Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5375

used in models used for different

purposes. For instance, commenters that

believe the modeling of the economic

cost of providing network facilities or

access costs can or should differ from

the modeling of the economic costs of

providing the services receiving

universal service support should

describe their reasons, including in part

the differences in network investments

required. Specifically, they should

identify any costs included in

unbundled elements that are directly

attributable to unsupported services.

More broadly, the Bureau seeks

comment on whether the various inputs

to the models, such as rate of return and

depreciation, can or should differ for

these different purposes.

6. The Bureau looks forward to

receiving comments and working with

all interested parties in developing

reasonable approaches to using

economic cost models as tools in

resolving the various critical

telecommunications policy issues

described above. The comments should

be filed on or before February 3, 1997,

with reply comments due February 14,

1997. Commenters must file an original

and four copies of their comments with

the Office of the Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission, Room

222, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C. 20554. Comments should reference

CPD Docket No. 97–2. Commenters

should send one copy of their comments

to the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Room 140, 2100 M Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20037. Comments will

be available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the FCC

Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M

Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20554.

7. Parties are also asked to submit

comments on diskette. Such diskette

submissions would be in addition to

and not a substitute for the formal filing

requirements addressed above. Parties

submitting diskettes should submit

them to Wanda M. Harris, Competitive

Pricing Division, Common Carrier

Bureau, 1919 M Street, N.W., Room 518,

Washington, D.C. 20554. Such a

submission should be on a 3.5 inch

diskette in an IBM compatible format

using WordPerfect 5.1 for Windows

software in a ‘‘read only’’ mode. The

diskette should be clearly labelled with

the party’s name, proceeding, and date

of submission. The diskette should be

accompanied by a cover letter.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 36

Communications common carriers,

Telephone, Uniform System of

Accounts.

47 CFR Part 51

Communications common carriers,

Telephone.

47 CFR Part 61

Communications common carriers,

Tariffs, Telephone.

47 CFR Part 69

Access charges, Communications

common carriers, Telephone.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–2502 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 960805216–7013–04; I.D.

121796B]

RIN 0648–AH06

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Regulatory Amendment to the

Fishery Management Plan for the

Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black

Sea Bass Fisheries

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed

rule and request for comments to

implement a regulatory amendment to

the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for

the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black

Sea Bass Fisheries. This proposed

regulatory amendment would revise the

allocation and management of the

commercial scup quota.

DATES: Public comments must be

received on or before March 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed

rule should be sent to Dr. Andrew A.

Rosenberg, Regional Administrator,

National Marine Fisheries Service,

Northeast Regional Office, One

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930.

Mark the outside of the envelope,

‘‘Comments on Scup Regulatory

Amendment.’’

Comments regarding burden-hour

estimates for collection-of-information

requirements contained in this proposed

rule should be sent to the Regional

Administrator, Northeast Region,

NMFS, at the address above, and the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 20502

(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

Copies of the regulatory amendment

are available upon request from David

R. Keifer, Executive Director, MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council,

Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South

New Street, Dover, DE 19901.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Regina L. Spallone, Fishery Policy

Analyst, 508–281–9221.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council (Council) and the

Atlantic States Marine Fisheries

Commission (Commission) adopted an

FMP for the Scup Fishery for NMFS

review in November 1995. To reduce

the number of separate regulations

issued by the Federal Government,

however, the proposed scup FMP was

incorporated into the Summer Flounder

FMP as Amendment 8 to that FMP.

Amendment 8 was approved by NMFS

on July 29, 1996 (61 FR 43420, August

23, 1996). The Commission then

adopted a plan with measures that are

identical to those in Amendment 8. The

Commission plan would confer to States

responsibility of managing their quota

for the scup industry in their state and

can implement and enforce landing

limits. In addition, quota monitoring

and closures upon quota attainment

would be state compliance measures

under the Commission plan, as stated in

the Atlantic Coastal Fisheries

Cooperative Management Act.

