Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 215 / Tuesday, November 8, 2005 / Notices 67669 

Research (Primary and Alternate). 

Applicants are chosen based upon 

their particular expertise and experience 

in relation to the seat for which they are 

applying; community and professional 

affiliations; philosophy regarding the 

protection and management of marine 

resources; and possibly the length of 

residence in the area affected by the 

Sanctuary. Applicants who are chosen 

as members should expect to serve 

either a two or three-year term, pursuant 

to the Advisory Council’s Charter. 

DATES: Applications are due by 

December 31, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Application kits may be 

obtained from Rowena Forest, Advisory 

Council Coordinator, Gulf of the 

Farallones National Marine Sanctuary, 

P.O. Box 159, Olema, CA 94950, (415) 

663–0314 extension 105, 

rowenaforest@noaa.gov, and over the 

Internet at: http://farallones.noaa.gov/ 

manage/sac.html. Completed 

applications should be sent to the above 

mailing address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rowena Forest, Advisory Council 

Coordinator, Gulf of the Farallones 

National Marine Sanctuary, P.O. Box 

159, Olema, CA 94950, (415) 663–0314 

x105, rowenaforest@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Gulf 

of the Farallones National Marine 

Sanctuary (GFNMS) was established in 

1981 to protect the near shore waters of 

the California Coast north and west of 

San Francisco, and the offshore Farallon 

Islands. The Sanctuary includes nursery 

and spawning grounds for commercially 

important species, over 33 species of 

marine mammals, and 15 species of 

breeding seabirds. The Farallon Islands 

themselves contain the largest 

concentration of breeding seabirds in 

the contiguous United States. Key 

habitats include coastal beaches, rocky 

shores, mud and tidal flats, salt marsh, 

estuaries, and pelagic waters. 

Additionally, the area within the 

Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (MBNMS) north of the San 

Mateo/Santa Cruz county boundary is 

administered by the GFNMS. The legal 

boundaries of each sanctuary remain as 

is. The GFNMS is responsible for 

developing and managing most 

sanctuary programs within this area, 

with the exception that the MBNMS is 

responsible for the Water Quality 

Protection Program. 

The GFNMS Advisory Council was 

originally chartered in 2001, with seven 

voting members. It has recently been 

expanded to 12 voting members. The 

primary focus of the Council is to advise 

the Sanctuary Manager regarding the 

implementation of the sanctuary 

management plan, in conjunction with 

the contiguous Monterey Bay and 

Cordell Bank National Marine 

Sanctuaries. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1431, et seq. 

(Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog 

Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary Program) 

Dated: November 1, 2005. 

Daniel J. Basta, 

Director, National Marine Sanctuary Program, 

National Ocean Service, National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration. 

[FR Doc. 05–22172 Filed 11–7–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–NK–M 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

[Docket No. 051102288-5288-01; I.D. 

102805B] 

New Bedford Harbor Trustee Council; 

Proposed Funding for Natural 

Resource Restoration Projects 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: On behalf of the New Bedford 

Harbor Trustee Council (Council), 

NMFS, serving as the Administrative 

Trustee, publishes this notice to see 

comment on its proposed funding of six 

restoration projects for possible 

implementation through funding from 

the AVX Natural Resource Damages 

Trust Account (Trust Account). The 

Council, through an earlier published 

Federal Register notice requested grant 

applications for projects to restore 

natural resources that were injured by 

the release of hazardous substances and 

materials, including polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs), in the New Bedford 

Harbor Environment (Harbor 

Environment). Nineteen grant 

applications for natural resource 

restoration projects were submitted for 

consideration by the Council. The 

Council is now seeking public comment 

on the preferred projects to assist in 

making a final decision on projects 

eligible for funding. 

DATES: The Council will accept 

comments on the proposed restoration 

projects through 30 days after date of 

publication in the Federal Register and 

will hold a public hearing regarding the 

preliminary selection. 

The public hearing will be held on 

November 16, 2005, at 7 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Please send your comments 

by email to: NBHTC@noaa.gov or by 

mail to: New Bedford Harbor Trustee 

Council, c/o National Marine Fisheries 

Service, 1 Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, 

MA 01930, Attn.: Jack Terrill. 

Comments also may be sent via 

facsimile (fax) to 978–281–9301. 

The public hearing will be held at the 

Days Inn, 500 Hathaway Road, New 

Bedford, MA. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack 

Terrill, Coordinator, 978–281–9136, fax 

978–281–9301, or e-mail 

Jack.Terrill@NOAA.GOV. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

New Bedford Harbor is located in 

southeastern Massachusetts at the 

mouth of the Acushnet River on 

Buzzards Bay. The Harbor and River are 

contaminated with high levels of 

hazardous substances and materials, 

including PCBs, and as a consequence 

are on the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) Superfund 

National Priorities List. This site is also 

listed by the Massachusetts Department 

of Environmental Protection as a 

priority Tier 1 disposal site. 

The Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA or ‘‘Superfund,’’ 42 U.S.C. 

9601 et seq.) designates as possible 

natural resource trustees Federal, state, 

or tribal authorities who represent the 

public interest in natural resources. The 

trustees are responsible for recovering 

funds through litigation or settlement 

for damages for natural resource 

injuries. CERCLA requires that any 

recovered monies be used to ‘‘restore, 

replace, or acquire the equivalent of’’

the natural resources that have been 

injured by a release of a hazardous 

substance. 

For the New Bedford Harbor 

Superfund Site, there are three natural 

resource trustees on the Council 

representing the public interest in the 

affected natural resources. They are the 

Department of Commerce (DOC), the 

Department of the Interior, and the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The 

Secretary of Commerce has delegated 

DOC trustee responsibility to NOAA; 

within NOAA, NMFS has responsibility 

for natural resource restoration at this 

site. The Secretary of the Interior has 

delegated trustee responsibility to the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The 

Governor of Massachusetts has 

delegated trustee responsibility to the 

Secretary of Environmental Affairs. 

To initiate restoration of the New 

Bedford Harbor Environment the 

Council previously issued two 

‘‘Request(s) for Restoration Ideas’’ in 

October 1995 (60 FR 52164, October 5, 

67670 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 215 / Tuesday, November 8, 2005 / Notices 

1995) (Round I) and August 1999 (64 FR 

44505, August 16, 1999) (Round II). For 

each round, restoration ideas were 

received from the local communities, 

members of the public, academia and 

state and federal agencies. The 56 

restoration ideas submitted under 

Round I were the basis for the 

alternatives listed in the Council’s 

‘‘Restoration Plan for the New Bedford 

Harbor Environment’’ (Restoration Plan) 

that was developed to guide the 

Council’s restoration efforts. An 

environmental impact statement (EIS) 

was prepared in conjunction with the 

Restoration Plan to fulfill requirements 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act. A record of decision, issued on 

September 22, 1998 for both the 

Restoration Plan and the EIS, provided 

for implementation of 11 Round I 

preferred restoration projects through 

funding provided by the Trust Account. 

Thirty-five restoration ideas were 

submitted to the Council under Round 

II. Following procedures established in 

the Restoration Plan/EIS, an 

environmental assessment was prepared 

to evaluate the ideas. A public comment 

period/hearing was held and after 

consideration of the comments received, 

the Trustee Council decided to pursue 

implementation of 17 restoration ideas. 

Rather than requesting restoration 

ideas, Round III solicited grant 

applications for natural resource 

restoration projects. This process has 

the advantage of allowing for faster 

implementation of projects by having 

applicants conduct the restoration 

projects after receiving direct funding 

through NOAA-issued grants. Further 

this process allows Trustee Council staff 

to continue implementation of Round I 

and Round II projects while still 

providing oversight to Round III 

projects. 

The Round III solicitation appeared in 

the Federal Register (70 FR 5191, 

February 1, 2005), on the World Wide 

Web on GRANTS.GOV where a Federal 

Funding Opportunity (FFO) was 

published, and on the Trustee Council’s 

webpage at www.restorenbh.gov. A total 

of 19 applications were received, but of 

these, four were rejected for not being 

related to the New Bedford Harbor 

restoration activities. Following 

procedures specified in the FFO, 

technical reviewers independently rated 

each application using five evaluation 

criteria which totalled 100 points. The 

applications were then ranked by the 

total score received. In addition to the 

technical review, a legal review was 

conducted to ensure the resulting 

projects were consistent with the 

requirements of CERCLA. The results of 

the technical review was provided as a 

recommendation to the Trustee Council. 

The FFO also established in Section 

V.B. Review and Selection, that the 

‘‘Council will review the 

recommendation, accept or modify the 

recommendations, and make a 

preliminary determination of the 

projects it expects to undertake.’’

Following this, the Council will initiate 

a 30-day comment period during which 

a public hearing would be held. 

The Council is now seeking public 

review of the preferred projects and the 

proposed level of funding for each 

project. The public is also invited to 

attend a public hearing (see DATES and 

ADDRESSES) to provide oral comment 

based upon its review of the Trustees’

preliminary recommendations. 

At the conclusion of the comment 

period, the Council will consider the 

comments from the public and its 

advisors before making final decisions 

on the projects eligible for funding 

through the Trust Account. 

Prior to final approval for funding, all 

selected projects require environmental 

review under applicable law and the 

submission of detailed scopes of work 

for Council review and approval. The 

release of funds may be conditioned on 

the results of project activity such as 

feasibility studies or assessments. In 

addition, implementation of the projects 

may be conditioned or delayed, and the 

funds therefore held in reserve, until 

more information becomes available or 

specific conditions are met. Funds held 

in reserve will continue to be held in 

the interest bearing Trust Account, 

administered by the Court Registry 

Investment System of the United States 

District Courts. 

II. The Preferred Project Ideas 

Recommended by the Trustee Council 

Below is a description of the preferred 

projects proposed by the Council for 

potential implementation and funding. 

A draft environmental assessment has 

been prepared which provides further 

information on the preferred projects 

and a discussion of those ideas which 

are not considered preferred projects. 

The draft environmental assessment is 

available at the Council office (see 

ADDRESSES) or by accessing the Council 

website http://www.restorenbh.gov. 

1. Acushnet River: ‘‘Headwaters to Bay’’

Land Conservation Project. 

The project was composed of four 

separate subprojects which follow: 

a. Acushnet River North (Requested 

amount: $833,500; Council suggested 

amount: to be determined based upon 

the option chosen) 

The project is located in East 

Freetown and Acushnet, MA at the 

headwaters of the Acushnet River. The 

alternative is to provide funding for the 

purchase of 88 acres (35.6 hectares) of 

undisturbed forest and wetlands west of 

Squam Brook and open the property to 

the public for passive recreational use. 

The parcel would also be protected 

through the attachment of a permanent 

conservation restriction to the deed. An 

additional 90 acres (36.4 hectares) east 

of Squam Brook would be protected 

through the purchase of a conservation 

restriction (CR) on the land. This action 

would prevent any future development 

of the land and preserve the existing 

agricultural use (cranberry production) 

in accordance with Best Management 

Practices. The eastern portion of the site 

would remain in private ownership 

with public access limited by the 

owners. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved the project for possible 

implementation pending public 

comment on its decision and the 

project. The Trustee Council is 

considering two options for the project: 

(1) Purchase and/or CR of the entire 

property or (2) purchase and/or CR of 

the western portion of the property 

only. The western portion is 

characterized by upland forest and 

wetlands leading down to an irrigation 

reservoir and Squam Brook. This second 

option would not purchase a CR on the 

eastern portion where there are active 

cranberry bog operations. The Council 

favors outright purchase, the second 

option, to provide greater protection to 

the headwaters since there is 

development pressure in this area. The 

Council is not as interested in the 

eastern portion unless the potential 

exists for restoring the natural condition 

of the wetlands. 

b. Acushnet Saw Mill (Requested 

amount: $1,651,500; Council suggested 

amount: to be determined based upon 

the option chosen) 

This project is located in Acushnet, 

MA on the Acushnet River at a point 

where the freshwater portion ends and 

the tidal estuary begins. Funds would be 

provided for the fee simple purchase 

and conservation restriction of 21 acres 

(8.5 hectares) (consisting of field, forest, 

riverfront, freshwater pond and marsh) 

at the Acushnet Sawmill site from its 

present owners. The site is the location 

of the first dam on the Acushnet River 

that is being examined by the Trustee 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 215 / Tuesday, November 8, 2005 / Notices 67671 

Council and the Massachusetts Division 

of Marine Fisheries for modifications to 

restore anadromous fish passage under 

Round I. There are presently three 

buildings located on site as well as other 

structures associated with a once active 

sawmill and lumberyard. The applicant 

envisions restoring this site to a natural 

state through the removal of all the 

buildings and pavement covering 

approximately 4 acres (1.6 hectares). 

While this may be a long-term objective 

of the applicant, the only action to be 

taken at this time is the fee simple 

acquisition and conservation restriction. 

This action would prevent further 

development of the site. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved of the project for possible 

implementation pending public 

comments on its decision and the 

project. The Trustee Council is 

considering two options for the project: 

(1) Purchase and/or CR of the entire 

property or (2) purchase and/or CR of 

the undeveloped portion of the property 

composed primarily of the eastern 

portion of the property. The concern 

over the developed portion is the 

amount of effort needed to restore the 

property to natural conditions and the 

various unknowns associated with the 

commercial use (e.g. sawmill 

operations) of the site. The Council has 

not made a decision on either option 

and invites public comment. 

c. Marsh Island South (Requested 

amount: $447,500; Council suggested 

amount: up to $397,500) 

The project is located in Fairhaven, 

MA in the Inner Harbor just south of the 

Route 195 crossing. Funds would be 

provided for the fee simple purchase 

and conservation restriction of a 7.68–

acre (3.1–hectare) site on the southern 

portion of a peninsula known as Marsh 

Island in Fairhaven. (The remaining 

northern portion of Marsh Island was 

purchased using Trustee Council funds 

authorized in Round II. The Trustee 

Council is investigating the feasibility of 

restoring the salt marsh that was present 

before fill was placed on the island.) 

Prior to the purchase, funds would be 

provided for a title examination, fair 

market real estate appraisal, 

environmental site assessment and 

survey (if needed). 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved the project for possible 

implementation subject to consideration 

of public comment. The Council is 

concerned about the two existing radio 

towers on site and will explore with the 

applicant options for their eventual 

removal. The Council does not believe 

the $50,000 for ‘‘Restoration Planning 

and Design’’ is required since the 

Council is already funding efforts on 

Marsh Island revolving around salt 

marsh restoration. 

d. Viveiros Farm (Requested amount: 

$1,270,000; Council suggested amount: 

up to $1,270,000) 

The project is located on the eastern 

side of Sconticut Neck, Fairhaven, MA. 

The overall project goal is to protect 127 

acres (51.4 hectares) (comprised of 

farmland, salt marsh, freshwater 

wetlands and coastal beach) from future 

development through a combination of 

land protection methods. Funding 

would be used for a fee simple purchase 

on 40 acres (16.2 hectares) and a 

conservation restriction would be 

placed on 16 acres (6.5 hectares). The 

remaining 71 acres (28.3 hectares) 

would be acquired using an Agricultural 

Protection Restriction (APR) through the 

Massachusetts Department of 

Agricultural Resources (MDAR). The 

amount requested from the Trustee 

Council would be cost shared with 

$2,050,000 coming from a North 

Atlantic Wetland Conservation Act oil 

spill grant, a MDAR grant and other 

municipal and private sources. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved the project for possible 

implementation subject to consideration 

of public comment. The Trustee Council 

would like clarification on how its 

funding would be used and for which 

components of the project. The Council 

is uncertain whether Council funding 

would be used to supplement MDAR 

funding for the APR. The Council is not 

interested in funding the APR and does 

not want agricultural use of the Council 

funded portion of the land. 

2. Apponagansett Bay Resource 

Restoration Feasibility Study (Requested 

amount: $175,000; Council suggested 

amount: $175,000) 

The project is located in Dartmouth, 

MA where the Padanaram Causeway 

crosses Apponagansett Bay. The project 

would investigate the feasibility of 

restoring a more natural tidal exchange 

between inner Apponagansett Bay, outer 

Apponagansett Bay and Buzzards Bay 

by installing additional openings in the 

Padanaram causeway. A feasibility 

study would be conducted to determine 

whether modifying the Padanaram 

causeway will increase tidal flushing 

with the inner Bay with the goal of 

restoring upstream degraded resources, 

including salt marsh and shellfish beds. 

The feasibility study would consist of 

two phases. The first phase would 

consist of data collection and 

developing and running a 

hydrodynamic model. The results of the 

first phase will describe the 

modifications to the causeway (such as 

installing additional culverts in the 

causeway) necessary to improve the 

resources of Apponagansett Bay and 

quantify the effects of such actions. The 

results of the first phase of the 

feasibility study would be presented to 

the Trustee Council. Should the results 

demonstrate that the project is worth the 

Council’s continued support, the second 

phase of the feasibility study would be 

implemented. The second phase 

consists of the development of 

conceptual restoration plans that could 

be used to produce construction cost 

estimates and discuss regulatory 

approvals. Once this study is complete, 

the effects of additional openings in the 

causeway and the costs of implementing 

these changes will be known and a 

preferred restoration alternative will be 

developed. Funds for the further design, 

permitting and construction for such a 

project could be requested in a future 

Trustee Council funding round. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

chosen to include the study as a 

preferred study for possible funding and 

implementation after consideration of 

public comment. Funding would be 

provided for the initial feasibility 

investigation (data gathering and 

hydrodynamic modeling) and if the 

results are favorable, and the Trustee 

Council approves, funding would then 

be provided for the second phase to 

produce the conceptual plan. 

3. Restoration and Management of Tern 

Populations (Requested amount: 

$833,336.15; Council suggested amount: 

$833,336.15) 

The project is located on three islands 

in Buzzards Bay: Bird Island, Marion, 

Massachusetts; Ram Island, 

Mattapoisett, Massachusetts; and 

Penikese Island, Gosnold, 

Massachusetts. Roseate and common 

terns were injured while feeding on 

PCB- contaminated fish in the New 

Bedford Harbor Environment. The 

project goal is to rebuild and restore the 

population of roseate terns (a federally 

listed endangered species) and common 

terns through management or 

enhancement of nesting locations. The 

management aspect of this project 

involves moving other species, such as 

gulls, off the nesting areas and the daily 

monitoring of the terns that locate at the 

three islands. The project would also 

increase nesting habitat on Ram Island 

by removing an invasive plant 

Phragmites australis and filling an 

eroded section of the island. 

This idea would extend the work 

being conducted under restoration 

funding from Rounds I and II for an 

additional period of three years. Round 

67672 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 215 / Tuesday, November 8, 2005 / Notices 

I provided funding ($266,400) to 

implement biological management and 

monitoring of tern colonies at Bird 

Island and Ram Island to restore 

populations of common terns and 

roseate terns. At Penikese Island, the 

project focused on reclaiming the island 

as a nesting site by managing gulls. 

Preliminary engineering work to 

stabilize Bird island and toxicological 

analyses of tern eggs were also funded. 

Round II funding ($853,600) continued 

the Round I management efforts at the 

three islands for an additional six years. 

Further work was done to assess what 

needed to be done to improve tern 

nesting habitat at Bird Island. Samples 

of unhatched tern eggs were collected 

for chemical analysis. Overall tern 

numbers on the islands have increased 

59 percent since Trustee Council 

funding commenced. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

chosen to include the project as a 

preferred project for possible funding 

and implementation after consideration 

of public comment. 

4. River Road Restoration Project 

(Requested amount: $954,453; Council 

suggested amount: $195,000 for wetland 

restoration components and signage) 

The project is located at 246 River 

Road, New Bedford, MA and is 

composed of 2.5 acres (1.0 hectares) of 

city-owned land along the Acushnet 

River. The project would return a former 

industrial site to open space including 

restoring a 23,000–square foot (2,137–

square meter) salt marsh on filled 

tideland and creating walking trails, 

interpretative signs, canoe/kayak 

launch, picnic area, play area, lawn and 

parking area. The Acushnet River along 

this location has been the subject of EPA 

and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

recent cleanup activity involving the 

removal of bottom sediments and 

replanting along the shoreline. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved only the wetland restoration 

component of the project for possible 

implementation after consideration of 

public comment. The wetland 

restoration component will provide a 

direct benefit to injured natural 

resources. 

5. Round Hill Salt Marsh Restoration 

Project (Requested amount: $164,000; 

Council suggested amount: $164,000) 

The project is located at Round Hill 

Point, Dartmouth, MA. The project 

would conduct an investigation 

exploring the feasibility of restoring up 

to 24 acres (9.7 hectares) of coastal salt 

marsh through the removal of 

significant amounts of fill material and 

re-grading to historic marsh elevations 

at the Round Hill Salt Marsh Restoration 

Site. A phased approach would be taken 

with Phase I involving a feasibility 

study and Phase II involving the 

conceptual design of the proposed 

project. 

Under Phase I, a contractor would be 

hired to complete a full feasibility study 

including development of historical 

background/site history, base mapping 

(vegetation, topographic and 

bathymetric maps as necessary), 

hydrologic and alternatives analyses 

and cut and fill calculations. Upon 

completion of Phase I, the feasibility 

study would be presented to the 

Trustees for their consideration and 

approval. If approved by the Trustee 

Council and project partners, the second 

Phase (Phase II) would proceed with 

conceptual design. 

Conceptual design would include 

development of conceptual alternatives 

and estimates of project costs. 

Completion of conceptual designs and 

cost estimates will be used to further 

develop the project with partners and 

regulatory authorities and aid in 

identifying a potential preferred 

alternative. Upon successful completion 

through Phase II with a conceptual 

design, the project team would re-apply 

for additional Trustee Council funding 

through future funding opportunities to 

complete final design, permitting and 

construction. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

chosen to include the project as a 

preferred study for possible funding and 

implementation after consideration of 

public comment. Funding would be 

provided for the initial feasibility study. 

If the results are favorable and the 

Trustee Council approves, funding 

would then be provided for the second 

phase to produce the conceptual design 

and alternatives analysis. 

6. West Island Beach (Requested 

amount: $162,000; Council suggested 

amount: $162,000) 

The project site is located at the 

entrance to West Island Beach in 

Fairhaven, MA. The project is intended 

to increase full tidal exchange to a 

tidally-restricted 8–acre (3.2–hectare) 

salt marsh by replacing an undersized 

culvert with a properly-sized culvert 

beneath the West Island Beach access 

road (Fir Street). Requested funds will 

be used to hire contractors to correctly 

size and design a culvert that will 

maximize tidal exchange with the West 

Island Beach marsh (without adversely 

affecting nearby properties), obtain all 

necessary permits and approvals, 

develop construction drawings, 

specifications and bid documents, 

construct the project, and install an 

interpretive sign that recognizes the 

contribution of the New Bedford Harbor 

Trustee Council and the project 

partners. 

The Trustee Council has preliminarily 

approved the idea for possible funding 

and implementation after consideration 

of public comment. The Council would 

be interested in pursuing an expansion 

of the project through the relocation of 

the beach parking lot and by removing 

the fill that was used to create the 

parking lot and will discuss this 

alternative with the Town of Fairhaven. 

Such a project change would require the 

approval of the Town. 

Classification 

This notice does not contain a 

collection-of-information requirement 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

A draft environmental assessment has 

been prepared which provides further 

information on the preferred projects 

and a discussion of those ideas which 

are not considered preferred projects. 

The draft environmental assessment is 

available at the Council office (see 

ADDRESSES) or by accessing the 

Council’s website at http:// 

www.restorenbh.gov. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. and 9601 

et seq. 

Dated: November 1, 2005. 

Garry F. Mayer, 

Acting Director, Office of Habitat 

Conservation, National Marine Fisheries 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 05–22237 Filed 11–7–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

Performance Review Board (PRB) 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office. 

ACTION: Notice; Update membership list 

of the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office Performance Review 

Board. 

SUMMARY: In conformance with the Civil 

Service Reform Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. 

4314(c)(4), the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office announces the 

appointment of persons to serve as 

members of its Performance Review 

Board. 

ADDRESSES: Director, Office of Human 

Resources, United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Matthews at (571) 272–6200.