[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 28, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71042-71052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30336]



[[Page 71041]]

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

Part VI





Department of Commerce





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



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



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



50 CFR Part 648



Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder, Scup, and 
Black Sea Bass Fisheries; 2001 Specifications; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 28, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 71042]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 001121328-0328-01; I.D. 111500C]
RIN 0648-AN71


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder, 
Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; 2001 Specifications

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

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes specifications for the 2001 summer flounder, 
scup, and black sea bass fisheries. The implementing regulations for 
the Fishery Management Plan for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black 
Sea Bass Fisheries (FMP) require NMFS to publish specifications for the 
upcoming fishing year for each fishery and to provide an opportunity 
for public comment. This proposed rule requests comment on proposed 
measures for summer flounder and black sea bass and on four alternative 
management options for the 2001 scup fishery. The intent is to specify 
the allowed harvest in 2001 and other measures to address overfishing 
of the summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass resources.

DATES: Public comments must be received (see ADDRESSES) no later than 5 
p.m. eastern standard time on December 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the proposed specifications should be 
sent to Patricia A. Kurkul at the same address. Mark on the outside of 
the envelope, ``Comments--2001 Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea 
Bass Specifications.'' Comments may also be sent via facsimile (fax) to 
(978) 281-9371. Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail 
or the Internet.
    Send comments on any ambiguity or unnecessary complexity arising 
from the language used in this proposed rule to Patricia A. Kurkul at 
the same address.
    Copies of supporting documents used by the Summer Flounder, Scup, 
and Black Sea Bass Monitoring Committees; the Environmental Assessment, 
Regulatory Impact Review, Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (EA/
RIR/IRFA); and the Essential Fish Habitat Assessment are available from 
Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional Administrator, Northeast Region, National 
Marine Fisheries Service, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-
2298. The EA/RIR/IRFA is accessible via the Internet at http:/
www.nero.nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nero.html.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard A. Pearson, Fishery Policy 
Analyst, (978)281-9279, fax (978)281-9135, e-mail 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The regulations implementing the FMP at 50 CFR part 648, subparts 
A, G, H, and I outline the process for specifying annually the catch 
limits for the summer flounder, scup and black sea bass commercial and 
recreational fisheries, as well as other management measures (e.g., 
mesh requirements, minimum fish sizes, seasons, and area restrictions) 
for these fisheries. These measures are intended to achieve the annual 
targets set forth for each species in the FMP, specified either as a 
fishing mortality rate (F) or an exploitation rate.
    The FMP is a joint plan involving the Mid-Atlantic Fishery 
Management Council (Council) and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries 
Commission (Commission). A Monitoring Committee for each species, made 
up of members from NMFS, the Commission, and both the Mid-Atlantic and 
New England Fishery Management Councils, is required to review 
available information and to recommend catch limits and other 
management measures necessary to achieve the target F or exploitation 
rate for each fishery, as specified in the FMP. The Council's Demersal 
Species Committee and the Commission's Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black 
Sea Bass Board (Board) then consider the Monitoring Committee's 
recommendations and any public comment in making their recommendations. 
The Council and Board made their annual recommendations at a joint 
meeting held August 14-17, 2000. In addition to recommending annual 
measures, the Council proposes modifying the current trip limit 
provisions in the FMP so that they are possession limits to enhance at-
sea enforcement. For black sea bass and scup, the Council also approved 
a motion that the possession limit would be the maximum amount that 
could be landed in a 24-hour period (calendar day).
    NMFS notes that the Council included a recommendation that 2 
percent of the 2001 Total Allowable Landings (TAL) for summer flounder, 
scup and black sea bass be set aside for experimental fishing and data 
collection purposes. This deduction was to occur no later than December 
31, 2000, if the Council and Commission approved a specific project or 
projects that would use the set-aside allocation. However, the Council 
does not expect to complete its work until February 2001 on the 
framework action that would have authorized the provision for the set-
aside allocation. Although this proposed rule includes a statement 
indicating the amount of the 2-percent research set-aside, NMFS has not 
made the deduction in the allocations for 2001, because the legal 
authority for doing so will not be in place until that framework action 
is implemented.

Scup

    Scup was most recently assessed at the 31st Northeast Regional 
Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC 31) in June 2000, which 
determined that scup are overfished and that overfishing is occurring. 
SARC 31 concluded that the scup spawning stock biomass (SSB) is low. 
The 1998-2000 Northeast Fisheries Science Center (NEFSC) spring survey 
3-year average SSB was 0.10 SSB kg/tow, which is less than 5 percent of 
the index that defines the stock as overfished (2.77 kg/tow; the 
maximum NEFSC spring survey 3-year average of SSB). Indices of 
recruitment have generally trended downward in recent years, except for 
a moderate 1994 year class, a moderate to strong 1999 year class, and a 
strong 1997 year class. Due to the 1997 and 1999 year classes, spawning 
stock abundance has been increasing since 1998. However, the overall 
stock has a highly truncated age structure (i.e., there are fewer older 
fish than there would be in a healthy stock), which likely reflects 
prolonged high fishing mortality rates. SARC 31 also noted that F 
should be reduced substantially and immediately, and that a reduction 
in fishing mortality from discards would have the most impact on 
rebuilding the stock, especially considering the importance of allowing 
recent year classes and all future good recruitment to contribute to 
rebuilding of the stock size and age structure.
    The FMP established a target exploitation rate for scup in 2001 of 
33 percent. The total allowable catch (TAC) associated with that rate 
is allocated 78 percent to the commercial sector and 22 percent to the 
recreational sector by the FMP. Scup discard estimates are deducted 
from both TACs to establish TALs for both sectors (TAC - discards = 
TAL). The commercial TAL is then allocated with differing percentages 
to three quota periods--Winter I (January-April)--45.11 percent; Summer 
(May-

[[Page 71043]]

October)--30.95 percent; and Winter II (Nov-December)--15.94 percent.
    The proposed scup specifications for fishing year 2001 are based on 
the exploitation rate in the rebuilding schedule that was approved when 
scup was added to the FMP in 1996, prior to passage of the Sustainable 
Fisheries Act (SFA). Subsequently, to comply with the SFA amendments to 
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-
Stevens Act), the Council prepared Amendment 12, which proposed to 
maintain the existing rebuilding schedule. On April 28, 1999, NMFS 
disapproved that rebuilding plan for scup because it did not comply 
with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Although the exploitation rate portion 
of the overfishing definition (converted to an F) was conceptually 
sound, though somewhat risk-prone, NMFS determined that the combination 
of that exploitation rate and the general decline of the stock made the 
risk that the rebuilding plan would not achieve stock rebuilding goals 
in the long-term unacceptable. The proposed scup specifications for 
2001 are based on the exploitation rate that was found to be 
conceptually sound. NMFS believes that the long-term risks that were 
associated with the disapproved rebuilding plan do not apply to the 
proposed specifications since they apply only for 1 fishing year and 
will be reviewed, and modified as appropriate, by the Council and NMFS 
annually. Furthermore, setting the scup specifications using that 
exploitation rate is a more cautious approach to managing this resource 
than not setting any specifications until the Council submits, and NMFS 
approves, a revised rebuilding plan that meets all Magnuson-Stevens Act 
requirements.