Due to the seriously overfished status

of the stock, the Council had requested,

and the Secretary of Commerce

(Secretary) implemented, emergency

regulations to enact a minimum mesh

requirement and minimum fish size for

the fishery. These measures were in

effect from March 22, 1996, until

regulations implementing Amendment 8

were published on September 23, 1996.

Amendment 8 established target

annual exploitation rates for rebuilding

the stock that are to be reached through

a total allowable catch (TAC) for the

scup fishery that includes both landings

and discards. The TAC is divided into

a commercial TAC and a recreational

TAC. Discard estimates are then

subtracted from each of those

allocations. The result is an annual
5376 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

commercial quota and recreational

harvest limit. The commercial quota for

the fishing year beginning on January 1,

1997, is allocated on a coastwide basis.

When the Council and the Commission

adopted Amendment 8 for submission,

they stated their intent to begin a

process to better define the system that

would be used to distribute the

commercial quota. However, to begin

the rebuilding of the resource, they

decided to submit Amendment 8 before

the coastwide quota system was refined

so that regulations could be

implemented as quickly as possible.

The current regulations allow the

commercial quota system to operate

without restrictions to control the rate of

harvest, e.g., trip limits or seasonal

allocations. Without specific

restrictions, it is possible that large,

offshore vessels fishing in the first

portion of the year will fill the annual

quota quickly, closing the fishery before

other participants have an opportunity

to fish on the stock. Therefore, the

Council and the Commission have

developed another system to allow for a

more equitable distribution of the quota

to the commercial sector.

The proposed measure would

implement a commercial quota system

in which the TAC would be allocated

into two winter periods: January–April

(45.11 percent) and November–

December (15.94 percent), and one

summer period: May–October (38.95

percent). The discard estimates for each

period would be subtracted from the

TAC for each period, to derive the

commercial quota for each period. The

two winter periods would each be

allocated to the coastal states from

Maine to North Carolina on a coastwide

basis, during which coastwide landing

limits would be in effect. During the

summer period, a state-by-state quota

system would be in effect, and the quota

would be managed in the same manner

as the state-by-state quota system

currently in effect in the commercial

summer flounder fishery.

Issues of Concern

Concerns have been raised to NMFS

about the lack of gear-specific discard

estimates that may result in inequitable

treatment between the inshore and

offshore fisheries. Some argue that

because the discard estimates are based

on offshore trawler discard data, and the

offshore trawler discard rates are greater

than the discard rates for the inshore

fishery, this would penalize the summer

inshore fishery. The summer inshore

fishery uses predominantly different

gear types than the offshore fishery. The

public is encouraged to submit

comments on this issue.

NMFS also is concerned that the

implication of de minimus status is not

defined in the amendment. It is not

possible to ascertain what de minimus

means to a state, versus a state that does

not share that distinction, with regard to

implementation of the regulations.

Therefore, NMFS invites comments on

that provision.

Proposed Measures

The regulatory amendment would

implement in 1997 a commercial quota

system in which the TAC would be

allocated into three periods: Winter I

(January–April), Summer (May–

October) and Winter II (November–

December). The discard estimates for

each period would be subtracted from

the TAC for that period, to derive the

commercial quota for each period.

Based on historical data, the quota

would be allocated to each period as

follows: 45.11 percent to Winter I, 38.95

percent to Summer, and 15.94 percent

to Winter II. During the two winter

periods, the commercial fishery would

operate under a coastwide quota with

landing limits. These landing limits

would be set annually by the

Monitoring Committee. In Winter I, the

coastwide landing limit may be

decreased when a specified percentage

of the quota is attained for that period.

Landing limits would be specified

annually through the process

established in the FMP and could not be

altered once adopted by NMFS. The

quota for the two winter periods would

be allocated to the coastal states from

Maine to North Carolina. Fishing for or

landing scup would be prohibited when

the quota is attained. NMFS will

implement the closures for federally

permitted vessels and dealers, and the

states would take complementary action

for their state-permitted vessels and

dealers. As stated above, quota

monitoring and closures upon quota

attainment by the states would be

compliance measures enforceable by the

states.

During the Summer period, a state-bystate quota would be in effect. Based on

historical data, the quota for that period

would be allocated among the states

based on their percentage share of

commercial landings from May to

October for the years 1983 through

1992. Each state would be closed to the

landing of scup when its individual

allocation of quota is attained. Any

overages in the quota harvest that occurs

during each of the winter periods would

be deducted from that period’s

allocation the following year. Any

overages in the quota harvest that occurs

in a state during the Summer period

would be deducted from that state’s

Summer period allocation the following

year.

The regulatory amendment also

would confer de minimus status

annually upon any state in which

commercial scup landings during the

Summer period for the last preceding

calendar year for which data are

available were less than 0.1 percent of

the total Summer period’s quota. If

implemented, this action would make

the FMP, which is jointly administered

by both the Council and the

Commission, consistent with the

Commission plan, which allows for

such status for states. States that have

been conferred de minimus status

would be allowed to harvest up to 0.1

percent, even though they have

historically harvested less than 0.1

percent.

The coastwide quota for 1997

specified under Amendment 8 will be

implemented prior to issuance of the

regulations proposed in this regulatory

amendment. (The proposed

specifications for the 1997 scup fishery

were published at 61 FR 64854,

December 9, 1996.) This regulatory

amendment specifies that any quota

harvested during that time in excess of

the proposed 1997 Winter I allocation

would be deducted from the quota

allocation for the November–December

1997 (Winter II) period. Landings in

excess of both Winter 1997 periods

would be deducted from 1998 Winter

periods. This action would not affect the

summer allocation in either year.

Classification

This proposed rule has been

determined to be not significant for the

purposes of E.O. 12866.

The Assistant General Counsel for

Legislation and Regulation of the

Department of Commerce certified to

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy the

Small Business Administration that this

proposed rule, if adopted, would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities as

follows:

The proposed rule would revise the

manner in which the commercial quota for

the scup fishery is allocated, but would not

alter the total quota. The impact of the

commercial quota on the commercial fishery

was completely described in the certification

that accompanied the proposed

specifications for the 1997 scup fishery, and

is not repeated here.

Currently, regulations specify that the scup

quota be allocated to the commercial fishery

on a coastwide basis. No restrictions exist to

control the rate of harvest (e.g., seasonal

closures or trip limits). Without restrictions,

it is possible that the quota would be

harvested early in the year by larger, offshore

vessels, resulting in market gluts, irregular
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5377

supplies, and exvessel price fluctuations.

Additionally, the current system does not

recognize the seasonal nature of the scup

fishery (i.e., large vessels fishing offshore in

the winter, and small vessels fishing inshore

in the summer). According to the NMFS

weighout database (database), approximately

525 fishing vessels landed scup during 1995.

It is concluded that most of these were

fishing offshore. There is no estimate on the

number of vessels taking part in the inshore

fishery, as they could be, for the most part,

state licensed and may not be completely

represented in the database. The database is

used to estimate the numbers of participants

because prior to 1997, no permit requirement

existed for this fishery in the exclusive

economic zone. However, all of the known

participants would readily fall under the

definition of a small business, having annual

receipts of less than $2.0 million.

The proposed amendment endeavors to

mitigate the impacts of unrestricted harvest

and untimely closures by establishing a

commercial quota system in which the total

allowable catch (TAC) would be allocated

into three seasonal periods: Winter I

(January–April), Summer (May–October) and

Winter II (November–December). The discard

estimates for each period would be

subtracted from the TAC for each period to

derive the commercial quota for each period.

During the two winter periods, the

commercial fishery would operate under a

coastwide quota with landing limits. During

the summer period, a state-by-state quota

would be in effect.

