potential to undermine both the GAF and
RQE Program fee collection, primarily due to the difficulty of
accounting for, and enforcing, both bag limits and stamp requirements
when halibut landed as GAF are mixed with non-GAF halibut onboard a
charter vessel.
Comment 13: The RQE Program and associated fee collection are
unnecessary because GAF already provides a way for charter businesses
to purchase more halibut QS.
Response: NMFS disagrees that the RQE Program and associated fee
collection are unnecessary. Both the GAF Program and the RQE Program
provide unique benefits to the charter fishery. GAF are intended to
benefit individual charter operations by providing a means to
temporarily transfer a limited amount of halibut IFQ from the
commercial halibut fishery to individual charter vessel guides. This
differs from the RQE Program, which allows the RQE to hold halibut QS
indefinitely and is designed to benefit all charter operations in IPHC
areas 2C and 3A.
NMFS also notes that CHP holders who currently participate in the
GAF Program will likely benefit from both programs. That is, all CHP
holders will benefit from less restrictive annual management measures
and holders of GAF will also continue to benefit from GAF to retain
large fish or fish on days otherwise closed to halibut retention.
Comments on Stamp Structure and Fee Amount
Comment 14: The stamp fee should be a different price than $20.
Several commenters suggested a price of $10 per stamp. Selecting the
$20 fee over lesser costs is unreasonable in light of the last-minute
changes recommended by the Council in October 2024.
Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment. This final rule
establishes a fee of $20 for charter halibut stamps, as recommended by
the Council after extensive analysis and public comment.
[[Page 29781]]
The $20 fee is expected to strike a balance between providing a
meaningful amount of funding to benefit the charter fishery while also
limiting the annual cost burden. Section 3.5.1.3 of the RIR shows
expected revenue to the RQE at various stamp fee amounts. The $20 fee
amount is intended to allow the RQE to relatively quickly purchase a
reasonable amount of halibut QS to supplement the charter halibut
allocation while also representing a nominal increase to the total cost
of a charter halibut fishing trip. Beginning on January 1, 2028, the
RQE may petition NMFS to increase or decrease the fee for the stamp.
Changes to the fee amount will be subject to a regulatory action and
all relevant Federal requirements, including an analysis of
alternatives and opportunities for public input. NMFS will provide the
Council with an update on any requests to modify or suspend the fee for
a charter halibut stamp. As discussed in response to comment 15, a $20
fee for each stamp is reasonable considering the analysis and the
Council's decision to remove the tiered fee structure in October 2024.
Comment 15: The stamp should resemble the ADF&G king stamp by
implementing a one-day, three-day, seven-day or seasonal stamp with
discount rates as originally recommended by the Council in 2022. This
would reduce costs to anglers and administrative burden to charter
halibut fishery participants who would not have to validate stamps each
day for anglers fishing multiple days. This would also make it easier
for charter vessel guides to adjust their fishing plans on a multi-day
trip without having to commit to validating a stamp each day prior to
fishing when they may not end up fishing for halibut due to weather or
other reasons.
Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment. The Council's original
recommendation called for a tiered fee structure for stamps. Although
tiered fees are common among State of Alaska stamps and licenses, all
the State of Alaska tiered fees that were analyzed for this action are
linked to a specific person and must be purchased by the person
intending to fish. Applying tiered fees to a daily halibut stamp would
greatly add to the complexity and cost of the RQE Program because the
stamps would need to be assigned to specific anglers and tracked across
multiple days, vessels, and potentially ADF&G logbooks.
As noted in the RIR, in April 2022, the Council recommended a
tiered fee structure for halibut stamps, with a base fee of $20 for a
daily stamp, and tiered to $40 for a three-day stamp and $60 for a
seven-day stamp. After Federal law was amended in early 2023 to
authorize the RQE fee collection through the Act, NMFS further analyzed
implementation of the fee collection program. This effort included
outreach sessions with participants in the charter halibut fishery in
several communities located in IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A in 2023
and early 2024. NMFS and Council staff subsequently prepared a
discussion paper on the halibut stamp fee implementation, and in June
2024 presented the paper to the Council. Among other things, the paper
established a rationale for a uniform $20 stamp fee instead of tiered
fees. The Council addressed this topic again in October 2024 and took
action to amend their original April 2022 motion and to adopt and
recommend the uniform $20 stamp fee to the Secretary of Commerce.
During the outreach process, participants in the charter halibut
fishery pointed to a lack of equity among fishing businesses if tiered
fees were implemented. CHP holders that cater almost exclusively to one
or two-day trips would be responsible for paying fees at the highest
level, while other operations that log the same number of angler days,
but whose guests tend to fish for three or more days, would contribute
disproportionately less to the RQE. Ultimately, the Council
recommended, and NMFS is adopting, a single daily fee to establish a
simple, less costly program that ensures specific business types are
not arbitrarily penalized, and all CHP holders will contribute equally
to the RQE fee collection based on the number charter vessel angler
halibut fishing days. These issues are also described in Section
3.5.1.3 of the RIR.
Comment 16: The removal of the multi-day stamp option adversely
impacts the intent-based validation of stamps. Charter vessel guides
may have to validate a stamp for every fishing trip, regardless of
target species. It is unrealistic to expect enforcement officers to
intuitively determine target species at sea.
Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment. The charter halibut
stamp validation process and enforcement of the validation is the same
for a single day trip or a multi-day trip. The requirement for a
halibut stamp is based on whether the charter vessel angler intends at
the beginning of each charter vessel fishing trip to catch and retain
halibut. From an enforcement perspective, the presence of retained
halibut onboard a charter vessel after a charter vessel fishing trip
has begun will evidence the need for validated stamps for that charter
vessel trip. In any case, under the Council's recommendation, a multi-
day stamp would require validation prior to the start of a charter
vessel fishing trip on any given day. Functionally, this would be the
same as a daily stamp. This final rule does not prohibit the catch and
release of halibut without a charter halibut stamp validation. Rather,
a charter halibut stamp validation is required only if a charter vessel
angler intends to both catch and retain halibut.
Comment 17: Unused stamps should be refundable or, at least,
transferable. This will cost the CHP holder money as these stamps are
not able to be refunded or validated a second time.
Response: NMFS disagrees. As described in this preamble under
``Charter Halibut Stamp Transferability,'' NMFS considered, but decided
against, allowing for the transfer and reimbursement of purchased
stamps. Given the purchase-as-needed flexibility built into the RQE
Program fee collection, NMFS determined that allowing stamp transfers
and reimbursements would serve limited purposes and materially increase
the complexity and administrative costs associated with fee collection
without proportionate benefits. CHP holders are allowed to purchase
stamps at any time during the season, allowing CHP holders to maintain
an operable amount of stamps without the need to stockpile stamps. CHP
holders may also lease their CHPs to other users to deplete any unused
stamps prior to the transfer of a CHP. Additionally, CHP holders are
able to reconcile stamp deficits at the end of the year without
penalty. Furthermore, stamps not used in a fishing year do not expire
and roll over into all subsequent fishing years until used (i.e.,
validated).
Comments on the Impacts of the RQE Program and Associated Fee
Collection
Comment 18: This proposed rule precedes the development of
operating rules for the RQE, which creates uncertainty regarding how
the RQE will function on behalf of the diverse businesses funding it.
Commenters noted that there are no requirements on RQE board membership
imposed by the proposed rule. How does NMFS intend to prevent the RQE
from using funds from this fee collection improperly or operating
inefficiently?
Response: This action does not address the existing regulations
governing the RQE and any changes to these regulations are outside of
the scope of this action. NMFS published a proposed rule to authorize
the formation of the RQE on November 17, 2017 (82 FR 46016). NMFS
considered
[[Page 29782]]
implementing requirements on RQE board members but ultimately proposed
that no requirements be specified. NMFS received no comments requesting
NMFS specify requirements for the RQE board. The final rule to
authorize the formation of the RQE did not specify requirements for RQE
board members (83 FR 47819, September 21, 2018).
Existing regulations, at Sec. Sec. 679.5(l)(9) and 679.5(v),
require the RQE to submit an annual report to NMFS detailing its
activities. This report will provide information on the RQE's
structure, expenditures, and other activities such that compliance with
applicable law and regulations can be determined. Additionally, the RQE
must continue to be recognized as exempt from Federal income tax by the
Internal Revenue Service. If the RQE is determined to be out of
compliance with regulations, the RQE's own by-laws, or other applicable
regulations, the Regional Administrator may suspend the stamp
requirement and fee collection, as specified at Sec. 679.46(d).
