Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 271 

(OEA) to modify the template and 

instructions for the most recent data 

collection to the extent appropriate to 

timely collect such information to cover 

the additional services and providers 

now subject to the Commission’s 

authority. On April 28, 2023, WCB and 

OEA issued a Public Notice seeking 

comment on all aspects of the proposed 

data collection. WCB and OEA Seek 

Comment on Proposed 2023 Mandatory 

Data Collection for Incarcerated 

People’s Communication Services, WC 

Docket Nos. 23–62, 12–375, Public 

Notice, DA 23–355 (WCB/OEA April 28, 

2023). On July 26, 2023, WCB and OEA 

released an Order adopting instructions, 

a reporting template, and a certification 

form to implement the 2023 Mandatory 

Data Collection. Incarcerated People’s 

Communications Services; 

Implementation of the Martha WrightReed Act, Rates for Interstate Inmate 

Calling Services, WC Docket Nos. 23–62, 

12–375, Order, DA 23–638 (July 26, 

2023). In the 2023 IPCS Order, the 

Commission also reaffirmed and 

updated its prior delegation of authority 

to WCB and the Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) 

(collectively, the Bureaus) to revise the 

instructions and reporting templates for 

the Annual Reports. Specifically, the 

Commission delegated to the Bureaus 

the authority to modify, supplement, 

and update the instructions and 

templates for the Annual Reports. 

On August 3, 2023, the Bureaus 

issued a Public Notice seeking comment 

on proposed revisions to the 

instructions, template, and certification 

form for the Annual Reports, https://

www.fcc.gov/proposed-2023-ipcsannual-reports, which are necessary to 

reflect the revised rules improving 

access to communications services for 

incarcerated people with 

communication disabilities adopted in 

the 2022 ICS Order and to help 

implement the Martha Wright-Reed Act 

to ensure just and reasonable rates for 

consumers and fair compensation for 

providers. Wireline Competition Bureau 

and Consumer and Governmental 

Affairs Bureau Seek Comment on 

Revisions to IPCS Providers’ Annual 

Reporting and Certification 

Requirements, Public Notice, WC 

Docket Nos. 23–62, 12–375, DA 23–656 

(August 3, 2023). https://www.fcc.gov/ 

document/2023-incarcerated-peoplescommunications-services-annualreports-pn. Notice of this document was 

published in the Federal Register at 88 

FR 53850 on August 9, 2023. 

The Bureaus have not yet issued an 

Order adopting revisions to the 

instructions, template, and certification 

form for the Annual Reports. To 

effectuate the improved access to 

communications services for 

incarcerated people with 

communication disabilities required by 

§ 64.6040(c) of the Commission’s rules, 

the Bureaus divided the information 

requirements and burdens of this 

information collection into two PRA 

submissions to OMB, with the first 

seeking approval of the new information 

requirements associated with 

§ 64.6040(c) of the Commission’s rules. 

OMB approved the revised information 

collection on December 14, 2023. Upon 

release of an Order adopting revisions to 

the instructions, template, and 

certification form for the Annual 

Reports, the Bureaus will seek OMB 

approval of any revised information 

requirements adopted in that Order, as 

well as the new information 

requirements in § 64.6060(a)(5) through 

(7), which expands the rule requiring 

the filing of Annual Reports to include 

additional data related to access to 

communications services for 

incarcerated people with 

communication disabilities. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Katura Jackson, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28765 Filed 1–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. 231222–0315] 

RIN 0648–BL98 

Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South 

Atlantic Region; Golden Crab Fishery 

of the South Atlantic Region; Dolphin 

and Wahoo Fishery of the Atlantic; 

Acceptable Biological Catch Control 

Rules 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues regulations to 

implement amendments to the Fishery 

Management Plans (FMPs) for the 

Snapper-Grouper Fishery, the Golden 

Crab Fishery, and the Dolphin and 

Wahoo Fishery, referenced here as the 

Acceptable Biological Catch (ABC) 

Control Rule Amendments. This final 

rule modifies the ABC control rules, 

allows the phase-in of subsequent ABC 

changes, allows some carry-over of an 

unharvested portion of the annual catch 

limit (ACL) to the following fishing 

year, and modifies the FMP framework 

procedures to implement carry-overs of 

ACLs when appropriate. NMFS also 

implements an administrative 

clarification to existing regulations for 

the Snapper-Grouper FMP framework 

procedure. The purpose of this final rule 

is to ensure catch level 

recommendations are based on the best 

scientific information available, prevent 

overfishing while achieving optimum 

yield, and increase flexibility in setting 

catch limits. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

February 2, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: An electronic copy of the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments, which 

includes an environmental assessment, 

a fishery impact statement, and a 

regulatory impact review, may be 

obtained from the NMFS Southeast 

Regional Office website at https://

www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/ 

comprehensive-acceptable-biologicalcatch-abc-control-rule-amendmentrevisions-abc-control. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nikhil Mehta, telephone: 727–824– 

5305, or email: nikhil.mehta@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The South 

Atlantic snapper-grouper and golden 

crab fisheries are managed under the 

Snapper-Grouper FMP and Golden Crab 

FMP, respectively. The dolphin and 

wahoo fishery of the Atlantic is 

managed under the Dolphin and Wahoo 

FMP. These 3 FMPs were prepared by 

the South Atlantic Fishery Management 

Council (Council) and are implemented 

by NMFS through regulations at 50 CFR 

part 622 under the authority of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act). The Council 

has developed, and NMFS has 

approved, the Comprehensive 

Acceptable Biological Catch Control 

Rule Amendment: Revisions to the 

Acceptable Biological Catch Control 

Rules and Specifications for Carry-Overs 

and Phase-Ins. The Council document is 

composed of Amendment 45 to the 

Snapper-Grouper FMP, Amendment 11 

to the Golden Crab FMP, and 

Amendment 11 to the Dolphin and 

Wahoo FMP. 

Background 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires 

that NMFS and the regional fishery 

management councils prevent 

overfishing and achieve, on a 

continuing basis, the optimum yield 

from federally managed fish stocks. 

These mandates are intended to ensure 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
272 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

that fishery resources are managed for 

the greatest overall benefit to the Nation, 

particularly with respect to providing 

food production and recreational 

opportunities and protecting marine 

ecosystems. The Council and NMFS 

manage snapper-grouper species and 

golden crab in Federal waters from 

North Carolina south to the Florida 

Keys. The Council and NMFS manage 

the dolphin and wahoo fishery in 

Federal waters from Maine south to the 

Florida Keys. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires 

the Secretary to approve, disapprove, or 

partially approve fishery management 

plan amendments and issue regulations 

necessary to implement them (16 U.S.C. 

1854(a)). On September 11, 2023, NMFS 

published a notice of availability for the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments and 

requested public comment (88 FR 

62309). On October 2, 2023, NMFS 

published a proposed rule for the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments and 

requested public comment (88 FR 

67721). NMFS approved the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments on December 

8, 2023. The proposed rule and the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments detail the 

rationale for the actions contained in 

this final rule and is not all repeated 

here. This final rule (1) provides notice 

of approval of the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments and (2) makes minor 

changes to regulatory text to implement 

those amendments to the FMPs. A 

summary of the management measures 

described in the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments and implemented by this 

final rule is provided below. 

The Council’s Scientific and 

Statistical Committee (SSC) will use the 

ABC control rules described in the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments and 

implemented by this final rule to 

recommend future ABC levels to the 

Council. The ABC control rules use 

uncertainty and risk ranking traits to 

determine the acceptable risk of 

overfishing. The ABC control rule is the 

method by which the ABC for a stock 

is set, ideally based on an overfishing 

limit (OFL) from a stock assessment but 

at times established using more datalimited methodologies. The acceptable 

risk of overfishing is denoted as P-Star 

(P*) and is applied through stock 

assessment projections to develop the 

SSC’s ABC recommendation to the 

Council. 

In October 2016, NMFS published a 

final rule to revise the guidelines for 

National Standard 1 (NS1) of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act (81 FR 71858, 

October 18, 2016). NS1 states that 

fishery conservation and management 

measures shall prevent overfishing 

while achieving, on a continuing basis, 

the optimum yield from each fishery for 

the United States fishing industry. One 

of the objectives of the 2016 NS1 

revisions was to provide additional 

flexibility within current statutory 

limits to address fishery management 

issues. For example, the revised NS1 

guidelines allow for changes in catch 

limits to be phased in over time. A 

similar ‘‘phase-in’’ provision is included 

in the ABC Control Rule Amendments 

and this final rule. The revised 

guidelines also allow for some of the 

unused portion of an ACL to be carried 

over from a single fishing year to the 

next, which is also described as ‘‘carryover’’ in this final rule. 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

incorporate carry-over and phase-in 

provisions by modifying the existing 

ABC control rules for the SnapperGrouper, Golden Crab, and Dolphin and 

Wahoo FMPs by clarifying the 

incorporation of scientific uncertainty 

and management risk, modifying the 

approach used to determine the 

acceptable risk of overfishing, and 

prioritizing the use of stock rebuilding 

plans for overfished stocks. 

Management Measure Contained in 

This Final Rule 

Modify Framework Procedures 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

and this final rule will modify the 

framework procedures in the SnapperGrouper, Golden Crab, and Dolphin and 

Wahoo FMPs to allow for the future 

transfer, if pre-qualifying criteria are 

met, of an unharvested portion of a 

stock, total, or sector-specific ACL to the 

following fishing year (details are 

described in the Allow Carry-Over of 

Unharvested Portion of ACLs section of 

this final rule). 

The revised FMP framework 

procedures implemented by this final 

rule will allow for the potential carryover of an ACL in future management 

actions. Before NMFS can implement an 

ACL carry-over, other preceding steps 

by the Council, SSC, and NMFS must 

occur. 

First, a future stock assessment must 

be conducted to determine if a species 

is eligible for carry-over and specify the 

appropriate catch level based on the 

criteria contained in the applicable ABC 

control rule. Then, the SSC would 

determine and recommend an ABC to 

the Council and the Council would 

develop an FMP amendment or 

framework action for the species that 

includes the option of ACL carry-over. 

If the related rulemaking was 

implemented by NMFS, then that 

species would be eligible for future 

carry-over through a subsequent action 

under the abbreviated framework 

procedures described in this final rule. 

To support potential carry-over 

justification, a Term of Reference will be 

added to each future stock assessment to 

project the maximum amount of 

landings beyond the ABC that could be 

carried over in 1 year while not 

resulting in overfishing or the stock 

becoming overfished within the 

projection period. 

When the Council develops a 

subsequent fishery management action 

in response to a stock assessment to 

specify or revise an ABC and ACL for 

a stock or sector, the Council will 

determine whether carry-over will be 

authorized if annual conditions cause a 

stock ACL or sector ACL to qualify for 

carry-over. In doing so, the Council will 

consider the potential need for, and 

benefits of, carry-over for a stock that 

could become eligible according to 

criteria specified in the ABC control 

rule. The Council will also consider the 

duration of time when the specified 

ABC and ACL are effective. An FMP 

amendment or framework action that 

specifies carry-over for a stock or sector 

will include analysis of the relevant 

biological, economic, and social 

information necessary to meet the 

criteria and guidance of the ABC control 

rule. 

Following the conclusion of each 

fishing year, Council staff will notify the 

Council if any stocks and sectors for 

which carry-over is approved qualify 

based on the previous year’s landings, 

including preliminary landings 

estimates from the previous year if those 

landings data are not yet finalized. If a 

stock or sector qualifies for carry-over 

according to specifications of the ABC 

recommended by the SSC and annual 

landings meet criteria specified in the 

ABC control rule, NMFS will implement 

carry-over of eligible landings from the 

previous year via a temporary rule 

published in the Federal Register 

through the existing FMP framework 

procedure and rulemaking process. 

The ACL carry-over procedure for 

eligible fish stocks or fishery sectors 

generally will not require additional 

advisory panel (AP) input or SSC 

recommendation, because input 

relevant to an ABC being approved with 

potential for ACL carry-over will be part 

of the prior development process for the 

FMP amendment or framework in 

which the ABC and ACL for a stock or 

sector are already specified. Application 

of the carry-over procedure is expected 

to be routine and formulaic. 

The NMFS Regional Administrator 

(RA) will review any Council 

recommendations for carry-over and 

supporting information. If the RA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 273 

concurs that the Council’s 

recommendations are consistent with 

the objectives of the applicable FMP, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and all other 

applicable law, the RA will be 

authorized to implement the Council’s 

proposed action through publication of 

appropriate notification in the Federal 

Register. 

If the Council chooses to deviate from 

the criteria and guidance of the ABC 

control rules, this abbreviated process 

will not apply. 

Further details of the process can be 

found in section 2.4.1 and Appendix J 

of the ABC Control Rule Amendments. 

An example of the carry-over can be 

found in Appendix H of the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments. 

The new process will allow ACL 

carry-overs to occur in a more timely 

manner than that of an FMP amendment 

or framework action. A faster process is 

necessary due to the year-to-year nature 

of carry-overs. Under-harvest of an ACL 

may only be carried over in the 

immediate next year. Therefore, 

defining a stock’s eligibility and the 

amount of ACL being carried over must 

occur quickly enough such that the 

fishery has time to harvest the carried 

over amount within the fishing year 

following a year of under-harvest. The 

process also provides the Council 

discretion in determining whether 

carry-over should be applied to a 

potentially eligible stock when setting 

the ABC and ACL. 

It is important to note that this final 

rule will not change current ABCs or 

ACLs for any species managed under 

the FMPs affected by the ABC Control 

Rule Amendments. This rule makes no 

other substantive changes to the current 

framework procedures in the SnapperGrouper, Golden Crab, and Dolphin and 

Wahoo FMPs. 

Management Measures in the ABC 

Control Rule Amendments Not Codified 

by This Final Rule 

In addition to the regulatory language 

within this final rule, the ABC Control 

Rule Amendments contain more 

specific provisions that modify the ABC 

control rules, allow the phasing in of 

ABC changes, and allow carry-over of 

unharvested portion of the ACL, for 

Snapper-Grouper, Golden Crab, and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs. 

Modify the ABC Control Rules 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

will modify the ABC control rules for 

the Snapper-Grouper, Golden Crab, and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs by 

categorizing stocks based on the 

available information, scientific 

uncertainty evaluation, and 

incorporation of the Council’s risk 

tolerance policy through an accepted 

P*. The Council will specify the P* 

based on relative stock biomass and a 

stock risk rating. When possible, the 

SSC will determine the OFL and 

characterize its uncertainty based 

primarily on the stock assessment and 

secondarily on the SSC’s expert 

opinion. The SSC will then use the OFL 

and its uncertainty to derive and 

recommend the ABC to the Council, 

based on the risk tolerance specified by 

the Council. The detailed step-by-step 

procedure detailing how the ABC is 

derived for assessed stocks can be found 

in section 2.1.1 of the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments. ABC for unassessed 

stocks will be recommended by the SSC 

based on applicable data-limited 

methods. Unassessed stocks will be 

assigned the moderate biomass level 

unless there is a recommendation from 

the SSC that justifies assignment of a 

different level. For overfished stocks, 

the Council will specify a stock 

rebuilding plan, considering 

recommendations from the SSC and the 

AP of the respective FMP. The ABC 

enacted while the rebuilding plan is in 

effect will be based on 

recommendations from the Council’s 

SSC. The probability of success for 

rebuilding plans (1 minus P*) will be at 

least 50 percent. Control rule categories 

for assessments are described in detail 

in Table 2.1.1.2 of the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments. 

In summary, four categories in the 

revised ABC control rules will facilitate 

an ABC determination based on 

scientific uncertainty and SSC guidance. 

The Council, with advice from the SSC 

and AP, will evaluate management risk 

for each stock through a stock risk 

rating. Stock risk ratings include 

information already used in the 

productivity and susceptibility analysis 

(PSA), but also incorporate socioeconomic (for example, potential for 

discard losses, annual commercial 

value, recreational desirability, etc.) and 

environmental attributes (for example, 

climate change) (see Appendix E of the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments for 

more details). These recommendations 

will be revisited when new information 

becomes available (for example, a new 

stock assessment). The Council will 

then specify the risk rating as low, 

medium, or high risk of overfishing. A 

higher risk of overfishing will indicate 

that risk tolerance (i.e., the accepted 

probability of overfishing) should be 

lower. These stock risk ratings, along 

with relative biomass levels, will be 

used to determine the Council’s default 

risk tolerance for each stock. Default P* 

values based on relative biomass and 

stock risk rating are shown in Table 

2.1.1.3 of the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments. As an example, a stock 

with high biomass and medium stock 

risk rating will have a P* of 45 percent. 

This will be lower than the OFL, in 

accordance with Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

The SSC can recommend the Council 

reconsider the stock risk rating. This 

could happen, for example, with the 

emergence of new scientific studies or 

new information discovered through a 

stock assessment. 

The modified ABC control rules will 

also allow the Council to deviate, to a 

greater or lesser amount, from the 

default accepted probability of 

overfishing by up to 10 percent for an 

individual stock, based on its expert 

judgment, new information, or 

recommendations by the SSC or other 

expert advisors. Accepted probability of 

overfishing may not exceed 50 percent. 

Using a 50 percent probability of 

overfishing implies negligible scientific 

uncertainty and sets OFL equal to ABC. 

At P* equals 0.50, removals above ABC 

caused by deviations in biological 

parameters (for example, natural 

mortality (M), recruitment) could cause 

an overfishing determination and delay 

rebuilding plans. Therefore, adjusting 

P* above the value recommended by the 

SSC will be infrequent and well 

justified based on new scientific 

understanding and the Council’s risk 

tolerance. Additionally, when requested 

by the Council, the SSC will 

recommend the ABC for up to 5 years 

as both a constant value across years 

and as individual annual values for the 

same period of years. These options 

provide more flexibility to both the 

Council and SSC in the ABC 

determination. 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

does not change the current ABC levels 

for any species managed under the 

Snapper-Grouper, Golden Crab, and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs. Modifying 

the ABC control rules as specified will 

give the SSC the ability to recommend 

adjusting or deriving uncertainty of 

future assessment results (ultimately 

impacting projections of future catch) if 

they determine uncertainty is not 

adequately estimated through 

information used in the assessment. 

Evaluation of risk tolerance will also be 

improved by considering factors beyond 

the current PSA and expanding the 

range of reference points used to 

describe and incorporate relative 

biomass. For unassessed stocks, the 

modifications will expand the number 

of methods that could be considered for 

estimating OFL and ABC. The addition 

of economic factors in the ABC control 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
274 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

rules will allow the Council to better 

consider the long-term economic 

implications when examining 

management risk, which could lead to 

better economic outcomes and increase 

net economic benefits in a fishery for a 

given species. The inclusion of social 

factors in the ABC control rules will 

allow the Council to directly consider 

the importance of a given species to 

fishing communities and businesses 

when determining risk tolerance and 

will have long-term social benefits in 

the form of a more appropriate ABC. 

Allow the Phase-In of ABC Changes 

Currently, the phase-in of ABC 

changes is not allowed in the SnapperGrouper, Golden Crab, and Dolphin and 

Wahoo FMPs. The ABC Control Rule 

Amendments will establish criteria 

specifying when the phase-in of ABC 

changes will be allowed and specify the 

approach for the phase-in of ABC 

changes. 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

will allow the phase-in of increases to 

ABC as specified by the Council, with 

advice from the SSC and AP. Increases 

to ABC (assuming the presence of 

comparable data between assessments) 

are generally indicative of an increase in 

relative biomass and improving stock 

condition. The revised approach in the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments allows 

greater consideration of ecological, 

social, and economic effects of an 

increased ABC, and increased flexibility 

in how that change can be implemented. 

Because ABCs during an increasing 

phase-in will be less than those initially 

recommended by the SSC, the phase-in 

period is not limited (i.e., it can exceed 

the maximum timeframe specified for 

the phase-in decreases). The Council 

may specify ABC to be less than the 

SSC’s recommended ABC, but it may 

not exceed the SSC’s recommendation. 

Phasing in an ABC increase will set 

ABC below the SSC’s recommendation. 

If the phase-in is included in projections 

used to develop the SSC’s ABC 

recommendation, there also may be an 

increase to the recommended long-term 

ABC (i.e., the ABC that persists after the 

phase-in is complete). Thus, phasing in 

increases to ABC over a longer time 

period could result in a greater increase 

to long-term ABC, and phasing in 

increases over a shorter period could 

result in a smaller increase to long-term 

ABC. 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

will allow the phase-in of decreases to 

ABC when a new ABC is less than 80 

percent of the existing ABC, and over a 

period not to exceed 3 years, which is 

the maximum phase-in period allowed 

by the NS1 guidelines. The criterion 

requiring a minimum threshold of 

difference between the current and new 

ABCs to be 20 percent defines a 

significant enough change to merit 

phasing in the change and is more 

flexible than other minimum threshold 

levels considered in the ABC Control 

Rule Amendments. The Council will 

consider whether to apply a phase-in on 

a case-by-case basis when specifying a 

stock ABC through an FMP amendment 

after a new ABC has been recommended 

by the SSC. A longer phase-in period 

provides more flexibility and allows a 

more gradual change from the existing 

ABC to the new ABC. 

The phase-in of the ABC is an option 

the Council can consider to address the 

social and economic effects from 

management changes. Adopting this 

flexibility does not require the Council 

to phase in all ABC changes, nor does 

adopting one approach for one stock 

prevent the Council from choosing a 

more restrictive schedule of ABC phaseins (less than 3 years) for a different 

stock. When considering whether to 

phase in an ABC change, the Council 

will compare the risk to the stock 

against the expected social and 

economic benefits of the alternative 

ABC. Management strategy evaluations 

may be used to quantify such trade-offs. 

The Council will be able to consult with 

its scientific and fishery advisors to help 

develop a rationale and implementation 

plan for phase-ins. The phase-in of ABC 

changes is consistent with the NMFS 

2020 guidance and incorporates 

flexibility as per the revised NS1 

guidelines into the FMPs for SnapperGrouper, Golden Crab, and Dolphin and 

Wahoo. 

Allow Carry-Over of Unharvested 

Portion of ACLs 

Currently, carry-over of unharvested 

portion of ACLs is not allowed in the 

Snapper-Grouper, Golden Crab, and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs. The ABC 

Control Rule Amendments will 

establish criteria specifying 

circumstances when an unharvested 

portion of the originally specified sector 

ACL can be carried over from a single 

fishing year to increase the available 

harvest in the immediate next year. 

Carry-overs may not be delayed, and 

only amounts from the originally 

specified sector ACL may be carried 

over. Carry-over of the unharvested 

portion of a sector ACL will be allowed 

if: 

(1) The stock status is known; 

(2) The stock is neither overfished nor 

experiencing overfishing; 

(3) An overfishing limit for the stock 

is defined; 

(4) ABC decreases are not being 

phased-in; 

(5) There are measures that restrict 

annual landings to the ACL; and 

(6) The post-season AM that reduces 

the ACL in the following year according 

to any landings overages is in place for 

that stock and sector. 

The ABC Control Rule Amendments 

also specify limits on how much of the 

unharvested portion of a sector ACL 

may be carried over from a single 

fishing year to increase the sector ACL 

in the next year. The ABC and the total 

ACL may be temporarily increased to 

allow this carry-over. The temporary 

ABC may not exceed the OFL. The 

revised total ACL may not exceed the 

temporary ABC or the total ACL plus 

the carried over amount, whichever is 

less. If a stock experiences overfishing, 

either as the result of a stock assessment 

or as determined by NMFS’ annual 

evaluation of landings, that stock will 

no longer qualify for carry-over. 

Additional conditions to annually 

qualify for carry-over can be added on 

a stock-by-stock basis. For example, to 

prevent overharvest of other species 

commonly caught with the target 

species (referred to as co-caught species) 

during years with a carried-over ACL, a 

future FMP amendment specifying an 

ABC and ACL with carry-over could 

additionally require that the previous 

year’s harvest for co-caught species also 

be less than or equal to the ACL for 

carry-over to occur. When applicable, 

the Council will specify whether 

fisheries that have split seasons or subsector allocations (such as gear 

allocations) should be eligible for interannual carry-over on a case-by-case 

basis. 

Carry-overs will also be sectorspecific. The Snapper-Grouper and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs have both 

commercial and recreational sectors 

whereas the Golden Crab FMP includes 

only a commercial sector. Thus, if only 

one sector is carrying over unused ACL, 

the carried-over amount will be 

allocated only to that sector, subject to 

limitations defined above. If more than 

one sector is carrying over unused ACL 

in the same year, each sector carry-over 

amount will be completely allocated to 

the sector from which it was derived, 

unless the sum of all carry-over amounts 

plus the specified total ACL is greater 

than the OFL. In this case, the difference 

between the temporary revised ABC and 

the specified total ACL will be allocated 

using sector allocation percentages 

specified by the FMP. A revised sector 

ACL and revised ABC will remain in 

place for a single fishing year. Following 

a year that included carry-over, 

evaluations of carry-over amounts for 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 275 

future years will be based on the ABC 

and sector ACLs specified by the FMP 

rather than on the temporarily revised 

values. 

The carry-over criteria and conditions 

contained in the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments are consistent with the 

NMFS 2020 guidance. The carry-over 

criteria and conditions will also make 

carry-over applicable to only a few 

stocks managed by the Council under 

the Snapper-Grouper FMP at the time 

this action was developed. However, 

allowing carry-over does fulfill Federal 

guidance on carry-overs that requires 

allowance of this management tool to be 

included in an FMP, and provide 

additional management flexibility to 

better enable harvest of the optimum 

yield from a healthy stock. 

Changes to Codified Text Not in the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments 

In this final rule, NMFS clarifies 

existing regulations in 50 CFR 

622.194(a) about the scope of allowable 

management changes using the 

framework procedure in the SnapperGrouper FMP. Specifically, NMFS 

clarifies the allowable changes via 

framework to essential fish habitat 

(EFH), EFH habitat areas of particular 

concern (HAPCs), and coral HAPCs. 

In 2000, NMFS implemented two 

final rules that updated the SnapperGrouper FMP framework procedures to 

include EFH, EFH HAPCs, and coral 

HAPCs that enabled more timely 

implementation of subsequent 

management measures than is possible 

via an FMP amendment (65 FR 37292, 

June 14, 2000; 65 FR 51248, August 23, 

2000). Since NMFS implemented those 

final rules, NMFS has made no other 

changes to the framework procedure for 

EFH, EFH HAPCs, and coral HAPCs. 

Those regulations implemented Council 

recommendations to allow for the 

establishment of or modifications to 

EFH HAPCs or coral HAPCs via 

framework procedure. However, the 

rules are overly general and reference 

both ‘‘definitions of EFH’’ and ‘‘EFH,’’ 

which could be interpreted as 

duplicative. 

In this final rule, NMFS clarifies the 

regulations by more clearly describing 

the existing parameters for EFH, EFH 

HAPCs, and coral HAPCs that can be 

changed via framework action. 

Accordingly, NMFS revises § 622.194(a) 

without changing the Council’s original 

management recommendations. 

Comments and Reponses 

NMFS received four comments from 

individuals during the public comment 

period on the notice of availability and 

proposed rule for the ABC Control Rule 

Amendments. NMFS acknowledges the 

comment in favor of the actions in the 

ABC Control Rule Amendments and 

proposed rule and agrees that the 

actions will aid in ensuring sustainable 

fish populations. NMFS received two 

comments regarding the development of 

offshore wind infrastructure that were 

outside the scope of the ABC Control 

Rule Amendments and the proposed 

rule and are not responded to in this 

final rule. One commenter wanted more 

clarification and made comments for the 

actions contained in the ABC Control 

Rule Amendments and the proposed 

rule, and those comments are 

summarized below, along with NMFS’ 

responses. The same commenter also 

expressed an opinion as to how to 

improve the organization of the 

discussion presented in Federal 

Register, to which no response is 

provided. No changes were made to this 

final rule as a result of public comment. 

Comment 1: Why do changes need to 

be made to the current framework 

procedures for the three FMPs regarding 

biomass levels, age-structure analyses, 

maximum sustainable yield, etc.? 

Response: This final rule will allow 

for the carry-over of future ACLs and in 

a more timely manner and is the only 

substantive change to the framework 

procedures for the three FMPs within 

the scope of this rule. This final rule 

also clarifies current regulations in 50 

CFR 622.194(a) about the scope of 

allowable management changes using 

the framework procedure in the 

Snapper-Grouper FMP as described 

earlier. This final rule will not change 

any other regulatory provisions 

currently included in the framework 

procedures for the Snapper-Grouper, 

Golden Crab, or Dolphin and Wahoo 

FMPs. 

Comment 2: Biological, social, and 

economic data from all sectors and the 

analyses are necessary to help guide 

changes to an ABC and ACL. It would 

be wise if the Council completed these 

analyses each year to track the changes 

in fish, which may be applied to future 

conservation projects as needed. 

Response: NMFS agrees. NMFS and 

the Council already have an extensive 

process in place to gather biological, 

social, and economic data from all 

sectors, and analyze the effects on any 

action to change an ABC or ACL. This 

is done via the amendments to an 

existing FMP, in consultation with the 

Council’s AP, SSC, NMFS’ Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center, and the public 

through scoping meetings, public 

hearings, and public comment 

opportunities at Council meetings. 

NMFS reviews and approves the FMP 

amendments and implements necessary 

regulations only after ensuring the 

actions are consistent with the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and its National 

Standards, and all other applicable 

laws. NMFS and the Council track 

landings weekly for the commercial 

sector and recreational charter vessels 

and headboats, and every 2 months for 

the private recreational component, and 

conduct analyses as necessary. Fishery 

performance reports are published by 

the Council after getting extensive 

feedback from its APs for each FMP, 

investigating life-history parameters, 

and landings reports from fishery 

dependent and independent sources. 

NMFS and the Council evaluate trends 

and consider possible changes to the 

ABC and ACL through amendments to 

an FMP. 

Comment 3: What are the 

qualifications for including unassessed 

species in levels 2 through 5? 

Additionally, would it be possible for 

the five-star restoration system to be 

implemented here? 

Response: The current ABC control 

rules contain five levels of conditions, 

decisions, and processes, involved to set 

an ABC (see Table 2.1.1.1 in the 

Comprehensive ABC Control Rule 

Amendments). Level 1 is for species that 

have stock assessments (assessed 

species). Levels 2 through 5 apply to 

species without a stock assessment 

(unassessed species), with each level 

corresponding to a specific data-limited 

method used to calculate the ABC. 

Typically, the SSC proceeded 

sequentially through the levels adopting 

the first level that was adequate for 

deriving an ABC for the unassessed 

stock at issue. This final rule will 

implement revised ABC control rules by 

removing levels 1 through 5, and 

establishing four categories to set an 

ABC (see Table 2.1.1.2 and Section 2.1.1 

in the Comprehensive ABC Control Rule 

Amendments for more details). 

NMFS is unclear what the commenter 

meant by ‘‘the five-star restoration 

system’’ and, therefore, cannot provide 

a response. 

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 

ABC Control Rule Amendments, the 

Snapper-Grouper, Golden Crab, and 

Dolphin and Wahoo FMPs, 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. 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides 

the legal basis for this final rule. No 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1
276 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 3, 2024 / Rules and Regulations 

duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting 

Federal rules have been identified. A 

description of this final rule, why it is 

being considered, and the purpose of 

this final rule is contained in the 

SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION sections of the preamble. 

The objectives of this final rule are to 

ensure catch level recommendations are 

based on the best scientific information 

available, prevent overfishing while 

achieving optimum yield, and include 

flexibility in setting catch limits as 

allowed by the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

and in accordance with NMFS’ 

guidance on carry-over and phase-in 

provisions. 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of 

the Department of Commerce certified 

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

during the proposed rule stage that this 

rule 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. NMFS did not receive any 

comments from SBA’s Office of 

Advocacy or the public regarding the 

certification in the proposed rule. No 

changes to this final rule were made in 

response to public comments. As a 

result, a final regulatory flexibility 

analysis was not required and none was 

prepared. 

This final rule contains no 

information collection requirements 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622 

Fisheries, Fishing, South Atlantic, 

Atlantic. 

Dated: December 28, 2023. 

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 

622 as follows: 

PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE 

CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND 

SOUTH ATLANTIC 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 622 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 622.194, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 622.194 Adjustment of management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(a) Biomass levels, age-structured 

analyses, target dates for rebuilding 

overfished species, maximum 

sustainable yield (or its proxy), 

optimum yield, acceptable biological 

catch, total allowable catch, quotas 

(including a quota of zero), annual catch 

limits, annual catch targets, 

accountability measures, maximum 

fishing mortality threshold, minimum 

stock size threshold, trip limits, bag 

limits, size limits, gear restrictions 

(ranging from regulation to complete 

prohibition), seasonal or area closures, 

fishing year, rebuilding plans, 

definitions of essential fish habitat 

(EFH), establishment of or modifications 

to EFH habitat areas of particular 

concern (HAPCs) or coral HAPCs, 

restrictions on gear and fishing activities 

applicable in EFH and EFH HAPCs, 

establish or modify spawning SMZs, 

and allow transfer of the unharvested 

total or sector ACL to the following 

fishing year. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 622.252, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 622.252 Adjustment of management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(a) Biomass levels, age-structured 

analyses, maximum sustainable yield, 

acceptable biological catch, total 

allowable catch, quotas (including 

quotas equal to zero), trip limits, 

minimum sizes, gear regulations and 

restrictions, permit requirements, 

seasonal or area closures, sub-zones and 

their management measures, time frame 

for recovery of golden crab if overfished, 

fishing year (adjustment not to exceed 2 

months), observer requirements, 

authority for the Regional Administrator 

to close the fishery when a quota is 

reached or is projected to be reached, 

definitions of essential fish habitat 

(EFH), EFH habitat areas of particular 

concern (HAPCs), or coral HAPCs, and 

allow transfer of the unharvested ACL to 

the following fishing year. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. In § 622.281, revise paragraph (a) to 

read as follows: 

§ 622.281 Adjustment of management 

measures. 

* * * * * 

(a) Biomass levels, age-structured 

analyses, maximum sustainable yield, 

optimum yield, overfishing limit, total 

allowable catch, acceptable biological 

catch (ABC), ABC control rule, annual 

catch limits, annual catch targets, 

accountability measures, trip limits, 

minimum sizes, gear regulations and 

restrictions, permit requirements, 

seasonal or area closures, sub-zones and 

their management measures, overfishing 

definitions and other status 

determination criteria, time frame for 

recovery of Atlantic dolphin or wahoo 

if overfished, fishing year (adjustment 

not to exceed 2 months), authority for 

the Regional Administrator to close a 

fishery when a quota is reached or is 

projected to be reached or reopen a 

fishery when additional quota becomes 

available, definitions of essential fish 

habitat (EFH), EFH habitat areas of 

particular concern (HAPCs), or coral 

HAPCs, and allow transfer of the 

unharvested total or sector ACL to the 

following fishing year. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2023–28906 Filed 1–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. 231226–0316] 

RIN 0648–BL93 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery of the South Atlantic 

Region; Amendment 49; Correction 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule; correcting 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: NMFS corrects the final rule 

that implemented management 

measures described in Amendment 49 

to the Fishery Management Plan for the 

Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South 

Atlantic Region (FMP), which published 

in the Federal Register on September 

26, 2023. For greater amberjack, that 

final rule revised the sector annual 

catch limits (ACLs), the commercial 

minimum size limit, the commercial 

seasonal trip limits, and the April 

spawning season closure. In addition, 

Amendment 49 revised the overfishing 

limit, acceptable biological catch, 

annual optimum yield, and sector 

allocations of the total ACL, as well as 

removed the recreational annual catch 

targets for species in the FMP. In that 

final rule, NMFS inadvertently 

neglected to include a previously 

contained commercial quota provision 

that did not change through 

Amendment 49, and did not include a 

commercial trip limit paragraph heading 

that did not change through 

Amendment 49. The purpose of this 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES1