55096 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 916—NECTARINES GROWN IN 

CALIFORNIA 

■ 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

parts 916 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. 

§ 916.356 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 916.356 paragraph (a)(1) 

introductory text is amended by 

removing words ‘‘Provided further, That 

all varieties of nectarines which fail to 

meet the U.S. No. 1 grade only on 

account of lack of blush or red color due 

to varietal characteristics shall be 

considered as meeting the requirements 

of this subpart:’’. 

Dated: September 15, 2006. 

Lloyd C. Day, 

Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 06–7868 Filed 9–20–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

15 CFR Part 902 

50 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. 060525140–6221–02; I.D. 

051106B] 

RIN 0648–AT75 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery Off the Southern 

Atlantic States; Amendment 13C 

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 13C to the 

Fishery Management Plan for the 

Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South 

Atlantic Region (FMP), as prepared and 

submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council (Council). 

Amendment 13C establishes 

management measures to end 

overfishing of snowy grouper, golden 

tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black 

sea bass and measures to allow 

moderate increases in recreational and 

commercial harvest of red porgy 

consistent with the rebuilding program 

for that stock. 

For the commercial fisheries, this 

final rule establishes restrictive quotas 

for snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 

vermilion snapper, and black sea bass 

and, after the quotas are met, prohibits 

all purchase and sale of the applicable 

species and restricts all harvest and 

possession to the applicable bag limit; 

establishes restrictive trip limits for 

snowy grouper and golden tilefish; 

requires at least 2-inch (5.1-cm) mesh in 

the back panel of black sea bass pots; 

requires black sea bass pots to be 

removed from the water after the quota 

is reached; changes the fishing year for 

black sea bass; increases the trip limit 

for red porgy; establishes a red porgy 

quota that would allow a moderate 

increase in harvest; and, after the red 

porgy quota is reached, prohibits all 

purchase and sale and restricts all 

harvest and possession to the bag limit. 

For the recreational fisheries, this 

final rule reduces the bag limits for 

snowy grouper, golden tilefish, and 

black sea bass; increases the minimum 

size limit for vermilion snapper and 

black sea bass; changes the fishing year 

for black sea bass; and increases the bag 

limit for red porgy. 

The intended effects of this final rule 

are to eliminate or phase out overfishing 

of snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 

vermilion snapper, and black sea bass; 

and increase red porgy harvest 

consistent with an updated stock 

assessment and rebuilding plan to 

achieve optimum yield. Finally, NMFS 

informs the public of the approval by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) of the collection-of-information 

requirements contained in this final rule 

and publishes the OMB control numbers 

for those collections. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

October 23, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 

and the Record of Decision (ROD) may 

be obtained from John McGovern, 

NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 

13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 

33701; telephone 727–824–5305; fax 

727–824–5308; e-mail 

John.McGovern@noaa.gov. 

Comments regarding the burden-hour 

estimates or other aspects of the 

collection-of-information requirements 

contained in this final rule may be 

submitted in writing to Jason Rueter at 

the Southeast Regional Office address 

(above) and to David Rostker, Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), by email at David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or 

by fax to 202–395–7285. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

McGovern, telephone: 727–824–5305; 

fax: 727–824–5308; e-mail: 

John.McGovern@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

snapper-grouper fishery off the southern 

Atlantic states is managed under the 

FMP. The FMP was prepared by the 

Council and is implemented under the 

authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by 

regulations at 50 CFR part 622. 

On May 18, 2006, NMFS published a 

notice of availability of Amendment 13C 

and requested public comment (70 FR 

28841). On June 9, 2006, NMFS 

published the proposed rule to 

implement Amendment 13C and 

requested public comment (71 FR 

33423). NMFS approved Amendment 

13C on August 14, 2006. The rationale 

for the measures in Amendment 13C is 

provided in the amendment and in the 

preamble to the proposed rule and is not 

repeated here. 

Comments and Responses 

NMFS received a total of 32 comment 

letters: 17 addressed Amendment 13C, 6 

addressed the Final Environmental 

Impact Statement (FEIS) associated with 

Amendment 13C, and 9 addressed the 

proposed rule. Four of these comment 

letters supported the proposed actions. 

The remaining comment letters opposed 

one or more of the proposed actions for 

reasons summarized below. Similar 

comments are consolidated, and each is 

followed by NMFS’s response. 

Comment 1: Concerns were raised 

about edits made to Amendment 13C 

after it was approved by the Council and 

its Scientific and Statistical Committee 

(SSC), and before it was transmitted for 

Secretarial review. At issue is whether 

NMFS altered the document without the 

Council’s knowledge and in a way that 

was inconsistent with the Council’s 

intent. 

Response: At the December 2005 

meeting, the Council chose several 

different preferred alternatives than 

those in the public hearing draft of 

Amendment 13C. Thus, when 

approving Amendment 13C for 

Secretarial review during its December 

2005 meeting, the Council requested the 

NMFS and Council staffs work together 

through an Interdisciplinary Plan Team 

(IPT) to finalize the integrated 

amendment for Secretarial review. 

Specifically, the Council directed the 

IPT to modify a number of preferred 

alternatives, and to ‘‘* * * complete the 

document as reflected by all the 

discussion here at this meeting with the 

preferreds and everything else.’’ The IPT 

made the requested edits following the 

December Council meeting. Edits 

included modifying and supplementing 

analyses, as needed, to describe the 

effects of the Council’s revised preferred 

alternatives that were chosen to further 

mitigate the unavoidable short-term 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55097 

adverse socioeconomic impacts of 

ending overfishing. Additionally, the 

IPT corrected some statements and 

conclusions not supported by the 

analyses, added text describing the longterm benefits of the proposed actions, 

and added text describing the adverse 

effects of continued overfishing in 

response to a request of the Snapper 

Grouper Committee at its September 

2005 meeting. The additional text was 

added in support of the Council for 

Environmental Quality’s regulatory 

requirement to consider the magnitude 

of impacts at various spatial and 

temporal scales (40 CFR 1508.27). 

For example, the DEIS reviewed by 

the Council in December 2005 stated, 

‘‘Preferred Alternative 2 (regardless of 

which sub-alternative is chosen) would 

have a disproportionately negative effect 

on North Carolina fishermen unless 

perhaps the fishing year is changed. The 

100-lb (45.4-kg) gutted weight or 10-fish 

trip limit is intended to extend the 

fishery through December. However, it 

is likely that this amendment will be 

implemented in the middle of 2006. 

Without these trip limits, the quota will 

potentially be filled by the end of March 

2006 according to average landings by 

state (Figure 4–4) mostly by those 

commercial fishermen fishing in south 

Florida, and then by others in areas 

south of Cape Fear. Once the fishing 

begins in North Carolina in late March 

or early April (dependant on the 

weather), it is likely that the majority of 

the 84,000 lbs (38,102 kg) of quota will 

be filled. This may allow for an unequal 

opportunity to fish between states and 

inequitable access to the resource.’’

At its December 2005 meeting, the 

Council changed the quota for 2006 

from 84,000 lb (38,102 kg) gutted weight 

to 151,000 lb (68,492 kg) gutted weight. 

Projections based on landings data from 

1999 through 2003 indicated the 

151,000-lb (68,492-kg) gutted weight 

commercial quota associated with the 

new preferred alternative would not be 

met until June 2006 rather than March 

or April 2006. Examination of historical 

data from 1999 through 2003 suggested 

North Carolina fishermen would be 

expected to land 62 percent of their 

average catch during 1999 through 2003 

by June, and Florida fishermen would 

be expected to land 57 percent of their 

historical average catch during that 

same month. Additionally, the proposed 

trip limit is designed to provide for a 

year-round fishery in the first full year 

the regulations become effective and 

onwards, until eliminated or modified 

by the Council. Therefore, the IPT 

revised the document to clarify the 

Council’s Preferred Alternative 2 would 

not likely have a disproportionate 

negative effect on North Carolina 

fishermen during 2006. This revision is 

supported by a review of preliminary 

landings data through April 2006 which 

indicates North Carolina fishermen 

landed substantially more snowy 

grouper than Florida fishermen during 

the first 4 months of this calendar year. 

While, together, edits to the 

socioeconomic analyses made 

subsequent to Council approval were 

substantive, such edits were necessary 

to comply with legal mandates and were 

done in response to the Council’s 

actions. All document edits and 

revisions proposed by the IPT were 

reviewed by the Southeast Regional 

Office’s Social Science Branch Chief, 

then submitted to and reviewed by the 

Council staff, who incorporated them in 

the document before the Council Chair 

forwarded Amendment 13C to NMFS 

for Secretarial review on February 24, 

2006. 

Comment 2: Numerous individuals 

stated snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 

black sea bass, and vermilion snapper 

are in better shape than the assessments 

indicated. 

Response: An inclusive and rigorous 

scientific process was used to assess the 

status of the stocks addressed in 

Amendment 13C. Status determinations 

for all four stocks were derived from the 

Southeast Data Assessment and Review 

(SEDAR) process. The SEDAR process 

involves a series of three workshops 

designed to ensure each stock 

assessment reflects the best available 

scientific information. First, 

representatives from State agencies, the 

South Atlantic Council, academia, 

NMFS, and other environmental and 

fishery interest groups, participate in a 

data workshop. The purpose of this 

workshop is to assemble and review 

available fishery dependent and 

independent data and information on a 

stock, and to develop consensus about 

what constitutes the best available 

scientific information, how that 

information should be used in an 

assessment, and what types of stock 

assessment models should be employed. 