NMFS will maintain administrative oversight of the RQE operations,
including the appropriate use of funds, by virtue of the stipulations
and conditions associated with the NMFS grant of funds to the RQE.
Comment 19: The stamp fee and fee increase provision are not
appropriate, as the RQE board members and NMFS may change the stamp fee
with no additional input from the CHP holders who are subject to paying
that increase.
Response: NMFS disagrees that changes to the fee could occur with
no input from the CHP holders who are responsible for paying those
fees. While the RQE may petition NMFS to initiate a fee change request,
any eventual increases to the stamp fee would entail a regulatory
amendment because the fee is set in regulation at Sec. 679.46(b)(1).
NMFS will comply with all necessary steps required under Federal law,
including public input, in promulgating a regulatory amendment. NMFS
would consider all comments from the public when deciding to develop
any rule implementing a fee change.
Comment 20: Please clarify how the charter halibut fleet will see
benefits that result from the fee collection. Will there ever be enough
RFQ to lessen restrictions on the charter halibut fleet? When will the
RQE purchase halibut QS? What is the endpoint for RQE QS purchases?
Will the RQE or NMFS determine when to purchase additional QS?
Response: NMFS expects this action to provide significant funding
for the RQE to obtain halibut QS, as explained in the RIR for this
action (see ADDRESSES). It is expected that fees collected by this
program will be primarily used by the RQE to purchase halibut QS. The
RQE will determine when to purchase halibut QS and the resulting
poundage will be added to the charter halibut allocation as RFQ under
the CSP. The RIR indicates how these additions to the charter halibut
allocation could provide greater opportunities for charter vessel
anglers.
In order for the RQE to receive funds from this action, Congress
must first appropriate collected funds to NMFS. NMFS then expects to
issue funds to the RQE as a grant as soon as practicable. It may be
reasonable to expect that Congress appropriates these funds annually.
For example, fees collected during the 2026 fishing year could be
appropriated to NMFS in 2027 if Congress takes the necessary action.
After the appropriation is made, NMFS will work to make these funds
available to the RQE as soon as practicable. Once the RQE receives
these funds, the RQE will determine when to purchase QS.
Existing regulations allow the RQE annually to purchase up to 1
percent of the commercial QS in IPHC regulatory area 2C, and 1.2
percent of the QS in area 3A, subject to certain restrictions on
particular classification types of QS (Sec. 679.42(f)(8)).
Cumulatively over time, existing regulations allow the RQE to hold an
amount of halibut QS equivalent to up to 10 percent of the halibut QS
in IPHC regulatory area 2C and 12 percent of the halibut QS in area 3A
(Sec. 679.42(f)(8)). The RIR indicates this cumulative amount would
have added 341,000 pounds to the IPHC regulatory area 2C charter
allocation, and 846,000 pounds to the area 3A charter allocation, based
on the QS/IFQ conversion rates in 2020. These amounts are expected to
be meaningful when the annual management measures are developed. The
additional pounds could allow for less restrictive annual management
measures such as bag limits, size limits, and day of the week closures,
and in the event of declines in the halibut resource could help avoid
more conservative management measures which would further constrain the
charter halibut fishery.
Comment 21: Will future CHP entrants that have not paid into the
RQE Program fee collection benefit from the QS purchased in previous
years?
Response: Yes. QS purchased by the RQE may be held indefinitely and
the added allocation from that QS will be available to all CHP holders
operating in IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A. It should also be noted
that existing CHP holders may benefit from increased permit values if
the RQE Program increases charter halibut harvest opportunity as it is
designed to do.
Comment 22: The RQE should not be allowed to continue using the fee
funding to purchase QS should the halibut stock continue to decline.
Many commenters were concerned about the potential conservation impacts
of this action would have on the halibut stock in its current low
abundance state.
Response: Existing RQE regulations at Sec. 679.42(f) establish
limits on the amount of QS that the RQE can receive by transfer
annually and in total, as explained in the response to comment 20.
However, as noted above, Congress authorized stamp fees to be used for
other activities besides QS purchases. Those uses may factor into
decisions about the amount of the fee, or whether the stamp program
should continue. Regardless, after 2028 the RQE may petition NMFS to
reduce the stamp fee, or the RQE may petition to suspend the fee at any
time.
The RQE Program and associated fee collection action are
specifically intended to provide additional harvest opportunities to
the charter halibut fishery, particularly during periods of low halibut
abundance through a market-based transfer of halibut QS from the
commercial sector to the charter halibut sector. This action also
provides mechanisms to reduce or suspend the fees in the event they are
no longer required or beneficial to the charter industry.
This action is not expected to result in increased impacts to the
halibut stock. The RQE Program and the regulations addressed by this
final rule for this fee collection program do not change the total
halibut mortality limits established annually by the IPHC. As such, if
the halibut stock were to decline, the amount of halibut associated
with the QS purchased with fee funding would be adjusted according to
the limits established on an annual basis. As noted above and in the
preamble to the proposed rule, the RQE Program merely represents a
voluntary (i.e., willing buyer, willing seller) transfer of halibut
harvest opportunity from one sector (the directed commercial fishery)
to another (the charter halibut fishery) in IPHC regulatory areas 2C
and 3A, with no overall increase in halibut harvest.
Comment 23: This proposed fee collection adds a substantial cost to
participants in the charter halibut fishery, despite the cost per
charter vessel angler being $20 per day or per charter vessel fishing
trip. This additional cost burden will negatively impact businesses and
increase the end cost to charter vessel anglers. Moreover,
[[Page 29783]]
prices for the 2025 fishing year have already been posted, and this is
a new cost to the business not previously factored in. Charter vessel
anglers often reserve charter trips one to two years in advance,
meaning that charter businesses may not be able to collect this fee, or
will have to adjust prices retroactively, which is problematic to
clients that have already paid some or all of the previously agreed
upon price. To address this, if this action is approved, those
commenters recommended delaying fee collection implementation until
2026 or 2027 to allow charter businesses time to adjust and notify
future clients.
Response: NMFS agrees that this final rule should be implemented in
2026 to avoid disruptions to business operations from a mid-season
implementation, including the disruptions identified in public
comments. NMFS set the effective date of this final rule to January 1,
2026.
NMFS acknowledges that this action, which has been in development
since 2019, results in additional costs to CHP holders and charter
businesses, which they may choose to pass on to other charter halibut
fishery participants. The impacts are described in detail at Section
3.5.5 of the RIR. However, over the long term, this action is expected
to benefit the charter halibut sector participants by increasing the
charter sector's share of the annual halibut allocation.
Public comments and the RIR that led to this action suggest that
some or all of these additional costs will be passed on to charter
vessel anglers, thereby spreading the burden of the payments to others
who may also benefit from an increased charter halibut allocation.
NMFS recognizes that the total sum of fees paid for halibut stamps
in a given fishing year is substantial. With the $20 stamp fee, as
noted in section 3.5.5 of the RIR, the average cost to a charter
halibut business is estimated to be approximately $5,600 annually in
IPHC regulatory area 2C and $7,500 annually in area 3A. In both IPHC
regulatory areas the maximum cost could be over $50,000 for some CHP
holders. The estimated total annual revenues from stamps in IPHC
regulatory area 2C is $1.79 million, and $2.20 million from area 3A.
Section 3.5.1.2 of the RIR further discusses the potential revenue from
the stamp. However, NMFS notes that these costs are also proportional
to the gross revenue of the business because the number of stamps is
equivalent to the number of charter vessel anglers served.
Disproportionate costs on smaller entities are one of the more
important reasons that the Council chose not to recommend, and NMFS has
not implemented, a flat fee on CHP holders or a multi-day stamp sold at
a discounted rate.
Furthermore, NMFS recognizes that charter vessel anglers currently
pay a significant amount to participate in the charter halibut fishery.
NMFS considered this when developing this action. If considered in the
context of costs for travel, lodging, and meals associated with the
charter vessel fishing trip that are also required, the impact of this
additional fee on individuals is marginal. The $20 fee amount is small
relative to the existing costs of participating in the charter halibut
fishery while also providing significant funding to the RQE which
should yield additional harvest opportunities to charter fishery
participants through a market-based transfer of halibut QS from the
commercial fishery to the charter fishery. The structure of the halibut
stamp program allows the flexibility of CHP holders to share those
costs with other participants in the charter halibut fishery if they
choose to do so.
Comment 24: Costs imposed by the RQE Program fee collection
encourages nonresident anglers to choose self-guided charters.
