Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 10473

38. Section 2.975 is amended by

revising paragraphs (b) and (g) to read

as follows:

§ 2.975 Application for notification.

* * * * *

(b) The statement required in

paragraph (a)(6) of this section shall be

signed pursuant to § 2.911(c).

* * * * *

(g) The records of measurement data,

measurement procedures, photographs,

circuit diagrams, etc. for a device

subject to notification shall be retained

for two years after the manufacture of

said equipment has been permanently

discontinued, or, if the responsible

party is officially notified that an

investigation or any other

administrative proceeding involving the

equipment has been instituted prior to

the expiration of such two year period,

until the conclusion of that

investigation or proceeding.

§ 2.979 [Removed]

39. Section 2.979 is removed.

§ 2.983 [Amended]

40. Section 2.983 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph (h)

and by removing the reference ‘‘subpart

C of part 97’’ in the last sentence of

paragraph (i) and adding in its place

‘‘subpart D of part 97’’.

§ 2.1003 [Removed]

41. Section 2.1003 is removed.

42. Section 2.1005 is amended by

revising paragraph (a), the introductory

text of paragraphs (c) and (c)(4) and

paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 2.1005 Equipment for use in the Amateur

Radio Service.

(a) The general provisions of §§ 2.981,

2.983, 2.991, 2.993, 2.997, 2.999, and

2.1001 shall apply to applications for,

and grants of, type acceptance for

equipment operated under the

requirements of part 97 of this chapter,

the Amateur Radio Service.

* * * * *

(c) Any supplier of an external radio

frequency power amplifier kit as

defined by § 97.3(a)(17) of this chapter

shall comply with the following

requirements:

* * * * *

(4) The identification label required

by § 2.925 shall be permanently affixed

to the assembled unit and shall be of

sufficient size so as to be easily read.

The following information shall be

shown on the label:

* * * * *

(d) Type acceptance of external radio

frequency power amplifiers and

amplifier kits may be denied when

denial serves the public interest,

convenience and necessity by

preventing the use of these amplifiers in

services other than the Amateur Radio

Service. Other uses of these amplifiers,

such as in the Citizens Band Radio

Service, are prohibited (§ 95.411 of this

chapter). Examples of features which

may result in the denial of type

acceptance are contained in § 97.317 of

this chapter.

§ 2.1033 [Amended]

43. Section 2.1033 is amended by

removing and reserving paragraph

(b)(10) and by removing the reference

‘‘§ 15.257(e)’’ in paragraph (b)(11) and

adding in its place ‘‘§ 15.247(e)’’.

§ 2.1045 [Removed]

44. Section 2.1045 is removed.

45. Section 2.1300 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 2.1300 Cross reference.

The general provisions of this part,

§§ 2.911, 2.923, 2.929, 2.935, 2.936, and

2.946 shall apply to applications for and

grants of registration for telephone

terminal equipment pursuant to part 68

of this chapter.

[FR Doc. 97–5349 Filed 3–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 961210346–7035–02; I.D.

120596A]

RIN 0648–XX76

Summer Flounder Fishery; Final

Specifications for 1997; Adjustment to

1997 State Quotas; Commercial Quota

Harvested for Delaware

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Final specifications for the 1997

summer flounder fishery and

adjustments to state commercial quotas.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues the final

specifications for the 1997 summer

flounder fishery that include

commercial catch quotas and an

increase in commercial minimum fish

size, makes adjustments to the

commercial quota for the 1997 summer

flounder fishery as a result of overages

in the 1996 fishing year and, as a

consequence of these overages,

announces that the summer flounder

quota available to the State of Delaware

for 1997 has been harvested. The intent

of this document is to comply with

implementing regulations for the

summer flounder fishery that require

NMFS to publish measures for the

upcoming fishing year that will prevent

overfishing of this species, require

overages in any state to be deducted

from that state’s commercial quota for

the following year, require publication

of a notice to advise the State of

Delaware that its quota has been

harvested, and to advise vessel and

dealer permit holders that no

commercial quota is available for

landing summer flounder in Delaware.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 4, 1997 through

December 31, 1997, except for

§ 648.103(a) which will be effective

April 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the

Environmental Assessment and

supporting documents used by the

Monitoring Committee are available

from: Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic

Fishery Management Council, Room

2115, Federal Building, 300 S. New

Street, Dover, DE 19901–6790.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dana Hartley, Fishery Management

Specialist, 508–281–9226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Fishery Management Plan for the

Summer Flounder Fishery (FMP) was

developed jointly by the Atlantic States

Marine Fisheries Commission

(Commission) and the Mid-Atlantic

Fishery Management Council (Council)

in consultation with the New England

and South Atlantic Fishery Management

Councils. The management unit for the

FMP is summer flounder (Paralichthys

dentatus) in U.S. waters of the Atlantic

Ocean from the southern border of

North Carolina northward to the

Canadian border. Implementing

regulations for the fishery are found at

50 CFR part 648, subparts A and G.

Section 648.100(a) of the regulations

implementing the FMP specifies the

process for setting annual management

measures in order to achieve the fishing

mortality (Ftgt) rates specified in the

FMP. Under Amendment 7 to the FMP,

the schedule of F rates sets a target

fishing mortality rate of 0.41 in 1996,

0.3 in 1997, and 0.23 in 1998 and

thereafter, provided the allowable levels

of fishing in 1996 and 1997 may not

exceed 18.51 million lb (8.4 million kg),

unless the fishing mortality rate (F) of

0.23 is met.

Pursuant to § 648.100, the Regional

Administrator, Northeast Region,

NMFS, implements certain measures for

the fishing year to ensure achievement

of the appropriate fishing mortality rate.
10474 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

With the exception of the proposed

increase in codend mesh requirements,

the measures remain unchanged from

the proposed 1997 specifications that

were published in the Federal Register

on December 18, 1996 (61 FR 66646).

These measures include: (1) A

coastwide harvest limit of 18.51 million

lb (8.40 million kg); (2) a coastwide

commercial quota of 11.11 million lb

(5.04 million kg); (3) a coastwide

recreational harvest limit of 7.41 million

lb (3.36 million kg); and (4) an increase

in the minimum commercial fish size

from 13 inches (33.0-cm) to 14 inches

(35.6 cm).

Detailed background information

regarding the development of this rule

was provided in the proposed

specifications for the 1997 summer

flounder fishery and is not repeated

here.

Section 648.100(d)(2) provides that all

landings for sale in a state shall be

applied against that state’s annual

commercial quota. Any landings in

excess of the state’s quota will be

deducted from that state’s annual quota

for the following year. Based on dealer

reports and other information, NMFS

has determined that the States of Maine,

Massachusetts, Rhode Island,

Connecticut, New York, New Jersey,

Delaware, Virginia, and North Carolina

have exceeded their 1996 quotas. The

remaining States of New Hampshire and

Maryland did not exceed their 1996

quotas. A complete summary of 1996

quota overages is shown in Table 1.

After the proposed 1997

specifications were published, a

document was published adjusting the

State of Delaware’s 1996 quota based on

data that indicated additional landings

in that State in 1995 (61 FR 67497,

December 23, 1996). Consequently,

Delaware’s 1996 commercial quota was

adjusted to reflect those landings. The

resulting quota was 278 lb (126 kg).

Landings in 1996 were well in excess of

that number, and the resulting overage

leaves no quota available for 1997.

Commercial Quota

The coastwide commercial quota is

allocated among the states based on

historical catch shares specified in the

regulations. Table 2 presents the 1997

commercial quota (11,111,298 lb;

5,040,000 kg) apportioned among the

states according to the percentage shares

specified in § 648.100(d)(1), and the

resulting quotas after deductions were

made for 1996 overages.

TABLE 1.—1996 STATE COMMERCIAL QUOTAS, LANDINGS AND OVERAGES

State

1996 Quota 1996 Landings 1996 Overages

lb (kg) 1 lb (kg) lb (kg)

ME ............................................................. 5,284 1,062 8,226 3,731 2,942 1,334

NH ............................................................. 51 23 0 0 0 0

MA ............................................................. 752,092 328,350 780,297 353,940 28,205 12,794

RI ............................................................... 1,620,342 715,390 1,663,520 754,560 43,178 19,585

CT ............................................................. 250,791 113,757 278,776 126,451 27,985 12,694

NY ............................................................. 844,976 345,723 927,763 420,826 82,787 37,552

NJ .............................................................. 1,858,363 621,996 2,345,460 1,063,883 487,097 220,943

DE ............................................................. 278 126 7,153 3,245 6,875 3,118

MD ............................................................. 226,570 102,770 225,051 102,081 0 0

VA2 ........................................................... 2,200,681 962,062 2,280,457 1,034,398 79,776 36,186

NC ............................................................. 2,451,068 1,111,786 3,688,217 1,672,947 1,237,149 561,161

Totals ................................................. 10,210,496 4,631,403 12,204,920 5,536,059 1,995,994 905,368

1Kilograms are as converted from pounds, and may not necessarily add due to rounding.

2 Includes preliminary inshore landings data provided by the Commonwealth of Virginia.

TABLE 2.—1997 STATE COMMERCIAL QUOTAS, AS ADJUSTED FOR 1996 OVERAGES

State Share percent

Initial 1997 quota Adjusted 1997 quota

lb (kg) 1 lb (kg)

ME ......................................................................................... 0.04756 5,284 2,397 2,342 1,062

NH ......................................................................................... 0.00046 51 23 51 23

MA ......................................................................................... 6.82046 757,8413 43,751 729,636 330,957

RI .......................................................................................... 15.68298 1,742,583 790,422 1,699,405 770,837

CT ......................................................................................... 2.25708 250,791 113,757 222,806 101,063

NY ......................................................................................... 7.64699 849,680 385,408 766,893 347,857

NJ .......................................................................................... 16.72499 1,858,363 842,939 1,371,266 621,996

DE ......................................................................................... 0.01779 1,977 897 2 (4,898) (2,222)

MD ........................................................................................ 2.03910 226,570 102,770 226,570 102,770

VA ......................................................................................... 21.31676 2,368,569 1,074,365 2,288,793 1,038,179

NC ......................................................................................... 27.44584 3,049,589 1,383,270 1,812,440 822,109

Totals ............................................................................. ........................ 11,111,298 5,040,000 9,115,304 4,134,632

1Kilograms are as converted from pounds, and may not necessarily add due to rounding.

2 Numbers in parentheses are negative.

Recreational catch data for 1996 are

not yet available. The Council and

Commission will consider modifications

to the recreational possession limit and

recreational season after a review of that

information.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

In response to public, state agency,

and Council comments, NMFS has

decided not to implement the proposed
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 10475

measure that would have increased the

present minimum codend mesh

regulation of 5.5-inch diamond (14.0-

cm) to 6-inch (15.2-cm) diamond. The

measure was opposed by a majority of

the commenters. An alternative measure

is proposed in Amendment 10 to the

FMP to require 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh

throughout the net. This amendment is

under development by the Council, and

the Council has requested

implementation of this measure through

the new interim measure provision of

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). Action on that

request is pending.

In the meantime, the current net

restrictions coupled with the increase in

commercial minimum fish size will

provide some reductions in F. During

public participation at the Council

meetings, and in the comments received

on the proposed rule, industry members

made the point that net violations (the

use of liners and tying off the codend)

have occurred because fisherman felt

that the existing mesh regulation (5.5-

inch (14.0-cm) codend) was too large to

retain sufficiently 13-inch (33.0-cm)

fish. Increasing the minimum fish size

should reduce the incentive for these

violations, as 13-inch (33.0-cm) fish

cannot be retained.

Lastly, the Council’s proposal to

require 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh

throughout the net, if approved, will

require a considerable financial

investment on the part of the industry.

Although many industry members that

fish for summer flounder in the

northern part of its range may already

own 6-inch (15.2-cm) codends,

commenters indicated that the limited

availability of 6-inch (15.2-cm) codends

and expense of meeting this

requirement for Federal permit holders

in other areas would present some

problems. Industry members have also

stated in their comments that because

the measure to require 5.5-inch (14.0-

cm) mesh throughout the net has been

discussed so much at Commission and

Council meetings, many fishermen have

been gearing up for this change.

Requiring an increase to a 6-inch (15.2-

cm) codend at this time would only

compound the expense of gear

modifications.

Comments and Responses

Comments regarding the 1997

proposed annual specifications for

summer flounder were received from 24

organizations or individuals. These

included Congressional representatives,

industry members and associations,

state agencies, various individuals, and

the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management

Council. Three commenters approved of

all the proposed measures. Ten

commenters indicated opposition to the

proposed increase in the codend mesh

to 6 inches (15.2-cm) but approved of

the proposed increase in minimum fish

size and supported or accepted the

coastwide harvest limit and the

commercial quota. Two commenters

expressed disapproval for the proposed

increase in the codend mesh, as well as

the commercial quota, but supported the

proposed increase in commercial

minimum fish size. Three commenters

expressed opposition to the proposed

increases in commercial minimum fish

size, and codend mesh, but supported or

accepted the proposed commercial

quota. One commenter expressed

concern and opposition to the proposed

1997 commercial quota because of the

impacts after the deduction of quota

overages from the previous year. Four

commenters opposed the 1997

commercial quota based on indications

of stock biomass strength early in

January 1997. They also were

dissatisfied with the rationale used to

decide that the measures would not

significantly impact a substantial

number of small entities. One

commenter, representing a fisheries

association, opposed all measures.

Several letters offered suggestions for

future management that are not within

the scope of this final rule.

Comment 1. A vessel captain, a

former commercial fisherman, and a

U.S. Congressman wrote to extend their

support for all measures. All expressed

concern about the overages in the

commercial fishery and urged NMFS to

approve the proposed specifications.

One commenter noted that, although

there may be a lot of political pressure

to the contrary, it is essential to ‘‘finally

regulate a fishing industry that is on the

verge of self destruction.’’

Response 1. NMFS agrees that

regulation is needed to rebuild the

summer flounder resource, but in

establishing such measures, must

balance the benefits of conservation

with the impact on industry. For the

reasons outlined in the preamble, NMFS

has determined not to implement the

codend mesh increase at this time.

Comment 2. Sixteen of the comments

were in opposition to the proposed

increase in codend mesh from the

present 5.5 inches (14.0-cm) to 6 inches

(15.2-cm). Of these, 14 were in favor of

replacing this measure with one that

would require 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh

throughout the net. This measure has

been proposed in an upcoming plan

amendment (Amendment 10) and

appears to be widely supported by the

Council, the Commission, and industry

members. The Council seeks earlier

implementation of this measure through

an interim management measure

procedure contained in the MagnusonStevens Act. The Council and a North

Carolina fisheries association would

also like to see the option for a 6-inch

(15.2-cm) codend as part of this pending

amendment to aid industry members

who already own them.

Many industry members commented

that because the measure to go to 5.5-

inch (14.0-cm) mesh throughout the net

has been discussed and supported by

the Council and Commission, many

industry members have made an initial

investment in constructing nets that

meet these specifications. Further, a

marine supply distributor noted that the

proposed measure for 6-inch (15.2-cm)

codend mesh would present some

problems in his industry and for the

manufacturer. He stated that the

polyethylene used to construct codends

requires 3 or 4 months to manufacture.

He feels that it may be difficult to

acquire 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh if the

proposed measure is approved. He

stressed that the time it takes to meet

these proposed gear changes should be

considered in the management process.

The Connecticut Department of

Environmental Protection and a Council

member stated that the proposed

increase in the codend would have

significant negative impacts on Federal

permit holders who fish primarily in

state waters, especially for those

dependent upon the winter flounder

fishery. Similarly, Federal permit

holders from the more southern states

within the management unit

emphasized that raising the minimum

mesh size for summer flounder would

be a de facto increase in the minimum

mesh requirement for the Mid-Atlantic

groundfish fishery. The regulations in

the Fishery Management Plan for the

Northeast Multispecies Fishery declare

that the minimum mesh requirement for

vessels fishing in the Mid-Atlantic

regulated mesh area (the area bounded

on the east by a line running from the

shoreline along 72°30′ west long.) is the

mesh requirement specified in the

summer flounder regulations. Meeting

this required change would be a

considerable expense for the industry.

Many of the commenters stressed the

need for net retention studies.

Response 2. NMFS intends to pursue

the possibility of implementing the

measure for 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh

throughout the net via the interim

management measure process. Because

this process was only recently made

available through the Magnuson Stevens

Act, guidelines governing its use are

presently being developed. Similarly, it
10476 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

is unclear until the guidelines are

promulgated how much time it will take

to implement this measure through the

interim management measure process.

NMFS agrees that there appears to be

wide support for 5.5-inch (14.0-cm)

mesh throughout the net, but this

measure has yet to be taken to public

hearing.

NMFS is aware that the codend mesh

requirement for the Mid-Atlantic

groundfish fishery is dependent upon

the mesh requirement set for the

summer flounder fishery and

acknowledges some costs would have

accompanied the proposed increase in

codend mesh for both fisheries.

Similarly, depending upon the state

requirement for minimum mesh in the

multispecies winter flounder fishery

(state waters exemption program),

Federal permit holders who fish

primarily in state waters for winter

flounder would have to purchase new

codends to meet the proposed increase

in minimum codend mesh for the

summer flounder fishery.

NMFS makes every effort to anticipate

the costs of proposed measures to the

industry. In addition, proposed

measures are subject to public hearing

and a comment period so that concerns

such as these can be expressed and

addressed. For the reasons presented by

commenters here and addressed in the

preamble, NMFS has determined not to

implement the proposed increase in

codend mesh.

NMFS is currently unaware of any

ongoing summer flounder net retention

studies and acknowledges the need for

these studies for many of the regulated

fisheries. NMFS funds are limited and

unless monies can be made available,

NMFS must rely on the industry and

other sources to procure accurate catch

information associated with mesh size.

Comment 3. Four commenters

opposed the proposed increase in

commercial minimum fish size. Reasons

for this opposition centered around the

issue of increased discard mortality. An

industry advisor to the Council used

discard rates given in Amendment 2 to

the FMP for summer flounder to

illustrate this. Those that oppose the

increase would rather see 13-inch (33.0-

cm) fish count toward the quota rather

than toward discards.

Response 3. Amendment 2 to the FMP

for summer flounder implemented a 5.5-

inch (14.0-cm) codend mesh and a 13-

inch (33.0-cm) total length minimum

fish size for the commercial fishery. At

the time of Amendment 2, these

measures were intended to target 14-

inch (35.6-cm) fish. However, the

Council and Commission recognized

that a 5.5-inch (14.0-cm) mesh would

retain some 13-inch (33.0-cm) fish and

decided that allowing fishermen to land

13-inch (33.0-cm) fish would be less

wasteful. Unfortunately, this allowance

has resulted in the unintended targeting

of 13-inch (33.0-cm) fish. Mortality has

increased for fish of this size well

beyond the mortality associated with an

incidental take of this size fish.

Many industry members have

indicated that the current minimum

codend mesh is too large to target

sufficiently 13-inch (33.0-cm) fish. They

have also indicated that raising the

minimum mesh size would discourage

cheating and lessen the impacts and

discard mortality on still smaller fish

captured in nets that are fished with

liners or with codends that have been

tied off. NMFS agrees that, initially, it

would appear that discard values will

increase under the proposed

specifications. However, successful

regulations require the support of those

subject to them. NMFS has received

many indications that the previous

minimum fish size has not worked to

conserve 13-inch (33.0-cm) summer

flounder. NMFS anticipates improved

compliance with net regulations

because the increase in minimum size

will act as a disincentive to target 13-

inch (33.0-cm) fish with illegal mesh or

other net modifications (such as tying

off the net) since these fish cannot be

retained. Thus, increasing the minimum

fish size will serve to reduce mortality

on younger fish.

Comment 4. Fifteen commenters

supported the proposed increase in

commercial minimum fish size. They

felt that the measure would contribute

toward conservation of younger fish and

would eliminate the incentive for net

violations (tying off the codend or using

liners).

Response 4. For the reasons outlined

in the response above and presented in

the preamble, NMFS agrees with this

comment.

Comment 5. Seven commenters felt

that the proposed commercial quota is

too low. They suggest alternate

commercial quotas that range from

18.51 million lb (8.4 million kg) to 30

million lb (13.6 million kg) and stress

the economic hardships associated with

the proposed quota level. Many

participants believe that biomass has

been underrepresented in the stock

assessments and believe that NMFS is

being overly cautious at the expense of

the industry. They cite various factors

that may have contributed to an

inaccurate assessment, including aging

discrepancies, data collection problems,

and cyclical environmental events.

Response 5. Scientists have noted the

increase in biomass. This increase was

forecast in their projections. NMFS

expects that harvesters would also note

the increase in biomass, and NMFS

commits substantial resources to

compiling observations from industry

members. These observations, through

biological sampling, interviews with

captains, vessel logbooks, and other

methods, contribute toward stock

assessments. Although biomass has

increased, the age structure of the stock

remains compressed in that it only

contains the younger age classes. NMFS,

the Council, and Commission are

committed to the conservation of these

younger age classes to improve the longterm viability of the stock and

ultimately the industry.

The 1997 commercial quota for

summer flounder is set at the upper

limit authorized by the FMP, which

does not allow the commercial quota to

exceed this ‘‘cap’’ unless the fishing

mortality rate of 0.23 is met. The target

fishing mortality rate for 1997, as part of

the rebuilding schedule implemented

under the FMP, is 0.30. In every year

since 1993, the fishing mortality rate has

exceeded the goal of the rebuilding

schedule. Therefore, increasing the

quota is not allowed under the

regulations implementing the FMP and

is not advised based on the best

available scientific information.

Comment 6. A U.S. Senator from

North Carolina noted that the summer

flounder fishery is extremely valuable to

the State and its residents and noted

that, although the summer flounder

stock is at 80 percent of its historic peak

level, the 1997 North Carolina quota

will be the lowest in history. The

Senator also expressed concern about

the impact that overage deductions will

have on the State.

Response 6. The 22nd Stock

Assessment Workshop (SAW) reported

that the stock is at the medium level of

historical abundance. The coastwide

harvest limit and commercial quota

level are set at the FMP’s ‘‘cap.’’ The

process of overage deductions for

landings that exceed the quota in any

state is also outlined in the regulations.

The Council recommended the

commercial quota level in an attempt to

balance stock conservation with

economic impact. NMFS acknowledges

that overharvest in prior years will have

an impact on the quota level for North

Carolina in 1997 and advises that the

State consider management measures

used by other states to prolong the

harvest of the quota and support the

price per pound paid to fishermen. For

instance, states with a small share

percentage of the commercial quota use

trip limit systems that effectively extend

their quota, spread catches over various
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 10477

fleet sectors, and maximize ex-vessel

and market values.

Comment 7. Several commenters

raised the issue that the proposed

increase in minimum fish size and

codend mesh would force longer tow

times because these measures would

result in the loss of 30 percent of 14-

inch (35.6-cm) fish. This increased effort

would, in turn, raise fuel and crew

costs.

Response 7. NMFS has determined

not to implement the mesh increase.

Therefore, decreases in relative catch

will be less than anticipated. Raising the

minimum fish size may increase effort

but because of this measure, landing

larger, more valuable fish may offset

these costs.

Comment 8. A commenter from North

Carolina contested the statement that

larger fish bring a higher price and,

therefore, offset any increased costs

associated with the proposed rule. The

commenter also contended that this

conclusion of the impacts of this

measure on small businesses is

unsatisfactory.

Response 8. Data supplied by both the

commenter and NMFS weighout

database indicate that summer flounder

prices tend to increase with the size of

the fish landed. Weighout data in 1993

indicate prices ranged from $1.10 per lb

for small summer flounder to $2.41 per

lb for jumbos. Preliminary figures for

1997 indicate that nearly 90 percent of

the summer flounder landed in North

Carolina were in the medium and large

size ranges. Medium fish average

between 14 and 16.1 inches (35.6–40.8

cm) and large fish average between 16.5

and 18.2 inches (42–46.2-cm). If the

market were to be ‘‘flooded’’ with large

or jumbo fish sufficient to drive down

the price of those fish, the net effect

would still be positive, as a large or

jumbo fish would still hold more value

than a medium or large fish, even if all

the categories were priced the same,

based on the weight of those fish.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

requires that agencies consider the

economic impact of their rulemakings

on small entities, including small

businesses. Based on the best available

data, NMFS concluded that this rule

would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. As explained above, the data

presented by the commenter, supports

this conclusion.

Comment 9. Several commenters

stressed that most North Carolina

fishermen do not participate in the

groundfish fishery and do not have 6-

inch (15.2-cm) codends. Therefore, costs

would increase.

Response 9. Approximately 75

percent of the North Carolina vessels

that hold commercial summer flounder

permits also hold permits for the

Northeast Multispecies fishery.

Presuming such vessels do not fish

outside of the Mid-Atlantic regulated

mesh area (described in Comment 1),

the need for a 6-inch (15.2-cm) mesh

(the mesh size required throughout the

net in areas other than the Mid-Atlantic

regulated mesh area) would not arise

and the vessel might not possess the 6-

inch (15.2-cm) diamond mesh. While

NMFS still contends that any costs

associated with the change would be

minor because codends are routinely

replaced as part of normal operating

expenses, the Council has repeatedly

stressed its desire for a mesh

requirement of 5.5 inches (14.0-cm)

throughout the net. For this and other

reasons as described in the preamble of

this rule, NMFS has determined that the

6-inch (15.2-cm) codend mesh would be

inappropriate at this time.

Comment 10. Several commenters

contend that North Carolina is receiving

only 42 percent of its historical landings

since 1989 and that a 58-percent

reduction is significant under the RFA.

Response 10. NMFS is required to

conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis

to consider the needs and concerns of

small entities, unless, as in this case, it

makes a determination that the rule will

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

The determination of significance of a

rule is made regarding the impact of the

rule on the recent or current situation of

small entities. The RFA does not require

NMFS to compare the level of the 1997

summer flounder quota with the amount

of summer flounder harvested in 1989

to determine if the 1997 quota is

significant. The RFA requires NMFS to

determine the incremental impact of the

1997 summer flounder quota relative to

the impacts of the 1996 summer

flounder quota on those same entities,

as last year’s quota represents the

baseline under which these small

entities operated. The impact of the

incremental change from 1996 to 1997

has been determined to be not

significant.

With respect to the incremental

impact of this action on North Carolina,

the coastwide harvest limit and

commercial quota for 1997 are no

different than those set for 1996. Thus,

the impact of the 1997 quota on North

Carolina is not significant. North

Carolina’s adjusted quota for 1997

reflects deductions to the 1997 quota

due to overages in excess of its quotas

in 1995 and 1996.

Comment 11. A commenter wanted to

know how vessels, unable to take

advantage of a season as brief as the 10-

day season in North Carolina in 1997,

were accounted for in the regulatory

flexibility analysis.

Response 11. The RFA requires

analysis of the economic impacts of a

regulatory action, in total. To the extent

that the various sectors are impacted

differently by a regulatory action, the

regulatory flexibility analysis should

address the impacts on those sectors.

However, nothing in the RFA requires

analysis of the economic impact of a

regulation on an individual small entity.

In fact, such an evaluation would be

impossible to conduct. For the industry

as a whole, the economic impacts of the

proposed quota are not significant

because the total quota is the same for

1997 as it was in 1996 (before overages).

The ‘‘cap’’ on the quota established

under Amendment 7, which revised the

rebuilding schedule, was deemed to

have significant positive impacts on the

industry relative to the quota that would

have been implemented had the

amendment not been passed. The quota

implemented by this action is set equal

to that ‘‘cap.’’ The State of North

Carolina, as with all the states

implementing the quota, has the ability

to further manage its allocation through

trip limits and/or seasons, as the State

deems appropriate for its fishery. How

a state chooses to utilize its allocation

is beyond the scope of the economic

analysis and the regulations

implemented here.

Comment 12. One commenter

questioned the combined effects under

the RFA of regulations in other fisheries,

particularly striped bass and weakfish,

on the North Carolina summer flounder

fishery and remarked on a reduction in

permit holders fishing in the State.

Response 12. While various

regulations may impact fishery

participants differently, the RFA does

not require an analysis of cumulative

impacts of regulations other than those

being proposed in a given action. NMFS

acknowledges that there may be such

cumulative effects. However, it would

be nearly impossible to anticipate

behavioral changes by the industry in

response to every regulatory change.

While there may be a reduction of

permit holders in North Carolina, this

does not necessarily mean a reduction

in fishing effort. Some vessel owners

may have shifted their vessels to other

states but remain in the fishery.

Comment 13. Many commenters

voiced concerns about state commercial

quota overages and urged NMFS to

improve the quota monitoring system.

Similarly, NMFS was advised to
10478 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

improve enforcement and to reduce

underreporting and high levels of

discards associated with the summer

flounder fishery.

Response 13. At the September 1996

Council meeting, the Council discussed

the need for improved enforcement and

quota monitoring. At that meeting, the

Council proposed to establish a

committee of enforcement personnel

and quota system administrators to

evaluate the commercial reporting

requirements of the Summer Flounder

FMP. The goal of this committee was to

develop by January 1, 1997, an

investigation and enforcement strategy

to ensure compliance with vessel owner

and dealer permit and reporting

requirements. The committee has met

several times to discuss ways to

improve compliance on the part of the

states, federally permitted dealers, and

fishermen. NMFS anticipates that the

Commission will adopt compliance

criteria in Amendment 10 to the FMP.

NMFS has limited authority under the

current regulations to improve quota

monitoring. NMFS has taken steps to

secure direct landings reports from

federally permitted dealers in states that

have been late in reporting those

landings. This will constitute a

duplication of effort (double reporting),

but NMFS believes this is the only

effective alternative available at present.

NMFS law enforcement personnel

review proposed regulations and work

with the Council to facilitate plan

development with enforceability as a

central component. Additionally, law

enforcement personnel work proactively

with industry and the Coast Guard to

promote training and education

concerning fishery regulations. NMFS

law enforcement personnel continue to

conduct periodic random checks for

compliance of federally permitted

dealers and vessels. Further, NMFS

maintains cooperative agreements with

several states that provide for increased

and improved enforcement coverage.

Comment 14. One commenter

contended that the statement that net

violations (tying off the codend) have

occurred in the summer flounder fishery

is largely unsubstantiated in NMFS law

enforcement records.

Response 14. Although NMFS has

relatively few records of this type of

violation for the summer flounder

fishery in 1996, harvesters and other

industry members have given every

indication that violations involving the

use of liners or tying off the codend are

a concern. In addition, the 22nd SAW

reports that high discards probably

contributed to the pattern of

underestimating the fishing mortality in

the present assessment and in past

assessments. These net infractions

contribute directly and substantially to

the discard rate.

Classification

This action is authorized by 50 CFR

part 648 and complies with the National

Environmental Policy Act.

These final specifications are exempt

from review under E.O. 12866.

The Assistant General Counsel for

Legislation and Regulation of the

Department of Commerce certified to

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration that the

management measures contained in this

rule would not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The reasons

for this determination were discussed in

the proposed rule published in the

Federal Register on December 18, 1996

(61 FR 66646). NMFS received four

comments, addressed above, regarding

this certification. These comments did

not cause NMFS to change its

determination regarding the

certification. As a result, a regulatory

flexibility analysis was not prepared.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Reporting and record

keeping requirements.

Dated: March 3, 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 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. Effective April 7, 1997 § 648.103,

paragraph (a), is revised to read as

follows:

§ 648.103 Minimum fish sizes.

(a) The minimum size for summer

flounder is 14 inches (35.6 cm) TL for

all vessels issued a moratorium permit

under § 648.4 (a)(3), except on board

party and charter boats carrying

passengers for hire or carrying more

than three crew members, if a charter

boat, or more than five crew members,

if a party boat;

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–5698 Filed 3–4–97; 3:06 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 961126330–7039–02; I.D.

110796H]

RIN: 0648–XX72

Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and

Butterfish Fisheries; 1997

Specifications

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Final 1997 initial specifications.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues final initial

specifications for the 1997 fishing year

for Atlantic mackerel, squid, and

butterfish (SMB). Regulations governing

these fisheries require NMFS to publish

specifications for each fishing year. This

action is intended to promote the

development of the U.S. SMB fisheries.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 1997,

through December 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Mid-Atlantic

Fishery Management Council’s quota

paper and recommendations and the

Environmental Assessment are available

from David R. Keifer, Executive

Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council, Room 2115,

Federal Building, 300 South New Street,

Dover, DE 19901.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Myles Raizin, Fishery Policy Analyst,

508–281–9104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulations implementing the Fishery

Management Plan for Atlantic Mackerel,

Squid, and Butterfish Fisheries (FMP)

prepared by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery

Management Council (Council) appear

at 50 CFR part 648. These regulations

stipulate that NMFS publish a

document specifying the initial annual

amounts of the initial optimum yield

(IOY), as well as the amounts for

allowable biological catch (ABC),

domestic annual harvest (DAH),

domestic annual processing (DAP), joint

venture processing (JVP), and total

allowable levels of foreign fishing

(TALFF) for the species managed under

the FMP. No reserves are permitted

under the FMP for any of these species.

Procedures for determining the initial

annual amounts are found in § 648.21.

Proposed 1997 initial specifications,

requesting public comment were

published on December 11, 1996 (61 FR

65192). No public comments were

received. Therefore, the final 1997

initial specifications are unchanged

from those that were proposed. An