Contact Us Search: All EPA This Area

• You are here: EPA Home
• Federal Register
• FR Years
• FR Months
• FR Days
• FR Documents
• Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 13C

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 13C

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

---

 [Federal Register: September 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 183)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55096-55108]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21se06-3]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 902
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 060525140-6221-02; I.D. 051106B]
RIN 0648-AT75

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; 
Snapper-Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 13C

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 13C to the 
Fishery Management Plan for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South 
Atlantic Region (FMP), as prepared and submitted by the South Atlantic 
Fishery Management Council (Council). Amendment 13C establishes 
management measures to end overfishing of snowy grouper, golden 
tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black sea bass and measures to allow 
moderate increases in recreational and commercial harvest of red porgy 
consistent with the rebuilding program for that stock.
    For the commercial fisheries, this final rule establishes 
restrictive quotas for snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion 
snapper, and black sea bass and, after the quotas are met, prohibits 
all purchase and sale of the applicable species and restricts all 
harvest and possession to the applicable bag limit; establishes 
restrictive trip limits for snowy grouper and golden tilefish; requires 
at least 2-inch (5.1-cm) mesh in the back panel of black sea bass pots; 
requires black sea bass pots to be removed from the water after the 
quota is reached; changes the fishing year for black sea bass; 
increases the trip limit for red porgy; establishes a red porgy quota 
that would allow a moderate increase in harvest; and, after the red 
porgy quota is reached, prohibits all purchase and sale and restricts 
all harvest and possession to the bag limit.
    For the recreational fisheries, this final rule reduces the bag 
limits for snowy grouper, golden tilefish, and black sea bass; 
increases the minimum size limit for vermilion snapper and black sea 
bass; changes the fishing year for black sea bass; and increases the 
bag limit for red porgy.
    The intended effects of this final rule are to eliminate or phase 
out overfishing of snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, 
and black sea bass; and increase red porgy harvest consistent with an 
updated stock assessment and rebuilding plan to achieve optimum yield. 
Finally, NMFS informs the public of the approval by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) of the collection-of-information 
requirements contained in this final rule and publishes the OMB control 
numbers for those collections.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 23, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 
and the Record of Decision (ROD) may be obtained from John McGovern, 
NMFS, Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, 
FL 33701; telephone 727-824-5305; fax 727-824-5308; e-mail 
John.McGovern@noaa.gov.
    Comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of 
the collection-of-information requirements contained in this final rule 
may be submitted in writing to Jason Rueter at the Southeast Regional 
Office address (above) and to David Rostker, Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), by e-mail at David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or by fax to 
202-395-7285.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John McGovern, telephone: 727-824-
5305; fax: 727-824-5308; e-mail: John.McGovern@noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The snapper-grouper fishery off the southern 
Atlantic states is managed under the FMP. The FMP was prepared by the 
Council and is implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) by 
regulations at 50 CFR part 622.
    On May 18, 2006, NMFS published a notice of availability of 
Amendment 13C and requested public comment (70 FR 28841). On June 9, 
2006, NMFS published the proposed rule to implement Amendment 13C and 
requested public comment (71 FR 33423). NMFS approved Amendment 13C on 
August 14, 2006. The rationale for the measures in Amendment 13C is 
provided in the amendment and in the preamble to the proposed rule and 
is not repeated here.

Comments and Responses

    NMFS received a total of 32 comment letters: 17 addressed Amendment 
13C, 6 addressed the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) 
associated with Amendment 13C, and 9 addressed the proposed rule. Four 
of these comment letters supported the proposed actions. The remaining 
comment letters opposed one or more of the proposed actions for reasons 
summarized below. Similar comments are consolidated, and each is 
followed by NMFS's response.
    Comment 1: Concerns were raised about edits made to Amendment 13C 
after it was approved by the Council and its Scientific and Statistical 
Committee (SSC), and before it was transmitted for Secretarial review. 
At issue is whether NMFS altered the document without the Council's 
knowledge and in a way that was inconsistent with the Council's intent.
    Response: At the December 2005 meeting, the Council chose several 
different preferred alternatives than those in the public hearing draft 
of Amendment 13C. Thus, when approving Amendment 13C for Secretarial 
review during its December 2005 meeting, the Council requested the NMFS 
and Council staffs work together through an Interdisciplinary Plan Team 
(IPT) to finalize the integrated amendment for Secretarial review. 
Specifically, the Council directed the IPT to modify a number of 
preferred alternatives, and to ``* * * complete the document as 
reflected by all the discussion here at this meeting with the 
preferreds and everything else.'' The IPT made the requested edits 
following the December Council meeting. Edits included modifying and 
supplementing analyses, as needed, to describe the effects of the 
Council's revised preferred alternatives that were chosen to further 
mitigate the unavoidable short-term

[[Page 55097]]

adverse socioeconomic impacts of ending overfishing. Additionally, the 
IPT corrected some statements and conclusions not supported by the 
analyses, added text describing the long-term benefits of the proposed 
actions, and added text describing the adverse effects of continued 
overfishing in response to a request of the Snapper Grouper Committee 
at its September 2005 meeting. The additional text was added in support 
of the Council for Environmental Quality's regulatory requirement to 
consider the magnitude of impacts at various spatial and temporal 
scales (40 CFR 1508.27).
    For example, the DEIS reviewed by the Council in December 2005 
stated, ``Preferred Alternative 2 (regardless of which sub-alternative 
is chosen) would have a disproportionately negative effect on North 
Carolina fishermen unless perhaps the fishing year is changed. The 100-
lb (45.4-kg) gutted weight or 10-fish trip limit is intended to extend 
the fishery through December. However, it is likely that this amendment 
will be implemented in the middle of 2006. Without these trip limits, 
the quota will potentially be filled by the end of March 2006 according 
to average landings by state (Figure 4-4) mostly by those commercial 
fishermen fishing in south Florida, and then by others in areas south 
of Cape Fear. Once the fishing begins in North Carolina in late March 
or early April (dependant on the weather), it is likely that the 
majority of the 84,000 lbs (38,102 kg) of quota will be filled. This 
may allow for an unequal opportunity to fish between states and 
inequitable access to the resource.''
    At its December 2005 meeting, the Council changed the quota for 
2006 from 84,000 lb (38,102 kg) gutted weight to 151,000 lb (68,492 kg) 
gutted weight. Projections based on landings data from 1999 through 
2003 indicated the 151,000-lb (68,492-kg) gutted weight commercial 
quota associated with the new preferred alternative would not be met 
until June 2006 rather than March or April 2006. Examination of 
historical data from 1999 through 2003 suggested North Carolina 
fishermen would be expected to land 62 percent of their average catch 
during 1999 through 2003 by June, and Florida fishermen would be 
expected to land 57 percent of their historical average catch during 
that same month. Additionally, the proposed trip limit is designed to 
provide for a year-round fishery in the first full year the regulations 
become effective and onwards, until eliminated or modified by the 
Council. Therefore, the IPT revised the document to clarify the 
Council's Preferred Alternative 2 would not likely have a 
disproportionate negative effect on North Carolina fishermen during 
2006. This revision is supported by a review of preliminary landings 
data through April 2006 which indicates North Carolina fishermen landed 
substantially more snowy grouper than Florida fishermen during the 
first 4 months of this calendar year.
    While, together, edits to the socioeconomic analyses made 
subsequent to Council approval were substantive, such edits were 
necessary to comply with legal mandates and were done in response to 
the Council's actions. All document edits and revisions proposed by the 
IPT were reviewed by the Southeast Regional Office's Social Science 
Branch Chief, then submitted to and reviewed by the Council staff, who 
incorporated them in the document before the Council Chair forwarded 
Amendment 13C to NMFS for Secretarial review on February 24, 2006.
    Comment 2: Numerous individuals stated snowy grouper, golden 
tilefish, black sea bass, and vermilion snapper are in better shape 
than the assessments indicated.
    Response: An inclusive and rigorous scientific process was used to 
assess the status of the stocks addressed in Amendment 13C. Status 
determinations for all four stocks were derived from the Southeast Data 
Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process. The SEDAR process involves a 
series of three workshops designed to ensure each stock assessment 
reflects the best available scientific information. First, 
representatives from State agencies, the South Atlantic Council, 
academia, NMFS, and other environmental and fishery interest groups, 
participate in a data workshop. The purpose of this workshop is to 
assemble and review available fishery dependent and independent data 
and information on a stock, and to develop consensus about what 
constitutes the best available scientific information, how that 
information should be used in an assessment, and what types of stock 
assessment models should be employed. For each assessment, 
representatives of each state provided available data on the species to 
be assessed. Second, assessment biologists from these agencies and 
organizations participate in an assessment workshop, during which the 
data obtained from the data workshop are input into one or more 
assessment models to estimate parameters used in evaluating the status 
of a stock and its fishery. Generally, multiple runs of each model are 
conducted, including a base run and a number of additional runs, to 
examine how differing data and assumptions affect results. Third, a 
review workshop is convened to provide representatives from the South 
Atlantic Council, NMFS, constituent groups, and the Center for 
Independent Experts the opportunity to peer review the results of the 
stock assessment workshop. The findings and conclusions of each SEDAR 
workshop are documented in a series of reports, which are ultimately 
reviewed and discussed by the Council's SSC. The Council's SSC 
concluded the snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, and 
black sea bass assessments were based on the best available science.
    Comment 3: Several letters assert the data supporting the actions 
proposed in the amendment are flawed and inadequate, and do not 
adequately represent conditions off North Carolina, where a large 
portion of the catch is harvested. Specifically at issue is text in the 
SEDAR report of the snowy grouper and golden tilefish peer review 
workshop, which states the data used in assessing the status of those 
stocks, ``are weaker than those generally expected in fisheries 
assessments.'' Also at issue is the use of headboat survey data and 
fishery-independent Marine Resources Monitoring, Assessment, and 
Prediction Program survey data as indices of abundance in the black sea 
bass, vermilion snapper, and snowy grouper stock assessments.
    Response: SEDAR participants, Council advisory committees, the 
Council, and NMFS staff reviewed and considered these and other 
concerns about the adequacy of the data underlying the proposed actions 
in Amendment 13C. SEDAR workshops rejected the assertion the headboat 
index has no utility as an index of abundance. Although the SEDAR 
report of the snowy grouper and golden tilefish peer review workshop 
acknowledged data used in those assessments were relatively weak, the 
same report also states, ``The data used for both species were 
scientifically sound and appropriate for use in stock assessments (with 
minor exceptions), adequate to make useful inferences about stock 
status, and the best available for this purpose.'' The Council's SSC 
concluded the snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion snapper, red 
porgy, and black sea bass assessments were based on the best available 
science. The Council's Snapper Grouper Committee acknowledged, while 
stock assessment findings are uncertain, there is no reason to assume 
such uncertainty leads to unrealistically pessimistic conclusions about 
stock status. Rather, the stocks could be in worse shape than indicated 
by the stock assessment.

[[Page 55098]]

Therefore, uncertainty should not be used as a reason to avoid taking 
action. The Council agreed with this conclusion when voting to submit 
Amendment 13C for Secretarial review in December 2005. The NMFS' 
Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC) reviewed and certified 
Amendment 13C and its supporting analyses as being based on the best 
available scientific information in April 2006. Finally, the amendment 
also was subject to a pre-dissemination review in May 2006 in 
compliance with the Information Quality Act.
    Comment 4: Eight letters stated the recreational and commercial 
measures in Amendment 13C would have negative economic and social 
impacts. One group suggested the proposed actions in Amendment 13C do 
not adequately balance socioeconomic needs with the need to rebuild 
snapper-grouper stocks. Another letter stated Amendment 13C ignores 
national standards 6 and 8 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which require 
``conservation and management shall take into account and allow for 
variations among, and contingencies in, fisheries, fisheries resources, 
and catches,'' and ``conservation and management measures shall, 
consistent with the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (including 
prevention of overfishing and rebuilding of overfished stocks), take in 
account the importance of fishery resources to fishing communities in 
order to (A) Provide for the sustained participation of such 
communities, and (B) to the extent practicable, minimize adverse 
economic impacts on such communities.'', respectively.
    Response: NMFS agrees the actions proposed in Amendment 13C will 
have immediate, short-term, negative socioeconomic impacts. The Council 
made efforts to minimize, to the extent practicable, the unavoidable 
adverse socioeconomic impacts of ending overfishing by modifying a 
number of alternatives identified as preferred in the DEIS to allow 
overfishing to be phased out over a 3-year period.
    Together, the actions proposed in Amendment 13C are estimated to 
reduce the revenue of the commercial harvest sector $730,000 the first 
year the regulations are effective, and $1,080,000 in the third year, 
and each subsequent year the regulations are effective. The actions are 
estimated to decrease the net non-market benefits of the recreational 
sector $80,000 the first year the regulations are effective, and 
$1,120,000 in the second year and each subsequent year the regulations 
are effective.
    NMFS is unable to quantify either the adverse socioeconomic effects 
of continued overfishing of the snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 
vermilion snapper, and black sea bass stocks, or the long-term benefits 
expected to accrue to fishery participants and communities as catch per 
unit effort and the age structure of the stocks improve in response to 
decreased fishing mortality rates. However, although unquantifiable, 
the adverse socioeconomic effects of inaction (not ending overfishing) 
are expected to far exceed those associated with the proposed actions, 
as continued overfishing would require fishermen to increase effort in 
the future as the size and age of target species further decrease and, 
ultimately, threaten the long-term viability of these fisheries. 
Furthermore, the proposed actions support the goal of rebuilding these 
important fisheries to higher abundance levels, increasing future catch 
per unit effort, and achieving the optimum yield. The long-term 
benefits of rebuilding stocks to sustainable, optimum yield levels 
exceed the short-term costs associated with the necessary restrictions 
to achieve stock rebuilding.
    There is no guarantee all current fishery participants and related 
industries adversely affected by the proposed actions will experience 
the long-term benefits of ending overfishing. The short-term losses of 
some individuals could be sufficiently severe to encourage them to exit 
the fishery. While individual proposed actions are not expected to 
threaten the sustainability of fishing communities in the South 
Atlantic, the cumulative effects of the actions proposed in Amendment 
13C, in conjunction with other State and regional fishery regulations 
and community changes, could be severe enough to change the economic 
and social structures of fishing communities over the long term. 
However, stock assessment models indicate that if adequate corrective 
action to end overfishing is not taken at this time, even more severe 
harvest restrictions would be required in the future. This would result 
in greater short-term, adverse socioeconomic effects than those 
associated with the proposed actions.
    Comment 5: Two individuals stated the Council refused to consider 
an alternative that would have minimized adverse economic impacts on 
fishermen, particularly those from North Carolina, by establishing an 
annual commercial snowy grouper quota of 151,000 lb (68,492 kg) gutted 
weight. Several others advocated alternative snowy grouper quota and 
trip limits, including: A quota of 151,000 lb (68,492 kg) gutted weight 
and trip limit of 600 to 700 lb (272 to 318 kg) gutted weight; a quota 
of 172,000 lb (78,018 kg) gutted weight with a trip limit of 500 lb 
(227 kg) gutted weight; a trip limit of 30 fish; a trip limit of 1,500 
lb (680 kg) gutted weight; and a moratorium on the commercial harvest 
of snowy grouper.
    Response: The Council considered, but eliminated from detailed 
study, an alternative that would reduce the annual commercial snowy 
grouper quota from 344,508 lb (156,256 kg) gutted weight to 151,000 lb 
(68,492 kg) gutted weight and specify a commercial trip limit of 275 lb 
(125 kg) gutted weight until the quota is met. This alternative was not 
retained for detailed analysis because it would not end overfishing 
until 2022. The Council believes this alternative is too risky due to 
the poor status of the snowy grouper stock and life history 
characteristics that make it vulnerable to overfishing. The remaining 
quota and trip limit recommendations would allow overfishing to occur 
for an even longer period of time. A moratorium on the commercial 
harvest of snowy grouper would have minimal biological benefits 
relative to the proposed action because the commercial quota proposed 
by the Council essentially allows fishermen to retain their snowy 
grouper bycatch, which is expected to die when discarded.
    Comment 6: Two groups suggested there should be different 
regulations for snowy grouper and other species by region because these 
species are perceived to be in better shape in the northern extent of 
their range and are more accessible in the southern part of their range.
    Response: The Council considered but rejected in Amendment 13C, an 
alternative that would specify two separate commercial quotas for snowy 
grouper; one for fish landed in North Carolina, and another for fish 
landed in the remaining three South Atlantic states. The Council 
considered this alternative impractical because it was concerned 
regional quotas would be too low to manage effectively in-season.
    Comment 7: One group suggested the proposed snowy grouper plan 
would negatively impact the blueline tilefish fishery in the northern 
part of the Council's jurisdiction because blueline tilefish and snowy 
grouper are caught together. Due to the small trip limit for snowy 
grouper, it may not be worthwhile for fishermen to make a trip for 
blueline tilefish. Furthermore, two groups suggested that, if fishermen 
did target blueline tilefish after the proposed snowy grouper trip 
limit and/or quota is met, then the snowy grouper stock could be 
adversely affected by

[[Page 55099]]

discard mortality because the release mortality rate of that species is 
estimated to be 100 percent.
    Response: NMFS realizes blueline tilefish and snowy grouper are 
captured in the same locations, and is currently working with the 
Council to evaluate multispecies management alternatives to reduce 
bycatch of deep-water species in Snapper Grouper Amendment 15. This 
action is being evaluated separately from Amendment 13C to ensure 
debate about the composition and management of a proposed deep-water 
grouper unit does not delay Council action to effectively address 
overfishing of the snowy grouper stock.
    Comment 8: One group commented that fishery management plans must 
establish a standardized bycatch reporting methodology.
    Response: Currently, approximately 20 percent of commercial 
fishermen are asked to record discard information in NMFS logbooks. In 
addition, observer data has been provided by the Marine Fisheries 
Initiative Program and Cooperative Research Programs for ongoing 
bycatch studies, which will provide information for future management 
actions. In Amendment 15, the Council is reviewing alternative interim 
methodologies for monitoring and assessing bycatch in the snapper-
grouper fisheries.
    Comment 9: One group stated NMFS should disapprove the actions 
proposed in Amendment 13C for the snowy grouper and black sea bass 
fisheries, because they fail to immediately end decades of overfishing 
on these stocks as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act's national 
standard 1. Another group expressed similar concerns with the delay in 
Council action to end overfishing and with the slow and stepped 
implementation of necessary restrictions, but encouraged the Secretary 
to quickly approve and implement the actions proposed in Amendment 13C 
because they represent reasonable and prudent steps toward finally 
rebuilding South Atlantic snapper-grouper fisheries. A third individual 
also supported the proposed actions, stating he has been fishing for 26 
years, and the fish he catches are much smaller than they used to be.
    Response: NMFS has determined the Council's proposed actions to 
immediately end or phase out overfishing of the snowy grouper, golden 
tilefish, vermilion snapper, and black sea bass stocks meet the 
biological objectives set forth in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, while 
minimizing to the extent practicable the unavoidable adverse short-term 
effects of such actions on fishing communities. The snowy grouper and 
black sea bass fisheries are economically important to both commercial 
and recreational fishermen. Because phasing-out overfishing on these 
stocks over a 3-year period would not compromise their long-term 
sustainability, ending overfishing on these stocks immediately would 
result in unnecessarily severe adverse impacts to affected fishermen, 
ancillary industries, and fishing communities.
    Comment 10: One group stated Amendment 13C provides an inadequate 
range of reasonable alternatives for immediately ending overfishing of 
snowy grouper and black sea bass as required by the National 
Environmental Policy Act. Another group stated the amendment does not 
contain a reasonable range of alternatives for phasing out overfishing 
over time to minimize adverse socioeconomic impacts on fishing 
communities, as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Act and the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.
    Response: The Council evaluated a broad range of alternatives for 
ending overfishing on the snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion 
snapper, and black sea bass stocks. The alternatives considered for 
each proposed action, with the exception of vermilion snapper, ranged 
from those that would end overfishing immediately to those that would 
phase out overfishing over short time periods that could reasonably be 
expected to assure long-term biological goals would not be compromised. 
The alternatives considered for the vermilion snapper stock evaluated 
the sustainability of a large range of allowable harvest levels in the 
context of historical catches and recent stock assessment information.
    Comment 11: Amendment 13C only considers overfishing. A fully 
developed amendment would define conservation goals in terms of 
overfishing definitions, rebuilding periods, and other elements while 
providing a suite of alternatives that meet these objectives.
    Response: The purpose of Amendment 13C is to end overfishing of 
four snapper-grouper stocks recently assessed through the SEDAR 
process. These actions originated from the Council's work on Snapper 
Grouper Amendment 13, which contained a broad range of actions to 
define management reference points, end overfishing and rebuild 
overfished stocks, consider a multispecies approach to management, 
address bycatch, modify permit renewal and transferability 
requirements, and address the scheduled sunset of regulations 
protecting the Oculina Experimental Closed Area.
    NMFS announced in two Federal Register notices (68 FR 53706, 
September 12, 2003 and 70 FR 46126, July 26, 2005) the Council's intent 
to evaluate and propose separately some of the actions originally 
proposed in Amendment 13. The first notice announced the Council's 
intent to transfer the Oculina Experimental Closed Area action from 
Amendment 13 to Amendment 13A, and the remaining actions in Amendment 
13 to Amendment 13B. This decision was intended to ensure the Council 
adequate time to fully evaluate a range of actions to address 
overfishing, rebuilding, and other issues in the snapper-grouper 
fishery without compromising the Council's ability to act on the 
Oculina Experimental Closed Area before its scheduled sunset date of 
June 27, 2004.
    The second notice announced the Council's intent to address 
overfishing and a few other priority actions in a regulatory amendment, 
which later evolved into Amendment 13C. This decision was intended to 
ensure extended debate about multispecies management and other actions 
in Amendment 13B did not delay Council action to effectively address 
overfishing of key snapper-grouper stocks recently assessed through the 
SEDAR process, including snowy grouper, golden tilefish, vermilion 
snapper, and black sea bass, and to attend to a few other, less 
complicated issues. The Council is currently expediting the evaluation 
of alternative management reference points and rebuilding plans for the 
four stocks addressed in Amendment 13C in Amendment 15, which is 
scheduled to be implemented in 2007. The other actions referenced above 
and not evaluated in Amendments 13A or 13C remain in Amendment 13B.
    Comment 12: One individual stated Executive Order 12866 should be 
applied to the proposed rule.
    Response: A Regulatory Impact Review (RIR) was conducted to satisfy 
the requirements of Executive Order 12866 and the results of the review 
are contained in the amendment.
    Comment 13: One group commented the proposed action to end 
overfishing on the vermilion snapper stock by the commercial fishery is 
insufficient. This group pointed out the FEIS states a 31-percent 
reduction in fishing mortality is required to end overfishing, but the 
proposed action would reduce fishing mortality by just 8 percent.
    Response: The Council's initial preferred alternative for ending 
overfishing on the vermilion snapper stock would have reduced commercial

[[Page 55100]]

harvest by 31 percent. Numerous comments opposing this alternative 
indicated it was needlessly restrictive, and would have extremely 
negative short-term socioeconomic impacts on affected fishermen and 
fishing communities. After further discussion and review of landings 
data used in the vermilion snapper assessment, the Council developed 
and identified a proposed action that would minimize the unavoidable 
short-term adverse socioeconomic effects associated with ending 
overfishing on the vermilion snapper stock until the 2007 SEDAR 
assessment update is completed and presented to the Council.
    The commercial quota proposed for vermilion snapper is equivalent 
to the average commercial landings during 1999 to 2003, and takes into 
consideration stakeholder concerns about the uncertainty of the 
assessment that prompted Council action to end overfishing of the 
vermilion snapper stock.
    The recent stock assessment indicated overfishing was occurring 
during 1999-2001 when the commercial landings peaked at 1,680,000 lb 
(762,036 kg) gutted weight. Commercial landings have generally been 
below 1,100,000 lb (498,952 kg) gutted weight with occasional spikes in 
landings. Based on the ratio between the average fishing mortality 
during 1999-2001 and the fishing mortality which would produce maximum 
sustainable yield, a 31-percent reduction in catch would be needed to 
end overfishing immediately. During 2003 and 2004, a 30-percent 
reduction in landings from the 1999-2001 average occurred.
    Although the stock assessment indicated overfishing was occurring 
during 1999-2001 the Scientific and Statistical Committee and Stock 
Assessment Review Panel stated the stock recruitment relationship was 
poorly defined, and it was uncertain whether or not the stock was 
overfished. Despite uncertain biomass values, optimum yield is 
estimated to be 1,630,000 lb (739,356 kg) gutted weight. As 68 percent 
of the total catch during 1999-2003 was taken by the commercial 
fishery, the commercial portion of the optimum yield would be 1,110,000 
lb (498,952 kg) gutted weight which is roughly equivalent to the 
average landings during 1999-2003.
    Due to uncertainty associated with the assessment, the Council 
believed it was best to cap landings at 1,100,000 lb (498,952 kg) 
gutted weight until a new stock assessment update was completed in 
2007. A 30-percent reduction in landings during 2003-2004 would have 
ended overfishing. The proposed quota, which approximates the optimum 
yield, would prevent overfishing from occurring in the future and 
eliminate the occasional spikes in landings. Preventing peaks in 
fishing pressure and eliminating overfishing would stabilize stock 
biomass at current levels, ensuring there are no declines in the mean 
length and size/age at sexual maturity, and protecting the stock 
against recruitment overfishing.
    Comment 14: Various groups advocated bag limits from five fish to 
two fish per person per day be considered for snowy grouper and golden 
tilefish rather than the preferred alternative of one fish per person 
per day. One group stated that hi-grading is less likely with a larger 
bag limit. One group stated their preference for a spawning season 
closure rather than a 1-fish bag limit.
    Response: The Council did not consider bag limits exceeding two 
fish per person per day because the average catch of snowy grouper and 
golden tilefish is already low (i.e., about one fish per angler per 
day) and the intent of the proposed actions is to end overfishing on 
these stocks. Also, the Council was concerned recreational fishing 
pressure might increase as stock biomass increases in response to 
reduced fishing pressure. The Council believed that a bag limit of one 
fish per person per day would provide a greater incentive than a 2-fish 
bag limit would provide for fishermen to avoid areas where golden 
tilefish and snowy grouper occur.
    The Council considered, but eliminated from detailed study, 
alternatives to establish seasonal and/or area closures for the snowy 
grouper and golden tilefish stocks because these species could still be 
taken during a closed season or in a closed area when fishermen 
targeted co-occurring species, and the release mortality rate of these 
species is estimated to be nearly 100 percent.
    Comment 15: A longline fisherman stated the proposed action to 
implement a stepped trip limit for the commercial snowy grouper fishery 
will make longlining for golden tilefish unprofitable and could 
eliminate longline vessels from the fishery. A hook-and-line fisherman 
stated the proposed stepped trip limit could disadvantage commercial 
hook-and-line fishermen by reducing the availability of snowy grouper 
to the fishery during the fall.
    Response: NMFS and the Council are considering an action to address 
these concerns in Amendment 15. Specifically, an evaluation is being 
conducted on the effects of changing the golden tilefish fishing year 
to begin on September 1 to eliminate the possibility the hook-and-line 
fishery would be impacted by a fall closure, and eliminating the 
stepped trip limit strategy to lessen the economic impact of the 
reduced golden tilefish quota on longline fishermen.
    Comment 16: One individual suggested the Council specify separate 
golden tilefish quotas for the longline and hook-and-line fisheries.
    Response: The Council discussed alternatives that would specify 
separate quotas for fishermen using longline and hook-and-line gear, 
and determined they were not necessary. Because the commercial hook-
and-line fishery catches a minor portion of the overall harvest, 
separate quotas for the two sectors would have little effect on 
restricting harvest.
    Comment 17: One individual stated the Council should limit the 
number of black sea bass pots to 20 to 30 per boat, and require pots be 
returned to the dock after each trip. Another individual stated the 
Council should prohibit the use of black sea bass pots, or restrict the 
number of pots used per boat.
    Response: The Council considered but eliminated from detailed study 
alternatives that would restrict the number of sea bass pots a fisher 
could deploy and require fishermen to return pots to the dock after 
each trip. The Council believes its proposed action to prohibit the use 
of black sea bass pots after the black sea bass quota is met will 
restrict the number of pots fishermen use over the course of a year.
    Comment 18: One group suggested NMFS implement a less restrictive 
black sea bass regulation until new data became available on the status 
of the stock. Specifically, the group proposed a commercial quota of 
477,000 lb (216,364 kg) gutted weight, a requirement to include a 2-
inch (5-cm) back panel in black sea bass pots, a recreational size 
limit of 11 inches (28 cm) (total length), and a bag limit of 15 fish 
per person per day.
    Response: The suggested alternative would not achieve the purpose 
of Amendment 13C because it is not sufficiently restrictive to end 
overfishing on the black sea bass stock.
    Comment 19: One group opposed increasing the allowable red porgy 
catch, indicating that, although red porgy are numerous, very few 
individuals are of legal size. Another individual indicated the 
allowable catch level should be even larger than that proposed because 
red porgy have become so plentiful in some areas they are a nuisance.

[[Page 55101]]

    Response: Both the commercial and recreational regulations proposed 
in Amendment 13C for red porgy are expected to constrain total harvest 
to a level that would not compromise stock rebuilding. This expectation 
is supported by the 2006 assessment update, which indicates the stock 
would recover ahead of schedule if the proposed harvest increases were 
maintained throughout the rebuilding period. The proposed quota would 
provide for a fishing mortality rate that remains well below the 
maximum threshold.

Classification

    The Regional Administrator, Southeast Region, NMFS, determined that 
Amendment 13C is necessary for the conservation and management of the 
South Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery and is consistent with the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
    This final rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    The Council and NMFS prepared an FEIS for Amendment 13C. The FEIS 
was filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on May 18, 
2006. A notice of availability was published on May 26, 2006 (71 FR 
30399). In approving Amendment 13C, NMFS issued a Record of Decision 
(ROD) identifying the selected alternative. A copy of the ROD is 
available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
    NMFS prepared an FRFA, as required by section 604 of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act. The FRFA incorporates the initial regulatory 
flexibility analysis (IRFA), a summary of significant issues raised by 
public comments, NMFS responses to those comments, and a summary of the 
analyses completed to support the action. A copy of the full analysis 
is available from the NMFS (see ADDRESSES). A summary of the analysis 
follows.
    This final rule will reduce the commercial quotas and establish 
trip limits for snowy grouper and golden tilefish, establish commercial 
quotas for vermilion snapper and black sea bass, establish a back-panel 
mesh size requirement for black sea bass pots, change the fishing year 
for the commercial and recreational black sea bass fisheries, establish 
a commercial quota and increase the trip limit for red porgy, reduce 
the recreational bag limit for snowy grouper and golden tilefish, 
increase the recreational minimum size limit of black sea bass, and 
increase the recreational bag limit of red porgy. The purpose of the 
final rule is to end overfishing for snowy grouper, golden tilefish, 
vermilion snapper, and black sea bass, and allow for an increase in the 
harvest of red porgy consistent with the rebuilding schedule for this 
species. The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for the 
final rule.
    Nine comment letters were received from the public in response to 
the proposed rule, 6 letters received on the FEIS, and 17 letters 
received on the Amendment. A complete summary of these comments and 
NMFS' responses is provided in the previous section of this final rule. 
No changes were made in the final rule as a result of these comments. 
Among the 32 comment letters, 8 individuals or organizations raised 
issues regarding the economic impacts of the proposed actions. These 
comments collectively stated the magnitude and distributional regional 
or sector adverse economic impacts were too great to justify the 
actions. NMFS agrees the actions in the final rule will have immediate, 
short-term, negative socioeconomic impacts. Estimates of the expected 
impacts, both total and average by individual entity, are provided in 
this assessment. This assessment also concludes, while individual 
actions of the final rule are not expected to threaten the 
sustainability of fishing communities in the South Atlantic, the 
cumulative effects of the actions contained in the final rule, in 
conjunction with other State and regional fishery regulations and 
community changes, could be severe enough to change the economic and 
social structures of fishing communities over the long term. However, 
although unquantifiable, the adverse socioeconomic effects of inaction 
are expected to far exceed those associated with the final rule, as 
continued overfishing would ultimately threaten the long-term viability 
of these fisheries, resulting in increased levels of business failure 
and adverse community change. Thus, while the assessment concludes 
there is no guarantee all current fishery participants and related 
industries adversely affected by the final rule will experience the 
long-term benefits of ending overfishing, as the short-term losses of 
some individuals could be sufficiently severe to result in their exit 
from the fishery, the final rule is expected to best meet the Council's 
goals of ending overfishing while minimizing adverse economic and 
community impacts.
    No duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules have been 
identified. The final rule will not impose any reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements. However, sea bass pot fishermen who 
encounter personal hardship and are unable to meet the pot removal 
requirements may request through application to the Regional 
Administrator, NMFS Southeast Region (RA), a grace period of up to 10 
days. Completion of this application is not expected to require special 
skills, recordkeeping, or substantial allocation of time, which should 
not exceed 30 minutes. No fees or costs other than the time spent and 
postage are associated with this application.
    Two general classes of small business entities are expected to be 
directly affected by the final rule, commercial fishing vessels and 
for-hire fishing vessels (charterboats and headboats). The Small 
Business Administration defines a small entity in the commercial 
fishing sector as a firm that is independently owned and operated, is 
not dominant in its field of operation, and has annual gross receipts 
not in excess of $3.5 million. For a for-hire business, the appropriate 
revenue benchmark is $6.0 million.
    An analysis of the gross revenue per vessel for commercial vessels 
that harvest species addressed in this action was conducted using data 
from the NMFS Southeast logbook program. These vessels also operate in 
other federally permitted fisheries, some harvests of which are also 
reported in the Southeast logbook program. All harvests (snapper-
grouper and non-snapper-grouper species) and associated gross revenues 
encompassed by the Southeast logbook program were summarized. During 
the period 2001 to 2004, average annual gross revenue per vessel did 
not exceed $14,000, and total annual gross revenue for an individual 
vessel did not exceed approximately $247,000. It should be noted these 
vessels may also operate in the for-hire sector and other commercial 
fisheries whose landings are not covered by the Southeast logbook. 
Thus, this analysis may underestimate the total gross revenue for some 
vessels, though any underestimation is not believed to be substantial.
    A comprehensive study of vessels that participated in the South 
Atlantic snapper-grouper fishery in 1994 provided estimates of total 
vessel revenue from all fishing activities. Average net income (1994 
dollars) from sampled boats, in declining order, was $83,224 for boats 
that primarily used bottom longlines in the northern area (St. 
Augustine, FL, northward); $23,075 for boats that primarily used black 
sea bass pots in the northern area, $15,563 for boats that primarily 
used bottom longlines in the southern area (south of St. Augustine, 
FL); $11,649 for boats that primarily used vertical lines in the 
southern area; and $8,307 for boats that primarily used vertical lines 
in the

[[Page 55102]]

northern area. Overall, boats in the northern area averaged $14,143 in 
net income based on average revenues of $48,702, while boats in the 
southern area averaged $12,388 net income based on average revenues of 
$39,745.
    Although some fleet activity may exist in the snapper-grouper 
fishery, the extent of such has not been determined. Thus, all vessels 
are assumed to be unique business entities. Given the gross revenue 
profile captured by 2001-2004 Southeast logbook program data and the 
findings of the 1994 survey, it is assumed all vessels represent small 
business entities.
    Charterboats are defined as boats for hire carrying 6 or fewer 
passengers that charge a fee to rent the entire boat. Headboats are 
for-hire vessels with a larger passenger capacity that charge a fee per 
individual angler. Using 1998 survey data, two methods were used to 
determine the average gross revenue per vessel for the for-hire sector. 
The first method summarized the survey response to total gross revenue 
provided by the vessel owner. The second method calculated gross 
revenue based on the survey response to the average price per trip/
passenger and the average number of trips/passengers taken/carried per 
year. The second method consistently generated higher estimates of 
average gross revenues, suggesting either over-reporting of the 
individual data elements utilized in the calculated method or under-
reporting of gross revenues. The analysis of the expected impacts of 
the proposed action, however, assumed the alternative estimation 
methods generated an acceptable range of the true average gross 
revenues for this sector. For the charterboat sector, these results 
(1998 dollars) are as follows: $51,000 to $69,268 for Florida Atlantic 
coast vessels; $60,135 to $73,365 for North Carolina vessels; $26,304 
to $32,091 for South Carolina vessels; and $56,551 to $68,992 for 
Georgia vessels. For the headboat sector, the results are: $140,714 to 
$299,551 for Florida (east and west coast) vessels, and $123,000 to 
$261,990 for vessels in the other South Atlantic states. Similar to the 
commercial harvest sector, some fleet activity may exist within the 
for-hire sector. The magnitude and identity of such is unknown, 
however, and all vessels are assumed to represent unique business 
entities. Given the gross revenue profiles generated, it is assumed all 
for-hire operations expected to be affected by this final rule are 
small business entities.
    During 2004, 1,066 commercial vessels were permitted to operate in 
the snapper-grouper fishery. Not all permitted vessels operate every 
year, and some vessels are believed to obtain permits for either 
speculative purposes or as insurance against further restriction in 
commercial fisheries. Nevertheless, the total number of permitted 
vessels is considered an upper bound on the potential universe of 
vessels in the snapper-grouper fishery. The lower bound is assumed to 
be the number of vessels active in 2003--906 vessels. Thus, the range 
of vessels assumed to potentially operate in the commercial snapper-
grouper fishery is 906 to 1,066. A subset of these vessels harvest the 
five species addressed in this action. From 2001 through 2004, the 
number of vessels that harvested any of the species addressed in this 
action ranged from 396 to 459 and are assumed to be the universe of 
potentially affected entities in the commercial harvest sector. This 
represents 37 percent (396/1,066) to 51 percent (459/906) of the entire 
universe of entities potentially active in the snapper-grouper fishery. 
Thus, it is determined a substantial number of small entities in the 
commercial harvest sector would be affected by this final rule.
    For the for-hire sector, 1,594 snapper-grouper for-hire permits 
were issued to vessels in the southern Atlantic states in 2004. The 
for-hire fishery operates as an open access fishery, and not all 
permitted vessels are necessarily active in the fishery. Some vessel 
owners purchase open access permits as insurance for uncertainties in 
the fisheries in which they currently operate. A 1999 study of the 
Southeast for-hire industry estimated a total of 1,080 charter vessels 
and 96 headboats supplied for-hire services in Florida (east and west 
coast) and the rest of the South Atlantic in 1997.
    Data on the number of for-hire vessels that actually harvest the 
species addressed by this action are not available. However, harvest 
data for 1999-2003 indicate most (70 percent) of the headboat harvest 
in the South Atlantic is comprised of snapper-grouper species, and 
approximately 36 percent of total snapper-grouper headboat harvest is 
comprised of the species addressed in this action. Therefore, it is 
assumed all South Atlantic headboats harvest or target snapper-grouper 
species, and it is likely a substantial number of headboats will be 
affected by measures in this final rule.
    Data on the charter sector also imply a substantial number of 
charterboat entities will be affected by this final rule. Based on 2003 
data, snapper-grouper species are caught on 28 percent of all charter 
trips, while 14 percent of the charter sector's snapper-grouper harvest 
is comprised of species addressed by this action.
    The economic impact can be ascertained by examining two issues: 
Disproportionality and profitability. The disproportionality question 
is, do the regulations place a substantial number of small entities at 
a significant competitive disadvantage to large entities? All vessel 
operations affected by this final rule are considered small entities so 
the issue of disproportionality does not arise in the present case. 
However, among the entities in the commercial harvest sector, there is 
a high degree of diversity in terms of primary gear employed and level 
of engagement in the snapper-grouper fishery. The snowy grouper and 
golden tilefish actions are expected to have a proportionally higher 
negative short-term impact on vessels which employ longline gear or 
fish off south and central Florida. The vermilion snapper quota is 
expected to have a relatively larger negative impact on vessels that 
employ hook-and-line gear or fish off Georgia and Northeast Florida. 
The black sea bass management measures are expected to have a 
proportionally higher negative impact on vessels that utilize black sea 
bass pots in North Carolina. Although the red porgy management measures 
will increase the allowable harvest and revenues in the commercial 
fishery, most of the increase in revenue is expected to be realized by 
vessels that employ hook-and-line gear.
    The short-term impacts on the for-hire sector from this final rule 
for the snowy grouper and golden tilefish management measures are 
expected to be minimal. In contrast, for-hire vessels are expected to 
bear substantially larger short-term negative impacts associated with 
implementation of the regulations for vermilion snapper and black sea 
bass. Assessment of the impacts on for-hire vessels is limited to 
expected reductions in harvest because the econometric models to 
predict changes in for-hire trips and subsequent changes in revenues as 
a result of the regulations contained in the final rule are not 
available. The short-term reduction in harvest of these two species is 
expected to be proportionally greater in the headboat sector than the 
charterboat or private boat sectors. For the vermilion snapper fishery, 
the final rule is expected to reduce vermilion snapper harvests by 21 
percent in the private/charter sector compared to 30 percent in the 
headboat sector. Similarly, the regulations for black sea bass are 
expected to reduce black sea bass

[[Page 55103]]

harvests by 27 percent (year 1) in the charter/private sector compared 
to 41 percent (year 1) in the headboat sector.
    The final rule is expected to result in an increase in recreational 
red porgy harvest and associated benefits and is projected to increase 
red porgy harvest in the headboat sector by 36 percent and by 21 
percent in the charter/private recreational fishery sector.
    The profitability question is, do the regulations significantly 
reduce profit for a substantial number of small entities? In the 
recreational fishery, for-hire business entities are expected to lose 
revenues and profits as a result of trip cancellation by clients who 
determine the measures will significantly affect the quality of the 
fishing experience. As previously discussed, these losses cannot be 
estimated at this time due to data limitations. However, it is 
reasonable to assume the greater the reduction in harvest, the higher 
the likelihood of trip cancellation and potential revenue loss. Even 
though it is not possible to calculate the change in profitability 
expected to arise from the final rule, given the dependence of the for-
hire sector on the harvest of vermilion snapper and black sea bass, it 
is reasonable to assume the expected harvest reductions may result in a 
substantial adverse impact on the profitability of affected for-hire 
entities. The estimated reduction in consumer surplus for anglers that 
participate in the headboat sector (approximately $577,000) as a result 
of the final rule in these two fisheries is approximately 19 percent of 
total estimated consumer surplus generated from the snapper-grouper 
fishery for this sector (approximately $2.978 million). Similar 
analysis is not possible for the charter sector because this sector was 
combined with the private recreational sector in the assessment 
results. Although it is inappropriate to translate these results one-
for-one into expected trip cancellations, they demonstrate the 
potential magnitude of trip cancellation and potential business revenue 
and profit changes.
    In the commercial harvest sector, data from 2001 through 2004 were 
used to examine the profitability of vessels that are likely to be 
affected by the final rule. This analysis encompassed an average of 408 
vessels per year. Because the analysis for red porgy was conducted 
using data during a different time period (1995 through 1998), the 
revenue increase associated with this measure was not included in the 
assessment of the short-term cumulative effects of the final rule. 
Instead, the estimated increase in net cash flow in the commercial 
harvest sector due to red porgy regulations is presented separately.
    Net vessel revenues (gross revenue minus trip costs and opportunity 
cost of labor) were estimated from landings reported to the Southeast 
logbook program. Over the period 2001 to 2004, a large proportion (67 
percent) of the entities included in this analysis earned less than 
$10,001 per year. Also, a number of vessels appeared to operate at a 
loss or break-even condition. These results could be an indication a 
high proportion of the commercial fishermen in the Southeast are part-
time fishermen who supplement their household income by other 
employment. Another explanation of the results is not all of the 
fishing revenues for these vessels are reported in the Southeast 
logbooks and/or the vessels are engaged in for-hire activities. 
Revenues and costs associated with commercial fishing on trips that did 
not harvest any of the species covered by this action, commercial 
fishing not captured by the Southeast logbook program, and for-hire 
activities are not reflected in the results contained in the following 
analyses. As such, total and net revenues for entire fishing business 
operations are unknown, and the following analysis likely overstates 
total and average individual impacts on the affected entities. The 
magnitude of this overstatement, however, cannot be determined.
    During the first year of implementation, the harvest restrictions 
for golden tilefish, snowy grouper, vermilion snapper, and black sea 
bass are expected to result in a total net short-term annual loss of 
$0.735 million to the commercial harvest sector, or 12 percent of the 
total net revenue for trips that harvested any of the affected species. 
The final rule will implement a stepped-down approach on harvest 
restrictions for snowy grouper and black sea bass over a 3-year period, 
and the cumulative effects of the proposed measures for these four 
species is expected to increase to $1.085 million in the third year.
    When evaluated at the individual vessel/entity level, the average 
annual loss per affected entity associated with the final rule in the 
first year is expected to vary between $760 and $3,261, and the maximum 
net loss per boat is expected to vary between $26,533 and $76,390 per 
year. On average, 219 vessels (54 percent of potentially affected 
entities) are not expected to incur losses under the final rule.
    Revenue loss per vessel was classified as Range I ($1-$500), Range 
II ($501-$10,000), or Range III (greater than $10,000). The short-term 
economic effects of the final rule are not expected to be distributed 
evenly across all affected entities. During the first year of 
implementation of the final rule, it is expected 21 vessels would 
sustain Range III losses (an average of $22,764 per vessel) and 
collectively account for 62 percent of the total net loss in the 
commercial harvest sector. Conversely, 82 entities are expected to 
sustain Range I losses ($102 per vessel), and 86 entities are expected 
to sustain Range II losses ($3,165 per vessel) and account for 37 
percent of the total net loss in the commercial harvest sector.
    Vessel profitability is expected to decrease by more than 10 
percent for 86 vessels (21 percent of the 408 potentially affected 
entities) during the first year of implementation of this final rule.
    This final rule is expected to result in a loss in net revenue of 
more than 10 percent for the 21 vessels that experience a Range III 
reduction. Also, 80 percent of all affected entities (16 vessels) that 
experience a Range III decrease in net revenue are expected to realize 
more than a 25 percent reduction in profitability. In contrast, 
profitability is expected to decrease by more than 10 percent for only 
24 percent (7 vessels) of all vessels that are likely to sustain Range 
I losses.
    For red porgy, this final rule is expected to increase short-term 
revenue to the commercial harvest sector by $0.07 million annually. The 
estimated increase in earnings of 32 vessels (10 percent of the 317 
vessels expected to be affected by the red porgy action) are expected 
to exceed $2,500 per vessel annually. The estimated average net revenue 
increase per vessel within the red porgy fishery is $221 ($70,000/317) 
per year.
    In summary, this final rule is expected to result in a 12-percent 
loss in short-term net revenue to the commercial harvest sector. At 
least 26 percent of potentially affected entities are expected to 
sustain more than $501 losses in net revenue, and 31 percent of all 
affected entities (13 percent of all potentially affected entities) are 
expected to experience more than a 25 percent decrease in profitability 
during the first year of implementation of the proposed action. The 
reductions in profitability are expected to increase through the third 
year as total target harvest reductions are achieved. Thus, both the 
magnitude and distributional effects of the reduction in net revenues 
could increase over this period of time. However, the delayed 
implementation of the full harvest reductions could allow operational 
adaptation by the affected entities, resulting in smaller

[[Page 55104]]

total impacts and smaller distributional effects than those discussed 
above. In addition to the impacts described for the commercial finfish 
harvest sector, certain segments of the for-hire sector are expected to 
experience substantial reductions in allowable harvests of certain 
species as a result of the final rule and may experience commensurate 
reductions in revenues if unable to maintain service demand through the 
substitution of other species.
    Three alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the commercial fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the snowy grouper fishery. The status quo would allow 
continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the Council's 
objective or the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    The third alternative would have achieved the full commercial quota 
reduction in the first year of implementation, rather than the step-
down provision of the proposed action and, as such, would result in 
greater short-term adverse economic impacts than the proposed action.
    Three alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the recreational fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the snowy grouper fishery. The status quo would have 
allowed continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the 
Council's objective or the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Due to the low catch per unit effort in the recreational fishery, 
the third alternative would not have resulted in sufficient harvest 
reduction to achieve the goal of ending overfishing. Therefore, 
although this alternative would have resulted in lower short-term 
adverse economic impacts to the recreational sector (i.e., an annual 
short-term reduction in consumer surplus of $3,497, compared to a 
$5,402 reduction for the preferred alternative), this alternative would 
not achieve the Council's objective or the requirements of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Three alternatives, including the status quo and two quota 
alternatives, one of which was the preferred alternative, were 
considered for the proposed action to establish management measures for 
the commercial fishery consistent with ending overfishing in the golden 
tilefish fishery. The status quo would allow continued overfishing and 
would, therefore, not achieve the Council's objective or the 
requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    For each quota alternative, five step-down trip limit alternatives, 
including the status quo, and two step-down trigger date control 
options, including the status quo no control trigger date, were 
considered. Under the quota specified by the proposed action, the trip 
limit alternatives encompassed either a lower trip limit, 3,000 lb 
(1,361 kg), than the proposed action or a less restrictive harvest 
trigger, 85 percent of the quota, for the step down. The short-term 
adverse economic impacts of all trip limit alternative combinations 
that include the 75-percent harvest trigger would be expected to be 
approximately equal to or greater than those of the proposed action. 
The trip limit alternative combinations that include the 85-percent 
harvest trigger would generate lower short-term adverse economic 
impacts than the proposed action. However, this higher trigger would 
result in a shorter fishing season, on average, than the proposed 
action. Although these impacts were not able to be quantified, shorter 
fishing seasons are recognized to result in adverse price effects, 
market disruptions, and disruptions of business operation. Therefore, 
the expected longer season projected under the proposed action was 
determined to best meet the Council's objectives.
    Under the alternative quota specification, the expected adverse 
short-term economic impacts of seven of the ten trip limit and trigger 
date combinations are projected to be less than those of the proposed 
action due to the 3-year progression to the target quota of 295,000 lb 
(133,810 kg), which is implemented in the third year under this 
alternative, resulting in larger allowable harvests the first 2 years. 
This alternative, however, would not end overfishing as soon as 
practicable and would, therefore, not meet the Council's objective or 
the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Four alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the recreational fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the golden tilefish fishery. The status quo would allow 
continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the Council's 
objective.
    Due to the low catch per unit effort in the recreational fishery, 
the third alternative would not have resulted in sufficient harvest 
reduction to achieve the goal of ending overfishing. Therefore, 
although this alternative would have resulted in lower short-term 
adverse economic impacts to the recreational sector, this alternative 
would not achieve the Council's objective.
    The fourth alternative would impose greater restrictions on 
recreational golden tilefish harvest, resulting in greater adverse 
economic impacts than the proposed action.
    Ten alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the commercial fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the vermilion snapper fishery. The status quo would 
allow continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the 
Council's objective or the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    Eight alternatives would have established lower commercial quotas 
(either 757,000 or 821,000 lb (343,369 or 372,399 kg) gutted weight) 
than the preferred alternative, in addition to alternative minimum size 
and trip limits. These quotas represent reductions in allowable harvest 
greater than is necessary to end overfishing of this resource. Further, 
each of the eight alternatives would result in greater adverse economic 
impacts than the proposed action.
    Nine alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the recreational fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the vermilion snapper fishery. The status quo would 
allow continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the 
Council's objective or the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
    In addition to the minimum size limit increase of the proposed 
action, one alternative to the proposed action would reduce the daily 
bag limit to six fish. Although this alternative would increase the 
likelihood of ending overfishing relative to the proposed action, this 
alternative would result in greater adverse economic impacts than the 
proposed action.
    A similar alternative would, in addition to the minimum size limit 
increase, impose lower, but differential, bag limits on the for-hire 
and recreational sectors. Similar to the alternative discussed above, 
although this alternative would increase the likelihood of ending 
overfishing relative to the proposed action, this alternative would 
result in greater adverse economic impacts than the proposed action.
    Two alternatives to the proposed vermilion snapper recreational 
action would maintain the current minimum

[[Page 55105]]

size limit but impose fishery closures for different periods: October 
through December and January through February. Both alternatives are 
projected to result in lower adverse economic impacts than the proposed 
action. However, these estimates do not incorporate additional 
potential adverse impacts associated with potential fishing trip 
cancellation as a result of the closures. These impacts cannot be 
determined at this time. The addition of these impacts to these 
alternatives, however, may result in greater total adverse impacts 
compared to the proposed action. Further, although the proposed action 
may not end overfishing, depending on the level of the current 
vermilion snapper biomass, these alternatives are not expected to 
achieve as much progress toward the goal of ending overfishing as the 
proposed action and, as such, do not meet the Council's objectives.
    Two alternatives to the proposed recreational vermilion snapper 
action would retain the closures specified in the alternatives 
discussed above and add reductions in the bag limit to six fish and 
five fish, respectively. Although each of these alternatives would be 
expected to achieve greater progress toward ending overfishing relative 
to the proposed action, each would also result in greater adverse 
economic impacts than the proposed action.
    The ninth and final alternative to the proposed recreational 
vermilion snapper action would include the minimum size limit increase 
in the proposed action and close the fishery from January through 
February. This alternative would achieve greater harvest reductions 
than the proposed action, thereby accomplishing more progress toward 
ending overfishing. This action would also, however, result in greater 
adverse economic impacts than the proposed action. Due to uncertainty 
associated with the stock assessment for vermilion snapper, the Council 
believed it was best to cap landings at 1,100,000 lb (498,952 kg) 
gutted weight until a new stock assessment update was competed in 2001. 
A 30-percent reduction in landings during 2003-2004 would have ended 
overfishing. The proposed quota, which approximates the optimum yield, 
would prevent overfishing from occurring in the future.
    Eight alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the commercial fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the black sea bass fishery. The status quo would allow 
continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the Council's 
objective.
    The third alternative would have established a lower quota than 
that specified for the first 2 years under the proposed action, but 10 
percent greater than the third-year quota. Thus, this alternative would 
be expected to result in greater adverse economic impacts than the 
proposed action in the first 2 years, but slightly lesser impacts in 
subsequent years. Although the effects of such could not be quantified, 
the Council determined that a more gradual progression to a lower quota 
would support greater adaptive behavior by participants and result in 
lower total adverse economic impacts.
    The fourth alternative would have established the lower third-year 
quota target of the proposed action immediately and also would have 
established an increased minimum size limit and trip limits. This 
alternative would result in greater adverse economic impacts, $0.32 
million, than the proposed action.
    The fifth alternative would have established a quota equal to that 
specified in the second year of the proposed action and an increased 
minimum size limit. This alternative would result in greater adverse 
economic impacts in the first 2 years, $0.74 million, than the proposed 
action, but less impacts thereafter. This alternative would not, 
however, achieve the necessary harvest reductions to meet the Council's 
objective to end overfishing.
    The sixth alternative would add trip limits and an increase in the 
minimum size limit to the measures contained in the proposed action. 
Because this alternative would be more restrictive than the proposed 
action, this alternative would result in greater adverse economic 
impacts, $0.22-$0.32 million over the course of the first 3 years.
    The seventh alternative would not impose a quota but would, 
instead, in addition to the mesh size specification of the proposed 
action, limit harvest and/or possession of black sea bass to the 
recreational bag limit. This alternative would result in greater 
adverse economic impacts, $0.26 million, than the proposed action.
    The eighth and final alternative to the proposed action on the 
commercial black sea bass fishery would impose the mesh size 
specification of the proposed action and increase the minimum size 
limit. Although this alternative would result in less adverse economic 
impacts than the proposed action, this alternative would not achieve 
the necessary harvest reductions to meet the Council's objective of 
ending overfishing.
    Eight alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures for the recreational fishery consistent with ending 
overfishing in the black sea bass fishery. The status quo would allow 
continued overfishing and would, therefore, not achieve the Council's 
objective.
    The third alternative to the proposed action would immediately 
establish a lower allocation than the first 2 years of the proposed 
action, but greater than that of the third and subsequent years, as 
well as an immediate increase in the minimum size limit matching the 
specification in the second year of the proposed action. The bag limit 
specifications of both alternatives are identical. Since this 
alternative is more aggressive in achieving desired reductions, the 
short-term adverse impacts, $ 1.5 million, are greater than those of 
the proposed action. Further, the progressive achievement of the target 
restrictions in the proposed action allow for more gradual adaptation 
to the new restrictions and the changes to the business environment 
they may engender.
    The fourth alternative to the proposed action would immediately 
establish the third-year allocation of the proposed action, forgo the 
second increase in the minimum size limit, and reduce the bag limit to 
four fish per person per day. Although the quantifiable adverse 
economic impacts of this alternative are lower than those of the 
proposed action, these impacts do not account for additional potential 
adverse impacts associated with trip cancellation due to the severe 
reduction (80 percent) in the daily bag limit. These additional adverse 
impacts are expected to result in this alternative having a greater 
adverse economic impact than the proposed action.
    The fifth alternative would establish a recreational allocation 
equal to that of the second year under the proposed action and limit 
the increase in the minimum size limit to 1 inch (2.5 cm). Although 
this alternative would result in lower adverse economic impacts, 
$873,000, than the proposed action, the resultant harvest reductions 
would be insufficient to meet the Council's objective.
    The sixth alternative would mimic the allocation specifications of 
the proposed action but would limit the minimum size limit increase to 
1 inch (2.5 cm) while reducing the daily bag limit to four fish. 
Similar to the discussion of

[[Page 55106]]

the second alternative above, the analytical results do not capture the 
full potential impacts associated with the bag limit reduction, and 
this alternative is expected to result in greater adverse economic 
impact, i.e., in excess of $1.5 million, than the proposed action.
    The seventh alternative would simply reduce the bag limit to 10 
fish per person per day. This alternative would not achieve the 
necessary harvest reductions to meet the Council's objective.
    The eighth and final alternative to the proposed action for the 
recreational black sea bass fishery would simply increase the minimum 
size limit 1 inch (2.5 cm). This alternative would not achieve the 
necessary harvest reductions to meet the Council's objective.
    Five alternatives, including the status quo and the preferred 
alternative, were considered for the proposed action to establish 
management measures to increase the allowable harvest in the 
recreational and commercial fisheries for red porgy. A recent stock 
assessment indicates the stock is rebuilding and catches can be 
increased without overfishing or compromising the approved rebuilding 
schedule.
    The third alternative would be identical to the proposed action 
except for allowing a smaller recreational bag limit. This alternative 
would result in lower economic benefits than the proposed action.
    The fourth alternative similarly imposes the smaller recreational 
bag limit and reduces the number of fish that can be harvested per 
commercial trip relative to the proposed action, while allowing the 
limit to remain in effect year-round rather than just May through 
December. Although this alternative would result in slightly greater 
benefits to the commercial sector, the benefits to the recreational 
sector would be less than those of the proposed action, and the Council 
determined that overall the proposed action would be more effective in 
allowing increased benefits relative to the status quo while protecting 
against harvest overages.
    The fifth and final alternative to the proposed action on the red 
porgy fishery would implement the commercial trip limits of the second 
alternative discussed above, while allowing the higher daily 
recreational bag limit of the proposed action. Although this 
alternative would result in the higher economic benefits associated 
with the more liberal increases for both harvest sectors, the Council 
determined that the more conservative harvest potential associated with 
the commercial trip limits of the proposed action would be more 
effective in insuring that harvest overages do not occur.
    Copies of the FRFA are available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES).
    Section 212 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996 states that, for each rule or group of related rules for 
which an agency is required to prepare a FRFA, the agency shall publish 
one or more guides to assist small entities in complying with the final 
rule, and shall designate such publications as ``small entity 
compliance guides.'' As part of the rulemaking process, NMFS prepared a 
fishery bulletin, which also serves as a small entity compliance guide. 
The fishery-bulletin will be sent to all vessel permit holders for the 
South Atlantic Snapper-Grouper fishery.
    This final rule contains a collection-of-information requirement 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) and which has been 
approved by OMB under control number 0648-0013. Public reporting burden 
for the requirement to submit a letter of request to the RA for sea 
bass pot removal is estimated to average 10 minutes per response, 
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the collections of information. Send comments on these burden 
estimates or any other aspect of this data collection, including 
suggestions for reducing the burden, to NMFS (see ADDRESSES) and by e-
mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202-395-7285.
    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 PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.

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: September 18, 2006.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.

? For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR Chapter IX and 50 CFR 
Chapter III 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, paragraph (b), the table is amended by adding in the 
left column under 50 CFR, in numerical order, ``622.40(d)(2)'', and in 
the right column, in the corresponding position, the control number ``-
0013'', 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 numbers
                 requirement is located                  begin with 0648-
                                                                )
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
50 CFR

                                * * * * *
622.40(d)(2)...........................................            -0013

                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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. In Sec.  622.30, paragraph (e) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  622.30  Fishing years.

* * * * *
    (e) South Atlantic black sea bass--June 1 through May 31.

? 5. In Sec.  622.36, paragraph (b)(5) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  622.36  Atlantic EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) Red porgy. During January, February, March, and April, the harvest

[[Page 55107]]

or possession of red porgy in or from the South Atlantic EEZ is limited 
to three per person per day or three per person per trip, whichever is 
more restrictive. In addition, this limitation is applicable in the 
South Atlantic on board a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial 
or charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper 
has been issued without regard to where such red porgy were harvested. 
Such red porgy are subject to the prohibition on sale or purchase, as 
specified in Sec.  622.45(d)(5).

? 6. In Sec.  622.37, paragraphs (e)(1)(ii) and (e)(3)(i) are revised to 
read as follows:

Sec.  622.37  Size limits.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Vermillion snapper--12 inches (30.5 cm), TL.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Black sea bass. (A) For a fish taken by a person subject to the 
bag limit specified in Sec.  622.39(d)(1)(vii):
    (1) Through May 31, 2007--11 inches (27.9 cm), TL; and
    (2) On and after June 1, 2007--12 inches (30.5 cm), TL.
    (B) For a fish taken by a person not subject to the bag limit in 
Sec.  622.39(d)(1)--10 inches (25.4 cm), TL.
* * * * *

? 7. In Sec.  622.39, paragraphs (d)(1)(ii), (d)(1)(vi), (d)(1)(vii), and 
(d)(2)(ii) are revised to read as follows:

Sec.  622.39  Bag and possession limits.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Groupers and tilefish, combined--5. However, within the 5-fish 
aggregate bag limit:
    (A) No more than two fish may be gag or black grouper, combined;
    (B) No more than one fish may be a snowy grouper;
    (C) No more than one fish may be a golden tilefish; and
    (D) No goliath grouper or Nassau grouper may be retained.
* * * * *
    (vi) Red porgy--3.
    (vii) Black sea bass--15.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) A person aboard a vessel may not possess red porgy in or from 
the EEZ in excess of three per day or three per trip, whichever is more 
restrictive.
* * * * *
? 8. In Sec.  622.40, paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (d)(2) are revised to read 
as follows:

Sec.  622.40  Limitations on traps and pots.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) A sea bass pot used or possessed in the South Atlantic EEZ must 
have mesh sizes as follows (based on centerline measurements between 
opposite, parallel wires or netting strands):
    (A) For sides of the pot other than the back panel:
    (1) Hexagonal mesh (chicken wire)--at least 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) 
between the wrapped sides;
    (2) Square mesh--at least 1.5 inches (3.8 cm) between sides; or
    (3) Rectangular mesh--at least 1 inch (2.5 cm) between the longer 
sides and 2 inches (5.1 cm) between the shorter sides.
    (B) For the entire back panel, i.e., the side of the pot opposite 
the side that contains the pot entrance, mesh that is at least 2 inches 
(5.1 cm) between sides.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) South Atlantic EEZ--(i) Sea bass pots. (A) In the South 
Atlantic EEZ, sea bass pots may not be used or possessed in multiple 
configurations, that is, two or more pots may not be attached one to 
another so that their overall dimensions exceed those allowed for an 
individual sea bass pot. This does not preclude connecting individual 
pots to a line, such as a ``trawl'' or trot line.
    (B) A sea bass pot must be removed from the water in the South 
Atlantic EEZ when the quota specified in Sec.  622.42(e)(5) is reached. 
The RA may authorize a grace period of up to 10 days for removal of 
pots after a closure is in effect based on exigent circumstances which 
include, but are not limited to, insufficient advance notice of a 
closure or severe weather. In addition, a person may request that the 
RA grant such a grace period based on severe personal hardship, such as 
equipment failure or the vessel operator's health, by providing a 
letter outlining the nature and circumstances of the severe personal 
hardship to be received by the RA no later than the effective date of 
the closure. The RA will advise the requester of the approval or 
disapproval of the request. After a closure is in effect, a black sea 
bass may not be retained by a vessel that has a sea bass pot on board.
    (ii) Golden crab traps. Rope is the only material allowed to be 
used for a buoy line or mainline attached to a golden crab trap.
? 9. In Sec.  622.42, paragraph (e) is revised to read as follows:

Sec.  622.42  Quotas.

* * * * *
    (e) South Atlantic snapper-grouper, excluding wreckfish. The quotas 
apply to persons who are not subject to the bag limits. (See Sec.  
622.39(a)(1) for applicability of the bag limits.) The quotas are in 
gutted weight, that is, eviscerated but otherwise whole.
    (1) Snowy grouper. (i) For the fishing year that commences January 
1, 2006--151,000 lb (68,492 kg).
    (ii) For the fishing year that commences January 1, 2007--118,000 
lb (53,524 kg).
    (iii) For the fishing year that commences January 1, 2008, and for 
subsequent fishing years-84,000 lb (38,102 kg).
    (2) Golden tilefish--295,000 lb (133,810 kg).
    (3) Greater amberjack--1,169,931 lb (530,672 kg).
    (4) Vermilion snapper--1,100,000 lb (498,952 kg).
    (5) Black sea bass. (i) For the fishing year that commences June 1, 
2006--477,000 lb (216,364 kg).
    (ii) For the fishing year that commences June 1, 2007--423,000 lb 
(191,870 kg).
    (iii) For the fishing year that commences June 1, 2008, and for 
subsequent fishing years--309,000 lb (140,160 kg).
    (6) Red porgy--127,000 lb (57,606 kg).
* * * * *

? 10. In Sec.  622.43, paragraphs (a)(5) and (b)(1) are revised to read 
as follows:

Sec.  622.43  Closures.

    (a) * * *
    (5) South Atlantic greater amberjack, snowy grouper, golden 
tilefish, vermilion snapper, black sea bass, and red porgy. The 
appropriate bag limits specified in Sec.  622.39(d)(1) and the 
possession limits specified in Sec.  622.39(d)(2) apply to all harvest 
or possession of the applicable species in or from the South Atlantic 
EEZ, and the sale or purchase of the applicable species taken from the 
EEZ is prohibited. In addition, the bag and possession limits for the 
applicable species and the prohibition on sale/purchase apply in the 
South Atlantic on board a vessel for which a valid Federal commercial 
or charter vessel/headboat permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper 
has been issued, without regard to where such species were harvested.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) The prohibition on sale/purchase during a closure for Gulf reef 
fish, king and Spanish mackerel, royal red shrimp, or specified 
snapper-grouper species in

[[Page 55108]]

paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3)(iii), (a)(4), or (a)(5) and (a)(6), 
respectively, of this section does not apply to the indicated species 
that were harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior to the effective 
date of the closure and were held in cold storage by a dealer or processor.
* * * * *

? 11. In Sec.  622.44, paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(5) are 
revised to read as follows:

Sec.  622.44  Commercial trip limits.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Golden tilefish. (i) Until 75 percent of the fishing year quota 
specified in Sec.  622.42(e)(2) is reached--4,000 lb (1,814 kg).
    (ii) After 75 percent of the fishing year quota specified in Sec.  
622.42(e)(2) is reached--300 lb (136 kg). However, if 75 percent of the 
fishing year quota has not been taken on or before September 1, the 
trip limit will not be reduced. The Assistant Administrator, by filing 
a notification of trip limit change with the Office of the Federal 
Register, will effect a trip limit change specified in this paragraph, 
(c)(2)(ii), when the applicable conditions have been taken.
    (iii) See Sec.  622.43(a)(5) for the limitations regarding golden 
tilefish after the fishing year quota is reached.
    (3) Snowy grouper. (i) During the 2006 fishing year, until the 
quota specified in Sec.  622.42(e)(1)(i) is reached--275 lb (125 kg).
    (ii) During the 2007 fishing year, until the quota specified in 
Sec.  622.42(e)(1)(ii) is reached--175 lb (79 kg).
    (iii) During the 2008 and subsequent fishing years, until the quota 
specified in Sec.  622.42(e)(1)(iii) is reached--100 lb (45 kg).
    (iv) See Sec.  622.43(a)(5) for the limitations regarding snowy 
grouper after the fishing year quota is reached.
    (4) Red porgy. (i) From May 1 through December 31--120 fish.
    (ii) From January 1 through April 30, the seasonal harvest limit 
specified in Sec.  622.36(b)(5) applies.
    (iii) See Sec.  622.43(a)(5) for the limitations regarding red 
porgy after the fishing year quota is reached.
    (5) Greater amberjack. Until the fishing year quota specified in 
Sec.  622.42(e)(3) is reached, 1,000 lb (454 kg). See Sec.  
622.43(a)(5) for the limitations regarding greater amberjack after the 
fishing year quota is reached.
* * * * *

? 12. In Sec.  622.45, paragraph (d)(8) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  622.45  Restrictions on sale/purchase.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (8) No person may sell or purchase a snowy grouper, golden 
tilefish, greater amberjack, vermilion snapper, black sea bass, or red 
porgy harvested from or possessed in the South Atlantic by a vessel for 
which a valid Federal commercial or charter vessel/headboat permit for 
South Atlantic snapper-grouper has been issued for the remainder of the 
fishing year after the applicable commercial quota for that species 
specified in Sec.  622.42(e) has been reached. The prohibition on sale/
purchase during these periods does not apply to such of the applicable 
species that were harvested, landed ashore, and sold prior to the 
applicable commercial quota being reached and were held in cold storage 
by a dealer or processor.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-7940 Filed 9-18-06; 2:59 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P 

Local Navigation

• FR Home
• About the Site
• FR Listserv
• FR Search
• Selected Electronic Dockets
• Regulatory Agenda
• Executive Orders
• Current Laws and Regulations

• EPA Home
• Privacy and Security Notice
• Contact Us