[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 30, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67714-67723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33887]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 971009242-7308-02; I.D. 091997B]
RIN 0648-AJ14
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;
Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 15; OMB Control
Numbers
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; extension of effectiveness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement the approved measures
in Amendment 15 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish
Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). Amendment 15 and this rule
replace the current commercial red snapper endorsement and trip limit
system with a system comprised of two classes of transferrable red
snapper licenses and trip limits; split the red snapper commercial
fishing season into two time periods, the first commencing February 1
with two-thirds of the annual quota available and the second commencing
on September 1 with the remainder of the annual quota available; open
the red snapper commercial fishery at noon on the first of each month
and close it at noon on the 15th of each month during the commercial
season; prohibit the possession of reef fish in excess of the bag limit
on a vessel that has on board, or is tending, a trap other than a fish,
stone crab, or spiny lobster trap; limit the harvest of greater
amberjack to the bag limit each year during March
[[Page 67715]]
through May; remove sea basses (black, bank, and rock sea bass),
grunts, and porgies from the FMP; and remove certain species from the
aggregate bag limit for reef fish. As approved in Amendment 15, the
increase in the minimum size limit for vermilion snapper, currently in
effect as an interim measure, is continued indefinitely. In addition,
this rule excludes certain species from the prohibition on their
harvest using powerheads in the stressed area and corrects and
clarifies the regulations. Finally, NMFS informs the public of the
approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of the
collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule,
publishes the OMB control number for these collections, and corrects
the list of control numbers applicable to Title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. The intended effects of this rule are to conserve
and manage the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico. This rule
also extends indefinately the effectiveness of the interim final rule
regarding vermilion snapper size limit, published September 11, 1997.
DATES: This rule is effective January 29, 1998, except that the
amendments to 15 CFR 902 and Secs. 622.4(d) and (p), and 622.7(b) are
effective December 30, 1998, and Sec. 622.34(l) is effective January 1,
1997. The interim final rule published on September 11, 1997 (62 FR
47765), which became effective September 14, 1997, through March 10,
1998, is to continue in effect indefinitely.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA)
may be obtained from the 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 Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 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 under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
On September 26, 1997, NMFS announced the availability of Amendment
15 and requested comments on the amendment (62 FR 50553). On October
23, 1997, NMFS published a proposed rule to implement the measures in
Amendment 15 and an additional measure proposed by NMFS, and requested
comments on the rule (62 FR 55205). The background and rationale for
the measures in the amendment and proposed rule are contained in the
preamble to the proposed rule and are not repeated here. On December
19, 1997, after considering the comments received on the amendment and
the proposed rule, NMFS partially approved Amendment 15. One measure
was not approved, namely, the exclusion of hogfish and queen
triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit for reef fish.
Comments and Responses
Twenty public comments on Amendment 15 and/or the proposed rule,
including a minority report signed by two Council members, were
received. Comments in support of one or more Amendment 15 measures were
submitted by 13 entities (including one fishing association), one of
which submitted a petition signed by 42 persons. Comments in opposition
to one or more Amendment 15 measures were submitted in the minority
report and by 15 entities, including two fishing associations.
Initial Allocation of Red Snapper Licenses
Comment: The minority report and one commenter objected to the
initial allocation provisions of the red snapper license system on the
basis that the proposed 2-tier system did not recognize the request of
some of the major producers (highliners) for an alternative 3-tier
system. That commenter also stated that continuation of the existing
trip limits (instead of a reduced trip limit for some vessels) does not
address excessive harvest capacity in the red snapper fishery. Another
commenter supported trip limits and endorsements but opposed issuance
of licenses. A third commenter, who participates in multiple commercial
fisheries, opposed the initial red snapper license allocation, since
those provisions preclude vessels without endorsements on March 1,
1997, from obtaining a Class 1 license and, therefore, sufficient
income to remain profitable. The minority report recommends that NMFS
not approve Amendment 15 until some solution to resolving the perceived
inequity associated with the 2-tier system is agreed upon.
One of the commenters also noted that charter vessels with red
snapper licenses could fish commercially and, thereby, continue to
exploit the red snapper resource during winter when charter business is
slow. That commenter also claimed that the initial allocation of Class
1 licenses gives an unfair advantage to endorsement holders because
they would be allowed to fish in other fisheries when the red snapper
commercial fishery is closed. Another commenter opposed the initial
allocation of Class 1 licenses to all who held endorsements on March 1,
1997, because that criterion does not specifically recognize various
levels of investment in red snapper vessels and gear by the endorsement
holders.
Response: NMFS disagrees with these comments for the following
reasons. After much debate, the Council concluded that its proposed 2-
tier red snapper commercial license limitation system was the fairest
and most equitable of the alternatives considered for meeting the
objectives of Amendment 15. The 2-tier license system provides for
equal trip limits for all endorsement holders, as under the endorsement
and trip limits system. The rejected 3-tier alternative was found to be
inequitable since that system would have significantly reduced the
landings of many of the endorsement holders. Regarding excessive
harvest capacity, Amendment 15 addresses this problem by establishing a
license limitation system that caps participation in the fishery and is
expected to reduce the number of vessels that can fish under the 200-lb
(91-kg) trip limit. The actual level of harvest is controlled by an
annual quota.
NMFS also disagrees with the comment opposing charter vessel
participation. The Council considered historical fishing practices in,
and dependence on, the fishery, as required by the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, and chose not to exclude charter vessels from an initial
allocation. Amendment 15 recognizes that some charter vessels
traditionally target red snapper for commercial harvest during the
season when charter business is slow. The Council's decision in this
regard is consistent with the FMP, which allows charter income to count
toward the earned income requirement for commercial vessel permits.