Response: As described in the response to Comment 23, the $20 stamp
amount is not significant in the context of total costs to participate
in the charter halibut fishery. The RIR indicates that the great
majority of charter vessel anglers fish for halibut for one to three
days. If charter halibut businesses pass the entire cost of halibut
stamps to their anglers, this would add $20 to $60 in fees for these
anglers. CHP holders may choose to pass along only some or even no
additional costs to charter vessel anglers. Therefore, it is unclear
whether this additional cost will negatively impact the number of
persons who choose to participate in halibut charter fishing,
particularly if the net benefits of the RQE Program provide more
harvest opportunities to charter vessel anglers.
Comment 25: The proposed fee collection is more beneficial to
certain charter halibut fishery participants. CHP holders with a large
number of lessees and single vessel owners do not benefit equivalently
to charter halibut fishery participants deploying multiple vessels from
a larger port.
Response: The RQE Program and this fee collection are intended to
broadly benefit the entire charter halibut fishery through equitable
contributions from all users. As halibut abundance continues to
fluctuate, the fees collected from this action may be important to
stabilize management measures such as bag limits and day-of-the-week
closures that can have significant impacts to certain charter business
models and may potentially provide growth opportunities to other
charter halibut fishery participants that can take advantage of relaxed
management measures.
Comment 26: IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A should have fee
collection funds allocated proportionally to each area based on the fee
revenue generated from each respective area.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Total fees collected from IPHC regulatory
areas 2C and 3A will be directly proportional to the number of charter
vessel anglers on charter vessel fishing trips in each area. The RQE,
which is composed of board members who represent each of the IPHC
regulatory areas, has the discretion to purchase proportional amounts
of halibut QS for each area. Reasons the RQE may not choose to purchase
QS proportionally in each area during each year would likely be related
to market conditions, including QS availability in each area and
pricing.
Comment 27: NMFS is not using all relevant data and should conduct
additional analyses before continuing with this action. Many aspects of
the proposed fee collection have changed since the Council first took
action: the GAF Program is working well for charter halibut fishery
participants who want to market opportunities to catch larger halibut
or avoid daily closures; the halibut resource is in a precarious state,
which raises questions as to whether the RQE will be able to purchase
enough QS to influence annual regulatory measures; the sportfishing
industry continues to grow, showing that many charter halibut fishery
participants can successfully sell trips even with the current size
limits; and the Council has refused to address the unregulated growth
in self-guided fishing trips.
Response: NMFS has determined that the RIR is sufficient to support
the regulations adopted by this final rule. The RIR, the analysis that
supported the development of the RQE Program, and comments received on
the proposed rule clearly indicate how a greater share of the combined
halibut catch limits to the charter sector may allow charter businesses
to offer greater opportunities to their clients. Both the GAF Program
and the RQE Program are intended to help maintain these opportunities
and are especially relevant in periods of low halibut abundance when
annual management measures are necessarily restrictive.
NMFS agrees that the GAF Program is working as intended. The
success of this program provides evidence that willing
[[Page 29784]]
buyer-willing seller options to shift halibut allocation from the
commercial sector to the charter sector are valid, effective, and
reasonable. NMFS notes that the GAF Program is designed to benefit
individual participants in the charter halibut fishery, while the RQE
Program benefits the charter sector as a whole. Each program will
continue to operate concurrently.
While regulating unguided fishing trips is outside of the scope of
this action, the Council previously evaluated this issue in 2019 and
decided to take no action due to several factors, including challenges
in quantifying the number and geographic scope of non-guided rental
boat activities and determining the amount of halibut effort and
removals that might be associated with this form of unguided
recreational halibut fishing. However, the Council process allows the
public to raise such concerns as new information becomes available.
Comments on Stamp Accounts and Fee Collection Administration
Comment 28: The Act authorizes fees to be collected from the
charter vessel operators. The RQE Program fee collection should require
charter vessel operators or charter vessel guides to purchase stamps.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Section 6 of the Act authorizes the
development of regulations ``for the collection of fees from charter
vessel operators.'' We do not interpret this provision so restrictively
to mean that only a charter vessel operator can be required to purchase
stamps. The CHP holder would otherwise be indirectly responsible for
the failure to purchase stamps and is in a better position to directly
carry the burden of purchasing them. This rulemaking therefore imposes
that obligation on the CHP holder, consistent with Congress' intent,
purpose, and plain meaning of the Act. Indeed, under longstanding
regulations at Sec. 300.67(a)(1), every CHP holder is obligated to
ensure that associated charter vessel operators and charter vessel
guides comply with all applicable regulatory requirements. Further, CHP
holders commonly are the charter vessel operators themselves.
There are also additional reasons to impose the obligation to
purchase stamps on CHP holders. If NMFS was to impose that duty on
charter vessel operators, the costs of administering this program would
increase markedly. Charter vessel guides and charter vessel operators
are often employees of the CHP holder and they hold no durable link to
NMFS or the charter halibut regulatory programs. Conversely, CHP
holders already have established an annual administrative relationship
with NMFS. As a result, if charter vessel operators were required to
purchase stamps, many new administrative accounts would have to be
created. Ultimately, this would mean that there would be a much higher
number of eFISH users, the number of eFISH users could change
significantly each year, and the technical support that NMFS would need
to provide to maintain this system would significantly increase costs.
Because the Act authorizes the deduction of administrative costs from
the fees collected, this would reduce the benefits of the RQE Program,
which would be at odds with Congress's intent and purpose in passing
the Act. The requirements for CHP holders in the RQE Program are also
consistent with other NMFS regulations that obligate persons or
business entities who hold exclusive fishing rights to ensure
regulatory compliance for most of the actions associated with their
permits (e.g., Sec. 679.85(a)(1)).
Finally, collecting fees from CHP holders will make the RQE fee
collection provisions more readily enforceable than collecting fees
from charter vessel operators. In the event of a stamp deficiency,
NMFS's only remedy would be to pursue collections against charter
vessel operators, who are not required to register otherwise with NMFS.
This contrasts with program enforcement for CHP holders, who are
limited in number and have greater incentives to timely pay any stamp
deficiency and, therein, ensure their CHPs are current and active.
Indeed, a CHP is an important asset that a holder has a vested interest
in maintaining, and it must be registered with NMFS annually before
use. NMFS can require payment of outstanding fees before renewing a
CHP.
Comment 29: The RQE Program fee collection places an extra burden
on the CQE to purchase and manage stamps in their account throughout
the fishing year.
Response: NMFS acknowledges this comment. As described in the
proposed rule, CQEs participate in the Charter Halibut Limited Access
Program and may be granted Community CHPs by NMFS. Charter operations
that use community CHPs are subject to the same annual management
measures as all other charter halibut operations. The administrative
and management burden by CQEs and all other charter halibut operations
are expected to be offset by the benefits of the RQE Program. NMFS
designed the elements of the fee collection to minimize the
administrative burden to the extent practicable. CQEs would have
significant flexibility to administer their stamps in the way that is
most advantageous to them.
Comment 30: Only CHP holders are allowed to use accounts to
purchase stamps, but some CHP holders lease permits to charter vessel
guides who do not hold CHPs. In addition to added difficulties tracking
validations across multiple CHPs, this creates tax challenges for the
CHP holder as well as the lessee without proper tax documentation, such
as receipts. A charter vessel guide should be able to purchase stamps
to use in his business. In particular, charter vessel guides leasing a
nontransferable CHP should be responsible for purchasing and tracking
the stamps associated with that CHP.
Response: NFMS disagrees. As the commenters note, CHPs are commonly
leased, and the charter vessel guide who leases, or otherwise uses, the
CHP may not be the person who holds or owns the CHP. The CHP holder
will ultimately be responsible for ensuring that an adequate number of
stamps has been purchased to cover the number of stamp validations that
are made by the person who leases, or otherwise uses, the CHP. This
action does not limit the ability of CHP holders to incorporate terms
related to stamps into their private CHP lease agreements.
NMFS does not expect that this program design will create
additional tax challenges. As with any fee paid to lease a CHP, the
cost of stamps may simply constitute a business expense. While NMFS
would not provide a record of stamp transactions directly to the person
leasing a CHP, as NMFS does not regulate and does not have, or provide,
any record of CHP lease transactions, there is nothing preventing this
from being documented in a private business agreement. A CHP holder may
share the record of stamp validations associated with a CHP that will
be provided to them in eFISH with any person leasing their permit as
supporting documentation.
NMFS will provide a record of stamp validations to the CHP holder
that includes validations by individual CHP to CHP holders with
multiple CHPs. Additionally, ADF&G logbooks will provide a record of
all the stamp validations that charter vessel guides made that are
associated with that charter business.
