Proposed Amendment to Initial Funded Priorities List, 36541-36543 [2016-13356]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 2, 2016. Michele Taylor Fennell, Assistant Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 2016–13400 Filed 6–6–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210–01–P GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION [OMB Control No. 3090–XXXX; Docket 2016–0001; Sequence 9] Information Collection; Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA Form 3702 Office of Civil Rights, General Services Administration (GSA). ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding a new request for an OMB clearance. AGENCY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Regulatory Secretariat Division will be submitting to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request to review and approve a new information collection requirement regarding OMB Control No: 3090–XXXX; Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702. This information is needed to facilitate nondiscrimination in GSA’s Federal Financial Assistance Programs, consistent with Federal civil rights laws and regulations that apply to recipients of Federal financial assistance. DATES: Submit comments on or before: August 8, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Evelyn Britton, Director, External Programs Division, Office of Civil Rights, at telephone 202–603–1645 or via email to evelyn.britton@gsa.gov. ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by Information Collection 3090–XXXX, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702, by any of the following methods: • Regulations.gov: https:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching the OMB control number. Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that corresponds with ‘‘Information Collection 3090–XXXX, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702’’. Follow the instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ‘‘Information Collection 3090– XXXX, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702’’ on your attached document. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. Flowers/IC 3090–0228, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702. Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite Information Collection 3090–XXXX, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702, in all correspondence related to this collection. Comments received generally will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Purpose GSA has mission responsibilities related to monitoring and enforcing compliance with Federal civil rights laws and regulations that apply to Federal financial assistance programs administered by GSA. Specifically, those laws provide that no person on the ground of race, color, national origin, disability, sex or age shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program in connection with which Federal financial assistance is extended under laws administered in whole, or in part, by GSA. These mission responsibilities generate the requirement to request and obtain certain data from recipients of Federal surplus property for the purpose of determining compliance, such as the number of individuals, based on race and ethnic origin, of the recipient’s eligible and actual serviced population; race and national origin of those denied participation in the recipient’s program(s); non-English languages encountered by the recipient’s program(s) and how the recipient is addressing meaningful access for individuals that are Limited English Proficient; whether there has been complaints or lawsuits filed against the recipient based on prohibited discrimination and whether there has been any findings; and whether the recipient’s facilities are accessible to qualified individuals with disabilities. B. Annual Reporting Burden Respondents: 1200. Responses per Respondent: 1. Total Responses: 1200. PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36541 Hours per Response: 2. Total Burden Hours: 2400. C. Public Comments Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW., Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202–501–4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090–XXXX, Nondiscrimination in Federal Financial Assistance Programs, GSA 3702, in all correspondence. Dated: May 31, 2016. David A. Shive, Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2016–13396 Filed 6–6–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820–34–P GULF COAST ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION COUNCIL [Docket No.: 106072016–1111–03] Proposed Amendment to Initial Funded Priorities List Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. ACTION: Proposed amendment to Initial Funded Priorities List. AGENCY: The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (Council) seeks public and Tribal comment on a proposal to amend its Initial Funded Priorities List (FPL) to approve implementation funding for the Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration project in Florida (Project). The Council is proposing to approve $3,978,000 in implementation funding for this Project. The Council is also proposing to reallocate $702,000 from project planning to project implementation, after any remaining planning expenses have been met. The total amount available for implementation of the Project would thus be $4,680,000. These funds would be used to restore approximately 251 acres of oyster beds, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1 36542 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES which is an increase from the 219 acres originally proposed in the FPL. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other applicable laws, the Council is proposing to adopt an existing Environmental Assessment (EA) that addresses the activities in the Project. In so doing, the Council would expedite project implementation, reduce planning costs and increase the ecological benefits of this Project by using savings in planning funds to expand the Project by approximately 32 acres. The Council looks forward to public and Tribal comment on this proposal. DATES: Comments on this proposed amendment are due July 7, 2016. ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed amendment may be submitted as follows: By Email: Submit comments by email to frcomments@restorethegulf.gov. Email submission of comments ensures timely receipt and enables the Council to make them available to the public. In general, the Council will make such comments available for public inspection and copying on its Web site, www.restorethegulf.gov, without change, including any business or personal information provided, such as names, addresses, email addresses and telephone numbers. All comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, will be part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. You should only submit information that you wish to make publicly available. By Mail: Send comments to Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council, 500 Poydras Street, Suite 1117, New Orleans, LA 70130. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please send questions by email to frcomments@restorethegulf.gov or contact Will Spoon at (504) 239–9814. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Deepwater Horizon oil spill led to passage of the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act (RESTORE Act), which dedicates 80 percent of all Clean Water Act administrative and civil penalties related to the oil spill to the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund (Trust Fund). The RESTORE Act also created the Council, an independent Federal entity comprised of the five Gulf Coast states and six Federal agencies. Among other responsibilities, the Council administers a portion of the Trust Fund known as the Council- VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 Selected Restoration Component in order to ‘‘undertake projects and programs, using the best available science, which would restore and protect the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, coastal wetlands, and economy of the Gulf Coast.’’ Additional information on the Council can be found here: https:// www.restorethegulf.gov. On December 9, 2015, the Council published the FPL, which includes projects and programs approved for funding under the Council-Selected Restoration Component, along with activities that the Council identified as priorities for potential future funding. Activities approved for funding in the FPL are included in ‘‘Category 1’’; the priorities for potential future funding are in ‘‘Category 2.’’ In the FPL the Council approved approximately $156.6 million in Category 1 restoration and planning activities, and prioritized twelve Category 2 activities for possible funding in the future, subject to environmental compliance and further Council and public review. The Council included planning activities for the Project in Category 1 and implementation activities for the Project in Category 2 of the FPL. The Council reserved approximately $26.6 million for implementing priority activities in the future. These reserved funds may be used to support some, all or none of the activities included in Category 2 of the FPL and/or to support other activities not currently under consideration by the Council. As appropriate, the Council intends to review each activity in Category 2 in order to determine whether to: (1) Move the activity to Category 1 and approve it for funding, (2) remove it from Category 2 and any further consideration, or (3) continue to include it in Category 2. A Council decision to amend the FPL to move an activity from Category 2 into Category 1 must be approved by a Council vote after consideration of public and Tribal comments. II. Environmental Compliance Prior to approving an activity for funding in FPL Category 1, the Council must comply with NEPA and other Federal environmental laws. At the time of approval of the FPL, the Council had not complied with NEPA and other applicable laws with respect to implementation of the Project. The Council did, however, recognize the potential ecological value of the Project, based on review conducted as part of the FPL process. For this reason, the Council approved $702,000 in planning PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 funds for this Project, a portion of which would be used to complete any needed environmental compliance activities. As noted above, the Council placed the implementation portion of this Project into FPL Category 2, pending the outcome of this environmental compliance work and further Council review. The estimated cost of the Project’s implementation component was listed at $3,978,000, which would fund the restoration of approximately 219 acres of oyster beds in Apalachicola Bay. Inclusion of the Project’s implementation activities into Category 2 did not in any way commit the Council to subsequently approve those implementation activities for funding. Since approval of the FPL, Florida has collaborated with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to identify an existing EA that could be used to support Council approval of implementation funding for this Project. This EA was prepared by USACE in association with a Clean Water Act Section 404 and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 programmatic general permit (PGP) that authorizes the Florida Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services to conduct aquaculture of live rock and marine bivalves in navigable waters of the U.S. which are within the jurisdiction of the State of Florida, provided that such activities comply with the terms and conditions of the PGP. The Council has reviewed this EA and associated documents, including an August 13, 2015, letter from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration regarding compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In addition to ESA, the EA addresses compliance with other Federal environmental laws, including the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the National Historic Preservation Act and more. Based on this review, the Council is proposing to adopt this EA to support the proposed approval of implementation funds for the Project, provided that the Project is implemented in accordance with the terms and conditions of the PGP and the design criteria set forth in the associated ESA programmatic consultation. This EA and the associated ESA documentation can be found here: https://www.restorethegulf.gov/fundedpriorities-list. (See Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration Project— Implementation.) Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration Project If approved for implementation funding, this Project would include the E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices placement of approximately 50,258 cubic yards of suitable oyster reef substrate through the use of barges and high-pressure water. Areas to be restored would be marked with buoys or clearly marked stakes. Following the completion of the planting, oyster density sampling would be conducted and analyzed at a minimum of six months, one year and two years after clutching at each restoration site. Ecological benefits associated with the Project would be realized through an array of ecological services in the form of increased fishery and wildlife habitat; increased biodiversity and trophic dynamics; increased filtering capacity to improve water quality and recycle nutrients; increased structural stability to reduce coastal erosion and to protect near shore resources; protection of water quality; and the protection of healthy, diverse and sustainable living coastal marine resources. Beyond the fact that oysters and oyster reef communities represent important food sources for many species of commercially important fish and invertebrates, functioning oyster reefs are also recognized as critical structural and community components which stabilize and sustain a broad array of ecological relationships. Additional outcomes include economic benefits through harvesting, processing, and marketing fishery products locally and regionally by all who enjoy high-quality seafood. Additional information on this Project, including metrics of success, response to science reviews and more is available in an activity-specific appendix to the FPL, which can be found here: https:// www.restorethegulf.gov. (Please see the table on page 24 of the FPL and click on Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration, Implementation.) Justin R. Ehrenwerth, Executive Director, Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council. [FR Doc. 2016–13356 Filed 6–6–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–58–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Request for Nominations of Candidates To Serve on the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee (CLIAC) and Request for Suggested Meeting Topics for CLIAC The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is soliciting nominations for membership on CLIAC VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 and soliciting suggestions for topics to be considered for future Committee deliberation. CLIAC provides scientific and technical advice and guidance to the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); the Assistant Secretary for Health, HHS; the Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); the Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and the Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The advice and guidance pertain to general issues related to improvement in clinical laboratory quality and laboratory medicine. In addition, the Committee provides advice and guidance on specific questions related to possible revision of the CLIA standards. Examples include providing guidance on studies designed to improve safety, effectiveness, efficiency, timeliness, equity, and patientcenteredness of laboratory services; revisions to the standards under which clinical laboratories are regulated; the impact of proposed revisions to the standards on medical and laboratory practice; and the modification of the standards and provision of nonregulatory guidelines to accommodate technological advances, such as new test methods, the electronic transmission of laboratory information, and mechanisms to improve the integration of public health and clinical laboratory practices. CLIAC consists of 20 members including the Chair, and represents a diverse membership across laboratory specialties, professional roles (laboratory management, technical specialists, physicians, nurses) and practice settings (academic, clinical, public health), and includes a consumer representative. In addition, the Committee includes three ex officio members (or designees), including the Director, CDC; the Administrator, CMS; and the Commissioner, FDA. A nonvoting representative from the Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) serves as the industry liaison. The Designated Federal Officer (DFO) or their designee and the Executive Secretary are present at all meetings to ensure meetings are within applicable statutory, regulatory and HHS General Administration manual directives. Request for Candidates: Nominations are being sought for individuals who have expertise and qualifications necessary to contribute to accomplishing CLIAC’s objectives. Nominees will be selected by the HHS Secretary or designee from authorities knowledgeable across the fields of microbiology (including bacteriology, PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36543 mycobacteriology, mycology, parasitology, and virology), immunology (including histocompatibility), chemistry, hematology, pathology (including histopathology and cytology), or genetic testing (including cytogenetics); representatives from the fields of medical technology, public health, and clinical practice; and consumer representatives. Members may be invited to serve for terms of up to four years. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services policy stipulates that Committee membership be balanced in terms of professional training and background, points of view represented, and the committee’s function. Consideration is given on the basis of geographic, ethnic and gender representation. Nominees must be U.S. citizens, and cannot be full-time employees of the U.S. Government. Current participation on federal workgroups or prior experience serving on a federal advisory committee does not disqualify a candidate; however, HHS policy is to avoid excessive individual service on advisory committees and multiple committee memberships. Committee members are Special Government Employees, requiring the filing of financial disclosure reports at the beginning and annually during their terms. CDC reviews potential candidates for CLIAC membership each year, and provides a slate of nominees for consideration to the Secretary of HHS for final selection. HHS notifies selected candidates of their appointment near the start of the term in July, or as soon as the HHS selection process is completed. Note that the need for different expertise and individuals to maintain the appropriate demographic balance varies from year to year and a candidate who is not selected in one year may be reconsidered in a subsequent year. Candidates should submit the following items to be considered for nomination. The deadline for receipt of materials for the 2017 term is August 1, 2016: • Current curriculum vitae, including complete contact information (name, affiliation, mailing address, telephone number, email address). • Letter(s) of recommendation from person(s) not employed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Request for Suggested Meeting Topics: Consideration of topics for meeting agendas begins approximately four months prior to each meeting. The agendas are developed by CDC in collaboration with CMS, FDA, and the CLIAC Chair. Topics within the scope of E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Agencies

