[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 29, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61200-61209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-29102]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 641

[Docket No. 950810206-5268-03; I.D. 071395A]
RIN 0648-AG29


Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 8

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement certain provisions of 
Amendment 8 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Fishery of 
the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). Amendment 8 initiates a limited entry program 
for the commercial red snapper sector of the reef fish fishery in the 
Gulf of Mexico. Initial participants in the limited entry program will 
receive shares of the commercial quota of red snapper based on 
specified criteria. The percentage shares of the commercial quota 
equate to individual transferable quotas (ITQs). In addition, NMFS 
clarifies the regulations regarding commercial permit requirements, and 
informs the public of the approval by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) of the collection-of-information requirements contained in 
this rule and publishes the OMB control numbers for those collections. 
The intended effect of this rule is to manage the commercial red 
snapper sector of the reef fish fishery to preserve its long-term 
economic viability.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 1996; except that the amendments to 15 CFR 
part 902 and 50 CFR 641.2, 641.7(s), 641.24(g), and the additions 50 
CFR 641.7(ee) and 641.10 heading and paragraph (c), are effective 
November 24, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the final regulatory flexibility 
analysis (FRFA) should be sent to Robert Sadler, Southeast Regional 
Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, FL 33702.
    Comments regarding the collection-of-information requirements 
contained in this rule should be sent to Edward E. Burgess, Southeast 
Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, 
FL 33702, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, 
Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Sadler, 813-570-5305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 
is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented through 
regulations at 50 CFR part 641 under the authority of the Magnuson 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act).
    Based on a preliminary evaluation of Amendment 8 at the beginning 
of formal agency review, NMFS disapproved three of its measures after 
determining that they were inconsistent with the provisions of the 
Magnuson Act and other applicable law. NMFS published a proposed rule 
to implement the remaining measures of Amendment 8 and to clarify 
existing regulations regarding commercial permit requirements (60 FR 
44825, August 29, 1995). The rationale for the remaining measures of 
Amendment 8 and for the clarification of existing regulations, as well 
as the reasons for the disapproval of the three Amendment 8 measures at 
the beginning of formal agency review, are contained in the preamble of 
the proposed rule and are not repeated here. On October 13, 1995, NMFS 
approved the remaining measures of Amendment 8; this final rule 
implements those approved measures.

Comments and Responses

    A minority report signed by three Council members was submitted 
with Amendment 8. In addition, written comments during the comment 
period were received from 34 entities, including individual 
representatives of four commercial seafood associations (fishing 
associations), two state government agencies, and 28 members of the 
public. Seventeen of the comments supported the proposed rule and/or 
Amendment 8, including 12 from persons holding red snapper endorsements 
on their reef fish vessel permits. Sixteen of the comments opposed the 
proposed rule and/or Amendment 8, including three from endorsement 
holders. Three of the 

[[Page 61201]]
comments opposing the proposed rule were identical in content. Specific 
responses follow each comment, and are separated by general category.

Information Used in Amendment 8

    Comment: The minority report claimed that an ITQ program is 
unnecessary, because the fishery conditions that the program proposes 
to correct do not actually exist. The report argues that both 
recreational and commercial user groups have concluded that the 
scientific stock assessment is flawed, because it is based on allegedly 
erroneous information and that the stock is in the best condition they 
can recall in their fishing experience. The report also stated that the 
authors have no confidence in the reliability of the recreational 
landings data collected under the Marine Recreational Fishery 
Statistical Survey.
    Response: The NMFS stock assessment has undergone extensive peer 
review and was found by the Southeast Fisheries Science Center (Center) 
to be based on the best available scientific information. The Center 
also reviewed Amendment 8 and concluded that the amendment is based on 
the best available scientific information. The stock assessment does 
indicate some recovery of the red snapper stock condition during the 
period under Federal management; however, the assessment also indicates 
that the stock is still overfished and that continuing harvest 
restrictions are required for the FMP's long-term stock rebuilding 
program.
    NMFS agrees, however, with the need to continually update the stock 
assessment database used in formulating management decisions. 
Appropriate updates to the database will be made as data become 
available.
    Comment: A fishing association representative noted that the 
Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) previously had 
voted for no new regulatory actions (i.e., discontinuance of the 
current red snapper permit endorsement program at the end of 1995 and 
no ITQ program beginning in 1996) based on the lack of a feasibility 
study at that time. The commenter questioned the need for an ITQ 
program after noting the SSC position. The commenter did acknowledge 
that the SSC had subsequently concluded that sufficient evaluation had 
been completed for the Council to select one of the identified 
management program alternatives (i.e., ITQs, license limitations, or no 
new regulatory action).
    Response: NMFS does not dispute the comment, but notes that the SSC 
vote for no regulatory action was based on an earlier version of 
Amendment 8.
    Comment: The minority report and one commenter stated that the 
erroneous information created an unfair and inequitable commercial/
recreational allocation ratio of 51/49 for red snapper. These 
commenters also objected to the FMP's provision that requires closure 
of the annual commercial fishery for the rest of the fishing year once 
the annual commercial quota is projected to be met, while potentially 
allowing recreational fishermen to exceed their allocation. The 
commenters claim that this penalizes the commercial sector to the 
benefit of the recreational sector and stated that Amendment 8 would 
continue this inequitable distribution of the allocation, particularly 
when the stock is recovered and total allowable catch (TAC) may safely 
be increased.
    Response: The FMP provides for a commercial/recreational allocation 
ratio of 51/49 for red snapper, and has a requirement that the 
commercial sector be closed for the remainder of the year once the 
annual commercial quota is met or is projected to be met. These 
measures were found to be fair and equitable and consistent with the 
national standards based on the best available information, as 
originally set forth in Amendment 1. These provisions are not modified 
under Amendment 8 or its implementing regulations. Changes to either 
the allocation ratio or closure provision, therefore, are not actions 
within the scope of Amendment 8 and would require an additional FMP 
amendment.
    Comment: One of the commenters stated that Amendment 8 violates 
National Standard 2, since NMFS did not use available social 
assessments, and the Council and NMFS did not adequately consider the 
``human factor,'' or social and economic effects.
    Response: NMFS does not agree. The Council conducted extensive 
analyses and used all available data sources in developing Amendment 8, 
including the most current landings data, economic, social, and 
biological information. Amendment 8 includes a social impact 
assessment, and also references extensive Council deliberations on 
avoiding social impacts.
    Comment: The minority report also stated that the ITQ program is 
based on the NMFS concept that such a program will improve the economic 
conditions of the industry.
    Response: The Council selected ITQs as the preferred option, 
principally because it should result in the largest increase in net 
economic benefits, achieve optimum yield (OY), and address many of the 
major problems in the fishery. In particular, the approved measures of 
the Amendment 8 ITQ program are expected to resolve the problems of a 
harvest capability that is larger than necessary to produce the 
commercial quota in an economically efficient manner. The ITQ program 
also is expected to resolve the problems associated with the derby 
fishery, including depressed prices, fishing in dangerous weather 
conditions, and increased total costs of production. In approving 
Amendment 8, NMFS agreed with the Council's rationale and objectives 
for the ITQ program.

Historical Captains

    Comment: A representative of a commercial fishing association 
expressed concern regarding historical captains being included as 
initial shareholders. The commenter recommended that only persons who 
qualified for red snapper permit endorsements should be initial 
recipients of ITQ shares and noted that vessel owners provide the 
vessels and have the principal legal responsibility for their 
operation.
    Response: Initial shareholders in the ITQ system include vessel 
owners or operators, depending on whose earned income qualified for the 
reef fish permit, and historical captains. The Council concluded that 
the unique status of historical captains as independent contractors who 
operated vessels under share agreements warranted their inclusion as 
initial shareholders. Unlike earned income qualifying operators, 
however, the initial share of a historical captain is divided with the 
vessel owner, based on the terms of the share agreement. NMFS finds no 
basis for disapproval of the Council's allocation of initial shares to 
historical captains.

Additional Issues Related to National Standards

    Comment: The minority report and three of the commenters claimed 
that the ITQ system was unfair and inequitable because initially 
entitled fishery participants would be allocated excessive shares or 
because allocated shares would not be issued to all historical 
participants or in appropriate allocation ratios. One of the commenters 
stated that the ITQ system was unfair and inequitable, but did not 
provide specific rationale as the basis for this comment.
    Response: Amendment 8 addresses the allocation issues raised by 
these comments. For example, Amendment 8 lists the factors that the 
Council took into account in establishing the ITQ system to limit 
access to the fishery and to achieve optimum yield (OY) 

[[Page 61202]]
including: Present participation in the fishery; historical fishing 
practices in, and dependence on, the fishery; the economics of the 
fishery; the capability of fishing vessels used in the fishery to 
engage in other fisheries; and the cultural and social framework 
relevant to the fishery.
    The ITQ system provides for issuance of initial shares that more 
closely track the actual harvest during the qualifying years than the 
current endorsement system. For example, the endorsement provisions 
established a trip limit of 2,000 lb (907 kg) for fishermen with 
endorsements on their permits (i.e., caught at least 5,000 lb (2,268 
kg) in any 2 of the 3 years between 1990-1992). Vessels without an 
endorsement were limited to a 200 lb (91 kg) trip limit. In effect, the 
endorsement system provided only two levels of harvest based on 
applicants meeting a minimum threshold. Persons who landed 
substantively more than the threshold were not provided a larger trip 
limit than those who landed only 5,000 lb (2,268 kg). This system 
resulted in inequities, as stated in several of the comments.
    In contrast, the initial ITQ shares to be issued under Amendment 8 
will correspond to the actual harvests accepted by NMFS under Amendment 
9 during the qualifying period for shares. Moreover, the overall 
benefits of the ITQ system to the economic integrity of the fishery are 
expected to accrue over time. For example, the allowance for ITQ share 
transfers to any U.S. citizen or permanent resident alien starting 
October 1, 1997, will provide access to those ineligible for an initial 
share. This should result in significantly increased flexibility 
regarding who may participate in the fishery.
    Amendment 8 explicitly reflects the requirements of NMFS' 
Guidelines for Fishery Management Plans; Subpart B--National Standards 
(National Standard Guidelines) regarding the application of National 
Standard 4 (allocation of fishing privileges) (see 50 CFR 
602.14(c)(3)(i)). Specifically, Amendment 8 states that to be ``fair 
and equitable,'' an allocation should be rationally connected with the 
achievement of OY or with the furtherance of an FMP objective; 
otherwise, the inherent advantaging of one group to the detriment of 
another would be without adequate justification. Also, Amendment 8 
indicates that an allocation of fishing privileges may impose hardship 
on one group if this hardship is outweighed by the total benefits 
received by another group. Although the ITQ program will not prevent 
any person who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident alien from 
entering the red snapper fishery, those persons who receive an initial 
allocation of harvesting privileges (initial shares) will have a 
competitive advantage over subsequent participants by not having to pay 
for those privileges. Any such competitive advantage would be 
constrained by the mandatory 4-year evaluation period, which the 
Council believes was necessary to minimize windfall profit and 
speculation.
    According to the National Standard Guidelines, an allocation of 
fishing privileges must be designed to avoid creating conditions that 
foster the acquisition by any person of an inordinate share of fishing 
privileges or control by buyers and sellers that would not otherwise 
exist (see 50 CFR 602.14(c)(3)(iii)). Although the National Standard 
Guidelines do not specifically define an ``excessive share,'' they 
imply conditions of monopoly or oligopoly. The Council does not believe 
that a monopoly will occur and expects that owners/operators will 
remain the dominant entities in the fishery. Therefore, the Council 
recommended no limit on ownership of ITQ shares. It is anticipated that 
this will not lead to overall market control of the fishery. Also, the 
Council can recommend, and NMFS approve and implement, a different 
allocation scheme by FMP amendment at any time if it meets the 
requirements of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
and other applicable law.
    NMFS acknowledges the Amendment 8 discussion of these allocation 
issues and agrees with the Council that the ITQ program is consistent 
with National Standard 4 requirements that allocations of fishing 
privileges be fair and equitable and be carried out in such manner that 
no particular individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an 
excessive share.

Effects of ITQ System on Red Snapper Resource Status

    Comment: The minority report states that the ITQ system does not 
promote conservation. One commenter opposed the ITQ system indicating 
that it may contribute to overfishing. Another commenter stated that he 
would benefit from a relatively high ITQ share, but that he opposed the 
ITQ system because possible unlawful and unreported landings (landings 
without ITQ coupons) would result in exceeding the red snapper annual 
quota because these landings would go unrecorded. He argued that these 
circumstances would cause overfishing of the red snapper resource and 
undermine the long-term rebuilding of this overfished species.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with these comments. The current red 
snapper management program provision for an automatic commercial 
fishery closure once the commercial quota is met was intended to ensure 
that the quota is not exceeded, thereby ensuring the recovery of the 
overfished red snapper resource under its rebuilding program. However, 
red snapper discarded during closed fishery periods are not counted 
against the commercial quota; some of these closed fishery periods have 
been considerably long such as the one that occurred after the April 
15, 1995, fishery closure. Since the ITQ program is expected to 
minimize closed fishery periods, it should correspondingly reduce 
unaccounted for incidental catch mortality of red snapper. Reducing the 
magnitude of this fishing morality during fishery closures is expected 
to allow a larger proportion of the red snapper harvested to be 
retained and counted against the commercial quota that occurs 
currently. Accordingly, the ITQ program should both reduce the total 
fishing mortality of red snapper as well as provide a more accurate 
estimate of it. The slower-paced fishery that is anticipated under the 
ITQ program will be easier for NMFS to monitor, particularly with fewer 
fishermen operating over a longer season. Also, ITQ program 
participants will have an interest in ensuring the continued viability 
of the fishery and the ITQ program, and are expected to assist in 
reported illegal activities or under-reporting. Overall, these ITQ 
program results should significantly enhance conservation benefits.

Industry Opinions on Amendment 8

    Comment: Two representatives of fishing associations noted that 
most public comments at the Council meetings opposed ITQs. One of these 
commenters noted the various votes of the Council's Red Snapper and 
Reef Fish Advisory Panels against ITQs. The minority report and one 
fishing association representative stated that the majority of the red 
snapper industry opposes Amendment 8. They argued that approval of 
Amendment 8 and its implementing rule is inconsistent with what they 
perceive to be NMFS' policy that no proposed ITQ program would be 
implemented over industry objections.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with these comments and believes that a 
majority of the fishing industry participants supports the ITQ program. 
As with any controversial action, some commenters opposed Amendment 8. 
However, the ITQ system appears to be supported by a majority of the 
fishery participants as providing for better red snapper fishery 

[[Page 61203]]
management including ensuring more reliable monitoring of catches with 
regards to quotas, avoiding increasingly short fishing seasons and low 
ex-vessel prices, and improving the enforceability of the management 
measures. Public commenters that expressed an opinion at area hearings 
held by the Council in December 1994 supported, in general, the ITQ 
program (23 in favor, 19 opposed). A stronger majority opinion (15 in 
favor, 9 opposed) was evidenced at the hearings by commenters who hold 
a red snapper endorsement on their reef fish vessel permit and who have 
caught the bulk of the commercial harvest since 1993, when the 
endorsement provisions were implemented. More recent indications of 
industry views on the Amendment 8 ITQ program were reflected in the 
public comments received on the proposed rule that supported the 
program by a slight margin (17-16), with a much larger margin of 
support (12 to 3) among commenters with a red snapper endorsement on 
their reef fish vessel permit. Public support for the ITQ program is 
expected to increase as more participants become familiar with it and 
with the benefits to the fishery expected to result from its 
implementation. Those benefits are expected to accrue over time. 
Finally, NMFS has not issued a policy regarding the approval and 
implementation of limited entry programs, including ITQ systems, except 
for guidance to the Regional Fishery Management Councils contained in 
the National Standard Guidelines at 50 CFR part 602 regarding the 
consistency of management measures assigning fishing privileges with 
National Standard 4. However, NMFS has indicated to the Councils that 
it is their responsibility to develop and recommend controlled access 
systems only if there is considerable support from the industries 
involved. NMFS believes that the controlled access system under 
Amendment 8 does have this considerable support from the affected 
industries.

Enforcement Issues

    Comment: The minority report and five of the comments cited 
enforcement concerns. These comments stated that, with current NMFS 
enforcement capability and recent budget cuts, the ITQ system would be 
unenforceable.
    Response: NMFS does not agree that the ITQ program will be 
unenforceable. First, NMFS anticipates cooperation from all the Gulf 
coastal states who have indicated that they will implement regulations 
for their waters consistent with those in the exclusive economic zone. 
Specifically, Texas and Florida provided comments in support of 
Amendment 8 and indicated a capability to enact compatible regulations 
in waters under their jurisdiction. Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi 
provided similar comments that were received after the end of the 
comment period, but before NMFS took final action to approve the 
remaining measures of Amendment 8. Thus, in making its decision to 
approve and implement the remaining measures of Amendment 8, NMFS 
obtained reasonable assurance from all the affected states that they 
will be able to issue compatible state regulations effective on or 
about the time that Amendment 8 is fully implemented (April 1, 1996). 
This cooperation will greatly enhance enforcement of the regulations. 
NMFS also has committed the resources for additional Federal 
enforcement agents.
    Second, the Council and NMFS believe that the ITQ system will be 
more self-policing than the current management system (permit 
endorsements with trip limits) because ITQ holders will have a vested 
interest in seeing that all red snapper landings conform with the ITQ 
program requirements. ITQ shares will have a value to the holder 
proportionate to the size of the total commercial quota. Fishermen who 
hold ITQ shares will have a greater incentive to report to enforcement 
officials (NMFS Enforcement, the Coast Guard, or state enforcement 
agencies) any illegal/unreported landings outside the ITQ program 
(e.g., landings without use of ITQ share coupons), since such landings 
would eventually result in adverse effects on the stock condition with 
the likely result of quota reductions.
    Comment: Two of the commenters indicated that fishermen may 
illegally sell red snapper to restaurants without using their ITQ 
shares, thus allowing them to catch large quantities of red snapper 
outside of the ITQ program.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges that illegal activity is possible with 
or without ITQs. Nevertheless, NMFS has determined that such activity 
can be kept to a minimum with compatible state regulations, which will 
greatly increase the probability of any fisherman being detected 
landing fish illegally and thereby risking his/her right to participate 
in the ITQ program.
    Comment: One of the commenters stated that ITQ shareholders have an 
interest in helping the ITQ system succeed and, therefore, may report 
violations and keep enforcement costs down. That commenter stated that 
the additional requirement of ITQ coupons should help enforcement 
officers to detect chronic violators.
    Response: NMFS agrees.

Use of Qualifying Years (1990-92)

    Comment: Another commenter stated that the qualifying years (1990-
92) were atypical of his historic dependence on the fishery, as he 
stopped fishing due to the derby fishery during that time.
    Response: The collection of past landings data under Amendment 9 
covers all red snapper landings information for the period when data 
were readily available (i.e., 1990 through 1992). Data were not readily 
available before 1990, and the vessel permit endorsement provisions, 
including trip limits, were implemented in 1993. As a result, the years 
1990-92 constitute the best available qualifying period for determining 
eligibility for the ITQ system. The Council, after extensive 
deliberations and consideration of longer qualifying periods, 
determined that the 1990-92 period was the most appropriate for 
determining historical dependence on the fishery. No reliable 
information or data were provided at Council-held public hearings or 
during NMFS-held comment periods on Amendment 8 and the proposed rule 
that convinced the Council or NMFS that this qualifying period was 
unfair or inappropriate. Based on these considerations, NMFS agreed 
with the Council's decision about the qualifying period in approving 
certain measures of both Amendments 8 and 9.
    Comment: One of the commenters stated that the Amendment 8 proposed 
rule is inconsistent with the National Standards because it denies 
access to the red snapper fishery by those who did not have red snapper 
catches during the years 1990-92; those fishermen will not receive an 
initial allocation.
    Response: The rationale for selecting the 1990-92 qualifying period 
was discussed above. Regarding access to the red snapper resource, a 
major feature of the ITQ program is allowance of new entrants to 
participate by buying existing ITQ shares. Hence, the program allows 
wider participation than the permit endorsement system it will replace.
    The choice of the eligibility period (1990-92) to determine access 
also is consistent with the Council's established control date for the 
fishery. The published notice of the control date stated that anyone 
entering the Gulf of Mexico commercial reef fish fishery after November 
7, 1989, could not be assured of future access to the reef fish fishery 
if a management regime were developed and implemented that 

[[Page 61204]]
limited the number of participants in the fishery.
    Comment: One of the commenters requested that NMFS further review 
all landings data submitted for the ITQ program-qualifying period.
    Response: NMFS does not agree that the additional review of 
qualifying landings data, as requested by the commenter, is necessary. 
The red snapper landings data for the 1990-92 qualifying period 
submitted to NMFS by the cutoff date (established under Amendment 9) 
were carefully reviewed by NMFS before being accepted as a basis for 
calculating individual percentage shares of the commercial quota. 
Persons submitting data showing landings during the 1990-92 eligibility 
period were given an opportunity to review NMFS' landings figures. 
Finally, Amendment 8 establishes a Council advisory panel to consider 
written requests from persons who contest their tentative allocations 
of shares or determinations of historical captain status.

