This fishery consists primarily of the use of hook and line, gillnet, and beach seine gear. No fisheryspecific exploitation rate is defined for this fishery. Instead, management relies on a stepped fishing schedule based on an inseason assessment of natural escapement. During each season, the escapement of both coho and summer chum salmon shall be assessed on a weekly basis, from the last week in the month of August through the first week in October. On or about September 10, an assessment of the natural summer chum escapement shall be made. If the escapement is projected to be below 1,500 then Gillnet gear will not be permited. One day per week of fishing with the use of gillnet gear is allowed for escapements between 1,500 and 2,500. If the escapement is projected to exceed 2,500 , a decision will be made whether one or more additional days per week of gillnet 8 fishing is necessary to provide sufficient opportunity to harvest returning coho salmon. This schedule regulates only the use of gillnet gear. Regulation of selective gears such as beach seine, dip nets and hook and line are described in Tables 3.29 3.32.

Southeast Hood Canal Fishery: Under the BCR, during the time that summer chum are present, area 12D is closed to commercial fishing and requires release of chum when using hook and line gear. During the 1974 1998 period, when fisheries for chinook and coho salmon occurred in the Hood Canal mainstem, the average summer chum exploitation rate on the Area 12D Management Unit was Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 315 40.9% ( range = 0.2 73.5%) ( Table 3.27). Under this regime, the extreme terminal fishery in Southeast Hood Canal is expected to have no effect on Hood Canal summer chum ( i. e. near zero exploitation rate). If exploitation rates deviate from this the co managers will take corrective management actions.

Freshwater Fisheries: Impacts on summer chum in these areas have been minimal in recent years. Under this regime, impacts to summer chum will continue to be minimized through the use of selective gear, chum non retention regulations, and area closures.

<IP_ADDRESS> Harvest Regime Modification In any given year, the BCR will be applied except where additional harvest management measures are needed to respond to a critical situation affecting a management unit or stock, or where recovery of the populations merits a liberalization of harvest meaures.

Critical Response If a management unit should fall below its Critical Abundance or Critical Escapement threshold in the previous year, is forecast to fall below these thresholds in the upcoming year, falls below the thresholds in the parent brood years: OR if a stock fails to meet its Critical Escapement Distribution Flag or Minimum Escapement Flag in the previous return year, as provided in section 1.7.3 and Tables 1.9 and 1.10, the co managers will investigate any additional harvest management measures, as provided for in section 3.6.1, which may be necessary to assist in restoring the management unit or stock to non critical status. If there are modifications to the BCR, they will be referred to as the Critical harvest response.

Recovered Response The goal for recovered status for summer chum salmon is to achieve self sustaining, harvestable run sizes on a regular basis. This will provide the fishery managers greater management flexibility and will allow them to relax restrictions imposed in the BCR, including expanded fishing opportunity for other species and in some cases directed harvest for summer chum.

Given current levels of escapement and run size, recovery is not expected to occur for a number of years. In addition, the existing stock assessment data are limited, making it difficult to determine with reasonable surety when recovery is achieved. Because of these current data limitations and the extended time frame that will be required to achieve recovered status, this plan does not at this time include specific population recovery goals. However, the co managers are in the process of developing interim recovery goals which will likely be added to the plan as an addendum during 2000. All state and tribal fisheries will operate in compliance with the BCR, and with any modifications made in response to detecting critical status for one or more management units or stocks, until such time as the co managers have determined how to incorporate the population recovery goals into the management structure and will discuss what terms of the existing plan will continue. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 316 <IP_ADDRESS> Fishery Performance Standards By achieving the fishery performance standards described in this plan, the harvest element of this plan will contribute to the stability and recovery of the HC SJF summer chum. To fully meet these standards, assessments must be performed with a high degree of confidence. Evaluation each year will assess compliance with the regulations and management strategy described above, effectiveness of the implementation of that strategy and whether the data demonstrates that the assumptions made in developing the plan were reasonable and supported by field data. The following performance standards will be used to assess whether the harvest management strategy is being successfully implemented. In addition to these harvest management performance standards, population performance standards are provided in section 3.6.4, upon which this entire recovery plan will be evaluated and modified, as appropriate.

Compliance 1. Regulations were adopted consistent with the management actions described in Tables 3.29  3.34 or as modified per section <IP_ADDRESS>.

2. Enforcement patrols indicate a high level of compliance with regulations adopted consistent with this plan. For example, weekly or daily reports indicate no fishing occurring inside stream mouth closures.

Exploitation Rates Exploitation rates must have been within the identified range in any year. At the time of plan review, the expected rates must be within the established range and are not clustered toward either extreme of the range ( see Table 3.35).

Preseason Forecasts 1. Annual run size forecasts are a component of our performance standards for harvest regime assessment and modification, and efforts should be made to ensure they are as precise and accurate as possible. Forecasts should be accurate and precise enough to ensure that the correct management regime is applied 80% of the time.

2. Forecasts of abundance should be unbiased relative to the post season estimates. Any identified bias will be corrected or management actions adjusted to account for it, unless it is shown not to effect achievement of exploitation rates, escapement or abundance management targets.

3.5.7 Implementation Efficient and effective plan implementation requires the tasks and process for review to be clearly described. This section describes the annual plan implementation, defines the responsible agencies for specific stock assessment, harvest management planning, regulations and tasks, and includes a schedule for annual plan implementation, review and evaluation. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 317 Figure 3.19. Comparison of proposed Hood Canal terminal exploitation rate with observed rates in 1989 1998. <IP_ADDRESS> Annual Plan Implementation The following are the tasks required for annual implementation of the harvest plan. The comanagers shall:

1. Develop preliminary estimates and analyses of escapement, catch and catch distribution, recruit abundance ( run reconstruction), and exploitation rates for the previous year's summer chum return. These estimates should be made by fishery aggregate, management unit and stock, as appropriate, no later than January 15 of each year. When age composition information becomes available, it will be provided along with estimates of brood survival, when sufficient age data exists to make these estimates.

2. Evaluate the exploitation rates in each of the three fishery aggregates to evaluate whether any of them has exceeded its expected exploitation rate range for that fishery. For the Quilcene/ Dabob Management Unit this would involve an assessment of whether the escapement corresponding to the stepped fishery regime had been met or exceeded. If, for whatever reasons, these management objectives were not met, the Parties will identify the causes for the deviation and take such harvest management measures necessary to maintain exploitation rate( s) within the expected range( s). When this involves the conduct of intercepting fisheries in Canadian areas, the co managers shall work in cooperation with the members of the PSC , beginning with the January PSC meeting, to take the necessary harvest management measures to bring that fishery back within the expected range.

3. Complete preseason forecasts for each management unit by February 15 of each year and note whether any management unit's recruitment is projected to fall below its Critical Threshold, and those management units where the parental broods were below the Critical Threshold. In those cases, the co managers will implement any additional necessary harvest management measures as described in section 3.6.1. In preparing preseason forecasts, managers will use conservative methods. For example, until age data are available on which to make recruit/ spawner estimates, no forecasted returns from parent broods which fell below their Critical Thresholds may exceed a recruit/ spawner ratio of 1.2. Similar management considerations will be defined for abundances above the Recovered Thresholds as those are developed. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 318 Figure 3.18. Comparison of Hood Canal coho abundance with HC SJF summer chum terminal exploitation rates. 4. Review by March 1 the pre season forecasts for the current year, and the analysis of escapements and management performance of the previous year ( post season review), and parental brood escapements. Based on this information, the co managers shall determine the appropriate fishing regime for the upcoming year. The management recommendations shall include any appropriate regime adjustments as well as regime modifications from the latest Five Year Review Report.

