Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Regulations; Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Regulations; and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary Regulations, 70488-70540 [E8-27220]
Download as PDF
70488
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
20910. Copies are also available on the
Web at https://
www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Armor, NOAA Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries, 301–713–7234.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 080302355–81415–02]
RINs 0648–AT14, 0648–AT15, 0648–AT16
Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary Regulations; Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary
Regulations; and Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuary Regulations
National Marine Sanctuary
Program (NMSP), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Final rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is
issuing final revised management plans
and revised regulations for the Gulf of
the Farallones, Cordell Bank, and
Monterey Bay national marine
sanctuaries (GFNMS, CBNMS, and
MBNMS respectively). This final rule
updates the existing regulations for
these three sanctuaries and establishes
new regulatory prohibitions for them.
New prohibitions contained in this final
rule include restrictions on: the
introduction of introduced species;
discharges from cruise ships and other
vessels; attracting or approaching white
sharks in GFNMS; anchoring vessels in
seagrass in Tomales Bay; deserting
vessels; motorized personal watercraft
use in the MBNMS (definition revision);
and, possessing, moving, or injuring
historic resources. This final rule also
codifies three dredge disposal sites in
the MBNMS that existed prior to the
MBNMS designation in 1992 and
expands the boundaries of the MBNMS
to include the Davidson Seamount and
surrounding area.
DATES: Effective Date: Pursuant to
section 304(b) of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C.
1434(b)), the revised designations and
regulations shall take effect and become
final after the close of a review period
of forty-five days of continuous session
of Congress beginning on November 20,
2008. Announcement of the effective
date of the final regulations will be
published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final
management plans and final
environmental impact statement and the
record of decision are available upon
request to NOAA’s Office of National
Marine Sanctuaries, 1305 East-West
Highway, N/NMS, Silver Spring, MD
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
I. Background
Pursuant to section 304(e) of the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16
U.S.C. 1434 et seq.) (NMSA), the
National Marine Sanctuary Program
(NMSP)1 conducted a review of the
management plans for the GFNMS,
CBNMS, and MBNMS. The review
resulted in revised management plans
for the sanctuaries, revisions to existing
regulations (including new regulatory
prohibitions), and changes to the terms
of designation for each sanctuary. On
October 6, 2006, NOAA issued notices
of availability of the DMPs and DEIS,
and published the associated proposed
rules. (GFNMS, 71 FR 59338; CBNMS,
71 FR 59039; and MBNMS, 71 FR
59050). On March 27, 2008, NOAA
published a supplemental proposed rule
relating to discharges from vessels 300
gross registered tons or more in the
three sanctuaries (73 FR 16224). This
final rule publishes the response to
comments on the proposed rule and the
final regulations for the GFNMS,
CBNMS, and MBNMS, and announces
the availability of the final revised
management plans.
A. GFNMS Background
NOAA established the GFNMS in
1981 to protect and preserve a unique
and fragile ecological community,
including the largest seabird colony in
the contiguous United States and
diverse and abundant marine mammals.
The GFNMS lies off the coast of
California, to the west and north of San
Francisco. The GFNMS is composed of
1,279 square statute miles (966 square
nautical miles) of offshore waters
extending out to and around the
Farallon Islands and nearshore waters
(up to the mean high tide line) from
Bodega Head to Rocky Point in Marin.
The GFNMS is characterized by the
widest continental shelf on the west
coast of the contiguous United States. In
the Gulf of the Farallones, the shelf
1 The National Marine Sanctuary Program was
recently elevated to an ‘‘Office’’ level within
NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS). Therefore,
the official name of the operating unit within
NOAA that implements the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act is now the National Ocean Service
Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. However, to
minimize confusion that might be created by using
different operating unit names between proposed
rule and final rule, we have chosen to use National
Marine Sanctuary Program and its associated
acronym NMSP in this document.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
reaches a width of 37 statute miles (32
nmi). Shoreward of the Farallon Islands,
the continental shelf is a relatively flat
sandy/muddy plain, which slopes
gently to the west and north from the
mainland shoreline. The Farallon
Islands lie along the outer edge of the
continental shelf, between 15 and 22
statute miles (13 and 19 nmi) southwest
of Point Reyes and approximately 30
statute miles (26 nmi) due west of San
Francisco. In addition to sandy beaches,
rocky cliffs, small coves, and offshore
stacks, the GFNMS includes open bays
(Bodega Bay, Drakes Bay) and enclosed
bays or estuaries (Bolinas Lagoon,
Tomales Bay, Estero Americano, and
Estero de San Antonio).
B. CBNMS Background
NOAA established the CBNMS in
1989 to protect and preserve the
extraordinary ecosystem, including
marine birds, mammals, and other
natural resources of Cordell Bank and
its surrounding waters. The CBNMS
protects an area of 529 square statute
miles (399 square nautical miles) off the
northern California coast. The main
feature of the sanctuary is Cordell Bank,
an offshore granite bank located on the
edge of the continental shelf, about 43
nautical miles (nmi) northwest of the
Golden Gate Bridge and 23 statute miles
(20 nmi) west of the Point Reyes
lighthouse. The CBNMS is entirely
offshore and shares its southern and
eastern boundary with the GFNMS. The
CBNMS eastern boundary is six miles
from shore and the western boundary is
the 1000 fathom isobath on the edge of
the continental slope. The CBNMS is
located in one of the world’s four major
coastal upwelling systems. The
combination of oceanic conditions and
undersea topography provides for a
highly productive environment in a
discrete, well-defined area. The vertical
relief and hard substrate of the Bank
provide benthic habitat with near-shore
characteristics in an open ocean
environment 23 statute miles (20 nmi)
from shore.
C. MBNMS Background
NOAA established the MBNMS in
1992 for the purposes of protecting and
managing the conservation, ecological,
recreational, research, educational,
historical, and esthetic resources and
qualities of the area. The MBNMS is
located offshore of California’s central
coast, adjacent to and south of the
GFNMS. It encompasses a shoreline
length of approximately 276 statute
miles (240 nmi) between Marin Rocky
Pt. in Marin County and Cambria in San
Luis Obispo County and, with the
inclusion of the Davidson Seamount,
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
approximately 6,094 square statute
miles (4,602 square nautical miles) of
ocean and coastal waters, and the
submerged lands thereunder, extending
an average distance of 30 statute miles
(26 nmi) from shore. Supporting some of
the world’s most diverse marine
ecosystems, it is home to numerous
mammals, seabirds, fishes,
invertebrates, sea turtles and plants in a
remarkably productive coastal
environment.
II. Revisions to Sanctuary Terms of
Designation
Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA (16
U.S.C. 1434(a)(4)) requires that, in
designating national marine sanctuaries,
NOAA specify the sanctuary’s ‘‘terms of
designation.’’ The NMSA requires that
each sanctuary’s terms of designation
include:
1. The geographic area proposed to be
included within the sanctuary;
2. The characteristics of the area that
give it conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, research,
educational, or esthetic value; and
3. The types of activities that will be
subject to regulation by the Secretary of
Commerce to protect those
characteristics.
The NMSA further requires that terms
of designation be modified only by
following the same procedures for
designating the sanctuary.
Following the extensive public
process for reviewing the management
plans for the sanctuaries, NOAA
determined that revisions to all three
sanctuaries’ terms of designation are
necessary to ensure they continue to
reflect current management priorities.
The sections below describe the changes
NOAA is making to each sanctuary’s
terms of designation and provide a
printed version of each (as modified) in
its entirety.
A. Revisions to the GFNMS Terms of
Designation
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
NOAA is revising the GFNMS terms
of designation to:
• Clarify that submerged lands are
part of the GFNMS;
• Revise the description of activities
that may be regulated to include
additional activities; and
• Make minor updates to ensure the
text reflects the current text of the
NMSA and to ensure its description of
the area is current.
1. Submerged Lands
NOAA is clarifying that the
submerged lands of GFNMS are legally
part of the sanctuary and included in
the boundary description. At the time
the sanctuary was designated in 1981,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Title III of the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act (now also
known as the NMSA) characterized
national marine sanctuaries as
consisting of coastal and ocean waters
but did not expressly mention
submerged lands thereunder. NOAA has
consistently interpreted its authority
under the NMSA as extending to
submerged lands, and amendments to
the NMSA in 1984 (Pub. L. 98–498)
clarified that submerged lands may be
designated by the Secretary of
Commerce as part of a national marine
sanctuary (16 U.S.C. 1432(3)). Therefore,
NOAA is modifying the GFNMS terms
of designation and the boundary
description to replace the term ‘‘seabed’’
with ‘‘submerged lands.’’ Additionally,
boundary coordinates in the revised
terms of designation and in the
sanctuary regulations are expressed by
coordinates based on the North
American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is also revising the GFNMS
terms of designation to modify the list
of activities that may be regulated. The
revised terms of designation now also
authorize regulation of: discharging or
depositing from beyond the boundary of
the sanctuary; activities regarding
cultural or historical resources; taking or
possessing any marine mammal, sea
turtle, or bird within or above the
Sanctuary except as authorized by the
Marine Mammal Protection Act,
Endangered Species Act, and the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act; introducing
or otherwise releasing from within or
into the sanctuary an introduced
species; attracting or approaching any
animal; and operating a vessel (i.e.,
watercraft of any description) within the
sanctuary, including but not limited to,
anchoring or deserting a vessel. These
revisions will enable NOAA to more
effectively and efficiently address new
and emerging resource management
issues, and are necessary in order to
ensure protection, preservation, and
management of the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
cultural, educational, archeological,
scientific, and esthetic resources and
qualities of the GFNMS. Finally, a
technical correction is being made to
Article V to delete the phrase ‘‘and in
Article IV’’ from the statement that
‘‘fishing’’ includes mariculture.2 The
term ‘‘fishing’’ does not appear in
Article IV.
2 Throughout
this document, the term
‘‘mariculture’’ means the same as ‘‘marine
aquaculture.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70489
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the GFNMS
terms of designation to provide: an
updated and more complete description
of characteristics that give the sanctuary
particular value; greater clarity on the
applicability of sanctuary emergency
regulations (and consistency with the
National Marine Sanctuary Program
regulations of general applicability, 15
CFR Part 922, Subpart E); an updated
explanation of the effect of Sanctuary
authority on preexisting leases, permits,
licenses, and rights; and various minor
revisions to conform wording of the
Designation Document, where
appropriate, to wording used for more
recently designated sanctuaries. In
Article V (Relation to Other Regulatory
Programs), the ‘‘Fishing and Waterfowl
Hunting’’ section is revised to clarify the
original intent that, although the
Sanctuary does not have authority to
regulate fishing, fishing vessels may be
regulated with respect to activities such
as discharge/deposit and anchoring in
accordance with Article IV. No changes
are made to the ‘‘Defense Activities’’
section of the Designation Document.
An additional change to the terms of
designation updates Article VI regarding
the process to modify the terms of
designation. This change deletes the
requirement that modifications must be
approved by the President of the United
States and replaces it with a
requirement that changes be approved
by the Secretary of Commerce or his or
her designee. This change is consistent
with amendments to the NMSA enacted
after the sanctuary was designated in
1981.
The revised terms of designation
printed below replace the current terms
of designation first printed in the
Federal Register on January 26, 1981
(46 FR 7936).
REVISED DESIGNATION DOCUMENT
FOR GULF OF THE FARALLONES
NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, Public Law 92–
532 (the Act), the waters and submerged
lands along the Coast of California north
and south of Point Reyes Headlands,
between Bodega Head and Rocky Point
and surrounding the Farallon Islands,
are hereby designated a National Marine
Sanctuary for the purposes of preserving
and protecting this unique and fragile
ecological community.
Article I. Effect of Designation
Within the area designated in 1981 as
The Point Reyes/Farallon Islands
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70490
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
National Marine Sanctuary (the
Sanctuary) described in Article II, the
Act authorizes the promulgation of such
regulations as are reasonable and
necessary to protect the values of the
Sanctuary. Section 1 of Article IV of this
Designation Document lists activities of
the types that are either to be regulated
on the effective date of final rulemaking
or may have to be regulated at some
later date in order to protect Sanctuary
resources and qualities. Listing does not
necessarily mean that a type of activity
will be regulated; however, if a type of
activity is not listed it may not be
regulated, except on an emergency
basis, unless section 1 of Article IV is
amended to include the type of activity
by the same procedures by which the
original designation was made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of an area of
the waters and the submerged lands
thereunder adjacent to the coast of
California of approximately 966 square
nautical miles (nmi), extending seaward
to a distance of 6 nmi from the
mainland from Point Reyes to Bodega
Bay and 12 nmi west from the Farallon
Islands and Noonday Rock, and
including the intervening waters and
submerged lands. The precise
boundaries are defined by regulation.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area
That Give It Particular Value
The Sanctuary includes a rich and
diverse marine ecosystem and a wide
variety of marine habitats, including
habitat for over 36 species of marine
mammals. Rookeries for over half of
California’s nesting marine bird
populations and nesting areas for at
least 12 of 16 known U.S. nesting
marine bird species are found within
the boundaries. Abundant populations
of fish and shellfish are also found
within the Sanctuary. The Sanctuary
also has one of the largest seasonal
concentrations of white sharks
(Carcharodon carcharias) in the world.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Article IV. Scope of Regulation
Section 1. Activities Subject to
Regulation
The following activities are subject to
regulation, including prohibition, as
may be necessary to ensure the
management, protection, and
preservation of the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
cultural, archeological, scientific,
educational, and aesthetic resources and
qualities of this area:
a. Hydrocarbon operations;
b. Discharging or depositing any
substance within or from beyond the
boundary of the Sanctuary;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
c. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise
altering the submerged lands of the
Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or
abandoning any structure, material, or
other matter on or in the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary;
d. Activities regarding cultural or
historical resources;
e. Introducing or otherwise releasing
from within or into the Sanctuary an
introduced species;
f. Taking or possessing any marine
mammal, marine reptile, or bird within
or above the Sanctuary except as
permitted by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, Endangered Species Act
and Migratory Bird Treaty Act;
g. Attracting or approaching any
animal; and
h. Operating a vessel (i.e., watercraft
of any description) within the
Sanctuary.
Section 2. Consistency With
International Law
The regulations governing the
activities listed in section 1 of this
Article will apply to foreign flag vessels
and persons not citizens of the United
States only to the extent consistent with
recognized principles of international
law, including treaties and international
agreements to which the United States
is signatory.
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or
minimize the destruction of, loss of, or
injury to a Sanctuary resource or
quality, or minimize the imminent risk
of such destruction, loss, or injury, any
and all activities, including those not
listed in section 1 of this Article, are
subject to immediate temporary
regulation, including prohibition.
Article V. Relation to Other Regulatory
Programs
Section 1. Fishing and Waterfowl
Hunting
The regulation of fishing, including
fishing for shellfish and invertebrates,
and waterfowl hunting, is not
authorized under Article IV. However,
fishing vessels may be regulated with
respect to vessel operations in
accordance with Article IV, section 1,
paragraphs (b) and (h), and mariculture
activities involving alterations of or
construction on the seabed, or release of
introduced species by mariculture
activities not covered by a valid lease
from the State of California and in effect
on the effective date of the final
regulation, can be regulated in
accordance with Article IV, section 1,
paragraph (c) and (e). All regulatory
programs pertaining to fishing, and to
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
waterfowl hunting, including
regulations promulgated under the
California Fish and Game Code and
Fishery Management Plans promulgated
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq., will remain in
effect, and all permits, licenses, and
other authorizations issued pursuant
thereto will be valid within the
Sanctuary unless authorizing any
activity prohibited by any regulation
implementing Article IV.
The term ‘‘fishing’’ as used in this
Article includes mariculture.
Section 2. Defense Activities
The regulation of activities listed in
Article IV shall not prohibit any
Department of Defense activity that is
essential for national defense or because
of emergency. Such activities shall be
consistent with the regulations to the
maximum extent practicable.
Section 3. Other Programs
All applicable regulatory programs
will remain in effect, and all permits,
licenses, and other authorizations
issued pursuant thereto will be valid
within the Sanctuary unless prohibited
by regulations implementing Article IV.
The Sanctuary regulations will set forth
any necessary certification procedures.
Article VI. Alterations to This
Designation
The terms of designation, as defined
under section 304(a) of the Act, may be
modified only by the same procedures
by which the original designation is
made, including public hearings,
consultation with interested Federal,
State, and local agencies, review by the
appropriate Congressional committees
and Governor of the State of California,
and approval by the Secretary of
Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
B. Revisions to the CBNMS Terms of
Designation
NOAA is revising the CBNMS terms
of designation to:
• Clarify that submerged lands are a
part of the CBNMS;
• Revise the description of activities
that may be regulated to include
additional activities;
• Make minor updates to ensure the
text reflects the current text of the
NMSA and to ensure its description of
the area is current.
1. Submerged Lands
NOAA is clarifying that the
submerged lands of the CBNMS are
legally part of the sanctuary and are
included in the boundary description.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
At the time the sanctuary was
designated in 1989, Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act (now also known as the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act)
characterized national marine
sanctuaries as consisting of coastal,
marine and ocean waters but did not
expressly mention submerged lands
thereunder. NOAA has consistently
interpreted its authority under the
NMSA as extending to submerged lands,
and amendments to the NMSA in 1984
(Pub. L. 98–498) clarified that
submerged lands may be designated by
the Secretary of Commerce as part of a
national marine sanctuary (16 U.S.C.
1432(3)). Therefore, to be consistent
with the NMSA, NOAA is updating the
terms of designation and the boundary
description, by adding ‘‘submerged
lands thereunder’’ to the term ‘‘marine
waters.’’ Additionally, boundary
coordinates in the revised Designation
Document and in the sanctuary
regulations will be expressed by
coordinates based on the North
American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is revising the CBNMS terms
of designation to modify the list of
activities that may be regulated. The
revised terms of designation now also
authorize regulation of: activities
regarding cultural or historic resources;
placing or abandoning any structure,
material, or other matter on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanctuary;
taking or possessing any marine
mammal, sea turtle, or bird; introducing
or otherwise releasing an introduced
species from within or into the
Sanctuary; and drilling into, dredging,
altering, or constructing on the
submerged lands.
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the CBNMS
terms of designation to provide: an
updated and more complete description
of characteristics that give the Sanctuary
particular value; an updated
explanation of the effect of Sanctuary
authority on preexisting leases, permits,
licenses, and rights; and various minor
revisions in order to conform wording of
the Designation Document, where
appropriate, to wording used for more
recently designated sanctuaries.
In Article V (Relation to Other
Regulatory Programs), the ‘‘Fishing’’
section is revised to clarify the original
intent that, although the Sanctuary does
not have authority to regulate fishing,
fishing vessels may be regulated with
respect to discharge/deposit and
anchoring in accordance with Article
IV. No changes are being made to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
70491
‘‘Defense Activities’’ section of the
Designation Document.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area
That Give It Particular Value
Revised Designation Document for the
Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary
Cordell Bank is characterized by a
combination of oceanic conditions and
undersea topography that provides for a
highly productive environment in a
discrete, well-defined area. In addition,
the Bank and its surrounding waters
may contain historical resources of
national significance. The Bank consists
of a series of steep-sided ridges and
narrow pinnacles rising from the edge of
the continental shelf. It lies on a plateau
300 to 400 feet (91 to 122 meters) deep
and ascends to within about 115 feet (35
meters) of the surface at its shallowest
point. The seasonal upwelling of
nutrient-rich bottom waters and wide
depth ranges in the vicinity, have led to
a unique association of subtidal and
oceanic species. The vigorous biological
community flourishing at Cordell Bank
includes an exceptional assortment of
algae, invertebrates, fishes, marine
mammals and seabirds.
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, 16
U.S.C. 1431 et seq. (the ‘‘Act’’), the
Cordell Bank and its surrounding waters
offshore northern California, as
described in Article 2, are hereby
designated as the Cordell Bank National
Marine Sanctuary (the Sanctuary) for
the purpose of protecting and
conserving that special, discrete, highly
productive marine area and ensuring the
continued availability of the
conservation, ecological, research,
educational, aesthetic, historical, and
recreational resources therein.
Article I. Effect of Designation
The Sanctuary was designated on May
24, 1989 (54 FR 22417). Section 308 of
the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, 16
U.S.C. 1431 et seq. (NMSA), authorizes
the issuance of such regulations as are
necessary to implement the designation,
including managing, protecting and
conserving the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
cultural, archeological, scientific,
educational, and aesthetic resources and
qualities of the Sanctuary. Section 1 of
Article IV of this Designation Document
lists activities of the types that are either
to be regulated on the effective date of
final rulemaking or may have to be
regulated at some later date in order to
protect Sanctuary resources and
qualities. Listing does not necessarily
mean that a type of activity will be
regulated; however, if a type of activity
is not listed it may not be regulated,
except on an emergency basis, unless
Section 1 of Article IV is amended to
include the type of activity by the same
procedures by which the original
designation was made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of a 399
square nautical mile area of marine
waters and the submerged lands
thereunder encompassed by a boundary
extending approximately 250° from the
northernmost boundary of Gulf of the
Farallones National Marine Sanctuary
(GFNMS) to the 1,000 fathom isobath
northwest of the Bank, then south along
this isobath to the GFNMS boundary
and back to the northeast along this
boundary to the beginning point. The
precise boundaries are set forth in the
regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Article IV. Scope of Regulation
Section 1. Activities Subject to
Regulation
The following activities are subject to
regulation, including prohibition, as
may be necessary to ensure the
management, protection, and
preservation of the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
cultural, archeological, scientific,
educational, and aesthetic resources and
qualities of this area:
a. Depositing or discharging any
material or substance;
b. Removing, taking, or injuring or
attempting to remove, take, or injure
benthic invertebrates or algae located on
the Bank or on or within the line
representing the 50 fathom isobath
surrounding the Bank;
c. Hydrocarbon (oil and gas) activities
within the Sanctuary;
d. Anchoring on the Bank or on or
within the line representing the 50
fathom isobath surrounding the Bank;
e. Activities regarding cultural or
historical resources;
f. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise
altering the submerged lands of the
Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or
abandoning any structure, material, or
other matter on or in the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary;
g. Taking or possessing any marine
mammal, marine reptile, or bird except
as permitted under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, Endangered Species Act
or Migratory Bird Treaty Act; and
h. Introducing or otherwise releasing
from within or into the Sanctuary an
introduced species.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70492
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Section 3. Other Programs
Section 2. Consistency With
International Law
The regulations governing activities
listed in Section 1 of this Article shall
apply to foreign flag vessels and foreign
persons only to the extent consistent
with generally recognized principles of
international law, and in accordance
with treaties, conventions, and other
agreements to which the United States
is a party.
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or
minimize the destruction of, loss of, or
injury to a Sanctuary resource or
quality, or minimize the imminent risk
of such destruction, loss, or injury, any
and all activities, including those not
listed in Section 1 of this Article, are
subject to immediate temporary
regulation, including prohibition,
within the limits of the Act on an
emergency basis for a period not to
exceed 120 days.
Article V. Relation to Other Regulatory
Programs
Section 1. Fishing
The regulation of fishing is not
authorized under Article IV. All
regulatory programs pertaining to
fishing, including Fishery Management
Plans promulgated under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq. (‘‘Magnuson-Stevens
Act’’), shall remain in effect. All
permits, licenses, approvals, and other
authorizations issued pursuant to the
Magnuson-Stevens Act shall be valid
within the Sanctuary. However, all
fishing vessels are subject to regulation
under Article IV with respect to
discharges and anchoring.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Section 2. Defense Activities
The regulation of activities listed in
Article IV shall not prohibit any
Department of Defense (DOD) activities
that are necessary for national defense.
All such activities being carried out by
DOD within the Sanctuary on the
effective date of designation shall be
exempt from any prohibitions contained
in the Sanctuary regulations. Additional
DOD activities initiated after the
effective date of designation that are
necessary for national defense will be
exempted after consultation between the
Department of Commerce and DOD.
DOD activities not necessary for
national defense, such as routine
exercises and vessel operations, shall be
subject to all prohibitions contained in
the Sanctuary regulations.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
All applicable regulatory programs
shall remain in effect, and all permits,
licenses, approvals, and other
authorizations issued pursuant to those
programs shall be valid unless
prohibited by regulations implementing
Article IV.
Article VI. Alterations to This
Designation
The terms of designation, as defined
under section 304(a) of the Act, may be
modified only by the same procedures
by which the original designation is
made, including public hearings,
consultation with interested Federal,
State, and local agencies, review by the
appropriate Congressional committees
and Governor of the State of California,
and approval by the Secretary of
Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
C. Revisions to the MBNMS Terms of
Designation
NOAA is revising the MBNMS terms
of designation to:
• Add Davidson Seamount
Management Zone;
• Revise the description of activities
that may be regulated to include
additional activities; and
• Make minor updates to ensure the
text reflects the current text of the
NMSA and to ensure its description of
the area is current.
1. Add Davidson Seamount
Management Zone
NOAA is amending the MBNMS
boundary description to include the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone,
a 775 square statute mile (585 square
nautical mile) area defined by the
geodetic lines connecting the
coordinates provided in Appendix F to
this subpart. The Davidson Seamount is
located approximately 80 statute miles
(70 nmi) to the southwest of Monterey,
due west of San Simeon, and is home
to a diverse assemblage of deep water
organisms. This highly diverse
community includes many endemic
species and fragile, long-lived coldwater corals and sponges. NOAA also
updates Article III, Characteristics of the
Area that Give it Particular Value to
include a discussion of the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone.
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is revising the MBNMS terms
of designation to modify the list of
activities that may be regulated. A
priority issue identified during the
management plan review was
addressing the threat posed by
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
introduced species. One of the
recommended strategies for addressing
this issue was to develop regulations
prohibiting such releases. In addition,
NOAA modifies the terms of
designation to authorize regulation of
the possession of a Sanctuary historical
resource wherever the resource is found.
The existing designation document
currently lists as subject to regulation
‘‘possessing within the Sanctuary a
Sanctuary resource * * * ’’. NOAA is
making clear that a prohibition against
possession of Sanctuary historical
resources would apply outside the
Sanctuary boundaries (e.g., at a harbor).
With these changes, the revised terms
of designation now authorize regulation
of: Activities regarding cultural or
historic resources; placing or
abandoning any structure, material, or
other matter on or in the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary; taking or
possessing any marine mammal, sea
turtle, or bird; introducing or otherwise
releasing an introduced species from
within or into the Sanctuary; and
drilling into, dredging, altering, or
constructing on the submerged lands.
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the MBNMS
terms of designation to make minor
punctuation improvements and to
delete Appendices I and II of the
MBNMS Designation Document and
refer to the site regulations for sanctuary
seaward boundaries and the location of
four sites designated for disposal of
dredged material. NOAA is also deleting
outdated language related to study areas
for dredged material disposal sites
outside the MBNMS boundaries.
REVISED TERMS OF DESIGNATION
DOCUMENT FOR THE MONTEREY
BAY NATIONAL MARINE
SANCTUARY
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and
Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended
(the ‘‘Act’’), 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.,
Monterey Bay and the Davidson
Seamount, and their surrounding waters
offshore of central California, and the
submerged lands under Monterey Bay
and its surrounding waters, as described
in Article II, and the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone, as
described in Article II, are hereby
designated as the Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary (the
Sanctuary) for the purposes of
protecting and managing the
conservation, ecological, recreational,
research, educational, historical, and
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
esthetic resources and qualities of the
area.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Article I. Effect of Designation
The Act authorizes the issuance of
such regulations as are necessary and
reasonable to implement the
designation, including managing and
protecting the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
research, educational, and esthetic
resources and qualities of the Sanctuary.
Section 1 of Article IV of this
Designation Document lists activities of
the types that either are to be regulated
on the effective date of designation or
may have to be regulated at some later
date in order to protect Sanctuary
resources and qualities. Listing does not
necessarily mean that a type of activity
will be regulated; however, if a type of
activity is not listed it may not be
regulated, except on an emergency
basis, unless section 1 of Article IV is
amended to include the type of activity
by the same procedures by which the
original designation was made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of two
separate areas. (a) The first area consists
of an area of approximately 4017 square
nautical miles (nmi) of coastal and
ocean waters, and submerged lands
thereunder, in and surrounding
Monterey Bay off the central coast of
California. The northern terminus of the
Sanctuary boundary is located along the
southern boundary of the Gulf of the
Farallones National Marine Sanctuary
(GFNMS) beginning at Rocky Point just
south of Stinson Beach in Marin
County. The Sanctuary boundary
follows the GFNMS boundary westward
to a point approximately 29 nmi
offshore from Moss Beach in San Mateo
County. The Sanctuary boundary then
extends southward in a series of arcs,
which generally follow the 500 fathom
isobath, to a point approximately 27
nmi offshore of Cambria, in San Luis
Obispo County. The Sanctuary
boundary then extends eastward
towards shore until it intersects the
Mean High Water Line (MHWL) along
the coast near Cambria. The Sanctuary
boundary then follows the MHWL
northward to the northern terminus at
Rocky Point. The shoreward Sanctuary
boundary excludes a small area between
Point Bonita and Point San Pedro. Pillar
Point Harbor, Santa Cruz Harbor,
Monterey Harbor, and Moss Landing
Harbor are all excluded from the
Sanctuary shoreward from the points
listed in Appendix A of the site
regulations except for Moss Landing
Harbor, where all of Elkhorn Slough east
of the Highway One bridge, and west of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
the tide gate at Elkhorn Road and
toward the center channel from the
MHWL is included within the
Sanctuary, excluding areas within the
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine
Research Reserve. Exact coordinates for
the seaward boundary and harbor
exclusions are provided in Appendix A
of the site regulations.
(b) The Davidson Seamount
Management Zone (DSMZ) is also part
of the Sanctuary. This area, bounded by
geodetic lines connecting a rectangle
centered on the top of the Davidson
Seamount, consists of approximately
585 square nmi of ocean waters and the
submerged lands thereunder. The
shoreward boundary of this portion of
the Sanctuary is located approximately
65 nmi off the coast of San Simeon in
San Luis Obispo County. Exact
coordinates for the DSMZ boundary are
provided in Appendix F of the site
regulations.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area
That Give It Particular Value
The Monterey Bay area is
characterized by a combination of
oceanic conditions and undersea
topography that provides for a highly
productive ecosystem and a wide
variety of marine habitat. The area is
characterized by a narrow continental
shelf fringed by a variety of coastal
types. The Monterey Submarine Canyon
is unique in its size, configuration, and
proximity to shore. This canyon system
provides habitat for pelagic
communities and, along with other
distinct bathymetric features, may
modify currents and act to enrich local
waters through strong seasonal
upwelling. Monterey Bay itself is a rare
geological feature, as it is one of the few
large embayments along the Pacific
coast.
The Monterey Bay area has a highly
diverse floral and faunal component.
Algal diversity is extremely high and
the concentrations of pinnipeds, whales,
otters and some seabird species are
outstanding. The fish populations,
particularly in Monterey Bay, are
generally abundant and the variety of
crustaceans and other invertebrates is
high.
In addition there are many direct and
indirect human uses of the area. The
most important economic activity
directly dependent on the resources is
commercial fishing, which has played
an important role in the history of
Monterey Bay and continues to be of
great economic value.
The diverse resources of the Monterey
Bay area are enjoyed by the residents of
this area as well as numerous visitors.
The population of Monterey and Santa
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70493
Cruz counties is rapidly expanding and
is based in large part on the
attractiveness of the area’s natural
beauty. The high water quality and the
resulting variety of biota and their
proximity to shore is one of the prime
reasons for the international renown of
the area as a prime tourist location. The
quality and abundance of the natural
resources have attracted human beings
from the earliest prehistoric times to the
present and as a result the area contains
significant historical, e.g.,
archaeological and paleontological,
resources, such as Costanoan Indian
midden deposits, aboriginal remains,
and sunken ships and aircraft.
The biological and physical
characteristics of the Monterey Bay area
combine to provide outstanding
opportunities for scientific research on
many aspects of marine ecosystems. The
diverse habitats are readily accessible to
researchers. These research institutions
are exceptional resources with a long
history of research and large databases
possessing a considerable amount of
baseline information on the Bay and its
resources, providing interpretive
exhibits of the marine environment,
docent programs serving the public and
marine related programs for school
groups and teachers.
The Davidson Seamount located
offshore of California, 70 nmi southwest
of Monterey, due west of San Simeon,
and is one of the largest known
seamounts in U.S. waters. Davidson
Seamount is twenty-six statute miles
long and eight statute miles wide. From
base to crest, Davidson Seamount is
7,480 feet (2,280 meters) tall; yet still
4,101 feet (1,250 meters) below the sea
surface. Davidson Seamount has an
atypical seamount shape, having
northeast-trending ridges created by a
type of volcanism only recently
described. It last erupted about 12
million years ago. This large geographic
feature was the first underwater
formation to be characterized as a
‘‘seamount’’ and was named after the
Coast and Geodetic Survey (forerunner
to the National Ocean Service) scientist
George Davidson. Davidson Seamount’s
geographical importance is due to its
location in the California Current,
which likely provides a larger flux of
carbon (food) to the sessile organisms on
the seamount surface relative to a
majority of other seamounts in the
Pacific and may have unique links to
the nearby Partington and Monterey
submarine canyons.
The surface water habitat of the
Davidson Seamount hosts a variety of
seabirds, marine mammals, and pelagic
fishes, e.g., albatrosses, shearwaters,
sperm whales, killer whales, albacore
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70494
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
tuna, and ocean sunfish. Organisms in
the midwater habitat have a patchy
distribution, e.g., jellies and swimming
worms, with marine snow, organic
matter that continually ‘‘rains’’ down
from the sea surface, providing an
important food source for deep-sea
animals. The seamount crest habitat is
the most diverse of habitats in the
Davidson Seamount area, including
large gorgonian coral (e.g., Paragorgia
sp.) forests, vast sponge fields (many
undescribed species), crabs, deep-sea
fishes, shrimp, and basket stars. The
seamount slope habitat is composed of
cobble and rocky areas interspersed
with areas of ash and sediment, and
hosts a diverse assemblage of sessile
invertebrates and rare deep-sea fishes.
The seamount base habitat is the
interface between rocky outcrops and
the flat, deep soft bottom habitat.
Davidson Seamount is home to
previously undiscovered species and
species assemblages, such as large
patches of corals and sponges, where
there is an opportunity to discover
unique associations between species
and other ecological processes. The high
biological diversity of these assemblages
has not been found on other California
seamounts. Davidson Seamount’s
importance for conservation revolves
around the endemism of seamount
species, potential future harvest damage
to coral and sponge assemblages, and
the low resilience of these species.
Abundant and large, fragile species (e.g.,
corals greater than eight feet tall, and at
least 200 years old, as well as vast fields
of sponges) and a physically
undisturbed seafloor appear relatively
pristine.
The final environmental impact
statements (1992 and 2008) provide
more detail on the characteristics of the
Monterey Bay and Davidson Seamount
area that give it particular value.
Article IV. Scope of Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Section 1. Activities Subject to
Regulation
The following activities are subject to
regulation, including prohibition, to the
extent necessary and reasonable to
ensure the protection and management
of the conservation, ecological,
recreational, research, educational,
historical, and esthetic resources and
qualities of the Sanctuary:
a. Exploring for, developing, or
producing oil, gas, or minerals (e.g.,
clay, stone, sand, metalliferous ores,
gravel, non-metalliferous ores, or any
other solid material or other matter of
commercial value) within the
Sanctuary;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
b. Discharging or depositing, from
within the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter, except
dredged material deposited at disposal
sites authorized prior to the effective
date of Sanctuary designation, as
described in Appendix C to the
regulations, provided that the activity is
pursuant to, and complies with the
terms and conditions of, a valid Federal
permit or approval existing on the
effective date of Sanctuary designation;
c. Discharging or depositing, from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter, except
dredged material deposited at the
authorized disposal sites described in
Appendix D to the site regulations,
provided that the activity is pursuant to,
and complies with the terms and
conditions of, a valid Federal permit or
approval;
d. Taking, removing, moving,
catching, collecting, harvesting, feeding,
injuring, destroying, or causing the loss
of, or attempting to take, remove, move,
catch, collect, harvest, feed, injure,
destroy, or cause the loss of, a marine
mammal, sea turtle, seabird, historical
resource, or other Sanctuary resource;
e. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise
altering the submerged lands of the
Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or
abandoning any structure, material, or
other matter on or in the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary;
f. Possessing within the Sanctuary a
Sanctuary resource or any other
resource, regardless of where taken,
removed, moved, caught, collected, or
harvested, that, if it had been found
within the Sanctuary, would be a
Sanctuary resource;
g. Possessing any Sanctuary historical
resource;
h. Flying a motorized aircraft above
the Sanctuary;
i. Operating a vessel (i.e., water craft
of any description) within the
Sanctuary;
j. Aquaculture or kelp harvesting
within the Sanctuary;
k. Interfering with, obstructing,
delaying, or preventing an investigation,
search, seizure, or disposition of seized
property in connection with
enforcement of the Act or any regulation
or permit issued under the Act; and
l. Introducing or otherwise releasing
from within or into the Sanctuary an
introduced species.
Section 2. Emergencies
Where necessary to prevent or
minimize the destruction of, loss of, or
injury to a Sanctuary resource or
quality, or minimize the imminent risk
of such destruction, loss, or injury, any
and all activities, including those not
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
listed in section 1 of this Article, are
subject to immediate temporary
regulation, including prohibition.
Article V. Effect on Leases, Permits,
Licenses, and Rights
Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the
Act, 16 U.S.C. 1434(c)(1), no valid lease,
permit, license, approval, or other
authorization issued by any Federal,
State or local authority of competent
jurisdiction, or any right of subsistence
use or access, may be terminated by the
Secretary of Commerce or designee as a
result of this designation or as a result
of any Sanctuary regulation if such
authorization or right was in existence
on the effective date of this designation.
The Secretary of Commerce or designee,
however, may regulate the exercise
(including, but not limited to, the
imposition of terms and conditions) of
such authorization or right consistent
with the purposes for which the
Sanctuary is designated.
In no event may the Secretary or
designee issue a permit authorizing, or
otherwise approve: (1) The exploration
for, development of or production of oil,
gas, or minerals within the Sanctuary
except for limited, small-scale jade
collection in the Jade Cove area of the
Sanctuary [defined as the area bounded
by the 35.92222 N latitude parallel
(coastal reference point: beach access
stairway at South Sand Dollar Beach),
the 35.88889 N latitude parallel (coastal
reference point: westernmost tip of Cape
San Martin), and the mean high tide line
seaward to the 90 foot isobath (depth
line)]; (2) the discharge of primarytreated sewage (except for regulation,
pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the Act,
of the exercise of valid authorizations in
existence on the effective date of
Sanctuary designation and issued by
other authorities of competent
jurisdiction); or (3) the disposal of
dredged material within the Sanctuary
other than at sites authorized by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(in consultation with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers) prior to the effective
date of designation. Any purported
authorizations issued by other
authorities after the effective date of
Sanctuary designation for any of these
activities within the Sanctuary shall be
invalid.
Article VI. Alterations to This
Designation
The terms of designation, as defined
under section 304(a) of the Act, may be
modified only by the same procedures
by which the original designation is
made, including public hearings,
consultation with interested Federal,
State, and local agencies, review by the
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
appropriate Congressional committees
and Governor of the State of California,
and approval by the Secretary of
Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
III. Summary of Regulatory
Amendments
This section describes the changes
NOAA is making to the regulations for
the CBNMS, GFNMS, and the MBNMS
(hereinafter the ‘‘Sanctuaries’’) to
implement the management plan
reviews for the three sanctuaries.
Because the rationale behind the
amendments to each sanctuary’s
regulations is similar or the same, the
discussion of the changes has been
grouped by subject area, except where
explicitly noted otherwise. References
in this section to ‘‘former regulations’’
are to the state of the regulations as they
existed before this final rule becomes
effective.
A. Update and Clarify the Regulations
on Discharges
NOAA is modifying the regulatory
prohibition on discharging or depositing
material or other matter (hereafter
‘‘discharge regulations’’) into the
Sanctuaries. The following regulatory
changes are made to all three
sanctuaries unless otherwise specified.
1. This rule clarifies the prohibition
on discharging or depositing any
material or other matter to make it clear
that the regulation applies to discharges
and deposits ‘‘from within or into’’ the
Sanctuaries. Adding the word ‘‘into’’ is
intended to clarify that the prohibition
applies not only to discharges and
deposits originating in the Sanctuaries
(e.g., from vessels in the Sanctuaries),
but also, for example, from discharges
and deposits above the Sanctuaries.
2. This rule clarifies that the
exception to the discharge/deposit
prohibition for fish, fish parts, or
chumming materials (bait) applies only
to discharges or deposits made during
the conduct of lawful fishing activities
within the Sanctuaries.
3. This rule clarifies that the
exception to the discharge prohibition
for biodegradable effluent discharges/
deposits from marine sanitation devices
applies only to operable Type I or II
marine sanitation devices approved by
the United States Coast Guard in
accordance with the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended.
Although the exception for vessel
wastes ‘‘generated by marine sanitation
devices’’ was intended to prohibit the
discharge of untreated sewage into the
Sanctuaries, it was unclear if it allowed
discharges from Type III marine
sanitation devices. Therefore, NOAA
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
modifies its regulations to clarify that
such discharges are only allowed if
generated by properly functioning Type
I or II marine sanitation devices. Type
I and Type II marine sanitation devices
treat wastes, but Type III marine
sanitation devices store waste until it is
removed at designated pump-out
stations on shore or discharged at sea.
Finally, the revised regulations also
require vessel operators to lock all
marine sanitation devices in a manner
that prevents the discharge of untreated
sewage. This requirement would aid in
enforcement and compliance with
Sanctuary regulations.
Note that in the response to comments
‘‘biodegradable’’ has been replaced with
‘‘clean.’’ See Section IV.
4. This rule eliminates the exception
for discharging or depositing food waste
resulting from meals onboard vessels
into CBNMS and GFNMS. Coast Guard
regulations prohibit all discharges of
food wastes (garbage) within three nmi
of land and require that they be ground
to less than one inch when discharged
between three and twelve nmi of land.
This rule modifies the regulations for
CBNMS and GFNMS to mirror the Coast
Guard regulations, and to be consistent
with the MBNMS regulations. This
amendment provides increased
protection to sanctuary resources and
`
qualities from such marine debris vis-avis the Coast Guard regulations in the
area of the two sanctuaries beyond three
nmi.
5. This rule prohibits discharges/
deposits originating beyond the
boundary of the GFNMS that
subsequently enters the sanctuary and
injures a sanctuary resource or quality.
‘‘Sanctuary resource’’ is defined at 15
CFR 922.3 as ‘‘any living or non-living
resource of a National Marine Sanctuary
that contributes to the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical,
research, educational, or aesthetic value
of the Sanctuary, including, but not
limited to, the substratum of the area of
the sanctuary, other submerged features
and the surrounding seabed, carbonate
rock, corals and other bottom
formations, coralline algae and other
marine plants and algae, marine
invertebrates, brine-seep biota,
phytoplankton, zooplankton, fish,
seabirds, sea turtles and other marine
reptiles, marine mammals and historical
resources.’’ ‘‘Sanctuary quality’’ is
defined at 15 CFR 922.3 as ‘‘any of those
ambient conditions, physical-chemical
characteristics and natural processes,
the maintenance of which is essential to
the ecological health of the Sanctuary,
including, but not limited to, water
quality, sediment quality and air
quality.’’ This modification will help
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70495
protect sanctuary resources and
qualities from harmful influences
originating outside the boundaries of the
GFNMS. The coastal waters of the
sanctuary, particularly the estuarine
habitats of Bolinas Lagoon, Tomales
Bay, Estero Americano and Estero de
San Antonio, are vulnerable to landbased nonpoint source pollution from
outside the sanctuary. Sources of
concern include runoff, agriculture,
marinas and boating activities, past
mining, and aging and undersized septic
systems. Water quality in offshore areas
of the sanctuary could be threatened or
impacted by large or continuous
discharges from shore, spills by vessels,
illegal dumping activities or residual
contaminants from past dumping
activities. The threat of an offshore oil
spill is a constant reality near the busy
shipping lanes in and adjacent to the
sanctuary. CBNMS and MBNMS
regulations already prohibit this
activity. This modification makes the
discharge/deposit regulations for the
three sanctuaries consistent.
6. This rule eliminates in the GFNMS
regulations the exceptions at § 922.84
for the disposal of dredged material at
the interim dumpsite and the discharge
of municipal sewage because they are
no longer necessary. The exception for
the disposal of dredged material at the
‘‘interim dumpsite’’ is no longer
necessary because this site is no longer
being used as a permanent dumpsite.
The interim dumpsite, located
approximately 10 nmi south of
Southeast Farallon Island, is no longer
in use. The permanent dumpsite outside
the sanctuary has been in use for more
than fifteen years, making this exception
unnecessary. Similarly, since the
designation of the sanctuary in 1981,
there have been no applications to
discharge municipal sewage into the
sanctuary. Thus, this exception is also
unnecessary. By removing these two
exceptions, the discharge/deposit
regulation has been streamlined,
focusing on current and necessary
exceptions to the prohibition.
7. In addition, this rule clarifies that
current exceptions to the prohibition on
discharges/deposits from vessels for
graywater and deck wash down must be
clean, meaning not containing
detectable levels of harmful matter as
defined. It clarifies that discharges/
deposits from clean vessel deck wash
down, clean vessel generator cooling
water, clean vessel engine cooling
water, clean bilge water, and anchor
wash are excepted from the discharge/
deposit prohibition. The discharge/
deposit of oily wastes from bilge
pumping has been and continues to be
prohibited. However, this rule modifies
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70496
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
this prohibition by requiring that all
bilge discharges/deposits be clean,
meaning not containing detectable
levels of harmful matter as defined. For
purposes of determining detectable
levels of oil in bilge discharges/deposits,
a detectable level of oil is interpreted
here to include anything that produces
a visible sheen. This rule provides
clarification regarding permitted
contents of bilge water discharges/
deposits.
The discharge/deposit of ballast water
is already prohibited.
B. Prohibit Certain Discharges From
Cruise Ships and Large Vessels
This rule amends the discharge
regulations for the Sanctuaries to
narrow the types of vessels that may
discharge certain types of material or
other matter.
This rule prohibits vessels 300 GRT or
greater with sufficient holding tank
capacity from discharging or depositing
graywater, and effluent from any type of
marine sanitation device. In the GFNMS
and CBNMS the discharge/deposit of
graywater is already prohibited and that
remains unchanged. The former
regulations did not make a distinction
between sizes of vessels for discharge
purposes. The regulations prohibiting
discharge/deposit of treated sewage
from vessels 300 GRT or more are
consistent with existing state law
applicable to state waters. The
regulations now extend the prohibition
to all waters of the national marine
sanctuaries including federal waters.
The regulation does not restrict vessels
without capacity to hold the waste
while in a national marine sanctuary.
The revised regulation better
addresses NOAA’s concerns about the
potential impacts of discharges/deposits
from large vessels in the Sanctuaries.
Blackwater from vessels includes raw or
treated sewage. Such discharges are
more concentrated than domestic landbased sewage and may introduce
disease-causing microorganisms
(pathogens), such as bacteria,
protozoans, and viruses, into the marine
environment (EPA 2007). They may also
contain high concentrations of nutrients
that can lead to eutrophication (the
process that can cause oxygen-depleted
‘‘dead zones’’ in aquatic environments),
and may yield unpleasant esthetic
impacts to the Sanctuary (diminishing
Sanctuary resources and its ecological,
conservation, esthetic, recreational and
other qualities).
Graywater from vessels includes
wastewater from showers, baths, and
galleys. Graywater can contain a variety
of substances including (but not limited
to) detergents, oil and grease, pesticides
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
and food wastes (Eley 2000). Very little
research has been done on the impacts
of graywater on the marine
environment, but many of the chemicals
commonly found in graywater are
known to be toxic (Casanova et al.
2001). These chemicals have been
implicated in the occurrence of
cancerous growths in bottom-dwelling
fish (Mix 1986). Furthermore, studies of
graywater discharges from large cruise
ships in Alaska (prior to strict state
effluent standards for cruise ship
graywater discharges) found very high
levels of fecal coliform in large cruise
ship graywater (well exceeding the
federal standards for fecal coliform from
Type II MSDs). These same studies also
found high mean total suspended solids
in some graywater sources (exceeding
the federal standards for total
suspended solids from Type II MSDs).
2. This rule revises the discharge/
deposit regulations to implement
additional restrictions on cruise ships.
Under the revised discharge/deposit
regulations, cruise ships are allowed to
discharge or deposit only clean vessel
engine cooling water, clean vessel
generator cooling water, clean bilge
water, and anchor wash into the
Sanctuaries. Other discharges or
deposits are no longer allowed in the
Sanctuaries. Cruise ship discharges and
deposits are more stringently regulated
than other vessels to reduce the adverse
effects on the marine environment from
this growing source of pollutants.
The strict prohibition on cruise ships
protects sanctuary water quality from
the potentially large volume of
wastewater that may be discharged by
these vessels, while allowing them to
continue to transit the Sanctuaries.
‘‘Cruise ship’’ is defined to mean: a
vessel with 250 or more passenger
berths for hire. Currently 643,000 cruise
ship passengers embark annually from
California ports in San Francisco Bay,
Los Angeles, and San Diego. Ninety
cruise ship arrivals and departures
(Metropolitan Stevedore Company) were
estimated at the San Francisco
Passenger Terminal in 2006. Many of
these cruise ships enter and exit the Bay
through the northbound vessel traffic
lanes, which transit through the
Sanctuaries. Although partly
constrained by the lack of local docking
facilities, cruise ship visits are likely to
increase as the fleet shifts from
international to more domestic cruises,
and as they begin to use a new cruise
ship docking facility planned for San
Francisco Bay.
Due to their sheer size and passenger
capacity, cruise ships are able to
generate larger volumes of a wide array
of pollutants, which can cause serious
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
impacts to the marine environment. The
main pollutants generated by a cruise
ship are: sewage, also referred to as
blackwater; graywater; oily bilge water;
hazardous wastes, and solid wastes. The
large volumes of discharged effluent
associated with cruise ships may not
adequately disperse to avoid harm to
marine resources. Based on EPA
estimates, in one week a 3000-passenger
cruise ship generates about 210,000
gallons of sewage, 1,000,000 gallons of
graywater, 37,000 gallons of oily bilge
water, more than 8 tons of solid waste,
millions of gallons of ballast water
containing potential invasive species,
and toxic wastes from dry cleaning and
photo-processing laboratories.
Additionally, the volume of material
from a cruise ship resulting from deck
washdown greatly exceeds the volumes
associated with other vessels used in the
Sanctuaries. Although several laws and
regulations partly address these issues,
this regulation is needed to ensure a
more comprehensive prohibition on
cruise ship discharges/deposits within
the Sanctuaries.
C. Clarify and Update the Regulation on
Disturbing Sanctuary Areas
To ensure consistency among the
regulations for the Sanctuaries, this rule
implements a prohibition on drilling
into, dredging, or otherwise altering the
submerged lands, or constructing,
placing or abandoning any structure,
material, or other matter on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanctuaries.
While this prohibition has been in effect
for the MBNMS since 1992, this is a
new prohibition for the CBNMS, and
updates the regulations for the GFNMS.
As described below, this rule maintains
some differences in the exceptions to
the prohibition for the different
sanctuaries.
This rule makes a technical change to
the regulations by replacing the term
‘‘seabed’’ with ‘‘submerged lands’’
throughout the regulations for the
Sanctuaries in order to be consistent
with the NMSA, and to ensure that
certain estuarine areas within the
MBNMS, such as Elkhorn Slough, are
described accurately. This change is
necessary to eliminate any confusion
created by the term ‘‘seabed.’’
This rule makes additional changes to
the regulations for the GFNMS and the
CBNMS to implement new prohibitions
regarding disturbance to the submerged
lands in these two sanctuaries. The
revised regulations prohibit abandoning
structures, materials, or other matter, for
these two sanctuaries. The term
‘‘abandoning’’ means leaving without
intent to remove, any structure,
material, or other matter on or in the
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
submerged lands of the Sanctuaries. In
addition to this provision, this rule
implements a new provision in the
CBNMS that prohibits drilling into,
dredging or otherwise altering the
submerged lands.
These prohibitions as they apply to
the area within the 50-fathom isobath of
the CBNMS, do not apply to use of
bottom contact gear used during fishing
activities. This activity is prohibited
pursuant to 50 CFR part 660 (Fisheries
off West Coast States). These
prohibitions as they apply to the area
outside of the 50-fathom isobath of the
CBNMS, do not apply to the anchoring
of any vessels, or the lawful use of
fishing gear during normal fishing
activities. The coordinates for the line
representing the 50-fathom isobath are
listed in Appendix B to the regulations.
This regulation ensures the prominent
geological features of the Bank, such as
the pinnacles and ridges, are protected
from permanent destruction from
activities such as anchoring or
exploratory activity.
For the GFNMS, NOAA revises the
exception for the laying of pipelines
related to hydrocarbon operations to
clarify that the laying of pipelines is
specifically limited to hydrocarbon
operations that are adjacent to the
GFNMS (i.e., bordering) rather than
anywhere outside the sanctuary. This
revision is made to protect sensitive
sanctuary benthic habitats from impacts
from disturbance. Additionally, in the
GFNMS regulations, NOAA revises the
prohibition regarding disturbance to the
submerged lands, by removing the
exception for ecological maintenance in
the GFNMS regulations (formerly at 15
CFR 922.82(a)(3)(iii)). Ecological
maintenance is not defined in the
regulations or administrative record,
which made it difficult to interpret, and
thus the definition was removed to
streamline the regulatory language.
There is no record of the use of the
ecological maintenance exception.
There are no exceptions to the
prohibition against disturbing the
submerged lands within the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone of the
MBNMS, other than as incidental and
necessary to the conduct of lawful
fishing activities. Fishing in the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone
below 3000 feet is prohibited under 50
CFR 660 (Fisheries off West Coast
States). Please see the discussion on the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone
below for more information.
This regulation helps protect the
Sanctuaries from, for example,
unwanted debris, and adds protection to
the shallow sand and mud deposits that
make up the surrounding soft bottom of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
the continental shelf and slope of
CBNMS, which are important habitats
that provide support for the living
resources of the sanctuary.
D. Prohibit the Desertion of Vessels
NOAA modifies the regulations for
the GFNMS and MBNMS to prohibit the
desertion of a vessel within these two
sanctuaries. Leaving vessels unattended
increases the likelihood of a calamitous
event or the risk of sinking. These
events could result in the discharge of
harmful toxins, chemicals or oils into
the marine environment, reducing water
quality and impacting biological
resources and habitats. In addition, the
vessel itself could cause injury. This
revision is not made for the CBNMS
because that site is offshore and vessel
abandonment is not a pressing resource
issue.
To address concerns regarding the
threats to the marine environment from
deserted vessels, NOAA is prohibiting
deserting a vessel aground, at anchor, or
adrift in the GFNMS and the MBNMS.
The term ‘‘deserting’’ means leaving a
vessel aground or adrift: (1) Without
notification to the Director of the vessel
going aground or becoming adrift within
12 hours of its discovery and developing
and presenting to the Director a
preliminary salvage plan within 24
hours of such notification; (2) after
expressing or otherwise manifesting
intention not to undertake or to cease
salvage efforts; or (3) when the owner/
operator cannot after reasonable efforts
by the Director be reached within 12
hours of the vessel’s condition being
reported to authorities. Deserting also
means leaving a vessel at anchor when
its condition creates potential for a
grounding, discharge, or deposit and the
owner/operator fails to secure the vessel
in a timely manner.
This rule also prohibits leaving
harmful matter aboard a grounded or
deserted vessel in the GFNMS and
MBNMS. Once a vessel is grounded or
deserted, there is a high risk of
discharge/deposit of harmful matter into
the marine environment. Harmful
matter aboard a deserted vessel also
poses a threat to water quality.
Preemptive removal of harmful matter
(e.g., motor oil) was not required by the
former regulations. The prohibition
implemented by this rule helps reduce
or avoid harm to sanctuary resources
and qualities from potential leakage of
hazardous or other harmful matter from
a vessel. This revision is not made for
the CBNMS because that site is offshore
and leaving harmful matter on
abandoned vessels is not a pressing
resource issue.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70497
E. Clarify the Prohibition on Disturbing
Historic Resources
NOAA modifies the regulation for the
GFNMS and MBNMS to amend the
prohibitions regarding removing or
damaging any historical or cultural
resource. For the GFNMS, this rule adds
‘‘moving’’ and ‘‘possessing’’ to the
existing prohibition; replaces ‘‘damage’’
with ‘‘injure,’’ a term defined at 15 CFR
922.3; and adds the word ‘‘attempting’’
to move, remove, injure, or possess as a
prohibition. This modification provides
added protection to the fragile, finite,
and non-renewable resources so they
may be studied, and appropriate
information may be made available for
the benefit of the public. (The MBNMS
regulations already contain these terms.)
For the GFNMS, this rule replaces the
phrase ‘‘historical or cultural resource’’
with ‘‘Sanctuary historical resource’’ to
be consistent with regulatory language
used at more recently designated
national marine sanctuaries, e.g., the
MBNMS. The term ‘‘historical resource’’
is defined in NMSP program-wide
regulations as ‘‘any resource possessing
historical, cultural, archaeological or
paleontological significance, including
sites, contextual information, structures,
districts, and objects significantly
associated with or representative of
earlier people, cultures, maritime
heritage, and human activities and
events. Historical resources include
‘‘submerged cultural resources,’’ and
‘‘historical properties,’’ as defined in the
National Historic Preservation Act, as
amended, and its implementing
regulations, as amended.’’ (15 CFR
922.3).
This rule prohibits the possession of
a sanctuary historical resource either
within or outside the sanctuary. The
clarification will increase protection of
sanctuary resources by making it illegal
to possess historical resources in any
geographic location. For example, this
rule makes it illegal to have an artifact
taken from a shipwreck in MBNMS even
if you are no longer in the sanctuary.
F. Prohibit the Take and Possession of
Certain Species
NOAA modifies its regulations for the
GFNMS and the CBNMS to include a
new prohibition on take of marine
mammals, birds, and sea turtles, except
as authorized by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1361 et seq.) (MMPA), Endangered
Species Act, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) (ESA), Migratory Bird
Treaty Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703
et seq.) (MBTA), or any regulation, as
amended, promulgated under one of
these acts. ‘‘Take’’ is defined in the
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70498
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
NMSP program-wide regulations at 15
CFR 922.3. This rule prohibits
possessing within the CBNMS and the
GFNMS (regardless of where taken,
moved, or removed from) any marine
mammal, bird (including, but not
limited to, seabirds, shorebirds and
waterfowl) within or above the two
sanctuaries or sea turtle except as
authorized under the MMPA, the ESA,
the MBTA, and any regulations, as
amended, promulgated under these acts.
This regulation provides a stronger
deterrent for violations of existing laws
designed to protect marine mammals,
birds, or sea turtles, than that offered by
those other laws alone and is consistent
with regulatory language used at more
recently designated national marine
sanctuaries, e.g., the MBNMS. This
regulation does not apply to activities
(including a federally or state-approved
fishery) that have been authorized under
the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA or an
implementing regulation. Therefore,
under this regulation, if the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) or the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) issues a permit for, or
otherwise authorizes, the take of a
marine mammal, bird, or sea turtle, the
permitted or authorized taking is
allowed under this rule and would not
require an additional sanctuary permit
unless the activity also violates another
provision of the sanctuary’s regulations.
The intent of this regulation is to
bring a special focus to the protection of
the diverse and vital marine mammal,
bird, and sea turtle populations of the
Sanctuaries. This area-specific focus is
complementary to efforts of other
resource protection agencies, especially
given that other federal and state
authorities spread limited resources
over much wider geographic areas.
This prohibition also complements
the provisions of the GFNMS
regulations prohibiting disturbing birds
or marine mammals by flying motorized
aircraft at less than 1000 feet over the
waters within one nmi of the Farallon
Islands, Bolinas Lagoon, or any ASBS.
This provision remains unique and
important in that it provides special
focus on a specific type of activity,
operation of motorized aircraft, within
particularly sensitive environments of
the GFNMS. The MBNMS regulations
already contain this take and possession
prohibition. There is a minor wording
change to conform to the new GFNMS
and CBNMS prohibition.
G. Prohibit the Introduction of
Introduced Species
This rule prohibits introducing or
otherwise releasing from within or into
the Sanctuaries an introduced species,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
except: (1) striped bass (Morone
saxatilis) released in the Sanctuaries
during catch and release fishing; and (2)
species cultivated by mariculture in
Tomales Bay (in the GFNMS), pursuant
to a valid lease, permit, license or other
authorization issued by the State of
California.
The term ‘‘introduced species’’ is
defined as: any species (including but
not limited to any of its biological
matter capable of propagation) that is
non-native to the ecosystems of the
Sanctuary; or any organism into which
altered genetic matter, or genetic matter
from another species, has been
transferred in order that the host
organism acquires the genetic traits of
the transferred genes.
During consultations with the State of
California, concern was expressed that
striped bass would qualify as an
introduced species and that an angler
who catches and then releases a striped
bass would be in violation of the
proposed regulation. While prohibiting
such activity is not the intent of the
regulation, to address this concern, the
regulation now exempts striped bass,
the only introduced species for which
there is an active fishery. Striped bass
were intentionally introduced in
California in 1879, and in 1980 the
California Department of Fish and Game
initiated a striped bass hatchery
program to support the striped bass
sport fishery, which according to the
California Department of Fish and Game
is an important fishery on the Pacific
Coast. The California Department of
Fish and Game manages the striped bass
fishery through a Striped Bass
Management Conservation Plan.
The prohibition also does not apply to
species cultivated by mariculture
activities in Tomales Bay in the
GFNMS, pursuant to a valid lease,
permit, license or other authorization
issued by the State of California. There
are twelve active state water bottom
mariculture leases in Tomales Bay
managed by the California Department
of Fish and Game. Three leases have
been recently renewed: M–430–19
(Marin Oyster Company, 2001), M430–
05 (Tomales Bay Oyster Company,
2002), and M–430–06 (Cove Mussel
Company, 2002).
The other nine leases were issued in
the 1980s and have not yet come up for
renewal. The exception to the
introduced species prohibition
grandfathers in the renewals of existing
current lease agreements in effect on the
effective date of the final regulation that
allow for the introduction of introduced
species as specified in these original
lease agreements. However, new lease
agreements executed after the effective
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
date of this rule are subject to this
prohibition. Operations conducted
under new lease agreements could
cultivate native species but not
introduced species. NOAA is not aware
of any pending lease applications.
The prohibition against introducing
species into the Sanctuaries is designed
to help reduce the risk from introduced
species, including their seeds, eggs,
spores, and other biological material
capable of propagating. The intent of the
prohibition is to prevent injury to the
Sanctuaries’ resources and qualities, to
protect the biodiversity of sanctuary
ecosystems, and to preserve the native
functional aspects of sanctuary
ecosystems, which are put at risk by
introduced species. Introduced species
may become a new form of predator,
competitor, disturber, parasite, or
disease that can have devastating effects
upon ecosystems. For example,
introduced species impacts on native
coastal marine species of the
Sanctuaries could include: replacement
of a functionally similar native species
through competition; reduction in
abundance or elimination of an entire
population of a native species, which
can affect native species richness;
inhibition of normal growth or
increased mortality of the host and
associated species; increased intra- or
interspecies competition with native
species; creation or alteration of original
substrate and habitat; hybridization
with native species; and direct or
indirect toxicity (e.g., toxic diatoms).
Changes in species interactions can lead
to disrupted nutrient cycles and altered
energy flows that ripple with
unpredictable results through an entire
ecosystem. Introduced species may also
pose threats to endangered species and
native species diversity.
For example, a number of non-native
species now found in the Gulf of the
Farallones and Monterey Bay regions
were introduced elsewhere on the west
coast but have spread through vessel
hull-fouling, ballast water discharge,
and accidental introductions. In the
MBNMS, the European green crab, now
found in Elkhorn Slough, both preys on
the young of valuable species (such as
Dungeness crab) and competes with
them for resources. Introduced species
may also cause changes in physical
habitat structure. For example, burrows
caused by the isopod Sphaeroma
quoyanum, originally from New
Zealand and Australia, are found in
banks throughout the Elkhorn Slough,
and may exacerbate the high rate of tidal
erosion in the Slough. Introduced
species pose a significant threat to the
natural biological communities and
ecological processes in the MBNMS and
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
may have a particularly large impact on
the sanctuary’s twenty-six threatened
and endangered species.
Introduced species are also a major
economic and environmental threat to
the living resources and habitats of the
Sanctuaries as well as the commercial
and recreational uses that depend on
these resources. Once established,
introduced species can be extremely
difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate.
Introduced species have become
increasingly common in recent decades,
and the rate of invasions continues to
accelerate at a rapid pace. Estuaries are
particularly vulnerable to invasion; and
large ports, such as San Francisco Bay,
can support hundreds of introduced
species with significant impacts to
native ecosystems.
H. Prohibit the Attraction of White
Sharks
This rule expands the prohibition on
attracting white sharks in state waters of
the MBNMS to the entire MBNMS and
GFNMS. It also prohibits approaching
within 50 meters of a white shark
within 2 nmi around the Farallon
Islands. Attract or attracting means the
conduct of any activity that lures or may
lure any animal in the Sanctuary by
using food, bait, chum, dyes, decoys
(e.g., surfboards or body boards used as
decoys), acoustics or any other means,
except the mere presence of human
beings (e.g., swimmers, divers, boaters,
kayakers, surfers).
Disturbance related to human
interaction is increasing as a result of
controversial cage shark diving
operations, also known as adventure
tourism, and other wildlife watching
operations. These activities may degrade
the natural environment, impacting the
species as a whole, and individual
sharks may be negatively impacted from
repeated encounters with humans and
boats. Implementing these regulations
will resolve user conflicts (between
shark researchers and adventure
tourism) and prevent interference with
the seasonal feeding behavior of white
sharks. Reducing human interaction and
chumming would decrease the impacts
on natural shark behavior. This
regulation is not expected or intended to
impact any current lawful fishing
activities within the GFNMS and
MBNMS. The purpose of this
prohibition is to protect white sharks
from intrusive activities during their
critical feeding life-cycle in the GFNMS
and the MBNMS.
With respect to the MBNMS, this rule
modifies the regulations to expand the
prohibition against shark attraction to
the entire sanctuary. White sharks have
experienced disturbance from cage
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
diving operations, filming, and other
wildlife watching operations. The
former regulations prohibited white
shark attraction activities within
specific areas of the sanctuary,
including the area out to the seaward
limit of state waters (three miles from
the coastline). This rule extends the
prohibition to the entire sanctuary.
I. Prohibit Anchoring in Certain Zones
of Tomales Bay in the GFNMS
This rule prohibits anchoring a vessel
in a designated no-anchoring seagrass
protection zone in Tomales Bay. This
prohibition does not apply to vessels
anchoring as necessary for mariculture
operations that are conducted pursuant
to a valid lease, permit, or license. For
the purposes of this regulation,
anchoring refers to the dropping and
placement of an anchor that is attached
to a vessel, and which, being cast
overboard, retains the vessel in a
particular station.
There are a total of seven noanchoring zones implemented in this
regulation, which comprise 22% of the
surface area of Tomales Bay. The
location and extent of the no-anchoring
zones encompass the known seagrass
coverage and are based upon seagrass
data provided by California Department
of Fish and Game from 1992, 2000, 2001
and 2002. The no-anchoring seagrass
protection zones include some areas
where seagrass coverage is extensive
and other areas where coverage is
discontinuous and patchy. All zones
extend shoreward to the Mean High
Water Line (MHWL). Also, the extent of
the seagrass beds can change over time.
NOAA will review and update
periodically the adequacy of these
zones, as needed, based on new seagrass
monitoring data.
This prohibition protects seagrass
beds in Tomales Bay from the
destructive effects of anchoring vessels.
Seagrass means any species of marine
angiosperms (flowering plants) that
inhabit portions of the seabed in the
Sanctuary. Those species include, but
are not limited to: Zostera asiatica and
Zostera marina. Seagrass beds are
commonly found in tidal and upper
subtidal zones and foster high levels of
biological productivity. Seagrass beds
are located throughout the sanctuary in
estuaries, bays and lagoons, such as
Tomales Bay, Bolinas Lagoon, Estero de
San Antonio and Estero Americano.
Seagrass species within GFNMS
jurisdiction, including Zostera marina
and Gracilaria spp., cover an estimated
397 hectares (1.5 mi2) or 13% of
Tomales Bay. The seagrass beds help
trap sediments and reduce excess
nutrients and pollutants in the water
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70499
column and thereby contribute towards
the Bay’s high water quality. Seagrass
provides breeding and nursery grounds
for fish such as herring, which attach
their eggs to the seagrass blades.
Seagrass beds also provide important
habitats for migratory birds, such as
shorebirds, who feed upon the abundant
fish and invertebrate species that live in
the seagrass beds. Disappearance of this
habitat poses a particular threat to
vulnerable species worldwide. Seagrass
beds also serve as buffer zones in
protecting coastal erosion and are a
filter for pollutants.
J. Clarify and Update the Use of
Motorized Personal Watercraft in
MBNMS
This rule (1) updates the definition of
motorized personal watercraft (MPWC)
for MBNMS, and (2) adds a new
seasonal MPWC zone to the Pillar Point
area. Implementing this modified
definition will help fulfill the original
intent of the regulation and its zoning
restriction, namely to avoid disturbance
and other injury of marine wildlife by
MPWCs, minimize user conflicts
between MPWC operators and other
recreationalists, and continue to provide
opportunities for MPWC within the
MBNMS. The new MPWC zone is
restricted to periods of high surf
warnings and during winter months.
This additional exception
accommodates recreational activities in
the area without impacting Sanctuary
uses or exacerbating user conflicts.
NOAA received comments that the
Mavericks surf break at Half Moon Bay
was a unique big wave tow-in surfing
location in the continental United
States, accessible only by MPWC tow-in
techniques and should be given special
consideration for MPWC access. See
discussion in Appendix A of the DEIS
at page 18–19 (of Appendix 1). Based
upon the evidence that Mavericks was
such a special national sporting venue,
NOAA investigated whether allowing
MPWC operations at that location could
be accomplished in a manner
compatible with the Sanctuary’s
primary goal of marine resource
protection. As a result of the review this
rule establishes a new MPWC zone off
Pillar Point Harbor that will allow for
recreational access via MPWC to the
Mavericks surf break during National
Weather Service High Surf Warnings
issued for San Mateo County during
December, January, and February. High
Surf Warning conditions from December
through February are not likely to occur
at Mavericks more than 3–4 days per
year. These are the conditions that
create oversized wave face, for which
motorized tow-in support is necessary.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70500
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
They are the very conditions that big
wave tow-in surfers desire and that have
made Mavericks a world renowned surf
break. Surfers and other water users not
operating MPWC will have access to
Mavericks year-round, so the presence
of MPWC at the site for potentially 1%
of the year will not significantly disrupt
other recreational activities there.
Furthermore, during High Surf Warning
conditions, most people do not enter the
ocean, further reducing potential user
conflicts due to MPWC operations at
Mavericks.
MPWC are small, fast, and highly
maneuverable craft that possess
unconventionally high thrust capability
and horsepower relative to their size
and weight. Their small size, shallow
draft, instant thrust, and ‘‘quick reflex’’
enable them to operate closer to shore
and in areas that would commonly pose
a hazard to conventional craft operating
at comparable speeds. Resources such as
sea otters and seabirds are either unable
to avoid these craft or are frequently
alarmed enough to significantly modify
their behavior such as cessation of
feeding or abandonment of young. Towin surfing activity using MPWC has
been increasing at many traditional
surfing locations in the MBNMS,
regardless of surf conditions. The
MBNMS has received complaints by
surfers, beachgoers, and coastal
residents that the use of MPWC in
traditional surfing areas has produced
conflicts with other ocean users and has
caused disturbance of wildlife. During
the designation of the MBNMS, the
operation of MPWC in nearshore areas
was identified as an activity that should
be prohibited to avoid such impacts.
NOAA’s rationale and authority to
impose such restrictions were affirmed
in Personal Watercraft Industry
Association, et al. v. Department of
Commerce, 48 F.3d 540 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
The former regulations restricted MPWC
to specific zones within the MBNMS;
however, the definition did not cover all
types of existing MPWC. Watercraft that
were larger and that could accommodate
three or more persons were not subject
to the regulations because the former
definition did not define them as
MPWC. The former regulations therefore
did not fully address the threat posed by
MPWC to marine resources and the
issue of user conflict. To address these
concerns, the new definition of MPWC
covers all categories of MPWC and
therefore eliminates the loophole in the
former regulations. The changes expand
the definition of MPWC to address a
broader range of watercraft that are
restricted.
Under the new definition, MPWC
means (1) any vessel, propelled by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
machinery, that is designed to be
operated by standing, sitting, or
kneeling on, astride, or behind the
vessel, in contrast to the conventional
manner, where the operator stands or
sits inside the vessel; (2) any vessel less
than 20 feet in length overall as
manufactured and propelled by
machinery and that has been exempted
from compliance with the U.S. Coast
Guard’s Maximum Capacities Marking
for Load Capacity regulations found at
33 CFR Parts 181 and 183, except
submarines; or (3) any other vessel that
is less than 20 feet in length overall as
manufactured, and is propelled by a
water jet pump or drive. Part 1 of the
definition focuses on operating
characteristics and is not constrained by
hull design or propulsion unit
specifications. Part 2 focuses on highspeed hull designs that shed water (e.g.,
Kawasaki Corporation’s Jet Ski line) and
is not constrained by propulsion unit
specifications or operating
characteristics. Part 3 focuses on jet
boats that share the same operating
capabilities as craft that meet the
definition under parts 1 and 2 but where
passengers sit inside the craft.
The new definition is intended to
effectively identify all craft of concern
without inadvertently restricting other
watercraft by including them in the
definition. The former definition was
insufficient to meet NOAA’s original
goal of restricting the operation of small,
highly maneuverable watercraft within
the boundaries of the MBNMS. It did
not encompass the majority of MPWC
operating within the MBNMS because it
was based upon outdated MPWC design
characteristics of the early 1990s. Since
1992, MPWC manufacturers have built
increasingly larger craft with 3+
passenger riding capacity or varied
design characteristics that place these
craft outside the former MBNMS
regulatory definition. These newer craft
effectively skirt the definition, yet they
retain or exceed the performance
capabilities of their predecessors that
pose a threat to Sanctuary resources and
qualities. The former definition was
based solely upon static design
characteristics that have rendered it
obsolete and ineffective over time.
NOAA has therefore developed a more
flexible, integrated three-part definition
that will continue to be relevant even in
light of continuing MPWC design
changes. Should a future MPWC design
unexpectedly displace any one part of
the definition, one or both of the
remaining two parts would still apply to
sustain the intent of the definition.
Though the vast majority of MPWC
operated in the Sanctuary today are
similar to Kawasaki Corporation’s
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
classic Jet Ski design, a variety of craft
are currently marketed that are equally
maneuverable at high speeds, with
shallow drafts and powerful thrust/
weight ratios. One such innovation
involves a remotely operated water-jet
propulsion pod controlled via a tow line
by a skier behind the pod. Water-jet
propelled surf boards are also available.
Small, highly maneuverable jet boats
have also entered the market. These
non-conventional watercraft designs
demonstrate the creative variations in
MPWC that warrant a more resilient
regulatory definition.
Part 1 of the definition is similar to
current definitions of MPWC used by
the Gulf of the Farallones and Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuaries, the
National Park Service, and the State of
California’s Harbor and Navigation
Code. However, it differs by omitting
reference to particular hull design,
length, or propulsion system in order to
prevent the definition from becoming
obsolete over time due to the rapidly
evolving MPWC design. It also no longer
includes a reference to a speed
threshold. This language was difficult to
enforce and did not sufficiently
encompass those vessels of concern to
the NOAA. The new definition also
identifies a wide variety of riding
postures common to the unconventional
vessel designs that pose a threat to
Sanctuary resources and qualities.
These threats arise because these design
features increase the vessel’s
maneuverability and allow riders to
enter shallow water zones and areas
adjacent to small islands and off-shore
rocks used by marine mammals and
seabirds as breeding, nursing, and
resting areas. Although part 1 identifies
the operating characteristics of most
vessels of concern at the present time,
it alone does not reach all craft of
concern. For this reason, parts 2 and 3
were included in the definition.
Part 2 utilizes an existing U.S. Coast
Guard regulation to identify many
existing and future vessel designs that
pose a threat to Sanctuary resources and
qualities. The Coast Guard requires
special testing for most powered vessels
under 20 feet in length. This is due to
the unique stability and displacement
characteristics of these vessels that
affect passenger safety (33 CFR part
183). The weight/size ratio of these
small craft presents a higher risk of
swamping, capsizing, sinking, and
passenger dismount. The Coast Guard
requires that the results of the vessel
stability tests be printed on a capacity
plate affixed to each vessel design for
which the special testing is required (33
CFR part 181). A key component of the
Coast Guard’s regulation is a stability
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
test. To conduct this test, weight is
systematically added to the outer hull
until it tips to the waterline, allowing
water to flood into the vessel. From
such tests, computations can be made to
determine the maximum safe passenger
and cargo loading capacity for that
vessel design.
Some high-speed unconventional
vessels (e.g., jet bikes, hovercraft, air
boats, and race boats) are designed
without carrying spaces that hold water.
In other words, their hull designs
prevent flooding, because they do not
have open hulls into which water will
flow. Since this design feature makes it
impossible to complete the tests
required by 33 CFR Part 183, the
manufacturers of such craft routinely
seek and receive exemptions from these
testing and labeling requirements.
With the exception of submarines, the
‘‘powered’’ surface vessel designs that
are exempted from the Coast Guard
regulations at 33 CFR parts 181 and 183
(e.g., jet bikes, hovercraft, air boats, and
race boats) possess two or more of the
following characteristics: Robust
buoyancy, are capable of rapid
acceleration, are capable of high
maneuverability at speed, and have a
shallow draft. These and other
associated design characteristics afford
such vessels unique access and
operability within sensitive marine
areas (e.g., marine mammal and seabird
enclaves). This fact poses a threat to
Sanctuary resources and qualities—the
same threat that prompted regulatory
restrictions on the operation of such
hull designs within the MBNMS in
1992. By using the Coast Guard’s
maximum capacity standard (33 CFR
Parts 181 and 183) in part 2 of the
definition, NOAA can effectively and
precisely identify various vessels of
concern while avoiding an excessively
complicated and lengthy definition for
MPWC. Although part 2 of the
definition includes some vessel designs
already captured by part 1, it
compensates for static aspects of part 1
that could result in a regulatory
loophole due to rapidly evolving MPWC
designs, as has happened with the
former definition.
Parts 1 and 2 largely address problems
caused by non-conventional hull
designs, which allow the user to enter
sensitive and important wildlife
habitats. But they do not adequately
address the emergence of small,
conventional hulls powered by water jet
propulsion systems. Jet propulsion
systems give vessels many of the same
operating characteristics and
capabilities of the previously identified
vessels of concern (e.g., rapid
acceleration, high maneuverability at
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
speed, and shallow draft). They
therefore allow these vessels to operate
in areas where wildlife is most
frequently found. Part 3 was thus
developed to include these small craft
in the definition. Jet propulsion vessels
that are longer than twenty feet do not
generally possess these same
operational characteristics and
capabilities, and are thus excluded from
the definition. Further, Coast Guard
regulations often categorize small boats
as less than 20 feet in length. NOAA has
similarly adopted this standard to
differentiate between smaller and larger
jet-propelled vessels.
K. Incorporate Davidson Seamount
Management Zone (DSMZ) Into MBNMS
This rule defines and incorporates the
DSMZ into the MBNMS, and establishes
a unique set of prohibitions for that
area. The shoreward boundary of the
DSMZ is located 75 statue miles (65
nmi) due west of San Simeon, and is
one of the largest known seamounts in
U.S. waters. It is 26 statute miles long
and 8 miles wide. From base to crest,
the Davidson Seamount is 7,480 feet
(2,280 meters) tall, yet it is still 4,101
feet (1,250 meters) below the sea
surface. Threats from fishing are
relatively remote; the top of the
seamount is too deep for most fish
trawling technology. However, future
fishing efforts could target the
seamount.
NOAA determined the Davidson
Seamount requires protection from the
take or other injury to benthic organisms
or those organisms living near the sea
floor because of the seamount’s special
ecological and fragile qualities and
potential future threats that could
adversely affect these qualities. For
example, the crest of the seamount
supports large gorgonian coral forests,
vast sponge fields, crabs, deep sea
fishes, shrimp and basket stars.
NOAA consulted with the Pacific
Fishery Management Council (PFMC)
on the most appropriate level of
resource protection for the Davidson
Seamount and the various means for
achieving it. This consultation
coincided with the culmination of the
PFMC’s separate, longer-term efforts to
identify and protect Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) on the West Coast. The
PFMC unanimously supported the
incorporation of the seamount into the
MBNMS, but recommended that
protection from fishing impacts be
achieved by including Davidson
Seamount as one of the areas considered
for protection as EFH under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(Magnuson-Stevens Act) (at 50 CFR part
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70501
660). NOAA subsequently approved and
implemented this recommendation by
designating Davidson Seamount as EFH
and prohibiting all fishing below 3000
feet in the area proposed to be included
in the MBNMS (71 FR 27408, May 11,
2006).
In order to protect its resources and
provide opportunities for a better
understanding of the seamount, this rule
incorporates into the MBNMS a square
area of approximately 29 statute miles
(25 nmi) per side. The incorporated area
includes the water and submerged lands
thereunder. This rule prohibits moving,
removing, taking, collecting, catching,
harvesting, disturbing, breaking, cutting,
or otherwise injuring, or attempting to
move, remove, take, collect, catch,
harvest, disturb, break, cut, or otherwise
injure, any sanctuary resource located
more than 3,000 feet below the sea
surface within the DSMZ. It also
prohibits possessing any sanctuary
resource the source of which is more
than 3,000 feet below the sea surface
within the DSMZ. Although the
prohibitions do not apply to commercial
and recreational fishing (or possession
resulting from such activity) below 3000
feet within the DSMZ, these activities
are prohibited under 50 CFR part 660
(Fisheries off West Coast States). The
Sanctuary regulations do, however,
prohibit resource extraction conducted
for research purposes, as research
extraction is not within the scope of 50
CFR part 660.
Preexisting Activities in the DSMZ
1. Military activities. Most of the
prohibitions in the MBNMS regulations
do not apply to military activities that
were conducted by the Department of
Defense prior to the 1992 designation of
the MBNMS and listed in the 1992 FEIS.
For purposes of the DSMZ, the date of
designation is the effective date of this
rule and the germane FEIS is the 2008
FEIS. This means that the military
activities identified in the 2008 FEIS are
exempted from the indicated MBNMS
regulations within the DSMZ.
2. Non-military activities. Section
304(c) of the NMSA provides that:
‘‘Nothing in this chapter shall be
construed as terminating or granting to
the Secretary the right to terminate any
valid lease, permit, license, or right of
subsistence use or of access that is in
existence on the date of designation of
any national marine sanctuary.’’ This
provision is implemented by National
Marine sanctuary Program Regulations
at 15 CFR 922.47.
Although NOAA is not aware of any
non-military activities being conducted
in the DSMZ, anyone who has a
preexisting activity in the DSMZ that
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70502
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
falls within section 304(a) of the NMSA
may request certification of that activity
by filing a formal application to NOAA
within 90 days of the effective date of
this rule.
L. Codify Preexisting Dredged Material
Disposal Sites in MBNMS
This rule clarifies the location of areas
where dredged material may be
disposed within MBNMS by codifying
and clearly identifying the coordinates
of four disposal sites: (1) SF–12 outside
Moss Landing at the head of Monterey
Canyon; (2) SF–14 offshore of Moss
Landing; (3) Twin Lakes Disposal Site
outside Santa Cruz Harbor; and (4)
Monterey Disposal Site adjacent to
Wharf 2 near Monterey Harbor. All four
sites were approved by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and
Army Corps of Engineers and have been
in use since before the MBNMS
designation in 1992. The former
MBNMS regulations did not include the
coordinates for these sites. To ensure
these sites are used appropriately and
accurately, this final rule contains a
table in the Appendix that includes the
coordinates.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
M. Update and Clarify Permitting
Regulations for the Sanctuaries
This rule makes a number of changes
the former permitting regulations.
1. NOAA amends its regulations to
modify the GFNMS permit regulations
to add ‘‘assist in the managing of the
Sanctuary’’ to the list of the types of
activities for which a permit may be
issued. This addition provides the
Director authority to issue permits for
otherwise prohibited activities in order
to further Sanctuary management.
2. This rule also modifies the permit
regulations for the GFNMS and CBNMS
to strengthen and augment the factors
that NOAA considers when evaluating
applications and issuing permits. Under
this rule, NOAA may not issue a permit
unless it first considers certain
additional factors, including but not
limited to, the manner in which the
activity will be conducted and whether
it is compatible with the primary
objective of protection of Sanctuary
resources and qualities, considering the
extent to which the conduct of the
activity may diminish or enhance
Sanctuary resources and qualities, any
potential indirect, secondary, or
cumulative effects of the activity, and
the duration of such effects; and the
necessity to conduct the activity within
the Sanctuary.
3. This rule also modifies the permit
application process to require
applicants to submit information that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
addresses the factors that the Director
must consider in order to issue a permit.
4. Finally, this rule modifies the
regulations to require the permittee to
hold the United States harmless against
any claims arising out of the permitted
activities.
N. Implement Other Technical Changes
and Updates
1. Clarify that ‘‘submerged lands’’ are
within the Sanctuaries’’ boundary, (i.e.,
part of the GFNMS and CBNMS). This
updates the boundary regulation to
make it consistent with the NMSA and
revised terms of designation.
2. Update the calculation for the area
of the GFNMS. Since designation the
area of GFNMS has been described as
approximately 948 square nautical
miles. However, adjusting for technical
corrections and using updated
technologies, the GFNMS area is now
calculated to be approximately 966
square nautical miles. The legal
description of GFNMS is updated to
reflect this change. This update does not
constitute a change in the geographic
area of the GFNMS but rather represents
a more precise measurement of its size.
3. Permanently fix the shoreward
boundary of the GFMNS adjacent to
Point Reyes National Seashore (PRNS).
The 1981 designation of GFNMS linked
the boundary to the seaward limit of
PRNS. Since then, the National Park
Service has made at least two boundary
modifications to the PRNS in areas
adjacent to the GFNMS, requiring
NOAA to redefine the GFNMS
boundary, the geographic extent of its
authority, and enforcement and
implementation of programs. Fixing the
shoreward boundary of the GFNMS
adjacent to PRNS as it was at the time
of GFNMS designation in 1981 by
coordinates using the North American
Datum of 1983 ensures consistency and
continuity for the boundary, sanctuary
management and user groups.
4. Technical corrections to the
CBNMS boundary and the boundary
coordinates are based on the North
American Datum of 1983. Since
designation, the area of CBNMS has
been described as approximately 397
square nautical miles. However,
adjusting for technical corrections and
using updated technologies, the CBNMS
area is now accurately described as
approximately 399 square nautical
miles. The legal description of CBNMS
reflects this change. This update does
not constitute a change in the
geographic area of the Sanctuary but
rather represents a more precise
measurement of its size.
5. Additional changes to the
Sanctuaries’ regulations include
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
grammatical and technical changes to
the permitting procedures section to
remove extraneous language concerning
standard permit conditions and to add
clarity to the necessary findings and
considerations for issuance of a permit.
6. The changes also include technical
changes to the MBNMS boundaries,
which are referenced in Appendix A to
the MBNMS regulations below. With the
exception of adding Davidson
Seamount, discussed above, the minor
changes are for purposes of clarifying
existing MBNMS boundaries.
IV. Comments and Responses
During the public comment period,
NOAA received over 17,250 written
comments, some of which were
submitted as part of a mass mailing
campaign. NOAA conducted 7
information sessions and 7 public
hearings to gather additional input.
Written and verbal comments were
compiled and grouped by general topics
into general topics and specific subissues. Substantive comments received
are summarized below, followed by
NOAA’s response. Multiple but similar
comments have been treated as one
comment for purposes of response.
Comments beyond the scope of the
proposed action are neither summarized
nor responded to. NOAA summarized
the comments according to the content
of the statement or question put forward
in written statements or oral testimony
regarding the proposed actions. NOAA
made appropriate changes to the FEIS
and Sanctuary Management Plans in
response to the comments including
updates to socioeconomic and
ecological data where the comments
affect the impact analysis or is relevant
to the sanctuary action plans. Several
technical or editorial comments on the
DEIS and Management Plans were also
taken under consideration by NOAA
and, where appropriate, applied to the
FEIS and/or Management Plans. These
comments are not however included in
the list below.
Alteration of or Construction on the
Seabed
Anchoring on Cordell Bank
Comment: The Cordell Bank
regulation regarding anchoring outside
the 50-fathom line should be edited to
make clear that anchoring is only
allowed in conjunction with lawful
fishing activities, with the assumption
that allowances/regulations for other
cases (such as anchoring in emergency
situations) are handled elsewhere as
needed.
Response: The regulation does not
prohibit anchoring of any type outside
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
the 50-fathom depth contour around
Cordell Bank. Anchoring for both lawful
fishing and other uses is allowed
outside the 50-fathom line. The intent of
the prohibition is consistent with the
wording as drafted and no changes are
necessary.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Coastal Armoring
Comment: The MBNMS Coastal
Armoring Action Plan should include a
guidance statement acknowledging that
the implementation of this Action Plan
may involve costs, which are not
feasible for the landowner.
Response: The Coastal Armoring
Action Plan in the MBNMS
Management Plan provides
programmatic guidance and no
additional regulations for landowners.
NOAA understands development of
additional structures to protect existing
structures involves certain market and
non-market costs for landowners and
the public. Loss of natural resources
also represents costs to landowners and
the public.
Comment: The Coastal Armoring
Action Plan should be more neutral in
tone and discuss the circumstances in
which the benefits of projects might
outweigh potential environmental
impacts.
Response: NOAA recognizes coastal
armoring may have benefits in certain
situations. The MBNMS Management
Plan and Action Plans were written to
describe the issues that MBNMS is
addressing—in the case of coastal
armoring, NOAA is concerned about
damage to the seafloor, wildlife impacts,
loss of habitat, aesthetic impacts, and
loss of recreational opportunities.
Comment: I strongly support
regulations to restrict coastal armoring
along MBNMS’s coastline. The
proliferation of structures such as
seawalls and breakwaters is having a
damaging effect on intertidal habitats
and is blocking public access to
beaches.
Response: NOAA recognizes coastal
armoring can involve adverse impacts to
coastal habitats and users. The action
plans for the MBNMS Management Plan
were written to address these issues as
part of a comprehensive program
including existing sanctuary regulatory
prohibitions regarding alteration of the
seabed and discharging into the
sanctuary.
Artificial Reefs
Comment: How would the vessel
abandonment prohibition affect
proposals to sink ships as artificial
reefs? Some people are interested in
doing this in MBNMS and areas north
of San Francisco.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Response: The regulation prohibiting
deserting a vessel is primarily designed
to address vessels posing a threat of
discharge or seabed alteration but that
have not yet submerged. However,
current regulations for the sanctuaries
prohibit discharge and abandonment of
any matter onto the seafloor within the
sanctuary. The current and new
prohibitions do not apply, however, if a
person/entity conducting an otherwise
prohibited activity has a valid permit or
authorization from the appropriate
sanctuary superintendent issued
pursuant to the regulations for that
sanctuary. Anyone wishing to establish
an artificial reef within one of the
sanctuaries could apply for a permit or
authorization. NOAA’s review of such a
project would include a consideration of
all relevant environmental issues, such
as contaminant discharges/leaching/
flaking, entrapment hazards, loss of
natural habitat and displacement/loss of
natural species assemblages, alteration
of local trophic relationships, fisheries
interactions, physical stability and longterm impacts, monitoring and liability.
Ocean Drilling
Comment: An offshore oil drilling ban
should be expanded.
Response: There is currently a
regulatory prohibition on exploring for,
developing, or producing oil, gas, or
minerals in the three national marine
sanctuaries (with the exception of
mineral extraction in MBNMS, these
prohibitions are also statutory for the
MBNMS and CBNMS); this ban on oil
drilling activities does not extend
beyond the boundaries of the
sanctuaries. Other regulatory authorities
including the Minerals Management
Service and the State of California have
regulatory authority for oil drilling, e.g.,
outside of national marine sanctuaries.
Comment: Offshore drilling for oil
and gas should be permitted.
Response: The regulations currently
prohibit exploring for, developing or
producing oil, gas or minerals in all
three sanctuaries. The MBNMS
Designation Document also contains
such a prohibition. NOAA has not
modified these prohibitions because it
believes they are appropriate. In
addition, in the MBNMS and CBNMS
there are statutory prohibitions on
certain oil and gas activities NOAA
cannot change. Public Law 101–74
(August 9, 1989) prohibits ‘‘the
exploration for, or the development or
production of, oil, gas, or minerals in
any area of the’’ CBNMS. Similarly,
Public Law 102–587 (November 4, 1992
at section 2203) prohibits ‘‘any leasing,
exploration, development, or
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70503
production of oil or gas’’ within the
MBNMS.
Comment: There is concern with the
‘MBNMS alteration of submerged lands’
prohibition, as it relates to the sanctuary
permitting process for a potential largescale research project associated with
the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program.
Response: The general permitting
process, protocols, and guidelines have
not changed in response to the updated
language used to describe the
prohibition on the alteration of
submerged lands within the sanctuary.
NOAA will continue to review any
proposal to conduct an otherwise
prohibited activity, whether it is a
commercial or research project, and
evaluate proposals on a case-by-case
basis, to determine whether the project
is consistent with the NMSA and
MBNMS regulations.
Research and Fishing Exceptions
Comment: The bottom trawling
exception for alteration of submerged
lands in GFNMS, 922.82(5)(B), should
be modified to allow ‘‘setting fish traps
or longlines’’ and ‘‘permitted research
vessel.’’
Response: The regulatory text has
been revised to use language consistent
with MBNMS regulations. The
exception to altering submerged lands
for ‘‘bottom trawling from a commercial
fishing vessel’’ is changed to ‘‘while
conducting lawful fishing activities.’’
This change did not necessitate
modification to the environmental
analysis. However, the regulations do
not provide an exception for permitted
research vessels. The Director, at his or
her discretion, may issue a permit,
subject to certain conditions, to allow
otherwise prohibited activities if they
further research related to Sanctuary
resources and qualities.
Submerged Cables
Comment: Should the Submerged
Cables Action Plan in the MBNMS
Management Plan also be incorporated
into the Gulf of the Farallones and
Cordell Bank management plans?
Response: The siting of submerged
cables was not identified as a priority
issue in the GFNMS and CBNMS
scoping meetings and is thus not
addressed in the GFNMS or CBNMS
management plans. NOAA reviews
permit applications to install submerged
cables in those sanctuaries pursuant to
the NMSA and applicable sanctuary
regulations in 15 CFR Part 922. NOAA
would also consider how similar
applications were addressed by the
NMSP for other sanctuaries.
Comment: NOAA is wrong in
distinguishing between submarine
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70504
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
cables for scientific purposes and those
for commercial purposes. Both have
nearly identical environmental impacts
and pose a conflict for other lawful
users of a sanctuary. Although NOAA’s
special use permit policy on submarine
cables does not distinguish among the
reasons for the ‘‘maintenance of
submarine cables beneath or below the
seabed,’’ MBNMS recently issued a
permit for a research cable not subject
to the special use permit restrictions in
the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. In
2000, Congress added language waiving
‘‘fees for any special use permit’’ for a
non-profit activity but did not authorize
waiving the requirement for the permit.
This issue must be clarified in a manner
confirming that any submarine cable
operator must first obtain a special use
permit and file an appropriate bond to
protect other users of a marine
sanctuary. Also, research cables may
have commercial benefits to the owners,
so an assessment needs to be made as
to whether fees are appropriate.
Response: Submarine cables for
scientific and commercial purposes
could have similar impacts to marine
resources. Both types of cable projects
are required to undergo thorough
environmental review. The NMSP has
distinct authorities (prescribed by law
and regulations) to allow the conduct of
specific otherwise prohibited activities
within national marine sanctuaries. The
most commonly used authority is found
in NMSP regulations (15 CFR Part 922)
to allow certain types of activities, such
as research, education and resource
management, to occur in instances
where it would otherwise be prohibited
by the NMSP regulations. In addition,
NMSP regulations applicable to
MBNMS allow ‘‘authorization’’ of other
agency permits for prohibited activities
not qualifying for a research or other
permit. Another authority derives from
Section 310 of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1441),
regarding ‘‘Special use permits’’ for
activities requiring access to or noninjurious use of sanctuary resources. To
date, the NMSP has issued few special
use permits for various commercial
activities not injuring sanctuary
resources. NOAA would issue special
use permits for submerged cables only
for continued presence of commercial
submarine cables already on or beneath
the seafloor and likely in conjunction
with an authorization for the
installation and removal components of
any project. The NMSP clarified special
use authority for commercial submarine
cables in the Federal Register (Vol. 71,
No. 19, Monday, January 30, 2006). As
stated therein, ‘‘The NMSP does not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
consider intrusive activities related to
commercial submarine cables such as
installation (e.g., burial), removal, and
maintenance/repair work to qualify for
a special use permit. When such
activities are subject to NMSP regulatory
prohibitions, they will be reviewed and,
if appropriate, approved through the
NMSP’s regulatory authority (and not
through the special use permit
authority).’’ Currently, only special use
permits are subject to fees.
Comment: The MBNMS Draft MP
should not include reference to allowing
a special use permit for submarine
cables for commercial purposes within
sanctuary waters. Many of the activities
inherent to submarine cable installation,
operation, repair and removal are
generally incompatible with the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act’s
statutory objective of resource
protection and violate existing MBNMS
prohibitions against ‘‘drilling into,
dredging, or otherwise altering the
submerged lands of the sanctuary; or
constructing, placing or abandoning any
structure, material or other matter on
the submerged lands of the sanctuary
* * *’’ Although exceptions may be
made for cable projects designed to
enhance scientific understanding of the
sanctuary, no such exception exists for
purely commercial projects. Special use
permits are designed for activities that
have a short-term duration (no more
than five years). Therefore, the MBNMS
Draft MP should be revised to clarify
that submarine cables for commercial
projects will not be permitted.
Response: The MBNMS
Superintendent has the discretion to
issue appropriate permits or
authorizations allowing specific
activities otherwise prohibited in the
sanctuary and NOAA’s regulations do
not limit this discretion in the manner
recommended by the commenter. See
previous response regarding special use
permits. The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act states that special use
permits shall not authorize the conduct
of any activity for a period of more than
5 years unless they are renewed.
Consideration of any permit or
authorization for commercial cables
requires extensive information and
analyses as outlined in detail in the
MBNMS Submerged Cables Action Plan.
The MBNMS will continue to evaluate
projects and proposals on a case-by-case
basis to ensure compatibility with
protection of sanctuary resources.
Aquaculture and Kelp Harvesting
Aquaculture
Comment: Commercial fish farming
poses tremendous risk to native species
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and the environment from food
additives, fecal contamination,
interbreeding/genetic pollution,
pharmaceuticals, food colorings and
pathogens. Consider a ban or subject
these activities to rigorous regulation
and monitoring. Aquaculture should be
restricted to native species only.
Response: Permitting decisions for
aquaculture involving any species other
than native species will consider the
risk of harm from escape or predation.
Certain activities associated with
aquaculture operations are already
regulated. Discharges from a future
aquaculture operation, if allowed, is
also regulated under prohibitions
against discharge or depositing from
within or into the sanctuary as well as
any discharge or deposits from beyond
the boundary of the sanctuary that enter
the sanctuary and injure a sanctuary
resource. If NOAA determines
additional aquaculture regulation is
necessary for the protection of sanctuary
resources and qualities in the future,
NOAA could issue regulations as
appropriate.
Comment: Mariculture operations
should be part of the sanctuary’s
education component, in terms of
educating public/children during tours
of facilities about this sustainable food
system, its impacts, and the marine
ecosystem as a whole.
Response: Ocean-based commerce
and industries are important to the
maritime history, the modern economy,
and the social character of this region.
The GFNMS Maritime Heritage Action
Plan includes activities to cultivate
partnerships with local and state
programs and communities to help
educate the public about maritime
economic activities and human
interaction with the ocean. NOAA’s
implementation of the MBNMS Fishing
Related Education and Research Action
Plan will educate the public about
fishing issues, including mariculture
operations in the MBNMS, to increase
public education about sustainable
fisheries and food systems.
Comment: The proposed regulations
prohibit new piers and docks in the
GFNMS. There had been some
exemption for coastal dependent uses in
the past because these facilities are
important to mariculture industry, in
terms of being able to land shellfish in
the GFNMS.
Response: NOAA is not issuing a new
prohibition on piers and docks in these
regulations. The construction of docks
and piers has been prohibited within
the GFNMS since its original
designation in 1981. The exception to
this prohibition in Tomales Bay remains
in the regulations. New language
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
clarifies existing regulations and all
current exemptions. This regulation also
does not prohibit mariculture operations
from using existing piers and docks.
Comment: The proposed regulations
include a provision about a moratorium
on laying any pipeline. This may be an
issue for mariculture in terms of intakes.
Response: The regulations do not
include a moratorium on laying
pipelines for water intake. The new
language in the GFNMS regulations
clarifies the existing regulation and
prohibits installing pipeline in the
GFNMS related to hydrocarbon
operations outside the GFNMS.
Kelp Harvesting
Comment: The kelp beds surrounding
Pleasure Point (Santa Cruz) that used to
clean and calm the surf under windy/
choppy conditions have been overharvested. There is a noticeable effect
on the water quality involving lack of
kelp and the oils that the kelp provides
for calming the surface conditions. The
kelp is cut at low tide and is reducing
the protection it provides to the eroding
cliffs. The kelp is nine feet under water
at high tide. The effects on aquatic life
have not been researched adequately.
Kelp beds that are adjacent to surf areas
should be left in their natural state as a
control and compared to those areas that
are being harvested.
Response: Kelp harvesting is currently
regulated by the California Department
of Fish and Game (CDFG) under the
authority of the Fish and Game
Commission. CDFG has conducted
extensive research on impacts of kelp
removal and prescribes restrictions for
kelp harvesting by permitted parties.
NOAA will continue to work with
CDFG to implement the kelp harvesting
policies adopted by the Commission in
2000.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Boundaries
Davidson Seamount
Comment: NOAA should prohibit
deep sea trawling at Davidson
Seamount.
Response: On June 12, 2006, NOAA
prohibited use of any gear that could
contact the bottom, including trawl gear,
at a depth of greater than 3,000 feet in
the Davidson Seamount Management
Zone. This prohibition was included in
management measures to implement
Amendment 19 to the West Coast
Groundfish Fishery Management Plan.
See Federal Register Docket No.
051213334–6119–02; I.D. 112905C.
Comment: There is no reason at this
time for including the Davidson
Seamount within the Monterey Bay
sanctuary, since there are no threats
currently on the horizon to that area.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Response: Sanctuary designation or
expansion is premised upon setting
aside areas of the marine environment
that have nationally, and sometimes
internationally significant living or nonliving resources. Sanctuary designation
provides authority for comprehensive
protection and management, including
research, education, and outreach. Thus,
designation does not require an existing
or imminent threat. The MBNMS
Management Plan, however, describes
threats to the Davidson Seamount in the
Davidson Seamount Action Plan. In
addition to resource protection, other
management interests warrant including
the Davidson Seamount in the National
Marine Sanctuary System. There is
currently no comprehensive
conservation and management scheme
in place to protect the organisms on the
seamount or the surrounding ecosystem.
While resource protection is the primary
purpose for designation as a national
marine sanctuary, NOAA also seeks to
increase national awareness and public
understanding of seamount systems.
Comment: The addition of Davidson
Seamount to the sanctuary will certainly
provide additional protection for this
area. Will there be considerations for
researchers who may want to study the
seamount and its ecology?
Response: NOAA’s goals in
incorporating the Davidson Seamount
into the MBNMS are to increase
understanding and protection of the
seamount through characterization and
ecological process studies. NOAA
encourages researchers to study the
seamount and to share the gained
knowledge about this important area.
However, if the research involves
collection of resources or involves
prohibited activities such as disturbance
of the seafloor or discharge of matter,
the researchers must seek a permit from
NOAA prior to engaging in those
activities.
Comment: Can you provide
supporting references regarding the
uniqueness of Davidson Seamount?
Response: Davidson Seamount is the
largest seamount in the western Pacific
Ocean and is one of the largest
seamounts in the world. It may have
unique links to the nearby Partington
and Monterey submarine canyons. The
seamount is home to fragile coral
colonies estimated to be more than 100
years old. It provides habitat for many
rare and endemic species. Davidson
Seamount is home to previously
undiscovered species (i.e., 15 species
are currently being described as new to
science) and large patches of corals and
sponges provide an opportunity to
discover new ecological processes. The
high biological diversity of these
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70505
assemblages may be found on other
central California seamounts; however,
we currently do not have enough
scientific information. The seamount
habitat of Davidson Seamount would be
unique to the MBNMS and National
Marine Sanctuary System as there are
no other seamounts within the current
sanctuary boundaries. The Davidson
Seamount description in the
Designation Document has been
clarified to describe the national
significance of the resources and
qualities of the Davidson Seamount.
(Davis et al. 2002; GSA Bulletin
14(3):316–333)
(DeVogelaere et al. 2005; In: A. Freiwald
and J.M. Roberts (eds), Cold-water
Corals and Ecosystems. SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1189–
1198)
(Planet Earth DVD 2007; British
Broadcasting Corporation)
Comment: Use NMSA to protect
Davidson Seamount if MSA protections
are reduced or eliminated.
Response: NOAA has two statutory
authorities relevant to this comment, the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act
(NMSA) and the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (MSA). NOAA considers both the
NMSA and MSA as tools that can be
used exclusively or in conjunction to
protect sanctuary resources. NOAA
evaluates the regulatory options on a
case by case basis to determine which
mechanism is most appropriate to meet
the stated goals and objectives of a
sanctuary. In the case of the Davidson
Seamount Zone, NOAA chose to use
both authorities to prohibit fishing and
other extractive activities below 3,000
feet. If, in the future, the goals and
objectives of the Davidson Seamount
Zone are not met because of the
reduction or removal of MSA
protections in the Davidson Seamount
Zone, NOAA will re-evaluate impacts
on the zone. If additional regulations on
fishing are warranted, NOAA will
follow the process set forward in
Section 304(a)(5) of the NMSA.
Comment: How does the circular
designation match the EFH designation?
Which one more closely matches the
EFH designation—the circle or the
square? Perhaps a depth contour
approach or lines based on a contour
would be more appropriate.
Response: NOAA selected the
rectangular boundary based on input
from the Sanctuary Advisory Council
and the Pacific Fishery Management
Council for ease of understanding and
enforcement of regulations. The
rectangular shape matches the
designation of the area as Essential Fish
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70506
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Habitat and a Habitat Area of Particular
Concern, as well as associated fishing
regulations.
Expansion
Comment: NOAA should expand the
Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary boundaries
north to cover the entire Sonoma
County Coast to the Mendocino County
line including the rivers and estuaries.
Response: NOAA did not propose to
expand the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the
Farallones Sanctuary boundaries as part
of the Joint Management Plan Review
process. However, the CBNMS and
GFNMS management plans include
strategies to develop a framework for
identifying and analyzing boundary
alternatives.
Comment: Bodega Harbor should be
included in GFNMS.
Response: At this time, NOAA is not
considering adding Bodega Harbor to
GFNMS and is not considering any
expansion of the Sanctuary boundary.
Comment: The Santa Cruz City
Council unanimously voted to support a
boundary adjustment to include the
nearshore waters of the City of Santa
Cruz within the MBNMS. In addition to
the technical corrections to the
boundary, specific mention of this area
should be included in the Final EIS.
Response: Consistent with the request
of the Santa Cruz City Council, NOAA
has adjusted the MBNMS boundary to
include within the sanctuary the outer
harbor waters of the City of Santa Cruz,
but exclude Santa Cruz Small Craft
Harbor. This boundary change is now
explicitly referenced in Section 2.6 of
the Final EIS.
Comment: Expand the MBNMS
boundary south to Pt. Sal to encompass
San Luis Obispo County.
Response: During the scoping and
prioritization process, NMSP
determined there was support for and
opposition to a boundary expansion of
MBNMS to include additional waters
offshore of San Luis Obispo County.
There were also various suggestions on
how far south to extend the boundary.
The NMSP, in consultation with elected
officials in this region, determined not
to expand the boundary to allow the
local community to work towards a
consensus on boundary expansion. For
this management plan review process,
the NMSP has not included or expanded
the boundary off San Luis Obispo
coastline, but could reconsider this in
the future.
Internal Boundaries
Comment: The Marin coastline in the
Sanctuary System is divided between
MBNMS (5%) and GFNMS (95%),
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
which has no basis in science and is
simply a historic attribute. There is
unnecessary confusion, and the Marin
coastline should be part of the GFNMS.
Also, the current ‘‘fixed boundary’’
proposed between GFNMS and National
Park Service (NPS) is unworkable and
should be amended to be a flexible
boundary that follows the NPS
boundary or the Mean High Water Line,
whichever is further from land. NPS has
authority and protections that meet or
exceed those of GFNMS, so there is no
reason for joint jurisdiction.
Response: The MBNMS and GFNMS
contain a Northern Management Plan
Cross-Cutting Action Plan to provide
consistent management of the resources.
NOAA is fixing the GFNMS boundaries
in Tomales Bay to the coordinates
established during the original
designation of the Sanctuary in 1981 to
avoid confusion and allow for accurate
mapping. The boundaries would return
to the mean high water line except in
the Point Reyes National Seashore
(PRNS) where the GFNMS boundary
follows the seaward extent of the PRNS.
Establishing fixed points for the
boundaries of the GFNMS in Tomales
Bay would not affect the National Park
Service’s authority to extend the PRNS
boundaries into the Sanctuary. Fixing
the boundaries to a set coordinate
avoids confusion of affected agencies
and the public. Having National
Seashore and National Marine
Sanctuary protection strengthens the
safeguards for resources in the area. If
the National Park Service proposes to
remove a shoreline parcel from its
boundaries, the NMSP may conduct the
appropriate review for inclusion in the
Sanctuary.
Comment: The management of the
San Mateo coast by the GFNMS should
be made permanent.
Response: The management of
sanctuary waters off San Mateo County
(and San Francisco and Marin County)
will remain as defined by the NMSP
Director in 2004. The GFNMS will be
the lead for most issues, including those
related to enforcement of MBNMS
regulations. The MBNMS will be the
lead to implement the Water Quality
Protection Program. Both sanctuaries’
staff and the NMSP West Coast Regional
Office coordinate closely in this
management regime.
Depositing and Discharging Activities
Desalination
Comment: Consideration of whether
or not desalination facilities may
provide for environmental
enhancement, such as restoring coastal
stream flows or overdrafted
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
groundwater basins (and appropriate
regulatory mechanisms) should be
added to the list of comprehensive
potential impacts.
Response: NOAA recognizes
desalination technologies potentially
address water shortages and may, in
some cases, be a preferred alternative to
further overdrafting of groundwater
basins or damming of coastal streams.
This consideration is added to the list
in Activity 2.3 of the Desalination
Action Plan in the MBNMS
Management Plan.
Comment: A comprehensive water
resource management plan should be
included as an information requirement
under Activity 4.2 of the Desalination
Action Plan.
Response: A water resource
management plan may be necessary for
other agency review of a potential
desalination project. However, at this
time, NOAA believes the existing list of
submittal requirements is adequate to
review a project for potential impacts on
sanctuary resources and qualities. If
additional information is necessary,
NOAA may request information from
the project applicant.
Comment: NOAA should provide
exemptions to MBNMS prohibitions on
exploring for, developing, or producing
oil, gas or minerals within the Sanctuary
and drilling, dredging or otherwise
altering submerged lands to allow for
desalination exploration and
construction, repair, or maintenance of
seawater desalination systems.
Response: NOAA will continue to
work with desalination plant owners
and operators as well as other relevant
management authorities to consider
projects on a case-by-case basis. NOAA
is concerned with negative effects of
desalination activities, both
individually and cumulatively, on the
health of the ecosystem and will
continue to review projects for impacts
from discharges, alterations of the
seabed, and the taking of marine
mammals, turtles, and seabirds.
Comment: We understand MBNMS
has proposed changes that refer to
‘‘beach wells’’ as an alternative source
of water for new desalination plants. We
object to the MBNMS proposals to
consider, support, recommend, or
approve beach wells for the purposes of
desalination and exporting groundwater
from our Salinas Valley groundwater
aquifers to the Monterey Peninsula. The
MBNMS has no authority to advocate,
support, promote or adopt policies, or
grant approval of any project that relies
on the illegal taking of groundwater that
belongs to the overlying landowners of
the Marina/Castroville/Moss Landing
areas.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Response: NOAA did not make
reference to or recommendations
regarding beach wells as a source of
water for desalination facilities in the
proposed rule or DEIS/draft
management plan.
Comment: NOAA should develop
regional oversight and guidelines for
proposed desalination plants to
eliminate piecemeal and inconsistent
reviews.
Response: There is a need to take a
regional approach to reviewing the need
for and siting of desalination facilities.
The MBNMS Desalination Action Plan
includes a strategy to encourage
development of a regional program.
Comment: The Desalination Action
Plan should not apply to previously
submitted applications for desalination
projects.
Response: The Desalination Action
Plan outlines NOAA’s role within the
regulatory framework—the plan does
not include additional regulations.
NOAA’s review of any application for
desalination projects will include, but
not be limited to: (1) Pipeline
construction on the seabed; (2)
degradation of water quality from
chemicals in the discharge brines and
their potential impacts on the resources
and qualities of the sanctuary; and (3)
discharge treatment methods utilized to
reduce the injury to sanctuary resources
and qualities.
Comment: Reductions in urban runoff
and increased use of porous surfaces,
retention ponds and cisterns would
reduce the need for desalination
facilities.
Response: The GFNMS and MBNMS
Management Plans include water
quality programs encouraging
reductions in urban runoff.
Dredged Material Disposal/Ocean
Dumping
Comment: Several agencies and
organizations oppose or do not
understand NOAA’s involvement,
oversight or regulation of disposal of
dredged material in the MBNMS.
Response: NOAA reviews the
composition of the sediment, volumes,
grain size, and contaminant load to
determine if the dredged sediments are
appropriated for disposal in the
MBNMS and comply with the
provisions of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act. NOAA works closely
with the Army Corps of Engineers and
Environmental Protection Agency to
determine the need for additional
measures in the regulatory program
necessary to ensure protection of
sanctuary resources and qualities. The
Harbors and Dredge Disposal Action
Plan includes a more complete
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
description of the role of the MBNMS in
regulating discharges of dredged
material and resulting disturbance of the
seabed. In 1992, the designation of the
MBNMS prohibited use of new ocean
dredged material disposal sites within
the Sanctuary.
Comment: Beneficial use / beach
nourishment sites are recognized at
Santa Cruz, Moss Landing and possibly
Pillar Point. We urge NOAA to be open
to future beach nourishment sites. Loss
of sand and beach value is a national
issue, as well as a California issue.
Opportunities of all types should be
recognized and nurtured.
Response: NOAA does not regulate
disposal of matter above the mean high
water line on beaches adjacent to the
sanctuary, except as regards discharges
that enter the sanctuary and injure a
sanctuary resource. NOAA has included
a strategy in the MBNMS Management
Plan (HDD–5) to address alternatives to
ocean disposal, particularly beneficial
uses such as beach nourishment. NOAA
deleted language in this strategy
regarding the lack of need for additional
beach nourishment sites in response to
comments.
Comment: California Coastal
Commission staff notes the increasing
number of incremental requests for
changing permitted harbor dredging
operations in the region. NOAA and the
Commission should work with the
harbors and require them to conduct a
more systematic and longer review of
their operation needs and materials
management. Commission staff
recommends additional text for Strategy
HDD–5 Alternative Disposal Methods to
explore a long-term approach with
harbors and deletion of text that
characterized a lack of need for
additional beach nourishment sites
within the MBNMS since this
characterization may be premature.
Response: NOAA has also received
requests to increase amounts of dredged
material to be disposed in the MBNMS.
NOAA is considering a variety of
potential modifications in the approach
to dredged material disposal, including
additional use of multiyear
authorizations, an ongoing interagency
workgroup to review permits and a
small relocation of one of the designated
disposal sites at Moss Landing. NOAA
also considers various means to reduce
dredging requirements through source
reduction or bypasses, and options for
potential beneficial uses. NOAA has
added additional language to the
MBNMS Management Plan to reflect the
need for long term planning, similar to
the approach to coastal armoring, and
has deleted the language in Strategy
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70507
HDD–5 regarding lack of need for
additional beach nourishment sites.
Comment: EPA guidelines do not state
that dredged material for ocean disposal
must be at least 80 percent sand.
Response: The Clean Water Act
guidelines for disposal of dredged
material state that material should be
‘‘predominantly’’ sand for the purpose
of applying the testing exclusion criteria
of the ocean dumping regulations in
Section 404. The EPA has provided
guidance stating ‘‘predominantly’’
should be interpreted as 80%.
Marine Debris
Comment: The sanctuaries need
stronger comprehensive action plans
and implementation to halt marine
debris and litter, including more
staffing. Also, there is a concern that
none of the water quality platforms deal
with the prevalence of marine debris in
the MBNMS. Marine debris is a separate
important facet of urban run off. NOAA
should ask restaurants to use
biodegradable take-out containers,
employ more cleanup crews, and install
more recycling bins (e.g., there are no
recycling bins on Fisherman’s Wharf in
Monterey). Other recommended
measures include: installing filters for
all the drains to the bay, in order to
catch large debris; employing crews to
clean up the marine environment like
on the highways; working with
companies to change the shape of items
that become debris so that the items
don’t look so much like food that
animals eat; and educating the
population about the dangers of marine
debris, regarding ingestion,
entanglement, etc. There are laws
requiring public outreach and education
regarding storm drains, but very little
effort/attention is given to this
important issue.
Response: NOAA will work closely
with the State to address issues
identified in the February 2007
resolution passed by the Ocean
Protection Council to reduce and
prevent marine debris. There are also
opportunities to partner with the
recently created NOAA Marine Debris
Program to address issues related to
marine debris in sanctuaries. The
NOAA Marine Debris Program has
awarded grants to reduce and remove
marine debris from the sanctuaries on
the central California coast. NOAA has
incorporated monitoring of marine
debris into monthly monitoring
activities to better understand sources
and timing of debris in sanctuaries. This
information will help NOAA design
targeted outreach and education
messages to reduce marine debris. The
MBNMS’s existing Urban Runoff Water
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70508
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Quality Action Plan addresses the
problem of land based runoff including
‘‘marine debris.’’ NOAA has also
developed restoration projects to
remove submerged entanglement
hazards and debris from the MBNMS.
Radioactive Waste
Comment: There is nuclear waste
sitting on the ocean floor of GFNMS.
Please do something about the nuclear
waste.
Response: The GFNMS Management
Plan includes Strategy RP–11
(Radioactive Waste Dump) to evaluate
the condition of, and actual impacts on,
sanctuary resources and qualities from
the Farallon Islands radioactive waste
dump site.
Comment: The GFNMS Resource
Protection Action Plan strategy for
radioactive waste should begin year one
instead of year four. Also this strategy
should include a proposal for the
designation and demarcation of the
approximate area of the dump site on
the nautical charts.
Response: GFNMS Management Plan
Strategy RP–11 (Radioactive Waste
Dump) has been amended to seek to
include an update to the NOAA nautical
charts of the known area with
radioactive waste containers. The
timeline has been modified to
implement strategy RP–11 starting in
Year 1.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Use of Dispersants
Comment: A coordinated sanctuary
emergency plan should include
coordination and decision-making
responsibilities on use of dispersants.
Response: Any sanctuary emergency
response plan will include
identification of decision-making
responsibilities on use of dispersants.
Use of dispersants in national marine
sanctuaries is discussed in the Sector
San Francisco Oil Spill Area
Contingency Plans for northern and
central California coastal counties.
Water Quality
Comment: Ensure that the final
management plans contain strong goals,
regulations and implementation
strategies for improving water quality in
our oceans, particularly regarding the
land-sea connection.
Response: The Water Quality
Protection Program Implementation
Action Plan in the MBNMS
Management Plan summarizes five
action plans developed through a
collaborative stakeholder process to
address a variety of water quality issues
related to the land-sea connection,
including urban and agricultural runoff,
microbial contamination of beaches, and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
regional monitoring. The GFNMS
Management Plan also contains a water
quality Action Plan with an emphasis
on watershed and water quality issues
affecting bays and estuaries. These plans
contain a wide range of implementation
strategies including management
measures, improved monitoring, and
outreach and education. In addition,
existing regulations for MBNMS
prohibit discharges from outside the
boundary of the sanctuary that enter and
injure a sanctuary resource or quality,
and identical regulatory language is
being implemented as a new regulation
for GFNMS and as a modification of the
existing CBNMS regulation.
Comment: Urban runoff needs to be
addressed by reducing impervious
surfaces. In that way, pollutants into the
sanctuary would be minimized and
groundwater could be recharged. This
will reduce the need for desalinization
plants and their detrimental
environmental effects.
Response: NOAA promotes reduction
of impervious surfaces in outreach and
technical training programs, and also
ensures these techniques are addressed
in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) storm
water management plans developed by
local cities with the state’s Regional
Water Quality Control Boards. Cities are
required as part of these state-regulated
plans to implement best management
practices reducing permeable surfaces at
new construction sites as well as
addressing water flowing off new
developments. In addition, NOAA
added a strategy to the MBNMS Water
Quality Protection Program
Implementation Plan addressing the
need for more permeable surfaces in
watersheds bordering the sanctuary.
This strategy identifies measures to
replace impermeable surfaces with
permeable surfaces and to promote Low
Impact Development strategies in new
developments. These efforts will help to
recharge ground water and improve the
quality of water flowing to the
sanctuary.
Comment: The San Lorenzo River has
some water quality problems and is
being tested, at great cost to the water
company. There are several agencies
involved, all specifying different things,
which is not helping. The problems
might be solved if a lead agency could
work on this river and coordinate
agency efforts.
Response: Several management plans
have been developed and implemented
in the San Lorenzo River watershed by
local agencies and organizations;
notably the 1979 San Lorenzo River
Watershed Management Plan and the
1995 Wastewater Management Plan for
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the San Lorenzo River Watershed. Each
of these plans contains detailed
recommendations that address water
supply, water quality, erosion and
sedimentation, instream flows, fishery
resources, and aquatic habitat, among
many others. These programs have
resulted in improvements in water
quality of the San Lorenzo River and
reductions in septic system failures and
nitrate concentrations. More work
remains, particularly for sediment
reduction, and the Santa Cruz County
Environmental Health Services
Department is the lead on
implementation of these plans. Specific
concerns mentioned in the comment are
best addressed by working directly with
Santa Cruz County. In addition, NOAA
has a long standing partnership with the
County, as the County is an active
participant on the Water Quality
Protection Program’s Committee.
Comment: The Monterey County
Board of Supervisors wants to increase
population by 50 percent within 20
years. Is this going to create more
pollution in the ocean (e.g., more oil
runoff)?
Response: Population projections in
all counties adjacent to the three
sanctuaries indicate that population
growth will increase in the future.
NOAA regulates discharges into all
three sanctuaries through various
prohibitions. The GFNMS and MBNMS
Management Plans include Water
Quality Action Plans addressing
discharges through runoff from landbased sources. The NMSP will continue
to work with local governments and
government associations to reduce
pollutant discharges.
Comment: The GFNMS may want to
look beyond traditional pollutants and
focus on emerging contaminants like
pharmaceuticals, pesticides and
chemicals that are found in treated and
untreated wastewater and agricultural
and urban runoff. Land based water
quality problems are passed on to the
oceans and the Sanctuary must
vigorously advocate for aggressive study
and regulation of all pollutants.
Response: Treated and untreated
wastewater, agricultural and urban
runoff, and various land based water
quality issues are addressed in the
Water Quality Action Plan of the
GFNMS proposed Management Plan.
Specific reference to pharmaceuticals
and other micropollutants has been
added to Activity 3.1 of the Water
Quality Action Plan.
Comment: Beach closures and
postings are also due to microbial
contamination from wildlife in and
around the ocean. The goal of the Beach
Closure and Microbial Contamination
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Action Plan should be modified to
include ‘‘eliminate beach closures by
reducing microbial contamination
caused by human activities.’’
Response: Beaches are closed only
when a known sewer spill has occurred.
Beach postings are due to high E. coli
and Enterrococcus concentrations from
unknown sources. The Action Plan
includes references to the fact there are
many sources of microbial
contamination that may trigger a
posting. There are many contributors of
microbial contamination in the ocean, of
which anthropogenic sources are just
one. The Beach Closure Action Plan
explains the difficulty in distinguishing
the source of the E. coli. The first three
strategies address the use and need for
new technology to both pinpoint
sources of E. coli and to find alternative
indicators identifying the pathogens
causing harm to both humans and
marine organisms.
Comment: Marine mammals and birds
are a significant source of bacterial
contamination yet this section is heavily
biased toward sewers as the main source
of the contamination. The City of
Monterey has inspected all of the sewer
lines and has not found any illicit
connections.
Response: Because the Action Plan is
intent on reducing beach closures, the
discussion and strategies focus on the
source of beach closures—known sewer
spills or overflows. The reasons for
potential overflows and the strategies to
reduce them are discussed. NOAA is
aware warm blooded animals contribute
to microbial contamination in the
environment. This is a natural
phenomenon, and it is unfortunate the
technology is not readily available to
distinguish between the different
sources. The Action Plan addresses this
and the need to support research to find
a real time indicator identifying
contamination sources. NOAA values
the City of Monterey’s partnership and
recognizes the leadership role it has
taken in regard to proactive responses to
water quality conditions flowing into
the Bay. This Action Plan addresses the
entire sanctuary including other urban
areas that have not yet addressed these
issues.
Comment: Is there local data to back
up the assertion that public sanitary
sewers are a significant source of
anthropogenic bacterial contamination?
Response: Strategy 5 in the MBNMS
Beach Closures Action Plan states that
sewer systems, septic systems and urban
runoff are a significant pathway of
anthropogenic bacterial contamination.
Sewers and septic systems carry
bacteria. Because they carry sewage,
which contains bacteria, they present a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
risk of discharge of bacteria into the
environment. The plan includes
strategies to minimize this risk.
Comment: Regarding the Beach
Closure & Microbial Contamination
Action Plan, since these are already
required by the sewer system Waste
Discharge Requirements (WDRs), how is
the MBNMS going to encourage those of
us with WDRs to do what is already
mandated?
Response: NOAA will promote
adequate ongoing maintenance of sewer
systems with a diversity of approaches
including assisting local jurisdictions
whenever possible to access grant
funding to implement the strategies that
are identified in Strategy 5 of the Beach
Closures Action Plan.
Comment: It is not clear what criteria
for the certification of an approved
vendor would be to address sewer
system upsets. How would a voluntary
lateral inspection program be
encouraged?
Response: Currently, in certain cities
on the Monterey Peninsula, plumbers
that attend workshops designed to
educate the industry on prevention of
sewer spills are put on a list and are
recommended by the public works
department. This is one way to create an
‘‘approved vendor list.’’ Regarding the
voluntary lateral inspection, there are
cities on the peninsula already
implementing a sewer lateral program.
NOAA will look to those programs for
guidance and to determine what
incentives work.
Comment: Why are the coordination
and outreach efforts only being aimed at
the Phase II communities?
Response: Phase II communities were
specifically identified because there is
only one Phase I city within the
Sanctuary watersheds and that city,
while updating its SWMP, has had a
plan in effect for over 5 years. The focus
currently is on Phase II cities that are
developing their plans and need more
assistance for regional outreach
coordination. However, reference to
Phase I cities has been added to Activity
7.2 in the MBNMS Beach Closure
Action Plan.
Comment: The sanctuary should work
through the state to get notifications via
the state’s notification system. Notifying
the sanctuary of all spills appears to be
overly burdensome.
Response: Strategy 9 in the MBNMS
Beach Closures Action Plan identifies
the need to have a single 24 hour
number to call for sewer spill
emergencies. This number has been
created for the Monterey Peninsula
cities by calling 1–800–CLEANUP. The
strategy does not require that the
sanctuary be notified directly.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70509
Comment: The Monterey Chapter of
the Surfriders requests more money be
allocated to water quality testing and
offers their organization as a partner to
develop a comprehensive educational
program that increases the public’s
awareness of the issue.
Response: NOAA encourages
Surfrider Foundation members to
participate in the Citizen Watershed
Monitoring Network volunteer
monitoring programs. There is
identified capacity to enhance these
programs by adding monitoring sites or
expanding the duration of the
monitoring possibly into the winter
months.
Comment: Do red tides in nearshore
waters relate to the level of nutrients in
urban runoff?
Response: Excess nutrients contribute
to the formation of algal blooms that can
be red in color. There are also recent
laboratory studies that have been
conducted at UCSC directly correlating
the amount of urea to domoic acid in
algal blooms. Urea is a form of nitrogen
found in fertilizer and animal waste.
Domoic acid is known to be harmful to
both humans and marine organisms.
Comment: The sanctuaries need to
pursue an aggressive, coordinated water
quality program by working closely with
the U.S. EPA and California State Water
Resources Control Board. Also, the
sanctuaries need to work closely with
local, regional, state and federal
agencies in rigorous monitoring
regulation of all toxics and pathogens.
These policies must be frequently
revised in view of rapidly advancing
scientific evidence of toxicity for many
man-made chemistries that have
heretofore not been adequately
evaluated for biological impacts.
Response: NOAA and its partners
created the MBNMS Water Quality
Protection Program in 1994 with
twenty-five federal, state and local
agencies, public and private groups in
order to protect and enhance water
quality in the sanctuary and its
watersheds. There is a long history of
multiple agencies collaborating on water
quality issues, and NOAA is also
pursuing these same relationships for
the watersheds of the Gulf of the
Farallones and Cordell Bank NMS.
Currently, the MBNMS is synthesizing
and assessing major water quality
monitoring programs within the
sanctuary to determine the state of water
quality, trends over time, effectiveness
of management measures and
appropriate recommendations to
improve a regional monitoring program.
To address emerging water quality
issues associated with anthropogenic
sources, the Beach Closure and
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70510
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Microbial Contamination Action Plan in
the MBNMS Management Plan
identifies four activities to investigate
indicators that provide real time
information on pollutants, and to
develop indicators that correspond
directly to disease causing agents and
are able to pinpoint sources of the
pathogens.
Comment: The NMSP needs to
partner with local water quality groups
(e.g., Bodega Bay Watershed Council
and others) to address the problem of
runoff from erosion and sedimentation
(non-point source pollution). The whole
system needs to be evaluated to
understand what is flowing into the
estuaries, as the health is deteriorating.
There is a need to look ‘‘upstream’’ to
address the problem.
Response: It is important to
investigate sources of pollution
upstream and partner with local water
quality groups and other agencies to
address the problems.
Comment: Shouldn’t there be one
governmental authority that would be in
charge of pollution on the beaches?
Greater water quality monitoring is
needed in the winter season, when
runoff can most likely bring E. coli and
toxins into the bay and surfing areas.
Response: California Assembly Bill
411, passed in 1997, gave responsibility
to county environmental health
departments along the coast to monitor
at public beaches with more than 50,000
visitors a year and that are adjacent to
storm drain outfalls. AB 411 also set
uniform health standards for those
monitoring programs and requires
health officials to close beaches when
pollution levels exceed the established
limits. It also set up a hotline for beach
closure information. Counties monitor
pollution levels weekly from April
through October and then monthly from
November through March. In addition,
the Beach Closures and Microbial
Contamination Action Plan in the
MBNMS Management Plan contains
strategies to address microbial
contamination on beaches throughout
the sanctuary. These strategies include
more real time detection, source
tracking, infrastructure improvements,
increased monitoring, enhanced
notification, technical training, public
outreach, enforcement and emergency
response.
Comment: The sanctuaries are
restricted in their ability to limit toxic
runoff, and correct deficits in antiquated
treatment systems. More effective
regulation of pollution is still needed,
especially where public health is often
put at risk by bacterial contamination at
beaches. The NMSP needs to look for
authority to regulate runoff into the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
ocean from land-based sources, which is
the source of a lot of pollution.
Response: The NMSP is able to
address sources of water pollution
through both regulatory and nonregulatory means, and partners with
other federal, state and local agencies
and organizations to address these
issues (see above response). In addition,
the Beach Closures and Microbial
Contamination Action Plan in the
MBNMS Management Plan contains
multiple strategies to address microbial
contamination at beaches.
Comment: NOAA should address
cleaning storm drain runoff, which is
the worst thing that is polluting our
oceans.
Response: The Sanctuary
Management Plans contain detailed
Water Quality Action Plans that include
provisions to address stormwater runoff.
The Action Plans include many
measures such as working with relevant
jurisdictions to reduce contaminants in
stormwater runoff and implementing
extensive education programs. For
additional details see the three Draft
Management Plans. The NMSP has
worked closely with local
municipalities over the last ten years to
implement these strategies.
Comment: The NMSP should evaluate
the feasibility of creating a program in
cooperation with the coastal cities and
operators of proposed desalination
facilities to bring one or two historic
lakes (specifically Merritt and Espinosa
Lakes, historic water bodies that are still
surrounded by rural lands with large
watersheds, both of which must be
mechanically drained and which empty
into the existing Tembladero Slough)
and marsh lands back into existence
adjacent to the MBNMS. These water
bodies historically collected and filtered
runoff.
Response: In recognition of the
important roles of these types of water
bodies, the Water Quality Protection
Program Implementation Action Plan in
the MBNMS Management Plan includes
a recommendation to develop a new
plan focused on protection of wetland
and riparian corridors. It addresses the
need for wetland inventory, assessment
and restoration. The Action Plan
includes a strategy to identify historic
wetlands that might be restored and
used for multiple benefits such as
ground water recharge, water quality
improvements and possibly water reuse.
Comment: The NMSP needs to
expand the non-point source pollution
water quality issue into pathogen
pollution and address the land/sea
connection (e.g., feral cats and the
parasite being shed by cats into the
watershed and sanctuary, which kills
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
otters). Pathogen pollution and nonpoint source pollution are going to
become more critical as the landscape
continues to be used by humans.
Response: The NMSP is very
concerned about the decline of the
Southern Sea Otter population.
Research has shown nearly 40 percent
of sea otter deaths were due to protozoal
parasites and bacteria spread by fecal
contamination of nearshore marine
waters by terrestrial animals or humans.
The Beach Closure and Microbial
Contamination Action Plan in the
MBNMS Management Plan includes
numerous strategies to address this
issue. NOAA also has a long term
program monitoring bacterial
contamination discharging from urban
storm drains and works closely with
cities to identify sources of the bacteria.
Comment: There needs to be horse
manure management education. A lot of
manure is not composted or managed
and there is nitrogen and sediment
going into the creeks.
Response: The Water Quality
Protection Program Action Plan in the
MBNMS Management Plan contains
various strategies to educate ranchers
and rural homeowners about best
management practices that can be
implemented on ranches and ranchettes
to improve water quality. NOAA
coordinates with partners such as the
Natural Resources Conservation Service,
the Resource Conservation Districts and
local Farm Bureaus to implement the
agricultural aspects of the plan through
numerous strategies such as improved
communications among ranchers,
provision of technical expertise, and
funding incentives. These partners
identify specific ranches having manure
management issues and help them
mitigate sources of manure entering
local streams.
Comment: The management plans
should address acid pollution effects on
marine life, as research indicates that
crustaceans will be harmed to the point
of extinction in about 25 years, if
acidification continues. The main
source of acid pollution in the area is
woodburning—fireplaces and fire pits.
Response: In its response to
comments regarding global warming
and in the implementing additions to
the Management Plan action plans,
NOAA will continue to evaluate and
address global warming impacts on a
number of factors including ocean
chemistry, including acidification as the
key chemical change being projected.
The management actions at this time,
however, do not address the sources the
commenter mentions. NOAA believes
this type of point source pollution is out
of its scope of authority, better managed
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
by relevant federal, state, and local
authorities.
Comment: The ‘‘enter and injure’’
discharge rule should be worded to
include discharge from land-based
sources, thus allowing similar
prosecution and enforcement.
Response: The regulation includes
material or other matter from land-based
sources. The prohibition is broad and
includes discharging or depositing, from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter that
subsequently enters the sanctuary and
injures a sanctuary resource or quality
including land-based sources of
discharge.
Comment: The Sanctuary needs an
‘‘enter and injure’’ clause to its
regulations to protect the Sonoma coast
from pollution and mining discharges.
There was also concern expressed about
proposed and current mining operations
in Sonoma County causing
sedimentation, siltation, a need for
dredging in Bodega Harbor, and damage
to fish from dynamite blasting.
Response: NOAA’s regulations
prohibit discharging or depositing, from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter that
subsequently enters the Sanctuary and
injures a Sanctuary resource or quality.
(This regulation is already in effect for
the MBNMS.) Although this regulation
by itself would not prevent activities
beyond the Sanctuary boundary (e.g.,
coastal development, dredging, mining
or other resource extraction activities)
including in Bodega Harbor, it can be
used to prevent injury to sanctuary
resources from these activities.
Vessel Abandonment
Comment: The proposed prohibition
against abandoning a vessel would make
it a federal penalty to leave: ‘‘* * * a
vessel at anchor when its condition
creates potential for a grounding,
discharge, or deposit, and the owner/
operator fails to secure the vessel in a
timely manner.’’ This language does not
make sense. The regulation states that
the vessel in question would be
anchored. Normally, if a vessel is
anchored, it is secured. Thus, the phrase
‘‘secure the vessel in a timely manner’’
would not be germane in this situation.
NOAA should re-write this section for
clarity. Also, the phrase ‘‘potential for
grounding’’ is overly broad and would
be subject to arbitrary law enforcement
standards.
Response: There have been many
situations in the sanctuaries where a
vessel has been either left adrift, left
partially submerged at anchor, or is
dragging anchor in such a way as to
create an imminent threat of a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
grounding or sinking. Previously,
NOAA had to wait until these imperiled
vessels went aground or sank in order
to take action, as no discharge or
disturbance of the seabed had yet
occurred. This regulation allows NOAA
to be more proactive in preventing harm
to marine resources. The regulation
clearly states that an anchored vessel is
not considered secure if it is in such a
state that it creates the potential for a
grounding, discharge, or deposit and the
owner/operator fails to remedy the
situation. NOAA believes the regulation
as drafted provides sufficient guidance
to enforcement personnel to assess
environmental threats and scale their
response to the circumstances in a given
incident.
Comment: The proposed prohibition
regarding deserted vessels lacks clear
standards and is too broad. The Coast
Guard should be consulted on this
issue. The standard for issuing a civil
penalty of any size should be spelled
out and should only be issued for a
condition that everyone agrees is grossly
negligent and imminently dangerous.
The protocols established by the
sanctuary must include consultation
with the Coast Guard and any
applicable local port authority. With a
lack of a complete network of harbors of
refuge, a sailboat with an outboard
engine with two gallons of gasoline
could sink and be fined for failing to
salvage the vessel. Also, a vessel adrift
from a boating accident should not be
penalized, especially when the
occupants may have lost their lives due
to a disastrous situation beyond their
control.
Response: The definition for
‘‘deserting’’ a vessel lists clear and
specific qualifying standards, including
the physical state of the vessel,
notification protocols, specific time
requirements, and required hazard
remediation actions. The U.S. Coast
Guard has had an opportunity to review
the draft regulation and has forwarded
no objections or comments to NOAA
regarding this issue. Coast Guard
regulations about vessel abandonment
primarily center on obstruction of
navigable waterways and public safety
issues, so the Coast Guard’s definition
and timelines for addressing abandoned
vessels are designed for an intent other
than natural resource protection. The
sanctuary definition for a deserted
vessel is designed to address the risk of
natural resource injury from an
unattended vessel through its potential
grounding, sinking, discharging of
hazardous materials and marine debris.
Thus, a deserted vessel presents a more
immediate concern to natural resource
managers tasked with protecting marine
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70511
habitat and wildlife. NOAA civil
penalties are assessed based upon
Federal law and the particular facts of
a case, including aggravating and
mitigating circumstances. The
regulation would in no way limit the
authority of the Coast Guard or local
port districts to manage the marine
waters within their jurisdictions. NOAA
enforcement officials consider
aggravating circumstances and
mitigating circumstances in all vessel
casualty incidents and assess penalties
appropriately.
Comment: Local and state
enforcement agencies should be the
point of contact regarding deserted
vessels.
Response: Deserted vessels that pose
a threat to sanctuary resources and
qualities require immediate attention
before being rapidly destroyed by open
ocean forces. State and local
enforcement agencies have limited
resources and mandates to address
derelict vessels on short notice or to
compel immediate corrective action by
a vessel owner/operator. State and local
jurisdictions overlay less than 20% of
sanctuary waters. Also, State and local
governments must often give first
priority to derelict vessel removal from
inland waterways due to navigational
obstruction issues or constituent
concerns. Vessel casualties can present
a significant threat anywhere in the
Sanctuaries and at any time. The
MBNMS and GFNMS need consistent
regulations that compel immediate
action by vessel operators/owners to
remediate threats to protected national
resources.
Comment: The proposed prohibition
regarding deserted vessels could be a
detriment to safety of life at sea, in that
the threat of penalty may cause a master
to delay abandonment of a sinking
vessel beyond what is prudent. This
regulation should be much more
narrowly drafted to allow for a master’s
judgment in extremis.
Response: Sanctuary regulations
include exceptions for otherwise
prohibited activities when conducted in
response to an emergency threatening
life, property, or the environment. Thus
evacuation of crew members whose
lives are in immediate danger would
constitute an exception to the
prohibition. A vessel master’s primary
duty is to safeguard the lives of his/her
crew and passengers, in all
circumstances. Further, NOAA
considers mitigating circumstances
when reviewing vessel casualty
incidents for potential legal action.
However, the prohibition against
deserting a vessel could apply, for
example, where the crew has been
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70512
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
removed to safety and the vessel owner
or operator fails to take immediate
action to prevent environmental damage
from a vessel casualty or where other
circumstances warrant such application.
Vessel Discharges
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Note: For the purposes of the responses
below, ‘‘discharge’’ is intended also to
encompass ‘‘deposit.’’
Comment: The regulations for the
MBNMS should prohibit large cargo
vessels from operating within Areas of
Special Biological Significance (ASBSs).
Response: The ASBSs in the MBNMS
are nearshore and do not need
protection from transiting cargo ships.
Vessel traffic lanes were established in
offshore waters of the MBNMS for the
movement of cargo vessels through the
sanctuary. These lanes are well outside
of ASBS areas. The ASBSs within the
MBNMS are protected by the same
sanctuary discharge prohibitions that
apply throughout the Sanctuary.
Comment: The proposed cross-cutting
vessel discharge regulations, which
allow the discharge of ‘‘biodegradable
effluent incidental to vessel use and
generated by an operable Type I or II
marine sanitation device * * *’’
regardless of the size of the vessel, may
be inconsistent with State law. Recently
enacted State regulations (SB 771, Ch.
588 of the Statutes of 2005, titled ‘‘The
California Clean Coast Act of 2005’’)
prohibit sewage and graywater
discharges (including oily bilgewater,
hazardous waste and other waste—
photographic, dry-cleaning and medical
waste) from vessels of 300 gross
registered tons or more if vessels have
holding tank capacity (rather than
allowing discharge from Type II MSD).
NOAA should consider whether it is
appropriate to change the management
plans and regulations to reflect these
State standards or if this current
proposal can be complementarily
implemented with the State standards.
Response: The regulations prohibit
discharging any matter from a cruise
ship other than clean engine or
generator cooling water, clean bilge
water, and anchor wash. For vessels
other than cruise ships, the regulations
clarify that discharges/deposits allowed
from marine sanitation devices apply
only to Type I and Type II marine
sanitation devices, and vessel operators
are required to lock all marine
sanitation devices in a manner that
prevents discharge of untreated sewage.
In response to the comment, the NMSP
revised its regulations to prohibit
sewage and graywater discharges from
vessels of 300 gross tons or more,
consistent with SB771. Similar to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
State regulation, the prohibition only
applies if vessels have sufficient holding
tank capacity when in sanctuary waters.
Comment: MARPOL Annexes should
provide a benchmark for ‘‘minimum’’
standards for compliance by vessels
operating within a national marine
sanctuary.
Response: MARPOL Annexes are the
original minimum standards for
compliance for vessels operating in a
national marine sanctuary. The national
marine sanctuaries include additional
regulations and higher standards for
discharges and use of marine sanitation
devices, which are desirable to protect
sanctuary resources and qualities from
marine pollution. The regulations are
enforced in accordance with
international law.
Comment: The need and intent of the
proposed regulation for locking marine
sanitation devices are not entirely clear.
The proposal to lock all sanitation
devices on small vessels in sanctuary
waters has neither a factual basis nor
extensive analysis.
Response: The MBNMS regulations
have included a prohibition against
discharge of untreated sewage from
vessels since 1992; however, detection
and identification of unlawful sewage
discharges from vessels at sea and/or
underway has proven to be impractical.
The requirement that MSDs be locked in
a manner that prevents overboard
discharges (e.g., locking closed an
overboard discharge valve) provides a
practical compliance element for
enforcing this prohibition and helps
prevent both intentional and
unintentional overboard discharges of
untreated sewage within the MBNMS.
Comment: Vessels 300 GRT or greater
with insufficient holding capacity for
treated sewage from a Type I or II MSD
may not be able to ‘‘lock’’ the system,
yet would still only discharge treated
sewage above and beyond their holding
capacity. NOAA should substitute the
term ‘‘operate’’ for the term ‘‘lock’’ to
avoid confusion and provide protection
sought by the regulation.
Response: The intention of the
regulation for restricting discharges of
treated sewage from vessels 300 GRT or
greater is to minimize discharges from
these large vessels while in the
sanctuary. If the vessel does not have
sufficient holding capacity while
operating in the sanctuary, the vessel
may discharge sewage treated by a Type
I or II MSD. The term ‘‘lock’’ only refers
to ensuring the device is operational
and not in a mode bypassing the
treatment device. NOAA understands
the determination as to whether a vessel
has sufficient holding tank capacity to
provide for no discharge of treated
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
sewage or graywater will vary
depending on a number of factors and
must be determined by each vessel at
the time it enters the boundaries of the
National Marine Sanctuary. A vessel
with adequate holding capacity must
retain those discharges to the extent
possible in designated waters. Vessels
without holding capacity, either because
of a lack of holding tanks or lack of
excess capacity within their tanks, may
discharge treated sewage and graywater
in designated waters.
Comment: Adequate education about
these discharge restrictions will ensure
the ocean going fleet retains all
discharges to the greatest extent possible
within these sanctuaries.
Response: NOAA will continue to
educate vessel operators about existing
and new regulations regarding discharge
of matter in National Marine
Sanctuaries. NOAA will also seek
assistance from the various marine
shipping representatives such as the
World Shipping Council and Pacific
Merchant Shipping Association to
educate its member companies about
operational restrictions in National
Marine Sanctuaries.
Comment: More consideration and
discussion should be devoted to the
need to control microbial pathogens
from anthropogenic onshore sources
that may affect the marine habitat, as
well as from vessel discharges. These
are highly significant water quality
problems that are expected to increase
with population growth and increases in
vessel traffic. This issue needs more
explicit attention in order to plan for the
protection of both humans visiting the
sanctuaries as well as the veterinary
medical implications of current research
in the survival of waterborne microbial
pathogens in marine ecosystems.
Viruses are a concern due to their high
survival rates in marine waters and their
capacity for causing infection in much
lower doses than are generally required
in the case of bacterial pathogens. They
can pose both a public health hazard
and veterinary medical hazard to
various species, as implicated in various
studies. Some of the implications of
these findings strongly suggest that
current federal performance standards
for MSDs, based as they are on fecal
coliforms, are insufficiently protective
of both human water-contact activities
and marine mammals. Graywater
discharges from vessels are generally
untreated, yet may also contain a similar
range of microbial pathogens, in
particular those associated with galley
waste (e.g., Salmonella), hand-washing
facilities, laundry services, and bathing
facilities. NOAA should prohibit
discharges of graywater and treated
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
sewage from vessels in each sanctuary
in the following areas: All State waters,
other locations where there are resident
colonies of protected marine mammals,
shellfish beds, and areas in which the
public has significant contact with
either marine waters and/or resources
harvested in the sanctuaries, and other
locations which NOAA determines
there is a significant likelihood that
wildlife, fisheries, and/or the public
could be harmed from exposure to
microbial pathogens.
Response: NOAA recognizes
microbial contamination is a significant
issue for health of living marine
resources. These contaminants from
anthropogenic land based sources and
from vessels are addressed in the
management plans and regulations. As
such, this rule prohibits discharge of
sewage and graywater from cruise ships
and vessels 300 gross tons or more in all
three sanctuaries. Discharge of sewage
from other types of vessels is prohibited
except for effluents free from harmful
matter and incidental to vessel use and
generated by an operable Type I or Type
II marine sanitation device. Discharge of
graywater from other types of vessels is
prohibited under regulations in GFNMS
and CBNMS, while the new regulations
for MBNMS allow the discharge of
graywater only if it does not contain
harmful matter. For land-based sources
of microbial contamination, the
MBNMS Beach Closures and Microbial
Contamination Action Plan includes
strategies for working with partners
improving analyses and reducing
microbial contamination, including
enhanced research and monitoring,
notification programs, source control,
technical training, public outreach and
enforcement. In addition, NMSP staff
review, comment on and authorize
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits
ensuring sewage treatment plants and
municipal stormwater systems are
adequately addressing microbial
contamination.
Comment: What benefit would be
gained from a prohibition on discharges
from small vessels (with small crew or
passenger loads) through all of the
sanctuary waters, given both the de
minimus impact of such discharges on
water quality and the vast size of the
combined waters of the three
sanctuaries? That a transiting
recreational boater unfamiliar with
sanctuary regulations would be subject
to fairly considerable penalties for using
a non-biodegradable cleaning agent
while washing his deck or dishes
demonstrates the unfortunate
consequences of excessive regulation.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Response: The purpose of requiring
deck wash down and graywater to be
biodegradable was to prevent boaters
from washing their decks down with
solvents, or discharging harmful
chemicals in their graywater. However,
NOAA agrees use of the term
‘‘biodegradable’’ potentially raises
enforcement and compliance issues. It is
not a term that has a recognized legal
definition and products are labeled as
‘‘biodegradable’’ without reference to a
fixed set of standards. NOAA could
define the term; however, it would not
be reasonable to expect a boater to know
which of the wide spectrum of products
labeled as ‘‘biodegradable’’ meet
NOAA’s definition. For all three
sanctuaries, NOAA replaced the
requirement that deck wash down and
graywater be ‘‘biodegradable’’ with the
requirement that they be free of
detectable levels of ‘‘harmful matter’’ as
defined in the regulations. This
facilitates compliance by providing
boaters a definition of what is
prohibited, and will be more focused on
the type of contaminants that pose the
greatest threat to water quality.
Comment: The DEIS frequently cites
recreational boating as a source of water
contamination, which presumably
underlies its proposed requirements
with respect to graywater, bilge, deck
wash and sewage discharges. Yet, the
DEIS provides little in the way of
specific data regarding the extent of
potential water contamination
associated with recreational boating or
the impact such contamination would
have on marine life.
Response: The changes to the
discharge regulations with respect to
use of marine sanitation devices on
vessels are meant to clarify existing
prohibitions. The FEIS does not
distinguish discharges from commercial
or recreational vessels, only a vessel’s
size and the material or other matter
discharged. Discussions of those
discharges and impacts on marine life
are discussed in the Biological
Resources section of the FEIS. New
prohibitions with respect to cruise ships
and vessels 300 gross tons or more
address impacts associated with
discharges from large vessels.
Comment: The proposed rule that
prohibits discharge or depositing of any
material or other matter from beyond
the boundary of the Sanctuary that
subsequently enters the sanctuary
should be deleted. It is absurd to the
extreme for the NMSP to seek to impose
its civil and criminal authorities to
activities conducted outside of any
sanctuary boundaries.
Response: Activities taking place
beyond sanctuary boundaries are only
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70513
subject to this regulation if the discharge
injures a sanctuary resource or quality
within the sanctuary. This is not a new
regulation for MBNMS, where it has
been in place since 1993. This final rule
does not change the boundaries of the
sanctuary except for the addition of the
Davidson Seamount to the MBNMS. The
regulation has two additive elements. In
order for a violation to occur, the
material discharged or deposited from
beyond the boundary of the sanctuary
subsequently entering the sanctuary
must also injure a sanctuary resource or
quality, except for the exclusions listed
in the regulations.
Comment: The proposed cruise ship
discharge prohibition should be
extended to all ocean-going vessels.
While the volume of discharge is
considerably smaller per ship, relative
to cruise ships, the total volume has the
potential to harm sanctuary resources.
Under the proposed regulations,
‘‘biodegradable’’ graywater and vessel
deck wash, and ‘‘clean’’ bilge water
could be discharged, but the regulations
do not define biodegradable, and
provide no means for actually enforcing
these limitations. Graywater can contain
pollutants such as oil, grease, ammonia,
detergents, metals, and pesticides. Even
in minuscule amounts, oil in bilge water
or graywater has the potential to harm
sanctuary resources. The best way to
ensure that sanctuary resources are
protected is to prohibit discharges
completely. Without significant
enforcement efforts, the ability to
distinguish ‘‘clean’’ discharge from
harmful effluent is nearly impossible. In
addition, the sanctuaries should
implement an education, monitoring
and enforcement program similar to
those proposed for cruise ships.
Response: Regulations for each of the
sanctuaries prohibit the discharge of
most matter; however, prohibiting
discharges completely would be nearly
impossible given the size of the
sanctuaries, use of the sanctuaries by
commercial and recreational vessels,
and proximity to coastal development.
NOAA included additional regulations
restricting treated waste and graywater
discharges from vessels 300 gross
registered tons or greater with sufficient
holding capacity while in the sanctuary.
See the response in this section
regarding graywater and the term
‘‘biodegradable.’’
Comment: Discharge from advance
wastewater purification (AWP) systems
on cruise ships should be permitted.
These systems provide tertiary
treatment resulting in an effluent quality
cleaner than a Type II MSD and a
majority of shoreside treatment
facilities. Extensive study in Alaska has
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70514
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
shown these systems to be acceptable
for discharge and the U.S. EPA is
evaluating these systems. NOAA should
consult closely with the EPA and Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation as they have both done
substantive work on this issue.
Response: The DEIS evaluated an
alternative regulation allowing cruise
ships to discharge from advanced
wastewater systems (see DEIS Section
2.2.1 for a description of this
alternative). NOAA is aware of the work
done by EPA and the Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation regarding AWP systems.
The program adopted in Alaska is a
complex arrangement requiring issuance
of a permit, prior demonstration that the
ships can meet water quality standards
based on independent contractor
evaluation, environmental compliance
fees, wastewater sampling and testing
protocols, record keeping and reporting
protocols, on-board observers, and a tax
per passenger to fund the administration
of the program. Such a program is
inherently difficult to monitor and
enforce, and the NMSP has no
mechanism in place for recouping the
necessary funds needed to administer it
(see below for additional information
regarding the Alaska regulations). Also,
the EPA studies indicate that although
AWPs remove most of the priority
pollutants of concern, they do not
adequately reduce discharge of
ammonia and metals.
Comment: The DEIS analyzes an
‘‘alternative prohibition’’ that would
allow discharge from AWP systems on
cruise ships, in compliance with
minimum effluent water quality
standards established by the Coast
Guard in Alaska at 33 CFR 159. There
are serious concerns about the
feasibility of administering, monitoring
and enforcing such a program. The
Alaska regulations have been widely
recognized to lack adequate monitoring
and enforcement prohibitions and the
Alaska program has significant
administrative costs. The DEIS does not
provide this important information
about recent changes to the Alaska
regulations. The new Alaska regulations
prohibit the discharge of any treated
sewage, graywater, or other wastewater
from a large passenger vessel unless the
owner or operator obtains a permit and
discharges may not violate any
applicable effluent limits or standards
under state or federal law. Unlike
Alaska, the NMSP does not have a
mechanism in place to recover the
administration costs. The alternative
prohibition is not feasible, is
inconsistent with state law, and should
not be adopted.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Response: The EIS has been revised to
reflect the current cruise ship
regulations in Alaska, as summarized in
the comment. See FEIS Section 3.5.4.
The referenced alternative prohibition
that would allow discharge from AWPs
was analyzed in the DEIS, but it is not
NOAA’s preferred alternative.
Comment: The Cruise Ship Discharges
Action Plan’s stated goal ‘‘to prevent
impacts * * * from cruise ship
discharges’’ is not consistent with
proposed regulations. The proposed
regulation prohibits any discharge.
Ships have been outfitted with
treatment units that convert all black
and graywater into potable water, which
can then be discharged. Several ships
that visited Monterey with advanced
treatment systems spent approximately
5 million dollars per ship to install such
a system. There is no scientific basis to
prohibit all discharges and no reason
why material from this advanced
treatment could not be discharged.
Response: By only allowing certain
types of discharge from a cruise ship,
NOAA has in effect targeted the
discharges that have the potential to be
harmful to sanctuary resources. Effluent
monitoring would be cost prohibitive
and infeasible, particularly for vessels
underway. Additionally, ship discharge
audits often reveal a discharge occurred
but do not contain information on
contaminant levels. Advanced waste
water treatment systems (AWPs) on
cruise ships do not always function
properly and when they do, they may
not effectively remove all contaminants.
Therefore NOAA believes prohibiting
discharge with specified exceptions is
the most effective and enforceable
regulation.
Comment: Didn’t the California
Governor recently sign a bill to prevent
all cruise ship dumping?
Response: California law imposes
restrictions on cruise ships operating in
state waters or calling on state ports.
These restrictions prohibit the burning
of wastes and the discharging of
graywater and sewage. However the
national marine sanctuaries off of
central California are predominantly
federal waters (beyond 3 nautical miles)
and not protected by the State’s laws.
The regulations implemented by this
final rule are complementary to the
State’s laws and provide comprehensive
protection from the threat of cruise ship
discharges throughout the three national
marine sanctuaries.
Comment: Anchor wash and cooling
water for all engines, whether main
propulsion or electrical power
generation should be permitted in
GFNMS and CBNMS. This change will
match the MBNMS regulation, which
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
contains exemptions for vessel engine
cooling water, vessel generator cooling
water, or anchor wash.
Response: NOAA has incorporated
revised wording in the final regulations
allowing discharge of clean cooling
water for engines and generators and
anchor wash in all three sanctuaries.
Comment: Prohibiting discharge of
any material from a cruise ship, other
than the noted exceptions, could be
interpreted to prohibit deck runoff
during a rainstorm or high seas.
Response: The regulations
implemented in this final rule do not
prohibit routine runoff of rainwater or
ocean spray/water from vessels.
Comment: The preamble discussion
in the proposed rule affecting cruise
ships states that ‘‘* * * such discharged
effluent associated with cruise ships
may not adequately disperse to avoid
harm to marine resources.’’ This
statement is inaccurate and misleading
and is not supported by scientific
evaluation. Numerous studies of
discharged effluent dispersion from
cruise ships indicate that both the nearfield and far-field dispersion of
discharged effluent is significantly high
when a ship is underway at moderate
speed. Please see the U.S. EPA report on
Cruise Ship Plume Tracking Survey
(July 30, 2001). This report concludes
that ‘‘* * * discharges from cruise
ships undergo a dilution that is much
greater than the initial dilution
predicted by a model * * * Measure
dilutions ranged from 195,000:1 to
666,000:1. Secondary dilution, as the
effluent passes through the propellers is
an important factor when considering
the ambient concentrations of discharge
effluents, as the effluent will undergo a
dramatic and rapid dilution after mixing
with ambient water in the prop wash.
See additional studies by the State of
Alaska, the U.S. Navy and M. Rosenblatt
and Sons. These studies should be fully
evaluated before enacting the proposed
prohibition. The drafters of the
proposed regulations consider the
dilution from a moving source that is
mixing its effluent in the propellers as
inadequate and completely ignore fixed
point discharges from municipal waste
water treatment plants.
Response: Dilution may help reduce
impacts; however, dilution rates vary
with the speed of a vessel, and dilution
does not change the volume of sewage,
graywater, and bilge water discharged
from the vessel. The NMSP also
addresses discharges from wastewater
treatment plants. These facilities are
regulated by the state’s Regional Water
Quality Control Boards under the
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES). The
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
NMSP tracks and evaluates NPDES
permit applications for these facilities,
coordinates with the State on
development of appropriate permit and
monitoring conditions to ensure
protection of sanctuary resources, and—
for MBNMS—issues a sanctuary
authorization of the permit. The NMSP
coordinates with State and local
agencies to track and follow up on spills
or other compliance violations at these
facilities.
Comment: The proposed rule affecting
cruise ships states, ‘‘Due to their sheer
size and passenger capacity, cruise
ships can cause serious impacts to the
marine environment.’’ It goes on to state
that cruise ships generate sewage
(blackwater), graywater from showers
and sinks, oily bilge, hazardous waste,
solid waste, toxic waste from dry
cleaning and photo processing
laboratories, and millions of gallons of
ballast water containing potentially
invasive species. The next sentence
implies to the reader and public that
cruise ships discharge all these
byproducts and waste from a ‘‘single
source’’ that is not regulated. This is
misleading at best. Waste onboard
cruise ships is fully regulated and very
carefully handled. Hazardous waste is
carefully segregated, packaged onboard
and discharged ashore in accordance
with very stringent Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
requirements. Other waste is disposed
of as permitted by law and regulation.
The preamble should be rewritten to
accurately reflect cruise industry
environmental management practices
and procedures.
Response: NOAA recognizes many
cruise ship waste products are
regulated, and has added clarifying
language to the FEIS Section 2.2.1 and
the three management plans indicating
that many cruise ship discharges are
regulated in some form by state or
federal law and/or by international
treaties.
Comment: Discharge from Type II
MSD units onboard cruise ships should
be permitted.
Response: NOAA is not allowing
discharge from Type II MSD units for
cruise ships because Type II MSDs can
fail to meet applicable federal standards.
Also see section 3.5 of the FEIS, which
contains a discussion of sewage and
other discharges from cruise ships.
Further, allowing Type II MSD
discharge would be inconsistent with
State of California discharge law for
cruise ships.
Comment: Cruise ships should be
permitted to discharge effluent oil
content at 15 parts per million with no
visible sheen.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Response: To ensure a heightened
level of protection for the resources and
qualities of the national marine
sanctuaries, the oil discharge
prohibition for all vessels is more
restrictive than standards for areas
outside of national marine sanctuaries.
Fishing Activities
Bottom Trawling
Comment: Trawling indiscriminately
takes all ages and species in the trawl
nets’ paths, as well as damaging/
destroying habitat. Bottom trawling
should be prohibited in the three
national marine sanctuaries.
Response: Bottom trawling is
currently banned, with limited
exceptions, in State waters. With the
implementation of Amendment 19 to
the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan, NOAA provided a
program to describe and protect
essential fish habitat (EFH) for Pacific
Coast Groundfish. The measures include
fishing gear restrictions and
prohibitions, areas that are closed to
bottom trawling, and areas that are
closed to all fishing that contacts the
bottom.
Comment: Because bottom trawling
impacts are in no way limited to the
MBNMS, the MBNMS Bottom Trawling
Action Plan should be made crosscutting and apply to all three central
coast sanctuaries. Some of the strategies
described under the MB Action Plan are
currently underway in GFNMS and
CBNMS. Also, this Action Plan should
include a more definitive commitment
to pursue additional regulation of
bottom trawling within sanctuary waters
because bottom trawling is a destructive
fishing practice that is inconsistent with
the primary objective of the NMSP of
resource protection.
Response: While the GFNMS and the
CBNMS do not have an action plan
focused specifically on the effects of
bottom trawling on benthic habitats,
they have plans that more broadly
address the impacts from fishing on the
ecosystem. In addition, NOAA has
prohibited bottom trawling in waters
less than 50 fathoms on Cordell Bank
and in several areas within the
sanctuary(50 CFR Part 660). If NOAA
determines additional regulations are
necessary to prevent harm to the
ecosystem from trawling, it will work
with fishery managers and industry to
develop regulations under the authority
of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act, the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act, or
both, as appropriate.
Comment: Commercial harvesting
heavily impacts many species of fish.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70515
The sanctuary managers must have
strong statutory authority to protect
endangered fish stocks. Similarly, the
sanctuaries should have strong voice in
the supervision and enforcement in
international fishing treaties as well as
local regulation of both commercial and
sport harvesting.
Response: The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act provides strong
authority to address and manage all
sanctuary resources and qualities,
including endangered fish stocks that
are important to the health of a
sanctuary ecosystem. NOAA’s Ocean
Service, National Marine Fisheries
Service, Office of Law Enforcement and
Office of International Affairs
coordinate supervision and enforcement
of international fishing treaties as well
as local fishing activities affecting
national marine sanctuaries.
Exceptions for Lawful Fishing Activities
Comment: NMSP should use the word
‘lawful fishing’ as opposed to
‘traditional fishing’ in the proposed
discharge and seabed disturbance
regulatory exceptions for MBNMS in
order to be consistent with language in
the GFNMS and CBNMS regulations.
Response: To use consistent
terminology and avoid unnecessary
confusion, NOAA has incorporated the
term ‘lawful fishing’ into the regulations
for all three national marine sanctuaries.
This change does not affect the
environmental impact analysis in the
EIS, although references in the EIS to
traditional fishing have been changed.
Fishing Gear
Comment: There is a problem with
the use and definition of the term
‘‘bottom contact gear’’ in the alternative
CBNMS seabed protection prohibition.
Any fishing line with a weight at the
end could be considered as bottom
contact gear. A weighted line is
necessary even for fishing off the
bottom, as occurs with salmon or
schooling rockfish and thus the
prohibition would prevent commercial
or recreational hook-and-line fishing.
Also, the definition of bottom contact
gear does not include pot or trap gear.
Even though the definition is not meant
to be inclusive, traps and pots constitute
a primary gear type and should be
added.
Response: For consistency, NOAA
used the definition for bottom contact
gear developed by the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (PFMC) in
Amendment 19 (Essential Fish Habitat)
of the Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery
Management Plan. NOAA has inserted
additional language in the EIS from the
PFMC definition for clarification of this
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70516
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
alternative. Additional EIS language
states: ‘‘Other gear, midwater trawl gear
for example, although it may
occasionally make contact with the sea
floor during deployment, is not
considered a bottom contact gear
because the gear is not designed for
bottom contact, is not normally
deployed so that it makes such contact,
nor is such contact normally more than
intermittent. Similarly, vertical hookand-line gear that during normal
deployment is not permanently in
contact with the bottom, would not be
considered bottom-contact gear. NOAA
has added pots and trap gear to the list
of prohibited gear types for clarity.’’
Comment: Evidence from recent
submersible surveys document a
prevalence of entangled fishing gear on
Cordell Bank suggests that additional
prohibitions targeting longlines on
Cordell Bank may also be warranted;
NOAA is urged to address this issue.
Response: CBNMS staff completed a
three-year process working with the
Pacific Fishery Management Council
and NMFS to address gear impacts and
determined additional regulations
targeting longlines are not necessary at
this time.
Comment: The proposed rule may
impact commercial and recreational
fishing through loss of fishing area
within the 50-fathom isobath
surrounding Cordell Bank. The
exception for fishing is not well defined.
As written, the proposed action may be
misinterpreted to indicate that fishing in
a location that is not regularly fished is
not ‘‘normal fishing operations.’’ A more
clear definition is needed.
Response: The wording has been
revised for the Benthic Habitat
Protection prohibition. See FEIS Section
2.2.2 and Table 2–1.
Comment: An official large whale
disentanglement team should be
established in Monterey Bay to respond
to accidental entanglement in fishing
gear or other entanglement. There is
such a program developed by the Center
for Coastal Studies on the East Coast.
Response: NMFS’ Large Whale
Disentanglement Network has been
active in the Sanctuaries since the early
1980’s. In the fall of 2006 and spring of
2008, NOAA offered public outreach
events and conducted trainings in whale
rescue techniques in conjunction with
other partners to demonstrate
techniques and gear used to disengage
large whales from fishing gear and nonfishery equipment and marine debris.
Training efforts were extended to a
group of invited professionals who
received special instruction consisting
of classroom sessions and vessel-based
training and exercises. Two new
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
disentanglement teams have been
formed to respond to large whale
disentanglements from Monterey
County through the San Francisco Bay
area and offshore of the Farallon
Islands. Next steps would include
formalizing the large whale
disentanglement team network through
agreements with NOAA. NOAA has
added this as an action item to the
Wildlife Disturbance: Marine Mammal,
Seabird and Turtle Action Plan under
Strategy MMST–4.
Comment: Make sure that the current
regulations closing sanctuary waters to
drift gillnetting during the fall each year
remain in place to protect the
endangered Pacific leatherback sea
turtles. Federal fishery managers are
seriously considering reopening the area
to drift gillnetters. MBNMS waters are
among the most important on the west
coast to turtle feeding. MBNMS
managers have the authority and
responsibility to protect endangered
species in sanctuary waters regardless of
what management measures are put into
place by others.
Response: In past consultations with
the NMFS on proposals to reopen drift
gillnet fishing off coastal California, the
NMSP has expressed concern for the
incidental take (as bycatch) of
leatherback sea turtles and other species
often associated with this gear type. The
NMSP also expressed these concerns
during recent consultation with NMFS
on a proposal for an Exempted Fishing
Permit for a single permittee to deploy
shallow set long line in the current
leatherback closure area. The NMSP
remains concerned about the incidental
take of leatherback sea turtles within
national marine sanctuaries and
throughout the Pacific, as the nesting
populations of these animals in the
Pacific region are in decline. The NMSP
will continue to work closely with
NMFS to ensure that any permitted drift
gillnet or shallow set long line fishery
do not pose a threat to leatherback sea
turtles, and other endangered species
and birds in the Sanctuary. The NMSP
will also continue to work with NMFS
on the development and use of gear
types to eliminate the take of these
endangered or protected species.
Fishing Regulations
Comment: It was guaranteed in
writing—known as ‘the promise’—in the
original designation documents that
there would be no regulation governing
fishing coming from the sanctuaries.
Response: The comment
misunderstands and misstates the
statement provided by NOAA in the
1992 MBNMS FEIS and Management
Plan (FEIS/MP) and in similar
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
documents for other national marine
sanctuaries. In a response to comments
published at page F–41 of the 1992
FEIS/MP, NOAA stated the sanctuary
was not regulating fishing at that time
but added that if sanctuary fishing
regulations were necessary later to
protect sanctuary resources and
qualities, NOAA would take the steps
required by section 304(a)(5) of the
NMSA and applicable law. At page
F–42 of the same document, NOAA
explicitly stated certain fish species in
the Sanctuary may eventually need to be
regulated. NOAA did not and would not
publish a statement promising not to
ever use resource protection authority
that Congress had provided.
Comment: Clarification is necessary
on the term ‘resource’, which by
definition could include fish species in
Article IV. Scope of Regulations, Part D
& F of the MBNMS designation
document. Clarification is also
necessary regarding the scope of these
proposed regulations and whether or
not they apply to fish species and/or the
closure of federally regulated or state
managed fisheries.
Response: The term ‘‘resource,’’ as it
is used in the terms of designation for
MBNMS, includes the fish and other
living and non-living resources of the
sanctuary. The regulations do not,
however, restrict the take of fish species
as part of legal fishing activities. If in
the future, NOAA determines additional
sanctuary fishing regulations are
necessary, it would follow the
promulgation and coordination
processes required by Section 304(a)(5)
of the NMSA.
Comment: The proposed fishing
regulations, as written, would have the
dire effect of destroying the commercial
fishing industry which is the economic
life blood of the Monterey peninsula.
Response: The regulations do not
contain prohibitions directly affecting or
targeting fishing activities. Specific
fisheries are also managed by other
agencies, including the California Fish
and Game Commission and NMFS in
consultation with PFMC. See also
previous responses to comment
regarding fishing regulations.
Comment: The Sanctuary Program
should remain vigilant and continue to
work with PFMC to ensure that fishing
regulations are not modified or
eliminated in the future to the detriment
of protection of the Cordell Bank. If
such changes do occur, we urge the
NMSP to act expeditiously to adopt
regulations, as authorized under section
304(a)(5) of NMSA, to protect the Bank
from bottom contact fishing gear.
Response: The NMSP will continue to
work with NMFS and PFMC on the
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Cordell Bank EFH closure area and all
other closures in National Marine
Sanctuaries affecting fishing activities. If
in the future existing EFH protections
for Cordell Bank from bottom contact
fishing gear are modified, NMSP would
examine potential impacts to the
CBNMS environment relative to its
goals and objectives. NOAA would
determine if additional closures are
warranted under either MSA and NMSA
or a combination of both authorities.
The JMPR EIS analyzes an alternative
seabed protection regulation, in which
bottom contact fishing gear is
prohibited. This alternative was
developed and evaluated in the event
regulations protecting the seabed from
bottom-contact fishing gear were not
implemented through the MSA or did
not meet the Sanctuaries’ goals and
objectives for protection of the Bank.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Fishery Management
Comment: NMSP should draft an
integrated fishery management plan that
addresses the San Francisco Bay and
perimeters of the Sanctuary.
Response: NMSP works with NMFS,
the Pacific Fishery Management Council
(PFMC) and the California Fish and
Game Commission when appropriate to
help meet sanctuary goals and
objectives. San Francisco Bay, while
providing important hydrologic and
ecological connections to the
sanctuaries, is not within any national
marine sanctuary.
Marine Reserves/Marine Protected
Areas
Comment: NOAA should pursue
marine protected areas (MPAs) action
plans in CBNMS and GFNMS similar to
the MBNMS MPAs action plan. The
sanctuaries must address marine
protected areas as a management tool to
achieve sanctuary goals related to
ecosystem protection and research.
Sanctuaries have both the legal
authority and legal obligation to review
changed conditions and adopt
management plan changes, as necessary.
Response: NOAA does not believe
there is a need for separate action plans
to address MPAs in CBNMS and
GFNMS. CBNMS Management Plan
strategy EP–4 addresses impacts on
sanctuary resources and area-based
restrictions are proposed as one of the
potential management actions, if needed
in the future. The GFNMS Management
Plan contains action plans on Impacts
from Fishing Activities (Strategy FA–4)
and Ecosystem Protection (Strategy EP–
1), addressing the need to provide
special areas of protection for sensitive
habitats, living resources, and other
unique sanctuary features. It considers a
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
variety of tools, including area-based
restrictions, to protect sanctuary
resources.
Comment: NMSP should not be
involved in creating no-take marine
reserves. Fishing regulations should
only be promulgated by the Pacific
Fishery Management Council and State
authorities. The Sanctuary designation
documents should not be changed to
allow fishing regulations.
Response: NOAA did not propose to
create any no-take MPAs as part of this
rulemaking. NOAA has two relevant
statutory authorities, the National
Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) and the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(MSA). NOAA considers both the
NMSA and MSA as tools that can be
used exclusively or in conjunction to
regulate fishing activities to meet
sanctuary goals and objectives.
Regulatory options are evaluated by
NOAA on a case by case basis to
determine the most appropriate
regulatory approach to meet the stated
goals and objectives of a sanctuary.
Comment: The use of an MPA
working group would be appropriate to
evaluate the utility of MPAs if the
working group process was fairly
constituted and science-based.
However, it is the perception of the
fishing community that the current
MBNMS MPA working group is
seriously flawed as a public/sciencebased process.
Response: The working group meeting
from 2002–2007 included a broad mix
of stakeholders including recreational
and commercial fishermen, divers,
scientists, environmentalists, and
agency personnel. The working group
includes preeminent local MPA
scientists who help provide scientific
guidance to the working group during
deliberations. NOAA’s decisions
regarding if and where to create new
MPAs will be grounded in the best
available information and science.
Comment: There is lack of specificity
in the strategies and associated activities
in the MBNMS MPA Action Plan. There
will be a rush by the sanctuaries to do
something without a clear
understanding of all the habitats within
such a large coastal area, nor the ability
to develop an integrated and adaptive
management system.
Response: The MBNMS MPA Action
Plan is intended to be a framework
document that outlines the general
types of evaluations, criteria, and
programs for considering and effectively
implementing MPAs. This framework
identifies the areas where specific
information will need to be developed,
such as in habitat characterization,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70517
research and monitoring, enforcement,
and education and outreach. The
consideration of MPAs has been
ongoing for five years and continues to
move forward in a very deliberate and
informed manner.
Comment: Monterey Bay should not
close waters off for anadromous or
pelagic fishing. These species cannot be
protected by closing off one area or
another to fishing, except where they
spawn. And, the continuation of longterm sustainable fishing in the region
requires that no marine reserves should
be placed in areas important to the
salmon fishery, the crab fishery and
certain types in the rockfish fishery.
Response: NOAA did not propose to
create any marine reserves as part of this
rulemaking. However, the Management
Plan for the MBNMS includes an action
plan with strategies for the
consideration of new MPAs in the
Sanctuary. This MPA Action Plan
recognizes the value of full no-take
MPAs. It also recognizes that allowing
certain types of ‘‘take’’ within an MPA
may be appropriate depending on the
location and the objectives of the site.
Comment: The NMSP should adopt
MPAs, including no-take reserves,
within federal waters of the sanctuaries
to complement the efforts of the State of
California. The NMSP should move
forward on creating MPAs in federal
waters using NMSA if necessary.
Response: NOAA believes additional
MPAs are needed in federal waters of
the MBNMS to address ecosystem
objectives, possibly including no-take
marine reserves. As such, NOAA has
initiated a process to consider how best
to address this need through a
collaborative public process that
involves all affected stakeholders.
NOAA has not determined there is a
need for additional no-take marine
reserves in the federal waters of CBNMS
or GFNMS at this time. NOAA may take
action in the future if there is a
determination additional fishing
regulations, possibly including no-take
marine reserves, are necessary to protect
sanctuary resources.
Comment: Limitations on noise
should be included in the definition of
an MPA.
Response: The Management Plan for
the MBNMS includes strategies to
reduce the threat of acoustic impacts on
marine mammals and other species but
not as part of the regulatory scheme for
MPAs addressing fishing activities. See
responses to comments in ‘‘Noise
Impacts’’ section.
Comment: The proposed MPA Action
Plan timeline is too slow. The plan
should make implementation of marine
protected areas—specifically fully
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70518
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
protected marine reserves—much higher
priority, and give it a more ambitious
timeline.
Response: As is true with many
community based initiatives, the
process for considering and potentially
siting MPAs in the MBNMS takes time.
This does not mean that the issue is not
a priority for NOAA. While the
management plan review process has
been progressing, NOAA convened a
multi-stakeholder group to consider
new MPAs.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Spearfishing
Comment: Do not prohibit free-dive
spearfishing.
Response: NOAA is not regulating
spearfishing at this time. Other
regulatory authorities, including
California Fish and Game Commission,
have regulations prohibiting
spearfishing in certain zones in State
waters of the MBNMS and are
developing regulations for zones that
could affect spearfishing in the GFNMS.
See also responses to comments
regarding fishing regulations.
Working With Fishing Community
Comment: The National Marine
Sanctuary Program should consider a
larger role for the fishing community
whose goodwill is important to longterm support for sanctuary programs
and whose livelihoods depend on the
protection of the sanctuary’s resources.
Response: The fishing community is
important and provides opportunities
for involvement in Sanctuary research,
education, and resource protection
activities. The NMSP recognizes the
economic importance of local fishing
and waterfront businesses, including the
infrastructures that support them.
Moreover, NOAA believes appropriate
fisheries within a national marine
sanctuary are an indication of a healthy
ecosystem protected by that Sanctuary.
The Cordell Bank, Gulf of the
Farallones, and Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuaries Joint Management
Plan Cross-cutting Maritime Heritage
Action Plan states ocean-based
commerce and industries (e.g., fisheries)
are important to the maritime history,
the modern economy, and the social
character of this region. The Action Plan
states ‘‘there is the potential to cultivate
partnerships with local, state, and
federal programs and identified
communities and that these
partnerships could aid in the design and
implementation of studies of living
maritime heritage and folk life to help
educate the public about traditional
cultures and practices including
fishermen and economic activities
reflecting historic human interaction
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
with the ocean.’’ The MBNMS
Management Plan includes the Fishing
Related Education and Research Action
Plan, whose goal is to involve fishermen
in research activities to add to the body
of research available for fishery-related
decision-making processes. The GFNMS
Management Plan includes strategy FA–
5: Develop public awareness about the
value and importance of the historical
and cultural significance of maritime
communities and their relationship and
reliance on healthy sanctuary waters.
The recreational and commercial fishing
communities also hold seats on the
advisory councils for the sanctuaries
and provide input into education,
research and resource protection
activities.
Comment: The plan allowing
fishermen to participate in fisheries
research may be a conflict of interest.
Response: Allowing fishermen to
participate in research activities adds to
the body of research available to
decision-makers and increases the
fishing community’s understanding of
ongoing research projects. In many
cases, fishermen possess experience and
knowledge that can be particularly
helpful in research activities.
Comment: Consider the impacts on
fishermen. There is a lack of
compassion for fisher folk; get them jobs
on the water, or buy their boats and
offer them jobs.
Response: This rulemaking does not
include regulation of fishing activities;
however, the management plans include
activities to involve fisherman in
research and outreach programs. See the
previous response for ways the
management plans involve fishermen in
sanctuary activities.
Introduced Species
Agency Coordination
Comment: It appears that the
sanctuary wishes to grant itself
unlimited authority to accomplish the
task of preventing and managing the
spread of introduced species.
Regulations, permit requirements, or
other enforcement oriented actions
associated with the Introduced Species
Action Plan affecting public agencies
should be coordinated with, and agreed
to by those agencies before they become
federal law.
Response: NOAA considers the threat
of introduced species to be a high
priority. The strategies in the
management plans to address this issue
include research, education, and
enforcement activities each including
coordination with federal, state and
local agencies. The regulation of
introduced species involves various
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
agencies, and NOAA is adopting a
comprehensive program coordinated
throughout the three sanctuaries in
northern and central California.
Definition and Regulation
Comment: The proposed Introduced
Species prohibition would prohibit any
new leases for the Pacific oyster, which
would impact the mariculture industry
in Tomales Bay. NOAA states that there
hasn’t been interest in additional leases,
but that’s due to the existing regulatory
framework, which is very restrictive and
cumbersome.
Response: This final rule restricts new
leasing of areas to native species but
would not impact any existing
mariculture activities in Tomales Bay.
Introduced species currently allowed by
the State of California as of the date of
this regulation, including Pacific
Oysters, may continue to be farmed.
Comment: Will a list be provided of
native species in each Sanctuary to
allow the Sanctuary to determine if in
fact a species introduced is non-native?
Response: NOAA does not have a
comprehensive inventory of species
introduced into the sanctuaries. If a
species is documented as native to the
ecosystem, it would not be considered
an introduced species.
Comment: The proposed Introduced
Species prohibition would prevent the
introduction of genetically modified
species (DEIS page 3–51), but there is no
definition provided. Triploid oysters are
commonly used by Tomales Bay oyster
growers to avoid the oysters spawning,
and thus avoid the resultant poor
condition of oysters for sale. Would this
proposed rule ban these oysters which
are a more desirable nonnative, due to
their lack of spawning, versus normal
oysters which spawn but do not
successfully establish?
Response: This rule does not prohibit
triploid oysters currently used by
Tomales Bay oyster growers and
cultivation of them would be allowed to
continue. Future leasing of undeveloped
lands in Tomales Bay would be
restricted to oysters not meeting the
definition of an introduced species (i.e.,
where altered genetic matter or genetic
matter from another species, has been
transferred in order that the host
organism acquires the genetic traits of
the transferred genes).
Comment: Currently the gross leased
mariculture areas authorized by CDFG
are 10–20% net usable for mariculture.
New growing techniques and/or new
CDFG policies could expand the size of
the area currently under cultivation out
to the boundary of the lease area, which
would result in a 500%–1,000% net
increase. The area under cultivation
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
should be limited to the current net
usable footprint. Consideration should
be made for the possibility of Drake Bay
Oyster Company moving into Tomales
Bay.
Response: NOAA acknowledges an
increase in mariculture activities could
occur within existing leases since most
of the leases are not fully developed.
The new regulation for introduced
species does not prohibit mariculture
operations in Tomales Bay conducted
pursuant to an existing valid lease,
permit, license or other authorization
issued by the State of California. The
regulation does not prohibit the transfer
of current valid leases in Tomales Bay
to new owners within existing lease
areas or future leasing of areas in
Tomales Bay provided the new leased
areas do not include introducing a
species not native to the ecosystem.
Comment: The exceptions would not
allow existing leases to fully utilize
lease acreage for which they pay the
State to the degree authorized by their
lease, Army Corps permit, and their
Coastal Development permit. The
prohibition conflicts with State policy
and limits the existing authority of the
CDFG to engage in additional bivalve
shellfish aquaculture leases, with
existing state environmental impact
review in place. To address these
concerns, the designation documents
and proposed Introduced Species
prohibition exceptions for all three
sanctuaries should be revised to allow
mariculture and research pursuant to a
valid lease, permit, license or other
authorization issued by the State of
California.
Response: The restrictions on
introduced species do not restrict any
areas currently leased by the State of
California so long as the species were
being cultivated in those areas prior to
the new prohibition taking effect. See
previous responses to comments
regarding the scope of this regulation. A
complete exception is not provided for
mariculture of introduced species and
associated research activities because
NOAA cannot accurately predict
impacts that might result from
introduced species that have not been
previously cultivated in these areas.
Please see the response to the next
comment below.
Comment: The basis for the proposed
Introduced Species prohibition cites
information that is more related to
finfish culture and net-pen culture than
shellfish mariculture. These issues do
not relate to shellfish mariculture in
terms of the way it’s conducted now or
with existing CDFG regulations, which
should be acknowledged (CDFG Title 24
regulations). The industry is heavily
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
scrutinized in terms of seed pathogens;
five years of pathology and cytology go
into the CDFG review. Increasing the
footprint is not going to increase
potential impacts. Science has proven
that there are more positive impacts
(e.g., sustainability) than negative
impacts from shellfish mariculture.
Response: There are some positive
impacts from shellfish mariculture, and
this regulation would not restrict
mariculture of native species and would
allow cultivation of introduced species
currently authorized under State of
California law in existing leases.
However, past introduction of foreign
shellfish has brought diseases, parasites,
and predators that have damaged
ecosystems and associated native
species. Moreover, the potential exists
ecologically for non-native shellfish to
be accidentally released and established
in sanctuary ecosystems.
Comment: The civil penalty of up to
$100,000 is too onerous for a
recreational boater who could
unintentionally or unknowingly violate
the proposed Introduced Species
prohibition by releasing a nonnative
seaweed or barnacle. This prohibition
should be deleted and attention should
be focused on education and on major
sources of introduction such as ballast
water exchange. Education is a more
appropriate tool to address invasive
species; NOAA could partner with
Department of Boating and Waterways
to educate boaters about precautions.
Response: The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act establishes a limit on
the maximum civil penalties that can be
charged for violations of sanctuary
regulations and law. Currently, that
limit is set at $130,000 per day for any
continuing violation. However, the act
does not require application of the
maximum allowable penalty in any
enforcement case. The amount of any
penalty is generally determined by the
nature of a violation and a variety of
aggravating/mitigating circumstances,
such as gravity of the violation, prior
violations, harm to protected resources,
value of protected resources, violator’s
conduct, and degree of cooperation.
NOAA prosecutors generally scale
proposed penalties to fit the nature of a
particular violation. Recreational
boating is a common method for spread
of non-native species in California.
However, this prohibition extends
beyond small-scale introduction by a
recreational boater. Introduced species
could be discharged into a sanctuary on
a large-scale, systematic basis through
many vectors, such as commercial
shipping, aquaculture, aquaria, or
fishing operations. Further, there are
circumstances in which introduced
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70519
species could be willfully and
intentionally discharged with full
knowledge of the potential negative
consequences. In such instances,
education alone could not address the
problem. Education is an important part
of this issue and NOAA has included
education components in its Action
Plans regarding Introduced Species.
NOAA coordinates with the California
Department of Boating and Waterways
already, and welcomes expanded
interagency cooperation to reduce
movement and introduction of nonnative species from recreational boating.
Comment: The broad nature of the
Introduced Species Action Plan may
result in controls on the fishing fleet
that would require all vessels to be
inspected and cleaned before every trip
in sanctuary waters. Vessels routinely
enter and exit sanctuary waters. There is
no scientific evidence that this activity
has caused any environmental problem
regarding non-resident species.
Additional regulations, without any
basis and without any evaluation of the
pros and cons, should not be adopted.
Response: The Action Plan does not
mandate vessel inspections and
cleaning before every entry to the
sanctuary, and such activities are not
required by the regulation. Multiple
studies document the spread of nonnative species by recreational and
commercial vessels (e.g., Zebra mussels
and quagga mussels). NOAA is also
concerned about the spread of invasive
algaes such as Undaria which have been
found in the Santa Barbara Harbor and
Monterey Harbor and could easily be
transmitted by vessels as they transit the
coastline.
Use of an Introduced Species as Bait
Comment: Bait used while fishing is
an exception to the discharge rule but
often times bait can be an introduced
species, so the discharge exception
needs to be clarified.
Response: Under this action, the
exception for the bait used in or
resulting from lawful fishing activities
from the prohibition on discharge of
materials or other matter does not
exempt the activity from the prohibition
on the introduction of non-native
species. Specific exceptions in one
prohibition do not except the activity
from other regulations. There is no need
to further clarify this in the regulations
as NOAA’s intent in this matter is
clearly articulated.
Motorized Personal Watercraft
Action Plan Review
Comment: There needs to be some
mechanism for periodic review of the
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70520
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
MBNMS MPWC Action Plan to allow
the action plan to be periodically
adjusted according to the effectiveness
of the program.
Response: The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act requires NOAA to
review the management plans and
action plans therein every five years.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Agency Coordination
Comment: NOAA should work with
state and local jurisdictions with
authority to regulate uses or activities
causing concern rather than creating
new authorities.
Response: NOAA has regulated
MPWC use in the MBNMS since 1993
and in GFNMS since 2001. State and
local jurisdictions overlay less than 20%
of MBNMS waters. Local governments
have no mandates or authority to issue
MPWC regulations throughout State and
Federal waters of the MBNMS. Where
local marine jurisdictions exist, they
seldom extend seaward of the 60-ft
depth line and are geographically
constrained. In addition, regulation of
MPWC is often inconsistent between
local jurisdictions within the MBNMS.
State and local regulations pertaining to
MPWC are usually designed primarily
for public safety purposes, not natural
resource conservation purposes. MPWC
operations present unique threats to
marine resources of the sanctuary due to
their relative size and weight. See the
MBNMS Motorized Personal Watercraft
Action Plan for a description of
uniqueness and subsequent impacts. By
limiting use of the MPWC to certain
areas, NOAA can ensure uniform and
consistent management of this activity
to minimize threats to protected
national resources throughout the
MBNMS.
Comment: NOAA should clarify what
agency will enforce the provisions of the
proposed regulations.
Response: Primary law enforcement
responsibilities for NOAA regulations
are assigned to NOAA’s Office for Law
Enforcement (OLE). Other federal and
state agencies are also capable of
enforcing NOAA regulations. For a
complete description of enforcement
responsibilities and partnerships see the
responses to comments under the
heading ‘‘Sanctuary Management—
Enforcement.’’
Economic Impacts
Comment: The new definition of
MPWC for MBNMS will have significant
negative economic impacts.
Response: NOAA’s socioeconomic
assessment in the Draft and Final EIS
found that the changes to the definition
of MPWC for the MBNMS have both
beneficial and adverse socioeconomic
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
impacts, and it concluded that overall
negative socioeconomic impacts would
be less than significant.
Prohibition and Exceptions
Comment: The proposed MPWC
definition change to include ‘‘any other
vessel that is less than 20 feet as
manufactured, and is propelled by a
water jet pump or drive’’ is very vague
and significantly over-broad.
Response: The revisions to the
definition provide readily visual cues
for determining if a vessel qualifies as
an MPWC, and focus on a very specific
group of small, powered vessels. The
agency has been specific in describing
the vessels of concern and believes the
proposed definition is sufficiently clear
to identify them.
Comment: NOAA should consider
alternative regulatory language such as
that used by the State of Hawaii which
requires training and certification and a
fixed speed of 5 miles per hour when
within 300–1,000 feet of the shoreline.
Response: Vessel training curricula
and certification requirements are
boating safety and registration issues
which are more appropriately managed
by State and Federal boat licensing
agencies. NOAA is not proposing
licensing requirements. Rules
implemented by the State of Hawaii to
regulate MPWC were developed
specifically to resolve boater safety and
user conflict issues that had arisen in
state coastal waters. The rules were
amended in 1994 to make provisions for
tow-in surfing activities and resolve
mounting conflicts between traditional
and tow-in surfing interests. The Hawaii
rules were not developed in response to
natural resource protection threats, nor
are they specifically designed to ensure
protection of nationally significant
marine resources or sensitive habitat
areas. No environmental studies were
conducted as part of the rulemaking
process for Hawaii MPWC regulations.
Further, NOAA is not proposing a
change to the MPWC regulation itself,
but rather a revision to the definition.
Comment: NOAA should develop a
program to allow MPWC use in
designated areas for tow-surfing
activities.
Response: NOAA considered a permit
program in the MBNMS Draft
Management Plan and concluded no
MPWC recreational activity could meet
the required criteria for issuance of a
Special Use Permit (see 15 CFR Sec.
922.133). NOAA will continue to allow
MPWC use for all activities in four
designated MPWC use zones, plus, per
the final regulation (i.e., the FEIS
preferred alternative), an additional
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
zone specifically designed to
accommodate big wave tow-in surfing.
During NOAA public scoping
meetings in 2001, NOAA received
comments that the Mavericks surf break
at Half Moon Bay was a unique big wave
tow-in surfing location in the
continental United States, accessible
only by MPWC tow-in techniques and
should be given special consideration
for MPWC access. Based upon the
evidence that Mavericks was such a
special national sporting venue, NOAA
investigated whether allowing MPWC
operations at that location could be
accomplished in a manner compatible
with the Sanctuary’s primary goal of
marine resource protection. As a result
of the review, this final rule establishes
a new MPWC zone off Pillar Point
Harbor that will allow for recreational
access via MPWC to the Mavericks surf
break during National Weather Service
high surf warnings issued for San Mateo
County during December, January, and
February. During the course of
management plan development, NOAA
also received public comment
requesting that MPWC access be granted
for big wave tow-in surfing at a surf
break known as Ghost Trees, located off
Pescadero Point in Carmel Bay. NOAA
examined this venue, but due to several
factors (including sensitive wildlife
resources, distant launch sites and
lengthy transit corridors, and impacts
on marine protected areas), determined
that authorization of MPWC activity at
this location would not be consistent
with the sanctuary’s primary goal of
resource protection. NOAA also
received public comments that broad
access to sanctuary waters should be
granted to MPWC to support tow-in
surfing at virtually any location within
the sanctuary and under any surf
conditions. Thus, in this final rule,
NOAA has made a limited provision for
MPWC assisted tow-in surfing at the
unique big wave site known as
Mavericks, but would continue to
prohibit MPWC use outside of the
designated riding zones that have been
in place since 1993. Many professional
and recreational surfers access breaking
surf up to 20 feet in height within the
sanctuary without the use of MPWC and
have done so for decades.
Comment: The existing MPWC zones
are not used and should be removed.
Response: The existing MPWC zones
are used in some areas of the MBNMS,
although the volume of use is currently
low. As the definition of MPWC is
extended to encompass larger MPWC
models currently in use within the
sanctuary, the larger models of MPWC
not currently regulated will be restricted
to the five zones. Therefore, use of
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
sanctuary MPWC operating zones is
expected to increase. NOAA is not
closing any zones at this time. See above
for additional discussion of zones.
Comment: NOAA should allow
MPWC use for emergencies such as
rescue operations or vessel assistance
and provide a method for emergency
response training.
Response: NOAA continues to allow
use of MPWC for emergency response
purposes. The prohibitions listed in the
regulations at 15 CFR Section
922.132(a)(2)–(11) do not apply to any
activity necessary to respond to an
emergency threatening life, property, or
the environment. NOAA has made
provisions in the final management plan
to support MPWC rescue and training
operations by government search and
rescue agencies operating within the
MBNMS. Search and rescue personnel
specialize in public safety, and their
training and operations are primarily
focused on that mission priority. Prior
to issuing any permits or authorizations
for MPWC search and rescue training
operations, NOAA will coordinate with
government agency partners to ensure
that training operations are conducted
in a manner, and at times and locations,
that minimize risk of disturbance or
harm to protected resources and habitats
within the Sanctuary.
User Conflicts
Comment: The MPWC issue is a user
conflict between traditional paddle
surfers and those who engage in tow-in
and or tow-at surfing. NOAA should not
discriminate between recreational
activities.
Response: NOAA has regulated
MPWC within the MBNMS since 1993,
prior to any significant use of MPWC by
surfers within the sanctuary. NOAA is
not regulating surfing activity and does
not promote one style of surfing over
another. NOAA is concerned with
threats posed by current and future
MPWC activity within the sanctuary
(not surfing) and is updating an existing
15-year-old restriction of MPWC to
specific areas in the sanctuary. In
response to comments and staff analysis
of various alternatives, this final rule
adds a new zone to allow use of MPWC
at Pillar Point (Mavericks) due to the
unique geographic, oceanographic, and
seasonal characteristics of that site. The
zone would be in effect during National
Weather Service high surf warnings
issued for San Mateo County in
December, January, and February.
Wildlife Disturbance
Comment: NOAA should update the
MBNMS MPWC definition to protect
wildlife and reduce user conflicts
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
consistent with the original intent of the
regulation.
Response: MPWC have special
maneuver, thrust, and buoyancy
capabilities distinguishing them from
other watercraft, enabling sustained
intrusion by MPWC into wildlife areas.
See the response immediately below
regarding protective measures by
NOAA.
Comment: MPWC should be regulated
in the same manner as other small
vessels.
Response: MPWC have several
characteristics distinguishing them from
other small vessels. MPWC are small,
fast, and highly maneuverable craft that
possess unconventionally high thrust
capability and horsepower relative to
their size and weight. This characteristic
enables them to make sharp turns at
high speeds and alter direction rapidly,
while maintaining controlled stability.
Their small size, shallow draft, instant
thrust, and ‘‘quick response’’ enable
them to operate closer to shore and in
areas that would commonly pose a
hazard to conventional craft operating at
comparable speeds. Many can be
launched across a beach area, without
the need for a launch ramp. Most
MPWC are designed to shed water,
enabling an operator to roll or swamp
the vessel without serious
complications or interruption of vessel
performance. The ability to shunt water
from the load carrying area exempts
applicable MPWC from Coast Guard
safety rating standards for small boats.
MPWC are often designed to
accommodate sudden separation and
quick remount by a rider. MPWC are not
commonly equipped for night operation
and have limited instrumentation and
storage space compared to conventional
vessels. MPWC propelled by a
directional water jet pump do not
commonly have a rudder and must
attain a minimum speed threshold to
achieve optimal maneuverability. Most
models have no steerage when the jet is
idle.
These characteristics enable MPWC to
conduct sustained operations in
sensitive habitat areas where other
vessels cannot routinely operate, thus
posing serious disturbance threats to
marine wildlife in those areas. In
addition, NOAA has received comments
that operation of these craft in a manner
that optimizes their design
characteristics (i.e., normal operation)
poses unique threats to other human
uses of Sanctuary nearshore areas.
Further, see the 1995 U.S. Court of
Appeals decision unanimously
upholding NOAA’s regulation of MPWC
in the MBNMS, Personal Watercraft
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70521
Industry Association v. Department of
Commerce, 48 F.3d. 540.
Comment: NOAA lacks adequate data
regarding endangerment or harassment
to wildlife from MPWC.
Response: Local observations and
documentation of MPWC disturbance of
marine birds and mammals elsewhere,
provide sufficient information
identifying the risks of MPWC. The
regulation of MPWC within the
Sanctuary in 1993 stemmed partially
from complaints of endangerment and
harassment of marine mammals,
including highly publicized claims that
a MPWC operator was observed running
over a sea otter, a species protected
under the Endangered Species Act, near
Monterey. Again, the adequacy of
NOAA’s administrative record for
regulation of MPWC has already been
upheld in court. (See previous
responses.) NOAA has received written
and oral reports of MPWC users
harassing sea otters, harbor seals,
porpoise, dolphin and other wildlife in
various areas of the sanctuary since
implementation of the regulation in
1993. Sometimes, due to high surf
conditions, operators are unaware of
their impacts on wildlife. For example,
sea otter biologists have observed
MPWC/sea otter interactions during
high surf events. In the first incident, a
sea otter biologist observed an MPWC
tow a skier across the course of an otter
swimming perpendicular to them in
Stillwater Cove. Due to high swell
conditions, the MPWC team never saw
or responded to the otter as it crossed
their path. In a second incident,
Monterey Bay Aquarium volunteers
observed an MPWC drive directly
through a group of otters at Otter Point
in Monterey Bay during high surf
conditions. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service biologists also report flushing of
Common Murres from the Devil’s Slide
Common Murre restoration project due
to MPWC use. Scientific research and
studies across the United States (e.g.,
California, New Jersey, Florida) have
produced strong evidence that MPWC
present a significant and unique
disturbance to marine mammals and
birds different from other watercraft.
Though some other studies have found
few differences between MPWC and
small motor-powered boats, they have
not presented evidence to invalidate the
studies detecting significant impacts.
In 1994, NOAA commissioned a
review of recreational boating activity in
the MBNMS. The review provided
statistics on MPWC use and operating
patterns in the Sanctuary at the time
and identified issues of debate from the
research community regarding MPWC
impacts on wildlife, but it made no
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70522
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
formal conclusion or recommendation.
A poll of Sanctuary harbormaster offices
by NOAA in 2003 provided updated
estimates on MPWC use in the
Sanctuary that are discussed in the
JMPR DEIS.
Comment: Improvements in MPWC
technology have reduced pollution and
noise.
Response: NOAA acknowledges that
MPWC technology has improved to
reduce noise and pollution. However,
MPWC have also become larger, faster,
and more powerful, with extended
ranges, and retain the maneuverability
characteristics that increase the
potential for disturbance of wildlife,
including acute turns at high speeds,
rapid course alterations, and ability to
operate closer to shore and in areas that
would commonly pose a hazard to
conventional craft operating at
comparable speeds. Though newer
MPWC are quieter than older models
under normal displacement conditions,
such improvements are largely
irrelevant when MPWC launch into the
air off of waves or breaking surf. Also,
lower sound intensity (decibel level)
does not equally reduce the effects of
oscillating sound caused by persistent
throttling (revving) of the engine during
repeated acceleration/deceleration
within the surf zone (which is often
necessary to avoid capsizing and pitch
polling). Research and observations
have shown that this frequent
oscillating sound pattern of irregular
intensities can be particularly disruptive
to wildlife and humans. This is the very
sound pattern that often elicits
complaints from coastal residents and
beachgoers. Many newer MPWC models
have 4-stroke engine technology or
cleaner 2-stroke engine technology
required to meet increased
governmental emissions standards.
While cleaner emissions are welcomed,
this improvement has little bearing on
the primary reasons for regulating
MPWC within the MBNMS.
User Education
Comment: NOAA should work with
the MPWC industry to develop user
education programs.
Response: The MBNMS Management
Plan includes Strategy MPWC–3:
Conduct Educational Outreach to
MPWC Community, which identifies the
Personal Watercraft Industry
Association and American Watercraft
Association as potential education and
outreach partners. These organizations,
as well as agencies such as the
California Department of Boating and
Waterways, conduct user education
programs throughout the State. NOAA
will continue to work with these
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
agencies and organizations to increase
understanding of MPWC etiquette as
well as the regulations regarding MPWC
use in a national marine sanctuary.
Noise Impacts
Comment: Provisions in the MBNMS
Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle
Disturbance Action Plan regarding
Acoustics (Strategy MMST–6) should be
expanded and addressed in all three
sanctuary management plans. Increased
use of military high-intensity active
sonar systems, undersea warfare
training zones, shipping lanes, and
increases in large vessel traffic can be
expected to result in substantial levels
of anthropogenic noise impacts. Also, a
different branch of NOAA is currently
funding geologic mapping of the coastal
seabed, including the sanctuaries, the
primary purpose of which is to
determine the presence of oil deposits.
This mapping uses an air concussion
with underwater sound impact not
unlike Low Frequency Active Sonar
which has been blamed for dozens of
whale beachings. Action plans might
contain the following components:
analyze noise sources, develop
monitoring programs, address stranding
issues and determine appropriate
management responses.
Response: Additional provisions have
been added to all three sanctuary
Management Plans in response to this
comment. See the MBNMS Marine
Mammal, Seabird and Turtle
Disturbance Action Plan regarding
Acoustics, the CBNMS Ecosystem
Protection Action Plan (Strategy EP–7),
and the GFNMS Wildlife Disturbance
Action Plan (Strategy WD–3). In
addition, this rule prohibits the ‘‘taking’’
of any marine mammal, sea turtle or
seabird in or above the Sanctuary,
except as authorized by the Marine
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 16
U.S.C. 1361 et seq., the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq., and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq. Use of
military high-intensity active sonar
systems, undersea warfare training
zones, and geologic mapping of the
coastal seabed within the sanctuaries
typically require that the project
proponents receive approval (likely in
the form of an Incidental Take
Authorization Letter or Letter of
Authorization (LOA), or an Incidental
Harassment Authorization (IHA) from
NMFS. As stated in the MBNMS
Strategy MMST–6.2, the NMSP intends
to continue collaborating with the
NMFS in evaluating individual
proposals on a case-by-case basis to
determine the impacts of such projects
and whether they would be appropriate
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
to conduct within the sanctuaries. The
Minerals Management Service is also
conducting geologic mapping of the
coastal seabed, under provisions of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005. A project of
this sort would still be subject to the
permitting and review provisions
outlined above. See the Sanctuary
Action Plans for additional activities
related to addressing noise effects on
wildlife. Although NMFS currently
addresses and evaluates potential
impacts on marine mammals resultant
from acoustic sources under the Marine
Mammal Protection Act, the NMSP will
continue to coordinate with NMFS to
evaluate acoustic impacts within
sanctuaries. Increasing research efforts,
such as those recommended within the
National Academies’ National Research
Council’s recent reports on the impacts
of noise on marine mammals, will assist
NOAA in continuing to evaluate the
agency’s management responses to this
issue.
NMFS has a stranding response
network of external partners that
coordinates with sanctuary staff as
appropriate on all marine mammal
(with the exception of sea otter) and sea
turtle standings. Sea otter standing are
investigated by the California
Department of Fish and Game through
an agreement with the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service. Responses
and investigations, including
postmortem examination and
diagnostics when feasible, are
conducted whether or not
anthropogenic acoustic or blast trauma
is suspected.
Comment: Acoustic impacts should
be divided into two categories and
addressed in sanctuary management
plans: impacts of noise on birds and
pinnipeds above the water (e.g., from
aircraft, boat traffic and MPWC), and the
impacts of underwater noise (e.g., ship
propulsion noise, active sonars and
seismic airgun exploration) on fish,
turtles, marine mammals and marine
invertebrates.
Response: The physical
characteristics of air-based and waterbased sound sources are different
(decibel levels, physics, attenuation, etc)
and thus have different potential
impacts on sanctuary species. Impacts
on marine species from sound sources
both above and below the water surface
have been studied, and such data are
available for management decisionmaking. Due to the importance of
accounting for possible cumulative
effects from exposure of sanctuary
resources to multiple noise source
types, sources are not divided into
categories. Instead, each source’s
propagation is modeled individually
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
and then considered additively (if
necessary) to estimate total levels of
ensonification over various spatial/
temporal scales. Currently, NMFS
addresses potential acoustic impacts on
marine mammals in accordance with its
mandates under the MMPA. The NMSP
is increasingly interested in issues of
noise impact on marine species. The
NMSP will continue to work closely
with NMFS and other research partners
to help identify critical subject areas
needing additional study and
evaluation. Based on the results of these
future studies, the NMSP will develop
reasonable management approaches to
responding to the issue. No additional
changes to the EIS are needed.
Comment: There should be a
permanent ban or rejection of any
request of the Navy in regard to sonar
testing experiments, which harm marine
life, especially whales and dolphins.
Response: The U.S. Navy must
consult with NOAA when its actions,
including sonar testing, trigger
consultation requirements under the
NMSA, MMPA, ESA, or MSA. Under
the NMSA, this consultation is triggered
when the action is likely to injure, cause
the loss of, or destroy sanctuary
resources. Once consultation is
initiated, NOAA will recommend
alternatives to the Navy to protect
sanctuary resources. Please also see
response to comments on Sanctuary
Management: Military Exemption for
more information on this issue.
Comment: Modify the DEIS to analyze
suggested noise regulations.
Response: NOAA did not propose
new regulations on noise in the
sanctuaries in the proposed rule. The
proposed Management Plans included
provisions for addressing noise and
additional provisions have been
included in the wildlife disturbance
action plans, based on public
comments. None of the changes in the
sanctuary regulations would result in
significant increased noise impacts on
wildlife in the sanctuaries. Noise has
been added to the list of impacts found
to be not significant in Section 5.5 of the
EIS.
Comment: The sanctuaries should
take a leadership role and establish
noise level criteria and regulations to
reduce or eliminate harmful
anthropogenic noise impacts on marine
life. Sanctuary management plans
should allow for a time in the near
future when an acceptable Ocean Noise
Criteria system emerges. Until that time,
precaution should inform decisions
about introducing or permitting new,
unusual, or loud human generated
sounds into the sanctuaries. Knowing
that we are already starting with a noisy
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
acoustical environment should not stop
us from moving ahead with informed
regulations and a policy framework.
Response: NOAA recognizes the
concern about potential negative
impacts on marine mammals from a
variety of acoustic disturbances (e.g.,
noise from ships, aircraft, research
boats, and military and industrial
activities). Noise can cause direct
physiological damage, mask
communication, or disrupt important
migration, feeding or breeding
behaviors. Active-sonar, specifically low
frequency (100–500 Hz) and midfrequency (2.8–3.3 kHz) active sonar
used in military activities by the U.S.
and other nations are of particular
concern. The impact of seismic testing
for geological mapping and oil and gas
exploration is also unknown. The
MBNMS Management Plan includes
Marine Mammal, Seabird and Turtle
Disturbance Action Plan Strategy
MMST–6: Assess Impacts from
Acoustics, which recognizes that noise
levels in the sanctuaries is increasing.
The Strategy includes activities to
expand research and monitoring of
acoustics and to continue to evaluate
individual projects with the potential to
disturb wildlife. NOAA’s Acoustics
Program is investigating all aspects of
marine animal acoustic communication,
hearing, and the effects of sound on
behavior and hearing in protected
marine species.
For additional information, please
see: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/
acoustics/.
Comment: NOAA should prohibit
seismic exploration for resource
extraction or even for ‘‘asset surveys’’
and other sources of sound that may
mask biological sounds critical to the
survival of marine animals. Noise from
seismic surveys adjacent to the
sanctuaries does not conform to the
sanctuary boundary, thus setting
sanctuary limitations on ‘‘transboundary noise pollution’’ will require
coordination and cooperation with other
jurisdictions.
Response: Within the sanctuaries,
NOAA prohibits exploring for,
development or production of oil, gas,
or minerals. NOAA works with the
Department of the Interior’s Minerals
Management Service and other agencies
to manage potential impacts to
sanctuary resources from seismic
exploration activities outside of the
sanctuary’s boundary.
Sanctuary Management
Agency Coordination
Comment: The management plans
should include language regarding
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70523
compatibility with the National Park
Service and other agencies’ management
plans.
Response: As a routine matter, NOAA
coordinates management efforts with
managers of adjacent protected areas.
Other agencies often manage resources
pursuant to mandates, polices, and
priorities that may be different from
NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries
Program or priorities set forth in the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act. NOAA
will continue coordination with the
National Park Service and other
agencies to ensure compatibility, to the
maximum extent practicable, with other
agencies management plans.
Comment: The commenter disagrees
with the findings under the Executive
Order 13132 (which refers to
regulations, legislative comments or
proposed legislation, and other policy
statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government) and request the
background material that allowed said
findings to be made.
Response: See discussion of
Executive Order 13132 under Section V,
Miscellaneous Rulemaking
Requirements.
Budget
Comment: We can’t do a better job of
conservation without spending some
money. I hope the Sanctuary Program
will fight for appropriate funding and
staffing.
Response: NOAA recognizes resource
limitations and necessary program and
partner developments may limit
implementation of all of the activities in
the various management plans. NOAA
will continue to work with the
Department of Commerce, Office of
Management and Budget, and Congress
in developing supporting justifications
when preparing budget submissions.
Emergency Regulations
Comment: Consistency does not exist
between the three sanctuaries on the use
of emergency regulations. CBNMS
establishes a 120-day maximum and the
others do not.
Response: NOAA will consider this
issue as part of a separate rulemaking
process that will propose to make
conforming modifications to all
sanctuary regulations to achieve an
appropriate level of consistency,
including the authority for emergency
regulations.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70524
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Enforcement
Comment: NOAA should clarify what
agency will enforce the provisions of the
proposed regulations.
Response: Primary law enforcement
responsibilities for NOAA regulations
are assigned to the NOAA Office for
Law Enforcement (OLE). An
enforcement officer conducts
investigations into violations of the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act and
regulatory prohibitions in coordination
with State, local and other Federal law
enforcement counterparts. In addition, a
cooperative enforcement agreement was
signed between NOAA and the State of
California to deputize State Fish and
Game Wardens and State Park Rangers
as Federal Sanctuary enforcement
officers. State peace officers work
together with NOAA to conduct patrols
and investigate potential violations. In
addition to the cooperative assistance by
the State, the U.S. Coast Guard conducts
air and sea surveillance within
sanctuaries and has broad Federal
enforcement authority. NOAA OLE also
works with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the Federal
Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to
investigate violations of environmental
laws within national marine
sanctuaries. More information about
enforcement of NOAA regulations can
be found at https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
ole/.
Comment: New regulations and
increasing the size of sanctuaries
significantly impacts the fisheries
enforcement staff of the California
Department of Fish and Game. The staff
work under a Joint Enforcement
Agreement with NOAA. CDFG can only
provide limited enforcement effort
without additional staff and funding to
successfully carry out expanded
enforcement activities.
Response: NOAA understands the
resource limitations of our partners in
enforcement. However, the revised
regulations and management plans
make only one significant boundary
modification—the addition of Davidson
Seamount, which is in federal waters, to
the MBNMS. This addition should not
create an additional enforcement burden
for the CDFG. NOAA acknowledges and
appreciates the efforts of CDFG in
assisting with enforcement of NMSP
regulations. NOAA will continue to
work with CDFG to seek additional
resources to mitigate workload impacts.
Global Warming
Comment: The sanctuary management
plans should address potential changes
resulting from global warming,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
including monitoring, education and
management responses. More
specifically, NOAA should infuse the
increasing body of scientific data,
ranging from ocean acidification to
rising sea temperatures and levels, as
well as their causes, effects, and the
huge potential ecosystem changes that
they portend, into each of the
appropriate action plan strategies.
Response: NOAA agrees global
warming trends and impacts on ocean
ecosystems have become important
issues in recent years and should be
addressed in the management plans.
Language has been inserted into the
emerging issues section of all three
sanctuaries’ management plans
recommending several steps: (a)
Identifying and coordinating with
partners for evaluating and addressing
global warming impacts on sanctuaries;
(b) enhancing scientific understanding
of existing and future changes in
temperature, rainfall and runoff,
oceanographic patterns, ocean
chemistry (including acidification), sea
level, species composition, seasonal
shifts, etc.; (c) evaluating impacts of
global warming on the other issues and
strategies in management plans,
including nonpoint runoff, beach
erosion, tidepool protection, fisheries
and MPAs, etc. and developing
modifications as needed to these plans
to reflect global warming concerns; (d)
implementing appropriate modifications
to sanctuary facilities and operations
ensuring the program minimizes its
contribution to global warming; and (e)
developing and incorporating messages
and recommendations about global
warming and ocean impacts into
outreach programs.
Military Exemptions
Comment: The U.S. Coast Guard
requests the management plans and
proposed regulations for each sanctuary
include language exempting the U.S.
Coast Guard and Department of Defense
activities from all prohibitions, similar
to provisions applicable to the
Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine
National Monument.
Response: Each of the regulations for
the national marine sanctuaries include
specific exceptions for activities carried
out by the Department of Defense
(DOD). In the sanctuaries, activities
carried by the DOD prior to date of
designation are generally exempted
from the prohibitions contained in the
regulations. Additional activities
initiated after designation can be
exempted after consultation between
NOAA and DOD. The referenced
exemption for the Northwestern
Hawaiian Islands Marine National
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Monument were crafted to address the
unique circumstances surrounding that
area including its remote location, its
large size, and the strategic military
importance of the area as identified by
DOD during interagency consultation on
the regulations for the area.
Nevertheless, the Proclamation
establishing the Monument
(Proclamation 8031) and the
implementing regulations promulgated
by NOAA and the Fish and Wildlife
Service (50 CFR part 404) require the
Armed Forces (including the Coast
Guard) to carry out all activities in a
manner that avoids, to the extent
practicable and consistent with
operational requirements, adverse
impacts on monument resources and
qualities. In addition, in the event of a
threatened or actual destruction of, loss
of, or injury to a Monument resource or
quality resulting from an incident,
including but not limited to spills or
groundings, caused by a component of
the Department of Defense or the Coast
Guard, the cognizant component shall
promptly coordinate with the
Secretaries of Commerce and the
Interior for the purpose of taking
appropriate actions to respond to and
mitigate the harm and, if possible,
restore or replace the monument
resource or quality. See 50 CFR 404.9 (c)
and (d).
Maritime Heritage
Comment: The GFNMS has significant
maritime heritage resources. GFNMS
needs to more explicitly address the
individual and cumulative significance
of shipwrecks, and the importance of
revisiting the recommendations
contained in the Submerged Cultural
Resource Assessment of 1989 by doing
a basic assessment and site survey. The
program should consider a joint
initiative with the Office of Exploration,
and partner with NPS in regard to
enhancing the interpretation of the
submerged maritime heritage in the
parks, and at the San Francisco
Maritime NHP.
Response: NOAA has added
additional discussion of the individual
and cumulative significance of the
shipwrecks in the GFNMS Management
Plan’s Maritime Heritage Cross-cutting
Action Plan. Basic assessment and site
survey of significant wrecks has been
added as well as the need for
establishing a baseline for further
monitoring to ensure their protection.
Additional information has also been
added to the Gulf of the Farallones
Administration Action Plan to include
restoration, education, outreach, and
exhibits about the historic Fort Point
Coast Guard Station. The NMSP has also
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
added NOAA’s Office of Exploration
and the National Park Service as
partners.
Performance Measures
Comments: NOAA should review its
proposals for measuring implementation
success of each action plan to ensure
that all desired outcomes and their
corollary performance measures have
been identified. For example, it appears
that only a portion of the Monterey Bay
Water Quality Program Action Plans has
been covered.
Response: NOAA considers
performance measurement an essential
component of management
responsibilities. All Action Plans have
performance measures selected for their
ability to indicate overall performance
of the action plans or strategies. NOAA
limited the number of performance
measures to correlate with the resources
available for program review.
Research and Monitoring
Comment: NOAA should include
Coastal Commission and other Resource
Agency partners in the execution of the
research and monitoring strategies.
Response: NOAA considers the
Coastal Commission a critical partner in
management of sanctuary resources and
will include the Coastal Commission in
research and monitoring activities.
California Resources Agency staff
(including Coastal Commission and
California Department of Fish and
Game) are also members of the
Sanctuary Advisory Councils and
MBNMS Research Activity Panel
helping guide implementation of
research activity in the sanctuaries.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Permitting
Comment: It is unclear from the
proposed language changes if currently
authorized activities will still be
permitted in the future. How would the
proposed regulation changes impact
currently permitted activities and
similar future activities?
Response: Individuals with currently
effective permits will be allowed to
continue permitted activities under the
terms and conditions of their permit.
The new regulations will apply for new
permits issued (and applications
received) on or after the effective date of
the new regulations.
Resource Protection
Comment: Please vacate failed plans
to create so-called marine sanctuaries
off California. All Management Plans
should be withdrawn because they are
discriminatory, out of touch, abusive;
some of the animals the plan intends to
protect are destructive over-populated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
pests such as the sea lion. Entire U.S.
industries and companies will be
adversely affected by this Plan; jobs will
be lost; and taxpayers will be denied
access to U.S. waterways.
Response: The JMPR process updates
existing management plans for existing
marine sanctuaries; it does not create
new sanctuaries. The proposed
management plans are revisions to
existing management plans and were
developed with input from
stakeholders, local and state agencies,
and the general public. The commenter
does not specify which parts of the
management plans are flawed. Adverse
impacts, including socioeconomic
effects, associated with implementing
the JMPR update are addressed in the
FEIS. No significant impacts on
businesses or jobs were identified in the
FEIS. Taxpayers will not be denied
access to the marine sanctuaries,
although specific types of activities that
pose risk of harm to sanctuary resources
would be prohibited or restricted.
Comment: The Sanctuary should
have very limited alteration and remain
in its natural current state.
Response: The intent of the sanctuary
management plans and regulations is to
protect sanctuary resources. Existing
sanctuary regulations include
prohibitions on numerous activities that
would alter or otherwise impact
sanctuary resources. The changes to
regulations and management plans are
consistent with the intent to limit
adverse effects on sanctuary resources.
Sanctuary Visibility
Comment: NOAA’s National Marine
Sanctuary Program needs to be more
visible in the public eye including
additional exposure on TV and radio.
Response: Please see the education,
outreach and constituent building
components of the site specific and
cross-cutting action plans (contained
within each Sanctuary’s Management
Plan), which include strategies to
increase public education including the
use of various forms of media.
Sanctuary Advisory Councils and
Management Plan Review Process
Comment: There are problems in the
structure and representation of the
MBNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council
and therefore the MBNMS Management
Plan does not represent the public’s
priorities.
Response: The Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council’s
twenty voting members represent a
variety of local user groups, as well as
the general public, plus seven local and
state governmental jurisdictions. The
Sanctuary Advisory Council adequately
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70525
represents the public and specific
stakeholders. In the past several years,
the NMSP has worked with the
Association of Monterey Bay Area
Governments to make improvements to
the selection process for
councilmembers. People who apply for
seats are reviewed by a subgroup of the
existing Sanctuary Advisory Council,
are appointed competitively by NOAA,
and serve three-year terms after which
they are readvertised for selection. Local
and state governmental jurisdiction
representatives are chosen by their
respective agencies. The recruitment of
Sanctuary Advisory Council members is
widely advertised throughout the state
and the public is welcomed to comment
or provide letters of support for
applicants.
Furthermore, NOAA has taken
extraordinary steps, above and beyond
the advisory council, to repeatedly and
regularly involve the general public in
addressing the priority issues in the
Management Plan. The process used by
the NMSP is a very inclusive public
process. Development of the MBNMS
Management Plan included more than
120 public meetings including Advisory
Council, Working Group, Scoping and
Public Comment meetings. 223
individuals participated in working
groups to develop the action plans for
the MBNMS and the NMSP received
over 30,000 comments during the
review of the management plans.
Comment: NOAA should have issued
the various draft management plans for
public comment and following the
inclusion of those comments released
proposed changes to both the
designation documents and regulations.
Response: The review of the
management plans began in 2001, with
scoping meetings requesting comments
on potential changes to the management
plans, regulations, and designation
documents. In 2003, the Sanctuary
Advisory Councils for each Sanctuary
held public meetings taking comment
from the public on the action plans,
which make up the substantive
programmatic direction in the
management plan. This process
occurred prior to release of any
regulations and the public was
encouraged to provide comments on any
program including regulations and
designation documents. After
consideration of the comments received
from the public and Sanctuary Advisory
Councils, NOAA’s release of the
proposed rules and management plans
in 2006 provided over 90 days for
public comment.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70526
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Seagrass Protection
Anchoring
Comment: Eel grass bed protections
should be strengthened to preclude both
commercial and recreational uses that
would further disturb these essential
resources. Measures should include
prohibitions of anchoring or mooring in
the beds and prohibitions against
shallow-draft motor boats that disturb
root systems.
Response: The regulation of anchoring
in seagrass zones in Tomales Bay is
designed to prevent damage from vessel
anchors. NOAA will monitor the
seagrass protection zones for
effectiveness and use a model of
adaptive management to make
appropriate adjustments to the zones.
The use of shallow-draft motor boats
will be monitored. A re-evaluation of
the zones will include an assessment of
all the effects of vessels on seagrass.
Comment: The creation of the noanchor zones in Tomales Bay, though
well intended, is ill considered because
it prohibits an activity that never occurs,
or only occurs to a truly insignificant
and immaterial extent. At the very least,
NOAA should consider putting a
‘‘sunset’’ provision on this requirement,
so that it can be reevaluated to
determine its need.
Response: NOAA has added language
about the biology of seagrass and the
effects from anchoring has been added
to the FEIS to document the need for the
prohibition. Seagrass, including
eelgrass, can grow in water depths up to
20 feet in Tomales Bay. The location
and extent of the no-anchoring zones are
based upon seagrass data provided by
California Department of Fish and Game
from 1992, 2000, 2001 and 2002. The
no-anchoring seagrass protection zones
include some areas where seagrass
coverage is extensive and other areas
where coverage is discontinuous and
patchy. All zones extend to the
shoreward Mean High Water Line
(MHWL) boundary.
Vessels have been observed through
California department of Fish and Game
aerial photographs within current and
historic eelgrass beds throughout
Tomales Bay. The State regulation that
states no eel grass, surf grass or sea palm
may be cut or disturbed does not
specifically prohibit anchoring. The
seagrass protection zone regulation is
intended to complement existing State
regulation. These zones would be more
enforceable and facilitate specific types
of vessel usage. The seagrass protection
zones would prevent the risk of harm to
seagrass beds before the damage occurs.
The regulation of anchoring in seagrass
zones in Tomales Bay is designed to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
prevent damage from vessel anchors.
NOAA will monitor the seagrass
protection zones for effectiveness and
use a model of adaptive management to
make appropriate adjustments to the
zones. The use of shallow-draft motor
boats will be monitored. A re-evaluation
of the zones will include an assessment
of all the effects of vessels on seagrass.
Comment: Is there any evidence that
any anchoring activities in Tomales Bay
have caused any damage to the seagrass?
If so, what is the relative impact of
anchoring activities that would continue
to be permitted as compared to the
remote possibility of recreational boat
anchoring? In the GFNMS MP and DEIS,
the only basis was reference to a
discussion at a meeting (DEIS page 2–
17) of a technical committee formed to
address boating impacts in Tomales
Bay.
Response: Additional background
information has been included in the
FEIS regarding the number and types of
vessels that use and anchor in Tomales
Bay. NOAA has also added information
about the effects of anchoring on
seagrass. Although there have been no
studies on the damage to seagrass beds
from anchoring in Tomales Bay, studies
in California, studies on similar types of
seagrass in coastal Florida, and on
seagrasses in other parts of the world
have found that boat propellers, anchors
and mooring lines can damage the
underground root and rhizome system
of seagrass (Milazzo, M., et al., 2002;
Walker et al., 1989; Kentworthy et al.,
2006).
Comment: What is the history of
enforcement actions under the current
regulations that would prevent
anchoring in seagrass beds (Cal. Admin.
Code Section 30.10) which has been in
effect since 1984? Have lawenforcement organizations in Tomales
Bay been asked for reports of any
problems in enforcing this law? Why
not direct the law enforcement agencies
to create a high priority for enforcement
of this law?
Response: Establishing specific
seagrass zones and demarcating these
zones with buoys would create an
enforceable regulation that is easy for
boaters to follow and understand, and is
likely to result in protection of the
seagrass beds. The State regulation on
disturbing or cutting eel grass, surf
grass, or sea palm does not specifically
prohibit anchoring. As such, the
seagrass protection zone regulation is
intended to complement existing State
regulation. These zones are more
enforceable and facilitate specific types
of vessel usage. The seagrass protection
zones would prevent the risk of harm to
seagrass beds before the damage occurs.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Comment: The DEIS states that the
Tomales Bay Vessel Management Plan,
currently being developed, would
provide ‘‘positive effects on marine
transportation and would offset any
minor adverse effects of the seagrass
anchoring prohibition,’’ and that the
implementation of the boating
Management Plan would result in a
‘‘slight net positive cumulative effect on
marine transportation.’’ (DEIS p. 3–167,
3–184) How was this plan that is in
development evaluated for its positive
effect on marine transportation, and
where can the public obtain a copy of
the draft plan so that they can evaluate
the ‘‘net positive cumulative effect’’?
Response: Additional information
about the Tomales Bay Vessel
Management Plan has been added to the
FEIS (see Section 3.10.8). This plan is
part of a multi-agency effort to
streamline future vessel-related
management activities. Only
approximately 22% of Tomales Bay is
currently being zoned as a no-anchor
area. The seagrass protection zones
avoid navigation channels and other
shallow, sheltered areas of Tomales Bay
are still available for anchoring;
including areas near boat launch ramps,
marinas, and docks. Copies of the plan
can be obtained from NOAA or by
visiting the GFNMS Web site at:
https://farallones.noaa.gov/
ecosystemprotection/
protect_tomalesbay.html.
Comment: What consideration has
been given to the health and safety
implications of requiring vessels to
anchor in less protected areas than
where they currently anchor?
Response: NOAA considered and
identified safe anchorages when
designing the proposed seagrass
protection zones. Shallow, sheltered
areas of Tomales Bay would still be
available for anchoring, including areas
near boat launch ramps, marinas, and
docks. Also, see additional text in FEIS
Section 3.10.8.
Comment: In order that the public can
fairly evaluate the true impact of the noanchoring plan, there should be
temporary buoy fields set up marking
the proposed zones. Why not consider
simply referring to the area within 2fathom (12 feet) line, which follows the
actual contours of the bottom and is
clearly shown on the nautical charts in
both paper and electronic form?
Response: NOAA will mark the
seagrass zones with buoys to provide
clear direction to boaters. The location
and area of the zones were identified
based on California Department of Fish
and Game seagrass surveys in 1992,
2000, 2001, and 2002. NOAA
considered using depth contours to as
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
the boundaries for the seagrass zones,
but has determined depth contours to be
unreliable as permanent boundaries and
thus difficult to enforce.
Comment: Why do the no-anchoring
zones extend into and encroach on
private property? The proposed Zone 3
of Tomales Bay covering the Marshall
area extends easterly to the mean high
water line. That is across the boundary
of the typical Marshall property line,
which extends into the Bay to the mean
low tide line, typically by referent to
Tide Land Survey No. 145 Marin
County.
Response: These submerged lands are
part of the GFNMS and are subject to
management actions of the sanctuary.
Comment: The proposed GFNMS
prohibition of anchoring in designated
seagrass protection zones in Tomales
Bay should provide an exemption for
research activities.
Response: Rather than provide a
blanket exemption for research
activities, NOAA has decided to
consider allowing research activities on
a case-by-case basis through its
permitting system. The GFNMS
Superintendent has the authority to
issue permits for activities that further
research or monitoring related to
Sanctuary resources and qualities. This
will allow NOAA to compare the
relative benefits of the research with the
impacts of the activity and to include
special conditions to prevent harm to
Sanctuary resources. The permitting
system also allows NOAA to track
research activities on a national level
through a permitting database and on a
regional level through the SIMoN Web
site as part of an outreach tool to the
public and the science community.
Taking of Marine Mammals, Seabirds
and Turtles
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Disturbance by Vessels
Comment: The MBNMS should
prohibit vessels from coming within a
quarter mile of areas where seabirds and
mammals aggregate for feeding and/or
breeding, especially those areas not
protected under the State’s Marine Life
Protection Act.
Response: Preventing disturbance to
marine mammals and seabirds is a
primary focus of both the sanctuary
regulations and its education and
outreach programs. Sanctuary wildlife
disturbance regulations complement the
MMPA, ESA and MBTA by prohibiting
unauthorized take of marine mammals
and seabirds. ‘‘Take’’ is defined in
§ 922.3 of the regulations for the
National Marine Sanctuary Program to
include operating a vessel in a way that
‘‘results in the disturbance or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
molestation of any marine mammal, sea
turtle or seabird.’’ The NMSP believes
this approach of prohibiting
unauthorized take wherever it occurs is
a better approach with regard to general
vessel traffic and is more functional
than fixed distance regulations.
Disturbance by Overflights
Comment: The regulations for the
MBNMS should prohibit aircraft from
flying below 1000 feet above a state
designated Area of Special Biological
Significance (ASBS).
Response: The existing overflight
zones in the MBNMS are focused on
areas where seabirds and marine
mammals are likely to be flushed by low
flying aircraft. They overlap with the
ASBSs off of Ano Nuevo and Big Sur.
The air space around the Monterey
Peninsula contains flight paths for the
Monterey Peninsula Airport and
overflight restrictions are not
practicable.
Comment: I have observed aircraft
flying low over Ano Nuevo Island in
violation of Sanctuary regulations. It is
my understanding that pilots are not
informed about overflight restrictions in
the Sanctuary. NOAA should work with
the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) to ensure that pilots are aware of
federal regulations.
Response: NOAA has an outreach
program to pilots to help ensure that
they are aware of the restrictions. The
NOAA Office for Law Enforcement
routinely contacts pilots when aircraft
are identified flying below 1000 feet
within restricted overflight zones of the
Sanctuary. However, the overflight
restrictions in Sanctuary regulations are
not accurately reflected on FAA
aeronautical charts. NOAA will
continue its efforts to work with FAA to
update the charts.
Comment: GFNMS should change its
overflight regulation to be consistent
with MBNMS. Specifically, GFNMS
should adopt the prohibition of flying
motorized aircraft at less than 1000 feet,
and remove the additional clause of
disturbing seabirds or marine mammals.
Response: NOAA is not changing the
overflight regulation for GFNMS or
MBNMS at this time. NOAA is in
conversations with the Federal Aviation
Administration regarding the regulation
of aircraft operations over national
marine sanctuaries and may make
modifications as part of a separate
regulatory process if determined
appropriate following those
conversations. The public will be
provided with an opportunity to
provide input into any such process.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70527
Lighting
Comment: Given the high seabird
density, NOAA should further consider
the potential effects of high intensity
lights on sensitive species, including
night foraging seabirds, within the
GFNMS and CBNMS Management
Plans. The use of high powered, high
intensity lights (e.g., squid fishing
vessels) may pose a risk to sensitive
resources.
Response: Currently the Market Squid
Fishery Management Plan adopted in
2004 by the California Fish and Game
Commission established a seabird
closure restricting the use of attracting
lights for commercial purposes in any
waters of the GFNMS.
Regulations
Comment: In relation to the proposed
prohibition on the ‘‘take’’ of marine
mammals, birds and sea turtles, the
NMSP should not grant itself expanded
authority to impose severe criminal and
civil penalties that far exceed those
penalties as provided in the MMPA,
ESA and Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
Response: The National Marine
Sanctuaries Act establishes a limit on
the maximum civil penalties (there are
essentially no criminal penalties) that
can be charged for violations of
Sanctuary regulations and law.
Currently, that limit is set at $130,000
per day for any continuing violation.
However, the act does not require
application of the maximum allowable
penalty in any enforcement case. The
amount of any penalty is determined by
the nature of a violation and a variety
of aggravating/mitigating circumstances,
such as gravity of the violation, prior
violations, harm to protected resources,
value of protected resources, violator’s
conduct, and degree of cooperation.
NOAA prosecutors scale penalties to fit
the nature of a particular violation, and
courts oversee penalty settlements to
ensure penalties are appropriate.
While marine mammals, seabirds and
endangered and threatened species are
protected under other legislation,
NOAA believes the higher penalties
under the NMSA will provide a stronger
deterrent.
Comment: The NMSP should
continue to support research into the
causes of endangerment of the elusive
leatherback sea turtle and to try to create
further protection. They’re in a 90
percent decline over the last 30 years.
Response: Sanctuary regulations
prohibit the unauthorized take of
leatherback sea turtles. Additionally, the
MBNMS management plan has
strategies in its Wildlife Disturbance
Action Plan to address disturbance to
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70528
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
turtles from harassment and marine
debris by working with NMFS’s Office
of Protected Resources. The Plan also
addresses the need for research to more
fully understand the life history
characteristics of the turtles and the
threats that they face. NOAA will
continue its efforts to better understand
and protect this endangered species.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
White Shark Attraction
Prohibition
Comment: The proposed GFNMS
prohibition on attracting white sharks
should include an exemption for
chumming conducted in the course of
lawful fishing. Also, the Designation
Document language, which allows the
regulation of ‘‘attracting or approaching
any animal’’ (page B–83), must be
clarified to be specific to white sharks
and not include chumming for lawful
fishing.
Response: The prohibition against
attracting white sharks is intended to
address harassment and disturbance
related to human interaction from shark
diving programs known generally as
adventure tourism, or from recreational
visitors who may opportunistically
approach a white shark after a feeding
event. NOAA concluded these activities
can degrade the natural environment,
impacting the species as a whole, as
well as individual sharks that may be
impacted from repeated encounters with
humans and boats. A similar prohibition
against attracting great white sharks was
promulgated for the MBNMS in 1996
and has not affected lawful fishing
activities.
The terms of designation for national
marine sanctuaries (as defined in the
NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434(a)(4))) list the
types of activities that they may be
subject to regulation under sanctuary.
Listing does not necessarily mean that a
type of activity will be regulated. If a
type of activity is not listed, it may not
be regulated, except on an emergency
basis, unless the terms of designation
are amended to include the type of
activity. NOAA must follow the same
procedures by which the original
designation was made to modify the
terms of designation of any national
marine sanctuary. In this case, the
authority to regulate attraction or
approach of any animal is only being
applied with respect to white sharks. No
regulations are being considered
regarding attracting or approaching
other animals at this time. Retaining the
authority in the terms of designation to
regulate attracting or approaching other
animals will maintain flexibility to
respond in the future, as necessary, to
similar resource issues involving the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
attraction of other animals. It is
important to note that, although it
would not be necessary to amend the
terms of designation to promulgate such
regulations, NOAA would still be
required to engage in a rulemaking
process before any additional
regulations could be issued. This would
include, among other things,
consultations with other governmental
entities, public notice and comment of
any proposed action, and compliance
with all applicable laws such as the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA).
Comment: The proposed GFNMS
prohibition on attracting white sharks
should be clarified to apply specifically
to intentional approaching.
Response: The prohibition against
approaching a white shark within the
GFNMS is intended to apply to vessels
that approach a white shark once it has
been identified in the water. A white
shark feeding event generally takes
place at or near the surface of the water,
and can be easily spotted. The
regulation is not intended to apply to
persons who are already near a white
shark when it surfaces but would
prohibit them from approaching closer.
Comment: Ecotourism should be
allowed to continue at South East
Farallon Island with educational
permits. NOAA should establish a
permit process to avoid curtailing
traditional, legitimate, and first-hand
education that does not require a Ph.D.
in order to participate.
Response: NOAA will consider
applications to conduct educational and
research activities that would violate the
regulation on attracting white sharks in
the GFNMS on a case-by-case basis and
will use the guidelines developed and
approved by the SAC to help draft
permit conditions. The Management
Plan outlines the approaches that will
be taken through the Wildlife
Disturbance Action Plan, Strategy WD–
5 and the Conservation Science Action
Plan CS–1. In 2006, NOAA launched a
pilot research program to assess current
white shark viewing practices by
adventure tourism operators, private
boaters and researchers, which will also
be used as a guide to developing permit
conditions. NOAA will continue to
conduct research to guide permit
conditions for new white shark viewing
and assess effectiveness of new
regulations.
Comment: White shark attraction
should be prohibited in all sites.
Response: This final rule prohibits
white shark attraction throughout
MBNMS and GFNMS. NOAA has
determined that at this time there is no
need for a regulation prohibiting white
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
shark attraction within CBNMS. CBNMS
is entirely offshore and, unlike the Gulf
of the Farallones, there are no seal or sea
lion haul outs to attract sharks. Without
aggregations of seals and sea lions to
prey on, there is no draw for sharks to
congregate or patrol within CBNMS.
V. Miscellaneous Rulemaking
Requirements
National Marine Sanctuaries Act
Section 301(b) of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1434)
provides authority for comprehensive
and coordinated conservation and
management of national marine
sanctuaries in coordination with other
resource management authorities.
Section 304(a)(4) of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act requires the procedures
specified in section 304 for designating
a national marine sanctuary be followed
for modifying any term of designation.
Because this action revises the
sanctuary designation documents (e.g.,
scope of regulations and boundaries),
NOAA must comply with the
requirements of section 304. All
necessary requirements have been
completed.
National Environmental Policy Act
NOAA has prepared a Supplemental
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(SDEIS) to evaluate the revisions to the
discharge/deposit regulations analyzed
in the DEIS. Copies are available at the
address and Web site listed in the
Address section of this rule. Responses
to comments received on the proposed
rule are also published in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement, which
is similarly available.
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Impact
This final rule has been determined to
be not significant within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Assessment
For the provisions related to the
CBNMS, NOAA has concluded this
regulatory action does not have
federalism implications, as that term is
defined in Executive Order 13132,
sufficient to warrant preparation of a
federalism assessment. NOAA consulted
with a number of entities within the
State which participated in
development of this final rule, including
but not limited to, the California Coastal
Commission, California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, California
Department of Fish and Game, and
California Resources Agency.
For the provisions related to the
GFNMS and MBNMS, NOAA has
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
concluded that this regulatory action
falls within the definition of ‘‘policies
that have federalism implications’’
within the meaning of Executive Order
13132. The changes will not preempt
State law, but will simply complement
existing State authorities. In keeping
with the intent of the Executive Order,
the NOAA consulted with a number of
entities within the State which
participated in development of the rule,
including but not limited to, the
California Department of Boating and
Waterways, the California State Lands
Commission, the California Department
of Fish and Game, and the California
Resources Agency.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration this
rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The factual basis for this certification
appears in the proposed rules and is not
repeated here. Comments received on
the economic impacts of this rule are
summarized and responded to in the
Response to Comments section. The
comments received did not impact the
factual basis for the certification. As a
result, a final regulatory flexibility
analysis was not required and none was
prepared.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule involves an existing
information collection requirement
previously approved by OMB (OMB#
0648–0141) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq. The rule will not require any
change to the currently approved OMB
approval and would not result in any
change in the public burden in applying
for and complying with NMSP
permitting requirements. The public
reporting burden for these permit
application requirements is estimated to
average 1.00 hour per response,
including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
The revised permit regulations would
require the Director of the NMSP to
consider the proposed activity for which
a permit application has been received.
The modifications to the permit
procedures and criteria (15 CFR
922.133) further refine current
requirements and procedures of the
general National Marine Sanctuary
Program regulations (15 CFR 922.48(a)
and (c)). The modifications also clarify
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
existing requirements for permit
applications found in the Office of
Management and Budget approved
applicant guidelines (OMB Control
Number 0648–0141). The revised permit
regulations add language about: the
qualifications, finances, and proposed
methods of the applicant; the
compatibility of the proposed method
with the value of the Sanctuary and the
primary objective of protection of
Sanctuary resources and qualities; the
necessity of the proposed activity; and
the reasonably expected end value of
the proposed activity.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, no person is required to respond
to, nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 922
Administrative practice and
procedure, Boats and boating safety,
Coastal zone, Education, Environmental
protection, Fish, Harbors, Marine
mammals, Marine pollution, Marine
resources, Marine safety, Natural
resources, Penalties, Recreation and
recreation areas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Research,
Water pollution control, Water
resources, Wildlife.
Dated: November 12, 2008.
William Corso,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Ocean
Services and Coastal Zone Management.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
above, 15 CFR part 922 is amended as
follows:
■
PART 922—NATIONAL MARINE
SANCTUARY PROGRAM
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 922
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.
2. Subpart H of part 922 is revised to
read as follows:
■
Subpart H—Gulf of the Farallones National
Marine Sanctuary
Sec.
922.80 Boundary.
922.81 Definitions.
922.82 Prohibited or otherwise regulated
activities.
922.83 Permit procedures and issuance
criteria.
922.84 Certification of other permits.
Appendix A to Subpart H of Part 922—Gulf
of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70529
Appendix B to Subpart H of Part 922—2 nmi
from the Farallon Islands Boundary
Coordinates
Appendix C to Subpart H of Part 922—NoAnchoring Seagrass Protection Zones in
Tomales Bay
Subpart H—Gulf of the Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary
§ 922.80
Boundary.
The Gulf of the Farallones National
Marine Sanctuary (Sanctuary) boundary
encompasses a total area of
approximately 966 square nautical miles
(nmi) of coastal and ocean waters, and
submerged lands thereunder,
surrounding the Farallon Islands (and
Noonday Rock) off the northern coast of
California. The northernmost extent of
the Sanctuary boundary is a geodetic
line extending westward from Bodega
Head approximately 6 nmi to the
northern boundary of the Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuary (CBNMS).
The Sanctuary boundary then turns
southward to a point approximately 6
nmi off Point Reyes, California, where it
then turns westward again out towards
the 1,000-fathom isobath. The Sanctuary
boundary then extends in a southerly
direction adjacent to the 1,000-fathom
isobath until it intersects the northern
extent of the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). The
Sanctuary boundary then follows the
MBNMS boundary eastward and
northward until it intersects the Mean
High Water Line at Rocky Point,
California. The Sanctuary boundary
then follows the MHWL north until it
intersects the Point Reyes National
Seashore (PRNS) boundary. The
Sanctuary boundary then approximates
the PRNS boundary, as established at
the time of designation of the Sanctuary,
to the intersection of the PRNS
boundary and the MHWL in Tomales
Bay. The Sanctuary boundary then
follows the MHWL up Tomales Bay and
Lagunitas Creek to the Route 1 Bridge
where the Sanctuary boundary crosses
the Lagunitas Creek and follows the
MHWL until it intersects its
northernmost extent near Bodega Head.
The Sanctuary boundary includes
Bolinas Lagoon, Estero de San Antonio
(to the tide gate at Valley Ford Franklin
School Road) and Estero Americano (to
the bridge at Valley Ford Estero Road),
as well as Bodega Bay, but not Bodega
Harbor. Where the Sanctuary boundary
crosses a waterway, the Sanctuary
boundary excludes these waterways
shoreward of the Sanctuary boundary
line delineated by the coordinates
provided. The precise seaward
boundary coordinates are listed in
Appendix A to this subpart.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70530
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
§ 922.81
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Definitions.
In addition to those definitions found
at § 922.3, the following definitions
apply to this subpart:
Areas of Special Biological
Significance (ASBS) are those areas
designated by California’s State Water
Resources Control Board as requiring
protection of species or biological
communities to the extent that
alteration of natural water quality is
undesirable. ASBS are a subset of State
Water Quality Protection Areas
established pursuant to California
Public Resources Code section 36700 et
seq.
Attract or attracting means the
conduct of any activity that lures or may
lure any animal in the Sanctuary by
using food, bait, chum, dyes, decoys
(e.g., surfboards or body boards used as
decoys), acoustics or any other means,
except the mere presence of human
beings (e.g., swimmers, divers, boaters,
kayakers, surfers).
Clean means not containing
detectable levels of harmful matter.
Cruise ship means a vessel with 250
or more passenger berths for hire.
Deserting means leaving a vessel
aground or adrift without notification to
the Director of the vessel going aground
or becoming adrift within 12 hours of its
discovery and developing and
presenting to the Director a preliminary
salvage plan within 24 hours of such
notification, after expressing or
otherwise manifesting intention not to
undertake or to cease salvage efforts, or
when the owner/operator cannot after
reasonable efforts by the Director be
reached within 12 hours of the vessel’s
condition being reported to authorities;
or leaving a vessel at anchor when its
condition creates potential for a
grounding, discharge, or deposit and the
owner/operator fails to secure the vessel
in a timely manner.
Harmful matter means any substance,
or combination of substances, that
because of its quantity, concentration, or
physical, chemical, or infectious
characteristics may pose a present or
potential threat to Sanctuary resources
or qualities, including but not limited
to: fishing nets, fishing line, hooks, fuel,
oil, and those contaminants (regardless
of quantity) listed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
101(14) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation
and Liability Act at 40 CFR 302.4.
Introduced species means any species
(including, but not limited to, any of its
biological matter capable of
propagation) that is non-native to the
ecosystems of the Sanctuary; or any
organism into which altered genetic
matter, or genetic matter from another
species, has been transferred in order
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
that the host organism acquires the
genetic traits of the transferred genes.
Motorized personal watercraft means
a vessel which uses an inboard motor
powering a water jet pump as its
primary source of motive power and
which is designed to be operated by a
person sitting, standing, or kneeling on
the vessel, rather than the conventional
manner of sitting or standing inside the
vessel.
Routine maintenance means
customary and standard procedures for
maintaining docks or piers.
Seagrass means any species of marine
angiosperms (flowering plants) that
inhabit portions of the submerged lands
in the Sanctuary. Those species include,
but are not limited to: Zostera asiatica
and Zostera marina.
§ 922.82 Prohibited or otherwise regulated
activities.
(a) The following activities are
prohibited and thus are unlawful for
any person to conduct or to cause to be
conducted within the Sanctuary:
(1) Exploring for, developing, or
producing oil or gas except that
pipelines related to hydrocarbon
operations adjacent to the Sanctuary
may be placed at a distance greater than
2 nmi from the Farallon Islands, Bolinas
Lagoon and Areas of Special Biological
Significance (ASBS) where certified to
have no significant effect on Sanctuary
resources in accordance with § 922.84.
(2) Discharging or depositing from
within or into the Sanctuary, other than
from a cruise ship, any material or other
matter except:
(i) Fish, fish parts, or chumming
materials (bait) used in or resulting from
lawful fishing activity within the
Sanctuary, provided that such discharge
or deposit is during the conduct of
lawful fishing activity within the
Sanctuary;
(ii) For a vessel less than 300 gross
registered tons (GRT), or a vessel 300
GRT or greater without sufficient
holding tank capacity to hold sewage
while within the Sanctuary, clean
effluent generated incidental to vessel
use by an operable Type I or II marine
sanitation device (U.S. Coast Guard
classification) that is approved in
accordance with section 312 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended (FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. 1322.
Vessel operators must lock all marine
sanitation devices in a manner that
prevents discharge or deposit of
untreated sewage;
(iii) Clean vessel deck wash down,
clean vessel engine cooling water, clean
vessel generator cooling water, clean
bilge water, or anchor wash; or
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(iv) Vessel engine or generator
exhaust.
(3) Discharging or depositing, from
within or into the Sanctuary, any
material or other matter from a cruise
ship except clean vessel engine cooling
water, clean vessel generator cooling
water, clean bilge water, or anchor
wash.
(4) Discharging or depositing, from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter that
subsequently enters the Sanctuary and
injures a Sanctuary resource or quality,
except for the exclusions listed in
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (iv) and
(a)(3) of this section.
(5) Constructing any structure other
than a navigation aid on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanctuary;
placing or abandoning any structure on
or in the submerged lands of the
Sanctuary; or drilling into, dredging, or
otherwise altering the submerged lands
of the Sanctuary in any way, except:
(i) By anchoring vessels (in a manner
not otherwise prohibited by this part
(see § 922.82(a)(16));
(ii) While conducting lawful fishing
activities;
(iii) The laying of pipelines related to
hydrocarbon operations in leases
adjacent to the Sanctuary in accordance
with paragraph (a)(1) of this section;
(iv) Routine maintenance and
construction of docks and piers on
Tomales Bay; or
(v) Mariculture activities conducted
pursuant to a valid lease, permit, license
or other authorization issued by the
State of California.
(6) Operating any vessel engaged in
the trade of carrying cargo within an
area extending 2 nmi from the Farallon
Islands, Bolinas Lagoon or any ASBS.
This includes but is not limited to
tankers and other bulk carriers and
barges, or any vessel engaged in the
trade of servicing offshore installations,
except to transport persons or supplies
to or from the Islands or mainland areas
adjacent to Sanctuary waters or any
ASBS. In no event shall this section be
construed to limit access for fishing,
recreational or research vessels.
(7) Operation of motorized personal
watercraft, except for the operation of
motorized personal watercraft for
emergency search and rescue missions
or law enforcement operations (other
than routine training activities) carried
out by the National Park Service, U.S.
Coast Guard, Fire or Police Departments
or other Federal, State or local
jurisdictions.
(8) Disturbing birds or marine
mammals by flying motorized aircraft at
less than 1000 feet over the waters
within one nmi of the Farallon Islands,
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Bolinas Lagoon, or any ASBS except to
transport persons or supplies to or from
the Islands or for enforcement purposes.
(9) Possessing, moving, removing, or
injuring, or attempting to possess, move,
remove or injure, a Sanctuary historical
resource.
(10) Introducing or otherwise
releasing from within or into the
Sanctuary an introduced species,
except:
(i) Striped bass (Morone saxatilis)
released during catch and release
fishing activity; or
(ii) Species cultivated by mariculture
activities in Tomales Bay pursuant to a
valid lease, permit, license or other
authorization issued by the State of
California and in effect on the effective
date of the final regulation.
(11) Taking any marine mammal, sea
turtle, or bird within or above the
Sanctuary, except as authorized by the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, as
amended, (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq., Endangered Species Act (ESA), as
amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.,
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended,
(MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq., or any
regulation, as amended, promulgated
under the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA.
(12) Possessing within the Sanctuary
(regardless of where taken, moved or
removed from), any marine mammal,
sea turtle, or bird taken, except as
authorized by the MMPA, ESA, MBTA,
by any regulation, as amended,
promulgated under the MMPA, ESA, or
MBTA, or as necessary for valid law
enforcement purposes.
(13) Attracting a white shark in the
Sanctuary; or approaching within 50
meters of any white shark within the
line approximating 2 nmi around the
Farallon Islands. The coordinates for the
line approximating 2 nmi around the
Farallon Islands are listed in Appendix
B to this subpart.
(14) Deserting a vessel aground, at
anchor, or adrift in the Sanctuary.
(15) Leaving harmful matter aboard a
grounded or deserted vessel in the
Sanctuary.
(16) Anchoring a vessel in a
designated seagrass protection zone in
Tomales Bay, except as necessary for
mariculture operations conducted
pursuant to a valid lease, permit or
license. The coordinates for the noanchoring seagrass protection zones are
listed in Appendix C to this subpart.
(b) All activities currently carried out
by the Department of Defense within the
Sanctuary are essential for the national
defense and, therefore, not subject to the
prohibitions in this section. The
exemption of additional activities shall
be determined in consultation between
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
the Director and the Department of
Defense.
(c) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)
of this section do not apply to activities
necessary to respond to an emergency
threatening life, property, or the
environment, or except as may be
permitted by the Director in accordance
with § 922.48 and § 922.83.
§ 922.83
criteria.
Permit procedures and issuance
(a) A person may conduct an activity
prohibited by § 922.82 if such activity is
specifically authorized by, and
conducted in accordance with the
scope, purpose, terms and conditions of,
a permit issued under § 922.48 and this
section.
(b) The Director, at his or her
discretion, may issue a National Marine
Sanctuary permit under this section,
subject to terms and conditions as he or
she deems appropriate, if the Director
finds that the activity will:
(1) Further research or monitoring
related to Sanctuary resources and
qualities;
(2) Further the educational value of
the Sanctuary;
(3) Further salvage or recovery
operations; or
(4) Assist in managing the Sanctuary.
(c) In deciding whether to issue a
permit, the Director shall consider
factors such as:
(1) The applicant is qualified to
conduct and complete the proposed
activity;
(2) The applicant has adequate
financial resources available to conduct
and complete the proposed activity;
(3) The methods and procedures
proposed by the applicant are
appropriate to achieve the goals of the
proposed activity, especially in relation
to the potential effects of the proposed
activity on Sanctuary resources and
qualities;
(4) The proposed activity will be
conducted in a manner compatible with
the primary objective of protection of
Sanctuary resources and qualities,
considering the extent to which the
conduct of the activity may diminish or
enhance Sanctuary resources and
qualities, any potential indirect,
secondary or cumulative effects of the
activity, and the duration of such
effects;
(5) The proposed activity will be
conducted in a manner compatible with
the value of the Sanctuary, considering
the extent to which the conduct of the
activity may result in conflicts between
different users of the Sanctuary, and the
duration of such effects;
(6) It is necessary to conduct the
proposed activity within the Sanctuary;
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70531
(7) The reasonably expected end value
of the proposed activity to the
furtherance of Sanctuary goals and
purposes outweighs any potential
adverse effects on Sanctuary resources
and qualities from the conduct of the
activity; and
(8) Any other factors as the Director
deems appropriate.
(d) Applications.
(1) Applications for permits should be
addressed to the Director, Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries; ATTN:
Superintendent, Gulf of the Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary, 991 Marine
Dr., The Presidio, San Francisco, CA
94129.
(2) In addition to the information
listed in § 922.48(b), all applications
must include information to be
considered by the Director in paragraph
(b) and (c) of this section.
(e) The permittee must agree to hold
the United States harmless against any
claims arising out of the conduct of the
permitted activities.
§ 922.84
Certification of other permits.
A permit, license, or other
authorization allowing: the laying of any
pipeline related to hydrocarbon
operations in leases adjacent to the
Sanctuary and placed at a distance
greater than 2 nmi from the Farallon
Islands, Bolinas Lagoon, and any ASBS
must be certified by the Director as
consistent with the purpose of the
Sanctuary and having no significant
effect on Sanctuary resources. Such
certification may impose terms and
conditions as deemed appropriate to
ensure consistency. In considering
whether to make the certifications
called for in this section, the Director
may seek and consider the views of any
other person or entity, within or outside
the Federal government, and may hold
a public hearing as deemed appropriate.
Any certification called for in this
section shall be presumed unless the
Director acts to deny or condition
certification within 60 days from the
date that the Director receives notice of
the proposed permit and the necessary
supporting data. The Director may
amend, suspend, or revoke any
certification made under this section
whenever continued operation would
violate any terms or conditions of the
certification. Any such action shall be
forwarded in writing to both the holder
of the certified permit and the issuing
agency and shall set forth reason(s) for
the action taken.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70532
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Appendix A to Subpart H of Part 922—
Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
Coordinates listed in this Appendix are
unprojected (Geographic) and based on the
North American Datum of 1983.
Point ID No.
Sanctuary
Boundary
1 ....................
2 ....................
3 ....................
4 ....................
5 ....................
6 ....................
7 ....................
8 ....................
9 ....................
10 ..................
11 ..................
12 ..................
13 ..................
14 ..................
15 ..................
16 ..................
17 ..................
18 ..................
19 ..................
20 ..................
21 ..................
22 ..................
23 ..................
24 ..................
25 ..................
26 ..................
27 ..................
28 ..................
29 ..................
30 ..................
31 ..................
Latitude
38.29896
38.26390
38.21001
38.16576
38.14072
38.12829
38.10215
38.09069
38.07898
38.06505
38.05202
37.99227
37.98947
37.95880
37.90464
37.83480
37.76687
37.75932
37.68892
37.63356
37.60123
37.59165
37.56305
37.52001
37.50819
37.49418
37.50948
37.52988
37.57147
37.61622
37.66641
Longitude
¥123.05989
¥123.18138
¥123.11913
¥123.09207
¥123.08237
¥123.08742
¥123.09804
¥123.10387
¥123.10924
¥123.11711
¥123.12827
¥123.14137
¥123.23615
¥123.32312
¥123.38958
¥123.42579
¥123.42694
¥123.42686
¥123.39274
¥123.32819
¥123.24292
¥123.22641
¥123.19859
¥123.12879
¥123.09617
¥123.00770
¥122.90614
¥122.85988
¥122.80399
¥122.76937
¥122.75105
Appendix B to Subpart H of Part 922—
2 nmi From the Farallon Islands
Boundary Coordinates
Coordinates listed in this Appendix are
unprojected (Geographic) and based on the
North American Datum of 1983.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Point ID No.
(2 nmi from
the Farallon
Islands
Boundary)
0 ....................
1 ....................
2 ....................
3 ....................
4 ....................
5 ....................
6 ....................
7 ....................
8 ....................
9 ....................
10 ..................
11 ..................
12 ..................
13 ..................
14 ..................
15 ..................
16 ..................
17 ..................
18 ..................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Latitude
37.77670
37.78563
37.79566
37.80296
37.80609
37.80572
37.80157
37.79776
37.79368
37.78702
37.77905
37.77014
37.76201
37.75758
37.76078
37.76151
37.75898
37.75267
37.74341
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Longitude
¥123.14954
¥123.14632
¥123.13764
¥123.12521
¥123.11189
¥123.09847
¥123.08484
¥123.07836
¥123.06992
¥123.06076
¥123.05474
¥123.05169
¥123.05151
¥123.05248
¥123.04115
¥123.02803
¥123.01527
¥123.00303
¥122.99425
Jkt 217001
Point ID No.
(2 nmi from
the Farallon
Islands
Boundary)
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Latitude
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Longitude
¥122.99017
¥122.97601
¥122.96548
¥122.95890
¥122.95720
¥122.95882
¥122.96469
¥122.97427
¥122.98478
¥122.99741
¥123.00991
¥123.02133
¥123.03830
¥123.04612
¥123.05334
¥123.05567
¥123.06858
¥123.07329
¥123.07399
¥123.07340
¥123.08620
¥123.09787
¥123.11296
¥123.12315
¥123.13124
¥123.13762
¥123.14466
¥123.14917
¥123.14954
37.73634
37.73036
37.72042
37.70870
37.69737
37.68759
37.67768
37.66905
37.66352
37.66037
37.66029
37.66290
37.67102
37.67755
37.68844
37.69940
37.71127
37.72101
37.73167
37.73473
37.73074
37.73010
37.73265
37.73685
37.74273
37.74725
37.75467
37.76448
37.77670
connect points 3 through 6 in sequence and
then connects point 6 to point 1. All
coordinates are in the Geographic Coordinate
System relative to the North American Datum
of 1983.
Zone 2 Point ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Latitude
Longitude
38.14071 ..
38.11386 ..
38.11899 ..
38.12563 ..
38.12724 ..
38.13326 ..
Same as 1
¥122.87440
¥122.85851
¥122.86731
¥122.86480
¥122.86488
¥122.87178
Same as 1.
ZONE 3: Zone 3 is an area of
approximately 4.6 hectares that begins just
south of Marshall and extends approximately
1 kilometer south along the eastern shore of
Tomales Bay. The eastern boundary is the
mean high water (MHW) line from point 1 to
point 2 listed in the coordinate table below.
The southern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 2 to point 3, the western
boundary is a straight line that connects
point 3 to point 4, and the northern boundary
is a straight line that connects point 4 to
point 5. All coordinates are in the Geographic
Coordinate System relative to the North
American Datum of 1983.
Zone 3 Point ID
Longitude
38.16031 ..
38.15285 ..
38.15250 ..
38.15956 ..
Same as 1
¥122.89442
¥122.88991
¥122.89042
¥122.89573
Same as 1.
Appendix C to Subpart H of Part 922—
No-Anchoring Seagrass Protection
Zones in Tomales Bay
1
2
3
4
5
Coordinates listed in this Appendix are
unprojected (Geographic) and based on the
North American Datum of 1983.
Table C–1: Zone 1:
Zone 1 is an area of approximately 39.9
hectares offshore south of Millerton Point.
The eastern boundary is a straight line that
connects points 1 and 2 listed in the
coordinate table below. The southern
boundary is a straight line that connects
points 2 and 3, the western boundary is a
straight line that connects points 3 and 4 and
the northern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 4 to point 5. All coordinates
are in the Geographic Coordinate System
relative to the North American Datum of
1983.
ZONE 4: Zone 4 is an area of
approximately 61.8 hectares that begins just
north of Nicks Cove and extends
approximately 5 kilometers south along the
eastern shore of Tomales Bay to just south of
Cypress Grove. The eastern boundary is the
mean high water (MHW) line from point 1 to
point 2 listed in the coordinate table below.
The southern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 2 to point 3. The western
boundary is a series of straight lines that
connect points 3 through 9 in sequence. The
northern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 9 to point 10. All coordinates
are in the Geographic Coordinate System
relative to the North American Datum of
1983.
Zone 1 Point ID
1
2
3
4
5
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Latitude
Longitude
Zone 4 Point ID
Latitude
Longitude
38.10571 ..
38.09888 ..
38.09878 ..
38.10514 ..
Same as 1
¥122.84565
¥122.83603
¥122.84431
¥122.84904
Same as 1.
1 .......................
2 .......................
3 .......................
4 .......................
5 .......................
6 .......................
7 .......................
8 .......................
9 .......................
10 .....................
38.20073 ..
38.16259 ..
38.16227 ..
38.16535 ..
38.16869 ..
38.17450 ..
38.17919 ..
38.18651 ..
38.18881 ..
Same as 1
¥122.92181
¥122.89627
¥122.89650
¥122.90308
¥122.90475
¥122.90545
¥122.91021
¥122.91404
¥122.91740
Same as 1.
ZONE 2: Zone 2 is an area of
approximately 50.3 hectares that begins just
south of Marconi and extends approximately
3 kilometers south along the eastern shore of
Tomales Bay. The eastern boundary is the
mean high water (MHW) line from point 1 to
point 2 listed in the coordinate table below.
The southern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 2 to point 3. The western
boundary is a series of straight lines that
PO 00000
Frm 00046
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Latitude
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
ZONE 5: Zone 5 is an area of
approximately 461.4 hectares that begins east
of Lawsons Landing and extends
approximately 5 kilometers east and south
along the eastern shore of Tomales Bay but
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
excludes areas adjacent (approximately 600
meters) to the mouth of Walker Creek. The
boundary follows the mean high water
(MHW) mark from point 1 and trends in a
southeast direction to point 2 listed in the
coordinate table below. From point 2 the
boundary trends westward in a straight line
to point 3, then trends southward in a
straight line to point 4 and then trends
eastward in a straight line to point 5. The
boundary follows the mean high water line
from point 5 southward to point 6. The
southern boundary is a straight line that
connects point 6 to point 7. The eastern
boundary is a series of straight lines that
connect points 7 to 9 in sequence and then
connects point 9 to point 10. All coordinates
are in the Geographic Coordinate System
relative to the North American Datum of
1983.
Zone 5 Point ID
Latitude
Longitude
1 .......................
2 .......................
3 .......................
4 .......................
5 .......................
6 .......................
7 .......................
8 .......................
9 .......................
10 .....................
38.23122 ..
38.21599 ..
38.20938 ..
38.20366 ..
38.20515 ..
38.20073 ..
38.19405 ..
38.20436 ..
38.21727 ..
Same as 1
¥122.96300
¥122.93749
¥122.94153
¥122.93246
¥122.92453
¥122.92181
¥122.93477
¥122.94305
¥122.96225
Same as 1.
ZONE 6: Zone 6 is an area of
approximately 3.94 hectares in the vicinity of
Indian Beach along the western shore of
Tomales Bay. The western boundary follows
the mean high water (MHW) line from point
1 northward to point 2 listed in the
coordinate table below. The northern
boundary is a straight line that connects
point 2 to point 3. The eastern boundary is
a straight line that connects point 3 to point
4. The southern boundary is a straight line
that connects point 4 to point 5. All
coordinates are in the Geographic Coordinate
System relative to the North American Datum
of 1983.
Zone 6 Point ID
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
1
2
3
4
5
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Latitude
Longitude
38.13811 ..
38.14040 ..
38.14103 ..
38.13919 ..
Same as 1
¥122.89603
¥122.89676
¥122.89537
¥122.89391
Same as 1.
ZONE 7: Zone 7 is an area of
approximately 32.16 hectares that begins just
south of Pebble Beach and extends
approximately 3 kilometers south along the
western shore of Tomales Bay. The western
boundary is the mean high water (MHW) line
from point 1 to point 2 listed in the
coordinate table below. The northern
boundary is a straight line that connects
point 2 to point 3. The eastern boundary is
a series of straight lines that connect points
3 through 7 in sequence. The southern
boundary is a straight line that connects
point 7 to point 8. All coordinates are in the
Geographic Coordinate System relative to the
North American Datum of 1983.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
Zone 7 Point ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
.......................
Latitude
Longitude
38.11034 ..
38.13008 ..
38.13067 ..
38.12362 ..
38.11916 ..
38.11486 ..
38.11096 ..
Same as 1
¥122.86544
¥122.88742
¥122.88620
¥122.87984
¥122.87491
¥122.86896
¥122.86468
Same as 1.
3. Subpart K of Part 922 is revised to
read as follows:
■
Subpart K—Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary
Sec.
922.110 Boundary.
922.111 Definitions.
922.112 Prohibited or otherwise regulated
activities.
922.113 Permit procedures and issuance
criteria.
Appendix A to Subpart K of Part 922—
Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary
Boundary Coordinates
Appendix B to Subpart K of Part 922—Line
Representing the 50-Fathom Isobath
Surrounding Cordell Bank
Subpart K—Cordell Bank National
Marine Sanctuary
§ 922.110
Boundary.
The Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary (Sanctuary) boundary
encompasses a total area of
approximately 399 square nautical miles
(nmi) of ocean waters, and submerged
lands thereunder, off the northern coast
of California approximately 50 miles
west-northwest of San Francisco,
California. The Sanctuary boundary
extends westward (approximately 250
degrees) from the northwestern most
point of the Gulf of the Farallones
National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) to
the 1,000 fathom isobath northwest of
Cordell Bank. The Sanctuary boundary
then generally follows this isobath in a
southerly direction to the western-most
point of the GFNMS boundary. The
Sanctuary boundary then follows the
GFNMS boundary again to the
northwestern corner of the GFNMS. The
exact boundary coordinates are listed in
Appendix A to this subpart.
§ 922.111
Definitions.
In addition to the definitions found in
§ 922.3, the following definitions apply
to this subpart:
Clean means not containing
detectable levels of harmful matter.
Cruise ship means a vessel with 250
or more passenger berths for hire.
Harmful matter means any substance,
or combination of substances, that
because of its quantity, concentration, or
physical, chemical, or infectious
characteristics may pose a present or
potential threat to Sanctuary resources
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70533
or qualities, including but not limited
to: fishing nets, fishing line, hooks, fuel,
oil, and those contaminants (regardless
of quantity) listed pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
Introduced species means any species
(including, but not limited to, any of its
biological matter capable of
propagation) that is non-native to the
ecosystems of the Sanctuary; or any
organism into which altered genetic
matter, or genetic matter from another
species, has been transferred in order
that the host organism acquires the
genetic traits of the transferred genes.
§ 922.112 Prohibited or otherwise
regulated activities.
(a) The following activities are
prohibited and thus are unlawful for
any person to conduct or to cause to be
conducted within the Sanctuary:
(1)(i) Discharging or depositing from
within or into the Sanctuary, other than
from a cruise ship, any material or other
matter except:
(A) Fish, fish parts, or chumming
materials (bait), used in or resulting
from lawful fishing activity within the
Sanctuary, provided that such discharge
or deposit is during the conduct of
lawful fishing activity within the
Sanctuary;
(B) For a vessel less than 300 gross
registered tons (GRT), or a vessel 300
GRT or greater without sufficient
holding tank capacity to hold sewage
while within the Sanctuary, clean
effluent generated incidental to vessel
use and generated by an operable Type
I or II marine sanitation device (U.S.
Coast Guard classification) approved in
accordance with section 312 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended, (FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. 1322.
Vessel operators must lock all marine
sanitation devices in a manner that
prevents discharge or deposit of
untreated sewage;
(C) Clean vessel deck wash down,
clean vessel engine cooling water, clean
vessel generator cooling water, clean
bilge water, or anchor wash; or
(D) Vessel engine or generator
exhaust.
(ii) Discharging or depositing, from
within or into the Sanctuary, any
material or other matter from a cruise
ship except clean vessel engine cooling
water, clean vessel generator cooling
water, clean bilge water, or anchor
wash.
(iii) Discharging or depositing, from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary,
any material or other matter that
subsequently enters the Sanctuary and
injures a Sanctuary resource or quality,
except as listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)
and (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70534
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
(2) On or within the line representing
the 50-fathom isobath surrounding
Cordell Bank, removing, taking, or
injuring or attempting to remove, take,
or injure benthic invertebrates or algae
located on Cordell Bank. This
prohibition does not apply to use of
bottom contact gear used during fishing
activities, which is prohibited pursuant
to 50 CFR part 660 (Fisheries off West
Coast States). The coordinates for the
line representing the 50-fathom isobath
are listed in Appendix B to this subpart.
There is a rebuttable presumption that
any such resource found in the
possession of a person within the
Sanctuary was taken or removed by that
person.
(3) Exploring for, or developing or
producing, oil, gas, or minerals in any
area of the Sanctuary.
(4)(i) On or within the line
representing the 50-fathom isobath
surrounding Cordell Bank, drilling into,
dredging, or otherwise altering the
submerged lands; or constructing,
placing, or abandoning any structure,
material or other matter on or in the
submerged lands. This prohibition does
not apply to use of bottom contact gear
used during fishing activities, which is
prohibited pursuant to 50 CFR part 660
(Fisheries off West Coast States). The
coordinates for the line representing the
50-fathom isobath are listed in
Appendix B to this subpart.
(ii) In the Sanctuary beyond the line
representing the 50-fathom isobath
surrounding Cordell Bank, drilling into,
dredging, or otherwise altering the
submerged lands; or constructing,
placing, or abandoning any structure,
material or matter on the submerged
lands except as incidental and necessary
for anchoring any vessel or lawful use
of any fishing gear during normal
fishing activities. The coordinates for
the line representing the 50-fathom
isobath are listed in Appendix B to this
subpart.
(5) Taking any marine mammal, sea
turtle, or bird within or above the
Sanctuary, except as authorized by the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, as
amended, (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq., Endangered Species Act, as
amended, (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.,
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended,
(MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq., or any
regulation, as amended, promulgated
under the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA.
(6) Possessing within the Sanctuary
(regardless of where taken, moved or
removed from), any marine mammal,
sea turtle or bird taken, except as
authorized by the MMPA, ESA, MBTA,
by any regulation, as amended,
promulgated under the MMPA, ESA, or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
MBTA, or as necessary for valid law
enforcement purposes.
(7) Introducing or otherwise releasing
from within or into the Sanctuary an
introduced species, except striped bass
(Morone saxatilis) released during catch
and release fishing activity.
(b) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)
of this section do not apply to activities
necessary to respond to an emergency
threatening life, property or the
environment, or except as may be
permitted by the Director in accordance
with § 922.48 and § 922.113.
(c) All activities being carried out by
the Department of Defense (DOD) within
the Sanctuary on the effective date of
designation that are necessary for
national defense are exempt from the
prohibitions contained in the
regulations in this subpart. Additional
DOD activities initiated after the
effective date of designation that are
necessary for national defense will be
exempted by the Director after
consultation between the Department of
Commerce and DOD. DOD activities not
necessary for national defense, such as
routine exercises and vessel operations,
are subject to all prohibitions contained
in the regulations in this subpart.
(d) Where necessary to prevent
immediate, serious, and irreversible
damage to a Sanctuary resource, any
activity may be regulated within the
limits of the Act on an emergency basis
for no more than 120 days.
§ 922.113
criteria.
Permit procedures and issuance
(a) A person may conduct an activity
prohibited by § 922.112 if such activity
is specifically authorized by, and
conducted in accordance with the
scope, purpose, terms and conditions of,
a permit issued under § 922.48 and this
section.
(b) The Director, at his or her
discretion, may issue a national marine
sanctuary permit under this section,
subject to terms and conditions, as he or
she deems appropriate, if the Director
finds that the activity will:
(1) Further research or monitoring
related to Sanctuary resources and
qualities;
(2) Further the educational value the
Sanctuary;
(3) Further salvage or recovery
operations in or near the Sanctuary in
connection with a recent air or marine
casualty; or
(4) Assist in managing the Sanctuary.
(c) In deciding whether to issue a
permit, the Director shall consider such
factors as:
(1) The applicant is qualified to
conduct and complete the proposed
activity;
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) The applicant has adequate
financial resources available to conduct
and complete the proposed activity;
(3) The methods and procedures
proposed by the applicant are
appropriate to achieve the goals of the
proposed activity, especially in relation
to the potential effects of the proposed
activity on Sanctuary resources and
qualities;
(4) The proposed activity will be
conducted in a manner compatible with
the primary objective of protection of
Sanctuary resources and qualities,
considering the extent to which the
conduct of the activity may diminish or
enhance Sanctuary resources and
qualities, any potential indirect,
secondary or cumulative effects of the
activity, and the duration of such
effects;
(5) The proposed activity will be
conducted in a manner compatible with
the value of the Sanctuary, considering
the extent to which the conduct of the
activity may result in conflicts between
different users of the Sanctuary, and the
duration of such effects;
(6) It is necessary to conduct the
proposed activity within the Sanctuary;
(7) The reasonably expected end value
of the proposed activity to the
furtherance of Sanctuary goals and
purposes outweighs any potential
adverse effects on Sanctuary resources
and qualities from the conduct of the
activity; and
(8) Any other factors as the Director
deems appropriate.
(d) Applications.
(1) Applications for permits should be
addressed to the Director, Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries; ATTN:
Superintendent, Cordell Bank National
Marine Sanctuary, P.O. Box 159, Olema,
CA 94950.
(2) In addition to the information
listed in § 922.48(b), all applications
must include information to be
considered by the Director in paragraph
(b) and (c) of this section.
(e) The permittee must agree to hold
the United States harmless against any
claims arising out of the conduct of the
permitted activities.
Appendix A to Subpart K of Part 922—
Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
Coordinates listed in this Appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and based on the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD83).
SANCTUARY BOUNDARY COORDINATES
Point ID No.
1 ....................
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Latitude
38.26390
Longitude
¥123.18138
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
SANCTUARY BOUNDARY
COORDINATES—Continued
Point ID No.
2 ....................
3 ....................
4 ....................
5 ....................
6 ....................
7 ....................
8 ....................
9 ....................
10 ..................
11 ..................
12 ..................
13 ..................
14 ..................
15 ..................
16 ..................
17 ..................
18 ..................
19 ..................
20 ..................
21 ..................
22 ..................
23 ..................
24 ..................
25 ..................
26 ..................
27 ..................
28 ..................
29 ..................
30 ..................
31 ..................
32 ..................
33 ..................
34 ..................
35 ..................
36 ..................
37 ..................
38 ..................
39 ..................
40 ..................
41 ..................
42 ..................
43 ..................
44 ..................
45 ..................
46 ..................
47 ..................
48 ..................
49 ..................
50 ..................
Latitude
38.13219
38.11256
38.08289
38.07451
38.06188
38.05308
38.04614
38.03409
38.02419
38.02286
38.01987
38.01366
37.99847
37.98678
37.97761
37.96683
37.95528
37.94901
37.93858
37.92288
37.90725
37.88541
37.87637
37.86189
37.84988
37.82296
37.81365
37.81026
37.80094
37.79487
37.78383
37.78109
37.77033
37.76687
37.83480
37.90464
37.95880
37.98947
37.99227
38.05202
38.06505
38.07898
38.09069
38.10215
38.12829
38.14072
38.16576
38.21001
38.26390
Longitude
¥123.64265
¥123.63344
¥123.62065
¥123.62162
¥123.61546
¥123.60549
¥123.60611
¥123.59904
¥123.59864
¥123.61531
¥123.62450
¥123.62494
¥123.61331
¥123.59988
¥123.58746
¥123.57859
¥123.56199
¥123.54777
¥123.54701
¥123.54360
¥123.53937
¥123.52967
¥123.52192
¥123.52197
¥123.51749
¥123.49280
¥123.47906
¥123.46897
¥123.47313
¥123.46721
¥123.45466
¥123.44694
¥123.43466
¥123.42694
¥123.42579
¥123.38958
¥123.32312
¥123.23615
¥123.14137
¥123.12827
¥123.11711
¥123.10924
¥123.10387
¥123.09804
¥123.08742
¥123.08237
¥123.09207
¥123.11913
¥123.18138
Coordinates listed in this Appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and based on the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD83).
CORDELL BANK FIFTY FATHOM LINE
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Latitude
37.96034
37.96172
37.99110
38.00406
38.01637
38.04684
38.07106
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Longitude
¥123.40371
¥123.42081
¥123.44379
¥123.46443
¥123.46076
¥123.47920
¥123.48754
Jkt 217001
towards shore until it intersects the
Mean High Water Line (MHWL) along
the coast near Cambria. The Sanctuary
boundary then follows the MHWL
Point ID No.
Latitude
Longitude
northward to the northern terminus at
8 ....................
38.07588
¥123.47195 Rocky Point. The shoreward Sanctuary
9 ....................
38.06451
¥123.46146 boundary excludes a small area between
10 ..................
38.07123
¥123.44467
Point Bonita and Point San Pedro. Pillar
11 ..................
38.04446
¥123.40286
12 ..................
38.01442
¥123.38588 Point Harbor, Santa Cruz Harbor,
13 ..................
37.98859
¥123.37533 Monterey Harbor, and Moss Landing
14 ..................
37.97071
¥123.38605 Harbor are all excluded from the
Sanctuary shoreward from the points
listed in Appendix A except for Moss
■ 4. Subpart M of Part 922 is revised to
Landing Harbor, where all of Elkhorn
read as follows:
Slough east of the Highway One bridge,
Subpart M—Monterey Bay National Marine
and west of the tide gate at Elkhorn
Sanctuary
Road and toward the center channel
Sec.
from the MHWL is included within the
922.130 Boundary.
Sanctuary, excluding areas within the
922.131 Definitions.
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine
922.132 Prohibited or otherwise regulated
Research Reserve. Exact coordinates for
activities.
the seaward boundary and harbor
922.133 Permit procedures and criteria.
922.134 Notification and review.
exclusions are provided in Appendix A
Appendix A to Subpart M of Part 922—
to this subpart.
Monterey Bay National Marine
(b) The Davidson Seamount
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
Management Zone is also part of the
Appendix B to Subpart M of Part 922—Zones
Sanctuary. This area, bounded by
Within the Sanctuary Where Overflights
geodetic lines connecting a rectangle
Below 1000 Feet Are Prohibited
Appendix C to Subpart M of Part 922—
centered on the top of the Davidson
Dredged Material Disposal Sites Within
Seamount, consists of approximately
the Sanctuary
585 square nmi of ocean waters and the
Appendix D to Subpart M of Part 922—
submerged lands thereunder. The
Dredged Material Disposal Sites
shoreward boundary of this portion of
Adjacent to the Monterey Bay National
the Sanctuary is located approximately
Marine Sanctuary
65 nmi off the coast of San Simeon in
Appendix E to Subpart M of Part 922—
San Luis Obispo County. Exact
Motorized Personal Watercraft Zones
and Access Routes Within the Sanctuary coordinates for the Davidson Seamount
Appendix F to Subpart M of Part 922—
Management Zone boundary are
Davidson Seamount Management Zone
provided in Appendix F to this subpart.
CORDELL BANK FIFTY FATHOM LINE—
Continued
Appendix B to Subpart K of Part 922—
Line Representing the 50-Fathom
Isobath Surrounding Cordell Bank
Point ID No.
70535
Subpart M—Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary
§ 922.130
Boundary.
The Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary (Sanctuary) consists of two
separate areas. (a) The first area consists
of an area of approximately 4016 square
nautical miles (nmi) of coastal and
ocean waters, and submerged lands
thereunder, in and surrounding
Monterey Bay off the central coast of
California. The northern terminus of the
Sanctuary boundary is located along the
southern boundary of the Gulf of the
Farallones National Marine Sanctuary
(GFNMS) beginning at Rocky Point just
south of Stinson Beach in Marin
County. The Sanctuary boundary
follows the GFNMS boundary westward
to a point approximately 29 nmi
offshore from Moss Beach in San Mateo
County. The Sanctuary boundary then
extends southward in a series of arcs,
which generally follow the 500 fathom
isobath, to a point approximately 27
nmi offshore of Cambria, in San Luis
Obispo County. The Sanctuary
boundary then extends eastward
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 922.131
Definitions.
In addition to those definitions found
at 15 CFR 922.3, the following
definitions apply to this subpart:
Attract or attracting means the
conduct of any activity that lures or may
lure any animal by using food, bait,
chum, dyes, decoys, acoustics, or any
other means, except the mere presence
of human beings (e.g., swimmers,
divers, boaters, kayakers, surfers).
Clean means not containing
detectable levels of harmful matter.
Cruise ship means a vessel with 250
or more passenger berths for hire.
Davidson Seamount Management
Zone means the area bounded by
geodetic lines connecting a rectangle
centered on the top of the Davidson
Seamount, and consists of
approximately 585 square nmi of ocean
waters and the submerged lands
thereunder. The shoreward boundary of
this portion of the Sanctuary is located
approximately 65 nmi off the coast of
San Simeon in San Luis Obispo County.
Exact coordinates for the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone boundary
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
70536
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
are provided in Appendix F to this
subpart.
Deserting means leaving a vessel
aground or adrift without notification to
the Director of the vessel going aground
or becoming adrift within 12 hours of its
discovery and developing and
presenting to the Director a preliminary
salvage plan within 24 hours of such
notification, after expressing or
otherwise manifesting intention not to
undertake or to cease salvage efforts, or
when the owner/operator cannot after
reasonable efforts by the Director be
reached within 12 hours of the vessel’s
condition being reported to authorities;
or leaving a vessel at anchor when its
condition creates potential for a
grounding, discharge, or deposit and the
owner/operator fails to secure the vessel
in a timely manner.
Federal Project means any water
resources development project
conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers or operating under a permit or
other authorization issued by the Corps
of Engineers and authorized by Federal
law.
Hand tool means a hand-held
implement, utilized for the collection of
jade pursuant to 15 CFR 922.132(a)(1),
that is no greater than 36 inches in
length and has no moving parts (e.g.,
dive knife, pry bar, or abalone iron).
Pneumatic, mechanical, electrical,
hydraulic, or explosive tools are,
therefore, examples of what does not
meet this definition.
Harmful matter means any substance,
or combination of substances, that
because of its quantity, concentration, or
physical, chemical, or infectious
characteristics may pose a present or
potential threat to Sanctuary resources
or qualities, including but not limited
to: Fishing nets, fishing line, hooks,
fuel, oil, and those contaminants
(regardless of quantity) listed pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. 9601(14) of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act at 40 CFR 302.4.
Introduced species means: Any
species (including but not limited to any
of its biological matter capable of
propagation) that is non-native to the
ecosystems of the Sanctuary; or any
organism into which altered genetic
matter, or genetic matter from another
species, has been transferred in order
that the host organism acquires the
genetic traits of the transferred genes.
Motorized personal watercraft
(MPWC) means any vessel, propelled by
machinery, that is designed to be
operated by standing, sitting, or
kneeling on, astride, or behind the
vessel, in contrast to the conventional
manner, where the operator stands or
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
sits inside the vessel; any vessel less
than 20 feet in length overall as
manufactured and propelled by
machinery and that has been exempted
from compliance with the U.S. Coast
Guard’s Maximum Capacities Marking
for Load Capacity regulation found at 33
CFR Parts 181 and 183, except
submarines; or any other vessel that is
less than 20 feet in length overall as
manufactured, and is propelled by a
water jet pump or drive.
§ 922.132 Prohibited or otherwise
regulated activities.
(a) Except as specified in paragraphs
(b) through (e) of this section, the
following activities are prohibited and
thus are unlawful for any person to
conduct or to cause to be conducted:
(1) Exploring for, developing, or
producing oil, gas, or minerals within
the Sanctuary, except: Jade may be
collected (meaning removed) from the
area bounded by the 35.92222 N latitude
parallel (coastal reference point: Beach
access stairway at south Sand Dollar
Beach), the 35.88889 N latitude parallel
(coastal reference point: Westernmost
tip of Cape San Martin), and from the
mean high tide line seaward to the 90foot isobath (depth line) (the
‘‘authorized area’’) provided that:
(i) Only jade already loose from the
submerged lands of the Sanctuary may
be collected;
(ii) No tool may be used to collect jade
except:
(A) A hand tool (as defined at 15 CFR
922.131) to maneuver or lift the jade or
scratch the surface of a stone as
necessary to determine if it is jade;
(B) A lift bag or multiple lift bags with
a combined lift capacity of no more than
two hundred pounds; or
(C) A vessel (except for motorized
personal watercraft) (see paragraph
(a)(7) of this section) to provide access
to the authorized area;
(iii) Each person may collect only
what that person individually carries;
and
(iv) For any loose piece of jade that
cannot be collected under paragraphs
(a)(1) (ii) and (iii) of this section, any
person may apply for a permit to collect
such a loose piece by following the
procedures in 15 CFR 922.133.
(2)(i) Discharging or depositing from
within or into the Sanctuary, other than
from a cruise ship, any material or other
matter, except:
(A) Fish, fish parts, chumming
materials, or bait used in or resulting
from lawful fishing activities within the
Sanctuary, provided that such discharge
or deposit is during the conduct of
lawful fishing activities within the
Sanctuary;
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(B) For a vessel less than 300 gross
registered tons (GRT), or a vessel 300
GRT or greater without sufficient
holding tank capacity to hold sewage
while within the Sanctuary, clean
effluent generated incidental to vessel
use by an operable Type I or II marine
sanitation device (U.S. Coast Guard
classification) approved in accordance
with section 312 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended
(FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. 1322. Vessel
operators must lock all marine
sanitation devices in a manner that
prevents discharge or deposit of
untreated sewage;
(C) Clean vessel deck wash down,
clean vessel engine cooling water, clean
vessel generator cooling water, clean
bilge water, or anchor wash;
(D) For a vessel less than 300 gross
registered tons (GRT), or a vessel 300
GRT or greater without sufficient
holding capacity to hold graywater
while within the Sanctuary, clean
graywater as defined by section 312 of
the FWPCA;
(E) Vessel engine or generator
exhaust; or
(F) Dredged material deposited at
disposal sites authorized by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
(in consultation with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (COE)) prior to the
effective date of Sanctuary designation
(January 1, 1993), provided that the
activity is pursuant to, and complies
with the terms and conditions of, a valid
Federal permit or approval existing on
January 1, 1993. Authorized disposal
sites within the Sanctuary are described
in Appendix C to this subpart.
(ii) Discharging or depositing from
within or into the Sanctuary any
material or other matter from a cruise
ship except clean vessel engine cooling
water, clean vessel generator cooling
water, clean bilge water, or anchor
wash.
(iii) Discharging or depositing from
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary
any material or other matter that
subsequently enters the Sanctuary and
injures a Sanctuary resource or quality,
except those listed in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i)(A) through (E) and (a)(2)(ii) of
this section and dredged material
deposited at the authorized disposal
sites described in Appendix D to this
subpart, provided that the dredged
material disposal is pursuant to, and
complies with the terms and conditions
of, a valid Federal permit or approval.
(3) Possessing, moving, removing, or
injuring, or attempting to possess, move,
remove, or injure, a Sanctuary historical
resource. This prohibition does not
apply to, moving, removing, or injury
resulting incidentally from kelp
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
harvesting, aquaculture, or lawful
fishing activities.
(4) Drilling into, dredging, or
otherwise altering the submerged lands
of the Sanctuary; or constructing,
placing, or abandoning any structure,
material, or other matter on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanctuary,
except as incidental and necessary to:
(i) Conduct lawful fishing activities;
(ii) Anchor a vessel;
(iii) Conduct aquaculture or kelp
harvesting;
(iv) Install an authorized navigational
aid;
(v) Conduct harbor maintenance in an
area necessarily associated with a
Federal Project in existence on January
1, 1993, including dredging of entrance
channels and repair, replacement, or
rehabilitation of breakwaters and jetties;
(vi) Construct, repair, replace, or
rehabilitate a dock or pier; or
(vii) Collect jade pursuant to
paragraph (a)(1) of this section,
provided that there is no constructing,
placing, or abandoning any structure,
material, or other matter on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanctuary, other
than temporary placement of an
authorized hand tool as provided in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section. The
exceptions listed in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)
through (a)(4)(vii) of this section do not
apply within the Davidson Seamount
Management Zone.
(5) Taking any marine mammal, sea
turtle, or bird within or above the
Sanctuary, except as authorized by the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, as
amended, (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 et
seq., Endangered Species Act, as
amended, (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.,
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended,
(MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq., or any
regulation, as amended, promulgated
under the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA.
(6) Flying motorized aircraft, except
as necessary for valid law enforcement
purposes, at less than 1,000 feet above
any of the four zones within the
Sanctuary described in Appendix B to
this subpart.
(7) Operating motorized personal
watercraft within the Sanctuary except
within the five designated zones and
access routes within the Sanctuary
described in Appendix E to this subpart.
Zone Five (at Pillar Point) exists only
when a High Surf Warning has been
issued by the National Weather Service
and is in effect for San Mateo County,
and only during December, January, and
February.
(8) Possessing within the Sanctuary
(regardless of where taken, moved, or
removed from), any marine mammal,
sea turtle, or bird, except as authorized
by the MMPA, ESA, MBTA, by any
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
regulation, as amended, promulgated
under the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA, or as
necessary for valid law enforcement
purposes.
(9) Deserting a vessel aground, at
anchor, or adrift in the Sanctuary.
(10) Leaving harmful matter aboard a
grounded or deserted vessel in the
Sanctuary.
(11) (i) Moving, removing, taking,
collecting, catching, harvesting,
disturbing, breaking, cutting, or
otherwise injuring, or attempting to
move, remove, take, collect, catch,
harvest, disturb, break, cut, or otherwise
injure, any Sanctuary resource located
more that 3,000 feet below the sea
surface within the Davidson Seamount
Management Zone. This prohibition
does not apply to fishing below 3000
feet within the Davidson Seamount
Management Zone, which is prohibited
pursuant to 50 CFR part 660 (Fisheries
off West Coast States).
(ii) Possessing any Sanctuary resource
the source of which is more than 3,000
feet below the sea surface within the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone.
This prohibition does not apply to
possession of fish resulting from fishing
below 3000 feet within the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone, which is
prohibited pursuant to 50 CFR part 660
(Fisheries off West Coast States).
(12) Introducing or otherwise
releasing from within or into the
Sanctuary an introduced species, except
striped bass (Morone saxatilis) released
during catch and release fishing activity.
(13) Attracting any white shark within
the Sanctuary.
(14) Interfering with, obstructing,
delaying, or preventing an investigation,
search, seizure, or disposition of seized
property in connection with
enforcement of the Act or any regulation
or permit issued under the Act.
(b) The prohibitions in paragraphs
(a)(2) through (11) of this section do not
apply to an activity necessary to
respond to an emergency threatening
life, property, or the environment.
(c)(1) All Department of Defense
activities must be carried out in a
manner that avoids to the maximum
extent practicable any adverse impacts
on Sanctuary resources and qualities.
The prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2)
through (12) of this section do not apply
to existing military activities carried out
by the Department of Defense, as
specifically identified in the Final
Environmental Impact Statement and
Management Plan for the Proposed
Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary (NOAA, 1992). (Copies of the
FEIS/MP are available from the
Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary, 299 Foam Street, Monterey,
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
70537
CA 93940.) For purposes of the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone,
these activities are listed in the 2008
Final Environmental Impact Statement.
New activities may be exempted from
the prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2)
through (12) of this section by the
Director after consultation between the
Director and the Department of Defense.
(2) In the event of destruction of, loss
of, or injury to a Sanctuary resource or
quality resulting from an incident,
including but not limited to discharges,
deposits, and groundings, caused by a
Department of Defense activity, the
Department of Defense, in coordination
with the Director, must promptly
prevent and mitigate further damage
and must restore or replace the
Sanctuary resource or quality in a
manner approved by the Director.
(d) The prohibitions in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section as it pertains to jade
collection in the Sanctuary, and
paragraphs (a)(2) through (11) and
(a)(13) of this section, do not apply to
any activity conducted under and in
accordance with the scope, purpose,
terms, and conditions of a National
Marine Sanctuary permit issued
pursuant to 15 CFR 922.48 and 922.133
or a Special Use permit issued pursuant
to section 310 of the Act.
(e) The prohibitions in paragraphs
(a)(2) through (a)(8) of this section do
not apply to any activity authorized by
any lease, permit, license, approval, or
other authorization issued after the
effective date of Sanctuary designation
(January 1, 1993) and issued by any
Federal, State, or local authority of
competent jurisdiction, provided that
the applicant complies with 15 CFR
922.49, the Director notifies the
applicant and authorizing agency that
he or she does not object to issuance of
the authorization, and the applicant
complies with any terms and conditions
the Director deems necessary to protect
Sanctuary resources and qualities.
Amendments, renewals, and extensions
of authorizations in existence on the
effective date of designation constitute
authorizations issued after the effective
date of Sanctuary designation.
(f) Notwithstanding paragraphs (d)
and (e) of this section, in no event may
the Director issue a National Marine
Sanctuary permit under 15 CFR 922.48
and 922.133 or a Special Use permit
under section 310 of the Act
authorizing, or otherwise approve: the
exploration for, development, or
production of oil, gas, or minerals
within the Sanctuary, except for the
collection of jade pursuant to paragraph
(a)(1) of this section; the discharge of
primary-treated sewage within the
Sanctuary (except by certification,
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
70538
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
pursuant to 15 CFR 922.47, of valid
authorizations in existence on January
1, 1993 and issued by other authorities
of competent jurisdiction); or the
disposal of dredged material within the
Sanctuary other than at sites authorized
by EPA (in consultation with COE) prior
to January 1, 1993. Any purported
authorizations issued by other
authorities within the Sanctuary shall
be invalid.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
§ 922.133
Permit procedures and criteria.
(a) A person may conduct an activity
prohibited by § 922.132(a)(1) as it
pertains to jade collection in the
Sanctuary, § 922.132(a)(2) through (11),
and § 922.132(a)(13), if such activity is
specifically authorized by, and
conducted in accordance with the
scope, purpose, terms, and conditions
of, a permit issued under this section
and 15 CFR 922.48.
(b) The Director, at his or her sole
discretion, may issue a permit, subject
to terms and conditions as he or she
deems appropriate, to conduct an
activity prohibited by § 922.132(a)(1) as
it pertains to jade collection in the
Sanctuary, § 922.132(a)(2) through (11),
and § 922.132(a)(13), if the Director
finds that the activity will have at most
short-term and negligible adverse effects
on Sanctuary resources and qualities
and:
(1) Is research designed to further
understanding of Sanctuary resources
and qualities;
(2) Will further the educational,
natural, or historical value of the
Sanctuary;
(3) Will further salvage or recovery
operations within or near the Sanctuary
in connection with a recent air or
marine casualty;
(4) Will assist in managing the
Sanctuary;
(5) Will further salvage or recovery
operations in connection with an
abandoned shipwreck in the Sanctuary
title to which is held by the State of
California; or
(6) Will allow the removal, without
the use of pneumatic, mechanical,
electrical, hydraulic or explosive tools,
of loose jade from the Jade Cove area
under § 922.132(a)(1)(iv).
(c) In deciding whether to issue a
permit, the Director shall consider such
factors as:
(1) Will the activity be conducted by
an applicant that is professionally
qualified to conduct and complete the
activity;
(2) Will the activity be conducted by
an applicant with adequate financial
resources available to conduct and
complete the activity;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
(3) Is the activity proposed for no
longer than necessary to achieve its
stated purpose;
(4) Must the activity be conducted
within the Sanctuary;
(5) Will the activity be conducted
using methods and procedures that are
appropriate to achieve the goals of the
proposed activity, especially in relation
to the potential effects of the proposed
activity on Sanctuary resources and
qualities;
(6) Will the activity be conducted in
a manner compatible with the primary
objective of protection of Sanctuary
resources and qualities, considering the
extent to which the conduct of the
activity may diminish or enhance
Sanctuary resources and qualities, any
potential indirect, secondary, or
cumulative effects of the activity, and
the duration of such effects;
(7) Will the activity be conducted in
a manner compatible with the value of
the Sanctuary as a source of recreation
and as a source of educational and
scientific information, considering the
extent to which the conduct of the
activity may result in conflicts between
different users of the Sanctuary and the
duration of such effects; and
(8) Does the reasonably expected end
value of the activity to the furtherance
of the Sanctuary goals and objectives
outweigh any potential adverse effects
on Sanctuary resources and qualities
from the conduct of the activity.
(d) For jade collection, preference will
be given for applications proposing to
collect loose pieces of jade for research
or educational purposes.
(e) The Director may consider such
other factors as he or she deems
appropriate.
(f) Applications.
(1) Applications for permits should be
addressed to the Director, Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries; ATTN:
Superintendent, Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary, 299 Foam Street,
Monterey, CA 93940.
(2) In addition to the information
listed in 15 CFR 922.48(b), all
applications must include information
the Director needs to make the findings
in paragraph (b) of this section and
information to be considered by the
Director pursuant to paragraph (c) of
this section.
(g) In addition to any other terms and
conditions that the Director deems
appropriate, a permit issued pursuant to
this section must require that the
permittee agree to hold the United
States harmless against any claims
arising out of the conduct of the
permitted activities.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 922.134
Notification and review.
(a) [Reserved]
(b)(1) NOAA has entered into a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
with the State of California, EPA, and
the Association of Monterey Bay Area
Governments regarding the Sanctuary
regulations relating to water quality
within State waters within the
Sanctuary.
With regard to permits, the MOA
encompasses:
(i) National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits
issued by the State of California under
section 13377 of the California Water
Code; and
(ii) Waste Discharge Requirements
issued by the State of California under
section 13263 of the California Water
Code.
(2) The MOA specifies how the
process of 15 CFR 922.49 will be
administered within State waters within
the Sanctuary in coordination with the
State permit program.
Appendix A to Subpart M of Part 922—
Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
[Coordinates in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and are calculated using the North American
Datum of 1983]
Point ID No.
Latitude
Longitude
Seaward Boundary
1 ....................
2 ....................
3 ....................
4 ....................
5 ....................
6 ....................
7 ....................
8 ....................
9 ....................
10 ..................
11 ..................
12 ..................
13 ..................
14 ..................
15 ..................
16 ..................
17 ..................
18 ..................
19 ..................
20 ..................
21 ..................
22 ..................
23 ..................
24 ..................
25 ..................
26 ..................
27 ..................
28 ..................
29 ..................
30 ..................
31 ..................
32 ..................
33 ..................
34 ..................
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
37.88163
37.66641
37.61622
37.57147
37.52988
37.50948
37.49418
37.50819
37.52001
37.45304
37.34316
37.23062
37.13021
37.06295
37.03509
36.92155
36.80632
36.69192
36.57938
36.47338
36.37242
36.27887
36.19571
36.12414
36.06864
36.02451
35.99596
35.98309
35.98157
35.92933
35.83773
35.72063
35.59497
35.55327
¥122.62788
¥122.75105
¥122.76937
¥122.80399
¥122.85988
¥122.90614
¥123.00770
¥123.09617
¥123.12879
¥123.14009
¥123.13170
¥123.10431
¥123.02864
¥122.91261
¥122.77639
¥122.80595
¥122.81564
¥122.80539
¥122.77416
¥122.72568
¥122.65789
¥122.57410
¥122.47699
¥122.36527
¥122.24438
¥122.11672
¥121.98232
¥121.84069
¥121.75634
¥121.71119
¥121.71922
¥121.71216
¥121.69030
¥121.63048
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Point ID No.
35
36
37
38
39
Latitude
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Longitude
¥121.09803
¥122.52082
¥122.61673
¥122.65011
¥122.53048
35.55485
37.59437
37.61367
37.76694
37.81760
Point ID No.
Monterey Harbor/Wharf II Dredge Disposal
Site
Harbor Exclusions
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
37.49414
37.49540
36.96082
36.96143
36.80684
36.80133
36.60837
36.60580
¥122.48483
¥122.48576
¥122.00175
¥122.00112
¥121.79145
¥121.79047
¥121.88970
¥121.88965
Appendix B to Subpart M of Part 922—
Zones Within the Sanctuary Where
Overflights Below 1000 Feet are
Prohibited
The four zones are:
(1) From mean high water out to three
nautical miles (NM) between a line extending
from Point Santa Cruz on a southwesterly
heading bearing of 220° true and a line
extending from 2.0 nmi north of Pescadero
Point on a southwesterly heading bearing of
240° true;
(2) From mean high water out to three nmi
between a line extending from the Carmel
River mouth on a westerly heading bearing
of 270° true and a line extending due west
along latitude 35.55488° off of Cambria;
(3) From mean high water and within a five
nmi arc drawn from a center point at the end
of Moss Landing Pier as it appeared on the
most current NOAA nautical charts as of
January 1, 1993; and
(4) Over the waters of Elkhorn Slough east
of the Highway One bridge to Elkhorn Road.
Appendix C to Subpart M of Part 922—
Dredged Material Disposal Sites Within
the Sanctuary
[Coordinates in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and are calculated using the North American
Datum of 1983]
Point ID No.
Latitude
Longitude
Santa Cruz Harbor/Twin Lakes Dredge
Disposal Site
1
2
3
4
....................
....................
....................
....................
36.9625
36.9625
36.96139
36.96139
¥122.00056
¥121.99861
¥121.99833
¥122.00083
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
SF–12 Dredge Disposal Site
1
2
3
4
....................
....................
....................
....................
36.80207
36.80157
36.80172
36.80243
¥121.79207
¥121.79218
¥121.79325
¥121.79295
VerDate Aug<31>2005
36.79799
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
¥121.81907
Jkt 217001
....................
....................
....................
....................
36.60297
36.60283
36.60092
36.60120
Longitude
¥121.88942
¥121.88787
¥121.88827
¥121.88978
Appendix D to Subpart M of Part 922—
Dredged Material Disposal Sites
Adjacent to the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary
[Coordinates in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and are calculated using the North American
Datum of 1983]
As of January 1, 1993, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers operates the following dredged
material disposal site adjacent to the
Sanctuary off of the Golden Gate:
Point ID No.
1
2
3
4
5
Latitude
....................
....................
....................
....................
....................
37.76458
37.74963
37.74152
37.75677
37.76458
Longitude
¥122.56900
¥122.62281
¥122.61932
¥122.56482
¥122.56900
Appendix E to Subpart M of Part 922—
Motorized Personal Watercraft Zones
and Access Routes Within the
Sanctuary
[Coordinates in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and are calculated using the North American
Datum of 1983]
The five zones and access routes are:
(1) The approximately one [1.0] NM2 area
off Pillar Point Harbor from harbor launch
ramps, through harbor entrance to the
northern boundary of Zone One:
Point ID No.
Latitude
1 (flashing 5-second breakwater
entrance light
and horn located at the
seaward end of
the outer west
breakwater) .....
2 (bell buoy) ........
3 ..........................
4 ..........................
Longitude
1 ....................
2 ....................
3 ....................
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Point ID No.
4 ....................
37.49395
37.48167
37.48000
37.49333
¥122.48477
¥122.48333
¥122.46667
¥122.46667
Latitude
36.91667
36.91667
36.94167
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Longitude
¥122.03333
¥121.96667
¥121.96667
Latitude
36.94167
Longitude
¥122.03333
(3) The approximately six [6.0] NM2 area
off of Moss Landing Harbor from harbor
launch ramps, through harbor entrance, and
then along a 100 yard wide access route west
along a bearing of approximately 270° true
(255° magnetic) due west to the eastern
boundary of Zone Three bounded by:
Point ID No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
....................
....................
....................
....................
(bell buoy) ..
....................
Latitude
36.83333
36.83333
36.77833
36.77833
36.79833
36.81500
Longitude
¥121.82167
¥121.84667
¥121.84667
¥121.81667
¥121.80167
¥121.80333
(4) The approximately five [5.0] NM2 area
off of Monterey Harbor from harbor launch
ramps to the seaward end of the U.S. Coast
Guard Pier, and then along a 100 yard wide
access route due north to the southern
boundary of Zone Four bounded by:
Point ID No.
1
2
3
4
....................
....................
....................
....................
Latitude
36.64500
36.61500
36.63833
36.66667
Longitude
¥121.92333
¥121.87500
¥121.85500
¥121.90667
(5) The approximately one-tenth [0.10]
NM2 area near Pillar Point from Pillar Point
Harbor entrance along a 100 yard wide access
route southeast along a true bearing of
approximately 174° true (159° magnetic) to
the bell buoy (identified as ‘‘Buoy 3’’) at
37.48154 N, 122.48156 W and then along a
100 yard wide access route northwest along
a true bearing of approximately 284° true
(269° magnetic) to the gong buoy (identified
as ‘‘Buoy 1’’) at 37.48625 N, 122.50603 W,
the southwest boundary of Zone Five. Zone
Five exists only when a High Surf Warning
has been issued by the National Weather
Service and is in effect for San Mateo County
and only during December, January, and
February. Zone Five is bounded by:
Point ID No.
(2) The approximately five [5.0] NM2 area
off of Santa Cruz Small Craft Harbor from
harbor launch ramps, through harbor
entrance, and then along a 100 yard wide
access route southwest along a true bearing
of approximately 196° true (180° magnetic) to
the whistle buoy at 36.93833N, 122.01000 W.
Zone Two is bounded by:
Point ID No.
SF–14 Dredge Disposal Site
(circle with 500 yard radius)
1 ....................
1
2
3
4
Latitude
70539
1 (gong buoy
identified as
‘‘Buoy 1’’) ..
2 ....................
3 (sail rock) ...
4 ....................
Latitude
37.48625
37.49305
37.49305
37.48625
Longitude
¥122.50603
¥122.50603
¥122.50105
¥122.50105
Appendix F to Subpart M of Part 922—
Davidson Seamount Management Zone
[Coordinates in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and are calculated using the North American
Datum of 1983]
Point ID No.
1 ....................
2 ....................
3 ....................
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Latitude
35.90000
35.90000
35.50000
Longitude
¥123.00000
¥122.50000
¥122.50000
70540
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Point ID No.
4 ....................
Latitude
35.50000
Longitude
¥123.00000
[FR Doc. E8–27220 Filed 11–19–08; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES3
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 19, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20NOR3.SGM
20NOR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 225 (Thursday, November 20, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70488-70540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27220]
[[Page 70487]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
15 CFR Part 922
Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Regulations; Monterey
Bay National Marine Sanctuary Regulations; and Cordell Bank National
Marine Sanctuary Regulations; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 225 / Thursday, November 20, 2008 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 70488]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 080302355-81415-02]
RINs 0648-AT14, 0648-AT15, 0648-AT16
Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Regulations;
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Regulations; and Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuary Regulations
AGENCY: National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is
issuing final revised management plans and revised regulations for the
Gulf of the Farallones, Cordell Bank, and Monterey Bay national marine
sanctuaries (GFNMS, CBNMS, and MBNMS respectively). This final rule
updates the existing regulations for these three sanctuaries and
establishes new regulatory prohibitions for them. New prohibitions
contained in this final rule include restrictions on: the introduction
of introduced species; discharges from cruise ships and other vessels;
attracting or approaching white sharks in GFNMS; anchoring vessels in
seagrass in Tomales Bay; deserting vessels; motorized personal
watercraft use in the MBNMS (definition revision); and, possessing,
moving, or injuring historic resources. This final rule also codifies
three dredge disposal sites in the MBNMS that existed prior to the
MBNMS designation in 1992 and expands the boundaries of the MBNMS to
include the Davidson Seamount and surrounding area.
DATES: Effective Date: Pursuant to section 304(b) of the National
Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C. 1434(b)), the revised
designations and regulations shall take effect and become final after
the close of a review period of forty-five days of continuous session
of Congress beginning on November 20, 2008. Announcement of the
effective date of the final regulations will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final management plans and final environmental
impact statement and the record of decision are available upon request
to NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, 1305 East-West
Highway, N/NMS, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Copies are also available on
the Web at https://www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Armor, NOAA Office of National
Marine Sanctuaries, 301-713-7234.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Pursuant to section 304(e) of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act
(16 U.S.C. 1434 et seq.) (NMSA), the National Marine Sanctuary Program
(NMSP)\1\ conducted a review of the management plans for the GFNMS,
CBNMS, and MBNMS. The review resulted in revised management plans for
the sanctuaries, revisions to existing regulations (including new
regulatory prohibitions), and changes to the terms of designation for
each sanctuary. On October 6, 2006, NOAA issued notices of availability
of the DMPs and DEIS, and published the associated proposed rules.
(GFNMS, 71 FR 59338; CBNMS, 71 FR 59039; and MBNMS, 71 FR 59050). On
March 27, 2008, NOAA published a supplemental proposed rule relating to
discharges from vessels 300 gross registered tons or more in the three
sanctuaries (73 FR 16224). This final rule publishes the response to
comments on the proposed rule and the final regulations for the GFNMS,
CBNMS, and MBNMS, and announces the availability of the final revised
management plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The National Marine Sanctuary Program was recently elevated
to an ``Office'' level within NOAA's National Ocean Service (NOS).
Therefore, the official name of the operating unit within NOAA that
implements the National Marine Sanctuaries Act is now the National
Ocean Service Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. However, to
minimize confusion that might be created by using different
operating unit names between proposed rule and final rule, we have
chosen to use National Marine Sanctuary Program and its associated
acronym NMSP in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. GFNMS Background
NOAA established the GFNMS in 1981 to protect and preserve a unique
and fragile ecological community, including the largest seabird colony
in the contiguous United States and diverse and abundant marine
mammals. The GFNMS lies off the coast of California, to the west and
north of San Francisco. The GFNMS is composed of 1,279 square statute
miles (966 square nautical miles) of offshore waters extending out to
and around the Farallon Islands and nearshore waters (up to the mean
high tide line) from Bodega Head to Rocky Point in Marin. The GFNMS is
characterized by the widest continental shelf on the west coast of the
contiguous United States. In the Gulf of the Farallones, the shelf
reaches a width of 37 statute miles (32 nmi). Shoreward of the Farallon
Islands, the continental shelf is a relatively flat sandy/muddy plain,
which slopes gently to the west and north from the mainland shoreline.
The Farallon Islands lie along the outer edge of the continental shelf,
between 15 and 22 statute miles (13 and 19 nmi) southwest of Point
Reyes and approximately 30 statute miles (26 nmi) due west of San
Francisco. In addition to sandy beaches, rocky cliffs, small coves, and
offshore stacks, the GFNMS includes open bays (Bodega Bay, Drakes Bay)
and enclosed bays or estuaries (Bolinas Lagoon, Tomales Bay, Estero
Americano, and Estero de San Antonio).
B. CBNMS Background
NOAA established the CBNMS in 1989 to protect and preserve the
extraordinary ecosystem, including marine birds, mammals, and other
natural resources of Cordell Bank and its surrounding waters. The CBNMS
protects an area of 529 square statute miles (399 square nautical
miles) off the northern California coast. The main feature of the
sanctuary is Cordell Bank, an offshore granite bank located on the edge
of the continental shelf, about 43 nautical miles (nmi) northwest of
the Golden Gate Bridge and 23 statute miles (20 nmi) west of the Point
Reyes lighthouse. The CBNMS is entirely offshore and shares its
southern and eastern boundary with the GFNMS. The CBNMS eastern
boundary is six miles from shore and the western boundary is the 1000
fathom isobath on the edge of the continental slope. The CBNMS is
located in one of the world's four major coastal upwelling systems. The
combination of oceanic conditions and undersea topography provides for
a highly productive environment in a discrete, well-defined area. The
vertical relief and hard substrate of the Bank provide benthic habitat
with near-shore characteristics in an open ocean environment 23 statute
miles (20 nmi) from shore.
C. MBNMS Background
NOAA established the MBNMS in 1992 for the purposes of protecting
and managing the conservation, ecological, recreational, research,
educational, historical, and esthetic resources and qualities of the
area. The MBNMS is located offshore of California's central coast,
adjacent to and south of the GFNMS. It encompasses a shoreline length
of approximately 276 statute miles (240 nmi) between Marin Rocky Pt. in
Marin County and Cambria in San Luis Obispo County and, with the
inclusion of the Davidson Seamount,
[[Page 70489]]
approximately 6,094 square statute miles (4,602 square nautical miles)
of ocean and coastal waters, and the submerged lands thereunder,
extending an average distance of 30 statute miles (26 nmi) from shore.
Supporting some of the world's most diverse marine ecosystems, it is
home to numerous mammals, seabirds, fishes, invertebrates, sea turtles
and plants in a remarkably productive coastal environment.
II. Revisions to Sanctuary Terms of Designation
Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434(a)(4)) requires that,
in designating national marine sanctuaries, NOAA specify the
sanctuary's ``terms of designation.'' The NMSA requires that each
sanctuary's terms of designation include:
1. The geographic area proposed to be included within the
sanctuary;
2. The characteristics of the area that give it conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational, or
esthetic value; and
3. The types of activities that will be subject to regulation by
the Secretary of Commerce to protect those characteristics.
The NMSA further requires that terms of designation be modified
only by following the same procedures for designating the sanctuary.
Following the extensive public process for reviewing the management
plans for the sanctuaries, NOAA determined that revisions to all three
sanctuaries' terms of designation are necessary to ensure they continue
to reflect current management priorities. The sections below describe
the changes NOAA is making to each sanctuary's terms of designation and
provide a printed version of each (as modified) in its entirety.
A. Revisions to the GFNMS Terms of Designation
NOAA is revising the GFNMS terms of designation to:
Clarify that submerged lands are part of the GFNMS;
Revise the description of activities that may be regulated
to include additional activities; and
Make minor updates to ensure the text reflects the current
text of the NMSA and to ensure its description of the area is current.
1. Submerged Lands
NOAA is clarifying that the submerged lands of GFNMS are legally
part of the sanctuary and included in the boundary description. At the
time the sanctuary was designated in 1981, Title III of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (now also known as the NMSA)
characterized national marine sanctuaries as consisting of coastal and
ocean waters but did not expressly mention submerged lands thereunder.
NOAA has consistently interpreted its authority under the NMSA as
extending to submerged lands, and amendments to the NMSA in 1984 (Pub.
L. 98-498) clarified that submerged lands may be designated by the
Secretary of Commerce as part of a national marine sanctuary (16 U.S.C.
1432(3)). Therefore, NOAA is modifying the GFNMS terms of designation
and the boundary description to replace the term ``seabed'' with
``submerged lands.'' Additionally, boundary coordinates in the revised
terms of designation and in the sanctuary regulations are expressed by
coordinates based on the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is also revising the GFNMS terms of designation to modify the
list of activities that may be regulated. The revised terms of
designation now also authorize regulation of: discharging or depositing
from beyond the boundary of the sanctuary; activities regarding
cultural or historical resources; taking or possessing any marine
mammal, sea turtle, or bird within or above the Sanctuary except as
authorized by the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered Species Act,
and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act; introducing or otherwise releasing
from within or into the sanctuary an introduced species; attracting or
approaching any animal; and operating a vessel (i.e., watercraft of any
description) within the sanctuary, including but not limited to,
anchoring or deserting a vessel. These revisions will enable NOAA to
more effectively and efficiently address new and emerging resource
management issues, and are necessary in order to ensure protection,
preservation, and management of the conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, cultural, educational, archeological,
scientific, and esthetic resources and qualities of the GFNMS. Finally,
a technical correction is being made to Article V to delete the phrase
``and in Article IV'' from the statement that ``fishing'' includes
mariculture.\2\ The term ``fishing'' does not appear in Article IV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Throughout this document, the term ``mariculture'' means the
same as ``marine aquaculture.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the GFNMS terms of designation to provide:
an updated and more complete description of characteristics that give
the sanctuary particular value; greater clarity on the applicability of
sanctuary emergency regulations (and consistency with the National
Marine Sanctuary Program regulations of general applicability, 15 CFR
Part 922, Subpart E); an updated explanation of the effect of Sanctuary
authority on preexisting leases, permits, licenses, and rights; and
various minor revisions to conform wording of the Designation Document,
where appropriate, to wording used for more recently designated
sanctuaries. In Article V (Relation to Other Regulatory Programs), the
``Fishing and Waterfowl Hunting'' section is revised to clarify the
original intent that, although the Sanctuary does not have authority to
regulate fishing, fishing vessels may be regulated with respect to
activities such as discharge/deposit and anchoring in accordance with
Article IV. No changes are made to the ``Defense Activities'' section
of the Designation Document.
An additional change to the terms of designation updates Article VI
regarding the process to modify the terms of designation. This change
deletes the requirement that modifications must be approved by the
President of the United States and replaces it with a requirement that
changes be approved by the Secretary of Commerce or his or her
designee. This change is consistent with amendments to the NMSA enacted
after the sanctuary was designated in 1981.
The revised terms of designation printed below replace the current
terms of designation first printed in the Federal Register on January
26, 1981 (46 FR 7936).
REVISED DESIGNATION DOCUMENT FOR GULF OF THE FARALLONES NATIONAL MARINE
SANCTUARY
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the Marine Protection, Research
and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, Public Law 92-532 (the Act), the waters
and submerged lands along the Coast of California north and south of
Point Reyes Headlands, between Bodega Head and Rocky Point and
surrounding the Farallon Islands, are hereby designated a National
Marine Sanctuary for the purposes of preserving and protecting this
unique and fragile ecological community.
Article I. Effect of Designation
Within the area designated in 1981 as The Point Reyes/Farallon
Islands
[[Page 70490]]
National Marine Sanctuary (the Sanctuary) described in Article II, the
Act authorizes the promulgation of such regulations as are reasonable
and necessary to protect the values of the Sanctuary. Section 1 of
Article IV of this Designation Document lists activities of the types
that are either to be regulated on the effective date of final
rulemaking or may have to be regulated at some later date in order to
protect Sanctuary resources and qualities. Listing does not necessarily
mean that a type of activity will be regulated; however, if a type of
activity is not listed it may not be regulated, except on an emergency
basis, unless section 1 of Article IV is amended to include the type of
activity by the same procedures by which the original designation was
made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of an area of the waters and the submerged
lands thereunder adjacent to the coast of California of approximately
966 square nautical miles (nmi), extending seaward to a distance of 6
nmi from the mainland from Point Reyes to Bodega Bay and 12 nmi west
from the Farallon Islands and Noonday Rock, and including the
intervening waters and submerged lands. The precise boundaries are
defined by regulation.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area That Give It Particular Value
The Sanctuary includes a rich and diverse marine ecosystem and a
wide variety of marine habitats, including habitat for over 36 species
of marine mammals. Rookeries for over half of California's nesting
marine bird populations and nesting areas for at least 12 of 16 known
U.S. nesting marine bird species are found within the boundaries.
Abundant populations of fish and shellfish are also found within the
Sanctuary. The Sanctuary also has one of the largest seasonal
concentrations of white sharks (Carcharodon carcharias) in the world.
Article IV. Scope of Regulation
Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation
The following activities are subject to regulation, including
prohibition, as may be necessary to ensure the management, protection,
and preservation of the conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, cultural, archeological, scientific, educational, and
aesthetic resources and qualities of this area:
a. Hydrocarbon operations;
b. Discharging or depositing any substance within or from beyond
the boundary of the Sanctuary;
c. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise altering the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or abandoning any
structure, material, or other matter on or in the submerged lands of
the Sanctuary;
d. Activities regarding cultural or historical resources;
e. Introducing or otherwise releasing from within or into the
Sanctuary an introduced species;
f. Taking or possessing any marine mammal, marine reptile, or bird
within or above the Sanctuary except as permitted by the Marine Mammal
Protection Act, Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act;
g. Attracting or approaching any animal; and
h. Operating a vessel (i.e., watercraft of any description) within
the Sanctuary.
Section 2. Consistency With International Law
The regulations governing the activities listed in section 1 of
this Article will apply to foreign flag vessels and persons not
citizens of the United States only to the extent consistent with
recognized principles of international law, including treaties and
international agreements to which the United States is signatory.
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of, loss of,
or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality, or minimize the imminent
risk of such destruction, loss, or injury, any and all activities,
including those not listed in section 1 of this Article, are subject to
immediate temporary regulation, including prohibition.
Article V. Relation to Other Regulatory Programs
Section 1. Fishing and Waterfowl Hunting
The regulation of fishing, including fishing for shellfish and
invertebrates, and waterfowl hunting, is not authorized under Article
IV. However, fishing vessels may be regulated with respect to vessel
operations in accordance with Article IV, section 1, paragraphs (b) and
(h), and mariculture activities involving alterations of or
construction on the seabed, or release of introduced species by
mariculture activities not covered by a valid lease from the State of
California and in effect on the effective date of the final regulation,
can be regulated in accordance with Article IV, section 1, paragraph
(c) and (e). All regulatory programs pertaining to fishing, and to
waterfowl hunting, including regulations promulgated under the
California Fish and Game Code and Fishery Management Plans promulgated
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. 1801 et seq., will remain in effect, and all permits, licenses,
and other authorizations issued pursuant thereto will be valid within
the Sanctuary unless authorizing any activity prohibited by any
regulation implementing Article IV.
The term ``fishing'' as used in this Article includes mariculture.
Section 2. Defense Activities
The regulation of activities listed in Article IV shall not
prohibit any Department of Defense activity that is essential for
national defense or because of emergency. Such activities shall be
consistent with the regulations to the maximum extent practicable.
Section 3. Other Programs
All applicable regulatory programs will remain in effect, and all
permits, licenses, and other authorizations issued pursuant thereto
will be valid within the Sanctuary unless prohibited by regulations
implementing Article IV. The Sanctuary regulations will set forth any
necessary certification procedures.
Article VI. Alterations to This Designation
The terms of designation, as defined under section 304(a) of the
Act, may be modified only by the same procedures by which the original
designation is made, including public hearings, consultation with
interested Federal, State, and local agencies, review by the
appropriate Congressional committees and Governor of the State of
California, and approval by the Secretary of Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
B. Revisions to the CBNMS Terms of Designation
NOAA is revising the CBNMS terms of designation to:
Clarify that submerged lands are a part of the CBNMS;
Revise the description of activities that may be regulated
to include additional activities;
Make minor updates to ensure the text reflects the current
text of the NMSA and to ensure its description of the area is current.
1. Submerged Lands
NOAA is clarifying that the submerged lands of the CBNMS are
legally part of the sanctuary and are included in the boundary
description.
[[Page 70491]]
At the time the sanctuary was designated in 1989, Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (now also known as the
National Marine Sanctuaries Act) characterized national marine
sanctuaries as consisting of coastal, marine and ocean waters but did
not expressly mention submerged lands thereunder. NOAA has consistently
interpreted its authority under the NMSA as extending to submerged
lands, and amendments to the NMSA in 1984 (Pub. L. 98-498) clarified
that submerged lands may be designated by the Secretary of Commerce as
part of a national marine sanctuary (16 U.S.C. 1432(3)). Therefore, to
be consistent with the NMSA, NOAA is updating the terms of designation
and the boundary description, by adding ``submerged lands thereunder''
to the term ``marine waters.'' Additionally, boundary coordinates in
the revised Designation Document and in the sanctuary regulations will
be expressed by coordinates based on the North American Datum of 1983
(NAD 83).
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is revising the CBNMS terms of designation to modify the list
of activities that may be regulated. The revised terms of designation
now also authorize regulation of: activities regarding cultural or
historic resources; placing or abandoning any structure, material, or
other matter on or in the submerged lands of the Sanctuary; taking or
possessing any marine mammal, sea turtle, or bird; introducing or
otherwise releasing an introduced species from within or into the
Sanctuary; and drilling into, dredging, altering, or constructing on
the submerged lands.
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the CBNMS terms of designation to provide:
an updated and more complete description of characteristics that give
the Sanctuary particular value; an updated explanation of the effect of
Sanctuary authority on preexisting leases, permits, licenses, and
rights; and various minor revisions in order to conform wording of the
Designation Document, where appropriate, to wording used for more
recently designated sanctuaries.
In Article V (Relation to Other Regulatory Programs), the
``Fishing'' section is revised to clarify the original intent that,
although the Sanctuary does not have authority to regulate fishing,
fishing vessels may be regulated with respect to discharge/deposit and
anchoring in accordance with Article IV. No changes are being made to
the ``Defense Activities'' section of the Designation Document.
Revised Designation Document for the Cordell Bank National Marine
Sanctuary
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1431 et
seq. (the ``Act''), the Cordell Bank and its surrounding waters
offshore northern California, as described in Article 2, are hereby
designated as the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary (the
Sanctuary) for the purpose of protecting and conserving that special,
discrete, highly productive marine area and ensuring the continued
availability of the conservation, ecological, research, educational,
aesthetic, historical, and recreational resources therein.
Article I. Effect of Designation
The Sanctuary was designated on May 24, 1989 (54 FR 22417). Section
308 of the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.
(NMSA), authorizes the issuance of such regulations as are necessary to
implement the designation, including managing, protecting and
conserving the conservation, recreational, ecological, historical,
cultural, archeological, scientific, educational, and aesthetic
resources and qualities of the Sanctuary. Section 1 of Article IV of
this Designation Document lists activities of the types that are either
to be regulated on the effective date of final rulemaking or may have
to be regulated at some later date in order to protect Sanctuary
resources and qualities. Listing does not necessarily mean that a type
of activity will be regulated; however, if a type of activity is not
listed it may not be regulated, except on an emergency basis, unless
Section 1 of Article IV is amended to include the type of activity by
the same procedures by which the original designation was made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of a 399 square nautical mile area of marine
waters and the submerged lands thereunder encompassed by a boundary
extending approximately 250[deg] from the northernmost boundary of Gulf
of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS) to the 1,000 fathom
isobath northwest of the Bank, then south along this isobath to the
GFNMS boundary and back to the northeast along this boundary to the
beginning point. The precise boundaries are set forth in the
regulations.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area That Give It Particular Value
Cordell Bank is characterized by a combination of oceanic
conditions and undersea topography that provides for a highly
productive environment in a discrete, well-defined area. In addition,
the Bank and its surrounding waters may contain historical resources of
national significance. The Bank consists of a series of steep-sided
ridges and narrow pinnacles rising from the edge of the continental
shelf. It lies on a plateau 300 to 400 feet (91 to 122 meters) deep and
ascends to within about 115 feet (35 meters) of the surface at its
shallowest point. The seasonal upwelling of nutrient-rich bottom waters
and wide depth ranges in the vicinity, have led to a unique association
of subtidal and oceanic species. The vigorous biological community
flourishing at Cordell Bank includes an exceptional assortment of
algae, invertebrates, fishes, marine mammals and seabirds.
Article IV. Scope of Regulation
Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation
The following activities are subject to regulation, including
prohibition, as may be necessary to ensure the management, protection,
and preservation of the conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, cultural, archeological, scientific, educational, and
aesthetic resources and qualities of this area:
a. Depositing or discharging any material or substance;
b. Removing, taking, or injuring or attempting to remove, take, or
injure benthic invertebrates or algae located on the Bank or on or
within the line representing the 50 fathom isobath surrounding the
Bank;
c. Hydrocarbon (oil and gas) activities within the Sanctuary;
d. Anchoring on the Bank or on or within the line representing the
50 fathom isobath surrounding the Bank;
e. Activities regarding cultural or historical resources;
f. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise altering the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or abandoning any
structure, material, or other matter on or in the submerged lands of
the Sanctuary;
g. Taking or possessing any marine mammal, marine reptile, or bird
except as permitted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, Endangered
Species Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act; and
h. Introducing or otherwise releasing from within or into the
Sanctuary an introduced species.
[[Page 70492]]
Section 2. Consistency With International Law
The regulations governing activities listed in Section 1 of this
Article shall apply to foreign flag vessels and foreign persons only to
the extent consistent with generally recognized principles of
international law, and in accordance with treaties, conventions, and
other agreements to which the United States is a party.
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of, loss of,
or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality, or minimize the imminent
risk of such destruction, loss, or injury, any and all activities,
including those not listed in Section 1 of this Article, are subject to
immediate temporary regulation, including prohibition, within the
limits of the Act on an emergency basis for a period not to exceed 120
days.
Article V. Relation to Other Regulatory Programs
Section 1. Fishing
The regulation of fishing is not authorized under Article IV. All
regulatory programs pertaining to fishing, including Fishery Management
Plans promulgated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. (``Magnuson-Stevens Act''),
shall remain in effect. All permits, licenses, approvals, and other
authorizations issued pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Act shall be
valid within the Sanctuary. However, all fishing vessels are subject to
regulation under Article IV with respect to discharges and anchoring.
Section 2. Defense Activities
The regulation of activities listed in Article IV shall not
prohibit any Department of Defense (DOD) activities that are necessary
for national defense. All such activities being carried out by DOD
within the Sanctuary on the effective date of designation shall be
exempt from any prohibitions contained in the Sanctuary regulations.
Additional DOD activities initiated after the effective date of
designation that are necessary for national defense will be exempted
after consultation between the Department of Commerce and DOD. DOD
activities not necessary for national defense, such as routine
exercises and vessel operations, shall be subject to all prohibitions
contained in the Sanctuary regulations.
Section 3. Other Programs
All applicable regulatory programs shall remain in effect, and all
permits, licenses, approvals, and other authorizations issued pursuant
to those programs shall be valid unless prohibited by regulations
implementing Article IV.
Article VI. Alterations to This Designation
The terms of designation, as defined under section 304(a) of the
Act, may be modified only by the same procedures by which the original
designation is made, including public hearings, consultation with
interested Federal, State, and local agencies, review by the
appropriate Congressional committees and Governor of the State of
California, and approval by the Secretary of Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
C. Revisions to the MBNMS Terms of Designation
NOAA is revising the MBNMS terms of designation to:
Add Davidson Seamount Management Zone;
Revise the description of activities that may be regulated
to include additional activities; and
Make minor updates to ensure the text reflects the current
text of the NMSA and to ensure its description of the area is current.
1. Add Davidson Seamount Management Zone
NOAA is amending the MBNMS boundary description to include the
Davidson Seamount Management Zone, a 775 square statute mile (585
square nautical mile) area defined by the geodetic lines connecting the
coordinates provided in Appendix F to this subpart. The Davidson
Seamount is located approximately 80 statute miles (70 nmi) to the
southwest of Monterey, due west of San Simeon, and is home to a diverse
assemblage of deep water organisms. This highly diverse community
includes many endemic species and fragile, long-lived cold-water corals
and sponges. NOAA also updates Article III, Characteristics of the Area
that Give it Particular Value to include a discussion of the Davidson
Seamount Management Zone.
2. List of Regulated Activities
NOAA is revising the MBNMS terms of designation to modify the list
of activities that may be regulated. A priority issue identified during
the management plan review was addressing the threat posed by
introduced species. One of the recommended strategies for addressing
this issue was to develop regulations prohibiting such releases. In
addition, NOAA modifies the terms of designation to authorize
regulation of the possession of a Sanctuary historical resource
wherever the resource is found. The existing designation document
currently lists as subject to regulation ``possessing within the
Sanctuary a Sanctuary resource * * * ''. NOAA is making clear that a
prohibition against possession of Sanctuary historical resources would
apply outside the Sanctuary boundaries (e.g., at a harbor).
With these changes, the revised terms of designation now authorize
regulation of: Activities regarding cultural or historic resources;
placing or abandoning any structure, material, or other matter on or in
the submerged lands of the Sanctuary; taking or possessing any marine
mammal, sea turtle, or bird; introducing or otherwise releasing an
introduced species from within or into the Sanctuary; and drilling
into, dredging, altering, or constructing on the submerged lands.
3. Updates
NOAA is also modifying the MBNMS terms of designation to make minor
punctuation improvements and to delete Appendices I and II of the MBNMS
Designation Document and refer to the site regulations for sanctuary
seaward boundaries and the location of four sites designated for
disposal of dredged material. NOAA is also deleting outdated language
related to study areas for dredged material disposal sites outside the
MBNMS boundaries.
REVISED TERMS OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT FOR THE MONTEREY BAY NATIONAL
MARINE SANCTUARY
Preamble
Under the authority of Title III of the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended (the ``Act''), 16
U.S.C. 1431 et seq., Monterey Bay and the Davidson Seamount, and their
surrounding waters offshore of central California, and the submerged
lands under Monterey Bay and its surrounding waters, as described in
Article II, and the Davidson Seamount Management Zone, as described in
Article II, are hereby designated as the Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary (the Sanctuary) for the purposes of protecting and managing
the conservation, ecological, recreational, research, educational,
historical, and
[[Page 70493]]
esthetic resources and qualities of the area.
Article I. Effect of Designation
The Act authorizes the issuance of such regulations as are
necessary and reasonable to implement the designation, including
managing and protecting the conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, research, educational, and esthetic resources and qualities
of the Sanctuary. Section 1 of Article IV of this Designation Document
lists activities of the types that either are to be regulated on the
effective date of designation or may have to be regulated at some later
date in order to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities. Listing
does not necessarily mean that a type of activity will be regulated;
however, if a type of activity is not listed it may not be regulated,
except on an emergency basis, unless section 1 of Article IV is amended
to include the type of activity by the same procedures by which the
original designation was made.
Article II. Description of the Area
The Sanctuary consists of two separate areas. (a) The first area
consists of an area of approximately 4017 square nautical miles (nmi)
of coastal and ocean waters, and submerged lands thereunder, in and
surrounding Monterey Bay off the central coast of California. The
northern terminus of the Sanctuary boundary is located along the
southern boundary of the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine
Sanctuary (GFNMS) beginning at Rocky Point just south of Stinson Beach
in Marin County. The Sanctuary boundary follows the GFNMS boundary
westward to a point approximately 29 nmi offshore from Moss Beach in
San Mateo County. The Sanctuary boundary then extends southward in a
series of arcs, which generally follow the 500 fathom isobath, to a
point approximately 27 nmi offshore of Cambria, in San Luis Obispo
County. The Sanctuary boundary then extends eastward towards shore
until it intersects the Mean High Water Line (MHWL) along the coast
near Cambria. The Sanctuary boundary then follows the MHWL northward to
the northern terminus at Rocky Point. The shoreward Sanctuary boundary
excludes a small area between Point Bonita and Point San Pedro. Pillar
Point Harbor, Santa Cruz Harbor, Monterey Harbor, and Moss Landing
Harbor are all excluded from the Sanctuary shoreward from the points
listed in Appendix A of the site regulations except for Moss Landing
Harbor, where all of Elkhorn Slough east of the Highway One bridge, and
west of the tide gate at Elkhorn Road and toward the center channel
from the MHWL is included within the Sanctuary, excluding areas within
the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve. Exact
coordinates for the seaward boundary and harbor exclusions are provided
in Appendix A of the site regulations.
(b) The Davidson Seamount Management Zone (DSMZ) is also part of
the Sanctuary. This area, bounded by geodetic lines connecting a
rectangle centered on the top of the Davidson Seamount, consists of
approximately 585 square nmi of ocean waters and the submerged lands
thereunder. The shoreward boundary of this portion of the Sanctuary is
located approximately 65 nmi off the coast of San Simeon in San Luis
Obispo County. Exact coordinates for the DSMZ boundary are provided in
Appendix F of the site regulations.
Article III. Characteristics of the Area That Give It Particular Value
The Monterey Bay area is characterized by a combination of oceanic
conditions and undersea topography that provides for a highly
productive ecosystem and a wide variety of marine habitat. The area is
characterized by a narrow continental shelf fringed by a variety of
coastal types. The Monterey Submarine Canyon is unique in its size,
configuration, and proximity to shore. This canyon system provides
habitat for pelagic communities and, along with other distinct
bathymetric features, may modify currents and act to enrich local
waters through strong seasonal upwelling. Monterey Bay itself is a rare
geological feature, as it is one of the few large embayments along the
Pacific coast.
The Monterey Bay area has a highly diverse floral and faunal
component. Algal diversity is extremely high and the concentrations of
pinnipeds, whales, otters and some seabird species are outstanding. The
fish populations, particularly in Monterey Bay, are generally abundant
and the variety of crustaceans and other invertebrates is high.
In addition there are many direct and indirect human uses of the
area. The most important economic activity directly dependent on the
resources is commercial fishing, which has played an important role in
the history of Monterey Bay and continues to be of great economic
value.
The diverse resources of the Monterey Bay area are enjoyed by the
residents of this area as well as numerous visitors. The population of
Monterey and Santa Cruz counties is rapidly expanding and is based in
large part on the attractiveness of the area's natural beauty. The high
water quality and the resulting variety of biota and their proximity to
shore is one of the prime reasons for the international renown of the
area as a prime tourist location. The quality and abundance of the
natural resources have attracted human beings from the earliest
prehistoric times to the present and as a result the area contains
significant historical, e.g., archaeological and paleontological,
resources, such as Costanoan Indian midden deposits, aboriginal
remains, and sunken ships and aircraft.
The biological and physical characteristics of the Monterey Bay
area combine to provide outstanding opportunities for scientific
research on many aspects of marine ecosystems. The diverse habitats are
readily accessible to researchers. These research institutions are
exceptional resources with a long history of research and large
databases possessing a considerable amount of baseline information on
the Bay and its resources, providing interpretive exhibits of the
marine environment, docent programs serving the public and marine
related programs for school groups and teachers.
The Davidson Seamount located offshore of California, 70 nmi
southwest of Monterey, due west of San Simeon, and is one of the
largest known seamounts in U.S. waters. Davidson Seamount is twenty-six
statute miles long and eight statute miles wide. From base to crest,
Davidson Seamount is 7,480 feet (2,280 meters) tall; yet still 4,101
feet (1,250 meters) below the sea surface. Davidson Seamount has an
atypical seamount shape, having northeast-trending ridges created by a
type of volcanism only recently described. It last erupted about 12
million years ago. This large geographic feature was the first
underwater formation to be characterized as a ``seamount'' and was
named after the Coast and Geodetic Survey (forerunner to the National
Ocean Service) scientist George Davidson. Davidson Seamount's
geographical importance is due to its location in the California
Current, which likely provides a larger flux of carbon (food) to the
sessile organisms on the seamount surface relative to a majority of
other seamounts in the Pacific and may have unique links to the nearby
Partington and Monterey submarine canyons.
The surface water habitat of the Davidson Seamount hosts a variety
of seabirds, marine mammals, and pelagic fishes, e.g., albatrosses,
shearwaters, sperm whales, killer whales, albacore
[[Page 70494]]
tuna, and ocean sunfish. Organisms in the midwater habitat have a
patchy distribution, e.g., jellies and swimming worms, with marine
snow, organic matter that continually ``rains'' down from the sea
surface, providing an important food source for deep-sea animals. The
seamount crest habitat is the most diverse of habitats in the Davidson
Seamount area, including large gorgonian coral (e.g., Paragorgia sp.)
forests, vast sponge fields (many undescribed species), crabs, deep-sea
fishes, shrimp, and basket stars. The seamount slope habitat is
composed of cobble and rocky areas interspersed with areas of ash and
sediment, and hosts a diverse assemblage of sessile invertebrates and
rare deep-sea fishes. The seamount base habitat is the interface
between rocky outcrops and the flat, deep soft bottom habitat.
Davidson Seamount is home to previously undiscovered species and
species assemblages, such as large patches of corals and sponges, where
there is an opportunity to discover unique associations between species
and other ecological processes. The high biological diversity of these
assemblages has not been found on other California seamounts. Davidson
Seamount's importance for conservation revolves around the endemism of
seamount species, potential future harvest damage to coral and sponge
assemblages, and the low resilience of these species. Abundant and
large, fragile species (e.g., corals greater than eight feet tall, and
at least 200 years old, as well as vast fields of sponges) and a
physically undisturbed seafloor appear relatively pristine.
The final environmental impact statements (1992 and 2008) provide
more detail on the characteristics of the Monterey Bay and Davidson
Seamount area that give it particular value.
Article IV. Scope of Regulations
Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation
The following activities are subject to regulation, including
prohibition, to the extent necessary and reasonable to ensure the
protection and management of the conservation, ecological,
recreational, research, educational, historical, and esthetic resources
and qualities of the Sanctuary:
a. Exploring for, developing, or producing oil, gas, or minerals
(e.g., clay, stone, sand, metalliferous ores, gravel, non-metalliferous
ores, or any other solid material or other matter of commercial value)
within the Sanctuary;
b. Discharging or depositing, from within the boundary of the
Sanctuary, any material or other matter, except dredged material
deposited at disposal sites authorized prior to the effective date of
Sanctuary designation, as described in Appendix C to the regulations,
provided that the activity is pursuant to, and complies with the terms
and conditions of, a valid Federal permit or approval existing on the
effective date of Sanctuary designation;
c. Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundary of the
Sanctuary, any material or other matter, except dredged material
deposited at the authorized disposal sites described in Appendix D to
the site regulations, provided that the activity is pursuant to, and
complies with the terms and conditions of, a valid Federal permit or
approval;
d. Taking, removing, moving, catching, collecting, harvesting,
feeding, injuring, destroying, or causing the loss of, or attempting to
take, remove, move, catch, collect, harvest, feed, injure, destroy, or
cause the loss of, a marine mammal, sea turtle, seabird, historical
resource, or other Sanctuary resource;
e. Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise altering the submerged
lands of the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing, or abandoning any
structure, material, or other matter on or in the submerged lands of
the Sanctuary;
f. Possessing within the Sanctuary a Sanctuary resource or any
other resource, regardless of where taken, removed, moved, caught,
collected, or harvested, that, if it had been found within the
Sanctuary, would be a Sanctuary resource;
g. Possessing any Sanctuary historical resource;
h. Flying a motorized aircraft above the Sanctuary;
i. Operating a vessel (i.e., water craft of any description) within
the Sanctuary;
j. Aquaculture or kelp harvesting within the Sanctuary;
k. Interfering with, obstructing, delaying, or preventing an
investigation, search, seizure, or disposition of seized property in
connection with enforcement of the Act or any regulation or permit
issued under the Act; and
l. Introducing or otherwise releasing from within or into the
Sanctuary an introduced species.
Section 2. Emergencies
Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of, loss of,
or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality, or minimize the imminent
risk of such destruction, loss, or injury, any and all activities,
including those not listed in section 1 of this Article, are subject to
immediate temporary regulation, including prohibition.
Article V. Effect on Leases, Permits, Licenses, and Rights
Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 1434(c)(1), no
valid lease, permit, license, approval, or other authorization issued
by any Federal, State or local authority of competent jurisdiction, or
any right of subsistence use or access, may be terminated by the
Secretary of Commerce or designee as a result of this designation or as
a result of any Sanctuary regulation if such authorization or right was
in existence on the effective date of this designation. The Secretary
of Commerce or designee, however, may regulate the exercise (including,
but not limited to, the imposition of terms and conditions) of such
authorization or right consistent with the purposes for which the
Sanctuary is designated.
In no event may the Secretary or designee issue a permit
authorizing, or otherwise approve: (1) The exploration for, development
of or production of oil, gas, or minerals within the Sanctuary except
for limited, small-scale jade collection in the Jade Cove area of the
Sanctuary [defined as the area bounded by the 35.92222 N latitude
parallel (coastal reference point: beach access stairway at South Sand
Dollar Beach), the 35.88889 N latitude parallel (coastal reference
point: westernmost tip of Cape San Martin), and the mean high tide line
seaward to the 90 foot isobath (depth line)]; (2) the discharge of
primary-treated sewage (except for regulation, pursuant to section
304(c)(1) of the Act, of the exercise of valid authorizations in
existence on the effective date of Sanctuary designation and issued by
other authorities of competent jurisdiction); or (3) the disposal of
dredged material within the Sanctuary other than at sites authorized by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (in consultation with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers) prior to the effective date of designation.
Any purported authorizations issued by other authorities after the
effective date of Sanctuary designation for any of these activities
within the Sanctuary shall be invalid.
Article VI. Alterations to This Designation
The terms of designation, as defined under section 304(a) of the
Act, may be modified only by the same procedures by which the original
designation is made, including public hearings, consultation with
interested Federal, State, and local agencies, review by the
[[Page 70495]]
appropriate Congressional committees and Governor of the State of
California, and approval by the Secretary of Commerce or designee.
[END OF DESIGNATION DOCUMENT]
III. Summary of Regulatory Amendments
This section describes the changes NOAA is making to the
regulations for the CBNMS, GFNMS, and the MBNMS (hereinafter the
``Sanctuaries'') to implement the management plan reviews for the three
sanctuaries. Because the rationale behind the amendments to each
sanctuary's regulations is similar or the same, the discussion of the
changes has been grouped by subject area, except where explicitly noted
otherwise. References in this section to ``former regulations'' are to
the state of the regulations as they existed before this final rule
becomes effective.
A. Update and Clarify the Regulations on Discharges
NOAA is modifying the regulatory prohibition on discharging or
depositing material or other matter (hereafter ``discharge
regulations'') into the Sanctuaries. The following regulatory changes
are made to all three sanctuaries unless otherwise specified.
1. This rule clarifies the prohibition on discharging or depositing
any material or other matter to make it clear that the regulation
applies to discharges and deposits ``from within or into'' the
Sanctuaries. Adding the word ``into'' is intended to clarify that the
prohibition applies not only to discharges and deposits originating in
the Sanctuaries (e.g., from vessels in the Sanctuaries), but also, for
example, from discharges and deposits above the Sanctuaries.
2. This rule clarifies that the exception to the discharge/deposit
prohibition for fish, fish parts, or chumming materials (bait) applies
only to discharges or deposits made during the conduct of lawful
fishing activities within the Sanctuaries.
3. This rule clarifies that the exception to the discharge
prohibition for biodegradable effluent discharges/deposits from marine
sanitation devices applies only to operable Type I or II marine
sanitation devices approved by the United States Coast Guard in
accordance with the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
Although the exception for vessel wastes ``generated by marine
sanitation devices'' was intended to prohibit the discharge of
untreated sewage into the Sanctuaries, it was unclear if it allowed
discharges from Type III marine sanitation devices. Therefore, NOAA
modifies its regulations to clarify that such discharges are only
allowed if generated by properly functioning Type I or II marine
sanitation devices. Type I and Type II marine sanitation devices treat
wastes, but Type III marine sanitation devices store waste until it is
removed at designated pump-out stations on shore or discharged at sea.
Finally, the revised regulations also require vessel operators to lock
all marine sanitation devices in a manner that prevents the discharge
of untreated sewage. This requirement would aid in enforcement and
compliance with Sanctuary regulations.
Note that in the response to comments ``biodegradable'' has been
replaced with ``clean.'' See Section IV.
4. This rule eliminates the exception for discharging or depositing
food waste resulting from meals onboard vessels into CBNMS and GFNMS.
Coast Guard regulations prohibit all discharges of food wastes
(garbage) within three nmi of land and require that they be ground to
less than one inch when discharged between three and twelve nmi of
land. This rule modifies the regulations for CBNMS and GFNMS to mirror
the Coast Guard regulations, and to be consistent with the MBNMS
regulations. This amendment provides increased protection to sanctuary
resources and qualities from such marine debris vis-[agrave]-vis the
Coast Guard regulations in the area of the two sanctuaries beyond three
nmi.
5. This rule prohibits discharges/deposits originating beyond the
boundary of the GFNMS that subsequently enters the sanctuary and
injures a sanctuary resource or quality. ``Sanctuary resource'' is
defined at 15 CFR 922.3 as ``any living or non-living resource of a
National Marine Sanctuary that contributes to the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational, or
aesthetic value of the Sanctuary, including, but not limited to, the
substratum of the area of the sanctuary, other submerged features and
the surrounding seabed, carbonate rock, corals and other bottom
formations, coralline algae and other marine plants and algae, marine
invertebrates, brine-seep biota, phytoplankton, zooplankton, fish,
seabirds, sea turtles and other marine reptiles, marine mammals and
historical resources.'' ``Sanctuary quality'' is defined at 15 CFR
922.3 as ``any of those ambient conditions, physical-chemical
characteristics and natural processes, the maintenance of which is
essential to the ecological health of the Sanctuary, including, but not
limited to, water quality, sediment quality and air quality.'' This
modification will help protect sanctuary resources and qualities from
harmful influences originating outside the boundaries of the GFNMS. The
coastal waters of the sanctuary, particularly the estuarine habitats of
Bolinas Lagoon, Tomales Bay, Estero Americano and Estero de San
Antonio, are vulnerable to land-based nonpoint source pollution from
outside the sanctuary. Sources of concern include runoff, agriculture,
marinas and boating activities, past mining, and aging and undersized
septic systems. Water quality in offshore areas of the sanctuary could
be threatened or impacted by large or continuous discharges from shore,
spills by vessels, illegal dumping activities or residual contaminants
from past dumping activities. The threat of an offshore oil spill is a
constant reality near the busy shipping lanes in and adjacent to the
sanctuary. CBNMS and MBNMS regulations already prohibit this activity.
This modification makes the discharge/deposit regulations for the three
sanctuaries consistent.
6. This rule eliminates in the GFNMS regulations the exceptions at
Sec. 922.84 for the disposal of dredged material at the interim
dumpsite and the discharge of municipal sewage because they are no
longer necessary. The exception for the disposal of dredged material at
the ``interim dumpsite'' is no longer necessary because this site is no
longer being used as a permanent dumpsite. The interim dumpsite,
located approximately 10 nmi south of Southeast Farallon Island, is no
longer in use. The permanent dumpsite outside the sanctuary has been in
use for more than fifteen years, making this exception unnecessary.
Similarly, since the designation of the sanctuary in 1981, there have
been no applications to discharge municipal sewage into the sanctuary.
Thus, this exception is also unnecessary. By removing these two
exceptions, the discharge/deposit regulation has been streamlined,
focusing on current and necessary exceptions to the prohibition.
7. In addition, this rule clarifies that current exceptions to the
prohibition on discharges/deposits from vessels for graywater and deck
wash down must be clean, meaning not containing detectable levels of
harmful matter as defined. It clarifies that discharges/deposits from
clean vessel deck wash down, clean vessel generator cooling water,
clean vessel engine cooling water, clean bilge water, and anchor wash
are excepted from the discharge/deposit prohibition. The discharge/
deposit of oily wastes from bilge pumping has been and continues to be
prohibited. However, this rule modifies
[[Page 70496]]
this prohibition by requiring that all bilge discharges/deposits be
clean, meaning not containing detectable levels of harmful matter as
defined. For purposes of determining detectable levels of oil in bilge
discharges/deposits, a detectable level of oil is interpreted here to
include anything that produces a visible sheen. This rule provides
clarification regarding permitted contents of bilge water discharges/
deposits.
The discharge/deposit of ballast water is already prohibited.
B. Prohibit Certain Discharges From Cruise Ships and Large Vessels
This rule amends the discharge regulations for the Sanctuaries to
narrow the types of vessels that may discharge certain types of
material or other matter.
This rule prohibits vessels 300 GRT or greater with sufficient
holding tank capacity from discharging or depositing graywater, and
effluent from any type of marine sanitation device. In the GFNMS and
CBNMS the discharge/deposit of graywater is already prohibited and that
remains unchanged. The former regulations did not make a distinction
between sizes of vessels for discharge purposes. The regulations
prohibiting discharge/deposit of treated sewage from vessels 300 GRT or
more are consistent with existing state law applicable to state waters.
The regulations now extend the prohibition to all waters of the
national marine sanctuaries including federal waters. The regulation
does not restrict vessels without capacity to hold the waste while in a
national marine sanctuary.
The revised regulation better addresses NOAA's concerns about the
potential impacts of discharges/deposits from large vessels in the
Sanctuaries. Blackwater from vessels includes raw or treated sewage.
Such discharges are more concentrated than domestic land-based sewage
and may introduce disease-causing microorganisms (pathogens), such as
bacteria, protozoans, and viruses, into the marine environment (EPA
2007). They may also contain high concentrations of nutrients that can
lead to eutrophication (the process that can cause oxygen-depleted
``dead zones'' in aquatic environments), and may yield unpleasant
esthetic impacts to the Sanctuary (diminishing Sanctuary resources and
its ecological, conservation, esthetic, recreational and other
qualities).
Graywater from vessels includes wastewater from showers, baths, and
galleys. Graywater can contain a variety of substances including (but
not limited to) detergents, oil and grease, pesticides and food wastes
(Eley 2000). Very little research has been done on the impacts of
graywater on the marine environment, but many of the chemicals commonly
found in graywater are known to be toxic (Casanova et al. 2001). These
chemicals have been implicated in the occurrence of cancerous growths
in bottom-dwelling fish (Mix 1986). Furthermore, studies of graywater
discharges from large cruise ships in Alaska (prior to strict state
effluent standards for cruise ship graywater discharges) found very
high levels of fecal coliform in large cruise ship graywater (well
exceeding the federal standards for fecal coliform from Type II MSDs).
These same studies also found high mean total suspended solids in some
graywater sources (exceeding the federal standards for total suspended
solids from Type II MSDs).
2. This rule revises the discharge/deposit regulations to implement
additional restrictions on cruise ships. Under the revised discharge/
deposit regulations, cruise ships are allowed to discharge or deposit
only clean vessel engine cooling water, clean vessel generator cooling
water, clean bilge water, and anchor wash into the Sanctuaries. Other
discharges or deposits are no longer allowed in the Sanctuaries. Cruise
ship discharges and deposits are more stringently regulated than other
vessels to reduce the adverse effects on the marine environment from
this growing source of pollutants.
The strict prohibition on cruise ships protects sanctuary water
quality from the potentially large volume of wastewater that may be
discharged by these vessels, while allowing them to continue to transit
the Sanctuaries. ``Cruise ship'' is defined to mean: a vessel with 250
or more passenger berths for hire. Currently 643,000 cruise ship
passengers embark annually from California ports in San Francisco Bay,
Los Angeles, and San Diego. Ninety cruise ship arrivals and departures
(Metropolitan Stevedore Company) were estimated at the San Francisco
Passenger Terminal in 2006. Many of these cruise ships enter and exit
the Bay through the northbound vessel traffic lanes, which transit
through the Sanctuaries. Although partly constrained by the lack of
local docking facilities, cruise ship visits are likely to increase as
the fleet shifts from international to more domestic cruises, and as
they begin to use a new cruise ship docking facility planned for San
Francisco Bay.
Due to their sheer size and passenger capacity, cruise ships are
able to generate larger volumes of a wide array of pollutants, which
can cause serious impacts to the marine environment. The main
pollutants generated by a cruise ship are: sewage, also referred to as
blackwater; graywater; oily bilge water; hazardous wastes, and solid
wastes. The large volumes of discharged effluent associated with cruise
ships may not adequately disperse to avoid harm to marine resources.
Based on EPA estimates, in one week a 3000-passenger cruise ship
generates about 210,000 gallons of sewage, 1,000,000 gallons of
graywater, 37,000 gallons of oily bilge water, more than 8 tons of
solid waste, millions of gallons of ballast water containing potential
invasive species, and toxic wastes from dry cleaning and photo-
processing laboratories. Additionally, the volume of material from a
cruise ship resulting from deck washdown greatly exceeds the volumes
associated with other vessels used in the Sanctuaries. Although several
laws and regulations partly address these issues, this regulation is
needed to ensure a more comprehensive prohibition on cruise ship
discharges/deposits within the Sanctuaries.
C. Clarify and Update the Regulation on Disturbing Sanctuary Areas
To ensure consistency among the regulations for the Sanctuaries,
this rule implements a prohibition on drilling into, dredging, or
otherwise altering the submerged lands, or constructing, placing or
abandoning any structure, material, or other matter on or in the
submerged lands of the Sanc