[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 5, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5375-5379]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2795]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 960805216-7013-04; I.D. 121796B]
RIN 0648-AH06
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Regulatory Amendment
to the Fishery Management Plan for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black
Sea Bass Fisheries
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed rule and request for comments to
implement a regulatory amendment to the Fishery Management Plan (FMP)
for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries. This
proposed regulatory amendment would revise the allocation and
management of the commercial scup quota.
DATES: Public comments must be received on or before March 7, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed rule should be sent to Dr. Andrew
A. Rosenberg, Regional Administrator, National Marine Fisheries
Service, Northeast Regional Office, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA
01930. Mark the outside of the envelope, ``Comments on Scup Regulatory
Amendment.''
Comments regarding burden-hour estimates for collection-of-
information requirements contained in this proposed rule should be sent
to the Regional Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, at the address
above, and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 20502 (Attention: NOAA
Desk Officer).
Copies of the regulatory amendment are available upon request from
David R. Keifer, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE
19901.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regina L. Spallone, Fishery Policy
Analyst, 508-281-9221.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) and the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) adopted an FMP
for the Scup Fishery for NMFS review in November 1995. To reduce the
number of separate regulations issued by the Federal Government,
however, the proposed scup FMP was incorporated into the Summer
Flounder FMP as Amendment 8 to that FMP. Amendment 8 was approved by
NMFS on July 29, 1996 (61 FR 43420, August 23, 1996). The Commission
then adopted a plan with measures that are identical to those in
Amendment 8. The Commission plan would confer to States responsibility
of managing their quota for the scup industry in their state and can
implement and enforce landing limits. In addition, quota monitoring and
closures upon quota attainment would be state compliance measures under
the Commission plan, as stated in the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries
Cooperative Management Act.
Due to the seriously overfished status of the stock, the Council
had requested, and the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) implemented,
emergency regulations to enact a minimum mesh requirement and minimum
fish size for the fishery. These measures were in effect from March 22,
1996, until regulations implementing Amendment 8 were published on
September 23, 1996.
Amendment 8 established target annual exploitation rates for
rebuilding the stock that are to be reached through a total allowable
catch (TAC) for the scup fishery that includes both landings and
discards. The TAC is divided into a commercial TAC and a recreational
TAC. Discard estimates are then subtracted from each of those
allocations. The result is an annual
[[Page 5376]]
commercial quota and recreational harvest limit. The commercial quota
for the fishing year beginning on January 1, 1997, is allocated on a
coastwide basis. When the Council and the Commission adopted Amendment
8 for submission, they stated their intent to begin a process to better
define the system that would be used to distribute the commercial
quota. However, to begin the rebuilding of the resource, they decided
to submit Amendment 8 before the coastwide quota system was refined so
that regulations could be implemented as quickly as possible.
The current regulations allow the commercial quota system to
operate without restrictions to control the rate of harvest, e.g., trip
limits or seasonal allocations. Without specific restrictions, it is
possible that large, offshore vessels fishing in the first portion of
the year will fill the annual quota quickly, closing the fishery before
other participants have an opportunity to fish on the stock. Therefore,
the Council and the Commission have developed another system to allow
for a more equitable distribution of the quota to the commercial
sector.
The proposed measure would implement a commercial quota system in
which the TAC would be allocated into two winter periods: January-April
(45.11 percent) and November-December (15.94 percent), and one summer
period: May-October (38.95 percent). The discard estimates for each
period would be subtracted from the TAC for each period, to derive the
commercial quota for each period. The two winter periods would each be
allocated to the coastal states from Maine to North Carolina on a
coastwide basis, during which coastwide landing limits would be in
effect. During the summer period, a state-by-state quota system would
be in effect, and the quota would be managed in the same manner as the
state-by-state quota system currently in effect in the commercial
summer flounder fishery.
