Withdrawal of Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary Proposed Regulations, 13303-13305 [2016-05452]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (j)(1) of this AD.
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(j) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Ronald Wissing, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ACE–117A, FAA, Atlanta
ACO, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park,
GA 30337; phone: 404–474–5552; fax: 404–
474–5606; email: ronald.wissing@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Gulfstream Aerospace
Corporation, Technical Publications Dept.,
P.O. Box 2206, Savannah, GA 31402–2206;
telephone: 800–810–4853; fax: 912–965–
3520; email: pubs@gulfstream.com; Internet:
https://www.gulfstream.com/product_
support/technical_pubs/pubs/index.htm.
You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA 98057–3356. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call
425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, WA, on March 3, 2016.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–05606 Filed 3–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2009–0559; Directorate
Identifier 2008–SW–66–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The FAA is withdrawing a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
The NPRM proposed a new
airworthiness directive (AD) for
Sikorsky Model S–92A helicopters. The
proposed action would have required
revising the Limitations section of the
Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM) to
clarify that the Model S–92A helicopter
was certificated as a transport category
rotorcraft in both Categories A and B
with different operating limitations for
each category and must be operated
accordingly. Since we issued the NPRM,
we have determined that operating the
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
As of March 14, 2016, the
proposed rule to amend 14 CFR part 39
published June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29148)
is withdrawn.
DATES:
John
Coffey, Flight Test Engineer, Boston
Aircraft Certification Office, Engine &
Propeller Directorate, FAA, 1200
District Avenue, Burlington,
Massachusetts 01803; telephone (781)
238–7173; email john.coffey@faa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The FAA
proposed to amend 14 CFR part 39 to
add a new AD (74 FR 29148, June 19,
2009) for Sikorsky Model S–92A
helicopters. The NPRM proposed to
require revising the Limitations section
of the RFM by clarifying that the Model
S–92A helicopter was certificated as a
transport category rotorcraft in both
Categories A and B with different
operating limitations for each category
and must be operated accordingly.
When the Model S–92A is configured
with 10 or more passenger seats, it is a
Category A helicopter, and operators
must follow the limitations for Category
A. When it is configured with 9 or fewer
passenger seats, it may be considered a
Category B helicopter, and operators
may follow the less stringent Category B
limitations. At the time the NPRM was
published, the limitation language in
the RFM did not make a clear
distinction between Category A and
Category B based on the seating
configuration. The proposed actions
were intended to prevent operating
under less stringent requirements.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Actions Since NPRM (74 FR 29148,
June 19, 2009) Was Issued
Airworthiness Directives; Sikorsky
Aircraft Corporation (Sikorsky)
Helicopters
SUMMARY:
helicopter in Category B with 10 or
more passenger seats is not an unsafe
condition but an inconsistency with 14
CFR 29.1(c). Accordingly, we withdraw
the proposed rule.
Since we issued the NPRM (74 FR
29148, June 19, 2009), one commenter
noted the proposed AD misinterprets
certification rules as operational rules.
We considered the comment and reevaluated the details that went into the
determination of the unsafe condition
for this concern. We determined that
operating the helicopter in Category B
with 10 or more passengers is not an
unsafe condition, and the associated
level of risk does not warrant AD action.
Rather, this was an inconsistency with
14 CFR 29.1(c). Sikorsky has since
revised the RFM to clarify that a
helicopter configured with a maximum
of 19 passenger seats must be operated
as a Category A but if configured with
9 or fewer passenger seats may be
operated as a Category B. This action
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13303
mitigates the inconsistency with 14 CFR
29.1(c).
Withdrawal of the NPRM constitutes
only such action and does not preclude
the agency from issuing another notice
in the future nor does it commit the
agency to any course of action in the
future.
Since this action only withdraws an
NPRM, it is neither a proposed nor a
final rule; therefore, it is not covered
under Executive Order 12866, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44
FR 11034, February 26, 1979).
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Withdrawal
Accordingly, the notice of proposed
rulemaking, Docket No. FAA–2009–
0559; Directorate Identifier 2008–SW–
66–AD, published in the Federal
Register on June 19, 2009 (74 FR 29148),
is withdrawn.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 4,
2016.
Scott A. Horn,
Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–05517 Filed 3–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 140207122–4122–01]
RIN 0648–BD97
Withdrawal of Hawaiian Islands
Humpback Whale National Marine
Sanctuary Proposed Regulations
Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), Department of Commerce
(DOC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
withdrawal.
AGENCY:
This action withdraws a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
published in the Federal Register on
March 26, 2015 (80 FR 16224), to amend
the regulations for the Hawaiian Islands
Humpback Whale National Marine
Sanctuary (HIHWNMS or sanctuary)
and to revise the sanctuary’s terms of
designation and management plan.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
13304
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
For copies of related
documents, you may obtain these
through either of the following methods:
• Copies of the draft environmental
impact statement and proposed rule
being withdrawn can be downloaded or
viewed on the internet at
www.regulations.gov (search for docket
‘‘NOAA–NOS–2015–0028’’) or at https://
hawaiihumpbackwhale.noaa.gov.
• Mail: Hawaiian Islands Humpback
Whale National Marine Sanctuary,
NOAA/DKIRC, 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg
176, Honolulu, HI 96818, Attn: Malia
Chow, Superintendent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Malia Chow, Superintendent, Hawaiian
Islands Humpback Whale National
Marine Sanctuary at 808–725–5901 or
hihwmanagementplan@noaa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Background
A. Regulatory Background
The Hawaiian Islands Humpback
Whale National Marine Sanctuary
covers approximately 1,031.4 square
nautical miles (1,366 square miles) of
federal and state waters in the Hawaiian
Islands, approximately 70% of which is
in State waters. The sanctuary lies
within the shallow warm waters
surrounding the main Hawaiian Islands,
which are a nationally significant
marine environment. Congress
designated the sanctuary in 1992
through the Hawaiian Islands National
Marine Sanctuary Act (HINMSA,
Subtitle C of the Oceans Act of 1992,
Pub. L. 102–587), which declared that
the purposes of the sanctuary were to:
(1) Protect humpback whales and their
habitat; (2) educate and interpret for the
public the relationship of humpback
whales to the Hawaiian Islands marine
environment; (3) manage human uses of
the sanctuary consistent with the Act
and the National Marine Sanctuaries
Act (NMSA); and (4) provide for the
identification of marine resources and
ecosystems of national significance for
possible inclusion in the sanctuary.
The sanctuary is co-managed by
NOAA and the State of Hawai‘i (State)
through a compact agreement signed in
1998. This agreement clarifies the
relative jurisdiction, authority, and
conditions of the NOAA-State
partnership for managing the sanctuary.
The Hawai‘i Department of Land and
Natural Resources (DLNR) serves as the
lead agency for the State’s comanagement of the sanctuary.
As noted above, an express purpose of
the HINMSA is to provide for the
identification of marine resources and
ecosystems of national significance for
possible inclusion in the HIHWNMS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Consistent with this purpose, the 2010
sanctuary management plan review
process (75 FR 40759) provided an
opportunity to consider the value of
marine resources and ecosystems of
Hawai’i, assess existing threats and
protections to these valuable resources,
and determine where NOAA can
provide added value to the resource
management efforts provided by the
State and other federal agencies.
B. Public Review Process
On July 14, 2010, NOAA formally
initiated the sanctuary management
plan review public scoping process by
publishing a notice of intent in the
Federal Register (75 FR 40759). That
notice informed the public that NOAA
was initiating a review of its sanctuary
management plan and regulations and
preparing an associated environmental
impact statement (EIS). On March 20,
2015, NOAA released a draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS)
and draft management plan for the
HIHWNMS (80 FR 15001) for public
comment. On March 26, 2015, NOAA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register (80
FR 16223) proposing to expand the size
and scope of the HIHWNMS through
revisions to the existing sanctuary
regulations provided at 15 CFR part 922,
subpart Q.
The proposed rule would have
changed the focus of the sanctuary from
management of a single species
(humpback whales and their habitat) to
a broader, ecosystem-based management
approach that applied the same
definition of sanctuary resources as
applies to the other 12 national marine
sanctuaries. Under 15 CFR 922.3, this
includes 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. The resources include
but are 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, brineseep biota,
phytoplankton, zooplankton, fish,
seabirds, sea turtles and other marine
reptiles, marine mammals and historical
resources. NOAA also proposed adding
an additional 255 square miles to the
sanctuary increasing its total area to
1,621 square miles.
