67706 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 

June 4–9, 2006, meeting in Orlando, 

Florida by NFPA members.

2005 NOVEMBER MEETING—REPORT ON PROPOSALS

[P = Partial revision; W = Withdrawal; R = Reconfirmation; N = New; C = Complete revision] 

NFPA 10 .................... Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers ................................................................................................................. C 

NFPA 14 .................... Standard for the Installation of Standpipe and Hose Systems ................................................................................ C 

NFPA 31 .................... Standard for the Installation of Oil-Burning Equipment ........................................................................................... P 

NFPA 37 .................... Standard for the Installation and Use of Stationary Combustion Engines and Gas Turbines ................................ P 

NFPA 51A .................. Standard for Acetylene Cylinder Charging Plants ................................................................................................... C 

NFPA 70B .................. Recommended Practice for Electrical Equipment Maintenance .............................................................................. P 

NFPA 79 .................... Electrical Standard for Industrial Machinery ............................................................................................................ P 

NFPA 97 .................... Standard Glossary of Terms Relating to Chimneys, Vents, and Heat-Producing Appliances ................................ W 

NFPA 102 .................. Standard for Grandstands, Folding and Telescopic Seating, Tents, and Membrane Structures ........................... C 

NFPA 211 .................. Standard for Chimneys, Fireplaces, Vents, and Solid Fuel-Burning Appliances .................................................... P 

NFPA 289 .................. Standard Method of Fire Test for Room Fire Growth Contribution of Individual Fuel Packages ........................... N 

NFPA 418 .................. Standard for Heliports .............................................................................................................................................. C 

NFPA 750 .................. Standard on Water Mist Fire Protection Systems ................................................................................................... P 

NFPA 804 .................. Standard for Fire Protection for Advanced Light Water Reactor Electric Generating Plants ................................. C 

NFPA 805 .................. Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection for Light Water Reactor Electric Generating Plants ................. C 

NFPA 901 .................. Standard Classifications for Incident Reporting and Fire Protection Data .............................................................. C 

NFPA 914 .................. Code for Fire Protection of Historic Structures ........................................................................................................ C 

NFPA 1401 ................ Recommended Practice for Fire Service Training Reports and Records ............................................................... C 

NFPA 1404 ................ Standard for Fire Service Respiratory Protection Training ...................................................................................... C 

NFPA 1405 ................ Guide for Land-Based Fire Fighters Who Respond to Marine Vessel Fires ........................................................... C 

NFPA 1851 ................ Standard on Selection, Care, and Maintenance of Structural Fire Fighting Protective Ensembles ....................... C 

NFPA 1906 ................ Standard for Wildland Fire Apparatus ..................................................................................................................... C 

NFPA 1912 ................ Standard for Fire Apparatus Refurbishing ............................................................................................................... C 

NFPA 1971 ................ Standard on Protective Ensemble For Structural Fire Fighting ............................................................................... C 

NFPA 1976 ................ Standard on Protective Ensemble for Proximity Fire Fighting ................................................................................. W 

NFPA 1983 ................ Standard on Fire Service Life Safety Rope and System Components ................................................................... C 

NFPA 1994 ................ Standard on Protective Ensembles for Chemical/Biological Terrorism Incidents ................................................... P 

Dated: November 10, 2004. 

Hratch G. Semerjian, 

Acting Director.

[FR Doc. 04–25732 Filed 11–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

[I.D. 081004A]

Incidental Take of Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Specified Activities; 

Taking of Harbor Seals Incidental to 

Wall Replacement and Bluff 

Improvement Projects at La Jolla, San 

Diego County, CA

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of an 

incidental harassment authorization.

SUMMARY: In accordance with provisions 

of the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) as amended, notification is 

hereby given that an Incidental 

Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take 

small numbers of marine mammals, by 

harassment, incidental to wall 

replacement and bluff improvement 

projects at La Jolla, California, has been 

issued to the City of San Diego.

DATES: Effective from September 20, 

2004, through January 1, 2005.

ADDRESSES: The application, a list of 

references used in this document, and 

the IHA are available by writing to 

Stephen L. Leathery, Chief, Permits, 

Conservation and Education Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910–3225, or by telephoning the 

contact listed here.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sarah Hagedorn, NMFS, (301) 713–2322 

or Monica DeAngelis, NMFS Southwest 

Region, (562) 980–3232.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the 

MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct 

the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) 

to allow, upon request, the incidental, 

but not intentional taking of marine 

mammals by U.S. citizens who engage 

in a specified activity (other than 

commercial fishing) within a specified 

geographical region if certain findings 

are made and regulations are issued.

Permission may be granted if the 

Secretary finds that the total taking will 

have a negligible impact on the species 

or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of the 

species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, 

and that the permissible methods of 

taking and requirements pertaining to 

the monitoring and reporting of such 

taking are set forth. NMFS has defined 

‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 

as ‘‘an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’

Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. Except 

for certain categories of actions not 

pertinent here, the MMPA defines 

‘‘harassment’’ as: any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 

which (i) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 

[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, including, 

but not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

[Level B harassment].

Summary of Request

On May 27, 2004, NMFS received an 

application from the City of San Diego 

requesting an IHA for the possible 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 67707

harassment of small numbers of Pacific 

harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) incidental 

to cove wall replacement and bluff 

improvement projects at La Jolla, CA. 

The purpose of this bluff improvement 

project is to protect public access along 

the coast and to maintain public rightsof-way that have been adversely affected 

by coastal erosion, in a safe and publicly 

accessible condition. Bluff improvement 

measures address ongoing marine and 

subaerial erosion in six study sites, 

along with the removal of an aging wall 

above La Jolla Cove. Improvement 

measures are limited to remediation of 

only the upper portion of the bluff, 

allowing natural marine processes to 

continue unabated. Mitigation of marine 

erosion associated with splash and 

spray on the upper sloping portion of 

the coastal bluff will be limited to revegetation, primarily hydroseeding, and 

some limited container plants, along 

with a combination of both setting back 

and deepening the seaward edge of 

reconstructed sidewalks to provide 

some structural stiffness and increased 

stability, as both marine and sub-aerial 

processes continue to encroach upon 

bluff-top improvements. Key objectives 

of the site improvements are to protect 

lateral public access along the coast, 

increase public safety, minimize 

disturbance of the marine environment 

and its inhabitants, minimize disruption 

of public recreation and scenic vista 

opportunities, avoid disruption of 

public access to coastal areas, minimize 

visual impacts by re-vegetating 

manufactured slopes with native 

vegetation, avoid changes in runoff 

patterns, maintain pedestrian and 

vehicular travel around the construction 

sites, and avoid the use of rip rap. This 

activity does not include improvements 

to Children’s Pool itself.

Measurement of Airborne Sound Levels

The following section is provided to 

facilitate an understanding of airborne 

and impulsive noise characteristics. 

Amplitude is a measure of the pressure 

of a sound wave that is usually 

expressed on a logarithmic scale with 

units of sound level or intensity called 

the decibel (dB). Sound pressure level 

(SPL) is described in units of dB re 

micro-Pascal (micro-Pa, or μPa); for 

energy, the sound exposure level (SEL), 

a measure of the cumulative energy in 

a noise event, is described in terms of 

dB re micro-Pa2 -second; and frequency, 

often referred to as pitch, is described in 

units of cycles per second or Hertz (Hz). 

In other words, SEL is the squared 

instantaneous sound pressure over a 

specified time interval, where the sound 

pressure is averaged over 5 percent to 95 

percent of the duration of the sound.

For airborne noise measurements the 

convention is to use 20 micro-Pa as the 

reference pressure, which is 26 dB 

above the underwater sound pressure 

reference of 1 micro-Pa and is the 

approximate threshold of human 

hearing. However, the conversion from 

air to water intensities is more involved 

than this and is beyond the scope of this 

document. NMFS recommends 

interested readers review NOAA’s 

tutorial on this issue: http://

www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/acoustics/

tutorial/tutorial.html.

Airborne sounds are also often 

expressed as broadband A-weighted 

(dBA) or C-weighted (dBC) sound levels. 

When frequency levels are made to 

correspond to human hearing, they are 

referred to as being A-weighted or Afiltered. With A-weighting, sound 

energy at frequencies below 1 kHz and 

above 6 kHz are de-emphasized and 

approximates the human ear’s response 

to sounds below 55 dB. C-weighting is 

often used in the analysis of highamplitude noises like explosions, and 

corresponds to the relative response to 

the human ear to sound levels above 85 

dB. C-weighting de-emphasizes ear 

frequency components of less than 

about 50 Hz. C-weight scaling is also 

useful for analyses of sounds having 

predominantly low-frequency sounds, 

such as sonic booms. For continuous 

noise like rocket launches, the 

important variables relevant to assessing 

auditory impacts or behavioral 

responses are intensity, frequency 

spectrum, and duration. In this 

document, whenever possible sound 

levels have been provided with Aweighting.

Project Description

The Children’s Pool area at La Jolla, 

including Children’s Pool Beach and 

Seal Rock, is a year-round haulout and 

rookery for harbor seals. Four of the six 

construction sites are close to where 

harbor seals may be hauled out, and 

therefore may result in the incidental 

harassment of harbor seals. All 

construction activities will begin no 

earlier than the effective date of this 

IHA and will end no later than January 

1, 2005. Construction can occur on any 

site on weekdays between the hours of 

8:30 am and 3:30 pm except on national 

holidays. Demolition and construction 

may take place simultaneously at all 

four sites. The duration of construction 

at any one of these four sites will be 

limited to six working days total. 

Demolition of each site is scheduled to 

last one day. Equipment required for 

demolition will include hand tools, 

backhoes, power saws, and pavement 

breakers and/or jackhammers. No 

explosives will be used during 

demolition. The City of San Diego 

estimates that the maximum received 

sound exposure level 100 ft (30.5 m) 

from demolition activities is 

approximately 90 dBA (re 20 micro-Pa2

-sec). The equipment involved in these 

activities will include a concrete mixer, 

power auger, and hand tools. The 

maximum received sound exposure 

level at 100 ft (30.5 m) from 

construction activities is estimated to be 

about 81 dBA (re 20 micro-Pa2 -sec). 

The entire Cove Wall Replacement and 

Bluff Improvement Project is expected 

to take 6 weeks or less. Summaries of 

the proposed improvements at each of 

the 4 sites that have a potential to harass 

harbor seals follows.

Site 55D

This site is located on the 700 block 

of Coast Boulevard, southeast of 

Children’s Pool Beach. At this site, the 

existing post-and-board wall located on 

the slope will be removed. The area 

eroded by the abandoned storm drain 

will be filled with a reinforced 

geometric grid at a 1.5:1 slope. The 

proposed fill of approximately 20 cubic 

yds (15.3 cubic m) will extend 

approximately 14 ft (4.3 m) seaward of 

the existing corrugated metal pipe 

outlet, and the toe of the fill will 

terminate approximately 5 ft (1.5 m) 

from the edge of the sea cliff. The 

manufactured slope area will be 

landscaped with primarily native, 

erosion control, low water use plants 

suited to a coastal marine environment.

Site 55F

This site is also located on the 700 

block of Coast Boulevard, southeast of 

Children’s Pool Beach. The existing 10 

ft-wide (3 m) sidewalk will be removed 

and a new 10 ft-wide (3 m) sidewalk 

will be constructed a minimum of 8 ft 

(2.4 m) from the top of the existing 

slope. The new sidewalk will have a 

deepened structural edge 5 ft (1.5 m) in 

thickness to provide the structural 

capacity to span the rubble-filled sea 

cave below. To minimize runoff, the 

curb will be installed and the sidewalk 

will be cross-sloped 1.5 percent toward 

the street and away from the bluff top. 

The existing wood posts and metal rails 

will be removed and new wood posts 

and metal rails will be located at the 

outer edge of the relocated sidewalk. 

The face of the existing vertical slope 

will be trimmed back somewhat to 

improve surficial stability and assist in 

the establishment of a vegetative cover. 

The exposed slope area will be 

landscaped with primarily native, 

erosion control, low water use plants 

suited to a coastal marine environment.

67708 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 

Site 57E

This site is located on the 800 block 

of Coast Boulevard, southwest of Jenner 

Street, adjacent to Seal Rock. The 

existing 5 ft-wide (1.5 m) sidewalk will 

be removed and a new 5 ft-wide (1.5 m) 

sidewalk with a deepened structural 

edge 5 ft (1.5 m) in thickness will be 

constructed. The existing wood posts 

and wood rails will be removed and 

new wood posts and wood rails will be 

located at the outer edge of the 

reconstructed sidewalk. The exposed 

slope areas will be landscaped with 

primarily native, erosion control, low 

water use plants suited to a coastal 

marine environment.

Site 58A

Site 58A is located on the 900 block 

of Coast Boulevard, southwest of Ocean 

Street. The existing 10 ft-wide (3 m) 

sidewalk will be removed and a new 10 

ft-wide (3 m) sidewalk with a deepened 

structural edge 5 ft (1.5 m) in thickness 

will be constructed. The existing wood 

posts and wood rails will be removed 

and new wood posts and wood rails will 

be located at the outer edge of the 

reconstructed sidewalk. The exposed 

slope areas will be landscaped with 

primarily native, erosion control, low 

water use plants suited to a coastal 

marine environment.

Comments and Responses

A notice of receipt of the City of San 

Diego’s application for wall replacement 

and bluff improvement projects at La 

Jolla, San Diego, CA, and proposed IHA 

was published in the Federal Register

on August 20, 2004 (69 FR 51632). That 

notice described in detail the proposed 

activity and the marine mammal species 

that may be affected by it. Additional 

information on harbor seals found in 

Central California waters can be found 

in Marine Mammal Stock Assessment 

Reports, which is available online at 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/protlres/

PR2/StocklAssessmentlProgram/

sars.html. During the 30–day public 

comment period, comments were 

received from the Marine Mammal 

Commission (Commission) and one 

member of the public. The Commission 

concurs with NMFS’ determinations 

concerning the impacts of the proposed 

activities on harbor seals and 

recommends that the authorization be 

granted.

Comment 1: This project shouldn’t 

happen because the seals would desert 

the area for a long period of time, 

making them homeless. There is much 

opposition to having seals in the La Jolla 

area, and this project is a ploy to hurt 

the seals so that they leave. This would 

be unfair to the people coming to see 

them. The comment period should be 

extended by another 90 days.

Response:The intent of this project is 

not to evict the seals from the area. The 

bluff-improvements are necessary to 

increase public safety along the coast 

and to maintain and protect public 

access and rights-of-way that have been 

adversely affected by coastal erosion. 

Planned improvements will result in 

increased stability of the seaward edge 

of sidewalks, resulting in increased 

safety to pedestrians, including those 

coming to see the seals. This activity 

does not include improvements to 

Children’s Pool itself.

The project will not occur over a long 

period of time. The entire Cove Wall 

Replacement and Bluff Improvement 

Project is expected to take 6 weeks or 

less. The duration of construction at any 

one of the four construction sites close 

to where harbor seals may be hauled out 

will be limited to six working days total. 

Demolition of each site is scheduled to 

last one day. Short term impacts that 

could occur include possible temporary 

reduction in utilization of the beach or 

Seal Rock at Children’s Pool. These 

short term impacts may result in a 

temporary reduced number of seals 

using the haul out sites during, and 

potentially past, the hours of 

construction. However, this area has 

become a tourist spot for viewing harbor 

seals, and the current population of 

seals utilizing the Children’s Pool area 

is accustomed to human activities and 

regular noise levels from people and 

traffic along Coast Boulevard. Therefore, 

potential impacts from the project are 

expected to be minimal to none. 

Depending on the disturbance, they may 

return to the haul-out site immediately, 

stay in the water for a length of time and 

then return to the haul-out, or 

temporarily haul-out at another site 

(NOAA, 1996). With the 

implementation of mitigation measures 

(see Mitigation), disturbance from 

construction-related activities is 

expected to have only a short term 

negligible impact to a small number of 

harbor seals. Short-term impacts are 

expected to result in a temporary 

reduction in utilization of haulout sites 

while work is in progress or until seals 

acclimate to the disturbance, and will 

not likely result in any permanent 

reduction in the number of seals at 

Children’s Pool or at Seal Rock.

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

specifies a public comment period of 30 

days for proposed IHA’s.

Comment 2: Seals might be killed or 

hurt by this project. The take is not 

incidental when a population is 

decimated. The take is substantial and 

the wording of the proposed 

authorization is misleading to the 

public. With California’s population in 

the high millions, there is no reason 

why 27,000 seals cannot be tolerated.

Response: Pacific harbor seals are 

widely distributed in the North Pacific 

Ocean. The estimated population of 

harbor seals in California is 27,863 

(NOAA Draft Stock Assessment Report, 

2003), with an estimated minimum 

population of 25,720 for the California 

stock of harbor seals. However, 27,000 

seals will not be affected by this project. 

Recent population counts show that the 

harbor seal population in La Jolla is 

stable at approximately 150–200 seals. 

The maximum number of harbor seals 

using the Children’s Pool haulout areas 

at one time can vary between 62 and 

172 (H-SWRI, 1995–1997). Therefore, 

the maximum number that could 

potentially be impacted would be no 

more than 172.

As described in the previous 

response, potential impacts from the 

project are expected to be minimal to 

none. Level B harassment may occur if 

hauled animals flush the haulout and/

or move to increase their distance from 

construction-related activities, such as 

the presence of workers, noise, and 

vehicles. Recent studies (Lawson et al., 

2002, and NAWS, 2002) show that Level 

B harassment, as evidenced by beach 

flushing, will sometimes occur upon 

exposure to rocket launch sounds with 

sound exposure levels of 90 dBA (re 20 

micro-Pa2 -sec) or higher for harbor 

seals. The maximum received levels 100 

ft away (30.5 m) from demolition and 

construction activities are expected to 

be about 90 dBA and 81 dBA, 

respectively. 57E is the closest of the 

four construction sites to any of the 

haulout areas. This site is approximately 

170 ft (51.8 m) from Seal Rock 

(dependent on tide), and about 350 ft 

(106.7 m) from Children’s Pool Beach. 

At this distance, construction noise will 

have attenuated to low levels and there 

should be little to no impact on the 

seals. Special attention will be given to 

this site during construction and 

monitoring (see Monitoring).

Comment 3: The estimates of seal 

numbers in the area are often political 

in nature, designed to give a number 

that coincides with a desired political 

action.

Response: NMFS uses all data and 

information resources available when 

making determinations. There are 

groups other than NMFS that collect 

information on the harbor seals that 

haulout at or near Children’s Pool and 

Seal Rock. These include Hubbs-Sea 

World Research Institute and Friends of 

La Jolla Seals. Additional information 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 67709

on harbor seals found in Central 

California waters can be found in 

NMFS’ Marine Mammal Stock 

Assessment Reports, which is available 

online at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/

protlres/PR2/

StocklAssessmentlProgram/

sars.html.

Mitigation

Several mitigation measures to reduce 

the potential for harassment from wall 

replacement and bluff improvement 

construction activities will be 

implemented under the IHA. The 

primary mitigation measure is the 

restriction on the days and times when 

construction can take place. Demolition 

will be limited to one day at each of the 

four sites, ensuring that the highest 

noise levels will only occur for a short 

period of time. In addition, construction 

activities will not take place prior to 

8:30 am and will not go beyond 3:30 

pm. Harbor seals in this area are known 

to use haulout areas in greatest numbers 

in the afternoon. Since construction 

activities will be finished by 3:30 pm 

every day, this minimizes the number of 

harbor seals potentially disturbed. 

Disturbance to harbor seals has a more 

serious effect when seals are pupping or 

nursing, when aggregations are dense, 

and during the molting period. To 

ensure that construction activities are 

not overlapping with the pupping 

season, the contractor will coordinate 

with ‘‘Friends of La Jolla Seals’’ or 

Hubbs-SeaWorld Research Institute 

(HSWRI). Either of these organizations 

will confirm when the pupping season 

has come to an end, usually sometime 

in late June or early July, after the last 

pup has been weaned. Once this is 

confirmed, construction activities may 

begin with the approval of NMFS. The 

pupping season for harbor seals begins 

in early February; however pregnant 

females are hauled out at Children’s 

Pool in the weeks leading up to the 

pupping season. Accordingly, all 

construction activity will be completed 

by the 1st of January, 2005. These 

mitigation measures will reduce the 

potential for Level B incidental 

harassment takes and eliminate the 

potential for injury or mortality of 

Pacific harbor seals.

As mentioned, demolition of 

sidewalks at the top of the bluff slopes 

and excavation for the new sidewalks 

may result in some downhill movement 

of debris. Just prior to the construction 

necessitating its use, a debris fence will 

be installed parallel to and just below 

the bluff edge and held in place with 

stakes driven by hand using a large 

hammer. This ensures that demolition 

will result in a minimal amount of 

debris on Seal Rock or the nearby beach.

Monitoring

Harbor seal haulouts will be 

monitored periodically during 

construction activities. Monitoring will 

be conducted by a qualified biologist 

approved by NMFS. During all 

monitoring periods, the following 

information will be recorded: date, time, 

tidal height, maximum number of 

harbor seals hauled out, number of 

adults and sub-adults, number of 

females and males (if possible), and any 

observed disturbances to the seals. 

During periods of construction, a 

description of construction activities 

will also be recorded. Observations of 

unusual behaviors, numbers, or 

distributions of pinnipeds, including 

any rare or unusual species of marine 

mammals, will be reported to NMFS’

Southwest Science Center allowing 

transmittal of this information to 

appropriate agencies and personnel for 

any potential follow-up observations.

Prior to construction at each of the 

four sites, three full days of baseline 

monitoring will occur to assess harbor 

seal use of the haulouts before 

construction begins. Wall replacement 

and bluff stabilization activities will 

begin with one day of demolition at 

each site. Monitoring at each site during 

demolition will start one hour before 

demolition begins, run all day, and will 

be completed no sooner than one hour 

after it ends.

Results from the pre-construction 

baseline monitoring will determine if 

mid-day monitoring is necessary for 

sites 55D, 55F, and 58A during the days 

of construction following demolition. If 

it is determined that it is necessary and/

or beneficial, monitoring will take place 

at each site during every day of 

construction starting one hour before 

construction begins each day and 

finishing one hour after it ends each 

day. If it is determined that mid-day 

monitoring is not necessary, two 2–hour 

monitoring sessions will occur each day 

of construction following demolition. 

The first session will begin one hour 

before the start of construction and end 

one hour after the start of construction, 

and then begin again one hour before 

the end of construction and end one 

hour after construction has finished for 

the day.

Site 57E is the closest work site to 

Seal Rock, which is located about 170 

feet (51.8 m) away from the site. At this 

distance, much of the construction noise 

will have attenuated to low levels. 

However, NMFS believes careful 

monitoring of this site is warranted. 

Despite results from baseline 

monitoring, monitoring will take place 

at site 57E during every day of 

construction starting one hour before 

construction begins each day and 

finishing no earlier than one hour after 

construction ends each day.

Sound levels 100 feet (30.5 m) from 

each site will be recorded during all 

periods of monitoring. If at any time 

indications of a substantial disturbance 

to harbor seals resulting from 

construction activities are observed, or 

if sound levels are found to be above 90 

dBA at a distance of 100 feet (30.5 m) 

from construction at any of the sites, the 

applicant will contact NMFS to provide 

this information. It will then be 

determined if any further mitigation or 

monitoring measures are needed, such 

as the installation of sound barriers. 

However, at this time NMFS is not 

requiring sound barriers because sound 

levels appear to be too low at most, if 

not all, sites to even cause Level B 

behavioral harassment.

Reporting

A draft report will be submitted to 

NMFS Regional Administrator, 

Southwest Region, within 90 days after 

project completion. The final report 

must be submitted to the Regional 

Administrator within 30 days after 

receiving comments from NMFS on the 

draft final report. If no comments are 

received from NMFS, the draft report 

will be considered to be the final report.

The City of San Diego is planning on 

sharing and comparing data collected as 

a result of these monitoring efforts with 

other interested parties, such as the 

HSWRI or Friends of La Jolla Seals. 

Monitoring work during this project 

may be conducted in collaboration with 

these groups as well.

Estimates of Take by Harassment

The estimated population of harbor 

seals in California is 27,863 (NOAA 

Draft Stock Assesment Report, 2003), 

with an estimated minimum population 

of 25,720 for the California stock of 

harbor seals. Peak numbers of harbor 

seal counts for the La Jolla area in 

general were 166 in June, 1996 and 172 

in July, 1997 (H-SWRI, 1995–1997). 

These numbers were recorded at the 

peak of the breeding season, the typical 

time of maximum haulout. As stated 

earlier, the population in La Jolla is 

stable at approximately 150–200 seals. 

Population trends from 1999 revealed 

that the largest counts of seals hauled 

out on the beach occurred during the 

period between January and May, with 

a peak in counts in June at Seal Rock. 

The maximum number of harbor seals 

using the Children’s Pool haulout areas 

at one time can vary between 62 and 

67710 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 

172 (H-SWRI, 1995–1997). Therefore, 

the maximum number that could be 

impacted would be 172. There is no 

anticipated impact from construction 

activities on the availability of the 

species or stocks for subsistence uses 

because there is no subsistence harvest 

of marine mammals in California.

Marine Mammal Impacts

Level B Harassment may occur if 

hauled animals flush the haulout and/

or move to increase their distance from 

construction-related activities, such as 

the presence of workers, noise, and 

vehicles. Short term impacts that could 

occur include possible temporary 

reduction in utilization of the beach or 

Seal Rock at Children’s Pool. These 

short term impacts may result in a 

temporary reduced number of seals 

using the haul out sites during, and 

potentially past, the hours of 

construction. However, this area has 

become a tourist spot for viewing harbor 

seals, and the current population of 

seals utilizing the Children’s Pool area 

is accustomed to human activities and 

regular noise levels from people and 

traffic along Coast Boulevard. Therefore, 

potential impacts from the project are 

expected to be minimal to none. The 

permanent abandonment of the 

Children’s Pool area is also not 

anticipated because harbor seals have 

habituated to traffic noise. Depending 

on the disturbance, they may return to 

the haul-out site immediately, stay in 

the water for a length of time and then 

return to the haul-out, or temporarily 

haul-out at another site (NOAA, 1996).

Recent studies (Lawson et al., 2002, 

and NAWS, 2002) show that Level B 

harassment, as evidenced by beach 

flushing, will sometimes occur upon 

exposure to launch sounds with sound 

exposure levels of 100 dBA (re 20 

micro-Pa2 -sec) or higher for California 

sea lions and northern elephant seals, 

and 90 dBA (re 20 micro-Pa2 -sec) or 

higher for harbor seals. Therefore, it is 

expected that most received noise levels 

at the harbor seal haulouts will be below 

levels that are likely to cause 

disturbance. However, to date that 

remains unknown. As stated earlier, the 

maximum received levels at 100 ft away 

(30.5 m) from demolition and 

construction activities are expected to 

be about 90 dBA and 81 dBA, 

respectively. Sites 55D and 55F are 

closest to Children’s Pool Beach. These 

sites are approximately 250 ft (76.2 m) 

from the beach haulout area used by the 

harbor seals. At that distance there 

should be little to no impact on the 

seals. Sites 57E and 58A are closer to 

Seal Rock. 58A is almost 400 ft (122 m) 

from Seal Rock, and is not expected to 

cause any harassment of the seals 

hauled out on Seal Rock. 57E is the 

closest of the four to any of the haulout 

areas. This site is approximately 170 ft 

(51.8 m) from Seal Rock (dependant on 

tide), and about 350 ft (106.7 m) from 

Children’s Pool Beach. At this distance, 

construction noise will have attenuated 

to low levels. However, special attention 

will be given to this site during 

construction and monitoring (see 

MONITORING).

Demolition of sidewalks at the top of 

the bluff slopes and excavation for the 

new sidewalks may result in some 

downhill movement of debris. Just prior 

to the construction necessitating its use, 

a debris fence will be installed parallel 

to and just below the bluff edge and 

held in place with stakes driven by 

hand using a large hammer. The 

expected debris would be soil or small 

pieces of concrete that could be 

removed by hand or shovel. Noise levels 

for installing the fence and removing 

debris trapped in it will be low and 

unlikely to harass harbor seals. The 

distance of the sites to Seal Rock or the 

beach where the seals haul out will not 

allow debris to fall onto these areas.

Incidental harassment resulting from 

bluff stabilization construction may 

occur in all age classes and sexes of 

harbor seals present in the Children’s 

Pool area. The number of harbor seals at 

Children’s Pool Beach and Seal Rock 

varies throughout the year. For the 

population of seals occupying 

Children’s Pool, the numbers of seals 

that haul out vary with season, tide, and 

time of day (Hubbs-SeaWorld Research 

Institute 1995–1997). More haulout area 

is available to be occupied during low 

tide. However, sometimes those animals 

that are on land will move higher up the 

beach to avoid the approaching tide and 

thus do not necessarily leave the 

haulout area. For the La Jolla area in 

general, a greater number of animals 

were seen hauled out in late afternoon 

or evening, regardless of the tide. In 

general, there is a decrease in counts in 

late summer through winter in La Jolla. 

The largest numbers of seals are seen 

during the molting/breeding season. 

Also, the number of seals hauled-out 

generally decreased during the first few 

calm days after a storm.

Although the seals in the area have 

become accustomed to the presence of 

tourists viewing the haulout site, the 

addition of construction workers, 

construction equipment (in particular 

the sudden noise of a jackhammer or 

power saw), and other project related 

activities could result in a temporary 

startle response when harbor seals may 

flush into the water. However, the 

likelihood of this occurring is very low, 

and with the implementation of 

mitigation measures, disturbance from 

construction-related activities is 

expected to have only a short term 

negligible impact to a small number of 

harbor seals. Demolition and 

construction work is not expected to 

result in injury or mortality because the 

required work restrictions and 

mitigation measures will minimize 

construction-related disturbance. At a 

maximum, the action is expected to 

result in a temporary reduction in 

utilization of haulout sites while work 

is in progress or until seals acclimate to 

the disturbance, and will not likely 

result in any permanent reduction in the 

number of seals at Children’s Pool or at 

Seal Rock.

Endangered Species Act (ESA)

NMFS has determined that the cove 

wall replacement and bluff 

improvement projects and the 

accompanying IHA will not have an 

effect on species listed under the ESA. 

Therefore, consultation under Section 7 

was not required.

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA)

On September 15, 2003, the City of 

San Diego completed an Environmental 

Impact Report (EIR) for the La Jolla Cove 

Wall Replacement and Bluff 

Improvements Project. In accordance 

with NOAA Administrative Order 216–

6 (Environmental Review Procedures for 

Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 

1999), NOAA Fisheries has reviewed 

the information contained in the EIR 

and determined that it accurately and 

completely describes the proposed 

action alternative, reasonable additional 

alternatives, and the potential impacts 

on marine mammals, endangered 

species, and other marine life that could 

be impacted by the preferred alternative 

and the other alternatives. Based on this 

review and analysis, NOAA Fisheries 

has adopted the City of San Deigo’s EIR 

as its own document and made a 

Finding of No Significant Impact on 

September 2, 2004. As a result, NOAA 

Fisheries has determined that it is not 

necessary to issue a new Environmental 

Assessment (EA), a supplemental EA or 

an Environmental Impact Statement for 

the issuance of an IHA to the City of San 

Diego for this activity.

Determinations

Based on the information contained in 

the application, the City of San Deigo’s 

EIR, the August 20, 2004 (69 FR 

51632)Federal Register notice and this 

document, NOAA Fisheries has 

determined that the cove wall 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 223 / Friday, November 19, 2004 / Notices 67711

replacement and bluff improvement 

project at La Jolla, CA, will result, at 

most, in a temporary modification in 

behavior by Pacific harbor seals by head 

alerts and/or flushing from the beach. 

While behavioral modifications may be 

made by these species as a result of 

demolition and construction activities, 

this behavioral change is expected to 

result in no more than a negligible 

impact on the affected species. While 

the number of potential incidental 

harassment takes will depend on the 

distribution and abundance of marine 

mammals in the vicinity of the survey 

activity and the distance between the 

seals and the construction site, the 

number of potential harassment takings 

will be small, and no take by injury and/

or death is anticipated. The project is 

not expected to interfere with any 

subsistence hunts. NMFS has therefore 

determined that the requirements of 

section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA have 

been met and the authorization can be 

issued.

Authorization

NMFS has issued an IHA to the City 

of San Diego to take small numbers of 

Pacific harbor seals incidental to wall 

replacement and bluff improvement 

projects, provided the previously 

mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting requirements are incorporated.

Dated: November 15, 2004.

Laurie K. Allen,

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 04–25741 Filed 11–18–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

COMMITTEE FOR THE 

IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE 

AGREEMENTS

Adjustment of Import Limits for Certain 

Cotton and Man-Made Fiber Textile 

Products Produced or Manufactured in 

the Philippines

November 15, 2004.

AGENCY: Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements 

(CITA).

ACTION: Issuing a directive to the 

Commissioner, Bureau of Customs and 

Border Protection adjusting limits.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 22, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Naomi Freeman, International Trade 

Specialist, Office of Textiles and 

Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce, 

(202) 482–4212. For information on the 

quota status of these limits, refer to the 

Bureau of Customs and Border 

Protection Web site (http://

www.cbp.gov), or call (202) 344-2650. 

For information on embargoes and quota 

re-openings, refer to the Office of 

Textiles and Apparel Web site at http:/

/otexa.ita.doc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority: Section 204 of the Agricultural 

Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854); 

Executive Order 11651 of March 3, 1972, as 

amended.

The current limit for Categories 638/

639 is being increased for the partial 

undoing of special shift, decreasing the 

limit for Categories 338/339 to account 

for the quantity being returned to 638/

639.

A description of the textile and 

apparel categories in terms of HTS 

numbers is available in the 

CORRELATION: Textile and Apparel 

Categories with the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (see 

Federal Register notice 69 FR 4926, 

published on February 2, 2004). Also 

see 68 FR 59923, published on October 

20, 2003.

D. Michael Hutchinson,

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements.

Committee for the Implementation of Textile 

Agreements

November 15, 2004.

Commissioner,

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, 

Washington, DC 20229.

Dear Commissioner: This directive 

amends, but does not cancel, the directive 

issued to you on October 14, 2003, by the 

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation 

of Textile Agreements. That directive 

concerns imports of certain cotton, wool and 

man-made fiber textiles and textile products 

and silk blend and other vegetable fiber 

apparel, produced or manufactured in the 

Philippines and exported during the twelvemonth period which began on January 1, 

2004 and extends through December 31, 

2004.

Effective on November 22, 2004, you are 

directed to adjust the limits for the following 

categories, as provided for under the Uruguay 

Round Agreement on Textiles and Clothing:

Category Twelve-month restraint 

limit 1

Levels in Group I

338/339 .................... 3,691,064 dozen.

638/639 .................... 2,954,972 dozen.

1The limits have not been adjusted to account for any imports exported after December 

31, 2003.

The Committee for the Implementation of 

Textile Agreements has determined that 

these actions fall within the foreign affairs 

exception to the rulemaking provisions of 5 

U.S.C. 553(a)(1).

Sincerely,

D. Michael Hutchinson,

Acting Chairman, Committee for the 

Implementation of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. E4–3261 Filed 11–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army 

Availability of Non-Exclusive, 

Exclusive License or Partially 

Exclusive Licensing of U.S. Patent 

Concerning Method and Apparatus for 

Making Body Heating and Cooling 

Garments

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In accordance with 37 CFR 

part 404.6, announcement is made of 

the availability for licensing of U.S. 

patent No. US 6,813,783 B2 entitled 

‘‘Method and Apparatus for Making 

Body Heating and Cooling Garments’’

issued November 9, 2004. This patent 

has been assigned to the United States 

Government as represented by the 

Secretary of the Army.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert Rosenkrans at U.S. Army Soldier 

and Biological Chemical Command, 

Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, 

Phone; (508) 233–4928 or e-mail 

Robert.Rosenkrans@natick.army.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Any 

licenses granted shall comply with 35 

U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–25680 Filed 11–18–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Athens Navigation Project, Village 

of Athens, Greene County, NY

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE), New York District, 

is preparing a Draft Environmental 

Impact Statement (DEIS) to ascertain 

compliance with and to lead to the 

production of a National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) document in 

accordance with the President’s Council 

of Environmental Quality (CEQ) Rules 

and Regulations, as defined and