Source: https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2015/09/02/2015-21786.html
Timestamp: 2020-08-11 11:03:47
Document Index: 134976646

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1', 'art 54', 'art 660', 'art 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', 'art 121', 'art 660', 'art 660', 'ART 660', 'art 660', '§ 660', '§ 660', 'art 121']

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Process for Divestiture of Excess Quota Shares in the Individual Fishing Quota Fishery, 53088-53100 [2015-21786] :: National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration :: Department Of Commerce :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia
Justia Regulation Tracker Department Of Commerce National Oceanic And Atmospheric Administration Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Process for Divestiture of Excess Quota Shares in the Individual Fishing Quota Fishery, 53088-53100 [2015-21786]
Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Process for Divestiture of Excess Quota Shares in the Individual Fishing Quota Fishery, 53088-53100 [2015-21786]
Download as PDF 53088 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules III. Waiver of 60-Day Comment Period We ordinarily permit a 60-day comment period on notices of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, as provided in section 1871(b)(1) of the Act. However, this period may be shortened, as provided under section 1871(b)(2)(C) of the Act, when the Secretary finds good cause that a 60-day comment period would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and incorporates a statement of the finding and its reasons in the rule issued. Because the correction in this document does not make any changes to the substantive policies proposed in the CY 2016 ESRD PPS proposed rule, but merely corrects the reference to a column in the preamble of the proposed rule, this correcting document does not constitute agency rulemaking and therefore, the 60-day comment period does not apply. In addition, we believe it is important for the public to have the corrected information as soon as possible and find no reason to delay dissemination of it. For the reasons stated previously, we find it both unnecessary and contrary to the public interest to undertake further notice and comment procedures with respect to this correcting document. IV. Correction of Errors In FR Doc. 2015–16074 of July 1, 2015 (80 FR 37808), make the following corrections: ■ 1. On page 37814, second column, second full paragraph, in line 16, the reference to ‘‘13A’’ is corrected to read ‘‘11A’’. Dated: August 27, 2015. Madhura Valverde, Executive Secretary to the Department, Department of Health and Human Services. [FR Doc. 2015–21783 Filed 9–1–15; 8:45 am] John J. Heitmann on behalf of The Wireless ETC Petitioners. DATES: Oppositions to the Petitions must be filed on or before September 17, 2015. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before September 11, 2015. ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodie Griffin, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7550, email: jodie.griffin@fcc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of Commission’s document, Report No. 3027, released August 26, 2015. The full text of the Petitions is available for viewing and copying in Room CY–B402, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC or may be accessed online via the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System at http:// apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. The Commission will not send a copy of this Notice pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because this notice does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability. Subject: Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, Telecommunications Carriers Eligible for Universal Service Support, Connect America Fund, published at 80 FR 40923, July 14, 2015, in WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 09–197, and 10–90, and published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also § 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission’s rules. Number of Petitions Filed: 2. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–21763 Filed 9–1–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P BILLING CODE 4120–01–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 47 CFR Part 54 50 CFR Part 660 [WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 09–197 and 10– 90; Report No. 3027] [Docket No. 150721634–5773–01] asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS RIN 0648–BF11 Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. AGENCY: Petitions for Reconsideration (Petitions) have been filed in the Commission’s Rulemaking proceeding by Thomas C. Power, on behalf of CTIA—THE WIRELESS ASSOCIATION; SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Process for Divestiture of Excess Quota Shares in the Individual Fishing Quota Fishery National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Proposed rule, request for comments. ACTION: In January 2011, NMFS implemented the groundfish trawl rationalization program (a catch share program) for the Pacific coast groundfish limited entry trawl fishery. The program was implemented through Amendment 20 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan and the corresponding implementing regulations. Amendment 20 established the trawl rationalization program, which includes an Individual Fishing Quota program for limited entry trawl participants. Under current regulations, quota share (QS) permit owners must divest quota share holdings that exceed accumulation limits by November 30, 2015. This proposed action would make minor procedural modifications to the program regulations to clarify how divestiture and revocation of excess quota share could occur in November, 2015, and establish procedures applicable in the future if divestiture becomes necessary. DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before October 2, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA– NMFS–2015–0086, by any of the following methods: • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/ #!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20150086, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments. • Mail: Submit written comments to William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115–0070; Attn: Colby Brady. • Fax: 206–526–6117; Attn: Colby Brady. 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, etc.), 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). SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Brady (West Coast Region, NMFS), phone: 206–526–6117, and email: colby.brady@noaa.gov, or contact Sarah Towne (West Coast Region, NMFS), phone: 206–526–4140, and email: sarah.towne@noaa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Electronic Access This proposed rule is accessible via the Internet at the Office of the Federal Register Web site at https:// www.federalregister.gov. Background information and documents are available at the NMFS West Coast Region Web site at http:// www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov and at the Pacific Fishery Management Council’s Web site at http:// www.pcouncil.org. The final environmental impact statement (FEIS) regarding specifications to rationalize the trawl fishery for the implementation of Amendment 20 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan (PCGFMP, or FMP) is available on the NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region Web site at: http://www.pcouncil.org/ groundfish/fishery-management-plan/ fmp-amendment-20 Copies of both documents are available from Donald McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council), 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Portland, OR 97220, phone: 503–820–2280. Background In January 2011, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implemented a trawl rationalization program, which is a catch share program, for the Pacific coast groundfish limited entry trawl fishery. The program was implemented through Amendment 20 to the PCGFMP and the corresponding implementing regulations at 50 CFR part 660. Amendment 20 established the trawl rationalization program that consists of: an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) program for the shorebased trawl fleet (including whiting and nonwhiting sectors), and cooperative (coop) programs for the at-sea mothership and catcher/processor trawl fleets (whiting only). Regulations in §§ 660.111 and 660.140(d)(4) define and describe quota share (QS) and individual bycatch quota (IBQ) control limits as the maximum amount of QS and IBQ that a person, individually or collectively, may own or control in the shorebased IFQ program. The regulations set individual control limits for each of the 30 IFQ species, as well as an aggregate nonwhiting control limit across species. NMFS collects ownership interest information annually VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 in order to ensure compliance with the control limits, and QS permit owners must disclose the identity and share of any persons who have an ownership interest greater or equal to 2% of the QS permit. Consistent with the trawl rationalization program, some QS permit owners were initially allocated an amount of QS and IBQ that exceeded one or more of the control limits, based on their catch history during the qualifying years. The regulations provided these QS permit owners an adjustment period to hold the excess shares, but they must completely divest of any excess QS or IBQ by November 30, 2015, as specified at § 660.140(d)(4)(v). For any QS permit owner who does not divest of their excess shares by the deadline, the regulations specify that NMFS will revoke their excess QS or IBQ and redistribute it to other QS permit owners in proportion to their current QS or IBQ holdings, up to the control limits. NMFS seeks to clarify the revocation protocols for cases where QS permit owners do not voluntarily divest before the deadline. The current regulations at § 660.140(d)(4)(v) make it clear that if a QS permit owner owns QS in excess of a control limit after the divestiture deadline, NMFS will revoke and redistribute the excess QS to all other QS permits in proportion to their QS and IBQ holdings, up to the control limits. These regulations are sufficient in simple situations where the permit owner only owns one permit. However, the current regulations do not address how NMFS would revoke shares from a person or entity that is over an individual species control limit across several QS permits, or how NMFS would revoke shares from a person or entity that is over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit. In addition, the Council’s Groundfish Advisory Panel (GAP) identified a problem where QS permit owners who are over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit may not be able to find a willing recipient to take their excess QS. Proposed Action The proposed action includes two regulatory mechanisms that further implement original QS divestiture provisions of the trawl rationalization program: proportional reduction of QS and abandonment. All items were discussed at the November 2014 Council meeting in Costa Mesa, CA, and at the April 2015 Council meeting in Rohnert Park, CA. NMFS proposes to apply a ‘‘proportional reduction’’ methodology PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 53089 to revoke excess shares from QS permit owners who exceed individual species control limits across several QS permits or exceed the aggregate nonwhiting control limit and fail to divest by the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline. In cases where a person or entity has not divested to the control limits for individual species across QS permits, NMFS would revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes to the total QS percentage owned. In cases where a QS permit owner has not divested to the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings, NMFS would revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. Because QS is a valuable asset, it is important to clearly define and receive public comment on the process by which NMFS would permanently revoke QS to the QS and IBQ control limits. More information and examples are provided below. In addition, NMFS proposes a process by which QS permit owners who are over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit may abandon shares of their choosing to NMFS by November 15, 2015. The ‘‘abandonment’’ option would provide additional flexibility for QS permit owners who are over the aggregate limit, because they could choose which nonwhiting IFQ species to abandon, rather than waiting until the divestiture deadline when some of each IFQ species would be revoked proportionally by NMFS. NMFS also proposes to modify the regulations so that the same revocation and abandonment procedures could be used in the future if necessary. NMFS proposes to notify any QS permit owner who is found to exceed an accumulation limit after the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline, and provide the QS permit owner 60 days to divest of the excess QS. NMFS also proposes that any QS permit owner who is found to exceed the aggregate nonwhiting control limit may abandon QS in excess of the limit to NMFS within 30 days of the notification, using the same method described further below. Proportional Reduction to Individual Species Control Limits As described above, the current regulations at § 660.140(d)(4) set individual control limits for each of 30 IFQ species. At the time of this rulemaking, nine unique entities hold QS in excess of one or more of the individual species control limits, and must divest to the limits by November 30, 2015. In the event that a QS permit E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 53090 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules owner has not divested to the individual species control limits by November 30, 2015, current regulations described in § 660.140(d)(4)(v) clearly define how NMFS will revoke and redistribute the excess QS or IBQ if the QS permit owner only has ownership in one QS permit. NMFS will revoke the QS or IBQ in excess of the limit and redistribute the excess QS to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their current QS holdings, up to the control limits. For example, the individual species control limit for starry flounder is 10 percent. If a QS permit owner holds 11 percent of starry flounder after the divestiture deadline, NMFS would revoke one percent of starry flounder and redistribute it to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their current QS holdings, up to the control limits. However, if a QS permit owner holds QS in excess of an individual species control limit across several QS permits after the November 30, 2015, deadline, current regulations do not specify how the excess QS would be revoked. NMFS proposes to revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes to the total QS percentage owned. For example, if a QS permit owner holds a total of 11 percent of starry flounder across five different QS permits, NMFS would need to revoke a total of one percent from the permit owner. In order to determine how much to revoke from each QS permit, NMFS would calculate how much each of the five QS permits was contributing to the total amount of starry flounder owned by the permit owner. In Table 1 below, QS Permit 1 accounts for 18.182 percent of the total starry flounder QS owned by the permit owner, QS Permit 2 accounts for 9.091 percent, etc. (see Column C below in Table 1). NMFS would then apply this same proportion to the overage amount to determine how much to revoke from each permit. For example, since the QS permit owner held one percent in excess of the control limit, 0.182 percent would be revoked from QS Permit 1, 0.091 percent would be revoked from QS Permit 2, etc. (see Column D below in Table 1). A total of one percent would be revoked across all permits to reach the 10 percent individual species control limit. TABLE 1— EXAMPLE OF HOW NMFS WOULD REVOKE QS FOR AN ENTITY OVER AN INDIVIDUAL SPECIES CONTROL LIMIT ACROSS MULTIPLE QS PERMITS AFTER THE DIVESTITURE DEADLINE [NMFS proposes to revoke QS from each permit in proportion to the amount each QS permit contributes to the overage. This example is speculative, and does not intentionally bear any resemblance to any particular QS owner.] A B C D E QS permit QS percent owned by individual in each permit for species X (%) Individual pemit’s share of total ercent owned across permits (%) = [B/total (11%)] Amount revoked and redistributed by NMFS (%) [C × overage (1%)] Amount remaining owned by individual (%) = (B–D) ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................... ............................................................................................... 2 1 3 1 4 18.182 9.091 27.273 9.091 36.364 0.182 0.091 0.273 0.091 0.364 1.818 0.909 2.727 0.909 3.636 Total QS% Owned by Individual Across QS Permits ...... QS Control Limit for Species ................................................... Amount Over Control Limit ...................................................... 11 10 1 .............................. .............................. .............................. 1.000 .............................. .............................. 10.000 .............................. .............................. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 1 2 3 4 5 The proposed method would provide NMFS with clear guidance of how to revoke QS from QS permit owners who are over an individual species control limit as of the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline. Because NMFS will strive to make all quota pound allocations to QS permit owners on or about January 1, 2016, and all QS permits must be under the control limits by this time, a clear process will allow NMFS to make any necessary QS revocations and redistributions, and subsequent quota pound allocations, in a timely manner. If a QS permit owner was found to exceed an individual control limit across QS permits in 2016 or beyond, NMFS proposes to notify the QS permit owner and provide them 60 days from the time of notification to transfer the excess QS/IBQ. If the QS permit owner still held excess QS/IBQ at the end of the 60-day divestiture period, NMFS VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 proposes to revoke the excess QS/IBQ using the same method described above, and redistribute the excess QS/IBQ to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS/IBQ holdings on or about January 1 of the following calendar year, based on current ownership records. No person would be allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put that person over an accumulation limit. Widow rockfish cannot be transferred under current regulations until widow reallocation is considered and implemented. Because widow rockfish QS percentages could be reallocated to QS permit owners in different amounts than their current holdings, NMFS will not revoke excess widow QS until widow rockfish reallocation consideration and applicable implementation is completed. Excessive shares of widow rockfish and potential divestiture will be considered as part of PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 the forthcoming widow rockfish reallocation proposed rule. Proportional Reduction to the Aggregate Nonwhiting Control Limit As described above, the current regulations at § 660.140(d)(4) set an aggregate nonwhiting control limit across IFQ species. The limit is 2.7 percent of the total nonwhiting, nonhalibut QS, and is calculated by multiplying a QS permit owner’s QS for each species by the 2010 optimum yield (OY), and then converting the total back into a percentage. The aggregate limit is more restrictive than the sum of individual species control limits, which was the intent of the Council and NMFS since the beginning of the trawl rationalization program in January 2011. At the time of this rulemaking, three or less unique entities hold QS in excess of the aggregate nonwhiting control limit (defined this way due to confidentiality requirements), and must E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS divest to the 2.7 percent limit by November 30, 2015. In the event that a QS permit owner has not divested to the aggregate nonwhiting control limit by November 30, 2015, current regulations do not describe how QS should be revoked. NMFS proposes to revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. For example, if a QS permit owner held the maximum allowable amount of each IFQ species (nonwhiting, nonhalibut) up to each of the individual species VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 control limits, they would have aggregate holdings of 5.840 percent, or 3.140 percent above the 2.7 percent aggregate nonwhiting control limit (see Columns A–D in Table 2, below). NMFS would divide the aggregate overage (3.140 percent) by the total aggregate amount owned (5.840 percent), and multiply this value (53.767%) by the QS owned for each nonwhiting nonhalibut species to get the amount of QS to revoke from each species (see Columns E–H in Table 2, below). For example, in Table 2 below, NMFS would revoke PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 53091 5.377 percent of arrowtooth flounder and 7.097 percent of bocaccio, etc. (see Column F in Table 2) from this QS permit owner in order to get them down to the 2.7% aggregate nonwhiting control limit. This example is intended to illustrate the basis for the calculation, but the revocation calculation will be affected by the moratorium on widow rockfish QS trading until widow is potentially reallocated, as described in Table 2 below. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 53092 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules Table 2. Example of How NMFS Would Revoke QS for an Entity Over the 2. 7 Percent Aggregate Non whiting Control Limit After the Divestiture Deadline. (NMFS proposes to revoke QS from each nonwhiting nonhalibut species in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. This example is speculative, and does not intentionally bear any resemblance to any particular QS owner.) D Arrowtooth flounder Bocaccio rockfish South of 40'10' N. canary rockfish Chili pepper rockfish South of 40'10' N. Cowcod South of 40'10' N. Darkblotched rockfish Dover sole English sole Lingcod North of 40'10' N. lingcod South of 40'10' N. Longspine thornyheads North of 34'27' N. Minor shelf rockfish North of 40'10' N. Minor shelf rocKF~h South of 40'10' N. Minor slope rocKf1sh North of 40'10' N. Minor slope rockfish South of 40'10' N. Other flatfish Pacific cod Pacific ocean perch North of 40'10' N. Petralesole Sablefish North of 36' N. Sablefish South of 36' N. Shortspine thornyheads North of 34'27' N. Shortspine thornyheads South of 34'27' N. Spl~nose rockfish South of 40'10' N. Starry flounder Widow rockfish Yelloweye rockfish Yellowtail rockfish North of 40'10' N. Total Non-Wh~ing Non-Halibut QP Sum: 21,156,441 113,287 34,294 4,046,034 4,409 655,071 34,546,436 20,398,822 3,494,084 1,283,443 4,544,278 543,925 133,526 1,950,209 869,459 9,646,547 3,340,003 377,577 2,502,247 6,606,862 1,164,834 3,288,084 110,231 965,514 1,176,166 713,178 406 8,189,203 131,854,570 10.000% 13.200% 4400% 10.000% 17.700% 4.500% 2.600% 5.1Xl0% 2.500% 2.500% 6.COOJ6 5.COOJ6 9.COOJ6 5.000% 6.COOJ6 10.000% 12.000% 4.COOJ6 3.COOJ6 3.COOJ6 10.000% 6.COOJ6 6.COOJ6 10.000% 10.000% 5100% 5.700% 5.000% Example Entity's QP Sum: 2,115,644 14,954 1,509 404,603 780 29,478 898,207 1,019,941 87,352 32,086 272,657 27,196 12,017 97,510 52,168 964,655 400,800 15,103 75,067 198,206 116,483 197,285 6,614 96,551 117,617 36,372 23 409,460 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Although in Table 2 widow rockfish is included in the aggregate nonwhiting control limit calculation, widow rockfish QS cannot currently be Jkt 235001 S3.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 3140% Frm 00074 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Amount Remaining Owned by Example Entity= (C-G) 4.623% 6103% 2034% 4.623% 8183% 2.080% 1.202% 2.312% 1.156% 1.156% 2.774% 2.312% 4161% 2.312% 2.774% 4.623% 5.548% 1.849% 1.387% 1.387% 4.623% 2.774% 2.774% 4.623% 4.623% 2.358% 2.635% 2.312% Example Entity's NEW QPSum: Example Entity's NEW Aggregate Non-Whiting Percentage: NEW Amount Over Um~(27%) transferred, pending the potential reallocation of widow QS. As described above, NMFS will not revoke widow rockfish QS since it could be reallocated and therefore the percentage owned by PO 00000 5.3n% 7.097% 2.366% 5.377% 9.517% 2.420% 1.398% 2.688% 1.344% 1.344% 3.226% 2.688% 4.839% 2.688% 3.226% 5.377% 6.452% 2151% 1.613% 1.613% 5.377% 3.226% 3.226% 5.3n% 5.377% 2.742% 3.065% 2.688% S.840% Amount Over Limit (2.7%) BILLING CODE 3510–22–C 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 53.767% 7,700,338 Example Entity's Aggregate Non-Whiting Percentage: 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 G Amount Revoked An Example Entity's Conversion of 2010 Shorebased Overage/Total OWned QS%- Here Set Equal to Example Entity's QS and Redistributed Trawl Allocation (lbs) =(3140%/5.840%) Control Limits to Pounds by NMFS = (C'E) IFQSpedes VerDate Sep<11>2014 F E H Conversion of Example Entity's Remaining QS to Pounds 978,119 6,914 698 187,059 361 13,629 415,265 471,546 40,385 14,834 126,057 12,574 5,556 45,082 24,118 445,986 185,301 6,983 34,706 91,636 53,853 91,210 3,058 44,638 54,377 16,816 11 189,304 3,560,075 2.700% 0.000% each QS permit owner could change. NMFS brought this issue to the Council in April 2015, noting that QS permit owners who are currently over the aggregate limit, including their QS E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 EP02SE15.000 c B A Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS percentage of widow rockfish, would need to divest of one or more of the other non-widow species included in the calculation to get under the limit by the deadline. The Council moved to continue to include widow rockfish in the aggregate calculation. Consequently, NMFS proposes to continue to include widow rockfish in the aggregate nonwhiting control limit calculation (as described in the Council motion), but if any QS permit owner has not divested to get under the aggregate limit by the divestiture deadline, NMFS will revoke some of each IFQ species VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 included in the calculation except for widow rockfish (until reallocation consideration and implementation is completed). As described above, NMFS would divide the amount of the aggregate overage by the aggregate total owned, but hold the QS permit owner’s widow QS holdings constant. NMFS would then adjust the proportion used in order to determine how much QS to revoke of the other 27 species in the calculation to bring the permit owner’s holdings to the 2.700% limit. The proportion used would be the same for each species, as above, but adjusted to PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 53093 take 0% away from widow and slightly more away from each of the other species included in the aggregate calculation in order to get the permit owner down to the limit. Using the same example as above, but holding widow constant, the proportion used in Table 3 to determine the QS to revoke for each species changes slightly, from 53.767% in Table 2 to 54.023% in Table 3 to bring the permit owner to the 2.700% aggregate limit without revoking any widow rockfish QS. BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 53094 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules Table 3. Example of How NMFS Would Revoke QS for an Entity Over the 2.7 Percent Aggregate N onwhiting Control Limit After the Divestiture Deadline, but Before Widow Reallocation Consideration and Implementation Is Complete. (; A 2010 An example Conversion of Shorellased IFQSpecies E ntity's ~ - Individual Trawl Here Set E to E qual ntity'.s QS to Allocation {lbs) Control limits Pounds Arr~tooth f!oum1er 2 ,115,644 4.40C'li 14,954 1,5 0S moore' 404,f,(l~ 17iCV-~ Cowcod South rlf 40''1G!~. ' 1\J.CCI».\ U.2~ 2ll56i#l 730 fi55,07 1 2~147& 4.5\lJ% 2.5:J:ili 5.0.:1]% 2.50J:l) Z.Sv:l:l\ 6.0:>J% 3,494 ,084 1,2B,443 UngrJJdNorthof40'10 N. 898.207 ~019,941 87,352 32,08& 172,65:7 27,1% . S.OO'J:>i Ot~.er fla rti;h Pacificcc.a 133,5.26 -~ _oo:r;~ 12,u17 1,%0,200 359,45 9 9,646,54i 3,340,1)33 5_00% 0 6.0.'\i"% 10.ll>"'l6 97,510 52,16& sn. .sn M sbelf r(;J:kiish S ci 40''10' N inilf outh . Minilf slo~e rockris~ North of <10'10' N . (l.~-ust~~O'I) 964,655 4l:r:i,-80:l 12.0CI!l!\ 4.0i)J% 15,10~ P .ole etrale> 3.00C'% Salll:iishNorth of 36' ~~. sow,, 75,067 198,205 lOC>CV-' 116,43~ 5.00~ Hri iRt;_ ...,.; 1 10,l3l 6.00011 965,514 10.000'~ 100:/J% S J!ltlll S.iOJ% 6,614 96,551 lli,6li 36,371 23 5. 0:/J. ~ 409,4&'1 1,154,&34 Shillt~ir.e thomvh eads ~-lorth cl 3 '27' N 4 .. Starl'j il~iinder 8,189,203 Total Non-Wiliti.llg Noo-Halillllt QP S.um: 131,354,570 Exam E ple ntity's QPSum: Example E ntity's Aggregate N onWhiting Percentage.: Amount Over limit (2.~} .~ ., .. - 7,700,338 541 23% 1 54{)23 % 54.023 % 54.02 3% 54.023.% 54.1123% 5 023% 4.' 5 4023% 5 .023% 4 5 4.023% 5.-402% 6.433% 2161% 1.621% 1.37~% 443.51 , 9 184,275 5,944 34,514 162.1% 5.402% L37S.% 91,12~ 4.59&% 3.241% 2.75~% 3.241% 5.<102% 5.402% 2.75S% 4 .59&% 459g% 53,555 90}05 3,041 44.~91 4.59a% 5517% 183!1% 54,077 jJ.~ 5 4.023% 54.02% 3 l6,312 2 .62t)f 2..701% 229~% . E xample E s ntity'. NEWQPS.um: 11 188,.257 307~~ E xample E ntity'.s NE Aggregate W 5.~ Non-Whiting 3,S60,035 2.7001 P ercentage: NEW Amount OVer limit !2J"l 3.1~ 0.0001 BILLING CODE 3510–22–C VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 EP02SE15.001 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS H Overage/Total Conversion of d Amount Amount Owne = Individual . 4IR/5 Revoked and Remaini~g Owned E ntity's Redistributed by lndtvGld ual (C- R .l emaining US ' l _· or by NMFS (C •fl Widow to Pounds 54112-% 3 5.4DZ% 459&% 972.71 , 0 5 4.02.31£ 7.131% 6.C~S% 5,~75 2..377% 2023% 54.023% 694 54.0231! 5.- 02% 4 4 .59&% 1 85,025 54.023% 9.56!% 8.136% . 359 54 02 3% 2.431% Hi59:% 13,553 54J}2 3% l19S% 1<105 % 41Z969 . 