While the quota for 1997 is based on

reported historical landings, no quota was

ever implemented for this fishery prior to

1997. This new quota may result in the

closure of the fishery, which, if it occurs,

could impact those small entities. More

complete impacts may be compiled during

the comment period of the proposed rule,

which specifically requests comments on this

issue. The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management

Council concluded that a substantial number

of these small entities (greater than 20

percent) operating in the commercial scup

fishery could be directly or indirectly

affected by the measures proposed in this

regulatory amendment. However, based on

available data, the economic impact of this

quota is not expected to be significant. When

compared to 1994 revenues, the quota in

1997 would decrease the total revenues $1.87

million. It is not expected that any entities

would be expected to cease operations

because of the 1997 quota and no change is

expected in compliance costs for these

entities.

Historical data indicate that a decrease in

landings generally leads to an increase in the

exvessel price for scup. The RIR analysis for

this regulatory amendment included

examination of the proposal to address the

seasonal nature of the scup fishery and allow

for a more equitable distribution of

commercial quota over the year, versus the

coastwide quota. The intent of this regulatory

amendment is to preserve the historical

pattern of commercial harvest of scup by

seasons to reduce the impact on small

entities. The analysis found that the

proposed amendment resulted in a more

consistent supply, and more stable prices for

the commercial sector. Based on unpublished

NMFS weighout data (Maine through

Virginia) in 1994, total commercial landings

for scup were estimated at 8,840,900 lb. The

1997 quota would reduce commercial scup

landings by 2,840,900 lb when compared to

the 1994 commercial landings. The effect on

the overall scup exvessel price, given the

potential reduction in landings from the

implementation of the quota proposed in this

amendment, would depend on the elasticity

of demand for scup. Since no study has

estimated the exvessel demand function for

scup, revenue changes from the

implementation of the new quota were

calculated by taking the exvessel price for

scup (value divided by pounds) for 1994, and

multiplying this value by the potential

change in landings. Assuming the 1994

exvessel price of $0.66 per pound, the 1997

quota would yield a decrease in revenues of

$1,874,994 from the 1994 period. However,

based on preliminary unpublished NMFS

weighout data (Maine through Virginia), scup

commercial landings were estimated at

5,947,253 lb and valued at $5,096,863 ($0.85

per pound) in 1995. It appears that the

decrease in landings from 1994 to 1995 has

increased exvessel price for scup during this

period. Given preliminary scup landings for

1995, the 1997 quota would be expected to

slightly increase exvessel revenue relative to

1994 landings.

This rule contains a collection-ofinformation requirement subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The

management measure that provides for

a state request for a quota transfer has

been approved by OMB under control

number 0648–0202, and is estimated to

take 1 hour per response.

The response estimate shown

includes the time for reviewing

instructions, searching existing data

sources, gathering and maintaining the

data needed, and completing and

reviewing the collection of information.

Send comments to NMFS and OMB (see

ADDRESSES) regarding this burden

estimate, including its accuracy,

whether the collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of

NMFS’ functions, suggestions on how to

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity

of the information to be collected, and

how to reduce or minimize the burden

of the collection of information on those

who must respond.

Notwithstanding any other provisions

of the law, no person is required to

respond to, nor shall any person be

subject to a penalty for failure to comply

with a collection of information subject

to the requirements of the PRA unless

that collection of information displays a

currently valid OMB control number.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: January 30, 1997.

Rolland A. Schmitten,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is proposed

to be amended as follows:

PART 648—FISHERIES OF THE

NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

1. The authority citation for part 648

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

2. In § 648.4, paragraph (b) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 648.4 Vessel permits.

* * * * *

(b) Permit conditions. Vessel owners

who apply for a fishing vessel permit

under this section must agree as a

condition of the permit that the vessel

and the vessel’s fishing activity, catch,

and pertinent gear (without regard to

whether such fishing occurs in the EEZ

or landward of the EEZ, and without

regard to where such fish or gear are

possessed, taken or landed), are subject

to all requirements of this part, unless

exempted from such requirements

under this part. All such fishing

activities, catch, and gear will remain

subject to all applicable state

requirements. Except as otherwise

provided in this part, if a requirement

of this part and a management measure

required by a state or local law differ,

any vessel owner permitted to fish in

the EEZ for any species managed under

this part must comply with the more

restrictive requirement. Owners and

operators of vessels fishing under the

terms of a summer flounder

moratorium, scup moratorium, or black

sea bass moratorium permit must also

agree not to land summer flounder,

scup, or black sea bass, respectively, in

any state after NMFS has published a

notification in the Federal Register

stating that the commercial quota for

that state or period has been harvested

and that no commercial quota is

available for the respective species. A

state not receiving an allocation of

summer flounder, scup or black sea

bass, either directly or through a

coastwide allocation, is deemed to have

no commercial quota available. Owners

or operators fishing for surf clams and

ocean quahogs within waters under the

jurisdiction of any state that requires

cage tags are not subject to any

conflicting Federal minimum size or

tagging requirements. If a surf clam and

ocean quahog requirement of this part

differs from a surf clam and ocean

quahog management measure required
5378 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

by a state that does not require cage

tagging, any vessel owners or operators

permitted to fish in the EEZ for surf

clams and ocean quahogs must comply

with the more restrictive requirement

while fishing in state waters. However,

surrender of a surf clam and ocean

quahog vessel permit by the owner by

certified mail addressed to the Regional

Director allows an individual to comply

with the less restrictive state minimum

size requirement, as long as fishing is

conducted exclusively within state

waters. If the commercial black sea bass

quota for a period is harvested and the

coast is closed to the possession of black

sea bass north of 35°15.3′ N. latitude,

any vessel owners that hold valid

commercial permits for both the black

sea bass and the NMFS, Southeast

Region Snapper-Grouper fisheries, may

surrender their moratorium black sea

bass permit by certified mail addressed

to the Regional Director and fish

pursuant to their Snapper-Grouper

permit, as long as fishing is conducted

exclusively in waters, and landings are

made, south of 35°15.3′ N. latitude. A

moratorium permit for the black sea

bass fishery that is voluntarily

relinquished or surrendered will be

reissued upon the receipt of the vessel

owner’s written request after a

minimum period of 6 months from the

date of cancellation.

* * * * *

3. In § 648.14, paragraphs (a)(89)

through (a)(96) are redesignated as

paragraphs (a)(90) through (a)(97),

respectively, and a new paragraph

(a)(89) is added to read as follows:

§ 648.14 Prohibitions.

(a) * * *

(89) Fish for, catch or retain scup in

or from the EEZ north of 35°15.3′ N. lat.

in excess of the landing limit

established pursuant to §§ 648.120 (b)(2)

and (b)(3).

* * * * *

4. In § 648.120, paragraph (b)(1) is

revised, paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(8)

are redesignated as paragraphs (b)(5)

through (b)(11), respectively, new

paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(4) are

added, paragraphs (c) and (d) are

revised, and paragraphs (e) and (f) are

added to read as follows:

§ 648.120 Catch quotas and other

restrictions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(1) The commercial quota for each of

the three periods specified in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section, to be set from a

range of 0 to the maximum allowed to

achieve the specified exploitation rate.

The commercial quota will be

established by estimating the annual

Total Allowable Catch (TAC), allocating

it into the three periods, and deducting

the discard estimates for each period.

(2) Landing limits for the Winter I and

Winter II periods.

(3) Percent of landings attained at

which the landing limit for the Winter

I period will be reduced.

(4) Those states eligible for de

minimus status, based upon commercial

scup landings for the last preceding

calendar year for which data are

available.

* * * * *

(c) Annual fishing measures. The

Demersal Species Committee shall

review the recommendations of the

Scup Monitoring Committee. Based on

these recommendations and any public

comment, the Demersal Species

Committee shall recommend to the

MAFMC measures necessary to assure

that the specified exploitation rate will

not be exceeded. The MAFMC shall

review these recommendations and,

based on these recommendations and

any public comment, recommend to the

Regional Director measures necessary to

assure that the specified exploitation

rate will not be exceeded. The

MAFMC’s recommendation must

include supporting documentation, as

appropriate, concerning the

environmental and economic impacts of

the recommendations. The Regional

Director shall review these

recommendations and any

recommendations of the Commission.

After such review, NMFS will publish a

proposed rule in the Federal Register by

October 15 to implement a commercial

quota, specifying the amount of quota

allocated to each of the three periods,

landing limits for the Winter I and

Winter II periods, the percentage of

landings attained during the Winter I

fishery at which the landing limits will

be reduced, a recreational harvest limit

and additional management measures

for the commercial fishery. NMFS will

publish a proposed rule in the Federal

Register by February 15 to implement

additional management measures for the

recreational fishery, if the Regional

Director determines that such measures

are necessary to assure that the specified

exploitation rate will not be exceeded.

After considering public comment,

NMFS will publish a final rule in the

Federal Register to implement the

annual measures.

(d) Distribution of Commercial Quota.

(1) The annual commercial quota will be

allocated into three periods, based on

the following percentages:

Period Percent

Winter I—January–April ................ 45.11

Summer—May–October ............... 38.95

Winter II—November–December .. 15.94

(2) The Winter I and Winter II

commercial quotas will each be

distributed to the coastal states from

Maine through North Carolina on a

coastwide basis.

(3) The Summer commercial quota

will be allocated to the coastal states

from Maine through North Carolina,

based upon the following percentages:

SUMMER PERIOD (MAY–OCTOBER)

COMMERCIAL QUOTA SHARES

State Share (percent)

Maine ........................................ 0.13042

New Hampshire ........................ 0.00004

Massachusetts .......................... 15.49117

Rhode Island ............................. 60.56588

Connecticut ............................... 3.39884

New York .................................. 17.05295

New Jersey ............................... 3.14307

Delaware ................................... 0.00000

Maryland ................................... 0.01288

Virginia ...................................... 0.17787

North Carolina ........................... 0.02688

Total ............................... 100.00000

(4) All scup landed for sale in any

state during either Winter I or Winter II

shall be applied against the coastwide

commercial quota for that period,

regardless of where the scup were

harvested. All scup landed for sale in a

state during the Summer period shall be

applied against that state’s summer

commercial quota, regardless of where

the scup were harvested.

(5) All scup landed for sale in any

state during the period January 1, 1997,

through [effective date of the final

regulations], shall be applied against the

coastwide commercial quota for the

1997 Winter I period, regardless of

where the scup were harvested. Any

landings during that time in excess of

the 1997 Winter I commercial quota will

be subtracted from the 1997 Winter II

period’s allocation. Any overage beyond

the 1997 Winter II allocation will be

deducted from subsequent winter

periods.

(6) Beginning in 1997, any overages of

the commercial quota landed in any

state, including those granted de

minimus status, during the Summer

period will be deducted from that state’s

Summer period quota for the following

year. Beginning in 1998, any overages of

the commercial quota landed in any

Winter period will be subtracted from

the period’s allocation for the following

year.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5379

(7) Based upon any changes in the

landings data available from the states

for the base years 1983–92, the

Commission and the Council may

recommend to the Regional Director that

the states’ shares specified in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section be revised. The

Council’s and the Commission’s

recommendation must include

supporting documentation, as

appropriate, concerning the

environmental and economic impacts of

the recommendation. The Regional

Director shall review the

recommendation of the Commission and

the Council. After such review, NMFS

will publish a proposed rule in the

Federal Register to implement a

revision in the state shares. After

considering public comment, NMFS

will publish a final rule in the Federal

Register to implement the changes in

allocation.

(e) De minimus status. Any state in

which commercial scup landings during

the Summer period for the last

preceding calendar year for which data

are available were less than 0.1 percent

of the total Summer period’s quota

could be granted de minimus status by

the NMFS upon the recommendation of

the Council by way of a

recommendation from the Monitoring

Committee.

(1) The de minimus status will be

valid only for that Summer period for

which the specifications are in effect

and will be effective upon filing by

NMFS of the final specifications for the

commercial scup fishery with the Office

of the Federal Register.

(2) The total quota allocated to each

de minimus state will be set equal to 0.1

percent of the total Summer period

allocation and will be subtracted from

the summer quota before the remainder

is allocated to the other states.

(f) Quota transfers and combinations.

Any state implementing a state

commercial quota for scup may request

approval from the Regional Director to

transfer part or all of its Summer period

quota to one or more states. Two or

more states implementing a state

commercial quota for scup may request

approval from the Regional Director to

combine their quotas, or part of their

quotas, into an overall regional quota.

Requests for transfer or combination of

commercial quotas for scup must be

made by individual or joint letter(s)

signed by the principal state official

with marine fishery management

responsibility and expertise, or his/her

previously named designee, for each

state involved. The letter(s) must certify

that all pertinent state requirements

have been met and identify the states

involved and the amount of quota to be

transferred or combined.

(1) Within 10 working days following

the receipt of the letter(s) from the states

involved, the Regional Director shall

notify the appropriate state officials of

the disposition of the request. In

evaluating requests to transfer a quota or

combine quotas, the Regional Director

shall consider whether:

(i) The transfer or combination would

preclude the overall Summer period

quota from being fully harvested.

(ii) The transfer addresses an

unforeseen variation or contingency in

the fishery.

(iii) The transfer is consistent with the

objectives of the Summer Flounder,

Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP and the

Magnuson-Stevens Act.

(2) The transfer of quota or the

combination of quotas will be valid only

for the Summer period for which the

request was made and will be effective

upon the filing by NMFS of a

notification of approval of the quota

transfer or combination with the Office

of the Federal Register.

(3) A state may not submit a request

to transfer quota or combine quotas if a

request to which it is party is pending

before the Regional Director. A state

may submit a new request when it

receives notice that the Regional

Director has disapproved the previous

request or when notification of approval

of the quota transfer or combination has

been filed at the Office of the Federal

Register.

(4) If there is a quota overage among

states involved in the combination of

quotas at the end of the Summer period,

the overage will be deducted from the

following Summer period’s quota for

each of the states involved in the

combined quota. The deduction will be

proportional, based on each state’s

relative share of the combined quota for

the previous Summer period. A transfer

of quota or combination of quotas does

not alter any state’s percentage share of

the overall Summer period quota

specified in paragraph (d) of this

section.

5. Section 648.121 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 648.121 Closures.

(a) Winter closures. The Regional

Director will monitor the harvest of

commercial quota for each Winter

period based on dealer reports, state

data, and other available information,

and shall determine the date when the

commercial quota for a Winter period

will be harvested. NMFS shall close the

EEZ to fishing for scup by commercial

vessels for the remainder of the

indicated period by publishing

notification in the Federal Register

advising that, effective upon a specific

date, the commercial quota for that

period has been harvested, and

notifying vessel and dealer permit

holders that no commercial quota is

available for landing scup for the

remainder of the period.

(b) Summer closure. The Regional

Director will monitor the Summer

period state commercial quota based on

dealer reports, state data, and other

available information, and shall

determine the date when a state

commercial quota will be harvested.

NMFS shall publish notification in the

Federal Register advising a state that,

effective upon a specific date, its

Summer period commercial quota has

been harvested and notifying vessel and

dealer permit holders that no Summer

period commercial quota is available for

landing scup in that state for the

remainder of the period.

[FR Doc. 97–2795 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P