Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fishing Capacity Reduction Program; Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs; Industry Fee System for Fishing Capacity Reduction Loan, 43673-43678 [05-14951]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
43673
TABLE 8.—PROPOSED APPROVALS OF SOUTH COAST AND COACHELLA VALLEY PM–10 ATTAINMENT PLAN SUBMITTALS
Plan citation
CAA section
Provision
South Coast
172(c)(3) ........................................
Emission Inventories ....................
110(a), 188(e), and 189(b)(1)(B) ...
Control Measures .........................
172(c)(2), 189(c)(1) ........................
Reasonable Further Progress ......
172(c)(9) ........................................
Contingency Measures .................
189(b)(1)(A) ...................................
Attainment Demonstration ............
176(c)(2)(A) ....................................
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
IV. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This proposed action merely
proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this proposed rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable
duty beyond that required by state law,
it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This proposed rule also does not have
tribal implications because it will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
Coachella Valley
2003 South Coast AQMP, Chapter 3 (Tables 3–1A and 3–3A);
Appendix III (Tables A–1, A–2,
A–3, A–5, and A–7); and Appendix V (Attachment 4).
Table 1 (derived from 2003 South
Coast AQMP, Appendix IV–A)
and Table 2 (derived from 2003
South Coast AQMP, Table 4–
8A).
2003 South Coast AQMP, Table
6–1.
2003 Coachella Valley Plan, Tables 2–2, 2–3, 2–4, and 2–5.
2003 South Coast AQMP, Appendix IV–A, Section 2 (CTY–01,
CTY–04, TCB–01).
2003 South Coast AQMP, Chapter 5; Appendix V, Chapter 2.
Table 6 (derived from ‘‘2003
South Coast AQMP On-Road
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets’’).
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
No new measures.
Table 5 (derived from 2003
Coachella Valley Plan, Tables
2–9 and 2–7).
No new measures.
2003 Coachella Valley Plan,
Chapter 3.
Table 7 (derived from ‘‘2003
Coachella Valley PM–10 SIP
On-Road Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets’’).
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: July 17, 2005.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 05–14931 Filed 7–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 050520139–5139–01; I.D.
030305A]
RIN 0648–AS46
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions;
Fishing Capacity Reduction Program;
Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and
Tanner Crabs; Industry Fee System for
Fishing Capacity Reduction Loan
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
43674
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to
implement an industry fee system for
repaying a $97,399,357.11 Federal loan
financing a fishing capacity reduction
program in the Bering Sea/Aleutian
Islands King and Tanner Crab fishery.
This action’s intent is to implement the
fee system.
DATES: Written comments on this
proposed rule must be received by
August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• E-mail: 0648–AS46@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line the following
identifier: Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands
Crab Fishing Capacity Reduction
Program RIN 0648–AS46. E-mail
comments, with or without attachments,
are limited to 5 megabytes.
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
http:www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: Michael L. Grable, Chief,
Financial Services Division, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910–3282.
• Fax: (301) 713–1306.
Comments involving the burden-hour
estimates or other aspects of the
collection-of-information requirements
contained in this proposed rule should
be submitted in writing to Michael L.
Grable, at the above address, and to
David Rostker, Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), by e-mail at
DavidlRostker@omb.eop.gov or by fax
to 202–395–7285.
Copies of the Environmental
Assessment, Regulatory Impact Review,
and Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (EA/RIR/FRFA) for the
program may be obtained from Michael
L. Grable, at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael L. Grable, (301) 713–2390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Sections 312(b)-(e) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1861a(b)
through (e)) generally authorized fishing
capacity reduction programs. In
particular, section 312(d) authorized
industry fee systems for repaying the
reduction loans which finance
reduction program costs.
Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600 is the
framework rule generally implementing
sections 312(b)-(e).
Sections 1111 and 1112 of the
Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App.
U.S.C. 1279f and 1279g) generally
authorized reduction loans.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act
of 2001 (Public Law 106–554) directed
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
the Secretary of Commerce to establish
a $100 million fishing capacity
reduction program in the Bering Sea/
Aleutian Islands king and Tanner crab
fishery. Congress amended the
authorizing act twice (Public Law 107–
20 and Public Law 107–117), once to
change the crab reduction program’s
funding from a $50 million
appropriation and a $50 million loan to
a $100 million loan and once to clarify
provisions about crab fishery vessels.
NMFS published the crab reduction
program’s proposed implementation
rule on December 12, 2002 (67 FR
76329) and its final rule on December
12, 2003 (68 FR 69331). Anyone
interested in the program’s full
implementation details should refer to
these two documents. NMFS initially
proposed and adopted the program’s
implementation rule as § 600.1018 of
Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600, but NMFS
has since, without other change, redesignated the rule as § 600.1103 in a
new subpart M of part 600.
To avoid confusion, the following
table identifies the various part 600
rules involved in or affecting the crab
reduction program:
DESCRIPTION
SUBPART
Reduction Framework Rule
L
600.1000–
600.1017.
L
600.1018.
M
M
600.1103.
600.1104.
Program Implementation Rule’s Initial
Designation
Program Implementation Rule’s Redesignation
Proposed Fee Rule
SECTION
The crab reduction program’s
maximum cost was $100 million
consisting of a 30–year loan to be repaid
by fees on future crab landings. Each of
six of the crab fishery’s seven former
crab area/species endorsement fisheries
were to pay fees at different rates. In
return for reduction payments equaling
their bid amounts, voluntary program
participants relinquished, among other
things, their crab fishing license
limitation program (LLP) licenses and
other permits, their catch histories
associated with those licenses and
permits, and their crab fishing vessels’
worldwide fishing privileges.
NMFS notice in the Federal Register
(69 FR 7421) issued the crab reduction
program’s invitation to bid on February
17, 2004. The bidding period opened on
March 5, 2004, and closed on April 23,
2004. NMFS scored each bid’s amount
against the bidder’s past ex-vessel crab
revenues and, in a reverse auction,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
accepted the bids whose amounts were
the lowest percentages of the revenues.
Forty-two non-interim crab LLP
license holders submitted bids totaling
$192,600,916. NMFS accepted 28 bids
totaling $99,878,316. The next lowest
scoring bid would have exceeded the
program’s maximum cost.
NMFS next held a referendum about
the fees. The reduction contracts would
have become void unless a two thirds
majority of votes cast in the referendum
approved the fees. Each crab LLP
license holder received one vote. NMFS
mailed ballots to qualifying referendum
voters and the voting period opened on
May 7, 2004. The voting period closed
on June 11, 2004. NMFS received 283
timely votes, four of which were
otherwise unresponsive. Approximately
93 percent (259 votes) approved the
fees. The referendum appeared to be
successful.
Before publishing a reduction
payment tender notice, however, NMFS
learned that the crab catch history for
some reduction/history vessels
overstated their actual crab catch history
during the bid scoring period. This
resulted from a computer programming
error which multiplied the crab catch
history of co-owned reduction/history
vessels times the number of vessel coowners. Accordingly, the bids
associated with these vessels appeared
to have more crab catch history during
the bid scoring period than they actually
did. This resulted in some inaccurate
bid scores.
Because of the government’s
unilateral mistake, the information
NMFS provided to the referendum
voters on May 7, 2004, was materially
inaccurate. In response, NMFS
readministered the referendum by
mailing new ballots to qualifying
referendum voters. The voting period
opened on July 9, 2004, and closed on
July 30, 2004. NMFS received 236
timely votes. This referendum was not
successful since only approximately 46
percent (109) of the votes cast approved
the fees.
Because of the first referendum’s
special circumstances, NMFS decided to
re-invite bids and held a second
referendum based on the new bidding
results. The second bidding period
opened on August 6, 2004, and closed
on September 24, 2004. Fifty-five noninterim crab LLP license holders
submitted bids totaling $225,954,284.
NMFS again scored each bid’s amount
against the bidder’s past ex-vessel
revenues and, in a reverse auction,
accepted the bids whose amounts were
the lowest percentages of the revenues.
NMFS accepted 25 bids totaling
$97,399,357.11. The next lowest scoring
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
bid would have exceeded the program’s
maximum cost. The accepted bids
involved 25 fishing vessels as well as 62
fishing licenses or permits. Twenty-five
of the permits were non-interim crab
fishery LLP licenses. The remaining
included 15 groundfish fishing licenses,
20 Federal fishery vessel permits, one
high seas permit, and one halibut
individual fishing quota share
allocation.
NMFS allocated the prospective
$97,399,357.11 million reduction loan
to the six reduction endorsement
fisheries involved, as the following subamounts:
1. Bristol Bay red king,
$17,129,957.23,
2. BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi,
$66,410,767.20,
3. Aleutian Islands brown king,
$6,380,837.19,
4. Aleutian Islands red king,
$237,588.04,
5. Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue
king, $1,571,216.35, and
6. St. Matthew blue king,
$5,668,991.10.
NMFS next held a another fee
referendum. The reduction contracts
would have become void unless a two
thirds majority of votes cast in the
second referendum approved the fees.
Each crab LLP license holder received
one vote. NMFS mailed ballots to 313
qualifying referendum voters. The
voting period opened on October 1,
2004, and closed on November 15, 2004.
NMFS received 273 timely votes. Over
79 percent (217 votes) approved the
fees. The referendum was successful.
Accordingly, the reduction contracts
were in full force and effect.
On November 24, 2004, NMFS
published another Federal Register
notice (69 FR 68313) advising the public
that NMFS would, beginning on
December 27, 2004, tender the crab
reduction program’s reduction
payments to the 25 accepted bidders.
On December 27, 2004, NMFS required
all accepted bidders to then
permanently stop all further fishing
with the reduction vessels and permits.
Subsequently, NMFS:
1. Disbursed $97,399,357.11 in
reduction payments to 25 accepted
bidders;
2. Revoked the relinquished reduction
permits;
3. Revoked each reduction vessel’s
fishing history;
4. Notified the National Vessel
Documentation Center to revoke the
reduction vessels’ fishery trade
endorsements and appropriately
annotate the reduction vessel’s
document; and
5. Notified the U.S. Maritime
Administration to prohibit the reduction
vessel’s transfer to foreign ownership or
registry.
REDUCTION ENDORSEMENT FISHERIES
Bristol Bay red king (BBR).
Bering Sea snow (BSS) and Bering Sea tanner (BST).
Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king (EAG) and Western
Aleutian Islands golden king (WAG).
Western Aleutian Islands red king (WAI).
Pribilof red king and blue king (PIK).
St. Matthew blue king (SMB).
Aleutian Islands red king
Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue king
St. Matthew blue king
II. Proposed Regulations
NMFS has completed the crab
reduction program except for
implementing the fee which this action
proposes to implement.
The terms defined in § 600.1103 of the
crab reduction program’s
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
implementation rule and in section
600.1000 of the program’s framework
rule apply to this action except for the
definitions of ‘‘reduction endorsement
fishery’’ and ‘‘reduction fishery’’. This
action proposes to refine the definitions
of these two terms to reflect the postCRP fishery’s circumstances. If this rule
is adopted, the new definitions of these
terms would, for purposes of this action,
supersede the old definitions in this
subpart’s § 600.1103.
The framework rule’s § 600.1013
governs fee payment and collection in
general, and this action proposes to
apply the section 600.1013 provisions to
the crab reduction program.
Under § 600.1013, the first ex-vessel
buyers (fish buyers) of post-reduction
fish (fee fish) subject to an industry fee
system must withhold the fee from the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
On March 2, 2005, NMFS published
a final rule (70 FR 10174 et seq.),
effective April 1, 2005, implementing
Amendments 18 and 19 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Bering Sea/
Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crab.
Among other things, this rule added a
new part 680 to this chapter.
Amendments 18 and 19 amended the
crab fishery management plan to
include the Voluntary Three-Pie
Cooperative Program, otherwise known
as the Crab Rationalization Program
(CRP).
The CRP involves terminology which
sometimes differs from the terminology
in the crab reduction program’s
implementation rule. For example, the
CRP uses different terminology for each
of the eight crab rationalization fisheries
which, under the crab reduction
program’s implementation rule,
constitute only six reduction
endorsement fisheries. Rather than
redefining these terms for an already
completed crab reduction program, this
action proposes to retain these terms
and cross reference them to the new
CRP terms.
The following table cross references
the terms for the six reduction
endorsement fisheries involved in the
crab reduction program with the
different terminology for the eight crab
rationalization fisheries involved in the
CRP:
CRAB RATIONALIZATION FISHERIES
Bristol Bay red king
BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi
Aleutian Islands brown king
Please note that, in two instances,
what are two separate crab reduction
fisheries are together but one reduction
endorsement fishery. Consequently,
both of the two separate crab reduction
fisheries will, in each of the two
instances, pay fees at the same rate as
the one reduction endorsement fishery
in which the two fisheries are included
until the one fishery’s reduction loan
sub-amount, for whose payment the two
fisheries are equally obligated, is fully
repaid.
43675
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
trip proceeds which the fish buyers
would otherwise have paid to the
parties (fish sellers) who harvested and
first sold the fee fish to the fish buyers.
Fish buyers calculate the fee to be
collected by multiplying the applicable
fee rate times the fee fish’s full delivery
value. Delivery value is the fee fish’s
full fair market value, including all inkind compensation or other goods or
services exchanged in lieu of cash.
Fish sellers pay the fees when fish
buyers collect by withholding the
applicable amount from trip proceeds.
Fee payment and collection is
mandatory, and there are substantial
penalties for failing to pay and collect
fees in accordance with the applicable
regulations.
The framework rule’s § 600.1014
governs how fish buyers must deposit,
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
43676
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
and later disburse to NMFS, the fees
which they have collected as well as
how they must keep records of, and
report about, collected fees.
Under the framework rule’s
§ 600.1014, fish buyers must, no less
frequently than at the end of each
business week, deposit collected fees in
segregated and Federally insured
accounts until, no less frequently than
on the last business day of each month,
they disburse all collected fees in the
accounts to a lockbox which NMFS has
specified for this purpose. Settlement
sheets must accompany these
disbursements. Fish buyers must
maintain specified fee collection records
for at least 3 years and send NMFS
annual reports of fee collection and
disbursement activities.
All parties interested in this proposed
action should carefully read the
following framework rule sections,
whose detailed provisions apply to the
fee system for repaying the crab
reduction program’s loan:
1. § 600.1012;
2. § 600.1013;
3. § 600.1014;
4. § 600.1015;
5. § 600.1016; and
6. § 600.1017.
You will not understand this action’s
full requirements unless you read this
action in conjunction with reading at
REDUCTION ENDORSEMENT FISHERIES
Bristol Bay red king
BSAI C. opilio and C.
bairdi
Aleutian Islands brown
king
Aleutian Islands red king
Pribilof red king and
Pribilof blue king
St. Matthew Blue
The rates are percentages of delivery
value. Please see the framework rule’s
section 600.1000 for the definition of
‘‘delivery value’’ and of the other terms
relevant to this proposed fee rule.
Each disbursement of the reduction
loan’s $97,399,357.11 principal amount
began accruing interest as of the date of
each such disbursement. The loan’s
interest rate will be the applicable rate,
plus 2 percent, which the U.S. Treasury
determines at the end of fiscal year
2005.
Classification
The Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, NMFS, determined that this
proposed rule is consistent with the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act and
other applicable laws.
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act, NMFS
prepared an environmental assessment
for the crab reduction program’s final
implementing rule (December 12, 2003;
68 FR 69331). The assessment discusses
the program’s impact on the natural and
human environment. The assessment
resulted in a finding of no significant
impact. The assessment considered,
among other alternatives, the
implementation of the fee payment and
collection which this action proposes.
Therefore, this proposed action has
received a categorical exclusion from
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
least the framework rule sections listed
above.
NMFS proposes, in accordance with
the framework rule’s section
600.1013(d), to establish the initial fee
for the program’s six reduction
endorsement fisheries. After this action
becomes a final rule, NMFS will then
separately mail notification to each
affected fish seller and fish buyer of
whom NMFS has notice. Until this
notification, fish sellers and fish buyers
do not have to either pay or collect the
fee. After this action becomes a final
rule, the initial fee rates applicable to
each reduction endorsement fishery
would be as indicated in the last
column of the following table:
FEE
RATE
CRAB RATIONALIZATION FISHERIES
LOAN SUB-AMOUNT
BBR ...............................................................
$17,129,957.23 ..................................
1.9%
BSS and BST ................................................
$66,410,767.20 ..................................
5.0%
EAG and WAG ..............................................
WAI ................................................................
$6,380,837.19 ....................................
$237,588.04 .......................................
2.6%
5.0%
PIK .................................................................
SMB ...............................................................
$1,571,216.35 ....................................
$5,668,991.10 ....................................
5.0%
5.0%
additional analysis. NMFS will provide
a copy of the assessment upon request
(see ADDRESSES).
The Office of Management and Budget
determined that this proposal is
significant under Executive Order
12866. NMFS prepared a Regulatory
Impact Review for the crab reduction
program’s final rule. NMFS will provide
a copy of the review upon request (see
ADDRESSES).
NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for the crab
reduction program as required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act’s section 603.
The analysis describes the impact this
proposed rule would have on small
entities. NMFS will provide a copy of
the analysis upon request (see
ADDRESSES). An analysis summary
follows:
1. Description of Reasons for Action and
Statement of Objective and Legal Basis
Please see the initial background
section of this proposed action’s
supplementary information, because the
information there is similar to the
analysis in this regard.
2. Description of Small Entities to
Which the Rule Applies
The Small Business Administration
has defined small entities to be all fish
harvesting businesses which are
independently owned and operated, are
not dominant in their field of operation,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and have annual receipts of $3.5 million
or less. The definition also includes
processors with 500 or fewer employees
involved in related industries such as
canned and cured fish and seafood or
preparing fresh fish and seafood.
Moreover, the definition also includes
virtually all harvesting vessels.
3. Description of Recordkeeping and
Compliance Costs
Please see this action’s collection-ofinformation requirements following the
analysis.
4. Duplication or Conflict with Other
Federal Rules
This proposed rule does not duplicate
or conflict with any Federal rules.
5. Description of Significant
Alternatives Considered
NMFS considered three alternatives:
(1) status quo (no fees); (2) buyback with
uniform fees; and (3) buyback with
weighted (by reduction endorsement
fishery) fees.
Status Quo (Alternative 1)
Under the status quo, vessel revenues
would not be affected. The status quo is
a significant alternative to the proposed
action because the former involves no
fees and the latter does. NMFS could
not choose this alternative because it is
contrary to Public Law 106–554.
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Uniform Loan Repayment Fees
(Alternative 2)
Under Alternative 2, NMFS would
apply one fee to the entire crab fishery
rather than assigning a different fee to
each of the six reduction endorsement
fisheries based on their proportional bid
crab values. NMFS could not choose
this alternative because it is contrary to
Public Law 106–554.
Repayment Fees (Alternative 3)
Under Alternative 3, NMFS would
assign a different fee rate for each of the
six reduction endorsement fisheries
based on their proportional bid crab
values. Like Alternative 2, Alternative 3
would adversely affect vessel revenues.
Nevertheless, Alternative 3 is the most
equitable because it apportions
repayment obligations based on the
actual reduction benefits which each
reduction endorsement fishery actually
received. This is the preferred
alternative both because it is the most
equitable and Public Law 106–554
requires this alternative’s method.
6. Steps the Agency Has Taken to
Mitigate Negative Effects of the Action
With the lack of available cost data,
increases in revenues may serve as a
proxy for increased profitability.
Further, in light of available revenue
data, and assuming that each individual
vessel shares in the increased revenues
resulting from the crab buyback
program, the comparison of the relative
effects of the program versus the effects
of the fees show that overall economic
benefits of the program would still be
greater than the relative fees charged
under this rule. NMFS is not aware of
any other measures that could reduce
the impact on small entities and still
meet statutory requirements. However,
NMFS welcomes comments that relay
such ideas.
This proposed rule contains
collection-of-information requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
OMB has approved these information
collections under OMB control number
0648–0376. NMFS estimates that the
public reporting burden for these
requirements will average:
1. Two hours for submitting a
monthly fish buyer settlement sheet;
2. Four hours for submitting an
annual fish buyer report; and
3. Two hours for making a fish buyer/
fish seller report when one party fails to
either pay or collect the fee.
These response estimates include the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the information collection.
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
Send comments regarding this burden
estimate, or any other aspect of this data
collection, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to both NMFS and
OMB (see ADDRESSES).
Notwithstanding any other provision
of the law, no person is required to
respond to, and no person is subject to
a penalty for failure to comply with, any
information collection subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
information collection displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 600
Fisheries, Fishing capacity reduction,
Fishing permits, Fishing vessels,
Intergovernmental relations, Loan
programs business, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons in the preamble, the
National Marine Fisheries Service
proposes to amend 50 CFR part 600 as
follows:
PART 600—MAGNUSON-STEVENS
ACT PROVISIONS
1. Section 600.1104 text is added to
read as follows:
§ 600.1104 Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands (BSAI) crab species fee payment
and collection system.
(a) Purpose. As authorized by Public
Law 106–554, this section’s purpose is
to:
(1) In accordance with § 600.1012 of
subpart L, establish:
(i) The borrower’s obligation to repay
a reduction loan, and
(ii) The loan’s principal amount,
interest rate, and repayment term; and
(2) In accordance with § 600.1013
through § 600.1016 of subpart L,
implement an industry fee system for
the reduction fishery.
(b) Definitions. Unless otherwise
defined in this section, the terms
defined in § 600.1000 of subpart L and
§ 600.1103 of this subpart expressly
apply to this section. The following
terms have the following meanings for
the purpose of this section:
Crab rationalization crab means the
same as in § 680.2 of this chapter.
Crab rationalization fisheries means
the same as in § 680.2 of this chapter.
Reduction endorsement fishery means
any of the seven fisheries that § 679.2 of
this chapter formerly (before adoption of
§ 680 of this chapter) defined as crab
area/species endorsements, except the
area/species endorsement for Norton
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43677
Sound red king. More specifically, the
reduction endorsement fisheries, and
the crab rationalization fisheries which
(after adoption of § 680 of this chapter)
correspond to the reduction
endorsement fisheries, are:
(1) Bristol Bay red king (the
corresponding crab rationalization
fishery is Bristol Bay red king crab),
(2) Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands
Area C. opilio and (the corresponding
crab rationalization fisheries are two
separate fisheries, one for Bering Sea
snow crab and another for Bering Sea
Tanner crab),
(3) Aleutian Islands brown king (the
corresponding crab rationalization
fisheries are the two separate fisheries,
one for Eastern Aleutian Islands golden
king crab and another for
Western Aleutian Islands golden king
crab),
(4) Aleutian Islands red king (the
corresponding crab rationalization
fishery is Western Aleutian Islands red
king crab),
(5) Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue
king (the corresponding crab
rationalization fishery is Pribilof red
king and blue king crab), and
(6) St. Matthew blue king (the
corresponding crab rationalization
fishery is also St. Matthew blue king
crab).
Reduction fishery means the fishery
for all crab rationalization crab in all
crab rationalization fisheries.
Sub-amount means the portion of the
reduction loan amount for whose
repayment the borrower in each
reduction endorsement fishery is
obligated.
(c) Reduction loan amount. The
reduction loan’s original principal
amount is $97,399,357.11.
(d) Sub-amounts. The sub-amounts
are:
(1) For Bristol Bay red king,
$17,129,957.23;
(2) For Bering Sea and Aleutian
Islands Area C. opilio and C. bairdi,
$66,410,767.20;
(3) For Aleutian Islands brown king,
$6,380,837.19;
(4) For Aleutian Islands red king,
$237,588.04;
(5) For Pribilof red king and Pribilof
blue king, $1,571,216.35; and
(6) For St. Matthew blue king,
$5,668,991.10.
(e) Interest accrual from inception.
Interest began accruing on each portion
of the reduction loan amount on and
from the date on which NMFS
disbursed each such portion.
(f) Interest rate. The reduction loan’s
interest rate shall be the applicable rate
which the U.S. Treasury determines at
the end of fiscal year 2005 plus 2
percent.
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
43678
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 144 / Thursday, July 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
(g) Repayment term. For the purpose
of determining fee rates, the reduction
loan’s repayment term is 30 years from
January 19, 2005, but each fee shall
continue indefinitely for as long as
necessary to fully repay each
subamount.
(h) Reduction loan repayment. (1) The
borrower shall, in accordance with
§ 600.1012, repay the reduction loan;
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:21 Jul 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
(2) Fish sellers in each reduction
endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with § 600.1013, pay the fee
at the rate applicable to each such
fishery’s subamount;
(3) Fish buyers in each reduction
endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with § 600.1013, collect the
fee at the rate applicable to each such
fishery;
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(4) Fish buyers in each reduction
endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with § 600.1014, deposit and
disburse, as well as keep records for and
submit reports about, the fees applicable
to each such fishery; and,
(5) The reduction loan is, in all other
respects, subject to the provisions of
§ 600.1012 through § 600.1017.
[FR Doc. 05–14951 Filed 7–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM
28JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 144 (Thursday, July 28, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43673-43678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-14951]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 050520139-5139-01; I.D. 030305A]
RIN 0648-AS46
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fishing Capacity Reduction
Program; Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs; Industry
Fee System for Fishing Capacity Reduction Loan
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
[[Page 43674]]
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to implement an industry fee system
for repaying a $97,399,357.11 Federal loan financing a fishing capacity
reduction program in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner
Crab fishery. This action's intent is to implement the fee system.
DATES: Written comments on this proposed rule must be received by
August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
E-mail: 0648-AS46@noaa.gov. Include in the subject line
the following identifier: Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands Crab Fishing
Capacity Reduction Program RIN 0648-AS46. E-mail comments, with or
without attachments, are limited to 5 megabytes.
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:www.regulations.gov.
Mail: Michael L. Grable, Chief, Financial Services
Division, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway,
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3282.
Fax: (301) 713-1306.
Comments involving the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of
the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed
rule should be submitted in writing to Michael L. Grable, at the above
address, and to David Rostker, Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
by e-mail at David--Rostker@omb.eop.gov or by fax to 202-395-7285.
Copies of the Environmental Assessment, Regulatory Impact Review,
and Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/FRFA) for the program
may be obtained from Michael L. Grable, at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael L. Grable, (301) 713-2390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Sections 312(b)-(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation
and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1861a(b) through (e)) generally
authorized fishing capacity reduction programs. In particular, section
312(d) authorized industry fee systems for repaying the reduction loans
which finance reduction program costs.
Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600 is the framework rule generally
implementing sections 312(b)-(e).
Sections 1111 and 1112 of the Merchant Marine Act, 1936 (46 App.
U.S.C. 1279f and 1279g) generally authorized reduction loans.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2001 (Public Law 106-554)
directed the Secretary of Commerce to establish a $100 million fishing
capacity reduction program in the Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands king and
Tanner crab fishery. Congress amended the authorizing act twice (Public
Law 107-20 and Public Law 107-117), once to change the crab reduction
program's funding from a $50 million appropriation and a $50 million
loan to a $100 million loan and once to clarify provisions about crab
fishery vessels.
NMFS published the crab reduction program's proposed implementation
rule on December 12, 2002 (67 FR 76329) and its final rule on December
12, 2003 (68 FR 69331). Anyone interested in the program's full
implementation details should refer to these two documents. NMFS
initially proposed and adopted the program's implementation rule as
Sec. 600.1018 of Subpart L of 50 CFR part 600, but NMFS has since,
without other change, re-designated the rule as Sec. 600.1103 in a new
subpart M of part 600.
To avoid confusion, the following table identifies the various part
600 rules involved in or affecting the crab reduction program:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DESCRIPTION SUBPART SECTION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduction Framework Rule L 600.1000-600.10
17
Program Implementation L 600.1018
Rule's Initial Designation
Program Implementation M 600.1103
Rule's Re-designation
Proposed Fee Rule M 600.1104
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crab reduction program's maximum cost was $100 million
consisting of a 30-year loan to be repaid by fees on future crab
landings. Each of six of the crab fishery's seven former crab area/
species endorsement fisheries were to pay fees at different rates. In
return for reduction payments equaling their bid amounts, voluntary
program participants relinquished, among other things, their crab
fishing license limitation program (LLP) licenses and other permits,
their catch histories associated with those licenses and permits, and
their crab fishing vessels' worldwide fishing privileges.
NMFS notice in the Federal Register (69 FR 7421) issued the crab
reduction program's invitation to bid on February 17, 2004. The bidding
period opened on March 5, 2004, and closed on April 23, 2004. NMFS
scored each bid's amount against the bidder's past ex-vessel crab
revenues and, in a reverse auction, accepted the bids whose amounts
were the lowest percentages of the revenues.
Forty-two non-interim crab LLP license holders submitted bids
totaling $192,600,916. NMFS accepted 28 bids totaling $99,878,316. The
next lowest scoring bid would have exceeded the program's maximum cost.
NMFS next held a referendum about the fees. The reduction contracts
would have become void unless a two thirds majority of votes cast in
the referendum approved the fees. Each crab LLP license holder received
one vote. NMFS mailed ballots to qualifying referendum voters and the
voting period opened on May 7, 2004. The voting period closed on June
11, 2004. NMFS received 283 timely votes, four of which were otherwise
unresponsive. Approximately 93 percent (259 votes) approved the fees.
The referendum appeared to be successful.
Before publishing a reduction payment tender notice, however, NMFS
learned that the crab catch history for some reduction/history vessels
overstated their actual crab catch history during the bid scoring
period. This resulted from a computer programming error which
multiplied the crab catch history of co-owned reduction/history vessels
times the number of vessel co-owners. Accordingly, the bids associated
with these vessels appeared to have more crab catch history during the
bid scoring period than they actually did. This resulted in some
inaccurate bid scores.
Because of the government's unilateral mistake, the information
NMFS provided to the referendum voters on May 7, 2004, was materially
inaccurate. In response, NMFS readministered the referendum by mailing
new ballots to qualifying referendum voters. The voting period opened
on July 9, 2004, and closed on July 30, 2004. NMFS received 236 timely
votes. This referendum was not successful since only approximately 46
percent (109) of the votes cast approved the fees.
Because of the first referendum's special circumstances, NMFS
decided to re-invite bids and held a second referendum based on the new
bidding results. The second bidding period opened on August 6, 2004,
and closed on September 24, 2004. Fifty-five non-interim crab LLP
license holders submitted bids totaling $225,954,284.
NMFS again scored each bid's amount against the bidder's past ex-
vessel revenues and, in a reverse auction, accepted the bids whose
amounts were the lowest percentages of the revenues.
NMFS accepted 25 bids totaling $97,399,357.11. The next lowest
scoring
[[Page 43675]]
bid would have exceeded the program's maximum cost. The accepted bids
involved 25 fishing vessels as well as 62 fishing licenses or permits.
Twenty-five of the permits were non-interim crab fishery LLP licenses.
The remaining included 15 groundfish fishing licenses, 20 Federal
fishery vessel permits, one high seas permit, and one halibut
individual fishing quota share allocation.
NMFS allocated the prospective $97,399,357.11 million reduction
loan to the six reduction endorsement fisheries involved, as the
following sub-amounts:
1. Bristol Bay red king, $17,129,957.23,
2. BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi, $66,410,767.20,
3. Aleutian Islands brown king, $6,380,837.19,
4. Aleutian Islands red king, $237,588.04,
5. Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue king, $1,571,216.35, and
6. St. Matthew blue king, $5,668,991.10.
NMFS next held a another fee referendum. The reduction contracts
would have become void unless a two thirds majority of votes cast in
the second referendum approved the fees. Each crab LLP license holder
received one vote. NMFS mailed ballots to 313 qualifying referendum
voters. The voting period opened on October 1, 2004, and closed on
November 15, 2004. NMFS received 273 timely votes. Over 79 percent (217
votes) approved the fees. The referendum was successful. Accordingly,
the reduction contracts were in full force and effect.
On November 24, 2004, NMFS published another Federal Register
notice (69 FR 68313) advising the public that NMFS would, beginning on
December 27, 2004, tender the crab reduction program's reduction
payments to the 25 accepted bidders. On December 27, 2004, NMFS
required all accepted bidders to then permanently stop all further
fishing with the reduction vessels and permits.
Subsequently, NMFS:
1. Disbursed $97,399,357.11 in reduction payments to 25 accepted
bidders;
2. Revoked the relinquished reduction permits;
3. Revoked each reduction vessel's fishing history;
4. Notified the National Vessel Documentation Center to revoke the
reduction vessels' fishery trade endorsements and appropriately
annotate the reduction vessel's document; and
5. Notified the U.S. Maritime Administration to prohibit the
reduction vessel's transfer to foreign ownership or registry.
On March 2, 2005, NMFS published a final rule (70 FR 10174 et
seq.), effective April 1, 2005, implementing Amendments 18 and 19 to
the Fishery Management Plan for Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands King and
Tanner Crab. Among other things, this rule added a new part 680 to this
chapter. Amendments 18 and 19 amended the crab fishery management plan
to include the Voluntary Three-Pie Cooperative Program, otherwise known
as the Crab Rationalization Program (CRP).
The CRP involves terminology which sometimes differs from the
terminology in the crab reduction program's implementation rule. For
example, the CRP uses different terminology for each of the eight crab
rationalization fisheries which, under the crab reduction program's
implementation rule, constitute only six reduction endorsement
fisheries. Rather than redefining these terms for an already completed
crab reduction program, this action proposes to retain these terms and
cross reference them to the new CRP terms.
The following table cross references the terms for the six
reduction endorsement fisheries involved in the crab reduction program
with the different terminology for the eight crab rationalization
fisheries involved in the CRP:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REDUCTION ENDORSEMENT FISHERIES CRAB RATIONALIZATION FISHERIES
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bristol Bay red king Bristol Bay red king (BBR)
BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi Bering Sea snow (BSS) and Bering Sea tanner (BST)
Aleutian Islands brown king Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king (EAG) and Western
Aleutian Islands golden king (WAG)
Aleutian Islands red king Western Aleutian Islands red king (WAI)
Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue Pribilof red king and blue king (PIK)
king
St. Matthew blue king St. Matthew blue king (SMB)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please note that, in two instances, what are two separate crab
reduction fisheries are together but one reduction endorsement fishery.
Consequently, both of the two separate crab reduction fisheries will,
in each of the two instances, pay fees at the same rate as the one
reduction endorsement fishery in which the two fisheries are included
until the one fishery's reduction loan sub-amount, for whose payment
the two fisheries are equally obligated, is fully repaid.
II. Proposed Regulations
NMFS has completed the crab reduction program except for
implementing the fee which this action proposes to implement.
The terms defined in Sec. 600.1103 of the crab reduction program's
implementation rule and in section 600.1000 of the program's framework
rule apply to this action except for the definitions of ``reduction
endorsement fishery'' and ``reduction fishery''. This action proposes
to refine the definitions of these two terms to reflect the post-CRP
fishery's circumstances. If this rule is adopted, the new definitions
of these terms would, for purposes of this action, supersede the old
definitions in this subpart's Sec. 600.1103.
The framework rule's Sec. 600.1013 governs fee payment and
collection in general, and this action proposes to apply the section
600.1013 provisions to the crab reduction program.
Under Sec. 600.1013, the first ex-vessel buyers (fish buyers) of
post-reduction fish (fee fish) subject to an industry fee system must
withhold the fee from the trip proceeds which the fish buyers would
otherwise have paid to the parties (fish sellers) who harvested and
first sold the fee fish to the fish buyers. Fish buyers calculate the
fee to be collected by multiplying the applicable fee rate times the
fee fish's full delivery value. Delivery value is the fee fish's full
fair market value, including all in-kind compensation or other goods or
services exchanged in lieu of cash.
Fish sellers pay the fees when fish buyers collect by withholding
the applicable amount from trip proceeds. Fee payment and collection is
mandatory, and there are substantial penalties for failing to pay and
collect fees in accordance with the applicable regulations.
The framework rule's Sec. 600.1014 governs how fish buyers must
deposit,
[[Page 43676]]
and later disburse to NMFS, the fees which they have collected as well
as how they must keep records of, and report about, collected fees.
Under the framework rule's Sec. 600.1014, fish buyers must, no
less frequently than at the end of each business week, deposit
collected fees in segregated and Federally insured accounts until, no
less frequently than on the last business day of each month, they
disburse all collected fees in the accounts to a lockbox which NMFS has
specified for this purpose. Settlement sheets must accompany these
disbursements. Fish buyers must maintain specified fee collection
records for at least 3 years and send NMFS annual reports of fee
collection and disbursement activities.
All parties interested in this proposed action should carefully
read the following framework rule sections, whose detailed provisions
apply to the fee system for repaying the crab reduction program's loan:
1. Sec. 600.1012;
2. Sec. 600.1013;
3. Sec. 600.1014;
4. Sec. 600.1015;
5. Sec. 600.1016; and
6. Sec. 600.1017.
You will not understand this action's full requirements unless you
read this action in conjunction with reading at least the framework
rule sections listed above.
NMFS proposes, in accordance with the framework rule's section
600.1013(d), to establish the initial fee for the program's six
reduction endorsement fisheries. After this action becomes a final
rule, NMFS will then separately mail notification to each affected fish
seller and fish buyer of whom NMFS has notice. Until this notification,
fish sellers and fish buyers do not have to either pay or collect the
fee. After this action becomes a final rule, the initial fee rates
applicable to each reduction endorsement fishery would be as indicated
in the last column of the following table:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REDUCTION ENDORSEMENT FISHERIES CRAB RATIONALIZATION FISHERIES LOAN SUB-AMOUNT FEE RATE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bristol Bay red king BBR $17,129,957.23 1.9%
BSAI C. opilio and C. bairdi BSS and BST $66,410,767.20 5.0%
Aleutian Islands brown king EAG and WAG $6,380,837.19 2.6%
Aleutian Islands red king WAI $237,588.04 5.0%
Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue king PIK $1,571,216.35 5.0%
St. Matthew Blue SMB $5,668,991.10 5.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rates are percentages of delivery value. Please see the
framework rule's section 600.1000 for the definition of ``delivery
value'' and of the other terms relevant to this proposed fee rule.
Each disbursement of the reduction loan's $97,399,357.11 principal
amount began accruing interest as of the date of each such
disbursement. The loan's interest rate will be the applicable rate,
plus 2 percent, which the U.S. Treasury determines at the end of fiscal
year 2005.
Classification
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, determined that
this proposed rule is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act and other applicable laws.
In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, NMFS
prepared an environmental assessment for the crab reduction program's
final implementing rule (December 12, 2003; 68 FR 69331). The
assessment discusses the program's impact on the natural and human
environment. The assessment resulted in a finding of no significant
impact. The assessment considered, among other alternatives, the
implementation of the fee payment and collection which this action
proposes. Therefore, this proposed action has received a categorical
exclusion from additional analysis. NMFS will provide a copy of the
assessment upon request (see ADDRESSES).
The Office of Management and Budget determined that this proposal
is significant under Executive Order 12866. NMFS prepared a Regulatory
Impact Review for the crab reduction program's final rule. NMFS will
provide a copy of the review upon request (see ADDRESSES).
NMFS prepared a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the crab
reduction program as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act's
section 603. The analysis describes the impact this proposed rule would
have on small entities. NMFS will provide a copy of the analysis upon
request (see ADDRESSES). An analysis summary follows:
1. Description of Reasons for Action and Statement of Objective and
Legal Basis
Please see the initial background section of this proposed action's
supplementary information, because the information there is similar to
the analysis in this regard.
2. Description of Small Entities to Which the Rule Applies
The Small Business Administration has defined small entities to be
all fish harvesting businesses which are independently owned and
operated, are not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual
receipts of $3.5 million or less. The definition also includes
processors with 500 or fewer employees involved in related industries
such as canned and cured fish and seafood or preparing fresh fish and
seafood. Moreover, the definition also includes virtually all
harvesting vessels.
3. Description of Recordkeeping and Compliance Costs
Please see this action's collection-of-information requirements
following the analysis.
4. Duplication or Conflict with Other Federal Rules
This proposed rule does not duplicate or conflict with any Federal
rules.
5. Description of Significant Alternatives Considered
NMFS considered three alternatives: (1) status quo (no fees); (2)
buyback with uniform fees; and (3) buyback with weighted (by reduction
endorsement fishery) fees.
Status Quo (Alternative 1)
Under the status quo, vessel revenues would not be affected. The
status quo is a significant alternative to the proposed action because
the former involves no fees and the latter does. NMFS could not choose
this alternative because it is contrary to Public Law 106-554.
[[Page 43677]]
Uniform Loan Repayment Fees (Alternative 2)
Under Alternative 2, NMFS would apply one fee to the entire crab
fishery rather than assigning a different fee to each of the six
reduction endorsement fisheries based on their proportional bid crab
values. NMFS could not choose this alternative because it is contrary
to Public Law 106-554.
Repayment Fees (Alternative 3)
Under Alternative 3, NMFS would assign a different fee rate for
each of the six reduction endorsement fisheries based on their
proportional bid crab values. Like Alternative 2, Alternative 3 would
adversely affect vessel revenues. Nevertheless, Alternative 3 is the
most equitable because it apportions repayment obligations based on the
actual reduction benefits which each reduction endorsement fishery
actually received. This is the preferred alternative both because it is
the most equitable and Public Law 106-554 requires this alternative's
method.
6. Steps the Agency Has Taken to Mitigate Negative Effects of the
Action
With the lack of available cost data, increases in revenues may
serve as a proxy for increased profitability. Further, in light of
available revenue data, and assuming that each individual vessel shares
in the increased revenues resulting from the crab buyback program, the
comparison of the relative effects of the program versus the effects of
the fees show that overall economic benefits of the program would still
be greater than the relative fees charged under this rule. NMFS is not
aware of any other measures that could reduce the impact on small
entities and still meet statutory requirements. However, NMFS welcomes
comments that relay such ideas.
This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB has approved these
information collections under OMB control number 0648-0376. NMFS
estimates that the public reporting burden for these requirements will
average:
1. Two hours for submitting a monthly fish buyer settlement sheet;
2. Four hours for submitting an annual fish buyer report; and
3. Two hours for making a fish buyer/fish seller report when one
party fails to either pay or collect the fee.
These response estimates include the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
information collection.
Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect
of this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden,
to both NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES).
Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is
required to respond to, and no person is subject to a penalty for
failure to comply with, any information collection subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that information collection displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 600
Fisheries, Fishing capacity reduction, Fishing permits, Fishing
vessels, Intergovernmental relations, Loan programs business, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 25, 2005.
James W. Balsiger,
Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National
Marine Fisheries Service.
For the reasons in the preamble, the National Marine Fisheries
Service proposes to amend 50 CFR part 600 as follows:
PART 600--MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT PROVISIONS
1. Section 600.1104 text is added to read as follows:
Sec. 600.1104 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) crab species fee
payment and collection system.
(a) Purpose. As authorized by Public Law 106-554, this section's
purpose is to:
(1) In accordance with Sec. 600.1012 of subpart L, establish:
(i) The borrower's obligation to repay a reduction loan, and
(ii) The loan's principal amount, interest rate, and repayment
term; and
(2) In accordance with Sec. 600.1013 through Sec. 600.1016 of
subpart L, implement an industry fee system for the reduction fishery.
(b) Definitions. Unless otherwise defined in this section, the
terms defined in Sec. 600.1000 of subpart L and Sec. 600.1103 of this
subpart expressly apply to this section. The following terms have the
following meanings for the purpose of this section:
Crab rationalization crab means the same as in Sec. 680.2 of this
chapter.
Crab rationalization fisheries means the same as in Sec. 680.2 of
this chapter.
Reduction endorsement fishery means any of the seven fisheries that
Sec. 679.2 of this chapter formerly (before adoption of Sec. 680 of
this chapter) defined as crab area/species endorsements, except the
area/species endorsement for Norton Sound red king. More specifically,
the reduction endorsement fisheries, and the crab rationalization
fisheries which (after adoption of Sec. 680 of this chapter)
correspond to the reduction endorsement fisheries, are:
(1) Bristol Bay red king (the corresponding crab rationalization
fishery is Bristol Bay red king crab),
(2) Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area C. opilio and (the
corresponding crab rationalization fisheries are two separate
fisheries, one for Bering Sea snow crab and another for Bering Sea
Tanner crab),
(3) Aleutian Islands brown king (the corresponding crab
rationalization fisheries are the two separate fisheries, one for
Eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab and another for
Western Aleutian Islands golden king crab),
(4) Aleutian Islands red king (the corresponding crab
rationalization fishery is Western Aleutian Islands red king crab),
(5) Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue king (the corresponding
crab rationalization fishery is Pribilof red king and blue king crab),
and
(6) St. Matthew blue king (the corresponding crab rationalization
fishery is also St. Matthew blue king crab).
Reduction fishery means the fishery for all crab rationalization
crab in all crab rationalization fisheries.
Sub-amount means the portion of the reduction loan amount for whose
repayment the borrower in each reduction endorsement fishery is
obligated.
(c) Reduction loan amount. The reduction loan's original principal
amount is $97,399,357.11.
(d) Sub-amounts. The sub-amounts are:
(1) For Bristol Bay red king, $17,129,957.23;
(2) For Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area C. opilio and C.
bairdi, $66,410,767.20;
(3) For Aleutian Islands brown king, $6,380,837.19;
(4) For Aleutian Islands red king, $237,588.04;
(5) For Pribilof red king and Pribilof blue king, $1,571,216.35;
and
(6) For St. Matthew blue king, $5,668,991.10.
(e) Interest accrual from inception. Interest began accruing on
each portion of the reduction loan amount on and from the date on which
NMFS disbursed each such portion.
(f) Interest rate. The reduction loan's interest rate shall be the
applicable rate which the U.S. Treasury determines at the end of fiscal
year 2005 plus 2 percent.
[[Page 43678]]
(g) Repayment term. For the purpose of determining fee rates, the
reduction loan's repayment term is 30 years from January 19, 2005, but
each fee shall continue indefinitely for as long as necessary to fully
repay each subamount.
(h) Reduction loan repayment. (1) The borrower shall, in accordance
with Sec. 600.1012, repay the reduction loan;
(2) Fish sellers in each reduction endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with Sec. 600.1013, pay the fee at the rate applicable to
each such fishery's subamount;
(3) Fish buyers in each reduction endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with Sec. 600.1013, collect the fee at the rate applicable
to each such fishery;
(4) Fish buyers in each reduction endorsement fishery shall, in
accordance with Sec. 600.1014, deposit and disburse, as well as keep
records for and submit reports about, the fees applicable to each such
fishery; and,
(5) The reduction loan is, in all other respects, subject to the
provisions of Sec. 600.1012 through Sec. 600.1017.
[FR Doc. 05-14951 Filed 7-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