For each assessment, representatives of 

each state provided available data on 

the species to be assessed. Second, 

assessment biologists from these 

agencies and organizations participate 

in an assessment workshop, during 

which the data obtained from the data 

workshop are input into one or more 

assessment models to estimate 

parameters used in evaluating the status 

of a stock and its fishery. Generally, 

multiple runs of each model are 

conducted, including a base run and a 

number of additional runs, to examine 

how differing data and assumptions 

affect results. Third, a review workshop 

is convened to provide representatives 

from the South Atlantic Council, NMFS, 

constituent groups, and the Center for 

Independent Experts the opportunity to 

peer review the results of the stock 

assessment workshop. The findings and 

conclusions of each SEDAR workshop 

are documented in a series of reports, 

which are ultimately reviewed and 

discussed by the Council’s SSC. The 

Council’s SSC concluded the snowy 

grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion 

snapper, and black sea bass assessments 

were based on the best available 

science. 

Comment 3: Several letters assert the 

data supporting the actions proposed in 

the amendment are flawed and 

inadequate, and do not adequately 

represent conditions off North Carolina, 

where a large portion of the catch is 

harvested. Specifically at issue is text in 

the SEDAR report of the snowy grouper 

and golden tilefish peer review 

workshop, which states the data used in 

assessing the status of those stocks, ‘‘are 

weaker than those generally expected in 

fisheries assessments.’’ Also at issue is 

the use of headboat survey data and 

fishery-independent Marine Resources 

Monitoring, Assessment, and Prediction 

Program survey data as indices of 

abundance in the black sea bass, 

vermilion snapper, and snowy grouper 

stock assessments. 

Response: SEDAR participants, 

Council advisory committees, the 

Council, and NMFS staff reviewed and 

considered these and other concerns 

about the adequacy of the data 

underlying the proposed actions in 

Amendment 13C. SEDAR workshops 

rejected the assertion the headboat 

index has no utility as an index of 

abundance. Although the SEDAR report 

of the snowy grouper and golden tilefish 

peer review workshop acknowledged 

data used in those assessments were 

relatively weak, the same report also 

states, ‘‘The data used for both species 

were scientifically sound and 

appropriate for use in stock assessments 

(with minor exceptions), adequate to 

make useful inferences about stock 

status, and the best available for this 

purpose.’’ The Council’s SSC concluded 

the snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 

vermilion snapper, red porgy, and black 

sea bass assessments were based on the 

best available science. The Council’s 

Snapper Grouper Committee 

acknowledged, while stock assessment 

findings are uncertain, there is no 

reason to assume such uncertainty leads 

to unrealistically pessimistic 

conclusions about stock status. Rather, 

the stocks could be in worse shape than 

indicated by the stock assessment. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55098 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

Therefore, uncertainty should not be 

used as a reason to avoid taking action. 

The Council agreed with this conclusion 

when voting to submit Amendment 13C 

for Secretarial review in December 2005. 

The NMFS’ Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center (SEFSC) reviewed and certified 

Amendment 13C and its supporting 

analyses as being based on the best 

available scientific information in April 

2006. Finally, the amendment also was 

subject to a pre-dissemination review in 

May 2006 in compliance with the 

Information Quality Act. 

Comment 4: Eight letters stated the 

recreational and commercial measures 

in Amendment 13C would have 

negative economic and social impacts. 

One group suggested the proposed 

actions in Amendment 13C do not 

adequately balance socioeconomic 

needs with the need to rebuild snappergrouper stocks. Another letter stated 

Amendment 13C ignores national 

standards 6 and 8 of the MagnusonStevens Act, which require 

‘‘conservation and management shall 

take into account and allow for 

variations among, and contingencies in, 

fisheries, fisheries resources, and 

catches,’’ and ‘‘conservation and 

management measures shall, consistent 

with the requirements of the MagnusonStevens Act (including prevention of 

overfishing and rebuilding of overfished 

stocks), take in account the importance 

of fishery resources to fishing 

communities in order to (A) Provide for 

the sustained participation of such 

communities, and (B) to the extent 

practicable, minimize adverse economic 

impacts on such communities.’’, 

respectively. 

Response: NMFS agrees the actions 

proposed in Amendment 13C will have 

immediate, short-term, negative 

socioeconomic impacts. The Council 

made efforts to minimize, to the extent 

practicable, the unavoidable adverse 

socioeconomic impacts of ending 

overfishing by modifying a number of 

alternatives identified as preferred in 

the DEIS to allow overfishing to be 

phased out over a 3-year period. 

Together, the actions proposed in 

Amendment 13C are estimated to 

reduce the revenue of the commercial 

harvest sector $730,000 the first year the 

regulations are effective, and $1,080,000 

in the third year, and each subsequent 

year the regulations are effective. The 

actions are estimated to decrease the net 

non-market benefits of the recreational 

sector $80,000 the first year the 

regulations are effective, and $1,120,000 

in the second year and each subsequent 

year the regulations are effective. 

NMFS is unable to quantify either the 

adverse socioeconomic effects of 

continued overfishing of the snowy 

grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion 

snapper, and black sea bass stocks, or 

the long-term benefits expected to 

accrue to fishery participants and 

communities as catch per unit effort and 

the age structure of the stocks improve 

in response to decreased fishing 

mortality rates. However, although 

unquantifiable, the adverse 

socioeconomic effects of inaction (not 

ending overfishing) are expected to far 

exceed those associated with the 

proposed actions, as continued 

overfishing would require fishermen to 

increase effort in the future as the size 

and age of target species further 

decrease and, ultimately, threaten the 

long-term viability of these fisheries. 

Furthermore, the proposed actions 

support the goal of rebuilding these 

important fisheries to higher abundance 

levels, increasing future catch per unit 

effort, and achieving the optimum yield. 

The long-term benefits of rebuilding 

stocks to sustainable, optimum yield 

levels exceed the short-term costs 

associated with the necessary 

restrictions to achieve stock rebuilding. 

There is no guarantee all current 

fishery participants and related 

industries adversely affected by the 

proposed actions will experience the 

long-term benefits of ending overfishing. 

The short-term losses of some 

individuals could be sufficiently severe 

to encourage them to exit the fishery. 

While individual proposed actions are 

not expected to threaten the 

sustainability of fishing communities in 

the South Atlantic, the cumulative 

effects of the actions proposed in 

Amendment 13C, in conjunction with 

other State and regional fishery 

regulations and community changes, 

could be severe enough to change the 

economic and social structures of 

fishing communities over the long term. 

However, stock assessment models 

indicate that if adequate corrective 

action to end overfishing is not taken at 

this time, even more severe harvest 

restrictions would be required in the 

future. This would result in greater 

short-term, adverse socioeconomic 

effects than those associated with the 

proposed actions. 

Comment 5: Two individuals stated 

the Council refused to consider an 

alternative that would have minimized 

adverse economic impacts on 

fishermen, particularly those from North 

Carolina, by establishing an annual 

commercial snowy grouper quota of 

151,000 lb (68,492 kg) gutted weight. 

Several others advocated alternative 

snowy grouper quota and trip limits, 

including: A quota of 151,000 lb (68,492 

kg) gutted weight and trip limit of 600 

to 700 lb (272 to 318 kg) gutted weight; 

a quota of 172,000 lb (78,018 kg) gutted 

weight with a trip limit of 500 lb (227 

kg) gutted weight; a trip limit of 30 fish; 

a trip limit of 1,500 lb (680 kg) gutted 

weight; and a moratorium on the 

commercial harvest of snowy grouper. 

Response: The Council considered, 

but eliminated from detailed study, an 

alternative that would reduce the 

annual commercial snowy grouper 

quota from 344,508 lb (156,256 kg) 

gutted weight to 151,000 lb (68,492 kg) 

gutted weight and specify a commercial 

trip limit of 275 lb (125 kg) gutted 

weight until the quota is met. This 

alternative was not retained for detailed 

analysis because it would not end 

overfishing until 2022. The Council 

believes this alternative is too risky due 

to the poor status of the snowy grouper 

stock and life history characteristics that 

make it vulnerable to overfishing. The 

remaining quota and trip limit 

recommendations would allow 

overfishing to occur for an even longer 

period of time. A moratorium on the 

commercial harvest of snowy grouper 

would have minimal biological benefits 

relative to the proposed action because 

the commercial quota proposed by the 

Council essentially allows fishermen to 

retain their snowy grouper bycatch, 

which is expected to die when 

discarded. 

Comment 6: Two groups suggested 

there should be different regulations for 

snowy grouper and other species by 

region because these species are 

perceived to be in better shape in the 

northern extent of their range and are 

more accessible in the southern part of 

their range. 

Response: The Council considered but 

rejected in Amendment 13C, an 

alternative that would specify two 

separate commercial quotas for snowy 

grouper; one for fish landed in North 

Carolina, and another for fish landed in 

the remaining three South Atlantic 

states. The Council considered this 

alternative impractical because it was 

concerned regional quotas would be too 

low to manage effectively in-season. 

Comment 7: One group suggested the 

proposed snowy grouper plan would 

negatively impact the blueline tilefish 

fishery in the northern part of the 

Council’s jurisdiction because blueline 

tilefish and snowy grouper are caught 

together. Due to the small trip limit for 

snowy grouper, it may not be 

worthwhile for fishermen to make a trip 

for blueline tilefish. Furthermore, two 

groups suggested that, if fishermen did 

target blueline tilefish after the 

proposed snowy grouper trip limit and/ 

or quota is met, then the snowy grouper 

stock could be adversely affected by 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55099 

discard mortality because the release 

mortality rate of that species is 

estimated to be 100 percent. 

Response: NMFS realizes blueline 

tilefish and snowy grouper are captured 

in the same locations, and is currently 

working with the Council to evaluate 

multispecies management alternatives 

to reduce bycatch of deep-water species 

in Snapper Grouper Amendment 15. 

This action is being evaluated separately 

from Amendment 13C to ensure debate 

about the composition and management 

of a proposed deep-water grouper unit 

does not delay Council action to 

effectively address overfishing of the 

snowy grouper stock. 

Comment 8: One group commented 

that fishery management plans must 

establish a standardized bycatch 

reporting methodology. 

Response: Currently, approximately 

20 percent of commercial fishermen are 

asked to record discard information in 

NMFS logbooks. In addition, observer 

data has been provided by the Marine 

Fisheries Initiative Program and 

Cooperative Research Programs for 

ongoing bycatch studies, which will 

provide information for future 

management actions. In Amendment 15, 

the Council is reviewing alternative 

interim methodologies for monitoring 

and assessing bycatch in the snappergrouper fisheries. 

Comment 9: One group stated NMFS 

should disapprove the actions proposed 

in Amendment 13C for the snowy 

grouper and black sea bass fisheries, 

because they fail to immediately end 

decades of overfishing on these stocks 

as required by the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act’s national standard 1. Another 

group expressed similar concerns with 

the delay in Council action to end 

overfishing and with the slow and 

stepped implementation of necessary 

restrictions, but encouraged the 

Secretary to quickly approve and 

implement the actions proposed in 

Amendment 13C because they represent 

reasonable and prudent steps toward 

finally rebuilding South Atlantic 

snapper-grouper fisheries. A third 

individual also supported the proposed 

actions, stating he has been fishing for 

26 years, and the fish he catches are 

much smaller than they used to be. 

Response: NMFS has determined the 

Council’s proposed actions to 

immediately end or phase out 

overfishing of the snowy grouper, 

golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and 

black sea bass stocks meet the biological 

objectives set forth in the MagnusonStevens Act, while minimizing to the 

extent practicable the unavoidable 

adverse short-term effects of such 

actions on fishing communities. The 

snowy grouper and black sea bass 

fisheries are economically important to 

both commercial and recreational 

fishermen. Because phasing-out 

overfishing on these stocks over a 3-year 

period would not compromise their 

long-term sustainability, ending 

overfishing on these stocks immediately 

would result in unnecessarily severe 

adverse impacts to affected fishermen, 

ancillary industries, and fishing 

communities. 

Comment 10: One group stated 

Amendment 13C provides an 

inadequate range of reasonable 

alternatives for immediately ending 

overfishing of snowy grouper and black 

sea bass as required by the National 

Environmental Policy Act. Another 

group stated the amendment does not 

contain a reasonable range of 

alternatives for phasing out overfishing 

over time to minimize adverse 

socioeconomic impacts on fishing 

communities, as required by the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Response: The Council evaluated a 

broad range of alternatives for ending 

overfishing on the snowy grouper, 

golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and 

black sea bass stocks. The alternatives 

considered for each proposed action, 

with the exception of vermilion 

snapper, ranged from those that would 

end overfishing immediately to those 

that would phase out overfishing over 

short time periods that could reasonably 

be expected to assure long-term 

biological goals would not be 

compromised. The alternatives 

considered for the vermilion snapper 

stock evaluated the sustainability of a 

large range of allowable harvest levels in 

the context of historical catches and 

recent stock assessment information. 

Comment 11: Amendment 13C only 

considers overfishing. A fully developed 

amendment would define conservation 

goals in terms of overfishing definitions, 

rebuilding periods, and other elements 

while providing a suite of alternatives 

that meet these objectives. 

Response: The purpose of 

Amendment 13C is to end overfishing of 

four snapper-grouper stocks recently 

assessed through the SEDAR process. 

These actions originated from the 

Council’s work on Snapper Grouper 

Amendment 13, which contained a 

broad range of actions to define 

management reference points, end 

overfishing and rebuild overfished 

stocks, consider a multispecies 

approach to management, address 

bycatch, modify permit renewal and 

transferability requirements, and 

address the scheduled sunset of 

regulations protecting the Oculina 

Experimental Closed Area. 

NMFS announced in two Federal 

Register notices (68 FR 53706, 

September 12, 2003 and 70 FR 46126, 

July 26, 2005) the Council’s intent to 

evaluate and propose separately some of 

the actions originally proposed in 

Amendment 13. The first notice 

announced the Council’s intent to 

transfer the Oculina Experimental 

Closed Area action from Amendment 13 

to Amendment 13A, and the remaining 

actions in Amendment 13 to 

Amendment 13B. This decision was 

intended to ensure the Council adequate 

time to fully evaluate a range of actions 

to address overfishing, rebuilding, and 

other issues in the snapper-grouper 

fishery without compromising the 

Council’s ability to act on the Oculina 

Experimental Closed Area before its 

scheduled sunset date of June 27, 2004. 

The second notice announced the 

Council’s intent to address overfishing 

and a few other priority actions in a 

regulatory amendment, which later 

evolved into Amendment 13C. This 

decision was intended to ensure 

extended debate about multispecies 

management and other actions in 

Amendment 13B did not delay Council 

action to effectively address overfishing 

of key snapper-grouper stocks recently 

assessed through the SEDAR process, 

including snowy grouper, golden 

tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black 

sea bass, and to attend to a few other, 

less complicated issues. The Council is 

currently expediting the evaluation of 

alternative management reference points 

and rebuilding plans for the four stocks 

addressed in Amendment 13C in 

Amendment 15, which is scheduled to 

be implemented in 2007. The other 

actions referenced above and not 

evaluated in Amendments 13A or 13C 

remain in Amendment 13B. 

Comment 12: One individual stated 

Executive Order 12866 should be 

applied to the proposed rule. 

Response: A Regulatory Impact 

Review (RIR) was conducted to satisfy 

the requirements of Executive Order 

12866 and the results of the review are 

contained in the amendment. 

Comment 13: One group commented 

the proposed action to end overfishing 

on the vermilion snapper stock by the 

commercial fishery is insufficient. This 

group pointed out the FEIS states a 31- 

percent reduction in fishing mortality is 

required to end overfishing, but the 

proposed action would reduce fishing 

mortality by just 8 percent. 

Response: The Council’s initial 

preferred alternative for ending 

overfishing on the vermilion snapper 

stock would have reduced commercial 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55100 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

harvest by 31 percent. Numerous 

comments opposing this alternative 

indicated it was needlessly restrictive, 

and would have extremely negative 

short-term socioeconomic impacts on 

affected fishermen and fishing 

communities. After further discussion 

and review of landings data used in the 

vermilion snapper assessment, the 

Council developed and identified a 

proposed action that would minimize 

the unavoidable short-term adverse 

socioeconomic effects associated with 

ending overfishing on the vermilion 

snapper stock until the 2007 SEDAR 

assessment update is completed and 

presented to the Council. 

The commercial quota proposed for 

vermilion snapper is equivalent to the 

average commercial landings during 

1999 to 2003, and takes into 

consideration stakeholder concerns 

about the uncertainty of the assessment 

that prompted Council action to end 

overfishing of the vermilion snapper 

stock. 

The recent stock assessment indicated 

overfishing was occurring during 1999–

2001 when the commercial landings 

peaked at 1,680,000 lb (762,036 kg) 

gutted weight. Commercial landings 

have generally been below 1,100,000 lb 

(498,952 kg) gutted weight with 

occasional spikes in landings. Based on 

the ratio between the average fishing 

mortality during 1999–2001 and the 

fishing mortality which would produce 

maximum sustainable yield, a 31- 

percent reduction in catch would be 

needed to end overfishing immediately. 

During 2003 and 2004, a 30-percent 

reduction in landings from the 1999–

2001 average occurred. 

Although the stock assessment 

indicated overfishing was occurring 

during 1999–2001 the Scientific and 

Statistical Committee and Stock 

Assessment Review Panel stated the 

stock recruitment relationship was 

poorly defined, and it was uncertain 

whether or not the stock was overfished. 

Despite uncertain biomass values, 

optimum yield is estimated to be 

1,630,000 lb (739,356 kg) gutted weight. 

As 68 percent of the total catch during 

1999–2003 was taken by the commercial 

fishery, the commercial portion of the 

optimum yield would be 1,110,000 lb 

(498,952 kg) gutted weight which is 

roughly equivalent to the average 

landings during 1999–2003. 

Due to uncertainty associated with the 

assessment, the Council believed it was 

best to cap landings at 1,100,000 lb 

(498,952 kg) gutted weight until a new 

stock assessment update was completed 

in 2007. A 30-percent reduction in 

landings during 2003–2004 would have 

ended overfishing. The proposed quota, 

which approximates the optimum yield, 

would prevent overfishing from 

occurring in the future and eliminate 

the occasional spikes in landings. 

Preventing peaks in fishing pressure and 

eliminating overfishing would stabilize 

stock biomass at current levels, ensuring 

there are no declines in the mean length 

and size/age at sexual maturity, and 

protecting the stock against recruitment 

overfishing. 

Comment 14: Various groups 

advocated bag limits from five fish to 

two fish per person per day be 

considered for snowy grouper and 

golden tilefish rather than the preferred 

alternative of one fish per person per 

day. One group stated that hi-grading is 

less likely with a larger bag limit. One 

group stated their preference for a 

spawning season closure rather than a 1- 

fish bag limit. 

Response: The Council did not 

consider bag limits exceeding two fish 

per person per day because the average 

catch of snowy grouper and golden 

tilefish is already low (i.e., about one 

fish per angler per day) and the intent 

of the proposed actions is to end 

overfishing on these stocks. Also, the 

Council was concerned recreational 

fishing pressure might increase as stock 

biomass increases in response to 

reduced fishing pressure. The Council 

believed that a bag limit of one fish per 

person per day would provide a greater 

incentive than a 2-fish bag limit would 

provide for fishermen to avoid areas 

where golden tilefish and snowy 

grouper occur. 

The Council considered, but 

eliminated from detailed study, 

alternatives to establish seasonal and/or 

area closures for the snowy grouper and 

golden tilefish stocks because these 

species could still be taken during a 

closed season or in a closed area when 

fishermen targeted co-occurring species, 

and the release mortality rate of these 

species is estimated to be nearly 100 

percent. 

Comment 15: A longline fisherman 

stated the proposed action to implement 

a stepped trip limit for the commercial 

snowy grouper fishery will make 

longlining for golden tilefish 

unprofitable and could eliminate 

longline vessels from the fishery. A 

hook-and-line fisherman stated the 

proposed stepped trip limit could 

disadvantage commercial hook-and-line 

fishermen by reducing the availability of 

snowy grouper to the fishery during the 

fall. 

