[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 189 (Monday, October 1, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55704-55706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-19348]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 648

[Docket No. 070706268-7513-02]
RIN 0648-AV21


Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Summer Flounder, 
Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Framework Adjustment 7

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to implement measures contained in 
Framework Adjustment 7 (Framework 7) to the Summer Flounder, Scup, and 
Black Sea Bass Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Framework 7 will broaden 
the FMP stock status determination criteria for summer flounder, scup, 
and black sea bass, while maintaining objective and measurable criteria 
for identifying when the FMP stocks are overfished or approaching an 
overfished condition. The framework action will also establish 
acceptable categories of peer review for providing new or revised stock 
status determination criteria for the Council to use in its annual 
management measures for each species. This action is necessary to 
ensure that changes or modification to the stock status determination 
criteria constituting the best available peer reviewed scientific 
information are accessible for the management of these three species in 
as timely a manner as is possible. The intended effect of this action 
is to improve the timeliness and efficiency of incorporating the best 
available scientific information, consistent with National Standards 1 
and 2 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
(Magnuson-Stevens Act), into the management processes for the three 
species covered by the FMP.

DATES: This rule is effective October 31, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Copies of Framework Adjustment 7 are available from Daniel 
T. Furlong, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 
Council, Room 2115, Federal Building, 300 South New Street, Dover, DE 
19901-6790. The framework document is also accessible via the Internet 
at http://www.nero.noaa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Ruccio, Fishery Policy 
Analyst, (978) 281-9104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The proposed rule for Framework 7 was published in the Federal 
Register on August 6, 2007 (72 FR 43587). A complete discussion of the 
development and rationale for the framework appeared in the preamble of 
the proposed rule and is not repeated here.
    The current stock status determination criteria for summer flounder 
(Paralichthys dentatus), scup (Stenotomus chrysops), and black sea bass 
(Centropristas striata) are found in Amendment 12 to the FMP. Prior to 
the development of Framework 7, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 
Council (Council) would be required to enact a framework adjustment or 
an amendment to the FMP to modify or replace these stock status 
determination criteria on a case-by-case basis.

[[Page 55705]]

    Stock assessment information is updated annually as part of the 
management process that is used to derive annual catch limits (e.g., 
Total Allowable Landings (TAL)). The updated assessment information is 
utilized in the regulatory processes for these three species outlined 
at Sec. Sec.  648.100, 648.120, and 648.140. These annual ``turn of the 
crank'' updates typically make no changes to the existing stock status 
determination criteria and are performed by groups with technical 
expertise, but are not typically subject to formal peer reviews nor are 
the stock status determination criteria often recommended to be 
changed.
    Full assessments for these three stocks undergo periodic formal 
scientific peer review as part of the Northeast Fisheries Science 
Center's (NEFSC) Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW) and Stock Assessment 
Review Committee (SARC) process. These and other periodic formal 
assessments and subsequent peer reviews conducted for these stocks may 
result in recommendations to revise or use different stock status 
determination criteria as different or new approaches are applied to 
previously existing data, or to new, previously unexamined data. These 
types of assessments and peer reviews are distinguishable from the 
annual updates as they are often more comprehensive in nature and 
subject to rigorous scientific peer review that is consistent with the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Information Quality Bulletin for 
Peer Review.
    In the absence of the provisions contained in Framework 7 to more 
generally describe stock status determination criteria, when a full 
stock assessment and subsequent peer review recommended modification of 
existing or new stock status determination criteria for these species 
occurs it is likely that the new criteria would not be available for 
the Council's use for one or more annual management review cycles 
(i.e., a 1- to 2-year delay) while a framework adjustment or an 
amendment was developed and implemented.
    The increased flexibility in defining the stock status 
determination criteria contained in Framework 7, consistent with 
National Standards 1 and 2, will allow the Council to utilize the best 
available peer reviewed science within the annual management measures 
development process, thereby improving the timeliness of incorporating 
the most current, best available stock status determination criteria.
    Additionally, Framework 7 provides guidance on acceptable peer 
review practices, particularly for conducting reviews on stock 
assessments that generate modified or new stock status determination 
criteria that may not originate from the NEFSC SAW/SARC process, which 
is the primary stock assessment process for the Northeast Region. This 
guidance will help ensure that any such external review is sufficiently 
rigorous so that the resulting stock status determination advice may be 
considered by the Council as the best available science. In the 
unlikely circumstance that two or more sets of different but peer 
review accepted stock status determination criteria are available for 
the Council's use, the Council would still be required to adequately 
justify its final selection of one set over the other or others, 
consistent with national standard guidelines.
    Framework 7 also provides guidance on how the Council may convene 
its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) in the unlikely event 
that peer reviewed stock status determination criteria recommendations 
are unclear (i.e., lack of consensus from the reviewers), and how such 
information should be used in crafting management decisions should the 
peer review not specify such guidance. The SSC would, in such 
instances, only review information that lacks clarity; in instances 
where a formal peer review results in a consensus recommendation for 
use, that information is clearly the best available information and, as 
such, requires no additional review or input from the SSC prior to the 
Council using the information. Similarly, the SSC would not be needed 
to review peer review recommendations that reject modified or new stock 
status determination criteria because such information is not the best 
available (i.e., if new information is rejected in peer review, the 
existing stock status determination criteria remains the best available 
information).

Comments and Response

    Two comments were received regarding the proposed rule. One comment 
did not address any aspect of the framework, instead raising questions 
about where commercial fisheries for summer flounder should be allowed 
to take place. As this comment is not directly related to the action of 
Framework 7, it is not responded to here.
    Comment: The commenter asserted that implementation of Framework 7 
would allow continued overfishing of summer flounder, scup, and black 
sea bass stocks and that the framework allows an unspecified, upward 
adjustment to quotas that would further exacerbate overfishing.
    Response: NMFS acknowledges that all three species are currently 
overfished. Framework 7 makes no specific adjustment to either the 
current biological reference points used to define the status of these 
three stocks, nor does the framework make any adjustment to the 
management measures (e.g., TALs, recreational possession and size 
limits, etc.) used to eliminate overfishing in this or in future years. 
As outlined in the preamble to the final rule, Framework 7 is an 
administrative change focused on the mechanism through which the best 
available peer-reviewed information may be incorporated into the annual 
management process that sets quotas and other management measures that 
are aimed at ending overfishing and rebuilding stocks to their maximum 
sustainable yield levels. Annual management measures that are part of 
separate rulemaking are used to eliminate overfishing.
    Furthermore, Framework 7 contains no explicit adjustments to quotas 
for any of the three species. If, in the future, revised or new stock 
status determination criteria are developed and vetted for use through 
the peer review process outlined in Framework 7, there may be 
adjustments, either upward or downward, to quotas as the results of the 
stock status and peer review dictate.

Classification

    The Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, determined that 
Framework Adjustment 7 is necessary for the conservation and management 
of the summer flounder, scup, and black sea bass fisheries and that it 
is consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act and other applicable laws.
    This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of 
Executive Order 12866.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration during the proposed rule stage that this action would 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The factual basis for the certification was published in the 
proposed rule and is not repeated here. No comments were received 
regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory flexibility 
analysis was not required and none was prepared.

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


[[Page 55706]]


    Dated: September 26, 2007.
John Oliver,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E7-19348 Filed 9-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S