Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58123 

(j) Related Information 

For more information about this AD, 

contact Douglas Tsuji, Aviation Safety 

Engineer, FAA, 2200 South 216th Street, Des 

Moines, WA 98198; telephone: 206–231– 

3548; email: douglas.tsuji@faa.gov. 

(k) Material Incorporated by Reference 

(1) The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference 

(IBR) of the service information listed in this 

paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 

part 51. 

(2) You must use this service information 

as applicable to do the actions required by 

this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. 

(i) Boeing Alert Requirements Bulletin 

747–31A2544 RB, dated March 31, 2020. 

(ii) [Reserved] 

(3) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Contractual & Data 

Services (C&DS), 2600 Westminster 

Boulevard, MC 110–SK57, Seal Beach, CA 

90740–5600; telephone 562–797–1717; 

website: myboeingfleet.com. 

(4) You may view this service information 

at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, 

Operational Safety Branch, 2200 South 216th 

Street, Des Moines, WA. For information on 

the availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 206–231–3195. 

(5) You may view this service information 

that is incorporated by reference at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For information on 

the availability of this material at NARA, 

fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to: 

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html. 

Issued on July 26, 2023. 

Victor Wicklund, 

Deputy Director, Compliance & Airworthiness 

Division, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2023–17775 Filed 8–24–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

15 CFR Part 922 

[Docket No. 230807–0185] 

RIN 0648–BL31 

Proposed Chumash Heritage National 

Marine Sanctuary 

AGENCY: Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean 

Service, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notification of 

availability of draft environmental 

impact statement and draft management 

plan; request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: NOAA proposes to designate 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary (CHNMS) in the waters along 

and offshore of the coast of central 

California to recognize the national 

significance of the area’s ecological, 

historical, archaeological, and cultural 

resources and to manage this special 

place as part of the National Marine 

Sanctuary System. The sanctuary 

boundary would encompass 5,617 

square miles (mi2) (4,242 nmi2) of 

submerged lands and marine waters 

from Montan ̃ a de Oro State Park in San 

Luis Obispo County to Naples along the 

Gaviota Coast in Santa Barbara County. 

NOAA proposes to establish the terms 

of designation for CHNMS and proposes 

regulations to implement the national 

marine sanctuary designation. NOAA is 

also publishing a draft environmental 

impact statement (draft EIS) and draft 

management plan, and soliciting public 

comment on the proposed rule, draft 

EIS, and draft management plan. 

DATES: 

Comments due: NOAA will consider 

all comments received by October 25, 

2023. 

Public comment meetings: NOAA will 

host two in-person public comment 

meetings and one virtual public 

comment meeting on the following 

dates and times: 

• Meeting #1: Monday, September 25, 

2023; Time: 5 p.m.; Location: San Luis 

Obispo, CA. 

• Meeting #2: Wednesday, September 

27, 2023; Time: 5 p.m.; Location: 

Lompoc, CA. 

• Meeting # 3: Thursday, October 12, 

2023; Time: 1 p.m. Pacific Time; 

Location: Virtual. 

ADDRESSES: 

Comments: You may submit 

comments on this document, identified 

by NOAA–NOS–2021–0080, by any of 

the following methods: 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for docket NOAA–NOS–2021–0080. 

Follow the instructions for sending 

comments. 

• Mail: Send any hard copy public 

comments by mail to Paul Michel, 

Regional Policy Coordinator, 99 Pacific 

Street, Suite 100F, Monterey, CA 93940. 

• Public Meetings: Provide oral 

comments during a public meeting, as 

described under DATES. Webinar 

registration details and additional 

information about how to participate in 

these public scoping meetings is 

available at: https://

sanctuaries.noaa.gov/chumashheritage/. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NOAA. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NOAA will 

accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/ 

A’’ in the required fields if you wish to 

remain anonymous). Copies of the 

proposed rule, draft EIS, and draft 

management plan can be downloaded or 

viewed on the internet at 

www.regulations.gov (search for docket 

# NOAA–NOS–2021–0080). Copies can 

also be obtained by contacting the 

person identified under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

• Meetings: The meetings will be held 

in the following locations: 

• Meeting #1: County of San Luis 

Obispo Board of Supervisors Hearing 

Room, 1055 Monterey Street, San Luis 

Obispo, CA 93408. 

• Meeting #2: Dick DeWees 

Community Center, 1120 West Ocean 

Avenue, Lompoc, CA 93436. 

• Meeting #3: Virtual, please see 

https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/chumashheritage/ for details. 

NOAA may substitute a virtual 

meeting platform rather than a public 

meeting if public safety concerns remain 

to prevent the spread of COVID–19. 

NOAA may take audio recordings of the 

public meetings, including the public 

comment portion of the meetings. Please 

check https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ 

chumash-heritage/ for updated 

information on public meetings. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Michel, Regional Policy Coordinator, 99 

Pacific Street, Suite 100F, Monterey, CA 

93940, 831–647–6450, paul.michel@

noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

A. Background 

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

(NMSA; 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) 

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, 

archaeological, educational, or esthetic 

qualities. Day-to-day management of 

national marine sanctuaries has been 

delegated by the Secretary to ONMS. 

The primary objective of the NMSA is 

to protect the resources of the National 

Marine Sanctuary System. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58124 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

NOAA proposes to designate CHNMS 

in the waters along and offshore of the 

coast of central California to recognize 

the national significance of the area’s 

ecological, historical, archaeological, 

and cultural resources and to manage 

this special place as part of the National 

Marine Sanctuary System. The proposed 

sanctuary boundary would encompass 

5,617 mi2 (4,242 nmi2) of submerged 

lands and marine waters from Montan ̃ a 

de Oro State Park in San Luis Obispo 

County to Naples along the Gaviota 

Coast in Santa Barbara County. This 

boundary reflects NOAA’s preferred 

alternative, which is described in the 

draft environmental impact statement 

(draft EIS) as Alternative 2 (Cropped 

Bank to Coast) and Sub-alternative 5b 

(Gaviota Coast Extension). NOAA has 

also proposed in the draft management 

plan a framework to provide 

collaborative management with the 

Chumash and Salinan tribes in this area 

for CHNMS. 

The specific area proposed for 

national marine sanctuary designation 

includes the coastline of central 

California from Hazard Canyon Reef at 

the north end of Montan ̃ a de Oro State 

Park, south along the San Luis Obispo 

County coast and a portion of Santa 

Barbara County to approximately two 

miles south of Dos Pueblos Creek near 

the township of Naples along the 

Gaviota Coast. Roughly 134 miles of the 

mainland coast (163 miles if including 

the shoreline of offshore rocks and 

islands) are part of the area proposed for 

sanctuary designation. The sanctuary’s 

proposed boundaries also include the 

offshore marine waters from the western 

end of Channel Islands National Marine 

Sanctuary (CINMS), northwards to 

within approximately 2.5 miles of the 

southern end of Morro Bay Wind Energy 

Area (WEA; as referenced in the Bureau 

of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)’s 

Final Sale Notice for Pacific Wind Lease 

Sale 1, 87 FR 64093, October 21, 2022), 

and then east and southeast to the point 

of origin at Hazard Canyon Reef. This 

area out to approximately 66 miles (50 

nmi) from shore includes numerous 

offshore features including the Santa 

Lucia Bank, portions of its escarpment, 

Rodriguez Seamount, Arguello Canyon, 

and other offshore features and 

resources. Coastal watersheds drain into 

this area via multiple outlets, including 

the Santa Maria and Santa Ynez river 

mouths and several other coastal 

streams and rivers. Strong coastal winds 

drive seasonal upwelling which fuels 

the area’s high biological productivity, 

supporting dense aggregations of marine 

life. Specifically, winds offshore of 

Point Arguello/Point Conception initiate 

a powerful upwelling process that 

nourishes other nearby productive 

ecosystems such as CINMS. The 

presence of a biogeographic transition 

zone around Point Conception, where 

temperate waters from the north meet 

waters from the subtropics, creates an 

area of nationally-significant 

biodiversity in sea birds, marine 

mammals, invertebrates, and fishes. 

For more than 10,000 years, the 

productive and diverse ecosystems in 

the region have been essential to the 

way of life of Indigenous peoples in the 

region, in particular the Chumash, one 

of the few ocean-going bands among the 

First Peoples of the Pacific Coast. The 

Salinan tribes have also relied on 

marine resources along the coast in this 

region Tribes’ connections to the region 

include their traditional and ancestral 

homelands, customary uses of marine 

resources for food and cultural 

connections, and stewardship of 

resources and ecosystems within their 

ancestral homelands and waters. Coastal 

landscapes and seascapes, including 

viewsheds, are integral and sacred 

elements of Native American cultural 

connections to the region’’). 

Additionally, during the last glacial 

maximum, the region’s coastline 

extended beyond the present-day coast 

to include now-submerged areas that 

were likely inhabited by ancestors of 

California Tribes before the last sea level 

rise. As ocean-going Indigenous people 

on the California coast, the Chumash 

traveled to sea, to the Channel Islands, 

and along the coast in traditional 

redwood plank canoes called ‘‘tomols.’’ 

Coastal Chumash traditionally harvested 

an array of marine resources such as 

abalone and other shellfish, Olivella 

shells, fish, kelp and other seaweeds, 

and marine mammals. Today, Chumash 

Peoples undertake ocean voyages in 

tomol canoes to honor their ancestors’ 

crossings to the offshore islands and to 

continue to honor ceremonial sites 

within their historic areas. 

The marine environment of the 

proposed sanctuary has provided and 

continues to provide a special sense of 

place to its changing coastal 

communities and visitors because of its 

historical, archaeological, cultural, 

aesthetic, and biological resources. The 

Indigenous peoples along this coast 

were the first people living in presentday California to have contact with 

Europeans when Spanish explorers 

arrived on the Pacific Coast in the mid1500s. Subsequent waves of Spanish, 

Mexican, English, Russian, and 

American explorers and settlers traveled 

to this region over the next 300 years. 

The region was shaped by development 

of a mission system from San Diego to 

San Francisco, the California gold rush 

in the mid-1800s, ranching for cattle 

and the hide/tallow trade, military 

training and operations, a coastal and 

offshore oil boom, and, more recently, 

coastal and offshore renewable energy 

development. Maritime shipping has 

been prominent in this portion of 

California, with treacherous weather 

and currents leading to over 200 

reported ship and aircraft wrecks; at 

least 20 prominent shipwrecks alone 

have been found in the area between 

Point Conception and Point Sal. Two 

shipwrecks that lie within the proposed 

sanctuary—the Yankee Blade and the 

McCulloch—have been listed on the 

National Register of Historic Places; the 

Montebello, also on the National 

Register, lies just beyond the proposed 

sanctuary’s boundaries. 

Coastal tourism, recreational 

activities, and commercial fishing are 

prominent components of the coastal 

and marine economy in this region, 

particularly in San Luis Obispo County. 

Coastal and offshore energy and military 

activities are more prominent in the 

portion of this region along the Santa 

Barbara County coastline. More public 

access is available for the portion of the 

area proposed for the sanctuary in San 

Luis Obispo County than in Santa 

Barbara County, where access is more 

limited due to the large military base 

and private land holdings along this 

stretch of coast. Marine research is a 

small but growing sector of the ocean 

uses in this area. 

B. Need for Action 

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

(NMSA; 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) 

authorizes the Secretary of Commerce 

(Secretary) to designate national marine 

sanctuaries to meet the purposes and 

policies of the NMSA, including: 

• ‘‘to identify and designate as 

national marine sanctuaries areas of the 

marine environment which are of 

special national significance and to 

manage these areas as the National 

Marine Sanctuary System’’ (16 U.S.C. 

1431(b)(1)); 

• ‘‘to provide authority for 

comprehensive and coordinated 

conservation and management of these 

marine areas, and activities affecting 

them, in a manner which complements 

existing regulatory authorities’’ (16 

U.S.C. 1431(b)(2)); 

• ‘‘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’’ (16 U.S.C. 1431(b)(6)); 

• ‘‘to develop and implement 

coordinated plans for the protection and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58125 

management of these areas with 

appropriate Federal agencies, State and 

local governments, Native American 

tribes and organizations, international 

organizations, and other public and 

private interests concerned with the 

continuing health and resilience of 

these marine areas’’ (16 U.S.C. 

1431(b)(7)); and, 

• ‘‘to create models of, and incentives 

for, ways to conserve and manage these 

areas, including the application of 

innovative management techniques’’ (16 

U.S.C. 1431(b)(8)). 

The nationally-significant natural 

resources, physical features and 

habitats, and the cultural and historical 

resources within the proposed sanctuary 

warrant long-term protection and 

management to reduce threats that 

would adversely affect their historical, 

cultural, archaeological, recreational, 

and educational value. For example, 

many threatened or endangered species, 

such as blue whales, snowy plovers, 

black abalone, white sharks, and 

leatherback sea turtles, rely on habitats, 

physical features, or prey found in the 

proposed sanctuary rely on habitats, 

physical features, or prey found in the 

proposed sanctuary. This area also 

contains hundreds of known or 

suspected shipwrecks of historical 

importance, including several on the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

Moreover, this region and its abundant 

resources have been home to coastal, 

ocean-going Indigenous tribes for tens of 

thousands of years, and submerged 

village sites may exist along 

paleoshorelines in the submerged lands 

of the proposed sanctuary. Several key 

threats to these natural, cultural, and 

historical resources include: various 

levels of human development and 

activity from: offshore energy 

development; decommissioning and 

removal of coastal and offshore 

industrial facilities; sound, discharges 

and whale strikes from vessel traffic; 

plastics, marine debris and pollutants 

from coastal runoff; and most of all, 

acute and cumulative impacts of climate 

change. 

Accordingly, NOAA is proposing to 

designate this area as a national marine 

sanctuary to: (1) manage and protect 

nationally-significant natural resources, 

physical features and habitats, and 

cultural and historical resources 

through a regulatory and nonregulatory 

framework; (2) document, characterize, 

monitor, study, and conserve these 

resources; (3) provide interpretation of 

their natural, cultural, historical, and 

educational value to the public; (4) 

promote public stewardship and 

responsible use of these resources for 

various purposes to the extent 

compatible with the sanctuary’s 

principal goal of resource protection; (5) 

develop a coordinated, communitybased, ecosystem-based management 

regime with partner Federal agencies, 

State and local governments, and 

Indigenous tribes and tribal 

organizations; and (6) develop and carry 

out an innovative collaborative 

management structure to involve 

Indigenous communities, including 

federally-recognized tribes and other 

tribal groups and organizations, in 

important management programs and 

initiatives of the sanctuary. 

Designating a new national marine 

sanctuary along the coast of central 

California would allow NOAA to 

complement and supplement existing 

Federal and State resource management 

programs, policies, and regulations. For 

instance, proposed discharge 

regulations to establish more 

comprehensive water quality protection 

across the geographic range proposed 

for sanctuary protection under NMSA 

would bolster existing authorities under 

the Clean Water Act (CWA; 33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq.). NOAA has well-regarded 

and successful programs to conduct 

outreach, education, and 

communication that would recognize 

and promote this area’s nationallysignificant natural, historical, and 

cultural properties. NOAA could assist 

the region’s scientific expertise and 

technological resources to enhance 

ongoing research, and provide a hub for 

the coordination of these activities. 

Through its focus on various initiatives 

benefiting the marine and coastal 

economy, NOAA’s designating the area 

as a national marine sanctuary would 

enhance and facilitate public 

stewardship of natural, historical, and 

cultural resources. Lastly, designating 

this proposed national marine sanctuary 

would provide expanded conservation 

of key resources within the California 

Current Large Marine Ecosystem, and 

create a collaborative framework to 

involve Indigenous communities in 

region-wide management. 

C. Designation Process 

1. Notice of Intent To Designate a 

National Marine Sanctuary 

In July 2015, a broad community 

consortium led by the Northern 

Chumash Tribal Council submitted a 

nomination through the Sanctuary 

Nomination Process. The nomination 

identified opportunities for NOAA to 

expand upon existing local and State 

efforts to study, interpret, and manage 

the area’s unique cultural and biological 

resources. The nomination also 

highlighted the maritime history and 

cultural heritage of the Chumash tribal 

nation, who, along with other Native 

American tribes, have deep cultural 

connections to this area of central 

California. NOAA completed its review 

of the nomination and, on October 5, 

2015, added the area to the inventory of 

successful nominations eligible for 

designation. All nominations submitted 

to NOAA can be found at: https://

www.nominate.noaa.gov/nominations. 

On November 10, 2021, NOAA began 

the sanctuary designation process for 

the proposed CHNMS by publishing a 

notice of intent (86 FR 62512) to prepare 

a draft EIS as well as other pertinent 

designation materials such as a draft 

management plan, terms of designation, 

and this proposed rule, as required by 

NMSA and the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.). The notice of intent also 

announced NOAA’s intent to fulfill its 

responsibilities under the requirements 

of the National Historic Preservation Act 

(NHPA; 54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.) and 

Executive Order 13175. 

Following the notice of intent, NOAA 

conducted three virtual public meetings, 

hearing oral comments from 100 

participants, and received thousands of 

written comments during an 83-day 

public comment period. The majority of 

comments supported the goals of 

sanctuary designation, including 

protecting the cultural heritage of 

Chumash tribal communities and 

protecting the coastal California 

ecosystem’s health and resilience. Many 

commenters also noted the importance 

of managing the area to promote 

recreation and tourism to support the 

local economy, to foster education and 

research programs, and to establish a 

shared management approach with 

Indigenous communities. Commenters 

also voiced concerns about overlapping 

existing and potential uses of the area 

such as fishing and offshore energy 

development. Overall, comments 

covered a diversity of other topics 

including views on: the proposed 

boundary and name for the proposed 

sanctuary; alternatives to consider for 

the boundary and name for the 

proposed sanctuary; activities that 

should be regulated; what nonregulatory programs the proposed 

sanctuary should have; and different 

ways to structure collaborative or comanagement with Native American 

tribes. More detail about the scoping 

comments are contained in the draft 

EIS, section 3.11 and appendix A. 

2. Development of Proposed Terms of 

Designation and Proposed Regulations 

Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA 

requires that the terms of designation 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58126 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

include the geographic area proposed to 

be included within 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 would be subject to 

regulation by the Secretary 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 purpose and need for the 

sanctuary provide the overarching basis 

for developing the proposed regulations. 

NOAA developed this proposed 

rulemaking and the proposed sanctuary 

terms of designation based on 

information received during public 

scoping comments, cooperating agency 

review, and government-to-government 

consultation with Tribal Nations under 

Executive Order 13175, as well as on 

information from analysis of issues in 

the draft EIS, interagency coordination, 

and internal staff analysis and expertise. 

Scoping comments from tribal 

representatives, governmental agencies, 

users such as the fishing industry and 

offshore wind energy industry, other 

interested organizations, and the public 

addressed the need for regulations and 

exemptions for certain activities. NOAA 

consulted with the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council as required under 

NMSA section 304(a)(5). NOAA also 

considered existing regulations for other 

west coast national marine sanctuaries, 

including Monterey Bay, Greater 

Farallones, Channel Islands, and 

Olympic Coast national marine 

sanctuaries, and developed terms of 

designation and a set of proposed 

regulations that are generally consistent 

with other sanctuary provisions in 

similar resource areas. In developing the 

proposed regulations, NOAA evaluated 

resource sensitivity, industry practices, 

and feasibility of implementing certain 

regulations, to balance resource 

protection regulations with existing and 

future compatible activities that may 

occur in the sanctuary. 

A detailed discussion of the proposed 

regulations is contained below in 

section II, subsections A through I. The 

proposed terms of designation are in 

section VI below and appendix B to the 

draft EIS, and would ultimately be 

incorporated as an appendix to the 

sanctuary management plan upon 

completion of designation. 

3. Development of Draft Management 

Plan and Framework for Tribal 

Collaborative Management 

When designating a national marine 

sanctuary, NOAA also develops and 

presents a management plan that 

describes the management activities and 

initiatives that it proposes to conduct. 

The draft management plan for the 

proposed designation of CHNMS 

describes actions that NOAA will take 

to manage the sanctuary, summarized in 

11 action plans, such as research and 

monitoring, education and outreach, 

sanctuary resource protection, and 

sanctuary operations, as well as 

practical programs to address certain 

issue areas, such as climate change, 

offshore energy, water quality, and 

wildlife disturbance. NOAA has 

developed the draft management plan 

for the largest boundary alternative as 

noted in the notice of intent and 

analyzed in the draft EIS as the ‘‘Initial 

Boundary Alternative,’’ so the public 

may evaluate the full suite of 

management measures for the proposed 

sanctuary; however, the final 

management plan could include fewer 

or reduced management actions if a 

boundary smaller than the Initial 

Boundary Alternative is ultimately 

designated. 

In addition to engaging in 

government-to-government consultation 

with the only federally-recognized tribe 

in the area, the Santa Ynez Band of 

Chumash Indians (SYBCI), as described 

in section V, Classification, below, 

NOAA has conducted meetings with 

non-federally-recognized tribes and 

tribal organizations along the central 

California coast, including the Northern 

Chumash Tribal Council, yak tityu tityu 

yak ti5hini Northern Chumash Tribe, 

Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation, 

Xolon Salinan Tribe, Salinan Tribe of 

Monterey and San Luis Obispo 

Counties, Wishtoyo Chumash 

Foundation, and Barbaren ̃o/Venturen ̃ o 

Band of Mission Indians. Close, 

deliberate collaboration between NOAA 

and these tribes has been an essential 

element of this sanctuary designation 

process. NOAA intends to incorporate 

input from interested federallyrecognized Indian tribes and all 

interested tribal entities, into the 

sanctuary designation process, as well 

as sanctuary management after the 

proposed designation. The draft 

management plan includes an 

Indigenous Cultural Engagement Action 

Plan that describes how sanctuary 

management would involve tribal 

perspectives and collaboration in a 

number of specific sanctuary 

management actions. 

Additionally, NOAA is proposing a 

framework for collaborative 

management with Native American 

tribes and tribal groups for the proposed 

CHNMS. A detailed explanation of that 

proposed framework and an outline of 

opportunities for tribal collaboration in 

management of the proposed sanctuary 

are found in the introduction to the 

draft management plan. In summary, the 

proposed framework, built upon 

extensive input from SYBCI, nonfederally-recognized tribes, and tribal 

organizations in this area of coast, 

envisions relying on government-togovernment consultation with federallyrecognized Indian tribes; an 

Intergovernmental Policy Council 

involving federally-recognized Indian 

tribes and the State of California; a 

Sanctuary Advisory Council (to be 

established after designation) that has 

one or more voting seats for federallyrecognized Indian tribes and one or 

more voting seats to represent the 

knowledge, history, and culture of 

Indigenous communities; and an 

Indigenous Cultures Advisory Panel, as 

a working group of the Sanctuary 

Advisory Council, to provide advice to 

the Sanctuary Advisory Council, with 

coordination and communication with 

other groups as appropriate, about 

cultural issues important to these 

coastal tribes. NOAA also envisions a 

role for one or more non-profit 

foundations to support joint projects 

between NOAA and federallyrecognized Indian tribes and/or nonfederally recognized tribes. The 

proposed framework was presented to 

SYBCI and other tribes in meetings 

during August 2022 and separately 

shared with the public in a workshop 

held on August 26, 2022. NOAA 

welcomes further comment on the 

proposed framework, as described in the 

draft management plan, through this 

rulemaking process. 

4. Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement 

In accordance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.) and the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 

1434), NOAA is releasing a draft EIS for 

the proposed national marine sanctuary 

designation in conjunction with the 

publication of this proposed rule. The 

draft EIS (https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ 

chumash-heritage) describes the 

purpose and need for the proposed 

action of designating a national marine 

sanctuary in the coastal and offshore 

waters of central California—the 

purpose of this proposed regulatory 

action—and evaluates the potential 

environmental consequences of the 

proposed designation of a national 

marine sanctuary; identifies a range of 

alternatives, including the preferred 

alternative; includes a comparison of 

the beneficial and adverse impacts 

among alternatives; and provides an 

assessment of resources and uses in the 

area. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58127 

The draft EIS analyzes the Initial 

Boundary Alternative (7,573 mi2; 5,718 

nmi2; 152 miles of mainland coast), 

which generally represents the 

boundary identified in the notice of 

intent (86 FR 62512) but with some 

adjustments that are described in 

section 3.2 of the draft EIS, and four 

alternatives that are smaller than the 

Initial Boundary Alternative, including: 

• Alternative 1, Bank to Coast, which 

focuses management from the Santa 

Lucia Bank to the coast (6,098 mi2; 

4,605 nmi2; 152 miles of mainland 

coast); 

• Alternative 2, Cropped Bank to 

Coast (5,553 mi2; 4,194 nmi2; 115 miles 

of mainland coast), largely copies 

Alternative 1, however it excludes the 

waters from Cambria to Hazard Canyon 

Reef, which would be the most direct 

path to shore for the installation of 

subsea electrical transmission lines from 

the Morro Bay WEA; 

• Alternative 3, Diablo to Gaviota 

Creek, also excludes more (relative to 

Alternative 2) northern waters that 

BOEM has identified for potential 

offshore wind development by removing 

the Diablo Canyon Call Area from the 

boundaries of the proposed sanctuary, 

and focuses management on the area 

from the Diablo Canyon Call Area and 

nuclear power plant south to Gaviota 

Creek (5,952 mi2; 4,494 nmi2; 99 miles 

of mainland coast), but it includes 

offshore waters west of the Santa Lucia 

Bank; 

• Alternative 4, Combined Smallest, 

excludes both the western and northern 

offshore areas focusing management on 

the smallest area (4,476 mi2; 3,380 nmi2; 

99 miles of mainland coast). 

The draft EIS also analyzes two small 

expansion areas: 

• Sub-alternative 5a, Morro Bay 

Estuary (2.5 mi2; 1.9 nmi2; 11 miles of 

mainland coast), would include the 

tidally-influenced portions of Morro Bay 

Estuary and could be added to the 

Initial Boundary Alternative or 

Alternative 1 (but would not be added 

to alternatives 2–4); 

• Sub-alternative 5b, Gaviota Coast 

Extension (64 mi2; 48 nmi2; 18 miles of 

mainland coast), would include in the 

proposed sanctuary the State waters 

from Gaviota Creek to the township of 

Naples, a potential addition to any of 

the action alternatives. 

The draft EIS also includes a ‘‘No 

Action Alternative’’ in which NOAA 

would not designate the area as a 

national marine sanctuary. 

NOAA has identified as the AgencyPreferred Alternative in the draft EIS the 

combination of Alternative 2 and Subalternative 5b. This is the boundary 

alternative that is reflected in this 

proposed rule. 

Based on public comments received 

on the draft designation documents and 

NOAA’s experience administering the 

national marine sanctuary program, 

pursuant to NEPA and the 

Administrative Procedure Act, NOAA 

may choose to select a new alternative 

in the final rule and final EIS that is 

within the geographic and regulatory 

scope of these alternatives currently 

considered in the draft EIS, and that is 

a logical outgrowth of this proposed 

rule. See, for example, sections 3.1.1 

and 3.9.2 of the draft EIS. 

The draft EIS evaluates and considers 

the potential impacts of implementing 

the proposed regulations that would be 

adopted as part of the preferred 

alternative and conducting the various 

management programs and initiatives 

described in the draft management plan. 

The draft EIS focuses on eight issue 

areas: physical resources; biological 

resources; commercial fishing and 

aquaculture; cultural heritage and 

maritime heritage resources; 

socioeconomics, human uses, and 

environmental justice; offshore energy; 

marine transportation; and homeland 

security and Department of Defense 

(DoD) activities. 

The BOEM, the Bureau of Safety and 

Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), the 

DoD and the Santa Ynez Band of 

Chumash Indians (SYBCI) are all 

cooperating agencies for the NEPA 

review. 

5. Agency-Preferred Alternative 

In accordance with NEPA (42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq.), NOAA is identifying as its 

preferred alternative the combination of 

Alternative 2, ‘‘Cropped Bank to Coast,’’ 

and Sub-alternative 5b, ‘‘Gaviota Coast 

Extension.’’ Section 5.4.9 of the draft 

EIS provides a map (Figure 5–1) and 

additional information regarding the 

reasons for identifying this alternative 

as the Agency-Preferred Alternative. 

NOAA has met with cooperating 

agencies for this action and considered 

their input. NOAA has also conducted 

formal government-to-government 

consultation with the SYBCI, and has 

held informational meetings with other 

bands of the Chumash and two bands of 

the Salinan Tribe. NOAA developed its 

preferred alternative from among the 

suite of alternatives analyzed after 

considering their views as well as those 

of cooperating agencies, including the 

SYBCI, the input from outreach 

meetings, and after weighing the NEPA 

analysis. 

The Agency-Preferred Alternative 

(i.e., preferred alternative) would 

provide numerous beneficial impacts on 

various issue areas, such as physical 

resources; biological resources; 

commercial fishing and aquaculture; 

cultural heritage and maritime heritage 

resources; socioeconomics, human uses, 

and environmental justice; offshore 

energy; and homeland security and DoD 

activities; largely through sanctuary 

regulations that would limit the scale 

and scope of offshore development 

activities and other human uses that 

could harm natural, historical, and 

cultural resources. NOAA has 

considered the potential adverse 

impacts of the preferred alternative and 

finds them to be not significant while 

also allowing an acceptable balance 

between resource use and conservation 

of sanctuary resources. This alternative 

would also limit adverse impacts on 

offshore wind development and would 

lessen adverse impacts on marine 

transportation compared to the Initial 

Boundary Alternative analyzed in the 

draft EIS. 

In identifying the preferred 

alternative, NOAA has considered 

which boundary alternatives NOAA 

could effectively manage while allowing 

for compatible uses and providing 

increased protection and conservation 

for sanctuary resources, which is the 

proposed sanctuary’s principal purpose. 

As such, the preferred alternative 

reflects NOAA’s consideration of key 

issues, including those pertaining to 

subsea electrical transmission cables 

and the name of the proposed sanctuary. 

The sanctuary boundary proposed 

under the preferred alternative would 

allow NOAA to focus its management 

on key areas historically important to 

the Chumash Peoples and natural 

resources important to their heritage, 

while appropriately managing for other 

resources and uses. 

NOAA’s identification of Alternative 

2 rather than Alternative 1 as part of the 

preferred alternative (in addition to Subalternative 5b, discussed below) is based 

on two principal concer ns about 

designating the area from Montan ̃ a de 

Oro north to Cambria as a sanctuary. 

The first concern, described in more 

detail in section 5.4.9 of the draft EIS, 

derives from BOEM’s estimation that 

offshore wind development in the 

Morro Bay WEA could require up to 20– 

30 subsea electrical transmission cables 

and possibly floating substations in the 

area offshore of Morro Bay. While 

NOAA’s proposed regulations contain a 

permit process that could be used to 

allow for the placement and continued 

presence of subsea electrical 

transmission cables within the 

sanctuary boundaries (for additional 

details please refer to part III, section D 

below), provided that the applicable 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58128 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

criteria and requirements are met and 

that any permit conditions can be 

satisfied by developers, the disturbance 

of submerged lands and associated 

potential impacts on biological 

resources that could result from 

development on this scale would likely 

be unprecedented in a national marine 

sanctuary. In excluding this area, NOAA 

anticipates developers will be able to 

plan infrastructure for this area, which 

may minimize the potential requests to 

use other parts of the proposed 

sanctuary. Therefore, Alternative 2 

would exclude some of the areas where 

subsea electrical transmission cables are 

expected to be placed from the proposed 

sanctuary. NOAA has evaluated the 

impacts of the proposed action on 

infrastructure in the draft EIS. NOAA 

additionally requests comment on any 

planned infrastructure in the area, as 

well as any potential impacts (including 

cost) that the sanctuary may have on 

this infrastructure. 

The second consideration for NOAA’s 

choice of Alternative 2 as part of the 

preferred alternative relates to the lack 

of agreement regarding the name for the 

portion of the proposed sanctuary from 

roughly Cambria to south of Morro Bay. 

During the scoping process and 

informational meetings, the Salinan 

bands objected to naming the sanctuary 

‘‘Chumash’’ in that area which they 

identify as being part of their ancestral 

homeland. Chumash bands have also 

considered this section of coast part of 

their ancestral homeland. The Xolon 

Salinan have expressed support for 

sanctuary designation of this area, 

provided it had a different name. 

Chumash bands were unwavering in 

their view that the entirety of the 

sanctuary should be named ‘‘Chumash 

Heritage.’’ Alternative 2 is responsive to 

Indigenous community input by 

delineating a geographic option that 

would ameliorate these concerns. 

Including the Gaviota Coast Extension 

(Sub-alternative 5b) within the preferred 

alternative would provide additional 

protection to important coastal 

resources. It would include waters off 

three popular State beaches and parks— 

Gaviota, Refugio and El Capitan—and 

include all of Kashtayit and Naples 

State Marine Conservation Areas within 

the sanctuary. It would include 

additional beaches, kelp forests, and 

rocky and soft substrate reefs. As 

discussed in detail in section 4.5 of the 

draft EIS, that portion of the Gaviota 

Coast was home to numerous, large 

Chumash villages at the time of 

European first contact. Conservation of 

these resources is an important benefit 

to including this sub-alternative in the 

preferred alternative. Offshore 

structures including those necessary for 

existing oil and gas production in this 

area, such as pipelines and cables 

related to the Santa Ynez Unit, could be 

accommodated via the certification 

process included in the proposed 

regulations. Repair, replacement, or 

removal of the structures necessary for 

existing oil and gas production could be 

considered via an ONMS authorization 

process. For more details regarding the 

proposed permitting, authorization, and 

certification processes for existing oil 

and gas production and repair, 

maintenance, and removal of oil and gas 

structures, please refer below to section 

III.D.1., as well as section III.H. 

II. Proposed Terms of Designation for 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary 

Section 304(a)(4) of NMSA as 

amended, 16 U.S.C. 1434(a)(4), requires 

that the terms of designation be 

described at the time a new sanctuary is 

designated, including the geographic 

area proposed to be included within 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 to protect those 

characteristics. 

The following represents the 

proposed terms of designation: 

Preamble 

Under the authority of the NMSA, 

approximately 5,600 mi2 (4,200 nmi2) of 

the coast of central California’s San Luis 

Obispo and Santa Barbara counties are 

hereby designated as a National Marine 

Sanctuary for the purpose of providing 

long-term protection and management 

of the ecological, cultural, and historical 

resources and the conservation, 

recreational, scientific, educational, and 

aesthetic qualities of the area. 

Article I: Effect of Designation 

The NMSA authorizes the issuance of 

such regulations as are necessary and 

reasonable to implement the 

designation, including managing and 

protecting the ecological, cultural, and 

historical resources and the 

conservation, recreational, scientific, 

educational, and aesthetic qualities of 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary (the ‘‘Sanctuary’’). Section 1 

of article IV of these terms of 

designation lists those activities that 

may have to be regulated on the 

effective date of designation, or at some 

later date, in order to protect Sanctuary 

resources and qualities. Listing an 

activity does not necessarily mean that 

it 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 Sanctuary 

designation was made. 

Article II: Description of the Area 

CHNMS covers approximately 5,600 

mi2 (4,200 nmi2) in central California. 

The Sanctuary’s shoreline is 

approximately 130 miles long along the 

mainland, and 163 miles long when also 

counting the shoreline of offshore rocks 

and islands. The boundary begins at the 

mean high water line (MHWL) at Hazard 

Canyon Reef in Montan ̃ a de Oro State 

Park, in San Luis Obispo County, and 

extends to the south along the MHWL 

to approximately two miles east of Dos 

Pueblos Canyon near the township of 

Naples along the Gaviota Coast, in Santa 

Barbara County. The boundary then 

shifts due south offshore to the State 

waters line, then to the west along the 

State waters line to approximately the 

outfall of Gaviota Creek, then in a 

southwest direction along the western 

end of Channel Islands National Marine 

Sanctuary, southward to include 

Rodriguez Seamount and shifting to the 

northwest in an arc reaching 

approximately 47 miles due west of 

Purisima Point and another arc reaching 

a distance approximately 54 miles due 

west of Morro Rock, then approximately 

2.5 miles to the north, then 

approximately 15 miles due east, and 

finally to the southeast approximately 

39 miles to the point of origin at MHWL 

at Hazard Canyon Reef. The private 

marina at Diablo Canyon Power Plant 

and Port San Luis are not included in 

the Sanctuary. The Sanctuary includes 

offshore waters and seafloor features 

such as Rodriguez Seamount, Arguello 

Canyon, and the Santa Lucia Bank. The 

boundary coordinates are defined by 

regulation (see 15 CFR 922.230 and 

appendix A to 15 CFR part 922, subpart 

V). 

Article III: Special Characteristics of 

the Area 

For well over 10,000 years, First 

Peoples along North America have 

resided on the coast and in inland 

valleys adjacent to central California. 

Caves and other village sites at the 

nearby Channel Islands indicate 

occupation in this region as much as 

13,000 years before present. At that 

time, due to glaciation at northern 

latitudes, the sea level was as much as 

10 miles offshore from the present 

coastline. Paleoshorelines may exist in 

this area that could provide further 

evidence of early human occupation. 

The Native Americans who live in this 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58129 

coastal area today, the Chumash and 

Salinan, can trace generations of family 

lineages in this region, that, when 

coupled with other historical accounts 

and archaeological data, show this coast 

and ocean area have supported their 

people, cultures, and heritage for 

thousands of years. 

The special characteristics of the coast 

east of Point Conception, consisting of 

a south-facing coast with a channel 

sheltered by offshore islands, allowed 

Chumash to develop and make use of 

the plank canoe, called a ‘‘tomol,’’ for 

fishing and trade with other Chumash 

groups. Chumash villages north of Point 

Conception could not make use of the 

plank canoe in the rough waters and 

instead relied on the abundance of 

shellfish in this area and reed canoes. 

There were approximately 14 Chumash 

villages within the area of the sanctuary 

at the time of contact with Europeans, 

nearly 500 years ago. The largest 

Chumash village on the California coast 

at that time was ‘‘Mikiw,’’ located on 

the west bluff of Dos Pueblos Canyon. 

Most of the inhabited sites were located 

at the mouths of rivers or along the 

seashore where there was an abundance 

of food. The range of sites documented 

along or near the Sanctuary’s coast 

includes rock art, shrines, village sites, 

camp sites, cemeteries, organic remains, 

evidence of trade systems, and evidence 

of various forms of subsistence, 

including hunting, fishing, and 

extraction. 

Serial use and development along this 

coastline, beginning with Indigenous 

peoples, then Spanish exploration and 

occupation, Russian fur trading, 

ranching and the trade for hides and 

tallow, discovery of gold, commercial 

fishing, and onshore and offshore oil 

and gas development have all had a 

hand in shaping this region’s coast and 

human use of resources. All of these 

uses have been dependent on marine 

transportation, and as a result over 200 

ship and aircraft wrecks are recorded in 

this area, including several of national 

significance such as the Yankee Blade. 

Commercial fishing for numerous 

abundant fish stocks and commercial 

fishermen are also part of the rich 

maritime heritage in the central coast 

region. 

The natural resources of the ocean 

have been a principal element of most 

of the human occupation and 

exploitation of the region. Strong and 

persistent coastal winds drive 

upwelling, an oceanographic process 

critical to the highly productive marine 

ecosystem. Large kelp forests, vast 

sandy beaches, rocky shorelines, 

shallow and deep reefs, and coastal 

wetlands are interconnected, codependent biological communities 

prominent in this region. Important, 

large-scale features include the Santa 

Lucia Bank, a highly productive, 

approximately 1,000-square mile area in 

the heart of the Sanctuary, and thriving 

deep sea communities at Rodriguez 

Seamount and in Arguello Canyon. 

These productive waters complement 

other protected portions of the 

California Current by serving as critical 

foraging habitat for huge populations of 

shearwaters from New Zealand, 

humpback whales born offshore of 

Central America, leatherback sea turtles 

that migrate from and back to 

Indonesian islands, and albatross from 

Hawaii. More sedentary, local species 

depend on healthy communities in the 

Sanctuary, including the endangered 

snowy plover and black abalone, and 

commercially-important fish species 

like Dungeness crab, sablefish, spot 

prawn, squid, salmon, and lingcod. An 

estimated 33 species of marine 

mammals are found in the area, 18 of 

which can be seen on a regular basis. 

The Sanctuary is considered a seabird 

hot spot, with a higher richness of bird 

species than other sanctuaries offshore 

California. At least 400 species of fish 

have been documented in the area, 

which is also a higher richness of 

species than in nearby areas, likely 

because the Sanctuary includes warmer 

waters south and east of the ecological 

transition zone around Point 

Conception—Point Arguello and colder 

waters to the north. 

The nationally significant ecological 

transition zone in the area around Point 

Conception—Point Arguello, where 

species more common in sub-tropical 

waters to the south meet with species 

more common in colder temperate 

waters to the north, is a central feature 

of the Sanctuary. The northern range of 

many warmer water species and the 

southern range of many colder water 

species meet in the area between Point 

Conception and Point Arguello. 

Increasing ocean temperatures and other 

impacts from climate change intensify 

the need to study biogeographic shifts in 

this area and affirm the importance of 

protecting the habitats on which these 

species depend. 

Rodriguez Seamount, 38 nmi 

southwest of Point Conception, formed 

10–12 million years ago through 

volcanic activity. It rises more than a 

mile above the seafloor to a relatively 

shallow depth of around 2,000 ft. below 

sea level. Scientists consider it to be 

relatively rare in that it may once have 

been an island, rising to possibly 200 ft. 

above sea level; due to sea level rise and 

seafloor subsidence, the seamount is 

now fully submerged. From its time as 

an island, it has remnants of sandy 

beach features and from its time as a 

seamount, it has large coral and sponge 

colonies. Preliminary studies indicate a 

high percentage of invertebrate species 

as well as fish species found on 

Rodriguez Seamount that are not found 

on other nearby seamounts. Some 

surveys have uncovered substantial 

aggregations of coral colonies, with large 

individuals likely decades old, 

indicating a low level of disturbance to 

date. A special management zone for 

Rodriguez Seamount has been 

designated by Sanctuary regulations to 

allow for special protection in the water 

column 500 ft. above the seamount and 

to complement regulations adopted 

separately under the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (MSA) to protect benthic habitats. 

The area contains dramatic coastlines 

consisting of rocky shorelines, large 

bluffs, and sweeping sandy beaches. 

Other than an approximately 10-mile 

stretch of urban development along the 

coast from Port San Luis through 

Oceano, most of the 134 miles of 

Sanctuary coastline is undeveloped due 

to State and county park ownership, a 

large stretch owned by the U.S. 

Government as a military installation, 

and private landholdings of large and 

small ranches or dispersed single-family 

dwellings. This lack of development 

creates a sense of wildness and highlyvalued aesthetics of a natural coastal 

setting worthy of national marine 

sanctuary designation. 

Article IV: Scope of Regulations 

Section 1. Activities Subject to 

Regulation 

The following activities are subject to 

regulation, including prohibition, as 

may be necessary to ensure the 

protection and effective management of 

the ecological, cultural, historical, 

conservation, recreational, scientific, 

educational, or aesthetic resources or 

qualities of the area: 

a. Exploring for, developing, or 

producing oil, gas, or minerals (e.g., 

clay, stone, sand, metalliferous ores, 

gravel, non-metalliferous ores, or any 

other solid material or other physical 

matter of commercial value) within the 

Sanctuary; 

b. Discharging or depositing, from 

within or into the boundary of the 

Sanctuary, or from beyond the boundary 

of the Sanctuary, any material or other 

matter; 

c. Taking, removing, moving, 

catching, collecting, harvesting, feeding, 

injuring, destroying, attracting, 

possessing, or causing the loss of, or 

attempting to take, remove, move, catch, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58130 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

1The proposed boundary would bisect Hazard 

Canyon Reef at MHWL. The detailed legal boundary 

description is included in § 922.230 and the 

collect, harvest, feed, injure, destroy, 

attract, or cause the loss of, a marine 

mammal, sea turtle, bird, historical 

resource, or other Sanctuary resource; 

d. Drilling into, dredging, or 

otherwise altering the submerged lands 

of the Sanctuary; or constructing, 

placing, or abandoning any structure, 

material, or other matter on or in the 

submerged lands of the Sanctuary; 

e. Flying a motorized aircraft above 

the Sanctuary; 

f. Operating a vessel (i.e., water craft 

of any description) within the 

Sanctuary; 

g. Aquaculture or kelp harvesting 

within the Sanctuary; 

h. Introducing or otherwise releasing 

from within or into the Sanctuary an 

introduced species; and, 

i. Interfering with, obstructing, 

delaying, or preventing an investigation, 

search, seizure, or disposition of seized 

property in connection with 

enforcement of the NMSA or any 

regulation or permit issued under the 

NMSA. 

Listing an activity here means that 

Secretary of Commerce can regulate the 

activity, after complying with all 

applicable regulatory laws, without 

going through the designation 

procedures required by paragraphs (a) 

and (b) of section 304 of the NMSA, 16 

U.S.C. 1434(a) and (b). No term of 

designation issued under the authority 

of the NMSA may take effect in 

California State waters within the 

Sanctuary if the Governor of California 

certifies to the Secretary of Commerce 

that such term of designation is 

unacceptable within the review period 

specified in the NMSA. 

Section 2. Emergencies 

Where necessary to prevent or 

minimize the destruction of, loss of, or 

injury to a Sanctuary resource or 

quality, or to minimize the imminent 

risk of such destruction, loss, or injury, 

any and all activities, including those 

not listed in section 1, are subject to 

immediate temporary regulation, 

including prohibition. 

Article V: Effect on Leases, Permits, 

Licenses, and Rights 

Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the 

NMSA, no valid lease, permit, license, 

approval, or other authorization issued 

by any Federal, State, or local authority 

of competent jurisdiction, or any 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. 

The Secretary of Commerce or designee, 

however, may regulate the exercise 

(including, but not limited to, the 

imposition of terms and conditions) of 

such authorization or right consistent 

with the purposes for which the 

Sanctuary is designated. 

In no event may the Secretary or 

designee issue a permit authorizing, or 

otherwise approve: (1) The exploration 

for, development of, or production of 

oil, gas, or minerals within the 

Sanctuary except for existing oil and gas 

production of existing reservoirs under 

production prior to the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation from Platform 

Irene and Platform Heritage; (2) the 

discharge of primary-treated sewage 

except for regulation, pursuant to 

section 304(c)(1) of the Act, of the 

exercise of valid authorizations in 

existence on the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation and issued by 

other authorities of competent 

jurisdiction; or (3) the disposal of 

dredged material within the Sanctuary 

other than at sites authorized by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) prior to the effective date of 

designation. The disposal of dredged 

material does not include the beneficial 

use of dredged material. Any purported 

authorizations issued by other 

authorities after the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation for any of these 

activities within the Sanctuary shall be 

invalid. 

Article IV does not authorize the 

direct regulation of lawful fishing 

activities within the Sanctuary, such as 

setting catch quotas, establishing spatial 

closures for fishing, or setting fishing 

seasons. However, all activities listed in 

article IV could apply to a person 

engaged in the act of fishing, such as but 

not limited to vessel operations, wildlife 

disturbance, discharges, introduction of 

an introduced species, or disturbance of 

cultural or historical resources. 

Aquaculture and kelp harvesting are not 

subject to this limitation and are subject 

to regulation under these terms of 

designation. Fishing in the Sanctuary 

may be regulated by other Federal or 

State authorities of competent 

jurisdiction, and designation of the 

Sanctuary shall have no effect on any 

fishery management regulation, permit, 

or license issued thereunder. 

Article VI: Alteration of This 

Designation 

The terms of designation, as defined 

under section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA, 

may be modified only by the same 

procedures by which the original 

designation is made, including public 

hearings, consultations with interested 

Federal, State, Tribal, regional, and local 

authorities and agencies, review by the 

appropriate congressional committees, 

and approval by the Secretary of 

Commerce, or his or her designee. 

[End of terms of designation] 

III. Summary of Proposed Regulations 

A. Adding New Subpart V 

NOAA is proposing to amend 15 CFR 

part 922 by adding a new subpart 

(subpart V) that contains site-specific 

regulations for the proposed sanctuary. 

This subpart would include the 

proposed boundary, contain definitions 

of common terms used in the new 

subpart, identify prohibited activities 

and exceptions, and establish 

procedures for certification of existing 

uses and permitting otherwise 

prohibited activities. 

B. Proposed Sanctuary Boundary 

NOAA proposes to designate 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary, consisting of an area of 

approximately 5,600 square miles (mi2) 

(4,200 square nautical miles (nmi2)) of 

coastal and ocean waters along the 

central coast of California and the 

submerged lands thereunder. The 

northern boundary would commence at 

Hazard Canyon Reef within Montan ̃ a de 

Oro State Park at the mean high water 

line (MHWL) and extend for 134 miles 

south along the MHWL through the 

remainder of San Luis Obispo County 

coast, excluding the private marina at 

Diablo Canyon Power Plant and Port 

San Luis (at the port’s boundary for 

International Regulations for Preventing 

Collisions at Sea (COLREGS) 

demarcation line (33 CFR 80.1130)), and 

then further south and east to include 

the coast of western Santa Barbara 

County to approximately two miles east 

of Dos Pueblos Canyon along the 

Gaviota Coast near the township of 

Naples. The boundary then shifts due 

south offshore to the State waters line, 

to the west along the State waters line 

to approximately Gaviota Creek, then in 

a southwest direction along the western 

end of CINMS, southward to include 

Rodriguez Seamount and shifting to the 

northwest in an arc reaching 

approximately 47 miles due west of 

Purisima Point and another arc reaching 

a distance approximately 54 miles due 

west of Morro Rock, then approximately 

2.5 miles to the north, then 

approximately 15 miles due east, and 

finally to the southeast approximately 

39 miles to the point of origin at MHWL 

at Hazard Canyon Reef.1


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58131 

coordinates are located in 15 CFR part 922, subpart 

V, appendix A. 

C. Definitions 

This proposed rule incorporates and 

adopts common terms defined in the 

national regulations at 15 CFR 922.11. 

In addition, NOAA proposes to include 

two site-specific definitions. 

NOAA has proposed to define 

‘‘beneficial use of dredged material’’ to 

distinguish between suitable dredge 

material that is discharged into the 

sanctuary for the purpose of protecting 

or restoring habitat of the sanctuary, 

which could be permitted, versus 

disposal of dredge material at a new 

disposal site within the sanctuary for 

purposes other than habitat protection 

or restoration, which would not be 

permittable. Dredged material eligible 

for this definition can come from a 

public harbor adjacent to the sanctuary, 

which for the Agency-Preferred 

Alternative would mean Port San Luis. 

Beneficial use of dredged material is not 

disposal of dredged material. 

NOAA is proposing a definition for 

the ‘‘Rodriguez Seamount Management 

Zone’’ to define the special marine area 

immediately on top of, around, and 

adjacent to the Rodriguez Seamount. 

This definition is necessary because 

NOAA is proposing a regulation that 

specifically prohibits the collection or 

other injury of any sanctuary resource 

below 1,500 ft. water depth in this area 

from any activity other than from lawful 

fishing. This corresponds to the water 

depth about 500 ft. above the very top 

of the seamount. Existing fishing 

regulations, separately established 

under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA), already restrict bottom trawling 

in much of the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone. This special area, 

entirely within the boundaries of the 

proposed sanctuary, is bounded by 

geodetic lines connecting a heptagon 

generally centered on the top of the 

Rodriguez Seamount, and consists of 

approximately 570 mi2 (430 nmi2) of 

ocean waters and the submerged lands 

thereunder. The northeast corner of this 

zone is located approximately 27 mi 

southwest of Point Conception off the 

coast of Santa Barbara County. Exact 

coordinates for the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone boundary are 

provided in appendix B to subpart V. 

D. Prohibited and Regulated Activities 

NOAA is proposing to supplement 

and complement existing management 

of this area by proposing the following 

regulations in § 922.232 to protect 

sanctuary resources and qualities. 

1. Prohibition on Exploring for, 

Developing, or Producing Oil, Gas, or 

Minerals 

The central California coast has 

hosted offshore oil and gas development 

for over 60 years and the area proposed 

for designation as a national marine 

sanctuary has hosted oil and gas 

development for nearly 40 years. There 

have been oil spills from platforms and 

pipelines in this area, and spills from 

onshore development and onshore 

pipeline transportation, all of which 

have caused significant environmental 

harm. Additional information about 

these spill incidents is contained in 

section 4.7 of the draft EIS. NOAA is 

proposing to prohibit exploration, 

development, and production of 

offshore oil and gas resources within the 

sanctuary to reduce the risk of offshore 

spills from oil and gas development in 

the area. Continued oil and gas 

production of existing reservoirs under 

production prior to the effective date of 

sanctuary designation from Platform 

Irene (as part of the Point Pedernales 

Unit development) and Platform 

Heritage (as part of the Santa Ynez Unit 

development), including well 

abandonment, and including 

transportation in pipelines of product to 

shore, would be allowed to continue 

after sanctuary designation until those 

fields are exhausted and/or the 

developer ends operation. However, this 

regulation would prevent development 

of new reservoirs from these existing 

platforms. 

Constructing and operating offshore 

platforms and pipelines also can cause 

direct impacts on natural, historical, 

and cultural resources, particularly from 

disturbance to the seafloor and benthic 

species. Those impacts would also be 

prevented because this regulation would 

not allow new oil and gas exploration, 

development, or production. Any 

construction, repair, replacement, or 

removal of existing pipelines would 

require a ONMS authorization or other 

approval in order to allow disturbance 

to the submerged lands. 

Most if not all of the platforms and 

pipelines within the sanctuary are likely 

to be decommissioned and removed 

within 5–10 years of sanctuary 

designation. The prohibition on new oil 

and gas development would not 

preclude the removal of these structures 

and restoration, if necessary, of any 

damage caused by removal, although a 

sanctuary permit, authorization, or other 

approval would be required in order to 

allow disturbance to the submerged 

lands during decommissioning, 

removal, and restoration activities. 

NOAA would be integrally involved in 

the planning and conduct of such 

decommissioning, removal, and 

restoration activities for structures 

within the sanctuary. 

This prohibition would also not allow 

for development, including exploratory 

activities, of any seafloor minerals. 

While seafloor mining has not been 

proposed in this area, this regulation 

would ensure that the disturbance to 

benthic habitat and species likely to 

result from seafloor mining would not 

occur in the sanctuary. 

2. Prohibition on Discharges 

This proposed prohibition on 

discharges has three main elements: 

prohibition on any discharge within or 

into the sanctuary; discharge from 

beyond the sanctuary boundary that 

subsequently enters and injures 

sanctuary resources; and discharges 

from cruise ships. Each is explained in 

separate paragraphs below. All three 

sub-elements of this prohibition are 

consistent with discharge prohibitions 

in adjacent national marine sanctuaries. 

The proposed prohibition on 

discharges within or into the sanctuary 

is proposed in recognition that various 

substances can be discharged from 

vessels or from infrastructure or 

individuals along the shoreline that can 

harm sanctuary resources or quality. 

The proposed discharge regulations 

would bolster existing authorities such 

as the Clean Water Act (CWA; 33 U.S.C. 

1251 et seq.) that provide some, yet 

incomplete, protection of resources from 

the adverse effects of discharges. 

Establishing a cohesive regulatory 

framework across the full range of the 

geography proposed for sanctuary 

protection would provide value to 

boaters and others using sanctuary 

waters. Section 4.2.1 of the draft EIS 

contains a detailed discussion of water 

quality and discharges that constitute 

key sources of water pollution in the 

area, and a brief summary of key points 

is provided here. While sewage is 

largely well-regulated from onshore 

facilities, and while the EPA has 

established a No Discharge Zone within 

three miles of the California coastline, 

NOAA’s proposed prohibition would 

complement this regulatory framework 

and apply throughout the entire 

geographic region of the proposed 

sanctuary; it would also provide 

additional enforcement authority to 

protect sanctuary resources. Moreover, 

NOAA would commit staff time towards 

education and outreach to help promote 

compliance with this important 

regulation. Furthermore, the prohibition 

would extend throughout the sanctuary 

to ensure discharge of sewage from 

vessels does not cause acute or 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58132 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

cumulative impacts on natural resources 

or water quality. 

Oil discharged from vessels or from 

shore can cause acute toxicity in 

organisms, and can foul feathers of 

seabirds leading to illness or death. 

Discharging other debris from vessels, 

by accident or on purpose, can lead to 

long-term impacts on resources. A 

chronic accumulation of plastics in 

marine ecosystems, for instance, can 

lead to an accumulation of plastic in 

marine organisms including those that 

are eventually ingested by humans. 

NOAA is proposing some exceptions 

for this prohibition consistent with 

those exceptions at adjacent sanctuaries. 

For instance, NOAA is proposing to 

except discharge of fish, fish parts, 

chumming materials, or bait used in and 

resulting from lawful fishing activities 

within the sanctuary. NOAA is also 

proposing to except discharge of sewage 

waste that has been treated by a Type 

I or Type II marine sanitation device, as 

these systems provide effective 

treatment for sewage as to mitigate any 

impact their discharge can have on 

marine resources. Normal vessel 

operations can also involve washing 

down the deck or the anchor, which is 

exempted provided the wash down 

qualifies as ‘‘clean’’ per the definition at 

15 CFR 922.11. There are also normal 

discharges from operating motorized 

vessels that are excepted, such as clean 

vessel engine cooling water, clean vessel 

generator water, and clean bilge water, 

as well as exhaust from an engine or 

generator. Provided that these 

discharges are clean, they may be 

discharged within or into the sanctuary. 

The more common threat to sanctuary 

resources can come from oily bilge 

water, soiled by oil that drips or leaks 

into an engine compartment. Oily bilge 

water may not be discharged into the 

sanctuary under this proposed 

prohibition, and would have to be 

disposed of at onshore pumpout 

stations. NOAA will coordinate with 

harbormasters to ensure existing 

onshore pumpout facilities remain 

operable, and, if necessary, to explore if 

other facilities are needed. 

NOAA is proposing to except the 

disposal of dredged material within the 

proposed sanctuary at disposal sites 

approved by the EPA prior to 

designation. The proposed sanctuary 

boundaries do not include the two 

known EPA-approved dredge disposal 

sites used for Morro Bay dredging. 

NOAA is not aware of any other such 

sites. Nonetheless, this exception would 

allow an agency to demonstrate, after 

sanctuary designation, that a disposal 

site approved by the EPA existed prior 

to sanctuary designation. 

Within the proposed sanctuary, 

NOAA would also consider allowing via 

permit the beneficial use of material 

removed from dredging Port San Luis, 

specifically to protect or restore habitat 

such as a sandy beach. The beneficial 

use of dredged material for habitat 

protection or restoration purposes is 

different from the disposal, or 

discarding, of dredged material. A 

proposed project involving the 

beneficial use of dredged material from 

Port San Luis may be eligible for 

approval by NOAA if the project 

demonstrates a sanctuary habitat 

protection or restoration purpose and if 

the permit requirements and criteria are 

met. 

NOAA is proposing an exception for 

routine discharges from U.S. Coast 

Guard operations. One part of the 

exception would allow U.S. Coast Guard 

vessels that lack sufficient holding tank 

capacity and lack a Type I or II marine 

sanitation device to discharge sewage 

and non-clean graywater beyond 3 nmi 

from shore. A second part of the 

exception would allow discharge of 

ammunition, pyrotechnics, and other 

material directly related to training from 

beyond 12 nmi from shore from U.S. 

Coast Guard vessels and aircraft 

conducting training activities for search 

and rescue and live ammunition fire in 

the sanctuary. NOAA recognizes that 

these exceptions are necessary to ensure 

existing U.S. Coast Guard patrols, 

operations, and training can be 

maintained in the new sanctuary. U.S. 

Coast Guard patrol vessels provide a 

tremendous benefit to NOAA by 

assisting with enforcement of national 

marine sanctuary regulations. Moreover, 

the U.S. Coast Guard is an essential 

element of marine safety to all mariners 

operating offshore in central California, 

and they also provide enforcement of 

other Federal laws, conduct drug 

smuggling interdiction activities, and 

protect the homeland. ONMS has 

developed plans with U.S. Coast Guard 

District 11 leadership through informal 

discussions and NMSA section 304(d) 

consultation to limit discharges into 

other west coast national marine 

sanctuaries and anticipates similar 

approaches could be explored for U.S. 

Coast Guard operations in the proposed 

sanctuary. Therefore, NOAA considers 

the proposed discharge exception for 

U.S. Coast Guard vessels appropriate. 

Finally, NOAA is proposing an 

exception that would allow discharges 

incidental and necessary to normal oil 

and gas production activities from 

Platforms Irene and Heritage into 

reservoirs already in production. These 

could include drill cuttings and mud to 

maintain well pressure and control 

during drilling as well as other materials 

necessary to force oil and gas products 

from one part of the reservoir into 

producing wells. The last step in the life 

of an oil and gas well is to abandon the 

well, with the operator pumping cement 

into the well to prevent release of 

hydrocarbons in the future; this activity 

would be part of the proposed 

exception. Use of the depleted 

reservoirs for injection or storage of any 

material not considered incidental and 

necessary to normal oil and gas 

production would not be covered by the 

exception yet could be considered via 

proposed permit processes. 

Discharges from beyond the boundary 

of the sanctuary would also be 

prohibited when those discharges 

subsequently enter the sanctuary and 

harm a sanctuary resource or quality. 

An example of this could be a spill from 

an onshore oil pipeline that flows down 

a creek, enters the sanctuary at the 

MHWL, and injures seabirds, fish, algae, 

or the sanctuary seafloor or other 

habitat. Unlike a discharge directly 

within or into the sanctuary, for a 

discharge to violate this prohibition, the 

discharge must injure a sanctuary 

resource or quality. This prohibition 

could also be applied to a spill or other 

discharge that originated from the 

marine environment and subsequently 

entered the sanctuary and injured a 

sanctuary resource or quality. The same 

exceptions that are proposed for the 

sub-element prohibiting discharge 

directly within or into the sanctuary 

would also apply for a discharge from 

beyond the boundary, except for the 

exception for dredge disposal and the 

exception for discharges incidental and 

necessary to oil and gas production. 

NOAA intends that dredge disposal 

discharges beyond the boundary of the 

sanctuary need to be designed in such 

a manner that they do not enter the 

sanctuary and injure sanctuary 

resources or qualities. 

The third sub-element of this 

discharge regulation would prohibit 

discharge from cruise ships. Across 

most national marine sanctuaries, 

NOAA has applied consistent 

regulations that allow for fewer 

exceptions for cruise ship discharges 

than for other vessel discharges within 

or into sanctuaries because cruise ships 

can generate very large volumes of 

waste or other discharges. Even if 

treated, the volume of sewage and 

graywater, for instance, on a cruise ship 

of more than 2,000 passengers can reach 

several million gallons a day. Sewage 

discharge may contain bacteria or 

viruses that can cause disease in 

humans and wildlife, and can cause 

excessive growth and decomposition of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58133 

oxygen-depleting plant life, resulting in 

harm or death to organisms. Section 

4.2.1 of the draft EIS provides additional 

detail on these sorts of discharges. The 

only exceptions proposed for cruise 

ships discharging within CHNMS would 

be for clean vessel engine cooling water, 

clean vessel generator cooling water, 

vessel engine or generator exhaust, clear 

bilge water, or anchor wash; in essence, 

discharges directly linked to propelling 

and operating the vessel itself. 

3. Prohibition on Drilling Into or 

Altering the Submerged Lands 

The seabed is a large and important 

habitat in the ecosystem within the 

proposed sanctuary, and NOAA 

proposes to prohibit activities that 

would drill into, dredge, or otherwise 

alter or disturb the submerged lands of 

the sanctuary. This prohibition would 

include constructing, placing or 

abandoning any structure, material, or 

other matter on the submerged lands. 

This is a common regulatory prohibition 

that NOAA has applied to most national 

marine sanctuaries. The purpose is to 

prevent activities that cause harm to 

habitat and species on or near the 

seafloor, such as drilling into or 

dredging into the seafloor. The proposed 

regulation includes exceptions for 

certain activities including disturbance 

during the conduct of lawful fishing 

activities, kelp harvesting, or anchoring 

a vessel. NOAA also proposes to except 

from this prohibition the installation of 

an aid to navigation, as well as the 

repair, replacement, or other 

maintenance on existing structures, 

specifically docks, piers, breakwaters, or 

jetties. Also, NOAA proposes an 

exception for maintenance dredging of 

the entrance channels for Port San Luis 

in existence at the time the sanctuary is 

designated. Vandenberg Space Force 

Base periodically conducts dredging 

near its coastal loading dock, with 

onshore disposal of the sand, but that 

dredging disturbance would be 

exempted with the general exemption 

for existing Department of Defense 

activities. NOAA has also proposed an 

exception to allow for drilling, 

maintaining, and abandoning wells 

incidental and necessary to normal oil 

and gas production activities within or 

into existing reservoirs in production at 

the time of sanctuary designation from 

Platforms Irene or Heritage. 

In proposing these exceptions, NOAA 

has considered both the anticipated 

level of disturbance to the submerged 

lands and the purpose of the specified 

activities, most of which are related to 

maritime safety. The proposed 

exceptions are intended to further the 

policy of the NMSA to facilitate public 

and private uses of sanctuary resources 

to the extent compatible with the 

primary objective of resource protection. 

However, in order to conserve and 

protect populations of coral and sponge 

colonies, NOAA proposes to not apply 

any of these exceptions within the 

Rodriguez Seamount Management Zone. 

The only exception that would apply 

within the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone is the exception for 

seabed disturbance conducted during 

lawful fishing activity as regulated 

under the MSA. Note, however, that 

most of the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone has been designated 

by the Pacific Fishery Management 

Council as groundfish essential fish 

habitat under the MSA, and areas in and 

around the zone are currently closed to 

bottom trawling under regulations at 50 

CFR part 660, subpart C. 

Certain currently proposed or 

contemplated future activities could 

result in disturbance to the submerged 

lands in the area proposed for sanctuary 

designation. Procedures described 

below in the section on General Permits, 

Authorizations, Certifications, and 

Special Use Permits could be used to 

allow such an activity that is otherwise 

prohibited, provided that the applicable 

criteria and requirements are met and 

that any permit conditions can be 

satisfied by developers. Examples of 

such activities that would be prohibited 

by the proposed seabed disturbance 

regulation unless a sanctuary general 

permit, ONMS authorization, or 

certification were issued include 

construction and operation of subsea 

electrical transmission cables from wind 

development in Federal waters beyond 

the sanctuary, or construction and 

operation of wind platforms in State 

waters near Vandenberg Space Force 

Base. Disturbance of submerged lands 

during repair and maintenance of 

existing structures not listed as being 

exempted, such as oil pipelines to shore 

from Platform Irene, or trans-oceanic 

fiber-optic telecommunications cables, 

would also require a permit, 

authorization, or certification from 

NOAA before proceeding. 

With respect to subsea electrical 

transmission cables, BOEM cannot issue 

leases, rights of way, or easements for 

wind development within national 

marine sanctuaries per the Outer 

Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 

43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(10). As discussed in 

the draft EIS, NOAA intends to 

coordinate with BOEM on potential 

integration of NMSA authorities and 

BOEM’s OCSLA authorities for the 

purposes of specific wind development 

projects contemplated adjacent to and 

within the proposed sanctuary. 

Although the details of any individual 

permit or authorization would be 

project-specific and would depend upon 

NOAA’s consideration of the permit 

application(s) for any particular project, 

NOAA believes that the most likely 

permitting approach for activities 

associated with subsea electrical 

transmission cables is as follows. 

• To allow the site assessment and 

characterization activities that must be 

conducted prior to cable installation, 

NOAA could consider issuing a 

sanctuary general permit for research 

purposes under 15 CFR part 922, 

subpart D, and 15 CFR 922.233 of the 

proposed rule. 

• For the installation of a subsea 

electric transmission cable on the outer 

continental shelf within the proposed 

sanctuary, NOAA could consider 

issuing an ONMS authorization of a 

permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers (USACE) under section 10 

of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 

403), under 15 CFR 922.36 and 

922.232(e) of the proposed rule. 

• For installation of cables within 

State waters of the proposed sanctuary, 

NOAA could similarly consider 

authorizing a lease issued by the State 

Lands Commission or a coastal 

development permit issued by the 

California Coastal Commission, under 

15 CFR 922.36 and 922.232(e) of the 

proposed rule. 

• To authorize the continued 

presence of the cable on or in the seabed 

within the proposed sanctuary, NOAA 

could then consider issuing a special 

use permit under section 310 of the 

NMSA. 

• To allow any necessary 

maintenance and repair associated with 

the cable that might cause a disturbance 

of the submerged lands of the sanctuary, 

NOAA could consider several potential 

options. These could include relying on 

the initial ONMS authorization of the 

USACE section 10 permit and/or State 

permit for the cable installation 

(depending on the duration of that 

permit and whether it included future 

repair and maintenance), or issuing an 

ONMS authorization of a separate 

USACE and/or State permit that is 

issued specifically for the maintenance 

and repair activity. 

NOAA has coordinated with USACE 

regarding this approach in Federal 

waters, and intends to continue that 

coordination throughout the designation 

process and as plans for cabling in the 

area are developed. Regular 

coordination with State agencies has 

occurred in the past and NOAA would 

conduct specific coordination meetings 

related to cable permitting as necessary. 

That said, NOAA’s proposed regulations 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58134 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

contain several permitting mechanisms 

(see section H of this preamble below 

and section 3.2.2 of the draft EIS) that 

would provide NOAA with flexibility in 

its approach to any individual 

permitting request. 

Decommissioning and removal 

activities that would disturb the 

sanctuary seabed, such as oil and gas 

platform removal or decommissioning 

of the outfall at the Diablo Canyon 

Power Plant, would require a permit, 

authorization, or certification from 

NOAA before proceeding. Further, 

NOAA has already commented, or could 

comment in the future as appropriate, to 

Federal, State, and local agencies 

leading regulatory review of these 

actions; also, some of these examples 

have been discussed with BOEM and 

BSEE, as cooperating agencies under 

NEPA for this designation, given the 

relevance to their authorities. 

4. Prohibition on Possessing, Moving, 

Removing, or Injuring or Attempting To 

Possess, Move, Remove, or Injure a 

Sanctuary Historical Resource 

NOAA is proposing to prohibit 

possessing, moving, removing, or 

injuring, or attempting to possess, move, 

remove, or injure a sanctuary historical 

resource, as defined at 15 CFR 922.11. 

This prohibition aims to reduce the risk 

of direct harm to sanctuary historical 

and cultural resources. ‘‘Moving’’ and 

‘‘injuring’’ would include any changes 

to the position or state of historical 

resources, as well as covering, 

uncovering, moving, or taking artifacts 

from a shipwreck, even if the artifacts 

are not located directly on a shipwreck. 

Sanctuary historical resources include 

cultural and archaeological resources 

and artifacts. This sanctuary prohibition 

would apply within both State and 

Federal waters of the sanctuary and is 

necessary to ensure conservation of 

historical resources on the more than 

200 ship and aircraft wrecks thought to 

exist in the sanctuary, as well as other 

known or unknown historical resources, 

such as resources that may be associated 

with submerged Native settlements. 

5. Prohibition on Taking Any Marine 

Mammal, Sea Turtle or Bird Within or 

Above the Sanctuary 

This prohibition is proposed to ensure 

conservation of important populations 

of marine mammals, sea turtles, and 

birds that are found in or above the 

sanctuary. The regulation would not 

apply should a person be authorized to 

take a marine mammal, sea turtle, or 

bird by NOAA or the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service pursuant to the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), or the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The 

term ‘‘take’’ including ‘‘taking’’ is 

defined in the national sanctuary 

regulations at 15 CFR 922.11. 

6. Prohibition on Possessing Within the 

Sanctuary (Regardless of Where Taken, 

Moved, or Removed From) Any Marine 

Mammal, Sea Turtle, or Bird 

This regulation is a companion to the 

preceding prohibition and is proposed 

to restrict a person’s ability to possess 

any marine mammal, sea turtle, or bird 

within the sanctuary, except as allowed 

by the MMPA, ESA, or MBTA, or as 

necessary for valid law enforcement 

purposes. 

7. Prohibition on Deserting a Vessel 

Aground, at Anchor, or Adrift in the 

Sanctuary or Leaving Harmful Matter 

Aboard a Grounded or Deserted Vessel 

in the Sanctuary 

Other adjacent national marine 

sanctuaries, similar to the proposed 

CHNMS, have considerable boating 

traffic along the coast and from local 

harbors. NOAA has responded to 

dozens of vessel sinkings, groundings, 

and discharges each year in national 

marine sanctuaries throughout the 

National Marine Sanctuary System, 

many with significant response and 

restoration costs and damage to 

sanctuary resources. Along with 

responding to those incidents, NOAA 

has adopted this regulation as a means 

to prevent a vessel’s sinking, grounding, 

or other incident, given that prevention 

is much less expensive than responding 

to incidents and can optimally prevent 

impacts and damage to sanctuary 

resources as well as to private property. 

NOAA proposes prohibiting deserting a 

vessel aground within the sanctuary for 

the same reasons. In the definition of 

the term ‘‘deserting’’ in the national 

sanctuary regulations at 15 CFR 922.11, 

NOAA has clarified conditions that 

constitute deserting a vessel. Finally, 

with this proposed regulation NOAA 

also proposes prohibiting leaving 

harmful matter aboard a grounded or 

deserted vessel in the sanctuary; the 

intent would be to minimize additional 

damage to sanctuary resources. The 

sanctuary regulations at 15 CFR 922.11 

also define ‘‘harmful matter.’’ 

8. Prohibition on Attracting Any White 

Shark Within the Sanctuary 

White sharks function as a key species 

in coastal ecosystems in three broad 

areas in the world, with California and 

Baja California forming one of those 

population centers. Several different 

areas within the proposed sanctuary 

have important populations of adult and 

sub-adult white sharks, and may offer 

linkage to other white shark aggregation 

areas in CINMS, Monterey Bay National 

Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS), and 

Greater Farallones National Marine 

Sanctuary (GFNMS). Including this 

proposed regulation would provide 

similar levels of protection to these 

central California white shark 

aggregation sites within CHNMS by 

preventing harm or behavioral 

disturbance to white sharks. The 

proposed regulation would apply the 

definition of ‘‘attract’’ in the national 

sanctuary regulations at 15 CFR 922.11. 

The prohibition against attracting white 

sharks is intended to address 

harassment and disturbance related to 

human interaction from research 

activities directed at white sharks or 

shark diving programs known generally 

as adventure tourism, or from 

recreational boaters who may approach 

a white shark. NOAA has concluded 

these activities can degrade the natural 

environment, impacting the species as a 

whole, or adversely impacting 

individual sharks from repeated 

encounters with humans and boats. A 

similar prohibition against attracting 

great white sharks was promulgated for 

MBNMS in 1996 and GFNMS in 2008, 

and NOAA has not had issues at those 

sanctuaries with lawful fishing activities 

inadvertently attracting white sharks. 

NOAA would have the ability to issue 

permits for activities that involve 

attracting a white shark if the permit 

procedures and requirements are met, as 

described below. 

9. Prohibition on Moving, Removing, 

Taking, Collecting, Catching, 

Harvesting, Disturbing, Breaking, 

Cutting or Otherwise Injuring a 

Sanctuary Resource Located Below 

1,500 ft. Water Depth Within the 

Rodriguez Seamount Management Zone; 

Prohibition on Possessing any Sanctuary 

Resource, the Source of Which Is Below 

1,500 ft. Water Depth With the 

Rodriguez Seamount Management Zone 

NOAA is proposing a regulatory 

framework for Rodriguez Seamount that 

is similar to its approach for Davidson 

Seamount in MBNMS. With the CHNMS 

regulations, NOAA proposes to create 

the Rodriguez Seamount Management 

Zone to ensure conservation of diverse 

and rare resources found on the 

seamount, including coral and sponges 

and other invertebrates, or living in the 

water column immediately above it. The 

seamount has seafloor features that 

suggest it may have been exposed above 

sea level millions of years ago, and its 

uncommon geomorphologic and benthic 

habitat features could be damaged 

without further protection. The top of 

the seamount is at approximately 2,000 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58135 

ft. water depth, so under the proposed 

regulation there would be a buffer of 

500 ft. above the top of the seamount to 

protect organisms that migrate above the 

seamount diurnally. 

This prohibition would not apply to 

lawful fishing activity that is regulated 

under the MSA and its implementing 

regulations. NOAA, through 

conservation actions under the MSA, 

has prohibited bottom trawling on and 

around Rodriguez Seamount since June 

2006. Additional protections provided 

to the seamount by the proposed 

sanctuary regulations would protect the 

high biodiversity and deep-sea habitat 

on the seamount. Long life histories and 

slow growth of deep-sea communities 

mean that these habitats have long 

recovery times following injuries and 

adverse impacts; additional protections 

for resources 1,500 ft. below sea level 

(roughly 500 ft. above the top of the 

seamount) would add critical additional 

risk mitigation for these sensitive 

resources. 

10. Prohibition on Introducing or 

Otherwise Releasing From Within or 

Into the Sanctuary an Introduced 

Species, Except Striped Bass Released 

During Catch and Release Fishing 

Activity 

NOAA is proposing to prohibit 

introducing or otherwise releasing an 

introduced species into the sanctuary. 

NOAA has adopted the same introduced 

species regulation at other national 

marine sanctuaries offshore of California 

to prevent the incidental or deliberate 

release of an introduced species into the 

sanctuary. Releases and subsequent 

spreading of introduced species have 

devastated marine ecosystems across the 

globe; most notably the alga Sargassum 

horneri has become a disruptive 

introduced species at nearby CINMS 

and has the potential to cause ecological 

and economic harm. This and other 

introduced species are potentially 

spread by vessels and have proliferated 

in the Santa Barbara Channel. Removing 

or otherwise eradicating introduced 

species once they have established local 

populations is extremely difficult; hence 

NOAA prefers to rely on prevention 

measures and deterring introducing 

such species within national marine 

sanctuaries. The proposed exemption 

for catch and release of striped bass 

recognizes the State of California has 

size limits for striped bass, an 

introduced but now established species 

harvested by recreational fishermen. 

Releasing a striped bass would not be a 

violation of this prohibition. 

11. Prohibition on Interfering With, 

Obstructing, or Preventing an 

Investigation, Search, or Other 

Enforcement Activity 

NOAA proposes a regulation, similar 

to regulations at other local national 

marine sanctuaries, to prohibit 

interfering with various sanctuary 

enforcement activities. This regulation 

would assist in NOAA’s enforcement of 

the sanctuary regulations and strengthen 

sanctuary management. 

E. Exemption for Emergencies 

The proposed prohibitions for 

CHNMS would not apply to any activity 

necessary to respond to emergencies 

that threaten life, property, or the 

environment. However, this proposed 

exemption for emergencies would not 

apply to the prohibitions on the 

development of oil, gas, or minerals; 

attracting a white shark; introducing an 

introduced species; or interfering with 

an investigation or other enforcement 

activity. 

F. Department of Defense Exemption 

NOAA has proposed a broad 

exemption to allow existing activities 

carried out or approved by the various 

branches of the Department of Defense 

as specifically identified in chapter 4.9 

or appendix I to the draft EIS. NOAA 

has coordinated with the Department of 

Defense, a cooperating agency under 

NEPA, to include in appendix I to the 

draft EIS a list of the activities that 

occur in the area proposed for sanctuary 

designation. 

The area overlaps with the Point 

Mugu sea range and is adjacent to 

Vandenberg Space Force Base, which 

conducts both military missions from 

the base as well as hosting commercial 

space launches. All launches from the 

base or within the proposed sanctuary 

that are carried out or approved by DoD 

would be included in this exemption. 

With respect to commercial and civil 

launches from the base and associated 

activities, DoD has informed NOAA 

that: 

• DoD approval is required for these 

activities. 

• DoD conducts NEPA reviews for 

these activities. Other Federal agencies, 

such as the Federal Aviation 

Administration and/or the U.S. Coast 

Guard, may be cooperating agencies for 

purposes of these NEPA reviews. 

• DoD also conducts all required 

natural and cultural resource 

consultations for these activities. 

• Civil partners and commercial 

providers conducting these activities are 

required to comply with DoD best 

management practices. 

NOAA advises that based on public 

comments received, additional 

coordination with DoD, and NOAA’s 

experience administering the national 

marine sanctuary system, pursuant to 

NEPA and the Administrative Procedure 

Act, the final rule and final EIS may 

reflect any modifications to the DoD 

exemption that are a logical outgrowth 

of the proposed rule and that do not 

constitute a substantial change to the 

proposed action relevant to 

environmental concerns. 

New DoD activities that would not 

otherwise be prohibited by the CHNMS 

regulations would not require an 

amendment to the list of exempted 

activities. For those new DoD activities 

that would otherwise be prohibited by 

the CHNMS regulations, NOAA has 

proposed a process whereby the ONMS 

Director, upon consultation with the 

appropriate counterpart at the 

Department of Defense, can also exempt 

such new activities carried out by the 

Department of Defense. 

An activity is considered to be a new 

activity, and not covered by the 

exemption for existing Department of 

Defense activities, if, as determined by 

NOAA, the activity is new or modified 

in any way (including change in 

location, frequency, duration, or 

technology used) from the activities 

described or listed in section 4.9 or 

appendix I, and the activity is likely to 

cause adverse effects on sanctuary 

resources or qualities that are 

substantially greater or different in kind 

than the effects of the activities 

described or listed in section 4.9 or 

appendix I. 

A new activity that is not covered by 

the exemption for existing Department 

of Defense activities could be conducted 

if a sanctuary general permit or ONMS 

authorization, as applicable, were 

issued for the proposed activity. 

In addition, NOAA commits to 

working with the Department of Defense 

to consider exempting new activities 

from the CHNMS regulatory 

prohibitions through subsequent 

rulemaking procedures, for instance in 

subsequent management plan and 

regulatory review processes for CHNMS. 

Any changes to the list of exempted 

Department of Defense activities could 

only occur after compliance with all 

applicable laws, such as the 

Administrative Procedure Act and 

NEPA, as necessary, and after public 

notice and comment, as applicable. 

NOAA is willing to work with the 

Department of Defense to create a 

mechanism whereby new activities that 

are likely to injure sanctuary resources, 

and thereby also require section 304(d) 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58136 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

consultation, could be handled in a 

single, consolidated review. 

This proposed regulation also 

contains language common to 

regulations for other national marine 

sanctuaries about obligations of the 

Department of Defense in the event an 

incident results in threatened or actual 

destruction, loss of, or injury to a 

sanctuary resource or quality. NOAA 

recognizes that this broad exemption is 

necessary to ensure military readiness 

for the Department of Defense to 

conduct existing training, operations, 

and military readiness activities in the 

area proposed to be designated as a 

national marine sanctuary. The United 

States military has been able to maintain 

readiness and conduct training and 

other operations in other national 

marine sanctuaries based on similar 

broad exemptions. 

G. Emergency Regulations 

NOAA is not proposing any 

sanctuary-specific regulation to allow 

for development of emergency 

regulations to address urgent threats to 

sanctuary resources. Rather, the 

emergency regulation provision 

included in the regulations of general 

applicability, which apply to all 

national marine sanctuaries (see 15 CFR 

922.7), would also apply to CHNMS. 

Emergency regulations are used when 

there is an imminent risk to sanctuary 

resources and a temporary regulation or 

prohibition is necessary to prevent or 

minimize the destruction or loss of 

those resources, or otherwise minimize 

the imminent risk of such destruction, 

loss, or injury. 

H. General Permits, Certifications, 

Authorizations, and Special Use Permits 

1. Sanctuary General Permits 

NOAA is proposing to include 

authority to issue sanctuary general 

permits to allow certain activities that 

would otherwise violate prohibitions in 

the proposed sanctuary’s regulations. 

NOAA’s proposal would not allow 

issuance of a sanctuary general permit 

for oil, gas, or mineral exploration, 

development, or production; 

introducing an introduced species; or 

interfering with an investigation or 

other enforcement activity; or as further 

limited in § 922.232(f) of the proposed 

regulations. National marine sanctuary 

program-wide regulations describe, at 

15 CFR 922.30, different purposes for 

which a sanctuary general permit could 

be issued, three of which would apply 

to this proposed sanctuary: ‘‘Research— 

activities that constitute scientific 

research or scientific monitoring of a 

national marine sanctuary resource or 

quality,’’ ‘‘Education—activities that 

enhance public awareness, 

understanding, or appreciation of a 

national marine sanctuary or national 

marine sanctuary resource or quality,’’ 

and ‘‘Management—activities that assist 

in managing a national marine 

sanctuary.’’ 

NOAA is proposing to add to the list 

at § 922.30, an additional purpose 

specific to CHNMS for which a 

sanctuary general permit could be 

issued: ‘‘Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities—activities within 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary that will promote or enhance 

local Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities; or will promote or 

enhance education and training related 

to local Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities.’’ NOAA is 

proposing this general permit category 

to address a need identified during 

scoping. Specifically, NOAA received a 

scoping comment letter stating that 

indigenous peoples should be allowed 

to conduct the following cultural 

activities in the proposed sanctuary, 

subject to all other applicable law: 

collecting culturally-significant 

resources including bones, feathers, 

shells, animals, and plants; burials of 

cremated remains in biodegradable 

receptacles; survey and other work at 

submerged indigenous living sites, like 

villages or caves, including collecting 

artifacts like stone bowls or pestles. 

ONMS may be able to allow some of 

these activities to occur within the 

proposed sanctuary under existing 

authorities and the current general 

permit categories at § 922.30 (e.g., a 

research or education permit may be 

appropriate to authorize survey 

activities at submerged indigenous 

living sites); however, ONMS is 

proposing this additional general permit 

category for CHNMS to ensure that 

activities to promote or enhance Native 

American cultural or ceremonial 

activities may be allowed to occur 

within the proposed sanctuary, 

consistent with the purpose and need of 

the proposed action. The proposed 

permit category would be recipient 

neutral; i.e., any person, as that term is 

defined in 15 CFR 922.11, would be able 

to apply for a permit under the 

proposed category. However, permits 

may only be issued for those activities 

that will promote or enhance local 

Native American cultural or ceremonial 

activities or education and training 

related to such activities. NOAA has 

determined that this proposed permit 

category would further the purposes and 

policies of the NMSA by facilitating 

uses of sanctuary resources compatible 

with the primary objective of resource 

protection, and by enhancing public 

awareness, understanding, appreciation, 

and wise and sustainable use of the 

historical, cultural, and archaeological 

resources of the proposed sanctuary. 

The proposed regulations would 

require compliance with 15 CFR part 

922, subpart D, in the national 

regulations for permit application 

processes, review procedures, 

amendments, and other permitting 

stipulations. These national permitting 

regulations include a list of factors 

NOAA considers in deciding whether or 

not to issue the permit, such as whether 

the activity must be conducted within 

the sanctuary, or whether the activity 

will be compatible with the primary 

objective of protection of sanctuary 

resources and qualities. NOAA would 

be able to impose specific terms and 

conditions through a permit as 

appropriate. 

2. Certifications 

Pre-existing activities specifically 

authorized by a valid Federal, State, or 

local lease, permit, license, or rights of 

subsistence use or access might be 

occurring within the proposed CHNMS 

area that would otherwise be prohibited 

by sanctuary regulations. Therefore, 

NOAA proposes including § 922.234 to 

describe the process by which it could 

certify an existing valid lease, permit, 

license, or right of subsistence use or 

access within the proposed sanctuary 

boundaries, consistent with 16 U.S.C. 

1434(c) and 15 CFR 922.10. In 

compliance with the NMSA, the 

regulations at § 922.234 would state that 

certification is the process by which 

such activities existing prior to the 

designation of the sanctuary that violate 

sanctuary prohibitions may be allowed 

to continue. NOAA may, however, 

further regulate the exercise of such 

activities by applying additional terms 

and conditions as a condition of the 

certification to achieve the purposes for 

which the sanctuary would be 

designated. Requests for certifying 

permitted existing uses would have to 

be received by NOAA within 90 days of 

the effective date of the designation. 

3. ONMS Authorizations 

Pursuant to § 922.36 in the national 

regulations and § 922.232(e) in the 

CHNMS regulations, NOAA would have 

the authority to consider allowing an 

activity otherwise prohibited by 

§ 922.232 if such activity is specifically 

authorized by any valid Federal, State, 

or local lease, permit, license, approval, 

or other authorization issued after the 

effective date of sanctuary designation. 

This ‘‘ONMS authorization authority’’ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58137 

would apply to most of the proposed 

prohibitions as outlined in § 922.232(e) 

and as limited in § 922.232(f). However, 

NOAA could not issue an authorization 

to allow for exploration, development, 

or production of oil, gas, or minerals, or 

for interfering with an investigation or 

other enforcement action. In general, an 

ONMS authorization could not be 

issued to allow for an introduction of an 

introduced species; however, NOAA 

proposes a process by which an ONMS 

authorization for aquaculture projects 

raising an introduced species approved 

in concert with the State of California 

could be issued after making certain 

findings. NOAA has previously adopted 

a memorandum of agreement (MOA) 

with the State of California for 

considering aquaculture projects raising 

an introduced species in State waters of 

MBNMS and intends to update that 

MOA to address future aquaculture 

projects raising an introduced species 

that may be proposed within CHNMS. 

4. Special Use Permits 

NOAA has the authority under the 

NMSA to issue special use permits 

(SUPs) at national marine sanctuaries, 

as established by section 310 of the 

NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1441) and by 15 CFR 

922.31. SUPs can be used to authorize 

specific activities in a sanctuary if such 

authorization is necessary to establish 

conditions of access to, and use of, any 

sanctuary resource or to promote public 

use and understanding of a sanctuary 

resource. Section 310 of the NMSA 

establishes four requirements for SUPs: 

(1) activities must be compatible with 

the purposes for which the sanctuary is 

designated and with protection of 

sanctuary resources; (2) SUPs shall not 

authorize the conduct of any activity for 

a period of more than five years unless 

otherwise renewed; (3) activities carried 

out under the SUP must be conducted 

in a manner that does not destroy, cause 

the loss of, or injure sanctuary 

resources; and (4) permittees are 

required to purchase and maintain 

comprehensive general liability 

insurance, or post an equivalent bond, 

against claims arising out of activities 

conducted under the SUP and to agree 

to hold the United States harmless 

against such claims. The NMSA 

authorizes NOAA to assess and collect 

fees for the conduct of any activity 

under an SUP, including costs incurred, 

or expected to be incurred, in issuing 

the permit and the fair market value use 

of sanctuary resources; for instance, for 

use of the seabed to protect a buried 

cable from anchor damage. 

Implementing regulations at 15 CFR 

922.35 provide additional detail on 

assessment of fees for SUPs. Like with 

sanctuary general permits, NOAA can 

place conditions on SUPs specific to the 

activity being permitted. 

The activities that may qualify for a 

SUP are set forth in the Federal Register 

(78 FR 25957 (May 3, 2013); 82 FR 

42298 (Sept.7, 2017)). Categories of 

SUPs may be changed or added to 

through public notice and comment, 

and no SUP may be issued for any 

category of activity unless ONMS has 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register that such category of activity is 

subject to the requirements of section 

310 of the NMSA. NOAA is not 

proposing any new SUP category as part 

of the designation of CHNMS. However, 

SUP categories that are potentially 

relevant to known activities at the 

proposed CHNMS include the 

continued presence of commercial 

subsea cables, discharge of cremated 

human remains, and discharges from 

fireworks displays. 

I. Other Conforming Amendments 

The general regulations in 15 CFR 

part 922, subpart A, for general 

information and 15 CFR part 922, 

subpart D, for National Marine 

Sanctuary permitting would also have to 

be amended so that the regulations are 

accurate and up-to-date. The modified 

sections to conform to adding a new 

sanctuary are: 

• Section 922.1 Purposes and 

applicability of the regulations 

• Section 922.4 Boundaries 

• Section 922.5 Allowed activities 

• Section 922.6 Prohibited or otherwise 

regulated activities 

• Section 922.30 National Marine 

Sanctuary general permits 

• Section 922.36 National Marine 

Sanctuary authorizations 

• Section 922.37 Appeals of permitting 

decisions 

IV. Request for Comments 

NOAA requests comments on this 

proposed rule including the terms of 

designation and proposed regulations, 

the draft EIS including the range of 

alternatives, and the draft management 

plan for the proposed CHNMS. NOAA 

will publish the final EIS and final 

management plan following public 

review and comment on this proposed 

rule and following NOAA’s 

consideration of substantive comments 

received. NOAA also requests 

comments on the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act certification and economic analysis 

(see section V.F). All substantive 

comments received, or comprehensive 

summary of all public comments on 

these documents as applicable, along 

with responses to comments, will be 

included in the final EIS. 

Sensitive personally identifiable 

information, such as account numbers 

and Social Security numbers, should 

not be included with the comment. 

Comments that are not related to the 

proposed Chumash Heritage National 

Marine Sanctuary or that contain 

profanity, vulgarity, threats, or other 

inappropriate language will not be 

considered. 

V. Classification 

A. National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

NOAA has determined that the 

designation of Chumash Heritage 

National Marine Sanctuary (CHNMS) 

will not have a negative impact on the 

National Marine Sanctuary System and 

that sufficient resources exist to 

effectively implement sanctuary 

management plans and to update site 

characterizations. The preliminary 

finding for NMSA section 304(f) is 

available on the proposed sanctuary’s 

website at: https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ 

chumash-heritage/. In addition, NOAA 

consulted with the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council (PFMC) as 

required in accordance with NMSA 

section 304(a)(5). Through this 

consultation, NOAA provided the PFMC 

with the opportunity to recommend any 

fishing regulations it deemed necessary 

to implement the proposed sanctuary 

designation, and participated in two 

public meetings with the PFMC in 

September 2022 and November 2022 as 

the Council deliberated on this issue. At 

its hearing on November 6, 2022, the 

PFMC decided not to recommend any 

fishing regulations to implement the 

proposed designation but expressed a 

willingness to reconsider in the future 

should new information about the need 

for fishing regulations arise. The PFMC 

documented this decision in a letter to 

ONMS West Coast Regional Office dated 

December 1, 2022. NOAA accepts the 

PFMC’s response relative to the 

proposed designation of CHNMS. 

B. National Environmental Policy Act 

As described in section I above, 

NOAA prepared a draft EIS to evaluate 

the impacts of this proposed action of 

designating a national marine sanctuary, 

which considered alternatives for the 

proposed designation of a national 

marine sanctuary along and offshore of 

the coast of central California. Copies of 

the draft EIS and related draft 

management plan are available at the 

address and website listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this proposed rule. 

NOAA is also soliciting public 

comments on the draft EIS and draft 

management plan. Responses to 

comments received on this proposed 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58138 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

rule as well as on the draft EIS and draft 

management plan will be published in 

the final EIS and preamble to the final 

rule. 

C. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Impact 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined this proposed 

rule is significant action under 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review,’’ 58 FR 190 (Oct 

4, 1993), as supplemented and 

reaffirmed E.O. 14094, ‘‘Modernizing 

Regulatory Review,’’ 88 FR 21879 (April 

11, 2023). Based upon the information 

provided in NOAA’s accompanying 

Cost-Benefit Analysis (draft EIS 

appendix D), this proposed rule would 

not meet the criteria for a significant 

regulatory action as defined in section 

3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866, as supplemented 

and reaffirmed by E.O. 14094. This 

means the estimated annual effect is less 

than $200 million, and the action would 

not adversely affect in a material way 

the economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities. Therefore, NOAA did not 

prepare the full regulatory impact 

analysis under E.O. 12866. However, 

NOAA requests public comment on all 

the costs and benefits discussed in the 

accompanying Cost-Benefit Analysis. 

D. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Assessment 

NOAA has concluded that this 

regulatory action does not have 

federalism implications sufficient to 

warrant preparation of a federalism 

assessment under Executive Order 

13132 because NOAA supplements and 

complements Federal, State, and local 

laws under the NMSA rather than 

supersedes or conflicts with them. 

NOAA has coordinated with State 

partners in the development of this 

proposed rule. NOAA has aimed for 

consistent regulations throughout 

sanctuary waters including those within 

State and Federal jurisdiction. 

E. Executive Order 13175 Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Under Executive Order 13175 of 

November 6, 2000, Federal departments 

and agencies are charged with engaging 

in regular and meaningful consultation 

and collaboration with officials of 

federally-recognized Tribal Nations on 

the development of Federal policies that 

have tribal implications. The Executive 

order identifies fundamental principles 

guiding agencies in formulating or 

implementing policies that have tribal 

implications, including working with 

federally-recognized Tribal Nations on a 

government-to-government basis to 

address issues concerning Indian tribal 

self-government, tribal trust resources, 

and Indian tribal treaty and other rights, 

recognizing the right of Indian tribes to 

self-government, and supporting tribal 

sovereignty and self-determination. 

NOAA implements Executive Order 

13175 through the NOAA 

Administrative Order 218–8 (Policy on 

Government-to-Government 

Consultation with Federally Recognized 

Indian Tribes and Alaska Native 

Corporations), and the NOAA Tribal 

Consultation Handbook. Under these 

policies and procedures, NOAA offers 

affected federally-recognized Tribal 

Nations government-to-government 

consultation at the earliest practicable 

time it can reasonably anticipate that a 

proposed policy or initiative may have 

Tribal implications. 

NOAA identified the Santa Ynez 

Band of Chumash Indians (SYBCI) as 

the only federally-recognized Tribe in 

the area of the proposed sanctuary. To 

date, five formal consultation meetings 

have been conducted, on January 27, 

2022, April 14, 2022, August 12, 2022, 

September 1, 2022, and December 19, 

2022, as well as one informational 

meeting with NOAA leadership on 

April 28, 2022. In the course of this 

consultation, NOAA has shared relevant 

portions of the draft EIS and the draft 

management plan with the SYBCI and 

incorporated comments received and 

information exchanged in consultation 

to revise and update the draft EIS. 

NOAA’s government-to-government 

consultation with the SYBCI for the 

purpose of designating the new national 

marine sanctuary is still ongoing. 

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 

5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal 

agencies to prepare an analysis of a 

rule’s impact on small entities whenever 

the agency is required to publish a 

notice of proposed rulemaking, unless 

the agency certifies, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

605, that the action will not have 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The RFA requires agencies to consider, 

but not necessarily minimize, the effects 

of proposed rules on small entities. The 

goal of the RFA is to inform the agency 

and public of expected economic effects 

of the proposed rule and to ensure the 

agency considers alternatives that 

minimize the expected economic effects 

on small entities while meeting 

applicable goals and objectives. 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, 

the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the 

Department of Commerce certified to 

the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) 

that this proposed rule, if adopted, 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The purpose, context, and 

statutory basis for this action is 

described above and not repeated here. 

The analysis below discusses the 

potential effects of the proposed 

designation of a Chumash Heritage 

National Marine Sanctuary and serves 

as the factual basis for the certification. 

In summary, with this proposed 

rulemaking, small businesses 

(commercial fishing, for-hire charter 

operations) are not expected to 

experience significant impacts. The 

extent of costs imposed on businesses 

would be for those seeking a general 

sanctuary permit of $172. 

I. Description of Small Entities to Which 

the Initial Boundary Alternative Would 

Apply 

NOAA has identified commercial and 

for-hire fishing vessels and the nonconsumptive recreational industry, 

which includes for-hire operations such 

as wildlife viewing, as small entities 

impacted by the Initial Boundary 

Alternative. Each relevant small 

business category is based on the most 

recent size standards published by the 

U.S. Small Business Administration 

(SBA) (2022). Size standards are based 

upon the average annual receipts (all 

revenue) or the average employment of 

a firm. The commercial size standard is 

$25.0 million for finfish fishing (North 

American Industry Classification 

System [NAICS] code—114111), $14.0 

million for shellfish fishing (NAICS 

code—114112), and $11.5 million for 

other marine fishing (NAICS code— 

114119). Water-based scenic and 

sightseeing transportation operations 

(NAICS code—487210), such as for-hire 

recreational fishing operations and dive/ 

snorkeling for-hire operations, have size 

standards of $14.0 million. All 

businesses within the industries 

analyzed here are small businesses, 

which include commercial and 

recreational fishing and nonconsumptive recreational businesses. 

There are other businesses that operate 

within the study area; however, they are 

not considered small businesses (e.g., 

cruise ships). These large entities are 

discussed in the Cost-Benefit Analysis 

(draft EIS appendix D). 

All commercial fishing and for-hire 

fishing vessel count data presented in 

this section are derived from California 

Department of Fish and Wildlife 

(CDFW) data. NOAA calculated the 

potential number of vessels that may be 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58139 

2Many of the permit applicants are from 

academic institutions; thus, ONMS’ information 

collection renewal uses the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) Occupational Employment and 

Wages (May 2020) for ‘‘Life, Physical, and Social 

Science Occupations.’’ For this group, BLS 

estimated a mean hourly wage of $38.15 (https://

www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes190000.htm). 

impacted by the proposed rule—as 

implemented in the Agency-Preferred 

Alternative (Alternative 2 and Gaviota 

Coast Extension (Sub-alternative 5b)) in 

the draft EIS—based on the number of 

vessels reporting activity, from 2016– 

2020, within the CDFW statistical areas 

that best align with the proposed 

sanctuary boundary. Statistical areas 

were included in the analysis if their 

center is located within the proposed 

boundary. In total, 53 statistical areas 

were included in the area analyzed— 

meaning if a fishing vessel landed at 

least one pound of commercial fish 

species within one of the 53 statistical 

areas within the study period, that 

vessel was considered in this analysis. 

Further information, including maps of 

the statistical areas included may be 

found in Eynon, 2023. Estimates of the 

number of vessels that operate within 

the proposed sanctuary boundaries are 

provided below. Data for nonconsumptive industries are not publicly 

available, so information was collected 

from personal communication with 

NOAA staff. 

i. Commercial Fishing 

All commercial fishing vessels were 

determined to be small businesses based 

on the SBA size standards. On average 

(2016–2020), 250.6 vessels landed at 

least one pound of marine life within 

the area analyzed each year and 3,057.6 

commercial fishing vessels operated 

within the State (CDFW, 2020a, 2021, 

2020b, 2019, 2018, 2017). 

ii. For-Hire Recreational Fishing 

For-hire recreational fishing includes 

both charter boats and headboats. 

Charter boats are fishing vessels that are 

typically hired to take up to six anglers 

on a fishing trip. In general, charter 

boats charge on a per-trip basis. 

Headboats usually operate on a 

schedule and may provide several trips 

in a single day, taking multiple fishing 

parties per trip and charging on a perperson basis. Headboats are usually 

larger and able to accommodate more 

anglers than a charter boat. All 

recreational fishing operations were 

determined to be small businesses. 

From 2016–2020, there was an annual 

average of 18.8 for-hire recreational 

fishing vessels operating within the 

proposed sanctuary boundaries 

annually and 532 vessels on average 

each year operating within the State 

(CDFW, 2020c, 2021, 2020b, 2019, 2018, 

2017). 

iii. Non-Consumptive Recreation 

Industry 

Businesses considered to operate in 

the non-consumptive recreation 

industry include dive and snorkel 

operations, rental equipment operations, 

wildlife viewing operations, and other 

businesses that either utilize or whose 

customers utilize, but do not take, 

sanctuary resources. 

There are several harbors within the 

study area that support nonconsumptive recreation businesses. 

Santa Barbara, Morro Bay, and Avila 

Beach all have been identified to have 

operations that use the harbors. Across 

these three harbors, NOAA identified 

nine operations that are likely to use the 

proposed sanctuary waters to support 

their operations for whale watching and 

other wildlife viewing (NOAA personal 

communication). All of these businesses 

were determined to be small businesses. 

No operations visiting the proposed 

sanctuary for white shark tours were 

identified. 

II. Analysis of Small Entities 

The proposed regulatory action would 

establish new reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements for small 

entities that apply for sanctuary general 

permits, certifications, or authorizations 

(see 15 CFR part 922 and the description 

in part III, section H above). As a result 

of this proposed action, only a minimal 

increase in the number of permits 

(approximately 5–15 permits per year) is 

expected, and these requirements would 

have a minimal impact on small entities 

because few operators in the area would 

need to apply for a permit in order to 

continue their activities. Minimal 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements are expected because 

lawful commercial and recreational 

fishing and recreational activities would 

be allowed to continue in the proposed 

sanctuary without a permit (with certain 

exceptions discussed below). An 

operator would be required to obtain a 

permit only if they wish to conduct 

activities that would be prohibited in 

the proposed sanctuary; for example, if 

a research operation or commercial 

activity was likely to result in damage 

to the seabed, a permit would be 

required unless an exception or 

exemption applies. 

As discussed below, in section G., the 

public reporting burden for ONMS 

general permits is estimated to average 

three responses with an average of 1.5 

hours per response, to include 

application submission, a cruise or 

flight log (or some other form of activity 

report), and a final summary report after 

the activity is complete. The only 

expected costs are related to permitting. 

The total cost estimate for reporting a 

permit is $171.68 based on an hourly 

rate of $38.15 (see Paperwork Reduction 

Act OMB control number (0648– 

0141 2)). All small and large entities 

would be subject to the same permitting 

and reporting requirements, and no 

unique professional skills are necessary 

to meet these reporting requirements. 

Therefore, the reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements resulting 

from this proposed rule would not have 

a significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

The proposed rule does not propose 

to regulate commercial fishing or 

recreational fishing. The proposed rule 

is not likely to impact commercial 

fishermen’s operations or profits within 

the statistical areas corresponding to the 

proposed sanctuary designation. 

Although vessels would not be 

permitted to discharge within the 

proposed sanctuary boundary, they are 

still permitted to discharge outside of 

sanctuary boundaries. As discussed in 

the supporting draft EIS (section 4.2.3), 

this regulation is unlikely to have an 

adverse impact on vessels, provided 

they plan accordingly to discharge 

outside of the sanctuary or use 

appropriate facilities near shore. 

Additionally, vessels are unlikely to be 

impacted by the seabed disturbance 

prohibition. If a vessel did need to 

engage in seabed disturbance, the small 

business could seek a permit from 

NOAA. 

It is also likely that increased name 

recognition, marketing, and outreach of 

the proposed sanctuary would result in 

increased demand for the services 

offered by small businesses that utilize 

sanctuary resources. This is described in 

more detail in the economic review of 

the potential impacts; see appendix D of 

the draft EIS. 

As described above, NOAA does not 

expect a significant reduction in profits, 

as the only expected costs are for 

permitting ($172 per permit). No 

duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting 

Federal rules have been identified for 

this proposed rule. Therefore, NOAA 

has concluded that the proposed rule 

would not have a significant impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

operating in the area of the proposed 

sanctuary due to the minimal permitting 

costs. Therefore, an Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis is not required. 

G. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Notwithstanding any other provisions 

of the law, no person is required to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58140 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

3https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-36/chapterVIII/part-800/subpart-C/section-800.16. 

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 (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq., unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) control number. 

NOAA has an OMB control number 

(0648–0141) for the collection of public 

information related to the processing of 

ONMS permits across the National 

Marine Sanctuary System. NOAA’s 

proposal to create a national marine 

sanctuary along the coast of central 

California would likely result in a 

minimal increase in the number of 

requests for ONMS general permits, 

special use permits, certifications, and 

authorizations because this action 

proposes to add those approval types for 

this proposed sanctuary. A large 

increase in the number of permit 

requests would require a change to the 

reporting burden certified for OMB 

control number 0648–0141. While not 

expected, if such permit requests do 

increase, a revision to this control 

number for the processing of permits 

would be requested. 

In the most recent Information 

Collection Request revision and 

approval for national marine sanctuary 

permits (dated November 30, 2021), 

NOAA reported approximately 424 

national marine sanctuary permitting 

actions each year, including 

applications for all types of ONMS 

permits, requests for permit 

amendments, and the conduct of 

administrative appeals. Of this amount, 

CHNMS is expected to add 5 to 15 

permit requests per year. The public 

reporting burden for national marine 

sanctuaries general permits is estimated 

to average three responses with an 

average of 1.5 hours per response, to 

include application submission, a cruise 

or flight log (or some other form of 

activity report), and a final summary 

report after the activity is complete. 

Therefore, the total annual burden hours 

would be expected to increase by 

approximately 22.5 to 67.5 hours. 

Please send any comments regarding 

the burden estimate for this data 

collection requirement or any other 

aspect of this data collection, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, to 

NOAA (see ADDRESSES above). 

Comments can also be submitted to 

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Before an agency submits a collection of 

information to OMB for approval, the 

agency shall provide 60-day notice in 

the Federal Register, and otherwise 

consult with members of the public and 

affected agencies concerning each 

proposed collection of information, to 

solicit comments to: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

H. National Historic Preservation Act 

Section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA, 54 U.S.C. 

306108) 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 with regard to 

the undertaking. ‘‘Historic property’’ 

means 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. This term 

includes artifacts, records, and material 

remains that are related to and located 

within such properties, including 

properties of traditional religious and 

cultural importance to an Indigenous 

nation or tribe or Native Hawaiian 

organization. 36 CFR 800.16(l). 

The regulations implementing section 

106 of the NHPA (36 CFR part 800) 

establish a process requiring Federal 

agencies to: (i) determine whether the 

undertaking is a type of activity that 

could affect historic properties, (ii) 

identify historic properties in the area of 

potential effects, (iii) assess potential 

adverse effects, and (iv) resolve adverse 

effects. The regulations require that 

Federal agencies consult with States, 

tribes, and other interested parties when 

making their effect determinations. 

NOAA has determined that the 

designation of a national marine 

sanctuary and related rulemaking for 

sanctuary-specific regulations meet the 

definition of an undertaking as defined 

at § 800.16(y). 

In fulfilling its responsibilities under 

section 106 of the NHPA, NOAA is 

seeking to identify potential consulting 

parties in addition to the State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO), and will 

complete the identification of historic 

properties in the area of potential effects 

and the assessment of the effects of the 

undertaking on such properties in 

consultations with those identified 

parties. By this notice of proposed 

rulemaking, NOAA seeks public input, 

particularly in regard to the 

identification of historic properties 

within the proposed area of potential 

effect. Pursuant to 36 CFR 800.16(l)(1),3

the term ‘‘historic property’’ means ‘‘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’’ as well as 

‘‘properties of traditional religious and 

cultural importance to an Indian tribe 

. . . that meet the National Register 

criteria.’’ If you, your organization(s), or 

business(es) would like to be considered 

a ‘‘consulting party’’ under section 106 

please contact the individual listed 

under the heading FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT; include contact 

information for the principal 

representative for the consultation; and 

describe you or your party’s interest in 

the proposed designation. In accordance 

with 36 CFR 800.3(f)(3), NOAA will 

consider all ‘‘consulting party’’ requests 

but has ultimate discretion in 

determining and inviting additional 

consulting parties. 

I. Sunken Military Craft Act 

The Sunken Military Craft Act of 2004 

(SMCA; Pub. L. 108–375, Title XIV, 

sections 1401 to 1408; 10 U.S.C. 113 

note) preserves and protects from 

unauthorized disturbance all sunken 

military craft that are owned by the 

United States Government, as well as 

foreign sunken military craft that lie 

within United States waters, as defined 

in the SMCA. Thousands of U.S. sunken 

military craft lie in waters around the 

world, many accessible to looters, 

treasure hunters, and others who may 

cause damage to them. These craft, and 

their associated contents, represent a 

collection of non-renewable and 

significant historical resources that 

often serve as war graves, carry 

unexploded ordnance, and contain oil 

and other hazardous materials. By 

protecting sunken military craft, the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58141 

SMCA helps reduce the potential for 

irreversible harm to these nationally 

important historical and cultural 

resources. 

There are seven known U.S. Navy 

destroyers that ran aground and sunk 

near Point Honda in 1923 within the 

proposed CHNMS. The proposed 

CHNMS may also include sunken 

military craft that have yet to be 

discovered. Sunken military craft fall 

under the jurisdiction of a number of 

Federal agencies such as the U.S. Navy 

and the U.S. Coast Guard. The USCGC 

McCulloch is an example of a known 

sunken military craft in the proposed 

National Marine Sanctuary that is under 

the jurisdiction of the U.S. Coast Guard, 

per the SMCA. NOAA would coordinate 

with the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Coast 

Guard and any other applicable Federal 

agency, or State agency if found within 

State waters, regarding activities 

directed at sunken military craft 

discovered within the sanctuary. 

J. Coastal Zone Management Act 

(CZMA) 

Section 307 of the Coastal Zone 

Management Act (CZMA; 16 U.S.C. 

1456) requires Federal agencies to 

consult with a State’s coastal program 

on potential Federal agency activities 

that affect any land or water use or 

natural resource of the coastal zone. 

Because the proposed sanctuary lies 

partially within State waters, NOAA 

intends to submit a copy of this 

proposed rule and supporting 

documents, including the draft EIS, to 

the California Coastal Commission for 

evaluation of Federal consistency under 

the CZMA. NOAA will publish the final 

rule and designation only after 

completion of the Federal consistency 

process under the CZMA. 

K. Executive Order 12898: 

Environmental Justice 

Executive Order 12898 directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

disproportionately high and adverse 

effects of their actions on human health 

and the environment of minority or lowincome populations. The designation of 

national marine sanctuaries by NOAA 

helps to ensure the enhancement of 

environmental quality for all 

populations in the United States. The 

proposed sanctuary designation would 

not result in disproportionate negative 

impacts on any minority or low-income 

population. In addition, many of the 

potential impacts from designating the 

proposed sanctuary would result in 

long-term or permanent beneficial 

impacts by protecting sanctuary 

resources, which may have a positive 

impact on communities by providing 

employment and educational 

opportunities, and potentially result in 

improved ecosystem services. 

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 922 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Coastal zone, Cultural 

resources, Historic preservation, Marine 

protected areas, Marine resources, 

National marine sanctuaries, Recreation 

and recreation areas, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Shipwrecks. 

Nicole R. LeBoeuf, 

Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services 

and Coastal Zone Management, National 

Ocean Service, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration. 

For the reasons set forth above, NOAA 

proposes to amend 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. 

■ 2. Amend § 922.1 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 922.1 Purposes and applicability of the 

regulations. 

(a) * * * 

(2) To implement the designations of 

the national marine sanctuaries, for 

which specific regulations appear in 

subpart F through subsequent subparts 

of this part, by regulating activities 

affecting them, consistent with their 

respective terms of designation, in order 

to protect, restore, preserve, manage, 

and thereby ensure the health, integrity, 

and continued availability of the 

conservation, recreational, ecological, 

historical, scientific, educational, 

cultural, archaeological, and aesthetic 

resources and qualities of these areas. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Revise § 922.4 to read as follows: 

§ 922.4 Boundaries. 

Subpart F and subsequent subparts of 

this part set forth the boundaries for all 

national marine sanctuaries. 

■ 4. Revise § 922.6 to read as follows: 

§ 922.6 Prohibited or otherwise regulated 

activities. 

Subpart F and subsequent subparts of 

this part set forth site-specific 

regulations applicable to the activities 

specified therein. 

■ 5. Amend § 922.30 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(2); 

■ b. Removing the word ‘‘and’’ at the 

end of paragraph (b)(5); 

■ c. Removing the period at the end of 

paragraph (b)(6) and adding ‘‘; and’’ in 

its place; and 

■ d. Adding paragraph (b)(7). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 922.30 National Marine Sanctuary 

general permits. 

(a) * * * 

(2) The permit procedures and criteria 

for all national marine sanctuaries in 

which the proposed activity is to take 

place in accordance with relevant sitespecific regulations appearing in 

subpart F and subsequent subparts of 

this part. 

(b) * * * 

(7) Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities—activities within 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary that will promote or enhance 

local Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities; or will promote or 

enhance education and training related 

to local Native American cultural or 

ceremonial activities. 

■ 6. Amend § 922.36 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (b)(1)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 922.36 National Marine Sanctuary 

authorizations. 

(a) Authority to issue authorizations. 

The Director may authorize a person to 

conduct an activity otherwise 

prohibited by subparts L through P, or 

subparts R through V, of this part, if 

such activity is specifically allowed by 

any valid Federal, State, or local lease, 

permit, license, approval, or other 

authorization (hereafter called ‘‘agency 

approval’’) issued after the effective date 

of sanctuary designation or expansion, 

provided the applicant complies with 

the provisions of this section. Such an 

authorization by the Office of National 

Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) is hereafter 

referred to as an ‘‘ONMS authorization.’’ 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Notification must be sent to the 

Director, Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries, to the attention of the 

relevant Sanctuary Superintendent(s) at 

the address specified in subparts L 

through P, or subpart R through V, of 

this part as appropriate. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Amend § 922.37 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 922.37 Appeals of permitting decisions. 

(a) * * * 

(2) An applicant or a holder of a 

National Marine Sanctuary permit 

issued pursuant to § 922.30 or pursuant 

to site-specific regulations appearing in 

subparts F through V of this part; 

* * * * * 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58142 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

■ 8. Add subpart V to read as follows: 

Subpart V—Chumash Heritage 

National Marine Sanctuary 

Sec. 

922.230 Boundary. 

922.231 Definitions. 

922.232 Prohibited or otherwise regulated 

activities. 

922.233 Permit procedures. 

922.234 Certification of preexisting leases, 

licenses, permits, approvals, other 

authorizations, or other rights to conduct 

a prohibited activity. 

Appendix A to Subpart V of Part 922— 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary Boundary Description and 

Coordinates 

Appendix B to Subpart V of Part 922— 

Coordinates for Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone 

§ 922.230 Boundary. 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary (CHNMS) consists of an area 

of approximately 5,617 square miles 

(mi2) (4,242 square nautical miles 

(nmi2)) of coastal and ocean waters 

along the central coast of California and 

the submerged lands thereunder. The 

northern boundary would commence at 

Hazard Canyon Reef within Montan ̃ a de 

Oro State Park at the mean high water 

line (MHWL) and extend for 134 miles 

south along the MHWL through the 

remainder of the San Luis Obispo 

County coast, excluding the private 

marina at Diablo Canyon Power Plant 

and Port San Luis (at the port’s 

boundary for International Regulations 

for Preventing Collisions at Sea 

(COLREGS) demarcation line (33 CFR 

80.1130)), and then further south and 

east to include the coast of western 

Santa Barbara County to approximately 

two miles east of Dos Pueblos Canyon 

along the Gaviota Coast near the 

township of Naples. The boundary then 

shifts due south offshore to the State 

waters line, then to the west along the 

State waters line to approximately 3 nmi 

offshore of Gaviota Creek, then in a 

southwest direction along the western 

end of Channel Islands National Marine 

Sanctuary, southward to include 

Rodriguez Seamount and shifting to the 

northwest in an arc reaching 

approximately 47 miles due west of 

Purisima Point and another arc reaching 

a distance approximately 54 miles due 

west of Morro Rock, then approximately 

2.5 miles to the north, then 

approximately 15 miles due east, and 

finally to the southeast approximately 

39 miles to the point of origin at MHWL 

at Hazard Canyon Reef. 

§ 922.231 Definitions. 

In addition to the definitions found in 

§ 922.11, the following terms are 

defined for purposes of this subpart: 

Beneficial use of dredged material 

means the use of dredged material 

removed from the public harbor 

adjacent to the Sanctuary (Port San 

Luis) that is determined by the Director 

to be suitable as a resource for habitat 

protection or restoration purposes. 

Beneficial use of dredged material is not 

disposal of dredged material. 

Rodriguez Seamount Management 

Zone means the area bounded by 

geodetic lines connecting a heptagon 

generally centered on the top of the 

Rodriguez Seamount, and consists of 

approximately 570 mi2 (430 nmi2) of 

ocean waters and the submerged lands 

thereunder. The northeast corner of this 

zone is located approximately 27 miles 

southwest of Point Conception off the 

coast of Santa Barbara County. Exact 

coordinates for the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone boundary are 

provided in appendix B to this subpart. 

§ 922.232 Prohibited or otherwise 

regulated activities. 

(a) Except as specified in paragraphs 

(b) through (e) and paragraph (g) of this 

section, the following activities are 

prohibited and thus are unlawful for 

any person to conduct or to cause to be 

conducted: 

(1) Exploring for, developing, or 

producing oil, gas, or minerals within 

the Sanctuary, except for continued oil 

and gas production, which includes 

well abandonment, of existing reservoirs 

under production prior to the effective 

date of Sanctuary designation 

([EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]) 

from Platform Irene and Platform 

Heritage. 

(2)(i) Discharging or depositing from 

within or into the Sanctuary, other than 

from a cruise ship, any material or other 

matter, except: 

(A) Fish, fish parts, chumming 

materials, or bait used in or resulting 

from lawful fishing activities within the 

Sanctuary, provided that such discharge 

or deposit is during the conduct of 

lawful fishing activities within the 

Sanctuary; 

(B) For a vessel less than 300 gross 

registered tons (GRT), or a vessel 300 

GRT or greater without sufficient 

holding tank capacity to hold sewage 

while within the Sanctuary, clean 

effluent generated incidental to vessel 

use by an operable Type I or II marine 

sanitation device (U.S. Coast Guard 

classification) approved in accordance 

with section 312 of the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act, as amended 

(FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. 1322. Vessel 

operators must lock all marine 

sanitation devices in a manner that 

prevents discharge or deposit of 

untreated sewage; 

(C) Clean vessel deck wash down, 

clean vessel engine cooling water, clean 

vessel generator cooling water, clean 

bilge water, or anchor wash; 

(D) For a vessel less than 300 GRT, or 

a vessel 300 GRT or greater without 

sufficient holding capacity to hold 

graywater while within the Sanctuary, 

clean graywater as defined by section 

312 of the FWPCA; 

(E) Vessel engine or generator 

exhaust; 

(F) Beyond 3 nautical miles from 

shore, sewage and non-clean graywater 

as defined by section 312 of the FWPCA 

generated incidental to vessel use by a 

U.S. Coast Guard vessel without 

sufficient holding tank capacity and 

without a Type I or II marine sanitation 

device; and beyond 12 nautical miles 

from shore, ammunition, pyrotechnics, 

or other materials directly related to 

training for search and rescue and live 

ammunition activities conducted by 

U.S. Coast Guard vessels and aircraft; 

(G) Dredged material deposited at 

disposal sites within the Sanctuary 

authorized by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), in 

consultation with the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers, prior to the effective date 

of Sanctuary designation ([EFFECTIVE 

DATE OF FINAL RULE]); or 

(H) Discharges incidental and 

necessary to oil and gas production 

within or into existing reservoirs under 

production prior to the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation ([EFFECTIVE 

DATE OF FINAL RULE]) from Platform 

Irene or Platform Heritage, including 

well abandonment. 

(ii) Discharging or depositing from 

within or into the Sanctuary any 

material or other matter from a cruise 

ship except clean vessel engine cooling 

water, clean vessel generator cooling 

water, vessel engine or generator 

exhaust, clean bilge water, or anchor 

wash. 

(iii) Discharging or depositing from 

beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary 

any material or other matter that 

subsequently enters the Sanctuary and 

injures a Sanctuary resource or quality, 

except material or other matter listed in 

paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(A) through (F) and 

(a)(2)(ii) of this section. 

(3) Drilling into, dredging, or 

otherwise altering the submerged lands 

of the Sanctuary; or constructing, 

placing, or abandoning any structure, 

material, or other matter on or in the 

submerged lands of the Sanctuary, 

except as incidental and necessary to: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58143 

(i) Conduct lawful fishing activities or 

lawful kelp harvesting; 

(ii) Anchor a vessel; 

(iii) Install or maintain an authorized 

navigational aid; 

(iv) Repair, replace, or rehabilitate an 

existing dock, pier, breakwater, or jetty; 

(v) Conduct maintenance dredging of 

entrance channels for harbors in 

existence prior to the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation ([EFFECTIVE 

DATE OF FINAL RULE]); or, 

(vi) Drill, maintain, or abandon a well 

necessary for purposes related to oil and 

gas production within or into existing 

reservoirs under production prior to the 

effective date of Sanctuary designation 

([EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]) 

from Platform Irene or Platform 

Heritage. 

(vii) The exceptions listed in 

paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) through (vi) of this 

section do not apply in the Rodriguez 

Seamount Management Zone, the 

boundary of which is defined in 

appendix B to this subpart. 

(4) Moving, removing, or injuring, or 

attempting to move, remove, or injure, 

a Sanctuary historical resource; or 

possessing or attempting to possess a 

Sanctuary historical resource, except as 

necessary for valid law enforcement 

purposes. This prohibition does not 

apply to, moving, removing, or injury 

resulting incidentally from lawful kelp 

harvesting or lawful fishing activities. 

(5) Taking any marine mammal, sea 

turtle, or bird within or above the 

Sanctuary, except as authorized by the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act, as 

amended (MMPA), 16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq., Endangered Species Act, as 

amended (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as amended 

(MBTA), 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq., or any 

regulation promulgated under the 

MMPA, ESA, or MBTA. 

(6) Possessing within the Sanctuary 

(regardless of where taken, moved, or 

removed from), any marine mammal, 

sea turtle, or bird, except as authorized 

by the MMPA, ESA, MBTA, by any 

regulation promulgated under the 

MMPA, ESA, or MBTA, or as necessary 

for valid law enforcement purposes. 

(7) Deserting a vessel aground, at 

anchor, or adrift in the Sanctuary or 

leaving harmful matter aboard a 

grounded or deserted vessel in the 

Sanctuary. 

(8) Attracting any white shark within 

the Sanctuary. 

(9)(i) Moving, removing, taking, 

collecting, catching, harvesting, 

disturbing, breaking, cutting, or 

otherwise injuring, or attempting to 

move, remove, take, collect, catch, 

harvest, disturb, break, cut, or otherwise 

injure, any Sanctuary resource located 

more than 1,500 ft. below the sea 

surface within the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone, as defined in 

appendix B to this subpart. This 

prohibition does not apply to lawful 

fishing, which is regulated pursuant to 

50 CFR part 660. 

(ii) Possessing any Sanctuary 

resource, the source of which is more 

than 1,500 ft. below the sea surface 

within the Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone, except as necessary 

for valid law enforcement purposes. 

This prohibition does not apply to 

possession of fish resulting from lawful 

fishing, which is regulated pursuant to 

50 CFR part 660. 

(10) Introducing or otherwise 

releasing from within or into the 

Sanctuary an introduced species, except 

striped bass (Morone saxatilis) released 

during catch and release fishing activity. 

(11) 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. 

(b) The prohibitions in paragraphs 

(a)(2) through (7) and (9) of this section 

do not apply to an activity necessary to 

respond to an emergency threatening 

life, property, or the environment. 

(c)(1) The prohibitions in paragraphs 

(a)(2) through (7) and (9) and (10) of this 

section do not apply to existing 

activities carried out or approved by the 

Department of Defense that were 

conducted prior to the effective date of 

this designation ([EFFECTIVE DATE OF 

FINAL RULE]), as specifically identified 

in section 4.9 or appendix I to the final 

environmental impact statement for 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary (for availability, see https://

sanctuaries.noaa.gov/chumashheritage/). New activities may be 

exempted from the prohibitions in 

paragraphs (a)(2) through (7) and (9) and 

(10) of this section by the Director after 

consultation between the Director and 

the Department of Defense. All 

Department of Defense activities must 

be carried out in a manner that avoids 

to the maximum extent practicable any 

adverse impacts on Sanctuary resources 

and qualities. 

(2) 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 the Department of Defense, 

the Department of Defense shall 

promptly coordinate with the Director 

for the purpose of taking appropriate 

actions to respond to and mitigate the 

harm and, if practicable, restore or 

replace the Sanctuary resource or 

quality. 

(d) The prohibitions in paragraphs 

(a)(2) through (9) of this section do not 

apply to any activity conducted under 

and in accordance with the scope, 

purpose, terms, and conditions of a 

National Marine Sanctuary general 

permit issued pursuant to subpart D of 

this part and § 922.233, or a special use 

permit issued pursuant to subpart D of 

this part. 

(e) The prohibitions in paragraphs 

(a)(2) through (9) of this section, and 

paragraph (a)(10) of this section 

regarding any introduced species of 

shellfish that NOAA and the State of 

California have determined is noninvasive and will not cause significant 

adverse effects to Sanctuary resources or 

qualities, and that is cultivated in State 

waters as part of commercial shellfish 

aquaculture activities, do not apply to 

any activity authorized by any lease, 

permit, license, approval, or other 

authorization issued after the effective 

date of Sanctuary designation 

([EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]) 

and issued by any Federal, State, or 

local authority of competent 

jurisdiction, provided that the applicant 

complies with § 922.36, the Director 

notifies the applicant and authorizing 

agency that the Director does not object 

to issuance of the authorization, and the 

applicant complies with any terms and 

conditions the Director deems necessary 

to protect Sanctuary resources and 

qualities. Amendments, renewals, and 

extensions of authorizations in 

existence on the effective date of 

designation constitute authorizations 

issued after the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation. 

(f)(1) Notwithstanding paragraphs (d) 

and (e) of this section, in no event may 

the Director issue a National Marine 

Sanctuary general permit under subpart 

D of this part and § 922.233, or an 

ONMS authorization or special use 

permit under subpart D of this part 

authorizing, or otherwise approve: 

(i) The exploration for, development, 

or production of oil, gas, or minerals 

within the Sanctuary; 

(ii) The discharge of untreated or 

primary-treated sewage within the 

Sanctuary (except by certification, 

pursuant to §§ 922.10 and 922.234, of 

valid authorizations in existence prior 

to the effective date of designation 

([EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]) 

and issued by other authorities of 

competent jurisdiction); or 

(iii) The disposal of dredged material 

within the Sanctuary other than at sites 

authorized by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency prior to the effective 

date of designation ([EFFECTIVE DATE 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
58144 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

OF FINAL RULE]). For the purposes of 

this subpart, the disposal of dredged 

material does not include the beneficial 

use of dredged material, as defined at 

§ 922.231, related to dredging activity at 

Port San Luis. 

(2) Any purported authorizations 

issued by other authorities within the 

Sanctuary shall be invalid. 

(g) A person may conduct an activity 

prohibited by paragraphs (a)(2) through 

(10) of this section within the Sanctuary 

if such activity is specifically authorized 

by a valid Federal, State, or local lease, 

permit, license, or right of subsistence 

use or of access that is in existence on 

the effective date of Sanctuary 

designation ([EFFECTIVE DATE OF 

FINAL RULE]) and within the sanctuary 

designated area and complies with 

§ 922.10, provided that the holder of the 

lease, permit, license, or right of 

subsistence use or of access complies 

with the certification procedures for 

CHNMS as outlined in § 922.234. 

§ 922.233 Permit procedures. 

(a) A person may conduct an activity 

prohibited by § 922.232(a)(2) through 

(9), if such activity is specifically 

authorized by, and conducted in 

accordance with the scope, purpose, 

terms, and conditions of, a sanctuary 

general permit issued under this section 

and subpart D of this part. 

(b) Applications for permits should be 

addressed to the West Coast Regional 

Office, Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries; ATTN: Superintendent, 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary, 99 Pacific Street, Suite 100F, 

Monterey, CA 93940. 

§ 922.234 Certification of preexisting 

leases, licenses, permits, approvals, other 

authorizations, or other rights to conduct a 

prohibited activity. 

(a) To obtain a certification of an 

activity that is specifically authorized 

by a valid Federal, State, or local lease, 

permit, license, or right of subsistence 

use or access in existence on the 

effective date of Sanctuary designation 

([EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE]) 

and within the sanctuary designated 

area, pursuant to §§ 922.10 and 

922.232(g), the holder of such 

authorization, permit, or right shall: 

(1) Notify the Director, in writing, 

within 90 days of the effective date of 

Sanctuary designation ([EFFECTIVE 

DATE OF FINAL RULE]) of the 

existence and location of such 

authorization or right and requests 

certification of such authorization or 

right; and 

(2) Comply with any terms and 

conditions on the exercise of such 

authorization or right imposed as a 

condition of certification, by the 

Director, to achieve the purposes for 

which the Sanctuary was designated. 

(b) The holder shall address any 

requests for certifications to: West Coast 

Regional Office, Office of National 

Marine Sanctuaries; ATTN: 

Superintendent, Chumash Heritage 

National Marine Sanctuary, 99 Pacific 

Street, Suite 100F, Monterey, CA 93940, 

or send by electronic means as defined 

in the instructions for the ONMS permit 

application. A copy of the lease, permit, 

license, or right of subsistence use or of 

access must accompany the request. 

(c) A holder requesting certification of 

an authorization or right described in 

§ 922.232(g) may continue to conduct 

the activity without being in violation of 

Sanctuary prohibitions pending the 

Director’s review of and decision 

regarding the holder’s certification 

request, provided the holder is 

otherwise in compliance with this 

section. 

(d) The Director may request 

additional information from the 

certification requester as the Director 

deems reasonably necessary to 

condition appropriately the exercise of 

the certified authorization or right to 

achieve the purposes for which the 

Sanctuary was designated. The Director 

must receive the information requested 

within 45 days of the date of the 

Director’s request for information. 

Failure to provide the requested 

information within this time frame may 

be grounds for denial by the Director of 

the certification request. 

(e) In considering whether to issue a 

certification, the Director may seek and 

consider the views of any other person 

or entity, within or outside the Federal 

Government, and may hold a public 

hearing as deemed appropriate by the 

Director. 

(f) Upon completion of review of the 

authorization or right and information 

received with respect thereto, the 

Director shall communicate, in writing, 

any decision on a certification request 

or any action taken with respect to any 

certification made under this section, in 

writing, to both the holder of the 

certified lease, permit, license, approval, 

other authorization, or right, and the 

issuing agency, and shall set forth the 

reason(s) for the decision or action 

taken. 

(g) The Director may amend, suspend, 

or revoke any certification issued under 

this section whenever continued 

operation would otherwise be 

inconsistent with any terms or 

conditions of the certification. Any such 

action shall be forwarded in writing to 

both the certification holder and the 

agency that issued the underlying lease, 

permit, license, or right of subsistence 

use or of access, and shall set forth 

reason(s) for the action taken. 

(h) The Director may amend any 

certification issued under this section 

whenever additional information 

becomes available that the Director 

determines justifies such an 

amendment. 

(i) The holder may appeal any action 

conditioning, amending, suspending, or 

revoking any certification in accordance 

with the procedures set forth in 

§ 922.37. 

(j) Any time limit prescribed in or 

established under this section may be 

extended by the Director for good cause. 

(k) It is unlawful for any person to 

violate any terms and conditions in a 

certification issued under this section. 

Appendix A to Subpart V of Part 922— 

Chumash Heritage National Marine 

Sanctuary Boundary Description and 

Coordinates 

Coordinates listed in this appendix are 

unprojected (Geographic) and based on the 

North American Datum of 1983. 

Point ID Longitude Latitude 

1 .............. ¥121.81352 35.39844 

2 .............. ¥121.56586 35.39742 

3 * ............ ¥120.88251 35.28952 

4 * ............ ¥120.85694 35.20600 

5 * ............ ¥120.85605 35.20671 

6 * ............ ¥120.74984 35.15602 

7 * ............ ¥120.72509 35.17425 

8 * ............ ¥119.93333 34.43590 

9 .............. ¥119.93333 34.37859 

10 ............ ¥119.93822 34.38126 

11 ............ ¥119.94270 34.38391 

12 ............ ¥119.94657 34.38362 

13 ............ ¥119.95046 34.38354 

14 ............ ¥119.95292 34.38358 

15 ............ ¥119.95496 34.38367 

16 ............ ¥119.95698 34.38381 

17 ............ ¥119.95900 34.38401 

18 ............ ¥119.96257 34.38451 

19 ............ ¥119.96946 34.38575 

20 ............ ¥119.97406 34.38677 

21 ............ ¥119.97601 34.38729 

22 ............ ¥119.97815 34.38794 

23 ............ ¥119.98047 34.38872 

24 ............ ¥119.98274 34.38959 

25 ............ ¥119.98497 34.39053 

26 ............ ¥119.98715 34.39154 

27 ............ ¥119.98928 34.39263 

28 ............ ¥119.99136 34.39379 

29 ............ ¥119.99319 34.39491 

30 ............ ¥119.99514 34.39621 

31 ............ ¥119.99731 34.39713 

32 ............ ¥119.99962 34.39823 

33 ............ ¥120.00168 34.39930 

34 ............ ¥120.00386 34.40054 

35 ............ ¥120.00625 34.40107 

36 ............ ¥120.00882 34.40173 

37 ............ ¥120.01178 34.40261 

38 ............ ¥120.01409 34.40339 

39 ............ ¥120.01636 34.40425 

40 ............ ¥120.01878 34.40527 

41 ............ ¥120.02094 34.40628 

42 ............ ¥120.02320 34.40744 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 164 / Friday, August 25, 2023 / Proposed Rules 58145 

Point ID Longitude Latitude 

43 ............ ¥120.02641 34.40752 

44 ............ ¥120.02955 34.40774 

45 ............ ¥120.03246 34.40806 

46 ............ ¥120.03569 34.40855 

47 ............ ¥120.03855 34.40907 

48 ............ ¥120.04137 34.40971 

49 ............ ¥120.04394 34.41040 

50 ............ ¥120.04667 34.41126 

51 ............ ¥120.04870 34.41100 

52 ............ ¥120.05096 34.41077 

53 ............ ¥120.05323 34.41062 

54 ............ ¥120.05528 34.41054 

55 ............ ¥120.05733 34.41052 

56 ............ ¥120.05961 34.41056 

57 ............ ¥120.06188 34.41068 

58 ............ ¥120.06392 34.41084 

59 ............ ¥120.06679 34.41046 

60 ............ ¥120.06927 34.41021 

61 ............ ¥120.07175 34.41004 

62 ............ ¥120.07424 34.40997 

63 ............ ¥120.07984 34.40990 

64 ............ ¥120.08368 34.41002 

65 ............ ¥120.08666 34.40991 

66 ............ ¥120.08964 34.40992 

67 ............ ¥120.09352 34.41011 

68 ............ ¥120.09739 34.41051 

69 ............ ¥120.09987 34.41088 

70 ............ ¥120.10255 34.41138 

71 ............ ¥120.10677 34.41203 

72 ............ ¥120.10941 34.41251 

73 ............ ¥120.11288 34.41331 

74 ............ ¥120.11729 34.41453 

75 ............ ¥120.11919 34.41509 

76 ............ ¥120.12107 34.41571 

77 ............ ¥120.12292 34.41639 

78 ............ ¥120.12474 34.41711 

79 ............ ¥120.12733 34.41802 

80 ............ ¥120.13068 34.41937 

81 ............ ¥120.13314 34.42030 

82 ............ ¥120.13678 34.42183 

83 ............ ¥120.14015 34.42266 

84 ............ ¥120.14124 34.42285 

85 ............ ¥120.14365 34.42227 

86 ............ ¥120.14631 34.42173 

87 ............ ¥120.14922 34.42126 

88 ............ ¥120.15216 34.42091 

89 ............ ¥120.15458 34.42039 

90 ............ ¥120.15725 34.41992 

91 ............ ¥120.16108 34.41942 

92 ............ ¥120.16493 34.41913 

93 ............ ¥120.16857 34.41904 

94 ............ ¥120.17221 34.41913 

95 ............ ¥120.17583 34.41941 

96 ............ ¥120.17943 34.41986 

97 ............ ¥120.18173 34.41968 

98 ............ ¥120.18378 34.41957 

99 ............ ¥120.18583 34.41952 

100 .......... ¥120.18788 34.41952 

101 .......... ¥120.19038 34.41961 

102 .......... ¥120.19288 34.41978 

103 .......... ¥120.19514 34.42001 

104 .......... ¥120.19763 34.42034 

105 .......... ¥120.20103 34.42014 

106 .......... ¥120.20468 34.42010 

107 .......... ¥120.21923 34.42062 

108 .......... ¥120.22203 34.41994 

109 .......... ¥120.22509 34.41933 

110 .......... ¥120.22818 34.41885 

111 .......... ¥120.23141 34.41849 

112 .......... ¥120.23501 34.41819 

113 .......... ¥120.23821 34.41806 

114 .......... ¥120.24012 34.41788 

115 .......... ¥120.24279 34.41768 

116 .......... ¥120.24551 34.41758 

Point ID Longitude Latitude 

117 .......... ¥120.24801 34.41758 

118 .......... ¥120.25140 34.41735 

119 .......... ¥120.26775 34.38689 

120 .......... ¥120.32691 34.33744 

121 .......... ¥120.37560 34.30480 

122 .......... ¥120.41671 34.27979 

123 .......... ¥120.53987 34.20486 

124 .......... ¥120.60041 34.18182 

125 .......... ¥120.64208 34.10208 

126 .......... ¥120.73023 34.07464 

127 .......... ¥120.85081 33.87643 

128 .......... ¥120.90550 33.82377 

129 .......... ¥121.21320 33.83184 

130 .......... ¥121.34958 33.85137 

131 .......... ¥121.40902 33.91005 

132 .......... ¥121.40925 34.08467 

133 .......... ¥121.49111 34.16932 

134 .......... ¥121.49220 34.21050 

135 .......... ¥121.49681 34.26897 

136 .......... ¥121.50604 34.32128 

137 .......... ¥121.51066 34.37975 

138 .......... ¥121.51681 34.41821 

139 .......... ¥121.52704 34.45284 

140 .......... ¥121.56178 34.54049 

141 .......... ¥121.57941 34.57950 

142 .......... ¥121.59010 34.59446 

143 .......... ¥121.62378 34.64285 

144 .......... ¥121.63763 34.65978 

145 .......... ¥121.65637 34.67837 

146 .......... ¥121.66652 34.69012 

147 .......... ¥121.68042 34.70722 

148 .......... ¥121.69538 34.72486 

149 .......... ¥121.70340 34.74143 

150 .......... ¥121.70500 34.76227 

151 .......... ¥121.69966 34.78952 

152 .......... ¥121.58778 35.00443 

153 .......... ¥121.57744 35.02331 

154 .......... ¥121.57606 35.03601 

155 .......... ¥121.58377 35.06135 

156 .......... ¥121.59758 35.10429 

157 .......... ¥121.61148 35.13903 

158 .......... ¥121.61469 35.14972 

159 .......... ¥121.65301 35.23983 

160 .......... ¥121.65744 35.24965 

161 .......... ¥121.66492 35.25607 

162 .......... ¥121.67721 35.26729 

163 .......... ¥121.70874 35.28974 

164 .......... ¥121.81352 35.35424 

165 .......... ¥121.81352 35.39844 

Note 1 to appendix A: The coordinates in 

the table marked with an asterisk (*) are not 

a part of the sanctuary boundary. These 

coordinates are landward reference points 

used to draw a line segment that intersects 

with the shoreline. 

Appendix B to Subpart V of Part 922— 

Coordinates for Rodriguez Seamount 

Management Zone Within the 

Sanctuary 

Coordinates listed in this table are 

unprojected (Geographic) and based on the 

North American Datum of 1983. 

Point ID Longitude Latitude 

1 .............. ¥120.75816 34.02873 

2 .............. ¥120.85081 33.87643 

3 .............. ¥120.90550 33.82377 

4 .............. ¥121.21320 33.83184 

5 .............. ¥121.25782 33.83812 

6 .............. ¥121.25937 34.13926 

Point ID Longitude Latitude 

7 .............. ¥120.75892 34.14264 

8 .............. ¥120.75816 34.02873 

[FR Doc. 2023–18271 Filed 8–24–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 23 and 37 

RIN 3038–AF34 

Swap Confirmation Requirements for 

Swap Execution Facilities 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (Commission or 

CFTC) is proposing amendments to its 

swap execution facility (SEF) 

regulations related to uncleared swap 

confirmations, as well as associated 

technical and conforming changes. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 24, 2023. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by ‘‘Swap Confirmation 

Requirements for Swap Execution 

Facilities’’ and RIN number 3038–AF34, 

by any of the following methods: 

• CFTC Comments Portal: https://

comments.cftc.gov. Select the ‘‘Submit 

Comments’’ link for this rulemaking and 

follow the instructions on the Public 

Comment Form. 

• Mail: Send to Christopher 

Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the 

Commission, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Follow the 

same instructions as for Mail, above. 

Please submit your comments using 

only one of these methods. Submissions 

through the CFTC Comments Portal are 

encouraged. 

All comments must be submitted in 

English, or if not, accompanied by an 

English translation. Comments will be 

posted as received to https://

comments.cftc.gov. You should submit 

only information that you wish to make 

available publicly. If you wish the 

Commission to consider information 

that you believe is exempt from 

disclosure under the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA), a petition for 

confidential treatment of the exempt 

information may be submitted according 

to the procedures established under 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1