Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39743 

For this rule, NMFS also reviewed the 

criteria at § 635.27(b)(3) to determine 

when opening each fishery would 

provide equitable opportunities for 

fishermen, to the extent practicable, 

while also considering the ecological 

needs of the different species. The 

opening dates of the fishing season(s) 

could vary depending upon the 

available annual quota, catch rates, and 

number of fishing participants during 

the year. For the 2018 fishing season, 

NMFS is proposing to open all of the 

shark management groups on the 

effective date of the final rule for this 

action (expected to be on or about 

January 1). The direct and indirect 

economic impacts would be neutral on 

a short- and long-term basis because 

NMFS is not proposing to change the 

opening dates of these fisheries from the 

status quo. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. 

Dated: August 15, 2017. 

Samuel D. Rauch, III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17575 Filed 8–21–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 679 and 680 

[Docket No. 170412391–7391–01] 

RIN 0648–BG84 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Bering Sea and 

Aleutian Islands Management Area; 

American Fisheries Act; Bering Sea 

and Aleutian Islands Crab 

Rationalization Program 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues a proposed rule 

to implement Amendment 48 to the 

Fishery Management Plan for Bering 

Sea/Aleutian Islands King and Tanner 

Crabs (Crab FMP) and a regulatory 

amendment to revise regulations 

implementing the American Fisheries 

Act (AFA) Program and the Crab 

Rationalization (CR) Program. This 

proposed rule would revise how NMFS 

determines the amount of limited access 

privileges held and used by groups in 

the Western Alaska Community 

Development Quota Program (CDQ 

Program) for the purposes of managing 

the excessive share limits under the 

AFA Program and the CR Program. This 

proposed rule is necessary to align 

regulations and the Crab FMP to be 

consistent with an amendment to the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) and NMFS’ 

current method of managing excessive 

share limits for CDQ groups in the AFA 

Program and the CR Program. This 

proposed rule is intended to promote 

the goals and objectives of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Crab FMP, 

and other applicable law. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

September 21, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number NOAA– 

NMFS–2017–0038, by either of the 

following methods: 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2017-0038, 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: 

Ellen Sebastian. 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 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 Amendment 48 to 

the Crab FMP, the Regulatory Impact 

Review (RIR), and the Categorical 

Exclusion prepared for this proposed 

action are available from http://

www.regulations.gov or from the NMFS 

Alaska Region Web site at http://alaska

fisheries.noaa.gov. 

The CR Program Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS), RIR, and Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, as well 

as the AFA Program EIS and RIR, are 

available from the NMFS Alaska Region 

Web site at http://alaska

fisheries.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keeley Kent, 907–586–7228. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for Action 

NMFS manages the pollock fisheries 

in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) 

off Alaska under the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands 

Management Area (BSAI FMP). NMFS 

manages the king and Tanner crab 

fisheries in the U.S. EEZ of the Bering 

Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) under 

the Crab FMP. The North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (Council) 

prepared, and NMFS approved, the 

BSAI FMP and the Crab FMP under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 

16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations 

governing and implementing the BSAI 

FMP appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 

679. Regulations governing and 

implementing the Crab FMP appear at 

50 CFR parts 600 and 680. 

A notice of availability for 

Amendment 48 to the Crab FMP was 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 3, 2017. Comment on 

Amendment 48 is invited through 

October 2, 2017. All relevant written 

comments received by the end of the 

comment period, whether specifically 

directed to the FMP amendment, this 

proposed rule, or both, will be 

considered in the approval/disapproval 

decision for Amendment 48 and 

addressed in the response to comments 

in the final rule. 

Background 

This proposed rule would modify 

regulations that specify how NMFS 

determines holding and use of limited 

access privileges (LAPs) for the 

purposes of managing excessive share 

limits for CDQ groups under the AFA 

Program and the CR Program. The 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requires NMFS 

to establish excessive share limits to 

prevent excessive consolidation of 

harvesting and processing LAPs in order 

to maintain an appropriate distribution 

of economic and social benefits for 

fishery participants and communities. 

NMFS has adopted regulations under its 

LAP programs to ensure that no person 

holds or uses more LAPs than 

authorized under excessive share limits 

established for each LAP program. 

Section 305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act describes the Western Alaska 

Community Development Quota 

Program (CDQ Program) (16 U.S.C. 