NMFS disagrees with the commenter who claimed that the initial
allocation of Class 1 licenses gives unfair advantage to endorsement
holders, who would receive Class 1 licenses, because they will be
allowed to fish in other
[[Page 67716]]
fisheries when the commercial red snapper fishery is closed. The
license limitation system makes no changes in the provisions of the
current endorsement and trip limits system that allow an endorsement
holder to participate freely in other fisheries, regardless of whether
the commercial red snapper fishery is open. Also, neither the
endorsement and trip limits system nor the license limitation system
differentiate between Class 1 and Class 2 license holders with regard
to their ability to participate in other fisheries. Furthermore, all
Class 1 license holders must comply with the same trip limits
regardless of whether they participate in other fisheries. Finally,
NMFS believes that Class 1 and Class 2 license holders should be
allowed equally to enter other fisheries in compliance with applicable
regulations regardless of whether the commercial red snapper fishery is
closed.
NMFS agrees with the comment that the initial allocation criterion
for a Class 1 license does not specifically address the level of
investment in gear or vessels. However, to obtain a Class 1 license, an
applicant must possess an endorsement on March 1, 1997. Eligibility for
such an endorsement was based on the level of historical participation
in the fishery, which presumably reflects, to some degree, varying
levels of investment in the fishery. Therefore, the Council and NMFS
determined that this criterion for participation in the fishery was
appropriate.
Comment: Another commenter stated that those individuals who will
meet the eligibility criteria for the initial allocation of Class 1
licenses under Amendment 15 constitute a different group than those who
would be participating in a future referendum for an individual fishing
quota (IFQ) program for red snapper on or after October 1, 2000, under
the provisions of section 407(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. That
commenter also questioned whether the Amendment 15 criterion for a
Class 1 license (i.e., holder of a red snapper endorsement on March 1,
1997, or a qualified historical captain) is consistent with
Congressional intent regarding who would be eligible to vote in this
referendum (section 407(c) limits referendum voting eligibility to
persons who held a reef fish permit with a red snapper endorsement on
September 1, 1996, and to vessel captains who harvested red snapper in
a commercial fishery using such endorsement in each red snapper fishing
season between January 1, 1993, and September 1, 1996).
Response: The initial allocation criteria for a Class 1 license
under Amendment 15 are not related, nor intended to be related, to the
universe of persons that would be eligible to vote in the IFQ
referendum provided for under section 407(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. NMFS has determined that the initial allocation provisions of
Amendment 15 are consistent with the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. Any subsequent Council or NMFS consideration of IFQ programs for
red snapper will be consistent with section 407(c).
Comment: Three comments (one was signed by two persons) supported
the initial allocation provisions as fair and equitable.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Historical Captains
Comment: Two commenters opposed initial allocations of red snapper
Class 1 licenses to historical captains, based on the belief that this
allowance would cause shorter seasons and lower red snapper prices by
allowing additional fishermen to compete for the resource. Another
commenter stated that issuance of two licenses (a license to a
historical captain and a license to the owner who were involved in the
operation of the same vessel) would unfairly penalize other types of
participants who would be issued one license (such as an owner-
operator).
Response: Approximately seven historical captains are expected to
obtain a Class 1 license. This would not substantially increase the
number of licenses so as to significantly shorten the season or
unfairly penalize other types of participants.
Comment: One comment supported the historical captain provisions as
being fair and equitable.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Red Snapper License Transfers
Comment: A commenter opposed providing for license transfers
following the initial allocation process, based on the belief that this
measure would cause shorter seasons and lower red snapper prices.
Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment and supports providing
for license transfers. License transfers simplify entry into, and exit
from, the fishery and thereby promote efficient fishing operations. As
a result, approval of this measure will provide economic benefits that
should outweigh any costs associated with decreases in red snapper
prices.
Limitation on Ownership of Red Snapper Licenses
Comment: A commenter opposed the Council's preferred alternative
regarding ownership of licenses by one entity (i.e., no limitation on
ownership by one entity) on the grounds that no limitation could lead
to a monopoly in a very short time.
Response: The Council fully considered the question of whether some
limitation should be imposed to try to prevent monopolies from
controlling the fishery, and determined that, even in the absence of
such limitations, fishing operations linked to individuals should
continue to dominate the fishery. NMFS believes that other existing
Federal laws are adequate to address monopolies.
Annual Fishing Season Opening Dates
Comments: A commenter opposed the September 1 starting date for the
commercial season, based on his belief that September is the peak time
for red snapper aggregation and spawning. Two other commenters
preferred an October 1 start for the fall season.
Response: NMFS disagrees with the comment that an October 1
starting date should be used. NMFS stock assessments indicate that the
peak aggregation and spawning period for red snapper typically is June
through August. The Council selected the September 1 date for opening
the fall season in part to afford fishermen higher revenues when
product demand is relatively high. The Council's selection of the
September 1 opening date, rather than a later date, also considered the
ability of fishing vessels to operate in more favorable weather
conditions, thus reducing vessel safety concerns. For these reasons,
NMFS approved the opening date selected by the Council.
Comment: Three comments supported this measure.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Red Snapper Harvest Periods
Comments: Two comments indicated that the proposed 15-day red
snapper commercial harvest periods (15-day harvest periods) would
encourage fishing in bad weather. Four commenters indicated that the
15-day harvest period in 1997 caused waste of fish and reduced prices
due to the associated increases in rate of harvest and, therefore,
opposed the 15-day harvest periods under Amendment 15. One commenter
recommended alternatives that were considered under Amendment 15 but
rejected by the Council. The minority report reiterated the need for
compatible state and
[[Page 67717]]
Federal regulations and cooperative state and Federal enforcement to
provide successful management results.
Response: The Council considered available information pertinent to
this measure, including public comment and NMFS analyses predicting
that total revenues generated by a series of mini-derbies (during the
15-day harvest periods) would be lower than generated under continuous
fishing without such short, intermittent, harvest periods. The Council
voted for the 15-day harvest periods to distribute landings over a
greater portion of the year, alleviating to some extent the economic
effects of a derby fishery. Also, the closed fishery periods between
harvest periods will allow for vessel repair and maintenance. Such
maintenance should improve safety and avoid the higher repair costs
that can occur when normal, preventive maintenance is postponed.
Comments opposing the 15-day harvest periods are based on very
limited experience during the 1997 fishing year, which involved open
harvest periods of September 1-15 and October 1-6. NMFS believes that
this experience is not an adequate basis for evaluating the
effectiveness of this measure. NMFS has approved this measure but will
monitor its effectiveness and, in cooperation with the Council, will
make future adjustments if necessary. Regarding the minority report's
concerns about enforceability, NMFS and the Council will request that
the Gulf states issue compatible regulations to aid in enforcement.
Limitation of the Possession of Reef Fish Caught in Traps That Are not
Fish Traps, Spiny Lobster Traps, or Stone Crab Traps
Comment: Two comments supported this measure.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Vermilion Snapper Minimum Size Limit
Comment: A fishing association, representing 28 red snapper
endorsement holders, opposed the 10-inch (25.4-cm) vermilion snapper
minimum size limit because of adverse impacts expected from the
associated undersized fish release mortality.
Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment, and supports this
measure. The measure responds to stock assessment information that the
vermilion snapper resource, while not currently overfished, is
undergoing overfishing based on decreasing trends in overall catch,
mean size of individual fish, catch-per-unit-effort, and estimated
numbers of age-1 fish in the population. The assessment considered the
effects of release mortality of undersized fish and determined that the
10-inch (25.4-cm) minimum size limit would reduce fishing mortality,
increase the vermilion snapper spawning potential ratio (SPR), and,
thereby, improve the status of the resource.
Comment: One comment supported the vermilion snapper size limit
measure based on the belief that vermilion snapper less than 10 inches
(25.4 cm) have low yield of meat. A second comment supported the
measure as an appropriate measure to address overfishing.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Removal of Sea Basses, Grunts, and Porgies from the FMP
Comment: The minority report stated that the Council acted to
remove sea basses (black, bank, and rock sea bass), grunts, and porgies
without regard to (1) the Council's Scientific and Statistical
Committee's (SSC) recommendations that these species should be under
FMP management, and (2) the SSC's statement that this measure is not
based on the best available scientific information. A commenter opposed
this measure on the basis that there is no substantive rationale for
approval by NMFS. The commenter noted that the proposed removal of
species from the FMP would prevent timely implementation of Federal
management measures to protect sea basses, grunts, and porgies. The
commenter asked that these species be kept in the FMP even though this
action may make processing of Amendment 15 more complicated.
Response: The SSC's concerns appear to be predicated on an
assumption that the removal of these species from the FMP would result
in no management or in ineffective management. This is not the case.
Management would be deferred to Florida. The Council fully considered
the SSC's recommendations prior to its vote on this measure. Amendment
15 and the preamble to the proposed rule provide a substantive
rationale for this measure and explain that returning management of
these species to Florida poses minimal risk to the resources. The
Council concluded, and NMFS agrees, that these species would be most
appropriately managed by Florida. The Florida Marine Fisheries
Commission (FMFC) has expressed an intent to manage the fisheries for
these species, which primarily occur off Florida. NMFS acknowledges
that impacts to fishery resources due to unrestricted harvest could
occur during the interim period (after sea basses, grunts, and porgies
are removed from the FMP, and prior to Florida's management of those
species). However, since the interim period is expected to be of very
short duration, any such impacts are not expected to be substantial.
Although Florida cannot regulate out-of-state vessels operating in
the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) unless those vessels land fish in
Florida, the threat of overfishing these species by vessels registered
outside Florida is minimal for two reasons. First, landings of these
species are insignificant outside Florida. Second, given the relatively
low value of these species, the economic incentive for harvest in the
EEZ off Florida by out-of-state vessels not landing in that state is
small. NMFS, therefore, disagrees with the opposing comments and
approved the removal of sea basses, grunts, and porgies from the FMP as
a rational management policy decision.
Comment: Two comments supported this measure.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Greater Amberjack Seasonal Harvest Restriction
Comment: A commenter representing a commercial fishing association,
a commenter representing a fish house and various fishery participants,
and the minority report opposed the greater amberjack spawning seasonal
harvest restriction as unnecessary and inconsistent with the NMFS stock
assessment, showing a 34-percent SPR. Another commenter noted
individual Council member's objections to this measure, and provided
biological information on greater amberjack migration and harvest
patterns. The minority report noted that the SSC recommended that this
measure be deferred until FMP Amendment 16. The minority report also
stated that the Council did not follow those recommendations and,
therefore, did not use the best available information.
Response: Given the uncertainty associated with the NMFS stock
assessment, and based on recent data showing declines in average size
and landings of greater amberjack, the Council and the Reef Fish Stock
Assessment Panel determined that the stock assessment is overly
optimistic. The Council and NMFS believe the greater amberjack spawning
seasonal harvest restriction is necessary to reduce fishing mortality,
ensure that commercial effort does not negate stock rebuilding
resulting from the recent recreational bag limit reduction, and provide
more equitable sharing of the burden of stock rebuilding between the
recreational and commercial sectors. This measure was found by the
Southeast Fisheries Science Center
[[Page 67718]]
(SEFSC) to be based on the best available scientific information. The
Council properly considered the SSC's recommendations prior to its vote
on the greater amberjack spawning seasonal harvest restriction. NMFS
believes that the biological information provided by the commenter does
not alter the need for a spawning seasonal harvest restriction.
Accordingly, NMFS disagrees with these comments and supports this
measure.
Comment: Six comments (including one from a fishing association)
support this measure.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Removal of Species Not in the Management Unit From the Aggregate Bag
Limit for Reef Fish
Comment: Three public comments and the minority report opposed
removal of hogfish from the 20-fish aggregate bag limit. The first
public commenter, a commercial fisherman who also owns a wholesale fish
house, stated that hogfish is heavily targeted in the recreational
sector, primarily using spear guns, and is one of the easiest species
to take with that gear. The comment included trade journal data that
predicted a large increase in the size of the diving/snorkeling
industry. The commenter concluded that hogfish would be adversely
impacted by allowing unlimited recreational catches. The commenter also
stated that this measure would encourage illegal sales of reef fish
caught under the recreational bag limit.
A second commenter opposed excluding hogfish and queen triggerfish
since those two species are overfished and scarce. A third commenter
supported the Council's rejected Alternative 1 that would either (1)
remove pinfish and sand perch from the aggregate bag limit, or (2)
remove pinfish and sand perch but make the removal of other species
subject to review by the Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel.
Response: NMFS agrees with the commenters who noted the possibility
of overfishing if hogfish and queen triggerfish are removed from the
aggregate bag limit. Based on its review of the three opposing
comments, the minority report, the SSC recommendations, and other
available information, NMFS disapproved the removal of hogfish and
queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit as a means of helping to
prevent overfishing of these species, as discussed above. Disapproval
of the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag
limit is consistent with national standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act that requires conservation and management measures to prevent
overfishing.
Comment: Three public comments supported removal of sand perch and
dwarf sand perch from the 20-fish aggregate bag limit.
Response: NMFS concurs.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
The implementation procedure for the initial issue of red snapper
licenses is revised by changing ``appeals'' to ``reconsideration'' at
Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(ii). The change in terminology is warranted because
the procedure describes the means by which a person may have the
Regional Administrator reconsider his initial determination of
eligibility for historical captain status or a Class 2 license. In
addition, Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(ii) is reordered for clarity and to remove
redundancy. To provide adequate time for an owner to collect and submit
information pertinent to his or her eligibility for a red snapper
license, the deadline date for submission of a copy of a legally
binding agreement under which an owner retained the landings record of
a previously owned vessel is delayed to January 30, 1998. Similarly,
the deadline date for the submission of a request for reconsideration
of NMFS' initial determination of eligibility for historical captain
status or for a Class 2 red snapper license is delayed until February
10, 1998. However, a person submitting such agreement or request after
January 6 and 13, respectively, will not be assured of receiving a red
snapper license before the commercial fishery for red snapper opens on
February 1, 1998.
Section 622.34(l) is revised to clarify that, after the
recreational quota for red snapper is reached, during a seasonal
closure (i.e., during a mid- to end-of-month closure) of the commercial
fishery for red snapper, possession of red snapper in or from the Gulf
of Mexico and in the Gulf of Mexico on board a vessel for which a
commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, without regard to
where such red snapper were harvested, is limited to zero. This
provision is in accordance with the possession limit applicable to the
commercial fishery for red snapper when a quota closure is in effect.
As discussed above, hogfish and queen triggerfish are not excluded
from the aggregate bag limit for reef fish. A change from the proposed
rule is made at Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(v).
NMFS also is making the following technical amendments, which were
not included in the proposed rule:
(1) In 15 CFR 902.1(b), in the listing of sections in title 50 of
the CFR where information collection requirements are located, the
entry ``622.10'' is redesignated to read ``622.8'' and the entry for
``641.4'' is removed. There currently are no regulations at 50 CFR
641.4.
(2) In 50 CFR 622.34(c), the reference to Figures 1 and 2 to this
part is removed and, in 50 CFR 622.34(g), the reference to Figures 3
and 4 to this part is removed. The regulations do not include Figures 1
through 4 to this part.
(3) In 50 CFR 622.43(a)(5), the reference ``Sec. 622.44(a),''
applicable to the trip limits for golden tilefish and snowy grouper in
the snapper-grouper fishery off the southern Atlantic states, is
corrected to read ``Sec. 622.44(c).''
(4) For clarity, at 50 CFR 622.39(b)(1)(ii), NMFS is explicitly
excluding Nassau grouper from the bag limit for groupers, combined,
applicable to the fishery for reef fish in the Gulf of Mexico. As
specified at 50 CFR 622.32(b)(2)(iii), a Nassau grouper in or from the
Gulf of Mexico exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is a prohibited species.
As such, a Nassau grouper may not be harvested or possessed in or from
the Gulf EEZ and, if caught in the Gulf EEZ, must be released
immediately with a minimum of harm. Accordingly, the exclusion of
Nassau grouper from the bag limit is not a substantive change in the
regulations.
Classification
The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, with the
concurrence of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA),
determined that the approved measures of Amendment 15 are necessary for
the conservation and management of the reef fish fishery of the Gulf of
Mexico and that, with the exception of the measure that was not
approved, Amendment 15 is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and
other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
NMFS prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA). The
FRFA concludes that a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities will result from implementation of Amendment
15. A summary of the FRFA follows.
The need for this rule is based on several problems that provided
the basis for Amendment 15. The first is that the existing endorsement
system for commercial red snapper fishermen needs to be replaced with
management that complies with recent Congressional action and also
achieves the FMP's objectives.
[[Page 67719]]
Other fishery problems include the use by some persons of blue crab
traps to target reef fish in the EEZ off the Big Bend area of Florida,
the overfishing of vermilion snapper under an 8-inch (20.3-cm) minimum
size limit, a need to address the Council's concern that Florida's
management of sea basses, grunts, and porgies would be more effective
than Federal management, concerns about declines in the greater
amberjack abundance and inequitable sharing of the burden of stock
rebuilding between the recreational and commercial sectors, and the
need to remove certain species not in the management unit from the
aggregate bag limit to relieve unintended burdens of limiting species
commonly used for bait. NMFS found that overfishing problems would
exist with the proposed removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from
the aggregate bag limit.
The following summarizes issues raised by public comments,
summarizes the agency's response to such issues, and describes any
changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments:
A number of public comments addressed negative economic impacts
that the commenters felt would occur as a result of implementing the
red snapper license limitation program and associated fishing season
provisions. The comments generally indicated that those measures would
not resolve existing problems of excessive harvest capacity, derby
fishing, vessel safety, lowered prices for red snapper, and a high
level of bycatch mortality. Several commenters favored a three-tier red
snapper license limitation system rather than a two-tier system.
However, such a system would provide highliners with unjust economic
benefits. NMFS considered these comments and has approved these
measures to provide net economic benefits (compared to status quo).
Other comments opposed the greater amberjack provision as
unnecessary and inconsistent with recent stock assessment information.
The Council and NMFS disagree with these comments and have approved
this measure, for the reasons previously stated.
A commenter opposed removal of sea basses, grunts, and porgies from
the FMP, which he felt prevents timely implementation of appropriate
Federal management measures. NMFS reviewed this issue and determined
that Florida intends to implement measures in a timely manner that
would be more effective than the Federal management regime. The interim
period (after sea basses, grunts, and porgies are removed from the FMP,
and prior to Florida's management of those species) is expected to be
of very short duration and, therefore, should not adversely impact the
status of these species.
Two other comments support disapproval of the provision for removal
of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit. This
disapproval was recommended to prevent reported overfishing. The
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) and Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR) did not address this issue.
Several comments also support removal of the sand perch species
from the bag limit. NMFS agrees with the public comments and similar
concerns expressed by the SEFSC. It has approved the removal of dwarf
sand perch and sand perch from the aggregate bag limit and disapproved
the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from that measure.
Approximately 1,424 commercial reef fish permit holders are active
in the fishery. All of these are expected to be affected to some degree
by each measure in the final rule. The average small business entity
operates with a fishing vessel that has a length of 38 ft (11.6 m), has
a current estimated resale value of $52,817, provides $52,000 in annual
gross sales of reef fish and other species, and produces an annual net
income of $12,000. Additionally, an estimated 838 small entities that
operate charter vessel businesses and an additional 92 headboat
operations will be affected by portions of the rule.
The public burden of compliance associated with all aspects of this
rule is estimated to cost the industry $35,000 annually, but only a
very small portion of this amount would be associated with changed
reporting and recordkeeping requirements. No additional professional
skills are required to comply with the final rule.
Several alternatives were considered as ways to meet the FMP
objectives. With respect to the license limitation program, the status
quo (i.e., no license management system in 1998) is not considered a
viable alternative since that would clearly result in major adverse
economic impacts on fishery participants. The Council considered
various provisions to establish and maintain the license limitation
system. The Council rejected between one to ten alternatives for each
preferred alternative under these provisions. The general finding of
the IRFA and RIR was that, while some of the implementation
alternatives would differ slightly in terms of overall changes in
economic impacts, the distribution of impacts would vary in all cases.
However, regarding the red snapper fishing seasons, the Council
considered information that two rejected alternatives were deemed
superior, in terms of economic impacts. Both of these rejected
alternatives would have provided one continuous commercial red snapper
monthly period, as opposed to the 15-day monthly seasons proposed in
Amendment 15. The Council selected, and NMFS approved, the 15-day
seasons to provide an interval between open periods for vessel repair
and preventive maintenance and, thereby, enhance safety.
The Council rejected two alternatives to the proposal to prohibit
the possession of reef fish in excess of the bag limit that were
harvested in a trap other than a fish, stone crab, or spiny lobster
trap. One of these alternatives would have specified an allowable
commercial catch of reef fish as a percentage of the other target
species on board. The other rejected alternative is status quo. Both of
these alternatives were rejected on the basis that neither one resolves
the problem described in Amendment 15.
Regarding the vermilion snapper minimum size limit (currently 10
inches (25.4 cm) by interim rule), the alternative 8-inch (20.3-cm)
size limit was determined to allow further overfishing and, therefore,
was rejected. Another rejected alternative proposed a 12-inch (30.5-cm)
size limit. This was rejected based on the substantial revenue
reduction on both the commercial vessels and for-hire vessels which
could lose as much as 25 percent and 69 percent in landings.
The Council considered only status quo as an alternative to
removing sea basses, grunts, and porgies from Federal management. The
Council rejected status quo on the basis that Florida could provide
more effective management of those species.
In regards to the greater amberjack harvest restriction, both
rejected alternatives were less restrictive and would have less adverse
short-term economic impacts on fishing participants. The Council
rejected those alternatives as not sufficiently reducing fishing
mortality or ensuring that the commercial harvest does not reverse the
stock rebuilding from the recent bag limit reduction.
The rejected alternatives regarding the exclusion of species from
the aggregate bag limit include the status quo (no revision to the list
of species subject to the aggregate bag limit). Status quo was rejected
because it would not resolve the unintended consequences of that limit.
In addition, a rejected alternative specified that either (1) pinfish
and sand
[[Page 67720]]
perch be removed from the aggregate bag limit, or (2) pinfish and sand
perch be removed, but the removal of other species be subject to review
by the Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel. Amendment 15 indicates that
this alternative would have roughly the same impact as the proposed
measure. NMFS has determined that removing hogfish and queen
triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit would have provided short-term
revenue increases for a number of persons who reportedly would then
harvest larger quantities of those species. However, NMFS believes that
the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag
limit could lead to overfishing followed by a relatively larger decline
in net economic benefits.
Copies of the FRFA are 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 (PRA) unless that collection of information
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
This rule contains two new, one-time collection-of-information
requirements subject to the PRA--namely, the submission of copies of
agreements whereby the seller and purchaser of a vessel agreed that a
vessel's record of landings would not be transferred to the purchaser
and the submission of requests for reconsideration of the Regional
Administrator's initial determination of eligibility for historical
captain status or a Class 2 red snapper license. These collections of
information have been approved by OMB under OMB control number 0648-
0336. The public reporting burdens for these collections of information
are estimated at 15 and 45 minutes per response, respectively,
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collections of information. This rule continues in effect
the collection-of-information requirement associated with the transfer
or renewal of commercial red snapper endorsements, which would be
applied to commercial red snapper licenses under Amendment 15. This
collection of information is currently approved under OMB control
number 0648-0205. Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any
other aspect of the data requirements, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES).
The technical amendments in this rule, discussed under Changes From
the Proposed Rule, correct and clarify the regulations and do not
require any changes in fishing practices. Accordingly, the AA, under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B), for good cause, finds that providing prior notice and
an opportunity for public comment on the technical amendments are
unnecessary in that they would serve no useful purpose.
The current seasonal closures and trip limits applicable to the
commercial fishery for red snapper expire December 31, 1997. Unless
replaced in a timely manner, the commercial fishery would open on
January 1, 1998, without trip limits, thus subverting the intended
effects of the new seasonal closures and trip limits, as discussed in
Amendment 15 and in the preamble to the proposed rule. Under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3), the AA, for good cause, finds that it would be contrary to
the public interest to delay for the full 30 days the effective date of
Sec. 622.34(l), which closes the commercial fishery for red snapper
from January 1 to noon on February 1. Accordingly, Sec. 622.34(l) is
effective January 1, 1998.
As explained in Amendment 15 and in the preamble to the proposed
rule, the commercial red snapper license and trip limit system will
replace the current endorsement and trip limit system, which expires
December 31, 1997. Implementation of the new system before the
commercial fishery opens at noon on February 1, 1998, requires
initiation of the application process for red snapper licenses as soon
as possible. The procedures for initial implementation of the license
system are at Sec. 622.4(p). Directly related to initial implementation
are the fees for applying for a commercial red snapper license and the
prohibition on falsifying information on an application at
Sec. 622.4(d) and Sec. 622.7(b), respectively, and the OMB control
numbers for the two new, one-time collection-of-information
requirements contained in 15 CFR 902.1(b). These sections authorize
NMFS to administratively implement the commercial red snapper license
and trip limit system. The regulations allow submission of information
regarding the retention of landings records through January 30, 1998,
and a request for reconsideration of an initial eligibility
determination through February 10, 1998, thus providing at least 30
days before submissions are required. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the AA,
for good cause, finds that it would be unnecessary and contrary to the
public interest to delay for 30 days the effective date of
Secs. 622.4(d) and (p), 622.7(b), and 15 CFR 902.1(b). Accordingly,
these paragraphs and the amendments to 15 CFR 902.1(b) are effective
December 30, 1997. To aid owners, operators, and historical captains in
obtaining red snapper licenses prior to February 1, 1998, NMFS has
already made its initial determinations of eligibility for initial red
snapper licenses, based on NMFS' records, and has advised owners,
operators, and potential historical captains of such determinations, as
specified at Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(i).
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 902
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
50 CFR Part 622
Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Virgin Islands.
Dated: December 22, 1997.
David L. Evans,
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 622 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. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 902.1, paragraph (b) table,
under 50 CFR, the entries for ``622.4'', ``622.10'', and ``641.4'' are
removed, and the following entries are added in numerical order to read
as follows:
Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
CFR part or section where the Current OMB control
information collection number (all numbers
requirement is located begin with 0648-)
* * * * * * *
50 CFR
* * * * * * *
622.4 -0205 and -0336
* * * * * * *
622.8 -0205
* * * * * * *
[[Page 67721]]
50 CFR Chapter VI
PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC
3. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
4. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 622.4, paragraphs (d) and
(p) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.4 Permits and fees.
* * * * *
(d) Fees. A fee is charged for each application for a permit,
license, or endorsement submitted under this section, for each request
for transfer or replacement of such permit, license, or endorsement,
and for each fish trap or sea bass pot identification tag required
under Sec. 622.6(b)(1)(i). The amount of each fee is calculated in
accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook, available
from the RD, for determining the administrative costs of each special
product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified
with each application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each
application, request for transfer or replacement, or request for fish
trap/sea bass pot identification tags.
* * * * *
(p) Gulf red snapper licenses--(1) Class 1 licenses. To be eligible
for the 2,000-lb (907-kg) trip limit for Gulf red snapper specified in
Sec. 622.44(e)(1), a vessel must have been issued both a valid
commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish and a valid Class 1 Gulf
red snapper license, and such permit and license must be on board.
(2) Class 2 licenses. To be eligible for the 200-lb (91-kg) trip
limit for Gulf red snapper specified in Sec. 622.44(e)(2), a vessel
must have been issued both a valid commercial vessel permit for Gulf
reef fish and a valid Class 2 Gulf red snapper license, and such permit
and license must be on board.
(3) Operator restriction. An initial Gulf red snapper license that
is issued for a vessel based on the qualification of an operator or
historical captain is valid only when that operator or historical
captain is the operator of the vessel. When applicable, this operator
restriction is shown on the license.
(4) Transfer of Gulf red snapper licenses. A red snapper license
may be transferred independently of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf
reef fish. To request the transfer of a red snapper license, complete
the transfer information on the reverse of the license and return it to
the RD.
(5) Initial issue of Gulf red snapper licenses--(i) Class 1
licenses. (A) An initial Class 1 license will be issued for the vessel
specified by the holder of a valid red snapper endorsement on March 1,
1997, and to a historical captain. In the event of death or disability
of such holder between March 1, 1997, and the date Class 1 licenses are
issued, a Class 1 license will be issued for the vessel specified by
the person to whom the red snapper endorsement was transferred.
(B) Status as a historical captain is based on information
collected under Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef
Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) (59 FR 39301, August 2,
1994). A historical captain is an operator who--
(1) 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;
(2) 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;
(3) 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
(4) Landed red snapper prior to November 7, 1989.
(ii) Class 2 licenses. (A) An initial Class 2 license will be
issued for the vessel specified by an owner or operator whose income
qualified for a commercial vessel permit for reef fish that was valid
on March 1, 1997, and such owner or operator was the person whose
earned income qualified for a commercial vessel permit for reef fish
that had a landing of red snapper during the period from January 1,
1990, through February 28, 1997.
(B) For the purpose of paragraph (p)(5)(ii)(A) of this section,
landings of red snapper are as recorded in the information collected
under Amendment 9 to the FMP (59 FR 39301, August 2, 1994) for the
period 1990 through 1992 and in fishing vessel logbooks, as required
under Sec. 622.5(a)(1)(ii), received by the SRD not later than March
31, 1997, for the period from January 1, 1993, through February 28,
1997.
(C) A vessel's red snapper landings record during the period from
January 1, 1990, through February 28, 1997, is retained by the owner at
the time of the landings if the vessel's permit was transferred to
another vessel owned by him or her. When a vessel has had a change of
ownership and concurrent transfer of its permit, the vessel's red
snapper landings record is credited to the owner of that vessel on
March 1, 1997, unless there is a legally binding agreement under which
a previous owner retained the landings record. An owner who claims such
retention of a landings record must submit a copy of the agreement to
the RD postmarked or hand delivered not later than January 30, 1998.
However, an owner who submits a copy of such agreement after January 6,
1998, is not assured that a red snapper license will be issued before
the opening of the commercial fishery for red snapper on February 1,
1998.
(6) Implementation procedures--(i) Initial notification. The RD
will notify each owner of a vessel that had a valid permit for Gulf
reef fish on March 1, 1997, each operator whose earned income qualified
for a valid permit on that date, and each potential historical captain
of his or her eligibility for a Class 1 or Class 2 red snapper license.
Initial determinations of eligibility will be based on NMFS' records of
red snapper endorsements, red snapper landings during the period from
January 1, 1990, through February 28, 1997, and applications for
historical captain status under Amendment 9 to the FMP (59 FR 39301,
August 2, 1994). An owner, operator, or potential historical captain
who concurs with NMFS' initial determination of eligibility need take
no further action. Each owner, operator, and historical captain who is
initially determined to be eligible will be issued an appropriate
license not later than January 23, 1998.
(ii) Reconsideration. (A) An owner, operator, or potential
historical captain who does not concur with NMFS' initial determination
of eligibility for historical captain status or for a Class 2 red
snapper license may request reconsideration of that initial
determination by the RD.
(B) A written request for reconsideration must be submitted to the
RD postmarked or hand delivered not later than February 10, 1998, and
must provide written documentation supporting the basis for
reconsideration. However, an owner who submits such request after
January 13, 1998, is not assured that a red snapper license will be
issued before the opening of the commercial fishery for red snapper on
February 1, 1998. Upon request by the owner, operator, or potential
historical captain, the RD will forward the initial determination, the
request for reconsideration, and pertinent records to a committee
consisting of the principal state officials who are members of the
GMFMC, or their
[[Page 67722]]
designees. An owner, operator, or potential historical captain may
request to make a personal appearance before the committee in his or
her request for reconsideration. If an owner, operator, or potential
historical captain requests that his or her request be forwarded to the
committee, such a request constitutes the applicant's written
authorization under section 402(b)(1)(F) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) for
the RD to make available to the committee members such confidential
catch and other records as are pertinent to the matter under
reconsideration.
(C) Members of the committee will provide their individual
recommendations for each application for reconsideration referred to
the committee to the RD. The committee may only deliberate whether the
eligibility criteria specified in paragraph (p)(5) of this section were
applied correctly in the applicant's case, based solely on the
available record, including documentation submitted by the applicant.
Neither the committee nor the RD may consider whether a person should
have been eligible for historical captain status or a Class 2 license
because of hardship or other factors. The RD will make a final decision
based on the initial eligibility criteria in paragraph (p)(5) of this
section and the available record, including documentation submitted by
the applicant, and, if the request is considered by the committee, the
recommendations and comments from each member of the committee. The RD
will notify the applicant of the decision and the reason therefore, in
writing, within 15 days of receiving the recommendations of the
committee members. If the application is not considered by the
committee, the RD will provide such notification within 15 days of the
RD's receipt of the request for reconsideration. The RD's decision will
constitute the final administrative action by NMFS on an application
for reconsideration.
5. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.4, paragraph (a)
introductory text, paragraph (a)(2) heading, and paragraphs (a)(2)(ix),
(g), and (i) through (l) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.4 Permits and fees.
(a) Permits required. To conduct activities in fisheries governed
in this part, valid permits, licenses, and endorsements are required as
follows:
* * * * *
(2) Commercial vessel permits, licenses, and endorsements.
* * * * *
(ix) Gulf red snapper. For a person aboard a vessel for which a
commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued to retain
red snapper under the trip limits specified in Sec. 622.44(e)(1) or
(2), a Class 1 or Class 2 Gulf red snapper license must have been
issued to the vessel and must be on board. See paragraph (p) of this
section regarding initial issue of red snapper licenses.
* * * * *
(g) Transfer. A vessel permit, license, or endorsement or dealer
permit issued under this section is not transferable or assignable,
except as provided in paragraph (m) of this section for a commercial
vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, paragraph (n) of this section for a
fish trap endorsement, or paragraph (p) of this section for a red
snapper license. A person who acquires a vessel or dealership who
desires to conduct activities for which a permit, license, or
endorsement is required must apply for such permit, license, or
endorsement in accordance with the provisions of this section. If the
acquired vessel or dealership is currently permitted, the application
must be accompanied by the original permit and a copy of a signed bill
of sale or equivalent acquisition papers.
* * * * *
(i) Display. A vessel permit, license, or endorsement issued under
this section must be carried on board the vessel. A dealer permit
issued under this section, or a copy thereof, must be available on the
dealer's premises. 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 Gulf EEZ. The operator of a vessel must
present the permit, license, or endorsement for inspection upon the
request of an authorized officer. A dealer or a vehicle operator must
present the permit or a copy for inspection upon the request of an
authorized officer.
(j) Sanctions and denials. A permit, license, or endorsement issued
pursuant to this section may be revoked, suspended, or modified, and a
permit, license, or endorsement application may be denied, in
accordance with the procedures governing enforcement-related permit
sanctions and denials found at subpart D of 15 CFR part 904.
(k) Alteration. A permit, license, or endorsement that is altered,
erased, or mutilated is invalid.
(l) Replacement. A replacement permit, license, or endorsement may
be issued. An application for a replacement permit, license, or
endorsement is not considered a new application.
* * * * *
6. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 622.7, paragraph (b) is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(b) Falsify information on an application for a permit, license, or
endorsement or submitted in support of such application, as specified
in Sec. 622.4(b), (g), or (p) or Sec. 622.17.
* * * * *
7. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.7, paragraphs (a) and
(c) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.7 Prohibitions.
* * * * *
(a) Engage in an activity for which a valid Federal permit,
license, or endorsement is required under Sec. 622.4 or Sec. 622.17
without such permit, license, or endorsement.
* * * * *
(c) Fail to display a permit, license, or endorsement, as specified
in Sec. 622.4(i) or Sec. 622.17(g).
* * * * *
8. Effective January 1, 1998, in Sec. 622.34, paragraph (l) is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.34 Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.
* * * * *
(l) Closures of the commercial fishery for red snapper. The
commercial fishery for red snapper in or from the Gulf EEZ is closed
from January 1 to noon on February 1 and thereafter from noon on the
15th of each month to noon on the first of each succeeding month. All
times are local times. During these closed periods, the possession of
red snapper in or from the Gulf EEZ and in the Gulf on board a vessel
for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, as
required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where such red
snapper were harvested, is limited to the bag and possession limits, as
specified in Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2), respectively, and such
red snapper are subject to the prohibition on sale or purchase of red
snapper possessed under the bag limit, as specified in
Sec. 622.45(c)(1). However, when the recreational quota for red snapper
has been reached and the bag and possession limit has been reduced to
zero, such possession during a closed period is zero.
9. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.34, in the last sentence
of paragraph (c), the phrase ``and shown in Figures 1 and 2'' is
removed; in
[[Page 67723]]
paragraph (g) introductory text, the phrase ``and shown in Figures 3
and 4'' is removed; and a sentence is added to the end of paragraph
(g)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 622.34 Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(1) * * * The provisions of this paragraph do not apply to the
following species: dwarf sand perch, hogfish, queen triggerfish, and
sand perch.
* * * * *
10. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.36, the introductory
text and paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) are redesignated as paragraphs
(b) introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3), respectively, and
paragraph (a) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 622.36 Seasonal harvest limitations.
(a) During March, April, and May, each year, the possession of
greater amberjack in or from the Gulf EEZ and in the Gulf on board a
vessel for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been
issued, as required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where
such greater amberjack were harvested, is limited to the bag and
possession limits, as specified in Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2),
respectively, and such greater amberjack are subject to the prohibition
on sale or purchase of greater amberjack possessed under the bag limit,
as specified in Sec. 622.45(c)(1).
* * * * *
11. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.39, paragraph (a)(2)
introductory text is republished, paragraph (a)(2)(iv) is added, and
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (v) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.39 Bag and possession limits.
(a) * * *
(2) Paragraph (a)(1) of this section notwithstanding, bag and
possession limits also apply for Gulf reef fish in or from the EEZ to a
person aboard a vessel that has on board a commercial permit for Gulf
reef fish--
* * * * *
(iv) When the vessel has on board or is tending any trap other than
a fish trap authorized under Sec. 622.40(a)(2), a stone crab trap, or a
spiny lobster trap.
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) Groupers, combined, excluding jewfish and Nassau grouper--5.
* * * * *
(v) Gulf reef fish, combined, excluding those specified in
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section and excluding dwarf
sand perch and sand perch--20.
* * * * *
12. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.42, paragraph (a)(1)(i)
is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.42 Quotas.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Red snapper--4.65 million lb (2.11 million kg), round weight,
apportioned as follows:
(A) 3.06 million lb (1.39 million kg) available at noon on February
1 each year, subject to the closure provisions of Secs. 622.34(l) and
622.43(a)(1)(i).
(B) The remainder available at noon on September 1 each year,
subject to the closure provisions of Secs. 622.34(l) and
622.43(a)(1)(i).
* * * * *
Sec. 622.43 [Amended]
13. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.43(a)(5), the reference
to ``Sec. 622.44(a)'' is removed and ``Sec. 622.44(c)'' is added in its
place.
14. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.44, paragraph (e) is
revised to read as follows:
Sec. 622.44 Commercial trip limits.
* * * * *
(e) Gulf red snapper. (1) The trip limit for red snapper in or from
the Gulf for a vessel that has on board a valid commercial permit for
Gulf reef fish and a valid Class 1 red snapper license is 2,000 lb (907
kg), round or eviscerated weight.
(2) The trip limit for red snapper in or from the Gulf for a vessel
that has on board a valid commercial permit for Gulf reef fish and a
valid Class 2 red snapper license is 200 lb (91 kg), round or
eviscerated weight.
(3) The trip limit for red snapper in or from the Gulf for any
other vessel for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been
issued is zero.
(4) As a condition of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef
fish, as required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where
red snapper are harvested or possessed, a vessel that has been issued
such permit--
(i) May not possess red snapper in or from the Gulf in excess of
the appropriate vessel trip limit, as specified in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (3) of this section.
(ii) May not transfer or receive at sea red snapper in or from the
Gulf.
* * * * *
Appendix A to Part 622 [Amended]
15. Effective January 29, 1998, in Table 3 of Appendix A to part
622, the family Haemulidae--Grunts and the three species and scientific
names thereunder are removed; under the family Serranidae, the species
Bank sea bass, Rock sea bass, and Black sea bass and their scientific
names are removed and the family name is revised to read Serranidae--
Groupers; and the family Sparidae--Porgies and the six species and
scientific names thereunder are removed.
[FR Doc. 97-33887 Filed 12-24-97; 10:06 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F