2J9g% 54.023% 2701% 4-58 ,938 54.02 3% 114!!:% 1551 % 49,162 14,752 54023% 1.351% l14S% 54.023% 3.241% vsr~ 125,359 54.023% 2.701% 22 . 95% 12.504 54,(1-% 23 4.&52% 4.BS% 5.515 54023% 1701% 2.29~% 44,832 2 .· ss 3g · , 54.02.31(, 3.241% 2.75S% G Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS NMFS proposes to revoke QS from each of the aggregate IFQ species (nonwhiting, non-halibut) except for widow rockfish since it cannot be transferred under current regulations and may be reallocated. NMFS would adjust the proportion in Column E so that the QS permit owner would continue to hold the same amount of widow, but a little less of all other species in order to hold widow constant. The example in Table 3 is speculative, and does not intentionally bear any resemblance to any particular QS owner. If a QS permit owner was found to exceed the aggregate nonwhiting control limit in 2016 or beyond, NMFS proposes to notify the QS permit owner and provide them 60 days from the time of notification to transfer excess QS. If the QS permit owner still held QS in excess of the aggregate nonwhiting control limit at the end of the 60 day divestiture period, NMFS proposes to revoke the excess QS using the same method described above, and redistribute the excess QS to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS holdings on or about January 1 of the following calendar year, based on current ownership records. No person would be allocated an amount of QS that would put that person over an accumulation limit. NMFS will consider the impacts of a reallocation of widow rockfish on the aggregate nonwhiting control limit and potential divestiture methods as part of the forthcoming widow rockfish reallocation proposed rule. The proposed method would provide NMFS with clear guidance of how to revoke QS from QS permit owners who are over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit as of the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline or in 2016 and beyond. Because NMFS will strive to make all quota pound allocations to QS permit owners on or about January 1, 2016, and all QS permits must be under the control limits by this time, a clear process will allow NMFS to make any necessary QS revocations and redistributions, and subsequent quota pound allocations, in a timely manner. Abandonment As described above, the Council’s GAP identified a situation where a QS permit owner who is over the 2.7% aggregate nonwhiting control limit may wish to divest of specific IFQ species, such as starry flounder, that are not fully utilized in the fishery in order to get down to the aggregate limit. However, the QS permit owner may be unable to find another QS permit owner who is willing to purchase or accept as VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 a donation the excess QS of these species. If they still held QS in excess of the aggregate nonwhiting control limit after the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline, NMFS would proceed with the proportional reduction method previously described, potentially revoking some of all nonwhiting nonhalibut species held by the QS permit owner. At the November 2014 Council meeting, the GAP proposed a process by which QS permit owners in this situation might voluntarily abandon QS of their choosing to NMFS to get under the limits by the divestiture deadline and avoid having QS revoked proportionally. The Council expressed support for this abandonment option at the April 2015 Council meeting. NMFS proposes the abandonment option recommended by the Council in order to provide additional flexibility for these QS permit owners to come into compliance before the divestiture deadline. NMFS proposes that any QS permit owner who is over the 2.7 percent aggregate nonwhiting control limit and wishes to voluntarily abandon QS do so by notifying NMFS in writing no later than November 15, 2015. NMFS would need enough time to process the letter, make an administrative transfer of the abandoned QS out of the requesting QS permit owner’s online QS account prior to the November 30 divestiture deadline, and provide the QS permit owner with a new estimate of their aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings. If the abandonment of QS had not yet gotten the QS permit owner down to the aggregate limit, they would still have time to divest of more QS to other QS permit owners prior to the November 30, 2015, deadline. NMFS proposes that a written abandonment request include: The QS permit number, IFQ species, and the QS percentage to be abandoned. Either the QS permit owner or an authorized representative of the QS permit owner would be required to sign and date the request. QS permit owners choosing to utilize the abandonment option would permanently relinquish any right to the abandoned QS, and NMFS would redistribute the abandoned QS percentages to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS holdings up to the QS and IBQ control limits, based on the most recent ownership interest records. No compensation would be due for any abandoned QS. The QS permit owner would be responsible for ensuring that the abandonment of QS to NMFS would get them under the aggregate nonwhiting control limit; any remaining excess found after the divestiture PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 53095 deadline would be revoked proportionally by NMFS, as described above. If a QS permit owner was found to exceed the aggregate nonwhiting control limit in 2016 or beyond, NMFS proposes to notify the QS permit owner and provide them 60 days from the time of notification to transfer excess QS, and 30 days from the time of notification to abandon excess QS to NMFS, using the same method described above. The proposed abandonment method would provide a further option for QS permit owners over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit to come into compliance. Currently, QS permit owners can sell, trade, or give away QS to other QS permit owners in order to reduce their holdings to the QS and IBQ control limits, or wait until the divestiture deadline for NMFS to revoke to these limits. By providing an abandonment option, QS permit owners could abandon QS for species of their choosing to NMFS instead of finding a buyer/recipient or having NMFS revoke proportionally across all nonwhiting nonhalibut species. An abandonment option will not be provided for QS permit owners to get under an individual species control limits since abandonment was intended to allow QS permit owners over the aggregate limit to choose which species to give up. 2015 Implementation Guidance All QS permit owners and individuals are currently able to divest of any QS (except widow QS) in excess of the QS and IBQ control limits by the November 30, 2015 divestiture deadline. A QS permit owner may sell excess QS in the open QS trading market, donate excess QS to other QS owners of their choosing, or barter. However, in the event that a QS permit owner is found to be in excess of QS and IBQ control limits after the divestiture deadline, NMFS will be required to revoke excess QS. This proposed rule clarifies how NMFS will revoke QS from permit owners who are over an individual species control limit across several QS permits or the aggregate nonwhiting control limit, and provides an abandonment option for those over the aggregate limit. NMFS anticipates that the proposed action could become final in October 2015, which will provide some opportunity for QS owners to use abandonment procedures prior to November 15, 2015. NMFS sent letters to all QS permit owners who were over one or more of the individual species control limits and/or the aggregate nonwhiting control limit as of July 28, 2015, to allow time and advance notification for divestiture E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 53096 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules (and potentially abandonment). NMFS encourages that all QS permit owners divest to the QS and IBQ control limits prior to the divestiture deadline if they want to avoid agency action to ensure that they are under the required control limits. If any QS is revoked, NMFS will send a letter to the QS permit owner with the QS permit in mid-December 2015, describing the species and amount revoked. If any QS is redistributed, NMFS will describe this in a cover letter to all QS permit owners when QS permits are mailed in mid-December 2015. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Future Divestiture Procedures Similar divestiture measures may be needed in the future for a variety of reasons. For example, if a company changes their ownership structure and a person’s QS increases over the control limits as a result, or if the IFQ system inadvertently allows a transfer that puts a QS permit owner over a limit. Accordingly, NMFS proposes to implement for future use, procedures similar to those outlined above. NMFS would notify a QS permit owner that he or she is over a QS or IBQ limit, the QS owner would have 30 days to abandon the excess quota for redistribution by NMFS, or within 30 days of the abandonment deadline, NMFS would revoke excess quota. 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 the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan, other provisions of the MagnusonStevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment. NMFS is amending the supporting statement for the Pacific Coast groundfish trawl rationalization program permit and license information collection Office of Management and Business (OMB) Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) requirements (number 0648– 0620) to reflect the abandonment protocols described in the preamble to this proposed rule. NMFS requests any comments on the PRA abandonment protocol, including whether those minor paperwork protocols described above would unnecessarily burden any QS owners. The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this proposed rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. As required by section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 (IRFA) was prepared. The IRFA describes the economic impact that this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A summary of the analysis follows. A copy of this analysis is available from NMFS. Under the RFA, the term ‘‘small entities’’ includes small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. The Small Business Administration (SBA) has established size criteria for all major industry sectors in the US, including fish harvesting and fish processing businesses. A business primarily involved in finfish harvesting 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 $20.5 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide (13 CFR part 121; August 17, 2015). For commercial shellfish harvesters, the other qualifiers apply and the receipts threshold is $5.5 million. For other commercial marine harvesters, for-hire businesses, and marinas, the other qualifiers apply and the receipts threshold is $7.5 million. A business primarily involved in seafood processing 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 employment not in excess of 500 employees for all its affiliated operations worldwide. For seafood dealers/wholesalers, the other qualifiers apply and the employment threshold is 100 employees. A small organization is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. Small governmental jurisdictions are governments of cities, counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with populations less than 50,000. At the time of initial implementation of the trawl rationalization program in 2011, NMFS issued QS to several QS permit owners in excess of one or more individual species control limits and/or the aggregate non-whiting control limit, based on their catch history during the qualifying years. Excess QS or IBQ was only meant to be held for a short adjustment period, and regulations require that QS permit owners must divest of any QS in excess of the accumulation limits by November 30, 2015. The primary purpose of this rule is to describe two methods by which excess quota share will be divested, if QS holders do not or are unable to divest by the deadline. One method will require NMFS to proportionately reduce PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 quota share in situations where a QS holder has excess QS for an individual species but has holding for that species across multiple species. Additionally, the proportional reduction method would be employed by NMFS for persons who have QS holdings that exceed the aggregate non-whiting control limit. A second method of divestiture would allow QS holders to abandon QS to NMFS by formally notifying NMFS of the IFQ species and amounts of QS they wish to divest to comply with the aggregate non-whiting control limit. In both cases, whether QS was revoked or abandoned, NMFS would redistribute excess QS to other QS holders proportionate to their current holdings, up to the accumulation limits for that species and to the aggregate non-whiting control limit. Under current regulations, quota share (QS) owners in the IFQ program must divest quota shareholdings that exceed individual accumulation limits by November 30, 2015. This proposed action would make minor procedural modifications, described above, to the program regulations to clarify how divestiture of excess quota share could occur. However, the regulations do not currently describe a method for NMFS to revoke shares in two situations: When a business entity or person is over an individual species control limit across several QS permits, and when a business entity or person is over the aggregate non-whiting control limit. There are two control limits that affect the amount of quota share (QS) or individual bycatch quota (IBQ) a person or entity can own: Control Limits for Individual Species: These are limits set for each species, and these are fairly straightforward to calculate. For example, the control limit for widow rockfish is 5.1%. If a permit owner has 6%, they are over the individual control limit and must divest 0.9% of widow rockfish. If an individual is an owner or partial owner across many QS permits, he or she must add up their shares across permits to see if they are under the limit. For example: If Joe Dragger has three QS permits: Permit A has 1% of widow rockfish, permit B has 1%, and permit C has 2%, the total widow rockfish owned by this person would be 4%, and would be under the 5.1% control limit. Aggregate Non-Whiting Control Limit: This limit applies to 28 IFQ species or species groups—all except Pacific whiting and Pacific halibut. There is a total limit of 2.7% that a quota shareholder can own across the nonwhiting IFQ species and species groups. This limit is more restrictive than the E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules sum of individual species limits. The limit is calculated by converting an entity’s QS percentages into pounds based on the 2010 optimum yields (OYs), and then dividing those pounds by the total 2010 OY to convert it back to a percentage. For example, if an entity owned 3% of aggregate nonwhiting shares, they would be over the limit by 0.3%. In this situation, the entity would need to divest of some shares (of the species and amounts of their choosing) in order to get under or equal to the 2.7% limit. This rule affects Quota Shareholders in the Pacific Groundfish Trawl Rationalization Fishery. For the years 2011 to 2014, the total IFQ fishery averaged harvests (including discards) of approximately 107,000 mt annually and worth over $52 million in ex-vessel revenues. Ex-vessel revenues in 2014 were over $52 million with a harvest of approximately 117,217 tons. Note that the use of ex-vessel values does not take into account the wholesale or export value of the fishery or the costs of harvesting and processing groundfish into a finished product. The shorebased quota share fishery in 2014 supported 138 quota shareholders that held shares of 30 groundfish species or species groups. Quota pounds are allocated annually based on the sector allocations and the quota share percentages for each species owned by each permit owner. These quota pounds then need to be transferred to vessel accounts to be fished. In 2014, there were 144 IFQ vessel accounts. Vessels fishing under these accounts must carry observers or be participating under an Electronic Monitoring Exempted Fishing Permit. Fish must be landed at a first receiver that has a federal license and the required equipment for all offloads to be monitored and accounted for by a compliance monitor. There is an online electronic database that tracks the trading of quota shares between quota share accounts and the trading of quota pounds and catch and discard amounts in vessel accounts. NMFS considered various alternatives for this action. Under the status quo/NoAction alternative, NMFS would have no specific regulations in place that detail how NMFS will revoke excess QS when QS holders either cannot or do not divest by the November 30, 2015, deadline if a business or person that is over the individual control limit for an IFQ/IBQ specie(s) across multiple permits or when a business or person is over the aggregate non-whiting control limit. At the November 2014 Pacific Fishery Management Council Meeting, NMFS noted the upcoming divestiture VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 deadline and proposed an alternative, where specific regulations would provide transparency to the process of revoking excess quota shares in these two situations (Agenda Item J.2.b, NMFS Report, November 2014). The NMFS alternative would provide quota share permit owners with explicit rules so that they would understand how excess QS would be revoked. These rules would aid business planning for current and future quota shareowners. The Pacific Fishery Management Council’s industry advisory group, the Groundfish Advisory Panel (GAP), made suggestions that a better alternative should be shaped. At the April Council Meeting, the GAP made the following statement: ‘‘The GAP reached consensus that forfeiture of quota in excess of caps should be allowed. If forfeiture were not allowed, it could result in a draconian outcome where NMFS takes species in excess pro rata resulting in loss of valuable species. Since there may be little to no demand for some species they may be impossible to divest through the market leaving forfeiture as the only realistic option. (Agenda Item E.6.a, Supplemental GAP Report, April 2014).’’ At the November 2014 Council meeting, the Groundfish Advisory Panel made the following suggestion: ‘‘The GAP believes a non-punitive option that allows participants to ‘‘abandon’’ quota share should be developed. In some cases, there may be no market for certain IFQ species quota share that needs to be divested. If a participant is unable to transfer that quota share for reasons beyond his control, he should not be penalized. An option that allows the quota to be ‘‘abandoned’’ to NMFS should be developed. (Agenda Item J.2.b, Supplemental GAP Report, November 2014) ’’ The Preferred option provides the ‘‘abandonment option’’ plus the application of the proportional reduction method in those instances where no abandonment occurs. The aggregate limit is based on 28 of the 30 IFQ species (all IFQ species except Pacific whiting and Pacific halibut). Current rules are silent on how NMFS should reduce a Quota Shareholder’s portfolio of individual species quota shareholding if they are over the aggregate non-whiting control limit. Therefore, NMFS is seeking public comment on a proposal to determine which individual species are reduced should a quota share owner not take action to reduce his quota shares to get under the limit. Currently there are two ways in which a Quota shareholder can reduce his quota share holdings to get under the aggregate limit—either by sale or by gift to another quota shareholder. There are two mechanisms PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 53097 in this proposed rule for NMFS will determine the amounts of individual species quota shares that need to be reduced. First, NMFS will use written instructions as provided by the quota shareholder that indicates what individual species quota shares are to be abandoned to NMFS for redistribution to other quota shareholders. Absent written instructions, NMFS will reduce each individual species quota share holdings in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned until the aggregate limit is reached. This proposed rule would have no negative effects on the current industry or on the economy more generally. Current levels of harvest will be left unaffected. The only changes that might happen would be as a result of NMFS reducing quota shareholders who failed to divest their excess shares by November 30, 2015. Should QS holders have excess QS after November 30, 2015, NMFS will revoke the excess QS and redistribute these shares to other quota shareholders up to the control limit. These excess quota shares will be redistributed to all other Quota shareholders on a proportional basis in a manner that their individual and aggregate limits are not exceeded. There may be situations in the future where NMFS ownership information is not current and the QS database fails to block transfers that result in QS holders exceeding their limits. NMFS proposes to continue to use the same rules of reducing excess quota shares. Quota shareholders are required to report their ownership structure. Annually NMFS collects ownership information at the entity level (corporation, LLC, partnership, trust, nonprofits, publicly held company etc.) and the individual level. Ownership is reported down to a level of 2% ownership. Some quota shareholders hold as many as 13 QS permits. For a given QS permit, the ownership hierarchy may reach to the 7th level. All told, there are an estimated 435 unique entities involved. NMFS reviewed the ownership structure of all the QS permits to the lowest level of ownership. There are nine unique entities over one or more of the individual species control limits, and 3 or less unique entities over the aggregate non-whiting control limit. The main purpose of this rulemaking is to provide transparency. This rule shows not only how NMFS will calculate excess quota share holding but also how NMFS will proportionately reduce either for an individual species across multiple permits or in cases where someone does not abandon QS E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 53098 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules and is over the aggregate limit. Even though there may not be negative effects on the industry, there may be effects on individual entities. For those that are over the individual species control limit, this rule provides transparency on how NMFS has calculated overages. Some quota shareholders may exceed the individual species limit as they are owners or part owners of multiple permits. This rule proposes the process for proportional reduction when a quota shareowner is over an individual limit across permits. For those entities that are over the aggregate non-whiting control limit, this rule provides transparency but also a process whereby the quota shareholder can direct NMFS on what quota share species should be reduced. With this option, the quota shareholder can direct NMFS to reduce his/her QS for lowvalued species to get under the aggregate limit. This option mitigates the economic effect on those quota shareholders over the aggregate limit, should they not be able to sell or gift their shares to another entity. This process is as follows: QS owners that are over the control limit for aggregate non-whiting QS holdings may voluntarily abandon QS prior to the November 30, 2015, deadline by notifying NMFS in writing by November 15, 2015. The written request must include: QS permit number, IFQ species, and the QS percentage to be abandoned. Either the QS permit owner or an authorized representative of the QS permit owner would be required to sign the request. QS permit owners choosing to utilize the abandonment option would permanently relinquish any right to the abandoned QS, and NMFS would redistribute the abandoned QS percentages to all other QS owners in proportion to their QS holdings, based on ownership records as of January 1, 2016. No compensation would be due for any abandoned shares. If a quota shareholder does not request abandonment and provide NMFS with directions, NMFS will use the proportional reduction methods where proportional amounts of QS for all nonwhiting species are reduced to come into compliance with the aggregate limit. Some of those reductions will include valuable market and bycatch species. This process may provide some small benefits to the affected quota shareholders. At the moment, the nature of trading is such that NMFS does not have good estimates of the value of a quota share because there has been insufficient information to establish quota share prices. Many trades are multiple species trades, barter trades, or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 trades among closely affiliated entities. However, the economic effect of allowing those entities the option of giving NMFS instructions on how to dispose of their excess shares can be illustrated with ex-vessel prices. At the low end of the price range are whiting and arrowtooth flounder at about $0.10 a pound each. At the high end of the spectrum are petrale sole and sablefish at $1.13 and $1.98 per lb., respectively. In between these prices are prices for important bycatch species such as canary and yelloweye. Although the exvessel prices for these bycatch species may not be high, they are needed to support the target catch. Without this option, NMFS would proportionally revoke quota shares from all species regardless of value if a QS permit owner had not divested voluntarily by the November 30, 2015 deadline. The quota shareholder can direct NMFS to reduce their low-valued species to get under the aggregate limit. This option mitigates the economic effect on those quota shareholders over the aggregate limit, should they not be able to sell or gift their shares to another entity. NMFS is almost done building a sophisticated ownership database. In the future, when quota share trades are made, the online quota share trading system will have rules that will prevent trades that bring individuals who own QS bring an entity over the aggregate species limit under the first level of ownership. However, in the event that such trading is not prevented because of complex trading and ownership relationships, the rules and processes associated with this rulemaking will apply. There are 138 quota shareholders potentially directly affected by the aggregate species limits as reductions of excess shares will be taken from the quota share percentages listed on the permit. At the first level of ownership and based on affiliations, there are 96 unique businesses. Even if some first level owners are persons, they are considered businesses for purposes for determining the effects on small businesses. These QS holders must direct the quota pounds to various vessel accounts so that quota pounds can be fished. Quite frequently they also own limited entry permits, the vessels attached to these permits, or processing facilities. As compared to secondary owners or investors, first level quota shareholders are active participants in the fishery, and thus are businesses for purposes of this rule. Also, all quota shareholders when renewing their quota share permits must respond to questions of whether they consider themselves a large or small business. All 138 quota PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 shareholders are businesses. Of these businesses, 15 are large. There are 9 entities affected by the control limit for one or more individual species. These entities are affected only in the sense that NMFS is showing how it will calculate excess shares across multiple permits. There are 3 or less affected entities by the aggregate species limit divestiture rules. When combined, there are 9 unique entities affected by this rule—7 small and 2 large. NMFS believes that are no significant alternatives to the proposed rule that accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and that minimize any of the significant economic impacts of the proposed rule on small entities. There are no relevant Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action. NMFS believes this proposed rule would not adversely affect small entities. Nonetheless, NMFS has prepared this IRFA. Through the rulemaking process associated with this action, we are requesting comments on these conclusions. This proposed rule was developed after meaningful collaboration, through the Council process, with the tribal representative on the Council. The proposed regulations have no direct effect on the tribes. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 660 Fisheries, Fishing, Indian fisheries. Dated: August 26, 2015. Eileen Sobeck, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 660 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 660—FISHERIES OFF WEST COAST STATES 1. The authority citation for part 660 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 773 et seq., and 16 U.S.C. 7001 et seq. 1. In § 660.140, revise paragraph (d)(4)(v) to read as follows: ■ § 660.140 Shorebased IFQ Program. * * * * * (d) * * * (4) * * * (v) Divestiture. Accumulation limits will be calculated by first calculating the aggregate non-whiting QS limit and then the individual species QS or IBQ control limits. For QS permit owners (including any person who has ownership interest in the owner named on the permit) that are found to exceed the accumulation limits during the initial issuance of QS permits, an E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules adjustment period will be provided during which they will have to completely divest their QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits. QS or IBQ will be issued for amounts in excess of accumulation limits only for owners of limited entry permits as of November 8, 2008, if such ownership has been registered with NMFS by November 30, 2008. The owner of any permit acquired after November 8, 2008, or if acquired earlier, not registered with NMFS by November 30, 2008, will only be eligible to receive an initial allocation for that permit of those QS or IBQ that are within the accumulation limits; any QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits will be redistributed to the remainder of the initial recipients of QS or IBQ in proportion to each recipient’s initial allocation of QS or IBQ for each species. Any person that qualifies for an initial allocation of QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits will be allowed to receive that allocation, but must divest themselves of the QS (except for widow rockfish QS) or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits by November 30, 2015, according to the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) of this section. If NMFS identifies that a QS permit owner exceeds the accumulation limits in 2016 or beyond, the QS permit owner must divest of the QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits according to the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(B) of this section. Owners of QS or IBQ in excess of the control limits may receive and use the QP or IBQ pounds associated with that excess, up to the time their divestiture is completed. (A) Divestiture and redistribution process in 2015. QS permit owners in excess of the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings may abandon QS to NMFS by November 15, 2015 using the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(C) of this section. QS permit owners must divest themselves of any QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits by November 30, 2015, except for widow rockfish QS, which cannot be transferred as described in paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(B)(2) of this section. After the November 30, 2015 divestiture deadline, NMFS will revoke all QS or IBQ held by a person (including any person who has ownership interest in the owner names on the permit) in excess of the accumulation limits following the procedures specified under paragraphs (d)(4)(v)(D) through (G) of this section. All abandoned or revoked shares will be redistributed to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS or IBQ holdings on or about January 1, 2016, based on current ownership records, except that no person will be allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put that person over an accumulation limit. (B) Divestiture and redistribution process in 2016 and beyond. Any person owning or controlling QS or IBQ must comply with the accumulation limits, even if that control is not reflected in the ownership records available to NMFS as specified under paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (iii) of this section. If NMFS identifies that a QS permit owner exceeds an accumulation limit in 2016 or beyond, NMFS will notify the QS permit owner that he or she has 60 days to divest of the excess QS or IBQ. In the case that a QS permit owner exceeds the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings, the QS permit owner may abandon QS to NMFS within 30 days of the notification by NMFS, using the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(C) of this section. After the 60-day divestiture period, NMFS will revoke all QS or IBQ held by a person (including any person who has ownership interest in the owner names on the permit) in excess of the accumulation limits following the procedures specified under paragraphs (d)(4)(v)(D) through (G) of this section. All abandoned or revoked shares will be redistributed to all other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS or IBQ holdings on or about January 1 of the following calendar year, based on current ownership records, except that no person will be allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put that person over an accumulation limit. (C) Abandonment of QS. QS permit owners that are over the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings may voluntarily abandon QS if they notify NMFS in writing by the applicable deadline specified under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. The written abandonment request must include the following information: QS permit number, IFQ species, and the QS percentage to be abandoned. Either the QS permit owner or an authorized representative of the QS permit owner must sign the request. QS permit owners choosing to utilize the abandonment option will permanently relinquish to NMFS any right to the abandoned QS, and the QS will be redistributed as described under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No compensation will be due for any abandoned shares. (D) Revocation. NMFS will revoke QS from any QS permit owner who exceeds an accumulation limit after the divestiture deadline specified under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. NMFS will follow the revocation approach summarized in the following table and explained under paragraphs (d)(4)(v)(E) through (G) of this section: If, after the divestiture deadline, a QS permit owner exceeds . . . Then . . . An individual species control limit (non-widow until reallocation is complete) in one QS permit. An individual species control limit (non-widow until reallocation is complete) across multiple QS permits. NMFS will revoke excess QS at the species level. The control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings .......................... asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 53099 (E) Revocation of excess QS or IBQ from one QS permit. In cases where a person has not divested to the control limits for individual species (nonwidow until reallocation is complete) in one QS permit by the deadline specified under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 NMFS will revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes to the total QS percentage owned. NMFS will revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. Until widow reallocation is complete, the proportion will be adjusted to hold widow QS at a constant level while bringing the aggregate percentage owned to 2.700%, using normal rounding rules. this section, NMFS will revoke excess QS at the species level in order to get that person to the limits. NMFS will redistribute the revoked QS following the process specified in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 compensation will be due for any revoked shares. (F) Revocation of excess QS or IBQ from multiple QS permits. In cases where a person has not divested to the control limits for individual species (non-widow QS until reallocation is E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1 53100 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 170 / Wednesday, September 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS complete) across QS permits by the deadline specified under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section, NMFS will revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes to the total QS percentage owned. NMFS will redistribute the revoked QS following the process specified in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No compensation will be due for any revoked shares. (G) Revocation of QS in excess of the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:00 Sep 01, 2015 Jkt 235001 QS holdings. In cases where a QS permit owner has not divested to the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings by the deadline specified under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section, NMFS will revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. Until widow reallocation is complete and transfer of widow is allowed, widow will continue to be included in the aggregate calculation, but the proportion PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 will be adjusted to hold widow QS at a constant level while bringing the aggregate percentage owned to 2.700%, using normal rounding rules. NMFS will redistribute the revoked QS following the process in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No compensation will be due for any revoked shares. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2015–21786 Filed 9–1–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM 02SEP1
[Pages 53088-53100]
[FR Doc No: 2015-21786]
[Docket No. 150721634-5773-01]
RIN 0648-BF11
Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Process for Divestiture of Excess
Quota Shares in the Individual Fishing Quota Fishery
SUMMARY: In January 2011, NMFS implemented the groundfish trawl
rationalization program (a catch share program) for the Pacific coast
groundfish limited entry trawl fishery. The program was implemented
through Amendment 20 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management
Plan and the corresponding implementing regulations. Amendment 20
established the trawl rationalization program, which includes an
Under current regulations, quota share (QS) permit owners must divest
quota share holdings that exceed accumulation limits by November 30,
2015. This proposed action would make minor procedural modifications to
the program regulations to clarify how divestiture and revocation of
excess quota share could occur in November, 2015, and establish
procedures applicable in the future if divestiture becomes necessary.
NOAA- NMFS-2015-0086, by any of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0086, click the
NE., Seattle, WA 98115-0070; Attn: Colby Brady.
Fax: 206-526-6117; Attn: Colby Brady.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Brady (West Coast Region, NMFS),
phone: 206-526-6117, and email: colby.brady@noaa.gov, or contact Sarah
Towne (West Coast Region, NMFS), phone: 206-526-4140, and email:
Coast Region Web site at http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov and at
the Pacific Fishery Management Council's Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org.
The final environmental impact statement (FEIS) regarding
specifications to rationalize the trawl fishery for the implementation
of Amendment 20 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan
(PCGFMP, or FMP) is available on the NOAA Fisheries West Coast Region
Web site at: http://www.pcouncil.org/groundfish/fishery-management-plan/fmp-amendment-20 Copies of both documents are available from
Donald McIsaac, Executive Director, Pacific Fishery Management Council
(Council), 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Portland, OR 97220, phone: 503-
In January 2011, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
implemented a trawl rationalization program, which is a catch share
program, for the Pacific coast groundfish limited entry trawl fishery.
The program was implemented through Amendment 20 to the PCGFMP and the
established the trawl rationalization program that consists of: an
(including whiting and nonwhiting sectors), and cooperative (coop)
programs for the at-sea mothership and catcher/processor trawl fleets
(whiting only).
Regulations in Sec. Sec.  660.111 and 660.140(d)(4) define and
describe quota share (QS) and individual bycatch quota (IBQ) control
limits as the maximum amount of QS and IBQ that a person, individually
or collectively, may own or control in the shorebased IFQ program. The
regulations set individual control limits for each of the 30 IFQ
species, as well as an aggregate nonwhiting control limit across
species. NMFS collects ownership interest information annually in order
to ensure compliance with the control limits, and QS permit owners must
disclose the identity and share of any persons who have an ownership
interest greater or equal to 2% of the QS permit.
Consistent with the trawl rationalization program, some QS permit
owners were initially allocated an amount of QS and IBQ that exceeded
one or more of the control limits, based on their catch history during
the qualifying years. The regulations provided these QS permit owners
an adjustment period to hold the excess shares, but they must
completely divest of any excess QS or IBQ by November 30, 2015, as
specified at Sec.  660.140(d)(4)(v). For any QS permit owner who does
not divest of their excess shares by the deadline, the regulations
specify that NMFS will revoke their excess QS or IBQ and redistribute
it to other QS permit owners in proportion to their current QS or IBQ
holdings, up to the control limits.
NMFS seeks to clarify the revocation protocols for cases where QS
permit owners do not voluntarily divest before the deadline. The
current regulations at Sec.  660.140(d)(4)(v) make it clear that if a
QS permit owner owns QS in excess of a control limit after the
divestiture deadline, NMFS will revoke and redistribute the excess QS
to all other QS permits in proportion to their QS and IBQ holdings, up
to the control limits. These regulations are sufficient in simple
situations where the permit owner only owns one permit. However, the
current regulations do not address how NMFS would revoke shares from a
person or entity that is over an individual species control limit
across several QS permits, or how NMFS would revoke shares from a
person or entity that is over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit.
In addition, the Council's Groundfish Advisory Panel (GAP) identified a
problem where QS permit owners who are over the aggregate nonwhiting
control limit may not be able to find a willing recipient to take their
excess QS.
The proposed action includes two regulatory mechanisms that further
implement original QS divestiture provisions of the trawl
rationalization program: proportional reduction of QS and abandonment.
All items were discussed at the November 2014 Council meeting in Costa
Mesa, CA, and at the April 2015 Council meeting in Rohnert Park, CA.
NMFS proposes to apply a ``proportional reduction'' methodology to
revoke excess shares from QS permit owners who exceed individual
species control limits across several QS permits or exceed the
aggregate nonwhiting control limit and fail to divest by the November
30, 2015, divestiture deadline. In cases where a person or entity has
not divested to the control limits for individual species across QS
permits, NMFS would revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the
amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes to the total QS
percentage owned. In cases where a QS permit owner has not divested to
the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings, NMFS would
revoke QS at the species level in proportion to the amount of the
aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned. Because QS is a
valuable asset, it is important to clearly define and receive public
comment on the process by which NMFS would permanently revoke QS to the
QS and IBQ control limits. More information and examples are provided
In addition, NMFS proposes a process by which QS permit owners who
are over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit may abandon shares of
their choosing to NMFS by November 15, 2015. The ``abandonment'' option
would provide additional flexibility for QS permit owners who are over
the aggregate limit, because they could choose which nonwhiting IFQ
species to abandon, rather than waiting until the divestiture deadline
when some of each IFQ species would be revoked proportionally by NMFS.