Congressional Action and User Fees

    Comment: The minority report and two fishing association 
representatives stated that Amendment 8 should not be approved because 
it would be ``in defiance of the Congressional mandate to develop 
appropriate guidelines for ITQs.'' The minority report also stated that 
Amendment 8 should not be approved, since the user fee schedule 
currently being considered in a proposed amendment to the Magnuson Act 
is unknown. According to the minority report, the user fee issue would 
have a bearing on industry's evaluation of the effects of the proposed 
rule.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the possibility that an amendment to 
the Magnuson Act or other Congressional action could affect 
continuation of the ITQ system under Amendment 8. NMFS also 
acknowledges the potential importance of user fees to persons involved 
in fishery business decisions. However, what final action Congress will 
take in amending the Magnuson Act regarding the establishment of ITQ 
programs or the application of user fees in fisheries management is 
unknown. Until such time as the Magnuson Act is amended, it authorizes 
the development and implementation of ITQ programs for fisheries under 
Federal management.

Costs of Implementing the ITQ System

    Comment: Four of the commenters, including a representative of a 
fishing association, complained about the high costs of implementing 
and enforcing the ITQ system. One comment indicated that costs should 
be one of the factors considered before implementing ITQs.
    Response: The regulatory impact review (RIR) prepared by the 
Council estimates that Amendment 8 will increase annual administration 
and enforcement costs on a continuing basis between $659,000 and 
$1,749,000, depending on the level of law enforcement efforts. However, 
it further indicates that annual benefits include increased revenues of 
$2.5 to $4.1 million and a decrease in the total cost of harvesting. 
While the RIR clearly points out that costs of the ITQ system are 
higher than for other management systems considered, the ITQ system 
should provide the largest increase in net economic benefits to the 
fishery of any of the management options for red snapper considered by 
the Council.

Duration of Implementing Regulations

    Comment: One of the commenters supported the ITQ system and the 4-
year evaluation period, noting that an evaluation might give the 
Council an opportunity to develop a more comprehensive ITQ system after 
the 4-year period. Another commenter supported the ITQ system and a 4-
year evaluation as a flexible approach that will benefit the fishery in 
terms of achieving the goals of Amendment 8. That commenter stated that 
4 years was an appropriate time period for monitoring and evaluation, 
without imposing an unnecessarily long time period that encourages 
windfall profits.
    Response: NMFS agrees with these comments and has approved the 
Council's proposed measure to evaluate the ITQ system no later than 4 
years after initial implementation.
    Comment: The minority report stated that the proposed 4-year 
evaluation period would preclude the industry from making business 
decisions. One of the commenters stated that the time limitation 
creates uncertainty in the ITQ system. Another commenter stated that 
the mandatory evaluation is not needed, because the Council already has 
the authority to evaluate the ITQ system and make changes as 
appropriate. Another commenter expressed a preference for an indefinite 
duration for the ITQ program.
    Response: The 4-year evaluation period was selected by the Council 
after consideration of various time periods. The Council was aware of 
the potential that fewer economic benefits might result from having an 
ITQ program with a fixed time period compared to a system of indefinite 
duration, but decided that a 4-year evaluation period was necessary to 
minimize windfall profits and speculation while still allowing a 
sufficiently long period to test the effectiveness of the program.
    NMFS agrees with the Council's decision to select a 4-year ITQ 
program period with an evaluation of its effectiveness at that time. 
This approach will allow the Council and NMFS to terminate the program 
at that time if it does not produce the expected benefits. The 
mandatory evaluation, while unavoidably creating a degree of 
uncertainty in the industry, is needed in order that the Council may 
identify and propose necessary changes to the ITQ program for achieving 
the greatest possible level of benefits.
    Comment: One of the commenters also objected to treating fish as 
private property, and stated that the ITQ program is a bad idea and 
should not be approved.
    Response: NMFS disagrees. The ITQ system will remain in effect for 
4 years from the date the system is implemented, while the 
effectiveness of the system is monitored and evaluated. Based on the 
evaluation, the system will be modified, or terminated. This temporary 
harvest privilege is not a transfer of the resource, but a revocable 
license to take a specified amount of the resource. There are no 
private property rights to wild fish before they have been reduced to 
one's possession.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that each permit holder be issued 
transferable ITQ coupons in an allotted percentage based on their 
previous records of red snapper landings, and be given 1 year to use 
their coupons.
    Response: This suggestion is already provided for by the provisions 
of the ITQ program. The Regional Director will provide each shareholder 
with ITQ coupons in various denominations on an annual basis, the total 
of which equals his or her ITQ share.
    Comment: Two of the commenters responded to the request in the 
proposed rule for specific comments on the possibility of a quota 
overrun if the states do not enact compatible regulations. Those two 
comments indicated that each state should enact specific compatible 
regulations for waters under their jurisdiction, since large quantities 
of landings are made from state waters off Texas and Louisiana.
    Response: NMFS shares the concerns expressed by these comments 
about the adverse effects of a quota overrun and a fishery closure 
before all ITQ coupons are used, if compatible state regulations are 
not enacted to prevent catch by non-permitted vessels in state waters. 
As noted above, NMFS has received reasonable assurance that all Gulf 
coastal states will enact or have in place 

[[Page 61205]]
in a timely manner regulations to require that vessels landing red 
snapper possess a Federal permit, no matter where the red snapper are 
harvested or possessed. This should preclude any non-ITQ harvest.
    Comment: One of the commenters suggested that a rule allowing 
permitted vessels without ITQ shares to sell red snapper harvested in 
state waters would encourage violations of the ITQ program.
    Response: NMFS agrees. The implementing regulations specify that 
red snapper in or from the EEZ, or on board a permitted reef fish 
vessel, may not be possessed without sufficient ITQ coupons on board. 
One of the permit conditions is that permitted vessels comply with the 
ITQ provisions, no matter where the red snapper are harvested or 
possessed. This would minimize violations, since the states have 
provided assurance that they will require that red snapper landings be 
from federally permitted vessels only.
    A federally permitted reef fish dealer would be allowed to receive 
red snapper only from a permitted vessel with ITQ coupons on board, 
regardless of where the red snapper were harvested. These provisions 
are intended to encourage effective monitoring and enforcement of the 
ITQ system.
    Comment: One of the commenters questioned the meaning of 
``excessive effort capacity'' in the proposed rule. Another commenter 
indicated that the ITQ system would force him to discharge two or three 
of his three to four employees from his vessel. The ITQ system, 
therefore, would be economically disadvantageous, particularly in areas 
with high unemployment and when fishermen are ineligible for 
unemployment benefits.
    Response: The term ``excessive effort capacity'' indicates the 
ability of red snapper fishermen to catch the annual quota in 
increasingly shorter time periods, resulting in fewer net economic 
benefits. Regarding the comment, NMFS acknowledges that some decrease 
in employment is expected to result from a reduction of effort capacity 
that optimizes net economic benefits of the fishery. While this may 
disadvantage some sectors, as stated in the comment, the net benefits 
to the entire fishery are increased.

Comments in Support of the Proposed Rule

    Comment: Seventeen of the commenters supported the ITQ system. 
Eleven supported the ITQ system because of problems with vessel crew 
safety and the short season due to the endorsement system. Seven also 
supported the ITQ system to avoid other problems associated with a 
derby fishery, such as low ex-vessel prices, and one noted that the 
commercial fishery is unable to achieve OY under the existing 
endorsement provisions. That commenter opposed the views of the 
minority report and urged NMFS to implement the ITQ system as soon as 
possible.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges these supportive comments and the 
identified program benefits.

Additional Issues Outside the Scope of the Proposed Rule

    Comment: One of the commenters suggested that sale of red snapper 
harvested in state waters be counted against the recreational harvest, 
not the commercial quota.
    Response: This provision is not currently in the FMP or Amendment 
8, and is outside the scope of the proposed rule.
    Comment: Three commenters noted that an ITQ system would not help 
the red snapper fishery, because imports comprise most of the total red 
snapper market. Another stated that imports should be considered before 
implementing ITQs.
    Response: The Magnuson Act currently does not govern imported fish, 
which may be legally landed in compliance with the Lacey Act and other 
applicable Federal laws. Moreover, inclusion of imported red snapper in 
the ITQ system is outside the scope of the proposed rule.
    Comment: One of the comments requested consideration of a small 
incidental catch of red snapper for boats operating out of Florida 
ports.
    Response: This requested action was not included in Amendment 8 or 
the proposed rule and, therefore, is outside the scope of this rule.
    Comment: One of the commenters stated that the penalty fee schedule 
should be provided in the proposed rule.
    Response: NOAA has made its Civil Administrative Penalty Schedule 
available (59 FR 19160, April 22, 1994). That schedule is outside the 
scope of the proposed rule and Amendment 8. The schedule, however, will 
be revised as any additional regulations are implemented.
    Comment: One of the commenters expressed no opinions on the 
proposed rule but requested that hardship appeals be considered.
    Response: The hardship appeals provisions proposed in Amendment 8 
were disapproved by NMFS during its preliminary review of the amendment 
for the reasons stated in the preamble of the proposed rule. These 
provisions were not included in the proposed rule and, therefore, are 
not included in the final rule. Therefore, this comment is considered 
outside the scope of the proposed rule.
    Comment: One of the commenters suggested that, instead of the ITQ 
program, fishermen be allowed to fish 10 days a month.
    Response: A split season was not included in Amendment 8 or the 
proposed rule. Therefore, this comment is outside the scope of this 
rule.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    Specific dates are added as follows: (1) In Sec. 641.10 
introductory text, for the termination of the period during which NMFS 
and the Council will evaluate the ITQ system; (2) in 
Sec. 641.10(c)(2)(iv), for the submission of requests for transfers of 
landings records; (3) in Sec. 641.10(c)(4)(iii), for the submission of 
appeals; and (4) in Sec. 641.10(c)(5), for the initial restrictions 
regarding transfers of shares.
    In Sec. 641.10(a)(3), information is added as to how a person who 
does not have an ITQ share may obtain a list of shareholders.
    The ITQ coupon system is simplified and clarified as follows. Since 
ITQ coupons will be used on board vessels rather than by individual 
fishermen, references in the proposed rule to the ``Fisherman'' part of 
coupons are changed to ``Vessel'' part. In Sec. 641.10(b)(3), when a 
coupon is transferred, the name of the recipient and the signature of 
the seller are no longer required. In lieu thereof, if the transfer is 
by sale, the price paid for the coupon must be entered on the coupon. 
To aid in monitoring the lawful use of coupons, Sec. 641.10(b)(5) is 
revised to require entry on the ``Vessel'' part of each coupon of the 
permit number of the dealer to whom red snapper are transferred. 
Sections 641.10(b)(6) and (b)(7) are modified to clarify that, after 
being landed, red snapper must be accompanied by appropriate amounts of 
properly completed ``Fish House'' parts of ITQ coupons, even when such 
red snapper are offloaded at a facility other than a dealer's; for 
example, when offloaded to a dealer's truck. In Sec. 641.10(b)(7), the 
requirement to enter the dealer's permit number on the ``Fish House'' 
part of a coupon is removed.

Classification

    The Director, Southeast Region, NMFS, determined that Amendment 8 
is necessary for the conservation and management of the reef fish 
fishery of the Gulf of Mexico and that it is consistent with the 
Magnuson Act and 

[[Page 61206]]
other applicable laws, with the exception of those measures that were 
disapproved at the beginning of formal agency review based on a 
preliminary evaluation of Amendment 8. (See the proposed rule (60 FR 
44825, August 29, 1995) for a discussion of the disapproved measures.)
    This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes 
of E.O. 12866.
    The Council prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis 
(IRFA) as part of its regulatory impact review of Amendment 8. The IRFA 
described the impacts that the proposed rule would have on small 
entities, if adopted. Those impacts were summarized in the proposed 
rule. NMFS prepared an FRFA, which adopts the IRFA without substantive 
change. A copy of the FRFA is available (see ADDRESSES).
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to 
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
    This rule contains a new, one-time collection of information and 
three new continuing collections, namely: (1) The one-time submission 
of a request for appeal of tentative share allocations and of 
determinations of historical captain status; (2) the submission by 
fishermen and dealers of ITQ coupons; (3) requests for transfer of ITQ 
shares; and (4) monthly dealer reports when red snapper are received. 
These collections of information have been approved by OMB under OMB 
control numbers 0648-0297, 0648-0298, 0648-0299, and 0648-0301, 
respectively. The public reporting burdens for these collections of 
information are estimated to average 90, 0.5, 15, and 15 minutes per 
response, respectively.
    This rule requires permits for dealers who receive red snapper 
harvested by permitted vessels from state waters adjoining the EEZ in 
the Gulf of Mexico. Previously, dealer permits were required only for 
those dealers receiving red snapper harvested in the EEZ. The 
collection of information for dealer permit applications is currently 
approved under OMB Control No. 0648-0205. The public reporting burden 
for this collection was estimated at 5 minutes per response and is 
unchanged by the revision.
    This rule also involves the collection of information under 
Amendment 9 of landings records during the period 1990 through 1992. 
That collection is currently approved under OMB Control No. 0648-0281 
and its public reporting burden is estimated at 2 hours per response.
    Each of the above reporting burden estimates includes the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collections of information. Send comments regarding any of these 
reporting burden estimates, or any other aspects of the collections of 
information, including suggestions for reducing the burdens, to NMFS 
and OMB (see ADDRESSES).
    The publication of the OMB control numbers for approved collection-
of-information requirements at 15 CFR part 902 does not constitute a 
substantive rule because it does not affect the activities of 
fishermen. The correction of the definition of ``Science and Research 
Director'' at 50 CFR 641.2, the addition of the prohibition at 50 CFR 
641.7(s), which complements an existing requirement, and the 
clarification of the permit requirements at 50 CFR 641.7(ee) and 
641.24(g) do not constitute substantive rules because they do not 
change existing requirements. Thus, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), there 
is no need to delay the effective date of these provisions. The 
addition to the regulations at 50 CFR 641.10(c) contains administrative 
procedures necessary for timely implementation of the ITQ system. Each 
potential initial shareholder in the ITQ system was advised of these 
procedures in the proposed rule and by letter dated September 14, 1995. 
Delay in effectiveness of the administrative procedures would 
unnecessarily delay commencement of the ITQ system. Accordingly, the 
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, finds that, pursuant to 5 
U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists to waive the 30-day delay in 
effective date of 50 CFR 641.10(c). To allow time for the determination 
of initial ITQ shares and for the distribution of ITQ coupons, NMFS 
makes the provisions of this final rule requiring ITQ coupons for the 
possession of red snapper in the commercial fishery effective on April 
1, 1996.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 902

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 641

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 22, 1995.
Nancy Foster,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902 and 50 CFR 
part 641 are amended as follows:

15 CFR Chapter IX

PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE 
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS

    1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
    2. In part 902, paragraph (b) table, effective November 24, 1995 in 
the entries for 50 CFR in the right column, corresponding to entry 
641.5 in the left column, the entry ``-0013 and -0016.'' is removed and 
``-0013, -0016, and -0301.'' is added in its place; and in the left 
column, in numerical order ``641.10'' is added, and in the right 
column, in corresponding position, the entry ``-0297, -0298, and -
0299.'' is added.

50 CFR Chapter VI

PART 641--REEF FISH FISHERY OF THE GULF OF MEXICO

    3. The authority citation for part 641 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    4. In Sec. 641.1, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 641.1  Purpose and scope.

* * * * *
    (b) This part governs conservation and management of reef fish in 
the Gulf of Mexico EEZ, except that Secs. 641.5 and 641.25 also apply 
to reef fish from adjoining state waters and Sec. 641.4(a)(2) and (q) 
also apply in the manner stated therein to red snapper from adjoining 
state waters. The Gulf of Mexico EEZ extends from the U.S./Mexico 
border to the intercouncil boundary between the South Atlantic and Gulf 
of Mexico Fishery Management Councils, as specified at 50 CFR 
601.11(c). ``EEZ'' in this part refers to the EEZ in the Gulf of 
Mexico, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
    5. In Sec. 641.2, effective November 24, 1995, the definition of 
``Science and Research Director'' is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 641.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Science and Research Director means the Science and Research 
Director, Southeast Fisheries Science Center, 

[[Page 61207]]
NMFS, 75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, FL 33149, telephone: 305-361-
5761; or a designee.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec. 641.4, the first sentence of paragraph (a)(2) and the 
third sentence of paragraph (i) are revised and paragraph (q) is added 
to read as follows:


Sec. 641.4  Permits and fees.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * * A dealer who receives from a fishing vessel reef fish 
harvested from the EEZ, or red snapper from adjoining state waters 
harvested by or possessed on board a vessel with a permit issued under 
this section, must obtain an annual dealer permit. * * *
* * * * *
    (i) * * * In addition, a copy of the dealer's permit must accompany 
each vehicle that is used to pick up from a fishing vessel reef fish 
harvested from the EEZ or red snapper from adjoining state waters 
harvested by or possessed on board a vessel with a permit issued under 
this section. * * *
* * * * *
    (q) Permit conditions. (1) As a condition of a vessel permit issued 
under this section, without regard to where red snapper are harvested 
or possessed, a permitted vessel--
    (i) Must comply with the red snapper individual transferable quota 
requirements of Sec. 641.10(b).
    (ii) May not transfer red snapper at sea or receive red snapper at 
sea.
    (iii) Must maintain red snapper with head and fins intact through 
landing, and the exceptions to that requirement contained in 
Sec. 641.21(b)(3) and (b)(4) do not apply to red snapper. Such red 
snapper may be eviscerated, gilled, and scaled but must otherwise be 
maintained in a whole condition.
    (2) As a condition of a dealer permit issued under this section, 
without regard to where red snapper are harvested or possessed, a 
permitted dealer must comply with the red snapper individual 
transferable quota requirements of Sec. 641.10(b).
    7. In Sec. 641.5, paragraph (d)(3) is redesignated as paragraph 
(d)(4), paragraph (d)(2) is revised, and paragraph (d)(3) is added to 
read as follows:


Sec. 641.5  Recordkeeping and reporting.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) In any month that a red snapper is received, a dealer must 
report total poundage of red snapper received during the month, in 
whole or eviscerated weight, the average monthly price paid for red 
snapper by market size, and the proportion of total poundage landed by 
each gear type. The ``Fish House'' parts of red snapper individual 
transferable coupons, received during the month in accordance with 
Sec. 641.10(b), must be submitted with the report to the Science and 
Research Director postmarked not later than 5 days after the end of the 
month.
    (3) For reef fish other than red snapper, when requested by the 
Science and Research Director, a dealer must provide the following 
information from his/her record of reef fish received: Total poundage 
of each species received during the requested period, average monthly 
price paid for each species by market size, and proportion of total 
poundage landed by each gear type.
* * * * *
    8. In Sec. 641.7, effective November 24, 1995, paragraph (s) is 
revised and paragraph (ee) is added; and, effective April 1, 1996, 
paragraphs (g), (r), and (bb) are revised and paragraphs (ff) through 
(kk) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 641.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (g) Possess a finfish without its head and fins intact, as 
specified in Sec. 641.21(b); or a red snapper without its head and fins 
intact, as specified in Sec. 641.4(q)(1)(iii).
* * * * *
    (r) Transfer reef fish at sea, as specified in Sec. 641.24(f); or 
transfer or receive red snapper at sea, as specified in 
Sec. 641.4(q)(1)(ii).
    (s) Purchase, barter, trade, or sell, or attempt to purchase, 
barter, trade, or sell, a reef fish--
    (1) Harvested from the EEZ by a vessel that does not have a valid 
Federal permit, or
    (2) Possessed under the bag limits--as specified in Sec. 641.24(g).
* * * * *
    (bb) Receive from a fishing vessel, by purchase, trade, or barter, 
reef fish harvested from the EEZ, or red snapper from adjoining state 
waters harvested by or possessed on board a vessel with a Federal 
permit, without a dealer permit, as specified in Sec. 641.4(a)(2).
* * * * *
    (ee) Falsify information required for administration of the 
individual transferable quota (ITQ) system specified in Sec. 641.10.
    (ff) Transfer an ITQ coupon by sale without the sale price 
completed thereon, as specified in Sec. 641.10(b)(3).
    (gg) Possess red snapper in or from the EEZ, or on board a 
federally permitted vessel, in an amount exceeding the total of the ITQ 
coupons on board or without the vessel permit on board, as specified in 
Sec. 641.10(b)(4).
    (hh) Fail to--
    (1) Sign and date the ``Vessel'' part of ITQ coupons;
    (2) Enter on the ``Vessel'' part the permit number of the dealer to 
whom red snapper are transferred; or
    (3) Submit such coupon parts with the logbook forms for that 
fishing trip--as specified in Sec. 641.10(b)(5).
    (ii) Transfer red snapper harvested from the EEZ, or possessed by a 
permitted vessel, to a dealer who does not have a Federal permit, or 
fail to give a dealer the ``Fish House'' part of ITQ coupons, as 
specified in Sec. 641.10(b)(6).
    (jj) As a permitted dealer--
    (1) Receive red snapper from a vessel that does not have a reef 
fish permit;
    (2) Fail to receive the ``Fish House'' part of ITQ coupons in 
denominations at least equal to the eviscerated weight of red snapper 
received; or
    (3) Fail to properly complete the ``Fish House'' parts of ITQ 
coupons--as specified in Sec. 641.10(b)(7).
    (kk) Fail to make ITQ coupons available to an authorized officer, 
as specified in Sec. 641.10(b)(5) and (b)(7).
    9. Effective November 24, 1995, Sec. 641.10 consisting of paragraph 
(c) is added to subpart A; effective April 1, 1996, the introductory 
text and paragraphs (a) and (b) are added to read as follows:


Sec. 641.10  Red snapper individual transferable quota (ITQ) system.

    The ITQ system established by this section will remain in effect 
through March 31, 2000, during which time NMFS and the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) will evaluate the effectiveness of 
the system. Based on the evaluation, the system may be modified, 
extended, or terminated.
    (a) Percentage shares. (1) Initial percentage shares of the annual 
commercial quota of red snapper are assigned to persons in accordance 
with the procedure specified in Amendment 8 to the Fishery Management 
Plan for the Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) and in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section. Each person is 
notified by the Regional Director of his or her initial percentage 
shares. If additional shares become available to NMFS, such as by 
forfeiture pursuant to subpart F of 15 CFR part 904 for rule 
violations, such shares will be proportionately reissued to 
shareholders based on their shares as of November 1, after the 
additional shares become available. If NMFS is required to issue 
additional shares, such as may 

[[Page 61208]]
be required in the resolution of disputes, existing shares will be 
proportionately reduced. This reduction of shares will be based on 
shares as of November 1 after the required addition of shares.
    (2) All or a portion of a person's percentage shares may be 
transferred to another person who is a U.S. citizen or permanent 
resident alien. (See paragraph (c)(5) of this section for restrictions 
on the transfer of shares in the initial months under the ITQ system.) 
Transfer of shares must be reported on a form available from the 
Regional Director. The Regional Director will confirm, in writing, the 
registration of each transfer. The effective date of each transfer is 
the confirmation date provided by the Regional Director. The 
confirmation of registration date will normally be not later than 3 
working days after receipt of a properly completed transfer form. 
However, reports of share transfers received by the Regional Director 
from November 1 through December 31 will not be recorded or confirmed 
until after January 1. A fee is charged for each transfer of percentage 
shares. The amount of the fee is calculated in accordance with the 
procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook for determining the 
administrative costs of each special product or service provided by 
NOAA to non-Federal recipients. The fee may not exceed such costs and 
is specified with each transfer form. The appropriate fee must 
accompany each transfer form.
    (3) On or about January 1 each year, the Regional Director will 
provide each red snapper shareholder with a list of all red snapper 
shareholders and their percentage shares, reflecting share transfers as 
indicated on properly completed transfer forms received through October 
31. Updated lists may be obtained at other times, and by persons who 
are not red snapper shareholders, by written request to the Regional 
Director.
    (b) ITQs. (1) Annually, as soon after November 15 as the following 
year's red snapper commercial quota is established, the Regional 
Director will calculate each red snapper shareholder's ITQ in terms of 
eviscerated weight. Each ITQ is the product of the red snapper 
commercial quota, in whole weight, for the ensuing fishing year, the 
factor for converting whole weight to eviscerated weight, and each red 
snapper shareholder's percentage share, reflecting share transfers 
reported on forms received by the Regional Director through October 31.
    (2) The Regional Director will provide each red snapper shareholder 
with ITQ coupons in various denominations, the total of which equals 
his or her ITQ, and a copy of the calculations used in determining his 
or her ITQ. Each coupon will be coded to indicate the initial 
recipient.
    (3) An ITQ coupon may be transferred. If the transfer is by sale, 
the seller must enter the sale price on the coupon.
    (4) Except when the red snapper bag limit applies, red snapper in 
or from the EEZ or on board a vessel that has been issued a reef fish 
permit under Sec. 641.4 may not be possessed in an amount, in 
eviscerated weight, exceeding the total of ITQ coupons on board. (See 
Sec. 641.24(a) for applicability of the bag limit.)
    (5) Prior to termination of a trip, the operator's signature and 
the date signed must be written in ink on the ``Vessel'' part of ITQ 
coupons totaling at least the eviscerated weight of the red snapper on 
board. An owner or operator of a vessel must separate the ``Vessel'' 
part of each such coupon, enter thereon the permit number of the dealer 
to whom the red snapper are transferred, and submit the ``Vessel'' 
parts with the logbook forms for that fishing trip. An owner or 
operator of a vessel must make available to an authorized officer all 
ITQ coupons in his or her possession upon request.
    (6) Red snapper harvested from the EEZ or possessed by a vessel 
with a permit issued under Sec. 641.4 may be transferred only to a 
dealer with a permit issued under Sec. 641.4. The ``Fish House'' part 
of each ITQ coupon must be given to such dealer, or the agent or 
employee of such dealer, in amounts totaling at least the eviscerated 
weight of the red snapper transferred to that dealer.
    (7) A dealer with a permit issued under Sec. 641.4 may receive red 
snapper only from a vessel that has on board a reef fish permit issued 
under Sec. 641.4. A dealer, or the agent or employee of a dealer, must 
receive the ``Fish House'' part of ITQ coupons totaling at least the 
eviscerated weight of the red snapper received. Immediately upon 
receipt of red snapper, the dealer, or the agent or employee of the 
dealer, must enter the permit number of the vessel received from and 
date and sign each such ``Fish House'' part. The dealer must submit all 
such parts as required by Sec. 641.5(d)(2). A dealer, agent, or 
employee must make available to an authorized officer all ITQ coupons 
in his or her possession upon request.
    (c) Procedures for implementation--(1) Initial shareholders. The 
following persons are initial shareholders in the red snapper ITQ 
system:
    (i) Either the owner or operator of a vessel with a valid permit on 
August 29, 1995, provided such owner or operator had a landing of red 
snapper during the period 1990 through 1992. If the earned income of an 
operator was used to qualify for the permit that is valid on August 29, 
1995, such operator is the initial shareholder rather than the owner. 
In the case of an owner, the term ``person'' includes a corporation or 
other legal entity; and
    (ii) A historical captain. A historical captain means an operator 
who--
    (A) From November 6, 1989, through 1993, fished solely under verbal 
or written share agreements with an owner, and such agreements provided 
for the operator to be responsible for hiring the crew, who was paid 
from the share under his or her control;
    (B) Landed from that vessel at least 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) of red 
snapper per year in 2 of the 3 years 1990, 1991, and 1992;
    (C) Derived more than 50 percent of his or her earned income from 
commercial fishing, that is, sale of the catch, in each of the years 
1989 through 1993; and
    (D) Landed red snapper prior to November 7, 1989.
    (2) Initial shares. (i) Initial shares are apportioned to initial 
shareholders based on each shareholder's average of the top 2 years' 
landings in 1990, 1991, and 1992. However, no person who is an initial 
shareholder under paragraph (c)(1) of this section will receive an 
initial percentage share that will amount to less than 100 lb (45.36 
kg), whole weight, of red snapper (90 lb (41 kg), eviscerated weight).
    (ii) The percentage shares remaining after the minimum shares have 
been calculated under paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section are 
apportioned based on each remaining shareholder's average of the top 2 
years' landings in 1990, 1991, and 1992. In a case where a landing is 
associated with an owner and a historical captain, such landing is 
apportioned between the owner and historical captain in accordance with 
the share agreement in effect at the time of the landing.
    (iii) The determinations of landings of red snapper during the 
period 1990 through 1992 and historical captain status are made in 
accordance with the data collected under Amendment 9 to the FMP. Those 
data identify each red snapper landing during the period 1990 through 
1992. Each landing is associated with an owner and, when an operator's 
earned income was used to qualify for the vessel permit at the time of 
the landing, with such operator. Where appropriate, a landing is also 

[[Page 61209]]
associated with a historical captain. However, a red snapper landings 
record during that period that is associated solely with an owner may 
be retained by that owner or transferred as follows:
    (A) An owner of a vessel with a valid reef fish permit on August 
29, 1995, who transferred a vessel permit to another vessel owned by 
him or her will retain the red snapper landings record for the previous 
vessel.
    (B) An owner of a vessel with a valid reef fish permit on August 
29, 1995, will retain the landings record of a permitted vessel if the 
vessel had a change of ownership to another entity without a 
substantive change in control of the vessel. It will be presumed that 
there was no substantive change in control of a vessel if a successor 
in interest received at least a 50 percent interest in the vessel as a 
result of the change of ownership whether the change of ownership was--
    (1) From a closely held corporation to its majority shareholder;
    (2) From an individual who became the majority shareholder of a 
closely held corporation receiving the vessel;
    (3) Between closely held corporations with a common majority 
shareholder; or
    (4) From one to another of the following: Husband, wife, son, 
daughter, brother, sister, mother, or father.
    (C) In other cases of transfer of a permit through change of 
ownership of a vessel, an owner of a vessel with a valid reef fish 
permit on August 29, 1995, will receive credit for the landings record 
of the vessel before his or her ownership only if there is a legally 
binding agreement for transfer of the landings record.
    (iv) Requests for transfers of landings records must be submitted 
to the Regional Director and must be postmarked not later than December 
14, 1995.The Regional Director may require documentation supporting 
such request. After considering requests for transfers of landings 
records, the Regional Director will advise each initial shareholder or 
applicant of his or her tentative allocation of shares.
    (3) Notification of status. The Regional Director will advise each 
owner, operator, and historical captain for whom NMFS has a record of a 
red snapper landing during the period 1990 through 1992, including 
those who submitted such record under Amendment 9 to the FMP, of his or 
her tentative status as an initial shareholder and the tentative 
landings record that will be used to calculate his or her initial 
share.
    (4) Appeals. (i) A special advisory panel, appointed by the Council 
to function as an appeals board, will consider written requests from 
persons who contest their tentative status as an initial shareholder, 
including historical captain status, or tentative landings record. In 
addition to considering written requests, the board may allow personal 
appearances by such persons before the board.
    (ii) The panel is only empowered to consider disputed calculations 
or determinations based on documentation submitted under Amendment 9 to 
the FMP regarding landings of red snapper during the period 1990 
through 1992, including transfers of such landings records, or 
regarding historical captain status. In addition, the panel may 
consider applications and documentation of landings not submitted under 
Amendment 9 if, in the board's opinion, there is justification for the 
late application and documentation. The board is not empowered to 
consider an application from a person who believes he or she should be 
eligible because of hardship or other factors.
    (iii) A written request for consideration by the board must be 
submitted to the Regional Director, postmarked not later than December 
27, 1995, and must contain documentation supporting the allegations 
that form the basis for the request.
    (iv) The board will meet as necessary to consider each request that 
is submitted in a timely manner. Members of the appeals board will 
provide their individual recommendations for each appeal to the 
Council, which will in turn submit its recommendation to the Regional 
Director. The board and the Council will recommend whether the 
eligibility criteria, specified in Amendment 8 to the FMP and 
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section, were correctly applied in 
each case, based solely on the available record including documentation 
submitted by the applicant. The Council will also base its 
recommendation on the recommendations of the board. The Regional 
Director will decide the appeal based on the above criteria and the 
available record, including documentation submitted by the applicant 
and the recommendation of the Council. The Regional Director will 
notify the appellant of his decision and the reason therefor, in 
writing, normally within 45 days of receiving the Council's 
recommendation. The Regional Director's decision will constitute the 
final administrative action by NMFS on an appeal.
    (v) Upon completion of the appeal process, the Regional Director 
will issue share certificates to initial shareholders. (5) Transfers of 
shares. The following restrictions apply to the transfer of shares:
    (i) The transfer of shares is prohibited through September 30, 
1996.
    (ii) From October 1, 1996, through September 30, 1997, shares may 
be transferred only to other persons who are initial shareholders and 
are U.S. citizens or permanent resident aliens.
    10. In Sec. 641.24, effective November 24, 1995, paragraph (g) is 
revised; and, effective April 1, 1996, paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(3) are 
redesignated as paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4), respectively, in newly 
redesignated paragraph (a)(4), the reference to ``paragraph 
(a)(2)(ii)(C)'' is revised to read ``paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(C)'', and 
paragraph (a)(2) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 641.24  Bag and possession limits.

    (a) * * *
    (2) In addition, the bag limit for red snapper applies to a person 
on board a vessel with a permit specified in Sec. 641.4 when that 
vessel does not have ITQ coupons on board.
* * * * *
    (g) Sale. A reef fish harvested in the EEZ by a vessel that does 
not have a valid permit, as required by Sec. 641.4(a)(1), or possessed 
under the bag limits specified in paragraph (b) of this section, may 
not be purchased, bartered, traded, or sold, or attempted to be 
purchased, bartered, traded, or sold.
[FR Doc. 95-29102 Filed 11-24-95; 12:10 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F