1855(i)). Regulations at 50 CFR 679.2 

define the term ‘‘CDQ group’’ as an 

entity identified as eligible for the CDQ 

Program under 16 U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(D). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39744 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

This proposed rule would revise the 

regulations that prescribe the 

calculation of excessive share limits for 

CDQ groups for two LAP programs: The 

AFA Program and the CR Program. CDQ 

groups participate in LAP programs, 

including the AFA and the CR Program, 

by purchasing harvesting and 

processing privileges and through 

ownership of vessels and processors 

that participate in these fisheries. The 

Magnuson-Stevens Act was amended by 

the Coast Guard and Maritime 

Transportation Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 

109–241; the Coast Guard Act) to 

specify the method that NMFS must use 

for monitoring excessive share limits as 

they apply to CDQ groups—the 

proportional or ‘‘individual and 

collective’’ rule. Section 305(i)(1)(F)(i) 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, as 

amended by the Coast Guard Act, 

provides that CDQ groups shall be 

subject to any excessive share 

ownership, harvesting, or processing 

limitations in the fisheries of the Bering 

Sea and Aleutian Islands Management 

Area only to the extent of the CDQ 

group’s proportional ownership (16 

U.S.C. 1855(i)(1)(F)(i)). 

NMFS has implemented in practice 

the method specified in the 2006 

amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act for CDQ groups to monitor 

excessive share limits in the AFA 

Program and the CR Program; however, 

the regulations for the AFA Program and 

the CR Program and the Crab FMP have 

not been revised to be consistent with 

the 2006 amendment to the MagnusonStevens Act. 

The following sections describe (1) 

excessive share limits, which are also 

called holding and use caps, (2) AFA 

Program use caps, (3) CR Program 

holding and use caps, (4) CDQ Program 

holding and use caps, and (5) this 

proposed rule and the anticipated 

effects of the action. 

Excessive Share Limits 

Section 301(a)(4) of the MagnusonStevens Act specifies that if 

conservation and management measures 

allocate or assign fishing privileges, the 

measures must be carried out so that no 

particular individual, corporation, or 

other entity acquires an excessive share 

of such privileges (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)(4)). 

Section 303A(c)(5)(D) of the MagnusonStevens Act requires regional fishery 

management councils to establish 

excessive share limits for LAP programs 

to prevent excessive accumulation of 

privileges by participants in the LAP 

programs (16 U.S.C. 1853a(c)(5)(D)). The 

intent of these limits or caps is to 

prevent excessive consolidation in the 

harvesting and processing sectors in 

order to maintain an appropriate 

distribution of economic and social 

benefits for fishery participants and 

communities. Because determination of 

excessive shares must consider the 

specific circumstances of each fishery, 

the Council has implemented different 

excessive share limits in the LAP 

programs in Alaska’s fisheries, 

including the AFA and CR Programs. 

NMFS implemented use caps for the 

AFA Program in 2002 (67 FR 79692; 

December 30, 2002) and holding and 

use caps for the CR Program in 2005 (70 

FR 10174; March 2, 2005). The 

regulations prohibit a person from using 

more than the harvesting and processing 

limits established in the AFA Program 

and from holding and using more than 

a specific portion of the LAPs allocated 

under the CR Program. Under 50 CFR 

679.2, ‘‘person’’ includes individuals, 

corporations, partnerships, associations, 

and other non-individual entities. To 

monitor holdings and use of LAPs, 

NMFS determines what portion of a 

program’s harvesting and processing 

privileges a person holds and uses to 

ensure that no person holds or uses 

more privileges than authorized by the 

applicable excessive share cap. 

NMFS determines a person’s holding 

and use of a LAP in the AFA Program 

and CR Program by summing (1) the 

amount directly held and used by that 

person, and (2) the amount held and 

used by that person indirectly through 

an ownership interest in or control of 

another entity that also holds and uses 

the LAP. Businesses that hold and use 

LAPs in the AFA Program and the CR 

Program are often composed of multiple 

owners that have ownership interests in 

multiple fishing businesses. In cases 

where a LAP is held by a business entity 

with more than one owner, NMFS 

applies the holding and use caps to each 

entity that holds or controls the LAP to 

monitor whether those entities each 

exceed the established caps. Ownership 

attribution refers to the method NMFS 

uses to assess the relationships between 

different entities that participate in LAP 

programs. 