  • GULF COAST ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION COUNCIL
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 7, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36541-36543]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13356]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

GULF COAST ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION COUNCIL

[Docket No.: 106072016-1111-03]


Proposed Amendment to Initial Funded Priorities List

AGENCY: Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council.

ACTION: Proposed amendment to Initial Funded Priorities List.

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

SUMMARY: The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (Council) seeks 
public and Tribal comment on a proposal to amend its Initial Funded 
Priorities List (FPL) to approve implementation funding for the 
Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration project in Florida (Project). The 
Council is proposing to approve $3,978,000 in implementation funding 
for this Project. The Council is also proposing to reallocate $702,000 
from project planning to project implementation, after any remaining 
planning expenses have been met. The total amount available for 
implementation of the Project would thus be $4,680,000. These funds 
would be used to restore approximately 251 acres of oyster beds,

[[Page 36542]]

which is an increase from the 219 acres originally proposed in the FPL.
    To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 
other applicable laws, the Council is proposing to adopt an existing 
Environmental Assessment (EA) that addresses the activities in the 
Project. In so doing, the Council would expedite project 
implementation, reduce planning costs and increase the ecological 
benefits of this Project by using savings in planning funds to expand 
the Project by approximately 32 acres. The Council looks forward to 
public and Tribal comment on this proposal.

DATES: Comments on this proposed amendment are due July 7, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed amendment may be submitted as 
follows:
    By Email: Submit comments by email to 
frcomments@restorethegulf.gov. Email submission of comments ensures 
timely receipt and enables the Council to make them available to the 
public. In general, the Council will make such comments available for 
public inspection and copying on its Web site, www.restorethegulf.gov, 
without change, including any business or personal information 
provided, such as names, addresses, email addresses and telephone 
numbers. All comments received, including attachments and other 
supporting materials, will be part of the public record and subject to 
public disclosure. You should only submit information that you wish to 
make publicly available.
    By Mail: Send comments to Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council, 
500 Poydras Street, Suite 1117, New Orleans, LA 70130.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Please send questions by email to 
frcomments@restorethegulf.gov or contact Will Spoon at (504) 239-9814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    The Deepwater Horizon oil spill led to passage of the Resources and 
Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies 
of the Gulf Coast States Act (RESTORE Act), which dedicates 80 percent 
of all Clean Water Act administrative and civil penalties related to 
the oil spill to the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund (Trust Fund). 
The RESTORE Act also created the Council, an independent Federal entity 
comprised of the five Gulf Coast states and six Federal agencies. Among 
other responsibilities, the Council administers a portion of the Trust 
Fund known as the Council-Selected Restoration Component in order to 
``undertake projects and programs, using the best available science, 
which would restore and protect the natural resources, ecosystems, 
fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, coastal wetlands, and 
economy of the Gulf Coast.'' Additional information on the Council can 
be found here: https://www.restorethegulf.gov.
    On December 9, 2015, the Council published the FPL, which includes 
projects and programs approved for funding under the Council-Selected 
Restoration Component, along with activities that the Council 
identified as priorities for potential future funding. Activities 
approved for funding in the FPL are included in ``Category 1''; the 
priorities for potential future funding are in ``Category 2.'' In the 
FPL the Council approved approximately $156.6 million in Category 1 
restoration and planning activities, and prioritized twelve Category 2 
activities for possible funding in the future, subject to environmental 
compliance and further Council and public review. The Council included 
planning activities for the Project in Category 1 and implementation 
activities for the Project in Category 2 of the FPL.
    The Council reserved approximately $26.6 million for implementing 
priority activities in the future. These reserved funds may be used to 
support some, all or none of the activities included in Category 2 of 
the FPL and/or to support other activities not currently under 
consideration by the Council. As appropriate, the Council intends to 
review each activity in Category 2 in order to determine whether to: 
(1) Move the activity to Category 1 and approve it for funding, (2) 
remove it from Category 2 and any further consideration, or (3) 
continue to include it in Category 2. A Council decision to amend the 
FPL to move an activity from Category 2 into Category 1 must be 
approved by a Council vote after consideration of public and Tribal 
comments.

II. Environmental Compliance

    Prior to approving an activity for funding in FPL Category 1, the 
Council must comply with NEPA and other Federal environmental laws. At 
the time of approval of the FPL, the Council had not complied with NEPA 
and other applicable laws with respect to implementation of the 
Project. The Council did, however, recognize the potential ecological 
value of the Project, based on review conducted as part of the FPL 
process. For this reason, the Council approved $702,000 in planning 
funds for this Project, a portion of which would be used to complete 
any needed environmental compliance activities. As noted above, the 
Council placed the implementation portion of this Project into FPL 
Category 2, pending the outcome of this environmental compliance work 
and further Council review. The estimated cost of the Project's 
implementation component was listed at $3,978,000, which would fund the 
restoration of approximately 219 acres of oyster beds in Apalachicola 
Bay. Inclusion of the Project's implementation activities into Category 
2 did not in any way commit the Council to subsequently approve those 
implementation activities for funding.
    Since approval of the FPL, Florida has collaborated with the U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to identify an existing EA that could 
be used to support Council approval of implementation funding for this 
Project. This EA was prepared by USACE in association with a Clean 
Water Act Section 404 and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 
1899 programmatic general permit (PGP) that authorizes the Florida 
Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services to conduct aquaculture 
of live rock and marine bivalves in navigable waters of the U.S. which 
are within the jurisdiction of the State of Florida, provided that such 
activities comply with the terms and conditions of the PGP.
    The Council has reviewed this EA and associated documents, 
including an August 13, 2015, letter from the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration regarding compliance with the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA). In addition to ESA, the EA addresses compliance with 
other Federal environmental laws, including the Magnuson-Stevens 
Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the National Historic 
Preservation Act and more. Based on this review, the Council is 
proposing to adopt this EA to support the proposed approval of 
implementation funds for the Project, provided that the Project is 
implemented in accordance with the terms and conditions of the PGP and 
the design criteria set forth in the associated ESA programmatic 
consultation. This EA and the associated ESA documentation can be found 
here: https://www.restorethegulf.gov/funded-priorities-list. (See 
Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration Project--Implementation.)

Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration Project

    If approved for implementation funding, this Project would include 
the

[[Page 36543]]

placement of approximately 50,258 cubic yards of suitable oyster reef 
substrate through the use of barges and high-pressure water. Areas to 
be restored would be marked with buoys or clearly marked stakes. 
Following the completion of the planting, oyster density sampling would 
be conducted and analyzed at a minimum of six months, one year and two 
years after clutching at each restoration site.
    Ecological benefits associated with the Project would be realized 
through an array of ecological services in the form of increased 
fishery and wildlife habitat; increased biodiversity and trophic 
dynamics; increased filtering capacity to improve water quality and 
recycle nutrients; increased structural stability to reduce coastal 
erosion and to protect near shore resources; protection of water 
quality; and the protection of healthy, diverse and sustainable living 
coastal marine resources. Beyond the fact that oysters and oyster reef 
communities represent important food sources for many species of 
commercially important fish and invertebrates, functioning oyster reefs 
are also recognized as critical structural and community components 
which stabilize and sustain a broad array of ecological relationships. 
Additional outcomes include economic benefits through harvesting, 
processing, and marketing fishery products locally and regionally by 
all who enjoy high-quality seafood.
    Additional information on this Project, including metrics of 
success, response to science reviews and more is available in an 
activity-specific appendix to the FPL, which can be found here: https://www.restorethegulf.gov. (Please see the table on page 24 of the FPL 
and click on Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration, Implementation.)

Justin R. Ehrenwerth,
Executive Director, Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council.
[FR Doc. 2016-13356 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-58-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.