[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 249 (Tuesday, December 30, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67714-67723]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33887]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 971009242-7308-02; I.D. 091997B]
RIN 0648-AJ14


Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 
Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Amendment 15; OMB Control 
Numbers

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

ACTION: Final rule; extension of effectiveness.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement the approved measures 
in Amendment 15 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish 
Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). Amendment 15 and this rule 
replace the current commercial red snapper endorsement and trip limit 
system with a system comprised of two classes of transferrable red 
snapper licenses and trip limits; split the red snapper commercial 
fishing season into two time periods, the first commencing February 1 
with two-thirds of the annual quota available and the second commencing 
on September 1 with the remainder of the annual quota available; open 
the red snapper commercial fishery at noon on the first of each month 
and close it at noon on the 15th of each month during the commercial 
season; prohibit the possession of reef fish in excess of the bag limit 
on a vessel that has on board, or is tending, a trap other than a fish, 
stone crab, or spiny lobster trap; limit the harvest of greater 
amberjack to the bag limit each year during March

[[Page 67715]]

through May; remove sea basses (black, bank, and rock sea bass), 
grunts, and porgies from the FMP; and remove certain species from the 
aggregate bag limit for reef fish. As approved in Amendment 15, the 
increase in the minimum size limit for vermilion snapper, currently in 
effect as an interim measure, is continued indefinitely. In addition, 
this rule excludes certain species from the prohibition on their 
harvest using powerheads in the stressed area and corrects and 
clarifies the regulations. Finally, NMFS informs the public of the 
approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of the 
collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule, 
publishes the OMB control number for these collections, and corrects 
the list of control numbers applicable to Title 50 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. The intended effects of this rule are to conserve 
and manage the reef fish resources of the Gulf of Mexico. This rule 
also extends indefinately the effectiveness of the interim final rule 
regarding vermilion snapper size limit, published September 11, 1997.

DATES: This rule is effective January 29, 1998, except that the 
amendments to 15 CFR 902 and Secs. 622.4(d) and (p), and 622.7(b) are 
effective December 30, 1998, and Sec. 622.34(l) is effective January 1, 
1997. The interim final rule published on September 11, 1997 (62 FR 
47765), which became effective September 14, 1997, through March 10, 
1998, is to continue in effect indefinitely.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) 
may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 
Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, FL 33702. Comments regarding 
the collection-of-information requirements contained in this rule 
should be sent to Edward E. Burgess, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 
9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, FL 33702, and to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, D.C. 20503 
(Attention: NOAA Desk Officer).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 
is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented under the 
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
    On September 26, 1997, NMFS announced the availability of Amendment 
15 and requested comments on the amendment (62 FR 50553). On October 
23, 1997, NMFS published a proposed rule to implement the measures in 
Amendment 15 and an additional measure proposed by NMFS, and requested 
comments on the rule (62 FR 55205). The background and rationale for 
the measures in the amendment and proposed rule are contained in the 
preamble to the proposed rule and are not repeated here. On December 
19, 1997, after considering the comments received on the amendment and 
the proposed rule, NMFS partially approved Amendment 15. One measure 
was not approved, namely, the exclusion of hogfish and queen 
triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit for reef fish.

Comments and Responses

    Twenty public comments on Amendment 15 and/or the proposed rule, 
including a minority report signed by two Council members, were 
received. Comments in support of one or more Amendment 15 measures were 
submitted by 13 entities (including one fishing association), one of 
which submitted a petition signed by 42 persons. Comments in opposition 
to one or more Amendment 15 measures were submitted in the minority 
report and by 15 entities, including two fishing associations.

Initial Allocation of Red Snapper Licenses

    Comment: The minority report and one commenter objected to the 
initial allocation provisions of the red snapper license system on the 
basis that the proposed 2-tier system did not recognize the request of 
some of the major producers (highliners) for an alternative 3-tier 
system. That commenter also stated that continuation of the existing 
trip limits (instead of a reduced trip limit for some vessels) does not 
address excessive harvest capacity in the red snapper fishery. Another 
commenter supported trip limits and endorsements but opposed issuance 
of licenses. A third commenter, who participates in multiple commercial 
fisheries, opposed the initial red snapper license allocation, since 
those provisions preclude vessels without endorsements on March 1, 
1997, from obtaining a Class 1 license and, therefore, sufficient 
income to remain profitable. The minority report recommends that NMFS 
not approve Amendment 15 until some solution to resolving the perceived 
inequity associated with the 2-tier system is agreed upon.
    One of the commenters also noted that charter vessels with red 
snapper licenses could fish commercially and, thereby, continue to 
exploit the red snapper resource during winter when charter business is 
slow. That commenter also claimed that the initial allocation of Class 
1 licenses gives an unfair advantage to endorsement holders because 
they would be allowed to fish in other fisheries when the red snapper 
commercial fishery is closed. Another commenter opposed the initial 
allocation of Class 1 licenses to all who held endorsements on March 1, 
1997, because that criterion does not specifically recognize various 
levels of investment in red snapper vessels and gear by the endorsement 
holders.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with these comments for the following 
reasons. After much debate, the Council concluded that its proposed 2-
tier red snapper commercial license limitation system was the fairest 
and most equitable of the alternatives considered for meeting the 
objectives of Amendment 15. The 2-tier license system provides for 
equal trip limits for all endorsement holders, as under the endorsement 
and trip limits system. The rejected 3-tier alternative was found to be 
inequitable since that system would have significantly reduced the 
landings of many of the endorsement holders. Regarding excessive 
harvest capacity, Amendment 15 addresses this problem by establishing a 
license limitation system that caps participation in the fishery and is 
expected to reduce the number of vessels that can fish under the 200-lb 
(91-kg) trip limit. The actual level of harvest is controlled by an 
annual quota.
    NMFS also disagrees with the comment opposing charter vessel 
participation. The Council considered historical fishing practices in, 
and dependence on, the fishery, as required by the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act, and chose not to exclude charter vessels from an initial 
allocation. Amendment 15 recognizes that some charter vessels 
traditionally target red snapper for commercial harvest during the 
season when charter business is slow. The Council's decision in this 
regard is consistent with the FMP, which allows charter income to count 
toward the earned income requirement for commercial vessel permits.
    NMFS disagrees with the commenter who claimed that the initial 
allocation of Class 1 licenses gives unfair advantage to endorsement 
holders, who would receive Class 1 licenses, because they will be 
allowed to fish in other