NMFS also notes that ADF&G logbooks are equipped to allow logbook
users, such as the charter vessel guide, to individually query the
historical data they have supplied on the logbook. Therefore, a charter
operation that leases one or more CHPs will have
[[Page 29785]]
ongoing records of the number and date of halibut stamp validations
that have occurred on each of their charter vessel trips. This
information is sufficient for the business needs of the charter
operations, including for CHP lease transactions and tax purposes.
Finally, NMFS disagrees that the applicability of and
responsibility for these fee collection provisions should vary between
transferable and non-transferable CHPs because these permits are
functionally identical except for transferability. The transferability
of a CHP does not affect whether a CHP may be leased or not and does
not affect the respective responsibilities of the lessee or lessor.
Therefore, there is no rationale establish differential requirements
for tacking and purchasing stamps between transferable and non-
transferable CHPs.
Comment 31: CHP holders who lease their CHP to multiple charter
vessel guides may have issues tracking stamp validations. Stamps should
be assigned to the charter vessel guides and specific CHPs, instead of
being lumped into a single eFISH account. CHP holders who hold multiple
CHPs should be allowed to create individual eFISH accounts for each CHP
to ease the burden of tracking individual lessees and their
validations.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Tracking the use of charter halibut
stamps will begin with halibut stamp validation on ADF&G logbooks.
Among other things, logbooks document the CHP serial number(s), the
vessel number, and identifiers for the ADF&G registered business that
is associated with each charter vessel trip. The logbook data will be
collected by ADF&G and shared with NMFS. NMFS intends to merge this
data to the eFISH account of each CHP holder. The compiled records in
the CHP holder's account will allow the CHP holder to effectively track
the daily validation of stamps associated with each unique CHP.
Assigning stamps to charter vessel guides and specific CHPs would
materially increase the cost, complexity, and burden of the RQE Program
fee collection. Specifically, a CHP, and NMFS, would have to
individually administer access and payment to a separate account for
each CHP they hold. Given the flexibility allowed in CHP leasing,
adjustments to these individual accounts would likely have to be made
multiple times per year. Therefore, while it is possible that certain
CHP holders who lease multiple CHPs could benefit from stamp accounts
associated with individual CHPs, on the whole this approach would
result in significant additional administrative cost and time burden
associated with the program. Therefore, NMFS chose to have a single
stamp account associated with each CHP holder for all of their CHPs.
Comment 32: Charter vessel guides who lease a permit through a
broker may not know the CHP holder personally. Please clarify what
happens if the CHP holder does not purchase the necessary stamps for
the charter vessel guide.
Response: CHP holders are responsible for maintaining an eFISH
account and purchasing enough stamps to ensure that the number of
validated stamps from charter vessels that use their CHP(s) does not
exceed the number of stamps that have been purchased in a given year as
required.
If a charter vessel guide validates a number of stamps in excess of
the number of stamps purchased by the CHP holder, the CHP holder is
responsible for reconciling the deficit. If the deficit is not
reconciled within the required time period, the CHP holder will receive
an Initial Administrative Determination imposing one or more of the
following consequences. Under these circumstances, NMFS may disapprove
the transfer application of the CHP and all associated CHPs from that
CHP holder until the outstanding stamps are purchased to correct the
deficit, except that NMFS may return unused GAF to the IFQ permit
holder's account from which it was derived. NMFS may also disapprove a
CHP holder's annual registration application for their CHP and all
associated CHPs until the outstanding stamps are purchased. Under
similar circumstances, NMFS may also invalidate a community or military
CHP.
Comment 33: The RQE fee collection will cause logistical issues for
charter vessel guides that operate out of remote ports.
Response: NMFS disagrees. This program's design prioritizes
flexibility to account for the unique qualities of the many business
models that operate under the Charter Halibut Limited Access Program.
For example, stamps may be purchased at any time, and in quantities
that make sense for a particular business. That means charter vessels
operating out of remote ports may purchase stamps at their convenience
when CHP holders have access to their eFISH account. Further,
validation of stamps can occur anywhere, including in remote areas,
just as charter vessel guides currently comply with all other logbook
requirements.
In the event a charter vessel guide has an insufficient number of
stamps, they may continue to operate, but the holder of the CHP that
the charter vessel guide is operating under must correct the deficiency
prior to the end of the calendar year. The stamp validation
reconciliation occurs at the end of each calendar year, well after all
known charter fishing operations cease for the year.
Comment 34: Please clarify whether there is a limit on the number
of stamps a CHP holder may purchase.
Response: There is no limit to the number of stamps a CHP holder
may purchase.
Comment 35: ADF&G should administer stamp purchases.
Response: NMFS disagrees. The RQE Program fee collection is a
Federal initiative. ADF&G has agreed to let NMFS rely on its
infrastructure to the extent practicable through use of the ADF&G
logbook for validation of stamps. To minimize costs, decrease the time
it takes to transfer funds to correct Federal accounts for eventual
distribution to the RQE, and to ensure the accountability of CHP
holders, NMFS will use its existing, secure eFISH program for stamp
purchases.
Comments on the Enforcement of the RQE Program Fee Collection
Comment 36: At-sea enforcement of the RQE Program fee collection
will be a lengthy and costly process. Please clarify the nature of
penalties and who will be held liable.
Response: NMFS anticipates that most RQE Program fee collection
enforcement activities will be conducted during the course of existing
enforcement activities and therefore will not add significantly to
existing enforcement costs. CHP holders are responsible for purchasing
a sufficient number of stamps to meet or exceed the number of
validations associated with their CHP(s) in a given fishing year.
Charter vessel guides are responsible for validating stamps prior to
the start of each charter vessel fishing trip, or each calendar day
during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days. The
penalties for failing to meet these responsibilities are set forth in
statute and regulation and are assessed according to the NOAA Penalty
Policy and, for certain violations, according to NOAA Summary
Settlement Schedules (see <a href="https://www.noaa.gov/general-counsel/gc-enforcement-section/penalty-policy-and-schedules">https://www.noaa.gov/general-counsel/gc-enforcement-section/penalty-policy-and-schedules</a>).
Comment 37: NMFS's collection of fees for its administrative role
in the RQE Program fee collection should be offset by the cost recovery
fees the RQE pays to NMFS. Over half of NMFS's annual budget from cost
recovery is spent on enforcement, and enforcement
[[Page 29786]]
of the RQE Program fee collection is not likely to impose significant
additional demand on the agency. NMFS should provide transparent
detailing of costs to be reimbursed in an annual itemized report that
is made available to the public.
Response: NMFS developed this final rule to minimize administrative
costs to the extent practicable, including those related to
enforcement. Cost recovery fees (i.e., IFQ Program cost recovery) paid
by the RQE to NMFS would be used to recover eligible costs related to
the IFQ Program, which may offset some portion of the total
administrative costs of the RQE Program. However, NMFS does not expect
that all of its costs to administer the RQE Program are eligible for
reimbursement under IFQ Program cost recovery. The remainder of NMFS's
administrative costs related to the RQE Program may be recouped from
the RQE Program fee collection as the Act provides. More detail on
expected enforcement costs related to this action is provided in the
response to comment 36. NMFS will continue to work to minimize costs
during implementation and operation of the RQE Program fee collection.
Additionally, NMFS will evaluate agency expenses each year and provide
the public with a report consistent with its existing cost recovery
reporting practices.
Comments on Stamp Validation
Comment 38: This action impacts the flexibility of extended fishing
trips or trips impacted by weather where there may not be a set
schedule for fishing where stamps may be validated but the fishing trip
is ultimately canceled. In the event that a trip is cancelled,
validated stamps should be refunded.
Response: NMFS disagrees. For charter vessel fishing trips that
span multiple days, stamp validation must occur prior to the first
deployment of fishing gear into the water each calendar day, as with
other existing State of Alaska ADF&G logbook requirements. As a result,
if there is uncertainty in whether halibut fishing can occur due to
weather or other reasons on a given day, a charter vessel guide may
wait to validate stamps until immediately before fishing gear is
deployed--that is, until the charter vessel fishing trip (Sec. 300.61)
begins.
Stamp validation is different from purchasing stamps. While stamps
should be purchased prior to validation, the regulations allow CHP
holders the flexibility to purchase stamps after a charter vessel
fishing trip when necessary.
Comment 39: It should be permissible to retain incidental halibut
catch during salmon charter fishing trips by allowing for mid-trip
validation of stamps after gear deployment. To do this, the regulations
should allow for the validation of stamps upon retention of a halibut
instead of when there is intent to retain the halibut. The anticipated
funds from this fee collection will be recovered by salmon and rockfish
charters that unintentionally catch a halibut.
Response: NMFS disagrees. Such an approach would be inconsistent
with the Council's recommendations and would also present significant
enforcement concerns. The Council's recommendations specify that stamps
will be required for charter vessel anglers 18 years of age or older
for each day they intend to catch and retain halibut. Notably, the
Council's recommendations are consistent with other wildlife stamp
programs, such as the State of Alaska king salmon stamp which is
required to both fish for and retain king salmon.
This final rule is consistent with the Council's recommendations
and contemplates situations where halibut are caught and retained by
charter vessel anglers targeting other species, such as salmon. Before
the deployment of fishing gear, regardless of the species targeted, the
charter vessel guide and a charter vessel angler will need to decide
whether the angler intends to retain halibut caught on that trip. If a
charter vessel angler decides not to retain a halibut or they believe
the opportunity to catch a halibut is unlikely, such as on a trip that
targets salmon, then the charter vessel angler and charter vessel guide
might decide not to validate a stamp for that trip. Conversely, if the
charter vessel angler and charter vessel guide intend to retain halibut
on a charter vessel fishing trip, whether the fish are caught
incidentally or targeted, a stamp must be validated before fishing gear
is deployed (i.e., before the charter vessel fishing trip begins).
Additionally, this program design addresses enforcement concerns.
By requiring stamp validation to occur before a charter vessel fishing
trip begins, the regulations discourage charter vessel guides from
opportunistically validating charter halibut stamps only when they
believe they would be questioned by enforcement personnel.
Regarding the anticipated funds collected by a fee collection that
would allow for incidental validation of stamps (i.e., being able to
validate a stamp at any time, including after unintentionally catching
a halibut and deciding to retain it), NMFS is unable to predict the
number of charter vessel anglers who plan to catch and retain halibut
given the available data; however, the RIR examines available data on
the number of days where ADF&G logbooks indicated some angling effort
was devoted to bottom fishing on that particular charter vessel fishing
trip. By logical extension, angler days summed in this manner would
reasonably be greater than the number of angler days where halibut were
retained (i.e., not all anglers who engage in bottom fishing retain
halibut, even if the charter trip targets halibut). Similarly, it is
reasonable to assume that the number of stamps validated before a
charter vessel angler intends to catch and retain halibut would be
greater than the number of stamps validated only when halibut are
retained.
Comment 40: Please clarify whether a charter vessel guide must
specify the IPHC regulatory area where the vessel will operate prior to
leaving the dock or while validating stamps.
Response: The charter vessel guide is not required to indicate
which IPHC regulatory area they will be operating in as part of the
stamp validation process. However, a charter vessel guide must have a
CHP appropriately endorsed for the IPHC regulatory area they are
operating in, and the CHP(s) used for the charter vessel fishing trip
must have the required number of charter halibut stamps validated that
are required for that charter vessel fishing trip prior to the first
deployment of gear for each fishing day.
Comment 41: The intent-based validation of stamps should be changed
to a retention-based validation of stamps. The Council's Enforcement
Committee recommended an annual fee assessment in order to avoid
expenditure of enforcement resources. The additional funding acquired
from retention of incidental halibut catch will offset the funding lost
by removing the intent-based validation of stamps.
Response: NMFS disagrees. The Council and NMFS considered an annual
fee levied on CHP holders as a possible way to reduce administrative
costs by relying primarily on existing NMFS infrastructure. Table 19 of
the RIR summarizes the benefits and challenges associated with this fee
mechanism, and section 3.5.1.5 of the RIR further describes some of the
expected long-term and short-term administrative costs. NMFS considered
this annual fee, but did not select this fee structure due to concerns
that it may not equitably distribute the fee burden across CHP holders.
More discussion on this is provided in the response to Comment 15.
[[Page 29787]]
The response to comment 39 addresses the expected difference in fee
collection when comparing an intent-based stamp versus one that could
be validated at any time to account for incidental catch.
Comments on Other Topics
Comment 42: The comment period for this rule should be extended
until September 1, 2025 to allow for further comment by the public,
including charter vessel clients.
Response: NMFS disagrees. This action has been in development since
April 2019. Public comments were accepted throughout this period at
Council meetings, as well as the standard 30-day comment period
provided by the proposed rule. Additionally, outreach events were held
in several communities throughout Areas 2C and 3A and were scheduled
during the off season, as this is when persons involved in the charter
industry were most available. Furthermore, the timing of the comment
period provided by the proposed rule in the off-season allowed fishery
participants who might otherwise be busy in the fishery greater
opportunity to comprehensively evaluate and comment on this action.
Please see the preamble to the proposed rule for more detail
information on the lengthy public process undertaken to develop the RQE
Program fee collection (89 FR 86772, October 31, 2024).
Comments Outside the Scope of This Action
Comment 43: Several commenters suggested that commercial trawl
vessels should contribute to the cost of these stamps or proposed other
more restrictive management measures for trawl fisheries.
Response: Management of trawl fisheries is outside of the scope of
this action. Furthermore, Congress authorized, through the Act, that
RQE Program fees be collected only from charter vessel operators.
Comment 44: NMFS should establish a similar funding mechanism for
CQE communities.
Response: Establishing funding mechanisms for CQE communities is
outside the scope of this action.
Comment 45: Non-transferable CHPs should be transferable in lieu of
a stamp.
Response: Changing the transferability of CHPs is outside the scope
of this action. However, NMFS notes that this action, and all other CHP
program provisions not related to CHP transferability, apply equally to
transferable and non-transferable CHPs.
Comment 46: Why is QS beyond that which allows the fleet to retain
two halibut of any size distributed back to the commercial sector?
These QS were purchased legally by the RQE.
Response: The RQE Program, implemented in 2018, establishes a
temporary redistribution of QS back to the commercial fishery if the
RQE holds halibut QS in excess of what would allow charter vessel
anglers to retain two halibut of any size per day. This is a component
of the original RQE Program rules and is not a subject of this rule.
Comment 47: QS purchased by the RQE should not be returned to the
commercial sector.
Response: This action does not implement or modify existing
regulations pertaining to the RQE's purchase and disposition of QS at
Sec. 679.41. Therefore, this comment is outside of the scope of this
action.
Comment 48: Several commenters suggested modifications to the
annual management measures applicable to the charter halibut fishery,
including that IPHC regulatory areas 2C and 3A should be limited to one
halibut per day for charter vessel fishing trips and adding monitoring
requirements for the charter halibut fishery that are consistent with
the commercial halibut fishery.
Response: This action does not address bag limits or other
management measures for the charter halibut fishery; therefore, this
comment is outside of the scope of this action. However, as previously
discussed, the fees collected as a result of this action may allow for
increased flexibility in selecting annual management measures.
Comment 49: The halibut size limits imposed on the charter fleet
should apply to self-guided fishing trips as well.
Response: Changing halibut size limits imposed on self-guided
anglers is outside the scope of this action.
Comment 50: Please clarify the details of the RQE Program with
respect to the function of the program, how quota is determined, and
how the program interacts with the commercial fleet.
Response: This action does not address or modify elements of the
RQE Program related to the transfer of QS from the commercial sector or
how the RQE's QS is applied each year. These details can be found in
the final rule document for the RQE Program (83 FR 47819, September 21,
2018) and Federal regulations at Sec. 679.41.
Comment 51: The charter halibut stamp should be a physical stamp or
logo so that charter vessel anglers have a tangible record of their
fishing trip.
Response: NMFS considered printable stamps but chose to issue
electronic stamps instead due to electronic stamps' distinct advantages
in cost, distribution, and accounting compared to paper or other forms
of physical stamps. These considerations are particularly important for
stamps that must be validated on (at minimum) a daily basis, as opposed
to other types of stamps such as State of Alaska king salmon stamps
that are valid for an entire year or season.
Comments on the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act
No comments were specifically related to the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Act (IRFA), and NMFS addresses comments that concern costs
generally throughout the ``Comments and Responses'' section and in the
Classification section.
Classification
The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this final
rule is consistent with section 106 of the Driftnet Modernization and
Bycatch Reduction Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Halibut Act, and
other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866. This final rule is not a regulatory
action for purposes of Executive Order 14192 because it is not
significant under Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 13175 (E.O. 13175)
A Tribal summary impact statement under section (5)(b)(2)(B) and
section (5)(c)(2)(B) of E.O. 13175 was not required for this final rule
because this action does not impose substantial direct compliance costs
on Indian Tribal Governments, this action is required by statute, and
this action does not preempt Tribal law. A Tribal summary impact
statement is not required and has not been prepared.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)
This FRFA incorporates the IRFA, a summary of the significant
issues raised by the public comments in response to the IRFA, NMFS's
responses to those comments, and a summary of the analyses completed to
support this action.