Recommended Scup Harvest Limits

    In making its recommendation to the Council, the Scup Monitoring 
Committee reviewed the available data. Deterministic projections of the 
NEFSC spring survey SSB, based on year 2000 index values and mean 
recruitment from the 1993 to 2000 surveys, indicated that the 2001 
spring survey SSB could increase to 0.24 kg/tow if the F on ages 0-4 
scup was 1.0. Assuming an F of 1.0 for 1999, and an average SSB that is 
at least equal to the 2000 value of 0.17 kg/tow in 2001 (average of 
0.11 for 1999, 0.15 for 2000, and the projected 0.24 for 2001), then 
the target scup exploitation rate of 33 percent could be achieved with 
a 2001 TAL of 5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg), which is the level 
recommended by the Scup Monitoring Committee. Then, using the same 
proportion of discards to landings as assumed for 2000 (57 percent), 
the Scup Monitoring Committee recommended a 2001 TAC of 7.85 million lb 
(3.56 million kg). Based on the sector allocation specified in the FMP 
(commercial--78 percent; recreational--22 percent), this results in a 
commercial TAC of 6.123 million lb (2.78 million kg) and a recreational 
TAC of 1.727 million lb (0.78 million kg). The Scup Monitoring 
Committee assumed that the proportion of commercial discards to catch 
would remain the same in 2001 as in 2000 (45.1 percent), and estimated 
commercial discards of 2.76 million lb (1.25 million kg), resulting in 
a commercial quota of 3.36-million lb (1.52 million kg). Similarly, 
assuming that the proportion of recreational discards to catch would 
remain the same as in 2000 (4.96 percent), then recreational discards 
would be 0.09 million lb (0.039 million kg), resulting in a 
recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million lb (0.74 million kg).
    If a research quota set-aside of 2 percent were implemented for 
2001 it would be deducted from the overall TAL, and the resulting 
commercial quota and recreational harvest limit would be 3.29 million 
lb (1.49 million kg) and 1.61 million lb (0.73 million kg), 
respectively.
    The commercial allocation recommended by the Scup Monitoring 
Committee is shown, by period, in Table 1. These allocations are 
preliminary and would be subject to downward adjustment, as required by 
the FMP, for any landings in excess of quota allocation in 2000 that 
are found when final 2000 data are available (a quota overage). Since 
the data collection for all periods in 2000 has not yet been finalized, 
this table shows the allocations prior to any deductions for overages. 
As of October 7, 2000, the Winter I allocation has been exceeded by 
259,991 lb (117,930 kg) and the Summer allocation has been exceeded by 
570,326 lb (258,695 kg).

                       Table 1.--Percent Allocation of Commercial Scup Quota Based on the Scup Monitoring Committee Recommendation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Quota Allocation
                          Period                             Percent      TAC \1\      Discards \2\  --------------------------  Possession   Limits  Kg
                                                                                                           Lb         Kg \3\         Lb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter I..................................................     45.11      2,762,085       1,246,840     1,515,245      687,303   \4\ 10,000        4,536
                                                                         (1,252,860)       (565,557)
Summer....................................................     38.95      2,384,908       1,076,577     1,308,331      593,449         *n/a  ...........
                                                                         (1,081,776)       (488,327)
Winter II.................................................     15.94        976,006         440,581       535,425      242,865        2,000          907
                                                                           (442,709)       (199,844)
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total \5\.............................................    100.00      6,122,999       2,763,998     3,359,001    1,523,617  ...........  ...........
                                                                         (2,777,346)     (1,253,728)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Total allowable catch, in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).
\2\ Discard estimates, in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).
\3\ Kilograms are as converted from pounds.
\4\ The Winter I landing limit will drop to 1,000 lb (454 kg) upon attainment of 75 percent of the seasonal allocation.
\5\ Totals subject to rounding error.
 
 *n/a--Not applicable.

    At its August 2000 meeting, the Council reviewed the 
recommendations of the Scup Monitoring Committee and did not accept its 
TAL and TAC recommendations. Rather than relying upon a 2001 SSB 
estimate of 0.17 kg/tow, which is based upon a 3-year average, the 
Council instead selected an SSB estimate of 0.21 in 2001, using the 
rationale that this value is higher than the 0.15 SSB value estimated 
for 2000, but slightly less than the 0.24 projected for 2001. Then, 
assuming an F of 1.0 for 1999, and an SSB estimate of 0.21 kg/tow in 
2001, the target scup exploitation

[[Page 71044]]

rate of 33 percent could be achieved if landings (TAL) do not exceed 
6.22 million lb (2.82 million kg) in 2001. Using an assumption 
different from that used by the Scup Monitoring Committee--that the 
amount of scup (rather than the proportion) calculated to be discarded 
in 2001 would remain the same as that calculated for 2000 (equating to 
2.15 million lb (0.97 million kg)), the Council recommended a 2001 TAC 
of 8.37 million lb (3.80 million kg). This would result in a commercial 
TAC (78 percent) of 6.53 million lb (2.96 million kg) and a 
recreational TAC (22 percent) of 1.84 million lb (0.83 million kg). 
Using the same value for scup discards as in 2000, the commercial 
discards would be 2.08 million lb (0.94 million kg), and the commercial 
quota would be 4.45 million lb (2.02 million kg). Similarly, 
recreational discards would be 0.07 million lb (0.03 million kg), and 
the recreational harvest limit would be 1.77 million lb (0.80 million 
kg).
    If a research quota set-aside of 2 percent were implemented, it 
would be deducted from the total TAL and the resulting commercial quota 
and recreational harvest limit would be 4.35 million lb (1.97 million 
kg) and 1.74 million lb (0.79 million kg), respectively.
    The Council's proposed commercial scup allocation is shown in Table 
2. These allocations would be subject to the same downward adjustment 
for any overages as would the Scup Monitoring Committee allocation 
recommendations, as explained previously.

                           Table 2.--Percent Allocations of Commercial Scup Quota Based on Mid-Atlantic Council Recommendation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                          Quota Allocation
                          Period                             Percent      TAC \1\      Discards \2\  --------------------------  Possession   Limits  Kg
                                                                                                           Lb         Kg \3\         Lb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winter I..................................................     45.11      2,945,502         940,543     2,004,959      909,434   \4\ 10,000        4,536
                                                                         (1,336,057)       (426,623)
Summer....................................................     38.95      2,543,280         812,108     1,731,172      785,246         *n/a
                                                                         (1,153,612)       (368,365)
Winter II.................................................     15.94      1,040,818         332,349       708,469      321,356        2,000          907
                                                                           (472,107)       (150,751)
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total \5\.............................................    100.00      6,529,600       2,085,000     4,444,600    2,016,036
                                                                         (2,961,776)       (945,739)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Total allowable catch, in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).
\2\ Discard estimates, in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).
\3\ Kilograms are as converted from pounds.
\4\ The Winter I possession limit will drop to 1,000 lb (454 kg) upon attainment of 75 percent of the seasonal allocation.
\5\ Totals subject to rounding error.
 
 *n/a--Not applicable.

    The Council based its recommended 40-percent increase in the scup 
quota from 2000 to 2001 on assumptions that scup stock biomass would 
increase from the estimated 2000 level and that the absolute amount of 
scup discarded (2.15 million lb (0.97 million kg)) would remain the 
same in 2001, rather than be proportional to landings. NMFS is 
concerned about these assumptions. The resultant quota recommendation 
may be risky and inconsistent with the best available scientific 
information, which indicates that scup biomass is very low--less than 5 
percent of the biomass level that defines the stock as overfished. The 
Scup Monitoring Committee used a more conservative assumption that scup 
biomass would be no greater in 2001 than in 2000 in developing its 
quota recommendation.
    The Council also assumed that the amount of discards would remain 
the same in 2001 as in 2000. This assumption may be unrealistic. 
Historically, the discard rate in the scup fishery has increased with 
the appearance of large year classes or has, at least, remained 
proportional to landings. Using the Council's rationale, scup discards 
as a proportion of scup catch were assumed to decline. The Scup 
Monitoring Committee assumed a constant proportion of discards to 
catch, as assumed in 2000, to establish its 2001 commercial quota and 
recreational harvest limit recommendations.
    Also, although both the Council and Scup Monitoring Committee 
assumed an F of 1.0 in their quota recommendations, SARC 31 noted that 
F is at least 1.0 and possibly greater. More recent analysis by the 
NEFSC indicates that F is greater than 1.0, and could be as high as 
1.95 for the 1998 year class. This may indicate the need for a more 
conservative quota recommendation. For these reasons, NMFS is seeking 
public comment on both the Monitoring Committee's and the Council's 
2001 scup quota recommendations.
    To enhance at-sea enforcement, the Council recommended changing the 
current scup trip limits to possession limits with the additional 
provision that these quantities be the maximum allowed to be landed 
within a 24-hour period (calendar day). To achieve the recommended 
commercial quotas, the Council recommended, and these specifications 
propose, a Winter I (January-April) possession limit of 10,000 lb 
(4,536 kg) with a reduction to 1,000 lb (454 kg) for the remainder of 
that period when 75 percent of the quota allocation is projected to 
have been harvested. The Council also recommended, and these 
specifications propose, decreasing the Winter II period (November-
December) possession limit from 4,000 lb (1,814 kg) to 2,000 lb (907 
kg). The Council also recommended increasing the thresholds that 
specify the amount of scup that may be retained on board a vessel that 
is using mesh smaller than 4.5 inches (11 cm). In order for a vessel to 
possess scup in excess of the threshold, mesh smaller than 4.5 inches 
(11 cm) must be stowed and unavailable for use. The Council recommended 
increasing the threshold amount from 200 lb (91 kg) to 500 lb (227 kg) 
for the period November 1-April 30. The threshold would remain at 100 
lb (45 kg) for the period May 1-October 31. The Council's 
recommendation to increase the threshold for the November-April period 
is intended to enable vessels to fish with smaller mesh for a longer 
period of time, but could potentially increase bycatch and subsequent 
discard of undersized scup. If discards are converted to landings due 
to the change in the mesh threshold, without additional discards 
occurring when the 500-lb (227 kg) threshold is reached, as the Council 
and industry believe would

[[Page 71045]]

occur, then the proposed change could be acceptable. Therefore, NMFS is 
specifically seeking public comments on the recommendation to increase 
the November-April threshold level from 200 lb (91 kg) to 500 lb (227 
kg).

Gear Restricted Areas (GRAs)

    As noted previously, SARC 31 emphasized the need to reduce fishing 
mortality from scup discards. The Scup Monitoring Committee took heed 
of this advice, particularly considering the importance of the 1999 
year class to future recruitment. Therefore, the Scup Monitoring 
Committee recommended that the Council maintain GRAs. The GRAs 
seasonally close areas to specified small-mesh fisheries using trawl 
gear with codend mesh sizes less than 4.5 inches (11 cm), to reduce 
discards of scup.
    GRAs were originally established by the Council in the 2000 
specifications for the scup fishery to reduce scup bycatch in small-
mesh fisheries (65 FR 33486, May 24, 2000). The GRAs established in the 
2000 specifications became effective November 1, 2000. There are two 
GRAs: the Northern GRA (November-December), and the Southern GRA 
(January-April). The Scup Monitoring Committee reviewed a proposal to 
modify the existing GRAs that was developed by the Council staff. The 
Council staff analysis indicated that the modification would decrease 
scup discards by 61 percent (as opposed to 71 percent under the 
existing GRAs), yet decrease revenues by only $7.2 million (as opposed 
to $13.7 million under the existing GRAs). The Committee recommended to 
the Council that the existing GRAs be modified consistent with the 
staff analysis. The Council adopted this recommendation and requested 
NMFS to make the modification effective November 1, 2000. NMFS has 
published a proposed rule (65 FR 65818, November 2, 2000) that proposes 
to: (1) Modify the GRAs as recommended by the Council; (2) exempt the 
Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fishery from the GRA restrictions; (3) 
exempt the Loligo squid small-mesh fishery from the GRA restriction 
from November 1-December 31, 2000; and (4) modify the procedure and 
criteria for exempting small-mesh fisheries from the requirements of 
the GRAs. Further information concerning the modification of the GRAs 
may be found in the preamble to the proposed rule and is not repeated 
here. Subsequent text of this proposed rule refers to these modified 
GRAs as the GRAs recommended by the Council.

Scup Management Options

    While SAW 31 concluded that a reduction in fishing mortality from 
discards would provide the most benefit to rebuilding the scup stock, 
the issue is complicated by a lack of sufficient sea sampling 
(observer) data to characterize the sources of the discards. Although 
NMFS does not have a precise estimate of scup discards, it is known 
that discards contribute to the mortality of small scup, and that 
levels of scup discards may have approached or exceeded scup landings 
in recent years. Given the relatively small amount of observer data, it 
has been difficult to determine exactly when, where, and in what 
fisheries the discards have occurred, and what the magnitudes of the 
scup discards are. In addition, because scup are migratory and fishing 
operations are mobile, it is difficult to define GRAs that will be 
equally effective over time (i.e., fishing effort may change over 
time). All of the uncertainties have made it difficult to devise GRAs 
that are expected to reduce scup bycatch and discards sufficiently 
without also significantly impacting small-mesh fisheries.
    While NMFS has proposed to modify the GRAs as recommended by the 
Council, NMFS also recognizes that GRAs are not the only way to address 
scup discard mortality. Therefore, through this proposed rule, NMFS is 
seeking comments on four possible options to meet the regulatory 
requirement at 50 CFR 648.120 that the Regional Administrator implement 
measures to ensure that the target exploitation rate will not be 
exceeded. The four options vary in terms of the TAC quota 
recommendation they incorporate, the discard deduction made to 
calculate TALs, the size and location of the GRAs, and the fisheries to 
be exempted from the GRAs. In general, if GRAs are used to reduce scup 
bycatch, the discard deduction made in establishing TAL is lower than 
it would be without GRAs, and the resultant quotas are higher. In other 
words, while scup need to be rebuilt, there are several ways to go 
about achieving that, but all involve reducing fishing mortality on 
scup.
    The four options for scup management in 2001 on which NMFS is 
seeking comments are:
    Option I--(This option is reflected in the regulatory text of this 
proposed rule as the recommendation of the Council and does not 
necessarily reflect NMFS' preferred alternative.) This option includes: 
(1) The Council's proposed quota for scup (a TAC of 8.37 million lb 
(3.80 million kg), a discard deduction of 2.15 million lb (0.97 million 
kg), and a TAL of 6.22 million lb (2.82 million kg)); (2) the GRAs 
recommended by the Council; and (3) exemptions for Atlantic herring, 
Atlantic mackerel and Loligo squid small-mesh fisheries.
    Under this option, the commercial TAC would be 6.53 million lb 
(2.96 million kg) minus discards of 2.08 million lb (0.94 million kg), 
resulting in a commercial quota of 4.45 million lb (2.02 million kg). 
The recreational TAC would be 1.84 million lb (0.83 million kg) minus 
discards of 0.07 million lb (0.03 million kg), resulting in a 
recreational harvest limit of 1.77 million lb (0.80 million kg).
    Option II--This option includes: (1) The Scup Monitoring 
Committee's quota recommendation for 2001 (a TAC of 7.85 million lb 
(3.56 million kg), a discard deduction of 2.85 million lb (1.29 million 
kg), and a TAL of 5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg)); (2) GRAs as 
recommended by the Council; and (3) exemptions for the Atlantic herring 
and Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fisheries.
    Under this option, the commercial TAC would be 6.12 million lb 
(2.78 million kg) minus discards of 2.76 million lb (1.25 million kg), 
resulting in a commercial quota of 3.36 million lb (1.52 million kg). 
The recreational TAC would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million kg) minus 
discards of 0.09 million lb (0.04 million kg), resulting in a 
recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million lb (0.74 million kg).
    Option III--This option includes: (1) The temporary suspension of 
GRA restrictions for 2001; and (2) a TAL established at a level that is 
consistent with the SARC conclusion that commercial discards are 
approximately equal to commercial landings (a TAC of 7.85 million lb 
(3.56 million kg), a discard deduction of 3.15 million lb (1.43 million 
kg), and a TAL of 4.70 million lb (2.13 million kg).
    Under this option, the commercial TAC would be 6.12 million lb 
(2.78 million kg) minus discards of 3.06 million lb (1.39 million kg), 
resulting in a commercial quota of 3.06 million lb (1.39 million kg). 
The recreational TAC would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million kg) minus 
discards of 0.09 million lb (0.04 million kg), resulting in a 
recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million lb (0.74 million kg).
    Option IV--This option includes: (1) Modified GRAs that are shorter 
in duration and that exclude the Hudson Canyon area, but incorporate 
other areas of high scup concentration and small-mesh fishing 
activities; (2) the Monitoring Committee's quota recommendation for 
2001 (a TAC of 7.85 million lb (3.56 million kg), a

[[Page 71046]]

discard deduction of 2.85 million lb (1.29 million kg), and a TAL of 
5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg)); and (3) exemptions for the Atlantic 
herring and Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fisheries.
    Under this option, the commercial TAC would be 6.12 million lb 
(2.78 million kg) minus discards of 2.76 million lb (1.25 million kg), 
resulting in a commercial quota of 3.36 million lb (1.52 million kg). 
The recreational TAC would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million kg) minus 
discards of 0.09 million lb (0.04 million kg), resulting in a 
recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million lb (0.74 million kg).
    The more southerly GRA under this option encompasses a large 
portion of the scup stock during the winter months, and would impact a 
substantial amount of coincident fishing effort directed at Loligo 
squid, according to vessel logbook reports. Therefore, the GRA would be 
expected to reduce scup discards in the winter, although a quantitative 
estimate of the reduction is not possible. The coordinates and time 
period of the modified GRAs for this option would be:

        Northern Gear Restricted Area I (November 1-December 31)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. lat.      W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NGA 1.........................................  41 deg. 00"  71 deg. 00"
NGA 2.........................................  41 deg. 00"  71 deg. 30"
NGA 3.........................................  40 deg. 00'  72 deg. 40"
NGA 4.........................................  40 deg. 00"  72 deg. 05"
NGA 1.........................................  41 deg. 00"  71 deg. 00"
------------------------------------------------------------------------


           Southern Gear Restricted Area (January 1-March 15)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. lat.      W. long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGA 1.........................................  39 deg. 20"  72 deg. 50"
SGA 2.........................................  39 deg. 20"  72 deg. 25"
SGA 3.........................................  38 deg. 00"  73 deg. 55"
SGA 4.........................................  37 deg. 00"  74 deg. 40"
SGA 5.........................................  36 deg. 30"  74 deg. 40"
SGA 6.........................................  36 deg. 30"  75 deg. 00"
SGA 7.........................................  37 deg. 00"  75 deg. 00"
SGA 8.........................................  38 deg. 00"  74 deg. 20"
SGA 1.........................................  39 deg. 20"  72 deg. 50"
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The four options for managing scup are significantly different from 
one another. While Option I may alleviate much of the negative economic 
impacts, NMFS is concerned that a 40-percent scup quota increase in 
combination with an exemption for the Loligo squid small-mesh fishery 
from the GRAs could result in an unacceptably high level of fishing 
mortality. Option II would incorporate the Scup Monitoring Committee's 
quota recommendation and the GRAs recommended by the Council, without 
exempting the Loligo squid small-mesh fishery. The Scup Monitoring 
Committee's quota recommendations appear to be more risk-averse than 
the Council's recommendation, with regard to discard assumptions and 
stock biomass. However, Option II would have greater negative economic 
impacts on small-mesh fisheries than would Option I. Suspending the 
GRAs for 2001 and reducing the scup quota to reflect more accurately 
scup discards, as in Option III, could reduce negative economic impacts 
on small-mesh fisheries, but would likely impose greater impacts on 
vessels that are more dependent on scup than would Options I or II. 
Option IV, which would further modify the GRAs, would allow small-mesh 
fishing in the Hudson Canyon area, but would restrict small-mesh 
fishing in areas farther south, albeit for a shorter duration than 
under the existing GRAs or the Council's proposed GRAs. A more detailed 
discussion of the analysis of these options is found in the 
Classification section of this proposed rule.
    When it was discussing the annual specifications, the Council noted 
its interest in obtaining more information about scup discard through 
experimental fisheries. NMFS notes that it has received one application 
for an experimental fishing permit (EFP) to conduct gear research in 
the small-mesh fisheries of the Mid-Atlantic region, particularly with 
regard to mesh selectivity in retaining scup. In order to issue an EFP, 
NMFS must publish a notification in the Federal Register to allow the 
public to comment. This notification should be published in the near 
future.

Summer Flounder

    In order to comply with a Court Order issued by the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia on April 25, 2000, NMFS 
implemented an emergency interim rule on August 2, 2000 (65 FR 47648), 
temporarily amending the FMP and its implementing regulations that 
establish the target to be achieved by the 2001 TAL for summer 
flounder. The emergency rule established a biomass target for 2001, 
rather than the F target specified in the FMP, and requires that the 
2001 total quota be set at a level that will achieve, with at least a 
50-percent probability, the biomass level that would have been achieved 
at the end of 2001 if the F target had been met in 1999 and 2000, and 
would be met in 2001.
    As indicated in the emergency interim regulations, the most recent 
stock assessment specified a biomass target of 148.8 million lb (67.5 
million kg) for December 31, 2001. The biomass target was calculated 
using the results of the summer flounder stock assessment completed by 
SARC 31 in June 2000. Although the F of 0.32 estimated for 1999 
represents a significant decline from the F of 1.31 estimated for 1994, 
the assessment indicates that the stock is still overfished and 
overfishing is still occurring, relative to the FMP overfishing 
definitions. Spawning stock biomass (SSB) has increased steadily each 
year since 1989 to a current 64.8 million lb (29.4 million kg), the 
highest value in the time series. However, total stock biomass, which 
is the basis for the overfishing definition, has been stable since 
1994. Projections based on assumptions about future landings, discards, 
and recruitment to the stock, indicate that if the 2000 TAL is not 
exceeded, total stock biomass will exceed the minimum biomass threshold 
in January 2001. Because of these assumptions, however, the forecast of 
stock biomass for January 2001 has a wide confidence interval. When the 
total stock biomass is above the stock's minimum biomass threshold, the 
stock will no longer be considered overfished, though it will remain 
below the level necessary to produce maximum sustainable yield 
(Bmsy). Because the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that 
stocks be managed to produce MSY, additional rebuilding of the stock 
still needs to be accomplished.
    The SARC 31 assessment estimated the 1999 year class to be the 
smallest since 1988, at 19 million fish. However, the Council noted 
that the Virtual Population Analysis (VPA) tends to underestimate the 
size of recent year-classes. Year-class estimates for 1996, 1997 and 
1998, based on the VPA, ranged from 32 to 38 million fish, which is 
about average.
    The Summer Flounder Monitoring Committee reviewed the stock status 
and projections to meet the biomass target based on these data and 
recommended a 17.91-million lb (8.125 million kg) TAL for 2001, which 
would be divided into a commercial quota of 10.75 million lb (4.877 
million kg) and a recreational harvest limit of 7.16 million lb (3.248 
million kg). The Council adopted these recommendations, and NMFS 
proposes to implement them because they are consistent with the 
emergency interim rule. Based on the current status of the stock and 
the catches estimated for 1999 and 2000, this level has a 50-percent 
probability of achieving the 2001 biomass target of 148.8 million lb 
(6,751 mt).

[[Page 71047]]

    Although the Council and the Board met jointly, the Board declined 
to make a TAL recommendation for summer flounder in August 2000. The 
Board is scheduled to make its TAL recommendation at a meeting on 
November 29, 2000.
    Currently, the Commission has voluntary measures in place to 
decrease discards of sublegal fish in the commercial fishery, as well 
as to reduce regulatory discards occurring as a result of landing 
limits in the states. The Commission established a system whereby 15 
percent of each state's quota could be voluntarily set aside each year 
for vessels to land an incidental catch allowance (implemented as trip 
limits) after the directed fishery has been closed. The intent of the 
voluntary incidental catch set-aside is to reduce discards by allowing 
fishermen to land summer flounder caught incidentally in other 
fisheries during the year, while also ensuring that the state's overall 
quota is not exceeded.
    The FMP requires that landings of summer flounder in excess of a 
state's commercial quota allocation in one year be deducted from that 
state's allocation for the following year. The emergency interim rule 
established a provision for the specification of quotas in 2001 whereby 
any under-harvest of an individual state's summer flounder commercial 
quota in 2000 would be applied to the final 2001 specifications for 
that state. This temporary measure was enacted because NMFS expected 
that some states might have been prompted by the Court Order to reduce 
commercial harvests prior to the implementation of the emergency 
measures. Therefore, the measure was established to avoid penalizing 
states for their precautionary action.
    The proposed commercial quotas, by state, for 2001 are presented in 
Table 3. These quotas are preliminary and subject to downward or upward 
adjustments if there are overages or underages in a state's 2000 
harvest. As of October 13, 2000, the only known overages are 2,033 lb 
(922 kg) in Maine and 14,142 lb (6,415 kg) in New Jersey. These and 
additional adjustments will be necessary as 2000 landings data are 
finalized. NMFS will publish such adjustments in the Federal Register.

