Aquaculture Opportunity Areas, 67519-67522 [2020-23487]
Download as PDF
67519
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Notices
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF DEEP-SET BUOY GEAR EXEMPTED FISHING PERMIT APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE
SEPTEMBER 2020 COUNCIL MEETING
(https://www.pcouncil.org/documents/2020/08/e-2-attachment-1-summary-of-dsbg-efp-applications-received-for-the-september-2020-councilmeeting.pdf/)
E.2 attachment
No.
Applicant name
Number
of vessels
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
17 ...................
18 ...................
19 ...................
20 ...................
21 ...................
Athens, Tim ......................................................................
Dell, Kevin ........................................................................
Dillman, Todd ...................................................................
Eberhardt, James .............................................................
Fischer, Paul ....................................................................
Ghio, Romolo ...................................................................
Haworth, Nick, Haworth, David ........................................
Herman, Marc ..................................................................
Lebeck, Mark ....................................................................
Lorton, Arthur, Lorton, J. Anthon .....................................
Medland, Robert, Castenada, James, Clayton, Terry .....
Pack, Troy, Fegerstedt, Ashley ........................................
Perez, Nathan, Carson, Thomas .....................................
Perez, Nathan, Carson, Thomas .....................................
Saraspe, Andres, Saraspe, Charles ................................
Sidielnikov, Andrii .............................................................
Tharp, Nicolas ..................................................................
Volaski, Andrew ...............................................................
Wallace, Miles ..................................................................
Weiser, Steve ...................................................................
Fishing method
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
DSLBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSLBG
NSBG
DSLBG
DSLBG, NSBG
DSLBG
DSBG
DSBG
NSBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSBG
DSLBG
DSBG, NSBG
DSBG
Notes
Not recommended.
NSBG portion not recommended.
Same vessel as #15.
Same vessel as #14.
NSBG portion not recommended.
Fishing Method DSBG—standard deep-set buoy gear, DSLBG—linked deep-set buoy gear, NSBG—night set buoy gear. DSLBG vessels can
also use standard deep-set buoy gear.
NMFS will consider all public
comments submitted in response to this
Federal Register notice prior to issuance
of any EFP. Additionally, NMFS has
analyzed the effects of issuing DSBG
and DSLBG EFPs, and would analyze
issuing additional NSBG EFPs in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act and NOAA’s
Administrative Order 216–6, as well as
for compliance with other applicable
laws, including Section 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.), which requires the agency to
consider whether the proposed action is
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence and recovery of any
endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: October 16, 2020.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–23537 Filed 10–22–20; 8:45 am]
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:09 Oct 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XA406]
Aquaculture Opportunity Areas
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; request for information.
AGENCY:
On May 7, 2020, the White
House issued an Executive Order (E.O.)
on Promoting American Seafood
Competitiveness and Economic Growth,
which requires the Secretary of
Commerce to identify geographic areas
containing locations suitable for
commercial aquaculture, and complete a
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement (PEIS) for each area to
assess the impact of siting aquaculture
facilities there. NOAA requests that
interested parties provide relevant
information on the identification of
areas within Federal waters of the Gulf
of Mexico and off Southern California,
south of Point Conception, for the first
two Aquaculture Opportunity Areas
(AOA) and on what areas NOAA should
consider nationally for future AOAs.
Please respond to the questions listed in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section,
as appropriate. The public input
provided in response to this request for
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
information (RFI) will inform NOAA as
it works with Federal agencies,
appropriate Regional Fishery
Management Councils, and in
coordination with appropriate State and
tribal governments to identify AOAs.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit written comments on or before
December 22, 2020.
Four webinar-based listening sessions
are scheduled. Each will focus on a
specific region or national comments,
but comments on each topic will be
accepted at all meetings:
1. November 5, 2020, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Eastern: National listening session.
2. November 12, 2020, 9 a.m. to 11
a.m. Pacific: Southern California
listening session.
3. November 17, 2020, 1 p.m. to 3
p.m. Eastern: Gulf of Mexico listening
session.