NMFS uses two ownership attribution 

methods to determine holdings and use 

of LAPs. These two methods for 

attributing ownership and use of a LAP 

are commonly known as the ‘‘individual 

and collective rule’’ and the ‘‘10-percent 

rule.’’ Under the individual and 

collective rule, NMFS attributes holding 

and use of LAPs by one person 

proportionally to their ownership in or 

control of another entity that holds and 

uses LAPs. For example, if Company A 

has a 15 percent ownership of Company 

B that holds LAPs, Company A would 

be attributed 15 percent of Company B’s 

holding and use of the LAPs. In 

contrast, under the 10-percent rule, a 

person is attributed 100 percent of an 

entity’s LAPs if that person owns or 

otherwise controls ten percent or more 

of that entity. Thus, if Company A holds 

or controls 10 percent or more of 

Company B, then 100 percent of 

Company B’s holdings and use of LAPs 

are attributed to Company A. When a 

person owns or controls 10 percent or 

more of another entity, the individual 

and collective rule is less restrictive 

than the 10-percent rule because a 

person is only attributed holding and 

use in proportion to how much that 

person owns or controls of other 

entities, rather than attributing 100 

percent of the other entity’s LAP 

holdings once the 10-percent ownership 

or control threshold is met. Thus, under 

a holding and use cap, the individual 

and collective rule would allow a 

person to hold and use more LAPs than 

if the person was evaluated using the 

10-percent rule. 

AFA Program Use Caps 

Congress passed the AFA in October 

1998 to implement additional U.S. 

ownership requirements for vessels 

harvesting fish from the EEZ. The 

purpose of the AFA was to tighten U.S. 

ownership standards that had been 

exploited under the Commercial Fishing 

Industry Vessel Anti-Reflagging Act of 

1987 (Pub. L. 100–239) and to provide 

the BSAI pollock fleet the opportunity 

to conduct their fishery in a more 

rational manner (i.e., stopping the race 

for fish) while protecting non-AFA 

participants in the other fisheries. The 

AFA established sector allocations in 

the BSAI pollock fishery, determined 

eligible vessels and processors, allowed 

for the formation of cooperatives, set 

limits on the participation of AFA 

vessels in other fisheries, and imposed 

special catch weighing and monitoring 

requirements on AFA vessels. The AFA 

also divided the available BSAI pollock 

directed fishing allowance among three 

harvesting sectors, after CDQ allocations 

and an amount for incidental catch of 

pollock by non-AFA vessels were 

deducted. 

Section 210(e) of the AFA set out 

excessive harvesting and processing 

limits for participants. Section 210(e)(1) 

of the AFA restricts an individual, 

corporation, or other entity to harvesting 

no more than 17.5 percent of the pollock 

available to be harvested in the directed 

pollock fishery. This limit is codified at 

50 CFR 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). Every year, 

this limit is published in the annual 

harvest specifications (82 FR 11826; 

February 27, 2017). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39745 

Section 210(e)(2) of the AFA directed 

the Council to create management 

measures to prevent any particular 

individual or entity from processing an 

excessive share of pollock available in 

the directed pollock fishery. The 

Council and NMFS set this limit at 30 

percent of the sum of the directed 

fishing allowances for pollock. This 

limit is codified at 50 CFR 

679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7). Every year, this 

limit is published in the annual harvest 

specifications (82 FR 11826; February 

27, 2017). 

Section 210(e)(3) of the AFA also 

specified that any entity in which 10 

percent or more of the interest is held 

or controlled by another individual or 

entity shall be considered to be the same 

entity as the other individual or entity 

for purposes of monitoring the 

harvesting and processing use caps. 

This section of the AFA directed NMFS 

to use the 10-percent rule to determine 

the use of AFA Program harvesting and 

processing privileges. NMFS 

implemented this AFA requirement in 

part by defining an ‘‘AFA entity’’ at 50 

CFR 679.2 as a group of affiliated 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns that harvest or 

process pollock in the Bering Sea 

directed pollock fishery. The proposed 

rule to implement the AFA Program 

stated that the concept of ‘‘affiliation’’ is 

central to the definition of ‘‘AFA entity’’ 

(66 FR 65028, 65049; December 17, 

2001). As the December 2001 proposed 

rule explained, ‘‘affiliation’’ means a 

relationship between two or more 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns in which one concern 

directly or indirectly owns a 10 percent 

or greater interest in the other, exerts 10 

percent or greater control over the other, 

or has the power to exert 10 percent or 

greater control over the other; or a third 

individual, corporation, or other 

business concern directly or indirectly 

owns a 10 percent or greater interest in 

both, exerts 10 percent or greater control 

over both, or has the power to exert 10 

percent or greater control over both (see 

regulations at § 679.2 for the definition 

of ‘‘affiliation’’ and Section 2.6.3 of the 

RIR for more information). 

CR Program Use Caps 

The CR Program was implemented on 

April 1, 2005 (70 FR 10174; March 2, 

2005). The CR Program established a 

LAP program for nine crab fisheries in 

the BSAI and assigned quota share (QS) 

to persons based on their historic 

participation in one or more of those 

nine BSAI crab fisheries during a 

specific period. Each year, a person who 

holds QS may receive an exclusive 

harvest privilege for a portion of the 

annual total allowable catch (TAC). This 

annual exclusive harvest privilege is 

called individual fishing quota (IFQ). 

NMFS also issued processor quota 

share (PQS) under the CR Program. Each 

year, PQS yields an exclusive privilege 

to process a portion of the IFQ in each 

of the nine BSAI crab fisheries. This 

annual exclusive processing privilege is 

called individual processor quota (IPQ). 

Only a portion of the QS issued yields 

IFQ that is required to be delivered to 

a processor with IPQ. Each year there is 

a one-to-one match of the total pounds 

of IFQ that must be delivered to a 

processor with IPQ with the total 

pounds of IPQ issued in each crab 

fishery. 

When the Council recommended the 

CR Program, it expressed concern about 

the potential for excessive consolidation 

of QS and PQS, in which too few 

persons control all of the QS or PQS and 

the resulting annual IFQ and IPQ. The 

Council determined that excessive 

consolidation could have adverse effects 

on crab markets, price setting 

negotiations between harvesters and 

processors, employment opportunities 

for harvesting and processing crew, tax 

revenue to communities in which crab 

are landed, and other factors considered 

and described in the CR Program EIS. 

To address this concern, the CR Program 

includes limits on the amount of QS and 

PQS that a person can hold and the 

amount of IFQ and IPQ that a person 

can use. 

The CR Program has QS and IFQ 

holding and use caps that vary by 

fishery because of different fleet 

characteristics and differences in 

historical dependency of participants on 

different crab fisheries. 50 CFR 

680.42(a)(2) specifies that NMFS uses 

the individual and collective rule to 

apply holding and use caps for QS and 

IFQ for all CR Program participants, 

including CDQ groups, as recommended 

by the Council for monitoring 

harvesting privileges (see Section 2.7 of 

the RIR for more information). 

For processing privileges, the CR 

Program limits a person to holding no 

more than 30 percent of the PQS 

initially issued in the fishery, and to 

using no more than the amount of IPQ 

resulting from 30 percent of the PQS 

initially issued in a given fishery, with 

a limited exemption for persons 

receiving more than 30 percent of the 

initially-issued PQS (50 CFR 680.42(b)). 

50 CFR 680.42(b)(3) specifies that NMFS 

uses the 10-percent rule to monitor 

holding and use caps for PQS and IPQ 

for all CR Program participants as 

recommended by the Council and 

addressed in the preamble to the 

proposed rule for the CR Program (69 FR 

63200, 63219 & 63226; October 29, 

2004). 

Use Caps for CDQ Groups 

The CDQ Program was established by 

the Council and NMFS in 1992, and in 

1996, authorization for the Program was 

incorporated into the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act. The purpose of the CDQ Program 

is (1) to provide eligible western Alaska 

villages with the opportunity to 

participate and invest in fisheries in the 

BSAI, (2) to support economic 

development in western Alaska, (3) to 

alleviate poverty and provide economic 

and social benefits for residents of 

western Alaska, and (4) to achieve 

sustainable and diversified local 

economies in western Alaska (16 U.S.C. 

1855(i)(1)(A)). 

Section 305(i) of the MagnusonStevens Act describes the CDQ Program 

and identifies the villages eligible to 

participate in the CDQ Program through 

the six entities specified in Section 

305(i)(1)(D) as the CDQ groups (16 

U.S.C. 1855(i)). Regulations at 50 CFR 

679.2 define the term ‘‘CDQ group’’ as 

an entity identified as eligible for the 

CDQ Program under 16 U.S.C. 

1855(i)(1)(D). The CDQ Program consists 

of six different non-profit managing 

organizations (CDQ groups) representing 

different geographical regions in Alaska. 

The CDQ Program receives annual 

allocations of TACs for a variety of 

commercially valuable species in the 

BSAI groundfish, crab, and halibut 

fisheries, which are in turn allocated 

among the CDQ groups (see Section 2.8 

of the RIR). 

The Secretary of Commerce approved 

regulations establishing the CDQ 

Program pollock allocation (57 FR 

54936; November 23, 1992). When the 

AFA Program was implemented, the 

CDQ Program received an allocation of 

10 percent of the Bering Sea pollock 

TAC (67 FR 79692, 79696; December 30, 

2002). CDQ groups participate in the 

AFA Program primarily through 

ownership (wholly or partially) in 

vessels authorized to fish for Bering Sea 

pollock under the AFA. Vessel 

ownership varies by CDQ group (see 

Section 2.8.1 of the RIR). When the CR 

Program was implemented in 2005, the 

CDQ Program received an allocation of 

10 percent of the TACs for some CR 

Program fisheries (70 FR 10174, 10176– 

77; March 2, 2005). In addition to the 

CDQ allocations, the CDQ groups hold 

QS and PQS directly as well as 

indirectly through ownership in other 

entities that hold QS and PQS (see 

Section 2.8.3 of the RIR). 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39746 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

Need for This Proposed Rule 

In 2006, Congress passed the Coast 

Guard Act (Pub. L. 109–241), which 

amended the CDQ Program to give CDQ 

groups and their communities greater 

autonomy based on recommendations 

from the State of Alaska’s Blue Ribbon 

Panel. Section 416(a) of the Coast Guard 

Act revised section 305(i) of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and made 

significant changes to the management 

and oversight of the CDQ Program. The 

amendments to section 305(i) of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act were intended to 

promote the ability of CDQ groups to 

responsibly manage their allocations 

similar to the LAPs provided by NMFS 

to most other participants in the BSAI 

fisheries, while promoting the goals of 

the CDQ Program (see Section 2.8 of the 

RIR). 

The Coast Guard Act also revised 

section 305(i)(1)(F)(i) of the MagnusonStevens Act to specify that CDQ groups 

would be subject to excessive share 

ownership, harvesting, and processing 

limitations proportional to their 

ownership of entities holding such 

privileges (i.e., holdings and use of 

LAPs by CDQ groups are to be 

determined by the ‘‘individual and 

collective rule’’) (16 U.S.C. 

1855(i)(1)(F)(i)). This requires NMFS to 

use the individual and collective rule to 

determine holding and use of harvesting 

and processing privileges for CDQ 

groups under all LAP programs in the 

BSAI. After the 2006 amendment to the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS reviewed 

its methods for determining holding and 

use of harvesting and processing 

privileges in all LAP programs in the 

BSAI and determined that modifications 

were required for the methods used to 

determine CDQ group holdings and use 

for (1) harvesting and processing 

privileges under the AFA and (2) PQS 

and IPQ under the CR Program. These 

modifications were required because the 

regulations implementing these 

programs specified that NMFS would 

use the 10-percent rule to determine 

holding and use of these harvesting and 

processing privileges for CDQ groups. 

This Proposed Rule and Its Anticipated 

Effects 

This proposed rule would revise 50 

CFR 679.2, 679.7(k)(6) and (7), 680.2, 

and 680.42(b). 

This proposed rule would revise the 

AFA Program to specify that NMFS uses 

the individual and collective rule for 

CDQ groups to attribute harvesting and 

processing privileges of AFA pollock 

proportionally to the CDQ groups’ 

ownership of vessels and processors 

active in those fisheries. For example, if 

a CDQ group holds 15 percent 

ownership of an entity that holds and 

uses AFA harvesting and processing 

privileges, this proposed rule would 

specify that the CDQ group is attributed 

15 percent of the harvest or processing 

privileges of that company for purposes 

of monitoring excessive harvesting and 

processing use caps under the AFA. 

The proposed rule would also 

implement Amendment 48 to the Crab 

FMP and revise the CR Program to 

specify that NMFS uses the individual 

and collective rule for CDQ groups to 

attribute holding and use of PQS and 

IPQ based on the CDQ groups’ 

proportional ownership of entities that 

hold and use PQS and IPQ. For 

example, if a CDQ group holds 15 

percent ownership of a company that 

holds or uses PQS or IPQ, this proposed 

rule would specify that the CDQ group 

is attributed 15 percent of the holding 

or use of that PQS or IPQ. The proposed 

rule would not alter the regulations for 

the QS and IFQ holding and use caps 

under the CR Program because current 

CR Program regulations specify that 

NMFS uses the individual and 

collective rule for all program 

participants, including CDQ groups, to 

attribute any participants’ holding and 

use of QS and IFQ based on their 

proportional ownership of entities that 

hold and use QS and IFQ. 

NMFS has used the individual and 

collective rule for CDQ group ownership 

attribution for both the AFA Program 

and the CR Program since enactment of 

the Coast Guard Act; however, the 

regulations and the Crab FMP have not 

been updated to reflect this change. This 

proposed rule would update the 

regulations and the Crab FMP to be 

consistent with NMFS’ current method 

of ownership attribution for CDQ groups 

and the Magnuson-Stevens Act. This 

proposed rule would benefit CDQ 

groups and the public by clarifying the 

method NMFS uses to attribute holding 

and use of harvesting and processing 

privileges by CDQ groups for purposes 

of monitoring holding and use caps for 

the AFA and CR Programs. 

Classification 

Pursuant to sections 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 Amendment 48, the 

Crab FMP, other provisions of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other 

applicable law, subject to further 

consideration of comments received 

during the public comment period. 

This proposed rule has been 

determined to be not significant for the 

purposes of Executive Order 12866. The 

Chief Counsel for Regulation of the 

Department of Commerce certified to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

that this proposed rule, if adopted, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. NMFS requests comments on 

the decision to certify this proposed 

rule. The factual basis for this 

determination is as follows: 

This proposed action would revise 

regulations and the Crab FMP so that 

they are consistent with the ownership 

attribution method mandated by the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act for CDQ groups 

for monitoring limitations on the 

holding and use of harvesting and 

processing privileges in the AFA and CR 

Programs. 

The CDQ groups would be the 

directly regulated entities under the 

proposed regulatory revisions. All six of 

the CDQ groups are non-profit 

corporations and are considered small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. As NMFS, one of the agencies that 

manages these holding and use 

limitations, has already implemented 

these provisions of the MagnusonStevens Act in practice, this proposed 

action is not expected to materially 

change how any small entities are 

regulated, nor is the proposed action 

expected to impose significant 

compliance costs or materially change 

how any small entities comply with the 

applicable regulations. Rather, this 

proposed rule would benefit CDQ 

groups and the public by clarifying the 

method NMFS uses to attribute holding 

and use of harvesting and processing 

privileges by CDQ groups for purposes 

of monitoring holding and use caps for 

the AFA and CR Programs. This 

proposed action therefore is not 

expected to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of the 

small entities regulated by this proposed 

action—the CDQ groups. As a result, an 

initial regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required, and none has been 

prepared. 

The economic analysis contained in 

the RIR for this action (see ADDRESSES) 

further describes the regulatory and 

operational characteristics of the CDQ 

Program, including the participation of 

CDQ groups in the AFA Program and 

the CR Program, the history of this 

action, and the details of the alternatives 

considered for this action, including the 

preferred alternative. 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements 

This rule references collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39747 

have been approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

OMB Control Number 0648–0514. The 

annual application for a crab IFQ permit 

and the application for a crab IPQ 

permit are mentioned in this rule; 

however, there are no changes to these 

forms or to who is required to submit 

the forms for this proposed rule, and 

therefore there would be no change in 

burden or cost. 

Send comments on these or any other 

aspects of the collection of information, 

to NMFS (see ADDRESSES), and by email 

to OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov 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: http://www.cio.noaa.gov/ 

services_programs/prasubs.html. 

Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 

Overlap, or Conflict With This Proposed 

Rule 

No relevant Federal rules have been 

identified that would duplicate, overlap, 

or conflict with this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

50 CFR Part 679 

Alaska, Fisheries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

50 CFR Part 680 

Alaska, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 15, 2017. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 

CFR part 679 and part 680 as follows: 

PART 679—FISHERIES OF THE 

EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE OFF 

ALASKA 

■ 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. 

■ 2. In § 679.2, revise the definitions for 

‘‘AFA entity’’ and ‘‘Affiliation for the 

purpose of defining AFA and the 

Rockfish Program’’ to read as follows: 

§ 679.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

AFA entity means a group of affiliated 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns, except for a CDQ 

group, that harvests or processes pollock 

in the BS directed pollock fishery. 

* * * * * 

Affiliation for the purpose of defining 

AFA and the Rockfish Program means a 

relationship between two or more 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns, except CDQ groups, 

in which one concern directly or 

indirectly owns a 10 percent or greater 

interest in another, exerts control over 

another, or has the power to exert 

control over another; or a third 

individual, corporation, or other 

business concern directly or indirectly 

owns a 10 percent or greater interest in 

both, exerts control over both, or has the 

power to exert control over both. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 679.7 revise paragraphs (k)(6) 

and (k)(7) to read as follows: 

§ 679.7 Prohibitions. 

* * * * * 

(k) * * * 

(6) Excessive harvesting shares. It is 

unlawful for an AFA entity or a CDQ 

group to harvest, through a fishery 

cooperative or otherwise, an amount of 

BS pollock that exceeds the 17.5 percent 

excessive share limit specified under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(6). A CDQ group’s 

harvest of BS pollock will be calculated 

through its proportional ownership of 

individuals, corporations, or other 

business concerns that harvest BS 

pollock. The owners and operators of 

the individual vessels comprising the 

AFA entity or CDQ group that harvest 

BS pollock will be held jointly and 

severally liable for exceeding the 

excessive harvesting share limit. 

(7) Excessive processing shares. It is 

unlawful for an AFA entity or a CDQ 

group to process an amount of BS 

pollock that exceeds the 30-percent 

excessive share limit specified under 

§ 679.20(a)(5)(i)(A)(7). The amount of BS 

pollock processed by a CDQ group will 

be calculated through its proportional 

ownership of individuals, corporations, 

or other business concerns that process 

BS pollock. The owners and operators of 

the individual processors comprising 

the AFA entity or CDQ group that 

process BS pollock will be held jointly 

and severally liable for exceeding the 

excessive processing share limit. 

* * * * * 

PART 680—SHELLFISH FISHERIES OF 

THE EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE 

OFF ALASKA 

■ 4. The authority citation for 50 CFR 

part 680 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1862; Pub. L. 109– 

241; Pub. L. 109–479. 

■ 5. In § 680.2, revise the introductory 

text to the definition for ‘‘Affiliation’’ 

and the introductory text of paragraph 

(1) of the definition for ‘‘Affiliation’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 680.2 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Affiliation means a relationship 

between two or more entities, except for 

CDQ groups, in which one directly or 

indirectly owns or controls a 10 percent 

or greater interest in, or otherwise 

controls, another, or a third entity 

directly or indirectly owns or controls a 

10 percent or greater interest in, or 

otherwise controls, both. For the 

purpose of this definition, the following 

terms are further defined: 

(1) Entity. An entity may be an 

individual, corporation, association, 

partnership, joint-stock company, trust, 

or any other type of legal entity, except 

for a CDQ group, any receiver, trustee in 

bankruptcy or similar official or 

liquidating agent, or any organized 

group of persons whether incorporated 

or not, that holds direct or indirect 

interest in: 

* * * * * 

■ 6. In § 680.42, revise paragraphs 

(b)(3)(ii), (b)(3)(iii), and (b)(3)(iv) to read 

as follows: 

§ 680.42 Limitations on use of QS, PQS, 

IFQ, and IPQ. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) Is not a CDQ group and directly 

or indirectly owns a 10 percent or 

greater interest in an entity that holds 

PQS. 

(iii) A person that is not a CDQ group 

and holds PQS is limited to a PQS use 

cap that is calculated based on the sum 

of all PQS held by that PQS holder and 

all PQS held by any affiliate of the PQS 

holder. A CDQ group that holds PQS is 

limited to a PQS use cap that is 

calculated based on the sum of all PQS 

held, individually or collectively, by 

that CDQ group. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39748 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 161 / Tuesday, August 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

(iv) A person that is not a CDQ group 

and holds IPQ is limited to an IPQ use 

cap that is calculated based on the sum 

of all IPQ held by that IPQ holder and 

all IPQ held by any affiliate of the IPQ 

holder. A CDQ group that holds IPQ is 

limited to an IPQ use cap that is 

calculated based on the sum of all IPQ 

held, individually or collectively, by 

that CDQ group. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–17607 Filed 8–21–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS