Western Pacific Pelagic Fisheries; U.S. Territorial Catch and Fishing Effort Limits

AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:

Proposed rule; proposed specifications; request for comments.

SUMMARY:

NMFS seeks public comment on two proposed actions. First, NMFS proposes to establish a management framework for specifying catch and fishing effort limits and accountability measures for pelagic fisheries in the U.S. Pacific territories (American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands). The framework would authorize the government of each territory to allocate a portion of its catch or fishing effort limit to a U.S. fishing vessel or vessels through a specified fishing agreement, and establish the criteria that an agreement would need to satisfy. The proposed framework also includes accountability measures for adhering to catch and fishing effort limits to ensure sustainability.

Second, NMFS proposes an annual limit of 2,000 metric tons (mt) of longline-caught bigeye tuna for each territory, using the framework described in the proposed rule. NMFS would allow a territory to allocate up to 1,000 mt of the 2,000 mt each year to a U.S. longline fishing vessel or vessels in a specified fishing agreement that meets the established criteria. NMFS would monitor, attribute, and restrict catches of longline-caught bigeye tuna, including catches made under a specified fishing agreement, using the procedures and accountability measures described in the proposed rule. The longline bigeye tuna catch limit specifications would be effective in 2014.

NMFS also proposes to make technical administrative changes to certain international fisheries requirements under the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act, to make them consistent with this proposed rule.

NMFS intends the proposed rule and specifications to implement Section 113 of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriation Act of 2012, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act.

DATES:

In order to be considered, NMFS must receive any comments on the proposed rule and proposed specifications by February 24, 2014.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments on the proposed rule and proposed specifications, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2012-0178, by either of the following methods:

• Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2012-0178 , click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
• Mail: Send written comments to Michael D. Tosatto, Regional Administrator, NMFS Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814-4700.

Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous), and will accept attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

The proposed rule and proposed specifications would implement Amendment 7 to the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for Pelagic Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (Pelagics FEP). Amendment 7, which includes an environmental assessment and regulatory impact review, provides background information on the proposed rule and proposed specifications and is available from www.regulations.gov or the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, tel 808-522-8220, fax 808-522-8226, www.wpcouncil.org.

You may submit written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule to Michael D. Tosatto (see ADDRESSES) and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or fax to 202-395-7285.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Adam Bailey, NMFS PIR Sustainable Fisheries Division, 808-944-2248.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

NMFS and the Council manage the pelagic fisheries of American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), and Hawaii under the Pelagics FEP. Typically, the Council recommends conservation and management measures for NMFS to implement under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Certain pelagic fish stocks, including tunas, are also subject to conservation and management measures cooperatively agreed to by the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), an international regional fisheries management organization that has jurisdiction over fisheries harvesting highly migratory species in the western and central Pacific Ocean (WCPO, generally west of 150° W. longitude). Although NMFS often implements these decisions directly under the authority of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act, the Council may also recommend conservation and management measures applicable to the U.S. component of internationally-managed fisheries for implementation by NMFS under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

In 2008, the WCPFC adopted Conservation and Management Measure (CMM) 2008-01 “Conservation and Management Measure for Bigeye and Yellowfin Tuna in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean.” CMM 2008-01 established an annual bigeye tuna catch limit for U.S. longline fisheries operating in the WCPO, and separate longline bigeye tuna catch limits for the U.S. participating territories to the WCPFC, which are American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI. The U.S. bigeye tuna limit was 3,763 mt, which NMFS implemented in 2009, 2010 and 2011 (December 7, 2009, 74 FR 63999). This limit applied only to Hawaii- and U.S. West Coast-based longline fisheries that fished in the WCPO; the limit did not apply to longline fisheries of the U.S. participating territories. CMM 2008-01 also provided that WCPFC members and Participating Territories of the WCPFC that caught less than 2,000 mt of bigeye tuna in 2004 would be subject to an annual limit of 2,000 mt, except that Small Island Developing States and Participating Territories of the WCPFC undertaking responsible development of their fisheries would not be subject to individual annual limits for bigeye tuna. The three U.S. participating territories fell into this category.

The WCPFC extended the U.S. bigeye tuna limit for 2012 through CMM 2011-01 (August 27, 2012, 77 FR 51709), and for fishing year 2013 through CMM 2012-01 (September 23, 2013, 78 FR 58240). In addition, under CMM 2012-01, Small Island Developing States and Participating Territories of the WCPFC, including American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI, were not subject to individual longline limits for bigeye tuna for fishing year 2013. Subsequently, in December 2013, the WCPFC adopted a new tropical tuna conservation and management measure, which maintain the U.S. longline bigeye tuna catch limit of 3,763 mt for 2014, and reduces the limit to 3,554 mt in 2015 and 2016, and to 3,345 mt for 2017. CMM 2013-01 further provides that members that caught less than 2,000 mt of bigeye in 2004 are limited to no more than 2,000 mt in each of 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017. However, this limit does not apply to Small Island Developing States and Participating Territories of the WCPFC. Consistent with previous WCPFC measures, the U.S. participating territories are not subject to individual longline limits for bigeye tuna under CMM 2013-01.

There are two Hawaii longline fisheries: The deep-set fishery that targets bigeye tuna, and the shallow-set fishery that targets swordfish, but also retains other pelagic management unit species (MUS), including bigeye tuna. Therefore, the U.S. bigeye tuna limit applies to both fisheries. NMFS monitors the longline catch and, when NMFS projects the fisheries will reach the U.S. bigeye tuna limit, NMFS prohibits the retention, transshipment, or landing of bigeye tuna by Hawaii longline vessels in the WCPO through the remainder of the year. NMFS restricted the fisheries in this way in 2009 and 2010.

In 2011, Congress passed Public Law 112-55, 125 Stat. 552 et seq., the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (CFCAA), 2012. Section 113 of the CFCAA authorized the U.S. participating territories to use, assign, allocate, and manage catch or fishing effort limits agreed to by the WCPFC through fishing agreements with U.S. fishing vessels to support fisheries development in the territories, and directed NMFS to attribute pelagic MUS catches made by such vessels to the U.S. participating territory to which the agreement applies. In 2011, NMFS forecasted that the U.S. bigeye catch limit of 3,763 mt would be reached on November 17, 2011. Under the authority of Section 113, the government of American Samoa entered into a fishing agreement with certain Hawaii longline fishing vessels for 2011 and 2012. From November 18 through December 31, 2011, NMFS attributed to American Samoa 628 mt of bigeye tuna caught by those vessels. Because of the Section 113 agreement, the U.S. bigeye tuna limit was not reached, and Hawaii longline vessels that were not part of that agreement continued to catch bigeye tuna in the WCPO under the remaining amount of the U.S. bigeye tuna limit.

In 2012, NMFS forecasted that the U.S. bigeye tuna catch limit of 3,763 mt would be reached on November 27, 2012. In accordance with NMFS regulations at 50 CFR 300.224, from November 20, 2012, through December 31, 2012, NMFS attributed to American Samoa 771 mt of bigeye tuna caught by Hawaii longline vessels in the American Samoa fishing agreement. Consequently, the U.S. bigeye tuna limit was not reached, and Hawaii longline vessels that were not part of that agreement continued to catch bigeye tuna in the WCPO under the remaining amount of the U.S. bigeye tuna limit. In both 2011 and 2012, the United States did not exceed its bigeye tuna limit of 3,763 mt, and the amount of bigeye tuna caught by Hawaii-based longline vessels and attributed to American Samoa was less than 1,000 mt each year.

In 2013, Congress extended the Section 113 provisions through Public Law 113-6, 125 Stat. 603, Section 110, the Department of Commerce Appropriations Act. For 2013, the government of the CNMI entered into a Section 113 agreement with certain Hawaii longline vessels. On December 5, 2013, in accordance with NMFS regulations at 50 CFR 300.224, NMFS began attributing to the CNMI bigeye tuna catches made by vessels identified in the agreement. The attribution is expected to continue through the end of 2013. NMFS does not expect the 2013 U.S. bigeye tuna limit of 3,763 mt to be reached.

Proposed Rule

As provided in Section 113 of the CFCAA, and based on recommendations from the Council, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, this proposed rule would implement the following:

• Establish a framework consistent with WPCFC conservation and management measures for specifying catch or fishing effort limits and accountability measures for pelagic fisheries in the U.S. participating territories, which are American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands;
• Authorize each U.S. participating territory to enter into specified fishing agreements with U.S. fishing vessels permitted under the Pelagic FEP, and allocate to those vessels a specified portion of a territory's catch or fishing effort limit, as determined by NMFS and the Council;
• Establish the criteria that specified fishing agreements must satisfy, and the procedures for reviewing agreements; and
• Establish accountability measures for attributing and restricting catch and fishing effort toward specified limits, including catches and fishing effort made by vessels in the agreements.

Under the proposed rule, the Council would review existing and proposed catch or fishing effort limit specifications and the portion available for allocation at least annually to ensure consistency with the Pelagics FEP, Magnuson-Stevens Act, WCPFC decisions, and other applicable laws. Based on this review, at least annually, the Council would recommend to NMFS whether such catch or fishing effort limit specification or the portion available for allocation should be approved for the next fishing year. NMFS would review any Council recommendation and, if determined to be consistent with the Pelagics FEP, Magnuson-Stevens Act, WCPFC decisions and other applicable laws, would approve such recommendation. If NMFS determines that a recommendation is inconsistent with the Pelagics FEP, Magnuson-Stevens Act, WCPFC decisions and other applicable laws, NMFS would disapprove the recommendation and provide the Council with a written explanation of the reasons. If a catch or fishing effort limit specification or allocation limit is disapproved, or if the Council recommends and NMFS approves no catch or fishing effort limit specification or allocation limit, then no specified fishing agreements would be accepted for the fishing year covered by such action.

Proposed Specifications

In addition to the proposed framework process, NMFS also proposes to apply that process to specify a longline bigeye tuna catch limit of 2,000 mt for each U.S. participating territory. The current WCPFC Conservation and Management Measure for tropical tuna stocks (CMM 2013-01), adopted in December 2013, limits members that harvested less than 2,000 mt of bigeye in 2004 to no more than 2,000 mt for each of the years 2014 through 2017. However, paragraph 7 of CMM 2013-01 does not establish an individual limit on the amount of bigeye tuna that may be harvested annually in the WCPFC Convention Area by Small Island Developing States and Participating Territories of the WCPFC, including American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI. NMFS and the Council, however, believe it is important that the paragraph 7 exemption not apply to U.S. participating territories, since bigeye tuna is currently subject to overfishing. Therefore, NMFS proposes to establish 2,000-mt limits for the U.S. participating territories. These limits, in conjunction with the 1,000-mt limits that may be allocated under specified fishing agreements (see below), will help ensure stock sustainability under the proposed action.

NMFS would specify that each U.S. participating territory may allocate up to 1,000 mt of its 2,000-mt bigeye tuna limit to a U.S. longline fishing vessel or vessels based in another U.S. participating territory or Hawaii, and identified in a specified fishing agreement. For U.S. fishing vessels identified in a valid specified fishing agreement that are subject to the U.S. bigeye tuna limit and fishing restrictions set forth in 50 CFR 300 Subpart O, NMFS would attribute catch made by such vessels to the applicable territory. The attribution would begin seven days before the date that NMFS projects the limit to be reached, or upon the effective date of the agreement, whichever is later. The effective date is the date upon which NMFS provides written notice to the authorized official or designated representative that the specified fishing agreement meets the requirements of this rule.

For all other U.S. fishing vessels identified in a valid specified fishing agreement, NMFS would attribute catch made by such vessels to the applicable territory beginning seven days before the date NMFS determines the limit is projected to be reached, or upon the effective date of the agreement, whichever is later. NMFS would monitor and restrict, as appropriate, catches of longline-caught bigeye tuna, including catches made under a specified fishing agreement, using the accountability measures described in the proposed rule. The longline bigeye tuna catch limit specifications would be effective for the 2014 fishing year, which is scheduled to begin on January 1, 2014.

In addition to seeking public comments on this proposed rule and associated proposed specifications, NMFS is soliciting comments on proposed Amendment 7 to the Pelagics FEP, as stated in the Notice of Availability published on December 30, 2013 (78 FR 79388). NMFS must receive comments on Amendment 7 by February 28, 2014. The Secretary of Commerce will consider public comments on this proposed rule and proposed specifications in the decision to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 7.

Classification

Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that the proposed action is consistent with the Pelagics FEP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.

Executive Order 12866

This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Chief Council for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Council for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed action, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. A description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal basis for this action are contained in the preamble to this proposed rule.

In 2011, the U.S. Congress passed Public Law 112-55, 125 Stat. 552 et seq., the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act (CFCAA), 2012. Section 113 of the CFCAA allows the U.S. participating territories (i.e., American Samoa, Guam, and the CNMI) of the WCPFC to use, assign, allocate, and manage catch limits of highly migratory fish stocks, or fishing effort limits agreed to by the WCPFC through fishing agreements with fishing vessels of the United States for the purpose of supporting fisheries development in those territories. Section 113 also authorizes NMFS to attribute catches made by such vessels to the U.S. participating territory to which the agreement applies. Section 113, as extended through the end of 2013 by Public Law 113-6, 125 Stat. 603, Section 110, the Department of Commerce Appropriations Act, also directed the Council to amend the Pelagics FEP to implement these provisions under the plan. The proposed action intends to implement Section 113 of the CFCAA through Amendment 7 to the Pelagics FEP, consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

This proposed action would directly apply to vessels federally permitted under the Pelagics FEP, specifically Hawaii longline limited entry, American Samoa longline limited entry, Western Pacific general longline, Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA) troll and handline, and Western Pacific Pelagic squid jig permit holders. As of August 2013, 131 vessels possessed Hawaii longline limited entry permits (out of 164 total permits), 47 possessed American Samoa longline limited entry permits (out of 60 total permits), no vessels held Western Pacific general longline permits, five vessels held Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA) troll and handline permits, and one held a Western Pacific pelagic squid jig permit. Among the American Samoa and Hawaii longline vessels with limited entry permits in August 2013, 16 held both American Samoa and Hawaii longline limited entry permits (dual permit holders).

According to landings information provided in the environmental assessment in support of this action and logbook information, Hawaii-based longline vessels landed approximately 25,866,000 lb of pelagic fish valued at $94,901,000 in 2012 (see Tables 7 and 8 of Amendment 7). These vessels made 1,437 trips, caught 159,787 bigeye tuna, and kept 157,502, along with other pelagic fish. With 129 vessels making either a deep- or shallow-set trip that year, the ex-vessel value of pelagic fish caught by Hawaii-based longline fisheries averaged about $736,000 per vessel. In 2012, 25 American Samoa longline vessels turned in logbooks reporting the landing of 255,686 pelagic fish valued at $9,793,153, of which almost $7.7 million came from albacore tuna landings. With 25 active longline vessels, the ex-vessel value of pelagic fish caught by the American Samoa longline fishery averaged about $391,720 per vessel.

With respect to non-longline pelagic fisheries, NMFS requires federal permits only for pelagic troll and handline vessels fishing in the PRIA and squid jig vessels. Assuming average landings of pelagic species by all pelagic troll and handline vessels in the western Pacific reflect landings made by those vessels possessing PRIA troll and handline permits, annual revenues earned from landings of pelagic species are not expected to exceed $10,000 for a typical vessel. Information on catch or revenue from the one federally permitted squid jig vessel is considered confidential and cannot be publicly reported.

On June 20, 2013, the Small Business Administration (SBA) issued a final rule revising the small business size standards for several industries effective July 22, 2013 (78 FR 37398). The rule increased the size standard for Finfish Fishing from $4.0 to 19.0 million, Shellfish Fishing from $4.0 to 5.0 million, and Other Marine Fishing from $4.0 to 7.0 million. Based on available information, NMFS has determined that all vessels federally permitted under Pelagics FEP are small entities under the SBA definition of a small entity, i.e., they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, are independently owned or operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $19 million. Therefore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities. Furthermore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts among the universe of vessels based on gear, home port, or vessel length.

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NMFS has reviewed the analyses prepared for this action in light of the new size standards. Under the former, lower size standards, all vessels subject to this action were considered small entities, and they all would continue to be considered small under the new standards. NMFS does not think that the new size standards affect analyses prepared for this action and solicits public comments on the analyses in light of the new size standards.

Even though this proposed action would apply to a substantial number of vessels, the implementation of this action would not result in significant adverse economic impact to individual vessels. While the proposed framework would potentially apply to any highly migratory species under the Pelagics FEP that is subject to annual catch or fishing effort limits in the WCPO, in recent years, bigeye tuna has been the only species subject to these limits. Therefore, the discussion on impacts will center on bigeye tuna catch and longline fisheries.

The proposed action would potentially benefit Hawaii-based longline fishery participants, including dual permit holders that possess an American Samoa and Hawaii longline limited entry permit. The benefits to these vessels come through allowing the territorial fishing agreements, similar to those authorized under Section 113, to continue under the Pelagics FEP. In 2011 and 2012, American Samoa entered into a Section 113 agreement with almost all Hawaii longline fishery participants, under a framework that was similar to that proposed here. In both years, NMFS projected that the U.S. bigeye tuna limit of 3,763 mt would be reached in mid to late November. Within seven days of the date that NMFS projected the fishery would reach the U.S. bigeye tuna limit, NMFS began attributing to American Samoa, bigeye tuna catches made by longline vessels identified in the Section 113 agreement. Under regulations at 50 CFR 300 Subpart O, vessels that possess both Hawaii and American Samoa limited entry permits are allowed to land bigeye tuna in Hawaii that was caught outside the U.S. EEZ around Hawaii, after the date that the U.S. bigeye tuna limit is projected to be reached. However, under the Section 113 agreement with American Samoa, these vessels are also allowed to land bigeye tuna in Hawaii that was caught inside the U.S. EEZ around Hawaii after the projection date. The 2011 and 2012 fishing agreement with American Samoa allowed the Hawaii-based longline fishery to land 628 mt and 771 mt of bigeye tuna, respectively, after the date NMFS projected the U.S. bigeye tuna limit would be reached.

For fishing year 2013, the CNMI entered into a Section 113 agreement with certain Hawaii longline fishery participants. NMFS projected that the U.S. bigeye tuna limit of 3,763 mt would be reached in early December, and on December 5, 2013, began attributing to the CNMI bigeye tuna catches made by vessels identified in the Section 113 agreement. The attribution will continue through the end of December 2013.

Based on catch and fishing effort under the 2011 and 2012 fishing agreement, it is likely that under the proposed action, less than 1,000 mt of bigeye tuna would be harvested by Hawaii vessels identified in a specified fishing agreement for 2014. Providing opportunity to land bigeye tuna in Hawaii in the last quarter of the year when market demand is significant will result in positive economic benefits for fishery participants and net benefits to the nation. In terms of the impacts of reducing the limits of bigeye tuna catch by longline vessels based in the territories from an unlimited amount to 2,000 mt, this is not likely to adversely affect vessels based in the territories.

Historical catch of bigeye tuna attributed to American Samoa has been less than 2,000 mt, even when including catch by vessels based in American Samoa, catch attributed by U.S. vessels (in 2011 and 2012), and dual permitted vessels. There appears to have been little, if any, catch of bigeye tuna by longline vessels in Guam or CNMI in recent years.

Under the proposed action, longline fisheries managed under the Pelagics FEP are not expected to expand substantially nor change the manner in which they are currently conducted, (i.e., area fished, number of vessels longline fishing, number of trips taken per year, number of hooks set per vessel during a trip, depth of hooks, or deployment techniques in setting longline gear), due to existing operational constraints in the fleet, the limited entry permit programs, and protected species mitigation requirements. The likely scenario under the proposed action is expected to result fishing similar to what occurred in 2011 and 2012 under Section 113 fishing agreements.

The proposed rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules and is not expected to have significant impact on small entities (as discussed above), organizations or government jurisdictions. There does not appear to be disproportionate economic impacts from the proposed rule based on home port, gear type, or relative vessel size. The proposed rule also will not place a substantial number of small entities, or any segment of small entities, at a significant competitive disadvantage to large entities.

For the reasons above, NMFS does not expect the proposed action to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval. The public reporting burden for a specified fishing agreement is estimated to average six hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. NMFS expects to receive up to nine applications for specified fishing agreements each year, for a total maximum reporting burden of 54 hours per year.

Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information to Michael D. Tosatto (see ADDRESSES), and by email to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov or by fax to 202-395-7285.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 300

• Administrative practice and procedure
• Fish
• Fisheries
• Fishing
• Marine resources
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
• Treaties

50 CFR Part 665

• Administrative practice and procedure
• American Samoa
• Commercial fishing
• Fisheries
• Guam
• Hawaii
• Northern Mariana Islands
• Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission

For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR parts 300 and 665 as follows:

PART 300—INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS

1. The authority citation for part 300 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.

2. In § 300.224, remove paragraph (g) and revise paragraphs (d) and (f)(1)(iv) to read as follows:

PART 665—FISHERIES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC

3. The authority citation for part 665 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

4. In § 665.800, add new definitions of “Effective date,” “U.S. participating territory,” and “WCPFC” in alphabetical order to read as follows:

5. In § 665.802, add paragraph (o) to read as follows:

6. Add § 665.819 to subpart F to read as follows: