[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 19752-19753]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  LONGLINE CATCHER PROCESSOR SUBSECTOR SINGLE FISHERY COOPERATIVE ACT

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (S. 1609) to authorize a single fisheries cooperative for the 
Bering Sea Aleutian Islands longline catcher processor subsector, and 
for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                S. 1609

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Longline Catcher Processor 
     Subsector Single Fishery Cooperative Act''.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO APPROVE AND IMPLEMENT A SINGLE FISHERY 
                   COOPERATIVE FOR THE LONGLINE CATCHER PROCESSOR 
                   SUBSECTOR IN THE BSAI.

       (a) In General.--Upon the request of eligible members of 
     the longline catcher processor subsector holding at least 80 
     percent of the licenses issued for that subsector, the 
     Secretary is authorized to approve a single fishery 
     cooperative for the longline catcher processor subsector in 
     the BSAI.
       (b) Limitation.--A single fishery cooperative approved 
     under this section shall include a limitation prohibiting any 
     eligible member from harvesting a total of more than 20 
     percent of the Pacific cod available to be harvested in the 
     longline catcher processor subsector, the violation of which 
     is subject to the penalties, sanctions, and forfeitures under 
     section 308 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1858), 
     except that such limitation shall not apply to harvest 
     amounts from quota assigned explicitly to a CDQ group as part 
     of a CDQ allocation to an entity established by section 
     305(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)).
       (c) Contract Submission and Review.--The longline catcher 
     processor subsector shall submit to the Secretary--
       (1) not later than November 1 of each year, a contract to 
     implement a single fishery cooperative approved under this 
     section for the following calendar year; and
       (2) not later than 60 days prior to the commencement of 
     fishing under the single fishery cooperative, any interim 
     modifications to the contract submitted under paragraph (1).
       (d) Department of Justice Review.--Not later than November 
     1 before the first year of fishing under a single fishery 
     cooperative approved under this section, the longline catcher 
     processor sector shall submit to the Secretary a copy of a 
     letter from a party to the contract under subsection (c)(1) 
     requesting a business review letter from the Attorney General 
     and any response to such request.
       (e) Implementation.--The Secretary shall implement a single 
     fishery cooperative approved under this section not later 
     than 2 years after receiving a request under subsection (a).
       (f) Status Quo Fishery.--If the longline catcher processor 
     subsector does not submit a contract to the Secretary under 
     subsection (c) then the longline catcher processor subsector 
     in the BSAI shall operate as a limited access fishery for the 
     following year subject to the license limitation program in 
     effect for the longline catcher processor subsector on the 
     date of enactment of this Act or any subsequent modifications 
     to the license limitation program recommended by the Council 
     and approved by the Secretary.

     SEC. 3. HARVEST AND PROHIBITED SPECIES ALLOCATIONS TO A 
                   SINGLE FISHERY COOPERATIVE FOR THE LONGLINE 
                   CATCHER PROCESSOR SUBSECTOR IN THE BSAI.

       A single fishery cooperative approved under section 2 may, 
     on an annual basis, collectively--
       (1) harvest the total amount of BSAI Pacific cod total 
     allowable catch, less any amount allocated to the longline 
     catcher processor subsector non-cooperative limited access 
     fishery;
       (2) utilize the total amount of BSAI Pacific cod prohibited 
     species catch allocation, less any amount allocated to a 
     longline catcher processor subsector non-cooperative limited 
     access fishery; and
       (3) harvest any reallocation of Pacific cod to the longline 
     catcher processor subsector during a fishing year by the 
     Secretary.

     SEC. 4. LONGLINE CATCHER PROCESSOR SUBSECTOR NON-COOPERATIVE 
                   LIMITED ACCESS FISHERY.