4. November 19, 2020, 1 p.m. to 3
p.m. Eastern: National listening session.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by NOAA–NMFS–2020–0118,
by the following method:
Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-20200118, click the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon,
complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments.
Webinar links: Links and toll-free
phone numbers for each webinar can be
found at: https://
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
67520
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Notices
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/aquacultureopportunity-areas.
Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter
‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish
to remain anonymous).
Please note that the U.S. Government
will not pay for response preparation, or
for the use of any information contained
in the response.
If you are unable to provide electronic
comments, please contact: Kristy Beard,
301–427–8333 or
nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristy Beard, 301–427–8333 or
nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 7,
2020, the President signed a new E.O.
on Promoting American Seafood
Competitiveness and Economic Growth
(E.O. 13921). The E.O. calls for the
expansion of sustainable U.S. seafood
production. NOAA also has directives to
promote sustainable aquaculture in the
U.S. through the National Aquaculture
Act of 1980 and the NOAA Marine
Aquaculture Policy. NOAA has a variety
of proven science-based tools and
strategies that can support these
directives and help communities
thoughtfully consider how and where to
sustainably develop offshore
aquaculture that will complement wildcapture fisheries, working waterfronts,
and our nation’s seafood processing and
distribution infrastructure.
Section 7 of the E.O. directs the
Secretary of Commerce to identify
AOAs in consultation with the Secretary
of Defense, the Secretary of the Interior,
the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Secretary of Homeland Security, the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, other appropriate
Federal officials, and appropriate
Regional Fishery Management Councils,
and in coordination with appropriate
State and tribal governments. This
includes:
1. Within 1 year of the E.O., identify
at least two geographic areas containing
locations suitable for commercial
aquaculture;
2. Within 2 years of identifying each
area, complete a NEPA PEIS for each
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:09 Oct 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
area to assess the impact of siting
aquaculture facilities there;
3. For each of the following 4 years,
identify two additional geographic areas
containing locations suitable for
commercial aquaculture and complete a
PEIS for each within 2 years.
These geographic areas will be
referred to as AOAs once the PEIS is
complete. Identifying AOAs is an
opportunity to use the best available
science on sustainable aquaculture
management, and support the ‘‘triple
bottom line’’ of environmental,
economic, and social sustainability.
This approach has been refined and
utilized widely within states and by
other countries with robust, sustainable
aquaculture sectors. The 3-year process
to identify and complete a PEIS for each
AOA will result in the identification of
a geographic area that, through scientific
analysis and public engagement, is
determined to be environmentally,
socially, and economically suitable for
aquaculture. The areas identified as
AOAs will have characteristics that are
expected to be able to support multiple
aquaculture farm sites of varying types,
but all portions of the AOA may not be
appropriate for aquaculture or for all
types of aquaculture. Through spatial
modeling, NOAA expects to identify
areas that may support approximately
three to five aquaculture operations in
each of the first two AOAs. The most
suitable locations for aquaculture
operations within an AOA would be
considered through the PEIS, and
locations for individual operations
would be considered during the
required permitting process and
associated environmental consultations.
To identify the first two geographic
areas containing locations suitable for
commercial aquaculture within one year
of the Executive Order, NOAA will
focus on Federal waters of the Gulf of
Mexico and Southern California, south
of Point Conception, because there is
existing spatial analysis data and
current industry interest in developing
sustainable aquaculture operations in
these regions. NOAA will further
narrow those areas using a combination
of spatial mapping approaches,
scientific review, and public input.
NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal
Ocean Science will use the best
available data to account for key
environmental, economic, social, and
cultural considerations to identify areas
that may support sustainable
aquaculture development. NOAA will
then combine those results with input
from other Federal agencies, Fishery
Management Councils, Marine Fisheries
Commissions, states and tribes, and the
general public to identify the first two
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
geographic areas that will be considered
in more depth through the PEIS. Public
input on identification of geographic
areas will be gathered through this RFI;
additional opportunities for input will
be provided during the PEIS process for
each area.
NOAA may use the information
received through this RFI in the NEPA
PEIS process. The information could
inform the development of potential
NEPA alternatives, such as different
locations, different aquaculture types in
each location (e.g., finfish in one
location, shellfish in another location),
and different configurations of farm
locations and aquaculture types. NOAA
expects to publish a notice of intent
(NOI) to prepare a PEIS for each of the
first two AOAs in the Gulf of Mexico
and Southern California after
identifying at least two geographic areas
containing locations suitable for
commercial aquaculture. Public notices
announcing the NOI and announcing
the availability of a draft PEIS will
provide future opportunities for public
comment on the first two AOAs.
NOAA is also requesting public input
on what areas should be considered
nationally for future AOAs. NOAA will
use the information received from this
RFI to help determine where to focus
efforts for future AOAs. NOAA expects
to continue providing opportunities for
public comment until all 10 AOAs have
been identified over the next 5 years.
Aquaculture operations proposed
within an AOA would have the same
Federal and state permitting and
authorization requirements as anywhere
else and would be required to comply
with all applicable Federal and state
laws and regulations. Site-specific
environmental surveys may be required
for the permitting process. Additional
NEPA analysis beyond the PEIS for the
AOA(s) may be necessary as a part of
permitting and authorization processes
for individual operations. NOAA will
work with the Federal agencies
responsible for permitting offshore
aquaculture (e.g., the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and the Environmental
Protection Agency) throughout the AOA
identification process to identify
information NOAA can include in the
PEIS to help inform future permitting
needs.
Additional information on AOAs,
including frequently asked questions, is
available on NOAA’s website at: https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/insight/
aquaculture-opportunity-areas.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Notices
Questions To Inform the Identification
of the First Two AOAs, in the Gulf of
Mexico and Southern California, and
Locations for Future AOAs, Nationally
Through this RFI, NOAA (we) seeks
written public input on the
identification of the first two AOAs.
NOAA announced in August 2020 that
the first two AOAs would be in Federal
waters (i.e., U.S. Exclusive Economic
Zone) of the Gulf of Mexico and
Southern California; the comments
received through this RFI will help us
identify specific locations within those
regions which we will consider in more
depth through the PEIS process. There
will be additional opportunities for
public comment during the PEIS
process.
We also seek public input on what
regions of the country should be
considered as we go through the process
to identify two more geographic areas
per year, for a total of 10 by 2025.
When providing input, please specify:
• The question number(s) you are
responding to;
• Whether your comments apply to
the Gulf of Mexico, Southern California,
or other U.S. regions/areas; and
• Whether your comments apply to
specific type(s) of offshore aquaculture
(finfish, macroalgae, shellfish, or a
combination of species).
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Input Requested To Inform the
Identification of AOAs in Federal
Waters of the Gulf of Mexico and
Southern California
1. With input from industry and based
on previous permit applications, we
have identified the water depths and
maximum distances from shore (see a.
and b. below) that we expect to support
aquaculture within Federal waters (i.e.,
U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone) of the
Gulf of Mexico and Southern California
as starting points for the process of
identifying AOAs. Are there types of
offshore aquaculture that these areas
may or may not support, or are there
other water depths and maximum
distances from shore that should be
considered, and why?
a. In the Gulf of Mexico, we are
looking at areas that:
i. Are within the depth range of 50 to
150 meters.
ii. Do not have a specified maximum
distance from shore.
b. In Southern California, we are
looking at areas that:
i. Are within the depth range of 10 to
150 meters.
ii. Are a maximum distance of 25
nautical miles from shore.
2. Are there specific locations or
habitats within Federal waters of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:09 Oct 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
Gulf of Mexico or Southern California
that should be considered for AOAs?
Are there specific locations that should
be avoided? Please be as specific as
possible and include latitude and
longitude or defining landmarks. Please
indicate why such areas should be
considered or avoided, for example,
favorable biological parameters, water
quality (e.g., nutrients or other
constituents that might make an area
favorable), proximity to infrastructure
(e.g., ports, processing plants, hatcheries
or nurseries that could supply
fingerlings for grow-out), relationship to
other planned initiatives, etc.
3. Are there specific locations within
Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico or
Southern California where the presence
of aquaculture gear may overlap with
areas utilized by protected species (e.g.,
large whales, sea turtles, dolphins, etc.)?
4. Are there specific locations within
Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico or
Southern California that should be
avoided because of concerns about
harmful algal blooms (HABs) or
impaired water quality? Please specify
whether these concerns are related to:
(a) Aquaculture activities being
impacted by HABs and impaired water
quality, or (b) aquaculture activities
contributing to HABs and impaired
water quality?
5. Is there ongoing environmental,
economic, or social science research
that would assist in the identification
and implementation of AOAs in Federal
waters of the Gulf of Mexico or
Southern California? If so, please
describe in as much detail as is
available.
6. Is there information that may not be
readily available or accessible online
that would be useful for AOA planning
processes in Federal waters of the Gulf
of Mexico and Southern California? This
includes spatial data or geographic
information system (GIS) layers
representing environmental and
socioeconomic considerations, or a
point of contact for these data, for the
following categories:
—Biophysical/oceanographic (wave
climate, currents, bathymetry)
—Natural resources (minerals, energy
resources, fishes and aquatic
organisms, protected species and
habitats, coral reefs, biodiversity)
—Social and cultural resources
—Government boundaries
—Industry (fishing, energy production,
transportation, communication
cables)
—Military
—Navigation
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67521
Input Requested To Inform the
Identification of Future AOAs,
Nationally
7. What regions of the country should
be considered for future AOAs?
a. New England (Maine through
Connecticut)
b. Mid-Atlantic (New York through
Virginia)
c. South Atlantic (North Carolina
through east coast Florida)
d. U.S. Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S.
Virgin Islands)
e. Gulf of Mexico (west coast Florida
through Texas)
f. Alaska
g. Washington through California
h. Hawai’i, American Samoa, Guam, the
Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and U.S. Pacific
Remote Island Areas
8. Are there specific locations within
those regions identified in response to
#7 that should be considered for future
AOAs? Please be as specific as possible
and include latitude and longitude or
defining landmarks. Please indicate why
these areas are of interest, including
favorable biological parameters, water
quality (e.g., nutrients or other
constituents that might make an area
favorable), proximity to infrastructure
(e.g., ports, processing plants, hatcheries
or nurseries that could supply
fingerlings for grow-out), relationship to
other planned initiatives, etc.
9. Within those regions identified in
response to #7, what resource use
conflicts should we consider as we
identify future AOAs? Please describe
specific considerations that might make
an area unfavorable, including ongoing
or planned activities or ocean uses.
10. Is there ongoing environmental,
economic, or social science research
that would assist in the identification
and implementation of future AOAs? If
so, please describe in as much detail as
is available.
11. We are soliciting information on
siting requirements for aquaculture
operations to inform spatial analysis for
future AOAs. For the region(s)
identified in response to #7, please
provide:
a. Minimum and maximum depth
needed to operate aquaculture farms.
b. Minimum and maximum current
conditions that could impact farm
operation.
c. Minimum and maximum wave
climate that could impact farm
operation.
d. Proximity to shore.
12. If states express interest in
developing offshore aquaculture, should
we also consider state waters as areas
for future AOAs?
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
67522
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 206 / Friday, October 23, 2020 / Notices
(Authority: E.O. 13921)
Dated: October 19, 2020.
Danielle Blacklock,
Director, Office of Aquaculture, National
Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020–23487 Filed 10–22–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
Review and Approval; Comments
Request; Substantive Submissions
Made During Prosecution of the
Trademark Application
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of information collection;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO), in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, invites
comments on the extension and revision
of an existing information collection:
0651–0054 (Substantive Submissions
Made During Prosecution of the
Trademark Application). The purpose of
this notice is to allow 60 days for public
comment preceding submission of the
information collection to OMB.
DATES: To ensure consideration,
comments regarding this information
collection must be received on or before
December 22, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments by
any of the following methods. Do not
submit Confidential Business
Information or otherwise sensitive or
protected information.
• Email: InformationCollection@
uspto.gov. Include ‘‘0651–0054
comment’’ in the subject line of the
message.
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail: Kimberly Hardy, Office of the
Chief Administrative Officer, United
States Patent and Trademark Office,
P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–
1450.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be directed to Catherine Cain,
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
1 2019 Report of the Economic Survey, published
by the Committee on Economics of Legal Practice
of the American Intellectual Property Law
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:09 Oct 22, 2020
Jkt 253001
Attorney Advisor, United States Patent
and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by
telephone at 571–272–8946; or by email
to catherine.cain@uspto.gov with
‘‘0651–0054 comment’’ in the subject
line. Additional information about this
information collection is also available
at https://www.reginfo.gov under
‘‘Information Collection Review.’’
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) administers
the Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051 et
seq., which provides for the Federal
registration of trademarks, service
marks, collective trademarks and service
marks, collective membership marks,
and certification marks. Individuals and
businesses that use or intend to use
such marks in commerce may file an
application to register their mark with
the USPTO. Such individuals and
businesses may also submit various
communications to the USPTO during
the prosecution of an application.
This information collection covers the
various communications that may be
submitted by the applicant, including
providing additional information
needed to process a request to delete a
particular filing basis from an
application or to divide an application
identifying multiple goods and/or
services into two or more separate
applications. This information
collection also covers requests for a 6month extension of time to file a
statement that the mark is in use in
commerce or petitions to revive an
application that abandoned for failure to
submit a timely response to an office
action or a timely statement of use or
extension request. This information
collection also covers circumstances in
which an applicant may expressly
abandon an application by filing a
written request for withdrawal of the
application.
The regulations implementing the Act
are set forth in 37 CFR part 2. These
regulations mandate that each register
entry include the mark, the goods and/
or services in connection with which
the mark is used, ownership
information, dates of use, and certain
other information. The USPTO also
provides similar information concerning
pending applications. The register and
pending application information may be
accessed by an individual or by
businesses to determine the availability
Association (AIPLA); https://www.aipla.org/detail/
journal-issue/2019-report-of-the-economic-survey.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
of a mark. By accessing the USPTO’s
information, parties may reduce the
possibility of initiating use of a mark
previously adopted by another. The
Federal trademark registration process
may thereby reduce the number of
filings between both litigating parties
and the courts.
II. Method of Collection
Items in this information collection
must be submitted via online electronic
submissions. In limited circumstances,
applicants may be permitted to submit
the information in paper form by mail,
fax, or hand delivery.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 0651–0054.
Forms: (PTO = Patent and Trademark
Office)
• PTO Form 1553 (Trademark/Service
Mark Allegation of Use (Statement of
Use/Amendment to Allege Use))
• PTO Form 1581 (Request for
Extension of Time to File a Statement
of Use)
• PTO Form 2194 (Petition to Revive
Abandoned Application—Failure to
Respond Timely to Office Action)
• PTO Form 2195 (Petition to Revive
Abandoned Application—Failure to
File Timely Statement of Use or
Extension Request)
• PTO Form 2200 (Request to Delete
Section 1(b) Basis, Intent to Use)
• PTO Form 2202 (Request for Express
Abandonment (Withdrawal) of
Application)
• PTO Form 2301 (Petition to Director)
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved information
collection.
Affected Public: Private sector;
individuals or households.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
333,582 respondents per year.
Estimated Number of Responses:
333,582 responses per year.
Estimated Time per Response: The
USPTO estimates that it will take the
public from approximately 27 minutes
(0.5 hours) to 65 minutes (1.1 hours) to
complete a response, depending on the
complexity of the situation. This
includes the time to gather the
necessary information, prepare the
appropriate documents, and submit the
information to the USPTO.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent
Burden Hours: 208,219 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Respondent
(Hourly) Cost Burden: $83,287,600.
The USPTO uses the mean rate for attorneys in
private firms which is $400 per hour.
E:\FR\FM\23OCN1.SGM
23OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 206 (Friday, October 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67519-67522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23487]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[RTID 0648-XA406]
Aquaculture Opportunity Areas
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 7, 2020, the White House issued an Executive Order
(E.O.) on Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic
Growth, which requires the Secretary of Commerce to identify geographic
areas containing locations suitable for commercial aquaculture, and
complete a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Programmatic
Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for each area to assess the
impact of siting aquaculture facilities there. NOAA requests that
interested parties provide relevant information on the identification
of areas within Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico and off Southern
California, south of Point Conception, for the first two Aquaculture
Opportunity Areas (AOA) and on what areas NOAA should consider
nationally for future AOAs. Please respond to the questions listed in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section, as appropriate. The public input
provided in response to this request for information (RFI) will inform
NOAA as it works with Federal agencies, appropriate Regional Fishery
Management Councils, and in coordination with appropriate State and
tribal governments to identify AOAs.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on or
before December 22, 2020.
Four webinar-based listening sessions are scheduled. Each will
focus on a specific region or national comments, but comments on each
topic will be accepted at all meetings:
1. November 5, 2020, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern: National listening
session.
2. November 12, 2020, 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. Pacific: Southern
California listening session.
3. November 17, 2020, 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern: Gulf of Mexico
listening session.
4. November 19, 2020, 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern: National listening
session.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2020-0118,
by the following method:
Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via
the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2020-0118, click the ``Comment Now!'' icon,
complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
Webinar links: Links and toll-free phone numbers for each webinar
can be found at: https://
[[Page 67520]]
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/aquaculture-opportunity-areas.
Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period,
may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the
public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on
www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business
information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily
by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous
comments (enter ``N/A'' in the required fields if you wish to remain
anonymous).
Please note that the U.S. Government will not pay for response
preparation, or for the use of any information contained in the
response.
If you are unable to provide electronic comments, please contact:
Kristy Beard, 301-427-8333 or nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov">nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristy Beard, 301-427-8333 or
nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov">nmfs.aquaculture.info@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 7, 2020, the President signed a new
E.O. on Promoting American Seafood Competitiveness and Economic Growth
(E.O. 13921). The E.O. calls for the expansion of sustainable U.S.
seafood production. NOAA also has directives to promote sustainable
aquaculture in the U.S. through the National Aquaculture Act of 1980
and the NOAA Marine Aquaculture Policy. NOAA has a variety of proven
science-based tools and strategies that can support these directives
and help communities thoughtfully consider how and where to sustainably
develop offshore aquaculture that will complement wild-capture
fisheries, working waterfronts, and our nation's seafood processing and
distribution infrastructure.
Section 7 of the E.O. directs the Secretary of Commerce to identify
AOAs in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
the Interior, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency,
other appropriate Federal officials, and appropriate Regional Fishery
Management Councils, and in coordination with appropriate State and
tribal governments. This includes:
1. Within 1 year of the E.O., identify at least two geographic
areas containing locations suitable for commercial aquaculture;
2. Within 2 years of identifying each area, complete a NEPA PEIS
for each area to assess the impact of siting aquaculture facilities
there;
3. For each of the following 4 years, identify two additional
geographic areas containing locations suitable for commercial
aquaculture and complete a PEIS for each within 2 years.
These geographic areas will be referred to as AOAs once the PEIS is
complete. Identifying AOAs is an opportunity to use the best available
science on sustainable aquaculture management, and support the ``triple
bottom line'' of environmental, economic, and social sustainability.
This approach has been refined and utilized widely within states and by
other countries with robust, sustainable aquaculture sectors. The 3-
year process to identify and complete a PEIS for each AOA will result
in the identification of a geographic area that, through scientific
analysis and public engagement, is determined to be environmentally,
socially, and economically suitable for aquaculture. The areas
identified as AOAs will have characteristics that are expected to be
able to support multiple aquaculture farm sites of varying types, but
all portions of the AOA may not be appropriate for aquaculture or for
all types of aquaculture. Through spatial modeling, NOAA expects to
identify areas that may support approximately three to five aquaculture
operations in each of the first two AOAs. The most suitable locations
for aquaculture operations within an AOA would be considered through
the PEIS, and locations for individual operations would be considered
during the required permitting process and associated environmental
consultations.
To identify the first two geographic areas containing locations
suitable for commercial aquaculture within one year of the Executive
Order, NOAA will focus on Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico and
Southern California, south of Point Conception, because there is
existing spatial analysis data and current industry interest in
developing sustainable aquaculture operations in these regions. NOAA
will further narrow those areas using a combination of spatial mapping
approaches, scientific review, and public input. NOAA's National
Centers for Coastal Ocean Science will use the best available data to
account for key environmental, economic, social, and cultural
considerations to identify areas that may support sustainable
aquaculture development. NOAA will then combine those results with
input from other Federal agencies, Fishery Management Councils, Marine
Fisheries Commissions, states and tribes, and the general public to
identify the first two geographic areas that will be considered in more
depth through the PEIS. Public input on identification of geographic
areas will be gathered through this RFI; additional opportunities for
input will be provided during the PEIS process for each area.
NOAA may use the information received through this RFI in the NEPA
PEIS process. The information could inform the development of potential
NEPA alternatives, such as different locations, different aquaculture
types in each location (e.g., finfish in one location, shellfish in
another location), and different configurations of farm locations and
aquaculture types. NOAA expects to publish a notice of intent (NOI) to
prepare a PEIS for each of the first two AOAs in the Gulf of Mexico and
Southern California after identifying at least two geographic areas
containing locations suitable for commercial aquaculture. Public
notices announcing the NOI and announcing the availability of a draft
PEIS will provide future opportunities for public comment on the first
two AOAs.
NOAA is also requesting public input on what areas should be
considered nationally for future AOAs. NOAA will use the information
received from this RFI to help determine where to focus efforts for
future AOAs. NOAA expects to continue providing opportunities for
public comment until all 10 AOAs have been identified over the next 5
years.
Aquaculture operations proposed within an AOA would have the same
Federal and state permitting and authorization requirements as anywhere
else and would be required to comply with all applicable Federal and
state laws and regulations. Site-specific environmental surveys may be
required for the permitting process. Additional NEPA analysis beyond
the PEIS for the AOA(s) may be necessary as a part of permitting and
authorization processes for individual operations. NOAA will work with
the Federal agencies responsible for permitting offshore aquaculture
(e.g., the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental
Protection Agency) throughout the AOA identification process to
identify information NOAA can include in the PEIS to help inform future
permitting needs.
Additional information on AOAs, including frequently asked
questions, is available on NOAA's website at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/insight/aquaculture-opportunity-areas.
[[Page 67521]]
Questions To Inform the Identification of the First Two AOAs, in the
Gulf of Mexico and Southern California, and Locations for Future AOAs,
Nationally
Through this RFI, NOAA (we) seeks written public input on the
identification of the first two AOAs. NOAA announced in August 2020
that the first two AOAs would be in Federal waters (i.e., U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone) of the Gulf of Mexico and Southern California;
the comments received through this RFI will help us identify specific
locations within those regions which we will consider in more depth
through the PEIS process. There will be additional opportunities for
public comment during the PEIS process.
We also seek public input on what regions of the country should be
considered as we go through the process to identify two more geographic
areas per year, for a total of 10 by 2025.
When providing input, please specify:
The question number(s) you are responding to;
Whether your comments apply to the Gulf of Mexico,
Southern California, or other U.S. regions/areas; and
Whether your comments apply to specific type(s) of
offshore aquaculture (finfish, macroalgae, shellfish, or a combination
of species).
Input Requested To Inform the Identification of AOAs in Federal Waters
of the Gulf of Mexico and Southern California
1. With input from industry and based on previous permit
applications, we have identified the water depths and maximum distances
from shore (see a. and b. below) that we expect to support aquaculture
within Federal waters (i.e., U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone) of the Gulf
of Mexico and Southern California as starting points for the process of
identifying AOAs. Are there types of offshore aquaculture that these
areas may or may not support, or are there other water depths and
maximum distances from shore that should be considered, and why?
a. In the Gulf of Mexico, we are looking at areas that:
i. Are within the depth range of 50 to 150 meters.
ii. Do not have a specified maximum distance from shore.
b. In Southern California, we are looking at areas that:
i. Are within the depth range of 10 to 150 meters.
ii. Are a maximum distance of 25 nautical miles from shore.
2. Are there specific locations or habitats within Federal waters
of the Gulf of Mexico or Southern California that should be considered
for AOAs? Are there specific locations that should be avoided? Please
be as specific as possible and include latitude and longitude or
defining landmarks. Please indicate why such areas should be considered
or avoided, for example, favorable biological parameters, water quality
(e.g., nutrients or other constituents that might make an area
favorable), proximity to infrastructure (e.g., ports, processing
plants, hatcheries or nurseries that could supply fingerlings for grow-
out), relationship to other planned initiatives, etc.
3. Are there specific locations within Federal waters of the Gulf
of Mexico or Southern California where the presence of aquaculture gear
may overlap with areas utilized by protected species (e.g., large
whales, sea turtles, dolphins, etc.)?
4. Are there specific locations within Federal waters of the Gulf
of Mexico or Southern California that should be avoided because of
concerns about harmful algal blooms (HABs) or impaired water quality?
Please specify whether these concerns are related to: (a) Aquaculture
activities being impacted by HABs and impaired water quality, or (b)
aquaculture activities contributing to HABs and impaired water quality?
5. Is there ongoing environmental, economic, or social science
research that would assist in the identification and implementation of
AOAs in Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico or Southern California? If
so, please describe in as much detail as is available.
6. Is there information that may not be readily available or
accessible online that would be useful for AOA planning processes in
Federal waters of the Gulf of Mexico and Southern California? This
includes spatial data or geographic information system (GIS) layers
representing environmental and socioeconomic considerations, or a point
of contact for these data, for the following categories:
--Biophysical/oceanographic (wave climate, currents, bathymetry)
--Natural resources (minerals, energy resources, fishes and aquatic
organisms, protected species and habitats, coral reefs, biodiversity)
--Social and cultural resources
--Government boundaries
--Industry (fishing, energy production, transportation, communication
cables)
--Military
--Navigation
Input Requested To Inform the Identification of Future AOAs, Nationally
7. What regions of the country should be considered for future
AOAs?
a. New England (Maine through Connecticut)
b. Mid-Atlantic (New York through Virginia)
c. South Atlantic (North Carolina through east coast Florida)
d. U.S. Caribbean (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands)
e. Gulf of Mexico (west coast Florida through Texas)
f. Alaska
g. Washington through California
h. Hawai'i, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands, and U.S. Pacific Remote Island Areas
8. Are there specific locations within those regions identified in
response to #7 that should be considered for future AOAs? Please be as
specific as possible and include latitude and longitude or defining
landmarks. Please indicate why these areas are of interest, including
favorable biological parameters, water quality (e.g., nutrients or
other constituents that might make an area favorable), proximity to
infrastructure (e.g., ports, processing plants, hatcheries or nurseries
that could supply fingerlings for grow-out), relationship to other
planned initiatives, etc.
9. Within those regions identified in response to #7, what resource
use conflicts should we consider as we identify future AOAs? Please
describe specific considerations that might make an area unfavorable,
including ongoing or planned activities or ocean uses.
10. Is there ongoing environmental, economic, or social science
research that would assist in the identification and implementation of
future AOAs? If so, please describe in as much detail as is available.
11. We are soliciting information on siting requirements for
aquaculture operations to inform spatial analysis for future AOAs. For
the region(s) identified in response to #7, please provide:
a. Minimum and maximum depth needed to operate aquaculture farms.
b. Minimum and maximum current conditions that could impact farm
operation.
c. Minimum and maximum wave climate that could impact farm
operation.
d. Proximity to shore.
12. If states express interest in developing offshore aquaculture,
should we also consider state waters as areas for future AOAs?
[[Page 67522]]
(Authority: E.O. 13921)
Dated: October 19, 2020.
Danielle Blacklock,
Director, Office of Aquaculture, National Marine Fisheries Service,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020-23487 Filed 10-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P