52806 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

to these regulations, and because they 

do not impose a collection of 

information on small entities, the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

chapter 6) does not apply. Pursuant to 

section 7805(f) of the Code, these 

regulations have been submitted to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration for comment 

on its impact on small business. 

Comments and Requests for a Public 

Hearing 

Before these proposed regulations are 

adopted as final regulations, 

consideration will be given to any 

written (a signed original and eight (8) 

copies) or electronic comments that are 

submitted timely to the IRS. The IRS 

and the Treasury Department request 

comments on the clarity of the proposed 

rules and how they can be made easier 

to understand. All comments will be 

made available for public inspection 

and copying. A public hearing may be 

scheduled if requested by any person 

who timely submits comments. If a 

public hearing is scheduled, notice of 

the date, time and place for the public 

hearing will be published in the Federal 

Register. 

Drafting Information 

The principal author of these 

regulations is Matthew Cooper, Office of 

the Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure 

and Administration). 

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 301 

Employment taxes, Estate taxes, 

Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes, 

Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Proposed Amendments to the 

Regulations 

Accordingly, 26 CFR part 301 is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 301—PROCEDURE AND 

ADMINISTRATION 

Paragraph 1. The authority citation 

for part 301 continues to read in part as 

follows: 

Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * * 

Par. 2. Section 301.6707A–1 is added 

to read as follows: 

§ 301.6707A–1 Failure to include on any 

return or statement any information 

required to be disclosed under section 6011 

with respect to a reportable transaction. 

[The text of proposed § 301.6707A–1 

is the same as the text of § 301.6707A–

1T published elsewhere in this issue of 

the Federal Register]. 

Linda E. Stiff, 

Deputy Commissioner for Services and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. E8–21158 Filed 9–10–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 680 

RIN 0648–AW73 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Allocating Bering Sea 

and Aleutian Islands King and Tanner 

Crab Fishery Resources 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of fishery 

management plan amendment; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Bering Sea/Aleutian 

Islands (BSAI) Crab Rationalization 

Program (Program) allocates BSAI crab 

resources among harvesters, processors, 

and coastal communities. Amendment 

27 would amend the Fishery 

Management Plan for Bering Sea/ 

Aleutian Islands King and Tanner Crabs 

(FMP) and the Program to include the 

statutory requirements of section 122(e) 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management 

Reauthorization Act of 2006 and modify 

the methods used to determine 

individual processor quota share (IPQ) 

use caps when crab are processed under 

custom processing arrangements. 

Amendment 27 also would modify 

limits on the amount of Aleutian Islands 

golden and red king crab IPQ that could 

be processed at a facility. This action is 

intended to promote the goals and 

objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, the FMP, and other applicable 

laws. 

DATES: Comments on the amendment 

must be submitted on or before 

November 10, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 

Salveson, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: 

Ellen Sebastian. You may submit 

comments, identified by ‘‘RIN 0648–

AW73’’, by any one of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802. 

• Fax: (907) 586–7557. 

• Hand delivery to the Federal 

Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 

420A, Juneau, AK. 

All comments received are a part of 

the public record and will generally be 

posted to http://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All Personal Identifying 

Information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

portable document file (pdf) formats 

only. 

Copies of Amendment 27, the 

Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), 

the categorical exclusion prepared for 

this action, and the Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the 

Crab Rationalization Program may be 

obtained from the NMFS Alaska Region 

at the address above or from the Alaska 

Region Web site at http:// 

www.fakr.noaa.gov/ 

sustainablefisheries.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Glenn Merrill, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that 

each regional fishery management 

council submit any fishery management 

plan amendment it prepares to NMFS 

for review and approval, disapproval, or 

partial approval by the Secretary of 

Commerce (Secretary). The MagnusonStevens Act also requires that NMFS, 

upon receiving a fishery management 

plan amendment, immediately publish a 

notice in the Federal Register 

announcing that the amendment is 

available for public review and 

comment. 

The king and Tanner crab fisheries in 

the exclusive economic zone of the 

BSAI are managed under the FMP. The 

FMP was prepared by the North Pacific 

Fishery Management Council (Council) 

under the Magnuson-Stevens Act as 

amended by the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 

108–199, section 801). Amendments 18 

and 19 to the FMP amended the FMP to 

include the Program. Regulations 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 52807 

implementing these amendments were 

published on March 2, 2005 (70 FR 

10174), and are located at 50 CFR part 

680. 

Under the Program, NMFS issued 

quota share (QS) to holders of License 

Limitation Program (LLP) licenses and 

crew onboard vessels. One type of QS, 

catcher vessel owner (CVO) QS is 

assigned to holders of LLP licenses who 

delivered their catch onshore. Each year 

QS yields an exclusive harvest privilege 

for a portion of the total allowable catch 

called individual fishing quota (IFQ). 

NMFS also issued processor quota 

share (PQS) under the Program. Each 

year PQS yields an exclusive privilege 

to process a portion of the IFQ. This 

annual exclusive processing privilege is 

called individual processor quota (IPQ). 

CVO QS yields Class A and Class B IFQ. 

Class A IFQ is required to be delivered 

to a processor with matching IPQ within 

specific geographic regions. Class B IFQ 

can be delivered to any processor in any 

geographic region. Ninety percent of the 

IFQ derived from CVO QS is Class A 

IFQ, and the remaining 10 percent is 

Class B IFQ. These requirements ensure 

that catch continues to be delivered to 

processors and communities with 

historic investment in the fisheries. 

Currently, the Program establishes 

limits, or caps, on the amount of PQS 

and IPQ that a person can hold, and 

caps on the amount of IPQ that can be 

used at a processing facility. In each of 

the nine BSAI crab fisheries under the 

Program, a person is limited to holding 

no more than 30 percent of the PQS 

initially issued in the fishery and using 

no more than the amount of IPQ 

resulting from 30 percent of the initially 

issued PQS in a given fishery. In 

addition, no person is permitted to use 

more than 60 percent of the IPQ crab in 

the Bering Sea C. opilio fishery 

designated for exclusive use in the north 

region. Finally, no processing facility 

can be used to process more than 30 

percent of the IPQ in a crab fishery. 

The Program is designed to minimize 

the potential that PQS and IPQ use caps 

could be evaded through the use of 

corporate affiliations or other legal 

relationships. To accomplish this, the 

Program calculates a person’s IPQ use 

cap by summing the total amount of IPQ 

that (1) is held by that person; (2) is held 

by other persons who are affiliated with 

that person through common ownership 

or control; and (3) is custom processed 

at a facility at which an IPQ holder has 

at least a 10 percent direct or indirect 

ownership interest. Under existing 

practices, a custom processing 

arrangement exists when one IPQ holder 

(1) has a contract with the owners of a 

processing facility to have his crab 

processed at that facility; (2) that IPQ 

holder does not have an ownership 

interest in the processing facility; and 

(3) that IPQ holder is not otherwise 

affiliated with the owners of that crab 

processing facility. In custom processing 

arrangements, the IPQ holder contracts 

with a facility operator to have the IPQ 

crab processed according to his 

specifications. Custom processing 

arrangements typically occur when an 

IPQ holder does not own an onshore 

processing facility or cannot 

economically operate a stationary 

floating crab processor in a specific 

region. NMFS applies IPQ crab that is 

custom processed at a facility at which 

an IPQ holder has at least a 10-percent 

direct or indirect ownership interest 

against both the IPQ holder owning the 

facility, and the IPQ holder who is 

having his crab custom processed at that 

facility. This method for applying the 

IPQ use cap effectively counts custom 

processed IPQ crab against two separate 

persons. Industry participants asserted 

that this IPQ use cap calculation method 

discouraged the use of custom 

processing arrangements 

The Council was prompted to 

reexamine IPQ use cap calculations in 

light of a statutory exemption to the 

existing method of IPQ use cap 

calculation for custom processed crab 

that was created by the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Reauthorization Act 

(MSRA) of 2006 (Pub. L. 109–479). 

Section 122(e) of the MSRA specifically 

directs NMFS to modify the means for 

calculating IPQ use caps that apply to a 

person who is custom processing C. 

opilio crab in the north region. To fully 

implement Section 122(e), the Council 

and NMFS would need to adopt 

conforming regulations, and define 

several of the terms used in Section 

122(e). 

In response, the Council initiated an 

analysis and received comments from 

the public on implementation of section 

122(e) of the MSRA. During this 

process, participants in other crab 

fisheries indicated that their processing 

operations could become more efficient 

if IPQ use cap exemptions for custom 

processing arrangements 

congressionally mandated for the north 

region Bering Sea C. opilio fishery could 

also be extend to other crab fisheries. 

Specifically, participants in crab 

fisheries with historically low TAC 

allocations or active in crab fisheries in 

more remote geographic regions argued 

that exempting IPQ crab processed 

under custom processing arrangements 

from the IPQ use caps of the owners of 

facilities could improve their 

operational efficiency. 

Based on the analysis and public 

input, the Council adopted Amendment 

27 in December 2007, and submitted 

Amendment 27 to NMFS for review by 

the Secretary of Commerce. Amendment 

27 would modify the FMP to exempt 

individual processor quota share (IPQ) 

that is subject to a custom processing 

arrangement in specific fisheries, at 

specific facilities, or in specific crabdependent communities from the IPQ 

use cap of the processing facility 

owners. Amendment 27 also would 

establish limits on the amount of 

Aleutian Islands golden and red king 

crab IPQ that could be processed at a 

facility. Specifically, IPQ holders who 

own processing facilities would not be 

considered as using IPQ when IPQ crab 

is (1) received by an IPQ holder at their 

facility under a custom processing 

arrangement; (2) received and processed 

at specific types of processing facilities; 

or (3) derived from PQS earned from 

processing in specific communities 

where crab has been historically 

delivered. This change in IPQ use cap 

calculation would only apply to specific 

crab fisheries. In addition, Amendment 

27 would limit the amount of Eastern 

Aleutian Islands golden king crab and 

Western Aleutian Islands red king crab 

that could be processed at a facility. 

Finally, Amendment 27 would contain 

the clarifications necessary to 

implement section 122(e) of the MSRA. 

Public comments are being solicited 

on proposed Amendment 27 through 

the end of the comment period (see 

DATES). NMFS intends to publish a 

proposed rule in the Federal Register 

for public comment that would 

implement Amendment 27, following 

NMFS’ evaluation under the MagnusonStevens Act procedures. Public 

comments on the proposed rule must be 

received by the close of the comment 

period on Amendment 27 to be 

considered in the approval/disapproval 

decision on Amendment 27. All 

comments received by the end of the 

comment period on Amendment 27, 

whether specifically directed to the 

FMP amendment or the proposed rule, 

will be considered in the approval/ 

disapproval decision on Amendment 

27. Comments received after the end of 

the public comment period for 

Amendment 27, even if received within 

the comment period for the proposed 

rule, will not be considered in the 

approval/disapproval decision on the 

amendment. To be considered, 

comments must be received—not just 

postmarked or otherwise transmitted—

by the close of business on the last day 

of the comment period. 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
52808 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 177 / Thursday, September 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: September 8, 2008. 

James P. Burgess, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–21146 Filed 9–10–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS