Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 14

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 961108316-7051-02; I.D. 101796C]

RIN 0648-AI47

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic;

Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 14

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement Amendment 14 to the

Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of

Mexico (FMP). This final rule prohibits the use or possession of fish

traps in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf)

beginning February 8, 2007; prohibits the use or possession of fish

traps west of 85 deg.30' W. long.; modifies the procedure for retrieval

of fish traps when a breakdown prevents a vessel with a trap

endorsement from retrieving its traps; modifies the restrictions on

transfer of fish trap endorsements and reef fish permits; prohibits the

harvest or possession of Nassau grouper in or from the EEZ of the Gulf;

and clarifies the authority of the Regional Administrator, Southeast

Region, NMFS (RA), to reopen a prematurely closed fishery. In addition,

NMFS extends the current prohibition on the possession of dynamite on

board a permitted vessel to those vessels permitted in the South

Atlantic golden crab fishery. The intended effects of this rule are to

conserve and manage the reef fish resources of the Gulf and enhance

enforceability of the regulations. This rule also informs the public of

the approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of a new

collection-of-information requirement contained in this rule.

EFFECTIVE DATES: April 24, 1997, except that the amendments to

Sec. 622.4 are effective March 25, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the final regulatory flexibility

analysis (FRFA) should be sent to Robert Sadler, Southeast Regional

Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Dr. N., St. Petersburg, FL 33702.

Comments regarding the collection-of-information requirement

contained in this rule should be sent to Edward E. Burgess, Southeast

Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg,

FL 33702, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503 (Attention:

NOAA Desk Officer).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico

is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico

Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented through

regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-

Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).

The Council developed Amendment 14 to address various problems in

the reef fish fishery, primarily those associated with the fish trap

fishery and the expiration of a moratorium on the issuance of

additional fish trap endorsements to reef fish permits on February 7,

1997. The rationale for the management measures in Amendment 14, and

the additional regulatory changes proposed by NMFS, are contained in

the preamble of the proposed rule (61 FR 59852, November

[[Page 13984]]

25, 1996) and are not repeated here. After considering the public

comment received on the amendment and the proposed rule, NMFS approved

all of the amendment measures on January 22, 1997. NMFS is issuing this

final rule to implement those approved measures.

Comments and Responses

The notice of availability for Amendment 14 was published on

October 23, 1996 (61 FR 55128) and written public comments on the

amendment were requested through December 23, 1996. The proposed rule

requested written public comments on the rule through January 9, 1997.

Comments were received from five entities on Amendment 14 and/or the

proposed rule, summarized as follows.

Comments: An individual, the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission

(FMFC), and a coral reef conservation organization provided substantive

and detailed comments on various issues associated with the fish trap

ban. These comments suggest that the current fish trap regulations

cannot be effectively enforced and thereby contribute to continuing and

undesirable fishing mortality of reef fish (i.e., through illegal and

undetected use of fish traps, as well as through ghost-fishing by lost

traps). The FMFC and the conservation organization commented that

continued use of fish traps in Federal waters off Florida during the

10-year ``phaseout'' period will contribute to bycatch problems, user

group conflicts, and illegal trap use in State waters. The FMFC

preferred a ban on the use of traps after 2 years, but supported the

10-year phaseout compared to the status quo (i.e., unlimited

availability of fish trap endorsements for permitted reef fish vessels

after expiration of the current moratorium on trap endorsements on

February 7, 1997). The conservation organization also supported

Amendment 14, but recommended a 10-percent reduction in the number of

fish traps each year during the 10-year phaseout period. The individual

also commented that fish traps should be immediately banned off

Florida.

Another individual (the fourth commenter) commented that a phaseout

of fish traps in less than 10 years would be more logical, but did not

provide additional rationale in support of the comment. A seafood

company owner (the fifth commenter) provided editorial comments on the

text of the proposed rule.

Response: NMFS acknowledges the support for Amendment 14 indicated

by comments by the FMFC and the conservation organization. NMFS

supports the 10-year phaseout leading to a prohibition of fish traps.

This support is based on concerns that the current fish trap

regulations cannot be effectively enforced and thereby contribute to

continued fishing mortality by illegal and undetected fish traps, as

well as by lost traps (i.e., through ghost-fishing). NMFS approved the

10-year phaseout leading to a prohibition of fish traps as a fair and

satisfactory means of addressing the fishery problems of enforcement

and biological impacts associated with using trap gear for reef fish.

Enforcement of regulations regarding the use of fish traps during

the 10-year phaseout period should be improved by implementation of the

prohibition on the use or possession of fish traps west of Cape San

Blas, FL, and by the revised procedure for fish trap retrieval in the

event of a vessel breakdown. These two measures should significantly

address the commenters' concerns about the continuing illegal use of

traps in State waters.

After considering alternative time periods for elimination of trap

gear in the reef fish fishery, including an immediate ban, as well as

time periods longer and shorter than 10 years, the Council selected the

10-year phaseout period as the most reasonable compromise between

persons who supported an indefinite continuation of fish trapping and

fish trap opponents who supported an immediate ban on the gear. NMFS

concurs with the Council's selection.

A 10-percent reduction in the number of fish traps each year, as

suggested by the conservation organization, was not one of the

alternatives explicitly considered and evaluated by the Council in

Amendment 14. To undertake this approach in phasing out trap gear would

require that the Council propose the appropriate management measure

under another FMP amendment and that such measure be reviewed,

approved, and implemented by NMFS under provisions of the Magnuson-

Stevens Act.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

NMFS is adding to this final rule corrections of the scientific

names for red porgy in Tables 3 and 4 and saucereye porgy in Table 4 of

Appendix A to part 622. Otherwise, the proposed rule is adopted as

final without substantive change.

Under NOAA Administrative Order 205-11, 7.01, dated December 17,

1990, the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere, Department of

Commerce, has delegated authority to sign material for publication in

the Federal Register to the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

NOAA.

Classification

This final rule has been determined to be not significant for

purposes of E.O. 12866.

The Council prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA), pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(RFA), that described the expected significant economic effects on a

substantial number of the small business entities engaged in harvesting

the reef fish resources in the Gulf of Mexico. During the public

comment periods on the amendment and the proposed rule, no public

comments were received that addressed specifically the analysis or

conclusions of the IRFA; no additional information was received that

would change the analysis or conclusions of the IRFA regarding the

impacts on small business entities. Accordingly, the FRFA is based on

the IRFA without substantive change. Copies of the FRFA are available

(see ADDRESSES). A summary of the FRFA follows.

Amendment 14 and this final rule are needed to address five

problems in the fishery. The first problem resulted from the expiration

of a 3-year moratorium on the issuance of new fish trap endorsements on

February 7, 1997. New regulatory action following this moratorium

expiration is required to ensure that the fish trap fishery continues

to be managed and that specific restrictions are established regarding

the transfer of fish trap endorsements within the fishery. A continuing

management program is essential for addressing the concerns of the

Council and NMFS regarding the effects of the serious enforcement

problems within the trap fishery for reef fish. A second problem is the

potential for an uncontrolled expansion of the use of fish traps.

Geographical limitations on the gear are needed to prevent an

uncontrolled expansion of the range of the fishery and associated

enforcement problems. A third problem is that, prior to Amendment 14,

the FMP did not provide the NMFS Regional Administrator, Southeast

Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) with the authority to reopen and

subsequently close a prematurely closed commercial fishery (i.e., a

fishery that has not actually filled its quota on the initial closure

date); this resulted in the loss of harvestable fish to commercial

fishermen. A fourth problem is that the FMP allowed a reef fish permit

transfer only when the owner of the vessel whose permit is being

transferred had met the income qualification for the

[[Page 13985]]

permit. This prevented an operator, whose earned income qualified for

the permit, from acquiring the permit for which he/she has qualified

when he/she buys the vessel. A fifth problem is the reported decline in

the abundance of the Nassau grouper resource in the EEZ of the Gulf of

Mexico. This species is overutilized, is a candidate for protection

under the Endangered Species Act, and its harvest and possession is

prohibited in Florida's waters and in the South Atlantic and Caribbean

EEZ. Allowing continuing harvest of Nassau grouper in the Gulf of

Mexico EEZ could contribute to a further decline of this species. The

objectives of Amendment 14 and this final rule are to: (1) Provide for

control of the fish trap fishery after termination of the moratorium on

trap fishery participants that expired on February 7, 1997; (2) provide

the management flexibility to reopen and subsequently close a fishery

that has been prematurely closed; (3) provide some flexibility in the

transfer of fish trap endorsements during the trap fishery phaseout

period; and (4) provide for protection of Nassau grouper throughout its

range.

Limited public comments were received by NMFS on Amendment 14 and

its proposed rule. These comments generally supported the phaseout or

elimination of the trap fishery for reef fish in the EEZ because of

enforcement problems, potential adverse biological impacts of the

fishery, and possible effects of encouraging illegal trap fishing in

State waters. Commenters advocated different time periods for the

elimination of traps ranging from an immediate ban to an incremental

reduction in the number of traps each year over the 10-year period. No

changes were made in this final rule over the proposed rule as a result

of these public comments. A summary of the comments and NMFS' responses

is provided in the supplementary information for this rule (see

``Comments and Responses'' ).

Approximately 1,400 reef fish harvesting firms have reef fish

permits. The average fishing firm operates with a vessel that is 38 ft

(11.6 m) long, 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. All of the harvesting

firms affected by the rule are classified as small business entities.

The following measures directly apply to all of the firms holding a

reef fish permit (including fish trappers): Modification of the

restrictions on transfer of reef fish permits; allowance for transfer

of fish trap endorsements during the first 2 years of the phaseout

period; prohibition on the harvest or possession of Nassau grouper in

or from the EEZ; and provision of authority for the Regional

Administrator to reopen a prematurely closed fishery. The predicted

socioeconomic effects of these measures are not considered significant

under the RFA (i.e., as a result of these measures, no more than 20

percent of affected entities will incur revenue decreases greater than

5 percent; compliance costs will not increase total costs of production

by more than 5 percent, nor will they represent a significant portion

of capital available to small entities; disproportionate effects on

capital costs of compliance should not occur since all participants in

the reef fish fishery, including the 92 in the fish trap sector, are

small business entities; and no entity will be forced to cease business

operations).

The following management measures apply directly only to the 92

firms that comprise the fish trap component of the reef fish fishery

(i.e., those that hold fish trap endorsements): A prohibition on the

use or possession of fish traps in the EEZ beginning February 8, 2007;

a prohibition of the use or possession of fish traps west of Cape San

Blas, FL; and a modified procedure for retrieval of fish traps. These

measures are projected to have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. All of the 92 firms within this

sector should experience more than a 5-percent reduction in annual

gross income when fish trapping is prohibited. With such prohibition,

all current value of traps will be lost because the traps have no value

for other purposes. Available data indicate that the average fish

trapper fishes 53 traps. Given an estimated cost of $48.50 per trap

(adjusted for depreciation), the average fish trapper would lose an

estimated minimum of $2,570.50, or 12.7 percent, of the annual cost of

fish trapping (salvage value) in the year when the traps are

prohibited. It is estimated that 11 to 13 of the 92 firms, or 12 to 14

percent of the firms, would be forced out of business by the fish trap

phaseout.

This rule contains a new collection-of-information requirement.

When a permitted vessel with a trap endorsement is unable to retrieve

its own traps, the owner or operator must notify the nearest NMFS

Office of Enforcement and obtain authorization for another vessel to

retrieve the traps. This rule continues in effect previously approved

collection-of-information requirements associated with the fish trap

permit endorsement system.

The Council considered numerous management alternatives that would

address the enforcement problems with and biological impacts of the

fish trap fishery. These alternatives included periods for the phaseout

or elimination of trap gear in the reef fish fishery both shorter and

longer than its proposed 10-year period. Also, the Council considered a

permanent fish trap license limitation system involving varying numbers

of participants. The Council proposed the 10-year phaseout approach for

eliminating trap gear, and NMFS approved it, as an effective means of

resolving the issues of enforcement and biological effects in the

fishery while spreading out the adverse economic impacts on trap

fishermen over a reasonable time period. The 10-year period should

minimize short-term costs to trap fishermen by allowing continuing use

of the gear while still providing ample time for them to switch to

other gear, fisheries, or activities.

The Council proposed the additional provision that fish trap

endorsements be fully transferable for the first 2 years of the

phaseout period as a means of minimizing adverse economic impacts on

current trap fishery participants who could receive economic benefits

by selling their fish trap endorsements. The Council considered various

alternatives regarding liberalized transfer provisions for trap

endorsements for the remaining 8 years of the phaseout period, but

concluded that such measures would undermine its objective of reducing

the number of trap fishery participants.

The Council considered several options regarding area restrictions

on trap use (in addition to the current prohibition on traps within a

Gulf-wide ``stressed area'' in the nearshore waters of the Gulf EEZ).

The Council concluded that expansion of the fish trap fishery beyond

its current geographical scope is inconsistent with the intent of its

proposed phaseout of trap gear in the reef fish fishery. The Council's

proposed prohibition on the use of traps west of Cape San Blas, FL,

would limit the trap fishery to that area where the fishery currently

occurs and thereby prevent any increase in enforcement problems. The

Council rejected alternatives regarding area restrictions (except for

the status quo) as eliminating traps from some areas where they are

currently used. This would have differentially impacted certain trap

fishermen who would have to travel farther to reach areas open to

fishing. The result would be reduced efficiency of fishing operations

for certain fishermen, but no overall decrease in trap fishing effort.

Also, some of the rejected alternatives regarding area

[[Page 13986]]

restrictions would have increased user conflicts on the fishing

grounds.

Regarding the procedure for fish trap retrieval in the event of a

vessel breakdown, the Council rejected the status quo alternative,

since reliable information indicated action was needed to improve

enforceability of the requirement that fish traps be returned to shore

after each fishing trip. The approved management measures regarding

trap retrieval during a vessel breakdown should enhance fishermen's

compliance with existing trap-tending regulations. These measures are

expected to increase fishing operation costs primarily for those

fishermen who try to circumvent such regulations (i.e., the average

time that traps are left in the water, and therefore catching fish, may

be reduced).

Regarding the measure giving the Regional Administrator authority

to reopen a prematurely closed commercial or recreational fishery for a

Gulf reef fish species or species group when needed to ensure harvest

of the full commercial quota or recreational fishery allocation, all of

the alternatives considered by the Council would provide fishermen with

fewer economic benefits.

The modification of the restrictions on the transfer of reef fish

permits between a vessel owner and an income-qualifying operator and

the provision giving a non-income-qualifying owner who loses his/her

income-qualifying operator an additional grace period for meeting the

earned income requirements for a new permit should address unintended,

permit-transfer inequities adversely affecting income-qualifying vessel

operators and non-income qualifying vessel owners. The result should be

increased flexibility in the transfer of reef fish vessel permits,

minimized adverse economic impacts on small entities resulting from the

previous permit transfer restrictions, and, hence, increased efficiency

in commercial fishing operations in the long-run. No adverse impacts on

gross revenues or costs of fishing operations are expected.

The Council considered a status quo management alternative

regarding the harvest of Nassau grouper in the Gulf EEZ (allowing

continued harvest) that was rejected because it would not provide

adequate protection for this overutilized resource. Also, the

prohibited harvest in the Gulf EEZ should ensure consistent management

throughout the species' range. Considering the relatively small annual

commercial landings of this species since the mid-1980s, the prohibited

harvest is expected to have inconsequential economic impacts on

commercial fishermen. Adverse impacts would be relatively larger in the

recreational fishery, but are still considered small.

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.

As previously discussed, this rule contains a new collection-of-

information requirement subject to the PRA--namely the requirement

that, when a vessel with a fish trap endorsement has a breakdown that

prevents the vessel from retrieving its traps, the owner or operator

notify the nearest NMFS Office of Enforcement and obtain authorization

for another vessel to retrieve the traps. This collection of

information has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 0648-

0205. The public reporting burden for this collection of information is

estimated at 3 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and

maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the

collection of information. Send comments regarding this reporting

burden estimate, or any other aspect of the collection of information,

including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS and OMB (see

ADDRESSES). This rule continues in effect previous collection-of-

information requirements associated with the fish trap permit

endorsement system that were previously approved by OMB under OMB

control number 0648-0205.

The provisions of 50 CFR 622.4(m) provide additional circumstances

under which a reef fish permit may be transferred. These provisions

constitute a substantive rule that relieves a restriction and, pursuant

to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), are not subject to the general requirement of

the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to delay for 30 days the

effective date of the revisions to 50 CFR 622.4(m) or the revisions of

references to that paragraph.

The provisions of this rule regarding transfer and renewal of fish

trap endorsements at 50 CFR 622.4(n) (including references to this

paragraph) constitute a substantive rule that relieves restrictions

and, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), are not subject to the general

requirement of the APA to delay for 30 days the effective date.

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: March 19, 1997.

C. Karnella,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries

Service.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR chapter IX and 50

CFR chapter VI are amended as follows:

15 CFR CHAPTER IX

PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS

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

follows:

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

2. In Sec. 902.1, the table in paragraph (b) is amended by adding,

in numerical order, the following entry to read as follows:

Sec. 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork

Reduction Act.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

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

Current

OMB

control

number

CFR part or section where the information collection (all

requirement is located numbers

begin

with

0648-)

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

* * * * *

50 CFR

* * * * *

622.40(a)(2)................................................... -0205

* * * * *

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

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 March 25, 1997, in Sec. 622.4, in paragraph (a)(2)(i),

in the second sentence, the words ``a moratorium on'' are removed;

paragraph (a)(2)(v), the last sentence; paragraph (g),

[[Page 13987]]

the first sentence; paragraphs (m) and (n); and paragraph (p)(3)(i),

the last, parenthetical sentence are revised to read as follows:

Sec. 622.4 Permits and fees.

(a) * * *

(2) * * *

(v) Gulf reef fish. * * * See paragraph (m) of this section

regarding a moratorium on commercial vessel permits for Gulf reef fish

and limited exceptions to the earned income requirement for a permit.

* * * * *

(g) Transfer. A vessel permit 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, in paragraph (n) of this section for a fish

trap endorsement, or in paragraph (p) of this section for a red snapper

endorsement. * * *

* * * * *

(m) Moratorium on commercial vessel permits for Gulf reef fish. The

provisions of this paragraph (m) are applicable through December 31,

2000.

(1) No applications for additional commercial vessel permits for

Gulf reef fish will be accepted. Existing vessel permits may be

renewed, are subject to the restrictions on transfer or change in

paragraphs (m)(2) through (5) of this section, and are subject to the

requirement for timely renewal in paragraph (m)(6) of this section.

(2) An owner of a permitted vessel may transfer the commercial

vessel permit for Gulf reef fish to another vessel owned by the same

entity.

(3) An owner whose earned income qualified for the commercial

vessel permit for Gulf reef fish may transfer the permit to the owner

of another vessel, or to the new owner when he or she transfers

ownership of the permitted vessel. Such owner of another vessel, or new

owner, may receive a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish for

his or her vessel, and renew it through April 15 following the first

full calendar year after obtaining it, without meeting the earned

income requirement of paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section. However, to

further renew the commercial vessel permit, the owner of the other

vessel, or new owner, must meet the earned income requirement not later

than the first full calendar year after the permit transfer takes

place.

(4) An owner of a permitted vessel, the permit for which is based

on an operator's earned income and, thus, is valid only when that

person is the operator of the vessel, may transfer the permit to the

income qualifying operator when such operator becomes an owner of a

vessel.

(5) An owner of a permitted vessel, the permit for which is based

on an operator's earned income and, thus, is valid only when that

person is the operator of the vessel, may have the operator

qualification on the permit removed, and renew it without such

qualification through April 15 following the first full calendar year

after removing it, without meeting the earned income requirement of

paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section. However, to further renew the

commercial vessel permit, the owner must meet the earned income

requirement not later than the first full calendar year after the

operator qualification is removed. To have an operator qualification

removed from a permit, the owner must return the original permit to the

RD with an application for the changed permit.

(6) A commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish that is not

renewed or that is revoked will not be reissued. A permit is considered

to be not renewed when an application for renewal is not received by

the RD within 1 year of the expiration date of the permit.

(n) Endorsements for fish traps in the Gulf. The provisions of this

paragraph (n) are applicable through February 7, 2007. After February

7, 2007, no fish trap endorsements are valid.

(1) Only those fish trap endorsements that are valid on February 7,

1997, may be renewed. Such endorsements are subject to the restrictions

on transfer in paragraphs (n)(2) and (3) of this section and are

subject to the requirement for timely renewal in paragraph (n)(5) of

this section.

(2) Through February 7, 1999, a fish trap endorsement may be

transferred only to a vessel that has a commercial permit for reef

fish.

(3) After February 7, 1999, a fish trap endorsement is not

transferable except as follows:

(i) An owner of a vessel with a fish trap endorsement may transfer

the endorsement to another vessel owned by the same entity.

(ii) A fish trap endorsement is transferable upon a change of

ownership of a permitted vessel with such endorsement from one to

another of the following: Husband, wife, son, daughter, brother,

sister, mother, or father.

(iii) When a change of ownership of a vessel with a fish trap

endorsement is directly related to the disability or death of the

owner, the RD may issue such endorsement, temporarily or permanently,

with the commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish that is issued for

the vessel under the new owner. Such new owner will be the person

specified by the owner or his/her legal guardian, in the case of a

disabled owner, or by the will or executor/administrator of the estate,

in the case of a deceased owner. (Paragraphs (m)(3) and (4) of this

section apply for the transfer of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf

reef fish upon disability or death of an owner.)

(iv) A fish trap endorsement may be transferred to a vessel with a

commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish whose owner has a record of

landings of reef fish from fish traps in the Gulf EEZ, as reported on

fishing vessel logbooks received by the SRD, from November 20, 1992,

through February 6, 1994, and who was unable to obtain a fish trap

endorsement for the vessel with the reported landings.

(4) The owner of a vessel that is to receive a transferred

endorsement must return the originals of the endorsed commercial vessel

permit for Gulf reef fish and the unendorsed permit to the RD with an

application for a fish trap endorsement for his or her vessel.

(5) A fish trap endorsement that is not renewed or that is revoked

will not be reissued. Such endorsement is considered to be not renewed

when an application for renewal is not received by the RD within 1 year

of the expiration date of the permit.

* * * * *

(p) * * *

(3) * * *

(i) * * * (Paragraphs (m)(3) and (4) of this section apply for the

transfer of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish upon

disability or death of an owner.)

* * * * *

5. In Sec. 622.31, in paragraph (a), the reference to

``Sec. 622.4'' is revised to read ``Sec. 622.4 or Sec. 622.17'' and

paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 622.31 Prohibited gear and methods.

* * * * *

(c) Fish traps. (1) A fish trap may not be used in the South

Atlantic EEZ.

(2) A fish trap may not be used or possessed in the Gulf EEZ west

of 85 deg.30' W. long. and, after February 7, 2007, may not be used or

possessed in the Gulf EEZ.

(3) A fish trap used other than where authorized in paragraph

(c)(1) or (2) of this section may be disposed of in any appropriate

manner by the Assistant Administrator or an authorized officer.

* * * * *

6. In Sec. 622.32, paragraph (b)(2)(iii) is revised to read as

follows:

[[Page 13988]]

Sec. 622.32 Prohibited and limited harvest species.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) * * *

(iii) Red drum and Nassau grouper may not be harvested or possessed

in or from the Gulf EEZ. Such fish caught in the Gulf EEZ must be

released immediately with a minimum of harm.

* * * * *

Sec. 622.37 [Amended]

7. In Sec. 622.37(d)(4), the word ``Nassau,'' is removed.

8. In Sec. 622.40, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 622.40 Limitations on traps and pots.

(a) * * *

(2) Gulf EEZ. A fish trap in the Gulf EEZ may be pulled or tended

only by a person (other than an authorized officer) aboard the vessel

with the fish trap endorsement to fish such trap. If such vessel has a

breakdown that prevents it from retrieving its traps, the owner or

operator must immediately notify the nearest NMFS Office of Enforcement

and must obtain authorization for another vessel to retrieve and land

its traps. The request for such authorization must include the

requested effective period for the retrieval and landing, the persons

and vessel to be authorized to retrieve the traps, and the point of

landing of the traps. Such authorization will be specific as to the

effective period, authorized persons and vessel, and point of landing.

Such authorization is valid solely for the removal of fish traps from

the EEZ and for harvest of fish incidental to such removal.

* * * * *

9. In Sec. 622.42, paragraph (a)(3) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 622.42 Quotas.

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(3) Shallow-water groupers, that is, all groupers other than deep-

water groupers, jewfish, and Nassau grouper, including scamp before the

quota for shallow-water groupers is reached, combined--9.8 million lb

(4.4 million kg), round weight.

* * * * *

Sec. 622.43 [Amended]

10. In Sec. 622.43(b)(1), the words ``bartered, traded, or'' are

removed.

11. In Sec. 622.48, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 622.48 Adjustment of management measures.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(1) For a species or species group: Target date for rebuilding an

overfished species, TAC, bag limits, size limits, vessel trip limits,

closed seasons or areas, gear restrictions, reopening of a fishery

prematurely closed, and quotas.

* * * * *

Appendix A to Part 622 [Amended]

12. In Table 3, under the family Sparidae--Porgies, the scientific

name for Red porgy is revised to read ``Pagrus pagrus'' and in Table 4,

under the family Sparidae--Porgies, the scientific names of Saucereye

porgy and Red porgy are revised to read ``Calamus calamus'' and

``Pagrus pagrus'', respectively.

[FR Doc. 97-7528 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P