Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; IFQ Program; Modify Medical and Beneficiary Transfer Provisions, 56991-56998 [2019-23028]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56991-56998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23028]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No.: 191016-0065]
RIN 0648-BJ07


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; IFQ Program; 
Modify Medical and Beneficiary Transfer Provisions

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to modify the medical and 
beneficiary transfer provisions of the Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) 
Program for the fixed-gear commercial Pacific halibut and sablefish 
fisheries. This proposed rule is intended to simplify administration of 
the medical and beneficiary transfer provisions while promoting the 
long-standing objective of maintaining an owner-operated IFQ fishery. 
This proposed rule would also make minor technical corrections to 
regulations for improved accuracy and clarity. This proposed rule is 
intended to promote the goals and objectives of the IFQ Program, the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Northern 
Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, and other applicable laws.

DATES: Submit comments on or before November 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number NOAA-
NMFS-2019-0069, either of the following methods:
     Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2019-0069, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon, 
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
     Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant 
Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region 
NMFS, Attn: Records Office. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 
99802-1668.
    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, 
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on 
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying 
information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, 
or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender 
will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter 
``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
    Electronic copies of the Regulatory Impact Review (referred to as 
the ``Analysis'') and the Categorical Exclusion prepared for this 
proposed rule are available from https://www.regulations.gov.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
proposed rule may be submitted by mail to NMFS at the above address; by 
email to [email protected]; or by fax to (202) 395-5806.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Warpinski, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for Action

    NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic 
zone off Alaska under the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for Groundfish 
of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) and under the FMP for Groundfish of the 
Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI). The North 
Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMPs under 
the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 
Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMPs appear 
at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.
    The International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC) and NMFS manage 
fishing for Pacific halibut through regulations established under the 
authority of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 (Halibut Act). 
The IPHC promulgates regulations governing the halibut fishery under 
the Convention between the United States and Canada for the 
Preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific Ocean and 
Bering Sea (Convention). The IPHC's regulations are subject to

[[Page 56992]]

approval by the Secretary of State with concurrence of the Secretary of 
Commerce (Secretary). NMFS publishes the IPHC's regulations as annual 
management measures pursuant to 50 CFR 300.62.
    The Halibut Act, at sections 773c(a) and (b), provides the 
Secretary with general responsibility to carry out the Convention and 
the Halibut Act. In adopting regulations that may be necessary to carry 
out the purposes and objectives of the Convention and the Halibut Act, 
the Secretary is directed to consult with the Secretary of the 
department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating, currently the 
Department of Homeland Security.
    The Halibut Act, at section 773c(c), also provides the Council with 
authority to develop regulations, including limited access regulations, 
that are in addition to, and not in conflict with, approved IPHC 
regulations. Regulations developed by the Council may be implemented by 
NMFS only after approval by the Secretary. The Council has exercised 
this authority in the development of subsistence halibut fishery 
management measures, codified at 50 CFR 300.65, and the limited access 
program for charter operators in the charter fishery, codified at 50 
CFR 300.67. The Council also developed the IFQ Program for the 
commercial halibut and sablefish fisheries, codified at 50 CFR part 
679, under the authority of section 773c of the Halibut Act and section 
303(b) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).

Background

    The following background sections describe (1) the IFQ Program, (2) 
the IFQ medical transfer provision, (3) the IFQ beneficiary transfer 
provision, and (4) the appeals process.

The IFQ Program

    The commercial halibut and sablefish fisheries in the GOA and the 
BSAI management areas are managed under the IFQ Program that was 
implemented in 1995 (58 FR 59375, November 9, 1993). The Council and 
NMFS developed the IFQ Program to resolve the conservation and 
management problems commonly associated with open access fisheries. The 
preamble to the proposed rule published on December 3, 1992 (57 FR 
57130), describes the background issues leading to the Council's 
initial action recommending the adoption of the IFQ Program.
    The IFQ Program limits access to the halibut and sablefish 
fisheries to those persons holding quota share (QS) in specific 
management areas. The IFQ Program allocates QS annually, and each year 
that QS yields an exclusive harvest privilege, an annual IFQ permit, 
among participants in the fixed gear commercial fishery. An IFQ permit 
is expressed in pounds and is based on the amount of QS held in 
relation to the total QS pool. Each year, NMFS issues IFQ to each QS 
holder to harvest a specific percentage of either the total allowable 
catch (TAC) in the sablefish fishery or the annual commercial catch 
limit in the halibut fishery. In addition to being specific to 
sablefish or halibut, QS and IFQ are designated for specific geographic 
areas of harvest (commonly known as regulatory areas), a specific 
vessel operation type (catcher vessel or catcher/processor), and for a 
specific range of vessel sizes that may be used to harvest the 
sablefish or halibut (vessel category). Section 2.2 of the Analysis 
(see ADDRESSES) provides additional information on the sablefish and 
halibut IFQ Program.
    The Council and NMFS designed the IFQ Program to provide economic 
stability to the commercial halibut and sablefish fisheries and retain 
the character and distribution of the fishing fleets as much as 
possible. The IFQ Program includes several provisions, such as 
ownership caps and vessel use caps, to protect rural coastal community 
participants, part-time participants, and entry-level participants that 
could be adversely affected by excessive consolidation. The IFQ Program 
also includes other restrictions intended to slow consolidation of QS 
and prevent the fishery from being dominated by large vessels or by any 
particular vessel class.
    The Council and NMFS created the provisions of the IFQ Program to 
support the conservation and management objectives of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act and the Halibut Act while retaining the ``owner-operator'' 
character of the fishing fleets as much as possible. The three main 
exceptions to the owner-operator requirement are for initial issuees of 
QS to be able to use hired masters to fish the IFQ resulting from their 
QS; a medical transfer provision that allows QS holders with approved 
medical conditions to use hired masters for the IFQ derived from their 
QS if they are not able to harvest their own IFQ; and a beneficiary 
transfer provision that provides for temporary annual transfers of IFQ 
to a hired master for up to three years after a QS holder's death. 
Since implementation of the IFQ Program, the Council has recommended 
and NMFS has implemented many amendments to revise the IFQ Program to 
maintain the owner-operator character of the IFQ fishery. This proposed 
rule would not modify existing regulations that apply to initial 
issuances of QS, but would modify the medical and beneficiary transfer 
provisions.

Medical Transfer Provision

    The IFQ Program currently includes a medical transfer provision 
that allows QS holders of catcher vessel QS (referred to as class B, C, 
and D QS shares) who are not otherwise eligible to use a hired master 
(i.e., persons who are not initial issuees of QS) to temporarily 
transfer (lease) their annual IFQ to another individual if the QS 
holder or an immediate family member has a temporary medical condition 
that precludes the QS holder from fishing (72 FR 44795, August 9, 
2007). This provision was intended to provide a mechanism for QS 
holders with a temporary medical condition, or caring for an immediate 
family member with a medical condition, that would preclude the QS 
holder from fishing during a season to transfer their annual IFQ to 
another qualified individual. In recommending this medical transfer 
provision, the Council and NMFS balanced the objective to limit long-
term leasing of QS to promote an owner-onboard fishery with its 
recognition that a medical transfer provision would provide a mechanism 
for QS holders to retain their QS during bona fide medical hardships.
    Prior to implementation of this provision in 2007, a QS holder with 
a medical condition was required to divest of his or her QS or allow 
his or her IFQ to go unfished during years he or she could not be on 
board the vessel. Medical transfers were not intended to be a mechanism 
for persons unable or unwilling to participate in the fishery as an 
owner onboard to continue to receive economic benefits from their QS 
holdings, but were intended to address legitimate medical conditions 
that precluded participation (72 FR 44795, August 9, 2007).
    To limit potential for repeated, long-term, or illegitimate use of 
the medical transfer provision, the current provision's application is 
limited (1) to individuals who are not otherwise eligible to use hired 
masters; (2) to IFQ derived from catcher vessel QS held by the 
applicant; (3) to include a requirement for certification by specific 
types of medical providers who must describe the condition (and the 
care required if caring for a immediate family member); (4) to require 
verification of the inability of the QS holder to participate in IFQ 
fisheries; and (5) a use cap of 2 years in a 5-year period.

[[Page 56993]]

    An applicant for a temporary medical transfer must document the QS 
holder's, or immediate family member's, medical condition by submitting 
an affidavit to NMFS from a licensed medical doctor, an advanced nurse 
practitioner, or a primary community health aide, that describes the 
medical condition affecting the applicant (or applicant's immediate 
family member) that prevents participation in the fishery for the 
calendar year. In the case of an immediate family member's medical 
emergency, the affidavit must describe the necessity for the QS holder 
to care for an immediate family member who suffers from the medical 
condition. The QS holder must resubmit the application on an annual 
basis if his or her medical condition, or that of an immediate family 
member, continues.

Beneficiary Transfer Provision

    The beneficiary transfer provision allows for temporary annual 
transfers of catcher vessel IFQ to be approved for up to three years 
after the QS holder's death. In 1996, NMFS amended the IFQ Program 
regulations to allow for a temporary transfer of QS to surviving 
spouses of deceased QS holders (61 FR 41523, August 9, 1996). In 2000, 
a final rule (65 FR 78126, December 14, 2000) expanded the existing 
survivorship transfer provisions in 50 CFR 679.41(k) to include an 
immediate family member designated as beneficiary to whom the 
survivorship transfer privileges would extend in the absence of a 
surviving spouse. This transfer is intended to benefit the surviving 
spouse, or an immediate family member designated by the QS holder, for 
a limited period of time.
    To transfer QS under this beneficiary provision, the surviving 
spouse, or the designated beneficiary named on the QS/IFQ Beneficiary 
Designation Form by the QS holder, submits an Application for Transfer 
of QS/IFQ. These forms are processed by NMFS Restricted Access 
Management (RAM) Program.
    NMFS may approve an application to transfer QS to the surviving 
spouse or designated beneficiary, unless a contrary intent is expressed 
by the decedent in a will and if sufficient evidence has been provided 
to verify the death of the individual. Typically, NMFS requires a copy 
of the death certificate and the decedent's will to accompany a QS 
transfer. Legally, for purposes of transferring QS, a beneficiary 
identified in a will overrides any beneficiary designated on the form 
submitted to NMFS. NMFS allows the transfer of IFQ resulting from the 
QS transferred to the beneficiary by right of survivorship for a period 
of three years following the death of the QS holder. After the 3-year 
period expires, the spouse or designated beneficiary must either 
qualify to hold the QS or transfer the QS. Currently, the program 
allows the QS holder to designate a beneficiary that can either be the 
surviving spouse, or in the absence of a surviving spouse, an immediate 
family member.

Appeals Process

    If NMFS denies a transfer under the existing medical and 
beneficiary transfer provisions, a QS holder may appeal this denial 
through the National Appeals Office (NAO). If a claim is submitted that 
is inconsistent with the information required in regulations or if the 
transfer requested is beyond the number of years allowed, the QS holder 
would have the burden of proving that the submitted claim is correct. 
NMFS would not accept claims that are inconsistent with the official 
record, unless they are supported by clear, written documentation.
    NMFS issues an initial administrative determination (IAD) on behalf 
of the Regional Administrator to deny a medical or beneficiary 
transfer. If this happens, a QS holder may file an appeal. Prior to 
2014, the procedure for appealing an IAD was to submit the appeal 
directly to the NMFS's Alaska Office of Administrative Appeals and was 
described at Sec.  679.43. However, NMFS centralized the appeals 
process to be located in the National Appeals Office (NAO), which 
operates out of NMFS's headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland as 
described at 15 CFR part 906 (79 FR 7056, February 6, 2014).

Need for This Proposed Rule

    As part of the 20-year review of the IFQ Program conducted in 2016, 
NMFS identified several problems administering the medical and 
beneficiary transfer provisions discussed in Section 1.3 of the 
Analysis. Challenges with administering the medical transfer provision 
include: (1) The current definition of a ``certified medical 
professional'' does not include commonly used medical care providers 
such as chiropractors or providers located outside of the United 
States, and (2) difficulties enforcing the limitation on the use of the 
medical transfer provisions to two years of the previous five years for 
the same medical condition.
    Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis indicates that NMFS regularly 
receives medical transfer applications that include attestations from 
health care providers such as chiropractors or from health care 
providers located outside of the United States. Because these persons 
may not meet the current definition of a ``certified medical 
professional'' as defined in regulation, NMFS has to review these 
claims and make evaluations of the credentials of the professional 
qualifications. This review increases administrative costs and 
uncertainty for medical transfer applicants.
    As noted earlier in this preamble, the medical transfer provisions 
were intended for limited medical conditions and not to address long-
term chronic conditions. Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis indicates that 
some QS holders have used the medical transfer provision for the 
majority or all of the years during which medical leasing has been 
allowed. The repetitive use of the provision may indicate that a select 
group of shareholders is using it as a means of bypassing the owner-on-
board provision altogether. Furthermore, some QS holders may be using 
the medical lease provision for chronic conditions, from which recovery 
is unlikely, although the provision was intended to provide relief from 
fishing for IFQ participants in emergency hardship situations. 
Challenges with the beneficiary transfer provision include the lack of 
a regulatory definition of an ``immediate family member'' and the fact 
that an estate is not listed in regulations as a representative that is 
eligible to receive IFQ held by the decedent.
    Section 2.5.1 of the Analysis states that NMFS has received 
beneficiary transfer applications from persons who do not meet a 
commonly used definition of an immediate family member, which generally 
includes a person's parents, spouse, siblings, and children. This 
traditional definition for making determinations regarding transfer 
eligibility under the designated beneficiary transfer provision is 
narrower than many State and Federal beneficiary definitions currently 
applied in a variety of government programs. Since the current 
surviving heir regulations were implemented, the definition of 
immediate family has changed in many State and Federal jurisdictions, 
and now includes other persons connected to a QS holder by birth, 
adoption, marriage, civil partnership, or cohabitation. NMFS and IFQ 
Program participants would benefit from clarification for this 
provision's administration. NMFS has received requests from QS holders 
and their beneficiaries to clearly define immediate family member.
    Section 2.5.1 of the Analysis states that NMFS regularly receives 
QS transfer requests from a decedent's

[[Page 56994]]

estate representative. However, regulations do not currently authorize 
a QS holder's estate to apply to transfer the associated IFQ resulting 
from a decedent's QS. This can create additional challenges when 
attempting to resolve the distribution of assets and can limit an 
heir's ability to receive the benefits from a decedent's QS.
    This proposed rule would clarify the administration of the medical 
transfer and beneficiary transfer provisions. The proposed changes 
would benefit both IFQ Program participants, their beneficiaries, and 
NMFS by providing clear standards, reducing potential inconsistencies 
with other definitions used for other state or Federal programs, and 
reducing administrative costs and burdens associated with existing 
regulatory provisions.

Proposed Rule

    This section describes this proposed rule, its anticipated effects 
on fishery participants and the environment, and the proposed changes 
to current regulations at 50 CFR part 679. The Council recommended and 
NMFS proposes the following changes to the medical and beneficiary 
transfer provisions of the IFQ Program.

Medical Transfer Provision

    This proposed rule would make several changes to the medical 
transfer provision that include changes to: (1) Remove the definitions 
for ``Advanced nurse practitioner,'' ``Licensed medical doctor,'' and 
``Primary community health aide;'' and add the definition for ``Health 
care provider,'' and (2) modify Sec.  679.42(d)(2) to allow medical 
transfers for any medical condition and to allow the transfers to be 
used for 3 of 7 most recent years.
    The first proposed change would broaden the definition of who may 
attest to a medical condition of the QS holder, or his or her immediate 
family member, that precludes a QS holder from participating in the IFQ 
fisheries to include a broad range of health care providers. This would 
increase flexibility for a QS holder when selecting a health care 
provider for treatment and verifying the condition on the medical 
transfer application. Defining a certified medical professional is 
important because it sets the boundaries for who is allowed to attest 
that a QS holder is not physically able to fish his or her IFQ. This 
proposed rule would broaden the current definition while limiting the 
persons to those who are licensed or certified by the state or country 
in which they practice. The current definition prohibits commonly used 
licensed medical providers, such as chiropractors, from attesting to 
medical conditions they treat. This creates an additional 
administrative burden for NMFS and the person seeking the medical 
transfer as credentials have to be evaluated and reviewed. This 
proposed rule also would allow health care providers outside the United 
States to sign the medical transfer form. NMFS expects that any 
expansion of the definition over the status quo would be beneficial to 
QS holders, or their immediate family member, who need medical care and 
would lead to less rejections of applications based solely on the 
specialty of the health care provider.
    The second proposed change would remove the administrative step for 
NMFS staff to differentiate medical conditions and reduce the 
information required to be submitted to process a medical transfer 
application. This provision would apply the medical transfer limits 
such that a QS holder could only use the medical transfer provision 
during 3 of the 7 most recent years. This provision would not require 
NMFS staff to verify the nature of a specific medical condition and 
whether it is materially different from other medical claims, but only 
to verify that a medical condition exists and to apply the transfer 
provisions for a specific period of time. NMFS would apply this 
provision to applications of medical transfers that are received after 
the effective date of this rule, if approved.
    The Council recommended, and NMFS proposes, extending the number of 
years a medical transfer could be used from 2 of the 5 most recent 
years to 3 of the 7 most recent years, which would increase flexibility 
for those who need it. A year is defined as a calendar year, which is 
how IFQ permits are currently issued. Under the proposed revision, NMFS 
would begin to measure a 7-year period that would begin during the 
first calendar year that a medical transfer of IFQ is approved. After 
the third year a medical transfer is approved under the medical 
transfer provision, QS holders would not be able to transfer their IFQ 
for any medical condition for the remainder of the 7-year period that 
began the first calendar year the medical transfer of IFQ was approved. 
Section 2.4.4 of the Analysis provides additional detail on the range 
of years during which a medical transfer could apply and additional 
rationale for the provisions selected in this proposed rule.
    Any time the medical transfer is used by a QS holder during a year 
it counts as one year of usage, regardless of the portion of the QS 
holdings the person transferred. NMFS would implement this provision in 
this manner because the intent of the medical transfer provision is to 
provide a benefit for a person based on that person's medical condition 
and is not intended to apply to specific QS units. In most cases, NMFS 
anticipates that a person seeking a medical transfer will seek to 
transfer all of the QS that they hold after a medical condition 
requires transfer. However, if a person does not transfer all of his or 
her QS during a year, NMFS would still count the first year that any 
medical transfer of any QS occurs as the first year of the transfer. 
For example, if a QS holder held QS in two regulatory areas (e.g., 
halibut regulatory Area 2C and Area 3A) and only used the medical lease 
provision for the QS in one regulatory area (e.g., Area 2C) it would 
count as one year the medical transfer was used for all QS holdings. 
Only medical transfers that occur after the effective date of the final 
rule would count towards the limit. All IFQ participants currently 
using the medical transfer provision would be able to use all 3 of the 
7 most recent years after this final rule's effective date, if 
approved, regardless of how many years they have used it prior to rule 
implementation.
    This proposed rule would remove the current regulatory requirements 
at Sec.  679.42(d)(2)(iii)(F) that require that the application 
describe the medical condition affecting the applicant or applicant's 
immediate family member. This proposed change would reduce the 
requirement that medical information would need to be reviewed by NMFS 
staff because it would no longer be required to review a medical 
transfer. Instead, the applicant would be only required to submit a 
statement of the condition affecting the applicant or the applicant's 
immediate family member. NMFS staff would still review all applications 
to ensure they are filled out entirely with the correct documentation.
    This proposed rule would also remove requirements at Sec.  
679.42(d)(2)(iii) that an applicant provide his or her social security 
number because such information is no longer required to process 
transfer applications.
    This proposed rule would also update associated cross references at 
Sec.  679.42 to ``Advanced nurse practitioner,'' ``Licensed medical 
doctor,'' and ``Primary community health aide;'' to ``Health care 
provider.''
    When considering this issue, the Council recommended, and NMFS 
proposes, that it would be appropriate to only count transfers that are 
approved after the effective date of these proposed regulations. This 
would treat all QS

[[Page 56995]]

holders the same should the new regulations be implemented. Counting 
medical transfers that have already been approved could eliminate the 
ability of some QS holders to be eligible to use the provision in the 
near future.

Beneficiary Transfer Provision

    This proposed rule would make two changes to the beneficiary 
transfer provision to: (1) Define ``immediate family member'' at Sec.  
679.2; and (2) modify Sec.  679.41 to add estate representative to the 
list of people to receive IFQ held by the decedent for up to three 
years. These changes would improve and simplify the process of 
approving beneficiary transfers without causing undue negative impacts 
on a QS holder's estate planning.
    This proposed rule would define ``immediate family member'' using a 
current definition established by the U.S. Office of Personnel 
Management (OPM) that includes a more current definition of the range 
of relationship that comprise an immediate family member and provides 
greater flexibility to QS holders and their beneficiaries. The OPM 
definition is commonly used in Federal programs that provide benefits 
to immediate family members and would include persons connected to the 
QS holder by birth, adoption, marriage, civil partnership, or 
cohabitation, such as grandparents, great-grandparents, grandchildren, 
great-grandchildren, aunts, uncles, siblings-in-law, half-siblings, 
cousins, adopted children, step-parents/step-children, and cohabiting 
partners. Section 2.5.4 of the Analysis describes the range of 
definitions considered by the Council and NMFS and additional 
information on the rationale for the specific definition proposed in 
this rule.
    This proposed rule would also modify all references to surviving 
spouse and immediate family member in regulation by adding the term 
``estate.'' Without this change, the QS holder's estate would not be 
eligible to hold QS under the beneficiary transfer provision.
    This proposed rule would clarify that an estate could receive QS, 
and the court-appointed estate representative for the QS holder's 
estate would be authorized to use (if they are eligible to hold QS) or 
transfer the IFQ derived from the estate's QS for the benefit of the 
estate for a period of three years following the QS holder's death. 
NMFS would allow the estate representative to manage the use of the 
decedent's QS holdings by allowing the representative to transfer IFQ 
annually on behalf of the estate. If after three years the estate is 
not settled, the estate representative could determine whether the QS 
held by the estate should be sold and the proceeds retained by the 
estate, or the estate should continue to hold the QS; however, the 
estate would no longer be eligible to use the beneficiary transfer 
provisions to lease the annual IFQ. Including the estate representative 
in the list of successive beneficiaries (spouse, immediate family 
member) would not impact the existing order of priority. In the 
instance where the decedent has not explicitly appointed an estate 
representative in his or her will, for example, most states have an 
order of priority for appointment of the representative of the estate. 
An estate representative would be required to submit court-issued 
documents to demonstrate his or her eligibility to NMFS that they are 
legally representing the estate before they could use, permanently 
transfer, or temporarily transfer (lease) the IFQ. This addition would 
provide clear and consistent eligibility criteria for NMFS to determine 
if a person is eligible to transfer QS held by the estate of the 
deceased QS holder as well as use or lease the IFQ derived from those 
QS holdings. Allowing the estate to receive the QS for the purpose of 
this regulation supersedes the requirement that a QS holder must have 
designated an immediate family member with NMFS.
    Adding the QS holder's estate representative to the list of current 
beneficiaries eligible to receive IFQ after a QS holder's death would 
have minimal impact on existing wills and would have a positive impact 
on future beneficiary transfers of IFQ and QS. The 3-year transfer 
period of IFQ would extend to the estate representative.
    As part of this proposed rule, the Council and NMFS conducted an 
analysis that assessed the potential impacts on persons currently 
using, and who could potentially use, medical and beneficiary transfer 
provisions (see ADDRESSES). Overall, the impact on persons using 
existing medical transfer provisions would be limited since this 
proposed rule would not apply to medical transfer provisions that have 
been approved. This proposed rule could reduce the overall use of 
medical transfers in the limited cases when a person has consistently 
applied for and received consecutive medical transfer provisions 
(Section 2.4.1 of the Analysis). As noted in this preamble and in the 
preamble to the final rule that implemented the medical transfer 
provision (72 FR 44795, August 9, 2007), the medical transfer 
provisions were not intended to provide continuous opportunities to 
transfer QS. The impacts of this proposed action on communities and 
processors were evaluated in Sections 2.4.3.1 and 2.5.3 of Analysis and 
found to be negligible.
    This proposed rule is unlikely to negatively impact existing or 
future QS holders and their beneficiaries. QS holders and their future 
beneficiaries could benefit from improved clarity of the regulations 
implementing this administrative provision. Upon implementation, NMFS 
would conduct outreach to QS holders to increase awareness of the 
beneficiary process (Section 2.5.4 of the Analysis).

Additional Regulatory Changes

    In addition to modifications to the medical and beneficiary 
transfer provisions, this proposed rule would make several minor 
regulatory clarifications. First, this proposed rule would modify 
regulations at Sec.  679.42 to update the NOAA website URL and make 
minor technical corrections to remove unnecessary information collected 
such as Social Security numbers, number of IFQ units, and notary 
requirements. This proposed rule would add an additional way to 
describe ``other methods of compensation'' to provide flexibility to 
industry who may use a percentage of the total revenue as compensation 
instead of price per pound when they transfer under this provision.
    Second, this proposed rule would update regulations at Sec.  679.43 
to correctly cite the current process required to submit an appeal. 
This would accurately reflect the current process for submission of 
appeals to the National Appeals Office. The previous regulatory 
procedure for appealing an IAD to the NMFS's Alaska Office of 
Administrative Appeals was described at Sec.  679.43. Since 2014, all 
appeals are processed in the National Appeals Office, which operates 
out of NMFS's headquarters in Silver Spring, MD and is described at 15 
CFR part 906 (79 FR 7056, February 6, 2014). This proposed revision 
would not materially change the process that is currently used to 
submit appeals.

Classification

    Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) and 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed 
rule is consistent with the BSAI and GOA FMPs, other provisions of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Halibut Act, and other applicable law, 
subject to further consideration after public comment.
    Regulations governing the U.S. fisheries for Pacific halibut are 
developed by the IPHC, the Pacific Fishery Management Council, the 
North

[[Page 56996]]

Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), and the Secretary of 
Commerce. Section 5 of the Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982 
(Halibut Act, 16 U.S.C. 773c) allows the Regional Council having 
authority for a particular geographical area to develop regulations 
governing the allocation and catch of halibut in U.S. Convention waters 
which are in addition to, and not in conflict with, IPHC regulations.
    The Halibut Act, at sections 773c(a) and (b), provides the 
Secretary of Commerce with the general responsibility to carry out the 
Convention with the authority to, in consultation with the Secretary of 
the department in which the U.S. Coast Guard is operating, adopt such 
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes and 
objectives of the Convention and the Halibut Act. This proposed rule 
has been determined to be not significant for the purposes of Executive 
Order 12866.
    An RIR was prepared to assess costs and benefits of available 
regulatory alternatives. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS 
(see ADDRESSES). The Council recommended and NMFS proposes these 
regulations based on those measures that maximize net benefits to the 
Nation. Specific aspects of the economic analysis are discussed below 
in the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis section.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    This Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared 
for this action, as required by Section 603 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (RFA) to describe the economic impact this proposed 
rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. The IRFA describes the 
action; the reasons why this action is proposed; the objectives and 
legal basis for this proposed rule; the number and description of 
directly regulated small entities to which this proposed rule would 
apply; the recordkeeping, reporting, and other compliance requirements 
of this proposed rule; and the relevant Federal rules that may 
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this proposed rule. The IRFA also 
describes significant alternatives to this proposed rule that would 
accomplish the stated objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and any 
other applicable statutes, and that would minimize any significant 
economic impact of this proposed rule on small entities. The 
description of the proposed action, its purpose, and the legal basis 
are explained in the preamble and are not repeated here.
    For RFA purposes only, NMFS has established a small business size 
standard for businesses, including their affiliates, whose primary 
industry is commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily 
engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411) is classified as a 
small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not 
dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has 
combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all its 
affiliated operations worldwide.
Number and Description of Small Entities Regulated by This Proposed 
Rule
    QS holders that fish catcher vessel QS (B, C, and D class QS) are 
assumed to be directly regulated by this action. Section 2.9 of the 
Analysis assumes that all halibut and sablefish QS operations are small 
for RFA purposes. The number of entities that held B, C, or D class QS 
in 2018 are all assumed to be small entities because this action 
impacts all QS holders, regardless of whether they own a vessel or not. 
There were 2,418 QS holders that held class B, C, or D QS in the 
halibut and sablefish IFQ fisheries who could be impacted by this 
action. All of those QS holders are considered to be small entities 
using the SBA small entity criteria for harvest on catcher vessels, 
regardless of whether they have a vessel or actively fish their QS.
Description of Significant Alternatives That Minimize Adverse Impacts 
on Small Entities
    Sections 2.4 and 2.5 of the Analysis describe the estimated impacts 
on these entities. The medical transfer provisions would in general 
benefit the majority of QS holders as would the proposed changes to the 
designated beneficiary provision. The proposed change that NMFS 
anticipates to have the greatest, potential negative impact on certain 
QS holders is the limit on the number of medical transfers. Section 
2.4.1 of the Analysis notes that only a small number of QS holders have 
consistently used the medical transfer provisions and NMFS expects only 
a limited number of persons to be impacted by this proposed rule. This 
proposed rule would provide additional flexibility for the majority of 
small entities directly regulated by this proposed rule by increasing 
the number of years that the medical transfer can be used from 2 of 5 
years to 3 of 7 years, and broadening the scope of health care 
professionals that can attest to a medical condition. In addition, NMFS 
would apply this provision only to medical transfer applications that 
are received after the effective date of this proposed rule. Therefore, 
this proposed rule would not be expected to impact those QS holders 
that are currently using medical transfer provisions, and would be 
expected to increase the number of years that a medical transfer 
provision may be used for all QS holders after the effective date of 
this rule. The proposed revisions to the beneficiary transfer provision 
would improve the process to transfer IFQ to beneficiaries, which 
should have a benefit for small entities.
    There are no significant alternatives to this proposed rule that 
would accomplish the objectives to modify the medical and beneficiary 
transfers and minimize adverse economic impacts on small entities. The 
Council considered several alternatives not recommended for the medical 
and beneficiary provisions of the IFQ Program. These additional 
alternatives are not included in this proposed rule because they did 
not meet the Council's objectives and were not recommended (See 
sections 2.4.2.2 and 2.5.2.2 in the Analysis for more detail).
Duplicate, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
    NMFS has not identified any duplication, overlap, or conflict 
between this proposed action and existing Federal rules.
Recordkeeping, Reporting, and Other Compliance Requirements
    This proposed rule modifies the recordkeeping, reporting, and other 
compliance requirements for QS holders who use the medical transfer 
provision and beneficiary designation form. NMFS does not anticipate 
that these requirements would increase.
    Currently, a QS holder who submits an application for a temporary 
medical transfer must submit an affidavit to NMFS from a licensed 
medical doctor, an advanced nurse practitioner, or a primary community 
health aide that describes the medical condition affecting the 
applicant or the applicant's immediate family member that prevents the 
QS holder's participation in the fishery for the calendar year. This 
proposed rule would not require QS holders to disclose their 
confidential medical condition and would improve administration of the 
form by eliminating some information required on the previous form.
    Currently, NMFS provides QS holders an optional Beneficiary 
Designation form to designate a beneficiary to transfer IFQ under this 
provision. NMFS may approve an application to transfer QS to the 
surviving spouse or designated beneficiary, unless a contrary intent is 
expressed by the decedent in a will and if sufficient evidence has been 
provided to verify the

[[Page 56997]]

death of the individual. Typically, NMFS requires the death certificate 
and the will to accompany a QS transfer to a beneficiary.

Collection-of-Information Requirements

    This proposed rule contains collection-of-information requirements 
subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). NMFS has submitted these 
requirements to OMB for approval under Control Number 0648-0272.
    The public reporting burden per response is estimated to average 
1.5 hours for the Application for Medical Transfer of IFQ and 30 
minutes for the QS/IFQ Beneficiary Designation Form. The response time 
includes the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collection of information.
    Public comment is sought regarding whether these proposed 
collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall 
have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collections of 
information, including through the use of automated collection 
techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on 
these or any other aspects of the collections of information to NMFS 
(see ADDRESSES), and by email to [email protected] or fax to 
202-395-5806.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to penalty for 
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirement of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. All currently approved NOAA 
collections of information may be viewed at: https://www.cio.noaa.gov/services_programs/prasubs.html.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 679

    Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 17, 2019.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 679 is 
proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 679--FISHERIES OF THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF ALASKA

0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 679 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 773 et seq.; 1801 et seq.; 3631 et seq.; 
Pub. L. 108-447; Pub. L. 111-281.

0
2. Amend Sec.  679.2 by:
0
a. Removing the definitions for ``Advanced nurse practitioner,'' 
``Licensed medical doctor,'' and ``Primary community health aide;'' and
0
b. Adding the definitions in alphabetical order for ``Health care 
provider'' and ``Immediate family member''.
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  679.2   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Health care provider means an individual licensed to provide health 
care services by the state where he or she practices and performs 
within the scope of his or her specialty to diagnose and treat medical 
conditions as defined by applicable Federal, state, or local laws and 
regulations. A health care provider located outside of the United 
States and its territories who is licensed to practice medicine by the 
applicable medical authorities is included in this definition.
* * * * *
    Immediate family member includes an individual with any of the 
following relationships to the QS holder:
    (1) Spouse, and parents thereof;
    (2) Sons and daughters, and spouses thereof;
    (3) Parents, and spouses thereof;
    (4) Brothers and sisters, and spouses thereof;
    (5) Grandparents and grandchildren, and spouses thereof;
    (6) Domestic partner and parents thereof, including domestic 
partners of any individual in 1 through 5 of this definition; and
    (7) Any individual related by blood or affinity whose close 
association with the QS holder is the equivalent of a family 
relationship.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec.  679.41, revise paragraphs (k)(1), and (3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  679.41   Transfer of quota shares and IFQ.

* * * * *
    (k) * * *
    (1) On the death of an individual who holds QS or IFQ, the 
surviving spouse or, in the absence of a surviving spouse, a 
beneficiary designated pursuant to paragraph (k)(2) of this section or 
the estate representative, receives all QS and IFQ held by the decedent 
by right of survivorship, unless a contrary intent was expressed by the 
decedent in a will. The Regional Administrator will approve an 
Application for Transfer to the surviving spouse, designated 
beneficiary, or estate representative when sufficient evidence has been 
provided to verify the death of the individual.
    (2) * * *
    (3) The Regional Administrator will approve an Application for 
Transfer of IFQ for a period of 3 calendar years following the date of 
death of an individual to a designated beneficiary. NMFS will allow the 
transfer of IFQ only resulting from the QS transferred to the surviving 
spouse or, in the absence of a surviving spouse, from a beneficiary 
from the QS holder's immediate family designated pursuant to paragraph 
(k)(2) of this section or from an estate representative to a person 
eligible to receive IFQ under the provisions of this section, 
notwithstanding the limitations on transfers of IFQ in paragraph (h)(2) 
of this section.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec.  679.42 by:
0
a. Removing in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) introductory text, the website 
https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov and adding in its place https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/region/alaska;
0
b. Revising paragraphs (d)(2)(iii)(A) through (D);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (d)(2)(iii)(F) and (G);
0
d. Removing paragraph (d)(2)(iii)(H); and
0
e. Revising paragraph (d)(2)(iv)(C).
    The revisions read as follows:


Sec.  679.42   Limitations on use of QS and IFQ.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (A) The applicant's (transferor's) identity including his or her 
full name, NMFS person ID, date of birth, permanent business mailing 
address, business telephone and fax numbers, and email address (if 
any). A temporary mailing address may be provided, if appropriate;
    (B) The recipient's (transferee's) identity including his or her 
full name, NMFS person ID, date of birth, permanent business mailing 
address, business telephone and fax numbers, and email address (if 
any). A temporary mailing address may be provided, if appropriate;
    (C) The identification characteristics of the IFQ including whether 
the transfer is for halibut or sablefish IFQ, IFQ regulatory area, 
actual number of

[[Page 56998]]

IFQ pounds, transferor (seller) IFQ permit number, and fishing year;
    (D) The price per pound (including leases), or other method of 
compensation, and total amount paid for the IFQ in the requested 
transaction, including all fees;
    (E) * * *
    (F) A written declaration from a health care provider as defined in 
Sec.  679.2. The declaration must include:
    (1) The identity of the health care provider including his or her 
full name, business telephone, and permanent business mailing address 
(number and street, city and state, zip code);
    (2) A statement of the condition affecting the applicant or the 
applicant's immediate family member, that the applicant is unable to 
participate; and
    (3) The dated signature of the health care provider who conducted 
the medical examination;
    (G) The signatures and printed names of the transferor and 
transferee, and date.
    (iv) * * *
    (C) NMFS will not approve a medical transfer if the applicant has 
received a medical transfer in any 3 of the previous 7 calendar years 
for any medical condition.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec.  679.43, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  679.43   Determinations and appeals.

* * * * *
    (c) Submission of Appeals. An appeal to an initial administrative 
determination must be submitted under the appeals procedure set out at 
15 CFR part 906.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-23028 Filed 10-23-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P