Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

available in 19701980s, 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 sanctuarys 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 Managements 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 BOEMs 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 301b 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 304a4 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:FRFM19JAR1.SGM

19JAR1