should be sufficient in time, substance, and area coverage to assure that all interested parties are aware of the opportunity to make their views known.

(4) Record. An accurate record of the participants and their views shall be reported back to the Council and maintained as a part of the Council's official records.

(d) Council operational structure— (1) General. In addition to the Council staff and the advisory groups that are provided for in the Act, an operational structure will be needed to develop basic inputs to the Fishery Management Plans and to assemble drafts for formal review by the Councils and their advisors. The operation structure(s) selected by a Council should: (i) Address directly the responsibilities and functions listed in section 302(h) of the Act; and (ii) Strike a reasonable balance among the following criteria.

(2) Criteria for formation-(i) Focused responsibility. The structure selected should assign clearly defined responsibilities in a clearly defined chain

of command consistent with the formal structure provided in the Act.

(ii) Administrative simplicity. The structure selected should permit thorough and uncomplicated supervision by those with formal responsibility, including the Executive Director of the Council.

(iii) Flexibility. Within defined responsibilities, the structure should be able to bring to bear the necessary expertise on planning problems and to respond to shifts in Council priorities.

(iv) Independence and relevance of science. The scientific input to the development of plans should to the extent possible, be institutionally insulated from managerial biases and pressure from interested parties while remaining relevant to the problems of management.

(v) Quality of scientific and technical information. The structure should assure that the best scientific and technical information available will be applied in plan development.

(vi) Minimum cost. Cost, both in dollars and in diversionary impact on ongoing programs should be minimized

within the constraints of the other criteria.

§ 601.25 Council statement of organization, practices and procedures.

(a) General. (1) The Act requires that the details of how a Council operates shall be published by the Council and made available to the public. The required Statement of Organization, Practices and Procedures, as a minimum, shall address the items listed in the format below.

(2) Publication will be in the FEDERAL REGISTER, and include an address where interested members of the public may write to request copies. Changes in operating practices and procedures shall be reflected in revisions to the statement, which shall likewise be published and made available to the public.

(b) Format. (1) Name of council.
(2) Location of offices.
(3) Legal authority.
(4) Purpose.

(5) Council composition.

(6) Officers and terms of office. (7) Staff.

(i) Composition.

(ii) Functions.

(iii) Employment practices.

(8) Standing committees of council members.

(i) Name.

(ii) Composition.

(iii) Function.

(9) Meetings and hearings.
(i) Frequency.
(ii) Duration.
(iii) Location.

(iv) Agendas or orders of business. (v) Minutes.

(vi) General rules of procedures. (vii) Authority of the chair. (10) Advisory panels. (i) Name.

(ii) Composition.

(iii) Function.

(11) Organization of management plan development teams. (i) Organization.

(ii) Practices and procedures.
(iii) Balance among criteria.
(A) Focused responsibility.
(B) Administrative simplicity.
(C) Flexibility.

(D) Independence and relevance of science.

(E) Quality of scientific and technical information.

(F) Minimum cost.

(12) Financial management system. (i) Standards for and code of employment conduct in contract awards and administration.

(ii) Procurement procedures.

(iii) Property management.

(iv) Accounting and budgetary control procedures.

PART 602-GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLANS

Sec.

602.1 Purpose and scope.

602.2 National standards for fishery conservation and management.

602.3 Contents of fishery management plans.

602.4 Standard format for fishery management plans.

602.5 Procedures for development, review and amendment of fishery management plans.

602.6 Compliance with NEPA. [Reserved] AUTHORITY: 16 U.S.C. 1851; § 301(b), Pub. L. 94-265.

SOURCE: 42 FR 34458, July 5, 1977, unless otherwise noted.

§ 602.1 Purpose and scope.

(a) A major purpose of the Fishery Conservation and Management Act is to provide for the preparation and implementation, in accordance with National Standards, of fishery management plans that will achieve and maintain, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery covered by the exclusive fishery management authority established by the Act.

(b) Title III of the Act establishes seven National Standards for fishery conservation and management. Any fishery management plan prepared either by the Regional Councils or the Secretary and any regulation promulgated to implement a plan shall be consistent with these National Standards. The Secretary is required to establish guidelines based on the National Standards, to assist in the development of fishery management plans.

(c) This part accordingly constitutes the Secretarial Guidelines for fishery management plan development based upon the National Standards. It contains explanatory comments with regard to these National Standards, guidance regarding the content of fishery management plans and for various other procedures involved in the development, submission, review and amendment of plans process.

§ 602.2 National standards for fishery conservation and management.

(a) General. Each fishery management plan, and any amendment to such plan, prepared by any Council and submitted to the Secretary will be reviewed by the Secretary for approval, disapproval, or partial disapproval. The review will involve a determination of whether the proposed plan is consistent with The National Standards, the other provisions of the Act, and any other applicable law (Section 304(b)).

(1) Purpose. This section provides explanatory comments with respect to the National Standards so as to assist the Councils in preparing fishery management plans and amendments that are consistent with the National Standards.

(2) Definitions—(i) Habitat. Habitat is that combination of physical, chemical, and biological conditions and factors necessary for the completion of the life functions of any marine animal or plant that is to be managed under the Act.

(ii) Management unit. Any species, stock, or group of species or stocks of fish that is geographically or ecologically interrelated or is affected as a group by fishing practices, that is capable of being managed as a unit on a rational and timely basis.

(b) Standard 1. Conservation and management measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the optimum yield from each fishery.

(1) Overfishing. Overfishing is a level of fishing that results in a reduction in the capacity of a management unit to produce maximum biological yield on a sustained basis for specified habitat and environmental conditions.

(2) Maximum sustainable yield (MSY). The MSY from a fishery is the largest average annual catch or yield in terms of weight of fish caught by both commercial and recreational fishermen that can be taken continuously from a stock under existing environmental conditions. A determination of MSY, which should be an estimate based upon the best scientific information available, is a biological measure necessary in the development of optimum yield.

(3) Optimum yield concept. (i) The concept of optimum yield is broader than the consideration of only the stocks of fish. It takes into account the economic well-being of the commercial fishermen, the interests of recreational fishermen, the habitat quality and the national interest in conservation and management of the fisheries as expressed in sec. 2, and the National Standards in sec. 301(a) of the Act. Optimum yield:

(A) Recognizes resource uses and values other than harvesting;

(B) Allows for the importance of quality to the recreational fishing experience;

(C) Considers social and economic factors as important criteria in setting harvest rates;

(D) Recognizes the need for fisheries products; and

(E) Considers the present extent and condition of the habitat as well as long term changes.

(ii) The optimum yield for a particular fishery will seldom, if ever, be a constant quantity over time since the condition of the fishery resource and the desires of the users may change. Periodic adjustments of harvest quotas, rates, and methods may be needed.

(4) Optimum yield and management objectives. The determination of optimum yield for a particular fishery will depend heavily upon the objectives that must be determined and adopted by the Councils with the assistance of their advisory groups and in consideration of the views of user groups and the general public. Relative weighting of the elements of the optimum yield determination will be influenced by both regional objectives and national

considerations (as set forth in sec. 3(18) of the Act). Rarely will a fishery be managed to meet a single objective. Objectives sought may conflict to & degree with one another. Consequently, priority decisions must be made in developing objectives.

(5) Optimum yield and foreign fishing. Section 201(d) of the Act provides that fishing by foreign nations is limited to that portion of the optimum yield of any fishery subject to the fishery management authority of the United States which will not be harvested by vessels of the United States. In determining whether U.S. fishermen will not harvest an optimum yield, the Councils are to give consideration to the capacity and the extent to which fishing vessels of the United States will harvest such yield. Both the optimum yield and the total "surplus" that can be made available for foreign fishing are to be included in fishery management plans and amendments to such plans.

(c) Standard 2. Conservation and management measures shall be based upon the best scientific information available.

(1) Scientific information. The term "scientific information" is meant to include information of a biological, ecological, economic, and social nature. Success of a fishery management plan depends on the quantity and quality of its scientific and technical information, the thorough analysis of this information, and the degree to which it is applied.

(2) Standardization of information. State and Federal suppliers of technical data to the Councils should give consideration to the comparability and compatibility of their respective data sets. The Councils, by means of fishery management plans, shall specify pertinent data to be submitted with respect to the fishery. Council guidance concerning standardizing the methods of obtaining and presenting such data expected from a variety of sources and areas would facilitate data collection, analysis, and evaluation.

(3) Availability of information. The type and extent of scientific information available may vary substantially from fishery to fishery. The lack of

complete scientific information concerning a fishery shall not prevent the preparation and implementation of a fishery management plan. Councils should identify information gaps and indicate the need for acquisition of additional information. As better data become available, plans should be modified.

(d) Standard 3. To the extent practicable, an individual stock of fish shall be managed as a unit throughout its range, and interrelated stocks of fish shall be managed as a unit or in close coordination.

(1) Management unit. It is expected that the management unit will incorporate the entire range of a stock of fish to the extent practicable. Also, a unit should, to the extent practicable, comprise several stocks that are ecologically interrelated or are affected as a group by fishing practices. Management units may be broadly defined to take account of the multitude of fishing practices that can include effort directed toward: (i) A single stock of fish found in a certain area; (ii) different stocks of fish caught by the same vessels or gear; (iii) all the stocks in a certain area, and so on.

(2) Jurisdiction. Unity of management, or at least cooperation between various jurisdictional authorities (e.g., State, Council, Federal Government), is vital to prevent jurisdictional disputes from adversely affecting conservation practices. Where management units cross Council or Federal-State boundaries, coordination should be sought among the several fishery managers and Councils in the development of plans and regulations. The occurrence of a stock in a given Council area does not necessarily mean that a plan will be written specifically for that limited Council area. Where a stock's range overlaps Council areas, one plan may be written to cover the entire range.

(3) Interrelationship of species/habitat. The broad, long term goal of the several plans developed by each Council should be to optimize the benefits from the total weight of all forms of marine animal and plant life within the Council area of authority. This goal requires an emphasis upon man

agement of interrelated groups of species. Management plans should also address the impact of pollution and the effects of wetland and estuarine degradation upong the stocks of fish throughout their range.

(e) Standard 4. Conservation and management measures shall not discriminate between residents of different States. If it becomes necessary to allocate or assign fishing privileges among various U.S. fishermen, such allocation shall be (1) fair and equitable to all such fishermen; (2) reasonably calculated to promote conservation; and (3) carried out in such manner that no particular individual, corporation, or other entity acquires an excessive share of such privileges.

(1) Equity in allocation. Allocation is an important component of fishery management. Allocations among present users and between present and future users should be calculated to promote conservation and to take into consideration both public and private interests. When allocation of fishing privileges becomes necessary among U.S. fishermen, e.g., among recreational or commercial fishermen or different gear types, it must be done fairly. The requirement for fairness and equity should ensure that attention is given to the preservation of the quality of the recreational fishing experience with respect to any species of substantial interest to recreational fishermen. In determining fair and equitable allocations, considerable attention should be given to the economic and social consequences of alternative allocation schemes. Any plan must provide for fair and equal treatment of U.S. citizens and corporations operating or engaging in the fisheries concerned without regard to their particular state of residence or incorporation.

(2) Traditional fishing. Traditional or historic fishing patterns will also be considered when allocation of fishing privileges is necessary.

(3) Right of entry. The opportunity of new participants to enter a fishery should be protected wherever feasible and in a manner which prevents excessive fishing effort.

(f) Standard 5. Conservation and management measures shall where

30-142 0-7946

practicable, promote efficiency in the utilization of fishery resources; except that no such measure shall have economic allocation as its sole purpose.

(1) Efficiency in the utilization of fishery resources. This standard is intended to promote the efficiency of the three elements of utilization: harvesting, processing, and marketing of fishery products.

(2) Economic efficiency. (i) Economic efficiency may be regarded as one of many factors to be considered in the development of a plan. Councils will be involved in decisions about the distribution of costs and benefits, provision of employment opportunities, changes in the rate and composition of regional economic development, environmental effects, etc. To follow efficiency principles exclusively may not provide the greatest overall benefits to the Nation or necessarily reduce costs to the consumer. Accordingly, both the advantages and disadvantages of "efficiency" will have to be carefully weighted in the context of the objectives for the particular fishery involved.

(ii) Economic analyses made during plan development and amendment will provide a basis for management choices concerning economic efficiency. Where limited access systems are recommended, an economic analysis of such factors as the effects on the price of fish, or the price of vessels, or alternative employment problems, etc., will be necessary for an informed decision regarding the implementation of such systems.

(3) Economic allocation. Where conservation and management measures are recommended for economic allocation and for other purposes, due consideration shall be made of the biological, ecological and social consequences of such measures.

(g) Standard 6. Conservation and management measures shall take into account and allow for variations among, and contingencies in, fisheries, fishery resources and catches.

(1) Causes of variations. There can be great uncertainty with regard to the location, size, and even the existence of fish stocks. Historic "peaks" and "valleys" in annual catches,

changes in environmental conditions, and species replacement in various areas provide indicators of the types of variations to be expected. Changes in habitat conditions may alter population levels. Variations are also to be expected in harvesting effort, fishing strategy, and gear efficiency within a fishery.

(2) Flexibility in plan development and implementation. Sufficient flexibility must be built into the fishery management process to allow for timely response to unforeseen changes, either mancaused, (e.g., change in catch size) or natural, (e.g., spawning failure). To the extent that information is available, every effort should be made to develop fishery management plans that take into account these variations and provide a suitable buffer in favor of conservation. In evaluating the need for flexibility, consideration should be given to the completeness of fishery data available, future availability of improved data, and the ability of the fishery to adjust to new regulations. Constant acquisition and analysis of fishery and resource data will help reduce uncertainty. Councils should respond to changes in the fishery and the resource and additional information by amending management plans and by proposing improved management techniques.

(h) Standard 7. Conservation and management measures shall, where practicable, minimize costs and avoid unnecessary duplication. A continuing goal of management is to eliminate, to the extent feasible, unnecessary costs of doing business. It is particularly important in a cooperative management regime that all entities involved take such steps as are necessary to ensure full utilization of available capabilities. Cost effectiveness should be sought through the process of optimizing existing capabilities, rather than at the expense of program objectives or program effectiveness. The costs of the proposed management regime, including enforcement, should be carefully evaluated in relation to the anticipated benefits.