                                                 Table 3.--2001 Summer Flounder State Commercial Quotas
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Directed          15 Percent as incidental            Total
                                                                 Percent   --------------------------           catch          -------------------------
                            State                                 share                              --------------------------
                                                                                 lb         kg\1\          lb         kg\1\          lb         kg\1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ME...........................................................      0.04756        4,345        1,971          767          348        5,112        2,319
NH...........................................................      0.00046           42           19            7            3           49           22
MA...........................................................      6.82046      623,076      282,625      109,955       49,875      733,031      332,501
RI...........................................................     15.68298    1,432,704      649,870      252,830      114,683    1,685,534      764,553
CT...........................................................      2.25708      206,193       93,529       36,387       16,505      242,580      110,034
NY...........................................................      7.64699      698,583      316,875      123,280       55,919      821,863      372,795
NJ...........................................................     16.72499    1,527,896      693,049      269,628      122,302    1,797,524      815,352
DE...........................................................      0.01779        1,625          737          287          130        1,912          867
MD...........................................................      2.03910      186,280       84,496       32,873       14,911      219,153       99,407
VA...........................................................     21.31676    1,947,372      883,322      343,654      155,880    2,291,026    1,039,203
NC...........................................................     27.44584    2,507,289    1,137,299      442,462      200,699    2,949,751    1,337,998
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................       100.00    9,135,405    4,143,793    1,612,130      731,257   10,747,535   4,875,050
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Kilograms are as converted from pounds and do not add to the converted total due to rounding.

    If a 2-percent research quota set-aside were implemented for the 
2001 fishery, the total commercial quota would be 10,532,584 lb 
(4,777,500 kg).

Black Sea Bass

    Black sea bass was last assessed by the 27th Northeast Regional 
Stock Assessment Review Committee (SARC 27), with results published 
December 1998. SARC 27 indicated that black sea bass are over-exploited 
and at a low biomass level. However, relative exploitation rates, based 
on the total commercial and recreational landings and the moving 
average of the log-transformed spring survey index (an index based on 
scientific sampling of the distribution and relative abundance), 
indicate a significant reduction in mortality in 1998 and 1999 relative 
to 1996 and 1997 levels. Relative exploitation rates in 1999 were 
nearly identical to those estimated for 1998.
    Results of the spring trawl surveys conducted by the NEFSC indicate 
that stock size of black sea bass has increased in recent years. The 3-
year moving average for 1998-2000 is 42 percent higher than the value 
for 1997-1999. In addition, the recruitment index for 2000 (1.135) is 
the highest in the time series 1968-2000.
    The FMP specifies a target exploitation rate of 37 percent for 
2001. Although the exploitation rate for 2000 is uncertain, relative 
exploitation indices have declined in recent years. Based on length 
frequencies from the spring survey, and assuming length at full 
recruitment of 25 cm, the average F was 0.75 (48-percent exploitation 
rate) in 1998. If the 2001 biomass is at least equal to the 2000 value, 
and assuming an exploitation rate of 48 percent in 1998, the TAL could 
remain the same and the exploitation rate would be expected to drop to 
35 percent, which is close to the 2001 target of 37 percent specified 
in the FMP.
    The Black Sea Bass Monitoring Committee (BSB Monitoring Committee) 
reviewed this information and recommended that the 2001 TAL remain the 
same as in 2000--6.173 million lb (2.80 million kg). Based on this TAL, 
the commercial quota would be 3.025 million lb (1.37 million kg) and 
the recreational harvest limit would be 3.148 million lb (1.43 million 
kg). The BSB Monitoring Committee also recommended that the minimum 
fish size, mesh size, and pot or trap gear vent size remain unchanged, 
and that the threshold triggering the minimum mesh-size requirement be 
reduced from 1,000 lb (454 kg) to 200 lb (91 kg). The BSB Monitoring 
Committee recommended the threshold reduction to discourage small-mesh 
directed fishing for black sea bass. In addition, the BSB Monitoring 
Committee recommended that the possession limits be reduced to 1,500 lb 
(680 kg) in Quarters 2 and 4, and to 1,000 lb (454 kg) in Quarter 3. 
The Quarter 1 possession limit would remain at 9,000 lb (4,082 kg). The 
BSB Monitoring Committee believed that

[[Page 71048]]

these possession limits would provide the best chance of allowing the 
quotas to be harvested, while allowing the fishery to remain open for 
the entire quarter, thus providing extended fishing opportunities.
    At their August 2000 meeting, the Council and Board voted to adopt 
the BSB Monitoring Committee's recommendations for the black sea bass 
TAL and reductions in the possession limits for Quarters 2 and 3. The 
Council also voted to set the possession limit for Quarter 4 at 2,000 
lb (907 kg), rather than at 1,500 lb (680 kg) as recommended by the BSB 
Monitoring Committee. Possession limit reductions were recommended to 
prevent quota overages in each quarter. In addition, the Council 
recommended changing the current trip limits for black sea bass to 
possession limits to enhance at-sea enforcement, with the provision 
that these quantities be the maximum allowed to be landed within a 24-
hour period (calendar day). The Council and Board recommended 
maintaining other measures at status quo, including minimum mesh size, 
minimum fish size, and sea bass pot vent size. The Council and Board 
did not accept the BSB Monitoring Committee's recommendation to drop 
the level of catch triggering the requirement to use the minimum mesh 
of 4.0 inches (10.2 cm) from 1,000 lb (454 kg) to 200 lb (91 kg).
    The proposed commercial quota and corresponding possession limits 
are shown in Table 4. These allocations are preliminary and would be 
subject to a downward adjustment for any overages in a period's harvest 
in 2000, as provided in the FMP. Since the data collection for all 
periods in 2000 has not yet been finalized, this table shows the 
allocations prior to any deductions. As of October 7, 2000, the Quarter 
2 commercial quota has been exceeded by 229,075 lb (103,907 kg) and the 
Quarter 3 commercial quota has been exceeded by 64,101 lb (29,076 kg). 
Additional adjustments will be necessary as 2000 landings data are 
finalized.

       Table 4.--2001 Black Sea Bass Quarterly Coastwide Commercial Quotas and Quarterly Possession Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Possession limits
                    Quarter                        Percent         Lb           Kg     -------------------------
                                                                                             Lb           Kg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 (Jan-Mar)....................................        38.64    1,168,760      530,141         9000        4,082
2 (Apr-Jun)....................................        29.26      885,040      401,447         1500          680
3 (Jul-Sep)....................................        12.33      372,951      169,168         1000          454
4 (Oct-Dec)....................................        19.77      597,991      271,244         2000          907
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................................       100.00    3,024,742    1,372,000  ...........  ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If a research quota set-aside of 2 percent were implemented for the 
2001 fishery, the resulting commercial quota and recreational harvest 
limit would be 2,959,600 lb (1,342,452 kg) and 3,087,000 lb (1,400,239 
kg), respectively.

Classification

    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Council and NMFS prepared an IRFA that describes the economic 
impact this proposed rule, if adopted, would have on small entities. A 
description of the action, why it is being considered, and the legal 
basis for this action are contained at the beginning of this section of 
the preamble and in the SUMMARY section of the preamble. This proposed 
rule does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other Federal rules. 
A copy of the complete IRFA can be obtained from the Northeast Regional 
Office of NMFS (see ADDRESSES) or via the Internet at http:/www.nero. 
nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nero.html. A summary of the analysis follows.
    NMFS prepared an Integrated Analysis of Alternatives for the EA/
RIR/IRFA (NMFS' analysis) as a supplemental analysis to the IRFA to 
examine the overall economic impacts of the four options that are being 
considered for scup management, in combination with the proposed 
measures for summer flounder and black sea bass. Specifically, NMFS' 
comprehensive analysis incorporated the effects of the proposed GRAs, 
the proposed scup quotas, the preferred scup trip limits, the preferred 
summer flounder and black sea bass quotas and trip limits, and any 
known 2000 overages that would impact 2001 quotas. NMFS' analysis was 
similar to that of the Council, but there are several substantive 
differences. First, the Council's analysis evaluated the recommended 
quota specifications and GRA impacts separately, using different data 
sets and different methods; NMFS analyzed the combined effects of the 
GRAs and the quota specifications for all three species. Second, the 
Council did not incorporate the economic effects of the trip limit 
changes for scup and black sea bass; NMFS did. Third, the Council's 
analysis did not reflect the fact that no non-exempt small-mesh species 
may be retained within the GRAs; NMFS' analysis does reflect this. 
Finally, the Council's analysis of the GRAs was based on combinations 
of dealer and sea sampling (observer) data, whereas NMFS used calendar 
year 1999 logbook and dealer data to analyze the economic impacts of 
the quota specifications, GRAs, and trip limit changes in a single 
model. NMFS believes that this approach incorporates a more thorough 
assessment of the combined effects of the proposed management measures 
for 2001. The four scup management options were evaluated and compared 
against the 2000 measures, which was considered the status quo 
alternative.
    The economic effects of the four scup options were analyzed using 
two different proration methods to provide a range of impacts. In the 
first method (quota baseline), 1999 fishing year data were prorated by 
the percent change in the proposed 2001 adjusted quotas and then 
compared to the adjusted 2000 quotas. This proration scheme reflects 
changes in fishing opportunity from one year to the next, without 
biasing the impacts due to a large overage that may have occurred in 
the baseline year. Nevertheless, a large overage in a given year does 
represent a potential loss of income to participating vessels in the 
subsequent year. Therefore, a second proration scheme was developed. 
Under the second method (landings baseline), the adjusted 2001 quota 
was compared to actual 2000 landings wherever available, and to 1999 
landings otherwise. Using both proration schemes provides a range to 
estimate economic impacts for the status quo and all other alternatives 
considered. The alternatives and results of the analyses are summarized 
below.

[[Page 71049]]

    The use of 2000 measures as status quo provides the baseline 
against which the proposed options are compared. The status quo was 
defined as being equivalent to a continuation of measures that were in 
effect for fishing year 2000 into 2001, except that the summer flounder 
TAL was adjusted to 17.91 million lb (8.12 million kg), which is the 
level necessary to meet the requirements of the Court Order. The GRAs 
analyzed as status quo are the GRAs recommended by the Council, except 
that Atlantic herring was the only exempted fishery. The fishing year 
2000 trip limits for black sea bass and scup were assumed to be carried 
forward to 2001. Affected trips for the analysis of GRA impacts were 
those fishing trips that used less than 4.5-inch (11.43 cm) mesh during 
the proposed time and areas of the GRAs. Exempted trips were composed 
of trips in the area encompassed by the GRA that landed herring. 
Consistent with the exemption regulations that were implemented for 
fishing year 2000, landings of any non-exempt small-mesh species other 
than herring (Atlantic mackerel, Loligo squid, whiting, black sea bass) 
were deducted from total landings on exempted trips.
    While the scup options have been described earlier in this 
preamble, the analyses made other assumptions as well. Based on 1999 
logbook data, under Option I, aggregate scup landings would be expected 
to exceed 75 percent of the resulting Winter I scup quota, so a 10,000-
lb (4,536-kg) trip limit was assumed to prevail for the entire Winter I 
period. For Options II, III, and IV, the lower overall 2001 TAL for 
scup means that 75 percent of the Winter I scup quota would likely be 
reached by the end of February, based on 1999 logbook data, so a 1,000-
lb (454-kg) trip limit for scup was applied for March and April of the 
Winter I period under these three options.
    NMFS' analysis found that the proposed management measures 
potentially impact a total of 1,158 vessels that participated in at 
least one of the summer flounder, scup and black sea bass fisheries, or 
had fished with mobile gear with less than 4.5-inch (11.43 cm) mesh 
inside at least one of the proposed GRAs.
    Using the landings baseline proration method, Options I and III are 
expected to yield total gross revenues higher than would the status quo 
measures by approximately $0.91 million and $0.40 million, 
respectively, whereas Options II and IV yielded total gross revenues 
lower than the status quo by approximately $0.16 million and $0.13 
million, respectively.
    As part of the IRFA supplement, NMFS' analysis examined the four 
options relative to the status quo (2000 measures, as described 
earlier) to determine the percentage of the 1,158 potentially affected 
vessels that would experience a revenue loss of 5 percent or greater. A 
summary is provided here.

            Percent of Vessels Experiencing Revenue Loss > 5%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Landings    Quota
                                                     baseline   baseline
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option I..........................................        2.1        3.4
Option II.........................................        3.2        4.6
Option III........................................        2.8        4.1
Option IV.........................................        2.9        4.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Council's IRFA analysis examined the cumulative impacts of four 
alternative levels of commercial harvest limits (see Table 5). 
Alternative 1 analyzed the cumulative impacts of the harvest limits 
proposed by the Council and Board for summer flounder, scup, and black 
sea bass on vessels that are permitted to catch any of these three 
species. Alternative 2 analyzed the cumulative impacts if the harvest 
limits remained the same as 2000 (status quo). Alternative 3 analyzed 
the cumulative impacts of the least restrictive possible harvest 
levels--those that would result in the least reductions (or greatest 
increases) in landings (relative to 1999) for all species. Alternative 
3 resulted in the highest possible landings for 2001, regardless of 
their probability of achieving the biological targets. Alternative 4 
analyzed the cumulative impacts of the most restrictive possible 
harvest levels--those that would result in the greatest reductions in 
landings (relative to 1999) for all species.

 Table 5.--Comparison of the Alternatives of Quota Combinations Reviewed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Quota
                                              specification
                                  Commercial       as a        Percent
                                    quota     proportion of     change
                                                 the 2000
                                                  quotas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quota Alternative 1 (Council
 Alternative):
    FLK Preferred Alternative..   10,747,535         0.967         -3.27
    Scup Preferred Alternative.    4,444,600         1.754         75.38
    Black Sea Bass Preferred       3,024,742             1             0
     Alternative...............
Quota Alternative 2 (Status
 Quo):
    FLK Status Quo.............   11,111,298             1             0
    Scup Status Quo............    2,534,160             1             0
    Black Sea Bass Status Quo..    3,024,742             1             0
Quota Alternative 3 (Least
 Restrictive):
    FLK Non-Selected              12,276,662         1.105         10.49
     Alternative 3.............
    Scup Non-Selected              5,138,800         2.028        102.78
     Alternative 3.............
    Black Sea Bass Non-Selected    3,875,900         1.281         28.14
     Alternative 3.............
Quota Alternative 4 (Most
 Restrictive):
    FLK Non-Selected               9,940,643         0.895        -10.54
     Alternative 4.............
    Scup Non-Selected              3,496,120         1.380         37.96
     Alternative 4.............
    Black Sea Bass Non-Selected    1,999,200         0.661       -33.91
     Alternative 4.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``FLK'' is summer flounder

    The categories of small entities likely to be affected by this 
action include commercial vessel owners holding an active Federal 
permit for summer flounder, scup, or black sea bass, as well as vessels 
that fish for any of these species in state waters. The Council 
estimates that the proposed 2001 quotas could affect 1,969 vessels with 
a Federal summer flounder, scup, and/or black sea bass permit. Of 
these, 1,087 vessels are actively participating (i.e., landed catch in 
1999) in these fisheries. Note that this number is lower than the 
number estimated to be impacted in the NMFS analysis. This is because 
the NMFS analysis also includes vessels

[[Page 71050]]

that used fishing mesh less than 4.5 inches (11.43 cm) within the GRAs.
    The Council's analysis of the harvest limits in Alternative 1 
indicates that these harvest levels would result in greater than a 5-
percent revenue loss to eight of the 1,087 commercial vessels expected 
to be impacted by this rule. Six of the vessels with projected revenue 
losses of 5 percent or greater landed black sea bass only, one vessel 
landed scup and black sea bass, and the other vessel landed black sea 
bass and summer flounder. Six vessels would experience no change in 
revenue. Five hundred and forty-four vessels would experience revenue 
losses of less than 5 percent, and 529 vessels would experience an 
increase in revenue under the Council's proposed harvest limits.
    The analysis of Alternative 2 (status quo) indicated that these 
harvest limits would result in a revenue loss of 5 percent or greater 
to 15 of the 1,087 commercial vessels expected to be impacted by this 
rule. Six of the vessels with projected revenue losses of 5 percent or 
greater landed black sea bass only, five vessels landed scup and black 
sea bass, one vessel landed black sea bass and summer flounder, two 
vessels landed summer flounder scup and black sea bass, and one vessel 
landed scup only. No change in revenue would be experienced under the 
Alternative 2 by 6 vessels, while 95 vessels would have revenue losses 
less than 5 percent. 971 vessels would experience an increase in 
revenue.
    The analysis of the least restrictive harvest limits (Alternative 
3) indicated that none of the 1,087 vessels expected to be impacted by 
this rule would experience revenue losses of 5 percent or greater. All 
but one of the vessels would experience an increase in revenue. The 
vessel projected to experience a revenue loss of less than 5 percent 
possessed a summer flounder permit.
    The analysis of the most restrictive harvest limits (Alternative 4) 
indicated that revenue reductions of 5 percent or more would be 
experienced by 214 out of the 1,087 commercial vessels expected to be 
impacted by this rule. Eighty-six of the vessels with projected revenue 
losses of 5 percent or greater landed black sea bass only; 39 vessels 
landed summer flounder, scup and black sea bass; 38 vessels landed 
black sea bass and summer flounder; 25 vessels landed summer flounder 
only; 22 vessels landed scup and black sea bass; and 4 vessels landed 
summer flounder and scup. Six hundred and eighty-nine vessels would 
have a revenue loss less than 5 percent, and 184 vessels would 
experience an increase in revenue.
    The Council also prepared an analysis of the alternative 
recreational harvest limits. For the summer flounder recreational 
fishery, the preferred harvest limit of 7.165 million lb (3.25 million 
kg) in 2001 (Alternative 1) is only slightly less than the harvest 
limit for 1997, 1998, 1999, and 2000, and about 1.201 million lb (0.54 
million kg) below the recreational landings for 1999. Alternative 2's 
recreational harvest limit of 7.41 million lb (3.36 million kg) in 2001 
would be the same harvest level that was implemented each year 
beginning in 1997. However, it could result in a decrease in 
recreational landings of about 1 million lb (0.45 million kg) from 
estimated recreational landings for 1999. Alternative 4's recreational 
harvest limit of 6.63 million lb (3.0 million kg) in 2001 would be 0.78 
million lb (0.35 million kg) below the recreational harvest limit for 
2000 and 0.96 million lb (0.44 million kg) below the 1999 recreational 
landings. If Alternative 1, 2, or 4 were chosen, it is likely that more 
restrictive management measures would be required to prevent anglers 
from exceeding the recreational harvest limit in 2001. The effect of 
greater restrictions is unknown at this time. More limiting regulations 
could affect demand for party/charter boat trips. However, party/
charter activity in the 1990s has remained relatively stable, so the 
effects may be minimal. Alternative 3 would allocate 8.184 million lb 
(3.71 million kg) to the summer flounder recreational fishery and would 
increase short-term economic benefits due to increased landings.
    For the scup recreational fishery, Alternative 1's recreational 
harvest limit of 1.77 million lb (0.80 million kg) is nearly identical 
to 1999 landings and, therefore, should have minimal impacts. 
Alternative 2's limit of 1.238 million lb (0.56 million kg) could 
result in a decrease in recreational landings of about 0.65 million lb 
(0.29 million kg) from estimated recreational landings for 1999. 
Alternative 4's recreational harvest limit of 1.504 million lb (0.68 
million kg) ould be a 20-percent decrease from the 1999 recreational 
landings, but 0.3 million lb (0.14 million kg) more than the 
recreational harvest limit implemented for 2000. With Alternative 2 or 
4, it is likely that more restrictive management measures would be 
required to prevent anglers from exceeding the recreational harvest 
limit in 2001. The effect of greater restrictions on party/charter 
boats is unknown at this time. Alternative 3 would increase the 
recreational harvest limit by 4 percent compared to 1999 recreational 
landings, or to 1.967 million lb (0.89 million kg), and therefore is 
not expected to result in negative economic impacts.
    For the black sea bass recreational fishery, harvest limits under 
Alternative 1 and 2 (3.14 million lb (1.42 million kg)) are about 85 
percent above the 1999 recreational landings. As such they are not 
expected to result in negative economic impacts on the recreational 
fishery. Under Alternative 3 and 4 recreational landings would be 
increased by more than 2 million lb (0.90 million kg) and 0.38 million 
lb (0.17 million kg), respectively, over the 1999 landings estimate; 
therefore these alternatives are not expected to cause negative 
economic impacts.
    The Council analysis used 1998 Vessel Trip Report (VTR) data to 
estimate that a maximum of 172 vessels would be affected by the GRAs. 
The Council's analysis identified affected vessels as those that fished 
with trawl gear with codend mesh less than 4.5 inches (11.4 cm) in the 
largest of the GRAs evaluated in the 2000 specifications. These GRAs 
incorporated full statistical areas, while the GRAs that were 
implemented and that are analyzed here are smaller. Therefore, the 
Council concluded that 172 vessels would represent the maximum number 
of affected entities; the actual number would likely be smaller but 
could not be quantified.
    The Council noted that the economic impacts of the GRA alternatives 
may be overestimated because the GRAs do not prohibit all trawling 
activity, but may rather redirect it to other open areas. The amount of 
redirection could not be quantified. The economic impacts of a 
reduction in landings from inside the GRAs are likely to be mitigated 
by an increase in landings from outside the GRAs, though vessel costs 
could increase if being displaced from the GRAs increases trip length 
or decreases catch per unit effort.
    The Council analysis concludes that the proposed mesh threshold 
increase from 200 lb to 500 lb (91 kg to 227 kg) for the November-April 
period is expected to have a positive impact on harvesters using small 
mesh, since more scup will be able to be retained in the small mesh 
fishery than under the status quo.
    The 75-percent landing trigger proposed for the scup Winter I 
period would decrease the landing limit from 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) to 
1,000 lb (453 kg) per trip. An 85-percent trigger was used in 2000. The 
75-percent trigger is expected to decrease landings early enough in the 
period so that the quota

[[Page 71051]]

will be distributed over more of the Winter I period. This measure is 
not expected to have a major negative effect on landings during the 
period, because it is not a major change from the 2000 measure.
    The major impact associated with the proposed change in the scup 
possession limit in Winter II from 4,000 lb (1,814 kg) to 2,000 lb (907 
kg) is a potential increase in the number of trips made by vessels 
during that period. The Council estimated that the proposed change in 
the possession limit for Winter II would increase the numbers of trips 
from 142 to 232. If harvesters are unable to make additional trips to 
compensate for the reduction in landings associated with the possession 
limit (142 trips was a limiting factor), then each of the estimated 49 
vessels landing scup in this period would lose an estimated $3,692. 
This loss in revenue is likely to be overestimated, since vessels could 
make additional trips or fish longer on the same trips for other 
species to compensate for landings reductions associated with the 
proposed scup possession limit. This would have an unknown impact on 
scup mortaltiy.
    The major impact associated with the proposed black sea bass 
possession limit changes in Quarter 2, from 3,000 lb (1,361 kg) to 
1,500 lb (680 kg) and Quarter 3, from 2,000 lb (907 kg) to 1,000 lb 
(454 kg) is a potential increase in the number of trips made by vessels 
during those periods. Based on 1999 dealer reports, the Council 
estimated that the proposed possession limits for Quarters 2 and 3 
would increase the numbers of trips needed to land the same amount of 
black sea bass landed during those quarters in 1999 from 144 to 256, 
and from 102 to 177, respectively. If harvesters are unable to make 
additional trips to compensate for the reduction in landings associated 
with the possession limits (144 and 102 trips were limiting factors), 
each vessel would lose an estimated $7,802 and $7,065 during Quarters 2 
and 3, respectively. These revenue losses are likely to be 
overestimated, since vessels could make additional trips or fish longer 
on the same trips for other species to compensate for landings 
reductions associated with the proposed landing limit. This would have 
an unknown impact on black sea bass mortality.
    The President has directed Federal agencies to use plain language 
in their communications with the public, including regulations. To 
comply with this directive, we seek public comment on any ambiguity or 
unnecessary complexity arising from the language used in this proposed 
rule. Such comments should be sent to the Northeast Regional 
Administrator (see ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

    Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 22, 2000.
William T. Hogarth,
Deputy 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. 648.14, paragraph (a)(123) is removed; and paragraphs 
(a)(84), (a)(92), (a)(122) and (u)(9) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.14  Prohibitions.

    (a) * * *
    (84) Fish for, catch, possess, or retain scup in or from the EEZ 
north of 35 deg.15.3' N. lat. in excess of the amount specified in 
Sec. 648.123 (500 lb (226.8 kg) or more from November 1-April 30, or 
100 lb (45.4 kg) or more from May 1-October 31), unless the vessel 
meets the gear restrictions in Sec. 648.123.
* * * * *
    (92) Fish for, catch, possess, or retain 1,000 lb (453.4 kg) or 
more of black sea bass in or from the EEZ north of 35 deg.15.3' N. 
lat., the latitude of Cape Hatteras Light, NC, to the U.S.--Canadian 
border, unless the vessel meets the gear restrictions of Sec. 648.144.
* * * * *
    (122) Fish for, catch, possess, retain or land silver hake or black 
sea bass in or from the areas, and during the time periods, described 
in Sec. 648.122(a), (b), or (c) while in possession of any trawl nets 
or netting that do not meet the minimum mesh restrictions, or that are 
modified, obstructed or constricted, as specified in Sec. 648.122 and 
Sec. 648.123(a), unless the nets or netting are stowed in accordance 
with Sec. 648.23(b).
* * * * *
    (u) * * *
    (9) Possess, retain, or land black sea bass harvested in or from 
the EEZ in excess of the commercial possession limit established at 
Sec. 648.140.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec. 648.120, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.120  Catch quotas and other restrictions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Possession limits for the Winter I and Winter II periods. The 
possession limit is the maximum quantity of scup that is allowed to be 
landed within a 24 hour period (calendar day).
* * * * *
    4. In Sec. 648.122, paragraphs (d) and (e) are redesignated as (e) 
and (f); paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) are revised, and a new paragraph 
(d) is added as follows:


Sec. 648.122  Season and area restrictions.

    (a) Southern Gear Restricted Area. (1) From January 1 through April 
30, all trawl vessels in the Southern Gear Restricted Area that fish 
for or possess non-exempt species as specified in paragraph (a)(2) of 
this section, must fish with nets that have a minimum mesh size of 4.5 
inches (11.43 cm) diamond mesh, applied throughout the codend for at 
least 75 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the net. For 
codends with fewer than 75 meshes, the minimum-mesh-size codend must be 
a minimum of one-third of the net, measured from the terminus of the 
codend to the head rope, excluding any turtle excluder device 
extension, unless otherwise specified in this section. The Southern 
Gear Restricted Area is an area bounded by straight lines connecting 
the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart depicting 
the area are available from the Regional Administrator upon request):

                      Southern Gear Restricted Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Point                         N. Lat.    W. Long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SGA1..............................................  39 deg.00  72 deg.50
                                                            '          '
SGA2..............................................  39 deg.11  72 deg.58
                                                            '          '
SGA3..............................................  38 deg.00  74 deg.05
                                                            '          '
SGA4..............................................  38 deg.00  73 deg.57
                                                            '          '
SGA1..............................................  39 deg.00  72 deg.50
                                                            '          '
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Non-exempt species. Unless otherwise specified in paragraph (d) 
of this section, the restrictions specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this 
section apply only to vessels in the Southern Gear Restricted Area that 
are fishing for or in possession of the following non-exempt species: 
Black sea bass and silver hake (whiting).
    (b) Northern Gear Restricted Area I. (1) From November 1 through 
December 31, all trawl vessels in the Northern Gear Restricted Area I 
that fish for or possess non-exempt species as specified in paragraph 
(b)(2) of this section must fish with nets that have a minimum

[[Page 71052]]

mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm) diamond mesh, applied throughout the 
codend for at least 75 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the 
net. For codends with fewer than 75 meshes, the minimum-mesh-size 
codend must be a minimum of one-third of the net, measured from the 
terminus of the codend to the head rope, excluding any turtle excluder 
device extension, unless otherwise specified in this section. The 
Northern Gear Restricted Area I is an area bounded by straight lines 
connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart 
depicting the area are available from the Regional Administrator upon 
request):

                     Northern Gear Restricted Area I
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. Lat.      W. Long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NGA1..........................................   41 deg.00'   71 deg.00'
NGA2..........................................   41 deg.00'   71 deg.30'
NGA3..........................................   40 deg.00'   72 deg.40'
NGA4..........................................   40 deg.00'   72 deg.05'
NGA1..........................................   41 deg.00'   71 deg.00'
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Non-exempt species. Unless otherwise specified in paragraph (d) 
of this section, the restrictions specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this 
section apply only to vessels in the Northern Gear Restricted Area I 
that are fishing for, or in possession of, the following non-exempt 
species: Black sea bass and silver hake (whiting).
    (c) Northern Gear Restricted Area II. (1) From December 1 through 
January 31, all trawl vessels in the Northern Gear Restricted Area II 
that fish for or possess non-exempt species as specified in paragraph 
(c)(2) of this section must fish with nets that have a minimum mesh 
size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm) diamond mesh, applied throughout the 
codend for at least 75 continuous meshes forward of the terminus of the 
net. For codends with fewer than 75 meshes, the minimum-mesh-size 
codend must be a minimum of one-third of the net, measured from the 
terminus of the codend to the head rope, excluding any turtle excluder 
device extension, unless otherwise specified in this section. The 
Northern Gear Restricted Area II is an area bounded by straight lines 
connecting the following points in the order stated (copies of a chart 
depicting the area are available from the Regional Administrator upon 
request):

                    Northern Gear Restricted Area II
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Point                        N. Lat.      W. Long.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NGA6..........................................   40 deg.00'   71 deg.40'
NGA7..........................................   40 deg.00'   72 deg.10'
NGA8..........................................   39 deg.00'   73 deg.09'
NGA9..........................................   39 deg.00'   72 deg.50'
NGA6..........................................   40 deg.00'   71 deg.40'
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) Non-exempt species. Unless otherwise specified in paragraph (d) 
of this section, the restrictions specified in paragraph (c)(1) of this 
section apply only to vessels in the Northern Gear Restricted Area II 
that are fishing for, or in possession of, the following non-exempt 
species: Black sea bass, Loligo squid, and silver hake (whiting).
    (d) Transiting. Vessels that are subject to the provisions of the 
Southern and Northern GRAs, as specified in paragraphs (a), (b), and 
(c) of this section, respectively, may transit these areas provided 
that trawl net codends on board of mesh size less than that specified 
in paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section are not available for 
immediate use and are stowed in accordance with the provisions of 
Sec. 648.23(b).
* * * * *
    5. In Sec. 648.123, paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(5) are revised to 
read as follows:


Sec. 648.123  Gear restrictions.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Minimum mesh size. The owners or operators of otter trawlers 
who are issued a scup moratorium permit and who possess 500 lb (226.8 
kg) or more of scup from November 1 through April 30, or 100 lb (45.4 
kg) or more of scup from May 1 through October 31, must fish with nets 
that have a minimum mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm) diamond mesh, 
applied throughout the codend for at least 75 continuous meshes forward 
of the terminus of the net. For codends with fewer than 75 meshes, the 
minimum-mesh-size codend must be a minimum of one-third of the net, 
measured from the terminus of the codend to the head rope, excluding 
any turtle excluder device extension. Scup on board these vessels shall 
be stored separately and kept readily available for inspection.
* * * * *
    (5) Stowage of nets. The owner or operator of an otter trawl vessel 
retaining 500 lb (226.8 kg) or more of scup from November 1 through 
April 30, or 100 lb (45.4 kg) or more of scup from May 1 through 
October 31, and subject to the minimum mesh requirements in paragraph 
(a)(1) of this section, and the owner or operator of a midwater trawl 
or other trawl vessel subject to the minimum mesh size requirement in 
Sec. 648.122, may not have available for immediate use any net, or any 
piece of net, not meeting the minimum mesh size requirement, or mesh 
that is rigged in a manner that is inconsistent with the minimum mesh 
size. A net that conforms to one of the methods specified in 
Sec. 648.23(b), and that can be shown not to have been in recent use is 
considered to be not available for immediate use.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec. 648.140, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 648.140  Catch quotas and other restrictions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) A commercial possession limit for all moratorium vessels may be 
set from a range of zero to the maximum allowed to assure that the 
quarterly quota is not exceeded, with the provision that these 
quantities be the maximum allowed to be landed within a 24-hour period 
(calendar day).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 00-30336 Filed 11-22-00; 4:41 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P