The public comment period on the
proposed rule and associated draft
management plan and DEIS closed on
June 19, 2015. NOAA received 15,337
submissions from individuals,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
organizations, companies and agencies.
NOAA also held 11 public meetings
attended by over 739 people to gather
public comments. Comments received
covered a range of specific issues, which
included the following themes: (1)
Support for activities that continue to
protect and help the recovery of
humpback whales; (2) support for the
management plan activities that were
non-regulatory, and for which the
sanctuary program is known, such as
education and outreach; (3) support and
opposition to ecosystem-based
management; (4) opposition to a
boundary expansion to include the
waters around Niihau; (5) concerns
about additional and redundant federal
regulations; (6) concerns about the
designation of Maunalua Bay as a
Special Sanctuary Management Area; (7)
support for increased funding for the
Department of Land and Natural
Resources; (8) questions about comanagement with the State of Hawaii;
and (9) questions about the need for the
sanctuary in light of an increased
humpback whale population. NOAA
also received comments that were
general in nature and not directly
related to the specific aspects of the
proposal. These comments expressed
concerns about the federal government
and state rights, impacts on fishing
rights, access restrictions to areas, and
negative economic impacts. Comments
also expressed a general support for
continued whale conservation.
On June 19, 2015, NOAA received a
letter with detailed comments from
various entities within the State,
including DLNR; the Department of
Business, Economic Development, and
Tourism’s Office of Planning and
Hawai‘i State Energy Office; the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands;
the Department of Health
Environmental Health Administration;
the Department of Transportation; the
Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii
Authority; the Office of Environmental
Quality Control; and the Aha Moku
Advisory Committee. The letter detailed
the State’s feedback on the proposal and
included support for HIHWNMS
engaging in more management activities
such as outreach, research, enforcement,
and planning. However, the State was
not supportive of any additional federal
regulations as described in the proposal.
In its comments, the State expressed
concerns that, in its view: (1) The
proposed additional federal regulations
were redundant in light of existing State
regulations; (2) the proposed regulatory
language was overly broad and would
lead to implementation challenges; (3)
the DEIS did not adequately consider
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
current state and county regulations;
and (4) the DEIS did not include
adequate analysis of the economic,
social, and cultural impacts of the
proposal. The State recommended that
the HIHWNMS should instead focus on
regulatory gaps and avoid duplicating
existing regulations.
The Sanctuary Advisory Council
(SAC) formed a working group to
evaluate the Draft Management Plan and
DEIS and to provide recommendations
to the SAC. At the July 20, 2015, SAC
meeting in Honolulu, the council voted
to support the full recommendations as
formulated by the working group and
forward them to sanctuary management.
The SAC voted to support the transition
to ecosystem-based management, and
was supportive of the sanctuary’s
proposed work on key issues and
geographies, while recognizing the
importance of co-management between
NOAA and the State.
II. Basis for Withdrawing the Proposed
Rule
Throughout the management plan
review process and following the end of
public comment period, NOAA and
DLNR as co-managers engaged in a
dialog to consider how to address the
issues raised during the management
plan review process, including the
concerns from the State agencies. On
January 22, 2016, NOAA received a
letter from DLNR expressing concerns
that expanding the HIHWNMS to an
ecosystem-based sanctuary would
provide a new definition of sanctuary
resources that could restrict the State’s
ability to recover damages for violations
of state laws and rules governing natural
resources within the sanctuary. The
State expressed support for the concept
of ecosystem-based management but did
not support the expanded definition of
sanctuary resources in state waters.
