[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 169 (Wednesday, September 1, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53397-53402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-19971]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 679 and 680

[I.D. 082504A]
RIN 0648-AS47


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Voluntary 
Three-pie Cooperative Program; Allocation of Bering Sea and Aleutian 
Islands King and Tanner Crab Fishery Resources

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of amendments to a fishery management 
plan; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Congress amended the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act

[[Page 53398]]

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) to require the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) 
to approve the Voluntary Three-Pie Cooperative Program (Program). The 
Program is necessary to allocate specified Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands 
(BSAI) crab resources among harvesters, processors, and coastal 
communities. This Program will be implemented by Amendment 18 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for BSAI King and Tanner Crabs (FMP). 
Additionally, the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) 
has submitted Amendment 19 to the FMP for Secretarial review, which 
represents minor changes necessary to implement the Program. This 
action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act, the FMP, and other applicable laws.

DATES: Comments on the amendments must be submitted on or before 
November 1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional 
Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, 
Attn: Lori Durall. Comments may be submitted by:
     Mail to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802;
     Hand delivery to the Federal Building, 709 West 9th 
Street, Room 420A, Juneau, AK;
     FAX to 907-586-7557;
     E-mail to [email protected]. Include in the 
subject line of the e-mail the following document identifier: 18 19 
NOA. E-mail comments, with or without attachments, are limited to 5 
megabytes; or
     Webform at the Federal eRulemaking Portal: 
www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions at that site for 
submitting comments.
    Copies of Amendments 18 and 19 and the Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for this action may be obtained from the NMFS Alaska 
Region at the address above or from the Alaska Region website at http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/sustainablefisheries/crab/eis/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gretchen Harrington, 907-586-7228 or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that each 
regional fishery management council submit any FMP amendment it 
prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial 
approval by the Secretary. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that 
NMFS, upon receiving an FMP amendment, immediately publish a notice in 
the Federal Register announcing that the amendment is available for 
public review and comment.
    In January 2004, the U.S. Congress amended section 313 of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 
2004 (Pub. L. No. 108-199, section 801), by adding paragraph (j). As 
amended, section 313(j)(1) requires the Secretary to approve, by 
January 1, 2005, the Voluntary Three-Pie Cooperative Program (Program), 
as it was approved by the Council between June 2002 and April 2003, and 
all trailing amendments, including those reported to Congress on May 6, 
2003. The Program allocates BSAI crab resources among harvesters, 
processors, and coastal community interests. The Program, as it will be 
implemented by Amendments 18 and 19 to the FMP, is described below.

Voluntary Three-Pie Cooperative Program - Amendment 18

    The Council developed the Program over a 6-year period to fit the 
specific dynamics and needs of the BSAI crab fisheries. The Program is 
a limited access system that balances the interests of several groups 
that depend on these fisheries. The Program will address conservation 
and management issues associated with the current derby fishery and 
will reduce bycatch and associated discard mortality. The Program is 
also designed to improve the safety of crab fishermen by ending the 
race for fish. Share allocations to harvesters and processors, together 
with incentives to participate in fishery cooperatives, are intended to 
increase efficiencies, provide economic stability, and facilitate 
compensated reduction of excess capacities in the harvesting and 
processing sectors. Community interests are protected by Community 
Development Quota (CDQ) allocations and regional landing and processing 
requirements, as well as by several community protection measures.
    The Program encompasses the following BSAI crab fisheries: Bristol 
Bay red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus), Western Aleutian 
Islands (Adak) golden king crab (Lithodes aequispinus) - West of 
174[deg] W., Eastern Aleutian Islands (Dutch Harbor) golden king crab - 
East of 174[deg] W., Western Aleutian Islands (Adak) red king crab - 
West of 179[deg] W., Pribilof Islands blue king crab (P. platypus) and 
red king crab, St. Matthew Island blue king crab, Bering Sea snow crab 
(Chionoecetes opilio), and Bering Sea Tanner crab (C. bairdi). In this 
document, the phrase ``crab fisheries'' refers to these fisheries, 
unless otherwise specified.

Harvest Sector

    Qualified harvesters would be allocated quota share (QS) in each 
crab fishery. To receive a QS allocation, a harvester must hold a 
valid, permanent, fully transferable license limitation program (LLP) 
license endorsed for that crab fishery. Quota share represents an 
exclusive but revokable privilege that provides the QS holder with an 
annual allocation to harvest a specific percentage of the total 
allowable catch (TAC) from a fishery. The annual allocations of TACs, 
in pounds, are referred to as individual fishing quotas (IFQs). Using 
LLP licenses for defining eligibility in the Program would maintain 
current fishery participation. A harvester's allocation of QS for a 
fishery would be based on the landings made by his or her vessel in 
that fishery. Specifically, each allocation is the harvester's average 
annual portion of the total qualified catch during a specific 
qualifying period. Qualifying periods were selected to balance 
historical and recent participation. Different periods were selected 
for different fisheries to accommodate closures and other circumstances 
in the fisheries in recent years.
    Quota share would be designated as either catcher vessel (CV) 
shares or catcher/processor (C/P) shares, depending on whether the 
vessel processed the qualifying harvests on board. In addition, catcher 
vessel QS would be designated by landing region. Catcher vessel IFQ 
would be issued in two classes. Crabs harvested with class A IFQ would 
require delivery to a processor holding unused processing quota. Class 
A IFQ harvests also would be subject to a regional delivery 
requirement. Under this regional requirement, harvests would be 
delivered either in a North or in a South region (in most fisheries). 
Crabs harvested with class B IFQ could be delivered to any processor 
(except C/Ps operating as C/Ps) and would not be regionally designated. 
Harvests in excess of IFQ would be forfeited in all cases. Class B IFQs 
are intended to provide ex-vessel price negotiating leverage to 
harvesters. For each region of each fishery, the allocation of Class B 
IFQ would be 10 percent of the total allocation of IFQ to the CV 
sector.
    Transfer of quota share and IFQ , either by sale or lease, would be 
allowed, subject to limits including caps on the amount of shares a 
person may hold or use. Leasing would mean the use of IFQs on a vessel 
in which the holder of the underlying QS holds less

[[Page 53399]]

than a 10 percent ownership interest or on which the underlying QS 
holder is not present. To be eligible to receive transferred QS or IFQ, 
a person would be required to be a U.S. citizen with at least 150 days 
of sea time in any U.S. commercial fishery. A corporate entity would be 
eligible to receive transferred QS or IFQ only if it were at least 20 
percent owned by a U.S. citizen with at least 150 days of sea time in 
any U.S. commercial fishery. Initial recipients of QS, CDQ groups, and 
community entities would be exempt from these transfer eligibility 
criteria.
    Separate caps would be imposed to limit the amount of QS and IFQs a 
person could hold and to limit the use of IFQs onboard a vessel. These 
caps are intended to prevent negative impacts from what can be 
described as excessive consolidation of shares. Excessive share 
holdings are prohibited by the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Different caps are 
chosen for the different fisheries because fleet characteristics and 
dependence differ across fisheries. Separate caps on QS holdings are 
established for CDQ groups, which represent rural western Alaska 
communities. Processor holdings of harvest shares would also be limited 
by caps on vertical integration. Quota share holders could retain and 
use initial allocations of QS above the caps.

Captains Shares (C Shares)

    To protect their interests in the fisheries, qualifying captains 
would be allocated 3 percent of the qualifying catch history as C 
shares. These shares are intended to provide long term benefits to 
captains and crew. The allocation to captains would be based on the 
same qualifying years and computational method used for quota share 
allocations to LLP holders. To ensure that C shares benefit at-sea 
participants in the fisheries, the IFQ derived from C shares could be 
used only when the C share holder is on board the vessel.
    To be eligible to receive an allocation, an individual would be 
required to have historic and recent participation. Historic 
participation would be demonstrated by at least one landing in each of 
three of the qualifying years. Recent participation would be 
demonstrated by at least one landing in two of the three most recent 
seasons before June 10, 2002, except for the fisheries that were closed 
in this period. For these fisheries (Adak red king crab, the Pribilof 
Islands red and blue king crab, the St. Matthew Island blue king crab, 
and the Tanner crab fisheries), recent participation would be 
demonstrated by at least one landing in two of the three most recent 
seasons preceding June 10, 2002, in the snow crab, Bristol Bay red king 
crab, or one of the Aleutian Islands golden king crab fisheries. The 
recent participation requirement would be waived for captains who died 
in fishing-related incidents if the captain's estate applies for QS.
    C shares would be required to be delivered to shore-based or 
floating processors for processing. During the first 3 years a fishery 
is open after implementation, C shares would not be subject to specific 
delivery requirements. After 3 years, C shares would be subject to the 
Class A IFQ/Class B IFQ distinction with commensurate regional delivery 
requirements unless the Council determines, after review, not to apply 
those designations.
    To be eligible to receive transferred C shares, a person would be 
required to be a U.S. citizen with at least 150 days sea time in a U.S. 
commercial fishery in a harvest capacity. In addition, the person would 
be required to be an ``active participant'' in the BSAI crab fisheries, 
demonstrated by a landing in a crab fishery during the 365 days before 
the transfer application. Evidence of participation could be either a 
State of Alaska fish ticket, an affidavit from the vessel owner, or 
other verifiable evidence.
    Leasing of C shares in each fishery would be permitted in the first 
three seasons a fishery is prosecuted after implementation of the 
Program. After the first three seasons the fishery is prosecuted, 
leasing would be permitted only in the case of a documented hardship 
(such as a medical hardship or loss of vessel) for the term of the 
hardship, subject to a maximum of 2 years over a 10-year period.
    Individual C share use and holdings would be capped at the same 
level as the vessel use caps applicable to QS. Initial allocations of C 
shares in excess of the cap could be retained. C shares would not be 
considered in determining a vessel's compliance with the vessel use 
caps on QS. Landings with C shares would be subject to the IFQ fee 
program.
    C/P captains would be allocated C/P C shares that include a 
harvesting and on-board processing privilege. Harvests with C/P C 
shares also could be delivered to shore-based or floating processors.

Processing Sector

    A processing privilege, analogous to the harvesting privilege 
allocated to harvesters, would be allocated to processors. Qualified 
processors would be allocated processor quota share (PQS) in each crab 
fishery. PQS represent an exclusive but revocable privilege to receive 
deliveries of a specific portion of the annual TAC from a fishery. An 
annual allocation of PQS is referred to as IPQ and expressed in pounds 
of crab. IPQs would be issued for 90 percent of the allocated harvests, 
corresponding to the 90-percent allocation of Class A IFQ. Processor 
privileges would not apply to the remaining 10 percent of the TAC 
allocated as Class B IFQ. IPQs would be regionally designated for 
processing in a North or a South region (corresponding to the regional 
designation of the Class A IFQ).
    PQS allocations would be based on processing history during a 
specified qualifying period for each fishery. A processor's allocation 
in a fishery would equal its share of all qualified pounds of crab 
processed in the qualifying period (i.e., pounds processed by the 
processor divided by pounds processed by all qualified processors). 
Processor shares would be transferable, including the leasing of IPQs 
and the sale of PQS, subject to caps and to community protection 
measures. IPQs could be used without transfer at any facility or plant 
operated by a processor. New processors could enter the fishery by 
purchasing PQS or IPQ or by purchasing crab harvested with Class B IFQ 
or crab harvested by CDQ groups.
    Processors would be limited to holding 30 percent of the PQS issued 
for a fishery, except that initial allocations of shares above this 
limit could be retained and used. In addition, in the snow crab 
fishery, no processor would be permitted to use or hold in excess of 60 
percent of the IPQs issued for the Northern region.

Catcher/Processors

    C/Ps have a unique position in the Program because they participate 
in both the harvest and processing sectors. Persons who caught and 
processed crab on the same vessel would be allocated C/P QS. These 
shares would represent a harvest privilege and an on-board processing 
privilege. To be eligible for C/P shares, a person would be required to 
hold a permanent fully transferable C/P LLP license. In addition, a 
person must have processed crab on board the C/P in either 1998 or 
1999. Persons meeting these qualification requirements would be 
allocated C/P QS in accordance with the allocation rules for harvest 
shares for all qualified catch that was processed on board. Catcher/
Processor QS would not have regional designations.

[[Page 53400]]

Regionalization

    The regional designation of QS is intended to preserve the historic 
geographic distribution of landings in the fisheries. Communities in 
the Pribilof Islands are the prime beneficiaries of this 
regionalization provision. Two regional designations would be created 
in most fisheries. The North region would be all areas in the Bering 
Sea north of 56[deg]20' N latitude. The South region would be all other 
areas. Catcher vessel QS, Class A IFQ, PQS, and IPQ would be regionally 
designated. Crab harvested with regionally designated IFQ would be 
required to be delivered to a processor in the designated region. 
Likewise, a processor with regionally designated shares would be 
required to accept delivery of and process crab in the designated 
region. Catcher vessel QS and PQS would be designated based on the 
location of the activity that gave rise to the allocation. For example, 
qualified catch delivered in a region would result in CV QS designated 
for that region.
    The Program has two exceptions to the North/South regional 
designations. In the western Aleutian Islands (Adak) golden king crab 
fishery, 50 percent of the CV QS and PQS would be designated as western 
shares to be delivered west of 174[deg] W. longitude. The remaining 50 
percent of the Class A IFQ allocation would have no regional 
designation and would not be subject to a regional delivery 
requirement. This designation would be applied to all allocations 
regardless of the historic location of landings in the fishery. A 
second exception is the Bering Sea Tanner crab fishery, which would 
have no regional designation. This fishery is anticipated to be 
conducted primarily as a concurrent fishery with the regionalized 
Bristol Bay red king crab and Bering Sea snow crab fisheries, making 
the regional designation of Tanner crab landings unnecessary.

Cooperatives

    Harvesters may form voluntary cooperatives associated with one or 
more processors holding PQS. A minimum membership of four unique CV QS 
holders would be required for cooperative formation. The cooperative 
would receive the sum of the annual IFQ allocations of its members in 
the applicable crab fisheries. A cooperative would be required to 
submit annually a cooperative agreement to NMFS before NMFS would set 
aside the cooperative's IFQ allocation for its exclusive use. 
Cooperative members would be allowed to leave a cooperative at any time 
after one season. Departing members would retain their QS, but a 
departing member's IFQ would remain with the cooperative for the 
duration of the cooperative's IFQ permit. Vessels on which cooperative 
shares were fished would not be subject to use caps. IFQ could also be 
transferred between cooperatives, subject to NMFS' approval.
    Only processors that hold IPQ could associate with a cooperative. 
Processors that associate with cooperatives would not be members of the 
cooperatives but would remain independent. A cooperative would not be 
bound to deliver its harvests to an associated processor, provided that 
the cooperative complies with the delivery requirements associated with 
the harvest and processing shares. Processors that do not hold IPQ 
would not be able to associate with a cooperative.

Binding Arbitration

    BSAI crab fisheries have a history of contentious price 
negotiations. Harvesters have often acted collectively to negotiate an 
ex-vessel price with processors, at times delaying fishing to pressure 
price concessions from processors. Participants in both sectors are 
interested in ending that practice, but are concerned that market power 
could be altered by the rationalization of the fisheries. The Program 
would create a system with a one-to-one relationship of harvest and 
processing shares that would limit the pool of persons with whom a QS 
holder may transact. The concern is most acute for the last QS holders 
from each sector to commit their shares because of the one-to-one 
relationship of IPQ to Class A IFQ. The last Class A IFQ holder to 
contract deliveries will have a single IPQ holder to contract with, 
effectively limiting any ability to use other processor markets for 
negotiating leverage. To ensure fair price negotiations, the Program 
includes a provision for binding arbitration to resolve price disputes 
between harvesters and processors.
    The system of binding arbitration would apply to IPQ, Class A IFQ, 
and C shares when those shares are subject to IPQ landing requirements. 
Under the system, the arbitrator would establish a finding that 
preserves the historic division of revenues while considering other 
relevant factors, including current ex-vessel prices, location and 
timing of deliveries, and vessel safety.
    The arbitration process would begin pre-season with a market report 
for each fishery prepared by an independent market analyst and the 
establishment of a non-binding fleet wide benchmark price by an 
arbitrator who has consulted with both fleet representatives and 
processors. Information provided by the sectors would be historical in 
nature. In determining this benchmark price, the arbitrator would 
consider the highest arbitrated price that applied to at least 7 
percent of the IPQ in the fishery in the preceding year. This non-
binding price is intended to help guide price negotiations and inform 
later arbitration proceedings. After a negotiating period, a Class A 
IFQ holder could initiate a single arbitration proceeding with one or 
more IPQ holders before the fishing season. Proceedings may be 
initiated by one or more IFQ holders prior to the season after 
committing to deliver crab to the IPQ holder. For a brief period of 
time prior to the commencement of hearings, an IFQ holder could join 
the proceeding by unilaterally committing deliveries to the IPQ holder.
    The arbitration would be in a last best (or final) offer format. 
The IPQ holder would submit a single offer. Each IFQ holder could 
submit an offer, or a cooperative could submit a collective offer. For 
each IFQ holder or cooperative, the arbitrator would select between the 
IFQ holder's (or cooperative's) offer and the IPQ holder's offer. An 
IFQ holder with uncommited IFQ may opt-in to any contract that results 
from a competitive arbitration by accepting all terms of the 
arbitration decision (assuming that the IPQ holder held adequate shares 
to accept the deliveries).

Community Protection Measures

    The Program includes several provisions intended to protect 
communities from adverse impacts that could result from the Program. 
Communities would be defined as boroughs, if an organized borough 
exists, or as first or second class cities, if no organized borough 
exists. Communities eligible for the community protection measures 
would be those with 3 percent or more of the qualified landings in any 
crab fishery included in the Program. Based on these criteria, NMFS has 
preliminarily determined that the eligible crab communities are as 
follows: Adak, Akutan, Dutch Harbor, Kodiak, King Cove, False Pass, St. 
George, St. Paul, and Port Moeller.
    ``Cooling off'' provision. During the first two years of fishing 
under the Program, any PQS based on processing history from an eligible 
community could not be transferred from that community.
    ``Cooling off'' provision exemptions. Three exemptions exist to the 
cooling off provision. Tanner crab PQS would be exempt from the 
``cooling off'' provision because that fishery is

[[Page 53401]]

expected to be a concurrent fishery with the Bristol Bay red king crab 
and snow crab fisheries. Western Aleutian Islands red king crab PQS 
would also be exempt from the ``cooling off'' provision because that 
fishery was closed for several years leading up to development of the 
Program. Western Aleutian Islands golden king crab PQS would also be 
exempt from the ``cooling off'' provision because the West 
regionalization landing requirements are inconsistent with the historic 
distribution of landings that would be established by the ``cooling 
off'' provision.
    Individual processing quota caps. IPQ caps would be established to 
limit the annual issuance of IPQs in seasons when the TAC exceeds a 
threshold amount. When the Bristol Bay red king crab TAC is greater 
than 20 million pounds, IPQs would not be issued for the amount of the 
TAC in excess of 20 million pounds. When the snow crab TAC is greater 
than 175 million pounds, IPQs would not be issued for the amount of the 
TAC in excess of 175 million pounds. Under these circumstances, Class A 
IFQ issued in excess of these thresholds would not be subject to the 
IPQ landing requirements but would be subject to the regional landing 
requirements.
    Sea time waiver. Sea time eligibility requirements for the purchase 
of QS would be waived for CDQ groups and community entities in eligible 
communities, allowing those communities to build and maintain local 
interests in harvesting. CDQ groups and community entities would be 
eligible to purchase PQS. CDQ groups and community entities would not 
be permitted to purchase C shares.
    Right of first refusal for processor quota share. Eligible 
communities would have a right of first refusal on the transfer of PQS 
and IPQ originating from processing history in the community if the 
transfer would result in relocation of the shares outside the 
community. Adak would not be eligible for the right of first refusal 
provision because Adak would receive a direct allocation of western 
Aleutian Islands golden king crab. The right of first refusal would be 
granted to CDQ groups in CDQ communities. In addition, eligible 
communities in the Gulf of Alaska (GOA) north of 56[deg]20' would have 
a right of first refusal on the transfer of PQS and IPQ from 
communities in the GOA with less than 3 percent of the qualified 
landings in any crab fishery included in the Program.

Community Development Quota Program and Community Allocations

    Community development quota program. The CDQ program would be 
broadened to include the eastern Aleutian Islands golden king crab 
fishery and the western Aleutian Islands red king crab fishery. In 
addition, the CDQ allocations in all crab fisheries covered by the 
Program would be increased from 7.5 to 10 percent of the TAC. The 
increase would not apply in the Norton Sound crab fisheries, which are 
excluded from the Program. CDQ groups would be required to deliver at 
least 25 percent of their allocation to shore based processors. The CDQ 
allocations would be managed independently from the Program and would 
not be subject to the Program's share designations and landing 
requirements.
    Community purchase. Any non-CDQ community in which 3 percent or 
more of any crab fishery was processed could form a non-profit entity 
to receive QS, IFQ, PQ and IPQ transfers on behalf of the community.
    Adak allocation. An allocation of 10 percent of the TAC of western 
Aleutian Islands golden king crab fishery would be made to the 
community of Adak. The allocation to Adak would be made to a nonprofit 
entity representing the community, with a board of directors elected by 
the community. Oversight of the use of the allocation for ``fisheries 
related purposes'' would be deferred to the State of Alaska under the 
FMP. NMFS would have no direct role in oversight of the use of this 
allocation. The State of Alaska would provide an implementation review 
to the Council to ensure that the benefits derived from the allocation 
accrue to the community and achieve the goals of the fisheries 
development plan. This allocation would not be part of the crab IFQ 
fisheries, but would be managed as a separate commercial fishery by the 
State of Alaska in a manner similar to management of the crab CDQ 
fisheries.

Crew Loan Program

    To aid captains and crew in purchasing QS, a low interest loan 
program (similar to the loan program under the halibut and sablefish 
IFQ program) would be created. This program would be funded by 25 
percent of the cost recovery fees required by section 304 of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act. Loan money would be accessible only to active 
participants and could be used to purchase either C shares or QS. Quota 
share purchased with loan money would be subject to all use and leasing 
restrictions applicable to C shares for the term of the loan.

Protections for Participants in Other Fisheries

    The Program would affect the fishing patterns of current 
participants and could allow BSAI crab fishermen to increase 
participation in other fisheries. To protect participants in GOA 
groundfish fisheries, restrictions would apply to vessels that 
participate in the snow crab fishery. The restrictions, also called 
sideboards, would restrict a vessel's harvests to its historic harvests 
in all GOA groundfish fisheries (except the sablefish fishery). Vessels 
with less than 100,000 pounds of total snow crab harvests and more than 
500 metric tons (mt) of total Pacific cod harvests in the GOA during 
the qualifying years would be exempt from the restrictions. In 
addition, vessels with less than 50 mt of total groundfish landings in 
the GOA during the qualifying period would be prohibited from 
harvesting Pacific cod from the GOA. Restrictions would be applied to 
vessels but also would restrict harvests made using a groundfish LLP 
license derived from the history of a vessel so restricted, even if 
that LLP license is used on another vessel.

Additional Program Elements

    Annual reports and Program review. NMFS, in conjunction with the 
State of Alaska, would produce annual reports on the Program. Eighteen 
months after implementation of the Program, the Council would review 
the processor quota share and binding arbitration components. After 3 
years, the Council would conduct a preliminary review of the Program. A 
full review of the Program would be undertaken at the first Council 
meeting in the fifth year after implementation. These reviews are 
intended to objectively measure the success of the Program in achieving 
the goals and objectives specified in the Council's problem statement 
and the Magnuson-Stevens Act standards. These reviews would examine the 
impacts of the Program on vessel owners, captains, crew, processors, 
and communities, and include an assessment of options to mitigate 
negative impacts. Additional reviews would be conducted every 5 years.
    Data collection. The Program includes a comprehensive socio-
economic data collection program to aid the Council and NMFS in 
assessing the success of the Program and developing amendments 
necessary to mitigate any unintended consequences. Cost, revenue, 
ownership, and employment data would be collected regularly from