Response: NMFS and the Council are 

considering an action to address these 

concerns in Amendment 15. 

Specifically, an evaluation is being 

conducted on the effects of changing the 

golden tilefish fishing year to begin on 

September 1 to eliminate the possibility 

the hook-and-line fishery would be 

impacted by a fall closure, and 

eliminating the stepped trip limit 

strategy to lessen the economic impact 

of the reduced golden tilefish quota on 

longline fishermen. 

Comment 16: One individual 

suggested the Council specify separate 

golden tilefish quotas for the longline 

and hook-and-line fisheries. 

Response: The Council discussed 

alternatives that would specify separate 

quotas for fishermen using longline and 

hook-and-line gear, and determined 

they were not necessary. Because the 

commercial hook-and-line fishery 

catches a minor portion of the overall 

harvest, separate quotas for the two 

sectors would have little effect on 

restricting harvest. 

Comment 17: One individual stated 

the Council should limit the number of 

black sea bass pots to 20 to 30 per boat, 

and require pots be returned to the dock 

after each trip. Another individual 

stated the Council should prohibit the 

use of black sea bass pots, or restrict the 

number of pots used per boat. 

Response: The Council considered but 

eliminated from detailed study 

alternatives that would restrict the 

number of sea bass pots a fisher could 

deploy and require fishermen to return 

pots to the dock after each trip. The 

Council believes its proposed action to 

prohibit the use of black sea bass pots 

after the black sea bass quota is met will 

restrict the number of pots fishermen 

use over the course of a year. 

Comment 18: One group suggested 

NMFS implement a less restrictive black 

sea bass regulation until new data 

became available on the status of the 

stock. Specifically, the group proposed 

a commercial quota of 477,000 lb 

(216,364 kg) gutted weight, a 

requirement to include a 2-inch (5-cm) 

back panel in black sea bass pots, a 

recreational size limit of 11 inches (28 

cm) (total length), and a bag limit of 15 

fish per person per day. 

Response: The suggested alternative 

would not achieve the purpose of 

Amendment 13C because it is not 

sufficiently restrictive to end 

overfishing on the black sea bass stock. 

Comment 19: One group opposed 

increasing the allowable red porgy 

catch, indicating that, although red 

porgy are numerous, very few 

individuals are of legal size. Another 

individual indicated the allowable catch 

level should be even larger than that 

proposed because red porgy have 

become so plentiful in some areas they 

are a nuisance. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55101 

Response: Both the commercial and 

recreational regulations proposed in 

Amendment 13C for red porgy are 

expected to constrain total harvest to a 

level that would not compromise stock 

rebuilding. This expectation is 

supported by the 2006 assessment 

update, which indicates the stock would 

recover ahead of schedule if the 

proposed harvest increases were 

maintained throughout the rebuilding 

period. The proposed quota would 

provide for a fishing mortality rate that 

remains well below the maximum 

threshold. 

Classification 

The Regional Administrator, 

Southeast Region, NMFS, determined 

that Amendment 13C is necessary for 

the conservation and management of the 

South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery 

and is consistent with the MagnusonStevens Act and other applicable laws. 

This final rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866. 

The Council and NMFS prepared an 

FEIS for Amendment 13C. The FEIS was 

filed with the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) on May 18, 2006. A 

notice of availability was published on 

May 26, 2006 (71 FR 30399). In 

approving Amendment 13C, NMFS 

issued a Record of Decision (ROD) 

identifying the selected alternative. A 

copy of the ROD is available from NMFS 

(see ADDRESSES). 

NMFS prepared an FRFA, as required 

by section 604 of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. The FRFA incorporates 

the initial regulatory flexibility analysis 

(IRFA), a summary of significant issues 

raised by public comments, NMFS 

responses to those comments, and a 

summary of the analyses completed to 

support the action. A copy of the full 

analysis is available from the NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis 

follows. 

This final rule will reduce the 

commercial quotas and establish trip 

limits for snowy grouper and golden 

tilefish, establish commercial quotas for 

vermilion snapper and black sea bass, 

establish a back-panel mesh size 

requirement for black sea bass pots, 

change the fishing year for the 

commercial and recreational black sea 

bass fisheries, establish a commercial 

quota and increase the trip limit for red 

porgy, reduce the recreational bag limit 

for snowy grouper and golden tilefish, 

increase the recreational minimum size 

limit of black sea bass, and increase the 

recreational bag limit of red porgy. The 

purpose of the final rule is to end 

overfishing for snowy grouper, golden 

tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black 

sea bass, and allow for an increase in 

the harvest of red porgy consistent with 

the rebuilding schedule for this species. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the 

statutory basis for the final rule. 

Nine comment letters were received 

from the public in response to the 

proposed rule, 6 letters received on the 

FEIS, and 17 letters received on the 

Amendment. A complete summary of 

these comments and NMFS’ responses 

is provided in the previous section of 

this final rule. No changes were made in 

the final rule as a result of these 

comments. Among the 32 comment 

letters, 8 individuals or organizations 

raised issues regarding the economic 

impacts of the proposed actions. These 

comments collectively stated the 

magnitude and distributional regional or 

sector adverse economic impacts were 

too great to justify the actions. NMFS 

agrees the actions in the final rule will 

have immediate, short-term, negative 

socioeconomic impacts. Estimates of the 

expected impacts, both total and average 

by individual entity, are provided in 

this assessment. This assessment also 

concludes, while individual actions of 

the final rule are not expected to 

threaten the sustainability of fishing 

communities in the South Atlantic, the 

cumulative effects of the actions 

contained in the final rule, in 

conjunction with other State and 

regional fishery regulations and 

community changes, could be severe 

enough to change the economic and 

social structures of fishing communities 

over the long term. However, although 

unquantifiable, the adverse 

socioeconomic effects of inaction are 

expected to far exceed those associated 

with the final rule, as continued 

overfishing would ultimately threaten 

the long-term viability of these fisheries, 

resulting in increased levels of business 

failure and adverse community change. 

Thus, while the assessment concludes 

there is no guarantee all current fishery 

participants and related industries 

adversely affected by the final rule will 

experience the long-term benefits of 

ending overfishing, as the short-term 

losses of some individuals could be 

sufficiently severe to result in their exit 

from the fishery, the final rule is 

expected to best meet the Council’s 

goals of ending overfishing while 

minimizing adverse economic and 

community impacts. 

No duplicative, overlapping, or 

conflicting Federal rules have been 

identified. The final rule will not 

impose any reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. However, sea bass pot 

fishermen who encounter personal 

hardship and are unable to meet the pot 

removal requirements may request 

through application to the Regional 

Administrator, NMFS Southeast Region 

(RA), a grace period of up to 10 days. 

Completion of this application is not 

expected to require special skills, 

recordkeeping, or substantial allocation 

of time, which should not exceed 30 

minutes. No fees or costs other than the 

time spent and postage are associated 

with this application. 

Two general classes of small business 

entities are expected to be directly 

affected by the final rule, commercial 

fishing vessels and for-hire fishing 

vessels (charterboats and headboats). 

The Small Business Administration 

defines a small entity in the commercial 

fishing sector as a firm that is 

independently owned and operated, is 

not dominant in its field of operation, 

and has annual gross receipts not in 

excess of $3.5 million. For a for-hire 

business, the appropriate revenue 

benchmark is $6.0 million. 

An analysis of the gross revenue per 

vessel for commercial vessels that 

harvest species addressed in this action 

was conducted using data from the 

NMFS Southeast logbook program. 

These vessels also operate in other 

federally permitted fisheries, some 

harvests of which are also reported in 

the Southeast logbook program. All 

harvests (snapper-grouper and nonsnapper-grouper species) and associated 

gross revenues encompassed by the 

Southeast logbook program were 

summarized. During the period 2001 to 

2004, average annual gross revenue per 

vessel did not exceed $14,000, and total 

annual gross revenue for an individual 

vessel did not exceed approximately 

$247,000. It should be noted these 

vessels may also operate in the for-hire 

sector and other commercial fisheries 

whose landings are not covered by the 

Southeast logbook. Thus, this analysis 

may underestimate the total gross 

revenue for some vessels, though any 

underestimation is not believed to be 

substantial. 

A comprehensive study of vessels that 

participated in the South Atlantic 

snapper-grouper fishery in 1994 

provided estimates of total vessel 

revenue from all fishing activities. 

Average net income (1994 dollars) from 

sampled boats, in declining order, was 

$83,224 for boats that primarily used 

bottom longlines in the northern area 

(St. Augustine, FL, northward); $23,075 

for boats that primarily used black sea 

bass pots in the northern area, $15,563 

for boats that primarily used bottom 

longlines in the southern area (south of 

St. Augustine, FL); $11,649 for boats 

that primarily used vertical lines in the 

southern area; and $8,307 for boats that 

primarily used vertical lines in the 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55102 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

northern area. Overall, boats in the 

northern area averaged $14,143 in net 

income based on average revenues of 

$48,702, while boats in the southern 

area averaged $12,388 net income based 

on average revenues of $39,745. 

Although some fleet activity may exist 

in the snapper-grouper fishery, the 

extent of such has not been determined. 

Thus, all vessels are assumed to be 

unique business entities. Given the 

gross revenue profile captured by 2001–

2004 Southeast logbook program data 

and the findings of the 1994 survey, it 

is assumed all vessels represent small 

business entities. 

Charterboats are defined as boats for 

hire carrying 6 or fewer passengers that 

charge a fee to rent the entire boat. 

Headboats are for-hire vessels with a 

larger passenger capacity that charge a 

fee per individual angler. Using 1998 

survey data, two methods were used to 

determine the average gross revenue per 

vessel for the for-hire sector. The first 

method summarized the survey 

response to total gross revenue provided 

by the vessel owner. The second method 

calculated gross revenue based on the 

survey response to the average price per 

trip/passenger and the average number 

of trips/passengers taken/carried per 

year. The second method consistently 

generated higher estimates of average 

gross revenues, suggesting either overreporting of the individual data 

elements utilized in the calculated 

method or under-reporting of gross 

revenues. The analysis of the expected 

impacts of the proposed action, 

however, assumed the alternative 

estimation methods generated an 

acceptable range of the true average 

gross revenues for this sector. For the 

charterboat sector, these results (1998 

dollars) are as follows: $51,000 to 

$69,268 for Florida Atlantic coast 

vessels; $60,135 to $73,365 for North 

Carolina vessels; $26,304 to $32,091 for 

South Carolina vessels; and $56,551 to 

$68,992 for Georgia vessels. For the 

headboat sector, the results are: 

$140,714 to $299,551 for Florida (east 

and west coast) vessels, and $123,000 to 

$261,990 for vessels in the other South 

Atlantic states. Similar to the 

commercial harvest sector, some fleet 

activity may exist within the for-hire 

sector. The magnitude and identity of 

such is unknown, however, and all 

vessels are assumed to represent unique 

business entities. Given the gross 

revenue profiles generated, it is 

assumed all for-hire operations expected 

to be affected by this final rule are small 

business entities. 

During 2004, 1,066 commercial 

vessels were permitted to operate in the 

snapper-grouper fishery. Not all 

permitted vessels operate every year, 

and some vessels are believed to obtain 

permits for either speculative purposes 

or as insurance against further 

restriction in commercial fisheries. 

Nevertheless, the total number of 

permitted vessels is considered an 

upper bound on the potential universe 

of vessels in the snapper-grouper 

fishery. The lower bound is assumed to 

be the number of vessels active in 

2003—906 vessels. Thus, the range of 

vessels assumed to potentially operate 

in the commercial snapper-grouper 

fishery is 906 to 1,066. A subset of these 

vessels harvest the five species 

addressed in this action. From 2001 

through 2004, the number of vessels that 

harvested any of the species addressed 

in this action ranged from 396 to 459 

and are assumed to be the universe of 

potentially affected entities in the 

commercial harvest sector. This 

represents 37 percent (396/1,066) to 51 

percent (459/906) of the entire universe 

of entities potentially active in the 

snapper-grouper fishery. Thus, it is 

determined a substantial number of 

small entities in the commercial harvest 

sector would be affected by this final 

rule. 

For the for-hire sector, 1,594 snappergrouper for-hire permits were issued to 

vessels in the southern Atlantic states in 

2004. The for-hire fishery operates as an 

open access fishery, and not all 

permitted vessels are necessarily active 

in the fishery. Some vessel owners 

purchase open access permits as 

insurance for uncertainties in the 

fisheries in which they currently 

operate. A 1999 study of the Southeast 

for-hire industry estimated a total of 

1,080 charter vessels and 96 headboats 

supplied for-hire services in Florida 

(east and west coast) and the rest of the 

South Atlantic in 1997. 

Data on the number of for-hire vessels 

that actually harvest the species 

addressed by this action are not 

available. However, harvest data for 

1999–2003 indicate most (70 percent) of 

the headboat harvest in the South 

Atlantic is comprised of snappergrouper species, and approximately 36 

percent of total snapper-grouper 

headboat harvest is comprised of the 

species addressed in this action. 

Therefore, it is assumed all South 

Atlantic headboats harvest or target 

snapper-grouper species, and it is likely 

a substantial number of headboats will 

be affected by measures in this final 

rule. 

Data on the charter sector also imply 

a substantial number of charterboat 

entities will be affected by this final 

rule. Based on 2003 data, snappergrouper species are caught on 28 

percent of all charter trips, while 14 

percent of the charter sector’s snappergrouper harvest is comprised of species 

addressed by this action. 

The economic impact can be 

ascertained by examining two issues: 

Disproportionality and profitability. The 

disproportionality question is, do the 

regulations place a substantial number 

of small entities at a significant 

competitive disadvantage to large 

entities? All vessel operations affected 

by this final rule are considered small 

entities so the issue of 

disproportionality does not arise in the 

present case. However, among the 

entities in the commercial harvest 

sector, there is a high degree of diversity 

in terms of primary gear employed and 

level of engagement in the snappergrouper fishery. The snowy grouper and 

golden tilefish actions are expected to 

have a proportionally higher negative 

short-term impact on vessels which 

employ longline gear or fish off south 

and central Florida. The vermilion 

snapper quota is expected to have a 

relatively larger negative impact on 

vessels that employ hook-and-line gear 

or fish off Georgia and Northeast 

Florida. The black sea bass management 

measures are expected to have a 

proportionally higher negative impact 

on vessels that utilize black sea bass 

pots in North Carolina. Although the red 

porgy management measures will 

increase the allowable harvest and 

revenues in the commercial fishery, 

most of the increase in revenue is 

expected to be realized by vessels that 

employ hook-and-line gear. 

The short-term impacts on the for-hire 

sector from this final rule for the snowy 

grouper and golden tilefish management 

measures are expected to be minimal. In 

contrast, for-hire vessels are expected to 

bear substantially larger short-term 

negative impacts associated with 

implementation of the regulations for 

vermilion snapper and black sea bass. 

Assessment of the impacts on for-hire 

vessels is limited to expected reductions 

in harvest because the econometric 

models to predict changes in for-hire 

trips and subsequent changes in 

revenues as a result of the regulations 

contained in the final rule are not 

available. The short-term reduction in 

harvest of these two species is expected 

to be proportionally greater in the 

headboat sector than the charterboat or 

private boat sectors. For the vermilion 

snapper fishery, the final rule is 

expected to reduce vermilion snapper 

harvests by 21 percent in the private/ 

charter sector compared to 30 percent in 

the headboat sector. Similarly, the 

regulations for black sea bass are 

expected to reduce black sea bass 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55103 

harvests by 27 percent (year 1) in the 

charter/private sector compared to 41 

percent (year 1) in the headboat sector. 

The final rule is expected to result in 

an increase in recreational red porgy 

harvest and associated benefits and is 

projected to increase red porgy harvest 

in the headboat sector by 36 percent and 

by 21 percent in the charter/private 

recreational fishery sector. 

The profitability question is, do the 

regulations significantly reduce profit 

for a substantial number of small 

entities? In the recreational fishery, forhire business entities are expected to 

lose revenues and profits as a result of 

trip cancellation by clients who 

determine the measures will 

significantly affect the quality of the 

fishing experience. As previously 

discussed, these losses cannot be 

estimated at this time due to data 

limitations. However, it is reasonable to 

assume the greater the reduction in 

harvest, the higher the likelihood of trip 

cancellation and potential revenue loss. 

Even though it is not possible to 

calculate the change in profitability 

expected to arise from the final rule, 

given the dependence of the for-hire 

sector on the harvest of vermilion 

snapper and black sea bass, it is 

reasonable to assume the expected 

harvest reductions may result in a 

substantial adverse impact on the 

profitability of affected for-hire entities. 

The estimated reduction in consumer 

surplus for anglers that participate in 

the headboat sector (approximately 

$577,000) as a result of the final rule in 

these two fisheries is approximately 19 

percent of total estimated consumer 

surplus generated from the snappergrouper fishery for this sector 

(approximately $2.978 million). Similar 

analysis is not possible for the charter 

sector because this sector was combined 

with the private recreational sector in 

the assessment results. Although it is 

inappropriate to translate these results 

one-for-one into expected trip 

cancellations, they demonstrate the 

potential magnitude of trip cancellation 

and potential business revenue and 

profit changes. 

In the commercial harvest sector, data 

from 2001 through 2004 were used to 

examine the profitability of vessels that 

are likely to be affected by the final rule. 

This analysis encompassed an average 

of 408 vessels per year. Because the 

analysis for red porgy was conducted 

using data during a different time period 

(1995 through 1998), the revenue 

increase associated with this measure 

was not included in the assessment of 

the short-term cumulative effects of the 

final rule. Instead, the estimated 

increase in net cash flow in the 

commercial harvest sector due to red 

porgy regulations is presented 

separately. 

Net vessel revenues (gross revenue 

minus trip costs and opportunity cost of 

labor) were estimated from landings 

reported to the Southeast logbook 

program. Over the period 2001 to 2004, 

a large proportion (67 percent) of the 

entities included in this analysis earned 

less than $10,001 per year. Also, a 

number of vessels appeared to operate at 

a loss or break-even condition. These 

results could be an indication a high 

proportion of the commercial fishermen 

in the Southeast are part-time fishermen 

who supplement their household 

income by other employment. Another 

explanation of the results is not all of 

the fishing revenues for these vessels are 

reported in the Southeast logbooks and/ 

or the vessels are engaged in for-hire 

activities. Revenues and costs associated 

with commercial fishing on trips that 

did not harvest any of the species 

covered by this action, commercial 

fishing not captured by the Southeast 

logbook program, and for-hire activities 

are not reflected in the results contained 

in the following analyses. As such, total 

and net revenues for entire fishing 

business operations are unknown, and 

the following analysis likely overstates 

total and average individual impacts on 

the affected entities. The magnitude of 

this overstatement, however, cannot be 

determined. 

During the first year of 

implementation, the harvest restrictions 

for golden tilefish, snowy grouper, 

vermilion snapper, and black sea bass 

are expected to result in a total net 

short-term annual loss of $0.735 million 

to the commercial harvest sector, or 12 

percent of the total net revenue for trips 

that harvested any of the affected 

species. The final rule will implement a 

stepped-down approach on harvest 

restrictions for snowy grouper and black 

sea bass over a 3-year period, and the 

cumulative effects of the proposed 

measures for these four species is 

expected to increase to $1.085 million 

in the third year. 

When evaluated at the individual 

vessel/entity level, the average annual 

loss per affected entity associated with 

the final rule in the first year is expected 

to vary between $760 and $3,261, and 

the maximum net loss per boat is 

expected to vary between $26,533 and 

$76,390 per year. On average, 219 

vessels (54 percent of potentially 

affected entities) are not expected to 

incur losses under the final rule. 

Revenue loss per vessel was classified 

as Range I ($1–$500), Range II ($501–

$10,000), or Range III (greater than 

$10,000). The short-term economic 

effects of the final rule are not expected 

to be distributed evenly across all 

affected entities. During the first year of 

implementation of the final rule, it is 

expected 21 vessels would sustain 

Range III losses (an average of $22,764 

per vessel) and collectively account for 

62 percent of the total net loss in the 

commercial harvest sector. Conversely, 

82 entities are expected to sustain Range 

I losses ($102 per vessel), and 86 entities 

are expected to sustain Range II losses 

($3,165 per vessel) and account for 37 

percent of the total net loss in the 

commercial harvest sector. 

Vessel profitability is expected to 

decrease by more than 10 percent for 86 

vessels (21 percent of the 408 

potentially affected entities) during the 

first year of implementation of this final 

rule. 

This final rule is expected to result in 

a loss in net revenue of more than 10 

percent for the 21 vessels that 

experience a Range III reduction. Also, 

80 percent of all affected entities (16 

vessels) that experience a Range III 

decrease in net revenue are expected to 

realize more than a 25 percent reduction 

in profitability. In contrast, profitability 

is expected to decrease by more than 10 

percent for only 24 percent (7 vessels) 

of all vessels that are likely to sustain 

Range I losses. 

For red porgy, this final rule is 

expected to increase short-term revenue 

to the commercial harvest sector by 

$0.07 million annually. The estimated 

increase in earnings of 32 vessels (10 

percent of the 317 vessels expected to be 

affected by the red porgy action) are 

expected to exceed $2,500 per vessel 

annually. The estimated average net 

revenue increase per vessel within the 

red porgy fishery is $221 ($70,000/317) 

per year. 

In summary, this final rule is 

expected to result in a 12-percent loss 

in short-term net revenue to the 

commercial harvest sector. At least 26 

percent of potentially affected entities 

are expected to sustain more than $501 

losses in net revenue, and 31 percent of 

all affected entities (13 percent of all 

potentially affected entities) are 

expected to experience more than a 25 

percent decrease in profitability during 

the first year of implementation of the 

proposed action. The reductions in 

profitability are expected to increase 

through the third year as total target 

harvest reductions are achieved. Thus, 

both the magnitude and distributional 

effects of the reduction in net revenues 

could increase over this period of time. 

However, the delayed implementation 

of the full harvest reductions could 

allow operational adaptation by the 

affected entities, resulting in smaller 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55104 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

total impacts and smaller distributional 

effects than those discussed above. In 

addition to the impacts described for the 

commercial finfish harvest sector, 

certain segments of the for-hire sector 

are expected to experience substantial 

reductions in allowable harvests of 

certain species as a result of the final 

rule and may experience commensurate 

reductions in revenues if unable to 

maintain service demand through the 

substitution of other species. 

Three alternatives, including the 

status quo and the preferred alternative, 

were considered for the proposed action 

to establish management measures for 

the commercial fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the snowy grouper 

fishery. The status quo would allow 

continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective or the requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

The third alternative would have 

achieved the full commercial quota 

reduction in the first year of 

implementation, rather than the stepdown provision of the proposed action 

and, as such, would result in greater 

short-term adverse economic impacts 

than the proposed action. 

Three alternatives, including the 

status quo and the preferred alternative, 

were considered for the proposed action 

to establish management measures for 

the recreational fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the snowy grouper 

fishery. The status quo would have 

allowed continued overfishing and 

would, therefore, not achieve the 

Council’s objective or the requirements 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Due to the low catch per unit effort in 

the recreational fishery, the third 

alternative would not have resulted in 

sufficient harvest reduction to achieve 

the goal of ending overfishing. 

Therefore, although this alternative 

would have resulted in lower short-term 

adverse economic impacts to the 

recreational sector (i.e., an annual shortterm reduction in consumer surplus of 

$3,497, compared to a $5,402 reduction 

for the preferred alternative), this 

alternative would not achieve the 

Council’s objective or the requirements 

of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Three alternatives, including the 

status quo and two quota alternatives, 

one of which was the preferred 

alternative, were considered for the 

proposed action to establish 

management measures for the 

commercial fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the golden tilefish 

fishery. The status quo would allow 

continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective or the requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

For each quota alternative, five stepdown trip limit alternatives, including 

the status quo, and two step-down 

trigger date control options, including 

the status quo no control trigger date, 

were considered. Under the quota 

specified by the proposed action, the 

trip limit alternatives encompassed 

either a lower trip limit, 3,000 lb (1,361 

kg), than the proposed action or a less 

restrictive harvest trigger, 85 percent of 

the quota, for the step down. The shortterm adverse economic impacts of all 

trip limit alternative combinations that 

include the 75-percent harvest trigger 

would be expected to be approximately 

equal to or greater than those of the 

proposed action. The trip limit 

alternative combinations that include 

the 85-percent harvest trigger would 

generate lower short-term adverse 

economic impacts than the proposed 

action. However, this higher trigger 

would result in a shorter fishing season, 

on average, than the proposed action. 

Although these impacts were not able to 

be quantified, shorter fishing seasons 

are recognized to result in adverse price 

effects, market disruptions, and 

disruptions of business operation. 

Therefore, the expected longer season 

projected under the proposed action 

was determined to best meet the 

Council’s objectives. 

Under the alternative quota 

specification, the expected adverse 

short-term economic impacts of seven of 

the ten trip limit and trigger date 

combinations are projected to be less 

than those of the proposed action due to 

the 3-year progression to the target 

quota of 295,000 lb (133,810 kg), which 

is implemented in the third year under 

this alternative, resulting in larger 

allowable harvests the first 2 years. This 

alternative, however, would not end 

overfishing as soon as practicable and 

would, therefore, not meet the Council’s 

objective or the requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Four alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures for the 

recreational fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the golden tilefish 

fishery. The status quo would allow 

continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective. 

Due to the low catch per unit effort in 

the recreational fishery, the third 

alternative would not have resulted in 

sufficient harvest reduction to achieve 

the goal of ending overfishing. 

Therefore, although this alternative 

would have resulted in lower short-term 

adverse economic impacts to the 

recreational sector, this alternative 

would not achieve the Council’s 

objective. 

The fourth alternative would impose 

greater restrictions on recreational 

golden tilefish harvest, resulting in 

greater adverse economic impacts than 

the proposed action. 

Ten alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures for the 

commercial fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the vermilion 

snapper fishery. The status quo would 

allow continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective or the requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Eight alternatives would have 

established lower commercial quotas 

(either 757,000 or 821,000 lb (343,369 or 

372,399 kg) gutted weight) than the 

preferred alternative, in addition to 

alternative minimum size and trip 

limits. These quotas represent 

reductions in allowable harvest greater 

than is necessary to end overfishing of 

this resource. Further, each of the eight 

alternatives would result in greater 

adverse economic impacts than the 

proposed action. 

Nine alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures for the 

recreational fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the vermilion 

snapper fishery. The status quo would 

allow continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective or the requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

In addition to the minimum size limit 

increase of the proposed action, one 

alternative to the proposed action would 

reduce the daily bag limit to six fish. 

Although this alternative would 

increase the likelihood of ending 

overfishing relative to the proposed 

action, this alternative would result in 

greater adverse economic impacts than 

the proposed action. 

A similar alternative would, in 

addition to the minimum size limit 

increase, impose lower, but differential, 

bag limits on the for-hire and 

recreational sectors. Similar to the 

alternative discussed above, although 

this alternative would increase the 

likelihood of ending overfishing relative 

to the proposed action, this alternative 

would result in greater adverse 

economic impacts than the proposed 

action. 

Two alternatives to the proposed 

vermilion snapper recreational action 

would maintain the current minimum 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55105 

size limit but impose fishery closures 

for different periods: October through 

December and January through 

February. Both alternatives are projected 

to result in lower adverse economic 

impacts than the proposed action. 

However, these estimates do not 

incorporate additional potential adverse 

impacts associated with potential 

fishing trip cancellation as a result of 

the closures. These impacts cannot be 

determined at this time. The addition of 

these impacts to these alternatives, 

however, may result in greater total 

adverse impacts compared to the 

proposed action. Further, although the 

proposed action may not end 

overfishing, depending on the level of 

the current vermilion snapper biomass, 

these alternatives are not expected to 

achieve as much progress toward the 

goal of ending overfishing as the 

proposed action and, as such, do not 

meet the Council’s objectives. 

Two alternatives to the proposed 

recreational vermilion snapper action 

would retain the closures specified in 

the alternatives discussed above and 

add reductions in the bag limit to six 

fish and five fish, respectively. 

Although each of these alternatives 

would be expected to achieve greater 

progress toward ending overfishing 

relative to the proposed action, each 

would also result in greater adverse 

economic impacts than the proposed 

action. 

The ninth and final alternative to the 

proposed recreational vermilion 

snapper action would include the 

minimum size limit increase in the 

proposed action and close the fishery 

from January through February. This 

alternative would achieve greater 

harvest reductions than the proposed 

action, thereby accomplishing more 

progress toward ending overfishing. 

This action would also, however, result 

in greater adverse economic impacts 

than the proposed action. Due to 

uncertainty associated with the stock 

assessment for vermilion snapper, the 

Council believed it was best to cap 

landings at 1,100,000 lb (498,952 kg) 

gutted weight until a new stock 

assessment update was competed in 

2001. A 30-percent reduction in 

landings during 2003–2004 would have 

ended overfishing. The proposed quota, 

which approximates the optimum yield, 

would prevent overfishing from 

occurring in the future. 

Eight alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures for the 

commercial fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the black sea bass 

fishery. The status quo would allow 

continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective. 

The third alternative would have 

established a lower quota than that 

specified for the first 2 years under the 

proposed action, but 10 percent greater 

than the third-year quota. Thus, this 

alternative would be expected to result 

in greater adverse economic impacts 

than the proposed action in the first 2 

years, but slightly lesser impacts in 

subsequent years. Although the effects 

of such could not be quantified, the 

Council determined that a more gradual 

progression to a lower quota would 

support greater adaptive behavior by 

participants and result in lower total 

adverse economic impacts. 

The fourth alternative would have 

established the lower third-year quota 

target of the proposed action 

immediately and also would have 

established an increased minimum size 

limit and trip limits. This alternative 

would result in greater adverse 

economic impacts, $0.32 million, than 

the proposed action. 

The fifth alternative would have 

established a quota equal to that 

specified in the second year of the 

proposed action and an increased 

minimum size limit. This alternative 

would result in greater adverse 

economic impacts in the first 2 years, 

$0.74 million, than the proposed action, 

but less impacts thereafter. This 

alternative would not, however, achieve 

the necessary harvest reductions to meet 

the Council’s objective to end 

overfishing. 

The sixth alternative would add trip 

limits and an increase in the minimum 

size limit to the measures contained in 

the proposed action. Because this 

alternative would be more restrictive 

than the proposed action, this 

alternative would result in greater 

adverse economic impacts, $0.22-$0.32 

million over the course of the first 3 

years. 

The seventh alternative would not 

impose a quota but would, instead, in 

addition to the mesh size specification 

of the proposed action, limit harvest 

and/or possession of black sea bass to 

the recreational bag limit. This 

alternative would result in greater 

adverse economic impacts, $0.26 

million, than the proposed action. 

The eighth and final alternative to the 

proposed action on the commercial 

black sea bass fishery would impose the 

mesh size specification of the proposed 

action and increase the minimum size 

limit. Although this alternative would 

result in less adverse economic impacts 

than the proposed action, this 

alternative would not achieve the 

necessary harvest reductions to meet the 

Council’s objective of ending 

overfishing. 

Eight alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures for the 

recreational fishery consistent with 

ending overfishing in the black sea bass 

fishery. The status quo would allow 

continued overfishing and would, 

therefore, not achieve the Council’s 

objective. 

The third alternative to the proposed 

action would immediately establish a 

lower allocation than the first 2 years of 

the proposed action, but greater than 

that of the third and subsequent years, 

as well as an immediate increase in the 

minimum size limit matching the 

specification in the second year of the 

proposed action. The bag limit 

specifications of both alternatives are 

identical. Since this alternative is more 

aggressive in achieving desired 

reductions, the short-term adverse 

impacts, $ 1.5 million, are greater than 

those of the proposed action. Further, 

the progressive achievement of the 

target restrictions in the proposed action 

allow for more gradual adaptation to the 

new restrictions and the changes to the 

business environment they may 

engender. 

The fourth alternative to the proposed 

action would immediately establish the 

third-year allocation of the proposed 

action, forgo the second increase in the 

minimum size limit, and reduce the bag 

limit to four fish per person per day. 

Although the quantifiable adverse 

economic impacts of this alternative are 

lower than those of the proposed action, 

these impacts do not account for 

additional potential adverse impacts 

associated with trip cancellation due to 

the severe reduction (80 percent) in the 

daily bag limit. These additional 

adverse impacts are expected to result 

in this alternative having a greater 

adverse economic impact than the 

proposed action. 

The fifth alternative would establish a 

recreational allocation equal to that of 

the second year under the proposed 

action and limit the increase in the 

minimum size limit to 1 inch (2.5 cm). 

Although this alternative would result 

in lower adverse economic impacts, 

$873,000, than the proposed action, the 

resultant harvest reductions would be 

insufficient to meet the Council’s 

objective. 

The sixth alternative would mimic the 

allocation specifications of the proposed 

action but would limit the minimum 

size limit increase to 1 inch (2.5 cm) 

while reducing the daily bag limit to 

four fish. Similar to the discussion of 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55106 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

the second alternative above, the 

analytical results do not capture the full 

potential impacts associated with the 

bag limit reduction, and this alternative 

is expected to result in greater adverse 

economic impact, i.e., in excess of $1.5 

million, than the proposed action. 

The seventh alternative would simply 

reduce the bag limit to 10 fish per 

person per day. This alternative would 

not achieve the necessary harvest 

reductions to meet the Council’s 

objective. 

The eighth and final alternative to the 

proposed action for the recreational 

black sea bass fishery would simply 

increase the minimum size limit 1 inch 

(2.5 cm). This alternative would not 

achieve the necessary harvest 

reductions to meet the Council’s 

objective. 

Five alternatives, including the status 

quo and the preferred alternative, were 

considered for the proposed action to 

establish management measures to 

increase the allowable harvest in the 

recreational and commercial fisheries 

for red porgy. A recent stock assessment 

indicates the stock is rebuilding and 

catches can be increased without 

overfishing or compromising the 

approved rebuilding schedule. 

The third alternative would be 

identical to the proposed action except 

for allowing a smaller recreational bag 

limit. This alternative would result in 

lower economic benefits than the 

proposed action. 

The fourth alternative similarly 

imposes the smaller recreational bag 

limit and reduces the number of fish 

that can be harvested per commercial 

trip relative to the proposed action, 

while allowing the limit to remain in 

effect year-round rather than just May 

through December. Although this 

alternative would result in slightly 

greater benefits to the commercial 

sector, the benefits to the recreational 

sector would be less than those of the 

proposed action, and the Council 

determined that overall the proposed 

action would be more effective in 

allowing increased benefits relative to 

the status quo while protecting against 

harvest overages. 

The fifth and final alternative to the 

proposed action on the red porgy fishery 

would implement the commercial trip 

limits of the second alternative 

discussed above, while allowing the 

higher daily recreational bag limit of the 

proposed action. Although this 

alternative would result in the higher 

economic benefits associated with the 

more liberal increases for both harvest 

sectors, the Council determined that the 

more conservative harvest potential 

associated with the commercial trip 

limits of the proposed action would be 

more effective in insuring that harvest 

overages do not occur. 

Copies of the FRFA are available from 

NMFS (see ADDRESSES). 

Section 212 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 states that, for each rule or group 

of related rules for which an agency is 

required to prepare a FRFA, the agency 

shall publish one or more guides to 

assist small entities in complying with 

the final rule, and shall designate such 

publications as ‘‘small entity 

compliance guides.’’ As part of the 

rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a 

fishery bulletin, which also serves as a 

small entity compliance guide. The 

fishery-bulletin will be sent to all vessel 

permit holders for the South Atlantic 

Snapper-Grouper fishery. 

This final rule contains a collectionof-information requirement subject to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and 

which has been approved by OMB 

under control number 0648–0013. 

Public reporting burden for the 

requirement to submit a letter of request 

to the RA for sea bass pot removal is 

estimated to average 10 minutes per 

response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the 

collections of information. Send 

comments on these burden estimates or 

any other aspect of this data collection, 

including suggestions for reducing the 

burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and 

by e-mail to 

David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 

202–395–7285. 

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 PRA, unless that 

collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

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: September 18, 2006. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

■ For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, 15 CFR Chapter IX and 50 

CFR Chapter III 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 § 902.1, paragraph (b), the table 

is amended by adding in the left column 

under 50 CFR, in numerical order, 

‘‘622.40(d)(2)’’, and in the right column, 

in the corresponding position, the 

control number ‘‘–0013’’, as follows: 

§ 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned 

pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

CFR part or section where 

the information collection 

requirement is located 

Current OMB 

control number 

(all numbers 

begin with 

0648–) 

* * * * * 

50 CFR 

* * * * * 

622.40(d)(2) ........................ –0013 

* * * * * 

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. In § 622.30, paragraph (e) is added 

to read as follows: 

§ 622.30 Fishing years. 

* * * * * 

(e) South Atlantic black sea bass—

June 1 through May 31. 

■ 5. In § 622.36, paragraph (b)(5) is 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.36 Atlantic EEZ seasonal and/or area 

closures. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Red porgy. During January, 

February, March, and April, the harvest 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 55107 

or possession of red porgy in or from the 

South Atlantic EEZ is limited to three 

per person per day or three per person 

per trip, whichever is more restrictive. 

In addition, this limitation is applicable 

in the South Atlantic on board a vessel 

for which a valid Federal commercial or 

charter vessel/headboat permit for 

South Atlantic snapper-grouper has 

been issued without regard to where 

such red porgy were harvested. Such 

red porgy are subject to the prohibition 

on sale or purchase, as specified in 

§ 622.45(d)(5). 

■ 6. In § 622.37, paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) and 

(e)(3)(i) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.37 Size limits. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Vermillion snapper—12 inches 

(30.5 cm), TL. 

* * * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) Black sea bass. (A) For a fish taken 

by a person subject to the bag limit 

specified in § 622.39(d)(1)(vii): 

(1) Through May 31, 2007—11 inches 

(27.9 cm), TL; and 

(2) On and after June 1, 2007—12 

inches (30.5 cm), TL. 

(B) For a fish taken by a person not 

subject to the bag limit in 

§ 622.39(d)(1)—10 inches (25.4 cm), TL. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. In § 622.39, paragraphs (d)(1)(ii), 

(d)(1)(vi), (d)(1)(vii), and (d)(2)(ii) are 

revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.39 Bag and possession limits. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Groupers and tilefish, combined—

5. However, within the 5-fish aggregate 

bag limit: 

(A) No more than two fish may be gag 

or black grouper, combined; 

(B) No more than one fish may be a 

snowy grouper; 

(C) No more than one fish may be a 

golden tilefish; and 

(D) No goliath grouper or Nassau 

grouper may be retained. 

* * * * * 

(vi) Red porgy—3. 

(vii) Black sea bass—15. 

* * * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) A person aboard a vessel may not 

possess red porgy in or from the EEZ in 

excess of three per day or three per trip, 

whichever is more restrictive. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. In § 622.40, paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and 

(d)(2) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.40 Limitations on traps and pots. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) A sea bass pot used or possessed 

in the South Atlantic EEZ must have 

mesh sizes as follows (based on 

centerline measurements between 

opposite, parallel wires or netting 

strands): 

(A) For sides of the pot other than the 

back panel: 

(1) Hexagonal mesh (chicken wire)—

at least 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) between the 

wrapped sides; 

(2) Square mesh—at least 1.5 inches 

(3.8 cm) between sides; or 

(3) Rectangular mesh—at least 1 inch 

(2.5 cm) between the longer sides and 2 

inches (5.1 cm) between the shorter 

sides. 

(B) For the entire back panel, i.e., the 

side of the pot opposite the side that 

contains the pot entrance, mesh that is 

at least 2 inches (5.1 cm) between sides. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) South Atlantic EEZ—(i) Sea bass 

pots. (A) In the South Atlantic EEZ, sea 

bass pots may not be used or possessed 

in multiple configurations, that is, two 

or more pots may not be attached one 

to another so that their overall 

dimensions exceed those allowed for an 

individual sea bass pot. This does not 

preclude connecting individual pots to 

a line, such as a ‘‘trawl’’ or trot line. 

(B) A sea bass pot must be removed 

from the water in the South Atlantic 

EEZ when the quota specified in 

§ 622.42(e)(5) is reached. The RA may 

authorize a grace period of up to 10 days 

for removal of pots after a closure is in 

effect based on exigent circumstances 

which include, but are not limited to, 

insufficient advance notice of a closure 

or severe weather. In addition, a person 

may request that the RA grant such a 

grace period based on severe personal 

hardship, such as equipment failure or 

the vessel operator’s health, by 

providing a letter outlining the nature 

and circumstances of the severe 

personal hardship to be received by the 

RA no later than the effective date of the 

closure. The RA will advise the 

requester of the approval or disapproval 

of the request. After a closure is in 

effect, a black sea bass may not be 

retained by a vessel that has a sea bass 

pot on board. 

(ii) Golden crab traps. Rope is the 

only material allowed to be used for a 

buoy line or mainline attached to a 

golden crab trap. 

■ 9. In § 622.42, paragraph (e) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 622.42 Quotas. 

* * * * * 

(e) South Atlantic snapper-grouper, 

excluding wreckfish. The quotas apply 

to persons who are not subject to the bag 

limits. (See § 622.39(a)(1) for 

applicability of the bag limits.) The 

quotas are in gutted weight, that is, 

eviscerated but otherwise whole. 

(1) Snowy grouper. (i) For the fishing 

year that commences January 1, 2006—

151,000 lb (68,492 kg). 

(ii) For the fishing year that 

commences January 1, 2007—118,000 lb 

(53,524 kg). 

(iii) For the fishing year that 

commences January 1, 2008, and for 

subsequent fishing years–84,000 lb 

(38,102 kg). 

(2) Golden tilefish—295,000 lb 

(133,810 kg). 

(3) Greater amberjack—1,169,931 lb 

(530,672 kg). 

(4) Vermilion snapper—1,100,000 lb 

(498,952 kg). 

(5) Black sea bass. (i) For the fishing 

year that commences June 1, 2006—

477,000 lb (216,364 kg). 

(ii) For the fishing year that 

commences June 1, 2007—423,000 lb 

(191,870 kg). 

(iii) For the fishing year that 

commences June 1, 2008, and for 

subsequent fishing years—309,000 lb 

(140,160 kg). 

(6) Red porgy—127,000 lb (57,606 kg). 

* * * * * 

■ 10. In § 622.43, paragraphs (a)(5) and 

(b)(1) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 622.43 Closures. 

(a) * * * 

(5) South Atlantic greater amberjack, 

snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 

vermilion snapper, black sea bass, and 

red porgy. The appropriate bag limits 

specified in § 622.39(d)(1) and the 

possession limits specified in 

§ 622.39(d)(2) apply to all harvest or 

possession of the applicable species in 

or from the South Atlantic EEZ, and the 

sale or purchase of the applicable 

species taken from the EEZ is 

prohibited. In addition, the bag and 

possession limits for the applicable 

species and the prohibition on sale/ 

purchase apply in the South Atlantic on 

board a vessel for which a valid Federal 

commercial or charter vessel/headboat 

permit for South Atlantic snappergrouper has been issued, without regard 

to where such species were harvested. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) The prohibition on sale/purchase 

during a closure for Gulf reef fish, king 

and Spanish mackerel, royal red shrimp, 

or specified snapper-grouper species in 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1
55108 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 183 / Thursday, September 21, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3)(iii), (a)(4), or 

(a)(5) and (a)(6), respectively, of this 

section does not apply to the indicated 

species that were harvested, landed 

ashore, and sold prior to the effective 

date of the closure and were held in 

cold storage by a dealer or processor. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. In § 622.44, paragraphs (c)(2), 

(c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) are revised to 

read as follows: 

§ 622.44 Commercial trip limits. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) Golden tilefish. (i) Until 75 percent 

of the fishing year quota specified in 

§ 622.42(e)(2) is reached—4,000 lb 

(1,814 kg). 

(ii) After 75 percent of the fishing year 

quota specified in § 622.42(e)(2) is 

reached—300 lb (136 kg). However, if 75 

percent of the fishing year quota has not 

been taken on or before September 1, 

the trip limit will not be reduced. The 

Assistant Administrator, by filing a 

notification of trip limit change with the 

Office of the Federal Register, will effect 

a trip limit change specified in this 

paragraph, (c)(2)(ii), when the 

applicable conditions have been taken. 

(iii) See § 622.43(a)(5) for the 

limitations regarding golden tilefish 

after the fishing year quota is reached. 

(3) Snowy grouper. (i) During the 2006 

fishing year, until the quota specified in 

§ 622.42(e)(1)(i) is reached—275 lb (125 

kg). 

(ii) During the 2007 fishing year, until 

the quota specified in § 622.42(e)(1)(ii) 

is reached—175 lb (79 kg). 

(iii) During the 2008 and subsequent 

fishing years, until the quota specified 

in § 622.42(e)(1)(iii) is reached—100 lb 

(45 kg). 

(iv) See § 622.43(a)(5) for the 

limitations regarding snowy grouper 

after the fishing year quota is reached. 

(4) Red porgy. (i) From May 1 through 

December 31—120 fish. 

(ii) From January 1 through April 30, 

the seasonal harvest limit specified in 

§ 622.36(b)(5) applies. 

(iii) See § 622.43(a)(5) for the 

limitations regarding red porgy after the 

fishing year quota is reached. 

(5) Greater amberjack. Until the 

fishing year quota specified in 

§ 622.42(e)(3) is reached, 1,000 lb (454 

kg). See § 622.43(a)(5) for the limitations 

regarding greater amberjack after the 

fishing year quota is reached. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. In § 622.45, paragraph (d)(8) is 

added to read as follows: 

§ 622.45 Restrictions on sale/purchase. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(8) No person may sell or purchase a 

snowy grouper, golden tilefish, greater 

amberjack, vermilion snapper, black sea 

bass, or red porgy harvested from or 

possessed in the South Atlantic by a 

vessel for which a valid Federal 

commercial or charter vessel/headboat 

permit for South Atlantic snappergrouper has been issued for the 

remainder of the fishing year after the 

applicable commercial quota for that 

species specified in § 622.42(e) has been 

reached. The prohibition on sale/ 

purchase during these periods does not 

apply to such of the applicable species 

that were harvested, landed ashore, and 

sold prior to the applicable commercial 

quota being reached and were held in 

cold storage by a dealer or processor. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 06–7940 Filed 9–18–06; 2:59 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9280] 

RIN 1545–BE10 

Section 411(d)(6) Protected Benefits; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correcting amendment. 

SUMMARY: This document contains 

corrections to final regulations that were 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 9, 2006 (71 FR 45379) that 

provide guidance on certain issues 

under section 411(d)(6) of the Internal 

Revenue Code (Code), including the 

interaction between the anti-cutback 

rules of section 411(d)(6) and the 

nonforfeitability requirements of section 

411(a). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: This correction is 

effective August 9, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pamela R. Kinard, at (202) 622–6060 

(not a toll-free number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The final regulations that are the 

subject of this correction are under 

section 411(d)(6) of the Code. 

Need for Correction 

As published, the final regulations 

(TD 9280), contain errors that may prove 

to be misleading and are in need of 

clarification. 

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 

Income taxes, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Correction of Publication 

■ Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is 

corrected by making the following 

correcting amendments: 

PART 1—INCOME TAXES 

■ Paragraph 1. The authority citation 

for part 1 continues to read in part as 

follows: 

Authority: 26 U.S.C 7805 * * * 

■ Par. 2. Section 1.411(d)–3 is amended 

by revising paragraph (a)(3)(i), second 

sentence and (a)(4) Example 4 (ii), 

second sentence to read as follows: 

§ 1.411(d)–3 Section 411 (d)(6) protected 

benefits. 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * However, such an 

amendment does not violate section 

411(d)(6) to the extent it applies with 

respect to benefits that accrue after the 

applicable amendment date. 

(4) * * * 

Example 4 * * * 

(ii) * * * A method of avoiding a section 

411 (d)(6) violation with respect to account 

balances attributable to benefits accrued as of 

the applicable amendment date and earnings 

thereon would be for Plan D to provide for 

the vested percentage of G and each other 

participant in Plan E to be no less than the 

greater of the vesting percentages under the 

two vesting schedules (for example, for G and 

each other participant in Plan E to be 20% 

vested upon completion of 3 years of service, 

40% vested upon completion of 4 years of 

service, and fully vested upon completion of 

5 years of service) for those account balances 

and earnings. 

* * * * * 

Cynthia Grigsby, 

Senior Federal Liaison Officer, Legal 

Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel 

(Procedure and Administration). 

[FR Doc. 06–7862 Filed 9–20–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Internal Revenue Service 

26 CFR Part 1 

[TD 9280] 

RIN 1545–BE10 

Section 411(d)(6) Protected Benefits; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

Treasury. 

ACTION: Correction to final regulations. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES1