Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 49911

unknown, to bring about acts that 

constituted a violation of the 

Regulations when it agreed to 

participate in the export of the furnace 

referenced above to BRIMT in China 

without the Department of Commerce 

license required by Section 744.3 of the 

Regulations. In furtherance of the 

conspiracy, Sunford and its coconspirators agreed to conceal the 

identity of the actual end-user and of 

the item being exported in an attempt to 

circumvent the license requirement 

described in Section 744.3 of the 

Regulations. 

3. One violation of 15 CFR 764.2(b)—

Causing an Export to China Without the 

Required Department of Commerce 

License. Beginning on or about 

November 23, 1998 and continuing to 

on or about July 20, 1999, Sunford 

caused the export of the furnace 

described above to BRIMT in China 

without the required Department of 

Commerce license. Specifically, Sunford 

ordered, bought, financed, and/or 

forwarded the industrial furnace 

described above, thereby causing the 

furnace to be exported to BRIMT in 

China despite the fact that the 

Department of Commerce license 

required by Section 744.3 of the 

Regulations had not been obtained. 

Whereas, BIS and Sunford have 

entered into a Settlement Agreement 

pursuant to Section 766.18(b) of the 

Regulations whereby they agreed to 

settle this matter in accordance with the 

terms and conditions set forth therein, 

and 

Whereas I have approved of the terms 

of such Settlement Agreement; 

It is therefore ordered:

First, that a civil penalty of $33,000 is 

assessed against Sunford, which shall be 

paid to the U.S. Department of 

Commerce within 30 days from the date 

of entry of this Order. Payment shall be 

made in the manner specified in the 

attached instructions. 

Second, that, pursuant to the Debt 

Collection Act of 1982, as amended (31 

U.S.C. 3701–3720E (2000)), the civil 

penalty owed under this Order accrues 

interest as more fully described in the 

attached Notice, and, if payment is not 

made by the due date specified herein, 

Sunford will be assessed, in addition to 

the full amount of the civil penalty and 

interest, a penalty charge and an 

administrative charge, as more fully 

described in the attached Notice.

Third, that the timely payment of the 

civil penalty set forth above is hereby 

made a condition to the granting, 

restoration, or continuing validity of any 

export license, license exception, 

permission, or privilege granted, or to be 

granted, to Sunford, Accordingly, if 

Sunford should fail to pay the civil 

penalty in a timely manner, the 

undersigned may enter an Order 

denying all of Sunford’s export 

privileges for a period of one year from 

the date of entry of this Order. 

Fourth, for a period of three years 

from the date of entry of the Order, 

Sunford Trading, Ltd., Room 2208, 22/

F, 118 Connaught Road West, Hong 

Kong, China, its successors or assigns, 

and when acting for or on behalf of 

Sunford, its officers, representatives, 

agents, or employees (‘‘Denied Person’’) 

may not participate, directly or 

indirectly, in any way in any transaction 

involving any commodity, software or 

technology (hereinafter collectively 

referred to as ‘‘item’’) exported or to be 

exported from the United States that is 

subject to the Regulations, or in any 

other activity subject to the Regulations, 

including, but not limited to: 

A. Applying for, obtaining or using 

any license, License Exception, or 

export control document; 

B. Carrying on negotiations 

concerning, or ordering, buying, 

receiving, using, selling, delivering, 

storing, disposing of, forwarding, 

transporting, financing, or otherwise 

servicing in any way, any transaction 

involving any item exported or to be 

exported from the United States that is 

subject to the Regulations, or in any 

other activity subject to the Regulations; 

or 

C. Benefitting in any way from any 

transaction involving any item exported 

or to be exported from the United States 

that is subject to the Regulations, or in 

any other activity subject to the 

Regulations. 

Fifth, that no person may, directly or 

indirectly, do any of the following: 

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf 

of the Denied Person any item subject to 

the Regulations; 

B. Take any action that facilitates the 

acquisition or attempted acquisition by 

the Denied Person of the ownership, 

possession, or control of any item 

subject to the Regulations that has been 

or will be exported from the United 

States, including financing or other 

support activities related to a 

transaction whereby the Denied Person 

acquires or attempts to acquire such 

ownership, possession or control; 

C. Take any action to acquire from or 

to facilitate the acquisition or attempted 

acquisition from the Denied Person of 

any item subject to the Regulations that 

has been exported from the United 

States; 

D. Obtain from the Denied Person in 

the United States any item subject to the 

Regulations with knowledge or reason 

to know that the item will be, or is 

intended to be, exported from the 

United States; or 

E. Engage in any transaction to service 

any item subject to the Regulations that 

has been or will be exported from the 

United States and which is owned, 

possessed or controlled by the Denied 

Person, or service any item, of whatever 

origin, that is owned, possessed or 

controlled by the Denied Person if such 

service involves the use of any item 

subject to the Regulations that has been 

or will be exported from the United 

States. For purposes of this paragraph, 

servicing means installation, 

maintenance, repair, modification or 

testing. 

Sixth, that, to prevent evasion of this 

Order, BIS, after notice and opportunity 

for comment as provided in Section 

766.23 of the Regulations, may make 

any person, firm, corporation, or 

business organization related to Sunford 

by affiliation, ownership, control, or 

position of responsibility in the conduct 

of trade or related services subject to the 

provisions of this Order. 

Seventh, that this Order does not 

prohibit any export, reexport, or other 

transaction subject to the Regulations 

where the only items involved that are 

subject to the Regulations are the 

foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-

origin technology. 

Eighth, that the charging letter, the 

Settlement Agreement, this Order, and 

the record of this case as defined by 

Section 766.20 of the Regulations shall 

be made available to the public. 

Ninth, that the administrative law 

judge shall be notified that this case is 

withdrawn from adjudication. 

This Order, which constitutes the 

final agency action in this matter, is 

effective upon publication in the 

Federal Register.

Entered this 18th day of August 2005. 

Wendy Wysong, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Export Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 05–16885 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

[I.D. 081905B]

Notice of Intent to Conduct Public 

Scoping Meetings and to Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Related to the Makah Tribe’s 

Continuation of Treaty Right Hunting 

of Gray Whales

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

49912 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; scoping meetings.

SUMMARY: We intend to conduct public 

scoping meetings to gather information 

to prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 

related to the Makah Tribe’s request that 

NMFS waive the take moratorium of the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA) to allow for treaty right 

hunting of eastern North Pacific gray 

whales in usual and accustomed 

grounds off the coast of Washington 

State. This notice briefly describes the 

background of the Makah’s request for 

waiver; gives dates, times, and locations 

of public scoping meetings; identifies a 

set of preliminary alternatives to serve 

as a starting point for discussions; and 

terminates the prior notice of intent to 

prepare an EIS on a similar action.

DATES: Three public scoping meetings 

are scheduled:

1. October 5, 2005, Neah Bay, WA.

2. October 6, 2005, Port Angeles, WA.

3. October 11, 2005, Seattle, WA.

See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

specific times and locations of the 

public meetings.

In addition to the meetings, written or 

electronic comments from all interested 

parties are encouraged and must be 

received no later than 5 p.m. PDT 

October 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning 

preparation of the EIS and NEPA 

process should be addressed to: 

Kassandra Brown, NMFS Northwest 

Region, Building 1, 7600 Sand Point 

Way NE, Seattle, WA 98115. Comments 

may also be submitted via fax (206)526-

6426, Attn: Makah Tribe Whale Hunt 

EIS, or by electronic mail to 

MakahEIS.nwr@noaa.gov with a subject 

line containing the document identifier: 

Makah Whale EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kassandra Brown, NMFS Northwest 

Region, (206)526–4348.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Scoping Meetings

Specific Times and Locations

Public scoping meetings will be held 

at the following addresses and times:

1. October 5, 2005, 6:30 p.m. – 9:30 

p.m., Makah Tribal Council Community 

Hall, 81 3rd Avenue (Makah Passage), 

Neah Bay, WA.

2. October 6, 2005, 6:30 p.m. – 9:30 

p.m., Vern Burton Memorial 

Community Center, 308 East 4th Street 

(corner of 4th Street and Peabody Street), 

Port Angeles, WA.

3. October 11, 2005, 6:30 p.m. – 10 

p.m., South Lake Union Park, 860 Terry 

Avenue North (The Naval Reserve 

Building), Seattle, WA.

The meeting format has been designed 

so that the public can constructively 

assist NMFS in development of the draft 

EIS, and will generally include 

presentations and small group work 

sessions. More details regarding meeting 

format will be posted under the ‘‘gray 

whale’’ link at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov

by mid-September 2005.

Reasonable Accommodation

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations to attend and 

participate in the public meetings 

should contact Kassandra Brown (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). To 

allow sufficient time to process 

requests, please call at least 10 business 

days prior to the relevant meeting(s). 

Information regarding the Makah’s 

request is available in alternative 

formats upon request.

Background

The Makah Indian Tribe of 

Washington State (Makah) seeks to 

continue its subsistence hunt(s) of 

eastern North Pacific (ENP) gray whales, 

a tradition dating back at least 1,500 

years. The Makah’s right to hunt whales 

at usual and accustomed grounds and 

stations off the coast of Washington was 

secured in Article 4 of the 1855 Treaty 

of Neah Bay in exchange for most of the 

land in the Olympic Peninsula. The 

Treaty of Neah Bay is the primary 

instrument defining the legal 

relationship between the United States 

Government and the Makah. 

The Makah hunted whales until the 

1920s when commercial whaling had 

drastically reduced the numbers of ENP 

gray whales available to the Makah 

hunters for harvest. Prior to enactment 

of the Endangered Species Act (of 1973 

16 U.S.C. 1351 et seq.), the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service included gray 

whales (among several genera of baleen 

whales) on its 1970 list of endangered 

species (35 FR 8491, June 2, 1970). The 

ENP distinct population segment was 

subsequently delisted on June 16, 1994 

(59 FR 31094). In 1999, Makah hunters 

killed one ENP gray whale pursuant to 

an aboriginal subsistence harvest quota 

granted for 1998 through 2002 by the 

International Whaling Commission 

(IWC) and domestically implemented by 

NMFS under the Whaling Convention 

Act (WCA)(16 U.S.C. 916 et seq.). Due 

to a series of lawsuits, no whales were 

hunted by the Makah for the remainder 

of the 1998 through 2002 quota. 

In May 2002, the IWC approved 

another aboriginal subsistence harvest 

quota of 620 gray whales for 2003 

through 2007, on the basis of a joint 

request by the Russian Federation 

(approved for 600 whales) and the 

United States (approved for 20 whales). 

The United States’ request was made on 

behalf of the Makah. On March 6, 2003 

NMFS initiated an EIS to assess the 

environmental impacts of allocating the 

2003 through 2007 quota to the Makah 

by soliciting comments and information 

to facilitate the environmental analysis 

(68 FR 10703). Due to litigation 

(described below), NMFS did not 

complete the EIS and did not allocate 

the quota under the WCA. The Makah 

have not conducted subsistence hunts to 

date under the 2003 through 2007 IWC 

quota. 

On June 7, 2004, the Ninth Circuit 

Court of Appeals in the second 

amended version of Anderson v. Evans, 

371 F.3d 475, held that the Tribe, to 

pursue any treaty rights for whaling, 

must comply with the process 

prescribed in the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 

1361 et seq.) for authorizing ‘‘take’’ of 

marine mammals otherwise prohibited 

by a moratorium in section 101(a)(16 

U.S.C. 1371(a)). The term ≥take≥ means 

to harass, hunt, capture, or kill, or 

attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill 

any marine mammal (16 U.S.C. 

1362(13)). Subsequent to the Anderson

v. Evans ruling, the Makah submitted a 

request for a limited waiver of the 

moratorium on taking marine mammals, 

which we received on February 14, 

2005. We published notice of 

availability of the waiver request for 

public inspection on March 3, 2005 (70 

FR 10369), available online at http://

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/international/

makah (soon to be available on the 

NMFS Northwest Region website under 

the ‘‘gray whale’’ link at http://

www.nwr.noaa.gov).

To exercise subsistence hunting treaty 

rights of gray whales, the Makah Tribe 

must undergo three separate but related 

processes: (1) The United States must 

obtain an aboriginal subsistence quota 

from the IWC on the Makah Tribe’s 

behalf, (2) NMFS must decide whether 

to waive the MMPA take moratorium for 

the Makah Tribe, including conducting 

a NEPA review and issuing possible 

regulations and permits (see Proposed 

Action for more details), and (3) NMFS 

must allocate the IWC quota under the 

WCA. More information regarding these 

processes will soon be available to the 

public under the NMFS Northwest 

Region website ‘‘gray whale’’ link at 

http://www.nwr.noaa.gov. The NEPA 

review initiated by this notice of intent 

is to comply with process number (2) 

described above, which requires 

preparation of a site-specific EIS related 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 49913

to the Makah Tribe’s request for a 

waiver of the MMPA take moratorium. 

Proposed Action

The Makah’s proposed action is to 

hunt up to 20 ENP gray whales during 

a 5-year period, subject to a maximum 

of five gray whales in any calendar year, 

within its adjudicated usual and 

accustomed grounds (See, United States

v. Washington, 626 F.Supp. 1405, 1467 

(W.D. Wash 1985)), subject to quotas 

granted by the IWC. The Makah 

proposes to hunt up to seven gray 

whales per year. The Makah’s proposal 

to continue subsistence hunting of gray 

whales includes other standards for 

hunting, such as: (1) time and area 

restrictions designed to avoid any 

intentional harvest of gray whales 

comprising the Pacific Coast Feeding 

Aggregation (PCFA), (2) monitoring and 

adaptive management measures to 

ensure that any incidental harvest of 

gray whales from the PCFA remains at 

or below the annual strike limit, (3) 

measures to ensure that hunting is 

conducted in the most humane manner 

practicable, consistent with continued 

use of traditional hunting methods, and 

(4) measures to protect public safety. 

The full waiver request is posted online 

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

international/makah, and will soon be 

available at NMFS Northwest Region’s 

website at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov

under the ‘‘gray whale’’ link.

Based on the Makah’s waiver request, 

the Federal action consists of three 

parts: (1) Waiving the moratorium on 

take of marine mammals under section 

101(a)(3)(A)(16 U.S.C. 1371(3)(A)) of the 

MMPA, and subsequently (2) 

promulgating hunting regulations 

implementing the waiver in accordance 

with section 103 (16 U.S.C. 1373) of the 

MMPA, and (3) issuing any necessary 

permit(s) to the Makah for whale 

hunting. 

If NMFS waives the MMPA take 

moratorium and issues the necessary 

regulations and permit(s), the Makah 

would be allowed to continue 

subsistence hunting of ENP gray whales, 

subject to IWC quotas and allocation of 

those quotas under the WCA. The NEPA 

review initiated by this notice of intent, 

therefore, involves preparation of a sitespecific EIS related to the Makah Tribe’s 

proposed action of continuing treaty 

right subsistence ENP whale hunting 

(i.e., request for a waiver of the MMPA 

take moratorium), and alternatives to 

the waiver request. 

Alternatives

Pursuant to NEPA, which requires 

Federal agencies to conduct an 

environmental analysis of proposed 

actions to determine if the actions may 

affect the human environment, and in 

recognition of the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals ruling in Anderson v. Evans, 

we intend to conduct public scoping 

meetings and to prepare an EIS. Under 

NEPA, a reasonable range of alternatives 

to a proposed action must be developed 

and considered in our environmental 

review. Alternatives considered for 

analysis in this EIS may include: 

variations in the scope of the hunting 

activities, variations in the hunting 

location, or a combination of these 

elements. In addition, the EIS will 

identify potentially significant direct, 

indirect, and cumulative impacts on 

geology and soils, air quality, water 

quality, other fish and wildlife species 

and their habitat, vegetation, 

socioeconomics/tourism, treaty rights 

and Federal trust responsibilities, 

environmental justice, cultural 

resources, noise, aesthetics, 

transportation, public services, and 

human health and safety, and other 

environmental issues that could occur 

with the implementation of the Makah’s 

proposed action and alternatives. For all 

potentially significant impacts, the EIS 

will identify avoidance, minimization, 

and mitigation measures to reduce these 

impacts, where feasible, to a level below 

significance. 

We have identified the following 

preliminary alternatives for public 

comment during the public scoping 

period, and encourage information on 

additional alternatives to consider:

Alternative 1: No Action - Under the 

No Action Alternative, we would not 

approve the requested whale hunting, 

would not grant the waiver of the 

moratorium on take under the MMPA, 

nor issue the necessary regulations and 

permits.

Alternative 2: The Proposed Action - 

Under the proposed action, the Makah 

Tribe would be allowed to continue 

treaty right subsistence hunting of gray 

whales imposing time and area 

restrictions designed to target migrating 

whales and to avoid any intentional 

harvest of whales from the PCFA. We 

would grant the waiver of the 

moratorium on take under the MMPA 

and issue the necessary regulations and 

permits.

Alternative 3: The proposed action 

would be modified to allow limited take 

of gray whales from the PCFA during 

hunts.

Alternative 4: The proposed action 

would be modified to remove time and 

area restrictions from the hunts.

Alternative 5: The proposed action 

would be modified to allow hunting to 

target migrating whales, imposing time 

and area restrictions different than those 

contained in the proposed action that 

would maximize the likelihood of 

taking a migrating whale (and minimize 

the likelihood of taking a PCFA whale).

Request for Comments

We provide this notice to: (1) Advise 

other agencies and the public of our 

intentions, (2) obtain suggestions and 

information on the scope of issues to 

include in the EIS, (3) terminate the 

prior notice of intent to prepare an EIS 

on allocation of the 2003 through 2007 

quota (68 FR 10703) published on 

March 6, 2003. Comments and 

suggestions received during the prior 

public comment period for the 2003 

through 2007 quota allocation (March 6 

through April 21, 2003), will be 

considered in developing the current 

EIS. Other comments and suggestions 

are invited from all interested parties to 

ensure that the full range of issues 

related to the Makah’s waiver request 

and all significant issues are identified. 

We request that comments be as specific 

as possible. We seek public input on the 

scope of the required NEPA analysis, 

including the range of reasonable 

alternatives; associated impacts of any 

alternatives on the human environment, 

including geology and soils, air quality, 

water quality, other fish and wildlife 

species and their habitat, vegetation, 

socioeconomics/tourism, treaty rights 

and Federal trust responsibilities, 

environmental justice, cultural 

resources, noise, aesthetics, 

transportation, public services, and 

human health and safety; and suitable 

mitigation measures.

Comments concerning this 

environmental review process should be 

directed to NMFS (see ADDRESSES). See 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for 

questions. All comments and material 

received, including names and 

addresses, will become part of the 

administrative record and may be 

released to the public.

Authority

The environmental review of 

continuation of the Makah subsistence 

gray whale hunting will be conducted 

under the authority and in accordance 

with the requirements of NEPA, Council 

on Environmental Quality Regulations 

(40 CFR 1500-1508), other applicable 

Federal laws and regulations, and 

policies and procedures of NMFS for 

compliance with those regulations. This 

notice is being furnished in accordance 

with 40 CFR 1501.7 to obtain 

suggestions and information from other 

agencies and the public on the scope of 

issues and alternatives to be addressed 

in the EIS.

49914 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 164 / Thursday, August 25, 2005 / Notices 

Dated: August 19, 2005.

William T. Hogarth,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 05–16940 Filed 8–24–05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[I.D. 080405A]

Taking and Importing Marine 

Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals 

Incidental to Navy Operations of 

Surveillance Towed Array Sensor 

System Low Frequency Active Sonar

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of two Letters 

of Authorization.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), as amended, and 

implementing regulations, notification 

is hereby given that NMFS has issued 

two 1–year Letters of Authorization 

(LOAs) to take marine mammals by 

harassment incidental to the U.S. Navy’s 

operation of Surveillance Towed Array 

Sensor System Low Frequency Active 

(SURTASS LFA) sonar operations to the 

Chief of Naval Operations, Department 

of the Navy, 2000 Navy Pentagon, 

Washington, D.C., and persons 

operating under his authority.

DATES: Effective from August 16, 2005, 

through August 15, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the LOAs and the 

Navy’s March 31, 2005 application, 

which contains a list of references used 

in this document, are available by 

writing to Steve Leathery, Chief, 

Permits, Conservation, and Education 

Division, Office of Protected Resources, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 

East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910–3225, by telephoning the contact 

listed here (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT), or online at: 

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

PR2/SmalllTake/

smalltakelinfo.htm#applications. 

Documents cited in this notice may be 

viewed, by appointment, during regular 

business hours, at the aforementioned 

address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolie 

Harrison (ext 166) or Kenneth 

Hollingshead (ext 128), Office of 

Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–

2289.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (16 

U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) directs the Secretary 

of Commerce to allow, upon request, the 

incidental, but not intentional taking of 

small numbers of marine mammals by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and 

regulations are issued.

Authorization may be granted for 

periods of 5 years or less if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have no more than 

a negligible impact on the species or 

stock(s), and will not have an 

unmitigable adverse impact on the 

availability of the species or stock(s) for 

subsistence uses. In addition, NMFS 

must prescribe regulations that include 

permissible methods of taking and other 

means effecting the least practicable 

adverse impact on the species and its 

habitat, and on the availability of the 

species for subsistence uses, paying 

particular attention to rookeries, mating 

grounds, and areas of similar 

significance. The regulations must 

include requirements pertaining to the 

monitoring and reporting of such taking.

Regulations governing the taking of 

marine mammals incidental to the U.S. 

Navy’s operation of SURTASS LFA 

sonar were published on July 16, 2002 

(67 FR 46712), and remain in effect until 

August 15, 2007. For detailed 

information on this action, please refer 

to that document. These regulations 

include mitigation, monitoring, and 

reporting requirements for the 

incidental taking of marine mammals by 

the SURTASS LFA sonar system.

On November 24, 2003, the President 

signed into law the National Defense 

Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA) 

(Public Law 108–136). Included in this 

law were amendments to the MMPA 

that apply where a ‘‘military readiness 

activity’’ is concerned. Of specific 

importance for the SURTASS LFA sonar 

take authorization, the NDAA amended 

section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA to 

exempt military readiness activities 

from the ‘‘specified geographical 

region’’ and ‘‘small numbers’’ 

requirements. The term ‘‘military 

readiness activity’’ is defined in Public 

Law 107–314 (16 U.S.C. 703 note) to 

include all training and operations of 

the Armed Forces that relate to combat; 

and the adequate and realistic testing of 

military equipment, vehicles, weapons 

and sensors for proper operation and 

suitability for combat use. The term 

expressly does not include the routine 

operation of installation operating 

support functions, such as military 

offices, military exchanges, 

commissaries, water treatment facilities, 

storage facilities, schools, housing, 

motor pools, laundries, morale, welfare 

and recreation activities, shops, and 

mess halls; the operation of industrial 

activities; or the construction or 

demolition of facilities used for a 

military readiness activity.

NMFS published a proposed rule to 

amend its SURTASS LFA sonar final 

rule and regulations, to implement 

provisions of the NDAA (69 FR 38873; 

June 29, 2004). The public comment 

period ended on July 29, 2004. NMFS 

has not issued a final rule as of the date 

of this notice.

Summary of LOA Request

NMFS received an application from 

the U.S. Navy for two LOAs, one 

covering the R/V Cory Chouest and one 

the USNS IMPECCABLE, under the 

regulations issued on July 16, 2002 (67 

FR 46712). The Navy requested that the 

LOAs become effective on August 16, 

2005. The application requested 

authorization, for a period not to exceed 

1 year, to take, by harassment, marine 

mammals incidental to employment of 

the SURTASS LFA sonar system for 

training, testing and routine military 

operations on the aforementioned ships. 

The application’s take estimates are 

based on 16 nominal 9–day active sonar 

missions (or equivalent shorter 

missions) between both vessels, 

regardless of which vessel is performing 

a specific mission, not to exceed a total 

of 432 hours of LFA sonar transmission 

time combined for both vessels.

The specified geographic regions 

identified in the application in which 

the Navy proposes to operate SURTASS 

LFA sonar are the following 

oceanographic provinces described in 

Longhurst (1998) and identified in 50 

CFR 216.180(a): the Archipelagic Deep 

Basins Province, the Western Pacific 

Warm Pool Province, and the North 

Pacific Tropical Gyre West Province, all 

within the Pacific Trade Wind Biome; 

the Kuroshio Current Province and the 

Northern Pacific Transition Zone 

Province within the Pacific Westerly 

Winds Biome; the North Pacific 

Epicontinental Sea Province within the 

Pacific Polar Biome; and the China Sea 

Coastal Province within the North 

Pacific Coastal Biome. The operational 

areas proposed in the Navy’s 

application are portions of the provinces 

but do not encompass the entire area of 

the provinces. Due to critical naval 

warfare requirements, the U.S. Navy has 

identified the necessity for both 

SURTASS LFA sonar vessels to be 

stationed in the North Pacific Ocean 

during fiscal year 2006.