Section 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that,
when an agency promulgates a final rule under section 553 of Title 5 of
the U.S. Code, after being required by that section or any other law to
publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking,
[[Page 29788]]
the agency shall prepare a FRFA. Section 604 describes the required
contents of a FRFA: a statement of the need for and objectives for this
final rule; a statement of the significant issues raised by the public
comments in response to the IRFA, a statement of the assessment of the
agency of such issues, and a statement of any changes made to the
proposed rule as a result of such comments; the response of the agency
to any comments filed by the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration (SBA) in response to the proposed rule, and a
detailed statement of any change made to the proposed rule in this
final rule as a result of the comments; a description of and an
estimate of the number of small entities to which the rule will apply
or an explanation of why no such estimate is available; a description
of the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance
requirements of the rule, including an estimate of the classes of small
entities that will be subject to the requirement and the type of
professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
and a description of the steps the agency has taken to minimize the
significant economic impact on small entities consistent with the
stated objectives of applicable statutes including a statement of the
factual, policy, and legal reasons for selecting the alternative
adopted in this final rule and why each one of the other significant
alternatives to the rule considered by the agency which affect the
impact on small entities was rejected.
A description of this final rule and the need for and objectives of
this final rule are contained in the preamble to this final rule and
the preamble to the proposed rule (89 FR 86772, October 31, 2024) and
are not repeated here.
Public and Chief Counsel for Advocacy Comments on the Proposed Rule
NMFS published the proposed rule on October 31, 2024 (89 FR 86772).
An IRFA was prepared and summarized in the Classification section of
the preamble to the proposed rule. The Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the SBA did not file any comments on the proposed rule.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised During Public Comment
NMFS received no comments specifically on the IRFA. However, many
commenters were concerned with the additional costs imposed on charter
businesses by this stamp requirement. Commenters were also concerned
with the additional time burden of complying with this final rule. Some
commenters suggested requiring individual charter vessel anglers to pay
the fee rather than CHP holders. However, Congress only provided
authorization for NMFS to collect fees from charter vessel operators,
not individual anglers. In Comments and Responses above, Comment 28
addresses this concern.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by This Final Rule
This final rule requires a charter halibut stamp for each charter
vessel angler, 18 years of age or older, for each charter vessel
fishing trip in a given calendar day, or each calendar day during a
charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days, that the charter
vessel angler intends to catch and retain halibut on a charter vessel
in IPHC regulatory area 2C or 3A, unless that charter vessel angler
retains halibut landed as GAF on days that are otherwise closed by
regulation to halibut retention. Charter vessel guides are obligated to
ensure that there are validated stamps for each charter vessel angler
fishing for halibut on a charter vessel. CHP holders are ultimately
responsible for purchasing a sufficient quantity of stamps each fishing
year.
Thus, for RFA purposes, those entities that are directly regulated
by the action are charter halibut businesses (i.e., Sportfishing Guide
Business Owners), charter vessel guides, CHP holders (including CHPs
issued under the CQE and MWR programs), and the RQE. The thresholds
applied to determine if an entity or group of entities is considered a
``small'' business under the RFA depends on the industry classification
for the entity or entities.
The ADF&G logbook data shows that, between 2017 and 2022, there
were as many as 478 charter halibut businesses, with the low count of
342 occurring in 2021. The most recent data available shows 368
directly regulated charter halibut businesses in 2022. The count of
directly regulated charter halibut guides was lowest in 2020, at 820,
and highest in 2019 when 1,240 charter vessel guides participated in
the affected fishery. Data for the most recent year, 2022, identified
1,037 directly regulated charter vessel guides. Charter vessel guides
that are employees of charter halibut businesses are not directly
regulated entities under the RFA. However, guides that are independent
contractors are directly regulated by this action and would be
considered directly regulated entities under the RFA.
There is no annual census data collection of gross revenues for
charter businesses or charter vessel guides with which to compare to
the $14 million threshold. A voluntary Alaska Saltwater Sport Fishing
Charter Business Survey has been conducted by the Alaska Fisheries
Science Center, which has gathered information on expenses, revenues,
and business characteristics for the 2011, 2013, 2015, and 2017 fishing
years. As demonstrated in the most recent Cost and Earnings Report, as
detailed in the RIR for this action, the mean gross revenue for the
population of charter businesses was between $200,894 (in 2012) and
$302,609 (in 2013). These estimates are based on self-reported sales
and revenues of charter trips (not necessarily charter vessel fishing
trips for halibut) and include client referrals and booking commission
revenue as well as revenue accrued by leasing a CHP. These estimates do
not account for values derived from additional accommodations or food/
beverage service.
Based on the difference between the SBA threshold ($14 million) and
the mean revenue for charter businesses reported in the RIR, the
available evidence indicates that all directly regulated businesses and
associated charter vessel guides are considered ``small.'' If a
business was large enough, potentially including lodging and multiple
recreational activities, it is possible it could exceed the SBA
threshold. However, there is no data to identify if or how many
businesses may fit into this category; thus, all businesses are
considered ``small.''
Moreover, there is no available data to determine the relationship
charter vessel guides have to the business (e.g., owner/operator,
hourly or salaried employee, contracted partnership, etc.). However,
given the relative difference between estimated gross revenue at the
business level and the $14 million threshold, those charter vessel
guides that represent a separate entity are very likely still
considered a small entity by SBA standards. Similarly, CQEs, MWRs, and
the RQE are considered to be small entities due to their relationship
to the charter fishery. Analysis of the QS purchase limitations of one
percent annually and ten percent total are estimated to produce total
value of just over $2 million in annual revenue by year ten in IPHC
regulatory area 2C and approximately $5.6 million in total value annual
value after ten years in IPHC regulatory area 3A. Thus, the CQE and RQE
entities are considered to be directly regulated small entities.
Description of Significant Alternatives That Minimize Adverse Impacts
on Small Entities
The action alternative analyzed two options for funding the RQE.
The first, and the basis of this action, is the stamp
[[Page 29789]]
paid for by CHP holders with the stamp fees potentially passed on to
individual charter vessel anglers. The second alternative is an annual
CHP holder fee collection. Note that charter vessel anglers are
considered individuals and not directly regulated small entities under
the RFA definition. However, as demonstrated in this IRFA, based on the
information that is available, all charter halibut businesses and
charter vessel guides are considered to be directly regulated small
entities. Charging an annual CHP holder-based fee that did not vary
depending on the number of charter vessel anglers served may
disproportionately impact some directly regulated small entities. The
stamp method of fee collection would utilize a market-based approach to
fund the RQE that is proportional to each CHP holder's use of the
resource. There are costs associated with this action. These include
direct costs for the stamps, which are designed to provide a directly
corresponding benefit to charter businesses by increasing allocation.
With the $20 stamp fee, as noted in section 3.5.5 of the RIR, the
average cost to a charter halibut business is estimated to be
approximately $5,600 annually in IPHC regulatory area 2C and $7,500
annually in area 3A. In both IPHC regulatory areas the maximum cost
could be over $50,000 for some CHP holders. The estimated total annual
revenues from stamps in IPHC regulatory area 2C is $1.79 million, and
$2.20 million from area 3A. However, NMFS notes that these costs are
also proportional to the gross revenue of the business because the
number of stamps is equivalent to the number of charter vessel anglers
served. The second category of costs are those required to administer
the program, which may be deducted from stamp revenues.
Therefore, development of the administrative elements of this
action selected options designed to maximize efficiency and benefits to
the directly regulated entities. These choices include allowing holders
of multiple CHPs to pool their stamps for use on any of those CHPs,
rolling unused stamps over to the next fishing year, disallowing
transfers of stamps, and utilizing preexisting electronic systems for
purchasing stamps. As a result, administrative costs are expected to be
only a small portion of total stamp revenues.
Furthermore, this action was requested and helped developed by
charter halibut fishery representatives and stakeholders. The analysis
of benefits of the stamp fee collection funding mechanism indicates
that this is a generally beneficial action in that it provides
individual charter vessel anglers with potential opportunities for
eased restrictions on halibut retention and greater business
opportunities for charter halibut businesses and charter vessel guides.
The second alternative of implementing an annual CHP holder fee was
deemed insufficient, as it may have disproportionately impacted small
entities, which, despite less the halibut resource, would pay the same
amount as a larger user under this approach. Thus, based upon the best
available scientific data, it appears that there are no significant
alternatives to the action that have the potential to accomplish the
stated objectives of the section 106 of the Driftnet Modernization and
Bycatch Reduction Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Halibut Act, and
any other statutes, and minimize any significant adverse economic
impact of the action on small entities while preventing overfishing.
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
NMFS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict
between this final rule and existing Federal rules.
Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
This final rule contains a collection-of-information requirement
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). OMB did not receive any
comments related to the collection-of-information requirements during
the PRA comment period, which were outlined in the proposed rule and
associated PRA package that was submitted to OMB. NMFS received several
comments that relate both to the contents of the proposed rule and its
new collection-of-information requirements. Comments 9, 15, 16, 28, 29,
30, 31, 33, and 40 relate to different aspects of the new collection-
of-information requirements and NMFS's rationale can be found in the
responses to those comments. This final rule maintains the proposed
rule's changes to the existing requirements for the collection of
information for OMB Control Number 0648-0575 (Alaska Halibut Fisheries:
Charter) by adding the purchase of charter halibut stamps, adding one
new field to the existing ADF&G logbook to record the number of stamps
validated on each charter vessel fishing trip, and adding appeals for
an IAD received for a number of stamps validated in excess of the
number of stamps purchased by the CHP holder in a year. NMFS expects
that every CHP holder will purchase stamps at least once per season,
and likely at some periodic monthly or weekly interval. This final rule
does not change the number of respondents or the responses for the
ADF&G logbook. The ADF&G logbook is already completed for every charter
vessel fishing trip, and the stamp validation field would be required
to be completed for every charter vessel fishing trip that intends to
catch and retain halibut. These information collections are necessary
to collect fees and administer, and to enforce the RQE Program that was
requested by charter halibut fishery stakeholders. Public reporting
burden is estimated to average 5 minutes to purchase charter halibut
stamps; 5 minutes for the ADF&G logbook, which includes 1 minute for
completing the additional field in the logbook; and 4 hours for
appeals. The public reporting burden includes the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information.
We invite the general public and other Federal agencies to comment
on proposed and continuing information collections, which helps us
assess the impact of our information collection requirements and
minimize the public's reporting burden. Written comments and
recommendations for this information collection should be submitted on
the following website: <a href="https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain">https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain</a>. Find
this particular information collection by using the search function and
entering either the title of the collection or the OMB Control Number
0648-0575.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a 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.
Small Entity Compliance Guide
Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the rule
and shall designate such publications as ``small entity compliance
guides.'' The agency shall explain the actions a small entity is
required to take to comply with a rule or group of rules. Copies of the
proposed rule, this final rule, and the small entity compliance guide
are available on the Alaska Region's website
[[Page 29790]]
at: <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/pacific-halibut-recreational-quota-entity-program-fee-collection">https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/pacific-halibut-recreational-quota-entity-program-fee-collection</a>.
List of Subjects
50 CFR Part 300
Administrative practice and procedure, Antarctica, Canada, Exports,
Fish Fisheries, Fishing, Imports, Indians, Labeling, Marine resources,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Russian Federation,
Transportation, Treaties, Wildlife.
50 CFR Part 679
Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 1, 2025.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR parts
300 and 679 as follows:
PART 300--INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS
Subpart E--Pacific Halibut Fisheries
0
1. The authority citation for part 300, subpart E, continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773-773k.
0
2. Amend Sec. 300.61 by:
0
a. Revising the definition of ``Charter halibut permit'';
0
b. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Charter halibut
stamp'' and Charter halibut stamp validation''; and
0
c. Revising the definitions of ``Charter vessel'' and ``Charter vessel
angler'' ``Charter vessel fishing trip,'' and ``Charter vessel guide''
to read as follows:
Sec. 300.61 Definitions.
* * * * *
Charter halibut permit means a permit issued by the National Marine
Fisheries Service pursuant to Sec. 300.67, and subject to requirements
in Sec. Sec. 300.65, 300.66, and 300.67, and 50 CFR 679.7(q), and
679.46.
Charter halibut permit holder (see Sec. 679.2 of this title).
Charter halibut stamp (see Sec. 679.2 of this title).
Charter halibut stamp validation (see Sec. 679.2 of this title).
Charter vessel, for purposes of Sec. Sec. 300.65, 300.66, and
300.67, and 50 CFR 679.7(q) and 679.46, means a vessel used while
providing or receiving sport fishing guide services for halibut, and,
for purposes of Sec. 300.63, means a vessel used for hire in
recreational (sport) fishing for Pacific halibut, but not including a
vessel without a hired operator.
Charter vessel angler, for purposes of Sec. Sec. 300.65, 300.66,
and 300.67, and 50 CFR 679.7(q) and 679.46, means a person, paying or
non-paying, receiving sport fishing guide services for halibut.
Charter vessel fishing trip, for purposes of Sec. Sec. 300.65,
300.66, and 300.67, and 50 CFR 679.7(q) and 679.46, means the time
period between the first deployment of fishing gear into the water from
a charter vessel by a charter vessel angler and the offloading of one
or more charter vessel anglers or any halibut from that vessel.
Charter vessel guide, for purposes of Sec. Sec. 300.65, 300.66,
and 300.67, and 50 CFR 679.7(q) and 679.46, means a person who holds an
annual sport fishing guide license or registration issued by the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game, or a person who provides sport fishing
guide services.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 300.65 by revising paragraphs (d)(1)(ii) and
(d)(4)(ii)(B) introductory text and adding paragraph (d)(4)(ii)(B)(11)
to read as follows:
Sec. 300.65 Catch sharing plan and domestic management measures in
waters in and off Alaska.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) The charter vessel guide is responsible for complying with the
reporting requirements of this paragraph (d) and 50 CFR 679.46. The
person whose business was assigned to an Alaska Department of Fish and
Game Saltwater Sport Fishing Charter Trip Logbook is responsible for
ensuring that the charter vessel guide complies with the reporting
requirements of this paragraph (d) and 50 CFR 679.46.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Charter vessel guide requirements. If halibut were caught and
retained in Commission regulatory area 2C or 3A, the charter vessel
guide must record the following information (see paragraphs
(d)(4)(ii)(B)(1) through (10) of this section and 50 CFR 679.46) in the
Alaska Department of Fish and Game Saltwater Sport Fishing Charter Trip
Logbook:
* * * * *
(11) Validation of charter halibut stamps. The charter vessel guide
is responsible for complying with the charter halibut stamp validation
requirements at 50 CFR 679.46 before the charter vessel fishing trip
begins, or prior to deployment of fishing gear on each calendar day of
a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 300.67 by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text and
(a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 300.67 Charter halibut limited access program.
* * * * *
(a) General permit requirements--(1) Requirements. In addition to
other applicable permit, licensing, or registration requirements, any
charter vessel guide of a charter vessel during a charter vessel
fishing trip with one or more charter vessel anglers catching and
retaining Pacific halibut on board must have on board the vessel an
original valid charter halibut permit or permits endorsed for the
regulatory area in which the charter vessel is operating and endorsed
for at least the number of charter vessel anglers who are catching and
retaining Pacific halibut. Each charter halibut permit holder must
ensure that the charter vessel operator and charter vessel guide of the
charter vessel comply with all requirements of Sec. Sec. 300.65 and
300.66, this section, and 50 CFR 679.46.
* * * * *
PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA
0
5. The authority citation for part 679 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.;
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.
0
6. Amend Sec. 679.2 by adding in alphabetical order the definitions of
``Charter halibut permit,'' ``Charter halibut permit holder,''
``Charter halibut stamp,'' ``Charter halibut stamp validation,''
``Charter vessel,'' ``Charter vessel angler,'' ``Charter vessel fishing
trip,'' ``Charter vessel guide,'' ``Community charter halibut permit,''
and ``Military charter halibut permit'' to read as follows:
Sec. 679.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Charter halibut permit (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title).
Charter halibut permit holder, for purposes of 50 CFR 300.67 of
this title and Sec. 679.46, means the person identified on a charter
halibut permit, community charter halibut permit, or military charter
halibut permit.
Charter halibut stamp means an electronic stamp that is required
for each charter vessel angler, 18 years of
[[Page 29791]]
age or older, for each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar
day, or each calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that
spans multiple days, that the charter vessel angler intends to catch
and retain halibut on a charter vessel in International Pacific Halibut
Commission (IPHC) regulatory area 2C or 3A, unless that charter vessel
angler retains halibut as Guided Angler Fish, as defined at 50 CFR
300.61 of this title, on days that are otherwise closed to halibut
retention by the annual management measures published pursuant to 50
CFR 300.62 of this title.
Charter halibut stamp validation means, with respect to the
Recreational Quota Entity Program fee collection, as described at 50
CFR 679.46, the charter vessel guide, as defined at 50 CFR 300.61 of
this title, recording the number of charter halibut stamps required for
each charter vessel fishing trip the charter vessel guide provides
sport fishing guide services, as defined at 50 CFR 300.61 of this
title, in the ADF&G Saltwater Sport Fishing Charter Trip Logbook that
is required by 50 CFR 300.65(d) of this title before the trip begins,
or prior to the first deployment of fishing gear on each calendar day
during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days.
Charter vessel (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title).
Charter vessel angler (see 50 CFR 300.61of this title).
Charter vessel fishing trip (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title).
Charter vessel guide (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title).
* * * * *
Community charter halibut permit (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title).
* * * * *
Military charter halibut permit (see 50 CFR 300.61 of this title)
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 679.4 by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(xv)(A) through (C)
to read as follows:
Sec. 679.4 Permits.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permit is in effect For more
If program permit or card from issue date information, see. .
type is: through the end of: .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(xv) Guided sport halibut
fishery permits:
(A) Charter halibut Until expiration 50 CFR 300.67 of
permit. date shown on this title and Sec.
permit. 679.46.
(B) Community charter Indefinite unless 50 CFR 300.67 of
halibut permit. invalidated under this title and Sec.
Sec. 679.46.
679.46(a)(1)(vi)(D).
(C) Military charter Indefinite unless 50 CFR 300.67 of
halibut permit. invalidated under this title and Sec.
Sec. 679.46.
679.46(a)(1)(vi)(D).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 679.7 by adding paragraph (q) to read as follows:
Sec. 679.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(q) Recreational Quota Entity Program. (1) Be a charter vessel
guide during a charter vessel fishing trip in IPHC regulatory area 2C
or 3A, unless:
(i) the charter vessel guide has completed a charter halibut stamp
validation for each charter vessel angler before the charter vessel
fishing trip began, or prior to first deployment of fishing gear on
each calendar day of a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple
days, as specified at Sec. 679.46(a)(1); or
(ii) one or more charter vessel anglers retains halibut as Guided
Angler Fish, as defined at 50 CFR 300.61 of this title, on days that
are otherwise closed to halibut retention by the annual management
measures published pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62 of this title.
(2) Be a charter halibut permit holder and fail to purchase a
number of charter halibut stamps equal to or greater than the number of
charter halibut stamp validations that were performed in a given
fishing year by the reconciliation deadline specified in Sec.
679.46(a)(1)(v).
0
9. Add Sec. 679.46 to read as follows:
Sec. 679.46 Recreational Quota Entity (RQE) Program fee collection.
(a) Fee collection--(1) Charter halibut stamp. A charter halibut
stamp is required for charter vessel anglers, 18 years of age or older,
for each charter vessel fishing trip in a given calendar day, or each
calendar day during a charter vessel fishing trip that spans multiple
days, that the charter vessel angler intends to catch and retain
halibut on a charter vessel in IPHC regulatory area 2C or 3A, unless
that charter vessel angler retains halibut as Guided Angler Fish, as
described at 50 CFR 300.65 of this title, on days that are otherwise
closed to halibut retention by the annual management measures published
pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62 of this title. This includes charter vessel
anglers on charter vessels operated under a charter halibut permit,
community charter halibut permit, or military charter halibut permit
issued pursuant to 50 CFR 300.67 of this title. A charter halibut
permit holder is responsible for purchasing the required number of
charter halibut stamps and for complying with all other requirements of
this section. The required number of charter halibut stamps is equal to
or greater than the number of charter halibut stamp validations (as
defined at Sec. 679.2) performed in a given fishing year for each
charter halibut permit, community charter halibut permit, or military
charter halibut permit.
(i) Validation of stamps. After determining the number of charter
halibut stamps required under this paragraph (a)(1), the charter vessel
guide must perform a charter halibut stamp validation as defined at
Sec. 679.2 before the charter vessel fishing trip begins, or prior to
first deployment of fishing gear on each calendar day of a charter
vessel fishing trip that spans multiple days.
(ii) Duration of validation. The charter halibut stamp that has
received a charter halibut stamp validation, as defined at Sec. 679.2,
is in effect from the time, A.l.t, that it is validated until 2400
hours, A.l.t., the same day. For the purposes of charter halibut stamp
validation, if a charter vessel fishing trip lasts more than one
calendar day, a charter halibut stamp is required for each charter
vessel angler for each calendar day of the charter vessel fishing trip
as specified at Sec. 679.46(a)(1).
(iii) Non-transferability. Charter halibut stamps are not
transferable. This includes:
(A) After charter halibut stamp validation for an individual
charter vessel angler, the charter halibut stamp may not be transferred
to or used by any other person.
[[Page 29792]]
(B) Charter halibut stamps may only be used for charter halibut
permits in a given NMFS-approved account and may not be transferred
between approved accounts.
(iv) Rollover. A charter halibut stamp that has been purchased and
has not received charter halibut permit validation does not expire.
Such charter halibut stamps may be validated in a future fishing year.
(v) Charter halibut stamp validation reconciliation. If, by 2400
A.l.t. on December 31 of a given fishing year, a charter halibut permit
holder, for one or more associated charter halibut permits in a NMFS-
approved account, has not purchased a number of charter halibut stamps
equal to or greater than the number of charter halibut stamps validated
under that account for that same fishing year, the Regional
Administrator will send a reconciliation notice to the charter halibut
permit holder. The reconciliation notice will state the validated
charter halibut stamp deficit, as determined by the number of charter
halibut stamps validated for that fishing year in excess of the number
of charter halibut stamps that have been purchased. A charter halibut
permit holder has 30 days from the date of the notice to either
purchase the outstanding number of validated stamps or demonstrate how
the reconciliation determination is in error.
(vi) Validated Charter halibut stamp deficit. If a charter halibut
permit holder does not purchase the outstanding number of validated
charter halibut stamps or demonstrate how the reconciliation
determination described in paragraph (a)(1)(v) of this section is
erroneous within 30 days as outlined in this paragraph (a)(1)(vi) of
this section, the Regional Administrator may:
(A) Issue an Initial Administrative Determination (IAD) upholding
the reconciliation determination;
(B) Disapprove any application to transfer the charter halibut
permit, associated charter halibut permits in a NMFS-approved account,
GAF, IFQ, or QS to or from the charter halibut permit holder until the
outstanding validated charter halibut stamps are purchased, except that
NMFS may return unused GAF to the IFQ holder's account from which it
was derived on or after the automatic GAF return date;
(C) Disapprove the annual registration application of the charter
halibut permit, and all associated charter halibut permits in a NMFS-
approved account, in accordance with 50 CFR 300.67(a) of this title,
until the outstanding validated charter halibut stamps are purchased;
and
(D) Invalidate the community charter halibut permit or military
charter halibut permit until the outstanding validated charter halibut
stamps associated with that permit are purchased.
(vii) Appeals. A charter halibut permit holder who receives an IAD
for a validated charter halibut stamp deficit may appeal the IAD
pursuant to 15 CFR part 906.
(2) [Reserved]
(b) Fee amount. (1) The fee for a charter halibut stamp is $20.
(2) The RQE may petition NMFS to increase or decrease the fee for a
charter halibut stamp beginning on January 1, 2028. The fee for the
charter halibut stamp may not increase by an amount more than 10
percent of the fee in the previous fishing year.
(3) The RQE may petition NMFS to suspend the fee at any time.
(c) Fee payment to NMFS--(1) Obtaining charter halibut stamps.
Charter halibut permit holders must obtain charter halibut stamps from
NMFS and pay applicable fees as specified at paragraph (a)(1) of this
section.
(2) Charter vessel guide responsibilities. Before each charter
vessel fishing trip begins, the charter vessel guide is responsible for
charter halibut stamp validation for each charter vessel angler as
specified at paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(3) Timing of charter halibut stamp reconciliation. Charter halibut
stamp reconciliation must occur as specified at paragraph (a)(1)(v) of
this section.
(d) RQE fee collection suspension. The Regional Administrator may
suspend the RQE fee collection indefinitely, or until such a time that
any identified RQE operational deficiencies are corrected, if:
(1) Through the issuance of an IAD and the opportunity to appeal
the IAD under 15 CFR part 906, the Regional Administrator determines
that the RQE is out of compliance with regulations in this title, the
RQE's own by-laws, or other applicable law;
(2) The Regional Administrator approves a petition by the RQE to
suspend the RQE fee collection; or
(3) Congress no longer provides authorization for the Secretary of
Commerce to collect and spend fees.
[FR Doc. 2025-12558 Filed 7-3-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 7, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.