5. Adopt by April 15, an annual harvest management regime, as modified in number 4 above, in accordance with the procedures defined in the Puget Sound Salmon Management Plan ( PSSMP) and through those forums involved with management of fisheries impacting HC SJF summer chum such as the North of Falcon and Pacific Fisheries Management Council forums.

6. Finalize by May 31 details of monitoring, supplementation, and information gathering programs for the subsequent season, in cooperation with, and as appropriate, with the assistance of all Parties, using the procedures and requirements of this plan, as well as the PSSMP and Hood Canal Salmon Management Plan.

7. Coordinate and communicate with the NMFS during the conduct of the above activities to confirm that the regime will meet the requirements of this plan and satisfy NMFS' ESA obligations. The Parties will share documentation and data used in development and evaluation of the annual harvest regime. This should occur prior to May 31. As necessary, the co managers will request assistance from NMFS and USFWS in carrying out the tasks described above.

8. Conduct inseason management activities relating to management, regulation filing and enforcement in accordance with the PSSMP and other relevant orders of the U. S. District Court.

3.5.8 Expected Regime Effects on Recovery The harvest management strategies described in this section are expected to result in significant reductions from total exploitation rates on HC SJF summer chum observed in the period from the 1975 to 1992 which were the result of fisheries targeted at other species ( Figure 3.14). This plan changes that by establishing annual fishing regimes for Canadian, Washington pre terminal, and Washington terminal area fisheries, designed to minimize incidental impacts to summer chum salmon, while providing opportunity for fisheries conducted for the harvest of other species ( Figures 3.18 and 3.19). The expected reduction in incidental interceptions, relative to the high rates observed during previous years is approximately 78% for Canadian fisheries ( 1989 92), 65% for U. S. pre terminal ( 1976 93, odd years only), and 92% for Washington terminal area fisheries ( 1975; 1977 87; 1989 90). The BCR is based on a series of management measures, which Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 319 Figure 3.20. Simulated escapements of Hood Canal summer chum salmon with varying exploitation rates for the years 1978 1994. are expected to effectively and substantially reduce incidental impacts, in order to conserve, and not appreciably reduce the likelihood of survival and recovery of this HC SJF summer chum in the wild.

At present, given the limited data on summer chum productivity, it is not possible to construct a regime based on more technically sophisticated objectives such as MSY. The combination of specific management actions and fishery specific exploitation rate targets comprising the BCR is based on a conservative integration of the existing data and management experience. However, the plan is designed to be responsive to feedback mechanisms, in order to provide for adaptive management towards meeting the goals of protection of summer chum, while maintaining harvest opportunities. The regime has built in adaptive response mechanisms to respond to a management unit not meeting a critical abundance threshold, or an individual stock not meeting its escapement distribution flag ( see <IP_ADDRESS>).

The BCR has been constructed using a conservative approach that would pass through to spawning escapement on average, in excess of 95% of the HC SJF summer chum recruitment to U. S. waters, and nearly 90% of the total recruitment of the run of each management unit. At the exploitation rates provided for in this harvest strategy, spawner replacement would be assured in each subsequent generation, if the average recruits per spawner ratio was at least 1.2: 1 ( replacement with an approximately 15% exploitation rate, the upper end of the BCR exploitation rate range). At this very restrictive maximum exploitation rate, harvest exerts very little effect on recovery of the populations. At recruits per spawner of less than 1.0, the population will decline regardless of harvest. At recruits per spawner greater than 1.2, the populations will increase regardless of harvest.

While the conservation regime is in place, forecasts for individual management units will be constrained by the assumption that the recruit/ spawner ratio from parental brood escapements below the Critical Threshold, is no greater than 1.2: 1. This constrains the forecast to be within the assumptions used in the development of the BCR, minimizes the effects of forecast and modeling error, and ensures that the regime remains conservative until predictions of sufficient abundance are confirmed. If average recruitment rates were found to be lower than this value, it would be an indication of severe productivity and productive capacity problems which cannot be remedied through harvest management actions.

Another way to look at the effect of the expected exploitation rates is through a simulation of what might have happened to summer chum populations and spawning escapement if these rates had been in effect in past years. While we do not have adequate age data from all years to allow estimation of the actual productivities that occurred in past years, we can use age data for the years they exist and the average age for all other years to create a set of productivities that can be used in a simulation for illustration purposes. Figure 3.20 shows the results of such a Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 320 simulation. Starting with a given year's abundance, different exploitation rates are applied resulting in varying escapement levels. The simulated productivities are applied to these new escapements to arrive at new recruit abundances, and the process is repeated. The actual exploitation rate ( ER) escapement is derived using the same simulation approach, but with the actual observed exploitation rates applied instead of a constant exploitation rate. What this set of simulations demonstrate is that, at the exploitation rates expected through this plan's harvest strategy ( 10.9% average; 15.3% maximum), there is very little difference in the realized adult spawning escapement whether these limited exploitation rates are applied or there is no harvest at all. Also, significantly, there is essentially no difference in the frequency of escapements below the critical abundance levels.

3.5.9 Compliance and Enforcement In the context of this recovery plan, " compliance" is intended to mean adherence, by each of the parties, to the guidelines, mandates and performance standards of the plan, including adoption of any necessary rules to implement their responsibilities under the plan.

Compliance certainty shall be assured through the application of U. S. v Washington rules and procedures.

The annual and five year review processes, described in section <IP_ADDRESS> and sections 3.6.2 and 3.6.3, respectively, shall include a review of the level of compliance by each of the parties, and recommendations may be made as necessary for improvements in the level of compliance, to ensure the successful implementation of the plan.

In the context of this recovery plan, " enforcement" shall mean the efforts and means of each party to implement the guidelines, measures and standards of this plan, including the enforcement of rules and regulations adopted to implement the guidelines, measures and standards.

Guidelines and actions are generally detailed in the harvest BCR ( Tables 3.29 3.34). Parties responsible for implementation of the BCR include the co managers, and for international and ocean fisheries, NMFS.

For fisheries outlined in the BCR, the co managers and NMFS shall ensure that, at least, current levels of fishery monitoring and on the water enforcement of fishing regulations shall be maintained. Additional monitoring may be necessary, however, its implementation may depend on the availability of sufficient funds.

The co managers' and federal court systems are currently sufficient to ensure that enforcement is followed through with appropriate prosecution of violators. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 321 3.5.10 Harvest Management Monitoring and Assessment Specific, integrated monitoring programs shall be established to improve stock assessment methodologies as well as effectiveness of harvest management actions and objectives. These programs should include, at least:

1. consistent escapement monitoring methods; 2. identification and quantification of harvest contributions; 3. assessment of survival rates to recruitment by age; and 4. assessment of stock productivity and productive capacity.

The first two are critical to implementation of the plan, at its initial phase. The third and fourth are necessary to provide information that would allow managers to tailor harvest, supplementation, and habitat planning guidelines and actions, to the extent necessary to determine with acceptable accuracy the necessary steps, time horizon and likelihood of restoration. The fourth monitoring provision will also allow managers to better define survival parameters, thus, allowing us to better define recovery; what can be sustained over the long term, and how to maximize benefits by stabilizing the HC SJF summer chum resource. This information will also be essential to the integration and effectiveness of habitat and harvest management strategies by keying production to current estimates of habitat capacity and productivity. Current survey and monitoring programs are limited to quantitative monitoring of escapement and harvest. The others are included under research needs. As funding becomes available, monitoring must be expanded to include them.