[[Page 53402]]

the harvesting and processing sectors. The data would be used to study 
the economic and social impacts of the Program on harvesters, 
processors, and communities. Participation in the data collection 
program would be mandatory for all participants in the fisheries.
    Monitoring and enforcement. NMFS and the State of Alaska would 
coordinate monitoring and enforcement of this Program. Harvesting and 
processing activity would need to be monitored for compliance with the 
implementing regulations. Methods for catch accounting and catch 
monitoring plans for cooperatives would generate data to provide 
accurate and reliable estimates of the total catch and landings to 
manage quota share accounts, prevent overages of IFQ and IPQ, and 
determine regionalization requirements. Monitoring would include landed 
catch weight and species composition, bycatch, and deadloss to estimate 
total fishery removals.
    Cost Recovery. NMFS would establish a cost recovery fee system, 
required by section 304(d)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, to recover 
actual costs directly related to the management and enforcement of the 
Program. The crab cost recovery fee would be paid in equal shares by 
the harvesting and processing sectors and would be based on the ex-
vessel value of all crab harvested under the Program, including CDQ 
crab and Adak crab. NMFS also would enter into a cooperative agreement 
with the State of Alaska to use IFQ cost recovery funds in State 
management and observer programs for BSAI crab fisheries. The crab cost 
recovery fee is prohibited from exceeding 3 percent of the annual ex-
vessel value. However, the collection of up to 133 percent of the 
actual costs of management and enforcement under the Program would be 
authorized, which would provide for up to 100 percent of management 
costs after allocation of 25 percent of the cost recovery fees to the 
loan program.

Amendment 19

    The amended Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the Council the authority 
to recommend to the Secretary subsequent amendments to the Program and 
provides the Secretary with the discretion to approve these amendments 
by January 1, 2005. In June 2004, the Council reviewed the public 
comments received on the Draft EIS and determined that changes to the 
Program were warranted. The Council recommended changes to three 
components of the Program: binding arbitration, cooperative sideboard 
management, and program review. These changes are contained in 
Amendment 19 to the FMP.
    The first change would limit information sharing among participants 
involved in binding arbitration to minimize the exposure of these 
participants to antitrust liability. The second change would remove a 
provision that directs cooperatives to limit their aggregate Pacific 
cod catch in both federal and state waters because this provision is 
not practical or enforceable. Thus, groundfish sideboards in the GOA 
would be managed by NMFS through fleet-wide sideboard directed fishing 
closures for federal waters and the parallel fishery in state waters.
    The Council also directed its staff to prepare an analysis of 
captain share (C share) landings for consideration by the Council 18 
months after fishing begins under the Program. The purpose of the 
analysis is to examine landings patterns of C shares to determine 
whether the distribution of landings among processors and communities 
of C shares differs from the distribution of landings of the general 
harvest share pool. After receiving the analysis, the Council will 
consider whether to remove the 90/10 Class A/Class B split from C 
shares, which is scheduled to take effect 3 years after fishing under 
the Program begins.
    An EIS was prepared for Amendments 18 and 19 that describes the 
management background, the purpose and need for action, the management 
alternatives, and the environmental and socio-economic impacts of the 
alternatives (see ADDRESSES). The EIS contains as appendices the 
Regulatory Impact Review/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and 
the Social Impact Assessment prepared for this action.
    Public comments are being solicited on proposed Amendments 18 and 
19 through the end of the comment period stated (see DATES). All 
comments received by the end of the comment period on the amendments 
will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision. Comments 
received after that date will not be considered in the approval/
disapproval decision on the amendments. To be considered, comments must 
be received not just postmarked or otherwise transmitted by the close 
of business on the last day of the comment period. NMFS will publish 
the proposed regulations to implement Amendments 18 and 19 in October 
2004.

    Dated: August 26, 2004.
Allen D. Risenhoover,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 04-19971 Filed 8-31-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S