[[Page 67716]]

fisheries when the commercial red snapper fishery is closed. The 
license limitation system makes no changes in the provisions of the 
current endorsement and trip limits system that allow an endorsement 
holder to participate freely in other fisheries, regardless of whether 
the commercial red snapper fishery is open. Also, neither the 
endorsement and trip limits system nor the license limitation system 
differentiate between Class 1 and Class 2 license holders with regard 
to their ability to participate in other fisheries. Furthermore, all 
Class 1 license holders must comply with the same trip limits 
regardless of whether they participate in other fisheries. Finally, 
NMFS believes that Class 1 and Class 2 license holders should be 
allowed equally to enter other fisheries in compliance with applicable 
regulations regardless of whether the commercial red snapper fishery is 
closed.
    NMFS agrees with the comment that the initial allocation criterion 
for a Class 1 license does not specifically address the level of 
investment in gear or vessels. However, to obtain a Class 1 license, an 
applicant must possess an endorsement on March 1, 1997. Eligibility for 
such an endorsement was based on the level of historical participation 
in the fishery, which presumably reflects, to some degree, varying 
levels of investment in the fishery. Therefore, the Council and NMFS 
determined that this criterion for participation in the fishery was 
appropriate.
    Comment: Another commenter stated that those individuals who will 
meet the eligibility criteria for the initial allocation of Class 1 
licenses under Amendment 15 constitute a different group than those who 
would be participating in a future referendum for an individual fishing 
quota (IFQ) program for red snapper on or after October 1, 2000, under 
the provisions of section 407(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. That 
commenter also questioned whether the Amendment 15 criterion for a 
Class 1 license (i.e., holder of a red snapper endorsement on March 1, 
1997, or a qualified historical captain) is consistent with 
Congressional intent regarding who would be eligible to vote in this 
referendum (section 407(c) limits referendum voting eligibility to 
persons who held a reef fish permit with a red snapper endorsement on 
September 1, 1996, and to vessel captains who harvested red snapper in 
a commercial fishery using such endorsement in each red snapper fishing 
season between January 1, 1993, and September 1, 1996).
    Response: The initial allocation criteria for a Class 1 license 
under Amendment 15 are not related, nor intended to be related, to the 
universe of persons that would be eligible to vote in the IFQ 
referendum provided for under section 407(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act. NMFS has determined that the initial allocation provisions of 
Amendment 15 are consistent with the provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act. Any subsequent Council or NMFS consideration of IFQ programs for 
red snapper will be consistent with section 407(c).
    Comment: Three comments (one was signed by two persons) supported 
the initial allocation provisions as fair and equitable.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Historical Captains

    Comment: Two commenters opposed initial allocations of red snapper 
Class 1 licenses to historical captains, based on the belief that this 
allowance would cause shorter seasons and lower red snapper prices by 
allowing additional fishermen to compete for the resource. Another 
commenter stated that issuance of two licenses (a license to a 
historical captain and a license to the owner who were involved in the 
operation of the same vessel) would unfairly penalize other types of 
participants who would be issued one license (such as an owner-
operator).
    Response: Approximately seven historical captains are expected to 
obtain a Class 1 license. This would not substantially increase the 
number of licenses so as to significantly shorten the season or 
unfairly penalize other types of participants.
    Comment: One comment supported the historical captain provisions as 
being fair and equitable.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Red Snapper License Transfers

    Comment: A commenter opposed providing for license transfers 
following the initial allocation process, based on the belief that this 
measure would cause shorter seasons and lower red snapper prices.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment and supports providing 
for license transfers. License transfers simplify entry into, and exit 
from, the fishery and thereby promote efficient fishing operations. As 
a result, approval of this measure will provide economic benefits that 
should outweigh any costs associated with decreases in red snapper 
prices.

Limitation on Ownership of Red Snapper Licenses

    Comment: A commenter opposed the Council's preferred alternative 
regarding ownership of licenses by one entity (i.e., no limitation on 
ownership by one entity) on the grounds that no limitation could lead 
to a monopoly in a very short time.
    Response: The Council fully considered the question of whether some 
limitation should be imposed to try to prevent monopolies from 
controlling the fishery, and determined that, even in the absence of 
such limitations, fishing operations linked to individuals should 
continue to dominate the fishery. NMFS believes that other existing 
Federal laws are adequate to address monopolies.

Annual Fishing Season Opening Dates

    Comments: A commenter opposed the September 1 starting date for the 
commercial season, based on his belief that September is the peak time 
for red snapper aggregation and spawning. Two other commenters 
preferred an October 1 start for the fall season.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the comment that an October 1 
starting date should be used. NMFS stock assessments indicate that the 
peak aggregation and spawning period for red snapper typically is June 
through August. The Council selected the September 1 date for opening 
the fall season in part to afford fishermen higher revenues when 
product demand is relatively high. The Council's selection of the 
September 1 opening date, rather than a later date, also considered the 
ability of fishing vessels to operate in more favorable weather 
conditions, thus reducing vessel safety concerns. For these reasons, 
NMFS approved the opening date selected by the Council.
    Comment: Three comments supported this measure.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Red Snapper Harvest Periods

    Comments: Two comments indicated that the proposed 15-day red 
snapper commercial harvest periods (15-day harvest periods) would 
encourage fishing in bad weather. Four commenters indicated that the 
15-day harvest period in 1997 caused waste of fish and reduced prices 
due to the associated increases in rate of harvest and, therefore, 
opposed the 15-day harvest periods under Amendment 15. One commenter 
recommended alternatives that were considered under Amendment 15 but 
rejected by the Council. The minority report reiterated the need for 
compatible state and

[[Page 67717]]

Federal regulations and cooperative state and Federal enforcement to 
provide successful management results.
    Response: The Council considered available information pertinent to 
this measure, including public comment and NMFS analyses predicting 
that total revenues generated by a series of mini-derbies (during the 
15-day harvest periods) would be lower than generated under continuous 
fishing without such short, intermittent, harvest periods. The Council 
voted for the 15-day harvest periods to distribute landings over a 
greater portion of the year, alleviating to some extent the economic 
effects of a derby fishery. Also, the closed fishery periods between 
harvest periods will allow for vessel repair and maintenance. Such 
maintenance should improve safety and avoid the higher repair costs 
that can occur when normal, preventive maintenance is postponed.
    Comments opposing the 15-day harvest periods are based on very 
limited experience during the 1997 fishing year, which involved open 
harvest periods of September 1-15 and October 1-6. NMFS believes that 
this experience is not an adequate basis for evaluating the 
effectiveness of this measure. NMFS has approved this measure but will 
monitor its effectiveness and, in cooperation with the Council, will 
make future adjustments if necessary. Regarding the minority report's 
concerns about enforceability, NMFS and the Council will request that 
the Gulf states issue compatible regulations to aid in enforcement.

Limitation of the Possession of Reef Fish Caught in Traps That Are not 
Fish Traps, Spiny Lobster Traps, or Stone Crab Traps

    Comment: Two comments supported this measure.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Vermilion Snapper Minimum Size Limit

    Comment: A fishing association, representing 28 red snapper 
endorsement holders, opposed the 10-inch (25.4-cm) vermilion snapper 
minimum size limit because of adverse impacts expected from the 
associated undersized fish release mortality.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with this comment, and supports this 
measure. The measure responds to stock assessment information that the 
vermilion snapper resource, while not currently overfished, is 
undergoing overfishing based on decreasing trends in overall catch, 
mean size of individual fish, catch-per-unit-effort, and estimated 
numbers of age-1 fish in the population. The assessment considered the 
effects of release mortality of undersized fish and determined that the 
10-inch (25.4-cm) minimum size limit would reduce fishing mortality, 
increase the vermilion snapper spawning potential ratio (SPR), and, 
thereby, improve the status of the resource.
    Comment: One comment supported the vermilion snapper size limit 
measure based on the belief that vermilion snapper less than 10 inches 
(25.4 cm) have low yield of meat. A second comment supported the 
measure as an appropriate measure to address overfishing.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Removal of Sea Basses, Grunts, and Porgies from the FMP

    Comment: The minority report stated that the Council acted to 
remove sea basses (black, bank, and rock sea bass), grunts, and porgies 
without regard to (1) the Council's Scientific and Statistical 
Committee's (SSC) recommendations that these species should be under 
FMP management, and (2) the SSC's statement that this measure is not 
based on the best available scientific information. A commenter opposed 
this measure on the basis that there is no substantive rationale for 
approval by NMFS. The commenter noted that the proposed removal of 
species from the FMP would prevent timely implementation of Federal 
management measures to protect sea basses, grunts, and porgies. The 
commenter asked that these species be kept in the FMP even though this 
action may make processing of Amendment 15 more complicated.
    Response: The SSC's concerns appear to be predicated on an 
assumption that the removal of these species from the FMP would result 
in no management or in ineffective management. This is not the case. 
Management would be deferred to Florida. The Council fully considered 
the SSC's recommendations prior to its vote on this measure. Amendment 
15 and the preamble to the proposed rule provide a substantive 
rationale for this measure and explain that returning management of 
these species to Florida poses minimal risk to the resources. The 
Council concluded, and NMFS agrees, that these species would be most 
appropriately managed by Florida. The Florida Marine Fisheries 
Commission (FMFC) has expressed an intent to manage the fisheries for 
these species, which primarily occur off Florida. NMFS acknowledges 
that impacts to fishery resources due to unrestricted harvest could 
occur during the interim period (after sea basses, grunts, and porgies 
are removed from the FMP, and prior to Florida's management of those 
species). However, since the interim period is expected to be of very 
short duration, any such impacts are not expected to be substantial.
    Although Florida cannot regulate out-of-state vessels operating in 
the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) unless those vessels land fish in 
Florida, the threat of overfishing these species by vessels registered 
outside Florida is minimal for two reasons. First, landings of these 
species are insignificant outside Florida. Second, given the relatively 
low value of these species, the economic incentive for harvest in the 
EEZ off Florida by out-of-state vessels not landing in that state is 
small. NMFS, therefore, disagrees with the opposing comments and 
approved the removal of sea basses, grunts, and porgies from the FMP as 
a rational management policy decision.
    Comment: Two comments supported this measure.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Greater Amberjack Seasonal Harvest Restriction

    Comment: A commenter representing a commercial fishing association, 
a commenter representing a fish house and various fishery participants, 
and the minority report opposed the greater amberjack spawning seasonal 
harvest restriction as unnecessary and inconsistent with the NMFS stock 
assessment, showing a 34-percent SPR. Another commenter noted 
individual Council member's objections to this measure, and provided 
biological information on greater amberjack migration and harvest 
patterns. The minority report noted that the SSC recommended that this 
measure be deferred until FMP Amendment 16. The minority report also 
stated that the Council did not follow those recommendations and, 
therefore, did not use the best available information.
    Response: Given the uncertainty associated with the NMFS stock 
assessment, and based on recent data showing declines in average size 
and landings of greater amberjack, the Council and the Reef Fish Stock 
Assessment Panel determined that the stock assessment is overly 
optimistic. The Council and NMFS believe the greater amberjack spawning 
seasonal harvest restriction is necessary to reduce fishing mortality, 
ensure that commercial effort does not negate stock rebuilding 
resulting from the recent recreational bag limit reduction, and provide 
more equitable sharing of the burden of stock rebuilding between the 
recreational and commercial sectors. This measure was found by the 
Southeast Fisheries Science Center

[[Page 67718]]

(SEFSC) to be based on the best available scientific information. The 
Council properly considered the SSC's recommendations prior to its vote 
on the greater amberjack spawning seasonal harvest restriction. NMFS 
believes that the biological information provided by the commenter does 
not alter the need for a spawning seasonal harvest restriction. 
Accordingly, NMFS disagrees with these comments and supports this 
measure.
    Comment: Six comments (including one from a fishing association) 
support this measure.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Removal of Species Not in the Management Unit From the Aggregate Bag 
Limit for Reef Fish