Escapement and harvest monitoring form the core elements of the monitoring program. These programs are stable and will continue at or above current levels. Although information gained from the other suggested monitoring activities would improve management, the funding and resources to implement them is not currently available. The co managers, therefore, have designed the management actions in this plan to provide sufficient protection for summer chum populations without them. The co managers commit to maintain programs identified as core elements of the monitoring program at or above current levels, and recognize that additional monitoring programs are important over the long term and funding will be sought to support them.

Escapement Spawning ground surveys will be conducted in established index areas from mid August through late October in systems comprising the known spawning distribution of current HC SJF summer chum populations. In addition to spawner counts, carcasses will be sampled for marks and scales or otoliths will be taken to determine age structure where possible. At a minimum, monitoring will be maintained at current levels ( Appendix Report 1.1 and Table 3.36). Currently spawning ground surveys cover 90% or more of the temporal and spatial distribution of summer chum. Additional surveys are conducted in less utilized areas. These surveys will occur at 7 10 day intervals to maintain the current level of sampling, unless weather or water conditions interfere. This level of sampling has been determined to be necessary to provide reliable escapement and spawn timing estimation. Surveys shall be expanded as necessary to refine or develop additional standards for determining the present and future abundance status of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum. Spot surveys will be continued each year in extirpated systems to assess potential natural straying. These programs will evolve into standard surveys as re introduction programs come on line. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 322 Table 3.36. Spawning survey index reaches for summer chum in Hood Canal and the eastern Strait of Juan De Fuca1 WRIA Stream name WRIA river Comments miles 15.0389 Big Beef Cr. 0.0 1.7 Fixed rack passage  operated late summer to late fall.

15.0412 Anderson Cr. 0.0 1.0 15.0420 Dewatto R. 0.3 1.8 15.0446 Tahuya R. 0.0 2.6 15.0495 Big Mission Cr. 0.0 1.6 Early fall run ( peaks late Oct., early Nov.).

15.0503 Union R. 0.3 2.1 16.0001 Skokomish R 9.0 13.3 Summer chum data collected incidentally during chinook ( mainstem and SF) surveys.

16.0230 Lilliwaup R. 0.0 0.7 16.0251 Hamma Hamma R. 0.3 1.8 16.0253 John Cr. 0.0 1.6 16.0351 Duckabush R. 0.0 2.3 16.0442 Dosewallips R. 0.02.3 17.0012 Big Quilcene R. 0.0 2.8 17.0076 Little Quilcene R. 0.0 1.8 17.0219 Snow Cr. 0.0 1.5 17.0245 Salmon Cr. 0.0 0.8 Includes rack counts.

17.0285 Jimmycomelately Cr. 0.0 1.5 18.0018 Dungeness R. 0.0 18.9 Pink and chinook surveys.

18 0048 Greywolf R. 0.0 5.1 Surveys conducted late August to late October. On all streams except the Strait of Juan de Fuca tributaries directed 1 chum survey effort is continued into the fall chum run period.

Fishery Sampling Canadian Commercial Fisheries ( July through September)

The co managers will work with the Pacific Salmon Commission and Canadian Department of Fish and Oceans to implement monitoring programs to collect data on landed catch, species and stock composition, biological traits ( sex, age, size), encounter rates and non landed mortality of chum caught in fisheries in at least Canadian Areas 18, 19, 20 and 29 during the July through September time period.

Washington Pre terminal Commercial Fisheries ( July through mid September)

1. Landed catch ticket information will be the primary source for catch and species composition data from chinook, coho, sockeye and pink fisheries. Shore based sampling, will be included as part of catch sampling to verify fish ticket information. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 323 2. In fisheries utilizing non retention strategies, data will be collected on the number of encounters and species composition. Monitoring will include logbooks and on the water observation of encounters and releases.

3. A target of 200 chum per stratum will be sampled for biological data such as sex, size, and age structure both as a component of the catch sampling and as part of genetic stock identification ( GSI) sampling described below. Given the small numbers of summer chum present it may be unrealistic to obtain this sample in all desired strata, in which case the intent is to get the greatest sample size possible. The sample design and stratification will depend on the resolution of management action needed but will be no greater than a catch area. Where the sampling target is not met, samples may be pooled, but this may limit the development of fine resolution management strategies. This type of information is an important element in assessing exploitation rates and entry pattern analysis, and is essential to better estimates of recruit abundance.

Recreational Fisheries ( Sport Areas 5,6,7,( July September) 9 ( July  September) and 12; ( July  mid October))

1. Shore based sampling will be maintained at or above 1998 levels. Biological information such as age, sex and size will be collected as part of the shore based sampling programs. Encounter rate data on all species will be collected from angler interviews and logbook programs. On the water monitoring programs will be implemented as necessary to verify the logbook and interview data.

2. Where non retention strategies are implemented, data will be collected on the number of encounters and species composition. Monitoring will include logbooks and on the water observation of encounters and releases.

Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca Extreme Terminal and Terminal Area Fisheries ( August through mid October)

1. Commercial and recreational salmon harvests will be sampled annually at a minimum of 20% for species composition to obtain statistically valid estimates of species composition. Landed catch ticket information will be the primary source for commercial catch and species composition data in chinook, coho, sockeye and pink fisheries. Shore based sampling, will be included as part of catch sampling to verify fish ticket information.

2. In fisheries utilizing non retention strategies, data will be collected on the number of encounters and species composition. Monitoring will include logbooks and on the water observation of encounters and releases. 3. A target of 200 chum per stratum will be sampled for biological data such as sex, size, and age structure both as a component of the catch sampling and as part of the GSI sampling described below ( M. Alexandersdottir, NWIFC, pers. comm. 1996). Given the low numbers of summer chum present in some strata, the intent will be to collect as many samples as possible. The sample design and stratification will depend on the resolution of management action needed but will be no greater than a catch area. Where the sampling target is not met, samples may be pooled, but this may limit its use in developing fine resolution management Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 324 strategies. This type of information is an important element in assessing exploitation rates and entry pattern analysis, and is essential to better estimates of recruit abundance.

Catch Reporting Commercial fish ticket and Ceremonial and Subsistence reporting systems and databases will be maintained at current levels. Recreational punch card and creel census reporting systems will be maintained at current levels. These will be the primary sources of catch information used to assess landed catch mortality.

Stock Composition Genetic stock identification baselines for Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca stocks will be completed prior to the first Five Year Plan Review. Subject to available funding, GSI sampling programs will be conducted annually in Puget Sound fisheries at times when HC SJF summer chum are likely to be present. Initial efforts should be focused in commercial areas 5,6C, 6, 7, 7A, 9, and 12 12C in order to improve impact assessment and cohort reconstruction data. Ideally, samples should be taken throughout the time HC SJF summer chum would reasonably be expected to be in the area. U. S. managers will coordinate with the Canadian Department of Fish and Oceans to continue GSI sampling the Canadian Catch Areas 18,19, 20 and 29 during sockeye and pink salmon fisheries. Sampling design shall conform with the requirements of the PSC Chum Technical Committee recommendations.

A DNA baseline should be established and fin tissue collected from commercial and recreational fisheries as an alternative to lethal sampling for stock composition information.

If targets are not met, samples will be pooled for analysis, but pooling samples may limit development of fine resolution management strategies. At such time as sufficient data is available to detect patterns in stock composition in these fisheries, sampling may be discontinued, although sampling should be conducted occasionally to validate the assumptions.

3.5.11 Adaptive Management As more information is collected and becomes available, harvest management strategies will be coordinated with habitat and hatchery strategies, with the intent to incrementally increase abundance and spawning escapements above recovered levels. These recovered levels represent the level at which management units are relatively stable and productive and pose little or no foreseeable risk of extinction to the populations ( see Part One, section 1.7.4 Stock Extinction Risk). Recovery goals for each management unit will be developed in 2000, and the parties will subsequently determine how to incorporate the recovery goals into the management structure. In addition, fishery performance criteria will be revised to include the new information. As reintroduction programs are implemented and become effective, fishery performance criteria will be expanded to include the additional management targets if it is found that the current targets are insufficient to provide the necessary protection. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 325 3.5.12 Stock Assessment Information Needs Success of this management plan is dependent on application of the best current data and data analysis to the management of the summer chum salmon resource. The harvest management strategies described in this plan have been designed with the intent to provide sufficient protection to HC SJF summer chum populations given current data limitations. However, better information and analyses will be necessary to make significant improvements to the Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative. The co managers will include projects focused on gathering this information in their fishery management programs to the extent possible and will seek necessary funding for projects not currently a part of the agencies standard operations. The following outline of information gathering activities will be updated as needs are identified and as part of the Five Year Plan Review. Research programs should be designed to provide new information in time for the Review.

Improvement of Sub Populations Definitions The management units and stocks form the basis of the harvest management strategies and recovery objectives described in this plan. The definitions are based on what we currently know about the similarities and differences of HC SJF summer chum populations, and the level of management resolution the limitations of that information allow. Research programs should be designed to gather more definitive information on the structure of HC SJF summer chum populations in order to simplify management where a single management strategy can meet the needs of multiple populations, to structure harvest opportunity, and to understand the contribution of each population to the overall health of HC SJF summer chum.

Age Composition and Structure Development of estimates of age specific return information will provide important information about the degree to which escapement targets are providing sufficient production to protect and rebuild summer chum populations, and would allow reliance on better management techniques such as MSY exploitation rates for which we currently lack data. Consequently, it could allow the managers a greater ability to integrate conservation and harvest opportunity objectives. Collection of this information would lead to significant improvements to the current plan.

The success of harvest guidelines rely on accurate information regarding annual recruitment to each management unit ( particularly when the recruitment may lie near the Critical Abundance Threshold) and, accurate estimates of mortality rates associated with those harvest regimes, and the escapement levels needed to sustain or rebuild the populations. Research and monitoring projects will be designed to obtain annual estimates of age composition in the escapement for each management unit and stock using scales and/ or otoliths. Fishery sampling programs will also include the collection of age composition data.

Implementation of an exploitation rate based management strategy will depend on the availability of age data to accurately assess brood specific contributions, and to relate the impacts of annual chum returns to the brood year production of management units and stocks. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 326 Improvement of Escapement Estimates Methodology: The annual assessment of the number and distribution of fish that escape to spawn is the most important means of evaluating the progress and success of this plan. It is critical to forecasts and the choice of the appropriate management regime. It is also critical in assessing whether habitat management strategies are successful in maintaining or increasing natural production. Therefore, a critical area of research will be to review, and revise where necessary, escapement estimation methodologies in order to improve estimates for each management unit and stock.

Survey frequency: In order to reduce data induced inaccuracies to our estimates of escapement, and entry pattern definition, surveys should be conducted on a weekly basis, throughout the expected entry period, plus at least a week before the start of the expected entry, and a week after its expected end. Current estimates for numerous years are inadequate in this respect.

Summer chum definition: Current surveys use a cutoff date, and it is left to further data analysis to determine whether some early entering fall chum have been included. Surveys, after October 15, should provide field estimates of the proportion or numbers of spawners who appear to be recent entrants. This information is not available at this time.

Age composition: Since the capture of summer chum salmon in fisheries during the restoration period, is expected to be minimal, scales should be collected from spawned out chum in order to gain the information critical to estimation of survival rates from each brood. Such collections should be representative of the entire escapement, at least in each management unit, although samples sufficient to assess each stock would be preferable. This information is not available at this time.

Sex composition/ distribution: At each survey, an estimate of the sex ratio of the enumerated spawners should be made. The need for this is twofold: to determine potential egg deposition, as well as to determine whether females enter the systems at different times than males, and therefore assess the need for customized protective measures. This information is not available at this time.

Stray rates and supplementation contribution: As re introduction and supplementation programs are implemented, another critical component of the spawning escapement estimate will be to determine what portion of the spawning escapement was naturally produced and what portion was derived from supplemented production. This will provide valuable information on both the success of the supplementation programs and the response of the natural production. Marking programs are already in place to provide information for use in evaluation of the success and contribution of summer chum produced from the supplementation projects currently being implemented. This is an essential task, in order to determine the contribution, distribution and survival of supplementation fish. ( If adipose fin clips are used as external marks, additional effort should be expended to assess the level of any additional mis identification caused by the mark, during selective fisheries.) Currently, sampling for marks on the spawning grounds only occurs for the Quilcene and Salmon Creek supplementation projects. Resources for sampling other supplementation projects are not currently available. The intent is to seek funding to expand escapement surveys for mark sampling. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 327 Improvement of Productivity and Productive Capacity Estimates Minimum population sizes, escapement and exploitation rate targets that form the basis for harvest management in this plan, critically depend on estimates of productivity and production capacity. This information is critical not only for evaluation of harvest management activities and stock status, but also for evaluation of habitat management and supplementation strategies. This information is currently lacking for all areas and so the interim harvest management targets are based on expert professional interpretation and extrapolation of historical escapement and abundance patterns. Research programs should be developed to estimate current productivity and production capacity, as well as potential productivity and capacity, on the stock level.

Non landed Mortality Management actions under some regimes described in this plan, propose significant use of live release or selective gears. Information on the mortality associated with releasing chum is important in evaluating the effectiveness of the fishing regime and in assessing total recruitment available to recreational and commercial users. Some studies have indicated that significant mortality may occur over an extended time after release in non retention fisheries ( PSC 1997). Although several studies have been conducted to estimate release mortality within several hours of release ( NRC 1994), studies on the magnitude of delayed mortality are rare and none have been conducted on Puget Sound chum. Research should be conducted to improve estimates of the non landed mortality of HC SJF summer chum salmon as a mortality rate per fish encountered such that the rate for each gear type is estimated with sufficient precision to meet the overall goals for precision of exploitation rate estimates and management action effectiveness. In some cases, estimates may differ for a single gear type. For example, hook and release mortality rates may be different for marine waters, estuaries and freshwater. Funding should be made available for studies to determine delayed mortality on released chum salmon.

Catch Sampling Accuracy of estimates: The scope of coverage and percentage of catch sampled for species and stock composition should be increased in both commercial and recreational fisheries in order to increase the accuracy of by catch estimates and catch distribution. Ideally, sampling protocols would be designed to achieve an precision in the catch estimate of +/ 5% of the true catch number. However, in most cases, this is beyond the current level of resources. The co managers will continue to seek the level of funding necessary to implement the appropriate protocols that would increase the accuracy of catch estimates.

Species mis identification: Focused surveys of the landed catch, from commercial and recreational fisheries where summer chum salmon form a very low proportion of the landings, is needed to estimate the proportion of summer chum which may be mis identified. These are primarily fisheries directed at sockeye and pink salmon in the San Juan Islands and Strait of Juan de Fuca. This information is currently unavailable, and is necessary in order to obtain increasingly accurate estimates of catch, fishing mortality rates, and recruit abundance ( via reconstruction). Mark sampling, to estimate the relative contribution of marked supplementation fish is also necessary in order to increase the accuracy of survival estimates. Because the bycatch of summer chum in these fisheries is very small and the Base Conservation Regime further constrains these fisheries, it may take many years to collect sufficient samples. Samples will likely have to be pooled across years or time strata. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.5 Harvest Management Page 328 Species composition: GSI samples should be obtained on a weekly basis in Areas 5, 7, and 7A; as well as Canadian areas 18,19, 20 and 29. Current samples indicating the presence and relative contribution of HC SJF summer chum salmon, are based on a handful of samples obtained over a short period of years. Increased accuracy in this estimate is essential in order to estimate the catch, exploitation rate, as well as annual recruitment of HC SJF summer chum. Additionally, this information can be used to improve historical estimates. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 329 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management This summer chum salmon conservation initiative is intended to be an integrated plan, with each element contributing in concert with the other elements, and leading to a successful outcome in restoring these summer chum populations. In developing the plan elements, and the strategies and specific actions that put the plan into effect, the parties to this plan specifically considered how these plan elements would work together. Each individual element  Habitat, Harvest, Artificial Production, Ecological Interactions  will not be successful alone in rebuilding summer chum.

Each of the preceding sections of Part Three presents one of the elements of the plan. Each section's specific actions and contributions to recovery are presented separately, and compliance with those actions is evaluated separately. However, it is the combination of strategies and actions across all elements that provides the confidence that this is a substantive and robust recovery plan with a high probability of success. The habitat element describes what conditions will allow the populations of summer chum to be productive. If the habitat strategies are implemented by those managers with the appropriate jurisdiction, we will see production from these populations which will allow recovery. The harvest element of the plan initially reduces harvest impacts to very low levels that clearly will not impede recovery, and will be maintained at these low levels or at higher levels which are consistent with the productivity of the populations. The ecological interactions element is designed to further examine the complex relationships between summer chum salmon and other species which share the same habitats, and to reduce or control those interactions which may be limiting recovery. These three elements, taken together, and properly implemented, should provide the conditions necessary for a diverse set of summer chum populations to be productive and to grow in abundance to levels where they are no longer at risk of extinction and can support healthy fisheries. Lastly, the artificial production element provides for carefully controlled supplementation that acts as a fail safe mechanism for very small and/ or unstable populations that are at a high risk of extinction, and as a boost to recovery for populations that have a long way to go.

Despite the efforts of the parties to integrate the strategies and actions included in this plan, full integration of the plan elements will only occur as a result of assessing the results of the plan implementation and modifying the plan through adaptive management approaches. There is much we don't know about summer chum salmon and adaptive management is a critically important feature of this plan. The parties believe that this plan is well thought out and addresses all likely factors for the decline of summer chum, but it is critically important that the plan's performance be carefully and promptly evaluated and that there is a quick response to any signs of failure.

Each of the preceding sections of Part Three addresses a specific element of the plan and defines how we will evaluate the performance ( compliance and effectiveness) of the specific strategies and actions relevant to that element. However, the success of the overall plan can only be measured by how well the populations of summer chum respond. We can fully implement all of the actions defined in the elements and still fail to recover these fish if our understandings and assumptions about the factors limiting recovery are incorrect. Ultimately the plan must be evaluated as to whether it meets the overall goal " to protect, restore and enhance the productivity, production, and diversity of Hood Canal and Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum and their ecosystems to provide surplus production sufficient to allow future directed and incidental harvests of summer chum salmon". 1 Note that " critical status" in the context used here has a different definition ( described in section 1.7.3 and Appendix Report 1.5) than the critical definition for SASSI stocks ( shown in section 1.7.2).

2 Actions taken will depend on the specific situation. In some cases, a management unit or stock may fall below a threshold but demonstrate that a declining trend has stopped or a recovery trend has begun, indicating that present management actions are currently sufficient.

Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 330 The following describes the measures that will be used to evaluate the performance of the plan relative to specific population criteria. It includes thresholds that would trigger immediate additional actions to protect specific management units and populations, describes periodic plan reviews with specific performance requirements, defines the process for responding to performance failures ( adaptive management) and defines how we will assess success in meeting recovery.

3.6.1 Critical Thresholds and Response Typically a resource management plan such as this would be evaluated after it has been in place for a number of years and there is an accumulation of data upon which to assess performance. It is reasonable to observe some variation in expected outcomes from the specific strategies and actions and an evaluation across years to assess average performance and the degree of variation provides the best assessment of performance and a basis upon which to make plan modifications. Procedures for conducting this type of evaluation are provided in the following sections.

However, when dealing with populations that are at very low abundance and at considerable risk of extinction it is appropriate to provide some annual checks on total abundance and/ or spawner abundance which will detect any significant problems with the recovery strategy, and allow immediate emergency actions to be taken to avoid possible damage or extinction of populations. Section 1.7.3 provides annual abundance thresholds and spawning escapement distribution flags that will be used to identify management units or stocks that are in a critical status . 1 If any management unit falls below its critical abundance or escapement threshold, or if an escapement distribution flag is triggered for a Mainstem Management Unit stock, the co managers will: 1) promptly identify any emergency actions that can be taken immediately to respond to the critical condition , and 2) within 6 months, prepare an assessment of the factors resulting in this 2 failure and provide comprehensive recommended actions and modifications to the plan to promptly restore the management unit or stock to non critical status. The assessment will also include an examination of stock extinction risk, as described in section 1.7.4, and utilized in section 3.2, to assist in developing recommended actions.

The emergency actions will include any actions that can be expected to have an immediate, short term effect on either productivity or mortality of the critical management unit or stock. They will be designed to avoid further declines in abundance while the causes for the failure are being evaluated and corrective actions developed. Actions might include additional harvest management actions to reduce fishing mortality. These should be designed to specifically benefit the management unit or stock that is in the critical condition ( e. g. additional restrictions in the extreme terminal area for that management unit). Actions might include immediate response to a critical habitat problem through Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 331 a habitat restoration project where the benefits can be expected to accrue to the current or next year's spawners and their progeny. This will likely be a response to a specific event that may be having a dramatic effect on the success of the population ( e. g. a landslide that is blocking access or radically degrading substrate conditions). Emergency collection of broodstock for supplementation purposes may be necessary when populations are at critically low abundance to provide a higher level of survival for the offspring of the few spawners available. Actions might also include emergency efforts to reduce predation effects of marine mammals such as removal of problem animals or taking measures to limit their access to the critical populations.

The assessment to be conducted within 6 months will attempt to assess the specific causes for the management unit or stock falling to or remaining at critical abundance levels, using the best available data. Recommended actions from the assessment will include any modifications to the emergency actions taken when the critical status was identified and any additional actions deemed necessary to quickly restore the abundance of the critical management unit or stock to non critical status. The assessments and recommendations will specifically address productivity and habitat conditions, harvest and supplementation impacts and supplementation opportunities.

The assessment and recommended actions will also include an identification of conditions and criteria for the management unit or stock by which it will no longer be considered to be in critical status, and will define when the additional actions are no longer necessary. Curtailment or relaxation of actions will vary depending on the kind of actions that are recommended. For example, harvest actions may be relaxed once significant improvement in management unit or stock status is observed, while commitments to supplementation or habitat improvements may require a longer term.

3.6.2 Annual Plan Report Annually, the plan is assessed for compliance with the specific plan provisions and to determine if any critical thresholds or escapement distribution flags have been triggered. In each of the preceding sections on Artificial Production ( 3.2), Ecological Interactions ( 3.3), and Harvest Management ( 3.5), there is a description of annual actions that must be taken to assess compliance with and effectiveness of the plan provisions. Sections 1.7.3, <IP_ADDRESS> and 3.6.1 describe the critical thresholds and escapement distribution flags and the actions to be taken, on an annual basis, when these thresholds are triggered.

By June of each year the co managers will compile all of the annual assessments required in Part Three of this plan into an Annual Plan Progress Report. This report is intended to provide an overview of the plan's performance and may consist only of a summary of the actions and assessments conducted in the preceding calendar year. The Annual Plan Progress Report will be provided to all of the parties to the plan.

3.6.3 Five Year Plan Review A five year plan review will assess whether progress towards recovery is being achieved and whether the results of monitoring and evaluation studies indicate a need to revise assumptions and/ or Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 332 strategies and actions. As management units are rebuilt, the plan review will assess whether the conservation and recovery criteria are being maintained, as well as incorporating the results of monitoring and evaluation studies. At the time of the review, results from the monitoring and evaluation studies will be used to modify the specific actions and strategies ( harvest regime, supplementation projects, habitat restoration strategies, etc), modify the monitoring and evaluation programs, make recommendations for further research and provide guidance on other aspects of the plan. Strategies and actions described in this plan will be assessed, to the extent possible, at both the management unit and stock levels. The WDFW and tribes will conduct a plan review every five years and generate a report of the findings to be complete and available to state, tribal and federal agencies within one year of the review. The first review will occur in 2004 ( to cover the five year period 1999 2003), with a report available by February of 2005 ( subsequent reviews will occur every fifth year ( i. e., 2009, 2014, etc.). However, this should not constrain the managers from introducing substantive new information for discussion and possible incorporation at any time.

The following are the steps required to complete review of the plan.

1. Review and describe performance of each element of the plan in meeting their specific compliance and effectiveness standards, as provided in previous sections ( sections 3.2  3.5), by management unit and stock, since the last review period and since adoption of the plan.

2. Evaluate management unit and stock performance relative to the standards provided in section 3.6.4.

3. Determine which strategies and actions and conservation objectives were most effective and least effective and which management unit and stock did or did not see the desired improvement. Document the findings by management unit and stock and at the region wide level, i. e., were successes concentrated geographically or were certain units chronically falling short of objectives.

4. Identify causes of successes and failures and categorize them according to type:

Compliance: Actions were not implemented correctly or had a significant degree of noncompliance by user groups or governments.

Effectiveness: Actions were implemented correctly and had high degrees of compliance but did not have the intended effect( s).

Assumptions: Assessment methods or parameters were accurately or inaccurately estimated and applied.

5. Make adjustments to plan elements as provided in sections 3.2  3.5. Co managers will incorporate new information from monitoring, evaluation and research studies in making adjustments as prescribed. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 333 6. Make recommendations for plan changes or amendments. This information should be as specific as possible, including the watersheds, river systems, estuaries, management units, stocks, programs or projects, and fisheries affected, the type of suggested change and the time frame over which it should be implemented.

3.6.4 Performance Standards By achieving the management unit and stock performance standards described in this plan, the elements of this plan will contribute to the stability and recovery of the HC SJF summer chum. To fully meet these standards, assessments must be performed with a high degree of confidence. The measurement of several of the following standards ( e. g. productivity) is dependent on the collection of representative age data.

As more information is gathered that effects our assessments of escapement and abundance, the following performance standards will be revised to include the new information. As reintroduction programs are implemented and become effective, the performance standards will be expanded to include additional criteria for those populations if it is found that the current criteria are insufficient to provide the necessary protection.

The following performance standards are meant to provide immediate criteria upon which to measure progress toward recovery of summer chum salmon populations. In addition, the comanagers are working on developing a set of population based recovery goals that can be used to determine when full recovery is achieved. These recovery goals will address levels of abundance, productivity and diversity of summer chum populations that will achieve self sustaining, harvestable run sizes on a regular basis. These HC SJF summer chum recovery goals are scheduled for completion in spring 2000 and will be distributed as a supplement to this initiative ( see also sections 4.4 and 4.6).

<IP_ADDRESS> Abundance As used in this plan, abundance refers to the annual total number of adult recruits or the adult run size prior to any fishing related mortality. Escapement refers to the portion of the abundance that has " escaped" through the various fisheries and arrived on the spawning grounds.

Progress toward recovery of abundance and escapement will be measured relative to the performance of natural origin recruits ( NOR) of each management unit and stock( s) within them. Such assessments will be made using post season information for each stock. The following standards shall be used to evaluate the progress of harvest, artificial production, ecological interaction, and habitat management measures in recovering Hood Canal/ Strait of Juan de Fuca summer chum:

1. Annual post season estimated abundance must be equal to, or greater than that of the parent brood abundance. When this is not the case, an investigation of the causes shall be made and remedial measures shall be formulated, when appropriate. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 334 2. Annual abundance should be stable or increasing the 5 year and average abundance must be higher than the critical threshold. Annual abundances shall not fall below the critical threshold in more than two out of five consecutive years. Information concerning the productivity and productive capacity of the stock( s) shall be pursued to further refine the thresholds themselves.

3. Liberalization of actions under the Base Conservation Regime shall not be considered unless number 2 above is met.

<IP_ADDRESS> Productivity As used in this plan, productivity refers to the ratio of maturing recruits per parent brood spawner. This ratio shall initially be specific to each management unit, however it is the co managers intent to obtain information necessary to estimate this quantity for individual stocks within management units as well.

Since the number of recruits produced by each spawner is affected by both density dependent ( biological) and density independent ( physical habitat) factors, the following elements shall be used to evaluate the progress of harvest, supplementation, and habitat management measures:

1. Five year estimated mean productivity shall be greater than 1.2 recruits per spawner.

2. The number of recruits per spawner when management units are at or near critical threshold abundances, must be stable or increasing.

<IP_ADDRESS> Escapement 1. The annual post season estimated NOR escapement rate of each run must be within or above the range specified by the Base Conservation Regime.

2. Annual NOR escapements shall be stable or increasing and 5 year average escapements must be higher than the critical thresholds. Information concerning the productivity and productive capacity of the stock( s) shall be used to further refine the thresholds themselves.

3. Expected escapement rates are based on numerous assumptions made during the formulation of the Base Conservation Regime. Annually estimated rates, for the period being evaluated, must be normally distributed across the Base Conservation Regime's anticipated range. If this does not occur, the Base Conservation Regime, its underlying assumptions, and the application of the Regime shall be re evaluated and remedial measures shall be formulated.

<IP_ADDRESS> Management Actions 1. At a minimum, the plan strategies and actions shall result in stable recruit abundances at current levels, while ensuring that escapement rates are high. The plan's strategies shall be considered successful if progress toward recovery is demonstrated by positive trends in NOR abundance. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative April 2000 3.6 Program Integration and Adaptive Management Page 335 2. Strategies and actions directed at management units or stocks, whose abundance is below their currently estimated critical thresholds, will be considered successful if they stop and reverse the decline in productivity and/ or abundance.

3. Plan strategies and actions shall be considered successful when all management units are maintained, on average, above their critical abundance and escapement thresholds.


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 203 (Monday, October 21, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 62365]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24581]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Thursday, October
3, 2013 at 10:30 a.m.
    Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the Closed Meeting.
Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be
present.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or her designee, has
certified that, in her opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth
in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR
200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii) and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Stein, as duty officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the Closed Meeting in a closed session.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting will be:

Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Adjudicatory matters; and
Other matters relating to enforcement proceedings.

    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in
the scheduling of meeting items.
    For further information and to ascertain what, if any, matters have
been added, deleted or postponed, please contact the Office of the
Secretary at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: September 26, 2013.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.

Editorial Note: This document was received by the Office of the Federal
Register on October 17, 2013.

[FR Doc. 2013-24581 Filed 10-17-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 83949]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28392]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2883-009]

Aquenergy Systems, LLC; Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission)
regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has
reviewed the application for a new license for the Fries Hydroelectric
Project, located on the New River, in Grayson County, Virginia and has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The project
does not occupy federal land.
    The EA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental
impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with
appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a
major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the
human environment.
    The Commission provides all interested persons with an opportunity
to view and/or print the EA via the internet through the Commission's
Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the
docket number, excluding the last three digits in the docket number
field, to access the document. At this time, the Commission has
suspended access to the Commission's Public Reference Room, due to the
proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the President on March 13,
2020. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll-free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659.
    You may also register online at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eSubscription.aspx to be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance,
contact FERC Online Support.
    Any comments should be filed within 45 days from the date of this
notice.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please file
comments using the Commission's eFiling system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/eFiling.aspx. Commenters can submit brief comments
up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment
system at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/QuickComment.aspx. You must
include your name and contact information at the end of your comments.
For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support. In lieu of
electronic filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via
the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier
must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
The first page of any filing should include docket number P-2883-009.
    For further information, contact Jody Callihan at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: December 17, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-28392 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Comment Info: =================

General Comment: I have been tobacco free for 5 months now thanks to the availability of Nicotine in the delivery device known as a mechanical mod, which was created post 2007, to produce a superior vaping experience. I was a slave to cigarettes for 30 yrs.and tried many,many times to quit. I was prescribed Nicorette, the Patch, and Chantix. Nothing worked beyond a couple of weeks and I went back to smoking. Vaping has saved my life! The Vaping community is THE STRONGEST SUPPORT GROUP because its made up of people just like me who have tried to quit cigarettes and had no success until we switched to Vaping. Vaping is not SMOKING and is not a TOBACCO product. Nicotine as doctors have stated over and over is NOT A CARCINOGEN but a mild stimulant on par with caffeine. Should the FDA regulate ever coffee shop because they are serving "drugs" in each cup of coffee? The 3 components of e-liquid are already USDA and FDA certified a safe to consume. The 4500+ ingredients in cigarettes are not. Please allow the Vaping industry to flourish with life saving innovation. It is working and thriving right now because of the internet and by brick and mortar shops. Please listen to our success stories in quitting TOBACCO and living TOBACCO FREE, and healthy lives. A 75 day comment period is insufficient time for the vaping industry and the wider vaping community to comment on the proposed deeming regulations. I would respectfully request that the period for comment be extended to 180 days.

Thank You,

Mack Jones ,Ex Smoker


June 10, 2021

Mr. Gregory J. Mitchell, General Manager  -  Keystone Station
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Keystone Conemaugh Project, LLC
175 Cornell Road
Blairsville, PA 15717

Re:	Title V Operating Permit 03-000027 Modification Application
      Keystone Conemaugh Project, LLC
      Keystone Generating Station
      Units 1 & 2 & Auxiliary Boilers A & B RACT II Compliance
	Plumcreek Township, Armstrong County
	APS # 1002530, Auth #1349542, PF # 275229

Dear Mr. Mitchell,

The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has reviewed the above referenced operating permit significant modification application (Keystone Generating Station TV-03-00027) and has identified the following technical deficiencies.  This information is required pursuant to 25 Pa. Code §127.541.

 The following data should be supplied for all hours during the years 2017 to 2020 in an electronic format, preferably in an excel spreadsheet. This data should be given in hourly increments in a form that it can easily be added to the publicly available CAMD data (sample attached).
          The hourly exhaust temperature at the inlet to the SCR for each unit

          The hourly ammonia injection rate

 Please provide SCR operations and maintenance manual. If you wish to keep certain information confidential, please see the Confidential Business Information (CBI) Procedure, below.

      Confidential Business Information (CBI) Procedure

      Any CBI claims must be addressed at the time of submittal.  Please be aware that DEP has a specific procedure for deciding confidentiality requests from source owners made under Section 13.2 of the Air Pollution Control Act (APCA), 35 P.S. Section 4013.2.  This procedure requires that source owners submit their request in writing to DEP.  The request must specifically designate which items of information the source owner wishes DEP to treat confidentially, along with a reason why those items should be treated in this manner.  The word "confidential" on a page or plan sheet submitted to DEP has no validity by itself.  Each item must be identified, and justification presented per Section 13.2 of the APCA for why it warrants confidential treatment.

             Pursuant to Section 13.2 of the APCA, information can generally qualify for confidential treatment if it is not emission data and if disclosure of the information would divulge production or sales figures or methods, or would divulge a unique process or production, or would otherwise adversely affect competitive position by revealing trade secrets.

             In order to request confidential treatment for information in any document, you must submit a redacted version of the relevant document with the confidential information blacked out (and thus suitable for public disclosure), along with a letter of request containing a table identifying the page and line number of each redaction, along with a justification for each redacted item as to why it should be deemed confidential under the specific criteria allowed under Section 13.2 of the APCA.  Please see the Example Confidential Information Log to use as a guide when submitting your confidentiality justifications.

             DEP's final decision on any CBI request will be sent to you in writing, along with a notice of appeal rights in the event the request is denied.  Please be aware that if you do not provide adequate justification for each redacted item such that it meets one of the specific criteria for confidential treatment under Section 13.2 of the APCA, your request may be denied.

Example Confidential Information Log
Page # in Document
Description
Basis for Confidential Treatment as Identified in the Pennsylvania Air Pollution Control Act,
35 P.S. § 4013.2

You must submit a response fully addressing the significant technical deficiencies set forth above within 15 business days of receipt of this letter or the Department may deny the application.

If you believe that any of the stated deficiencies is not significant, instead of submitting a response to that deficiency, you have the option of asking the Department to make a decision based on the information with regard to the subject matter of that deficiency that you have already made available.  If you choose this option with regard to any deficiency, you should explain and justify how your current submission satisfies that deficiency.  Please keep in mind that if you fail to respond, your application may be denied.

Should you have any questions regarding the identified deficiencies, please contact me at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or David Balog at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and refer to TV-03-00027 to discuss your concerns or to schedule a meeting.  The meeting must be scheduled within the 15-day period allotted for your reply, unless otherwise extended by the Department.  You may also follow your application through the review process via eFACTS on the Web at:  http//www.ahs2.dep.state.pa.us/eFactsWeb/default.aspx.

Sincerely,

/s/ Hubert Thomas Flaherty

Hubert Thomas Flaherty
Air Quality Engineer
Air Quality Program

cc:  	AQ/Facilities/Permits/03-00027
	New Castle District Office
	Harrisburg


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41022-41023]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18296]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0478, FRL- 9967-03-OEI]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives:
Gasoline Volatility (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Regulation of Fuels and Fuel
Additives: Gasoline Volatility (EPA ICR No. 1367.12, OMB Control No.
2060-0178) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and
approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This is
a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved through
August 31, 2017. Public comments were previously requested via the
Federal Register (82 FR 29548) on June 29, 2017 during a 60-day comment
period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before September 28,
2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2007-0478, online using https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by mail to: EPA Docket
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code: 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for
EPA.
    EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James W. Caldwell, Compliance
Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Mail Code 6406J,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax number:
(202) 343-2801; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail
the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the
public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at https://www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone
number for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional
information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: Gasoline volatility, as measured by Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP) in pounds per square inch (psi), is controlled in the spring and
summer in order to minimize evaporative hydrocarbon emissions from
motor vehicles. RVP is subject to a Federal standard of 7.8 psi or 9.0
psi, depending on location. The addition of ethanol to gasoline
increases the RVP by about 1 psi. Gasoline that contains 9 volume
percent to 10 volume percent ethanol is subject to a standard that is
1.0 psi greater. As an aid to industry compliance and EPA enforcement,
the product transfer document, which is prepared by the producer or
importer and which accompanies a shipment of gasoline containing
ethanol, is required by regulation to contain a legible and conspicuous
statement that the gasoline contains ethanol and the percentage
concentration of ethanol. This is intended to deter the mixing within
the distribution system, particularly in retail storage tanks, of
gasoline which contains ethanol in the 9 to 10 percent range with
gasoline which does not contain ethanol in that range. Such mixing
would likely result in a gasoline which is in violation of its RVP
standard. Also, a party wishing a testing exemption, for research on
gasoline that is not in compliance with the applicable volatility
standard, must submit certain information to EPA.
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by
this action are those who produce or import gasoline containing
ethanol, or who wish to obtain a testing exemption.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory per 40 CFR 80.27(d)
and (e).
    Estimated number of respondents: 2,000.
    Frequency of response: On occasion.
    Total estimated burden: 12,330 hours per year. Burden is defined at
5 CFR 1320.03(b).

    Total estimated cost: $1.1 million, includes $20 annualized capital
or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in estimates: There is no change in the hours in the total
estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by
OMB. The use of ethanol in gasoline has increased slightly, but that
has been offset by a slight decrease in gasoline consumption.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2017-18296 Filed 8-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: May 22, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 29329-29330]
[DOCID:fr22my06-46]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Notice of Application Accepting for Filing and Soliciting Motions
To Intervene, Protests and Comments

May 12, 2006.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Preliminary Permit.
    b. Project No.: 12637-000.
    c. Date filed: January 9, 2006.
    d. Applicant: Elias A. Felluss.
    e. Name of Project: Columbia Hydro Power Alpha Station.
    f. Location: On Claverack Creek, in Stottville, Columbia County,
New York.

The existing dam is owned by the applicant.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Elias A. Felluss, 71 Centershore Road,
Centerport, NY 11721,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. FERC Contact: Etta Foster,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    j. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: 60 days from the issuance date of this notice.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with
Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project
number (P-12637-000) on any comments, protests, or motions filed.
    k. Description of Project: The proposed project would consist of:
(1) An existing 10-foot-high, 180-foot-long dam; (2) a 180-foot-wide
reservoir; (3) a 12-foot-wide, 70-foot-long penstock; (4) a proposed
powerhouse containing a single generator with an installed capacity of
approximately 1MW; (5) a tailrace; and (6) appurtenant facilities.
    The project would have an estimated annual generation of
approximately 2 MW. The applicant plans to sell the generated energy.
    l. Location of Application: A copy of the application is available
for inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov using the

``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is

also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
h. above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Competing Preliminary Permit: Anyone desiring to file a
competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project
must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to
file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36).
Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to
file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days
after the specified comment date for the particular application. A
competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR
4.30(b) and 4.36.
    o. Competing Development Application: Any qualified development
applicant desiring to file a competing development application must
submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the
particular application, either a competing development application or a
notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely
notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested
person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after
the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing
license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30(b) and 4.36.
    p. Notice of Intent: A notice of intent must specify the exact
name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective
applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to
submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary
permit application or a development application (specify which type of
application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s)
named in this public notice.
    q. Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit: A preliminary permit, if
issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed
preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the
preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of
preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts.
Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide
whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to
construct and operate the project.
    r. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210,
385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the
Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only
those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments,
protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the
specified comment date for the particular application.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically
via the Internet in lieu of paper; See 18 CFR 385.2001 (a)(1)(iii) and
the instructions on the Commission's Web site under ``e-filing'' link.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing.
    s. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filings must
bear in all capital letter the title ``COMMENTS'', ``RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS'', ``PROTEST'', ``MOTION TO INTERVENE'',
``NOTICE OF INTENT'', or ``COMPETING APPLICATION'', as applicable, and
the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing
refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the
original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's
regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to
intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant
specified in the particular application.
    t. Agency Comments: Federal, state, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the applicant. If
an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing
comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an
agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-7694 Filed 5-19-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


Appendix L, Page 1 of 3 Appendix L. QA/ QC Guidance for Models Model Name Version Number QA Summary Summary Developer: Person or Team Name and Team Member Names Date: dd/ mmm/ yyyy Model Developer: Person or Team Name and Member Names Phone, Address ( e mail and postal) Model Contact: Primary Contact Name and Alternate Contact Name Phone, Address ( e mail and postal)

Model Type: Empirical, deterministic, stochastic(?), Aquatic, Ecological, Health Effects, etc.

Historical Insight:

Method of Version Control and Notification: process and names involved in version control List of All Prior Model Versions and Dates of their QA Summaries: Version Number, QA Summary Date: dd/ mmm/ yyyy Version Number, QA Summary Date: dd/ mmm/ yyyy Model Calibration Reports: Include a reference to where this information is available.

Model Evaluation Reports: Include a reference to where this information is available. Summerize model evaluation. Refer to: Guidance for QA Project Plans for Modeling ( QA/ G 5M) EPA/ 600/ R 02/ 007 http:// www. epa. gov/ quality/ qa_ docs. html Peer Review Report Summary  Dated: dd/ mmm/ yyyy Include a reference to where this information is available.

Model Access Mechanism or Model Site: Web Site or Access Location User Manual Access Mechanism or Site: Web Site or Access Location Intended Use of Output ( risk characterization, support decision, answer question, etc.):

Intended Use of Output justification goes here.

Regulatory Context, if any:

Regulatory Context justifying existence of the model goes here.

Process for archiving and documentation: Appendix L, Page 2 of 3 Model Name Version Number QA Summary Summary Developer: Person or Team Name and Team Member Names Date: dd/ mmm/ yyyy Model Output Description: Include output description( s) including the format( s). And/ Or include a reference to where this information is available.

Examples of How Model Output is Used: Include examples of model output. And/ Or include a reference to where this information is available. An appendix in the User's Manual might be appropriate.

Limitations on Model Use: Describe any limitations on using the model. And/ Or include a reference to where this information is available. An appendix in the User's Manual might be appropriate.

Description of Model Input including Input Sources: List the Model Input and Input Sources. Describe details as necessary and/ or include a reference to where this information is available. This should refer to a particular portion of the User's Manual. Appendix L, Page 3 of 3 Suggested QA/ QC Steps for Documenting Changes to a Model:

1. Objective: Why were changes necessary?

2. Process: What was changed and how?

3. Results: Were changes made in a satisfactory manner? Was " revised" model tested to make sure that changes met objectives? This step must be performed by someone who was not involved in the " Process" step.

4. What's Next: If changes were found to met set objectives:

! Document all above steps. It is recommended that a " readme. txt" file containing all relevant information about the changes be created for the " new" version.

! Replace " old" version with " new" version ( Make sure to have a version control number to differentiate new vs old).

! Notify users of changes and of the " new" version ! Archive " old" version ! Send a copy of the documentation to the QA officer.

TLN 01/ 24/ 2003