Issues of Concern
Concerns have been raised to NMFS about the lack of gear-specific
discard estimates that may result in inequitable treatment between the
inshore and offshore fisheries. Some argue that because the discard
estimates are based on offshore trawler discard data, and the offshore
trawler discard rates are greater than the discard rates for the
inshore fishery, this would penalize the summer inshore fishery. The
summer inshore fishery uses predominantly different gear types than the
offshore fishery. The public is encouraged to submit comments on this
issue.
NMFS also is concerned that the implication of de minimus status is
not defined in the amendment. It is not possible to ascertain what de
minimus means to a state, versus a state that does not share that
distinction, with regard to implementation of the regulations.
Therefore, NMFS invites comments on that provision.
Proposed Measures
The regulatory amendment would implement in 1997 a commercial quota
system in which the TAC would be allocated into three periods: Winter I
(January-April), Summer (May-October) and Winter II (November-
December). The discard estimates for each period would be subtracted
from the TAC for that period, to derive the commercial quota for each
period. Based on historical data, the quota would be allocated to each
period as follows: 45.11 percent to Winter I, 38.95 percent to Summer,
and 15.94 percent to Winter II. During the two winter periods, the
commercial fishery would operate under a coastwide quota with landing
limits. These landing limits would be set annually by the Monitoring
Committee. In Winter I, the coastwide landing limit may be decreased
when a specified percentage of the quota is attained for that period.
Landing limits would be specified annually through the process
established in the FMP and could not be altered once adopted by NMFS.
The quota for the two winter periods would be allocated to the coastal
states from Maine to North Carolina. Fishing for or landing scup would
be prohibited when the quota is attained. NMFS will implement the
closures for federally permitted vessels and dealers, and the states
would take complementary action for their state-permitted vessels and
dealers. As stated above, quota monitoring and closures upon quota
attainment by the states would be compliance measures enforceable by
the states.
During the Summer period, a state-by-state quota would be in
effect. Based on historical data, the quota for that period would be
allocated among the states based on their percentage share of
commercial landings from May to October for the years 1983 through
1992. Each state would be closed to the landing of scup when its
individual allocation of quota is attained. Any overages in the quota
harvest that occurs during each of the winter periods would be deducted
from that period's allocation the following year. Any overages in the
quota harvest that occurs in a state during the Summer period would be
deducted from that state's Summer period allocation the following year.
The regulatory amendment also would confer de minimus status
annually upon any state in which commercial scup landings during the
Summer period for the last preceding calendar year for which data are
available were less than 0.1 percent of the total Summer period's
quota. If implemented, this action would make the FMP, which is jointly
administered by both the Council and the Commission, consistent with
the Commission plan, which allows for such status for states. States
that have been conferred de minimus status would be allowed to harvest
up to 0.1 percent, even though they have historically harvested less
than 0.1 percent.
The coastwide quota for 1997 specified under Amendment 8 will be
implemented prior to issuance of the regulations proposed in this
regulatory amendment. (The proposed specifications for the 1997 scup
fishery were published at 61 FR 64854, December 9, 1996.) This
regulatory amendment specifies that any quota harvested during that
time in excess of the proposed 1997 Winter I allocation would be
deducted from the quota allocation for the November-December 1997
(Winter II) period. Landings in excess of both Winter 1997 periods
would be deducted from 1998 Winter periods. This action would not
affect the summer allocation in either year.
Classification
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for
the purposes of E.O. 12866.
The Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and Regulation of the
Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy the
Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities as follows:
The proposed rule would revise the manner in which the
commercial quota for the scup fishery is allocated, but would not
alter the total quota. The impact of the commercial quota on the
commercial fishery was completely described in the certification
that accompanied the proposed specifications for the 1997 scup
fishery, and is not repeated here.
Currently, regulations specify that the scup quota be allocated
to the commercial fishery on a coastwide basis. No restrictions
exist to control the rate of harvest (e.g., seasonal closures or
trip limits). Without restrictions, it is possible that the quota
would be harvested early in the year by larger, offshore vessels,
resulting in market gluts, irregular
[[Page 5377]]
supplies, and exvessel price fluctuations. Additionally, the current
system does not recognize the seasonal nature of the scup fishery
(i.e., large vessels fishing offshore in the winter, and small
vessels fishing inshore in the summer). According to the NMFS
weighout database (database), approximately 525 fishing vessels
landed scup during 1995. It is concluded that most of these were
fishing offshore. There is no estimate on the number of vessels
taking part in the inshore fishery, as they could be, for the most
part, state licensed and may not be completely represented in the
database. The database is used to estimate the numbers of
participants because prior to 1997, no permit requirement existed
for this fishery in the exclusive economic zone. However, all of the
known participants would readily fall under the definition of a
small business, having annual receipts of less than $2.0 million.
The proposed amendment endeavors to mitigate the impacts of
unrestricted harvest and untimely closures by establishing a
commercial quota system in which the total allowable catch (TAC)
would be allocated into three seasonal periods: Winter I (January-
April), Summer (May-October) and Winter II (November-December). The
discard estimates for each period would be subtracted from the TAC
for each period to derive the commercial quota for each period.
During the two winter periods, the commercial fishery would operate
under a coastwide quota with landing limits. During the summer
period, a state-by-state quota would be in effect.
While the quota for 1997 is based on reported historical
landings, no quota was ever implemented for this fishery prior to
1997. This new quota may result in the closure of the fishery,
which, if it occurs, could impact those small entities. More
complete impacts may be compiled during the comment period of the
proposed rule, which specifically requests comments on this issue.
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council concluded that a
substantial number of these small entities (greater than 20 percent)
operating in the commercial scup fishery could be directly or
indirectly affected by the measures proposed in this regulatory
amendment. However, based on available data, the economic impact of
this quota is not expected to be significant. When compared to 1994
revenues, the quota in 1997 would decrease the total revenues $1.87
million. It is not expected that any entities would be expected to
cease operations because of the 1997 quota and no change is expected
in compliance costs for these entities.
Historical data indicate that a decrease in landings generally
leads to an increase in the exvessel price for scup. The RIR
analysis for this regulatory amendment included examination of the
proposal to address the seasonal nature of the scup fishery and
allow for a more equitable distribution of commercial quota over the
year, versus the coastwide quota. The intent of this regulatory
amendment is to preserve the historical pattern of commercial
harvest of scup by seasons to reduce the impact on small entities.
The analysis found that the proposed amendment resulted in a more
consistent supply, and more stable prices for the commercial sector.
Based on unpublished NMFS weighout data (Maine through Virginia) in
1994, total commercial landings for scup were estimated at 8,840,900
lb. The 1997 quota would reduce commercial scup landings by
2,840,900 lb when compared to the 1994 commercial landings. The
effect on the overall scup exvessel price, given the potential
reduction in landings from the implementation of the quota proposed
in this amendment, would depend on the elasticity of demand for
scup. Since no study has estimated the exvessel demand function for
scup, revenue changes from the implementation of the new quota were
calculated by taking the exvessel price for scup (value divided by
pounds) for 1994, and multiplying this value by the potential change
in landings. Assuming the 1994 exvessel price of $0.66 per pound,
the 1997 quota would yield a decrease in revenues of $1,874,994 from
the 1994 period. However, based on preliminary unpublished NMFS
weighout data (Maine through Virginia), scup commercial landings
were estimated at 5,947,253 lb and valued at $5,096,863 ($0.85 per
pound) in 1995. It appears that the decrease in landings from 1994
to 1995 has increased exvessel price for scup during this period.
Given preliminary scup landings for 1995, the 1997 quota would be
expected to slightly increase exvessel revenue relative to 1994
landings.
This rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The management measure that
provides for a state request for a quota transfer has been approved by
OMB under control number 0648-0202, and is estimated to take 1 hour per
response.
The response estimate shown includes the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. Send comments to NMFS and OMB (see
ADDRESSES) regarding this burden estimate, including its accuracy,
whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of NMFS' functions, suggestions on how to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and
how to reduce or minimize the burden of the collection of information
on those who must respond.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the PRA unless that collection of information displays
a currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 30, 1997.
Rolland A. Schmitten,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. In Sec. 648.4, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.4 Vessel permits.
* * * * *
(b) Permit conditions. Vessel owners who apply for a fishing vessel
permit under this section must agree as a condition of the permit that
the vessel and the vessel's fishing activity, catch, and pertinent gear
(without regard to whether such fishing occurs in the EEZ or landward
of the EEZ, and without regard to where such fish or gear are
possessed, taken or landed), are subject to all requirements of this
part, unless exempted from such requirements under this part. All such
fishing activities, catch, and gear will remain subject to all
applicable state requirements. Except as otherwise provided in this
part, if a requirement of this part and a management measure required
by a state or local law differ, any vessel owner permitted to fish in
the EEZ for any species managed under this part must comply with the
more restrictive requirement. Owners and operators of vessels fishing
under the terms of a summer flounder moratorium, scup moratorium, or
black sea bass moratorium permit must also agree not to land summer
flounder, scup, or black sea bass, respectively, in any state after
NMFS has published a notification in the Federal Register stating that
the commercial quota for that state or period has been harvested and
that no commercial quota is available for the respective species. A
state not receiving an allocation of summer flounder, scup or black sea
bass, either directly or through a coastwide allocation, is deemed to
have no commercial quota available. Owners or operators fishing for
surf clams and ocean quahogs within waters under the jurisdiction of
any state that requires cage tags are not subject to any conflicting
Federal minimum size or tagging requirements. If a surf clam and ocean
quahog requirement of this part differs from a surf clam and ocean
quahog management measure required
[[Page 5378]]
by a state that does not require cage tagging, any vessel owners or
operators permitted to fish in the EEZ for surf clams and ocean quahogs
must comply with the more restrictive requirement while fishing in
state waters. However, surrender of a surf clam and ocean quahog vessel
permit by the owner by certified mail addressed to the Regional
Director allows an individual to comply with the less restrictive state
minimum size requirement, as long as fishing is conducted exclusively
within state waters. If the commercial black sea bass quota for a
period is harvested and the coast is closed to the possession of black
sea bass north of 35 deg.15.3' N. latitude, any vessel owners that hold
valid commercial permits for both the black sea bass and the NMFS,
Southeast Region Snapper-Grouper fisheries, may surrender their
moratorium black sea bass permit by certified mail addressed to the
Regional Director and fish pursuant to their Snapper-Grouper permit, as
long as fishing is conducted exclusively in waters, and landings are
made, south of 35 deg.15.3' N. latitude. A moratorium permit for the
black sea bass fishery that is voluntarily relinquished or surrendered
will be reissued upon the receipt of the vessel owner's written request
after a minimum period of 6 months from the date of cancellation.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 648.14, paragraphs (a)(89) through (a)(96) are
redesignated as paragraphs (a)(90) through (a)(97), respectively, and a
new paragraph (a)(89) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 648.14 Prohibitions.
(a) * * *
(89) Fish for, catch or retain scup in or from the EEZ north of
35 deg.15.3' N. lat. in excess of the landing limit established
pursuant to Secs. 648.120 (b)(2) and (b)(3).
* * * * *
4. In Sec. 648.120, paragraph (b)(1) is revised, paragraphs (b)(2)
through (b)(8) are redesignated as paragraphs (b)(5) through (b)(11),
respectively, new paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(4) are added,
paragraphs (c) and (d) are revised, and paragraphs (e) and (f) are
added to read as follows:
Sec. 648.120 Catch quotas and other restrictions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) The commercial quota for each of the three periods specified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section, to be set from a range of 0 to the
maximum allowed to achieve the specified exploitation rate. The
commercial quota will be established by estimating the annual Total
Allowable Catch (TAC), allocating it into the three periods, and
deducting the discard estimates for each period.
(2) Landing limits for the Winter I and Winter II periods.
(3) Percent of landings attained at which the landing limit for the
Winter I period will be reduced.
(4) Those states eligible for de minimus status, based upon
commercial scup landings for the last preceding calendar year for which
data are available.
* * * * *
(c) Annual fishing measures. The Demersal Species Committee shall
review the recommendations of the Scup Monitoring Committee. Based on
these recommendations and any public comment, the Demersal Species
Committee shall recommend to the MAFMC measures necessary to assure
that the specified exploitation rate will not be exceeded. The MAFMC
shall review these recommendations and, based on these recommendations
and any public comment, recommend to the Regional Director measures
necessary to assure that the specified exploitation rate will not be
exceeded. The MAFMC's recommendation must include supporting
documentation, as appropriate, concerning the environmental and
economic impacts of the recommendations. The Regional Director shall
review these recommendations and any recommendations of the Commission.
After such review, NMFS will publish a proposed rule in the Federal
Register by October 15 to implement a commercial quota, specifying the
amount of quota allocated to each of the three periods, landing limits
for the Winter I and Winter II periods, the percentage of landings
attained during the Winter I fishery at which the landing limits will
be reduced, a recreational harvest limit and additional management
measures for the commercial fishery. NMFS will publish a proposed rule
in the Federal Register by February 15 to implement additional
management measures for the recreational fishery, if the Regional
Director determines that such measures are necessary to assure that the
specified exploitation rate will not be exceeded. After considering
public comment, NMFS will publish a final rule in the Federal Register
to implement the annual measures.
(d) Distribution of Commercial Quota. (1) The annual commercial
quota will be allocated into three periods, based on the following
percentages:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter I--January-April...................................... 45.11
Summer--May-October.......................................... 38.95
Winter II--November-December................................. 15.94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) The Winter I and Winter II commercial quotas will each be
distributed to the coastal states from Maine through North Carolina on
a coastwide basis.
(3) The Summer commercial quota will be allocated to the coastal
states from Maine through North Carolina, based upon the following
percentages:
Summer Period (May-October) Commercial Quota Shares
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Share
State (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maine...................................................... 0.13042
New Hampshire.............................................. 0.00004
Massachusetts.............................................. 15.49117
Rhode Island............................................... 60.56588
Connecticut................................................ 3.39884
New York................................................... 17.05295
New Jersey................................................. 3.14307
Delaware................................................... 0.00000
Maryland................................................... 0.01288
Virginia................................................... 0.17787
North Carolina............................................. 0.02688
------------
Total................................................ 100.00000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) All scup landed for sale in any state during either Winter I or
Winter II shall be applied against the coastwide commercial quota for
that period, regardless of where the scup were harvested. All scup
landed for sale in a state during the Summer period shall be applied
against that state's summer commercial quota, regardless of where the
scup were harvested.
(5) All scup landed for sale in any state during the period January
1, 1997, through [effective date of the final regulations], shall be
applied against the coastwide commercial quota for the 1997 Winter I
period, regardless of where the scup were harvested. Any landings
during that time in excess of the 1997 Winter I commercial quota will
be subtracted from the 1997 Winter II period's allocation. Any overage
beyond the 1997 Winter II allocation will be deducted from subsequent
winter periods.
(6) Beginning in 1997, any overages of the commercial quota landed
in any state, including those granted de minimus status, during the
Summer period will be deducted from that state's Summer period quota
for the following year. Beginning in 1998, any overages of the
commercial quota landed in any Winter period will be subtracted from
the period's allocation for the following year.
[[Page 5379]]
(7) Based upon any changes in the landings data available from the
states for the base years 1983-92, the Commission and the Council may
recommend to the Regional Director that the states' shares specified in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section be revised. The Council's and the
Commission's recommendation must include supporting documentation, as
appropriate, concerning the environmental and economic impacts of the
recommendation. The Regional Director shall review the recommendation
of the Commission and the Council. After such review, NMFS will publish
a proposed rule in the Federal Register to implement a revision in the
state shares. After considering public comment, NMFS will publish a
final rule in the Federal Register to implement the changes in
allocation.
(e) De minimus status. Any state in which commercial scup landings
during the Summer period for the last preceding calendar year for which
data are available were less than 0.1 percent of the total Summer
period's quota could be granted de minimus status by the NMFS upon the
recommendation of the Council by way of a recommendation from the
Monitoring Committee.
(1) The de minimus status will be valid only for that Summer period
for which the specifications are in effect and will be effective upon
filing by NMFS of the final specifications for the commercial scup
fishery with the Office of the Federal Register.
(2) The total quota allocated to each de minimus state will be set
equal to 0.1 percent of the total Summer period allocation and will be
subtracted from the summer quota before the remainder is allocated to
the other states.
(f) Quota transfers and combinations. Any state implementing a
state commercial quota for scup may request approval from the Regional
Director to transfer part or all of its Summer period quota to one or
more states. Two or more states implementing a state commercial quota
for scup may request approval from the Regional Director to combine
their quotas, or part of their quotas, into an overall regional quota.
Requests for transfer or combination of commercial quotas for scup must
be made by individual or joint letter(s) signed by the principal state
official with marine fishery management responsibility and expertise,
or his/her previously named designee, for each state involved. The
letter(s) must certify that all pertinent state requirements have been
met and identify the states involved and the amount of quota to be
transferred or combined.
(1) Within 10 working days following the receipt of the letter(s)
from the states involved, the Regional Director shall notify the
appropriate state officials of the disposition of the request. In
evaluating requests to transfer a quota or combine quotas, the Regional
Director shall consider whether:
(i) The transfer or combination would preclude the overall Summer
period quota from being fully harvested.
(ii) The transfer addresses an unforeseen variation or contingency
in the fishery.
(iii) The transfer is consistent with the objectives of the Summer
Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP and the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
(2) The transfer of quota or the combination of quotas will be
valid only for the Summer period for which the request was made and
will be effective upon the filing by NMFS of a notification of approval
of the quota transfer or combination with the Office of the Federal
Register.
(3) A state may not submit a request to transfer quota or combine
quotas if a request to which it is party is pending before the Regional
Director. A state may submit a new request when it receives notice that
the Regional Director has disapproved the previous request or when
notification of approval of the quota transfer or combination has been
filed at the Office of the Federal Register.
(4) If there is a quota overage among states involved in the
combination of quotas at the end of the Summer period, the overage will
be deducted from the following Summer period's quota for each of the
states involved in the combined quota. The deduction will be
proportional, based on each state's relative share of the combined
quota for the previous Summer period. A transfer of quota or
combination of quotas does not alter any state's percentage share of
the overall Summer period quota specified in paragraph (d) of this
section.
5. Section 648.121 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 648.121 Closures.
(a) Winter closures. The Regional Director will monitor the harvest
of commercial quota for each Winter period based on dealer reports,
state data, and other available information, and shall determine the
date when the commercial quota for a Winter period will be harvested.
NMFS shall close the EEZ to fishing for scup by commercial vessels for
the remainder of the indicated period by publishing notification in the
Federal Register advising that, effective upon a specific date, the
commercial quota for that period has been harvested, and notifying
vessel and dealer permit holders that no commercial quota is available
for landing scup for the remainder of the period.
(b) Summer closure. The Regional Director will monitor the Summer
period state commercial quota based on dealer reports, state data, and
other available information, and shall determine the date when a state
commercial quota will be harvested. NMFS shall publish notification in
the Federal Register advising a state that, effective upon a specific
date, its Summer period commercial quota has been harvested and
notifying vessel and dealer permit holders that no Summer period
commercial quota is available for landing scup in that state for the
remainder of the period.
[FR Doc. 97-2795 Filed 2-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P