    Comment: Three public comments and the minority report opposed 
removal of hogfish from the 20-fish aggregate bag limit. The first 
public commenter, a commercial fisherman who also owns a wholesale fish 
house, stated that hogfish is heavily targeted in the recreational 
sector, primarily using spear guns, and is one of the easiest species 
to take with that gear. The comment included trade journal data that 
predicted a large increase in the size of the diving/snorkeling 
industry. The commenter concluded that hogfish would be adversely 
impacted by allowing unlimited recreational catches. The commenter also 
stated that this measure would encourage illegal sales of reef fish 
caught under the recreational bag limit.
    A second commenter opposed excluding hogfish and queen triggerfish 
since those two species are overfished and scarce. A third commenter 
supported the Council's rejected Alternative 1 that would either (1) 
remove pinfish and sand perch from the aggregate bag limit, or (2) 
remove pinfish and sand perch but make the removal of other species 
subject to review by the Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel.
    Response: NMFS agrees with the commenters who noted the possibility 
of overfishing if hogfish and queen triggerfish are removed from the 
aggregate bag limit. Based on its review of the three opposing 
comments, the minority report, the SSC recommendations, and other 
available information, NMFS disapproved the removal of hogfish and 
queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit as a means of helping to 
prevent overfishing of these species, as discussed above. Disapproval 
of the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag 
limit is consistent with national standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act that requires conservation and management measures to prevent 
overfishing.
    Comment: Three public comments supported removal of sand perch and 
dwarf sand perch from the 20-fish aggregate bag limit.
    Response: NMFS concurs.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    The implementation procedure for the initial issue of red snapper 
licenses is revised by changing ``appeals'' to ``reconsideration'' at 
Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(ii). The change in terminology is warranted because 
the procedure describes the means by which a person may have the 
Regional Administrator reconsider his initial determination of 
eligibility for historical captain status or a Class 2 license. In 
addition, Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(ii) is reordered for clarity and to remove 
redundancy. To provide adequate time for an owner to collect and submit 
information pertinent to his or her eligibility for a red snapper 
license, the deadline date for submission of a copy of a legally 
binding agreement under which an owner retained the landings record of 
a previously owned vessel is delayed to January 30, 1998. Similarly, 
the deadline date for the submission of a request for reconsideration 
of NMFS' initial determination of eligibility for historical captain 
status or for a Class 2 red snapper license is delayed until February 
10, 1998. However, a person submitting such agreement or request after 
January 6 and 13, respectively, will not be assured of receiving a red 
snapper license before the commercial fishery for red snapper opens on 
February 1, 1998.
    Section 622.34(l) is revised to clarify that, after the 
recreational quota for red snapper is reached, during a seasonal 
closure (i.e., during a mid- to end-of-month closure) of the commercial 
fishery for red snapper, possession of red snapper in or from the Gulf 
of Mexico and in the Gulf of Mexico on board a vessel for which a 
commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, without regard to 
where such red snapper were harvested, is limited to zero. This 
provision is in accordance with the possession limit applicable to the 
commercial fishery for red snapper when a quota closure is in effect.
    As discussed above, hogfish and queen triggerfish are not excluded 
from the aggregate bag limit for reef fish. A change from the proposed 
rule is made at Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(v).
    NMFS also is making the following technical amendments, which were 
not included in the proposed rule:
    (1) In 15 CFR 902.1(b), in the listing of sections in title 50 of 
the CFR where information collection requirements are located, the 
entry ``622.10'' is redesignated to read ``622.8'' and the entry for 
``641.4'' is removed. There currently are no regulations at 50 CFR 
641.4.
    (2) In 50 CFR 622.34(c), the reference to Figures 1 and 2 to this 
part is removed and, in 50 CFR 622.34(g), the reference to Figures 3 
and 4 to this part is removed. The regulations do not include Figures 1 
through 4 to this part.
    (3) In 50 CFR 622.43(a)(5), the reference ``Sec. 622.44(a),'' 
applicable to the trip limits for golden tilefish and snowy grouper in 
the snapper-grouper fishery off the southern Atlantic states, is 
corrected to read ``Sec. 622.44(c).''
    (4) For clarity, at 50 CFR 622.39(b)(1)(ii), NMFS is explicitly 
excluding Nassau grouper from the bag limit for groupers, combined, 
applicable to the fishery for reef fish in the Gulf of Mexico. As 
specified at 50 CFR 622.32(b)(2)(iii), a Nassau grouper in or from the 
Gulf of Mexico exclusive economic zone (EEZ) is a prohibited species. 
As such, a Nassau grouper may not be harvested or possessed in or from 
the Gulf EEZ and, if caught in the Gulf EEZ, must be released 
immediately with a minimum of harm. Accordingly, the exclusion of 
Nassau grouper from the bag limit is not a substantive change in the 
regulations.

Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, with the 
concurrence of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA), 
determined that the approved measures of Amendment 15 are necessary for 
the conservation and management of the reef fish fishery of the Gulf of 
Mexico and that, with the exception of the measure that was not 
approved, Amendment 15 is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act and 
other applicable law.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of E.O. 12866.
    NMFS prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA). The 
FRFA concludes that a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities will result from implementation of Amendment 
15. A summary of the FRFA follows.
    The need for this rule is based on several problems that provided 
the basis for Amendment 15. The first is that the existing endorsement 
system for commercial red snapper fishermen needs to be replaced with 
management that complies with recent Congressional action and also 
achieves the FMP's objectives.

[[Page 67719]]

