12902 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

materials, and information necessary for

the contracting officer to definitize the

contract, and should retain a copy for

his/her records. An EPA FCS 1102

contracting officer will be responsible

for definitization of the NTP consistent

with the definitization procedures set

forth in this subpart. During the process

of definitizing the NTP, the EPA FCS

1102 contracting officer will send the

contractor the ‘‘Representations,

Certifications, and Other Statements of

Offerors’’ for completion. The contractor

will complete this information, and any

other required information, and submit

it to the EPA FCS 1102 contracting

officer prior to definitization of the NTP.

(f) The CCO, who is authorized by

EPAAR 1516.603–3 to make the

determination to use a letter contract,

shall make a class determination and

findings authorizing EPA FCS 1102

contracting officers and duly authorized

EPA on-scene coordinators with

delegations of procurement authority to

award NTPs pursuant to the conditions

set forth in this subpart.

Dated: December 27, 2000.

Judy S. Davis,

Acting Director, Office of Acquisition

Management.

[FR Doc. 01–4978 Filed 2–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 001121328–1041–02; I.D.

111500C]

RIN 0648–AN71

Fisheries of the Northeastern United

States; Scup and Black Sea Bass

Fisheries; 2001 Specifications;

Commercial Quota Harvested for

Winter I Scup Period; Commercial

Quota Harvested for Black Sea Bass

Quarter I Period

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule, final 2001

specifications, and commercial quota

adjustment; notification of commercial

quota harvest for Winter I scup period;

notification of commercial quota harvest

for Quarter I black sea bass period.

SUMMARY: NMFS issues final

specifications for the 2001 scup and

black sea bass fisheries and makes

preliminary adjustments to the 2001

commercial quotas for these fisheries.

The annual specifications for the scup

fishery modify the Gear Restricted Areas

(GRAs) that were established in the

Mid-Atlantic Bight to reduce scup

bycatch in small-mesh fisheries. The

trip limit provisions in the scup and

black sea bass fisheries are modified to

be possession limits, and these limits

are further specified to be the maximum

amount allowed to be landed within a

24-hour period (calendar day). NMFS

also announces that the scup

commercial quota available in the

Winter I period and the black sea bass

commercial quota available in the

Quarter 1 period to the coastal states

from Maine through North Carolina has

been harvested. Federally permitted

commercial vessels may not land scup

in these states for the remainder of the

2001 Winter I quota period (through

April 30, 2001). Federally permitted

commercial vessels may not land black

sea bass in these states for the remainder

of the 2001 Quarter I quota period

(through March 31, 2001). Regulations

governing the scup and black sea bass

fisheries require publication of this

notification to advise the coastal states

from Maine through North Carolina that

these quotas have been harvested and to

advise Federal vessel permit holders

and Federal dealer permit holders that

no commercial quota is available for

landing scup in these states, and for

landing black sea bass in these states

north of 35°15.3′ N. lat. The intent of

this action is to comply with

implementing regulations for the

Fishery Management Plan for the

Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea

Bass Fisheries (FMP), which require

NMFS to publish measures for the

upcoming fishing year that will prevent

overfishing of these fisheries. The

specifications for the 2001 summer

flounder fishery will be published in the

Federal Register at a later date.

DATES: 1. The 2001 final specifications

for scup and black sea bass are effective

March 1, 2001, through December 31,

2001.

2. Sections 648.14(a)(84),

648.123(a)(1) and 648.123(a)(5) are

effective March 1, 2001.

3. The prohibition on landings of scup

in the coastal states from Maine through

North Carolina by Federal permit

holders is effective 0001 hours, March 1,

2001, through 2400 hours, April 30,

2001.

4. The prohibition on landings of

black sea bass in the coastal states from

Maine through North Carolina north of

35°15.3′ N. lat. by Federal permit

holders is effective 0001 hours, March 7,

2001, through 2400 hours, March 31,

2001.

5. Sections 648.14(a)(92),

648.14(a)(122), 648.14(u)(9),

648.120(b)(2), 648.122(a) through (c),

648.140(b)(2), the removal and

reservation of 648.122(d), and the

removal of 648.14(a)(123) are effective

April 2, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on any

ambiguity or unnecessary complexity

arising from the language used in this

final rule to Patricia A. Kurkul, Regional

Administrator, Northeast Region,

National Marine Fisheries Service, One

Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA

01930–2298.

Copies of supporting documents used

by the Scup and Black Sea Bass

Monitoring Committees, the Regulatory

Impact Review (RIR), the Final

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA)

contained within the RIR, and the

Environmental Assessment (EA) are

available from the Northeast Regional

Office at the same address. The EA/RIR/

FRFA contains an analysis of the final

scup and black sea bass measures and

includes a draft analysis of summer

flounder measures. The EA/RIR/FRFA is

also accessible via the Internet at http:/

/www.nero.nmfs.gov/ro/doc/nr.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard A. Pearson, Fishery Policy

Analyst, (978)281–9279, fax (978)281–

9135, e-mail rick.a.pearson@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The FMP was developed jointly by

the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries

Commission (Commission) and the MidAtlantic Fishery Management Council

(Council) in consultation with the New

England and South Atlantic Fishery

Management Councils. The management

units specified in the FMP include scup

(Stenotomus chrysops) and black sea

bass (Centropristis striata) in U.S.

waters of the Atlantic Ocean from

35°13.3′ N. lat. (the latitude of Cape

Hatteras Light, NC) northward to the

U.S./Canadian border. Implementing

regulations for these fisheries are found

at 50 CFR part 648, subparts A, H

(scup), and I (black sea bass).

Pursuant to §§ 648.120 (scup) and

648.140 (black sea bass), the

Administrator, Northeast Region,

NMFS, (Regional Administrator)

implements measures for the fishing

year to assure that the target fishing

mortality rate (F) or exploitation rate for

each fishery, as specified in the FMP, is

not exceeded. The target F or

exploitation rate and management

measures (e.g., mesh requirements,

minimum fish sizes, seasons, and area

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 12903

restrictions) are summarized here, by

species. Detailed background

information regarding the status of these

stocks and the development of the

proposed specifications was provided in

the proposed specifications for the 2001

summer flounder, scup, and black sea

bass fisheries (65 FR 71042, November

28, 2000) and is not repeated here. In

addition to establishing the annual

measures, this action modifies the trip

limit provisions in the scup and black

sea bass fisheries so that they are

possession limits, to enhance at-sea

enforcement. For black sea bass and

scup, this action also specifies that the

possession limit is the maximum

amount that can be landed in a calendar

day. NMFS will publish a proposed and

final rule for the 2001 recreational

management measures for these

fisheries in the Federal Register at a

later date.

Scup

The FMP established a target

exploitation rate for scup in 2001 of 33

percent. The total allowable catch (TAC)

associated with that rate is allocated 78

percent to the commercial sector and 22

percent to the recreational sector by the

FMP. Scup discard estimates are

deducted from both TACs to establish

total allowable landings (TAL) for both

sectors (TAC - discards = TAL). The

commercial TAL is then allocated with

differing percentages to three quota

periods: Winter I (January–April)–45.11

percent; Summer (May–October)–30.95

percent; and Winter II (Nov–December)–

15.94 percent.

In 2000, NMFS implemented GRAs, a

management tool recommended by the

Council, to reduce discards of scup in

small-mesh fisheries. The GRAs are

seasonally closed to specified smallmesh fisheries using trawl gear with

codend mesh sizes less than 4.5 inches

(11 cm). GRAs initially went into effect

on November 1, 2000, with an

exemption for the Atlantic herring

small-mesh fishery (65 FR 33486, May

24, 2000). They were later modified in

size, effective December 23, 2000, (65

FR 81761, December 27, 2000), and a

temporary exemption for the Loligo

squid fishery and a permanent

exemption for the Atlantic mackerel

small-mesh fishery were implemented.

In the proposed rule for this action,

NMFS noted the continued importance

of reducing scup discards in small-mesh

fisheries. NMFS also noted that it

recognized that GRAs are not the only

way to address scup discard mortality.

Therefore, NMFS sought comments on

four options to meet the regulatory

requirement at 50 CFR 648.120 that the

Regional Administrator implement

measures to ensure that the target

exploitation rate would not be

exceeded. The four options varied in

terms of the TAC level, the discard

deduction made to calculate TALs, the

size and location of the GRAs, and the

fisheries to be exempted from the GRAs.

In general, if GRAs were used to reduce

scup bycatch, the discard deduction

made in establishing the TAL would be

lower than it would have been without

GRAs, and the resultant quotas would

be higher. The options are outlined

here.

Option I: (1) The Council’s proposed

quota for scup (a TAC of 8.37 million lb

(3.80 million kg), a discard deduction of

2.15 million lb (0.97 million kg), and a

TAL of 6.22 million lb (2.82 million

kg)); (2) the GRAs currently in effect (as

recommended by the Council); and (3)

exemptions for Atlantic herring,

Atlantic mackerel and Loligo squid

small-mesh fisheries.

Under this option, the commercial

TAC would be 6.53 million lb (2.96

million kg) minus discards of 2.08

million lb (0.94 million kg), resulting in

a commercial quota of 4.45 million lb

(2.02 million kg). The recreational TAC

would be 1.84 million lb (0.83 million

kg) minus discards of 0.07 million lb

(0.03 million kg), resulting in a

recreational harvest limit of 1.77 million

lb (0.80 million kg).

Option II: (1) The Scup Monitoring

Committee’s quota recommendation for

2001 (a TAC of 7.85 million lb (3.56

million kg), a discard deduction of 2.85

million lb (1.29 million kg), and a TAL

of 5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg)); (2)

the GRAs currently in effect (as

recommended by the Council); and (3)

exemptions for the Atlantic herring and

Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fisheries.

Under this option, the commercial

TAC would be 6.12 million lb (2.78

million kg) minus discards of 2.76

million lb (1.25 million kg), resulting in

a commercial quota of 3.36 million lb

(1.52 million kg). The recreational TAC

would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million

kg) minus discards of 0.09 million lb

(0.04 million kg), resulting in a

recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million

lb (0.74 million kg).

Option III: (1) The temporary

suspension of GRA restrictions for 2001;

and (2) a TAL established at a level that

is consistent with the stock assessment’s

conclusion that commercial discards are

approximately equal to commercial

landings (a TAC of 7.85 million lb (3.56

million kg), a discard deduction of 3.15

million lb (1.43 million kg), and a TAL

of 4.70 million lb (2.13 million kg)).

Under this option, the commercial

TAC would be 6.12 million lb (2.78

million kg) minus discards of 3.06

million lb (1.39 million kg), resulting in

a commercial quota of 3.06 million lb

(1.39 million kg). The recreational TAC

would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million

kg) minus discards of 0.09 million lb

(0.04 million kg), resulting in a

recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million

lb (0.74 million kg).

Option IV: (1) Modified GRAs that are

shorter in duration and that exclude the

Hudson Canyon area, but incorporate

other areas of high scup concentration

and small-mesh fishing activities during

the winter months; (2) the Monitoring

Committee’s quota recommendation for

2001 (a TAC of 7.85 million lb (3.56

million kg), a discard deduction of 2.85

million lb (1.29 million kg), and a TAL

of 5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg)); and

(3) exemptions for the Atlantic herring

and Atlantic mackerel small-mesh

fisheries.

Under this option, the commercial

TAC would be 6.12 million lb (2.78

million kg) minus discards of 2.76

million lb (1.25 million kg), resulting in

a commercial quota of 3.36 million lb

(1.52 million kg). The recreational TAC

would be 1.73 million lb (0.78 million

kg) minus discards of 0.09 million lb

(0.04 million kg), resulting in a

recreational harvest limit of 1.64 million

lb (0.74 million kg).

Final 2001 Scup Specifications

Based on the comments received on

the proposed specifications and the

requirements of the FMP, NMFS is

implementing for 2001 the Council’s

recommended TAC of 8.37 million lb

(3.80 million kg) and associated TAL of

6.22 million lb (2.82 million kg), as

described in Option I. This final rule

also establishes the modified GRAs and

exemptions described in Option IV

(exempts Atlantic mackerel and Atlantic

herring fisheries), which will remain in

effect until modified by a subsequent

action.

The TAC implemented by this final

rule results in a consistent scup quota

throughout the management unit,

because it is the same as that adopted

by the Commission for 2001. This

prevents the confusion and inequities

that would occur if different TALs were

applicable to state-permitted and

federally permitted vessels. In that

situation, federally permitted vessels

would be precluded from fishing for

scup during a Federal closure, even

though state-permitted vessels could

continue to fish in state waters.

Furthermore, because the Commission

adopted a 6.22 million lb (282-million

kg) scup quota, landings of 6.22 million

lb (2.82 million kg) would likely occur

in 2001 even if a lower Federal quota of

5.0 million lb (2.27 million kg) were

12904 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

adopted, because fishing by statepermitted vessels would continue in

state waters even after Federal waters

were closed to scup fishing.

In the proposed rule for this action,

NMFS indicated concern regarding the

scup quota recommended by the

Council and the underlying assumption

that scup biomass would be greater in

2001 than in 2000. However, during the

comment period, the New York

Department of Environmental

Conservation presented new

information indicating very strong

recent scup year classes, particularly the

1999 year class, providing evidence that

scup are rebuilding and that the biomass

will increase in 2001. State fisheries

managers from Rhode Island and

Connecticut also indicated during the

December 2000, Council meeting that

their states’ inshore surveys indicated

strong recent scup year classes. These

states have provided preliminary

information to NMFS showing a strong

1999 year class and also potentially

strong 1998 and 2000 year classes.

NMFS recognizes that these data are

preliminary. Nevertheless, the

information indicates at least one very

strong scup year class. If protected from

excessive discard mortality, the 1999

year class, and possibly others, should

contribute significantly to rebuilding the

resource.

Because of these potentially strong

recent year classes, the harvest level

recommended by the Council and

adopted in this final rule can be

reasonably expected to attain the target

exploitation rate. However, these strong

year classes also mean that GRAs

remain necessary to protect juvenile

scup from discard mortality and to

allow rebuilding to take place. The

GRAs described in Option IV and

implemented through this final rule will

extend farther south than the existing

GRAs to include areas of high winter

scup abundance and coincidental Loligo

squid fishing effort, as identified by the

Northeast Fisheries Science Center

(NEFSC) winter bottom trawl survey

and in vessel logbook reports. Although

quantitative estimates are not available,

these GRAs are expected to reduce scup

discards in the winter. These GRAs will

also allow small-mesh fishing in the

Hudson Canyon area, which has been

identified by industry as a priority area

for winter fishing activity in several

small-mesh fisheries. NMFS believes

that these GRAs will reduce scup

discards with simultaneously fewer

adverse impacts on small-mesh fisheries

than the existing GRAs.

The commercial allocation is shown

in Table 1. These allocations are subject

to a downward adjustment for any

overages that occurred in a period’s

scup harvest in 2000, as is required by

§ 648.120(d)(6). Scup preliminary

landings data are listed in Table 2.

Preliminary data indicate that the

Winter I and Summer period allocations

were exceeded in 2000. The resulting

adjusted 2001 commercial quota for

each period is given in Table 3.

TABLE 1. PERCENT ALLOCATIONS OF 2001 COMMERCIAL SCUP QUOTA

Period Percent TAC1 Discards2

Quota allocation Possession

lb kg3 lb kg3

Winter I 45.11 2,945,502 940,543 2,004,959 909,434 10,0004 4,536

.............. (1,336,057) (426,623) .................... .................... ................ ..............

Summer 38.95 2,543,280 812,108 1,731,172 785,246 N/A N/A

.............. (1,153,612) (368,366) .................... .................... ................ ..............

Winter II 15.94 1,040,818 332,349 708,469 321,356 2,000 907

.............. (472,107) (150,751) .................... .................... ................ ..............

Total 100.00 6,529,600 2,085,000 4,444,600 2,016,036 ................ ..............

.............. (2,961,776) (945,740) .................... .................... ................ ..............

1Total allowable catch in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).

2Discard estimates in pounds (kilograms in parentheses).

3Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

4Possession limit will drop to 1,000 lb (453.6 kg) per trip when 75 percent of Winter I quota is reached.

TABLE 2. SCUP PRELIMINARY 2000 LANDINGS BY PERIOD

Period

2000 Quota1 2000 Landings 2000 Overage

lb kg2 lb kg2 lb kg2

Winter I 1,037,253 470,490 1,366,591 619,875 329,338 149,385

Summer 637,878 289,337 1,221,189 553,922 583,311 264,585

Winter II 70,356 31,913 34,939 15,848 0 0

Total 1,745,487 791,740 2,622,719 1,189,645 912,649 413,971

1 Reflects quotas as published on August 18, 2000 (65 FR 50463).

2Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

TABLE 3. SCUP FINAL 2001 ADJUSTED QUOTAS

Period

2000 Initial Quota 2000 Adjusted quota1

lb kg2 lb kg2

Winter I 2,004,959 909,434 1,675,621 760,049

Summer 1,731,172 785,246 1,147,861 520,661

Winter II 708,469 321,356 708,469 321,356

Total 4,444,600 2,016,037 3,531,951 1,602,066

1Possession limits specified in Table 1.

2Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 12905

To enhance at-sea enforcement, this

action changes the current scup trip

limits to possession limits, with the

additional provision that these

quantities be the maximum allowed to

be landed within a calendar day. This

action implements a Winter I (January–

April) possession limit of 10,000 lb

(4,536 kg) with a reduction to 1,000 lb

(454 kg) for the remainder of the period

when 75 percent of the quota allocation

is projected to have been harvested. The

Winter II period (November–December)

possession limit is decreased from 4,000

lb (1,814 kg) to 2,000 lb (907 kg).

This action also increases the level of

catch (threshold) that may be retained

on board a vessel that is using mesh

smaller than 4.5 inches (11 cm) from

200 lb (91 kg) to 500 lb (227 kg) for the

period November 1–April 30. The

threshold remains at 100 lb (45 kg) for

the period May 1–October 31. In order

for a vessel to possess scup in excess of

the threshold, mesh smaller than 4.5

inches (11 cm) must be stowed and

unavailable for use. In the proposed

rule, NMFS noted concern that

increasing the threshold for the

November–April period could

potentially increase bycatch and

subsequent discard of undersized scup.

However, it was recognized that, if scup,

which otherwise would have been

discarded, were instead converted to

landings due to the change in the mesh

threshold without incurring additional

discards when the 500-lb (227 kg)

threshold was reached, as the Council

and industry believed would occur, the

change in threshold limit would be

acceptable. After reviewing public

comment, NMFS concluded that this

belief cannot be tested definitively.

Therefore, NMFS has decided to defer to

the Council’s judgement on this matter.

Scup Closure

Section 648.121 requires the Regional

Administrator to monitor the

commercial scup quota for each quota

period and, based upon dealer reports,

state data, and other available

information, to determine when the

commercial quota for a period has been

harvested. NMFS is required to publish

a notification in the Federal Register

advising and notifying commercial

vessels and dealer permit holders that,

effective upon a specific date, the scup

commercial quota has been harvested

and no commercial quota is available for

landing scup for the remainder of the

Winter I period. The Regional

Administrator has determined, based

upon dealer reports and other available

information, that the scup commercial

quota of 1,666,570 lb for the 2001

Winter I period has been harvested.

Section 648.4(b) provides that Federal

scup moratorium permit holders agree

as a condition of the permit not to land

scup in any state after NMFS has

published a notification in the Federal

Register stating that the commercial

quota for the period has been harvested

and that no commercial quota for scup

is available. Therefore, effective 0001

hours, March 1, 2001, further landings

of scup by vessels holding Federal scup

moratorium permits are prohibited

through April 30, 2001. The Summer

period for commercial scup harvest will

open on May 1, 2001. Effective 0001

hours, March 1, 2001, federally

permitted dealers are also advised that

they may not purchase scup from

federally permitted vessels that land in

coastal states from Maine through North

Carolina for the remainder of the Winter

I period (through April 30, 2001).

Black Sea Bass

The FMP specifies a target

exploitation rate of 37 percent for 2001.

This target is to be attained through

specification of a TAL level that is

allocated to the commercial (49 percent)

and recreational (51 percent) fisheries.

The commercial quota is specified on a

coastwide basis, by quarter.

To achieve the target exploitation rate

for 2001, this action implements a black

sea bass TAL equal to the 2000 level and

reduces the possession limits in

Quarters 2, 3, and 4. The reduction in

the possession limits is intended to

allow the fishery to remain open for the

entire quarter. This action also changes

the current trip limits for black sea bass

to possession limits to enhance at-sea

enforcement, with the provision that

these quantities are the maximum

allowed to be landed within a calendar

day. The commercial quota and

corresponding possession limits are

shown in Table 4.

Preliminary data indicate overages of

the 2000 quota occurred in Quarters 2,

3, and 4 (Table 5), which requires a

corresponding deduction from the 2001

allocations for those quarters. The

resulting adjusted 2001 commercial

quota for each quarter is given in Table

6. These allocations are preliminary and

would be subject to a downward

adjustment for any additional overages

in a period’s harvest in 2000, as

provided in the FMP.

TABLE 4. 2001 BLACK SEA BASS QUARTERLY COASTWIDE COMMERCIAL QUOTAS AND QUARTERLY POSSESSION LIMITS

Quarter Percent lb kg1

Possession limits

lb kg1

1 (Jan–Mar) 38.64 1,168,760 530,141 9000 4,082

2 (Apr–Jun) 29.26 885,040 401,447 1500 680

3 (Jul–Sep) 12.33 372,951 169,168 1000 454

4 (Oct–Dec) 19.77 597,991 271,244 2000 907

Total 100.00 3,024,742 1,372,000 .............................. ..............................

1Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

TABLE 5. BLACK SEA BASS PRELIMINARY 2000 LANDINGS BY QUARTER

Period

2000 Quota 2000 Landings 2000 Overage

lb kg1 lb kg1 lb kg1

1 1,168,760 530,141 848,018 384,654 0 0

2 734,088 332,982 939,609 426,199 205,521 93,223

3 238,795 108,317 334,871 151,895 96,076 43,579

4 490,038 222,281 571,090 259,042 81,052 36,765

Total 2,631,681 1,193,721 2,693,588 1,221,791 382,649 173,567

1Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

12906 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 6. BLACK SEA BASS FINAL 2001 ADJUSTED QUOTAS

Period

2001 Initial quota 2001 Adjusted quota

lb kg1 lb kg1

1 1,168,760 530,141 1,168,760 530,141

2 885,040 401,447 679,519 308,225

3 372,951 169,168 276,875 125,588

4 597,991 271,244 516,939 234,480

Total 3,024,742 1,372,000 2,642,093 1,198,433

1Trip limits specified in Table 4.

