Rule2022-24997
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 22 to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 17, 2022
Effective
January 1, 2023
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
This action implements approved measures for Amendment 22 to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan. Amendment 22 was developed by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council to revise summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass commercial and recreational sector allocations. Amendment 22 is intended to ensure that the best available science is used to determine commercial and recreational sector allocations.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68925-68930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-24997]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 221110-0237]
RIN 0648-BL43
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 22
to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management
Plan
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action implements approved measures for Amendment 22 to
the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan.
Amendment 22 was developed by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council to revise summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass commercial
and recreational sector allocations. Amendment 22 is intended to ensure
that the best available science is used to determine commercial and
recreational sector allocations.
DATES: Effective January 1, 2023.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 22, including the Environmental
Assessment, the Regulatory Impact Review, and the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared in support of this action
are available from Dr. Christopher M. Moore, Executive Director, Mid-
Atlantic Fishery Management Council, Suite 201, 800 North State Street,
Dover, DE 19901. The supporting documents are also accessible via the
internet at: <a href="https://www.mafmc.org/s/SFSBSB_com_rec_allocation_EA-final_6-24-22.pdf">https://www.mafmc.org/s/SFSBSB_com_rec_allocation_EA-final_6-24-22.pdf</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Keiley, Fishery Policy Analyst,
(978) 281-9116.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) and the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (Commission) cooperatively
manage the summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass fisheries. The
Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan (FMP)
outlines the allocation of quota, for each species, between the
commercial and recreational fisheries. Amendment 22 reevaluated and
recommended revisions to the commercial and recreational sector
allocations in the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP.
Amendment 22 was initiated, in part, to address the allocation-related
impacts of the revised recreational catch and landings data provided by
the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). Specifically,
Amendment 22 considered:
1. Changing the allocations between the commercial and recreational
sectors for summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass;
2. Adding an option to transfer a portion of the allowable landings
each year between the commercial and recreational sectors, in either
direction, based on the needs of each sector; and
3. Adding the option for future additional changes to the
commercial/recreational allocation and transfer provisions to be
considered through an FMP addendum/framework action, as opposed to an
amendment.
[[Page 68926]]
Amendment 22 was approved by the Council and Commission in December
2021. A notice of availability (NOA) for the amendment published in the
Federal Register on August 12, 2022 (87 FR 49796), with a comment
period ending on October 11, 2022. We published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register on August 11, 2022 (87 FR 49573), with a comment
period ending on September 12, 2022.
When a Council approves and then transmits a fishery management
plan or amendment to NMFS, NMFS publishes a notice of availability in
the Federal Register announcing a 60-day comment period. Within 30 days
of the end of the comment period, NMFS must approve, disapprove, or
partially approve the plan or amendment based on consistency with law.
After considering public comment on the NOA and proposed rule, we
approved Amendment 22 on November 7, 2022. This final rule implements
the management measures in Amendment 22. The details of the development
of the measures in Amendment 22 were described in the NOA and proposed
rule, and are not repeated here.
Approved Measures
This action implements changes to the commercial and recreational
allocations for summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass. The original
commercial and recreational allocations for all three species were
established in the mid-1990s, based on historical proportions of
landings (for summer flounder and black sea bass) and catch (for scup)
from each sector.
In July 2018, MRIP released revised time series of catch and
harvest estimates based on adjustments to its angler intercept
methodology, which is used to estimate recreational catch rates, as
well as changes to its effort estimation methodology, namely, a
transition from a telephone-based effort survey to a mail-based effort
survey for the private/rental boat and shore-based fishing modes. These
revisions collectively resulted in higher recreational catch estimates
compared to previous estimates, affecting the entire time series of
data going back to 1981. The revised MRIP estimates were incorporated
into the stock assessments for summer flounder in 2018 and for scup and
black sea bass in 2019. This impacted the estimated stock biomass and
resulting catch limits for these species.
The revised MRIP time series created a mismatch between the data
that were used to set the allocations and the data currently used in
fishery management for setting catch limits. Changes to commercial
catch data have also been made since the allocations were established.
The allocation changes approved through Amendment 22 seek to ensure
that the best available data is used to determine commercial and
recreational sector allocations.
Amendment 22 considered a range of allocation alternatives, with
options that would have maintained the current allocations and a
variety of options to revise the allocations based on updated data
using the same or modified ``base years'' (the time periods used to set
the current allocations). The Council and Board ultimately decided to
revise the allocations using the original base years updated with new
data. This approach allows for consideration of fishery characteristics
in years prior to influence by the commercial/recreational allocations,
while also using the best scientific information available to
understand the fisheries in those base years.
For all three species, these changes result in a shift in
allocation from the commercial to the recreational sector. However,
because the summer flounder and black sea bass fisheries are
transitioning from landings-based to catch-based allocations, the
original and revised allocations for those species are not directly
comparable. The approved commercial and recreational sector allocations
are shown in Table 1.
Table 1--Approved Commercial/Recreational Allocations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial Recreational
Species Base years allocation allocation
percentage (%) percentage (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summer Flounder................................................. 1980-1989 55 45
Scup............................................................ 1988-1992 65 35
Black Sea Bass.................................................. 1983-1992 45 55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised Framework Provisions
This action would also allow future changes to commercial/
recreational allocations, annual quota transfers between sectors, and
other measures addressed in Amendment 22 to be made through framework
actions.
Comments and Responses
We received 10 comments, from 9 unique commenters, on the NOA and
the proposed rule, including comments from Scandinavian Fisheries
Incorporated, Viking Yacht Company, and the American Sportfishing
Association. One comment was not relevant to the proposed rule and is
not discussed further. One comment supported the changes in
allocations, and eight opposed the allocation changes. Those opposed to
the allocation changes were split; four did not think any additional
quota should be allocated to the recreational fisheries, two felt that
the allocations should be more reflective of recent catch proportions
(which would result in more allocation shifting to the recreational
fishery), and two comments, from one individual, had other concerns
about the data used.
Comment 1: Four commenters opposed the change in commercial and
recreational allocations. These commenters did not want the commercial
allocations to be reduced. One commenter cited high fuel costs and low
fish prices and the need to have as much allocation as possible. One
commenter suggested that allocations should remain status quo. Other
commenters cited the need for more recreational accountability and
reporting standards, which are outside the scope of this action.
Response: Maintaining the status quo allocations between the
commercial and recreational sectors would mean that those allocations
were not based on the best available science. The MRIP transition and
updated time series resulted in significantly different estimates of
recreational catch. Updates have also been made to the commercial
fisheries data since the original allocations were made. The revised
recreational and commercial data have been incorporated into the stock
assessments and, as a result, the recent quotas for both the commercial
and recreational fisheries. Leaving the allocations unchanged would
have created a mismatch between the data
[[Page 68927]]
used to set the allocation of quotas and the data used in the stock
assessment to set the quotas. Allocations based on data now known to be
incorrect would be inconsistent with National Standard 2. Therefore, we
approved the allocation changes that the Council and Board recommended
to ensure allocations are based on the best scientific information
available.
Comment 2: One comment supported the allocation changes, stating
that it was a more ``accurate reflection of reality.''
Response: We have approved the proposed allocation changes for
summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass.
Comment 3: Two commenters opposed the revised allocations. These
commenters suggested that the new allocations do not reflect the needs
of the recreational fishery and that the base years selected are not
fair, equitable, or based on the best available science. One commenter
stated that anything less than 50 percent of the summer flounder
allocation is not enough for the recreational sector. Both commenters
stated that a different approach should have been used and imply that
the recreational allocations should have been increased more than they
were in this action.
Response: This action increases the recreational allocations for
summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass, and reduces the commercial
fisheries' share. The Council and Board considered a range of
allocation alternatives for all three species, including options that
would have shifted more quota from the commercial sector to the
recreational sector. The selected alternative retains the original
allocation base years but uses the revised (current) catch or landings
data from those years. The Council and Board agreed that the original
base years are the most appropriate basis for the allocations, as they
are years before the fisheries were notably impacted by management
measures. Catch and landings percentages from more recent years are
influenced by many management measures, including the allocations and
the associated quotas. Basing the allocations on more recent trends in
catch or landings also raised concerns about fairness due to
differences in how well the commercial and recreational sectors have
stayed within their respective quota limits in past years. The Council
and Board also agreed that the allocations should be updated to reflect
the most recent available data from the base years, especially as other
parts of the management process, including the stock assessment and
catch accounting systems, now rely on newer, improved data compared to
when the allocations were first established.
Comment 4: One comment stated that we should disapprove the
amendment because it was not based on the best scientific information
available; specifically stating that MRIP data are not reliable.
Response: The revised MRIP data are the best scientific data
available for recreational catch and effort. MRIP, including the recent
transition to the Fishing Effort Survey (FES), has undergone a number
of peer reviews, including those conducted by the National Academy of
Sciences, Engineering and Medicine and the Center for Independent
Experts, as well as reviewers selected by the Atlantic States Marine
Fisheries Commission and the New England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic,
and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Councils. The FES was designed to
increase response rates, reduce the potential for reporting and recall
errors, and achieve a more representative sample than the survey it
replaced. With any sampling methodology there is uncertainty, but
evidence suggests the FES is a more accurate and efficient way of
estimating marine recreational fishing trips and are the best available
data we have for estimating recreational catch and effort for these
species.
Comment 5: One comment cited the use of landings for black sea bass
and summer flounder in the years when complete catch data were not
available. This comment suggested that the use of more recent data
would have eliminated this issue, allowed for the consideration of
discards and, therefore, constitutes the best available science.
Response: Although the allocation percentages under the preferred
alternative are based on landings data for two species, they will be
applied as catch-based allocations. Reliable dead discard data for the
summer flounder and black sea bass during the selected base years are
not available. As discussed in the response to Comment 3, the Council
and Board decided to maintain the original base years for a number of
reasons. More recent years considered by the Council and Board, when
discard data are available for both sectors, also correspond to years
when allocations, and constraining management measures were in place.
Given the influence of these management measures on fishery catches it
would be difficult to determine the actual unconstrained needs of each
fishery. This is further complicated in years when one sector exceeded
its quota and the other did not. This was a significant point of
discussion for the Council and Board, given the concerns about such new
allocations ``rewarding'' recreational sector overages, and whether
such a result would be fair and equitable. A recent court case, Guindon
v. Pritzker, 240 F. Supp. 3d 181, (D.D.C. 2017), involving the
reallocation of red snapper between the commercial and recreational
fisheries, addresses these concerns. Specifically, the Court's decision
concluded that NMFS failed to demonstrate that the allocations were
fair and equitable as required by National Standard 4 where the
recreational sector was given an increased allocation of red snapper
based on years of recreational quota overages, while the commercial
sector's catch during those years remained within its quota limits and
the commercial allocation was reduced.
The Council and Board also agreed that catch-based allocations are
preferable to landings-based allocations for all three species because
the calculations of sector-specific catch and landings limits allows
for separation and accounting of sector-specific discards. Because the
management process has moved toward catch accounting and greater
consideration of discards since the original allocations were set,
changing the allocations to be catch-based simplifies the
specifications process and decreases the influence of discards from one
sector on the other sector's Annual Catch Limit (ACL). For example, the
original summer flounder allocation was landings-based. This has
resulted in each sector receiving a varying percentage of the
Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC), depending on annual sector discard
trends, meaning that a sector may have received a percentage of the ABC
that may have been more, or less than their allocation in a given year.
For the reasons stated about, and in the response to Comment 3,
given the data constraints during the selected base years, the use of
landings for summer flounder and black sea bass constitutes the best
available science, and a reasonable proxy for use in the calculation of
the allocation percentages.
Comment 6: One comment in opposition to the amendment questioned
when managers would start managing fish for food, not fun. This comment
implied that the allocations would benefit one segment of the
recreational fishery (private boat anglers) more than shore-side
``subsistence'' recreational anglers.
Response: This amendment shifts quota from the commercial fishery
to
[[Page 68928]]
the recreational fishery for all three species. The recreational
fishery is inclusive of shore-side anglers, private boat anglers, and
for-hire vessels. Increasing recreational allocations are likely to
benefit all anglers including shore-side anglers.
Comment 7: One comment stated that the amendment should be
disapproved because we did not provide the number of recreational
anglers that would benefit from the action. This comment asserts that
providing the number of saltwater anglers was required by the 2006
reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
Response: There is no survey or database that counts the exact
total number of saltwater anglers. The National Saltwater Angler
Registry and State Exemption Program was developed over 10 years ago in
a transparent process that involved a national team that included
representatives of the States, Councils, Interstate Commissions, and
stakeholders (the Registry Team). The program the Registry Team
developed is implemented by Federal rule at 50 CFR 500 Subpart P, and
was subject to the standard process of Federal rulemaking, including
public notice and comment. The final rule (73 FR 79585, December 30,
2008) includes background information that lays out the rationale for
the program as designed and how it conforms to the requirements of
Section 401(g)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Currently, all of the
Atlantic coast states are sending NMFS updated lists of their license
holders monthly. Therefore, all of those currently-state-licensed
anglers are exempt from Federal registration. The purpose of the
section of the Magnuson-Stevens Act that established the national
saltwater angler registry was not to create a count of all anglers.
Rather, it was to establish a list of anglers and associated contact
information for use as a sample frame for surveys of fishing activity,
as recommended by the National Academies of Science in the 2006 review
of the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey. The license-
holder lists that the states send monthly are sufficient for that
purpose and are being used as part of the sample frame for the MRIP
Fishing Effort Survey.
Comment 8: One comment suggested that data prior to 1981, as early
as 1965, was available and demonstrates a greater historical use by the
recreational fisheries and that the original base years do not, and
never did, reflect true historical participation by the recreational
fisheries.
Response: In 1955, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) added questions about saltwater angling to their survey of
freshwater fishing and hunting in the United States. These surveys,
conducted every 5 years, collected data on number of anglers, angler
expenditures, and fishing activity level. In 1960, 1965, and 1970,
adjunct surveys also collected information about catch, effort and
participation. However, when analyzing the results of these surveys,
peer reviews found response bias and sampling errors. In addition,
because of the long interval between surveys, it was impossible to
detect or analyze possible seasonal variation in catch, effort, or
participation (sampling error). Due to these issues, NMFS developed its
own recreational survey, the Marine Recreational Fishery Statistics
Survey (MRFSS). It was not until 1981 that data from this survey were
widely available. Therefore, while there may be information on
recreational fisheries effort and catch prior to 1981, and prior to the
original base years, these data are likely not appropriate to use for
developing allocations given the known biases and sampling issues.
Changes From the Proposed Rule
There are no changes to the measures in this final rule from the
proposed rule.
Classification
Pursuant to section 304(b)(3) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS
Assistant
Administrator has determined that this final rule is consistent
with the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP, other
provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
A final regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) was prepared for
this action. The FRFA incorporates the IRFA and a summary of the
analyses completed to support the action. NMFS did not receive any
comments that were specifically in response to the IRFA. The FRFA
incorporates sections of the preamble (SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION) and
analyses supporting this rulemaking, including the Amendment 22 EA (see
ADDRESSES). A description of the action, why it is being considered,
and the objectives of and the legal basis for this rule are contained
in the Amendment 22 EA and preamble to the proposed rule, and are not
repeated here.
A Summary of the Significant Issues Raised by the Public in Response to
the IRFA, a Summary of the Agency's Assessment of Such Issues, and a
Statement of Any Changes Made in the Final Rule as a Result of Such
Comments
Our responses to all of the comments received on the proposed rule,
including those that raised significant issues with the proposed action
can be found in the Comments and Responses section of this rule. In the
proposed rule, we solicited comments on a revised allocation formula
for distributing commercial and recreational summer flounder, scup and
black sea bass quota. There were no comments that specifically
addressed the IRFA, and no changes from the proposed rule.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which This
Rule Would Apply
The entities (i.e., the small and large businesses) that may be
affected by this action include fishing operations with Federal
moratorium (commercial) permits and/or Federal party/charter permits
for summer flounder, scup, and/or black sea bass. Private recreational
anglers are not considered ``entities'' under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA). For RFA purposes only, NMFS established a small
business size standard for businesses, including their affiliates,
whose primary industry is commercial fishing (50 CFR 200.2). A business
primarily engaged in commercial fishing is classified as a small
business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in
its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined
annual receipts not in excess of $11 million, for all its affiliated
operations worldwide.
Vessel ownership data were used to identify all individuals who own
fishing vessels. Vessels were then grouped according to common owners.
The resulting groupings were then treated as entities, or affiliates,
for purposes of identifying small and large businesses which may be
affected by this action.
Commercial and recreational for-hire affiliates potentially
regulated by this action include all those with valid commercial
fishery permits for summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass and any
for-hire affiliates that reported landing summer flounder, scup, or
black sea bass in any year between 2018 and 2020, which is the most
recent calendar year with complete data. A total of 1,522 affiliates
were identified as being potentially regulated by this action, 1,513
(99 percent) of which were
[[Page 68929]]
identified as small businesses and 9 (1 percent) of which were
identified as large businesses based on their average annual revenues
for 2018-2020.
Of the total affiliates potentially regulated by this action, 455
affiliates reported that the majority of their revenues in 2020 came
from for-hire fishing. Some of these affiliates may have also
participated in commercial fishing. All 455 of these for-hire
affiliates were categorized as small businesses based on their average
annual revenues for 2018-2020. It is not possible to determine what
proportion of their revenues came from fishing for an individual
species. Nevertheless, given the popularity of summer flounder, scup,
and black sea bass as recreational species, revenues generated from
these species are likely important for many of these affiliates at
certain times of the year.
Description of the Projected Reporting, Record-Keeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements of This Proposed Rule
This final rule contains no information collection requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Federal Rules Which May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With This
Proposed Rule
The action does not duplicate, overlap, or conflict with other
Federal rules.
Description of Significant Alternatives to the Rule Which Accomplish
the Stated Objectives of Applicable Statutes and Which Minimize Any
Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities
The approved measures (i.e., the suite of preferred alternatives)
includes implementation of a revised commercial/recreational quota
allocation system for the summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass
fisheries.
When considering the economic impacts of the alternatives under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, consideration should also be given to those
non-preferred alternatives which would result in higher net benefits or
lower costs to small entities while still achieving the stated
objective of the action.
For summer flounder and scup, only the no action alternatives
(alternatives 1a-4 and 1b-1, respectively) had greater positive
expected impacts for the commercial sector than the preferred
alternatives; however, those alternatives had greater negative impacts
for the recreational sector than the preferred alternatives. For black
sea bass, both the no action alternative (alternative 1c-4) and
alternative 1c-5 were expected to have greater positive impacts for the
commercial sector than the preferred alternative. However, as with
summer flounder and scup, those alternatives had greater negative
impacts for the recreational sector than the preferred alternative. In
addition, alternative 1c-5 would have maintained a landings-based
allocation for black sea bass, and the Council and Board supported
switching to a catch-based allocation. Catch-based allocations were
supported because they eliminate the current discard apportionment
process and hold each sector accountable for their own discards.
All alternatives that had a greater potential for positive impacts,
or a lesser potential for negative impacts, to the recreational sector
than the preferred alternatives had a greater magnitude of negative
expected impacts for the commercial sector. The no action alternative,
for all three species, did not meet the stated objectives given the
notable changes in data that have occurred since these allocations were
first established, and that leaving the allocations unchanged would not
be based on the best scientific information available.
The non-preferred alternatives for phase-in, transfers, and
frameworks/addenda are not expected to have notably different
socioeconomic impacts than the preferred alternatives.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: November 10, 2022.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part
648 as follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
0
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 648.100, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 648.100 Summer flounder Annual Catch Limit (ACL).
(a) * * *
(1) Sector allocations. The commercial and recreational fishing
sector ACLs will be established based on the allocations defined in the
Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan
(FMP).
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 648.110, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 648.110 Summer flounder framework adjustments to management
measures.
(a) * * *
(1) Adjustment process. The MAFMC shall develop and analyze
appropriate management actions over the span of at least two MAFMC
meetings. The MAFMC must provide the public with advance notice of the
availability of the recommendation(s), appropriate justification(s) and
economic and biological analyses, and the opportunity to comment on the
proposed adjustment(s) at the first meeting and prior to and at the
second MAFMC meeting. The MAFMC's recommendations on adjustments or
additions to management measures must come from one or more of the
following categories: Adjustments within existing ABC control rule
levels; adjustments to the existing MAFMC risk policy; introduction of
new AMs, including sub-ACTs; minimum fish size; maximum fish size; gear
restrictions; gear requirements or prohibitions; permitting
restrictions; recreational possession limit; recreational seasons;
closed areas; commercial seasons; commercial trip limits; commercial
quota system including commercial quota allocation procedure and
possible quota set asides to mitigate bycatch; recreational harvest
limit; specification quota setting process; commercial/recreational
allocations; transfer provisions between the commercial and
recreational sectors; FMP Monitoring Committee composition and process;
description and identification of essential fish habitat (and fishing
gear management measures that impact EFH); description and
identification of habitat areas of particular concern; regional gear
restrictions; regional season restrictions (including option to split
seasons); restrictions on vessel size (LOA and GRT) or shaft
horsepower; operator permits; changes to the SBRM, including the CV-
based performance standard, the means by which discard data are
collected/obtained, fishery stratification, the process for
prioritizing observer sea-day allocations, reports, and/or industry-
funded observers or observer set aside programs; any other commercial
or recreational management measures; any other management measures
currently included in the FMP; and set aside quota for scientific
research. Issues that require significant departures from previously
contemplated measures or that are
[[Page 68930]]
otherwise introducing new concepts may require an amendment of the FMP
instead of a framework adjustment.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 648.120, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 648.120 Scup Annual Catch Limit (ACL).
(a) * * *
(1) Sector allocations. The commercial and recreational fishing
sector ACLs will be based on the allocations defined in the Summer
Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass FMP.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 648.130, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 648.130 Scup framework adjustments to management measures.
(a) * * *
(1) Adjustment process. The MAFMC shall develop and analyze
appropriate management actions over the span of at least two MAFMC
meetings. The MAFMC must provide the public with advance notice of the
availability of the recommendation(s), appropriate justification(s) and
economic and biological analyses, and the opportunity to comment on the
proposed adjustment(s) at the first meeting and prior to and at the
second MAFMC meeting. The MAFMC's recommendations on adjustments or
additions to management measures must come from one or more of the
following categories: Adjustments within existing ABC control rules;
adjustments to the existing MAFMC risk policy; introduction of new AMs,
including sub-ACTs; minimum fish size; maximum fish size; gear
restrictions; gear restricted areas; gear requirements or prohibitions;
permitting restrictions; recreational possession limits; recreational
seasons; closed areas; commercial seasons; commercial trip limits;
commercial quota system including commercial quota allocation procedure
and possible quota set asides to mitigate bycatch; recreational harvest
limits; annual specification quota setting process; commercial/
recreational allocations; transfer provisions between the commercial
and recreational sectors; FMP Monitoring Committee composition and
process; description and identification of EFH (and fishing gear
management measures that impact EFH); description and identification of
habitat areas of particular concern; regional gear restrictions;
regional season restrictions (including option to split seasons);
restrictions on vessel size (LOA and GRT) or shaft horsepower; operator
permits; changes to the SBRM, including the CV-based performance
standard, the means by which discard data are collected/obtained,
fishery stratification, the process for prioritizing observer sea-day
allocations, reports, and/or industry-funded observers or observer set
aside programs; any other commercial or recreational management
measures; any other management measures currently included in the FMP;
and set aside quota for scientific research.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 648.140, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 648.140 Black sea bass Annual Catch Limit (ACL).
(a) * * *
(1) Sector allocations. The commercial and recreational fishing
sector ACLs will be based on the allocations defined in the Summer
Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-24997 Filed 11-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 17, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.