    Other fishery problems include the use by some persons of blue crab 
traps to target reef fish in the EEZ off the Big Bend area of Florida, 
the overfishing of vermilion snapper under an 8-inch (20.3-cm) minimum 
size limit, a need to address the Council's concern that Florida's 
management of sea basses, grunts, and porgies would be more effective 
than Federal management, concerns about declines in the greater 
amberjack abundance and inequitable sharing of the burden of stock 
rebuilding between the recreational and commercial sectors, and the 
need to remove certain species not in the management unit from the 
aggregate bag limit to relieve unintended burdens of limiting species 
commonly used for bait. NMFS found that overfishing problems would 
exist with the proposed removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from 
the aggregate bag limit.
    The following summarizes issues raised by public comments, 
summarizes the agency's response to such issues, and describes any 
changes made in the proposed rule as a result of such comments:
    A number of public comments addressed negative economic impacts 
that the commenters felt would occur as a result of implementing the 
red snapper license limitation program and associated fishing season 
provisions. The comments generally indicated that those measures would 
not resolve existing problems of excessive harvest capacity, derby 
fishing, vessel safety, lowered prices for red snapper, and a high 
level of bycatch mortality. Several commenters favored a three-tier red 
snapper license limitation system rather than a two-tier system. 
However, such a system would provide highliners with unjust economic 
benefits. NMFS considered these comments and has approved these 
measures to provide net economic benefits (compared to status quo).
    Other comments opposed the greater amberjack provision as 
unnecessary and inconsistent with recent stock assessment information. 
The Council and NMFS disagree with these comments and have approved 
this measure, for the reasons previously stated.
    A commenter opposed removal of sea basses, grunts, and porgies from 
the FMP, which he felt prevents timely implementation of appropriate 
Federal management measures. NMFS reviewed this issue and determined 
that Florida intends to implement measures in a timely manner that 
would be more effective than the Federal management regime. The interim 
period (after sea basses, grunts, and porgies are removed from the FMP, 
and prior to Florida's management of those species) is expected to be 
of very short duration and, therefore, should not adversely impact the 
status of these species.
    Two other comments support disapproval of the provision for removal 
of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit. This 
disapproval was recommended to prevent reported overfishing. The 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) and Regulatory Impact 
Review (RIR) did not address this issue.
    Several comments also support removal of the sand perch species 
from the bag limit. NMFS agrees with the public comments and similar 
concerns expressed by the SEFSC. It has approved the removal of dwarf 
sand perch and sand perch from the aggregate bag limit and disapproved 
the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from that measure.
    Approximately 1,424 commercial reef fish permit holders are active 
in the fishery. All of these are expected to be affected to some degree 
by each measure in the final rule. The average small business entity 
operates with a fishing vessel that has a length of 38 ft (11.6 m), has 
a current estimated resale value of $52,817, provides $52,000 in annual 
gross sales of reef fish and other species, and produces an annual net 
income of $12,000. Additionally, an estimated 838 small entities that 
operate charter vessel businesses and an additional 92 headboat 
operations will be affected by portions of the rule.
    The public burden of compliance associated with all aspects of this 
rule is estimated to cost the industry $35,000 annually, but only a 
very small portion of this amount would be associated with changed 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements. No additional professional 
skills are required to comply with the final rule.
    Several alternatives were considered as ways to meet the FMP 
objectives. With respect to the license limitation program, the status 
quo (i.e., no license management system in 1998) is not considered a 
viable alternative since that would clearly result in major adverse 
economic impacts on fishery participants. The Council considered 
various provisions to establish and maintain the license limitation 
system. The Council rejected between one to ten alternatives for each 
preferred alternative under these provisions. The general finding of 
the IRFA and RIR was that, while some of the implementation 
alternatives would differ slightly in terms of overall changes in 
economic impacts, the distribution of impacts would vary in all cases. 
However, regarding the red snapper fishing seasons, the Council 
considered information that two rejected alternatives were deemed 
superior, in terms of economic impacts. Both of these rejected 
alternatives would have provided one continuous commercial red snapper 
monthly period, as opposed to the 15-day monthly seasons proposed in 
Amendment 15. The Council selected, and NMFS approved, the 15-day 
seasons to provide an interval between open periods for vessel repair 
and preventive maintenance and, thereby, enhance safety.
    The Council rejected two alternatives to the proposal to prohibit 
the possession of reef fish in excess of the bag limit that were 
harvested in a trap other than a fish, stone crab, or spiny lobster 
trap. One of these alternatives would have specified an allowable 
commercial catch of reef fish as a percentage of the other target 
species on board. The other rejected alternative is status quo. Both of 
these alternatives were rejected on the basis that neither one resolves 
the problem described in Amendment 15.
    Regarding the vermilion snapper minimum size limit (currently 10 
inches (25.4 cm) by interim rule), the alternative 8-inch (20.3-cm) 
size limit was determined to allow further overfishing and, therefore, 
was rejected. Another rejected alternative proposed a 12-inch (30.5-cm) 
size limit. This was rejected based on the substantial revenue 
reduction on both the commercial vessels and for-hire vessels which 
could lose as much as 25 percent and 69 percent in landings.
    The Council considered only status quo as an alternative to 
removing sea basses, grunts, and porgies from Federal management. The 
Council rejected status quo on the basis that Florida could provide 
more effective management of those species.
    In regards to the greater amberjack harvest restriction, both 
rejected alternatives were less restrictive and would have less adverse 
short-term economic impacts on fishing participants. The Council 
rejected those alternatives as not sufficiently reducing fishing 
mortality or ensuring that the commercial harvest does not reverse the 
stock rebuilding from the recent bag limit reduction.
    The rejected alternatives regarding the exclusion of species from 
the aggregate bag limit include the status quo (no revision to the list 
of species subject to the aggregate bag limit). Status quo was rejected 
because it would not resolve the unintended consequences of that limit. 
In addition, a rejected alternative specified that either (1) pinfish 
and sand

[[Page 67720]]

perch be removed from the aggregate bag limit, or (2) pinfish and sand 
perch be removed, but the removal of other species be subject to review 
by the Reef Fish Stock Assessment Panel. Amendment 15 indicates that 
this alternative would have roughly the same impact as the proposed 
measure. NMFS has determined that removing hogfish and queen 
triggerfish from the aggregate bag limit would have provided short-term 
revenue increases for a number of persons who reportedly would then 
harvest larger quantities of those species. However, NMFS believes that 
the removal of hogfish and queen triggerfish from the aggregate bag 
limit could lead to overfishing followed by a relatively larger decline 
in net economic benefits.
    Copies of the FRFA are available (see ADDRESSES).
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to 
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    This rule contains two new, one-time collection-of-information 
requirements subject to the PRA--namely, the submission of copies of 
agreements whereby the seller and purchaser of a vessel agreed that a 
vessel's record of landings would not be transferred to the purchaser 
and the submission of requests for reconsideration of the Regional 
Administrator's initial determination of eligibility for historical 
captain status or a Class 2 red snapper license. These collections of 
information have been approved by OMB under OMB control number 0648-
0336. The public reporting burdens for these collections of information 
are estimated at 15 and 45 minutes per response, respectively, 
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collections of information. This rule continues in effect 
the collection-of-information requirement associated with the transfer 
or renewal of commercial red snapper endorsements, which would be 
applied to commercial red snapper licenses under Amendment 15. This 
collection of information is currently approved under OMB control 
number 0648-0205. Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any 
other aspect of the data requirements, including suggestions for 
reducing the burden, to NMFS and OMB (see ADDRESSES).
    The technical amendments in this rule, discussed under Changes From 
the Proposed Rule, correct and clarify the regulations and do not 
require any changes in fishing practices. Accordingly, the AA, under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(B), for good cause, finds that providing prior notice and 
an opportunity for public comment on the technical amendments are 
unnecessary in that they would serve no useful purpose.
    The current seasonal closures and trip limits applicable to the 
commercial fishery for red snapper expire December 31, 1997. Unless 
replaced in a timely manner, the commercial fishery would open on 
January 1, 1998, without trip limits, thus subverting the intended 
effects of the new seasonal closures and trip limits, as discussed in 
Amendment 15 and in the preamble to the proposed rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 
553(d)(3), the AA, for good cause, finds that it would be contrary to 
the public interest to delay for the full 30 days the effective date of 
Sec. 622.34(l), which closes the commercial fishery for red snapper 
from January 1 to noon on February 1. Accordingly, Sec. 622.34(l) is 
effective January 1, 1998.
    As explained in Amendment 15 and in the preamble to the proposed 
rule, the commercial red snapper license and trip limit system will 
replace the current endorsement and trip limit system, which expires 
December 31, 1997. Implementation of the new system before the 
commercial fishery opens at noon on February 1, 1998, requires 
initiation of the application process for red snapper licenses as soon 
as possible. The procedures for initial implementation of the license 
system are at Sec. 622.4(p). Directly related to initial implementation 
are the fees for applying for a commercial red snapper license and the 
prohibition on falsifying information on an application at 
Sec. 622.4(d) and Sec. 622.7(b), respectively, and the OMB control 
numbers for the two new, one-time collection-of-information 
requirements contained in 15 CFR 902.1(b). These sections authorize 
NMFS to administratively implement the commercial red snapper license 
and trip limit system. The regulations allow submission of information 
regarding the retention of landings records through January 30, 1998, 
and a request for reconsideration of an initial eligibility 
determination through February 10, 1998, thus providing at least 30 
days before submissions are required. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the AA, 
for good cause, finds that it would be unnecessary and contrary to the 
public interest to delay for 30 days the effective date of 
Secs. 622.4(d) and (p), 622.7(b), and 15 CFR 902.1(b). Accordingly, 
these paragraphs and the amendments to 15 CFR 902.1(b) are effective 
December 30, 1997. To aid owners, operators, and historical captains in 
obtaining red snapper licenses prior to February 1, 1998, NMFS has 
already made its initial determinations of eligibility for initial red 
snapper licenses, based on NMFS' records, and has advised owners, 
operators, and potential historical captains of such determinations, as 
specified at Sec. 622.4(p)(6)(i).

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 902

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 622

    Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Virgin Islands.

    Dated: December 22, 1997.
David L. Evans,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902 and 50 CFR 
part 622 are amended as follows:

15 CFR Chapter IX

PART 902--NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE 
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS

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

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

    2. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 902.1, paragraph (b) table, 
under 50 CFR, the entries for ``622.4'', ``622.10'', and ``641.4'' are 
removed, and the following entries are added in numerical order to read 
as follows:


Sec. 902.1  OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
     
    CFR part or section where the Current OMB control
    information collection number (all numbers
    requirement is located begin with 0648-)
     
    * * * * * * *
    50 CFR
    * * * * * * *
    622.4 -0205 and -0336
    * * * * * * *
    622.8 -0205
    * * * * * * *
     

[[Page 67721]]

50 CFR Chapter VI

PART 622--FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC

    3. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as 
follows:

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

    4. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 622.4, paragraphs (d) and 
(p) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.4  Permits and fees.

* * * * *
    (d) Fees. A fee is charged for each application for a permit, 
license, or endorsement submitted under this section, for each request 
for transfer or replacement of such permit, license, or endorsement, 
and for each fish trap or sea bass pot identification tag required 
under Sec. 622.6(b)(1)(i). The amount of each fee is calculated in 
accordance with the procedures of the NOAA Finance Handbook, available 
from the RD, for determining the administrative costs of each special 
product or service. The fee may not exceed such costs and is specified 
with each application form. The appropriate fee must accompany each 
application, request for transfer or replacement, or request for fish 
trap/sea bass pot identification tags.
* * * * *
    (p) Gulf red snapper licenses--(1) Class 1 licenses. To be eligible 
for the 2,000-lb (907-kg) trip limit for Gulf red snapper specified in 
Sec. 622.44(e)(1), a vessel must have been issued both a valid 
commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish and a valid Class 1 Gulf 
red snapper license, and such permit and license must be on board.
    (2) Class 2 licenses. To be eligible for the 200-lb (91-kg) trip 
limit for Gulf red snapper specified in Sec. 622.44(e)(2), a vessel 
must have been issued both a valid commercial vessel permit for Gulf 
reef fish and a valid Class 2 Gulf red snapper license, and such permit 
and license must be on board.
    (3) Operator restriction. An initial Gulf red snapper license that 
is issued for a vessel based on the qualification of an operator or 
historical captain is valid only when that operator or historical 
captain is the operator of the vessel. When applicable, this operator 
restriction is shown on the license.
    (4) Transfer of Gulf red snapper licenses. A red snapper license 
may be transferred independently of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf 
reef fish. To request the transfer of a red snapper license, complete 
the transfer information on the reverse of the license and return it to 
the RD.
    (5) Initial issue of Gulf red snapper licenses--(i) Class 1 
licenses. (A) An initial Class 1 license will be issued for the vessel 
specified by the holder of a valid red snapper endorsement on March 1, 
1997, and to a historical captain. In the event of death or disability 
of such holder between March 1, 1997, and the date Class 1 licenses are 
issued, a Class 1 license will be issued for the vessel specified by 
the person to whom the red snapper endorsement was transferred.
    (B) Status as a historical captain is based on information 
collected under Amendment 9 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef 
Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) (59 FR 39301, August 2, 
1994). A historical captain is an operator who--
    (1) From November 6, 1989, through 1993, fished solely under verbal 
or written share agreements with an owner, and such agreements provided 
for the operator to be responsible for hiring the crew, who was paid 
from the share under his or her control;
    (2) Landed from that vessel at least 5,000 lb (2,268 kg) of red 
snapper per year in 2 of the 3 years 1990, 1991, and 1992;
    (3) Derived more than 50 percent of his or her earned income from 
commercial fishing, that is, sale of the catch, in each of the years 
1989 through 1993; and
    (4) Landed red snapper prior to November 7, 1989.
    (ii) Class 2 licenses. (A) An initial Class 2 license will be 
issued for the vessel specified by an owner or operator whose income 
qualified for a commercial vessel permit for reef fish that was valid 
on March 1, 1997, and such owner or operator was the person whose 
earned income qualified for a commercial vessel permit for reef fish 
that had a landing of red snapper during the period from January 1, 
1990, through February 28, 1997.
    (B) For the purpose of paragraph (p)(5)(ii)(A) of this section, 
landings of red snapper are as recorded in the information collected 
under Amendment 9 to the FMP (59 FR 39301, August 2, 1994) for the 
period 1990 through 1992 and in fishing vessel logbooks, as required 
under Sec. 622.5(a)(1)(ii), received by the SRD not later than March 
31, 1997, for the period from January 1, 1993, through February 28, 
1997.
    (C) A vessel's red snapper landings record during the period from 
January 1, 1990, through February 28, 1997, is retained by the owner at 
the time of the landings if the vessel's permit was transferred to 
another vessel owned by him or her. When a vessel has had a change of 
ownership and concurrent transfer of its permit, the vessel's red 
snapper landings record is credited to the owner of that vessel on 
March 1, 1997, unless there is a legally binding agreement under which 
a previous owner retained the landings record. An owner who claims such 
retention of a landings record must submit a copy of the agreement to 
the RD postmarked or hand delivered not later than January 30, 1998. 
However, an owner who submits a copy of such agreement after January 6, 
1998, is not assured that a red snapper license will be issued before 
the opening of the commercial fishery for red snapper on February 1, 
1998.
    (6) Implementation procedures--(i) Initial notification. The RD 
will notify each owner of a vessel that had a valid permit for Gulf 
reef fish on March 1, 1997, each operator whose earned income qualified 
for a valid permit on that date, and each potential historical captain 
of his or her eligibility for a Class 1 or Class 2 red snapper license. 
Initial determinations of eligibility will be based on NMFS' records of 
red snapper endorsements, red snapper landings during the period from 
January 1, 1990, through February 28, 1997, and applications for 
historical captain status under Amendment 9 to the FMP (59 FR 39301, 
August 2, 1994). An owner, operator, or potential historical captain 
who concurs with NMFS' initial determination of eligibility need take 
no further action. Each owner, operator, and historical captain who is 
initially determined to be eligible will be issued an appropriate 
license not later than January 23, 1998.
    (ii) Reconsideration. (A) An owner, operator, or potential 
historical captain who does not concur with NMFS' initial determination 
of eligibility for historical captain status or for a Class 2 red 
snapper license may request reconsideration of that initial 
determination by the RD.
    (B) A written request for reconsideration must be submitted to the 
RD postmarked or hand delivered not later than February 10, 1998, and 
must provide written documentation supporting the basis for 
reconsideration. However, an owner who submits such request after 
January 13, 1998, is not assured that a red snapper license will be 
issued before the opening of the commercial fishery for red snapper on 
February 1, 1998. Upon request by the owner, operator, or potential 
historical captain, the RD will forward the initial determination, the 
request for reconsideration, and pertinent records to a committee 
consisting of the principal state officials who are members of the 
GMFMC, or their

[[Page 67722]]

designees. An owner, operator, or potential historical captain may 
request to make a personal appearance before the committee in his or 
her request for reconsideration. If an owner, operator, or potential 
historical captain requests that his or her request be forwarded to the 
committee, such a request constitutes the applicant's written 
authorization under section 402(b)(1)(F) of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) for 
the RD to make available to the committee members such confidential 
catch and other records as are pertinent to the matter under 
reconsideration.
    (C) Members of the committee will provide their individual 
recommendations for each application for reconsideration referred to 
the committee to the RD. The committee may only deliberate whether the 
eligibility criteria specified in paragraph (p)(5) of this section were 
applied correctly in the applicant's case, based solely on the 
available record, including documentation submitted by the applicant. 
Neither the committee nor the RD may consider whether a person should 
have been eligible for historical captain status or a Class 2 license 
because of hardship or other factors. The RD will make a final decision 
based on the initial eligibility criteria in paragraph (p)(5) of this 
section and the available record, including documentation submitted by 
the applicant, and, if the request is considered by the committee, the 
recommendations and comments from each member of the committee. The RD 
will notify the applicant of the decision and the reason therefore, in 
writing, within 15 days of receiving the recommendations of the 
committee members. If the application is not considered by the 
committee, the RD will provide such notification within 15 days of the 
RD's receipt of the request for reconsideration. The RD's decision will 
constitute the final administrative action by NMFS on an application 
for reconsideration.
    5. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.4, paragraph (a) 
introductory text, paragraph (a)(2) heading, and paragraphs (a)(2)(ix), 
(g), and (i) through (l) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.4  Permits and fees.

    (a) Permits required. To conduct activities in fisheries governed 
in this part, valid permits, licenses, and endorsements are required as 
follows:
* * * * *
    (2) Commercial vessel permits, licenses, and endorsements.
* * * * *
    (ix) Gulf red snapper. For a person aboard a vessel for which a 
commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued to retain 
red snapper under the trip limits specified in Sec. 622.44(e)(1) or 
(2), a Class 1 or Class 2 Gulf red snapper license must have been 
issued to the vessel and must be on board. See paragraph (p) of this 
section regarding initial issue of red snapper licenses.
* * * * *
    (g) Transfer. A vessel permit, license, or endorsement or dealer 
permit issued under this section is not transferable or assignable, 
except as provided in paragraph (m) of this section for a commercial 
vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, paragraph (n) of this section for a 
fish trap endorsement, or paragraph (p) of this section for a red 
snapper license. A person who acquires a vessel or dealership who 
desires to conduct activities for which a permit, license, or 
endorsement is required must apply for such permit, license, or 
endorsement in accordance with the provisions of this section. If the 
acquired vessel or dealership is currently permitted, the application 
must be accompanied by the original permit and a copy of a signed bill 
of sale or equivalent acquisition papers.
* * * * *
    (i) Display. A vessel permit, license, or endorsement issued under 
this section must be carried on board the vessel. A dealer permit 
issued under this section, or a copy thereof, must be available on the 
dealer's premises. In addition, a copy of the dealer's permit must 
accompany each vehicle that is used to pick up from a fishing vessel 
reef fish harvested from the Gulf EEZ. The operator of a vessel must 
present the permit, license, or endorsement for inspection upon the 
request of an authorized officer. A dealer or a vehicle operator must 
present the permit or a copy for inspection upon the request of an 
authorized officer.
    (j) Sanctions and denials. A permit, license, or endorsement issued 
pursuant to this section may be revoked, suspended, or modified, and a 
permit, license, or endorsement application may be denied, in 
accordance with the procedures governing enforcement-related permit 
sanctions and denials found at subpart D of 15 CFR part 904.
    (k) Alteration. A permit, license, or endorsement that is altered, 
erased, or mutilated is invalid.
    (l) Replacement. A replacement permit, license, or endorsement may 
be issued. An application for a replacement permit, license, or 
endorsement is not considered a new application.
* * * * *
    6. Effective December 30, 1997, in Sec. 622.7, paragraph (b) is 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (b) Falsify information on an application for a permit, license, or 
endorsement or submitted in support of such application, as specified 
in Sec. 622.4(b), (g), or (p) or Sec. 622.17.
* * * * *
    7. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.7, paragraphs (a) and 
(c) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.7  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (a) Engage in an activity for which a valid Federal permit, 
license, or endorsement is required under Sec. 622.4 or Sec. 622.17 
without such permit, license, or endorsement.
* * * * *
    (c) Fail to display a permit, license, or endorsement, as specified 
in Sec. 622.4(i) or Sec. 622.17(g).
* * * * *
    8. Effective January 1, 1998, in Sec. 622.34, paragraph (l) is 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.34  Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.

* * * * *
    (l) Closures of the commercial fishery for red snapper. The 
commercial fishery for red snapper in or from the Gulf EEZ is closed 
from January 1 to noon on February 1 and thereafter from noon on the 
15th of each month to noon on the first of each succeeding month. All 
times are local times. During these closed periods, the possession of 
red snapper in or from the Gulf EEZ and in the Gulf on board a vessel 
for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been issued, as 
required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where such red 
snapper were harvested, is limited to the bag and possession limits, as 
specified in Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(iii) and (b)(2), respectively, and such 
red snapper are subject to the prohibition on sale or purchase of red 
snapper possessed under the bag limit, as specified in 
Sec. 622.45(c)(1). However, when the recreational quota for red snapper 
has been reached and the bag and possession limit has been reduced to 
zero, such possession during a closed period is zero.
    9. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.34, in the last sentence 
of paragraph (c), the phrase ``and shown in Figures 1 and 2'' is 
removed; in

[[Page 67723]]

paragraph (g) introductory text, the phrase ``and shown in Figures 3 
and 4'' is removed; and a sentence is added to the end of paragraph 
(g)(1) to read as follows:


Sec. 622.34  Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) * * * The provisions of this paragraph do not apply to the 
following species: dwarf sand perch, hogfish, queen triggerfish, and 
sand perch.
* * * * *
    10. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.36, the introductory 
text and paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) are redesignated as paragraphs 
(b) introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3), respectively, and 
paragraph (a) is added to read as follows:


Sec. 622.36  Seasonal harvest limitations.

    (a) During March, April, and May, each year, the possession of 
greater amberjack in or from the Gulf EEZ and in the Gulf on board a 
vessel for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been 
issued, as required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where 
such greater amberjack were harvested, is limited to the bag and 
possession limits, as specified in Sec. 622.39(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2), 
respectively, and such greater amberjack are subject to the prohibition 
on sale or purchase of greater amberjack possessed under the bag limit, 
as specified in Sec. 622.45(c)(1).
* * * * *
    11. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.39, paragraph (a)(2) 
introductory text is republished, paragraph (a)(2)(iv) is added, and 
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (v) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.39  Bag and possession limits.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Paragraph (a)(1) of this section notwithstanding, bag and 
possession limits also apply for Gulf reef fish in or from the EEZ to a 
person aboard a vessel that has on board a commercial permit for Gulf 
reef fish--
* * * * *
    (iv) When the vessel has on board or is tending any trap other than 
a fish trap authorized under Sec. 622.40(a)(2), a stone crab trap, or a 
spiny lobster trap.
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Groupers, combined, excluding jewfish and Nassau grouper--5.
* * * * *
    (v) Gulf reef fish, combined, excluding those specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section and excluding dwarf 
sand perch and sand perch--20.
* * * * *
    12. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.42, paragraph (a)(1)(i) 
is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.42  Quotas.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Red snapper--4.65 million lb (2.11 million kg), round weight, 
apportioned as follows:
    (A) 3.06 million lb (1.39 million kg) available at noon on February 
1 each year, subject to the closure provisions of Secs. 622.34(l) and 
622.43(a)(1)(i).
    (B) The remainder available at noon on September 1 each year, 
subject to the closure provisions of Secs. 622.34(l) and 
622.43(a)(1)(i).
* * * * *


Sec. 622.43  [Amended]

    13. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.43(a)(5), the reference 
to ``Sec. 622.44(a)'' is removed and ``Sec. 622.44(c)'' is added in its 
place.
    14. Effective January 29, 1998, in Sec. 622.44, paragraph (e) is 
revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.44  Commercial trip limits.

* * * * *
    (e) Gulf red snapper. (1) The trip limit for red snapper in or from 
the Gulf for a vessel that has on board a valid commercial permit for 
Gulf reef fish and a valid Class 1 red snapper license is 2,000 lb (907 
kg), round or eviscerated weight.
    (2) The trip limit for red snapper in or from the Gulf for a vessel 
that has on board a valid commercial permit for Gulf reef fish and a 
valid Class 2 red snapper license is 200 lb (91 kg), round or 
eviscerated weight.
    (3) The trip limit for red snapper in or from the Gulf for any 
other vessel for which a commercial permit for Gulf reef fish has been 
issued is zero.
    (4) As a condition of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef 
fish, as required under Sec. 622.4(a)(2)(v), without regard to where 
red snapper are harvested or possessed, a vessel that has been issued 
such permit--
    (i) May not possess red snapper in or from the Gulf in excess of 
the appropriate vessel trip limit, as specified in paragraphs (e)(1) 
through (3) of this section.
    (ii) May not transfer or receive at sea red snapper in or from the 
Gulf.
* * * * *

Appendix A to Part 622 [Amended]

    15. Effective January 29, 1998, in Table 3 of Appendix A to part 
622, the family Haemulidae--Grunts and the three species and scientific 
names thereunder are removed; under the family Serranidae, the species 
Bank sea bass, Rock sea bass, and Black sea bass and their scientific 
names are removed and the family name is revised to read Serranidae--
Groupers; and the family Sparidae--Porgies and the six species and 
scientific names thereunder are removed.
[FR Doc. 97-33887 Filed 12-24-97; 10:06 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F