       (a) In General.--An eligible member that elects not to 
     participate in a single fishery cooperative approved under 
     section 2 shall operate in a non-cooperative limited access 
     fishery subject to the license limitation program in effect 
     for the longline catcher processor subsector on the date of 
     enactment of this Act or any subsequent modifications to the 
     license limitation program recommended by the Council and 
     approved by the Secretary.
       (b) Harvest and Prohibited Species Allocations.--Eligible 
     members operating in a non-cooperative limited access fishery 
     under this section may collectively--
       (1) harvest the percentage of BSAI Pacific cod total 
     allowable catch equal to the combined average percentage of 
     the BSAI Pacific cod harvest allocated to the longline 
     catcher processor sector and retained by the vessel or 
     vessels designated on the eligible members license limitation 
     program license or licenses for 2006, 2007, and 2008, 
     according to the catch accounting system data used to 
     establish total catch; and
       (2) utilize the percentage of BSAI Pacific cod prohibited 
     species catch allocation equal to the percentage calculated 
     under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 5. AUTHORITY OF THE NORTH PACIFIC FISHERY MANAGEMENT 
                   COUNCIL.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this Act shall supersede the 
     authority of the Council to recommend for approval by the 
     Secretary such conservation and management measures, in 
     accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et 
     seq.) as it considers necessary to ensure that this Act does 
     not diminish the effectiveness of fishery management in the 
     BSAI or the Gulf of Alaska Pacific cod fishery.
       (b) Limitations.--
       (1) Notwithstanding the authority provided to the Council 
     under this section, the Council is prohibited from altering 
     or otherwise modifying--
       (A) the methodology established under section 3 for 
     allocating the BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch and 
     BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation to a 
     single fishery cooperative approved under this Act; or
       (B) the methodology established under section 4 of this Act 
     for allocating the BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch and 
     BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation to the 
     non-cooperative limited access fishery.
       (2) No sooner than 7 years after approval of a single 
     fisheries cooperative under section 2 of this Act, the 
     Council may modify the harvest limitation established under 
     section 2(b) if such modification does not negatively impact 
     any eligible member of the longline catcher processor 
     subsector.
       (c) Protections for the Gulf of Alaska Pacific Cod 
     Fishery.--The Council may recommend for approval by the 
     Secretary such harvest limitations of Pacific cod by the 
     longline catcher processor subsector in the Western Gulf of 
     Alaska and the Central Gulf of Alaska as may be necessary to 
     protect coastal communities and other Gulf of Alaska 
     participants from potential competitive advantages provided 
     to the longline catcher processor subsector by this Act.

     SEC. 6. RELATIONSHIP TO THE MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT.

       (a) In General.--Consistent with section 301(a) of the 
     Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1851(a)), a single fishery 
     cooperative approved under section 2 of this Act is intended 
     to enhance conservation and sustainable fishery management, 
     reduce and minimize bycatch, promote social and economic 
     benefits, and improve the vessel safety of the longline 
     catcher processor subsector in the BSAI.
       (b) Transition Rule.--A single fishery cooperative approved 
     under section 2 of this Act is deemed to meet the 
     requirements of section 303A(i) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
     (16 U.S.C. 1853a(i)) as if it had been approved by the 
     Secretary within 6 months after the date of enactment of the 
     Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
     Reauthorization Act of 2006, unless the Secretary makes a 
     determination, within 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, that application of section 303A(i) of the 
     Magnuson-Stevens Act to the cooperative approved under 
     section 2 of this Act would be inconsistent with the purposes 
     for which section 303A was added to the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
       (c) Cost Recovery.--Consistent with section 304(d)(2) of 
     the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1854(d)(2)), the 
     Secretary is authorized to recover reasonable costs to 
     administer a single fishery cooperative approved under 
     section 2 of this Act.

     SEC. 7. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUOTA PROGRAM.

       Nothing in this Act shall affect the western Alaska 
     community development program established by section 305(i) 
     of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 1855(i)), including 
     the allocation of fishery resources in the directed Pacific 
     cod fishery.

     SEC. 8. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) BSAI.--The term ``BSAI'' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 219(a)(2) of the Department of Commerce and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-
     447; 118 Stat. 2886).
       (2) BSAI pacific cod total allowable catch.--The term 
     ``BSAI Pacific cod total allowable catch'' means the Pacific 
     cod total allowable catch for the directed longline catcher 
     processor subsector in the BSAI as established on an annual 
     basis by the Council and approved by the Secretary.
       (3) BSAI pacific cod prohibited species catch allocation.--
     The term ``BSAI Pacific cod prohibited species catch 
     allocation'' means the prohibited species catch allocation 
     for the directed longline catcher processor subsector in the 
     BSAI as established on

[[Page 19753]]

     an annual basis by the Council and approved by the Secretary.
       (4) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the North Pacific 
     Fishery Management Council established under section 
     302(a)(1)(G) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1852(a)(1)(G)).
       (5) Eligible member.--The term ``eligible member'' means a 
     holder of a license limitation program license, or licenses, 
     eligible to participate in the longline catcher processor 
     subsector.
       (6) Gulf of alaska.--The term ``Gulf of Alaska'' means that 
     portion of the Exclusive Economic Zone contained in 
     Statistical Areas 610, 620, and 630.
       (7) Longline catcher processor subsector.--The term 
     ``longline catcher processor subsector'' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 219(a)(6) of the Department of 
     Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005 
     (Public Law 108-447; 118 Stat. 2886).
       (8) Magnuson-stevens act.--The term ``Magnuson-Stevens 
     Act'' means the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
     Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).
       (9) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Commerce.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from West Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from West Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The pending legislation, the Catcher Processor Subsector Single 
Fishery Cooperative Act, was introduced by Senator Cantwell in August 
2009. Subsequently, our colleague, Congressman Larsen from the State of 
Washington, introduced H.R. 3910 as companion legislation.
  ``Catch shares'' are a fisheries management tool in which the total 
amount of fishing quota is divided among a group of fishermen. This 
tool is used to manage several fisheries in waters off of Alaska. 
However, one particular fishery in this area, the Pacific cod longline 
catcher processors, is not managed using catch shares. S. 1609 
authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to approve this fleet as a 
cooperative operating a catch share.
  I commend our colleague, the gentleman from Washington, Mr. Rick 
Larsen, for his diligence. He has discussed this with me on numerous 
occasions and with members of our committee, and I commend his 
leadership on this legislation. I also recognize the efforts to bring 
the bill to the floor by my good friend and colleague from Alaska, Mr. 
Don Young. And I would note this measure is fully supported by the 
ranking member of our full committee, Doc Hastings of Washington.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to my 
distinguished colleague from Alaska (Mr. Young).
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 3910, the companion legislation to 
S. 1609. This is a very important bill to the State of Alaska and the 
State of Washington.
  I would like to compliment my friend, Mr. Larsen, for his work on 
this legislation.
  I was originally a cosponsor of this. This is a much-needed bill for 
the management of fish in Alaska as well as in the State of Washington, 
where most of my fishermen do come from.
  I would also like to thank Steny Hoyer, the majority leader, for 
bringing this bill to the floor and making sure it becomes a reality.
  This is a bill that was strongly supported by the whole delegations 
from the State of Washington and from the State of Alaska, Senators as 
well as House Members. There was no objection to this legislation. It 
is an example of how we can work together on an issue that affects both 
areas. It is really much sought for by the industry itself. And I want 
to compliment everybody that worked on this legislation.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen).
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak in favor 
of S. 1609, the Longline Catcher Processor Subsector Single Fishery 
Cooperative Act. This bill, introduced by Senator Cantwell of 
Washington, is a Senate companion to H.R. 3910, legislation I 
introduced in the House, along with Representative Don Young of Alaska. 
This is a bipartisan effort. It has the support of Representatives Doc 
Hastings, Dave Reichert and Jay Inslee of Washington State as well.
  This bill will further efforts by the North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council to rationalize the Pacific cod fishery and end the 
``race for fish'' in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands. This 
legislation represents an important step in achieving the goals of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by enabling 
safer, more environmentally sound fishing practices, while also 
providing much-needed economic stability.
  The freezer longline sector of the Pacific cod industry currently 
operates as a derby-style fishery. Providing the opportunity for 
participants to transition from this style of fishing to a cooperative 
model is essential to meeting conservation goals and, most importantly, 
will significantly improve the safety of life at sea.
  In addition, fishery cooperatives provide more economic stability and 
predictability. They help prevent the types of severe price swings that 
this fishery experienced last year when the price for Pacific cod was 
cut in half. This type of instability not only impacts the market and 
consumers, but threatens the ability for these mostly family-owned 
businesses to continue fishing. The economic stabilization of the fleet 
will also allow for new investments in both vessels and equipment and 
much-needed jobs for shipyards throughout the Puget Sound region.
  S. 1609 has broad support within the freezer longline sector, the 
commercial fishing industry, the State of Alaska, the State of 
Washington, and the environmental community. So I urge the House to 
pass this bipartisan bill, S. 1609.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, we have no objection to this bill. We 
believe it should be passed and sent to the President for signature.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. Faleomavaega).
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Again, I want to thank the distinguished gentleman 
from West Virginia, the chairman of our committee, and my good friend 
from Utah on the other side of the aisle for their management and 
support of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the statement made 
earlier by the chief sponsor of this legislation, my good friend, the 
gentleman from Washington. I know a little bit about the industry of 
fishing. This is certainly important for the gentleman's district and 
the Members who are affected from the great State of Washington.
  I urge my colleagues to support this proposed legislation.
  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, S. 1609.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________