2Kilograms are as converted from pounds and may not add to the converted total due to rounding.

Black Sea Bass Closure

Section 648.141 requires the Regional

Administrator to monitor the

commercial black sea bass quota for

each quota period and, on the basis of

dealer reports, state data, and other

available information, to determine

when the commercial quota has been

harvested. NMFS is required to publish

a notification in the Federal Register

advising and notifying commercial

vessels and dealer permit holders that,

effective upon a specific date, the black

sea bass commercial quota has been

harvested and no commercial quota is

available for landing black sea bass for

the remainder of the quarter 1 period,

north of 35°15.3′ N. lat. The Regional

Administrator has determined, based

upon dealer reports and other available

information, that the black sea bass

commercial quota of 1,168,760 lb

(530,141 kg) for the 2001 quarter 1

period has been harvested.

The regulations at § 648.4(b) provide

that Federal black sea bass moratorium

permit holders agree as a condition of

the permit not to land black sea bass in

any state after NMFS has published a

notification in the Federal Register

stating that the commercial quota for the

period has been harvested and that no

commercial quota for the black sea bass

is available. The Regional Administrator

has determined that the quarter 1 period

for black sea bass no longer has

commercial quota available. Therefore,

effective 0001 hrs local time, March 7,

2001, further landings of black sea bass

in coastal states from Maine through

North Carolina, north of 35°15.3′ N. lat.,

by vessels holding commercial Federal

fisheries permits are prohibited through

March 31, 2001. The 2001 quarter 2

period for commercial black sea bass

harvest will open on April 1, 2001.

Effective March 7, 2001, federally

permitted dealers are also advised that

they may not purchase black sea bass

from federally permitted black sea bass

moratorium permit holders who land in

coastal states from Maine through North

Carolina, north of 35°15.3′ N. lat., for

the remainder of the quarter 1 period

(through March 31, 2001).

The regulations at § 648.4(b) also

provide that, if the commercial black sea

bass quota for a period is harvested and

the coast is closed to the possession of

black sea bass north of 35°15.3′ N. lat.,

any vessel owners who hold valid

commercial permits for both the black

sea bass and the NMFS Southeast

Region Snapper-Grouper fisheries may

surrender their black sea bass

moratorium permit by certified mail

addressed to the Regional Administrator

(see ADDRESSES) and fish pursuant to

their Snapper-Grouper permit, as long

as fishing is conducted exclusively in

waters, and landings are made, south of

35°15.3′ N. lat. A moratorium permit for

the black sea bass fishery that is

voluntarily relinquished or surrendered

will be reissued upon the receipt of the

vessel owner’s written request after a

minimum period of 6 months from the

date of cancellation.

Comments and Responses

A total of 30 comments on the

proposed rule were received in

reference to the scup and black sea bass

specifications, primarily from fishing

industry participants and organizations

representing the commercial fishing

industry. Other commenters included

the Massachusetts Division of Marine

Fisheries, the New York State

Department of Environmental

Conservation (NYDEC), a university

professor, and several environmental

organizations, which submitted one cosigned comment. All comments

received prior to the close of the

comment period that directly related to

the measures in the proposed rule were

considered in developing the measures

contained in this final rule. Several

commenters made points that went

beyond the scope of the proposed

action; those points are not responded

to here.

Comment 1: Twenty commenters

questioned the scientific information

underlying the proposed 2001 scup

specifications. In addition, eight

commenters stated that recently

available state survey data indicate that

scup abundance is higher than was

indicated by the data used in

developing the scup specifications, and

that the 2001 allowed harvest level

should be the level recommended by the

Council in scup Option I. Conversely,

one commenter felt that adopting a

higher scup TAL would violate the

overfishing, rebuilding, and bycatch

reduction requirements of the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act), its

implementing regulations, and the FMP.

Response: As noted in the preamble,

the most recent stock assessment was

conducted in June 2000 (SARC 31) and

incorporated the best scientific

information available at that time.

Several state fishery managers presented

more recent information at the

December 2000, meeting of the Council

and the Commission. NYDEC data

showed very strong recent scup year

classes, particularly in 1999, and

indicated that scup are rebuilding and

that biomass will increase in 2001. State

representatives from Rhode Island and

Connecticut also noted at the meeting

that their state surveys preliminarily

show similar increases in recent year

classes. These state survey data indicate

that the biomass estimated for 2001 will

likely be higher than the biomass

estimated for 2000. This recent

information indicating a scup biomass

increase provided the basis for NMFS’

decision to set the 2001 scup TAL at the

level recommended by the Council and

Board (reflected in scup Option I).

SARC 31 also noted evidence of

strong year classes in 1997 and 1999,

and an increase in spawning stock

abundance since 1998. SARC 31

concluded that fishing mortality should

be reduced substantially and

immediately, and that a reduction in

fishing mortality from discards would

have the most impact on rebuilding the

stock. Therefore, in recognizing a likely

increase in scup abundance, NMFS also

recognizes the imperative to maintain

GRAs to reduce discard mortality of

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 12907

juvenile scup. GRAs are necessary to

protect the strong recent year classes,

which have not yet reached harvestable

size. These year classes provide

opportunities for future rebuilding of

the scup stock. NMFS believes the GRAs

contained in Option IV and

implemented through this final rule will

provide the requisite protection.

Comment 2: One commenter felt that

NMFS’ failure to take action to lower

the Winter I scup trip possession limit

would violate the overfishing,

rebuilding, and bycatch reduction

requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens

Act, its implementing regulations, and

the FMP.

Response: NMFS notes that, although

Council staff recommended lowering

the Winter I scup possession limit, the

Scup Monitoring Committee did not

support that recommendation. The

allowable harvest limit is the primary

measure to control mortality in the scup

fishery, because the fishery is closed

upon attainment of the harvest limit.

Possession limits primarily serve to

distribute the quota over the quota

period. This final rule lowers the level

at which the landing limit is reduced to

1,000 lb from 85 percent of the Winter

I allocation to 75 percent of the Winter

I allocation, based on the

recommendations of the Council and

the Scup Monitoring Committee.

Lowering the trigger to 75 percent of the

Winter I quota will reduce the trip limit

earlier in the Winter I period, and better

ensure that the Winter I period quota is

not exceeded.

Comment 3: Nineteen commenters

stated that they disagreed with the scup

discard statistics. Four of these

commenters referred to an analysis of

NMFS sea sampling (observer) data

prepared by Dr. Eric Powell, Rutgers

University, that concluded that the

discard problem is primarily associated

with fishing trips directing on scup, not

trips directing on Loligo squid.

Response: NMFS has consistently

stated that it recognizes that it is

difficult to make a precise

determination of scup discards because

of the limited information available. Sea

sampling data for small-mesh fishery

trips, which are the best available

discard information, are not available

for all areas and time periods of

concern. However, SARC 31 concluded

that commercial discards may have

equaled or exceeded commercial

landings during 1989-1997. SARC 31

also noted that the limited sea sampling

information suggests that discards are

quite variable.

Based on the available sea sampling

data, the overall percent of discards in

the Loligo squid fishery is relatively

low, when calculated by comparing the

weight of scup caught to the total weight

of the catch. However, the percentage is

affected by the fact that the total volume

of fish caught by vessels fishing for

Loligo squid is very high. A review of

the sea sampling data shows that the

total poundage of scup discarded in the

Loligo fishery can be substantial.

Therefore, NMFS cannot currently

support an exemption from the GRAs

for the Loligo fishery.

NMFS notes that the analysis

conducted by Dr. Powell has not yet

been peer reviewed and that such a

review is necessary in order to evaluate

properly the results of the analysis.

Comment 4: One commenter objected

to exempting both the Loligo squid and

the Atlantic mackerel small-mesh

fisheries from the GRAs. This

commenter stated that the Loligo fishery

is considered the most significant

source of scup discards. Conversely,

several commenters showed support for

exempting the Loligo squid fishery from

GRA measures.

Response: NMFS recognizes that

overall scup discards as a percent of

total Loligo landings are comparatively

low. As stated in the response to

comment 3, the main reason for this is

that the overall volume of fish caught in

the Loligo fishery is large. Available

NMFS observer data show that

occasional large scup discard events (as

high as 28 percent) in the directed

Loligo fishery do occur. These

occasional large discard events are of

concern. Therefore, NMFS has not

exempted the Loligo fishery from the

GRA requirements. Loligo was exempted

from the modified Northern GRA

implemented from December 23, 2000,

through December 31, 2000, because the

Loligo quota had been harvested. Thus,

no directed Loligo fishery was occurring

during this time period, having minimal

impacts on the scup resource.

The highest percentage of scup

bycatch for any directed mackerel trip,

based on the limited sea-sampling data,

was 6 percent. The Scup Monitoring

Committee recommended that the

Atlantic mackerel small-mesh fishery be

exempt from the GRA requirements.

Based of the available observer

information and the Scup Monitoring

Committee recommendation, NMFS

believes that exempting the directed

small-mesh mackerel fishery will not

jeopardize the attainment of scup

mortality reduction objectives.

Comment 5: Two commenters

supported scup Option I, which

contains the GRAs implemented on

December 23, 2000, with exemptions for

the Loligo squid, Atlantic mackerel, and

Atlantic herring small-mesh fisheries,

and the Council’s recommended scup

TAL of 6.22 million lb (2.82-million kg).

Response: Scup Option I would have

retained GRAs, but would have

exempted the Loligo squid fishery from

the GRA restrictions. As explained in

the responses to Comments 4 and 5,

NMFS cannot currently support a Loligo

squid small-mesh exemption because of

concerns that the Loligo fishery is a

significant source of scup discard

mortality, despite the fact that the

overall percentage of scup discarded

relative to the Loligo catch may be low.

Comment 6: Twenty-six commenters

supported the temporary suspension of

GRAs as proposed in scup Option III,

with 11 of these commenters favoring an

increase of the scup TAL to the level

proposed in Option I. Many commenters

stated that GRAs are not necessary

because significant reductions in scup

mortality are being achieved through

other measures, including periodic

fishery closures due to quota

attainment, the 4.5-inch (11.4-cm) scup

minimum mesh size requirement, the

minimum fish size requirement, and

gear improvements adopted by industry

that reduce scup discards.

Response: The objective of the scup

management measures is to ensure that

scup mortality, both from discards in

small-mesh fisheries and from the

directed scup fishery, is controlled.

Option III included a GRA suspension

only in conjunction with a TAL

established at a level consistent with the

SARC 31 conclusion that commercial

discards are approximately equal to

commercial landings. As such, Option

III would have reduced the allowable

harvest level to compensate for

suspension of the GRAs. Combining the

GRA suspension with a higher harvest

level would have defeated the objective

of Option III.

Comment 7: Two commenters

supported scup Option III but stated

that, if NMFS felt GRAs were necessary,

they would support scup Option IV,

which allows small-mesh fisheries in

the Hudson Canyon area.

Response: As discussed earlier, NMFS

believes that GRAs are necessary,

especially in consideration of the recent

strong scup year classes that need

protection to allow stock rebuilding.

Therefore, NMFS is implementing the

GRAs contained in scup Option IV.

These GRAs will provide necessary

protection to juvenile scup, yet allow

small-mesh fishing activity in the

Hudson Canyon, which has been

identified by industry as a priority area

for small-mesh fisheries.

Comment 8: Some commenters

expressed opinions and concerns about

the areas encompassed by the GRAs

12908 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

proposed in Option IV. Three

commenters disagreed with the location

of the proposed GRAs, and stated that

these areas do not coincide with areas

of scup abundance. Conversely, another

commenter supported the proposal in

scup Option IV to extend the boundary

of the Southern GRA farther south, but

opposed opening the Hudson Canyon

area to small-mesh fishing. This

commenter stated that the proposed rule

provided no analysis to support opening

the Hudson Canyon, and cited

information in the EA indicating that

the northern portion of the Hudson

Canyon area is a source of significant

scup discards.

Response: On the basis of 1992-1998

NEFSC Winter Bottom Trawl Surveys,

NMFS believes that extending the GRAs

farther south and widening the GRAs to

include more of the area surrounding

the 100-fathom contour will provide

protection for abundant winter scup

congregations and compensate, in terms

of scup discards, for exempting the

Hudson Canyon area. Initially, the

southern area was not included in the

GRAs because there were no seasampling trips conducted in the area.

However, a comparison of Winter

Bottom Trawl Survey information with

vessel trip report data for the Loligo

fishery, prepared in conjunction with

the 2001 specifications, indicates this is

a key area of scup abundance that

coincides with numerous Loligo fishing

trips. Although the anticipated

reduction in discards is not quantifiable,

the EA provides charts documenting

that winter scup abundance coincides

with significant Loligo squid fishing

activity in the area.

Comment 9: One commenter stated

that NMFS Winter Bottom Trawl

Surveys from 1992 to 1998 show lower

scup abundance in the GRAs proposed

in Options I, II and IV than in areas

outside the GRAs.

Response: GRAs were initially

developed in the 2000 scup

specifications based on sea-sampling

data and industry input. The northern

GRA in scup Option IV, and the three

GRAs in Options I and II, were

developed in this manner. There were

no sea sampling data available for trips

conducted south of 38°N. lat. Therefore,

NMFS considered other available

information pertaining to the fishery

south of that area. NMFS compared the

distribution of scup, based on data from

the 1992-98 Winter Bottom Trawl

Survey, with fishing trips that landed

Loligo squid, based on data reported by

the industry in Fishing Vessel Trip

Reports. The southern GRA included in

scup Option IV includes areas where

scup are abundant at the same time that

small-mesh fishing occurs for Loligo

squid. Although the two areas in Option

IV were developed using different

databases, NMFS believes that both

GRAs are appropriately based on the

best available scientific information.

Comment 10: Two commenters stated

that the analysis of the economic impact

of GRAs is unrealistic. One commenter

questioned the conclusion of the

analysis, and instead restated the

conclusion to be, ‘‘that under 5 percent

of 1158 boats will suffer a loss of more

than 5 percent of revenue associated

with small-mesh fisheries in this time

period.’’ Both commenters included

information comparing selected vessel

revenues from November 1999 to

November 2000 to demonstrate revenue

declines. Conversely, one commenter

stated that NMFS failed to consider any

economic benefits to scup fishermen

resulting from reducing discards in

small-mesh fisheries.

Response: The NMFS integrated

analysis in the EA/RIR/IRFA was

conducted to assess the overall potential

impacts of revising the GRAs in

conjunction with the 2001

specifications being established for

summer flounder, scup and black sea

bass. The overall projected revenue

impacts of the proposed 2001 GRA

options and specifications were

compared with the impacts of the status

quo measures (2000 specifications and

GRAs). The commenters, on the other

hand, presented revenue information

showing decreases in revenue for

selected vessels in November 2000

compared to November 1999, a year

with no GRAs. Also, NMFS does not

agree that all revenue changes in

November 2000 were necessarily due to

the imposition of GRAs. Revenue

changes can occur for other reasons,

including the fact that several important

Mid-Atlantic fisheries were closed in

November 2000 due to quota

attainment.

The commenters may also have

misinterpreted the assumptions

underlying the impacts analysis in the

EA/RIR/IRFA. The analysis considered

the annual impacts on all 1,158 vessels

that had landed summer flounder, scup

or black sea bass, or that had fished with

mobile gear with mesh sizes of less than

4.5 inches (11.4 cm). This was

determined to be the affected universe

for these specifications. The analysis

did not only consider the impacts on

revenues derived solely from smallmesh species for the time period of the

GRAs. Rather, the analysis incorporated

the impacts of the proposed TALs, trip

limits, GRAs and other measures.

Importantly, the analysis indicated that

all vessels fishing with small-mesh gear,

at least to some extent, also participated

in the summer flounder, scup or black

sea bass fisheries.

NMFS recognizes the benefits to the

scup resource resulting from the

proposed GRA measures that are aimed

at reducing scup discards in small-mesh

fisheries. However, it is difficult to

quantify these benefits, since stock

abundance is dependent on several

factors unrelated to fishing activity,

making it difficult to determine a stock’s

response to a given management

measure.

Comment 11: One commenter stated

that it would be a violation of the

Magnuson-Stevens Act to suspend the

GRAs because suspension would be

contrary to national standard 9, which

requires that management measures

shall, to the extent practicable,

minimize bycatch and, to the extent

bycatch cannot be avoided, minimize

the mortality of such bycatch.

Response: NMFS is not suspending

the GRAs.

Comment 12: Three commenters

questioned the enforceability of the

GRA measures. One commenter felt that

GRAs are generally unenforceable,

while two commenters felt that the two

specific GRA Options contained in the

proposed rule for this action are

unenforceable due to their small size.

Response: The GRAs initially

established in 2000 were modified

effective December 23, 2000 (65 FR

81761, December 27, 2000). The

configuration of the GRAs implemented

through that rule were the same as the

GRAs in scup Options I and II. The U.S.

Coast Guard indicated, in reviewing the

proposal to modify the GRAs, that the

geographic configuration, size, and time

periods of the GRAs contained in

Options I and II are enforceable, and

that they can provide adequate

surveillance to detect the majority of

fishing vessels operating in the GRAs.

NMFS notes that the GRAs in Option IV,

which are implemented through this

final rule, are larger in area and more

regularly shaped than the existing

GRAs, and, therefore, should be more

easily enforced than the current GRAs.

Comment 13: One commenter was

concerned that all of the scup options

represent a retreat from regulations

designed to maximize protection of

juvenile scup. The commenter felt that

the options reduce impacts on smallmesh fisheries at the expense of scup

and other bycatch species. This

commenter appeared to support the

GRAs originally implemented in the

2000 specifications based on the belief

that either of the revised GRA options

contained in the proposed rule would

weaken scup rebuilding.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 12909

Response: As stated in the responses

to comments 7 and 8, the GRAs in

Option IV, and implemented through

this final rule, will provide protection to

the scup resource and allow it to

rebuild, while mitigating to some extent

the negative economic impacts on

small-mesh fisheries.

Comment 14: Three commenters

favored raising the minimum mesh

threshold for scup from 200 lb (90.7 kg)

to 500 lb (226.8 kg) for the November 1

through April 30 period. These

commenters stated that such a measure

would help reduce regulatory discards

in the scup fishery. One commenter

opposed the measure and stated that it

would violate the overfishing,

rebuilding, and bycatch reduction

requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens

Act.

Response: NMFS raised this issue in

the proposed rule and specifically

requested public comment. It is not

possible to quantify the effect of

increasing the minimum mesh size

threshold on scup discards at this time.

If discards are converted to landings due

to the change in the mesh threshold,

without additional discards occurring

when the 500-lb (226.8-kg) threshold is

reached, as assumed by the Council and

industry, then the impact on scup

mortality would be negligible. In the

absence of information to the contrary,

this final rule implements an increase in

the threshold as recommended by the

Council.

Comment 15: One commenter

supported an increase in the TAL for

black sea bass to the least restrictive

level (7.91 million lb (3.59 million kg))

presented in the alternatives analyzed in

the EA/RIR/IRFA.

Response: The commenter is

recommending a harvest level that was

not formally considered by the Council,

but was analyzed in the impacts

analysis for purposes of comparison.

This level was not recommended by the

Council and is not implemented in this

final rule. The harvest level

recommended by the commenter would

result in an exploitation rate that would

exceed the black sea bass exploitation

target for 2001, as described in the FMP.

Comment 16: Two commenters

supported the change in the black sea

bass regulations that specify landing

limits as possession limits. Five

commenters generally supported

changes to the specific possession

limits, though they did not support all

of the specific proposed changes. In

general, the commenters were seeking

lower possession limits that would

enable fishermen to fish for the entire

quarter.

Response: This final rule implements

the proposed changes to the black sea

bass trip limits for 2001.

Changes From the Proposed Rule

In § 648.14(a)(122), ‘‘Loligo squid’’ is

added to the list of species that are not

exempt from the GRA requirements and

references to the GRAs are revised.

In § 648.122, paragraph (a) is revised

to reflect the dates and coordinates of

the newly revised Southern GRA. Also,

in § 648.122, paragraph (c) is revised to

reflect the removal of Northern GRA II,

and is replaced with the transiting

provisions that were formerly contained

in paragraph (d) and paragraph (d) is

removed and reserved.

In § 648.123, paragraph (a)(5) is

revised for consistency with other net

stowage regulations.

No other changes were made from the

proposed rule.

Classification

This final rule has been determined to

be not significant for purposes of

Executive Order 12866.

This action establishes annual quotas

and related management measures for

the scup, and black sea bass fisheries,

which are used to control harvest of

these fisheries and to restrict landings

when their quotas are harvested. Action

to restrict landings must be taken

immediately upon attainment of the

quota to conserve fishery resources. The

Winter I scup allocation and the Quarter

1 black sea bass allocation have been

harvested. It would be contrary to the

public interest to provide prior notice of

these restrictions, since the allocations

have already been harvested and the

regulations require the publication of

this action. Failure to implement this

provision without due expedition

would result in overfishing. Therefore,

the Assistant Administrator for

Fisheries, NOAA (AA) finds good cause

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive the

requirement to provide prior notice and

opportunity for public comment on the

closure of the Winter I scup fishery in

the coastal states from Maine through

North Carolina and closure of the

Quarter 1 black sea bass fishery in these

states north of 35°15.3′ N. lat. Failure to

implement this provision immediately

would result in overfishing, so under 5

U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the AA also finds good

cause to waive the 30-day delay in

effectiveness of the closure of the

Winter I scup fishery in the coastal

states from Maine through North

Carolina and closure of the Quarter 1

black sea bass fishery in these states

north of 35°15.3′N. lat. Likewise, it

would be impracticable to delay

implementation of the remaining quota

provisions, because doing so would

prevent the agency from carrying out its

function of preventing overfishing of the

scup, and black sea bass resources in the

remaining periods. The fisheries

covered by this action are already in

progress and quota monitoring for the

fishing years began on January 1, 2001.

Therefore, the AA finds good cause

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the

30-day delayed effectiveness period for

the 2001 quotas and related

management measures, including the

landings restrictions. The provision in

this final rule that increases the

threshold possession limit for scup

above which a vessel is required to use

4.5-inch (11.4-cm) minimum mesh from

200 lb (90.7 kg) to 500 lb (226.8 kg)

relieves a restriction and, under 5 U.S.C.

553(d)(1), is not subject to a 30-day

delay in effectiveness.

NMFS determined that this rule will

be implemented in a manner that is

consistent, to the maximum extent

practicable, with the approved coastal

management programs of Maine, New

Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode

Island, Connecticut, New York,

Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware,

Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina,

South Carolina, Georgia and Florida.

This determination was submitted for

review by the responsible state agencies

on October 24, 2000, under section 307

of the Coastal Zone Management Act.

The following states submitted

responses concurring with NMFS’

determination: Massachusetts, Rhode

Island, New York, New Jersey,

Pennsylvania, Delaware, North Carolina

and Georgia. Maine, New Hampshire,

Maryland, South Carolina and Florida

did not respond and, therefore,

consistency is inferred. The State of

Connecticut concurred with the

determinations for all of the

components of the proposed 2001

specifications except for the summer

flounder TAL, which is not included in

this action.

The Council and NMFS prepared a

final regulatory flexibility analysis

(FRFA) for this action. The document

contains an analysis of the final scup

and black sea bass analysis and a draft

analysis of the proposed summer

flounder measures. A copy of this

analysis is available from the Regional

Administrator (see ADDRESSES). The

preamble to the proposed rule included

a detailed summary of the analyses

contained in the IRFA, and that

discussion is not repeated in its entirety

here. A summary of the FRFA follows.

A description of the reasons why

action by the agency is being taken and

the objectives of this final rule are

explained in the preambles to the

12910 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

proposed rule and final rule and are not

repeated here. This action does not

contain any collection-of- information,

reporting, recordkeeping, or other

compliance requirements.

Public Comments

Thirty-four comments were received

on the measures contained in the

proposed rule. Four of the comments

exclusively addressed the summer

flounder measures, which are not

implemented through this final rule.

Two were submitted in response to the

initial regulatory flexibility analysis

(IRFA) of the expected impacts of these

measures on small entities. NMFS has

responded to these comments in the

Comments and Responses section of this

final rule (see response to Comment 10).

Additional comments were received not

specifically on the IRFA, but related to

economic impacts (see responses to

Comments 7 and 16). Changes were

made to the measures outlined in the

proposed rule regarding the scup TAL;

the size, location, and season of the

GRAs; and exemptions to the

requirements of the GRAs. Although

these changes were not directly related

to the comments received on the IRFA,

the intent of the changes was, in part,

to minimize the economic effect on

small entities. These changes and the

reasons for them are discussed in the

responses to Comments 1, 7, 8 and 13,

as well as in the preamble to this final

rule.

Number of Small Entities

The measures established by this

action potentially impact a total of 1,158

vessels that participated in at least one

of the summer flounder, scup, and black

sea bass fisheries or that had fished with

mobile gear with less than 4.5-inch

(11.43-cm) mesh inside at least one of

the proposed GRAs.

Minimizing Significant Economic

Impact on Small Entities

In the FRFA, NMFS analyzed the

measures being implemented in this

action. Although summer flounder

measures are not being implemented

through this action, a summer flounder

TAL of 17.91 million lb (8.12 million

kg) was assumed for comparing the

impacts of the various options. The

analysis compared the effects of the

measures with both the 2000 adjusted

quotas and with the actual 2000

landings when available. When not

available, 1999 landings were used. In

terms of overall impacts on revenues,

the scup measures selected for

implementation (Option V) have the

second highest positive impact on

revenues. Using the landings baseline

proration method, Options I, III, and V

are expected to yield total gross

revenues higher than those yielded by

the status quo measures by

approximately $0.91 million, $0.40

million and $0.70 million respectively,

whereas Options II and IV yielded total

gross revenues lower than the status quo

by approximately $0.16 million and

$0.13 million, respectively. Option I is

presumed to have produced the highest

overall revenues because the Loligo

fishery is exempted from the GRA

restrictions. This Option was not

selected for implementation in this

action because, as explained in the

preamble, available information does

not justify an exemption of the Loligo

fishery.

The FRFA also analyzed revenue

impacts on individual vessels, as

summarized here:

PERCENT OF VESSELS EXPERIENCING

REVENUE LOSS > 5%

Landings

Baseline

Quota

Baseline

Option I 2.1% 3.4%

Option II 3.2% 4.6%

Option III 2.8% 4.1%

Option IV 2.9% 4.7%

Option V 2.9% 4.4%

The measures selected for

implementation (Option V) have slightly

greater impacts than either Option I or

Option III. As discussed earlier, Option

I was not selected for implementation

because the available information does

not support an exemption for Loligo

squid. The impact of Option III is

presumed to be lower because there are

no GRAs established. This alternative

was not selected for implementation

because, as explained in the preamble,

NMFS believes that GRAs remain

necessary for scup conservation. The

specific GRAs implemented by this

action were selected to moderate the

economic impacts on small entities by

extending GRAs further south and

opening the Hudson Canyon area.

For black sea bass, the harvest level

adopted in this final rule minimizes

significant economic impacts while

achieving the stated objectives of the

FMP. No other harvest level that was

considered would meet this objective

while minimizing significant economic

impacts on small entities.

Revision of the trip limits in the scup

and black sea bass fisheries were

recommended by the Council to allow

these fisheries to remain open for a

longer period of time, preferably for the

entire quota period. This is expected to

reduce the period of time that a fishery

would be closed, and, thereby, provide

for a more reliable stream of income for

small entities.

The President has directed Federal

agencies to use plain language in their

communications with the public,

including regulations. To comply with

this directive, we seek public comment

on any ambiguity or unnecessary

complexity arising from the language

used in this proposed rule. Such

comments should be sent to the

Northeast Regional Administrator (see

ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648

Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 22, 2001.

William T. Hogarth

Acting 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. In § 648.14, paragraph (a)(123) is

removed; and paragraphs (a)(84), (a)(92),

(a)(122) and (u)(9) are revised to read as

follows:

§ 648.14 Prohibitions.

(a) * * *

(84) Fish for, catch, possess, or retain

scup in or from the EEZ north of

35°15.3’ N. lat. in excess of the amount

specified in § 648.123 (500 lb (226.8 kg)

or more from November 1– April 30, or

100 lb (45.4 kg) or more from May 1–

October 31), unless the vessel meets the

gear restrictions in § 648.123.

* * * * *

(92) Fish for, catch, possess, or retain

1,000 lb (453.4 kg) or more of black sea

bass in or from the EEZ north of 35°15.3′

N. lat., the latitude of Cape Hatteras

Light, NC, to the U.S. - Canadian border,

unless the vessel meets the gear

restrictions of § 648.144.

* * * * *

(122) Fish for, catch, possess, retain or

land Loligo squid, silver hake or black

sea bass in or from the areas and during

the time periods described in §

648.122(a) or (b) while in possession of

any trawl nets or netting that do not

meet the minimum mesh restrictions or

that are modified, obstructed, or

constricted, as specified in § 648.122

and § 648.123(a), unless the nets or

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations 12911

netting are stowed in accordance with §

648.23(b).

* * * * *

(u) * * *

(9) Possess, retain, or land black sea

bass harvested in or from the EEZ in

excess of the commercial possession

limit established at § 648.140.

* * * * *

3. In § 648.120, paragraph (b)(2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.120 Catch quotas and other

restrictions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Possession limits for the Winter I

and Winter II periods. The possession

limit is the maximum quantity of scup

that is allowed to be landed within a 24-

hour period (calendar day).

* * * * *

4. In § 648.122, paragraph (d) is

removed and reserved, and paragraphs

(a), (b), and (c) are revised to read as

follows:

§ 648.122 Season and area restrictions.

(a) Southern Gear Restricted Area–(1)

Restrictions. From January 1 through

March 15, all trawl vessels in the

Southern Gear Restricted Area that fish

for or possess non-exempt species as

specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this

section must fish with nets that have a

minimum mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43

cm) diamond mesh, applied throughout

the codend for at least 75 continuous

meshes forward of the terminus of the

net. For codends with fewer than 75

meshes, the minimum-mesh-size

codend must be a minimum of one-third

of the net, measured from the terminus

of the codend to the headrope,

excluding any turtle excluder device

extension, unless otherwise specified in

this section. The Southern Gear

Restricted Area is an area bounded by

straight lines connecting the following

points in the order stated (copies of a

chart depicting the area are available

from the Regional Administrator upon

request):

SOUTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED AREA

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

SGA1 39°20′ 72°50′

SGA2 39°20′ 72°25′

SGA3 38°00′ 73°55′

SGA4 37°00′ 74°40′

SGA5 36°30′ 74°40′

SGA6 36°30′ 75°00′

SGA7 37°00′ 75°00′

SGA8 38°00′ 74°20′

SGA1 39°20′ 72°50′

(2) Non-exempt species. Unless

otherwise specified in paragraph (d) of

this section, the restrictions specified in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section apply

only to vessels in the Southern Gear

Restricted Area that are fishing for or in

possession of the following non-exempt

species: Loligo squid, black sea bass and

silver hake (whiting).

(b) Northern Gear Restricted Area I–

(1) Restrictions. From November 1

through December 31, all trawl vessels

in the Northern Gear Restricted Area I

that fish for or possess non-exempt

species as specified in paragraph (b)(2)

of this section must fish with nets that

have a minimum mesh size of 4.5 inches

(11.43 cm) diamond mesh, applied

throughout the codend for at least 75

continuous meshes forward of the

terminus of the net. For codends with

fewer than 75 meshes, the minimummesh-size codend must be a minimum

of one-third of the net, measured from

the terminus of the codend to the

headrope, excluding any turtle excluder

device extension, unless otherwise

specified in this section. The Northern

Gear Restricted Area I is an area

bounded by straight lines connecting

the following points in the order stated

(copies of a chart depicting the area are

available from the Regional

Administrator upon request):

NORTHERN GEAR RESTRICTED AREA I

Point N. Lat. W. Long.

NGA1 41°00′ 71°00′

NGA2 41°00′ 71°30′

SGA3 40°00′ 72°40′

SGA4 40°00′ 72°05′

NGA1 41°00′ 71°00′

(2) Non-exempt species. Unless

otherwise specified in paragraph (d) of

this section, the restrictions specified in

paragraph (b)(1) of this section apply

only to vessels in the Northern Gear

Restricted Area I that are fishing for, or

in possession of, the following nonexempt species: Loligo squid, black sea

bass and silver hake (whiting).

(c) Transiting. Vessels that are subject

to the provisions of the Southern and

Northern GRAs, as specified in

paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section,

respectively, may transit these areas

provided that trawl net codends on

board of mesh size less than that

specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of

this section are not available for

immediate use and are stowed in

accordance with the provisions of §

648.23(b).

(d) [Reserved]

* * * * *

5. In § 648.123, paragraphs (a)(1) and

(a)(5) are revised to read as follows:

§ 648.123 Gear restrictions.

(a) * * *

(1) Minimum mesh size. The owners

or operators of otter trawlers who are

issued a scup moratorium permit and

who possess 500 lb (226.8 kg) or more

of scup from November 1 through April

30, or 100 lb (45.4 kg) or more of scup

from May 1 through October 31, must

fish with nets that have a minimum

mesh size of 4.5 inches (11.43 cm)

diamond mesh, applied throughout the

codend for at least 75 continuous

meshes forward of the terminus of the

net. For codends with fewer than 75

meshes, the minimum-mesh-size

codend must be a minimum of one-third

of the net, measured from the terminus

of the codend to the headrope,

excluding any turtle excluder device

extension. Scup on board these vessels

shall be stored separately and kept

readily available for inspection.

* * * * *

(5) Stowage of nets. The owner or

operator of an otter trawl vessel

retaining 500 lb (226.8 kg) or more of

scup from November 1 through April

30, or 100 lb (45.4 kg) or more of scup

from May 1 through October 31, and

subject to the minimum mesh

requirements in paragraph (a) (1) of this

section, and the owner or operator of a

mid water trawl or other trawl vessel

subject to the minimum mesh size

requirement in § 648.122, may not have

available for immediate use any net, or

any piece of net, not meeting the

minimum mesh size requirement, or

mesh that is rigged in a manner that is

inconsistent with the minimum mesh

size. A net that is stowed in

conformance with one of the methods

specified in § 648.23 (b), and that can

be shown not to have been in recent use,

is considered to be not available for

immediate use.

* * * * *

6. In § 648.140, paragraph (b) (2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 648.140 Catch quotas and other

restrictions.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) A commercial possession limit for

all moratorium vessels may be set from

a range of zero to the maximum all

owed to assure that the quarterly quota

is not exceeded, with the provision that

these quantities be the maximum

12912 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 41 / Thursday, March 1, 2001 / Rules and Regulations

allowed to be landed within a 24-hour

period (calendar day).

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 01–4973 Filed 2–26–01; 4:00 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 010112013-1013-01; I.D.

022601B]

Fisheries of the Economic Exclusive

Zone Off Alaska; Groundfish Fisheries

by Vessels Using Hook-and-Line Gear

in the Gulf of Alaska

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed

fishing for groundfish by vessels using

hook-and-line gear in the Gulf of Alaska

(GOA), except for sablefish or demersal

shelf rockfish. This action is necessary

because the first seasonal bycatch

mortality allowance of Pacific halibut

apportioned to hook-and-line gear

targeting groundfish other than sablefish

or demersal shelf rockfish in the GOA

has been caught.

DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local

time (A.l.t.), February 26, 2000, until

1200 hrs, A.l.t., May 17, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Furuness, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS

manages the groundfish fishery in the

GOA exclusive economic zone

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act. Regulations governing

fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance

with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50

CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

The Pacific halibut bycatch mortality

allowance for groundfish included in

the other hook-and-line fishery, which

is defined at § 679.21(d)(4)(iii)(C), was

established by the Final 2001 Harvest

Specifications and Associated

Management Measures for the

Groundfish Fisheries Off Alaska (66 FR

7276, January 22, 2001) for the first

season, the period January 1, 2001,

through May 17, 2001, as 175 metric

tons. The other hook-and-line fishery

includes all groundfish except sablefish

or demersal shelf rockfish.

In accordance with § 679.21(d)(7)(ii),

the Administrator, Alaska Region,

NMFS (Regional Administrator), has

determined that the first seasonal

apportionment of the 2001 Pacific

halibut bycatch mortality allowance

specified for the hook-and-line

groundfish fisheries other than sablefish

or demersal shelf rockfish in the GOA

has been caught. Consequently, NMFS

is prohibiting directed fishing for

groundfish other than sablefish or

demersal shelf rockfish by vessels using

hook-and-line gear in the GOA.

Maximum retainable bycatch amounts

may be found in the regulations at §

679.20(e) and (f).

Classification

This action responds to the best

available information recently obtained

from the fishery. The Assistant

Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA,

finds that the need to immediately

implement this action because the first

seasonal bycatch mortality allowance of

Pacific halibut apportioned to hook-andline gear in the GOA has been caught

constitutes good cause to waive the

requirement to provide prior notice and

opportunity for public comment

pursuant to the authority set forth at 5

U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 50 CFR

679.20(b)(3)(iii)(A), as such procedures

would be unnecessary and contrary to

the public interest. Similarly the need to

implement these measures in a timely

fashion because the first seasonal

bycatch mortality allowance of Pacific

halibut apportioned to hook-and-line

gear in the GOA has been caught

constitutes good cause to find that the

effective date of this action cannot be

delayed for 30 days. Accordingly, under

5 U.S.C. 553(d), a delay in the effective

date is hereby waived.

This action is required by § 679.21

and is exempt from review under

Executive Order 12866.

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

Dated: February 26, 2001.

Dean Swanson,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 01–5001 Filed 2–26–01; 4:40 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S