DLNR requested that HIHWNMS
consider adding additional marine
mammals, but not their habitat, as
sanctuary resources, citing this as a way
for the sanctuary to further build on its
unique strengths and complement
existing state functions. On January 26,
2016, NOAA responded to DLNR’s letter
and expressed NOAA’s view that adding
marine mammals without including
their habitat would be inconsistent with
the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. It
is NOAA’s view that the definition of
‘‘sanctuary resource’’ (16 U.S.C. 1432)
does not allow NOAA to exclude habitat
since habitat clearly ‘‘contributes to the
value of the sanctuary.’’ This view of the
definition is consistent with the March
2015 DEIS which analyzed the proposal
to expand the purpose of the national
marine sanctuary.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Under the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1434(b)(1)),
and the terms of the 1998 compact
agreement, the Governor of Hawai‘i
would have the ability to formally object
to the proposed changes to the
HIHWNMS before any change were
finalized in State waters. Given the
respective positions of NOAA and
DLNR on the proposal, and NOAA’s
desire to continue effective comanagement of the sanctuary with the
State, NOAA has decided to withdraw
this proposal in light of the Governor’s
likely objection. NOAA will continue to
co-manage the current humpback
whale-focused sanctuary with the State
of Hawai‘i.
III. Withdrawal
In consideration of the foregoing,
NOAA hereby withdraws the NPRM for
NOAA Docket No. NOAA–NOS–2015–
0028, as published in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2015 (80 FR
16223).
Dated: March 2, 2016.
John Armor,
Acting Director, Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries.
[FR Doc. 2016–05452 Filed 3–11–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
The notice of proposed rulemaking
and notice of public hearing that is the
subject of this correction is under
section 103 of the Internal Revenue
Code.
26 CFR Part 1
[REG–129067–15]
RIN 1545–BM99
Definition of Political Subdivision;
Correction
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This document contains
corrections to a notice of proposed
rulemaking and notice of public hearing
(REG–129067–15) published in the
Federal Register on Tuesday, February
23, 2016, (81 FR 8870) that specifies the
elements of a political subdivision for
purposes of tax-exempt bonds. The
corrections amend the applicability
dates of the proposed definition of
political subdivision to provide
transition rules with respect to bonds
issued before the general applicability
date and certain refunding bonds.
DATES: Written or electronic comments
for the notice of proposed rulemaking
and notice of public hearing published
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
at 81 FR 8870, February 23, 2016, are
still being accepted and must be
received by May 23, 2016. Request to
speak and outlines of topics to be
discussed at the public hearing
scheduled for June 6, 2016, at 10:00
a.m., are also still being accepted and
must be received by May 23, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Send submissions to:
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–129067–15),
Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box
7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington,
DC 20044. Submissions may be hand
delivered to: CC:PA:LPD:PR Monday
through Friday between the hours of 8
a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–
129067–15), Courier’s Desk, Internal
Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20224 or
sent electronically via the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at
www.regulations.gov (REG–129067–15).
The public hearing will be held at the
Internal Revenue Building, 1111
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Concerning the correction to the
proposed regulations, Spence
Hanemann at (202) 317–6980;
concerning submissions of comments
and the hearing, Oluwafunmilayo
(Funmi) Taylor at (202) 317–6901 (not
toll-free numbers).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Internal Revenue Service
SUMMARY:
13305
Need for Correction
As published in the Federal Register
(81 FR 8870, February 23, 2016),
§ 1.103–1(c) of the notice of proposed
rulemaking and notice of public hearing
proposes a new definition of political
subdivision. Section 1.103–1(d)(1)
provides that, except as otherwise
provided in §§ 1.103–1(d)(2) through
(4), § 1.103–1 (including § 1.103–1(c))
applies to all entities for all purposes of
sections 103 and 141 through 150
beginning on the date 90 days after the
publication of the Treasury decision
adopting the rules as final regulations in
the Federal Register. Section 1.103–
1(d)(2) provides that, for purposes of
determining whether bonds are
obligations of a political subdivision
under section 103, the definition of
political subdivision in § 1.103–1(c)
does not apply to an entity with respect
to bonds that are issued before the
general applicability date under
§ 1.103–1(d)(1). Section 1.103–1(d)(3)
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13303-13305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05452]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 140207122-4122-01]
RIN 0648-BD97
Withdrawal of Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine
Sanctuary Proposed Regulations
AGENCY: Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2015 (80 FR 16224), to
amend the regulations for the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National
Marine Sanctuary (HIHWNMS or sanctuary) and to revise the sanctuary's
terms of designation and management plan.
[[Page 13304]]
ADDRESSES: For copies of related documents, you may obtain these
through either of the following methods:
Copies of the draft environmental impact statement and
proposed rule being withdrawn can be downloaded or viewed on the
internet at www.regulations.gov (search for docket ``NOAA-NOS-2015-
0028'') or at https://hawaiihumpbackwhale.noaa.gov.
Mail: Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine
Sanctuary, NOAA/DKIRC, 1845 Wasp Blvd., Bldg 176, Honolulu, HI 96818,
Attn: Malia Chow, Superintendent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Malia Chow, Superintendent, Hawaiian
Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary at 808-725-5901 or
hihwmanagementplan@noaa.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Regulatory Background
The Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary
covers approximately 1,031.4 square nautical miles (1,366 square miles)
of federal and state waters in the Hawaiian Islands, approximately 70%
of which is in State waters. The sanctuary lies within the shallow warm
waters surrounding the main Hawaiian Islands, which are a nationally
significant marine environment. Congress designated the sanctuary in
1992 through the Hawaiian Islands National Marine Sanctuary Act
(HINMSA, Subtitle C of the Oceans Act of 1992, Pub. L. 102-587), which
declared that the purposes of the sanctuary were to: (1) Protect
humpback whales and their habitat; (2) educate and interpret for the
public the relationship of humpback whales to the Hawaiian Islands
marine environment; (3) manage human uses of the sanctuary consistent
with the Act and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA); and (4)
provide for the identification of marine resources and ecosystems of
national significance for possible inclusion in the sanctuary.
The sanctuary is co-managed by NOAA and the State of Hawai`i
(State) through a compact agreement signed in 1998. This agreement
clarifies the relative jurisdiction, authority, and conditions of the
NOAA-State partnership for managing the sanctuary. The Hawai`i
Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) serves as the lead
agency for the State's co-management of the sanctuary.
As noted above, an express purpose of the HINMSA is to provide for
the identification of marine resources and ecosystems of national
significance for possible inclusion in the HIHWNMS. Consistent with
this purpose, the 2010 sanctuary management plan review process (75 FR
40759) provided an opportunity to consider the value of marine
resources and ecosystems of Hawai'i, assess existing threats and
protections to these valuable resources, and determine where NOAA can
provide added value to the resource management efforts provided by the
State and other federal agencies.
B. Public Review Process
On July 14, 2010, NOAA formally initiated the sanctuary management
plan review public scoping process by publishing a notice of intent in
the Federal Register (75 FR 40759). That notice informed the public
that NOAA was initiating a review of its sanctuary management plan and
regulations and preparing an associated environmental impact statement
(EIS). On March 20, 2015, NOAA released a draft environmental impact
statement (DEIS) and draft management plan for the HIHWNMS (80 FR
15001) for public comment. On March 26, 2015, NOAA published a notice
of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register (80 FR 16223) proposing
to expand the size and scope of the HIHWNMS through revisions to the
existing sanctuary regulations provided at 15 CFR part 922, subpart Q.
The proposed rule would have changed the focus of the sanctuary
from management of a single species (humpback whales and their habitat)
to a broader, ecosystem-based management approach that applied the same
definition of sanctuary resources as applies to the other 12 national
marine sanctuaries. Under 15 CFR 922.3, this includes 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. The resources include
but are 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, brineseep biota, phytoplankton,
zooplankton, fish, seabirds, sea turtles and other marine reptiles,
marine mammals and historical resources. NOAA also proposed adding an
additional 255 square miles to the sanctuary increasing its total area
to 1,621 square miles.
The public comment period on the proposed rule and associated draft
management plan and DEIS closed on June 19, 2015. NOAA received 15,337
submissions from individuals, organizations, companies and agencies.
NOAA also held 11 public meetings attended by over 739 people to gather
public comments. Comments received covered a range of specific issues,
which included the following themes: (1) Support for activities that
continue to protect and help the recovery of humpback whales; (2)
support for the management plan activities that were non-regulatory,
and for which the sanctuary program is known, such as education and
outreach; (3) support and opposition to ecosystem-based management; (4)
opposition to a boundary expansion to include the waters around Niihau;
(5) concerns about additional and redundant federal regulations; (6)
concerns about the designation of Maunalua Bay as a Special Sanctuary
Management Area; (7) support for increased funding for the Department
of Land and Natural Resources; (8) questions about co-management with
the State of Hawaii; and (9) questions about the need for the sanctuary
in light of an increased humpback whale population. NOAA also received
comments that were general in nature and not directly related to the
specific aspects of the proposal. These comments expressed concerns
about the federal government and state rights, impacts on fishing
rights, access restrictions to areas, and negative economic impacts.
Comments also expressed a general support for continued whale
conservation.
On June 19, 2015, NOAA received a letter with detailed comments
from various entities within the State, including DLNR; the Department
of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism's Office of Planning and
Hawai`i State Energy Office; the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands; the
Department of Health Environmental Health Administration; the
Department of Transportation; the Natural Energy Laboratory of Hawaii
Authority; the Office of Environmental Quality Control; and the Aha
Moku Advisory Committee. The letter detailed the State's feedback on
the proposal and included support for HIHWNMS engaging in more
management activities such as outreach, research, enforcement, and
planning. However, the State was not supportive of any additional
federal regulations as described in the proposal. In its comments, the
State expressed concerns that, in its view: (1) The proposed additional
federal regulations were redundant in light of existing State
regulations; (2) the proposed regulatory language was overly broad and
would lead to implementation challenges; (3) the DEIS did not
adequately consider
[[Page 13305]]
current state and county regulations; and (4) the DEIS did not include
adequate analysis of the economic, social, and cultural impacts of the
proposal. The State recommended that the HIHWNMS should instead focus
on regulatory gaps and avoid duplicating existing regulations.
The Sanctuary Advisory Council (SAC) formed a working group to
evaluate the Draft Management Plan and DEIS and to provide
recommendations to the SAC. At the July 20, 2015, SAC meeting in
Honolulu, the council voted to support the full recommendations as
formulated by the working group and forward them to sanctuary
management. The SAC voted to support the transition to ecosystem-based
management, and was supportive of the sanctuary's proposed work on key
issues and geographies, while recognizing the importance of co-
management between NOAA and the State.
II. Basis for Withdrawing the Proposed Rule
Throughout the management plan review process and following the end
of public comment period, NOAA and DLNR as co-managers engaged in a
dialog to consider how to address the issues raised during the
management plan review process, including the concerns from the State
agencies. On January 22, 2016, NOAA received a letter from DLNR
expressing concerns that expanding the HIHWNMS to an ecosystem-based
sanctuary would provide a new definition of sanctuary resources that
could restrict the State's ability to recover damages for violations of
state laws and rules governing natural resources within the sanctuary.
The State expressed support for the concept of ecosystem-based
management but did not support the expanded definition of sanctuary
resources in state waters. DLNR requested that HIHWNMS consider adding
additional marine mammals, but not their habitat, as sanctuary
resources, citing this as a way for the sanctuary to further build on
its unique strengths and complement existing state functions. On
January 26, 2016, NOAA responded to DLNR's letter and expressed NOAA's
view that adding marine mammals without including their habitat would
be inconsistent with the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. It is NOAA's
view that the definition of ``sanctuary resource'' (16 U.S.C. 1432)
does not allow NOAA to exclude habitat since habitat clearly
``contributes to the value of the sanctuary.'' This view of the
definition is consistent with the March 2015 DEIS which analyzed the
proposal to expand the purpose of the national marine sanctuary.
Under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1434(b)(1)),
and the terms of the 1998 compact agreement, the Governor of Hawai`i
would have the ability to formally object to the proposed changes to
the HIHWNMS before any change were finalized in State waters. Given the
respective positions of NOAA and DLNR on the proposal, and NOAA's
desire to continue effective co-management of the sanctuary with the
State, NOAA has decided to withdraw this proposal in light of the
Governor's likely objection. NOAA will continue to co-manage the
current humpback whale-focused sanctuary with the State of Hawai`i.
III. Withdrawal
In consideration of the foregoing, NOAA hereby withdraws the NPRM
for NOAA Docket No. NOAA-NOS-2015-0028, as published in the Federal
Register on March 26, 2015 (80 FR 16223).
Dated: March 2, 2016.
John Armor,
Acting Director, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.
[FR Doc. 2016-05452 Filed 3-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P
