September 21-24, 2025
Council Meeting Decision Summary Documents highlight significant activities and decisions made at Council meetings. Fishery management decisions made by the Council are formally transmitted to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as recommendations and are not final until NMFS approval. Results of agenda items that do not reach a level of highlight significance are typically not described in the Decision Summary Document. For a more detailed account of Council meeting discussions, see the Council meeting record and transcripts.
Habitat Issues
Current Habitat Issues
The Council received a briefing on several current habitat issues (C.1.a, Supplemental HC Report 1) including the status of the Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement (RCBA), the California Central Valley Project (CVP), and the Port of Coos Bay Pacific Coast Intermodal Port Project (PCIP). The Council expressed concerns about the cancellation of the Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement (RCBA) as well as apparent changes in long-term operations of the CVP. The Council requested that the Habitat Committee (HC) continue to monitor the issue and provide updates on the RCBA when appropriate and tasked the HC with providing a status update on California water issues, including potential changes to the CVP long-term operations plan. The Council also directed the HC to track the PCIP and be prepared to develop a comment letter on the Notice of Intent, anticipated for issuance in December 2025.
The Council also received a report from Dr. Lisa Wooninck (Superintendent, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary) on ONMS responses to Council questions from the ONMS annual coordination report in April 2025 (C.1.b, Supplemental ONMS Report 1). The Council expressed appreciation to ONMS for their efforts to follow up on important issues of mutual interest.
Highly Migratory Species Management
International Management Activities
The Council received updates on recent and upcoming meetings described in Agenda Item D.2.a, NMFS Report 1 and Supplemental NMFS Report 2. Several ongoing Highly Migratory Species international management issues remain unresolved, including the Pacific Bluefin Tuna (PBF) long-term harvest strategy harvest control rule, as well as delayed engagement in discussions that ultimately led to stalled negotiations under the U.S. – Canada Albacore Treaty. The Council also recommended NMFS engage in additional conversations with fishery stakeholders in the North Pacific Albacore fishery on ongoing efforts to translate fishing intensity into catch or effort controls, as that will be a topic of discussion next summer at both the Northern Committee and Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission.
Christa Svensson briefed the Council on the upcoming Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission Permanent Advisory Committee meeting and noted there was an opportunity for the Council to submit recommendations for inclusion in Permanent Advisory Committee meeting materials for the October 6 – 8 meeting. The Council endorsed submitting a brief cover letter and attaching the Highly Migratory Species Advisory Subpanel reports from June and September 2025.
The Council expressed a strong desire for the Joint Working Group to convene an intersessional meeting to pursue agreement on a PBF harvest control rule, in advance of next summer’s Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission meeting where PBF catch limits beyond 2026 will be considered.
Pacific Halibut Management
2026 Commercial and Recreational Catch Sharing Plan and Annual Regulations – Preliminary
The Council adopted, for public review, proposed changes to the 2026 Pacific Halibut Commercial and Recreational Catch Sharing Plan (CSP) and annual regulations change. The adopted proposals are consistent with those found in the reports from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW), along with an additional recommendation made by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
WDFW proposed changes for only the South Coast and Columbia River recreational subareas. No changes from status quo were proposed for the Puget Sound and North Coast.
Washington South Coast recreational subarea:
Option 1: Analyze a 2A fishery constant exploitable yield (FCEY) threshold, starting with 1.4 million pounds. If the 2A FCEY is above that threshold, in May and June, open up to four days per week (Sun/Tue/Th/Fri). If the 2A FCEY is below that threshold, in May and June, open up to three days per week but different days than the three days open under status quo (open Th/Fri/Sun instead of Th/Sun/Tu).
In addition, under Option 1 WDFW proposed revisions to the South Coast subarea management objective and to the description of the season structure to reflect that, when applying status quo measures, there would be nine open days in June (rather than eight, as currently written).
Columbia River recreational subarea:
WDFW and ODFW both had proposals related to the Columbia River recreational subarea, which is jointly managed by the two states. Both states were supportive of the other’s proposals.
WDFW proposed maintaining the status quo season structure, except that the CSP language be revised to clarify how the decision on the additional dates for the month of June would be made, including whether the amount of quota remaining should be the only factor considered when making this decision.
ODFW proposed two options for the nearshore fishery:
- Option 1: Open the nearshore fishery seven days per week (beginning May 1), superseded by the all-depth fishery when both are open, or
- Option 2: Remove the nearshore fishery and allocate the 500 pounds assigned to the nearshore fishery to the Columbia River subarea all-depth fishery.
In addition to the Columbia River subarea, ODFW proposed changes from status quo for the Central Oregon Coast subarea, but no changes to the Southern Oregon subarea.
Central Oregon Coast recreational subarea:
- Option 1: Allocate 75 percent of the subarea sub-quota to the spring all-depth fishery, regardless of the Area 2A FCEY, and
- Option 2: If the Area 2A FCEY is 700,000 pounds or greater, allocate 10,000 pounds to the nearshore fishery with the remaining subarea sub-quota allocated to the summer all-depth fishery, or
- Option 3: If the Area 2A FCEY is less than 700,000 pounds, allocate the remaining 25 percent of the sub-quota to the nearshore fishery.
(Option 1 would be combined with Option 2 or Option 3, depending on the 2A FCEY.)
In addition, the Council adopted ODFW’s proposal to build flexibility into the start date of the fishery, for public review:
That the nearshore season opens May 1, seven days per week, only in waters shoreward of the 40-fathom (73 meter) regulatory line, unless the Area 2A FCEY is less than 1.2M pounds, then it may be postponed and open on June 1.
All California recreational subareas:
Change the start date for all California recreational subareas to April 1. Under status quo, the recreational fishery in all California subareas start on May 1.
Commercial-Directed Fishing Regulations for 2026
The Council adopted, for public review, the status quo season structure for 2026, as described in Section 5.6.4 of the current CSP.
The Council will adopt final changes to the 2026 Pacific halibut CSP and annual fishery regulations at their November 2025 meeting.
Salmon Management
Methodology Review – Final Topic Selection
The Council selected two topics for the 2025 Salmon Methodology Review Meeting, scheduled to occur online on October 9, 2025:
1. The Oregon Production Index Hatchery forecast methodology, including the index exponential-decay-weighting approach adopted for use in 2025 (with Oregon and Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW & WDFW) as the responsible agencies); and
2. Changes to the Oregon Coast Natural coho marine survival index (with ODFW as the responsible agency).
Topic 1 was preliminarily selected by the Council at the April 2025 Council meeting. At its April meeting, the Council also preliminary selected two topics proposed by the Sacramento River Fall Chinook Workgroup, but in September did not move them forward as final topics. Instead, it expressed interest in revisiting the proposals as part of a comprehensive review to update Sacramento River fall Chinook management through the Fishery Management Plan amendment process.
Topic 2 was an additional item requested at this September meeting by ODFW in a letter submitted to the Council.
The results of the Salmon Methodology Review will be presented by the Scientific and Statistical Committee and Salmon Technical Team at the November 2025 Council meeting.
Groundfish Management
Phase 2 Stock Definitions – Final Action
The Council considered adopting a Final Preferred Alternative for 42 species in the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (FMP), identifying whether the species and their stocks are in need of conservation and management in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and if so, the appropriate stock definitions to include in the FMP. The decisions made at this meeting are in addition to previous Council action taken in June to define groundfish stocks in need of conservation and management in the EEZ.
The following stocks of species in Table 1 were identified as in need of conservation and management in the EEZ and were adopted under Alternative 1 – to be retained in the FMP. Stocks of black rockfish and quillback rockfish were already defined via Amendment 31 (A31). Only the stocks delineated off Washington were adopted under Alternative 1 for these species. Stocks of rosethorn and stripetail rockfishes were adopted under stock definition Option 1 – one coastwide stock.
Table 1. Species and their stock delineation as adopted under Alternative 1. *Stocks of black rockfish and quillback rockfish were already defined via A31
| Species | Stock Delineations |
| Black rockfish (WA) | WA only* |
| Rosethorn rockfish | Coastwide |
| Quillback rockfish (WA) | WA only* |
| Stripetail rockfish | Coastwide |
The following species and stocks of species in Table 2 were identified as not in need of conservation and management in the EEZ and adopted under Alternative 2 – to be removed from the FMP. For certain species, including black rockfish, copper rockfish, and quillback rockfish, only select stocks of those species (already defined via A31) were adopted under this Alternative. For certain species, including blue rockfish, cabezon, China rockfish, and kelp greenling, stocks have not yet been defined for these species, but based on preliminary determinations of stock delineation, have been adopted under Alternative 2 in select areas.
Table 2. Species adopted under Alternative 2, where species are removed from the FMP, and area of removal.
| Species | Area Removed From FMP |
| Black and yellow rockfish | Coastwide |
| Black rockfish | California-only |
| Blue rockfish | California-only |
| Brown rockfish | Coastwide |
| Cabezon | Oregon and California |
| Calico rockfish | Coastwide |
| Chameleon rockfish | Coastwide |
| China rockfish | California-only |
| Copper rockfish | California-only |
| Dwarf-red rockfish | Coastwide |
| Freckled rockfish | Coastwide |
| Gopher rockfish | Coastwide |
| Grass rockfish | Coastwide |
| Halfbanded rockfish | Coastwide |
| Harlequin rockfish | Coastwide |
| Honeycomb rockfish | Coastwide |
| Kelp greenling | Oregon and California |
| Kelp rockfish | Coastwide |
| Leopard shark | Coastwide |
| Light dusky rockfish | Coastwide |
| Olive rockfish | Coastwide |
| Pink rockfish | Coastwide |
| Pinkrose rockfish | Coastwide |
| Pygmy rockfish | Coastwide |
| Quillback rockfish | California-only |
| Swordspine rockfish | Coastwide |
| Treefish | Coastwide |
The following species in Table 3 were identified as not in need of conservation and management in the EEZ and adopted under Alternative 3 – to be designated as ecosystem component (EC) species in Table 3-1 of the FMP.
Table 3. Species adopted under Alternative 3, designating them as ecosystem component species in the FMP.
| Rockfish Species | Flatfish Species |
| Bronzespotted rockfish | Butter sole |
| Flag rockfish | Curlfin sole |
| Greenblotched rockfish | Rock sole |
| Mexican rockfish | Sand sole |
| Rosy rockfish | Starry flounder |
| Speckled rockfish | |
| Tiger rockfish |
The Council also provided guidance related to future monitoring and evaluation of EC species. They requested that Council staff and the Groundfish Management Team develop a checkpoint to prompt re-evaluation of all EC species, including those that were designated under this action.
For a select group of nearshore species, the Council was not able to come to a Final Preferred Alternative decision for all stocks of these species. The Council intends to return to the Phase 2 action on these species/stocks at a future meeting.
Table 4. Species and specific areas to be considered at a later date. *Stocks of black, copper, and quillback rockfishes have already been defined via A31.
| Species | Area(s) |
| Black rockfish | Oregon* |
| Blue and deacon rockfishes | State-specific preliminary stocks – Oregon and Washington |
| Cabezon | Washington |
| China rockfish | State-specific preliminary stocks – Oregon and Washington |
| Copper rockfish | Oregon/ Washington combined stock* |
| Kelp greenling | Washington |
| Quillback rockfish | Oregon* |
Adopt Stock Assessments
The Council adopted several stock assessments for use in the next management biennium. This adoption also includes levels of scientific uncertainty (denoted as “sigma”) associated with these assessments for use in establishing buffers according to the Council’s risk policy.
Full Assessments
Yellowtail rockfish (North of 40º 10’ N. Latitude) – Category 1b, default Sigma = 0.5
Chilipepper rockfish (Coastwide) – Category 1b, default Sigma = 0.5
Quillback rockfish (California) – Category 1b, Sigma = 0.75
Sablefish (Coastwide) – Category 1, default Sigma = 0.5
Rougheye/Blackspotted rockfish (Coastwide) – Category 2, default Sigma = 1
Update Assessment
Yelloweye rockfish (Coastwide) – Category 1, default Sigma = 0.5
Catch-Only Projections
Petrale sole
Canary rockfish
Shortspine thornyhead
Darkblotched rockfish
The Council delayed adoption of an update assessment of widow rockfish and requested further review of this assessment as recommended by the Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) and further outlined by the SSC Groundfish Subcommittee (September 2025 Briefing Book: SSC GFSC Groundfish Stock Assessment Report 2).
The Groundfish Subcommittee of the Scientific and Statistical Committee is scheduled to conduct a Supplemental Review meeting October 14-17, in Seattle, WA to review any additional analyses for the 2025 widow update assessment. The Groundfish Subcommittee will provide their recommendations to the SSC for Council consideration at their November 2025 meeting, when the Council is again scheduled to adopt stock assessments.
The Council also delayed adopting catch-only projections conducted in 2025 for black rockfish off Oregon and bocaccio, as harvest specifications were calculated per SSC recommendation with an updated time-varying buffer approach when natural mortality is high, for which the Council desired further discussion prior to adoption. The Council requested the two catch-only projections be provided for the November 2025 Council meeting utilizing the standard buffers for harvest specifications.
Stock Assessment Methodology Topic Selection – Final Topics
The Council adopted a single topic for groundfish stock assessment methodology review in 2026. The proposal adopted from the National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center aims to review commercial fishery-dependent index standardization and best practices for potential use in stock assessments (Agenda Item G.4.a, Supplemental NWFSC Report 1). The approach aims to generate more reliable abundance indices by correcting for non-random fishing behavior, reducing bias, and improving stock assessments for species poorly represented in traditional surveys.
Trawl Catch Share Program Review – Preliminary
The Council received a presentation on the preliminary draft of the trawl catch share program review and provided guidance to consider the recommendations provided in Agenda Item G.5.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1 and Agenda Item G.5.a, Supplemental GMT Report 1. The Council is anticipated to consider the review for final adoption, including a diagnosis of why the program is not meeting its goals and objectives, in November 2025.
Initial Harvest Specifications and Management Measures Actions for 2027-28
The Council adopted 2027-28 OFLs, stock categories, and P* values as presented in Agenda Item G.6, Supplemental Attachment 1, and Table 2 (quillback rockfish off California) in Agenda Item G.6,Supplemental REVISED Attachment 2, and the updates from Agenda Item G.6.a, Supplemental SSC Report 1, except for chilipepper, bocaccio, and black rockfish off Oregon. For these species, the Council requested the OFLs be calculated using the original time-varying sigma and brought back for the November 2025 meeting.
The Council adopted default harvest control rules (HCR) for quillback rockfish off of California, sablefish, petrale sole, and darkblotched rockfish, which represent stocks assessed in 2025 or with updated harvest projections.
The Council adopted the alternative HCRs for the eight stocks as described in Table 1 below (as detailed in Agenda Item G.6.a, Supplemental GMT Report 3 and Agenda Item G.6.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1):
Table 1. Stocks with alternative harvest control rules
| Stock | Alternative 1: Default HCR | Alternative 2 | Alternative 3 |
| Yellowtail rockfish north of 40° 10′ N. lat. | ABC = ACL, P* 0.45 | Ad hoc phase-in | – |
| Chilipepper rockfish | ABC = ACL, P* 0.45 | Constant ACL = 2,114 mt | – |
| Rougheye/ blackspotted rockfish | ABC = ACL, P* 0.45 | Constant ACL = 519 mt | Constant ACL =300 mt |
| Yelloweye rockfish | ABC = ACL, P* 0.40 (SPR = 0.50) | Constant ACL = 85 mt | – |
| Canary rockfish | ABC > ACL, P* 0.45 (40-10 rule) | ABC = ACL, P* 0.45, no 40-10 adjustment | – |
| Shortspine thornyhead | ABC > ACL, P* 0.45 (40-10 rule) | Constant ABC = ACL 902 mt | – |
| Petrale sole | ABC = ACL, P* 0.45 | Constant ABC = ACL 2,489 mt | – |
The Council adopted, for public review, the preliminary range of management measures identified in G.6.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1, September 2025, and as outlined in Table 4 from Agenda Item G.6.a, Supplemental GMT Report 3, September 2025. Table 2 below summarizes those measures detailed in the reports. The Groundfish Management Team (GMT) will scope these and other management measures, as appropriate, at their October 2025 meeting for Council consideration at the November 2025 meeting.
Table 2. Non-exhaustive list of potential 2027-28 routine management measures adjustments to be investigated by the GMT at their October 2025 meeting
| Management Measures | Sector(s) | Description |
| Rockfish Conservation Area Modifications | All | Waypoint modifications, as needed |
| Off-the-top deductions | Research, and IOA | Consider converting default approach from recent 10-year maximum to recent 10-year average for some or all stocks |
| Two Year Allocations | Trawl/ Non-Trawl | Review biennial allocations as appropriate |
| Rebuilding Species Allocations | All | Review any rebuilding species allocations |
| Within trawl Set-aside | At-sea whiting | Review At-sea whiting 2027-2028 set-asides. |
| Within non-trawl HGs, ACTs, or Shares | LEFG/OA/ Recreational | Review 2 year non-trawl HGs or shares adjustments including, canary rockfish, |
| Commercial Trip Limit Adjustments | OA and LEFG | Adjusting trip limits as appropriate.Sablefish trip limit adjustments to accommodate new ACLsCowcod trip limits off of CA (Agenda Item G.6.a, GMT Report 2, September 2025)Stock complex species-specific trip limits (Agenda Item G.6.a, GMT Report 2, September 2025) |
| Recreational Trip Limit Adjustments | OR, WA, CA Recreational | Adjustments to bag limits as appropriateExplore All Depth fishing off CaliforniaCowcod bag limit off CaliforniaLingcod retention off Leadbetter Point in the YRCA |
Inseason Adjustments-Final Action
The Council recommended two inseason adjustments. The first recommendation is to increase the incidental Pacific halibut landing limit from 75 pounds to 100 pounds of Pacific halibut for every 1,000 pounds of sablefish plus 2 additional halibut. The second recommendation is to modify bag limits of the coast of California to establish a two-fish sub-bag limit for canary rockfish. The Council adopted the recommendations based on the statements from the Groundfish Advisory Subpanel (GAP) (Agenda G.7.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1, September 2025) and GMT (Agenda G.7.a, Supplemental GMT Report 1, September 2025):
Emergency Action: Revised 2026 Specifications and Measures for Canary Rockfish, Shortspine Thornyhead, and Petrale Sole – Final Action
The Council recommended that NMFS implement an emergency rule to increase the 2026 harvest specifications and management measures for canary rockfish, shortspine thornyhead, and petrale sole. These specifications were endorsed by the SSC for use in management.
The table below shows the recommended harvest specifications (mt) based on the 2025 catch only projections endorsed by the SSC (Agenda Item G.8.a, Supplemental SSC Report 1) and recommended by the GAP (Agenda Item G.8.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1) and GMT (Agenda Item G.8.a, Supplemental GMT Report 1). The Council also recommended that the increases in annual catch limit (ACL) be issued proportionately to all sectors, excluding research and incidental open access, as described in Agenda Item G.8.a, Supplemental GAP Report 1.
Petrale Sole
| Current (2026) | Council Recommendation | |
| OFL | 2,424 | 2,676 |
| ABC | 2,255 | 2,489 |
| ACL | 2,238 | 2,489 |
| EFP/Research/IOA | 28.5 | 28.5 |
| Tribal | 290 | 322.5 |
| Fishery HG | 1,919.5 | 2,138.0 |
| Trawl Allocation | 1,889.5 | 2,104.6 |
| At-Sea Set Aside | 5 | 5.6 |
| IFQ Allocation | 1,884.5 | 2,099.0 |
| IFQ Annual Vessel Limit (lbs) | 186,957 | 208,242 |
| Non-Trawl Allocation | 30 | 33.4 |
Canary Rockfish
| Current (2026) | Council Recommendation | |
| OFL | 655 | 673 |
| ABC | 609 | 626 |
| ACL | 573 | 626 |
| EFP/Research/IOA | 12.9 | 12.9 |
| Tribal | 50 | 54.7 |
| Fishery HG | 509.6 | 558.4 |
| Trawl % | 72.3% | 72.3% |
| Trawl Allocation | 368.4 | 403.7 |
| At-Sea Set Aside | 20.0 | 21.9 |
| IFQ | 348.4 | 381.8 |
| IFQ Annual Vessel Limit (lbs) | 76,818 | 84,178 |
| Non-Trawl % | 27.7% | 27.7% |
| Non-Trawl Allocation | 141.2 | 154.7 |
| WA Recreational | 17.4 | 19.0 |
| OR Recreational | 26.1 | 28.6 |
| CA Recreational | 46.9 | 51.4 |
| Commercial | 50.8 | 55.7 |
Shortspine Thornyhead
| Current (2026) | Council Recommendation | |
| OFL | 961 | 970 |
| ABC | 831 | 902 |
| Annual Catch Limit (ACL) | 825 | 897 |
| EFP/Research/IOA | 22 | 22 |
| Tribal | 50 | 54.4 |
| Fishery Harvest Guideline (HG) | 752.8 | 820.6 |
| Trawl % | 71% | 71% |
| Trawl Allocation | 534.5 | 582.6 |
| At-Sea Set Aside | 70 | 76.3 |
| IFQ Allocation | 464.5 | 506.3 |
| IFQ Annual Vessel Limit (lbs) | 92,158 | 100,464 |
| Non-Trawl % | 29% | 29% |
| Non-Trawl Allocation | 218.3 | 238.0 |
Cross Fishery Management Plan
Adaptive Management and Flexibility – Scoping
The Council adopted a problem statement and provided guidance to staff on a scope of work for Council Special Project 1, Adaptive Management and Flexibility. The project’s problem statement reads:
Because management decisions in the Council process often unfold over years, Council actions can lag behind changes in the marine environment related to climate change and other unexpected events (e.g., natural disasters, pandemics) and [may not] keep pace with the science that underpins management decisions. We need to improve Council processes and operating procedures to support timely responses to rapidly changing conditions.
The Council identified the following priority actions to advance under this project: (1) “If-then” statements and in-season management actions for FMPs as appropriate, with a focus on allowing action to be taken outside of a Council meeting; (2) Exempted Fishing Permit (EFP) process improvements for all FMPs, using lessons learned from the work of the Council’s Ad Hoc Fisheries Innovation Workgroup, and including pathways to efficiently move tested EFPs into regulation; and (3) processes for improving the timeliness of data streams and the integration of Local and Indigenous Knowledge into Council decision-making. The Council also requested that the Executive Director explore and identify other opportunities outlined in H.1, Attachment 1 to increase procedural efficiencies as part of ongoing work under other initiatives, as appropriate.
Council Response to Executive Orders and Administration Updates
The Council identified four priority actions in response to Executive Order (EO) 14276 Restoring American Seafood Competitiveness which will enhance flexibility, reduce the occurrence of fishery closures, and advance new innovative fishing methods to access underutilized stocks. The actions are 1) reconsidering the sardine stocks defined in the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan (FMP), 2) adding provisions to the Groundfish FMP to increase flexibility in establishing harvest specifications and management measures, 3) modifications to the Council Operating Procedures to streamline consideration of Highly Migratory Species exempted fishing permits, and 4) providing additional flexibility in the Pacific halibut Catch Sharing Plan to increase attainment of the Area 2A allocation. The letter accompanying the actions in response to the EO will also emphasize the Council’s overarching priorities.
The Council also recommended staff send a letter to the Department of Commerce Secretary Lutnik and Assistant Administrator for Fisheries Mr. Soler proposing additional actions beyond deregulation that could be taken to increase seafood competitiveness.
Both letters will be available on the Council’s Correspondence Website in early October.
Administrative Matters
Fiscal Matters
The Council approved a Calendar Year 2025 Operational Budget, which includes an in-person November Council Meeting and an allowance for backfilling the currently vacant Staff Officer position. The Council asked that the Executive Director use discretion in any future hiring decisions if further budget uncertainties arise.
Membership Appointments and Council Operating Procedures
The Council appointed:
- Steve Hines to the tribal position on the Groundfish Advisory Subpanel
- Dr. Aaron Berger to an At-large position on the Scientific and Statistical Committee
Additionally, Chair Hassemer appointed Brad Pettinger as the Chair of the Budget Committee.
The Council adopted modifications to COP 20 Highly Migratory Species Protocol for Exempted Fishing Permits and COP 27 Process for Initiating Allocation Reviews as contained in Agenda Item I.3, Attachment 3 and Agenda Item I.3, Attachment 4. Edits to COP 20 change the Council meetings at which EFP applications are reviewed to November and March (previously June and September), permit initial submission of applications for review at either of those meetings, allow the Council to make recommendations on applications within a single meeting, and include administrative edits. Staff were tasked with incorporating the administrative edits to other COPs, as appropriate, and bringing such edits back for final Council action at a future meeting. The edits to COP 27 align with recent Council actions on groundfish and halibut, including removing outdated Amendment 6 allocation language, revising species allocation categories, eliminating obsolete references, and incorporating inseason flexibility for Pacific halibut management.