22 CFR 33.5 – Guaranty agreements
(a) Period in effect. Agreements are effective for a Fiscal Year beginning October 1 and ending on the next September 30. Applications submitted after October 1 are effective from the date the application and fee are mailed (determined by the postmark) through September 30.
Terms Used In 22 CFR 33.5
- Fiscal year: The fiscal year is the accounting period for the government. For the federal government, this begins on October 1 and ends on September 30. The fiscal year is designated by the calendar year in which it ends; for example, fiscal year 2006 begins on October 1, 2005 and ends on September 30, 2006.
- Jurisdiction: (1) The legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. Concurrent jurisdiction exists when two courts have simultaneous responsibility for the same case. (2) The geographic area over which the court has authority to decide cases.
(b) Guaranty agreement transfer. A guaranty agreement may, with the Secretary’s prior consent, be transferred when a vessel which is the subject of a guaranty agreement is transferred to a new owner if the transfer occurs during the agreement period.
(c) Guaranty agreement renewal. A guaranty agreement may be renewed for the next agreement year by submitting an application form with the appropriate fee for the next year in accordance with the Secretary’s annually published requirements regarding fees. Renewals are subject to the Secretary’s approval.
(d) Provisions of the agreement. The agreement will provide for reimbursement for certain losses caused by foreign countries’ seizure and detention of U.S. fishing vessels on the basis of claims to jurisdiction which are not recognized by the United States. Recent amendments to the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. (1801 et seq.) assert U.S. jurisdiction over highly migratory species of tuna in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Accordingly, as a matter of international law, the United States now recognizes other coastal states’ claims to jurisdiction over tuna in their EEZ’S. This change directly affect certification of claims filed under the Fishermen’s Protective Act. Participants are advised that this means that the Department will no longer certify for payment claims resulting from the seizure of a U.S. vessel while such vessel was fishing for tuna within the exclusive economic zone of another country in violation of that country’s laws. Claims for detentions or seizures based on other claims to jurisdiction not recognized by the United States, or on the basis of claims to jurisdiction recognized by the United States but exercised in a manner inconsistent with international law as recognized by the United states, may still be certified by the Department.