`[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 57 (Tuesday, March 25, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13983-13988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-7528]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 902

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 961108316-7051-02; I.D. 101796C]
RIN 0648-AI47


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

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement Amendment 14 to the 
Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of 
Mexico (FMP). This final rule prohibits the use or possession of fish 
traps in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) 
beginning February 8, 2007; prohibits the use or possession of fish 
traps west of 85 deg.30' W. long.; modifies the procedure for retrieval 
of fish traps when a breakdown prevents a vessel with a trap 
endorsement from retrieving its traps; modifies the restrictions on 
transfer of fish trap endorsements and reef fish permits; prohibits the 
harvest or possession of Nassau grouper in or from the EEZ of the Gulf; 
and clarifies the authority of the Regional Administrator, Southeast 
Region, NMFS (RA), to reopen a prematurely closed fishery. In addition, 
NMFS extends the current prohibition on the possession of dynamite on 
board a permitted vessel to those vessels permitted in the South 
Atlantic golden crab fishery. The intended effects of this rule are to 
conserve and manage the reef fish resources of the Gulf and enhance 
enforceability of the regulations. This rule also informs the public of 
the approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of a new 
collection-of-information requirement contained in this rule.

EFFECTIVE DATES: April 24, 1997, except that the amendments to 
Sec. 622.4 are effective March 25, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the final regulatory flexibility 
analysis (FRFA) should be sent to Robert Sadler, Southeast Regional 
Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Dr. N., St. Petersburg, FL 33702.
    Comments regarding the collection-of-information requirement 
contained in this rule should be sent to Edward E. Burgess, Southeast 
Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, 
FL 33702, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: 
NOAA Desk Officer).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 
is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico 
Fishery Management Council (Council) and is implemented through 
regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-
Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
    The Council developed Amendment 14 to address various problems in 
the reef fish fishery, primarily those associated with the fish trap 
fishery and the expiration of a moratorium on the issuance of 
additional fish trap endorsements to reef fish permits on February 7, 
1997. The rationale for the management measures in Amendment 14, and 
the additional regulatory changes proposed by NMFS, are contained in 
the preamble of the proposed rule (61 FR 59852, November

[[Page 13984]]

25, 1996) and are not repeated here. After considering the public 
comment received on the amendment and the proposed rule, NMFS approved 
all of the amendment measures on January 22, 1997. NMFS is issuing this 
final rule to implement those approved measures.

Comments and Responses

    The notice of availability for Amendment 14 was published on 
October 23, 1996 (61 FR 55128) and written public comments on the 
amendment were requested through December 23, 1996. The proposed rule 
requested written public comments on the rule through January 9, 1997. 
Comments were received from five entities on Amendment 14 and/or the 
proposed rule, summarized as follows.
    Comments: An individual, the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission 
(FMFC), and a coral reef conservation organization provided substantive 
and detailed comments on various issues associated with the fish trap 
ban. These comments suggest that the current fish trap regulations 
cannot be effectively enforced and thereby contribute to continuing and 
undesirable fishing mortality of reef fish (i.e., through illegal and 
undetected use of fish traps, as well as through ghost-fishing by lost 
traps). The FMFC and the conservation organization commented that 
continued use of fish traps in Federal waters off Florida during the 
10-year ``phaseout'' period will contribute to bycatch problems, user 
group conflicts, and illegal trap use in State waters. The FMFC 
preferred a ban on the use of traps after 2 years, but supported the 
10-year phaseout compared to the status quo (i.e., unlimited 
availability of fish trap endorsements for permitted reef fish vessels 
after expiration of the current moratorium on trap endorsements on 
February 7, 1997). The conservation organization also supported 
Amendment 14, but recommended a 10-percent reduction in the number of 
fish traps each year during the 10-year phaseout period. The individual 
also commented that fish traps should be immediately banned off 
Florida.
    Another individual (the fourth commenter) commented that a phaseout 
of fish traps in less than 10 years would be more logical, but did not 
provide additional rationale in support of the comment. A seafood 
company owner (the fifth commenter) provided editorial comments on the 
text of the proposed rule.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges the support for Amendment 14 indicated 
by comments by the FMFC and the conservation organization. NMFS 
supports the 10-year phaseout leading to a prohibition of fish traps. 
This support is based on concerns that the current fish trap 
regulations cannot be effectively enforced and thereby contribute to 
continued fishing mortality by illegal and undetected fish traps, as 
well as by lost traps (i.e., through ghost-fishing). NMFS approved the 
10-year phaseout leading to a prohibition of fish traps as a fair and 
satisfactory means of addressing the fishery problems of enforcement 
and biological impacts associated with using trap gear for reef fish.
    Enforcement of regulations regarding the use of fish traps during 
the 10-year phaseout period should be improved by implementation of the 
prohibition on the use or possession of fish traps west of Cape San 
Blas, FL, and by the revised procedure for fish trap retrieval in the 
event of a vessel breakdown. These two measures should significantly 
address the commenters' concerns about the continuing illegal use of 
traps in State waters.
    After considering alternative time periods for elimination of trap 
gear in the reef fish fishery, including an immediate ban, as well as 
time periods longer and shorter than 10 years, the Council selected the 
10-year phaseout period as the most reasonable compromise between 
persons who supported an indefinite continuation of fish trapping and 
fish trap opponents who supported an immediate ban on the gear. NMFS 
concurs with the Council's selection.
    A 10-percent reduction in the number of fish traps each year, as 
suggested by the conservation organization, was not one of the 
alternatives explicitly considered and evaluated by the Council in 
Amendment 14. To undertake this approach in phasing out trap gear would 
require that the Council propose the appropriate management measure 
under another FMP amendment and that such measure be reviewed, 
approved, and implemented by NMFS under provisions of the Magnuson-
Stevens Act.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

    NMFS is adding to this final rule corrections of the scientific 
names for red porgy in Tables 3 and 4 and saucereye porgy in Table 4 of 
Appendix A to part 622. Otherwise, the proposed rule is adopted as 
final without substantive change.
    Under NOAA Administrative Order 205-11, 7.01, dated December 17, 
1990, the Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere, Department of 
Commerce, has delegated authority to sign material for publication in 
the Federal Register to the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 
NOAA.

Classification

    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of E.O. 12866.
    The Council prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA), pursuant to the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(RFA), that described the expected significant economic effects on a 
substantial number of the small business entities engaged in harvesting 
the reef fish resources in the Gulf of Mexico. During the public 
comment periods on the amendment and the proposed rule, no public 
comments were received that addressed specifically the analysis or 
conclusions of the IRFA; no additional information was received that 
would change the analysis or conclusions of the IRFA regarding the 
impacts on small business entities. Accordingly, the FRFA is based on 
the IRFA without substantive change. Copies of the FRFA are available 
(see ADDRESSES). A summary of the FRFA follows.
    Amendment 14 and this final rule are needed to address five 
problems in the fishery. The first problem resulted from the expiration 
of a 3-year moratorium on the issuance of new fish trap endorsements on 
February 7, 1997. New regulatory action following this moratorium 
expiration is required to ensure that the fish trap fishery continues 
to be managed and that specific restrictions are established regarding 
the transfer of fish trap endorsements within the fishery. A continuing 
management program is essential for addressing the concerns of the 
Council and NMFS regarding the effects of the serious enforcement 
problems within the trap fishery for reef fish. A second problem is the 
potential for an uncontrolled expansion of the use of fish traps. 
Geographical limitations on the gear are needed to prevent an 
uncontrolled expansion of the range of the fishery and associated 
enforcement problems. A third problem is that, prior to Amendment 14, 
the FMP did not provide the NMFS Regional Administrator, Southeast 
Region, NMFS (Regional Administrator) with the authority to reopen and 
subsequently close a prematurely closed commercial fishery (i.e., a 
fishery that has not actually filled its quota on the initial closure 
date); this resulted in the loss of harvestable fish to commercial 
fishermen. A fourth problem is that the FMP allowed a reef fish permit 
transfer only when the owner of the vessel whose permit is being 
transferred had met the income qualification for the

[[Page 13985]]

permit. This prevented an operator, whose earned income qualified for 
the permit, from acquiring the permit for which he/she has qualified 
when he/she buys the vessel. A fifth problem is the reported decline in 
the abundance of the Nassau grouper resource in the EEZ of the Gulf of 
Mexico. This species is overutilized, is a candidate for protection 
under the Endangered Species Act, and its harvest and possession is 
prohibited in Florida's waters and in the South Atlantic and Caribbean 
EEZ. Allowing continuing harvest of Nassau grouper in the Gulf of 
Mexico EEZ could contribute to a further decline of this species. The 
objectives of Amendment 14 and this final rule are to: (1) Provide for 
control of the fish trap fishery after termination of the moratorium on 
trap fishery participants that expired on February 7, 1997; (2) provide 
the management flexibility to reopen and subsequently close a fishery 
that has been prematurely closed; (3) provide some flexibility in the 
transfer of fish trap endorsements during the trap fishery phaseout 
period; and (4) provide for protection of Nassau grouper throughout its 
range.
    Limited public comments were received by NMFS on Amendment 14 and 
its proposed rule. These comments generally supported the phaseout or 
elimination of the trap fishery for reef fish in the EEZ because of 
enforcement problems, potential adverse biological impacts of the 
fishery, and possible effects of encouraging illegal trap fishing in 
State waters. Commenters advocated different time periods for the 
elimination of traps ranging from an immediate ban to an incremental 
reduction in the number of traps each year over the 10-year period. No 
changes were made in this final rule over the proposed rule as a result 
of these public comments. A summary of the comments and NMFS' responses 
is provided in the supplementary information for this rule (see 
``Comments and Responses'' ).
    Approximately 1,400 reef fish harvesting firms have reef fish 
permits. The average fishing firm operates with a vessel that is 38 ft 
(11.6 m) long, has a current estimated resale value of $52,817, 
provides $52,000 in annual gross sales of reef fish and other species, 
and produces an annual net income of $12,000. All of the harvesting 
firms affected by the rule are classified as small business entities. 
The following measures directly apply to all of the firms holding a 
reef fish permit (including fish trappers): Modification of the 
restrictions on transfer of reef fish permits; allowance for transfer 
of fish trap endorsements during the first 2 years of the phaseout 
period; prohibition on the harvest or possession of Nassau grouper in 
or from the EEZ; and provision of authority for the Regional 
Administrator to reopen a prematurely closed fishery. The predicted 
socioeconomic effects of these measures are not considered significant 
under the RFA (i.e., as a result of these measures, no more than 20 
percent of affected entities will incur revenue decreases greater than 
5 percent; compliance costs will not increase total costs of production 
by more than 5 percent, nor will they represent a significant portion 
of capital available to small entities; disproportionate effects on 
capital costs of compliance should not occur since all participants in 
the reef fish fishery, including the 92 in the fish trap sector, are 
small business entities; and no entity will be forced to cease business 
operations).
    The following management measures apply directly only to the 92 
firms that comprise the fish trap component of the reef fish fishery 
(i.e., those that hold fish trap endorsements): A prohibition on the 
use or possession of fish traps in the EEZ beginning February 8, 2007; 
a prohibition of the use or possession of fish traps west of Cape San 
Blas, FL; and a modified procedure for retrieval of fish traps. These 
measures are projected to have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. All of the 92 firms within this 
sector should experience more than a 5-percent reduction in annual 
gross income when fish trapping is prohibited. With such prohibition, 
all current value of traps will be lost because the traps have no value 
for other purposes. Available data indicate that the average fish 
trapper fishes 53 traps. Given an estimated cost of $48.50 per trap 
(adjusted for depreciation), the average fish trapper would lose an 
estimated minimum of $2,570.50, or 12.7 percent, of the annual cost of 
fish trapping (salvage value) in the year when the traps are 
prohibited. It is estimated that 11 to 13 of the 92 firms, or 12 to 14 
percent of the firms, would be forced out of business by the fish trap 
phaseout.
    This rule contains a new collection-of-information requirement. 
When a permitted vessel with a trap endorsement is unable to retrieve 
its own traps, the owner or operator must notify the nearest NMFS 
Office of Enforcement and obtain authorization for another vessel to 
retrieve the traps. This rule continues in effect previously approved 
collection-of-information requirements associated with the fish trap 
permit endorsement system.
    The Council considered numerous management alternatives that would 
address the enforcement problems with and biological impacts of the 
fish trap fishery. These alternatives included periods for the phaseout 
or elimination of trap gear in the reef fish fishery both shorter and 
longer than its proposed 10-year period. Also, the Council considered a 
permanent fish trap license limitation system involving varying numbers 
of participants. The Council proposed the 10-year phaseout approach for 
eliminating trap gear, and NMFS approved it, as an effective means of 
resolving the issues of enforcement and biological effects in the 
fishery while spreading out the adverse economic impacts on trap 
fishermen over a reasonable time period. The 10-year period should 
minimize short-term costs to trap fishermen by allowing continuing use 
of the gear while still providing ample time for them to switch to 
other gear, fisheries, or activities.
The Council proposed the additional provision that fish trap 
endorsements be fully transferable for the first 2 years of the 
phaseout period as a means of minimizing adverse economic impacts on 
current trap fishery participants who could receive economic benefits 
by selling their fish trap endorsements. The Council considered various 
alternatives regarding liberalized transfer provisions for trap 
endorsements for the remaining 8 years of the phaseout period, but 
concluded that such measures would undermine its objective of reducing 
the number of trap fishery participants.
    The Council considered several options regarding area restrictions 
on trap use (in addition to the current prohibition on traps within a 
Gulf-wide ``stressed area'' in the nearshore waters of the Gulf EEZ). 
The Council concluded that expansion of the fish trap fishery beyond 
its current geographical scope is inconsistent with the intent of its 
proposed phaseout of trap gear in the reef fish fishery. The Council's 
proposed prohibition on the use of traps west of Cape San Blas, FL, 
would limit the trap fishery to that area where the fishery currently 
occurs and thereby prevent any increase in enforcement problems. The 
Council rejected alternatives regarding area restrictions (except for 
the status quo) as eliminating traps from some areas where they are 
currently used. This would have differentially impacted certain trap 
fishermen who would have to travel farther to reach areas open to 
fishing. The result would be reduced efficiency of fishing operations 
for certain fishermen, but no overall decrease in trap fishing effort. 
Also, some of the rejected alternatives regarding area

[[Page 13986]]

restrictions would have increased user conflicts on the fishing 
grounds.
    Regarding the procedure for fish trap retrieval in the event of a 
vessel breakdown, the Council rejected the status quo alternative, 
since reliable information indicated action was needed to improve 
enforceability of the requirement that fish traps be returned to shore 
after each fishing trip. The approved management measures regarding 
trap retrieval during a vessel breakdown should enhance fishermen's 
compliance with existing trap-tending regulations. These measures are 
expected to increase fishing operation costs primarily for those 
fishermen who try to circumvent such regulations (i.e., the average 
time that traps are left in the water, and therefore catching fish, may 
be reduced).
    Regarding the measure giving the Regional Administrator authority 
to reopen a prematurely closed commercial or recreational fishery for a 
Gulf reef fish species or species group when needed to ensure harvest 
of the full commercial quota or recreational fishery allocation, all of 
the alternatives considered by the Council would provide fishermen with 
fewer economic benefits.
    The modification of the restrictions on the transfer of reef fish 
permits between a vessel owner and an income-qualifying operator and 
the provision giving a non-income-qualifying owner who loses his/her 
income-qualifying operator an additional grace period for meeting the 
earned income requirements for a new permit should address unintended, 
permit-transfer inequities adversely affecting income-qualifying vessel 
operators and non-income qualifying vessel owners. The result should be 
increased flexibility in the transfer of reef fish vessel permits, 
minimized adverse economic impacts on small entities resulting from the 
previous permit transfer restrictions, and, hence, increased efficiency 
in commercial fishing operations in the long-run. No adverse impacts on 
gross revenues or costs of fishing operations are expected.
    The Council considered a status quo management alternative 
regarding the harvest of Nassau grouper in the Gulf EEZ (allowing 
continued harvest) that was rejected because it would not provide 
adequate protection for this overutilized resource. Also, the 
prohibited harvest in the Gulf EEZ should ensure consistent management 
throughout the species' range. Considering the relatively small annual 
commercial landings of this species since the mid-1980s, the prohibited 
harvest is expected to have inconsequential economic impacts on 
commercial fishermen. Adverse impacts would be relatively larger in the 
recreational fishery, but are still considered small.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to 
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
    As previously discussed, this rule contains a new collection-of-
information requirement subject to the PRA--namely the requirement 
that, when a vessel with a fish trap endorsement has a breakdown that 
prevents the vessel from retrieving its traps, the owner or operator 
notify the nearest NMFS Office of Enforcement and obtain authorization 
for another vessel to retrieve the traps. This collection of 
information has been approved by OMB under OMB control number 0648-
0205. The public reporting burden for this collection of information is 
estimated at 3 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing 
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
collection of information. Send comments regarding this reporting 
burden estimate, or any other aspect of the collection of information, 
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS and OMB (see 
ADDRESSES). This rule continues in effect previous collection-of-
information requirements associated with the fish trap permit 
endorsement system that were previously approved by OMB under OMB 
control number 0648-0205.
    The provisions of 50 CFR 622.4(m) provide additional circumstances 
under which a reef fish permit may be transferred. These provisions 
constitute a substantive rule that relieves a restriction and, pursuant 
to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), are not subject to the general requirement of 
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to delay for 30 days the 
effective date of the revisions to 50 CFR 622.4(m) or the revisions of 
references to that paragraph.
    The provisions of this rule regarding transfer and renewal of fish 
trap endorsements at 50 CFR 622.4(n) (including references to this 
paragraph) constitute a substantive rule that relieves restrictions 
and, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), are not subject to the general 
requirement of the APA to delay for 30 days the effective date.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 902

    Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

50 CFR Part 622

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

    Dated: March 19, 1997.
C. Karnella,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR chapter IX and 50 
CFR chapter VI are amended as follows:

15 CFR CHAPTER IX

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

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

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

    2. In Sec. 902.1, the table in paragraph (b) is amended by adding, 
in numerical order, the following entry to read as follows:


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

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Current
                                                                   OMB  
                                                                 control
                                                                  number
      CFR part or section where the information collection         (all 
                     requirement is located                      numbers
                                                                  begin 
                                                                   with 
                                                                  0648-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*      *      *      *      *                                           
                             50 CFR                                     
*      *      *      *      *                                           
622.40(a)(2)...................................................    -0205
*      *      *      *      *                                           
------------------------------------------------------------------------

50 CFR CHAPTER VI

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

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

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

    4. Effective March 25, 1997, in Sec. 622.4, in paragraph (a)(2)(i), 
in the second sentence, the words ``a moratorium on'' are removed; 
paragraph (a)(2)(v), the last sentence; paragraph (g),

[[Page 13987]]

the first sentence; paragraphs (m) and (n); and paragraph (p)(3)(i), 
the last, parenthetical sentence are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.4  Permits and fees.

    (a) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (v) Gulf reef fish. * * * See paragraph (m) of this section 
regarding a moratorium on commercial vessel permits for Gulf reef fish 
and limited exceptions to the earned income requirement for a permit.
* * * * *
    (g) Transfer. A vessel permit or endorsement or dealer permit 
issued under this section is not transferable or assignable, except as 
provided in paragraph (m) of this section for a commercial vessel 
permit for Gulf reef fish, in paragraph (n) of this section for a fish 
trap endorsement, or in paragraph (p) of this section for a red snapper 
endorsement. * * *
* * * * *
    (m) Moratorium on commercial vessel permits for Gulf reef fish. The 
provisions of this paragraph (m) are applicable through December 31, 
2000.
    (1) No applications for additional commercial vessel permits for 
Gulf reef fish will be accepted. Existing vessel permits may be 
renewed, are subject to the restrictions on transfer or change in 
paragraphs (m)(2) through (5) of this section, and are subject to the 
requirement for timely renewal in paragraph (m)(6) of this section.
    (2) An owner of a permitted vessel may transfer the commercial 
vessel permit for Gulf reef fish to another vessel owned by the same 
entity.
    (3) An owner whose earned income qualified for the commercial 
vessel permit for Gulf reef fish may transfer the permit to the owner 
of another vessel, or to the new owner when he or she transfers 
ownership of the permitted vessel. Such owner of another vessel, or new 
owner, may receive a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish for 
his or her vessel, and renew it through April 15 following the first 
full calendar year after obtaining it, without meeting the earned 
income requirement of paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section. However, to 
further renew the commercial vessel permit, the owner of the other 
vessel, or new owner, must meet the earned income requirement not later 
than the first full calendar year after the permit transfer takes 
place.
    (4) An owner of a permitted vessel, the permit for which is based 
on an operator's earned income and, thus, is valid only when that 
person is the operator of the vessel, may transfer the permit to the 
income qualifying operator when such operator becomes an owner of a 
vessel.
    (5) An owner of a permitted vessel, the permit for which is based 
on an operator's earned income and, thus, is valid only when that 
person is the operator of the vessel, may have the operator 
qualification on the permit removed, and renew it without such 
qualification through April 15 following the first full calendar year 
after removing it, without meeting the earned income requirement of 
paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section. However, to further renew the 
commercial vessel permit, the owner must meet the earned income 
requirement not later than the first full calendar year after the 
operator qualification is removed. To have an operator qualification 
removed from a permit, the owner must return the original permit to the 
RD with an application for the changed permit.
    (6) A commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish that is not 
renewed or that is revoked will not be reissued. A permit is considered 
to be not renewed when an application for renewal is not received by 
the RD within 1 year of the expiration date of the permit.
    (n) Endorsements for fish traps in the Gulf. The provisions of this 
paragraph (n) are applicable through February 7, 2007. After February 
7, 2007, no fish trap endorsements are valid.
    (1) Only those fish trap endorsements that are valid on February 7, 
1997, may be renewed. Such endorsements are subject to the restrictions 
on transfer in paragraphs (n)(2) and (3) of this section and are 
subject to the requirement for timely renewal in paragraph (n)(5) of 
this section.
    (2) Through February 7, 1999, a fish trap endorsement may be 
transferred only to a vessel that has a commercial permit for reef 
fish.
    (3) After February 7, 1999, a fish trap endorsement is not 
transferable except as follows:
    (i) An owner of a vessel with a fish trap endorsement may transfer 
the endorsement to another vessel owned by the same entity.
    (ii) A fish trap endorsement is transferable upon a change of 
ownership of a permitted vessel with such endorsement from one to 
another of the following: Husband, wife, son, daughter, brother, 
sister, mother, or father.
    (iii) When a change of ownership of a vessel with a fish trap 
endorsement is directly related to the disability or death of the 
owner, the RD may issue such endorsement, temporarily or permanently, 
with the commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish that is issued for 
the vessel under the new owner. Such new owner will be the person 
specified by the owner or his/her legal guardian, in the case of a 
disabled owner, or by the will or executor/administrator of the estate, 
in the case of a deceased owner. (Paragraphs (m)(3) and (4) of this 
section apply for the transfer of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf 
reef fish upon disability or death of an owner.)
    (iv) A fish trap endorsement may be transferred to a vessel with a 
commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish whose owner has a record of 
landings of reef fish from fish traps in the Gulf EEZ, as reported on 
fishing vessel logbooks received by the SRD, from November 20, 1992, 
through February 6, 1994, and who was unable to obtain a fish trap 
endorsement for the vessel with the reported landings.
    (4) The owner of a vessel that is to receive a transferred 
endorsement must return the originals of the endorsed commercial vessel 
permit for Gulf reef fish and the unendorsed permit to the RD with an 
application for a fish trap endorsement for his or her vessel.
    (5) A fish trap endorsement that is not renewed or that is revoked 
will not be reissued. Such endorsement is considered to be not renewed 
when an application for renewal is not received by the RD within 1 year 
of the expiration date of the permit.
* * * * *
    (p) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * * (Paragraphs (m)(3) and (4) of this section apply for the 
transfer of a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish upon 
disability or death of an owner.)
* * * * *
    5. In Sec. 622.31, in paragraph (a), the reference to 
``Sec. 622.4'' is revised to read ``Sec. 622.4 or Sec. 622.17'' and 
paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.31  Prohibited gear and methods.

* * * * *
    (c) Fish traps. (1) A fish trap may not be used in the South 
Atlantic EEZ.
    (2) A fish trap may not be used or possessed in the Gulf EEZ west 
of 85 deg.30' W. long. and, after February 7, 2007, may not be used or 
possessed in the Gulf EEZ.
    (3) A fish trap used other than where authorized in paragraph 
(c)(1) or (2) of this section may be disposed of in any appropriate 
manner by the Assistant Administrator or an authorized officer.
* * * * *
    6. In Sec. 622.32, paragraph (b)(2)(iii) is revised to read as 
follows:

[[Page 13988]]

Sec. 622.32  Prohibited and limited harvest species.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) Red drum and Nassau grouper may not be harvested or possessed 
in or from the Gulf EEZ. Such fish caught in the Gulf EEZ must be 
released immediately with a minimum of harm.
* * * * *


Sec. 622.37  [Amended]

    7. In Sec. 622.37(d)(4), the word ``Nassau,'' is removed.
    8. In Sec. 622.40, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.40  Limitations on traps and pots.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Gulf EEZ. A fish trap in the Gulf EEZ may be pulled or tended 
only by a person (other than an authorized officer) aboard the vessel 
with the fish trap endorsement to fish such trap. If such vessel has a 
breakdown that prevents it from retrieving its traps, the owner or 
operator must immediately notify the nearest NMFS Office of Enforcement 
and must obtain authorization for another vessel to retrieve and land 
its traps. The request for such authorization must include the 
requested effective period for the retrieval and landing, the persons 
and vessel to be authorized to retrieve the traps, and the point of 
landing of the traps. Such authorization will be specific as to the 
effective period, authorized persons and vessel, and point of landing. 
Such authorization is valid solely for the removal of fish traps from 
the EEZ and for harvest of fish incidental to such removal.
* * * * *
    9. In Sec. 622.42, paragraph (a)(3) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.42  Quotas.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (3) Shallow-water groupers, that is, all groupers other than deep-
water groupers, jewfish, and Nassau grouper, including scamp before the 
quota for shallow-water groupers is reached, combined--9.8 million lb 
(4.4 million kg), round weight.
* * * * *


Sec. 622.43  [Amended]

    10. In Sec. 622.43(b)(1), the words ``bartered, traded, or'' are 
removed.
    11. In Sec. 622.48, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 622.48  Adjustment of management measures.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) For a species or species group: Target date for rebuilding an 
overfished species, TAC, bag limits, size limits, vessel trip limits, 
closed seasons or areas, gear restrictions, reopening of a fishery 
prematurely closed, and quotas.
* * * * *

Appendix A to Part 622  [Amended]

    12. In Table 3, under the family Sparidae--Porgies, the scientific 
name for Red porgy is revised to read ``Pagrus pagrus'' and in Table 4, 
under the family Sparidae--Porgies, the scientific names of Saucereye 
porgy and Red porgy are revised to read ``Calamus calamus'' and 
``Pagrus pagrus'', respectively.

[FR Doc. 97-7528 Filed 3-24-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P`