[House Report 104-41]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



  

                                                                       
104th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 1st Session                                                     104-41
_______________________________________________________________________


 
          NORTHWEST ATLANTIC FISHERIES CONVENTION ACT OF 1995

_______________________________________________________________________


 February 21, 1995.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______


  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 622]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 622) to implement the Convention on Future Multilateral 
Cooperation in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 622 is to improve the conservation and 
management of high seas fisheries in the Northwest Atlantic by 
authorizing U.S. membership in the Northwest Atlantic by 
authorizing U.S. membership in the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries 
Organization.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Straddling fishery stocks are those fish stocks which 
travel between the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of two or 
more countries or between EEZs and the high seas. While nations 
have the authority to manage and conserve fisheries within 
their own EEZs, there is no single authority for high seas 
fisheries management. As a result, many high seas fisheries 
(many of which are straddling stocks from adjoining EEZs) can 
become overfished, negatively impacting the fisheries within 
the EEZ from which the stocks originate.
    In an effort to facilitate management and conservation of 
high seas resources, a number of regional, multilateral fishery 
management regimes have been negotiated. One such international 
body is the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO), 
established by convention in 1978 to coordinate and oversee the 
management of certain fisheries existing beyond the EEZs of the 
United States, Greenland, and Canada in the Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean.
    From 1950 to 1976, prior to the establishment of NAFO, the 
United States was a founding member of, and a participant in, 
the International Commission for Northwest Atlantic Fisheries 
(ICNAF). ICNAF managed the regions's fisheries, established a 
statistical database, and promoted scientific research. When 
nations extended their jurisdictions over natural resources to 
200 miles, and the U.S. implemented the Magnuson Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA) in 1976, the U.S. 
withdrew from ICNAF due to perceived conflicts between the 
MFCMA and ICNAF management authorities.
    The U.S. soon recognized the need to preserve the goals of 
ICNAF in international waters and sought to negotiate a new 
agreement that would continue the cooperative management and 
conservation of Northwest Atlantic fisheries found on the high 
seas. This effort resulted in the establishment of NAFO. NAFO's 
area of jurisdiction starts beyond the 200-mile EEZs and 
extends westward from the southern tip of Greenland, eastward 
from the North American coastline, and northward of Cape 
Hatteras, North Carolina.
    At least seventeen nations are members of NAFO, which 
manages all fisheries in its defined area of jurisdiction with 
the exception of salmon, swordfish, tuna, and marlin which are 
managed by other international organizations.
    While the United States participated in the NAFO 
negotiations, signed the original convention, and the Senate 
gave its advice and consent in 1983, the U.S. has not acceded 
to the Convention, pending the adoption of implementing 
legislation. Several factors account for this last of action. 
First, the Administration could not agree on which Federal 
agency should represent the U.S. at NAFO and in the selection 
of U.S. Commissioners. Second, U.S. fishermen had little 
interest in NAFO fisheries given the renewed interest in 
fisheries within the U.S. EEZ resulting from the passage of the 
MFCMA. Finally, U.S. fishermen were concerned that NAFO would 
seek to manage other fisheries, an issue that is no longer 
relevant.
    During the 1980's, the U.S. became more interested in NAFO. 
In 1984, the International Court of Justice resolved a maritime 
boundary dispute between the U.S. and Canada, resulting in the 
establishment of the Hague Line. Following this decision, some 
U.S. vessels were found to be operating in the NAFO regulatory 
area. In addition, the U.S. became more active in negotiations 
to seek international cooperation in other high seas areas on 
issues such as pollock management and driftnets.
    As the U.S. continues to seek greater cooperation in high 
seas fishery management to improve the conservation and 
management of these resources throughout the world's oceans, 
ignoring NAFO is inconsistent and undermines our negotiating 
credibility. While U.S. fishermen did not fish in the NAFO 
regulatory area for several years, the return of U.S. fishermen 
to the area in the past two years has been viewed by NAFO 
members as a flagrant violation of this international fishery 
agreement. Fishing by U.S. vessels is particularly troubling 
given that NAFO members are currently abiding by a moratorium 
for many fisheries in the area that was instituted by NAFO to 
address the decline of these stocks.
    U.S. membership in NAFO would provide opportunities for 
scientific research on fisheries of concern to U.S. fishermen 
and provide the U.S. with an opportunity to negotiate a quota 
for U.S. fishermen in the NAFO regulatory area. More 
importantly, it would demonstrate the U.S. commitment to 
international conservation and management of fishery resources 
throughout the high seas.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 622 was introduced on January 20, 1995, by Congressman 
Gerry Studds. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and within the Committee, to the Subcommittee on 
Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans.
    On January 25, 1995, the Subcommittee on Fisheries, 
Wildlife and Oceans held a hearing on a variety of 
international fisheries bills pending before the Congress. 
Witnesses included Ambassador David Colson, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Ocean and Fisheries Affairs, United States 
Department of State; and Mr. Rolland Schmitten, Assistant 
Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
    Both Mr. Colson and Mr. Schmitten testified in support of 
the bill. In particular, Mr. Colson noted that ``it is deeply 
important if we are to use commercial fisheries on a 
sustainable basis that any fishermen who fishes outside his 
national zone fishes pursuant to the rules established through 
the relevant conservation and management organization for the 
region.''
    On February 1, 1995, the Subcommittee on Fisheries, 
Wildlife and Oceans considered H.R. 622 in markup session and 
ordered it reported favorably, without amendment, to the full 
Committee on Resources by voice vote. On February 8, 1995, the 
Committee on Resources met to consider H.R. 622. There were no 
amendments and the Committee ordered the bill reported to the 
House of Representatives by voice vote, with a quorum present.

                      section-by-section analysis

Section 1. Short title

    This section provides that the Act may be cited as the 
``Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995''.

Section 2. Representation of United States under convention

    Section 2 authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to appoint 
Commissioners to the General Council and Fisheries Commission 
and Representatives to the Scientific Council. These 
Commissioners and Representatives must coordinate their 
functions with the Regional Fishery Management Councils 
established under the MFCMA and consent with the Committee 
established in Section 8. Of the three Commissioners appointed, 
no more than one may be an official of the Federal Government 
and at least one must be a representative of the Commercial 
fishing industry. This section also details the requirements 
for appointments, terms, alternate commissioners and 
representatives, and functions of the individuals.

Section 3. Requests for scientific advice

    The section requires that the Representatives of the 
Scientific Council consult with the appropriate Regional 
Fishery Management Councils and the Commissioners on any 
request to consider any particular questions concerning the 
scientific basis for the management and conservation of 
fisheries under the NAFO Convention.

Section 4. Authorities of Secretary of State with respect to convention

    This section authorizes the Secretary of State to act for 
the United States in matters related to the operations of NAFO, 
including receiving and transmitting reports and communications 
of the Organization, agreeing or objecting to proposals and 
amendments of the Fisheries Commission or amendments to the 
Convention, and giving notice of intent not to be bound by 
measures of the Fisheries Commission.

Section 5. Interagency cooperation

    This section authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to 
arrange for cooperation with other Federal agencies, States, 
the New England Fishery Management Council, and other private 
institutions and organizations to carry out the provisions of 
the Convention.

Section 6. Rulemaking

    Section 6 authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to 
promulgate regulations to carry out the purposes of the 
Convention.

Section 7. Prohibited acts and penalties

    This section details the prohibited acts the penalties, the 
enforcement authority, and the court jurisdiction applicable 
under this Act.

Section 8. Consultative committee

    This section establishes a consultative committee to advise 
the Secretaries of Commerce and State on fisheries management 
issues in the northwest Atlantic related to the Convention. The 
Committee shall include representatives from the New England 
Fishery Management Council, the states, the Atlantic States 
Marine Fisheries Commission, and representatives of the fishing 
and processing industry.

Section 9. Administrative matters

    This section describes the compensation measures that apply 
under this Act.

Section 10. Definitions

    This section defines the relevant terms used in this Act.

Section 11. Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes an annual appropriation of $500,000 
for each of Fiscal Years 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998, for 
carrying out the purposes of this Act.

            committee oversight findings and recommendations

    Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives and clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the house of Representatives, the Committee's 
oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in the 
body of this report.

                     inflationary impact statement

    Pursuant to clause 2(1)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee estimates that the 
enactment of H.R. 622 will have no significant inflationary 
impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national 
economy.

                        cost of the legislation

    Clause 7 of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 622. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     compliance with house rule xi

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(1)(3)(A) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans held hearings on 
January 25, 1995, on H.R. 622 and the oversight findings and 
recommendations of the Committee are reflected in this report.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(1)(#)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 622.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(1)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 622 
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               congressional budget office cost estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, February 15, 1995.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed H.R. 622, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention 
Act of 1995, as ordered reported by the House Committee on 
Resources on February 8, 1995. Because enactment of H.R. 622 
could affect direct spending and receipts, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would apply; however, CBO estimates that any change 
in direct spending and receipts would be negligible.
    The bill would allow the United States to become a fully 
participating member of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries 
Organization (NAFO), an international body established to 
oversee certain fisheries existing beyond the 200-mile 
territorial seas of the United States, Canada, and Greenland in 
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean. It also would authorize the 
Secretary of Commerce to appoint commissioners to the General 
Council and Fisheries Commission to appoint commissioners to 
the General Council and Fisheries Commission and 
representatives to the Scientific Council. The bill also would 
authorize the Secretary of State to act for the United States 
in matters related to the operations of NAFO, including 
arranging for the cooperation of federal agencies, states and 
other interested parties. The Secretaries of State and Commerce 
would be authorized to establish a consultative committee to 
advise them on issues related to the Convention.
    H.R. 622 prohibits any commissioner, representative, 
consultative committee member, or other adviser from being 
compensated for his or her service. The Secretary of State may 
pay their travel and other expenses, subject to availability of 
appropriations. The bill would authorize appropriations of 
$500,000 per year for fiscal years 1995 through 1998 for 
carrying out its purposes, including the contribution to NAFO.
    Finally, H.R. 622 specifies prohibited acts and establishes 
civil and criminal penalties under the Magnuson Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act. Any civil and criminal fines 
levied under these provisions would increase receipts to the 
federal government. Criminal fines would be deposited in the 
Crime Victims fund and would be spent in the following year. 
CBO does not expect this additional revenue or direct spending 
to be significant.
    H.R. 622 would result in no cost to state or local 
governments.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel 
Robertson, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                    Robert D. Reischauer, Director.

                        changes in existing law

    If enacted, H.R. 622 would make no changes in existing law.

                          departmental reports

    The Committee has received no departmental reports on H.R. 
622.