NMFS also proposes to modify the regulations so that the same
revocation and abandonment procedures could be used in the future if
necessary. NMFS proposes to notify any QS permit owner who is found to
exceed an accumulation limit after the November 30, 2015, divestiture
deadline, and provide the QS permit owner 60 days to divest of the
excess QS. NMFS also proposes that any QS permit owner who is found to
exceed the aggregate nonwhiting control limit may abandon QS in excess
of the limit to NMFS within 30 days of the notification, using the same
method described further below.
Proportional Reduction to Individual Species Control Limits
As described above, the current regulations at Sec.  660.140(d)(4)
set individual control limits for each of 30 IFQ species. At the time
of this rulemaking, nine unique entities hold QS in excess of one or
more of the individual species control limits, and must divest to the
limits by November 30, 2015. In the event that a QS permit
owner has not divested to the individual species control limits by
November 30, 2015, current regulations described in Sec.
660.140(d)(4)(v) clearly define how NMFS will revoke and redistribute
the excess QS or IBQ if the QS permit owner only has ownership in one
QS permit. NMFS will revoke the QS or IBQ in excess of the limit and
redistribute the excess QS to all other QS permit owners in proportion
to their current QS holdings, up to the control limits. For example,
the individual species control limit for starry flounder is 10 percent.
If a QS permit owner holds 11 percent of starry flounder after the
divestiture deadline, NMFS would revoke one percent of starry flounder
and redistribute it to all other QS permit owners in proportion to
their current QS holdings, up to the control limits.
However, if a QS permit owner holds QS in excess of an individual
species control limit across several QS permits after the November 30,
2015, deadline, current regulations do not specify how the excess QS
would be revoked. NMFS proposes to revoke QS at the species level in
proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit contributes
to the total QS percentage owned. For example, if a QS permit owner
holds a total of 11 percent of starry flounder across five different QS
permits, NMFS would need to revoke a total of one percent from the
permit owner. In order to determine how much to revoke from each QS
permit, NMFS would calculate how much each of the five QS permits was
contributing to the total amount of starry flounder owned by the permit
owner. In Table 1 below, QS Permit 1 accounts for 18.182 percent of the
total starry flounder QS owned by the permit owner, QS Permit 2
accounts for 9.091 percent, etc. (see Column C below in Table 1). NMFS
would then apply this same proportion to the overage amount to
determine how much to revoke from each permit. For example, since the
QS permit owner held one percent in excess of the control limit, 0.182
percent would be revoked from QS Permit 1, 0.091 percent would be
revoked from QS Permit 2, etc. (see Column D below in Table 1). A total
of one percent would be revoked across all permits to reach the 10
percent individual species control limit.
Table 1-- Example of How NMFS Would Revoke QS for an Entity Over an Individual Species Control Limit Across
Multiple QS Permits After the Divestiture Deadline
[NMFS proposes to revoke QS from each permit in proportion to the amount each QS permit contributes to the
overage. This example is speculative, and does not intentionally bear any resemblance to any particular QS
A                           B                  C                  D                  E
QS percent owned   pemit's share of    Amount revoked    Amount remaining
by individual in    total  percent   and redistributed       owned by
QS permit                each permit for      owned across    by NMFS (%)  = [C   individual (%) =
species X (%)    permits  (%) = [B/  x overage (1%)]         (B-D)
total (11%)]
1...................................                  2             18.182              0.182              1.818
2...................................                  1              9.091              0.091              0.909
3...................................                  3             27.273              0.273              2.727
4...................................                  1              9.091              0.091              0.909
5...................................                  4             36.364              0.364              3.636
Total QS% Owned by Individual                    11  .................              1.000             10.000
Across QS Permits..............
QS Control Limit for Species........                 10  .................  .................  .................
Amount Over Control Limit...........                  1  .................  .................  .................
The proposed method would provide NMFS with clear guidance of how
to revoke QS from QS permit owners who are over an individual species
control limit as of the November 30, 2015, divestiture deadline.
Because NMFS will strive to make all quota pound allocations to QS
permit owners on or about January 1, 2016, and all QS permits must be
under the control limits by this time, a clear process will allow NMFS
to make any necessary QS revocations and redistributions, and
subsequent quota pound allocations, in a timely manner.
If a QS permit owner was found to exceed an individual control
limit across QS permits in 2016 or beyond, NMFS proposes to notify the
QS permit owner and provide them 60 days from the time of notification
to transfer the excess QS/IBQ. If the QS permit owner still held excess
QS/IBQ at the end of the 60-day divestiture period, NMFS proposes to
revoke the excess QS/IBQ using the same method described above, and
redistribute the excess QS/IBQ to all other QS permit owners in
proportion to their QS/IBQ holdings on or about January 1 of the
following calendar year, based on current ownership records. No person
would be allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put that person
over an accumulation limit.
Widow rockfish cannot be transferred under current regulations
until widow reallocation is considered and implemented. Because widow
rockfish QS percentages could be reallocated to QS permit owners in
different amounts than their current holdings, NMFS will not revoke
excess widow QS until widow rockfish reallocation consideration and
applicable implementation is completed. Excessive shares of widow
rockfish and potential divestiture will be considered as part of the
forthcoming widow rockfish reallocation proposed rule.
Proportional Reduction to the Aggregate Nonwhiting Control Limit
set an aggregate nonwhiting control limit across IFQ species. The limit
is 2.7 percent of the total nonwhiting, nonhalibut QS, and is
calculated by multiplying a QS permit owner's QS for each species by
the 2010 optimum yield (OY), and then converting the total back into a
percentage. The aggregate limit is more restrictive than the sum of
individual species control limits, which was the intent of the Council
and NMFS since the beginning of the trawl rationalization program in
At the time of this rulemaking, three or less unique entities hold
QS in excess of the aggregate nonwhiting control limit (defined this
way due to confidentiality requirements), and must
divest to the 2.7 percent limit by November 30, 2015. In the event that
a QS permit owner has not divested to the aggregate nonwhiting control
limit by November 30, 2015, current regulations do not describe how QS
should be revoked. NMFS proposes to revoke QS at the species level in
proportion to the amount of the aggregate overage divided by the
aggregate total owned. For example, if a QS permit owner held the
maximum allowable amount of each IFQ species (nonwhiting, nonhalibut)
up to each of the individual species control limits, they would have
aggregate holdings of 5.840 percent, or 3.140 percent above the 2.7
percent aggregate nonwhiting control limit (see Columns A-D in Table 2,
below). NMFS would divide the aggregate overage (3.140 percent) by the
total aggregate amount owned (5.840 percent), and multiply this value
(53.767%) by the QS owned for each nonwhiting nonhalibut species to get
the amount of QS to revoke from each species (see Columns E-H in Table
2, below). For example, in Table 2 below, NMFS would revoke 5.377
percent of arrowtooth flounder and 7.097 percent of bocaccio, etc. (see
Column F in Table 2) from this QS permit owner in order to get them
down to the 2.7% aggregate nonwhiting control limit. This example is
intended to illustrate the basis for the calculation, but the
revocation calculation will be affected by the moratorium on widow
rockfish QS trading until widow is potentially reallocated, as
described in Table 2 below.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02SE15.000
Although in Table 2 widow rockfish is included in the aggregate
nonwhiting control limit calculation, widow rockfish QS cannot
currently be transferred, pending the potential reallocation of widow
QS. As described above, NMFS will not revoke widow rockfish QS since it
could be reallocated and therefore the percentage owned by each QS
permit owner could change. NMFS brought this issue to the Council in
April 2015, noting that QS permit owners who are currently over the
aggregate limit, including their QS
percentage of widow rockfish, would need to divest of one or more of
the other non-widow species included in the calculation to get under
the limit by the deadline. The Council moved to continue to include
widow rockfish in the aggregate calculation.
Consequently, NMFS proposes to continue to include widow rockfish
in the aggregate nonwhiting control limit calculation (as described in
the Council motion), but if any QS permit owner has not divested to get
under the aggregate limit by the divestiture deadline, NMFS will revoke
some of each IFQ species included in the calculation except for widow
rockfish (until reallocation consideration and implementation is
completed). As described above, NMFS would divide the amount of the
aggregate overage by the aggregate total owned, but hold the QS permit
owner's widow QS holdings constant. NMFS would then adjust the
proportion used in order to determine how much QS to revoke of the
other 27 species in the calculation to bring the permit owner's
holdings to the 2.700% limit. The proportion used would be the same for
each species, as above, but adjusted to take 0% away from widow and
slightly more away from each of the other species included in the
aggregate calculation in order to get the permit owner down to the
limit. Using the same example as above, but holding widow constant, the
proportion used in Table 3 to determine the QS to revoke for each
species changes slightly, from 53.767% in Table 2 to 54.023% in Table 3
to bring the permit owner to the 2.700% aggregate limit without
revoking any widow rockfish QS.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02SE15.001
NMFS proposes to revoke QS from each of the aggregate IFQ species
(nonwhiting, non-halibut) except for widow rockfish since it cannot be
transferred under current regulations and may be reallocated. NMFS
would adjust the proportion in Column E so that the QS permit owner
would continue to hold the same amount of widow, but a little less of
all other species in order to hold widow constant. The example in Table
3 is speculative, and does not intentionally bear any resemblance to
any particular QS owner.
If a QS permit owner was found to exceed the aggregate nonwhiting
control limit in 2016 or beyond, NMFS proposes to notify the QS permit
owner and provide them 60 days from the time of notification to
transfer excess QS. If the QS permit owner still held QS in excess of
the aggregate nonwhiting control limit at the end of the 60 day
divestiture period, NMFS proposes to revoke the excess QS using the
same method described above, and redistribute the excess QS to all
other QS permit owners in proportion to their QS holdings on or about
January 1 of the following calendar year, based on current ownership
records. No person would be allocated an amount of QS that would put
that person over an accumulation limit. NMFS will consider the impacts
of a reallocation of widow rockfish on the aggregate nonwhiting control
limit and potential divestiture methods as part of the forthcoming
widow rockfish reallocation proposed rule.
to revoke QS from QS permit owners who are over the aggregate
nonwhiting control limit as of the November 30, 2015, divestiture
deadline or in 2016 and beyond. Because NMFS will strive to make all
quota pound allocations to QS permit owners on or about January 1,
2016, and all QS permits must be under the control limits by this time,
a clear process will allow NMFS to make any necessary QS revocations
and redistributions, and subsequent quota pound allocations, in a
As described above, the Council's GAP identified a situation where
a QS permit owner who is over the 2.7% aggregate nonwhiting control
limit may wish to divest of specific IFQ species, such as starry
flounder, that are not fully utilized in the fishery in order to get
down to the aggregate limit. However, the QS permit owner may be unable
to find another QS permit owner who is willing to purchase or accept as
a donation the excess QS of these species. If they still held QS in
excess of the aggregate nonwhiting control limit after the November 30,
2015, divestiture deadline, NMFS would proceed with the proportional
reduction method previously described, potentially revoking some of all
nonwhiting nonhalibut species held by the QS permit owner. At the
November 2014 Council meeting, the GAP proposed a process by which QS
permit owners in this situation might voluntarily abandon QS of their
choosing to NMFS to get under the limits by the divestiture deadline
and avoid having QS revoked proportionally. The Council expressed
support for this abandonment option at the April 2015 Council meeting.
NMFS proposes the abandonment option recommended by the Council in
order to provide additional flexibility for these QS permit owners to
come into compliance before the divestiture deadline. NMFS proposes
that any QS permit owner who is over the 2.7 percent aggregate
nonwhiting control limit and wishes to voluntarily abandon QS do so by
notifying NMFS in writing no later than November 15, 2015. NMFS would
need enough time to process the letter, make an administrative transfer
of the abandoned QS out of the requesting QS permit owner's online QS
account prior to the November 30 divestiture deadline, and provide the
QS permit owner with a new estimate of their aggregate nonwhiting QS
holdings. If the abandonment of QS had not yet gotten the QS permit
owner down to the aggregate limit, they would still have time to divest
of more QS to other QS permit owners prior to the November 30, 2015,
NMFS proposes that a written abandonment request include: The QS
permit number, IFQ species, and the QS percentage to be abandoned.
Either the QS permit owner or an authorized representative of the QS
permit owner would be required to sign and date the request. QS permit
owners choosing to utilize the abandonment option would permanently
relinquish any right to the abandoned QS, and NMFS would redistribute
the abandoned QS percentages to all other QS permit owners in
proportion to their QS holdings up to the QS and IBQ control limits,
based on the most recent ownership interest records. No compensation
would be due for any abandoned QS. The QS permit owner would be
responsible for ensuring that the abandonment of QS to NMFS would get
them under the aggregate nonwhiting control limit; any remaining excess
found after the divestiture deadline would be revoked proportionally by
NMFS, as described above.
transfer excess QS, and 30 days from the time of notification to
abandon excess QS to NMFS, using the same method described above.
The proposed abandonment method would provide a further option for
QS permit owners over the aggregate nonwhiting control limit to come
into compliance. Currently, QS permit owners can sell, trade, or give
away QS to other QS permit owners in order to reduce their holdings to
the QS and IBQ control limits, or wait until the divestiture deadline
for NMFS to revoke to these limits. By providing an abandonment option,
QS permit owners could abandon QS for species of their choosing to NMFS
instead of finding a buyer/recipient or having NMFS revoke
proportionally across all nonwhiting nonhalibut species. An abandonment
option will not be provided for QS permit owners to get under an
individual species control limits since abandonment was intended to
allow QS permit owners over the aggregate limit to choose which species
2015 Implementation Guidance
All QS permit owners and individuals are currently able to divest
of any QS (except widow QS) in excess of the QS and IBQ control limits
by the November 30, 2015 divestiture deadline. A QS permit owner may
sell excess QS in the open QS trading market, donate excess QS to other
QS owners of their choosing, or barter. However, in the event that a QS
permit owner is found to be in excess of QS and IBQ control limits
after the divestiture deadline, NMFS will be required to revoke excess
QS. This proposed rule clarifies how NMFS will revoke QS from permit
owners who are over an individual species control limit across several
QS permits or the aggregate nonwhiting control limit, and provides an
abandonment option for those over the aggregate limit. NMFS anticipates
that the proposed action could become final in October 2015, which will
provide some opportunity for QS owners to use abandonment procedures
prior to November 15, 2015.
NMFS sent letters to all QS permit owners who were over one or more
of the individual species control limits and/or the aggregate
nonwhiting control limit as of July 28, 2015, to allow time and advance
notification for divestiture
(and potentially abandonment). NMFS encourages that all QS permit
owners divest to the QS and IBQ control limits prior to the divestiture
deadline if they want to avoid agency action to ensure that they are
under the required control limits. If any QS is revoked, NMFS will send
a letter to the QS permit owner with the QS permit in mid-December
2015, describing the species and amount revoked. If any QS is
redistributed, NMFS will describe this in a cover letter to all QS
permit owners when QS permits are mailed in mid-December 2015.
Future Divestiture Procedures
Similar divestiture measures may be needed in the future for a
variety of reasons. For example, if a company changes their ownership
structure and a person's QS increases over the control limits as a
result, or if the IFQ system inadvertently allows a transfer that puts
a QS permit owner over a limit. Accordingly, NMFS proposes to implement
for future use, procedures similar to those outlined above. NMFS would
notify a QS permit owner that he or she is over a QS or IBQ limit, the
QS owner would have 30 days to abandon the excess quota for
redistribution by NMFS, or within 30 days of the abandonment deadline,
NMFS would revoke excess quota.
proposed rule is consistent with the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and
Act (PRA) requirements (number 0648-0620) to reflect the abandonment
protocols described in the preamble to this proposed rule. NMFS
requests any comments on the PRA abandonment protocol, including
whether those minor paperwork protocols described above would
unnecessarily burden any QS owners.
IRFA describes the economic impact that this proposed rule, if adopted,
of this analysis is available from NMFS. Under the RFA, the term
``small entities'' includes small businesses, small organizations, and
small governmental jurisdictions. The Small Business Administration
the US, including fish harvesting and fish processing businesses. A
business primarily involved in finfish harvesting is classified as a
combined annual receipts not in excess of $20.5 million for all its
affiliated operations worldwide (13 CFR part 121; August 17, 2015). For
commercial shellfish harvesters, the other qualifiers apply and the
receipts threshold is $5.5 million. For other commercial marine
harvesters, for-hire businesses, and marinas, the other qualifiers
apply and the receipts threshold is $7.5 million. A business primarily
involved in seafood processing is classified as a small business if it
operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual
employment not in excess of 500 employees for all its affiliated
operations worldwide. For seafood dealers/wholesalers, the other
qualifiers apply and the employment threshold is 100 employees. A small
organization is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently
jurisdictions are governments of cities, counties, towns, townships,
villages, school districts, or special districts, with populations less
At the time of initial implementation of the trawl rationalization
program in 2011, NMFS issued QS to several QS permit owners in excess
of one or more individual species control limits and/or the aggregate
non-whiting control limit, based on their catch history during the
qualifying years. Excess QS or IBQ was only meant to be held for a
short adjustment period, and regulations require that QS permit owners
must divest of any QS in excess of the accumulation limits by November
The primary purpose of this rule is to describe two methods by
which excess quota share will be divested, if QS holders do not or are
unable to divest by the deadline. One method will require NMFS to
proportionately reduce quota share in situations where a QS holder has
excess QS for an individual species but has holding for that species
across multiple species. Additionally, the proportional reduction
method would be employed by NMFS for persons who have QS holdings that
exceed the aggregate non-whiting control limit. A second method of
divestiture would allow QS holders to abandon QS to NMFS by formally
notifying NMFS of the IFQ species and amounts of QS they wish to divest
to comply with the aggregate non-whiting control limit. In both cases,
whether QS was revoked or abandoned, NMFS would redistribute excess QS
to other QS holders proportionate to their current holdings, up to the
accumulation limits for that species and to the aggregate non-whiting
Under current regulations, quota share (QS) owners in the IFQ
program must divest quota shareholdings that exceed individual
accumulation limits by November 30, 2015. This proposed action would
make minor procedural modifications, described above, to the program
regulations to clarify how divestiture of excess quota share could
occur. However, the regulations do not currently describe a method for
NMFS to revoke shares in two situations: When a business entity or
person is over an individual species control limit across several QS
permits, and when a business entity or person is over the aggregate
non-whiting control limit.
There are two control limits that affect the amount of quota share
(QS) or individual bycatch quota (IBQ) a person or entity can own:
Control Limits for Individual Species: These are limits set for
each species, and these are fairly straightforward to calculate. For
example, the control limit for widow rockfish is 5.1%. If a permit
owner has 6%, they are over the individual control limit and must
divest 0.9% of widow rockfish. If an individual is an owner or partial
owner across many QS permits, he or she must add up their shares across
permits to see if they are under the limit. For example: If Joe Dragger
has three QS permits: Permit A has 1% of widow rockfish, permit B has
1%, and permit C has 2%, the total widow rockfish owned by this person
would be 4%, and would be under the 5.1% control limit.
Aggregate Non-Whiting Control Limit: This limit applies to 28 IFQ
species or species groups--all except Pacific whiting and Pacific
halibut. There is a total limit of 2.7% that a quota shareholder can
own across the non-whiting IFQ species and species groups. This limit
is more restrictive than the
sum of individual species limits. The limit is calculated by converting
an entity's QS percentages into pounds based on the 2010 optimum yields
(OYs), and then dividing those pounds by the total 2010 OY to convert
it back to a percentage. For example, if an entity owned 3% of
aggregate non-whiting shares, they would be over the limit by 0.3%. In
this situation, the entity would need to divest of some shares (of the
species and amounts of their choosing) in order to get under or equal
to the 2.7% limit.
This rule affects Quota Shareholders in the Pacific Groundfish
Trawl Rationalization Fishery. For the years 2011 to 2014, the total
IFQ fishery averaged harvests (including discards) of approximately
107,000 mt annually and worth over $52 million in ex-vessel revenues.
Ex-vessel revenues in 2014 were over $52 million with a harvest of
approximately 117,217 tons. Note that the use of ex-vessel values does
not take into account the wholesale or export value of the fishery or
the costs of harvesting and processing groundfish into a finished
product. The shorebased quota share fishery in 2014 supported 138 quota
shareholders that held shares of 30 groundfish species or species
groups. Quota pounds are allocated annually based on the sector
allocations and the quota share percentages for each species owned by
each permit owner. These quota pounds then need to be transferred to
vessel accounts to be fished. In 2014, there were 144 IFQ vessel
accounts. Vessels fishing under these accounts must carry observers or
be participating under an Electronic Monitoring Exempted Fishing
Permit. Fish must be landed at a first receiver that has a federal
license and the required equipment for all offloads to be monitored and
accounted for by a compliance monitor. There is an online electronic
database that tracks the trading of quota shares between quota share
accounts and the trading of quota pounds and catch and discard amounts
in vessel accounts.
NMFS considered various alternatives for this action. Under the
status quo/No-Action alternative, NMFS would have no specific
regulations in place that detail how NMFS will revoke excess QS when QS
holders either cannot or do not divest by the November 30, 2015,
deadline if a business or person that is over the individual control
limit for an IFQ/IBQ specie(s) across multiple permits or when a
business or person is over the aggregate non-whiting control limit.
At the November 2014 Pacific Fishery Management Council Meeting,
NMFS noted the upcoming divestiture deadline and proposed an
alternative, where specific regulations would provide transparency to
the process of revoking excess quota shares in these two situations
(Agenda Item J.2.b, NMFS Report, November 2014). The NMFS alternative
would provide quota share permit owners with explicit rules so that
they would understand how excess QS would be revoked. These rules would
aid business planning for current and future quota shareowners.
The Pacific Fishery Management Council's industry advisory group,
the Groundfish Advisory Panel (GAP), made suggestions that a better
alternative should be shaped. At the April Council Meeting, the GAP
made the following statement: ``The GAP reached consensus that
forfeiture of quota in excess of caps should be allowed. If forfeiture
were not allowed, it could result in a draconian outcome where NMFS
takes species in excess pro rata resulting in loss of valuable species.
Since there may be little to no demand for some species they may be
impossible to divest through the market leaving forfeiture as the only
realistic option. (Agenda Item E.6.a, Supplemental GAP Report, April
2014).'' At the November 2014 Council meeting, the Groundfish Advisory
Panel made the following suggestion: ``The GAP believes a non-punitive
option that allows participants to ``abandon'' quota share should be
developed. In some cases, there may be no market for certain IFQ
species quota share that needs to be divested. If a participant is
unable to transfer that quota share for reasons beyond his control, he
should not be penalized. An option that allows the quota to be
``abandoned'' to NMFS should be developed. (Agenda Item J.2.b,
Supplemental GAP Report, November 2014) '' The Preferred option
provides the ``abandonment option'' plus the application of the
proportional reduction method in those instances where no abandonment
The aggregate limit is based on 28 of the 30 IFQ species (all IFQ
species except Pacific whiting and Pacific halibut). Current rules are
silent on how NMFS should reduce a Quota Shareholder's portfolio of
individual species quota shareholding if they are over the aggregate
non-whiting control limit. Therefore, NMFS is seeking public comment on
a proposal to determine which individual species are reduced should a
quota share owner not take action to reduce his quota shares to get
under the limit. Currently there are two ways in which a Quota
shareholder can reduce his quota share holdings to get under the
aggregate limit--either by sale or by gift to another quota
shareholder. There are two mechanisms in this proposed rule for NMFS
will determine the amounts of individual species quota shares that need
to be reduced. First, NMFS will use written instructions as provided by
the quota shareholder that indicates what individual species quota
shares are to be abandoned to NMFS for redistribution to other quota
shareholders. Absent written instructions, NMFS will reduce each
individual species quota share holdings in proportion to the amount of
the aggregate overage divided by the aggregate total owned until the
aggregate limit is reached.
This proposed rule would have no negative effects on the current
industry or on the economy more generally. Current levels of harvest
will be left unaffected. The only changes that might happen would be as
a result of NMFS reducing quota shareholders who failed to divest their
excess shares by November 30, 2015. Should QS holders have excess QS
after November 30, 2015, NMFS will revoke the excess QS and
redistribute these shares to other quota shareholders up to the control
limit. These excess quota shares will be redistributed to all other
Quota shareholders on a proportional basis in a manner that their
individual and aggregate limits are not exceeded. There may be
situations in the future where NMFS ownership information is not
current and the QS database fails to block transfers that result in QS
holders exceeding their limits. NMFS proposes to continue to use the
same rules of reducing excess quota shares.
Quota shareholders are required to report their ownership
structure. Annually NMFS collects ownership information at the entity
level (corporation, LLC, partnership, trust, nonprofits, publicly held
company etc.) and the individual level. Ownership is reported down to a
level of 2% ownership. Some quota shareholders hold as many as 13 QS
permits. For a given QS permit, the ownership hierarchy may reach to
the 7th level. All told, there are an estimated 435 unique entities
involved. NMFS reviewed the ownership structure of all the QS permits
to the lowest level of ownership. There are nine unique entities over
one or more of the individual species control limits, and 3 or less
unique entities over the aggregate non-whiting control limit.
The main purpose of this rulemaking is to provide transparency.
This rule shows not only how NMFS will calculate excess quota share
holding but also how NMFS will proportionately reduce either for an
individual species across multiple permits or in cases where someone
does not abandon QS
and is over the aggregate limit. Even though there may not be negative
effects on the industry, there may be effects on individual entities.
For those that are over the individual species control limit, this rule
provides transparency on how NMFS has calculated overages. Some quota
shareholders may exceed the individual species limit as they are owners
or part owners of multiple permits. This rule proposes the process for
proportional reduction when a quota shareowner is over an individual
limit across permits.
For those entities that are over the aggregate non-whiting control
limit, this rule provides transparency but also a process whereby the
quota shareholder can direct NMFS on what quota share species should be
reduced. With this option, the quota shareholder can direct NMFS to
reduce his/her QS for low-valued species to get under the aggregate
limit. This option mitigates the economic effect on those quota
shareholders over the aggregate limit, should they not be able to sell
or gift their shares to another entity.
This process is as follows: QS owners that are over the control
limit for aggregate non-whiting QS holdings may voluntarily abandon QS
prior to the November 30, 2015, deadline by notifying NMFS in writing
by November 15, 2015. The written request must include: QS permit
would be required to sign the request. QS permit owners choosing to
utilize the abandonment option would permanently relinquish any right
to the abandoned QS, and NMFS would redistribute the abandoned QS
percentages to all other QS owners in proportion to their QS holdings,
based on ownership records as of January 1, 2016. No compensation would
be due for any abandoned shares. If a quota shareholder does not
request abandonment and provide NMFS with directions, NMFS will use the
proportional reduction methods where proportional amounts of QS for all
nonwhiting species are reduced to come into compliance with the
aggregate limit. Some of those reductions will include valuable market
and bycatch species.
This process may provide some small benefits to the affected quota
shareholders. At the moment, the nature of trading is such that NMFS
does not have good estimates of the value of a quota share because
there has been insufficient information to establish quota share
prices. Many trades are multiple species trades, barter trades, or
trades among closely affiliated entities. However, the economic effect
of allowing those entities the option of giving NMFS instructions on
how to dispose of their excess shares can be illustrated with ex-vessel
prices. At the low end of the price range are whiting and arrowtooth
flounder at about $0.10 a pound each. At the high end of the spectrum
are petrale sole and sablefish at $1.13 and $1.98 per lb.,
respectively. In between these prices are prices for important bycatch
species such as canary and yelloweye. Although the ex-vessel prices for
these bycatch species may not be high, they are needed to support the
target catch. Without this option, NMFS would proportionally revoke
quota shares from all species regardless of value if a QS permit owner
had not divested voluntarily by the November 30, 2015 deadline. The
quota shareholder can direct NMFS to reduce their low-valued species to
get under the aggregate limit. This option mitigates the economic
effect on those quota shareholders over the aggregate limit, should
they not be able to sell or gift their shares to another entity.
NMFS is almost done building a sophisticated ownership database. In
the future, when quota share trades are made, the online quota share
trading system will have rules that will prevent trades that bring
individuals who own QS bring an entity over the aggregate species limit
under the first level of ownership. However, in the event that such
trading is not prevented because of complex trading and ownership
relationships, the rules and processes associated with this rulemaking
There are 138 quota shareholders potentially directly affected by
the aggregate species limits as reductions of excess shares will be
taken from the quota share percentages listed on the permit. At the
first level of ownership and based on affiliations, there are 96 unique
businesses. Even if some first level owners are persons, they are
considered businesses for purposes for determining the effects on small
businesses. These QS holders must direct the quota pounds to various
vessel accounts so that quota pounds can be fished. Quite frequently
they also own limited entry permits, the vessels attached to these
permits, or processing facilities. As compared to secondary owners or
investors, first level quota shareholders are active participants in
the fishery, and thus are businesses for purposes of this rule. Also,
all quota shareholders when renewing their quota share permits must
respond to questions of whether they consider themselves a large or
small business. All 138 quota shareholders are businesses. Of these
businesses, 15 are large. There are 9 entities affected by the control
limit for one or more individual species. These entities are affected
only in the sense that NMFS is showing how it will calculate excess
shares across multiple permits. There are 3 or less affected entities
by the aggregate species limit divestiture rules. When combined, there
are 9 unique entities affected by this rule--7 small and 2 large.
NMFS believes that are no significant alternatives to the proposed
rule that accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and
that minimize any of the significant economic impacts of the proposed
rule on small entities. There are no relevant Federal rules that may
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this action. NMFS believes this
proposed rule would not adversely affect small entities. Nonetheless,
NMFS has prepared this IRFA. Through the rulemaking process associated
with this action, we are requesting comments on these conclusions.
1. In Sec.  660.140, revise paragraph (d)(4)(v) to read as follows:
that are found to exceed the accumulation limits during the initial
issuance of QS permits, an
adjustment period will be provided during which they will have to
completely divest their QS or IBQ in excess of the accumulation limits.
QS or IBQ will be issued for amounts in excess of accumulation limits
only for owners of limited entry permits as of November 8, 2008, if
such ownership has been registered with NMFS by November 30, 2008. The
owner of any permit acquired after November 8, 2008, or if acquired
earlier, not registered with NMFS by November 30, 2008, will only be
eligible to receive an initial allocation for that permit of those QS
or IBQ that are within the accumulation limits; any QS or IBQ in excess
of the accumulation limits will be redistributed to the remainder of
the initial recipients of QS or IBQ in proportion to each recipient's
initial allocation of QS or IBQ for each species. Any person that
qualifies for an initial allocation of QS or IBQ in excess of the
accumulation limits will be allowed to receive that allocation, but
must divest themselves of the QS (except for widow rockfish QS) or IBQ
in excess of the accumulation limits by November 30, 2015, according to
the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) of this section. If
NMFS identifies that a QS permit owner exceeds the accumulation limits
in 2016 or beyond, the QS permit owner must divest of the QS or IBQ in
excess of the accumulation limits according to the procedure provided
under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(B) of this section. Owners of QS or IBQ in
excess of the control limits may receive and use the QP or IBQ pounds
associated with that excess, up to the time their divestiture is
(A) Divestiture and redistribution process in 2015. QS permit
owners in excess of the control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS
holdings may abandon QS to NMFS by November 15, 2015 using the
procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(C) of this section. QS
permit owners must divest themselves of any QS or IBQ in excess of the
accumulation limits by November 30, 2015, except for widow rockfish QS,
which cannot be transferred as described in paragraph (d)(3)(ii)(B)(2)
of this section. After the November 30, 2015 divestiture deadline, NMFS
will revoke all QS or IBQ held by a person (including any person who
has ownership interest in the owner names on the permit) in excess of
the accumulation limits following the procedures specified under
paragraphs (d)(4)(v)(D) through (G) of this section. All abandoned or
revoked shares will be redistributed to all other QS permit owners in
proportion to their QS or IBQ holdings on or about January 1, 2016,
based on current ownership records, except that no person will be
allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put that person over an
accumulation limit.
(B) Divestiture and redistribution process in 2016 and beyond. Any
permit owner exceeds an accumulation limit in 2016 or beyond, NMFS will
notify the QS permit owner that he or she has 60 days to divest of the
excess QS or IBQ. In the case that a QS permit owner exceeds the
control limit for aggregate nonwhiting QS holdings, the QS permit owner
may abandon QS to NMFS within 30 days of the notification by NMFS,
using the procedure provided under paragraph (d)(4)(v)(C) of this
section. After the 60-day divestiture period, NMFS will revoke all QS
or IBQ held by a person (including any person who has ownership
interest in the owner names on the permit) in excess of the
accumulation limits following the procedures specified under paragraphs
(d)(4)(v)(D) through (G) of this section. All abandoned or revoked
shares will be redistributed to all other QS permit owners in
proportion to their QS or IBQ holdings on or about January 1 of the
following calendar year, based on current ownership records, except
that no person will be allocated an amount of QS or IBQ that would put
that person over an accumulation limit.
An individual species control limit      NMFS will revoke excess QS at
(non-widow until reallocation is         the species level.
complete) in one QS permit.
(non-widow until reallocation is         species level in proportion to
complete) across multiple QS permits.    the amount the QS percentage
aggregate total owned. Until
widow reallocation is
complete, the proportion will
be adjusted to hold widow QS
at a constant level while
bringing the aggregate
percentage owned to 2.700%,
using normal rounding rules.
species (non-widow until reallocation is complete) in one QS permit by
section, NMFS will revoke excess QS at the species level in order to
get that person to the limits. NMFS will redistribute the revoked QS
following the process specified in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of
this section. No compensation will be due for any revoked shares.
individual species (non-widow QS until reallocation is
complete) across QS permits by the deadline specified under paragraph
(d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section, NMFS will revoke QS at the species
level in proportion to the amount the QS percentage from each permit
contributes to the total QS percentage owned. NMFS will redistribute
the revoked QS following the process specified in paragraph
(d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No compensation will be due for
any revoked shares.
Until widow reallocation is complete and transfer of widow is allowed,
widow will continue to be included in the aggregate calculation, but
the proportion will be adjusted to hold widow QS at a constant level
while bringing the aggregate percentage owned to 2.700%, using normal
rounding rules. NMFS will redistribute the revoked QS following the
process in paragraph (d)(4)(v)(A) or (B) of this section. No
compensation will be due for any revoked shares.
[FR Doc. 2015-21786 Filed 9-1-15; 8:45 am]