Expansion of Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, 4937-4961 [2021-00887]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
I. Introduction
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
1. Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary
Located in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico, 70 to 115 nautical miles (130 to
213 kilometers) off the coasts of Texas
and Louisiana, FGBNMS encompasses
approximately 56 square miles and
includes three separate undersea
features: East Flower Garden Bank, West
Flower Garden Bank, and Stetson Bank.
The banks range in depth from 55 feet
(17 meters) to nearly 500 feet (152
meters), and are geological formations
created by the movement of ancient salt
deposits pushed up through overlying
sedimentary layers.
The banks provide a wide range of
habitat conditions that support several
distinct biological communities,
including the northernmost coral reefs
in the continental United States and
mesophotic coral habitats. These and
similar formations throughout the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico provide
the foundation for essential habitat for
numerous marine species, including a
variety of fish species of commercial
and recreational importance, and
several endangered or threatened
species, including sea turtles and
mobula rays. The combination of
location and geology makes the
sanctuary an extremely productive and
diverse ecosystem.
NOAA issued a final rule to
implement the designation of FGBNMS
on December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63634).
Congress subsequently passed a law
recognizing the designation on January
17, 1992 (Pub. L. 102–251, Title I, Sec.
101). At that time, the sanctuary
consisted of two areas known as East
and West Flower Garden Banks (56 FR
63634). Among other things, FGBNMS
regulated a narrow range of activities,
established permit and certification
procedures, and exempted certain U.S.
Department of Defense (DOD) activities
from the sanctuary’s prohibitions (56 FR
63634). Those regulations became
effective on January 18, 1994 (58 FR
65664). In 1996, Congress added Stetson
Bank to the sanctuary (Pub. L. 104–283).
The boundaries of Stetson Bank and
West Flower Garden Bank were later
amended to improve administrative
efficiencies and increase the precision
of all boundary coordinates based on
new positioning technology (65 FR
81175, Dec. 22, 2000). FGBNMS
regulations can be found at 15 CFR part
922, subpart L, and the sanctuary
management plan may be found on the
FGBNMS website.1 As a result of this
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 210107–0004]
RIN 0648–BA21
Expansion of Flower Garden Banks
National Marine Sanctuary
Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
issues final regulations to implement
the expansion of the boundaries of
Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary (FGBNMS or sanctuary) and
revise the sanctuary’s terms of
designation. The purpose of this action
is to expand the sanctuary to include
portions of 14 additional reefs and
banks in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico, representing approximately a
104 square mile increase in area. With
this action, the existing FGBNMS
regulations will apply to the expanded
locations.
DATES: Effective Date: Pursuant to
section 304(b) of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C.
1434(b)), the designation and
regulations shall take effect and become
final after the close of a review period
of forty-five days of continuous session
of Congress, beginning on the date on
which this document is published. The
public can track the days of
Congressional session at https://
www.congress.gov/days-in-session. After
the close of the forty-five days of
continuous session of Congress, NOAA
will publish a document announcing
the effective date of the final regulations
in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
described in this rule and the record of
decision (ROD) are available at https://
flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
sanctuaryexpansion.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
George P. Schmahl, Superintendent,
Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary, 4700 Avenue U, Building
216, Galveston, Texas 77551, at 409–
356–0383, or fgbexpansion@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
1 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
2012mgmtplan.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4937
action, FGBNMS is being expanded to a
total of 160.4 square miles, with the
existing regulations applying to the
expansion area.
2. Need for Action
The NMSA authorizes the Secretary of
Commerce (Secretary) to designate and
protect, as national marine sanctuaries,
areas of the marine environment that are
of special national significance due to
their conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, scientific,
cultural, archeological, educational, or
aesthetic qualities. Day-to-day
management of national marine
sanctuaries is delegated by the Secretary
to ONMS. The primary objective of the
NMSA is to protect nationally
significant marine resources, including
biological features such as coral reefs,
and cultural resources, such as historic
shipwrecks and archaeological sites.
The mission of FGBNMS is to identify,
protect, conserve, and enhance the
natural and cultural resources, values,
and qualities of the sanctuary and its
regional environment for this and future
generations.
This action responds to the need to
provide comprehensive and coordinated
management of, and additional
regulatory protection for, sensitive
underwater features and marine habitats
associated with continental shelf-edge
reefs and banks in the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico. The current
jurisdictional regime divides authority
among several governmental entities
that regulate offshore energy exploration
(Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM)), fishing (Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council
(GMFMC)), and water quality
(Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)), but does not provide
comprehensive and effective
management for the full range of
activities that impact the sensitive reefs
and banks in the region. For example,
BOEM has established No Activity
Zones (NAZs) that prohibit anchoring
only by vessels engaged in development
activities and platform services specific
to a particular lease, while anchoring by
other vessels remains unregulated.
Further, these anchoring regulations in
the NAZs apply only on a lease-by-lease
basis. Other vessel ground tackle
(including anchors, chains, and cables)
and marine salvage activities were
unregulated and have caused significant
injury to sensitive biological
communities. Sanctuary designation
will allow for additional protection of
these reefs and banks from other
bottom-disturbing activities, which are
otherwise unregulated at this time.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4938
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
The sanctuary expansion areas are
recognized as hotspots of marine
biodiversity that provide vital habitat
for many important species in the Gulf
of Mexico region. They are home to the
most significant examples of coral and
algal reefs, mesophotic and deepwater
coral communities, and other biological
assemblages in the Gulf of Mexico.
Furthermore, these areas provide
important habitat for vulnerable species
such as mobula rays, sea turtles, and
whale sharks, while serving as nurseries
for numerous fish species of commercial
and recreational importance. As such,
most of these areas have also been
identified as nationally significant
through their designation as Habitat
Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) by
the GMFMC and as NAZs by BOEM.
These habitats are vulnerable to a
variety of known and potential impacts,
including large vessel anchoring, marine
salvage operations, fishing techniques
that may injure benthic habitat (e.g.,
trawling, bottom-tending gear), and
certain oil and gas exploration and
development activities. These impacts
will more effectively be addressed
within the expanded areas through the
comprehensive habitat conservation and
management authorities under the
NMSA. The protection of these
ecologically significant sites would
increase the resilience of marine
ecosystems and enhance the
sustainability of the region’s thriving
recreation, tourism, and commercial
economies. Ultimately, expanding
FGBNMS will help ensure that valuable
marine resources remain available for
the use and enjoyment of future
generations of Americans.
This sanctuary expansion is the
outcome of decades of scientific
research and growing public recognition
of the need for coordinated protection of
significant offshore marine places in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico region.
Protecting additional habitat in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico emerged as
one of the highest priorities identified
during a vigorous public review process
of FGBNMS management issues.
Subsequently, ‘‘Sanctuary Expansion’’
was incorporated as a discrete action
plan in the 2012 revision of the
sanctuary’s management plan. The
region is utilized for a variety of
recreational, commercial, and industrial
purposes, and there are ongoing impacts
from bottom-disturbing activities, such
as large vessel anchoring and marine
salvage, on the sensitive biological
resources and geological features
associated with many reefs and banks in
the area. Therefore, pursuant to the
NMSA’s purpose to ‘‘facilitate to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
extent compatible with the primary
objective of resource protection, all
public and private uses of the resources
of these marine areas,’’ FGBNMS can
further resource protection while
balancing multiple uses. This action
will expand FGBNMS by incorporating
portions of selected reefs and banks in
the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. In
doing so, this action will provide
management of and protection for
nationally significant areas with
biological, ecological, and/or structural
links to the existing sanctuary,
including vulnerable mesophotic and
deep benthic habitat sites, while
providing important opportunities for
research and recovery of resources from
observed impacts. These areas contain
the most significant examples of
mesophotic coral communities in the
United States, including some of the
highest known densities (colonies per
square meter) and species richness of
mesophotic corals (Cairns et al. 2017).
In addition, and as noted above, many
banks in the expansion area have also
been recognized by BOEM and GMFMC
as nationally significant and designated
as HAPCs and NAZs.
II. History of the FGBNMS Expansion
Process
1. Management Plan Review
NOAA is required by NMSA Section
304(e) to periodically review sanctuary
management plans to ensure that
sanctuary management continues to
effectively conserve, protect, and
enhance the nationally significant living
and cultural resources at each site.
Management plans generally outline
regulatory goals, describe boundaries,
identify staffing and budgetary needs,
and set priorities and performance
measures for resource protection,
research, and education programs.
Management plans also guide the
development of future management
activities.
The FGBNMS management plan
review process began in 2006 with a
series of scoping meetings to obtain
information about the public’s interests
and priorities for FGBNMS management
(71 FR 52757; September 7, 2006).
Subsequently, NOAA worked with the
FGBNMS Advisory Council to prioritize
issues and develop appropriate
management strategies and activities for
the preparation of a draft revised
management plan. Protecting additional
nationally significant habitat in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico emerged as
one of the highest priority issues for the
sanctuary during the FGBNMS
management plan review process.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
In 2007, the FGBNMS Advisory
Council, using information developed
by its Boundary Expansion Working
Group (BEWG), recommended a range of
sanctuary boundary expansion
alternatives. Based on this input, and
information obtained through a
subsequent public process, NOAA
prepared a revised management plan (77
FR 25060, April 27, 2012) that
contained six action plans, including
one that specifically addressed
sanctuary expansion. The Sanctuary
Expansion Action Plan outlined a
strategy to expand the protected areas to
include additional reefs and banks in
the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, and to
develop a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) to evaluate
appropriate expansion alternatives. The
recommended expansion alternative, as
identified by the FGBNMS Advisory
Council in 2007, was included in the
Sanctuary Expansion Action Plan. This
recommendation included nine
additional reefs and banks,
encompassing approximately 281 square
miles.
2. Boundary Expansion Notice of Intent
On February 3, 2015, NOAA
published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
prepare a DEIS for expanding FGBNMS
boundaries (80 FR 5699). The NOI
solicited public input on the range and
significance of issues related to
sanctuary expansion, including
potential boundary configurations,
resources to be protected, other issues
NOAA should consider, and any
information that should be included in
the resource analysis. The public
scoping period was open through April
6, 2015, during which time ONMS held
three public hearings and interested
parties submitted both written and oral
comments.
NOAA received approximately 200
comments during the scoping period.
Most commenters were strongly
supportive of the concept of sanctuary
expansion. In addition to broad general
support, some comments expressed
conditional support while raising user
concerns primarily relating to the
potential impact of sanctuary expansion
on the offshore oil and gas industry and
historic fishing practices. Other
commenters recommended that NOAA
consider a broader geographical area
than the Sanctuary Expansion Action
Plan identified, especially in light of the
2010 BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill
and new information that became
available since the 2007 FGBNMS
Advisory Council recommendation.
This information was considered during
the development of the expansion
alternatives in the DEIS.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
3. Draft Environmental Impact
Statement
In accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the NMSA (16
U.S.C. 1434), NOAA prepared and
released a DEIS (81 FR 37576, June 10,
2016). The DEIS considered alternatives
for the proposed expansion of
boundaries at FGBNMS and application
of the existing sanctuary regulations and
management actions to the expanded
area. The DEIS evaluated the
environmental consequences of the
alternatives and provided an in-depth
resource assessment. The action
alternatives in the DEIS would expand
the network of protected areas within
FGBNMS by incorporating selected
reefs, banks, and other features
throughout the north central Gulf of
Mexico.
The DEIS evaluated five alternatives,
ranging from ‘‘no action’’ (maintaining
the current boundaries) to one that
included a total of 45 discrete boundary
units and encompassed approximately
935 square miles. The action discussed
in this rulemaking falls within the
bounds of the DEIS alternatives as
discussed below in part II, section 5 of
this final rule and in the supplemental
information report which is available at
the FGBNMS website.2 NOAA’s
preferred alternative in the 2016 DEIS
(Alternative 3) sought to expand the
existing sanctuary from approximately
56 square miles to approximately 383
square miles, including additional
important and sensitive marine habitat
areas in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. This alternative would have
applied the existing sanctuary
regulations and management actions to
the expanded area. The 2016 preferred
alternative included 15 reefs and banks
(in addition to those contained within
the existing 3 sanctuary units)
encompassed within 11 discrete
boundary polygons, including multibank complexes. No significant adverse
impacts to the human environment were
identified under any alternative
considered in the DEIS.
In June 2016, NOAA opened a public
comment period on the DEIS for sixtynine (69) days, which closed on August
19, 2016. During this public comment
period, NOAA also held five (5) in
person public hearings in Galveston,
TX; Houston, TX; New Orleans, LA;
Lafayette, LA; and Mobile, AL. NOAA
received 1,421 separate comments,
including three letter campaigns and
one petition, each with multiple
signatories. All written comments on
2 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
expansionnpr.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
the DEIS are available at the
Regulations.gov website.3 NOAA’s
response to the public comments are set
forth in Appendix A of the FEIS, which
was made available to the public on
December 11, 2020 (85 FR 80093).
4. NOAA’s Revised Preferred Alternative
and Supplemental Information Report
In response to concerns raised
primarily by the oil and gas industry
regarding the potential impacts to
offshore energy operations arising from
the Preferred Alternative presented in
the 2016 DEIS, the FGBNMS Advisory
Council (Advisory Council) established
a new BEWG to review NOAA’s
expansion proposal and make a
recommendation. Between July 2016
and May 2018, the BEWG met 21 times,
and considered a variety of topics,
including a range of boundary and
regulatory issues. The BEWG
recommended revised FGBNMS
expansion boundaries that tracked the
BOEM-designated NAZs. NAZs are
areas within which no operations,
anchoring, or structures are allowed for
oil and gas operations. The NAZs were
developed in the 1970–1980’s to protect
the shallowest portion of the reefs and
banks. Based primarily on the May 2018
FGBNMS Advisory Council
recommendation, along with input
received from public comments and
consultation with the GMFMC and
various Federal agencies, NOAA revised
the preferred alternative.
In the revised preferred alternative,
NOAA reduced the size of the
expansion areas proposed in the 2016
DEIS preferred alternative to promote
compatibility with users and reduce
potential economic impacts to the
offshore energy and fishing industries.
On March 22, 2019, NOAA evaluated
changes to the 2016 DEIS preferred
alternative in a Supplemental
Information Report (SIR). Through this
review, NOAA determined that
preparing a supplement to the 2016
DEIS is neither required nor necessary
under NEPA. The SIR is available on the
FGBNMS website.4 Pursuant to
applicable Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) guidance, NOAA’s
rationale for the revised preferred
alternative is now presented as NOAA’s
Final Preferred Alternative in the FEIS
and part II, section 7 of this final rule
and the ROD.
3 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAANOS-2016-0059.
4 https://nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/
flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/
deissupplementalinforeport.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4939
5. The Proposed Rule
On May 1, 2020, NOAA published a
proposed rule which would expand the
boundaries of FGBNMS from
approximately 56 square miles to 160
square miles (85 FR 25359 May 1, 2020).
This action would add 14 banks, for a
total of 17 banks, represented in 19
polygons (including 3 banks with multipolygons), and apply the existing
sanctuary regulations and management
plan to the expanded sanctuary
boundaries. Under the existing
sanctuary regulations, only
conventional hook and line gear would
be permissible in the expanded
sanctuary boundaries.
NOAA solicited public comment on
the proposed rule from May 1, 2020 to
July 3, 2020, including specifically on
whether to provide exemptions for
spearfishing and pelagic longline in the
expanded area. NOAA accepted
comments in the form of letters and
written comments through electronic
submissions to https://regulations.gov,
letters submitted by mail, and public
hearings. As a result of the Coronavirus
global pandemic and restrictions on
public gatherings, three virtual public
hearings were held via Gotowebinar®.
NOAA received 485 separate
comments, including four letter
campaigns and four petitions, each with
multiple signatories, for a total of 36,111
comments. All written public comments
on the proposed expansion are available
on the Regulations.gov website.5
NOAA’s responses to the public
comments are available in Appendix A
of the FEIS, and in section IV of this
final rule.
III. Summary of Final Regulations
With this final rule, NOAA is revising
the FGBNMS regulations at 15 CFR part
922, subpart L, as follows.
1. Sanctuary Boundary Expansion
NOAA is amending the sanctuary
boundary descriptions at 15 CFR part
922, subpart L, and the terms of
designation in order to expand the
boundaries of FGBNMS to include
portions of 14 additional reefs and
banks in the sanctuary, adding
approximately 104 square miles,
bringing the total area to 160.4 square
miles and encompassing 17 banks. The
boundary changes were selected
through a public process to identify and
assess marine areas that could more
effectively complement current
management authorities or enhance
natural and cultural resource values.
5 https://www.regulations.gov/
docketBrowser?rpp=25&so=DESC&sb=comment
DueDate&po=0&D=NOAA-NOS-2019-0033.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
4940
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Collectively, these new areas capture a
greater diversity of habitats and
biological resources than currently
protected by FGBNMS. Inclusion of
these areas within the sanctuary system
will provide additional regulatory
protection, additional management
actions and initiatives, and improved
public awareness of their natural
resource values. Detailed maps of these
boundary changes are available on the
FGBNMS website.6
Under this action, NOAA is
expanding the boundaries of the
sanctuary by 104.2 square miles from
56.2 square miles to 160.4 square miles
as follows:
a. Stetson Bank—increase of area by 0.6
square miles from 0.8 square miles
to 1.4 square miles
b. West Flower Garden Bank—increase
of area by 7.22 square miles from
29.94 square miles to 37.16 square
miles
c. East Flower Garden Bank—increase of
area by 2.4 square miles from 25.4
square miles to 27.8 square miles
d. Horseshoe Bank—28.7 square miles
e. MacNeil Bank—2.7 square miles
f. Rankin/28 Fathom Banks—5.6 square
miles
g. Bright Bank—7.7 square miles
h. Geyer Bank—11.5 square miles
i. Elvers Bank—4.6 square miles
j. McGrail Bank—4.7 square miles
k. Sonnier Bank—3.1 square miles
l. Bouma Bank—7.7 square miles
m. Rezak Bank—3.7 square miles
n. Sidner Bank—2.0 square miles
o. Alderdice Bank—5.0 square miles
p. Parker Bank—7.0 square miles
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
2. Apply the Existing Sanctuary
Regulations and Management Action to
the Expanded Area
NOAA will apply the existing
sanctuary regulations (including
regulatory prohibitions set forth in
§ 922.122) and the existing management
plan 7 to the expanded sanctuary
boundary in order to provide for more
comprehensive management and
protection of sensitive underwater
features and marine habitats associated
with continental shelf-edge reefs and
banks in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. Accordingly, 15 CFR 922.122(e)
will be updated to reflect the effective
date of the sanctuary expansion, and no
further amendments of the regulatory
text in 15 CFR part 922 are necessary to
implement this action.
6 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
sanctuaryexpansion.html.
7 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
2012mgmtplan.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
3. Department of Defense Activities
NOAA’s decision to amend the
effective date in § 922.122(e) addresses
concerns raised by the Department of
the Navy (DON) during coordination in
development of this final rule. In the
final rule, NOAA clarifies that the
prohibitions in § 922.122(a)(2) through
(11) do not apply to the activities being
carried out by the Department of
Defense as of the date of sanctuary
expansion.
4. Terms of Designation
Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA
requires that the terms of designation
include the geographic area of the
sanctuary; the characteristics of the area
that give it conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, research,
educational, or aesthetic value; and the
types of activities that will be subject to
regulation by the Secretary of Commerce
to protect these characteristics. Section
304(a)(4) also specifies that the terms of
designation may be modified only by
the same procedures by which the
original designation was made.
The terms of designation for FGBNMS
was first published in 1991 (56 FR
63637), and became effective in 1994
(58 FR 65664). The terms of designation
were not incorporated into the Code of
Federal Regulations, and, whenever
there was a proposed regulatory change,
NOAA and the general public had to
refer to the preamble of the 1991 final
rule to understand the nature and scope
of the terms of designation. With this
final rule, NOAA is making the terms of
designation more readily available to
the general public by amending the
FGBNMS regulations at 15 CFR part
922, subpart L, to incorporate the terms
of designation as a new appendix B to
the FGBNMS regulations. NOAA is
amending Article II. Description of the
Area to include Stetson Bank (added by
Congress in 1996 pursuant to Pub. L.
104–283) and the additional reefs and
banks included in this expansion, add a
new section relating to the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD)
exemption, and revising the
‘‘Consistency with International Law’’
section of the terms of designation in
order to address comments raised by the
U.S. Department of State during
interagency consultation.
5. No Exemptions for Spearfishing and
Pelagic Longline Fishing in the
Expanded Sanctuary
Based on the public comments
received on the proposed rule, NOAA
has decided not to provide exemptions
for spearfishing or pelagic longline
fishing. The rationale for the decisions
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
not to provide exemptions for
spearfishing or pelagic longline fishing
are addressed below in section IV.
Responses to Comments.
IV. Response to Comments
NOAA received 1,421 individual
(8,491 campaigns and petitions) public
comments on the DEIS and 485
individual (36,111 including campaigns
and petitions) public comments on the
proposed rule. The majority of
comments expressed general support for
sanctuary expansion, others expressed
concerns about the reduced size of the
boundaries, and few comments were
received opposing the expansion of
FGBNMS. Of the comments received
during this action, approximately one
third supported the revised preferred
alternative in the proposed rule (which
is identified as NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative in the FEIS). Public
comments identified specific geographic
locations of concern that were not
included in the revised preferred
alternative. Comments raised concerns
about boundary enforcement, essential
fish habitat, preservation of biodiversity,
connectivity between bank areas,
mesophotic/deepwater coral
ecosystems, mobula rays, whale sharks,
sea turtles, sharks, marine mammals,
and commercial and recreationally
important fish. Many of the comments
supportive of the proposed expansion
referred to industrial, environmental,
and global impacts.
In response to NOAA’s request for
public comment on fishery exemptions
for pelagic longline fishing and
spearfishing with sanctuary expansion,
25,641 comments opposed an
exemption for pelagic longline fishing,
23,353 opposed an exemption for
spearfishing, 2 comments supported
allowing pelagic longline fishing, and 8
comments indicated conditional
support for spearfishing. Conditional
support for spearfishing included an
exemption for breath-hold only
spearfishing, establishing an initial
limited capacity fishery that could be
assessed at a reduced number of banks,
and an exemption for lionfish only.
NOAA analyzed comments received
during this process and considered
them in preparation of this FEIS, as well
as developed agency responses. NOAA’s
responses to the public comments are
included in Appendix A of the FEIS and
in this document (Part IV).
NOAA has consolidated public
comments from the DEIS and proposed
rule and collectively responds to those
comments here and in Appendix A of
the FEIS.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
General Support and Opposition of
Proposed Sanctuary Expansion
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
1. Comment: NOAA received
comments that supported the proposed
expansion of the sanctuary and
encouraged NOAA to proceed with the
expansion process. Comments also
supported the Revised Preferred
Alternative (NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative).
Response: Comment accepted. NOAA
has considered these comments in
carrying the Revised Preferred
Alternative forward to the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
and final rule as NOAA’s Final
Preferred Alternative.
2. Comment: NOAA received
comments that opposed the overall
sanctuary expansion process citing
reasons including: (1) Existing
protections for sensitive resources; (2)
concern of restricting use/access to the
public; (3) safety, budget, and
management limitations; and (4)
socioeconomic consequences to certain
industries.
Response: NOAA determined the
proposed action responds to the need to
provide additional protection and
management of sensitive underwater
features and marine habitats associated
with continental shelf-edge reefs and
banks in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. The current jurisdictional
regime divides authority among several
governmental entities that regulate
offshore energy exploration (Bureau of
Ocean and Energy Management
(BOEM)), fishing (Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council
(GMFMC)), and water quality
(Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)). NOAA has determined the
current jurisdictional regime does not
provide comprehensive and effective
management for the full range of
activities that impact the sensitive reefs
and banks in the region. Chapter 2 of the
FEIS and Part I, Section 2 of the
preamble to the final rule describe the
purpose and need for this proposed
expansion. Extending the sanctuary
boundary to new reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico promotes
ecological conservation and
biodiversity, expands sanctuary
management efforts in the region, and
helps to balance multiple uses.
Boundaries
3. Comment: NOAA received
comments that generally supported
expansion, but opposed the boundaries
in the Revised Preferred Alternative
(NOAA’s Final Preferred Alternative).
These comments indicated that the
proposed boundaries of the Revised
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
Preferred Alternative were too small or
would exclude some ‘‘topographic
highs’’ and reduce migratory corridors,
or that NOAA should select a larger
boundary alternative. Additionally,
comments noted the removal of buffer
zones entirely in the Revised Preferred
Alternative and that very small areas
were created at some banks (e.g., Elvers,
McGrail), which results in fragmented
connectivity and diminished ecological
and species function. Comments also
stated NOAA’s Preferred Alternative in
the DEIS (Alternative 3) excluded 39
nationally significant areas and 9
nationally significant shipwrecks.
Response: NOAA developed the Final
Preferred Alternative in response to
public comments and recommendations
from the Sanctuary Advisory Council.
NOAA’s Final Preferred Alternative was
based on boundary configurations
developed by the Advisory Council’s
Boundary Expansion Working Group
and the Advisory Council’s 2018
recommendation. It was also based on
research conducted by the Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries,
consultation with other Federal and
state agencies, strong public support
and comment during public meetings
preceding this proposal, and extensive
input from oil and gas, and fishing
interests. The Final Preferred
Alternative further follows the National
Marine Sanctuaries Act’s goal of
facilitating, to the extent compatible
with the primary objective of resource
protection, all public and private uses of
the resources.
NOAA modified DEIS Alternative 3 to
develop the Final Preferred Alternative
under which the boundaries were
drawn more tightly around the
shallowest portions of the geological
features identified in Alternative 3. The
new boundaries closely follow the
BOEM No Activity Zones, which have
prohibitions on oil and gas exploration
and development, but allow other
bottom-disturbing activities that can
cause severe negative impacts to the
benthic areas. NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative expands the sanctuary by
approximately 104 square miles, to
include additional important and
sensitive marine habitat areas outside
the current sanctuary boundary, which
will offer additional protection not
provided by BOEM’s current
regulations. NOAA has determined the
Final Preferred Alternative minimizes
the impact to offshore energy
exploration and production while
providing substantial protection to
sensitive marine habitats of national
significance and meeting the expansion
objectives as identified in the 2012
FGBNMS management plan and 2016
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4941
DEIS. Refer also to FEIS Chapter 3,
Section 3.2 for additional details on the
development of NOAA’s proposed
action.
NOAA submits there were more
environmentally preferable alternatives
assessed in the DEIS; however, ONMS
has identified the Final Preferred
Alternative as one that, based on strong
input from the public and the Sanctuary
Advisory Council, provides a significant
environmental benefit, can be managed
with current FGBNMS operational
capacity, and minimizes negative
impact to industry activities.
NOAA has determined the Final
Preferred Alternative remains within the
range of alternatives and impacts
analyzed in the 2016 DEIS. Also refer to
NOAA’s Supplemental Information
Report and FEIS Chapter 3, Section 3.2
for additional details on the
development of the Final Preferred
Alternative.
4. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting additional areas
and banks to be considered in the
proposed expansion process, including:
Coffee Lump, 32 Fathom, Claypile,
Applebaum, 29 Fathom, Fishnet,
Phleger, Sweet, and Jakkula Banks,
Florida Middle Grounds, Madison/
Swanson, and Alabama Pinnacles, north
central Gulf of Mexico, Ewing Bank
(whale shark aggregation), Bryant Bank,
more of Bright Bank complex, and the
Deep Water Horizon (Deepwater
Horizon) rig/well area.
Response: NOAA rejects the requests
to add these additional banks and areas
for two primary reasons, (1) there was
insufficient data to characterize these
areas as nationally significant, or (2)
they were too far from the existing
sanctuary. NOAA considered including
32 Fathom Bank, Applebaum Bank,
Coffee Lump Bank, Fishnet Bank,
Phleger Bank, Sweet Bank, Diaphus
Bank, and Sackett Bank but determined
either insufficient data were available to
adequately characterize the sites or
available data does not indicate
sufficiently unique, diverse, productive,
or otherwise nationally significant
biological communities or geologic
features.
Sites in biogeographic regions other
than the north central Gulf of Mexico
were also eliminated from further
consideration; areas to both the east and
west of the area roughly defined by the
87th and 95th west meridians reflect
geologic/sedimentary and hydrologic/
oceanographic settings, as well as
biological communities, that are
distinctly different from those of the
north central Gulf of Mexico and are
faced with distinctly different threats or
other conservation issues. Features
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4942
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
eliminated from further consideration
based on this distinction include Big
Dunn Bar, Small Dunn Bar, Blackfish
Ridge, Mysterious Bank, the South
Texas Banks (Dream Bank, Southern
Bank, Hospital Bank, North Hospital
Bank, Aransas Bank, Baker Bank, and
South Baker Bank), Madison-Swanson,
the Florida Middle Grounds, and Pulley
Ridge. Bryant Bank and more areas of
the Bright Bank Complex were primarily
excluded from the Final Preferred
Alternative because of concerns raised
from the oil and gas industry.
Although these additional areas were
rejected for consideration in the current
FEIS, FGBNMS will consider extending
sanctuary protection and management
to these additional biogeographic
regions and habitat types during the
next management plan review.
For more information on how the
Final Preferred Alternative was
developed and selected, refer to FEIS
Chapter 1, Sections 1.5 and Chapter 3,
Sections 3.1 and 3.2.
5. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested the agency
identify areas to redraw boundaries to
reduce impact on fishing (i.e., northern
boundary of MacNeil, northern
boundary of Sonnier, and northeast
boundary of Bouma).
Response: NOAA considered this
request, and following the DEIS, slightly
reduced the boundaries at these banks
to more closely align with BOEM
designated NAZs. The decrease in
proposed expansion area in the Final
Preferred Alternative was partly in
response to requests, such as this, to
reduce impacts to historical fishing
activities. Moreover, ONMS has
completed consultation with the
GMFMC pursuant to NMSA section
304(a)(5) regarding the boundaries and
fishing regulations in the Final Preferred
Alternative, and GMFMC concurred
with this action. See Appendix G of the
FEIS for more details on the 304(a)(5)
consultation.
6. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested coordinates for
all proposed alternatives be included.
Response: NOAA disagrees. NOAA
provided the coordinates of NOAA’s
Final Preferred Alternative in Appendix
H of the FEIS. Additionally, the
coordinates of NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative are included as appendix A
to the final rule which will be codified
in 15 CFR part 922, subpart L. NOAA
does not believe inclusion of
coordinates for all other alternatives is
necessary. However, maps of all
alternatives can be reviewed in FEIS
Chapter 3 and Appendix D.
7. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting an explanation of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
how the FGBNMS Advisory Council’s
recommendations were incorporated
throughout the expansion process.
Response: The Sanctuary Advisory
Council was involved in developing
DEIS Alternative 2, reviewing DEIS
Alternative 3, and providing
recommendations to modify the
alternative. Ultimately, NOAAs Final
Preferred Alternative was largely
developed by recommendations
proposed by the Sanctuary Advisory
Council. Refer to FEIS Chapter 1,
Section 1.5, which provides background
information on development of the DEIS
alternatives and the process by which
NOAA modified DEIS Alternative 3 to
develop the Final Preferred Alternative,
including information of the Sanctuary
Advisory Council’s involvement. See
response to comment #3 pertaining to
the Revised Preferred Alternative.
8. Comment: NOAA received
comments that requested a buffer
around reefs to enhance connectivity,
compliance, and enforcement, as well as
to keep out any structure that may act
as a vector for invasive species spread.
Response: Buffers were considered
during the FGBNMS Advisory Council’s
Boundary Expansion Working Group
meetings and were rejected due to
potential impacts to the oil and gas and
fisheries industries. The 2018 Sanctuary
Advisory Council recommendation for
sanctuary expansion did not include
buffers. Refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Section
1.5 for details regarding development of
the Final Preferred Alternative and
associated interagency consultations
and coordination.
9. Comment: NOAA received
comments suggesting the boundaries
proposed in the Revised Preferred
Alternative (NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative) were too complicated for
enforcement purposes, stating that
simpler boundaries make enforcement
easier, which results in better
compliance of user groups.
Response: Along with input for
NOAA’s Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE), ONMS considered this concern
and determined the expansion
boundaries are enforceable as proposed
in NOAA’s Final Preferred Alternative.
The boundaries achieve a polygonal
configuration, which is recommended
by the OLE, and closely follow the
existing BOEM designated NAZ
boundaries. This polygonal approach
uses fewer vertices, simplifying the
NAZ boundaries and allowing for
heightened enforceability and user
compliance.
ONMS believes that vessels visiting
the sanctuary are likely to be equipped
with onboard mapping technology (e.g.,
Global Positioning System) that would
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
inform operators of their vessel’s
position relative to the expanded
sanctuary boundary. In light of the
technological capabilities of onboard
positioning systems, ONMS decided to
continue with the boundary
configuration of the Final Preferred
Alternative, confident that user
compliance and agency enforcement can
be achieved.
Please refer to FEIS Chapter 3, Section
3.2 for more details regarding
development of the Final Preferred
Alternative boundaries.
10. Comment: NOAA received
comments related to the influence of the
oil and gas industry on the boundary
configurations of the proposed
expansion of banks and reefs, including
a claim that the FGBNMS Advisory
Council’s Boundary Expansion Working
Group was biased (towards the oil and
gas industry).
Response: The BEWG included
Advisory Council members representing
multiple stakeholder groups including
the oil and gas industry, commercial
and recreational fishing industries,
recreational diving, science, and
conservation. The BEWG presented its
revised FGBNMS expansion boundaries
recommendation to the full FGBNMS
Advisory Council, representing all user
groups, on May 9, 2018, and the
recommendation was accepted by the
Advisory Council and subsequently by
ONMS as proposed. Refer to responses
to comments #3 and #7 and FEIS
Chapter 3, Section 3.2, which details the
Sanctuary Advisory Council’s BEWG
process for developing the Revised
Preferred Alternative.
Purpose and Need for Proposed
Expansion/Regulations
11. Comment: NOAA received
comments suggesting that the purpose
and/or need for the proposed expansion
was not warranted, citing several
reasons including: (1) Need for
protection was not demonstrated; (2)
expansion would offer no benefit of
protection; (3) government overreach;
(4) majority of sites are already
protected from oil and gas development
by the existing BOEM’s No Activity
Zones; and (5) proposed expansion
areas are not nationally significant or
unique.
Response: Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
NOAA has established a strong purpose
and need to expand FGBNMS (See FEIS
Chapter 2). Through the management
plan review and scoping process, NOAA
identified several gaps in management
of reefs and banks near the current
sanctuary where habitats were
experiencing damage from anchoring
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
and fishing gear in addition to potential
for further industrial development.
NOAA determined that extending
sanctuary management to these areas
would assist in addressing these gaps in
protections by supplementing and
complementing existing authorities
established by BOEM and the GMFMC.
While BOEM-designated NAZ’s protect
from oil and gas development, without
sanctuary management efforts, habitats
would remain vulnerable to anchor
damage, detrimental fishing impacts,
and other threats.
NOAA disagrees with the comment
that the expansion demonstrates
government overreach. The NMSA
provides NOAA with the authority to
designate, as marine sanctuaries, areas
of the marine environment, which are of
special national significance that
possess conservation, ecological, and
scientific qualities. Through decades of
scientific research and exploration,
NOAA has determined that the
sanctuary expansion areas contain some
of the highest reported densities of
corals in the U.S. and other unique
deepwater habitats that are not found
elsewhere in the world, making them
nationally significant and worthwhile to
protect.
Sanctuary Regulations and Enforcement
12. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting changes to
existing regulations including: (1) Allow
anchoring for fishing; (2) a reasonable
range of alternative management
actions; (3) allow spearfishing; and (4)
an exemption for pelagic longline
fishing.
Response: NOAA rejected these
requests because it was determined that
granting them would negate the overall
effectiveness of the existing regulations
in the expansion areas. Current
sanctuary regulations will address gaps
in protection of the expansion areas. In
the NPRM for sanctuary expansion,
NOAA requested public comments on
two fishery exemption requests: to allow
pelagic longlining and spearfishing.
NOAA received very limited support for
exempting these activities (see fishing
section below) and has determined that
extension of existing fishing regulations
to the expansion area is appropriate.
Refer to FEIS Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2
for alternatives considered but rejected.
13. Comment: NOAA received
comments that suggested the agency
should provide enforcement policies to
enhance the effectiveness of sanctuary
expansion.
Response: The FGBNMS management
plan details the enforcement policy for
the expansion areas. NOAA will
continue to work with Federal and state
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
enforcement partners to maintain water
and aerial surveillance, update patrol
guides and regulatory handbooks, and
conduct interpretive/outreach patrols
within all of FGBNMS.
Air Quality and Climate Change
14. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting that NOAA
evaluate how the sanctuary expansion
would affect the climate (i.e., potential
impacts to greenhouse gas emissions
within sanctuary expansion areas).
Response: NOAA agrees with the
need to evaluate the impacts of
sanctuary expansion on the climate and
has provided analysis of the potential
beneficial effects of the expansion on
physical and biological resources,
including beneficial impacts derived
from prohibiting harmful activities.
NOAA also estimates that this action
will help offset impacts of climate
change (see FEIS Chapter 5, Section
5.3.1).
15. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting an assessment of
how climate change affects FGBNMS,
how it will affect proposed additions,
and methods to reduce greenhouse gases
with sanctuary expansion areas. One
comment also requested a program-wide
evaluation of climate adaption
management gaps and needs.
Response: The management plan for
FGBNMS contains Conservation Science
Action Plans, which include goals to
increase knowledge and understanding
of the sanctuary’s ecosystem, develop
new and continue ongoing research and
monitoring programs to identify and
address specific resource management
issues, and encourage information
exchange, and cooperation. FGBNMS
participated in development of the
Ocean Acidification Action Plan 8 for
national marine sanctuaries. The plan
has numerous research
recommendations for studying ocean
acidification, a common consequence
expected of future climate change.
Please also visit NOAA’s website 9 for
program-wide climate change
initiatives, data, observations, and
outreach materials. ONMS is standing
up a Focus Group on climate, with the
goal to develop the ONMS Climate
Strategic Plan. FGBNMS is an active
participant in this initiative, and the
sanctuary, including the expansion
areas, will be integrated into the overall
plan. Ocean Acidification, specifically,
has been integrated into FGBNMS longterm monitoring programs.
16. Comment: NOAA received
recommendations that the agency use
8 https://oceanacidification.noaa.gov/Home.aspx.
9 https://www.noaa.gov/climate.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4943
newer emissions inventory for the
analysis on air monitoring and
pollutants.
Response: NOAA used the best
available data for their environmental
analysis of air emissions and pollutants
when developing the FEIS. Please refer
to FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1 for
detailed information about the data and
resources used for air quality and
climate change.
17. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that suggested the No Action
Alternative (Alternative 1) does
contribute to climate change over time
as it does not prevent climate change
from progressing, and requested the
agency amend the analysis in DEIS
Section 5.3.1.
Response: Since implementation of
the No Action Alternative is expected to
leave the existing environment
unchanged except for continuation of
existing impacts, including on-going
impacts of climate change, the effect of
this alternative is the same as described
in Chapter 4. The ‘‘No Action’’
Alternative served as a baseline for the
impact analysis to compare all other
alternatives. As such, there would be no
additional change to climate expected
under this alternative. The text has been
slightly amended in FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.2 to offer clarification in
response to this comment.
Biological Resources
18. Comment: NOAA received
comments related to biological resource
concerns. Biological comments focused
on how sanctuary expansion would
protect resources against damages (e.g.,
anchoring, invasive species), the
benefits sanctuary protection would
provide (e.g., improvements in fish
stocks and productivity, preservation of
biodiversity, continued discovery of
new species), and requests for
protection of specific species/groups
(e.g., Mobula rays, sea turtles, sharks,
coral).
Response: NOAA concurs with the
importance of protecting vulnerable
biological resources and believes that
this action helps to address many of the
remaining gaps that threaten biological
resources in the expanded sanctuary.
With this action, NOAA is prohibiting
the following activities in the sanctuary:
Anchoring; drilling into, dredging, or
altering the seabed; discharging or
depositing of material; any injury to
coral, rays, or whale sharks; fishing
except for with conventional hook and
line gear; and take of marine mammals
and turtles except when permitted
under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act (MMPA) and Endangered Species
Act (ESA). Collectively, these
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4944
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
prohibitions will help to protect fishes
from unsustainable harvest by limiting
fishing; help to maintain biodiversity of
benthic habitats by protecting the
seafloor; and allow further protection of
many vulnerable living marine
resources including rays, sea turtles and
other ESA and MMPA-listed species.
Please also refer to FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.6 and 5.3.8 for additional
details regarding impacts of sanctuary
expansion to biological resources.
19. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting the sanctuary
protect resources from negative impacts
of fishing. Commenters noted the
vulnerability of the expansion area to
fishing injury, and urged protection of
fish species in order to achieve fishing
sustainability. Requests for fishery
management included: (1) Limiting
fishing locations; (2) prohibiting bottomdragging gear; and (3) continuing to
limit fishing to hook and line only.
Some of the comments received in
support of expansion were from
members of the fishing sector.
Response: NOAA intends to extend
the current sanctuary regulations to the
proposed expansion areas, which
includes restricting fishing activities to
conventional hook and line techniques
only (i.e., any fishing apparatus
operated aboard a vessel and composed
of a single line terminated by a
combination of sinkers and hooks or
lures and spooled upon a reel that may
be hand- or electrically-operated, handheld or mounted). NOAA prohibits the
use of any bottom tending fishing gear
to protect delicate corals and important
benthic habitat from fishing impacts,
which will continue in the expansion
areas. A detailed list of the current
regulations can be reviewed in Table
1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.
20. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting projections of
ecosystem services (i.e., estimates for
the increase in value of managing
protected species and habitats such as
hard and soft corals, fish, and
mesophotic reefs) be included in the
final analysis.
Response: Analysis of ecosystem
services is beyond the scope of the
environmental analysis necessary for
this action, and thus, NOAA rejects this
request. Instead, NOAA provided an
economic analysis in the FEIS that
estimated a passive economic value (i.e.
non-use value) of the sanctuary
expansion. For details on the economic
analysis, please refer to Chapter 4,
Section 4.4.7 of the FEIS or the peerreviewed publication that resulted from
this study, Stefanski and Shimshack
(2016).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
21. Comment: NOAA received a
comment which indicated that the
BEWG was informed that higher coral
counts had been observed outside of the
NAZs, than inside NAZs, and requested
an explanation for why this was not
considered during the boundary
configuration of the Revised Preferred
Alternative.
Response: Additional areas containing
higher coral colony counts were
quantified during remotely operated
vehicle (ROV) surveys, and the data was
considered during the National Centers
for Coastal Ocean Sciences (NCCOS)
collaboration with the FGBNMS
Advisory Council’s BEWG. The BEWG
selected smaller boundaries, which
closely follow the NAZs, primarily to
reduce impacts to the oil and gas
industry and to retain access for
historical fishing practices. Outside of
the expansion process, NOAA will
provide the processed data and
associated publication to both BOEM
and NMFS, for consideration during
review of regulations, and for future oil
and gas, and fishing activities. While
this will not provide blanket protection
measures, it will be valuable in
protections from potential major
impacts.
22. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting an analysis of the
impacts sustained to the environment
from run-off of toxic and hazardous
elements, sewage, pollution, and
potential expansion of the Gulf of
Mexico hypoxic zone, or ‘dead zone’,
into the proposed sanctuary expansion
areas.
Response: NOAA used the best
available data to evaluate the
environmental impacts to the expansion
areas as required under NEPA and the
Council of Environmental Quality’s
(CEQ’s) 1978 NEPA regulations. NOAA,
however, is studying these issues and
plans to continue analyzing the impacts
in its next management plan review
process.
23. Comment: NOAA received
comments regarding disturbances
(vessel traffic) related to the noise
environment, including a request to
quantify the additional impact from an
increased number of boaters.
Response: NOAA continues to study
the issue of noise impacts on sanctuary
resources. Sanctuary regulations
prohibit the disturbance of marine
mammals and turtles except when
permitted under the MMPA and ESA.
With respect to sonar testing, Section
304(d) of the NMSA provides for
consultation with other federal agencies
if their actions have the likelihood to
injure sanctuary resources. NOAA has
previously used this mechanism in
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
consultations to minimize impacts of
noise on marine mammals and other
species. FGBNMS is actively engaged in
a vessel traffic and noise assessment and
monitoring program within the
sanctuary, which will be expanded to
the new areas.
Please refer to FEIS Chapter 4, Section
4.2.2 for detailed information about the
noise environment in the current
FGBNMS, as well as expansion areas.
Additionally, refer to FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.2 for NOAA’s analysis of
environmental consequences to marine
resources with respect to noise
disturbances.
24. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting protection for fish
spawning aggregations with the
expansion.
Response: NOAA concurs with
commenters and believes the expansion
of the sanctuary will assist in the
protection of fish spawning aggregations
in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico.
With this action, NOAA will extend
sanctuary regulations to the expansion
areas which limit fishing activities to
conventional hook and line techniques,
prohibit bottom tending gear, and
restrict the use of anchors within
sanctuary boundaries. This action will
thereby complement protections for fish
spawning habitats provided under the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act
(MSA). Fish spawning aggregations have
been observed and recorded during ROV
explorations at reefs and banks included
in the expansion areas. Therefore,
NOAA determined that sanctuary
designation will directly protect habitat
where the aggregations occur. NOAA
intends to consider further protection of
spawning aggregations during the next
management plan review.
25. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting NOAA consider
designating areas within the sanctuary
as ‘‘no take’’ marine reserves.
Response: NOAA considered this
request and does not intend to designate
any ‘‘no-take’’ marine reserves within
the sanctuary through this action. With
this action, NOAA extends the current
fishing regulations to the expansion
areas which limit fishing activities to
conventional hook and line techniques
and exclude any bottom tending gear.
Anchoring will also be prohibited in the
expanded sanctuary, and mooring buoys
will be installed so that fishers and
vessels (<100 feet long) can safely moor
within the sanctuary boundaries.
To evaluate the impact of
conventional hook and line fishing to
managed fish species in the sanctuary,
NOAA conducted an environmental
impact analysis on living marine
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
resources, including fish in relation to
the different expansion alternatives (see
FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.36). Overall,
NOAA determined none of these
resources would sustain any significant
adverse impacts with sanctuary
designation. However, NOAA
determined that this action will provide
benefit to fish, given the added
protection to critical habitat and
restrictions to fishing techniques.
Mesophotic and deep water reefs have
been shown to have low resilience and
slow recovery potential, and harbor
greater fish biomass than their shallower
counterparts, underlining the
importance of their protection
(Lindfield et al. 2016, Huvenne et al.
2016). By reducing fishing pressure
through sanctuary protection, fish size,
biomass, and abundance could increase,
while also enhancing coral reef
resiliency (Reed 2002, 2007, Bozec et al.
2016, Chirico et al. 2017). Impacts to the
resources may be reduced due to
limitations on fishing that can otherwise
alter predator-prey relationships,
disturb bottom habitats, and increase
loss of fish biomass. The added
prohibition of spearfishing further
protects fish from direct extraction
(Lindfield et al. 2014).
Sanctuary management actions could
reduce marine debris and impacts of
debris on corals and other organisms,
such as entanglement in derelict fishing
gear and incidental catch of fish in
‘‘ghost’’ fishing gears. Moreover,
extending to the expansion areas the
prohibition of bottom-tending fishing
gear, limits on anchoring and the
discharge of pollutants, removal of
marine debris such as derelict fishing
gear, and invasive species removal,
would all improve habitat for benthic
coral communities and fish
communities.
Designating areas as a ‘‘no take’’
marine reserve is an important issue and
NOAA plans to consider it in the next
review of the FGBNMS management
plan.
26. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting that a Gulf Sperm
Whale/Pelagic Ecosystem national
marine sanctuary be established.
Response: NOAA does not intend to
establish a Gulf Sperm Whale/Pelagic
Ecosystem National Marine Sanctuary.
The request is beyond the scope of this
proposed action.
Visual Resources
27. Comment: NOAA received a
comment on DEIS Section 5.3.2.3—
Scenic and Visual Resources requesting
that negative impacts to scenic and
visual resources that could occur
because of an increased number of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
boaters and/or increased use of fishing
line be considered in the analysis.
Response: NOAA evaluated both
beneficial and adverse impacts to each
resource area and determined there
would be no adverse impacts to scenic
and visual resources. NOAA predicts
beneficial impacts on the scenic and
visual resources of the proposed
expansion areas by reducing marine
debris including derelict fishing gear,
vessel traffic, and industrial
infrastructure. Refer to FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.3.
Fishing, Fishery Regulations, and
Fishery Management
28. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested the agency to
analyze recreational fishing activities in
the proposed expansion areas.
Response: NOAA addressed the
request for this analysis by evaluating
the level of recreational fishing activity
expected to occur in the proposed
expansion areas, using the best available
data, to capture the socioeconomic
impact to this industry. Ultimately,
NOAA determined that there would be
no significant adverse impacts to
recreational fishers. For analysis of
recreational fishing activities, please
refer to FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1.2
for a description of the data used and
Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.2 for the
expected environmental impact.
29. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested the agency
clarify benefits of the expansion to
commercial fishers and improve the
socioeconomic analysis of commercial
fishers.
Response: NOAA updated FEIS
Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1 to supplement
the analysis on commercial fisheries
with additional and current VMS data to
assess socioeconomic impacts imposed
by the expansion on commercial
(Section 4.4.1.1) and recreational
(Section 4.4.1.2) fishers. Overall, NOAA
determined that no significant adverse
impacts to fishers would result from the
proposed expansion (See Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.9.1 and 5.3.9.2). NOAA
concluded minor benefits to commercial
fishers may occur with the expansion of
the sanctuary (see Chapter 5, Section
5.3.9.1) as fish production may increase
in general with the decreased fishing
pressure and habitat protections of
specific locations.
Broadly, it is well documented by the
scientific community that coral reef and
mesophotic coral communities provide
necessary habitat for a significant
number of fish species, and the
prevention of loss of these habitats will
help to maintain and enhance fish
populations dependent on these areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4945
More specifically, higher biomass and
abundance of fish are often associated
with greater habitat coverage and/or
complexity, such that, protecting habitat
has an increased likelihood to improve
fish stocks (Jones et al. 2004, Coker et
al. 2014, Lindfield et al. 2016,
Komyakova et al. 2018, Carminatto et al.
2020, Russ et al. 2020). Additionally,
reducing fishing pressure could lead to
an increased monetary value of
commercial fisheries, partly due to the
presence of larger individuals (thus
more valuable) and higher densities of
high-value species (Chirico et al. 2017).
Mesophotic reefs have been found to
harbor greater biomass of fisherytargeted species than shallower reefs,
suggesting these habitats are important
to protect for the longevity of
commercial harvests (Lindfield et al.
2016). In essence, sanctuary expansion
is protecting critical habitat which may
result in increased fish biomass (Edgar
et al. 2011, Harborne et al. 2008) or
abundance (Jeffrey et al. 2012),
particularly where fishing pressure is
reduced (Edgar et al. 2011, Kramer and
Heck 2007), which could benefit
commercial fishers.
30. Comment: NOAA received
comments regarding spearfishing, with
the majority requesting a prohibition on
this activity. Some commenters offered
conditional support of spearfishing,
suggesting allowing the activity: (1) In a
limited capacity with access at a limited
number of banks and reefs in the
expansion area; (2) only for the removal
of lionfish, an invasive species present
in the current and proposed sanctuary
areas; or (3) by breath hold only.
Response: NOAA intends to extend
the current sanctuary regulations to the
expansion areas proposed in the Final
Preferred Alternative. As such, NOAA
will not be implementing any additional
fishing regulations as part of the final
rulemaking. NOAA prohibits
spearfishing in the current boundary to
protect delicate corals, including
threatened species, and important
benthic habitat from fishing impacts,
which will continue in the expansion
areas. Spearfishing for lionfish is not a
permissible activity within sanctuary
borders. However, spearfishing with
pole spears has been performed
opportunistically by research staff
through permitted long-term monitoring
activities at FGBNMS. Additionally,
lionfish invitational research cruises
have been a permitted activity since
2015 at FGBNMS to remove the invasive
species with highly skilled, qualified
recreational divers and contribute to a
variety of research projects with
external academic and agency partners.
NOAA intends to continue to permit
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4946
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
lionfish removals, with restrictions and
obligations to properly train divers in
effective removal techniques that
prioritize coral and ecosystem health. A
detailed description of sanctuary
regulations is described in FEIS Table
1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.
31. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that suggested the spearfishing
community has been excluded from
access to the sanctuary.
Response: NOAA solicited public
comment to exempt spearfishing in the
proposed sanctuary boundary with the
release of the NPRM. In response,
NOAA received overwhelming support
to continue prohibition of this activity.
Please see additional information
provided in comment #30. This will
restrict access to the sanctuary
expansion areas for the spearfishing
community.
32. Comment: In response to the DEIS,
NOAA received a request seeking a
pelagic longline exemption from the
otherwise applicable sanctuary fishing
prohibitions proposed for the expansion
areas. NOAA also received a few similar
comments in response to the NPRM.
However, there were also a significant
number of NPRM commenters that
opposed this exemption.
Response: NOAA considered the
request made during the public review
of the DEIS for a pelagic longline
exemption to the proposed fishing
prohibitions in the expansion area. In
response, NOAA solicited public
comments pertaining to pelagic longline
fishing in the NPRM. Based on strong
public support to prohibit this activity,
NOAA has rejected the request for an
exemption for pelagic longlining and,
instead, intends to extend the current
sanctuary regulations to the expansion
areas. Under existing regulations,
fishing will only be allowed with
conventional hook and line gear (i.e.,
any fishing apparatus operated aboard a
vessel and composed of a single line
terminated by a combination of sinkers
and hooks or lures and spooled upon a
reel that may be hand- or electrically
operated, hand-held or mounted).
NOAA believes the expansion of
FGBNMS to additional reefs and banks
in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico will
add critical protection for fish, marine
mammals, threatened and endangered
species, as well as their habitat. NOAA
determined the existing regulations
would best accomplish this protection
and fulfill the NMSA obligation to
protect nationally significant
environmental features.
A detailed description of sanctuary
regulations is described in the FEIS
Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4. NOAA
has been in consultation with NMFS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
and GMFMC throughout the entire
scoping process of sanctuary expansion,
please refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Section
1.5.4.2, for additional details on these
consultations.
33. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting its fisheries
analysis in the DEIS include more types
of fishing gear and data to determine
what areas were used by fishers and the
value of these areas to those fisheries.
Response: NOAA provided a detailed
list of the types of commercial vessel
and recreation vessels that operate
within the proposed sanctuary
boundaries in the DEIS. NOAA has
added a new table to the FEIS to include
gear types used by commercial fishers
that were observed in the vicinity of the
Final Preferred Alternative. Please
review Section 5.3.9.1 and 5.3.9.2 for a
description of the commercial and
recreational fishing vessels that operate
within the proposed sanctuary
boundaries based on permit or gear
type. This analysis estimates the
number of vessels within the vicinity of
the boundaries under each alternative.
34. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting an analysis of the
potential impact(s) of weights used in
bandit reel gear configurations on the
benthic habitat and corals, as well as
more information on the types of gear
used in this type of fishing
configuration.
Response: FGBNMS intends to
continue investigating impacts of
recreational and commercial fishing in
the sanctuary, including bandit reel
gear, and will address this in more
detail during the next management plan
review.
35. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting a comprehensive
commercial endorsement and
certification program be developed to
allow commercial fishers to continue to
operate within the proposed boundaries.
Additionally, there was a request to
create an exemption for shrimpers in the
Royal Red Shrimp industry to continue
their historical practices.
Response: NOAA has considered this
request, and following consultation with
GMFMC pursuant to NMSA section
304(a)(5), decided not to establish a
commercial endorsement and
certification program or provide an
exemption for shrimpers or other fishers
in the sanctuary, based on the reduction
in size of the new areas. Facilitating
commercial fishing in the sanctuary,
even through an endorsement and
certification process, could make corals
and other sensitive bottom habitats
vulnerable to injury. NOAA believes
that the reduction in boundaries
between the 2016 original preferred
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
alternative and the Final Preferred
Alternative, in addition to allowing
conventional hook and line fishing in
the expanded sanctuary, facilitates an
appropriate balance between
environmental protection and user
access dictated as mandated by the
NMSA. A detailed description of
sanctuary regulations is described in
FEIS Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.
FEIS Chapter 1, Section 1.5.2 provides
additional details on this consultation.
36. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that suggested specific
language be added for the discharge of
natural waste of farmed fish related to
open gulf mariculture, stating that fish
farming operations outside of sanctuary
boundaries may discharge sinking
organic material that deposit within the
sanctuary with prevailing currents.
Response: NOAA determined this
request is outside the scope of this
action. While sanctuary regulations do
not specifically prohibit aquaculture,
some associated activities are prohibited
such as discharge of certain material,
alteration of the seabed, and injury to
sanctuary resources. Furthermore, the
suitability of the area for aquaculture is
being separately considered under other
authorities including E.O. 13921,
(October 23, 2020; 85 FR 67519).
FGBNMS will further consider
aquaculture and its potential impacts
during the next management plan
review.
Military Uses
37. Comment: A comment related to
the Department of the Navy’s activities
within the proposed sanctuary areas
suggested to: (1) Include in the FEIS,
Department of Defense (DoD) use of
water space in the vicinity of proposed
expansion and current sanctuary; (2)
provide a map of the Gulf of Mexico
warning areas for military use; (3) add
military uses to marine-use categories;
and (4) add an analysis of the potential
impact to military uses.
Response: Homeland security and
military uses of the expanded sanctuary
are subject to compliance with NEPA
and NMSA, in addition to all applicable
environmental regulations. DoD would
be required to consult with ONMS
pursuant to NMSA section 304(d) on
any new military activities in the
expansion area that are likely to injure
sanctuary resources. NOAA believes the
existing regulatory framework
sufficiently addresses DoD impacts on
sanctuary resources. Existing military
uses and an analysis of their
environmental effects in the expansion
area have been added to Chapter 4,
Section 4.4.5 and Chapter 5, Section
5.3.9.7 of the FEIS.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
NEPA Process
38. Comment: NOAA received
comments regarding the NEPA process.
Commenters requested NOAA conduct a
new NEPA analysis because of: (1) The
difference in methodologies used to
configure the Final Preferred Alternative
and Alternative 3 in the DEIS; and (2)
new circumstances and/or information
available (e.g., fishing exemptions,
removal of buffer zones).
Response: NOAA evaluated the
changes made from the 2016 original
preferred alternative (Alternative 3) to
the Final Preferred Alternative
presented in the NPRM and this FEIS.
The Final Preferred Alternative revised
Alternative 3 boundaries to be more
tightly drawn near the shallowest
portions of the geological features of
interest, largely in response to existing
fishing activity and oil and gas activity
(see response to comment #3). The new
polygons included all of the same reefs
and banks, excluding Bryant Bank,
which is not included in the Final
Preferred Alternative. Ultimately,
NOAA determined that the changes
reflected in the Final Preferred
Alternative were not ‘‘substantial
changes in the proposed action that are
relevant to environmental concerns’’ (40
CFR 1502.9(c)(1)(i)). NOAA further
determined the comments received on
the 2016 DEIS did not ‘‘constitute
significant new circumstances or
information relevant to environmental
concerns and bearing on the proposed
action or its impacts’’ (40 CFR
1502.9(c)(1)(ii)). As such, NOAA
concluded that preparing a
supplemental environmental impact
statement or new NEPA analysis is
neither required nor necessary under
NEPA. NOAA has documented the
agency’s rationale for revising the Final
Preferred Alternative (see Chapter 3,
Section 3.2) and provided updated
information on the affected environment
in FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3, and
related Record of Decision. Please refer
to NOAA’s Supplemental Information
Report that was provided with the
release of the NPRM for further
information.
39. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested that the
Protected Species analysis in Section
5.3.2.7 of the DEIS be public and open
for review/comment.
Response: ONMS conducted an ESA
Section 7 consultation with NMFS in
conjunction with the development of
both the DEIS and NPRM. In the DEIS,
ONMS included a list of protected
species which may be affected by the
proposed action, and the DEIS was
subsequently submitted for public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
comment. Additional species were
included in the NPRM consultation. See
FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.3.4 for
additional information on protected
species with an updated list of protected
species and Appendix G for a summary
of how ONMS satisfied ESA
consultation requirements including
ONMS’s ESA consultation
correspondence.
40. Comment: NOAA received a
comment stating that the Notices to
Lessees are not simply guidance because
they contain requirements for oil and
gas.
Response: NOAA disagrees. Please
refer to the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement Notice to
Lessees 2009–G39,10 which provides
and consolidates guidance for oil and
gas.
National Marine Sanctuaries Act
41. Comment: NOAA received
comments that suggested the expansion
of sanctuaries must be conducted
through an act of Congress, otherwise it
violates Congressional intent found in
the NMSA.
Response: NOAA disagrees. NOAA
can administratively designate and
expand sanctuaries pursuant to Section
303 of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1433),
using procedures set forth in section 304
(16 U.S.C. 1434). It is also possible for
Congress to legislatively designate a
sanctuary; Stetson Bank (Pub. L. 104–
283) in the current FGBNMS serves as
an example of a legislatively designated
sanctuary.
42. Comment: NOAA received
comments stating the NPRM did not
comply with the NMSA and the
FGBNMS 2012 management plan to
prioritize conservation of surrounding
reefs and banks.
Response: The proposed action
responds to the need to provide
additional protection of sensitive
underwater features and marine habitats
associated with continental shelf-edge
reefs and banks in the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico. NOAA adds 14
additional reefs and banks, for a total of
17 features to be protected, expanding
the sanctuary by approximately three
times its current spatial extent. In
addition to prioritizing the conservation
of nationally significant biological
features, the NMSA section 301 (16
U.S.C. 1431) directs NOAA to facilitate,
to the extent compatible with the
primary objective of resource protection,
all public and private uses of the
resources of these marine areas not
10 https://www.bsee.gov/notices-to-lessees-ntl/
notices-to-lessees/ntl-2009-g39-biologicallysensitive-underwater-features.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4947
prohibited pursuant to other authorities.
Thus, compliant with the NMSA,
NOAA believes the current expansion in
this FEIS and final rule, as proposed in
the NPRM, maximizes conservation and
user group interests to allow for greater
protection of these areas.
Oil & Gas Exploration and Development
43. Comment: NOAA received
comments from the oil and gas industry
in response to the 2016 DEIS
alternatives regarding recognition and
inclusion of existing oil and gas leases.
Commenters expressed concern that
sanctuary expansion could be more
costly or difficult for oil and gas
production, new leases would be
precluded, and the loss of oil and gas
exploration may lead to reliance on
foreign oil. Industry representatives
noted their reliance on the 2007
Sanctuary Advisory Council
recommendation for expansion
(Alternative 2) to inform their
investment in resources for the
industry’s development and growth, or
their decision to relinquish certain lease
blocks. Industry representatives
requested oil and gas access, leasing,
produced water discharge requirements,
and seismic acquisition should remain
as is, with no additional regulations.
Response: To address concerns from
the oil and gas industry, the FGBNMS
Sanctuary Advisory Council’s BEWG
underwent an extensive process to
evaluate how protecting biologically
significant areas may impact the oil and
gas industry. They proposed modifying
DEIS Alternative 3 to develop the
Revised Preferred Alternative (see
comment #3). This process also
involved input from the Sanctuary
Advisory Council, the GMFMC, and
coordination within NOAA. The new
boundaries closely follow BOEM’s
NAZs, encompassing the shallowest
portions of the banks, which are already
protected from oil and gas exploration
and development. Furthermore, ONMS
consulted with BOEM pursuant to E.O.
13795—Implementing an America-First
Offshore Energy Strategy and
determined that expanding the
sanctuary would not have a significant
economic impact on oil and gas
exploration and development. BOEM’s
analysis is summarized in the NPRM
and in FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5.
44. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting an analysis of the
inclusion of four oil and gas platforms
within the expansion areas for
advantages and disadvantages,
especially in the context of Sanctuary
Expansion Action Plan Objective 6C.
Response: NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative does not include any
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4948
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
additional oil and gas platforms within
the existing or expanded sanctuary
boundaries, thus, the requested analysis
is not necessary. NOAA did, however,
consider inclusion of certain oil and gas
platforms as part of the alternatives
considered in the NEPA analysis for this
action. See Alternatives 4 and 5 of this
FEIS. Please also refer to FEIS Chapter
5, Section 5.3.9.5 for analysis of impacts
to offshore energy resources. Finally,
NOAA intends to continue analyzing
the advantages and disadvantages of oil
and gas structure inclusion within
FGBNMS as part of its ongoing
management plan review process.
45. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested an economic
analysis of: (1) Impacts to oil and gas
resources due to directional drilling; (2)
affected lease blocks; and (3) a
comparison in area between NAZs and
proposed sanctuary expansion areas.
There was also a request to identify any
future management actions/mitigations
which may affect oil and gas activities.
Response: BOEM analyzed potential
impacts to oil and gas resources
pursuant to E.O. 13795, and these
results are available on the sanctuary
website.11 BOEM determined that
expanding the sanctuary would not
have significant economic impacts on
the oil and gas industry, and NOAA
accepted BOEM’s findings. NOAA will
continue to coordinate with BOEM to
co-manage these resources and mitigate
any impacts to oil and gas activities,
including the 11 active Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas
leases that will lie wholly or partially
within the boundaries of the expanded
FGBNMS. For new leases, approvals or
permits, licenses, or other
authorizations in existence prior to the
date in which the FGBNMS expansion
is finalized, lessees or operators will be
required to obtain from NOAA a
certification to authorize the oil and gas
activities within the FGBNMS. The
certification will require compliance
with the FGBNMFS regulations, as well
as the permits or plan approvals issued
by BOEM and/or BSEE, and the
topographic features stipulation (as
applicable) in the lease.
Refer to FEIS Section 5.3.9.5 for
additional analysis of the impacts to oil
and gas activities.
46. Comment: NOAA received a
comment to incorporate BOEM lease
sales and stipulations into BOEM’s
Record of Decision and Final Notice of
Sale.
11 https://
nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/
flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/
boemenergyanalysis.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
Response: As a non-voting member on
the Sanctuary Advisory Council, and a
cooperating agency in the preparation of
the 2016 DEIS, BOEM has incorporated
lease sales and stipulations into BOEM’s
Record of Decision and Final Notice.
FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5 shows
that there were 13 active lease blocks, as
reported by BOEM in their 2019 report.
However, since publication of that
report, two leases were relinquished.
There are currently 11 active leases in
the expansion area, averaging
approximately 17% of the lease blocks
falling within the Final Preferred
Alternative boundaries. Lease sales
issued between 1996 and 2001 provided
Information for Lessees indicating
‘‘Minimizing Oil and Gas Structures
near Flower Garden Banks’’. Lease sales
issued between 2002 through 2014 did
not specifically mention FGBNMS, but
the lease sales do refer to the Notice to
Lessees outlining the topographic and
live bottom stipulations. The sanctuary
regulations track the operational
requirements established by BOEM in
those stipulations. Lease sales issued
between 2015 to the present provide
notice to prospective leaseholders of the
proposed expansion. More information
regarding BOEM lease sales may be
found on BOEM’s website.12
47. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested the agency
develop an appropriate regulatory
‘‘firewall’’ that will set a precedent for
other sanctuaries to protect those areas
from offshore drilling practices.
Response: NOAA believes this request
is beyond the scope of this action but
will continue to work toward balancing
multiple user interests with the NMSA’s
primary goal of resource protection.
48. Comment: NOAA received
comments related to environmental
impacts of the oil and gas industry. Of
these, nearly half requested the
sanctuary update the regulations to
prohibit oil and gas development and to
ensure management protects against
damages from this industry. Concerns
raised included: (1) Oil spills and leaks;
(2) extraction practices; (3) encroaching
drilling and exploration; and (4) the
vulnerability of biological resources to
oil and gas activities. Comments also
requested that NOAA prohibit fracking
and analyze the potential for fracking
fluids and directional hydraulic
fracturing to impact the area in and near
the sanctuary. A few comments related
specifically to methane hydrate
extraction.
Response: NOAA determined the
Final Preferred Alternative balances
12 https://www.boem.gov/oil-gas-energy/leasesale-information.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
protecting vulnerable habitats with
multiple uses of the region. See FEIS
Chapter 3, Section 3.2 for more details
regarding the Final Preferred
Alternative. NOAA intends to extend
the current FGBNMS regulations to the
new expansion areas. Please refer to
FEIS Table 1.1 in Chapter 1, Section 1.4
for a list of current sanctuary regulations
and management efforts from impacts of
oil and gas activities. Additionally,
sanctuary regulations prohibit discharge
of any kind from oil and gas activities
that may be harmful to the benthic
environment.
BOEM assessed the potential for
offshore energy resources including oil
and gas and methane hydrate resources
in the proposed expansion areas. BOEM
determined that due to the shallowwater depth of the proposed expansion
areas, the formation of methane hydrate
in the subsurface is unlikely. BOEM’s
E.O. 13795 report is available on the
sanctuary website.13
The FEIS describes damages related to
oil and gas activities observed at banks
proposed in the expansion, as well as
potential impacts that could be
sustained to these resources. Please
review Chapter 4, Section 4.4.3 of the
FEIS for additional information.
Furthermore, in 2016, the NOAA
Office of Response and Restoration Gulf
of Mexico Disaster Response Center
convened with the Department of
Interior and a variety of environmental,
regulatory, and resource protection
agencies to develop a document
outlining ‘‘Oil Spill Response Options
for FGBNMS.’’ This document may be
found at the University of New
Hampshire, Coastal Response Research
Center and the Center for Spills and
Environmental Hazards website.14
49. Comment: NOAA received
comments related to the prohibition of
oil and gas development. Specifically,
NOAA was requested to prohibit: (1)
New oil and gas directional drilling,
infrastructure, and transport; (2) oil and
gas leasing within new boundary areas;
and (3) directional drilling under new
boundary areas.
Response: With this action, NOAA
intends to extend existing sanctuary
prohibitions, which allow and regulate
oil and gas exploration and
development to the expansion areas.
Directional drilling permits for oil and
gas will continue to be considered for
surface operations in the expansion
13 https://
nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/
flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/
boemenergyanalysis.pdf.
14 https://crrc.unh.edu/sites/crrc.unh.edu/files/
nrpt_oil_spill_response_impacting_fgbnms_tx_
report.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
areas, given existing prohibitions,
outside of the BOEM-designated No
Activity Zones. Pursuant to NMSA
Section 301(b)(6), NOAA will continue
‘‘to facilitate to the extent compatible
with the primary objective of resource
protection, all public and private uses of
the resources of these marine areas not
prohibited pursuant to other
authorities’’. Please also refer to
comment #49 and FEIS Table 1.1,
Section 1.4 for current sanctuary
regulations.
50. Comment: NOAA received
comments from oil and gas industry
companies in support of this expansion
that recognized the balance between
conservation, extraction, and user
groups achieved through the Sanctuary
Advisory Council’s process in
developing the Revised Preferred
Alternative (NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative).
Response: NOAA has carried forward
the 2018 BEWG’s recommendation,
which is now NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative. Please refer above to the
Boundaries section and to FEIS Chapter
3, Sections 3.1 and 3.2 for more
information regarding the development
of alternatives and selection of the Final
Preferred Alternative.
Sanctuary Management and
Administration, Funding, Education
and Outreach, and Sanctuary Advisory
Council
51. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting that FGBNMS
develop a Resilient Habitat Plan, which
seeks to enhance habitat resilience to
uncertain and unpredictable effects of
future change, such as climate change.
Response: The current FGBNMS
management plan serves as a framework
for addressing issues facing the
sanctuary and lays the foundation for
protecting, conserving, and enhancing
FGBNMS and its regional environment
in the Gulf of Mexico. Following this
expansion, NOAA will begin the
process to review and update the
FGBNMS Management Plan as needed.
NOAA acknowledges the growing need
to integrate resiliency plans into their
habitat management schemes and are
beginning to implement sanctuary
climate assessment and adaptations
plans sitewide. As determined during
management plan review, FGBNMS will
aim to integrate adaptation and
resiliency strategies into their habitat
and resource management.
Additionally, FGBNMS will begin
development of a Condition Report
describing the current status of
sanctuary resources, including the
expansion areas. As described in the
FEIS Executive Summary, NOAA will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
be extending the existing sanctuary
management plan and regulations to the
newly expanded area.
52. Comment: NOAA received a
comment on DEIS Section 5.3.6—
Irreversible and Irretrievable
Commitments of Resources requesting
NOAA include costs of expansion and
evaluate potential impacts to
conservation and management
activities.
Response: NEPA requires an analysis
of the extent to which the proposed
project’s primary and secondary effects
would commit nonrenewable resources
to uses that future generations would be
unable to reverse (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)(v);
40 CFR 1502.16). See FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.6.4 which describes any
impacts, or losses, to resources that
cannot be recovered or reversed
associated with the proposed action or
alternatives. Alternatives 1–3 and the
Final Preferred Alternative are within
the current operational budget, and
NOAA expects field operations to
continue at current intensity in the
expanded sanctuary. Also refer to the
2012 FGBNMS Management Plan for
additional budgetary information.
53. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting the FEIS to clearly
describe ‘‘best diving practices’’ in
Section 5.3.9.4, how they will be
implemented, how they will protect
FGBNMS, and how NOAA will enforce
their use.
Response: The existing sanctuary
regulations (15 CFR 922.122(a)(2)(iii))
require any vessel moored in the
sanctuary to exhibit the blue and white
International Code flag ‘‘A’’ (‘‘alpha’’
dive flag) or red and white ‘‘sports
diver’’ flag whenever a scuba diver from
that vessel is in the water and remove
the ‘‘alpha’’ dive flag or ‘‘sports diver’’
flag after all divers exit the water and
return on board the vessel, consistent
with U.S. Coast Guard guidelines
relating to sports diving as contained
within ‘‘Special Notice to Mariners’’
(00–2008) for the Gulf of Mexico. This
final rule will apply that requirement to
the expanded areas and must be
followed. The FGBNMS Trip Prep web
page 15 provides recreational divers with
information to prepare for their trip to
the sanctuary, information about the
challenging diving conditions that can
be experienced at FGBNMS, and how to
safely prepare for these visits, and
includes information on best diving and
boating practices to ensure the safety of
visitors. Additionally, the FGBNMS
Trip Prep web page includes a link to
reef etiquette, which provides
15 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/visiting/
tripprep.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4949
information about the best diving
practices to ensure the protection of the
environment. A link to this reef
etiquette web page 16 has been added to
Section 5.3.6. NOAA believes when
these practices are followed, reefs
sustain very minimal, if any, damage.
While compliance with the sanctuary
regulations is mandatory, some of the
best diving practices set forth on the
FGBNMS Trip Prep web page are
voluntary.
FGBNMS also has regulations
prohibiting resources from being taken
from the sanctuary (e.g., shells, coral,
invertebrates) and restricting
harassment of marine wildlife (e.g.,
Mobula rays, whale sharks). A list of the
regulations is provided in FEIS Chapter
1, Section 1.4, Table 1.1. The USCG and
NOAA’s OLE are jointly responsible for
enforcing regulations at FGBNMS.
54. Comment: NOAA received
comments regarding sharing its coral
and habitat information with the
GMFMC so the data could be included
in the coral portal. Also, FGBNMS was
asked to collaborate with NOAA’s
National Resource Damage Assessment’s
(NRDA) Trustee Council’s Open Ocean
Trustee Implementation Group to
restore mesophotic and deep benthic
communities (MDBC).
Response: NOAA welcomes the
opportunity to collaborate with
organizations to build community
partnerships for education, outreach,
research, monitoring, and resource
protection. Before, during, and after the
release of the DEIS and the NPRM, the
FGBNMS Superintendent presented
information to the GMFMC on the
FGBNMS proposed sanctuary
expansion. Additionally, FGBNMS
provides benthic (e.g., coral) data from
the current and expanded FGBNMS, as
well as other offshore banks and reefs in
the northwestern Gulf of Mexico to
GMFMC for its publicly accessible coral
portal.17 FGBNMS has been intently
involved as an Active Management
Project Partner with NRDA’s
Mesophotic Deepwater Benthic
Community’s planning projects. Project
goals include: (1) Enhancing public
awareness and performing active
management and protection activities by
undertaking education and outreach
targeting MDBC resource users and the
general public; (2) engaging
stakeholders and developing
socioeconomic analyses to evaluate
potential impacts of management or
protection actions; and (3) directly
16 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/visiting/
reefetiquette.html.
17 https://portal.gulfcouncil.org/cp/.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4950
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
addressing threats to MDBC through
management activities.
55. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting a Critical Habitat
Assessment of the banks be included in
the proposed expansion as required in
the International Finance Corporation
(IFC) Performance Standard 6
(Biodiversity Conservation and
Sustainable Management of Living
Natural Resources).
Response: To develop each
alternative, NOAA identified nationally
significant coral habitats that are
vulnerable to multiple threats as
detailed in the FEIS and final rule’s
Need for Action sections. For more
detail regarding how specific habitats
were selected in the alternatives, refer to
Chapter 3 of the FEIS. In summary,
ONMS determined the selected habitats
were most in need of protection based
on the best available scientific
information as well as through public
comment and interagency coordination.
56. Comment: NOAA received a
comment that requested the agency
incorporate and address management of
artificial reefs within sanctuary
boundaries, specifically
decommissioning of oil and gas
platforms.
Response: NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative does not include any
artificial reef structures. Federal policy
on artificial reefs is discussed in the
FEIS Appendix G and in the 2012
FGBNMS Management Plan.
57. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting the use of
collaborative, consensus-building,
transparent processes for selection and
management of sanctuary resources.
Response: ONMS uses several public,
stakeholder-driven processes to ensure
collaborative, transparent selection and
management of resources. National
marine sanctuaries have sanctuary
advisory councils, composed of voting
and non-voting members that represent
a variety of government agencies; local
user groups; and the general public, that
advise sanctuary superintendents on
priority issues. Sanctuary advisory
councils may choose to establish
committees and working groups to
further delve into issues; working
groups provide an opportunity to
involve more stakeholders from the
community in developing
recommendations for consideration by
the full sanctuary advisory councils.
Additionally, through NEPA and the
federal rulemaking processes, ONMS is
required to solicit, consider, and
respond to public comments during
each stage in an expansion, designation,
or regulatory update. All comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
received are made available and
considered by ONMS.
58. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting the use of British
Petroleum (BP) restoration funds to
justify expansion to Alternatives 4 and
5. One comment noted specific issues
affecting FGBNMS’ operational capacity
to manage alternatives with greater
environmental benefit had changed (i.e.
substantial resources have since been
dedicated to managing mesophotic and
deep benthic communities in the Gulf of
Mexico through the Deepwater Horizon
NRDA).
Response: FGBNMS is engaged in
collaborative efforts with NOAA
Fisheries through the MDBC project
funded through NRDA. NOAA has
determined, for the purpose of this
action, that Alternatives 4 and 5 are
beyond the geographic scope that is
feasible for the sanctuary to effectively
manage (see comment #54 and refer to
Chapter 3 of the FEIS).
59. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting FGBNMS design,
develop, and commission a research
vessel dedicated to studying marine
mammal population growth in the
pelagic environment.
Response: FGBNMS currently
operates the R/V Manta, a research
vessel that can be used as a platform to
research marine mammals, and thus
rejects this request. NOAA Fisheries
conducts marine mammal population
studies and their Southeast Fisheries
Science Center develops a report every
5 years. Further, the sanctuary
collaborates with external organizations
and partners to support marine mammal
research.
60. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting the creation of an
interpretive center in support of the
sanctuary.
Response: NOAA will evaluate
opportunities for an interpretive center
through the next FGBNMS management
plan review process.
61. Comment: NOAA received a
comment requesting inclusion of a user
education and enforcement program to
ensure the public is aware of new
boundaries and requirements.
Response: Existing online and print
materials created for the proposed
action contain select maps and several
photographs. When the proposed action
becomes final, NOAA will work to
update and distribute printed and
online materials to reflect the features
and boundaries of FGBNMS.
62. Comment: NOAA received
comments regarding input from the
FGBNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council
and other stakeholders. More
specifically, commenters asked why the
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FGBNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council
was not informed of new information
and proposed boundaries for NOAA’s
original preferred alternative in the
DEIS (Alternative 3) prior to
publication, and asked why NOAA
selected Alternative 3 instead of the
2007 FGBNMS Advisory Council’s
recommendation (Alternative 2).
Response: FGBNMS received input
from its Sanctuary Advisory Council
through a Boundary Expansion Working
Group comprised of stakeholders from
varied constituent seats. In 2007, the
working group presented its
recommendation for sanctuary
expansion to the full Advisory Council,
after which the 2007 Sanctuary
Advisory Council recommendation
(Alternative 2) was approved, based on
the criteria developed by the original
BEWG. Their recommendation became
the foundation for NOAA’s original
preferred alternative (Alternative 3),
which also included additional research
in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico.
After the release of the DEIS, a
Sanctuary Advisory Council working
group reformed. Based on the Sanctuary
Advisory Council recommendations in
response to the DEIS, NOAA made a
number of changes to the boundaries of
the polygons surrounding the banks and
submerged features. In 2018, the BEWG
brought forth its recommendation for
sanctuary expansion to the full
Advisory Council, which was approved
and became NOAA’s Revised Preferred
Alternative for the NPRM and the Final
Preferred Alternative in this FEIS.
NOAA’s Final Preferred Alternative
represents the collaborative efforts
between constituent/stakeholder groups
and the sanctuary’s multi-use
management. Refer to FEIS Chapter 3,
Sections 3.2 and 3.5 which details
development of the Final Preferred
Alternative and provides the rationale
for the selection of Alternative 3 as the
original preferred alternative in the
DEIS, respectively.
63. Comment: NOAA received a
comment suggesting FGBNMS form an
Advisory Council working group on
maritime shipping traffic regarding
shipping routes.
Response: NOAA will consider this
suggestion in the future.
64. Comment: NOAA received
comments claiming science was
disregarded during the development of
the boundary configuration for the
Revised Preferred Alternative presented
in the NPRM.
Response: The bank boundaries of the
Revised Preferred Alternative presented
in the NPRM (NOAA’s Final Preferred
Alternative) closely follow BOEM’s
NAZs, which were based on information
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
available in 1970–1980’s, and
designated to protect active reef
building benthic communities,
associated with the shallowest portions
of the geographic features. NOAA
reduced the size of the expansion areas
proposed in the 2016 DEIS original
preferred alternative to minimize user
conflicts and potential economic
impacts to the offshore energy industry
in accordance with NMSA section 301
(16 U.S.C. 1431), which supports
establishing compatible uses with
public and private resource users.
Socioeconomic Issues and Access
65. Comment: NOAA received
comments stating that the economic
impact analysis in the DEIS was
insufficient and requested updates to
data pertaining to scuba diving,
commercial fishing, air emissions, and
oil and gas.
Response: NOAA used the best
available scientific information to
conduct the economic analysis for the
DEIS and incorporated updated data
and analysis, if available, in the FEIS
(see Chapter 5). Specifically, ONMS
updated analyses of impacts to
commercial and recreational fishing and
impacts to oil and gas resources in the
FEIS.
66. Comment: NOAA received
comments related to the positive
socioeconomic impacts resulting from
sanctuary expansion on local tourism/
businesses and the recreation industry.
Commenters noted some fishing
practices were harmful and therefore,
fishing restrictions in the expansion
areas would benefit the recreational
fishing industry, the commercial fishing
industry, and fisheries/seafood
production.
Response: Potential positive and
adverse impacts to socioeconomic
resources (e.g., recreation, fishing) are
detailed in FEIS Chapter 5. NOAA does
not anticipate any significant adverse
impacts to be incurred on the
commercial or recreational fishing
industry as a result of this expansion.
Rather, fishers may find a minor
beneficial impact with an increase in
fish production with the protection of
these important areas. Please review
FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.1 and
5.3.9.2 for more details on the expected
impact to commercial and recreational
fishing industries, respectively.
67. Comment: NOAA received
comments suggesting that the proposed
action removes an asset from public use
for both commercial and recreational
purposes, restricts recreational diving
access, and restricts recreational fishing
opportunities. Commenters urged
NOAA to allow for multiple use of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
sanctuary, with reasonable access
regulations and reasonable mitigation
measures that directly address threats.
Response: By expanding the
sanctuary’s boundaries and extending
existing regulations to the expansion
areas, NOAA is not restricting access to
divers or hook and line fishers in any
part of the sanctuary as long as users do
not injure or possess any sanctuaries
resources (see FEIS regulations Table
1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4). NOAA
determined through the Sanctuary
Advisory Council process and through
public input that the expansion would
allow for multiple uses of the sanctuary
while addressing threats to sanctuary
resources, as is set forth in NMSA
Section 301. For additional details
pertaining to impacts to socioeconomic
resources such as recreational diving,
please refer to FEIS Chapter 5.
68. Comment: NOAA received
comments from the diving industry and
scuba divers supporting sanctuary
expansion. Divers urged NOAA to
install mooring buoys in the expansion
areas to increase access and to provide
better maintenance of the mooring
buoys and longlines.
Response: NOAA intends to extend
the current management regime to the
expansion areas, under which the
sanctuary would provide and maintain
mooring buoys so that vessels (< 100
feet long) could safely moor in the
sanctuary boundaries, as is logistically
feasible. See the current FGBNMS
Management Plan.
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)
NOAA received eight comments on
the Bureau of Ocean Management’s
(BOEM) analysis (the RIR) (85 FR 74630,
November 23, 2020) and collectively
responds to those comments here.
69. Comment: NOAA received
comments expressing concern about the
short length of the period provided for
public comment, suggesting (1) it was
not long enough to provide substantive
feedback; (2) no similar National Marine
Sanctuary System has offered a 15-day
comment period; and (3) that it was not
circulated with other documents prior
to this period. NOAA also received a
request to provide justification for the
legality of the 15-day comment period,
and further requested that NOAA
extend the comment period for 60 days.
Response: The request to extend the
comment period is denied. Prior to
soliciting public comment for the RIR, a
60-day comment period was open for
the proposed rule, including a fulsome
summary of the RIR, which allowed the
public to comment on the proposed
action in its entirety (85 FR 25359, May
1, 2020). On November 23, 2020, NOAA
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4951
acknowledged the oversight of not
circulating the RIR, and reopened the
public comment period (85 FR 74630).
Given that NOAA provided 60 days for
public comment period on the proposed
rule, which contained a summary of the
BOEM analysis, the additional comment
period is reasonable.
70. Comment: NOAA received
comments suggesting that the RIR was
outdated and requesting a new analysis,
suggesting that a decline in the current
value of oil and gas and other
hydrocarbon resources leads to
mistaken assumptions in the current
RIR. Additionally, commenters suggest
that the RIR is no longer an accurate
portrayal of expected impacts to the oil
and gas industry. According to the
commenters, lower oil and gas prices
reduce the desire to explore and
develop resources in the region and,
thus, oil and gas resources cannot be
considered economically recoverable.
Response: NOAA disagrees with this
comment due to the uncertainty in
determining future oil prices, and
because BOEM’s February 2019 report
provides the best available economic
information. NOAA summarized this
analysis in the proposed rule for
sanctuary expansion and further
evaluated impacts of this action on the
oil and gas industry in their Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS);
see Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5.
71. Comment: NOAA received
comments requesting the other
alternatives be re-evaluated in light of
the analysis presented in the RIR.
Response: NOAA updated the
analyses of all alternatives in the FEIS;
see Chapters 4 and 5. Ultimately, NOAA
decided to move forward with the
Revised Preferred Alternative, as
presented in the proposed rule, as their
Final Preferred Alternative.
VI. Classification
A. National Marine Sanctuaries Act
Section 301(b) of the NMSA (16
U.S.C. 1431) provides authority for
comprehensive and coordinated
conservation and management of
national marine sanctuaries in
coordination with other resource
management authorities. Section
304(a)(4) of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434)
requires that the procedures specified in
Section 304 for designating a national
marine sanctuary be followed for
modifying any term of designation. This
action, in addition to expanding the
sanctuary, is revising the terms of
designation (e.g., scope of regulations)
for the FGBNMS. In accordance with
Section 304, the documents relevant to
the expansion of Flower Garden Banks
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
4952
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
are being submitted to the House
Resources Committee and the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation. Section 304(a)(5) of the
NMSA also requires that NOAA consult
with the appropriate Federal fishery
management council on any action
proposing to regulate fishing in federal
waters. Consultation with the Gulf of
Mexico Fishery Management Council
(GMFMC) is discussed above in part II
sections 4 and 5. NOAA solicited
comments on potential exemptions for
pelagic longline and spearfishing in the
expanded area, and based on public
comment and coordination with NOAA
fisheries, determined to not grant these
exemptions and to extend existing
fishing regulations into the expansion
areas.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
B. National Environmental Policy Act
In accordance with Section 304(a)(2)
of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434(a)(2)), and
the provisions of NEPA (42 U.S.C.
4321–4370), NOAA has prepared a FEIS
to evaluate the impacts of this action.
Because this environmental review
began before September 14, 2020, which
was the effective date of the
amendments to the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ)
regulations implementing NEPA (85 FR
43372 (Jul. 16, 2020)), the FEIS was
prepared using the 1978 CEQ NEPA
regulations. The Notice of Availability
(December 11, 2020, 85 FR 80093) of the
FGBNMS FEIS is available on the
FGBNMS website.18 NEPA reviews
initiated prior to the effective date of the
2020 revised CEQ regulations may be
conducted using the 1978 version of the
regulations. NOAA has also prepared a
ROD. Copies of the FEIS and ROD are
available at the address and website
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
final rule.
C. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Impact
This final rule has been determined to
be ‘‘significant’’ within the meaning of
Executive Order 12866. Details on the
estimated costs of this rule are
discussed in BOEM’s E.O. 13795 report,
which is available on regulations.gov at
docket NOAA–NOS–2019–033, and
serves as a substitute for the Regulatory
Impact Review (RIR). NOAA
inadvertently omitted this report in the
public docket for this action when the
NPRM was published. NOAA
subsequently published a Federal
Register notice on November 23, 2020
(85 FR 74630), making the RIR available
for public comments. Refer to section V
18 https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/
sanctuaryexpansion.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
of this rule for comments received on
the RIR. Details on the estimated
benefits of this action are discussed in
Chapter 5, section 5.3 of the FEIS.
G. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Assessment
This final rule is not a significant
energy action under the definition in
E.O. 13211. It is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Moreover,
the Administrator of OIRA has not
otherwise designated this action as a
significant energy action. A Statement of
Energy Effects, therefore, is not
required.
NOAA has concluded this regulatory
action does not have federalism
implications sufficient to warrant
preparation of a federalism assessment
under Executive Order 13132. The area
that is the subject of the final rule is
located entirely within federal waters
outside of state or local jurisdiction.
This rule will not have a substantial or
direct effect on states or local
governments.
E. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This Executive Order reaffirms the
Federal government’s commitment to
tribal sovereignty, self-determination,
and self-government. Its purpose is to
ensure that all Executive departments
and agencies consult with Indian tribes
and respect tribal sovereignty as they
develop policies on issues that impact
Indian communities. This action is not
anticipated to have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibility
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes.
F. Executive Order 13795: Implementing
an America-First Offshore Energy
Strategy
Executive Order 13795 directs the
Secretary of Commerce to refrain from
designating or expanding any national
marine sanctuary unless the proposal
includes a full accounting from the DOI
of any energy or mineral resource
potential (including offshore energy
from wind, oil, natural gas, methane
hydrates, and any other sources that the
Secretary of Commerce deems
appropriate) within the expansion area,
and the potential impact of the
expansion on energy or mineral
resource potential within the designated
area. On February 25, 2019, BOEM
provided NOAA with a review of
offshore energy and mineral resource
potential located within the revised
expansion areas in accordance with
Executive Order 13795. BOEM’s report
is available at the Supporting Document
section of the docket identified by
NOAA–NOS–2019–033, and posted at
https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=NOAA-NOS-2019-00331630.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
H. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
requires Federal agencies to prepare an
analysis of a rule’s impact on small
entities whenever the agency is required
to publish a rule, unless the head of the
agency can certify, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), that the action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Under section 605(b) of the RFA, if the
head of an agency (or his or her
designee) certifies that a rule will not
have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
then the agency is not required to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Pursuant to section 605(b), the Chief
Counsel for Regulations for the
Department of Commerce, through
delegation by the head of the agency,
certified to the Office of Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration during
the proposed rule stage that the
regulations would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The factual
basis for certification was published in
the proposed rule (85 FR 25367). No
public comments were received
regarding this certification. Therefore, a
regulatory flexibility analysis was not
required and none was prepared.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
The existing FGBNMS regulations
contain a collection-of-information
requirement subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA), approved by The
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), under control number 0648–
0141, for collection-of-information for
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements under 15 CFR part 922.
This final rule would not increase or
otherwise revise the existing paperwork
burdens.
The public reporting burden for
national marine sanctuary general
permit applications is estimated to
average 1 hour 30 minutes per
application, including the time for
reviewing the application instructions,
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
the collection of information. For
special use permits, a collection-of
information requirement is necessary to
determine whether the activities are
consistent with the terms and
conditions of special use permits
prescribed by the NMSA. The public
reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average
twenty four (24) hours per response
(application, annual report, and
financial report), including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching
existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and
completing and reviewing the collection
of information. This estimate does not
include additional time that may be
required should the applicant be
required to provide information to
NOAA for the preparation of
documentation that may be required
under NEPA (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.).
NOAA determined that this final rule
would not appreciably change the
average annual number of respondents
or the reporting burden for the
information requirements supporting
special use or research permits because
few activities requiring new permits are
expected for the new areas. Much of the
research is expected to be conducted by
the sanctuary, and other uses that
require permits are anticipated with
very low intensity in the proposed
expansion areas. NOAA also determined
that these regulations do not necessitate
a modification to its information
collection approval by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. Comments
on this determination were solicited in
the proposed rule, and no public
comments were received.
Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, no person is required to respond to,
nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
J. National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation
Act (NHPA; 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) is
intended to preserve historical and
archaeological sites in the United States
of America. The act created the National
Register of Historic Places, the list of
National Historic Landmarks, and the
State Historic Preservation Offices.
Section 106 of the NHPA requires
Federal agencies to take into account the
effects of their undertakings on historic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
properties, and afford the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to
comment. The historic preservation
review process mandated by Section
106 is outlined in regulations issued by
ACHP (36 CFR part 800). Pursuant to 36
CFR 800.16(l)(1), historic properties
include: ‘‘any prehistoric or historic
district, site, building, structure or
object included in, or eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places maintained by the
Secretary of the Interior.’’ The term
includes artifacts, records, and remains
that are related to and located within
such properties. NOAA did not identify
any known historic properties within
the boundaries of the Final Preferred
Alternative, and received no public
comments regarding historic properties
in the Final Preferred Alternative
boundaries.
K. Coastal Zone Management Act
Section 307 of the Coastal Zone
Management Act (CZMA; 16 U.S.C.
1456) requires Federal agencies carrying
out an activity that would affect any
land or water use or natural resource of
the coastal zone to provide a
consistency determination to the
relevant state agencies before final
approval of the agency action. Copies of
the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement were provided to five Gulf
Coast States (Texas, Louisiana,
Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi),
soliciting feedback on reasonably
foreseeable effects on coastal resources
and uses. Responses were received from
Mississippi Department of Marine
Resources and the Texas General Land
Office indicating no objection to the
proposed boundary changes or the DEIS.
With this information in addition to
analysis provided in the FEIS, NOAA
determined this action would have no
effect on coastal resources. On
November 16, 2020, NOAA prepared a
consistency determination, which was
submitted to the five Gulf Coast States
along with the proposed rule. In
response to this request, the five Gulf
States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Texas concurred with
NOAA’s consistency determination.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 922
Administrative practice and
procedure, Coastal zone, Fishing gear,
Marine resources, Natural resources,
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4953
Penalties, Recreation and recreation
areas, Wildlife.
Nicole R. LeBoeuf,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Ocean
Services and Coastal Zone Management,
National Ocean Service.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
above, NOAA amends part 922, title 15
of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 922—NATIONAL MARINE
SANCTUARY PROGRAM
REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 922
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.
Subpart L—Flower Garden Banks
National Marine Sanctuary
■
2. Revise § 922.120 to read as follows:
§ 922.120
Boundary.
The Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary (sanctuary) boundary
encompasses a total area of
approximately 121 square nautical miles
(160.35 square miles) of offshore ocean
waters, and submerged lands
thereunder, along the continental shelf
and shelf edge in the northwestern Gulf
of Mexico. The entire sanctuary
boundary is comprised of 19 unique
polygons. The precise boundary
coordinates for each polygon are listed
in appendix A to this subpart.
■ 3. In § 922.121, revise the term ‘‘Noactivity zone’’ to read as follows:
§ 922.121
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
No-activity zone (applicable only to
oil and gas industry activities) means
the geographic areas delineated by the
Department of the Interior in
Topographic Features Stipulations for
Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lease
sales as defined by a bathymetric
contour (isobath) ranging from 55–85m
in depth, with the exception of Stetson
Bank (52m) and East and West Flower
Garden Banks (100m). The Notice to
Lessees (NTL) No. 2009–G39 provides
and consolidates guidance for the
avoidance and protection of biologically
sensitive features and areas (i.e.
topographic features, pinnacles, live
bottoms (low relief features)) and other
potentially sensitive biological features
(PSBFs) when conducting operations in
water depths shallower than 980 feet
(300 meters) in the Gulf of Mexico. NTL
2009–G39 remains in effect pursuant to
NTL No. 2015–N02. The no-activity
zones are based on depth contours as
noted for the following Banks: Stetson
Bank (52 meters), MacNeil Bank (82
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
4954
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
meters), Rankin Banks (including 28
Fathom Bank) (85 meters), Bright Bank
(85 meters), Geyer Bank (85 meters),
Elvers Bank (85 meters), McGrail Bank
(85 meters), Bouma Bank (85 meters),
Rezak Bank (85 meters), Sidner Bank (85
meters), Sonnier Bank (55 meters),
Alderdice Bank (80 meters), and Parker
Bank (85 meters). For East and West
Flower Garden Banks, the no-activity
zones are based on the ‘‘1⁄4 1⁄4 1⁄4’’
aliquot system formerly used by the
Department of the Interior, a method
that delineates a specific portion of a
block rather than the actual underlying
isobath. The precise aliquot part
description of these areas around East
and West Flower Garden Banks are
provided in appendix A of this subpart.
4. Revise § 922.122(e)(1) to read as
follows:
■
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(e)(1) The prohibitions in paragraphs
(a)(2) through (11) of this section do not
apply to activities being carried out by
the Department of Defense as of the
effective date of the revised terms of
sanctuary designation. Such activities
shall be carried out in a manner that
minimizes any adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources or qualities. The
prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2)
through (11) of this section do not apply
to any new activities carried out by the
Department of Defense that do not have
the potential for any significant adverse
impact on Sanctuary resources or
qualities. Such activities shall be carried
out in a manner that minimizes any
adverse impact on Sanctuary resources
or qualities. New activities with the
potential for significant adverse impact
on Sanctuary resources or qualities may
Polygon ID
No.
Point ID No.
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
§ 922.122 Prohibited or otherwise
regulated activities.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5. Revise appendix A to subpart L to
read as follows:
■
Appendix A to Subpart L of Part 922—
Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary
Coordinates listed in this appendix are
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System)
and based on the North American Datum of
1983 (NAD83).
Bank(s)
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
be exempted from the prohibitions in
paragraphs (a)(2) through (11) of this
section by the Director after
consultation between the Director and
the Department of Defense. If it is
determined that an activity may be
carried out, such activity shall be
carried out in a manner that minimizes
any adverse impact on Sanctuary
resources or qualities.
*
*
*
*
*
Latitude
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
Stetson Bank ..................................................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
West Flower Garden Bank .............................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
Horseshoe Bank .............................................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
28.15673
28.15661
28.15862
28.16950
28.17386
28.17583
28.17543
28.17284
28.16924
28.16428
28.16274
28.15796
28.15673
27.84363
27.81750
27.81752
27.83069
27.81735
27.83220
27.85854
27.87925
27.92626
27.92620
27.91801
27.90969
27.88644
27.84363
27.82317
27.80927
27.80568
27.79429
27.78357
27.79640
27.81855
27.82742
27.81868
27.83143
27.84699
27.87165
27.88602
27.87252
27.85861
27.82317
27.89455
27.87999
27.88003
Longitude
¥94.29673
¥94.30312
¥94.30888
¥94.30839
¥94.30257
¥94.29445
¥94.29327
¥94.28952
¥94.28677
¥94.28681
¥94.28756
¥94.29047
¥94.29673
¥93.78549
¥93.81056
¥93.84752
¥93.86271
¥93.87490
¥93.89185
¥93.89369
¥93.87853
¥93.82011
¥93.81759
¥93.80801
¥93.77939
¥93.77939
¥93.78549
¥93.62789
¥93.63578
¥93.65541
¥93.66555
¥93.68846
¥93.70534
¥93.75198
¥93.74743
¥93.68868
¥93.68941
¥93.70079
¥93.73947
¥93.73294
¥93.64648
¥93.63908
¥93.62789
¥93.57040
¥93.61309
¥93.62961
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Point ID No.
Polygon ID
No.
Bank(s)
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
17 ...................
18 ...................
19 ...................
20 ...................
21 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
8 .....................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
East Flower Garden Bank ..............................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
MacNeil Bank ..................................................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Rankin Bank & 28—Fathom Bank .................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Bright Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Geyer Bank .....................................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Latitude
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
27.89330
27.92101
27.95899
27.97485
27.98177
27.98554
27.95206
27.92151
27.89455
28.00226
27.99707
28.00136
28.00518
28.01694
28.01883
28.03670
28.03724
28.03113
28.01300
28.00331
28.00226
27.92554
27.92039
27.92035
27.91387
27.90829
27.90641
27.90489
27.89549
27.88892
27.88072
27.87676
27.88449
27.88803
27.88794
27.89234
27.89971
27.90910
27.92847
27.93407
27.93599
27.92554
27.87310
27.86549
27.87300
27.89058
27.89839
27.90336
27.91010
27.91634
27.91263
27.90354
27.90253
27.89927
27.87310
27.78848
27.79458
27.83313
27.85306
27.86328
27.86908
27.86556
27.85211
27.83713
27.82540
27.82490
27.80846
27.78997
27.78602
27.78848
27.82285
27.82087
27.82009
4955
Longitude
¥93.64172
¥93.64747
¥93.64490
¥93.63086
¥93.60996
¥93.58188
¥93.57810
¥93.56880
¥93.57040
¥93.51550
¥93.52669
¥93.52423
¥93.52425
¥93.52233
¥93.51264
¥93.50300
¥93.49844
¥93.49199
¥93.49624
¥93.50725
¥93.51550
¥93.40593
¥93.41021
¥93.42474
¥93.43165
¥93.42234
¥93.42535
¥93.44219
¥93.44396
¥93.43403
¥93.42805
¥93.42787
¥93.44458
¥93.45159
¥93.45905
¥93.46410
¥93.45571
¥93.45343
¥93.45335
¥93.44743
¥93.44215
¥93.40593
¥93.27056
¥93.29462
¥93.31055
¥93.32193
¥93.31987
¥93.30953
¥93.30562
¥93.29292
¥93.28816
¥93.28386
¥93.27238
¥93.26729
¥93.27056
¥93.07794
¥93.08448
¥93.07913
¥93.08279
¥93.07885
¥93.06974
¥93.05944
¥93.05391
¥93.05725
¥93.04312
¥93.04276
¥93.03412
¥93.04096
¥93.05384
¥93.07794
¥92.88605
¥92.88600
¥92.88670
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
4956
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Point ID No.
Polygon ID
No.
Bank(s)
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
17 ...................
18 ...................
19 ...................
20 ...................
21 ...................
22 ...................
23 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9A ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
9B ..................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10A ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
10B ................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—A ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
Elvers Bank—B ...............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—A ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
McGrail Bank—B ............................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Bouma Bank ...................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Latitude
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
27.81869
27.81690
27.81615
27.80645
27.81221
27.81599
27.81934
27.82250
27.82809
27.83973
27.83972
27.83003
27.82285
27.85645
27.85662
27.85334
27.85076
27.84903
27.85145
27.85645
27.97684
27.97749
27.97475
27.97304
27.95173
27.94849
27.96632
27.96792
27.95989
27.95409
27.94951
27.94920
27.95846
27.97286
27.98096
27.97684
27.94116
27.94180
27.94010
27.93616
27.93481
27.93529
27.93859
27.94116
28.07909
28.07370
28.07370
28.06544
28.05162
28.03846
28.03463
28.03114
28.02915
28.03154
28.04166
28.04525
28.04751
28.04676
28.04866
28.05687
28.06388
28.07018
28.06974
28.06594
28.07109
28.07683
28.07909
28.32652
28.32495
28.32501
28.32796
28.33523
28.34453
Longitude
¥92.89235
¥92.89404
¥92.89653
¥92.90884
¥92.92082
¥92.93908
¥92.93940
¥92.92465
¥92.91359
¥92.89876
¥92.88038
¥92.86983
¥92.88605
¥92.92310
¥92.91922
¥92.91631
¥92.91727
¥92.92097
¥92.92524
¥92.92310
¥92.58489
¥92.57716
¥92.56753
¥92.56191
¥92.53902
¥92.54254
¥92.56116
¥92.58152
¥92.58187
¥92.57057
¥92.57135
¥92.57994
¥92.60274
¥92.61901
¥92.60158
¥92.58489
¥92.54750
¥92.54543
¥92.54202
¥92.54151
¥92.54398
¥92.54803
¥92.54901
¥92.54750
¥92.47305
¥92.44900
¥92.44891
¥92.43518
¥92.43380
¥92.44065
¥92.45289
¥92.45537
¥92.46338
¥92.47259
¥92.47229
¥92.46717
¥92.47310
¥92.48308
¥92.48462
¥92.48145
¥92.49262
¥92.49141
¥92.48613
¥92.48098
¥92.47708
¥92.48071
¥92.47305
¥92.45356
¥92.45647
¥92.45965
¥92.46626
¥92.47536
¥92.47511
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Point ID No.
Polygon ID
No.
Bank(s)
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
17 ...................
18 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
1 .....................
2 .....................
3 .....................
4 .....................
5 .....................
6 .....................
7 .....................
8 .....................
9 .....................
10 ...................
11 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
15 ...................
16 ...................
17 ...................
18 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
12 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
13 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
14 ...................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15A ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
15B ................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
16 ...................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Sonnier Bank ..................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Rezak Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Sidner Bank ....................................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—A ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Parker Bank—B ..............................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
Alderdice Bank ................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Latitude
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
28.34840
28.35256
28.35416
28.35456
28.35351
28.35174
28.34852
28.34303
28.34048
28.33584
28.33068
28.32652
27.95420
27.95847
27.95629
27.97297
27.97892
27.98869
27.99372
27.98603
27.98022
27.97442
27.96006
27.95420
27.93046
27.91368
27.91462
27.91976
27.92306
27.94525
27.94166
27.94231
27.93046
27.95067
27.94177
27.93547
27.92937
27.93224
27.93401
27.93958
27.95012
27.96214
27.96630
27.96869
27.96925
27.96678
27.95067
27.96082
27.96432
27.96566
27.96385
27.96149
27.95931
27.95824
27.96082
28.09726
28.09474
28.09569
28.09184
28.08410
28.07506
28.07053
28.06959
28.06819
28.07026
28.07562
28.08058
28.08463
28.09024
28.09487
28.09627
28.09507
28.09726
4957
Longitude
¥92.47439
¥92.47181
¥92.46784
¥92.46135
¥92.45729
¥92.45107
¥92.44564
¥92.44045
¥92.44024
¥92.44669
¥92.44985
¥92.45356
¥92.36641
¥92.37739
¥92.38599
¥92.39248
¥92.39845
¥92.39964
¥92.38244
¥92.36697
¥92.36429
¥92.36996
¥92.36854
¥92.36641
¥92.36762
¥92.37398
¥92.38530
¥92.39427
¥92.38792
¥92.38305
¥92.37565
¥92.37189
¥92.36762
¥92.00294
¥91.99762
¥91.99568
¥91.99981
¥92.02999
¥92.03946
¥92.05015
¥92.05050
¥92.05407
¥92.04745
¥92.04120
¥92.02758
¥92.02175
¥92.00294
¥91.99450
¥91.99285
¥91.99014
¥91.98600
¥91.98639
¥91.98760
¥91.99183
¥91.99450
¥91.99328
¥91.98619
¥91.97526
¥91.97361
¥91.97273
¥91.97457
¥91.98465
¥91.99347
¥92.00512
¥92.01321
¥92.02032
¥92.02436
¥92.02577
¥92.02296
¥92.01231
¥92.00735
¥92.00008
¥91.99328
4958
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
6. Revise appendix B to subpart L to
read as follows:
■
Appendix B to Subpart L of Part 922—
Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary—Terms of Designation
Preamble
Under the authority of title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries
Act, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), 16 U.S.C. 1431
et seq., 19 separate unique polygon areas of
ocean waters and the submerged lands
thereunder, along the continental shelf and
shelf edge in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico, as described in Article II, are hereby
designated as Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary for the purposes of
protecting and managing the conservation,
ecological, recreation, research, education,
historic and aesthetic resources and qualities
of these areas.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Article I—Effect of Designation
The Act authorizes the Secretary of
Commerce to issue such final regulations as
are necessary and reasonable to implement
the designation, including managing and
protecting the conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, research, educational,
and esthetic resources and qualities of a
sanctuary. Section 1 of Article IV of this
Designation Document lists those activities
that may be regulated on the effective date of
designation or at some later date in order to
protect Sanctuary resources and qualities.
Thus, the act of designation empowers the
Secretary of Commerce to regulate the
activities listed in Section 1. Listing does not
necessarily mean that an activity will be
regulated. However, if an activity is not listed
it may not be regulated, except on an
emergency basis, unless Section 1 of Article
IV is amended by the same procedures by
which the original designation was made.
Article II—Description of the Area
The Flower Garden Banks National Marine
Sanctuary (Sanctuary) boundary
encompasses a total area of approximately
121 square nautical miles (160 square miles)
of offshore ocean waters, and submerged
lands thereunder, along the continental shelf
and shelf edge in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. The entire sanctuary boundary is
composed of 19 unique polygons. The
precise boundary coordinates for each
polygon are listed in appendix A to this
subpart.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 1
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 13 and contains the submerged
feature of Stetson Bank with an area of
approximately 1.1 square nautical miles (1.5
square miles), located approximately 71
nautical miles (82 miles) south-southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 2 begins at Point 1 and continues
in numerical order to Point 14 and contains
the submerged feature of West Flower Garden
Bank with an area of approximately 28.0
square nautical miles (37.1 square miles),
located approximately 97 nautical miles (111
miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The
sanctuary boundary for Polygon 3 begins at
Point 1 and continues in numerical order to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
Point 16 and contains the submerged feature
of Horseshoe Bank with an area of
approximately 21.7 square nautical miles
(28.7 square miles), located approximately
102 nautical miles (117 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 4 begins at Point 1 and continues
in numerical order to Point 12 and contains
the submerged feature of East Flower Garden
Bank with an area of approximately 21.0
square nautical miles (27.8 square miles),
located approximately 101 nautical miles
(116 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 5 begins
at Point 1 and continues in numerical order
to Point 12 and contains the submerged
feature of MacNeil Bank with an area of
approximately 2.1 square nautical miles (2.7
square miles), located approximately 103
nautical miles (118 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 6 begins at Point 1 and continues
in numerical order to Point 21 and contains
the submerged features of Rankin Bank and
28 Fathom Bank with an area of
approximately 4.2 square nautical miles (5.6
square miles), located approximately 109
nautical miles (126 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 7 begins at Point 1 and continues
in numerical order to Point 13 and contains
the submerged features of Bright Bank with
an area of approximately 5.8 square nautical
miles (7.6 square miles), located
approximately 115 nautical miles (133 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary
boundary for Polygon 8 begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 15 and
contains the submerged feature of Geyer
Bank within an area of approximately 8.7
square nautical miles (11.5 square miles),
located approximately 126 nautical miles
(145 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 9A
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 16 and contains part of the
submerged feature of Elvers Bank within an
area of approximately 3.3 square nautical
miles (4.4 square miles), located
approximately 134 nautical miles (154 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary
boundary for Polygon 9B begins at Point 1
and continues in numerical order to Point 7
and also contains part of the submerged
feature of Elvers Bank within an area of
approximately 0.1 square nautical miles (0.2
square miles), located approximately 133
nautical miles (153 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 10A begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 16 and
contains part of the submerged feature of
McGrail Bank with an area of approximately
3.4 square nautical miles (4.5 square miles),
located approximately 142 nautical miles
(163 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 10B
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 8 and also contains part of the
submerged feature of McGrail Bank with an
area of approximately 0.1 square nautical
miles (0.2 square miles), located
approximately 146 nautical miles (168 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary
boundary for Polygon 11 begins at Point 1
and continues in numerical order to Point 23
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and contains the submerged feature of Bouma
Bank with an area of approximately 5.8
square nautical miles (7.7 square miles),
located approximately 145 nautical miles
(167 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 12
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 18 and contains the submerged
feature of Sonnier Bank with an area of
approximately 2.3 square nautical miles (3.1
square miles), located approximately 138
nautical miles (159 miles) east-southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 13 begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 12 and
contains the submerged feature of Rezak
Bank with an area of approximately 2.8
square nautical miles (3.7 square miles),
located approximately 151 nautical miles
(174 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 14
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 9 and contains the submerged
feature of Sidner Bank with an area of
approximately 1.5 square nautical miles (2.0
square miles), located approximately 153
nautical miles (177 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary
for Polygon 15A begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 14 and
contains part of the submerged feature of
Parker Bank within an area of approximately
5.2 square nautical miles (6.8 square miles),
located approximately 168 nautical miles
(194 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 15B
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 8 and also contains part of the
submerged feature of Parker Bank within an
area of approximately 0.1 square nautical
miles (0.2 square miles), located
approximately 171 nautical miles (197 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary
boundary for Polygon 16 begins at Point 1
and continues in numerical order to Point 18
and contains the submerged feature of
Alderdice Bank within an area of
approximately 3.8 square nautical miles (5.0
square miles), located approximately 166
nautical miles (191 miles) east-southeast of
Galveston, Texas.
Article III—Characteristics of Area That
Give it Particular Value
The Sanctuary contains a series of
underwater features located along the edge of
the continental shelf in the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico. These features are of interest
from both a geological and biological
perspective. Formed primarily as the result of
the movement of underlying salt deposits
(also called salt domes or salt diapirs), and
bathed by waters of tropical origin, they
contain important geological features,
biological habitats and other marine
resources of national significance. They
contain highly productive marine ecosystems
that support a variety of fish and invertebrate
communities of biological and economic
importance.
The reefs and banks of the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico are structurally complex and
contain a range of marine habitats, including
coral reefs, coralline algal reefs, algal nodule
beds, mesophotic and deepwater reefs, and
soft bottom communities. The composition,
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
diversity and vertical distribution of benthic
communities on the banks are strongly
influenced by the physical environment,
including water temperature, turbidity and
current regime. Geological features of interest
include brine seeps, exposed basalt, methane
seeps, and mud volcanoes. East and West
Flower Garden Banks, the most well-known
of the features, sustain the northernmost
living coral reefs on the U.S. continental
shelf, considered among the healthiest coral
reefs in the Caribbean and Western Atlantic
region. A deeper water coral reef also exists
at McGrail Bank, consisting primarily of large
colonies of blushing star coral
(Stephanocoenia intersepta) at depths
between 140 and 160 feet. These coral reefs
are isolated from other reef systems by over
300 nautical miles (342 miles) and exist
under hydrographic conditions generally
near the northern limit for tropical reef
formation. Several other banks, including
Stetson, Sonnier, Geyer, and Bright Banks,
contain various combinations of non-reef
building coral species known collectively as
coral communities, comprised of sponges,
stony corals, fire coral, leafy algae and
coralline algae. The deeper portions of the
banks host thriving mid-depth (or
‘‘mesophotic’’) coral habitats characterized
by the presence of both light-dependent and
deepwater corals, including black corals,
gorgonian corals, and associated organisms.
Biological communities are distributed
among several interrelated biotic zones,
including a coralline algae zone, deep reef
rocky outcrops, and soft bottom
communities. The complex and biologically
productive ecological communities of the
banks offer a combination of aesthetic appeal
and recreational and research opportunity
matched in few other ocean areas.
The following are qualitative descriptions
of the individual reefs and banks within the
Sanctuary; specific boundary coordinates can
be found in appendix A to this subpart.
a. Stetson Bank, Depth Range 56ft–194ft
Boundaries encompass a claystone/
siltstone ring feature of mesophotic coral
habitat revealed by high resolution
multibeam bathymetric surveys, and
subsequently ground-truthed by remotely
operated vehicle surveys. These features are
surface expressions of the salt dome
associated with the feature, and provide
habitat for sponges, gorgonians, stony
branching corals, black corals, and associated
fish and mobile invertebrates.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
b. West Flower Garden Bank, Depth Range
59ft–545ft
Boundaries encompass mesophotic coral
patch reefs to the north, southwest, and east
of the existing sanctuary. These reefs provide
coralline algae reef habitat for black corals,
gorgonians, stony branching corals, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
c. East Flower Garden Bank, Depth Range
52ft–446ft
Boundaries to encompass mesophotic coral
patch reefs to the north and southeast of the
existing sanctuary. These reefs provide deep
coral habitat for dense populations of black
corals, gorgonians, stony branching corals,
and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
d. Horseshoe Bank, Depth Range 243ft–614ft
Extensive deepwater habitat and coralline
algae reefs in the form of hundreds of patchy
outcroppings covering an area of
approximately 1.9 miles (3km) wide and
having 16.4–49.2ft (5–15m) of relief above
the seafloor, with dense assemblages of
mesophotic black coral, gorgonians, stony
branching corals, sponges, algae
invertebrates, and fish; several conicalshaped mud volcanoes clustered near the
center of the feature, with one rising 328ft
(100m) above the sea floor.
e. MacNeil Bank, Depth Range 210ft–315ft
Deep reef bedrock outcrops and coralline
algae patch reefs harboring populations of
black corals and gorgonians, sponges, fish,
and mobile invertebrates.
f. Rankin/28 Fathom Banks, Depth Range
164ft–571ft
Rankin Bank is just north of 28 Fathom
Bank, and separated from it by a long trough,
approximately 1,640-foot (500 m) wide,
approximately 6,070-foot (1,850 m) which
extends to a depth of approximately 570ft
(174 m). The boundaries encompass the
shallowest portions of Rankin and 28 Fathom
Banks, which harbor coral algae reefs and
deep coral reefs with populations of
gorgonians, black corals, sponges, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
g. Bright Bank, Depth Range 112ft–384ft
Bright Bank previously harbored a coral
reef on the very shallowest portions of the
bank, which sustained extensive damage
from salvage and mining activities employing
dynamite for excavation activities. The cap is
now considered a coral community, and in
spite of these impacts, nine species of
shallow water scleractinian corals survive,
along with two deeper water species. The
feature also harbors extensive coralline algae
reefs, providing habitat for populations of
gorgonians, black corals, sponges, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
h. Geyer Bank, Depth Range 128ft–722ft
Geyer Bank is a broad, relatively flat faultbounded structure situated on an active salt
diaper. This feature supports a coral
community, as well as extensive coralline
algae reefs and fields of algal nodules
including dense fields of macro-algae, black
corals, gorgonians, sponges, and associated
fish and mobile invertebrates. Seasonal
spawning aggregations of fish are associated
with this bank, including enormous numbers
of reef butterflyfish.
i. Elvers Bank, Depth Range 213ft–686ft
Two discreet polygons have been
developed to protect portions of Elvers Bank:
A larger polygon encompassing 4.43 square
miles on the south side of the feature, and
a small polygon, encompassing 0.19 square
miles on the north side of the feature. The
shallow areas of the bank feature coralline
algae reefs and algal nodule fields, and the
deeper areas in the southern polygon harbor
large deep reef outcroppings, both providing
habitat for black corals, gorgonians, sponges,
and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
The deep reefs also harbor glass sponge
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4959
fields, a feature not documented in any other
areas of the sanctuary, as well as a previously
undescribed species of black coral.
j. McGrail Bank, Depth Range 144ft–512ft
Two discreet polygons have been
developed to protect portions of McGrail
Bank: A larger claw shaped polygon reaching
from northwest to southeast, encompassing
4.54 square miles, and a smaller polygon,
encompassing 0.17 square miles, situated on
the southeast of the feature that wraps
around a conical shaped mound. This bank
features unique areas of coral reefs
dominated by large colonies of the blushing
star coral, Stephanocoenia intersepta, with
28% live coral cover in discrete areas (no
other known coral reef is dominated by this
species). Pinnacles varying in diameter from
∼80 to 395 feet (24–120 m) and as tall as ∼25
feet (8 m) are found on the southwest rim of
the main feature, along east- and southeasttrending scarps leading away from the bank
and in concentric fields to the south and
southeast of the bank. A significant portion
of the depth zone between 145 and 170 feet
is dominated by coral colonies up to 5 feet
tall, covering an area of approximately 37
acres. At least 14 species of stony corals have
been recorded. Deeper portions of this site
harbor mesophotic coral habitat for deep
coral, coralline algae reefs, and fields of algal
nodules. Dense populations of black corals,
gorgonians, macro-algae fields, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates are
present.
k. Sonnier Bank, Depth Range 62ft–210ft
Sonnier Bank consists of a series of
isolated clusters of pinnacles comprised of
uplifted siltstone and claystone, that rise
mostly around the perimeter of a single,
roughly circular ring 1.9 miles (3.2km) in
diameter. Two peaks are accessible and
popular with recreational scuba divers. The
peaks are dominated by coral communities
featuring fire coral, sponges, and algae. The
deeper portions of the feature are fairly
heavily silted, but provide habitat for black
corals, gorgonians, and associated fish and
mobile invertebrates.
l. Bouma Bank, Depth Range 187ft–322ft
Bouma Bank is dominated by coralline
algae reefs and algal nodule fields, providing
habitat for populations of black corals,
gorgonians, algae, branching stony coral,
clusters of cup coral, and associated fish and
mobile invertebrates.
m. Rezak Bank, Depth Range 197ft–430ft
Rezak Bank is dominated by coralline algae
reefs and extensive algal nodule fields,
providing habitat for populations of black
corals, gorgonians, algae, and associated fish
and mobile invertebrates.
n. Sidner Bank, Depth Range 190ft–420ft
Dominated by coralline algae reefs and
extensive algal nodule fields providing
habitat for populations of black corals,
gorgonians, algae, sponges, and associated
fish and mobile invertebrates.
o. Alderdice Bank, Depth Range 200ft–322ft
This feature includes spectacular basalt
outcrops of Late Cretaceous origin
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
4960
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
(approximately 77 million years old)
representing the oldest rock exposed on the
continental shelf offshore of Louisiana and
Texas. The outcrops at Alderdice Bank bear
diverse, extremely dense assemblages of
gorgonians and black corals, sponges, and
swarms of reef fish. Mesophotic coralline
algae reef habitats below the spires, silted
over in areas, provide habitat for dense
populations of black corals, gorgonians,
sponges, branching stony corals, fields of
macro-algae, and associated fish and mobile
invertebrates.
p. Parker Bank, Depth Range 187ft–387ft
Two discreet polygons have been
developed to protect portions of Parker Bank.
A larger polygon bounding the central
portion of the features, encompassing 6.82
square miles, and a smaller polygon to the
east, encompassing 0.14 square miles. These
boundaries protect the shallowest portions of
the bank, which harbor coralline algae reefs
and algal nodule fields and support
populations of plating stony corals, black
corals, gorgonians, sponges, macro-algae, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
Article IV—Scope of Regulations
Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation
The following activities are subject to
regulation, including prohibition, to the
extent necessary and reasonable to ensure the
protection and management of the
conservation, recreational, ecological,
historical, research, educational and esthetic
resources and qualities of the area:
a. Anchoring or otherwise mooring within
the Sanctuary;
b. Discharging or depositing, from within
the boundaries of the Sanctuary, any material
or other matter;
c. Discharging or depositing, from beyond
the boundaries of the Sanctuary, any material
or other matter;
d. Drilling into, dredging or otherwise
altering the seabed of the Sanctuary; or
constructing, placing or abandoning any
structure, material or other matter on the
seabed of the Sanctuary;
e. Exploring for, developing or producing
oil, gas or minerals within the Sanctuary;
f. Taking, removing, catching, collecting,
harvesting, feeding, injuring, destroying or
causing the loss of, or attempting to take,
remove, catch, collect, harvest, feed, injure,
destroy or cause the loss of, a Sanctuary
resource;
g. Possessing within the Sanctuary a
Sanctuary resource or any other resource,
regardless of where taken, removed, caught,
collected or harvested, that, if it had been
found within the Sanctuary, would be a
Sanctuary resource.
h. Possessing or using within the Sanctuary
any fishing gear, device, equipment or other
apparatus.
i. Possessing or using airguns or explosives
or releasing electrical charges within the
Sanctuary.
j. Interfering with, obstructing, delaying or
preventing an investigation, search, seizure
or disposition of seized property in
connection with enforcement of the Act or
any regulation or permit issued under the
Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
Section 2. Consistency With International
Law
Any regulation of activities listed in
Section 1 of this Article will be applied and
enforced as mandated by 16 U.S.C. 1435(a).1
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or minimize
the destruction of, loss of, or injury to a
Sanctuary resource or quality, or minimize
the imminent risk of such destruction, loss or
injury, any and all activities, including those
not listed in section 1 of this Article, are
subject to immediate temporary regulation,
including prohibition.
Article V—Effect on Other Regulations,
Leases, Permits, Licenses, and Rights
Section 1. Fishing Regulations, Licenses, and
Permits
The regulation of fishing is authorized
under Article IV. All regulatory programs
pertaining to fishing, including fishery
management plans promulgated under the
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.,
shall remain in effect. Where a valid
regulation promulgated under these programs
conflicts with a Sanctuary regulation, the
regulation deemed by the Secretary of
Commerce or designee as more protective of
Sanctuary resources and qualities shall
govern.
Section 2. Other Licenses, Regulations, and
Permits
If any valid regulation issued by any
Federal authority of competent jurisdiction,
regardless of when issued, conflicts with a
Sanctuary regulation, the regulation deemed
by the Secretary of Commerce or designee as
more protective of Sanctuary resources and
qualities shall govern.
Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the Act, 16
U.S.C. 1434(c)(1), no valid lease, permit,
license, approval, or other authorization
issued by any Federal authority of competent
jurisdiction, or any valid right of subsistence
use or access, may be terminated by the
Secretary of Commerce or designee as a result
of this designation or as a result of any
Sanctuary regulation if such authorization or
right was in existence on the effective date
of this designation. However, the Secretary of
Commerce or designee may regulate the
exercise of such authorization or right
consistent with the purposes for which the
Sanctuary is designated.
Accordingly, the prohibitions set forth in
the Sanctuary regulations shall not apply to
any activity authorized by any valid lease,
permit, license, approval, or other
authorization in existence on the effective
date of Sanctuary designation and issued by
any Federal authority of competent
jurisdiction, or by any valid right of
subsistence use or access in existence on the
effective date of Sanctuary designation,
provided that the holder of such
authorization or right complies with
Sanctuary regulations regarding the
1 Based on the legislative history of the NMSA,
NOAA has long interpreted the text of 16 U.S.C.
1435(a) as encompassing international law,
including customary international law.
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
certification of such authorizations and rights
(e.g., notifies the Secretary or designee of the
existence of, requests certification of, and
provides requested information regarding
such authorization or right) and complies
with any terms and conditions on the
exercise of such authorization or right
imposed as a condition of certification by the
Secretary or designee as he or she deems
necessary to achieve the purposes for which
the Sanctuary was designated.
Pending final agency action on the
certification request, such holder may
exercise such authorization or right without
being in violation of any prohibitions set
forth in the Sanctuary regulations, provided
the holder is in compliance with Sanctuary
regulations regarding certifications.
The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary
regulations shall not apply to any activity
conducted in accordance with the scope,
purpose, terms, and conditions of the
National Marine Sanctuary permit issued by
the Secretary or designee in accordance with
the Sanctuary regulations. Such permits may
only be issued if the Secretary or designee
finds that the activity for which the permit
is applied will: Further research related to
Sanctuary resources; further the educational,
natural or historical resource value of the
Sanctuary; further salvage or recovery
operations in or near the Sanctuary in
connection with a recent air or marine
casualty; or assist in managing the Sanctuary.
The prohibitions set forth in the sanctuary
regulations shall not apply to any activity
conducted in accordance with the scope,
purpose, terms, and conditions of a Special
Use permit issued by the Secretary or
designee in accordance with section 310 of
the Act. However, in areas where sanctuary
regulations prohibit oil, gas, or mineral
exploration, development or production, the
Secretary or designee may in no event,
permit or otherwise, approve such activities
in that area. Any leases, licenses, permits,
approvals, or other authorizations issued
after the effective date of designation
authorizing the exploration or production of
oil, gas, or minerals in that area shall be
invalid.
Section 3. Department of Defense Activities
The prohibitions in § 922.122(a)(2) through
(11) do not apply to activities being carried
out by the Department of Defense as of the
effective date of designation. Such activities
shall be carried out in a manner that
minimizes any adverse impact on Sanctuary
resources and qualities. The prohibitions in
§ 922.122(a)(2) through (11) do not apply to
any new activities carried out by the
Department of Defense that do not have the
potential for any significant adverse impact
on Sanctuary resources and qualities. Such
activities shall be carried out in a manner
that minimizes any adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources and qualities. New
activities with the potential for significant
adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and
qualities may be exempted from the
prohibitions in § 922.122(a)(2) through (11) of
this section by the Director after consultation
between the Director and the Department of
Defense. If it is determined that an activity
may be carried out, such activity shall be
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
carried out in a manner that minimizes any
adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and
qualities. In the event of threatened or actual
destruction of, loss of, or injury to a
Sanctuary resource or quality resulting from
an untoward incident, including but not
limited to spills and groundings, caused by
a component of the Department of Defense,
the cognizant component shall promptly
coordinate with the Director for the purpose
of taking appropriate actions to respond to
and mitigate the harm and, if possible,
restore or replace the Sanctuary resource or
quality.
Article VI—Alterations to This Designation
The terms of designation may be modified
only by the same procedures by which the
original designation is made, including
public hearings; consultation with any
appropriate Federal, State, regional and local
agencies; review by the appropriate
Congressional committees; and approval by
the Secretary of Commerce or designee.
[FR Doc. 2021–00887 Filed 1–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1223
[Docket No. CPSC–2013–0025]
Revisions to Safety Standard for Infant
Swings
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
In November 2012, the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC) published a consumer product
safety standard for infant swings under
section 104 of the Consumer Product
Safety Improvement Act of 2008
(CPSIA). The standard incorporated by
reference the ASTM voluntary standard
that was in effect for infant swings at the
time. The CPSIA sets forth a process for
updating mandatory standards for
durable infant or toddler products that
are based on a voluntary standard, when
a voluntary standards organization
revises the standard. Consistent with the
CPSIA update process, the Commission
issued a direct final rule in October
2013, to revise the incorporation by
reference for the mandatory swings
standard, to reflect ASTM’S revised
voluntary standard. Since 2013, ASTM
has revised the voluntary standard for
infant swings three times. This direct
final rule updates the mandatory
standard for infant swings to
incorporate by reference ASTM’s 2020
version of the voluntary standard.
DATES: The rule is effective on April 3,
2021, unless CPSC receives a significant
adverse comment by February 18, 2021.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:33 Jan 17, 2021
Jkt 253001
If CPSC receives such a comment, it will
publish a notice in the Federal Register,
withdrawing this direct final rule before
its effective date. The incorporation by
reference of the publication listed in
this rule is approved by the Director of
the Federal Register as of April 3, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You can submit comments,
identified by Docket No. CPSC–2013–
0025, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit
electronic comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
CPSC does not accept comments
submitted by electronic mail (email),
except through https://
www.regulations.gov. CPSC encourages
you to submit electronic comments by
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal,
as described above.
Mail/hand delivery/courier Written
Submissions: Submit comments by
mail/hand delivery/courier to: Division
of the Secretariat, Consumer Product
Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330
East West Highway, Bethesda, MD
20814; telephone: (301) 504–7479.
Alternatively, as a temporary option
during the COVID–19 pandemic, you
may email such submissions to: cpscos@cpsc.gov.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
number for this notice. CPSC may post
all comments without change, including
any personal identifiers, contact
information, or other personal
information provided, to: https://
www.regulations.gov. Do not submit
electronically: Confidential business
information, trade secret information, or
other sensitive or protected information
that you do not want to be available to
the public. If you wish to submit such
information, please submit it according
to the instructions for mail/hand
delivery/courier written submissions.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to: https://
www.regulations.gov, and insert the
docket number, CPSC–2013–0025, into
the ‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keysha Walker, Compliance Officer,
U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301)
504–6820; email: kwalker@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
1. Statutory Authority
Section 104(b)(1) of the CPSIA
requires the Commission to assess the
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4961
effectiveness of voluntary standards for
durable infant or toddler products and
adopt mandatory standards for these
products. 15 U.S.C. 2056a(b)(1). The
mandatory standard must be
‘‘substantially the same as’’ the
voluntary standard, or may be ‘‘more
stringent than’’ the voluntary standard,
if the Commission determines that more
stringent requirements would further
reduce the risk of injury associated with
the product. Id.
Section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA
specifies the process for when a
voluntary standards organization revises
a standard that the Commission
incorporated by reference under section
104(b)(1). First, the voluntary standards
organization must notify the
Commission of the revision. Once the
Commission receives this notification,
the Commission may reject or accept the
revised standard. The Commission may
reject the revised standard by notifying
the voluntary standards organization
that it has determined that the revised
standard does not improve the safety of
the consumer product and that it is
retaining the existing standard. When
rejecting a revision, the Commission
must notify the voluntary standards
organization of this determination
within 90 days of receiving notice of the
revision. If the Commission does not
take this action to reject the revised
standard, the revised voluntary standard
will be considered a consumer product
safety standard issued under section 9
of the Consumer Product Safety Act (15
U.S.C. 2058), effective 180 days after the
Commission received notification of the
revision (or a later date specified by the
Commission in the Federal Register). 15
U.S.C. 2056a(b)(4)(B).
2. Safety Standard for Infant Swings
Under section 104(b)(1) of the CPSIA,
the Commission adopted a mandatory
rule for infant swings, codified in 16
CFR part 1223. The rule incorporated by
reference ASTM F2088–12a, Standard
Consumer Safety Specification for
Infant Swings, with modifications to the
labeling and test method requirements.1
77 FR 66703 (Nov. 7, 2012). At the time
the Commission published the final
rule, ASTM F2088–12a was the current
version of the voluntary standard.
In April 2013, ASTM notified CPSC
that it had issued a revised standard for
infant swings, ASTM F2088–13. In
accordance with the procedures set out
in section 104(b)(4)(B) of the CPSIA, the
revised standard became the new
1 The modifications included changes to the
required warning label content and a revised test
method to address an omission in the voluntary
standard for toy mobiles attached to swings.
E:\FR\FM\19JAR1.SGM
19JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 11 (Tuesday, January 19, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4937-4961]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00887]
[[Page 4937]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
15 CFR Part 922
[Docket No. 210107-0004]
RIN 0648-BA21
Expansion of Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
AGENCY: Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (DOC).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
issues final regulations to implement the expansion of the boundaries
of Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS or sanctuary)
and revise the sanctuary's terms of designation. The purpose of this
action is to expand the sanctuary to include portions of 14 additional
reefs and banks in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, representing
approximately a 104 square mile increase in area. With this action, the
existing FGBNMS regulations will apply to the expanded locations.
DATES: Effective Date: Pursuant to section 304(b) of the National
Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C. 1434(b)), the designation and
regulations shall take effect and become final after the close of a
review period of forty-five days of continuous session of Congress,
beginning on the date on which this document is published. The public
can track the days of Congressional session at https://www.congress.gov/days-in-session. After the close of the forty-five
days of continuous session of Congress, NOAA will publish a document
announcing the effective date of the final regulations in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
described in this rule and the record of decision (ROD) are available
at https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/sanctuaryexpansion.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George P. Schmahl, Superintendent,
Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary, 4700 Avenue U, Building
216, Galveston, Texas 77551, at 409-356-0383, or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
1. Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
Located in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 70 to 115 nautical
miles (130 to 213 kilometers) off the coasts of Texas and Louisiana,
FGBNMS encompasses approximately 56 square miles and includes three
separate undersea features: East Flower Garden Bank, West Flower Garden
Bank, and Stetson Bank. The banks range in depth from 55 feet (17
meters) to nearly 500 feet (152 meters), and are geological formations
created by the movement of ancient salt deposits pushed up through
overlying sedimentary layers.
The banks provide a wide range of habitat conditions that support
several distinct biological communities, including the northernmost
coral reefs in the continental United States and mesophotic coral
habitats. These and similar formations throughout the northwestern Gulf
of Mexico provide the foundation for essential habitat for numerous
marine species, including a variety of fish species of commercial and
recreational importance, and several endangered or threatened species,
including sea turtles and mobula rays. The combination of location and
geology makes the sanctuary an extremely productive and diverse
ecosystem.
NOAA issued a final rule to implement the designation of FGBNMS on
December 5, 1991 (56 FR 63634). Congress subsequently passed a law
recognizing the designation on January 17, 1992 (Pub. L. 102-251, Title
I, Sec. 101). At that time, the sanctuary consisted of two areas known
as East and West Flower Garden Banks (56 FR 63634). Among other things,
FGBNMS regulated a narrow range of activities, established permit and
certification procedures, and exempted certain U.S. Department of
Defense (DOD) activities from the sanctuary's prohibitions (56 FR
63634). Those regulations became effective on January 18, 1994 (58 FR
65664). In 1996, Congress added Stetson Bank to the sanctuary (Pub. L.
104-283). The boundaries of Stetson Bank and West Flower Garden Bank
were later amended to improve administrative efficiencies and increase
the precision of all boundary coordinates based on new positioning
technology (65 FR 81175, Dec. 22, 2000). FGBNMS regulations can be
found at 15 CFR part 922, subpart L, and the sanctuary management plan
may be found on the FGBNMS website.\1\ As a result of this action,
FGBNMS is being expanded to a total of 160.4 square miles, with the
existing regulations applying to the expansion area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/2012mgmtplan.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Need for Action
The NMSA authorizes the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to
designate and protect, as national marine sanctuaries, areas of the
marine environment that are of special national significance due to
their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, scientific,
cultural, archeological, educational, or aesthetic qualities. Day-to-
day management of national marine sanctuaries is delegated by the
Secretary to ONMS. The primary objective of the NMSA is to protect
nationally significant marine resources, including biological features
such as coral reefs, and cultural resources, such as historic
shipwrecks and archaeological sites. The mission of FGBNMS is to
identify, protect, conserve, and enhance the natural and cultural
resources, values, and qualities of the sanctuary and its regional
environment for this and future generations.
This action responds to the need to provide comprehensive and
coordinated management of, and additional regulatory protection for,
sensitive underwater features and marine habitats associated with
continental shelf-edge reefs and banks in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. The current jurisdictional regime divides authority among
several governmental entities that regulate offshore energy exploration
(Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)), fishing (Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council (GMFMC)), and water quality (Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)), but does not provide comprehensive and
effective management for the full range of activities that impact the
sensitive reefs and banks in the region. For example, BOEM has
established No Activity Zones (NAZs) that prohibit anchoring only by
vessels engaged in development activities and platform services
specific to a particular lease, while anchoring by other vessels
remains unregulated. Further, these anchoring regulations in the NAZs
apply only on a lease-by-lease basis. Other vessel ground tackle
(including anchors, chains, and cables) and marine salvage activities
were unregulated and have caused significant injury to sensitive
biological communities. Sanctuary designation will allow for additional
protection of these reefs and banks from other bottom-disturbing
activities, which are otherwise unregulated at this time.
[[Page 4938]]
The sanctuary expansion areas are recognized as hotspots of marine
biodiversity that provide vital habitat for many important species in
the Gulf of Mexico region. They are home to the most significant
examples of coral and algal reefs, mesophotic and deepwater coral
communities, and other biological assemblages in the Gulf of Mexico.
Furthermore, these areas provide important habitat for vulnerable
species such as mobula rays, sea turtles, and whale sharks, while
serving as nurseries for numerous fish species of commercial and
recreational importance. As such, most of these areas have also been
identified as nationally significant through their designation as
Habitat Areas of Particular Concern (HAPC) by the GMFMC and as NAZs by
BOEM. These habitats are vulnerable to a variety of known and potential
impacts, including large vessel anchoring, marine salvage operations,
fishing techniques that may injure benthic habitat (e.g., trawling,
bottom-tending gear), and certain oil and gas exploration and
development activities. These impacts will more effectively be
addressed within the expanded areas through the comprehensive habitat
conservation and management authorities under the NMSA. The protection
of these ecologically significant sites would increase the resilience
of marine ecosystems and enhance the sustainability of the region's
thriving recreation, tourism, and commercial economies. Ultimately,
expanding FGBNMS will help ensure that valuable marine resources remain
available for the use and enjoyment of future generations of Americans.
This sanctuary expansion is the outcome of decades of scientific
research and growing public recognition of the need for coordinated
protection of significant offshore marine places in the northwestern
Gulf of Mexico region. Protecting additional habitat in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico emerged as one of the highest priorities
identified during a vigorous public review process of FGBNMS management
issues. Subsequently, ``Sanctuary Expansion'' was incorporated as a
discrete action plan in the 2012 revision of the sanctuary's management
plan. The region is utilized for a variety of recreational, commercial,
and industrial purposes, and there are ongoing impacts from bottom-
disturbing activities, such as large vessel anchoring and marine
salvage, on the sensitive biological resources and geological features
associated with many reefs and banks in the area. Therefore, pursuant
to the NMSA's purpose to ``facilitate to the extent compatible with the
primary objective of resource protection, all public and private uses
of the resources of these marine areas,'' FGBNMS can further resource
protection while balancing multiple uses. This action will expand
FGBNMS by incorporating portions of selected reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico. In doing so, this action will provide
management of and protection for nationally significant areas with
biological, ecological, and/or structural links to the existing
sanctuary, including vulnerable mesophotic and deep benthic habitat
sites, while providing important opportunities for research and
recovery of resources from observed impacts. These areas contain the
most significant examples of mesophotic coral communities in the United
States, including some of the highest known densities (colonies per
square meter) and species richness of mesophotic corals (Cairns et al.
2017). In addition, and as noted above, many banks in the expansion
area have also been recognized by BOEM and GMFMC as nationally
significant and designated as HAPCs and NAZs.
II. History of the FGBNMS Expansion Process
1. Management Plan Review
NOAA is required by NMSA Section 304(e) to periodically review
sanctuary management plans to ensure that sanctuary management
continues to effectively conserve, protect, and enhance the nationally
significant living and cultural resources at each site. Management
plans generally outline regulatory goals, describe boundaries, identify
staffing and budgetary needs, and set priorities and performance
measures for resource protection, research, and education programs.
Management plans also guide the development of future management
activities.
The FGBNMS management plan review process began in 2006 with a
series of scoping meetings to obtain information about the public's
interests and priorities for FGBNMS management (71 FR 52757; September
7, 2006). Subsequently, NOAA worked with the FGBNMS Advisory Council to
prioritize issues and develop appropriate management strategies and
activities for the preparation of a draft revised management plan.
Protecting additional nationally significant habitat in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico emerged as one of the highest priority
issues for the sanctuary during the FGBNMS management plan review
process.
In 2007, the FGBNMS Advisory Council, using information developed
by its Boundary Expansion Working Group (BEWG), recommended a range of
sanctuary boundary expansion alternatives. Based on this input, and
information obtained through a subsequent public process, NOAA prepared
a revised management plan (77 FR 25060, April 27, 2012) that contained
six action plans, including one that specifically addressed sanctuary
expansion. The Sanctuary Expansion Action Plan outlined a strategy to
expand the protected areas to include additional reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico, and to develop a Draft Environmental
Impact Statement (DEIS) to evaluate appropriate expansion alternatives.
The recommended expansion alternative, as identified by the FGBNMS
Advisory Council in 2007, was included in the Sanctuary Expansion
Action Plan. This recommendation included nine additional reefs and
banks, encompassing approximately 281 square miles.
2. Boundary Expansion Notice of Intent
On February 3, 2015, NOAA published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to
prepare a DEIS for expanding FGBNMS boundaries (80 FR 5699). The NOI
solicited public input on the range and significance of issues related
to sanctuary expansion, including potential boundary configurations,
resources to be protected, other issues NOAA should consider, and any
information that should be included in the resource analysis. The
public scoping period was open through April 6, 2015, during which time
ONMS held three public hearings and interested parties submitted both
written and oral comments.
NOAA received approximately 200 comments during the scoping period.
Most commenters were strongly supportive of the concept of sanctuary
expansion. In addition to broad general support, some comments
expressed conditional support while raising user concerns primarily
relating to the potential impact of sanctuary expansion on the offshore
oil and gas industry and historic fishing practices. Other commenters
recommended that NOAA consider a broader geographical area than the
Sanctuary Expansion Action Plan identified, especially in light of the
2010 BP/Deepwater Horizon oil spill and new information that became
available since the 2007 FGBNMS Advisory Council recommendation. This
information was considered during the development of the expansion
alternatives in the DEIS.
[[Page 4939]]
3. Draft Environmental Impact Statement
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434), NOAA prepared and
released a DEIS (81 FR 37576, June 10, 2016). The DEIS considered
alternatives for the proposed expansion of boundaries at FGBNMS and
application of the existing sanctuary regulations and management
actions to the expanded area. The DEIS evaluated the environmental
consequences of the alternatives and provided an in-depth resource
assessment. The action alternatives in the DEIS would expand the
network of protected areas within FGBNMS by incorporating selected
reefs, banks, and other features throughout the north central Gulf of
Mexico.
The DEIS evaluated five alternatives, ranging from ``no action''
(maintaining the current boundaries) to one that included a total of 45
discrete boundary units and encompassed approximately 935 square miles.
The action discussed in this rulemaking falls within the bounds of the
DEIS alternatives as discussed below in part II, section 5 of this
final rule and in the supplemental information report which is
available at the FGBNMS website.\2\ NOAA's preferred alternative in the
2016 DEIS (Alternative 3) sought to expand the existing sanctuary from
approximately 56 square miles to approximately 383 square miles,
including additional important and sensitive marine habitat areas in
the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. This alternative would have applied
the existing sanctuary regulations and management actions to the
expanded area. The 2016 preferred alternative included 15 reefs and
banks (in addition to those contained within the existing 3 sanctuary
units) encompassed within 11 discrete boundary polygons, including
multi-bank complexes. No significant adverse impacts to the human
environment were identified under any alternative considered in the
DEIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/expansionnpr.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2016, NOAA opened a public comment period on the DEIS for
sixty-nine (69) days, which closed on August 19, 2016. During this
public comment period, NOAA also held five (5) in person public
hearings in Galveston, TX; Houston, TX; New Orleans, LA; Lafayette, LA;
and Mobile, AL. NOAA received 1,421 separate comments, including three
letter campaigns and one petition, each with multiple signatories. All
written comments on the DEIS are available at the Regulations.gov
website.\3\ NOAA's response to the public comments are set forth in
Appendix A of the FEIS, which was made available to the public on
December 11, 2020 (85 FR 80093).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAA-NOS-2016-0059.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. NOAA's Revised Preferred Alternative and Supplemental Information
Report
In response to concerns raised primarily by the oil and gas
industry regarding the potential impacts to offshore energy operations
arising from the Preferred Alternative presented in the 2016 DEIS, the
FGBNMS Advisory Council (Advisory Council) established a new BEWG to
review NOAA's expansion proposal and make a recommendation. Between
July 2016 and May 2018, the BEWG met 21 times, and considered a variety
of topics, including a range of boundary and regulatory issues. The
BEWG recommended revised FGBNMS expansion boundaries that tracked the
BOEM-designated NAZs. NAZs are areas within which no operations,
anchoring, or structures are allowed for oil and gas operations. The
NAZs were developed in the 1970-1980's to protect the shallowest
portion of the reefs and banks. Based primarily on the May 2018 FGBNMS
Advisory Council recommendation, along with input received from public
comments and consultation with the GMFMC and various Federal agencies,
NOAA revised the preferred alternative.
In the revised preferred alternative, NOAA reduced the size of the
expansion areas proposed in the 2016 DEIS preferred alternative to
promote compatibility with users and reduce potential economic impacts
to the offshore energy and fishing industries. On March 22, 2019, NOAA
evaluated changes to the 2016 DEIS preferred alternative in a
Supplemental Information Report (SIR). Through this review, NOAA
determined that preparing a supplement to the 2016 DEIS is neither
required nor necessary under NEPA. The SIR is available on the FGBNMS
website.\4\ Pursuant to applicable Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) guidance, NOAA's rationale for the revised preferred alternative
is now presented as NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative in the FEIS and
part II, section 7 of this final rule and the ROD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/deissupplementalinforeport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The Proposed Rule
On May 1, 2020, NOAA published a proposed rule which would expand
the boundaries of FGBNMS from approximately 56 square miles to 160
square miles (85 FR 25359 May 1, 2020). This action would add 14 banks,
for a total of 17 banks, represented in 19 polygons (including 3 banks
with multi-polygons), and apply the existing sanctuary regulations and
management plan to the expanded sanctuary boundaries. Under the
existing sanctuary regulations, only conventional hook and line gear
would be permissible in the expanded sanctuary boundaries.
NOAA solicited public comment on the proposed rule from May 1, 2020
to July 3, 2020, including specifically on whether to provide
exemptions for spearfishing and pelagic longline in the expanded area.
NOAA accepted comments in the form of letters and written comments
through electronic submissions to https://regulations.gov, letters
submitted by mail, and public hearings. As a result of the Coronavirus
global pandemic and restrictions on public gatherings, three virtual
public hearings were held via Gotowebinar[supreg].
NOAA received 485 separate comments, including four letter
campaigns and four petitions, each with multiple signatories, for a
total of 36,111 comments. All written public comments on the proposed
expansion are available on the Regulations.gov website.\5\ NOAA's
responses to the public comments are available in Appendix A of the
FEIS, and in section IV of this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&so=DESC&sb=commentDueDate&po=0&D=NOAA-NOS-2019-0033.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Summary of Final Regulations
With this final rule, NOAA is revising the FGBNMS regulations at 15
CFR part 922, subpart L, as follows.
1. Sanctuary Boundary Expansion
NOAA is amending the sanctuary boundary descriptions at 15 CFR part
922, subpart L, and the terms of designation in order to expand the
boundaries of FGBNMS to include portions of 14 additional reefs and
banks in the sanctuary, adding approximately 104 square miles, bringing
the total area to 160.4 square miles and encompassing 17 banks. The
boundary changes were selected through a public process to identify and
assess marine areas that could more effectively complement current
management authorities or enhance natural and cultural resource values.
[[Page 4940]]
Collectively, these new areas capture a greater diversity of habitats
and biological resources than currently protected by FGBNMS. Inclusion
of these areas within the sanctuary system will provide additional
regulatory protection, additional management actions and initiatives,
and improved public awareness of their natural resource values.
Detailed maps of these boundary changes are available on the FGBNMS
website.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/sanctuaryexpansion.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under this action, NOAA is expanding the boundaries of the
sanctuary by 104.2 square miles from 56.2 square miles to 160.4 square
miles as follows:
a. Stetson Bank--increase of area by 0.6 square miles from 0.8 square
miles to 1.4 square miles
b. West Flower Garden Bank--increase of area by 7.22 square miles from
29.94 square miles to 37.16 square miles
c. East Flower Garden Bank--increase of area by 2.4 square miles from
25.4 square miles to 27.8 square miles
d. Horseshoe Bank--28.7 square miles
e. MacNeil Bank--2.7 square miles
f. Rankin/28 Fathom Banks--5.6 square miles
g. Bright Bank--7.7 square miles
h. Geyer Bank--11.5 square miles
i. Elvers Bank--4.6 square miles
j. McGrail Bank--4.7 square miles
k. Sonnier Bank--3.1 square miles
l. Bouma Bank--7.7 square miles
m. Rezak Bank--3.7 square miles
n. Sidner Bank--2.0 square miles
o. Alderdice Bank--5.0 square miles
p. Parker Bank--7.0 square miles
2. Apply the Existing Sanctuary Regulations and Management Action to
the Expanded Area
NOAA will apply the existing sanctuary regulations (including
regulatory prohibitions set forth in Sec. 922.122) and the existing
management plan \7\ to the expanded sanctuary boundary in order to
provide for more comprehensive management and protection of sensitive
underwater features and marine habitats associated with continental
shelf-edge reefs and banks in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico.
Accordingly, 15 CFR 922.122(e) will be updated to reflect the effective
date of the sanctuary expansion, and no further amendments of the
regulatory text in 15 CFR part 922 are necessary to implement this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/2012mgmtplan.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Department of Defense Activities
NOAA's decision to amend the effective date in Sec. 922.122(e)
addresses concerns raised by the Department of the Navy (DON) during
coordination in development of this final rule. In the final rule, NOAA
clarifies that the prohibitions in Sec. 922.122(a)(2) through (11) do
not apply to the activities being carried out by the Department of
Defense as of the date of sanctuary expansion.
4. Terms of Designation
Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA requires that the terms of
designation include the geographic area of the sanctuary; the
characteristics of the area that give it conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, research, educational, or aesthetic value; and
the types of activities that will be subject to regulation by the
Secretary of Commerce to protect these characteristics. Section
304(a)(4) also specifies that the terms of designation may be modified
only by the same procedures by which the original designation was made.
The terms of designation for FGBNMS was first published in 1991 (56
FR 63637), and became effective in 1994 (58 FR 65664). The terms of
designation were not incorporated into the Code of Federal Regulations,
and, whenever there was a proposed regulatory change, NOAA and the
general public had to refer to the preamble of the 1991 final rule to
understand the nature and scope of the terms of designation. With this
final rule, NOAA is making the terms of designation more readily
available to the general public by amending the FGBNMS regulations at
15 CFR part 922, subpart L, to incorporate the terms of designation as
a new appendix B to the FGBNMS regulations. NOAA is amending Article
II. Description of the Area to include Stetson Bank (added by Congress
in 1996 pursuant to Pub. L. 104-283) and the additional reefs and banks
included in this expansion, add a new section relating to the U.S.
Department of Defense (DoD) exemption, and revising the ``Consistency
with International Law'' section of the terms of designation in order
to address comments raised by the U.S. Department of State during
interagency consultation.
5. No Exemptions for Spearfishing and Pelagic Longline Fishing in the
Expanded Sanctuary
Based on the public comments received on the proposed rule, NOAA
has decided not to provide exemptions for spearfishing or pelagic
longline fishing. The rationale for the decisions not to provide
exemptions for spearfishing or pelagic longline fishing are addressed
below in section IV. Responses to Comments.
IV. Response to Comments
NOAA received 1,421 individual (8,491 campaigns and petitions)
public comments on the DEIS and 485 individual (36,111 including
campaigns and petitions) public comments on the proposed rule. The
majority of comments expressed general support for sanctuary expansion,
others expressed concerns about the reduced size of the boundaries, and
few comments were received opposing the expansion of FGBNMS. Of the
comments received during this action, approximately one third supported
the revised preferred alternative in the proposed rule (which is
identified as NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative in the FEIS). Public
comments identified specific geographic locations of concern that were
not included in the revised preferred alternative. Comments raised
concerns about boundary enforcement, essential fish habitat,
preservation of biodiversity, connectivity between bank areas,
mesophotic/deepwater coral ecosystems, mobula rays, whale sharks, sea
turtles, sharks, marine mammals, and commercial and recreationally
important fish. Many of the comments supportive of the proposed
expansion referred to industrial, environmental, and global impacts.
In response to NOAA's request for public comment on fishery
exemptions for pelagic longline fishing and spearfishing with sanctuary
expansion, 25,641 comments opposed an exemption for pelagic longline
fishing, 23,353 opposed an exemption for spearfishing, 2 comments
supported allowing pelagic longline fishing, and 8 comments indicated
conditional support for spearfishing. Conditional support for
spearfishing included an exemption for breath-hold only spearfishing,
establishing an initial limited capacity fishery that could be assessed
at a reduced number of banks, and an exemption for lionfish only. NOAA
analyzed comments received during this process and considered them in
preparation of this FEIS, as well as developed agency responses. NOAA's
responses to the public comments are included in Appendix A of the FEIS
and in this document (Part IV).
NOAA has consolidated public comments from the DEIS and proposed
rule and collectively responds to those comments here and in Appendix A
of the FEIS.
[[Page 4941]]
General Support and Opposition of Proposed Sanctuary Expansion
1. Comment: NOAA received comments that supported the proposed
expansion of the sanctuary and encouraged NOAA to proceed with the
expansion process. Comments also supported the Revised Preferred
Alternative (NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative).
Response: Comment accepted. NOAA has considered these comments in
carrying the Revised Preferred Alternative forward to the Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and final rule as NOAA's Final
Preferred Alternative.
2. Comment: NOAA received comments that opposed the overall
sanctuary expansion process citing reasons including: (1) Existing
protections for sensitive resources; (2) concern of restricting use/
access to the public; (3) safety, budget, and management limitations;
and (4) socioeconomic consequences to certain industries.
Response: NOAA determined the proposed action responds to the need
to provide additional protection and management of sensitive underwater
features and marine habitats associated with continental shelf-edge
reefs and banks in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. The current
jurisdictional regime divides authority among several governmental
entities that regulate offshore energy exploration (Bureau of Ocean and
Energy Management (BOEM)), fishing (Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council (GMFMC)), and water quality (Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)). NOAA has determined the current jurisdictional regime does not
provide comprehensive and effective management for the full range of
activities that impact the sensitive reefs and banks in the region.
Chapter 2 of the FEIS and Part I, Section 2 of the preamble to the
final rule describe the purpose and need for this proposed expansion.
Extending the sanctuary boundary to new reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico promotes ecological conservation and
biodiversity, expands sanctuary management efforts in the region, and
helps to balance multiple uses.
Boundaries
3. Comment: NOAA received comments that generally supported
expansion, but opposed the boundaries in the Revised Preferred
Alternative (NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative). These comments
indicated that the proposed boundaries of the Revised Preferred
Alternative were too small or would exclude some ``topographic highs''
and reduce migratory corridors, or that NOAA should select a larger
boundary alternative. Additionally, comments noted the removal of
buffer zones entirely in the Revised Preferred Alternative and that
very small areas were created at some banks (e.g., Elvers, McGrail),
which results in fragmented connectivity and diminished ecological and
species function. Comments also stated NOAA's Preferred Alternative in
the DEIS (Alternative 3) excluded 39 nationally significant areas and 9
nationally significant shipwrecks.
Response: NOAA developed the Final Preferred Alternative in
response to public comments and recommendations from the Sanctuary
Advisory Council. NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative was based on
boundary configurations developed by the Advisory Council's Boundary
Expansion Working Group and the Advisory Council's 2018 recommendation.
It was also based on research conducted by the Office of National
Marine Sanctuaries, consultation with other Federal and state agencies,
strong public support and comment during public meetings preceding this
proposal, and extensive input from oil and gas, and fishing interests.
The Final Preferred Alternative further follows the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act's goal of facilitating, to the extent compatible with
the primary objective of resource protection, all public and private
uses of the resources.
NOAA modified DEIS Alternative 3 to develop the Final Preferred
Alternative under which the boundaries were drawn more tightly around
the shallowest portions of the geological features identified in
Alternative 3. The new boundaries closely follow the BOEM No Activity
Zones, which have prohibitions on oil and gas exploration and
development, but allow other bottom-disturbing activities that can
cause severe negative impacts to the benthic areas. NOAA's Final
Preferred Alternative expands the sanctuary by approximately 104 square
miles, to include additional important and sensitive marine habitat
areas outside the current sanctuary boundary, which will offer
additional protection not provided by BOEM's current regulations. NOAA
has determined the Final Preferred Alternative minimizes the impact to
offshore energy exploration and production while providing substantial
protection to sensitive marine habitats of national significance and
meeting the expansion objectives as identified in the 2012 FGBNMS
management plan and 2016 DEIS. Refer also to FEIS Chapter 3, Section
3.2 for additional details on the development of NOAA's proposed
action.
NOAA submits there were more environmentally preferable
alternatives assessed in the DEIS; however, ONMS has identified the
Final Preferred Alternative as one that, based on strong input from the
public and the Sanctuary Advisory Council, provides a significant
environmental benefit, can be managed with current FGBNMS operational
capacity, and minimizes negative impact to industry activities.
NOAA has determined the Final Preferred Alternative remains within
the range of alternatives and impacts analyzed in the 2016 DEIS. Also
refer to NOAA's Supplemental Information Report and FEIS Chapter 3,
Section 3.2 for additional details on the development of the Final
Preferred Alternative.
4. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting additional areas and
banks to be considered in the proposed expansion process, including:
Coffee Lump, 32 Fathom, Claypile, Applebaum, 29 Fathom, Fishnet,
Phleger, Sweet, and Jakkula Banks, Florida Middle Grounds, Madison/
Swanson, and Alabama Pinnacles, north central Gulf of Mexico, Ewing
Bank (whale shark aggregation), Bryant Bank, more of Bright Bank
complex, and the Deep Water Horizon (Deepwater Horizon) rig/well area.
Response: NOAA rejects the requests to add these additional banks
and areas for two primary reasons, (1) there was insufficient data to
characterize these areas as nationally significant, or (2) they were
too far from the existing sanctuary. NOAA considered including 32
Fathom Bank, Applebaum Bank, Coffee Lump Bank, Fishnet Bank, Phleger
Bank, Sweet Bank, Diaphus Bank, and Sackett Bank but determined either
insufficient data were available to adequately characterize the sites
or available data does not indicate sufficiently unique, diverse,
productive, or otherwise nationally significant biological communities
or geologic features.
Sites in biogeographic regions other than the north central Gulf of
Mexico were also eliminated from further consideration; areas to both
the east and west of the area roughly defined by the 87th and 95th west
meridians reflect geologic/sedimentary and hydrologic/oceanographic
settings, as well as biological communities, that are distinctly
different from those of the north central Gulf of Mexico and are faced
with distinctly different threats or other conservation issues.
Features
[[Page 4942]]
eliminated from further consideration based on this distinction include
Big Dunn Bar, Small Dunn Bar, Blackfish Ridge, Mysterious Bank, the
South Texas Banks (Dream Bank, Southern Bank, Hospital Bank, North
Hospital Bank, Aransas Bank, Baker Bank, and South Baker Bank),
Madison-Swanson, the Florida Middle Grounds, and Pulley Ridge. Bryant
Bank and more areas of the Bright Bank Complex were primarily excluded
from the Final Preferred Alternative because of concerns raised from
the oil and gas industry.
Although these additional areas were rejected for consideration in
the current FEIS, FGBNMS will consider extending sanctuary protection
and management to these additional biogeographic regions and habitat
types during the next management plan review.
For more information on how the Final Preferred Alternative was
developed and selected, refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Sections 1.5 and
Chapter 3, Sections 3.1 and 3.2.
5. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested the agency
identify areas to redraw boundaries to reduce impact on fishing (i.e.,
northern boundary of MacNeil, northern boundary of Sonnier, and
northeast boundary of Bouma).
Response: NOAA considered this request, and following the DEIS,
slightly reduced the boundaries at these banks to more closely align
with BOEM designated NAZs. The decrease in proposed expansion area in
the Final Preferred Alternative was partly in response to requests,
such as this, to reduce impacts to historical fishing activities.
Moreover, ONMS has completed consultation with the GMFMC pursuant to
NMSA section 304(a)(5) regarding the boundaries and fishing regulations
in the Final Preferred Alternative, and GMFMC concurred with this
action. See Appendix G of the FEIS for more details on the 304(a)(5)
consultation.
6. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested coordinates for
all proposed alternatives be included.
Response: NOAA disagrees. NOAA provided the coordinates of NOAA's
Final Preferred Alternative in Appendix H of the FEIS. Additionally,
the coordinates of NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative are included as
appendix A to the final rule which will be codified in 15 CFR part 922,
subpart L. NOAA does not believe inclusion of coordinates for all other
alternatives is necessary. However, maps of all alternatives can be
reviewed in FEIS Chapter 3 and Appendix D.
7. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting an explanation of how
the FGBNMS Advisory Council's recommendations were incorporated
throughout the expansion process.
Response: The Sanctuary Advisory Council was involved in developing
DEIS Alternative 2, reviewing DEIS Alternative 3, and providing
recommendations to modify the alternative. Ultimately, NOAAs Final
Preferred Alternative was largely developed by recommendations proposed
by the Sanctuary Advisory Council. Refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Section
1.5, which provides background information on development of the DEIS
alternatives and the process by which NOAA modified DEIS Alternative 3
to develop the Final Preferred Alternative, including information of
the Sanctuary Advisory Council's involvement. See response to comment
#3 pertaining to the Revised Preferred Alternative.
8. Comment: NOAA received comments that requested a buffer around
reefs to enhance connectivity, compliance, and enforcement, as well as
to keep out any structure that may act as a vector for invasive species
spread.
Response: Buffers were considered during the FGBNMS Advisory
Council's Boundary Expansion Working Group meetings and were rejected
due to potential impacts to the oil and gas and fisheries industries.
The 2018 Sanctuary Advisory Council recommendation for sanctuary
expansion did not include buffers. Refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Section 1.5
for details regarding development of the Final Preferred Alternative
and associated interagency consultations and coordination.
9. Comment: NOAA received comments suggesting the boundaries
proposed in the Revised Preferred Alternative (NOAA's Final Preferred
Alternative) were too complicated for enforcement purposes, stating
that simpler boundaries make enforcement easier, which results in
better compliance of user groups.
Response: Along with input for NOAA's Office of Law Enforcement
(OLE), ONMS considered this concern and determined the expansion
boundaries are enforceable as proposed in NOAA's Final Preferred
Alternative. The boundaries achieve a polygonal configuration, which is
recommended by the OLE, and closely follow the existing BOEM designated
NAZ boundaries. This polygonal approach uses fewer vertices,
simplifying the NAZ boundaries and allowing for heightened
enforceability and user compliance.
ONMS believes that vessels visiting the sanctuary are likely to be
equipped with onboard mapping technology (e.g., Global Positioning
System) that would inform operators of their vessel's position relative
to the expanded sanctuary boundary. In light of the technological
capabilities of onboard positioning systems, ONMS decided to continue
with the boundary configuration of the Final Preferred Alternative,
confident that user compliance and agency enforcement can be achieved.
Please refer to FEIS Chapter 3, Section 3.2 for more details
regarding development of the Final Preferred Alternative boundaries.
10. Comment: NOAA received comments related to the influence of the
oil and gas industry on the boundary configurations of the proposed
expansion of banks and reefs, including a claim that the FGBNMS
Advisory Council's Boundary Expansion Working Group was biased (towards
the oil and gas industry).
Response: The BEWG included Advisory Council members representing
multiple stakeholder groups including the oil and gas industry,
commercial and recreational fishing industries, recreational diving,
science, and conservation. The BEWG presented its revised FGBNMS
expansion boundaries recommendation to the full FGBNMS Advisory
Council, representing all user groups, on May 9, 2018, and the
recommendation was accepted by the Advisory Council and subsequently by
ONMS as proposed. Refer to responses to comments #3 and #7 and FEIS
Chapter 3, Section 3.2, which details the Sanctuary Advisory Council's
BEWG process for developing the Revised Preferred Alternative.
Purpose and Need for Proposed Expansion/Regulations
11. Comment: NOAA received comments suggesting that the purpose
and/or need for the proposed expansion was not warranted, citing
several reasons including: (1) Need for protection was not
demonstrated; (2) expansion would offer no benefit of protection; (3)
government overreach; (4) majority of sites are already protected from
oil and gas development by the existing BOEM's No Activity Zones; and
(5) proposed expansion areas are not nationally significant or unique.
Response: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
NOAA has established a strong purpose and need to expand FGBNMS (See
FEIS Chapter 2). Through the management plan review and scoping
process, NOAA identified several gaps in management of reefs and banks
near the current sanctuary where habitats were experiencing damage from
anchoring
[[Page 4943]]
and fishing gear in addition to potential for further industrial
development. NOAA determined that extending sanctuary management to
these areas would assist in addressing these gaps in protections by
supplementing and complementing existing authorities established by
BOEM and the GMFMC. While BOEM-designated NAZ's protect from oil and
gas development, without sanctuary management efforts, habitats would
remain vulnerable to anchor damage, detrimental fishing impacts, and
other threats.
NOAA disagrees with the comment that the expansion demonstrates
government overreach. The NMSA provides NOAA with the authority to
designate, as marine sanctuaries, areas of the marine environment,
which are of special national significance that possess conservation,
ecological, and scientific qualities. Through decades of scientific
research and exploration, NOAA has determined that the sanctuary
expansion areas contain some of the highest reported densities of
corals in the U.S. and other unique deepwater habitats that are not
found elsewhere in the world, making them nationally significant and
worthwhile to protect.
Sanctuary Regulations and Enforcement
12. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting changes to existing
regulations including: (1) Allow anchoring for fishing; (2) a
reasonable range of alternative management actions; (3) allow
spearfishing; and (4) an exemption for pelagic longline fishing.
Response: NOAA rejected these requests because it was determined
that granting them would negate the overall effectiveness of the
existing regulations in the expansion areas. Current sanctuary
regulations will address gaps in protection of the expansion areas. In
the NPRM for sanctuary expansion, NOAA requested public comments on two
fishery exemption requests: to allow pelagic longlining and
spearfishing. NOAA received very limited support for exempting these
activities (see fishing section below) and has determined that
extension of existing fishing regulations to the expansion area is
appropriate. Refer to FEIS Chapter 3, Section 3.1.2 for alternatives
considered but rejected.
13. Comment: NOAA received comments that suggested the agency
should provide enforcement policies to enhance the effectiveness of
sanctuary expansion.
Response: The FGBNMS management plan details the enforcement policy
for the expansion areas. NOAA will continue to work with Federal and
state enforcement partners to maintain water and aerial surveillance,
update patrol guides and regulatory handbooks, and conduct
interpretive/outreach patrols within all of FGBNMS.
Air Quality and Climate Change
14. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting that NOAA evaluate
how the sanctuary expansion would affect the climate (i.e., potential
impacts to greenhouse gas emissions within sanctuary expansion areas).
Response: NOAA agrees with the need to evaluate the impacts of
sanctuary expansion on the climate and has provided analysis of the
potential beneficial effects of the expansion on physical and
biological resources, including beneficial impacts derived from
prohibiting harmful activities. NOAA also estimates that this action
will help offset impacts of climate change (see FEIS Chapter 5, Section
5.3.1).
15. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting an assessment of how
climate change affects FGBNMS, how it will affect proposed additions,
and methods to reduce greenhouse gases with sanctuary expansion areas.
One comment also requested a program-wide evaluation of climate
adaption management gaps and needs.
Response: The management plan for FGBNMS contains Conservation
Science Action Plans, which include goals to increase knowledge and
understanding of the sanctuary's ecosystem, develop new and continue
ongoing research and monitoring programs to identify and address
specific resource management issues, and encourage information
exchange, and cooperation. FGBNMS participated in development of the
Ocean Acidification Action Plan \8\ for national marine sanctuaries.
The plan has numerous research recommendations for studying ocean
acidification, a common consequence expected of future climate change.
Please also visit NOAA's website \9\ for program-wide climate change
initiatives, data, observations, and outreach materials. ONMS is
standing up a Focus Group on climate, with the goal to develop the ONMS
Climate Strategic Plan. FGBNMS is an active participant in this
initiative, and the sanctuary, including the expansion areas, will be
integrated into the overall plan. Ocean Acidification, specifically,
has been integrated into FGBNMS long-term monitoring programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://oceanacidification.noaa.gov/Home.aspx.
\9\ https://www.noaa.gov/climate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Comment: NOAA received recommendations that the agency use
newer emissions inventory for the analysis on air monitoring and
pollutants.
Response: NOAA used the best available data for their environmental
analysis of air emissions and pollutants when developing the FEIS.
Please refer to FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1 for detailed information
about the data and resources used for air quality and climate change.
17. Comment: NOAA received a comment that suggested the No Action
Alternative (Alternative 1) does contribute to climate change over time
as it does not prevent climate change from progressing, and requested
the agency amend the analysis in DEIS Section 5.3.1.
Response: Since implementation of the No Action Alternative is
expected to leave the existing environment unchanged except for
continuation of existing impacts, including on-going impacts of climate
change, the effect of this alternative is the same as described in
Chapter 4. The ``No Action'' Alternative served as a baseline for the
impact analysis to compare all other alternatives. As such, there would
be no additional change to climate expected under this alternative. The
text has been slightly amended in FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.2 to offer
clarification in response to this comment.
Biological Resources
18. Comment: NOAA received comments related to biological resource
concerns. Biological comments focused on how sanctuary expansion would
protect resources against damages (e.g., anchoring, invasive species),
the benefits sanctuary protection would provide (e.g., improvements in
fish stocks and productivity, preservation of biodiversity, continued
discovery of new species), and requests for protection of specific
species/groups (e.g., Mobula rays, sea turtles, sharks, coral).
Response: NOAA concurs with the importance of protecting vulnerable
biological resources and believes that this action helps to address
many of the remaining gaps that threaten biological resources in the
expanded sanctuary. With this action, NOAA is prohibiting the following
activities in the sanctuary: Anchoring; drilling into, dredging, or
altering the seabed; discharging or depositing of material; any injury
to coral, rays, or whale sharks; fishing except for with conventional
hook and line gear; and take of marine mammals and turtles except when
permitted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and Endangered
Species Act (ESA). Collectively, these
[[Page 4944]]
prohibitions will help to protect fishes from unsustainable harvest by
limiting fishing; help to maintain biodiversity of benthic habitats by
protecting the seafloor; and allow further protection of many
vulnerable living marine resources including rays, sea turtles and
other ESA and MMPA-listed species. Please also refer to FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.6 and 5.3.8 for additional details regarding impacts of
sanctuary expansion to biological resources.
19. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting the sanctuary
protect resources from negative impacts of fishing. Commenters noted
the vulnerability of the expansion area to fishing injury, and urged
protection of fish species in order to achieve fishing sustainability.
Requests for fishery management included: (1) Limiting fishing
locations; (2) prohibiting bottom-dragging gear; and (3) continuing to
limit fishing to hook and line only. Some of the comments received in
support of expansion were from members of the fishing sector.
Response: NOAA intends to extend the current sanctuary regulations
to the proposed expansion areas, which includes restricting fishing
activities to conventional hook and line techniques only (i.e., any
fishing apparatus operated aboard a vessel and composed of a single
line terminated by a combination of sinkers and hooks or lures and
spooled upon a reel that may be hand- or electrically-operated, hand-
held or mounted). NOAA prohibits the use of any bottom tending fishing
gear to protect delicate corals and important benthic habitat from
fishing impacts, which will continue in the expansion areas. A detailed
list of the current regulations can be reviewed in Table 1.1, Chapter
1, Section 1.4.
20. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting projections of
ecosystem services (i.e., estimates for the increase in value of
managing protected species and habitats such as hard and soft corals,
fish, and mesophotic reefs) be included in the final analysis.
Response: Analysis of ecosystem services is beyond the scope of the
environmental analysis necessary for this action, and thus, NOAA
rejects this request. Instead, NOAA provided an economic analysis in
the FEIS that estimated a passive economic value (i.e. non-use value)
of the sanctuary expansion. For details on the economic analysis,
please refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.4.7 of the FEIS or the peer-
reviewed publication that resulted from this study, Stefanski and
Shimshack (2016).
21. Comment: NOAA received a comment which indicated that the BEWG
was informed that higher coral counts had been observed outside of the
NAZs, than inside NAZs, and requested an explanation for why this was
not considered during the boundary configuration of the Revised
Preferred Alternative.
Response: Additional areas containing higher coral colony counts
were quantified during remotely operated vehicle (ROV) surveys, and the
data was considered during the National Centers for Coastal Ocean
Sciences (NCCOS) collaboration with the FGBNMS Advisory Council's BEWG.
The BEWG selected smaller boundaries, which closely follow the NAZs,
primarily to reduce impacts to the oil and gas industry and to retain
access for historical fishing practices. Outside of the expansion
process, NOAA will provide the processed data and associated
publication to both BOEM and NMFS, for consideration during review of
regulations, and for future oil and gas, and fishing activities. While
this will not provide blanket protection measures, it will be valuable
in protections from potential major impacts.
22. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting an analysis of the
impacts sustained to the environment from run-off of toxic and
hazardous elements, sewage, pollution, and potential expansion of the
Gulf of Mexico hypoxic zone, or `dead zone', into the proposed
sanctuary expansion areas.
Response: NOAA used the best available data to evaluate the
environmental impacts to the expansion areas as required under NEPA and
the Council of Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) 1978 NEPA regulations.
NOAA, however, is studying these issues and plans to continue analyzing
the impacts in its next management plan review process.
23. Comment: NOAA received comments regarding disturbances (vessel
traffic) related to the noise environment, including a request to
quantify the additional impact from an increased number of boaters.
Response: NOAA continues to study the issue of noise impacts on
sanctuary resources. Sanctuary regulations prohibit the disturbance of
marine mammals and turtles except when permitted under the MMPA and
ESA. With respect to sonar testing, Section 304(d) of the NMSA provides
for consultation with other federal agencies if their actions have the
likelihood to injure sanctuary resources. NOAA has previously used this
mechanism in consultations to minimize impacts of noise on marine
mammals and other species. FGBNMS is actively engaged in a vessel
traffic and noise assessment and monitoring program within the
sanctuary, which will be expanded to the new areas.
Please refer to FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2 for detailed
information about the noise environment in the current FGBNMS, as well
as expansion areas. Additionally, refer to FEIS Chapter 5, Section
5.3.2 for NOAA's analysis of environmental consequences to marine
resources with respect to noise disturbances.
24. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting protection for fish
spawning aggregations with the expansion.
Response: NOAA concurs with commenters and believes the expansion
of the sanctuary will assist in the protection of fish spawning
aggregations in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. With this action, NOAA
will extend sanctuary regulations to the expansion areas which limit
fishing activities to conventional hook and line techniques, prohibit
bottom tending gear, and restrict the use of anchors within sanctuary
boundaries. This action will thereby complement protections for fish
spawning habitats provided under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (MSA). Fish spawning aggregations have
been observed and recorded during ROV explorations at reefs and banks
included in the expansion areas. Therefore, NOAA determined that
sanctuary designation will directly protect habitat where the
aggregations occur. NOAA intends to consider further protection of
spawning aggregations during the next management plan review.
25. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting NOAA consider
designating areas within the sanctuary as ``no take'' marine reserves.
Response: NOAA considered this request and does not intend to
designate any ``no-take'' marine reserves within the sanctuary through
this action. With this action, NOAA extends the current fishing
regulations to the expansion areas which limit fishing activities to
conventional hook and line techniques and exclude any bottom tending
gear. Anchoring will also be prohibited in the expanded sanctuary, and
mooring buoys will be installed so that fishers and vessels (<100 feet
long) can safely moor within the sanctuary boundaries.
To evaluate the impact of conventional hook and line fishing to
managed fish species in the sanctuary, NOAA conducted an environmental
impact analysis on living marine
[[Page 4945]]
resources, including fish in relation to the different expansion
alternatives (see FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.36). Overall, NOAA
determined none of these resources would sustain any significant
adverse impacts with sanctuary designation. However, NOAA determined
that this action will provide benefit to fish, given the added
protection to critical habitat and restrictions to fishing techniques.
Mesophotic and deep water reefs have been shown to have low resilience
and slow recovery potential, and harbor greater fish biomass than their
shallower counterparts, underlining the importance of their protection
(Lindfield et al. 2016, Huvenne et al. 2016). By reducing fishing
pressure through sanctuary protection, fish size, biomass, and
abundance could increase, while also enhancing coral reef resiliency
(Reed 2002, 2007, Bozec et al. 2016, Chirico et al. 2017). Impacts to
the resources may be reduced due to limitations on fishing that can
otherwise alter predator-prey relationships, disturb bottom habitats,
and increase loss of fish biomass. The added prohibition of
spearfishing further protects fish from direct extraction (Lindfield et
al. 2014).
Sanctuary management actions could reduce marine debris and impacts
of debris on corals and other organisms, such as entanglement in
derelict fishing gear and incidental catch of fish in ``ghost'' fishing
gears. Moreover, extending to the expansion areas the prohibition of
bottom-tending fishing gear, limits on anchoring and the discharge of
pollutants, removal of marine debris such as derelict fishing gear, and
invasive species removal, would all improve habitat for benthic coral
communities and fish communities.
Designating areas as a ``no take'' marine reserve is an important
issue and NOAA plans to consider it in the next review of the FGBNMS
management plan.
26. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting that a Gulf Sperm
Whale/Pelagic Ecosystem national marine sanctuary be established.
Response: NOAA does not intend to establish a Gulf Sperm Whale/
Pelagic Ecosystem National Marine Sanctuary. The request is beyond the
scope of this proposed action.
Visual Resources
27. Comment: NOAA received a comment on DEIS Section 5.3.2.3--
Scenic and Visual Resources requesting that negative impacts to scenic
and visual resources that could occur because of an increased number of
boaters and/or increased use of fishing line be considered in the
analysis.
Response: NOAA evaluated both beneficial and adverse impacts to
each resource area and determined there would be no adverse impacts to
scenic and visual resources. NOAA predicts beneficial impacts on the
scenic and visual resources of the proposed expansion areas by reducing
marine debris including derelict fishing gear, vessel traffic, and
industrial infrastructure. Refer to FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.3.
Fishing, Fishery Regulations, and Fishery Management
28. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested the agency to
analyze recreational fishing activities in the proposed expansion
areas.
Response: NOAA addressed the request for this analysis by
evaluating the level of recreational fishing activity expected to occur
in the proposed expansion areas, using the best available data, to
capture the socioeconomic impact to this industry. Ultimately, NOAA
determined that there would be no significant adverse impacts to
recreational fishers. For analysis of recreational fishing activities,
please refer to FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1.2 for a description of
the data used and Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.2 for the expected
environmental impact.
29. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested the agency
clarify benefits of the expansion to commercial fishers and improve the
socioeconomic analysis of commercial fishers.
Response: NOAA updated FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.4.1 to supplement
the analysis on commercial fisheries with additional and current VMS
data to assess socioeconomic impacts imposed by the expansion on
commercial (Section 4.4.1.1) and recreational (Section 4.4.1.2)
fishers. Overall, NOAA determined that no significant adverse impacts
to fishers would result from the proposed expansion (See Chapter 5,
Section 5.3.9.1 and 5.3.9.2). NOAA concluded minor benefits to
commercial fishers may occur with the expansion of the sanctuary (see
Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.1) as fish production may increase in general
with the decreased fishing pressure and habitat protections of specific
locations.
Broadly, it is well documented by the scientific community that
coral reef and mesophotic coral communities provide necessary habitat
for a significant number of fish species, and the prevention of loss of
these habitats will help to maintain and enhance fish populations
dependent on these areas. More specifically, higher biomass and
abundance of fish are often associated with greater habitat coverage
and/or complexity, such that, protecting habitat has an increased
likelihood to improve fish stocks (Jones et al. 2004, Coker et al.
2014, Lindfield et al. 2016, Komyakova et al. 2018, Carminatto et al.
2020, Russ et al. 2020). Additionally, reducing fishing pressure could
lead to an increased monetary value of commercial fisheries, partly due
to the presence of larger individuals (thus more valuable) and higher
densities of high-value species (Chirico et al. 2017). Mesophotic reefs
have been found to harbor greater biomass of fishery-targeted species
than shallower reefs, suggesting these habitats are important to
protect for the longevity of commercial harvests (Lindfield et al.
2016). In essence, sanctuary expansion is protecting critical habitat
which may result in increased fish biomass (Edgar et al. 2011, Harborne
et al. 2008) or abundance (Jeffrey et al. 2012), particularly where
fishing pressure is reduced (Edgar et al. 2011, Kramer and Heck 2007),
which could benefit commercial fishers.
30. Comment: NOAA received comments regarding spearfishing, with
the majority requesting a prohibition on this activity. Some commenters
offered conditional support of spearfishing, suggesting allowing the
activity: (1) In a limited capacity with access at a limited number of
banks and reefs in the expansion area; (2) only for the removal of
lionfish, an invasive species present in the current and proposed
sanctuary areas; or (3) by breath hold only.
Response: NOAA intends to extend the current sanctuary regulations
to the expansion areas proposed in the Final Preferred Alternative. As
such, NOAA will not be implementing any additional fishing regulations
as part of the final rulemaking. NOAA prohibits spearfishing in the
current boundary to protect delicate corals, including threatened
species, and important benthic habitat from fishing impacts, which will
continue in the expansion areas. Spearfishing for lionfish is not a
permissible activity within sanctuary borders. However, spearfishing
with pole spears has been performed opportunistically by research staff
through permitted long-term monitoring activities at FGBNMS.
Additionally, lionfish invitational research cruises have been a
permitted activity since 2015 at FGBNMS to remove the invasive species
with highly skilled, qualified recreational divers and contribute to a
variety of research projects with external academic and agency
partners. NOAA intends to continue to permit
[[Page 4946]]
lionfish removals, with restrictions and obligations to properly train
divers in effective removal techniques that prioritize coral and
ecosystem health. A detailed description of sanctuary regulations is
described in FEIS Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4.
31. Comment: NOAA received a comment that suggested the
spearfishing community has been excluded from access to the sanctuary.
Response: NOAA solicited public comment to exempt spearfishing in
the proposed sanctuary boundary with the release of the NPRM. In
response, NOAA received overwhelming support to continue prohibition of
this activity. Please see additional information provided in comment
#30. This will restrict access to the sanctuary expansion areas for the
spearfishing community.
32. Comment: In response to the DEIS, NOAA received a request
seeking a pelagic longline exemption from the otherwise applicable
sanctuary fishing prohibitions proposed for the expansion areas. NOAA
also received a few similar comments in response to the NPRM. However,
there were also a significant number of NPRM commenters that opposed
this exemption.
Response: NOAA considered the request made during the public review
of the DEIS for a pelagic longline exemption to the proposed fishing
prohibitions in the expansion area. In response, NOAA solicited public
comments pertaining to pelagic longline fishing in the NPRM. Based on
strong public support to prohibit this activity, NOAA has rejected the
request for an exemption for pelagic longlining and, instead, intends
to extend the current sanctuary regulations to the expansion areas.
Under existing regulations, fishing will only be allowed with
conventional hook and line gear (i.e., any fishing apparatus operated
aboard a vessel and composed of a single line terminated by a
combination of sinkers and hooks or lures and spooled upon a reel that
may be hand- or electrically operated, hand-held or mounted). NOAA
believes the expansion of FGBNMS to additional reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico will add critical protection for fish,
marine mammals, threatened and endangered species, as well as their
habitat. NOAA determined the existing regulations would best accomplish
this protection and fulfill the NMSA obligation to protect nationally
significant environmental features.
A detailed description of sanctuary regulations is described in the
FEIS Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4. NOAA has been in consultation
with NMFS and GMFMC throughout the entire scoping process of sanctuary
expansion, please refer to FEIS Chapter 1, Section 1.5.4.2, for
additional details on these consultations.
33. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting its fisheries
analysis in the DEIS include more types of fishing gear and data to
determine what areas were used by fishers and the value of these areas
to those fisheries.
Response: NOAA provided a detailed list of the types of commercial
vessel and recreation vessels that operate within the proposed
sanctuary boundaries in the DEIS. NOAA has added a new table to the
FEIS to include gear types used by commercial fishers that were
observed in the vicinity of the Final Preferred Alternative. Please
review Section 5.3.9.1 and 5.3.9.2 for a description of the commercial
and recreational fishing vessels that operate within the proposed
sanctuary boundaries based on permit or gear type. This analysis
estimates the number of vessels within the vicinity of the boundaries
under each alternative.
34. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting an analysis of the
potential impact(s) of weights used in bandit reel gear configurations
on the benthic habitat and corals, as well as more information on the
types of gear used in this type of fishing configuration.
Response: FGBNMS intends to continue investigating impacts of
recreational and commercial fishing in the sanctuary, including bandit
reel gear, and will address this in more detail during the next
management plan review.
35. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting a comprehensive
commercial endorsement and certification program be developed to allow
commercial fishers to continue to operate within the proposed
boundaries. Additionally, there was a request to create an exemption
for shrimpers in the Royal Red Shrimp industry to continue their
historical practices.
Response: NOAA has considered this request, and following
consultation with GMFMC pursuant to NMSA section 304(a)(5), decided not
to establish a commercial endorsement and certification program or
provide an exemption for shrimpers or other fishers in the sanctuary,
based on the reduction in size of the new areas. Facilitating
commercial fishing in the sanctuary, even through an endorsement and
certification process, could make corals and other sensitive bottom
habitats vulnerable to injury. NOAA believes that the reduction in
boundaries between the 2016 original preferred alternative and the
Final Preferred Alternative, in addition to allowing conventional hook
and line fishing in the expanded sanctuary, facilitates an appropriate
balance between environmental protection and user access dictated as
mandated by the NMSA. A detailed description of sanctuary regulations
is described in FEIS Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4. FEIS Chapter 1,
Section 1.5.2 provides additional details on this consultation.
36. Comment: NOAA received a comment that suggested specific
language be added for the discharge of natural waste of farmed fish
related to open gulf mariculture, stating that fish farming operations
outside of sanctuary boundaries may discharge sinking organic material
that deposit within the sanctuary with prevailing currents.
Response: NOAA determined this request is outside the scope of this
action. While sanctuary regulations do not specifically prohibit
aquaculture, some associated activities are prohibited such as
discharge of certain material, alteration of the seabed, and injury to
sanctuary resources. Furthermore, the suitability of the area for
aquaculture is being separately considered under other authorities
including E.O. 13921, (October 23, 2020; 85 FR 67519). FGBNMS will
further consider aquaculture and its potential impacts during the next
management plan review.
Military Uses
37. Comment: A comment related to the Department of the Navy's
activities within the proposed sanctuary areas suggested to: (1)
Include in the FEIS, Department of Defense (DoD) use of water space in
the vicinity of proposed expansion and current sanctuary; (2) provide a
map of the Gulf of Mexico warning areas for military use; (3) add
military uses to marine-use categories; and (4) add an analysis of the
potential impact to military uses.
Response: Homeland security and military uses of the expanded
sanctuary are subject to compliance with NEPA and NMSA, in addition to
all applicable environmental regulations. DoD would be required to
consult with ONMS pursuant to NMSA section 304(d) on any new military
activities in the expansion area that are likely to injure sanctuary
resources. NOAA believes the existing regulatory framework sufficiently
addresses DoD impacts on sanctuary resources. Existing military uses
and an analysis of their environmental effects in the expansion area
have been added to Chapter 4, Section 4.4.5 and Chapter 5, Section
5.3.9.7 of the FEIS.
[[Page 4947]]
NEPA Process
38. Comment: NOAA received comments regarding the NEPA process.
Commenters requested NOAA conduct a new NEPA analysis because of: (1)
The difference in methodologies used to configure the Final Preferred
Alternative and Alternative 3 in the DEIS; and (2) new circumstances
and/or information available (e.g., fishing exemptions, removal of
buffer zones).
Response: NOAA evaluated the changes made from the 2016 original
preferred alternative (Alternative 3) to the Final Preferred
Alternative presented in the NPRM and this FEIS. The Final Preferred
Alternative revised Alternative 3 boundaries to be more tightly drawn
near the shallowest portions of the geological features of interest,
largely in response to existing fishing activity and oil and gas
activity (see response to comment #3). The new polygons included all of
the same reefs and banks, excluding Bryant Bank, which is not included
in the Final Preferred Alternative. Ultimately, NOAA determined that
the changes reflected in the Final Preferred Alternative were not
``substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to
environmental concerns'' (40 CFR 1502.9(c)(1)(i)). NOAA further
determined the comments received on the 2016 DEIS did not ``constitute
significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental
concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its impacts'' (40 CFR
1502.9(c)(1)(ii)). As such, NOAA concluded that preparing a
supplemental environmental impact statement or new NEPA analysis is
neither required nor necessary under NEPA. NOAA has documented the
agency's rationale for revising the Final Preferred Alternative (see
Chapter 3, Section 3.2) and provided updated information on the
affected environment in FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3, and related Record
of Decision. Please refer to NOAA's Supplemental Information Report
that was provided with the release of the NPRM for further information.
39. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested that the
Protected Species analysis in Section 5.3.2.7 of the DEIS be public and
open for review/comment.
Response: ONMS conducted an ESA Section 7 consultation with NMFS in
conjunction with the development of both the DEIS and NPRM. In the
DEIS, ONMS included a list of protected species which may be affected
by the proposed action, and the DEIS was subsequently submitted for
public comment. Additional species were included in the NPRM
consultation. See FEIS Chapter 4, Section 4.3.4 for additional
information on protected species with an updated list of protected
species and Appendix G for a summary of how ONMS satisfied ESA
consultation requirements including ONMS's ESA consultation
correspondence.
40. Comment: NOAA received a comment stating that the Notices to
Lessees are not simply guidance because they contain requirements for
oil and gas.
Response: NOAA disagrees. Please refer to the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement Notice to Lessees 2009-G39,\10\ which
provides and consolidates guidance for oil and gas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ https://www.bsee.gov/notices-to-lessees-ntl/notices-to-lessees/ntl-2009-g39-biologically-sensitive-underwater-features.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Marine Sanctuaries Act
41. Comment: NOAA received comments that suggested the expansion of
sanctuaries must be conducted through an act of Congress, otherwise it
violates Congressional intent found in the NMSA.
Response: NOAA disagrees. NOAA can administratively designate and
expand sanctuaries pursuant to Section 303 of the NMSA (16 U.S.C.
1433), using procedures set forth in section 304 (16 U.S.C. 1434). It
is also possible for Congress to legislatively designate a sanctuary;
Stetson Bank (Pub. L. 104-283) in the current FGBNMS serves as an
example of a legislatively designated sanctuary.
42. Comment: NOAA received comments stating the NPRM did not comply
with the NMSA and the FGBNMS 2012 management plan to prioritize
conservation of surrounding reefs and banks.
Response: The proposed action responds to the need to provide
additional protection of sensitive underwater features and marine
habitats associated with continental shelf-edge reefs and banks in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico. NOAA adds 14 additional reefs and banks,
for a total of 17 features to be protected, expanding the sanctuary by
approximately three times its current spatial extent. In addition to
prioritizing the conservation of nationally significant biological
features, the NMSA section 301 (16 U.S.C. 1431) directs NOAA to
facilitate, to the extent compatible with the primary objective of
resource protection, all public and private uses of the resources of
these marine areas not prohibited pursuant to other authorities. Thus,
compliant with the NMSA, NOAA believes the current expansion in this
FEIS and final rule, as proposed in the NPRM, maximizes conservation
and user group interests to allow for greater protection of these
areas.
Oil & Gas Exploration and Development
43. Comment: NOAA received comments from the oil and gas industry
in response to the 2016 DEIS alternatives regarding recognition and
inclusion of existing oil and gas leases. Commenters expressed concern
that sanctuary expansion could be more costly or difficult for oil and
gas production, new leases would be precluded, and the loss of oil and
gas exploration may lead to reliance on foreign oil. Industry
representatives noted their reliance on the 2007 Sanctuary Advisory
Council recommendation for expansion (Alternative 2) to inform their
investment in resources for the industry's development and growth, or
their decision to relinquish certain lease blocks. Industry
representatives requested oil and gas access, leasing, produced water
discharge requirements, and seismic acquisition should remain as is,
with no additional regulations.
Response: To address concerns from the oil and gas industry, the
FGBNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council's BEWG underwent an extensive process
to evaluate how protecting biologically significant areas may impact
the oil and gas industry. They proposed modifying DEIS Alternative 3 to
develop the Revised Preferred Alternative (see comment #3). This
process also involved input from the Sanctuary Advisory Council, the
GMFMC, and coordination within NOAA. The new boundaries closely follow
BOEM's NAZs, encompassing the shallowest portions of the banks, which
are already protected from oil and gas exploration and development.
Furthermore, ONMS consulted with BOEM pursuant to E.O. 13795--
Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy and determined
that expanding the sanctuary would not have a significant economic
impact on oil and gas exploration and development. BOEM's analysis is
summarized in the NPRM and in FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5.
44. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting an analysis of the
inclusion of four oil and gas platforms within the expansion areas for
advantages and disadvantages, especially in the context of Sanctuary
Expansion Action Plan Objective 6C.
Response: NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative does not include any
[[Page 4948]]
additional oil and gas platforms within the existing or expanded
sanctuary boundaries, thus, the requested analysis is not necessary.
NOAA did, however, consider inclusion of certain oil and gas platforms
as part of the alternatives considered in the NEPA analysis for this
action. See Alternatives 4 and 5 of this FEIS. Please also refer to
FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5 for analysis of impacts to offshore
energy resources. Finally, NOAA intends to continue analyzing the
advantages and disadvantages of oil and gas structure inclusion within
FGBNMS as part of its ongoing management plan review process.
45. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested an economic
analysis of: (1) Impacts to oil and gas resources due to directional
drilling; (2) affected lease blocks; and (3) a comparison in area
between NAZs and proposed sanctuary expansion areas. There was also a
request to identify any future management actions/mitigations which may
affect oil and gas activities.
Response: BOEM analyzed potential impacts to oil and gas resources
pursuant to E.O. 13795, and these results are available on the
sanctuary website.\11\ BOEM determined that expanding the sanctuary
would not have significant economic impacts on the oil and gas
industry, and NOAA accepted BOEM's findings. NOAA will continue to
coordinate with BOEM to co-manage these resources and mitigate any
impacts to oil and gas activities, including the 11 active Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas leases that will lie wholly or
partially within the boundaries of the expanded FGBNMS. For new leases,
approvals or permits, licenses, or other authorizations in existence
prior to the date in which the FGBNMS expansion is finalized, lessees
or operators will be required to obtain from NOAA a certification to
authorize the oil and gas activities within the FGBNMS. The
certification will require compliance with the FGBNMFS regulations, as
well as the permits or plan approvals issued by BOEM and/or BSEE, and
the topographic features stipulation (as applicable) in the lease.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ https://nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/boemenergyanalysis.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refer to FEIS Section 5.3.9.5 for additional analysis of the
impacts to oil and gas activities.
46. Comment: NOAA received a comment to incorporate BOEM lease
sales and stipulations into BOEM's Record of Decision and Final Notice
of Sale.
Response: As a non-voting member on the Sanctuary Advisory Council,
and a cooperating agency in the preparation of the 2016 DEIS, BOEM has
incorporated lease sales and stipulations into BOEM's Record of
Decision and Final Notice. FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5 shows that
there were 13 active lease blocks, as reported by BOEM in their 2019
report. However, since publication of that report, two leases were
relinquished. There are currently 11 active leases in the expansion
area, averaging approximately 17% of the lease blocks falling within
the Final Preferred Alternative boundaries. Lease sales issued between
1996 and 2001 provided Information for Lessees indicating ``Minimizing
Oil and Gas Structures near Flower Garden Banks''. Lease sales issued
between 2002 through 2014 did not specifically mention FGBNMS, but the
lease sales do refer to the Notice to Lessees outlining the topographic
and live bottom stipulations. The sanctuary regulations track the
operational requirements established by BOEM in those stipulations.
Lease sales issued between 2015 to the present provide notice to
prospective leaseholders of the proposed expansion. More information
regarding BOEM lease sales may be found on BOEM's website.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ https://www.boem.gov/oil-gas-energy/lease-sale-information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
47. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested the agency
develop an appropriate regulatory ``firewall'' that will set a
precedent for other sanctuaries to protect those areas from offshore
drilling practices.
Response: NOAA believes this request is beyond the scope of this
action but will continue to work toward balancing multiple user
interests with the NMSA's primary goal of resource protection.
48. Comment: NOAA received comments related to environmental
impacts of the oil and gas industry. Of these, nearly half requested
the sanctuary update the regulations to prohibit oil and gas
development and to ensure management protects against damages from this
industry. Concerns raised included: (1) Oil spills and leaks; (2)
extraction practices; (3) encroaching drilling and exploration; and (4)
the vulnerability of biological resources to oil and gas activities.
Comments also requested that NOAA prohibit fracking and analyze the
potential for fracking fluids and directional hydraulic fracturing to
impact the area in and near the sanctuary. A few comments related
specifically to methane hydrate extraction.
Response: NOAA determined the Final Preferred Alternative balances
protecting vulnerable habitats with multiple uses of the region. See
FEIS Chapter 3, Section 3.2 for more details regarding the Final
Preferred Alternative. NOAA intends to extend the current FGBNMS
regulations to the new expansion areas. Please refer to FEIS Table 1.1
in Chapter 1, Section 1.4 for a list of current sanctuary regulations
and management efforts from impacts of oil and gas activities.
Additionally, sanctuary regulations prohibit discharge of any kind from
oil and gas activities that may be harmful to the benthic environment.
BOEM assessed the potential for offshore energy resources including
oil and gas and methane hydrate resources in the proposed expansion
areas. BOEM determined that due to the shallow-water depth of the
proposed expansion areas, the formation of methane hydrate in the
subsurface is unlikely. BOEM's E.O. 13795 report is available on the
sanctuary website.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ https://nmsflowergarden.blob.core.windows.net/flowergarden-prod/media/archive/doc/expansion/boemenergyanalysis.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FEIS describes damages related to oil and gas activities
observed at banks proposed in the expansion, as well as potential
impacts that could be sustained to these resources. Please review
Chapter 4, Section 4.4.3 of the FEIS for additional information.
Furthermore, in 2016, the NOAA Office of Response and Restoration
Gulf of Mexico Disaster Response Center convened with the Department of
Interior and a variety of environmental, regulatory, and resource
protection agencies to develop a document outlining ``Oil Spill
Response Options for FGBNMS.'' This document may be found at the
University of New Hampshire, Coastal Response Research Center and the
Center for Spills and Environmental Hazards website.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ https://crrc.unh.edu/sites/crrc.unh.edu/files/nrpt_oil_spill_response_impacting_fgbnms_tx_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. Comment: NOAA received comments related to the prohibition of
oil and gas development. Specifically, NOAA was requested to prohibit:
(1) New oil and gas directional drilling, infrastructure, and
transport; (2) oil and gas leasing within new boundary areas; and (3)
directional drilling under new boundary areas.
Response: With this action, NOAA intends to extend existing
sanctuary prohibitions, which allow and regulate oil and gas
exploration and development to the expansion areas. Directional
drilling permits for oil and gas will continue to be considered for
surface operations in the expansion
[[Page 4949]]
areas, given existing prohibitions, outside of the BOEM-designated No
Activity Zones. Pursuant to NMSA Section 301(b)(6), NOAA will continue
``to facilitate to the extent compatible with the primary objective of
resource protection, all public and private uses of the resources of
these marine areas not prohibited pursuant to other authorities''.
Please also refer to comment #49 and FEIS Table 1.1, Section 1.4 for
current sanctuary regulations.
50. Comment: NOAA received comments from oil and gas industry
companies in support of this expansion that recognized the balance
between conservation, extraction, and user groups achieved through the
Sanctuary Advisory Council's process in developing the Revised
Preferred Alternative (NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative).
Response: NOAA has carried forward the 2018 BEWG's recommendation,
which is now NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative. Please refer above to
the Boundaries section and to FEIS Chapter 3, Sections 3.1 and 3.2 for
more information regarding the development of alternatives and
selection of the Final Preferred Alternative.
Sanctuary Management and Administration, Funding, Education and
Outreach, and Sanctuary Advisory Council
51. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting that FGBNMS develop
a Resilient Habitat Plan, which seeks to enhance habitat resilience to
uncertain and unpredictable effects of future change, such as climate
change.
Response: The current FGBNMS management plan serves as a framework
for addressing issues facing the sanctuary and lays the foundation for
protecting, conserving, and enhancing FGBNMS and its regional
environment in the Gulf of Mexico. Following this expansion, NOAA will
begin the process to review and update the FGBNMS Management Plan as
needed. NOAA acknowledges the growing need to integrate resiliency
plans into their habitat management schemes and are beginning to
implement sanctuary climate assessment and adaptations plans sitewide.
As determined during management plan review, FGBNMS will aim to
integrate adaptation and resiliency strategies into their habitat and
resource management. Additionally, FGBNMS will begin development of a
Condition Report describing the current status of sanctuary resources,
including the expansion areas. As described in the FEIS Executive
Summary, NOAA will be extending the existing sanctuary management plan
and regulations to the newly expanded area.
52. Comment: NOAA received a comment on DEIS Section 5.3.6--
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources requesting NOAA
include costs of expansion and evaluate potential impacts to
conservation and management activities.
Response: NEPA requires an analysis of the extent to which the
proposed project's primary and secondary effects would commit
nonrenewable resources to uses that future generations would be unable
to reverse (42 U.S.C. 4332(C)(v); 40 CFR 1502.16). See FEIS Chapter 5,
Section 5.6.4 which describes any impacts, or losses, to resources that
cannot be recovered or reversed associated with the proposed action or
alternatives. Alternatives 1-3 and the Final Preferred Alternative are
within the current operational budget, and NOAA expects field
operations to continue at current intensity in the expanded sanctuary.
Also refer to the 2012 FGBNMS Management Plan for additional budgetary
information.
53. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting the FEIS to clearly
describe ``best diving practices'' in Section 5.3.9.4, how they will be
implemented, how they will protect FGBNMS, and how NOAA will enforce
their use.
Response: The existing sanctuary regulations (15 CFR
922.122(a)(2)(iii)) require any vessel moored in the sanctuary to
exhibit the blue and white International Code flag ``A'' (``alpha''
dive flag) or red and white ``sports diver'' flag whenever a scuba
diver from that vessel is in the water and remove the ``alpha'' dive
flag or ``sports diver'' flag after all divers exit the water and
return on board the vessel, consistent with U.S. Coast Guard guidelines
relating to sports diving as contained within ``Special Notice to
Mariners'' (00-2008) for the Gulf of Mexico. This final rule will apply
that requirement to the expanded areas and must be followed. The FGBNMS
Trip Prep web page \15\ provides recreational divers with information
to prepare for their trip to the sanctuary, information about the
challenging diving conditions that can be experienced at FGBNMS, and
how to safely prepare for these visits, and includes information on
best diving and boating practices to ensure the safety of visitors.
Additionally, the FGBNMS Trip Prep web page includes a link to reef
etiquette, which provides information about the best diving practices
to ensure the protection of the environment. A link to this reef
etiquette web page \16\ has been added to Section 5.3.6. NOAA believes
when these practices are followed, reefs sustain very minimal, if any,
damage. While compliance with the sanctuary regulations is mandatory,
some of the best diving practices set forth on the FGBNMS Trip Prep web
page are voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/visiting/tripprep.html.
\16\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/visiting/reefetiquette.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FGBNMS also has regulations prohibiting resources from being taken
from the sanctuary (e.g., shells, coral, invertebrates) and restricting
harassment of marine wildlife (e.g., Mobula rays, whale sharks). A list
of the regulations is provided in FEIS Chapter 1, Section 1.4, Table
1.1. The USCG and NOAA's OLE are jointly responsible for enforcing
regulations at FGBNMS.
54. Comment: NOAA received comments regarding sharing its coral and
habitat information with the GMFMC so the data could be included in the
coral portal. Also, FGBNMS was asked to collaborate with NOAA's
National Resource Damage Assessment's (NRDA) Trustee Council's Open
Ocean Trustee Implementation Group to restore mesophotic and deep
benthic communities (MDBC).
Response: NOAA welcomes the opportunity to collaborate with
organizations to build community partnerships for education, outreach,
research, monitoring, and resource protection. Before, during, and
after the release of the DEIS and the NPRM, the FGBNMS Superintendent
presented information to the GMFMC on the FGBNMS proposed sanctuary
expansion. Additionally, FGBNMS provides benthic (e.g., coral) data
from the current and expanded FGBNMS, as well as other offshore banks
and reefs in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico to GMFMC for its publicly
accessible coral portal.\17\ FGBNMS has been intently involved as an
Active Management Project Partner with NRDA's Mesophotic Deepwater
Benthic Community's planning projects. Project goals include: (1)
Enhancing public awareness and performing active management and
protection activities by undertaking education and outreach targeting
MDBC resource users and the general public; (2) engaging stakeholders
and developing socioeconomic analyses to evaluate potential impacts of
management or protection actions; and (3) directly
[[Page 4950]]
addressing threats to MDBC through management activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ https://portal.gulfcouncil.org/cp/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
55. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting a Critical Habitat
Assessment of the banks be included in the proposed expansion as
required in the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance
Standard 6 (Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of
Living Natural Resources).
Response: To develop each alternative, NOAA identified nationally
significant coral habitats that are vulnerable to multiple threats as
detailed in the FEIS and final rule's Need for Action sections. For
more detail regarding how specific habitats were selected in the
alternatives, refer to Chapter 3 of the FEIS. In summary, ONMS
determined the selected habitats were most in need of protection based
on the best available scientific information as well as through public
comment and interagency coordination.
56. Comment: NOAA received a comment that requested the agency
incorporate and address management of artificial reefs within sanctuary
boundaries, specifically decommissioning of oil and gas platforms.
Response: NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative does not include any
artificial reef structures. Federal policy on artificial reefs is
discussed in the FEIS Appendix G and in the 2012 FGBNMS Management
Plan.
57. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting the use of
collaborative, consensus-building, transparent processes for selection
and management of sanctuary resources.
Response: ONMS uses several public, stakeholder-driven processes to
ensure collaborative, transparent selection and management of
resources. National marine sanctuaries have sanctuary advisory
councils, composed of voting and non-voting members that represent a
variety of government agencies; local user groups; and the general
public, that advise sanctuary superintendents on priority issues.
Sanctuary advisory councils may choose to establish committees and
working groups to further delve into issues; working groups provide an
opportunity to involve more stakeholders from the community in
developing recommendations for consideration by the full sanctuary
advisory councils. Additionally, through NEPA and the federal
rulemaking processes, ONMS is required to solicit, consider, and
respond to public comments during each stage in an expansion,
designation, or regulatory update. All comments received are made
available and considered by ONMS.
58. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting the use of British
Petroleum (BP) restoration funds to justify expansion to Alternatives 4
and 5. One comment noted specific issues affecting FGBNMS' operational
capacity to manage alternatives with greater environmental benefit had
changed (i.e. substantial resources have since been dedicated to
managing mesophotic and deep benthic communities in the Gulf of Mexico
through the Deepwater Horizon NRDA).
Response: FGBNMS is engaged in collaborative efforts with NOAA
Fisheries through the MDBC project funded through NRDA. NOAA has
determined, for the purpose of this action, that Alternatives 4 and 5
are beyond the geographic scope that is feasible for the sanctuary to
effectively manage (see comment #54 and refer to Chapter 3 of the
FEIS).
59. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting FGBNMS design,
develop, and commission a research vessel dedicated to studying marine
mammal population growth in the pelagic environment.
Response: FGBNMS currently operates the R/V Manta, a research
vessel that can be used as a platform to research marine mammals, and
thus rejects this request. NOAA Fisheries conducts marine mammal
population studies and their Southeast Fisheries Science Center
develops a report every 5 years. Further, the sanctuary collaborates
with external organizations and partners to support marine mammal
research.
60. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting the creation of an
interpretive center in support of the sanctuary.
Response: NOAA will evaluate opportunities for an interpretive
center through the next FGBNMS management plan review process.
61. Comment: NOAA received a comment requesting inclusion of a user
education and enforcement program to ensure the public is aware of new
boundaries and requirements.
Response: Existing online and print materials created for the
proposed action contain select maps and several photographs. When the
proposed action becomes final, NOAA will work to update and distribute
printed and online materials to reflect the features and boundaries of
FGBNMS.
62. Comment: NOAA received comments regarding input from the FGBNMS
Sanctuary Advisory Council and other stakeholders. More specifically,
commenters asked why the FGBNMS Sanctuary Advisory Council was not
informed of new information and proposed boundaries for NOAA's original
preferred alternative in the DEIS (Alternative 3) prior to publication,
and asked why NOAA selected Alternative 3 instead of the 2007 FGBNMS
Advisory Council's recommendation (Alternative 2).
Response: FGBNMS received input from its Sanctuary Advisory Council
through a Boundary Expansion Working Group comprised of stakeholders
from varied constituent seats. In 2007, the working group presented its
recommendation for sanctuary expansion to the full Advisory Council,
after which the 2007 Sanctuary Advisory Council recommendation
(Alternative 2) was approved, based on the criteria developed by the
original BEWG. Their recommendation became the foundation for NOAA's
original preferred alternative (Alternative 3), which also included
additional research in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. After the
release of the DEIS, a Sanctuary Advisory Council working group
reformed. Based on the Sanctuary Advisory Council recommendations in
response to the DEIS, NOAA made a number of changes to the boundaries
of the polygons surrounding the banks and submerged features. In 2018,
the BEWG brought forth its recommendation for sanctuary expansion to
the full Advisory Council, which was approved and became NOAA's Revised
Preferred Alternative for the NPRM and the Final Preferred Alternative
in this FEIS.
NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative represents the collaborative
efforts between constituent/stakeholder groups and the sanctuary's
multi-use management. Refer to FEIS Chapter 3, Sections 3.2 and 3.5
which details development of the Final Preferred Alternative and
provides the rationale for the selection of Alternative 3 as the
original preferred alternative in the DEIS, respectively.
63. Comment: NOAA received a comment suggesting FGBNMS form an
Advisory Council working group on maritime shipping traffic regarding
shipping routes.
Response: NOAA will consider this suggestion in the future.
64. Comment: NOAA received comments claiming science was
disregarded during the development of the boundary configuration for
the Revised Preferred Alternative presented in the NPRM.
Response: The bank boundaries of the Revised Preferred Alternative
presented in the NPRM (NOAA's Final Preferred Alternative) closely
follow BOEM's NAZs, which were based on information
[[Page 4951]]
available in 1970-1980's, and designated to protect active reef
building benthic communities, associated with the shallowest portions
of the geographic features. NOAA reduced the size of the expansion
areas proposed in the 2016 DEIS original preferred alternative to
minimize user conflicts and potential economic impacts to the offshore
energy industry in accordance with NMSA section 301 (16 U.S.C. 1431),
which supports establishing compatible uses with public and private
resource users.
Socioeconomic Issues and Access
65. Comment: NOAA received comments stating that the economic
impact analysis in the DEIS was insufficient and requested updates to
data pertaining to scuba diving, commercial fishing, air emissions, and
oil and gas.
Response: NOAA used the best available scientific information to
conduct the economic analysis for the DEIS and incorporated updated
data and analysis, if available, in the FEIS (see Chapter 5).
Specifically, ONMS updated analyses of impacts to commercial and
recreational fishing and impacts to oil and gas resources in the FEIS.
66. Comment: NOAA received comments related to the positive
socioeconomic impacts resulting from sanctuary expansion on local
tourism/businesses and the recreation industry. Commenters noted some
fishing practices were harmful and therefore, fishing restrictions in
the expansion areas would benefit the recreational fishing industry,
the commercial fishing industry, and fisheries/seafood production.
Response: Potential positive and adverse impacts to socioeconomic
resources (e.g., recreation, fishing) are detailed in FEIS Chapter 5.
NOAA does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts to be incurred
on the commercial or recreational fishing industry as a result of this
expansion. Rather, fishers may find a minor beneficial impact with an
increase in fish production with the protection of these important
areas. Please review FEIS Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.1 and 5.3.9.2 for
more details on the expected impact to commercial and recreational
fishing industries, respectively.
67. Comment: NOAA received comments suggesting that the proposed
action removes an asset from public use for both commercial and
recreational purposes, restricts recreational diving access, and
restricts recreational fishing opportunities. Commenters urged NOAA to
allow for multiple use of the sanctuary, with reasonable access
regulations and reasonable mitigation measures that directly address
threats.
Response: By expanding the sanctuary's boundaries and extending
existing regulations to the expansion areas, NOAA is not restricting
access to divers or hook and line fishers in any part of the sanctuary
as long as users do not injure or possess any sanctuaries resources
(see FEIS regulations Table 1.1, Chapter 1, Section 1.4). NOAA
determined through the Sanctuary Advisory Council process and through
public input that the expansion would allow for multiple uses of the
sanctuary while addressing threats to sanctuary resources, as is set
forth in NMSA Section 301. For additional details pertaining to impacts
to socioeconomic resources such as recreational diving, please refer to
FEIS Chapter 5.
68. Comment: NOAA received comments from the diving industry and
scuba divers supporting sanctuary expansion. Divers urged NOAA to
install mooring buoys in the expansion areas to increase access and to
provide better maintenance of the mooring buoys and longlines.
Response: NOAA intends to extend the current management regime to
the expansion areas, under which the sanctuary would provide and
maintain mooring buoys so that vessels (< 100 feet long) could safely
moor in the sanctuary boundaries, as is logistically feasible. See the
current FGBNMS Management Plan.
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)
NOAA received eight comments on the Bureau of Ocean Management's
(BOEM) analysis (the RIR) (85 FR 74630, November 23, 2020) and
collectively responds to those comments here.
69. Comment: NOAA received comments expressing concern about the
short length of the period provided for public comment, suggesting (1)
it was not long enough to provide substantive feedback; (2) no similar
National Marine Sanctuary System has offered a 15-day comment period;
and (3) that it was not circulated with other documents prior to this
period. NOAA also received a request to provide justification for the
legality of the 15-day comment period, and further requested that NOAA
extend the comment period for 60 days.
Response: The request to extend the comment period is denied. Prior
to soliciting public comment for the RIR, a 60-day comment period was
open for the proposed rule, including a fulsome summary of the RIR,
which allowed the public to comment on the proposed action in its
entirety (85 FR 25359, May 1, 2020). On November 23, 2020, NOAA
acknowledged the oversight of not circulating the RIR, and reopened the
public comment period (85 FR 74630). Given that NOAA provided 60 days
for public comment period on the proposed rule, which contained a
summary of the BOEM analysis, the additional comment period is
reasonable.
70. Comment: NOAA received comments suggesting that the RIR was
outdated and requesting a new analysis, suggesting that a decline in
the current value of oil and gas and other hydrocarbon resources leads
to mistaken assumptions in the current RIR. Additionally, commenters
suggest that the RIR is no longer an accurate portrayal of expected
impacts to the oil and gas industry. According to the commenters, lower
oil and gas prices reduce the desire to explore and develop resources
in the region and, thus, oil and gas resources cannot be considered
economically recoverable.
Response: NOAA disagrees with this comment due to the uncertainty
in determining future oil prices, and because BOEM's February 2019
report provides the best available economic information. NOAA
summarized this analysis in the proposed rule for sanctuary expansion
and further evaluated impacts of this action on the oil and gas
industry in their Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS); see
Chapter 5, Section 5.3.9.5.
71. Comment: NOAA received comments requesting the other
alternatives be re-evaluated in light of the analysis presented in the
RIR.
Response: NOAA updated the analyses of all alternatives in the
FEIS; see Chapters 4 and 5. Ultimately, NOAA decided to move forward
with the Revised Preferred Alternative, as presented in the proposed
rule, as their Final Preferred Alternative.
VI. Classification
A. National Marine Sanctuaries Act
Section 301(b) of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1431) provides authority for
comprehensive and coordinated conservation and management of national
marine sanctuaries in coordination with other resource management
authorities. Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434) requires
that the procedures specified in Section 304 for designating a national
marine sanctuary be followed for modifying any term of designation.
This action, in addition to expanding the sanctuary, is revising the
terms of designation (e.g., scope of regulations) for the FGBNMS. In
accordance with Section 304, the documents relevant to the expansion of
Flower Garden Banks
[[Page 4952]]
are being submitted to the House Resources Committee and the Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Section 304(a)(5)
of the NMSA also requires that NOAA consult with the appropriate
Federal fishery management council on any action proposing to regulate
fishing in federal waters. Consultation with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council (GMFMC) is discussed above in part II sections 4 and
5. NOAA solicited comments on potential exemptions for pelagic longline
and spearfishing in the expanded area, and based on public comment and
coordination with NOAA fisheries, determined to not grant these
exemptions and to extend existing fishing regulations into the
expansion areas.
B. National Environmental Policy Act
In accordance with Section 304(a)(2) of the NMSA (16 U.S.C.
1434(a)(2)), and the provisions of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370), NOAA has
prepared a FEIS to evaluate the impacts of this action. Because this
environmental review began before September 14, 2020, which was the
effective date of the amendments to the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA (85 FR 43372 (Jul. 16,
2020)), the FEIS was prepared using the 1978 CEQ NEPA regulations. The
Notice of Availability (December 11, 2020, 85 FR 80093) of the FGBNMS
FEIS is available on the FGBNMS website.\18\ NEPA reviews initiated
prior to the effective date of the 2020 revised CEQ regulations may be
conducted using the 1978 version of the regulations. NOAA has also
prepared a ROD. Copies of the FEIS and ROD are available at the address
and website listed in the ADDRESSES section of this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ https://flowergarden.noaa.gov/management/sanctuaryexpansion.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact
This final rule has been determined to be ``significant'' within
the meaning of Executive Order 12866. Details on the estimated costs of
this rule are discussed in BOEM's E.O. 13795 report, which is available
on regulations.gov at docket NOAA-NOS-2019-033, and serves as a
substitute for the Regulatory Impact Review (RIR). NOAA inadvertently
omitted this report in the public docket for this action when the NPRM
was published. NOAA subsequently published a Federal Register notice on
November 23, 2020 (85 FR 74630), making the RIR available for public
comments. Refer to section V of this rule for comments received on the
RIR. Details on the estimated benefits of this action are discussed in
Chapter 5, section 5.3 of the FEIS.
D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Assessment
NOAA has concluded this regulatory action does not have federalism
implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a federalism
assessment under Executive Order 13132. The area that is the subject of
the final rule is located entirely within federal waters outside of
state or local jurisdiction. This rule will not have a substantial or
direct effect on states or local governments.
E. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This Executive Order reaffirms the Federal government's commitment
to tribal sovereignty, self-determination, and self-government. Its
purpose is to ensure that all Executive departments and agencies
consult with Indian tribes and respect tribal sovereignty as they
develop policies on issues that impact Indian communities. This action
is not anticipated to have substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibility
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.
F. Executive Order 13795: Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy
Strategy
Executive Order 13795 directs the Secretary of Commerce to refrain
from designating or expanding any national marine sanctuary unless the
proposal includes a full accounting from the DOI of any energy or
mineral resource potential (including offshore energy from wind, oil,
natural gas, methane hydrates, and any other sources that the Secretary
of Commerce deems appropriate) within the expansion area, and the
potential impact of the expansion on energy or mineral resource
potential within the designated area. On February 25, 2019, BOEM
provided NOAA with a review of offshore energy and mineral resource
potential located within the revised expansion areas in accordance with
Executive Order 13795. BOEM's report is available at the Supporting
Document section of the docket identified by NOAA-NOS-2019-033, and
posted at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=NOAA-NOS-2019-0033-1630.
G. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This final rule is not a significant energy action under the
definition in E.O. 13211. It is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Moreover,
the Administrator of OIRA has not otherwise designated this action as a
significant energy action. A Statement of Energy Effects, therefore, is
not required.
H. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires Federal agencies to
prepare an analysis of a rule's impact on small entities whenever the
agency is required to publish a rule, unless the head of the agency can
certify, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Under section 605(b) of the RFA, if the head of an agency (or his or
her designee) certifies that a rule will not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small entities, then the agency is not
required to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.
Pursuant to section 605(b), the Chief Counsel for Regulations for
the Department of Commerce, through delegation by the head of the
agency, certified to the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration during the proposed rule stage that the regulations
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. The factual basis for certification was published in
the proposed rule (85 FR 25367). No public comments were received
regarding this certification. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility
analysis was not required and none was prepared.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
The existing FGBNMS regulations contain a collection-of-information
requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), approved by
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB), under control number 0648-
0141, for collection-of-information for reporting and recordkeeping
requirements under 15 CFR part 922. This final rule would not increase
or otherwise revise the existing paperwork burdens.
The public reporting burden for national marine sanctuary general
permit applications is estimated to average 1 hour 30 minutes per
application, including the time for reviewing the application
instructions,
[[Page 4953]]
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. For
special use permits, a collection-of information requirement is
necessary to determine whether the activities are consistent with the
terms and conditions of special use permits prescribed by the NMSA. The
public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated
to average twenty four (24) hours per response (application, annual
report, and financial report), including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
collection of information. This estimate does not include additional
time that may be required should the applicant be required to provide
information to NOAA for the preparation of documentation that may be
required under NEPA (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.).
NOAA determined that this final rule would not appreciably change
the average annual number of respondents or the reporting burden for
the information requirements supporting special use or research permits
because few activities requiring new permits are expected for the new
areas. Much of the research is expected to be conducted by the
sanctuary, and other uses that require permits are anticipated with
very low intensity in the proposed expansion areas. NOAA also
determined that these regulations do not necessitate a modification to
its information collection approval by the Office of Management and
Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Comments on this
determination were solicited in the proposed rule, and no public
comments were received. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject
to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that
collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
J. National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA; 16 U.S.C. 470 et
seq.) is intended to preserve historical and archaeological sites in
the United States of America. The act created the National Register of
Historic Places, the list of National Historic Landmarks, and the State
Historic Preservation Offices. Section 106 of the NHPA requires Federal
agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on
historic properties, and afford the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment. The historic
preservation review process mandated by Section 106 is outlined in
regulations issued by ACHP (36 CFR part 800). Pursuant to 36 CFR
800.16(l)(1), historic properties include: ``any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure or object included in, or
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
maintained by the Secretary of the Interior.'' The term includes
artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within
such properties. NOAA did not identify any known historic properties
within the boundaries of the Final Preferred Alternative, and received
no public comments regarding historic properties in the Final Preferred
Alternative boundaries.
K. Coastal Zone Management Act
Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA; 16 U.S.C.
1456) requires Federal agencies carrying out an activity that would
affect any land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zone to
provide a consistency determination to the relevant state agencies
before final approval of the agency action. Copies of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement were provided to five Gulf Coast States
(Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi), soliciting
feedback on reasonably foreseeable effects on coastal resources and
uses. Responses were received from Mississippi Department of Marine
Resources and the Texas General Land Office indicating no objection to
the proposed boundary changes or the DEIS. With this information in
addition to analysis provided in the FEIS, NOAA determined this action
would have no effect on coastal resources. On November 16, 2020, NOAA
prepared a consistency determination, which was submitted to the five
Gulf Coast States along with the proposed rule. In response to this
request, the five Gulf States of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Texas concurred with NOAA's consistency determination.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 922
Administrative practice and procedure, Coastal zone, Fishing gear,
Marine resources, Natural resources, Penalties, Recreation and
recreation areas, Wildlife.
Nicole R. LeBoeuf,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone
Management, National Ocean Service.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, NOAA amends part 922,
title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 922--NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY PROGRAM REGULATIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 922 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.
Subpart L--Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
0
2. Revise Sec. 922.120 to read as follows:
Sec. 922.120 Boundary.
The Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (sanctuary)
boundary encompasses a total area of approximately 121 square nautical
miles (160.35 square miles) of offshore ocean waters, and submerged
lands thereunder, along the continental shelf and shelf edge in the
northwestern Gulf of Mexico. The entire sanctuary boundary is comprised
of 19 unique polygons. The precise boundary coordinates for each
polygon are listed in appendix A to this subpart.
0
3. In Sec. 922.121, revise the term ``No-activity zone'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 922.121 Definitions.
* * * * *
No-activity zone (applicable only to oil and gas industry
activities) means the geographic areas delineated by the Department of
the Interior in Topographic Features Stipulations for Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS) lease sales as defined by a bathymetric contour (isobath)
ranging from 55-85m in depth, with the exception of Stetson Bank (52m)
and East and West Flower Garden Banks (100m). The Notice to Lessees
(NTL) No. 2009-G39 provides and consolidates guidance for the avoidance
and protection of biologically sensitive features and areas (i.e.
topographic features, pinnacles, live bottoms (low relief features))
and other potentially sensitive biological features (PSBFs) when
conducting operations in water depths shallower than 980 feet (300
meters) in the Gulf of Mexico. NTL 2009-G39 remains in effect pursuant
to NTL No. 2015-N02. The no-activity zones are based on depth contours
as noted for the following Banks: Stetson Bank (52 meters), MacNeil
Bank (82
[[Page 4954]]
meters), Rankin Banks (including 28 Fathom Bank) (85 meters), Bright
Bank (85 meters), Geyer Bank (85 meters), Elvers Bank (85 meters),
McGrail Bank (85 meters), Bouma Bank (85 meters), Rezak Bank (85
meters), Sidner Bank (85 meters), Sonnier Bank (55 meters), Alderdice
Bank (80 meters), and Parker Bank (85 meters). For East and West Flower
Garden Banks, the no-activity zones are based on the ``\1/4\ \1/4\ \1/
4\'' aliquot system formerly used by the Department of the Interior, a
method that delineates a specific portion of a block rather than the
actual underlying isobath. The precise aliquot part description of
these areas around East and West Flower Garden Banks are provided in
appendix A of this subpart.
0
4. Revise Sec. 922.122(e)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 922.122 Prohibited or otherwise regulated activities.
* * * * *
(e)(1) The prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (11) of this
section do not apply to activities being carried out by the Department
of Defense as of the effective date of the revised terms of sanctuary
designation. Such activities shall be carried out in a manner that
minimizes any adverse impact on Sanctuary resources or qualities. The
prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (11) of this section do not
apply to any new activities carried out by the Department of Defense
that do not have the potential for any significant adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources or qualities. Such activities shall be carried out
in a manner that minimizes any adverse impact on Sanctuary resources or
qualities. New activities with the potential for significant adverse
impact on Sanctuary resources or qualities may be exempted from the
prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (11) of this section by the
Director after consultation between the Director and the Department of
Defense. If it is determined that an activity may be carried out, such
activity shall be carried out in a manner that minimizes any adverse
impact on Sanctuary resources or qualities.
* * * * *
0
5. Revise appendix A to subpart L to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart L of Part 922--Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary Boundary Coordinates
Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
Coordinates listed in this appendix are unprojected (Geographic
Coordinate System) and based on the North American Datum of 1983
(NAD83).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point ID No. Polygon ID No. Bank(s) Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.15673 -94.29673
2........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.15661 -94.30312
3........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.15862 -94.30888
4........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.16950 -94.30839
5........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.17386 -94.30257
6........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.17583 -94.29445
7........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.17543 -94.29327
8........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.17284 -94.28952
9........................ 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.16924 -94.28677
10....................... 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.16428 -94.28681
11....................... 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.16274 -94.28756
12....................... 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.15796 -94.29047
13....................... 1........................ Stetson Bank.............. 28.15673 -94.29673
1........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.84363 -93.78549
2........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.81750 -93.81056
3........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.81752 -93.84752
4........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.83069 -93.86271
5........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.81735 -93.87490
6........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.83220 -93.89185
7........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.85854 -93.89369
8........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.87925 -93.87853
9........................ 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.92626 -93.82011
10....................... 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.92620 -93.81759
11....................... 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.91801 -93.80801
12....................... 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.90969 -93.77939
13....................... 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.88644 -93.77939
14....................... 2........................ West Flower Garden Bank... 27.84363 -93.78549
1........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.82317 -93.62789
2........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.80927 -93.63578
3........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.80568 -93.65541
4........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.79429 -93.66555
5........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.78357 -93.68846
6........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.79640 -93.70534
7........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.81855 -93.75198
8........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.82742 -93.74743
9........................ 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.81868 -93.68868
10....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.83143 -93.68941
11....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.84699 -93.70079
12....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.87165 -93.73947
13....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.88602 -93.73294
14....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.87252 -93.64648
15....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.85861 -93.63908
16....................... 3........................ Horseshoe Bank............ 27.82317 -93.62789
1........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.89455 -93.57040
2........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.87999 -93.61309
3........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.88003 -93.62961
[[Page 4955]]
4........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.89330 -93.64172
5........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.92101 -93.64747
6........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.95899 -93.64490
7........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.97485 -93.63086
8........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.98177 -93.60996
9........................ 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.98554 -93.58188
10....................... 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.95206 -93.57810
11....................... 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.92151 -93.56880
12....................... 4........................ East Flower Garden Bank... 27.89455 -93.57040
1........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.00226 -93.51550
2........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 27.99707 -93.52669
3........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.00136 -93.52423
4........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.00518 -93.52425
5........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.01694 -93.52233
6........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.01883 -93.51264
7........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.03670 -93.50300
8........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.03724 -93.49844
9........................ 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.03113 -93.49199
10....................... 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.01300 -93.49624
11....................... 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.00331 -93.50725
12....................... 5........................ MacNeil Bank.............. 28.00226 -93.51550
1........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.92554 -93.40593
Bank.
2........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.92039 -93.41021
Bank.
3........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.92035 -93.42474
Bank.
4........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.91387 -93.43165
Bank.
5........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.90829 -93.42234
Bank.
6........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.90641 -93.42535
Bank.
7........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.90489 -93.44219
Bank.
8........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.89549 -93.44396
Bank.
9........................ 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.88892 -93.43403
Bank.
10....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.88072 -93.42805
Bank.
11....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.87676 -93.42787
Bank.
12....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.88449 -93.44458
Bank.
13....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.88803 -93.45159
Bank.
14....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.88794 -93.45905
Bank.
15....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.89234 -93.46410
Bank.
16....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.89971 -93.45571
Bank.
17....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.90910 -93.45343
Bank.
18....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.92847 -93.45335
Bank.
19....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.93407 -93.44743
Bank.
20....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.93599 -93.44215
Bank.
21....................... 6........................ Rankin Bank & 28--Fathom 27.92554 -93.40593
Bank.
1........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.87310 -93.27056
2........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.86549 -93.29462
3........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.87300 -93.31055
4........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.89058 -93.32193
5........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.89839 -93.31987
6........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.90336 -93.30953
7........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.91010 -93.30562
8........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.91634 -93.29292
9........................ 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.91263 -93.28816
10....................... 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.90354 -93.28386
11....................... 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.90253 -93.27238
12....................... 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.89927 -93.26729
13....................... 7........................ Bright Bank............... 27.87310 -93.27056
1........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.78848 -93.07794
2........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.79458 -93.08448
3........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.83313 -93.07913
4........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.85306 -93.08279
5........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.86328 -93.07885
6........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.86908 -93.06974
7........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.86556 -93.05944
8........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.85211 -93.05391
9........................ 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.83713 -93.05725
10....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.82540 -93.04312
11....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.82490 -93.04276
12....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.80846 -93.03412
13....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.78997 -93.04096
14....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.78602 -93.05384
15....................... 8........................ Geyer Bank................ 27.78848 -93.07794
1........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82285 -92.88605
2........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82087 -92.88600
3........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82009 -92.88670
[[Page 4956]]
4........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81869 -92.89235
5........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81690 -92.89404
6........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81615 -92.89653
7........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.80645 -92.90884
8........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81221 -92.92082
9........................ 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81599 -92.93908
10....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.81934 -92.93940
11....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82250 -92.92465
12....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82809 -92.91359
13....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.83973 -92.89876
14....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.83972 -92.88038
15....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.83003 -92.86983
16....................... 9A....................... Elvers Bank--A............ 27.82285 -92.88605
1........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85645 -92.92310
2........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85662 -92.91922
3........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85334 -92.91631
4........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85076 -92.91727
5........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.84903 -92.92097
6........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85145 -92.92524
7........................ 9B....................... Elvers Bank--B............ 27.85645 -92.92310
1........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97684 -92.58489
2........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97749 -92.57716
3........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97475 -92.56753
4........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97304 -92.56191
5........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.95173 -92.53902
6........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.94849 -92.54254
7........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.96632 -92.56116
8........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.96792 -92.58152
9........................ 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.95989 -92.58187
10....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.95409 -92.57057
11....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.94951 -92.57135
12....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.94920 -92.57994
13....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.95846 -92.60274
14....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97286 -92.61901
15....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.98096 -92.60158
16....................... 10A...................... McGrail Bank--A........... 27.97684 -92.58489
1........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.94116 -92.54750
2........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.94180 -92.54543
3........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.94010 -92.54202
4........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.93616 -92.54151
5........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.93481 -92.54398
6........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.93529 -92.54803
7........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.93859 -92.54901
8........................ 10B...................... McGrail Bank--B........... 27.94116 -92.54750
1........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07909 -92.47305
2........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07370 -92.44900
3........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07370 -92.44891
4........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.06544 -92.43518
5........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.05162 -92.43380
6........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.03846 -92.44065
7........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.03463 -92.45289
8........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.03114 -92.45537
9........................ 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.02915 -92.46338
10....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.03154 -92.47259
11....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.04166 -92.47229
12....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.04525 -92.46717
13....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.04751 -92.47310
14....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.04676 -92.48308
15....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.04866 -92.48462
16....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.05687 -92.48145
17....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.06388 -92.49262
18....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07018 -92.49141
19....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.06974 -92.48613
20....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.06594 -92.48098
21....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07109 -92.47708
22....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07683 -92.48071
23....................... 11....................... Bouma Bank................ 28.07909 -92.47305
1........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.32652 -92.45356
2........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.32495 -92.45647
3........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.32501 -92.45965
4........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.32796 -92.46626
5........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.33523 -92.47536
6........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.34453 -92.47511
[[Page 4957]]
7........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.34840 -92.47439
8........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.35256 -92.47181
9........................ 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.35416 -92.46784
10....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.35456 -92.46135
11....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.35351 -92.45729
12....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.35174 -92.45107
13....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.34852 -92.44564
14....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.34303 -92.44045
15....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.34048 -92.44024
16....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.33584 -92.44669
17....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.33068 -92.44985
18....................... 12....................... Sonnier Bank.............. 28.32652 -92.45356
1........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.95420 -92.36641
2........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.95847 -92.37739
3........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.95629 -92.38599
4........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.97297 -92.39248
5........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.97892 -92.39845
6........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.98869 -92.39964
7........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.99372 -92.38244
8........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.98603 -92.36697
9........................ 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.98022 -92.36429
10....................... 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.97442 -92.36996
11....................... 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.96006 -92.36854
12....................... 13....................... Rezak Bank................ 27.95420 -92.36641
1........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.93046 -92.36762
2........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.91368 -92.37398
3........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.91462 -92.38530
4........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.91976 -92.39427
5........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.92306 -92.38792
6........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.94525 -92.38305
7........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.94166 -92.37565
8........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.94231 -92.37189
9........................ 14....................... Sidner Bank............... 27.93046 -92.36762
1........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.95067 -92.00294
2........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.94177 -91.99762
3........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.93547 -91.99568
4........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.92937 -91.99981
5........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.93224 -92.02999
6........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.93401 -92.03946
7........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.93958 -92.05015
8........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.95012 -92.05050
9........................ 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.96214 -92.05407
10....................... 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.96630 -92.04745
11....................... 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.96869 -92.04120
12....................... 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.96925 -92.02758
13....................... 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.96678 -92.02175
14....................... 15A...................... Parker Bank--A............ 27.95067 -92.00294
1........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96082 -91.99450
2........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96432 -91.99285
3........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96566 -91.99014
4........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96385 -91.98600
5........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96149 -91.98639
6........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.95931 -91.98760
7........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.95824 -91.99183
8........................ 15B...................... Parker Bank--B............ 27.96082 -91.99450
1........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09726 -91.99328
2........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09474 -91.98619
3........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09569 -91.97526
4........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09184 -91.97361
5........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.08410 -91.97273
6........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.07506 -91.97457
7........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.07053 -91.98465
8........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.06959 -91.99347
9........................ 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.06819 -92.00512
10....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.07026 -92.01321
11....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.07562 -92.02032
12....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.08058 -92.02436
13....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.08463 -92.02577
14....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09024 -92.02296
15....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09487 -92.01231
16....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09627 -92.00735
17....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09507 -92.00008
18....................... 16....................... Alderdice Bank............ 28.09726 -91.99328
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 4958]]
0
6. Revise appendix B to subpart L to read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart L of Part 922--Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary--Terms of Designation
Preamble
Under the authority of title III of the Marine Protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act, as amended (``the Act''), 16 U.S.C.
1431 et seq., 19 separate unique polygon areas of ocean waters and
the submerged lands thereunder, along the continental shelf and
shelf edge in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, as described in
Article II, are hereby designated as Flower Garden Banks National
Marine Sanctuary for the purposes of protecting and managing the
conservation, ecological, recreation, research, education, historic
and aesthetic resources and qualities of these areas.
Article I--Effect of Designation
The Act authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue such final
regulations as are necessary and reasonable to implement the
designation, including managing and protecting the conservation,
recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational, and
esthetic resources and qualities of a sanctuary. Section 1 of
Article IV of this Designation Document lists those activities that
may be regulated on the effective date of designation or at some
later date in order to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities.
Thus, the act of designation empowers the Secretary of Commerce to
regulate the activities listed in Section 1. Listing does not
necessarily mean that an activity will be regulated. However, if an
activity is not listed it may not be regulated, except on an
emergency basis, unless Section 1 of Article IV is amended by the
same procedures by which the original designation was made.
Article II--Description of the Area
The Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (Sanctuary)
boundary encompasses a total area of approximately 121 square
nautical miles (160 square miles) of offshore ocean waters, and
submerged lands thereunder, along the continental shelf and shelf
edge in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. The entire sanctuary
boundary is composed of 19 unique polygons. The precise boundary
coordinates for each polygon are listed in appendix A to this
subpart.
The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 1 begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 13 and contains the submerged
feature of Stetson Bank with an area of approximately 1.1 square
nautical miles (1.5 square miles), located approximately 71 nautical
miles (82 miles) south-southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary
boundary for Polygon 2 begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical
order to Point 14 and contains the submerged feature of West Flower
Garden Bank with an area of approximately 28.0 square nautical miles
(37.1 square miles), located approximately 97 nautical miles (111
miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for
Polygon 3 begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to
Point 16 and contains the submerged feature of Horseshoe Bank with
an area of approximately 21.7 square nautical miles (28.7 square
miles), located approximately 102 nautical miles (117 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 4
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 12 and
contains the submerged feature of East Flower Garden Bank with an
area of approximately 21.0 square nautical miles (27.8 square
miles), located approximately 101 nautical miles (116 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 5
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 12 and
contains the submerged feature of MacNeil Bank with an area of
approximately 2.1 square nautical miles (2.7 square miles), located
approximately 103 nautical miles (118 miles) southeast of Galveston,
Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 6 begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 21 and contains the submerged
features of Rankin Bank and 28 Fathom Bank with an area of
approximately 4.2 square nautical miles (5.6 square miles), located
approximately 109 nautical miles (126 miles) southeast of Galveston,
Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 7 begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 13 and contains the submerged
features of Bright Bank with an area of approximately 5.8 square
nautical miles (7.6 square miles), located approximately 115
nautical miles (133 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The
sanctuary boundary for Polygon 8 begins at Point 1 and continues in
numerical order to Point 15 and contains the submerged feature of
Geyer Bank within an area of approximately 8.7 square nautical miles
(11.5 square miles), located approximately 126 nautical miles (145
miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for
Polygon 9A begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to
Point 16 and contains part of the submerged feature of Elvers Bank
within an area of approximately 3.3 square nautical miles (4.4
square miles), located approximately 134 nautical miles (154 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 9B
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 7 and
also contains part of the submerged feature of Elvers Bank within an
area of approximately 0.1 square nautical miles (0.2 square miles),
located approximately 133 nautical miles (153 miles) southeast of
Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 10A begins at
Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 16 and contains
part of the submerged feature of McGrail Bank with an area of
approximately 3.4 square nautical miles (4.5 square miles), located
approximately 142 nautical miles (163 miles) southeast of Galveston,
Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 10B begins at Point 1 and
continues in numerical order to Point 8 and also contains part of
the submerged feature of McGrail Bank with an area of approximately
0.1 square nautical miles (0.2 square miles), located approximately
146 nautical miles (168 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The
sanctuary boundary for Polygon 11 begins at Point 1 and continues in
numerical order to Point 23 and contains the submerged feature of
Bouma Bank with an area of approximately 5.8 square nautical miles
(7.7 square miles), located approximately 145 nautical miles (167
miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for
Polygon 12 begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to
Point 18 and contains the submerged feature of Sonnier Bank with an
area of approximately 2.3 square nautical miles (3.1 square miles),
located approximately 138 nautical miles (159 miles) east-southeast
of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 13 begins at
Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 12 and contains
the submerged feature of Rezak Bank with an area of approximately
2.8 square nautical miles (3.7 square miles), located approximately
151 nautical miles (174 miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The
sanctuary boundary for Polygon 14 begins at Point 1 and continues in
numerical order to Point 9 and contains the submerged feature of
Sidner Bank with an area of approximately 1.5 square nautical miles
(2.0 square miles), located approximately 153 nautical miles (177
miles) southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for
Polygon 15A begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to
Point 14 and contains part of the submerged feature of Parker Bank
within an area of approximately 5.2 square nautical miles (6.8
square miles), located approximately 168 nautical miles (194 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon
15B begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 8
and also contains part of the submerged feature of Parker Bank
within an area of approximately 0.1 square nautical miles (0.2
square miles), located approximately 171 nautical miles (197 miles)
southeast of Galveston, Texas. The sanctuary boundary for Polygon 16
begins at Point 1 and continues in numerical order to Point 18 and
contains the submerged feature of Alderdice Bank within an area of
approximately 3.8 square nautical miles (5.0 square miles), located
approximately 166 nautical miles (191 miles) east-southeast of
Galveston, Texas.
Article III--Characteristics of Area That Give it Particular Value
The Sanctuary contains a series of underwater features located
along the edge of the continental shelf in the northwestern Gulf of
Mexico. These features are of interest from both a geological and
biological perspective. Formed primarily as the result of the
movement of underlying salt deposits (also called salt domes or salt
diapirs), and bathed by waters of tropical origin, they contain
important geological features, biological habitats and other marine
resources of national significance. They contain highly productive
marine ecosystems that support a variety of fish and invertebrate
communities of biological and economic importance.
The reefs and banks of the northwestern Gulf of Mexico are
structurally complex and contain a range of marine habitats,
including coral reefs, coralline algal reefs, algal nodule beds,
mesophotic and deepwater reefs, and soft bottom communities. The
composition,
[[Page 4959]]
diversity and vertical distribution of benthic communities on the
banks are strongly influenced by the physical environment, including
water temperature, turbidity and current regime. Geological features
of interest include brine seeps, exposed basalt, methane seeps, and
mud volcanoes. East and West Flower Garden Banks, the most well-
known of the features, sustain the northernmost living coral reefs
on the U.S. continental shelf, considered among the healthiest coral
reefs in the Caribbean and Western Atlantic region. A deeper water
coral reef also exists at McGrail Bank, consisting primarily of
large colonies of blushing star coral (Stephanocoenia intersepta) at
depths between 140 and 160 feet. These coral reefs are isolated from
other reef systems by over 300 nautical miles (342 miles) and exist
under hydrographic conditions generally near the northern limit for
tropical reef formation. Several other banks, including Stetson,
Sonnier, Geyer, and Bright Banks, contain various combinations of
non-reef building coral species known collectively as coral
communities, comprised of sponges, stony corals, fire coral, leafy
algae and coralline algae. The deeper portions of the banks host
thriving mid-depth (or ``mesophotic'') coral habitats characterized
by the presence of both light-dependent and deepwater corals,
including black corals, gorgonian corals, and associated organisms.
Biological communities are distributed among several interrelated
biotic zones, including a coralline algae zone, deep reef rocky
outcrops, and soft bottom communities. The complex and biologically
productive ecological communities of the banks offer a combination
of aesthetic appeal and recreational and research opportunity
matched in few other ocean areas.
The following are qualitative descriptions of the individual
reefs and banks within the Sanctuary; specific boundary coordinates
can be found in appendix A to this subpart.
a. Stetson Bank, Depth Range 56ft-194ft
Boundaries encompass a claystone/siltstone ring feature of
mesophotic coral habitat revealed by high resolution multibeam
bathymetric surveys, and subsequently ground-truthed by remotely
operated vehicle surveys. These features are surface expressions of
the salt dome associated with the feature, and provide habitat for
sponges, gorgonians, stony branching corals, black corals, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
b. West Flower Garden Bank, Depth Range 59ft-545ft
Boundaries encompass mesophotic coral patch reefs to the north,
southwest, and east of the existing sanctuary. These reefs provide
coralline algae reef habitat for black corals, gorgonians, stony
branching corals, and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
c. East Flower Garden Bank, Depth Range 52ft-446ft
Boundaries to encompass mesophotic coral patch reefs to the
north and southeast of the existing sanctuary. These reefs provide
deep coral habitat for dense populations of black corals,
gorgonians, stony branching corals, and associated fish and mobile
invertebrates.
d. Horseshoe Bank, Depth Range 243ft-614ft
Extensive deepwater habitat and coralline algae reefs in the
form of hundreds of patchy outcroppings covering an area of
approximately 1.9 miles (3km) wide and having 16.4-49.2ft (5-15m) of
relief above the seafloor, with dense assemblages of mesophotic
black coral, gorgonians, stony branching corals, sponges, algae
invertebrates, and fish; several conical-shaped mud volcanoes
clustered near the center of the feature, with one rising 328ft
(100m) above the sea floor.
e. MacNeil Bank, Depth Range 210ft-315ft
Deep reef bedrock outcrops and coralline algae patch reefs
harboring populations of black corals and gorgonians, sponges, fish,
and mobile invertebrates.
f. Rankin/28 Fathom Banks, Depth Range 164ft-571ft
Rankin Bank is just north of 28 Fathom Bank, and separated from
it by a long trough, approximately 1,640-foot (500 m) wide,
approximately 6,070-foot (1,850 m) which extends to a depth of
approximately 570ft (174 m). The boundaries encompass the shallowest
portions of Rankin and 28 Fathom Banks, which harbor coral algae
reefs and deep coral reefs with populations of gorgonians, black
corals, sponges, and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
g. Bright Bank, Depth Range 112ft-384ft
Bright Bank previously harbored a coral reef on the very
shallowest portions of the bank, which sustained extensive damage
from salvage and mining activities employing dynamite for excavation
activities. The cap is now considered a coral community, and in
spite of these impacts, nine species of shallow water scleractinian
corals survive, along with two deeper water species. The feature
also harbors extensive coralline algae reefs, providing habitat for
populations of gorgonians, black corals, sponges, and associated
fish and mobile invertebrates.
h. Geyer Bank, Depth Range 128ft-722ft
Geyer Bank is a broad, relatively flat fault-bounded structure
situated on an active salt diaper. This feature supports a coral
community, as well as extensive coralline algae reefs and fields of
algal nodules including dense fields of macro-algae, black corals,
gorgonians, sponges, and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
Seasonal spawning aggregations of fish are associated with this
bank, including enormous numbers of reef butterflyfish.
i. Elvers Bank, Depth Range 213ft-686ft
Two discreet polygons have been developed to protect portions of
Elvers Bank: A larger polygon encompassing 4.43 square miles on the
south side of the feature, and a small polygon, encompassing 0.19
square miles on the north side of the feature. The shallow areas of
the bank feature coralline algae reefs and algal nodule fields, and
the deeper areas in the southern polygon harbor large deep reef
outcroppings, both providing habitat for black corals, gorgonians,
sponges, and associated fish and mobile invertebrates. The deep
reefs also harbor glass sponge fields, a feature not documented in
any other areas of the sanctuary, as well as a previously
undescribed species of black coral.
j. McGrail Bank, Depth Range 144ft-512ft
Two discreet polygons have been developed to protect portions of
McGrail Bank: A larger claw shaped polygon reaching from northwest
to southeast, encompassing 4.54 square miles, and a smaller polygon,
encompassing 0.17 square miles, situated on the southeast of the
feature that wraps around a conical shaped mound. This bank features
unique areas of coral reefs dominated by large colonies of the
blushing star coral, Stephanocoenia intersepta, with 28% live coral
cover in discrete areas (no other known coral reef is dominated by
this species). Pinnacles varying in diameter from ~80 to 395 feet
(24-120 m) and as tall as ~25 feet (8 m) are found on the southwest
rim of the main feature, along east- and southeast-trending scarps
leading away from the bank and in concentric fields to the south and
southeast of the bank. A significant portion of the depth zone
between 145 and 170 feet is dominated by coral colonies up to 5 feet
tall, covering an area of approximately 37 acres. At least 14
species of stony corals have been recorded. Deeper portions of this
site harbor mesophotic coral habitat for deep coral, coralline algae
reefs, and fields of algal nodules. Dense populations of black
corals, gorgonians, macro-algae fields, and associated fish and
mobile invertebrates are present.
k. Sonnier Bank, Depth Range 62ft-210ft
Sonnier Bank consists of a series of isolated clusters of
pinnacles comprised of uplifted siltstone and claystone, that rise
mostly around the perimeter of a single, roughly circular ring 1.9
miles (3.2km) in diameter. Two peaks are accessible and popular with
recreational scuba divers. The peaks are dominated by coral
communities featuring fire coral, sponges, and algae. The deeper
portions of the feature are fairly heavily silted, but provide
habitat for black corals, gorgonians, and associated fish and mobile
invertebrates.
l. Bouma Bank, Depth Range 187ft-322ft
Bouma Bank is dominated by coralline algae reefs and algal
nodule fields, providing habitat for populations of black corals,
gorgonians, algae, branching stony coral, clusters of cup coral, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
m. Rezak Bank, Depth Range 197ft-430ft
Rezak Bank is dominated by coralline algae reefs and extensive
algal nodule fields, providing habitat for populations of black
corals, gorgonians, algae, and associated fish and mobile
invertebrates.
n. Sidner Bank, Depth Range 190ft-420ft
Dominated by coralline algae reefs and extensive algal nodule
fields providing habitat for populations of black corals,
gorgonians, algae, sponges, and associated fish and mobile
invertebrates.
o. Alderdice Bank, Depth Range 200ft-322ft
This feature includes spectacular basalt outcrops of Late
Cretaceous origin
[[Page 4960]]
(approximately 77 million years old) representing the oldest rock
exposed on the continental shelf offshore of Louisiana and Texas.
The outcrops at Alderdice Bank bear diverse, extremely dense
assemblages of gorgonians and black corals, sponges, and swarms of
reef fish. Mesophotic coralline algae reef habitats below the
spires, silted over in areas, provide habitat for dense populations
of black corals, gorgonians, sponges, branching stony corals, fields
of macro-algae, and associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
p. Parker Bank, Depth Range 187ft-387ft
Two discreet polygons have been developed to protect portions of
Parker Bank. A larger polygon bounding the central portion of the
features, encompassing 6.82 square miles, and a smaller polygon to
the east, encompassing 0.14 square miles. These boundaries protect
the shallowest portions of the bank, which harbor coralline algae
reefs and algal nodule fields and support populations of plating
stony corals, black corals, gorgonians, sponges, macro-algae, and
associated fish and mobile invertebrates.
Article IV--Scope of Regulations
Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation
The following activities are subject to regulation, including
prohibition, to the extent necessary and reasonable to ensure the
protection and management of the conservation, recreational,
ecological, historical, research, educational and esthetic resources
and qualities of the area:
a. Anchoring or otherwise mooring within the Sanctuary;
b. Discharging or depositing, from within the boundaries of the
Sanctuary, any material or other matter;
c. Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundaries of the
Sanctuary, any material or other matter;
d. Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the seabed of
the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing or abandoning any structure,
material or other matter on the seabed of the Sanctuary;
e. Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals
within the Sanctuary;
f. Taking, removing, catching, collecting, harvesting, feeding,
injuring, destroying or causing the loss of, or attempting to take,
remove, catch, collect, harvest, feed, injure, destroy or cause the
loss of, a Sanctuary resource;
g. Possessing within the Sanctuary a Sanctuary resource or any
other resource, regardless of where taken, removed, caught,
collected or harvested, that, if it had been found within the
Sanctuary, would be a Sanctuary resource.
h. Possessing or using within the Sanctuary any fishing gear,
device, equipment or other apparatus.
i. Possessing or using airguns or explosives or releasing
electrical charges within the Sanctuary.
j. Interfering with, obstructing, delaying or preventing an
investigation, search, seizure or disposition of seized property in
connection with enforcement of the Act or any regulation or permit
issued under the Act.
Section 2. Consistency With International Law
Any regulation of activities listed in Section 1 of this Article
will be applied and enforced as mandated by 16 U.S.C. 1435(a).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on the legislative history of the NMSA, NOAA has long
interpreted the text of 16 U.S.C. 1435(a) as encompassing
international law, including customary international law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 3. Emergency Regulations
Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of, loss
of, or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality, or minimize the
imminent risk of such destruction, loss or injury, any and all
activities, including those not listed in section 1 of this Article,
are subject to immediate temporary regulation, including
prohibition.
Article V--Effect on Other Regulations, Leases, Permits, Licenses, and
Rights
Section 1. Fishing Regulations, Licenses, and Permits
The regulation of fishing is authorized under Article IV. All
regulatory programs pertaining to fishing, including fishery
management plans promulgated under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation
and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., shall remain in effect.
Where a valid regulation promulgated under these programs conflicts
with a Sanctuary regulation, the regulation deemed by the Secretary
of Commerce or designee as more protective of Sanctuary resources
and qualities shall govern.
Section 2. Other Licenses, Regulations, and Permits
If any valid regulation issued by any Federal authority of
competent jurisdiction, regardless of when issued, conflicts with a
Sanctuary regulation, the regulation deemed by the Secretary of
Commerce or designee as more protective of Sanctuary resources and
qualities shall govern.
Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 1434(c)(1),
no valid lease, permit, license, approval, or other authorization
issued by any Federal authority of competent jurisdiction, or any
valid right of subsistence use or access, may be terminated by the
Secretary of Commerce or designee as a result of this designation or
as a result of any Sanctuary regulation if such authorization or
right was in existence on the effective date of this designation.
However, the Secretary of Commerce or designee may regulate the
exercise of such authorization or right consistent with the purposes
for which the Sanctuary is designated.
Accordingly, the prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary
regulations shall not apply to any activity authorized by any valid
lease, permit, license, approval, or other authorization in
existence on the effective date of Sanctuary designation and issued
by any Federal authority of competent jurisdiction, or by any valid
right of subsistence use or access in existence on the effective
date of Sanctuary designation, provided that the holder of such
authorization or right complies with Sanctuary regulations regarding
the certification of such authorizations and rights (e.g., notifies
the Secretary or designee of the existence of, requests
certification of, and provides requested information regarding such
authorization or right) and complies with any terms and conditions
on the exercise of such authorization or right imposed as a
condition of certification by the Secretary or designee as he or she
deems necessary to achieve the purposes for which the Sanctuary was
designated.
Pending final agency action on the certification request, such
holder may exercise such authorization or right without being in
violation of any prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary
regulations, provided the holder is in compliance with Sanctuary
regulations regarding certifications.
The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary regulations shall
not apply to any activity conducted in accordance with the scope,
purpose, terms, and conditions of the National Marine Sanctuary
permit issued by the Secretary or designee in accordance with the
Sanctuary regulations. Such permits may only be issued if the
Secretary or designee finds that the activity for which the permit
is applied will: Further research related to Sanctuary resources;
further the educational, natural or historical resource value of the
Sanctuary; further salvage or recovery operations in or near the
Sanctuary in connection with a recent air or marine casualty; or
assist in managing the Sanctuary.
The prohibitions set forth in the sanctuary regulations shall
not apply to any activity conducted in accordance with the scope,
purpose, terms, and conditions of a Special Use permit issued by the
Secretary or designee in accordance with section 310 of the Act.
However, in areas where sanctuary regulations prohibit oil, gas, or
mineral exploration, development or production, the Secretary or
designee may in no event, permit or otherwise, approve such
activities in that area. Any leases, licenses, permits, approvals,
or other authorizations issued after the effective date of
designation authorizing the exploration or production of oil, gas,
or minerals in that area shall be invalid.
Section 3. Department of Defense Activities
The prohibitions in Sec. 922.122(a)(2) through (11) do not
apply to activities being carried out by the Department of Defense
as of the effective date of designation. Such activities shall be
carried out in a manner that minimizes any adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources and qualities. The prohibitions in Sec.
922.122(a)(2) through (11) do not apply to any new activities
carried out by the Department of Defense that do not have the
potential for any significant adverse impact on Sanctuary resources
and qualities. Such activities shall be carried out in a manner that
minimizes any adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and qualities.
New activities with the potential for significant adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources and qualities may be exempted from the
prohibitions in Sec. 922.122(a)(2) through (11) of this section by
the Director after consultation between the Director and the
Department of Defense. If it is determined that an activity may be
carried out, such activity shall be
[[Page 4961]]
carried out in a manner that minimizes any adverse impact on
Sanctuary resources and qualities. In the event of threatened or
actual destruction of, loss of, or injury to a Sanctuary resource or
quality resulting from an untoward incident, including but not
limited to spills and groundings, caused by a component of the
Department of Defense, the cognizant component shall promptly
coordinate with the Director for the purpose of taking appropriate
actions to respond to and mitigate the harm and, if possible,
restore or replace the Sanctuary resource or quality.
Article VI--Alterations to This Designation
The terms of designation may be modified only by the same
procedures by which the original designation is made, including
public hearings; consultation with any appropriate Federal, State,
regional and local agencies; review by the appropriate Congressional
committees; and approval by the Secretary of Commerce or designee.
[FR Doc. 2021-00887 Filed 1-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P