Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules 57583 

PART 552–SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

552.215–71 [Redesignated as 552.238–XX] 

552.215–72 [Redesignated as 552.238–YY] 

4. Sections 552.215–71 and 552.215– 

72 are redesignated as 552.238–XX and 

552.238–YY, respectively. 

[FR Doc. E8–22745 Filed 10–2–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–61–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 226 

[Docket No. 0809161218–81253–01] 

RIN 0648–AX23 

Listing Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Designating Critical 

Habitat; 90–day Finding for a Petition 

to Revise the Critical Habitat 

Designation for the Hawaiian Monk 

Seal 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), NationalOceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of petition finding; 

request for information and comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS), announce a 

90–day finding for a petition to revise 

Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus 

schauinslandi) critical habitat under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, 

as amended. The Hawaiian monk seal is 

listed as endangered throughout its 

range, and currently designated critical 

habitat consists of all beach areas, sand 

spits, and islets, including all beach 

crest vegetation to its deepest extent 

inland, lagoon waters, inner reef waters, 

and ocean waters out to a depth of 20 

fathoms (36.6m) around specific areas in 

the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. The 

petition seeks to include key beach 

areas, sand spits, and islets, including 

all beach crest vegetation to its deepest 

extent inland, lagoon waters, inner reef 

waters, and ocean waters out to a depth 

of 200 meters around the main 

Hawaiian Islands, and to extend critical 

habitat designation in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands to Sand Island and 

ocean waters out to a depth of 500 

meters. We are initiating a review of 

currently designated critical habitat of 

the species to determine whether 

revision is warranted. To ensure a 

comprehensive review, we solicit 

information and comments pertaining to 

this species’ essential habitat needs 

from any interested party. 

DATES: Written comments and 

information related to this petition 

finding must be received [see 

ADDRESSES] by December 2, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by [0648–AX23], by any one 

of the following methods: (1) Electronic 

Submissions: Submit all electronic 

public comments via the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; (2) Fax: 808–973– 

2941, attention: Krista Graham; or (3) 

mail: addressed to Krista Graham, 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Pacific Islands Regional Office, 

Protected Resources Division, 1601 

Kapiolani Boulevard Suite 1110, 

Honolulu, HI 96814. 

All comments received are a part of 

the public record and will generally be 

posted to httphttp:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All personal identifying information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

fields if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

PDF file formats only. 

Interested persons may obtain more 

information about critical habitat 

designated for the Hawaiian monk seal 

online at the NMFS Pacific Islands 

Regional Office website: http:// 

www.fpir.noaa.gov/PRD/ 

prdlcriticallhabitat.html 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Krista Graham by phone 808–944–2238, 

fax 808–973–2941, or e-mail 

krista.graham@noaa.gov; Lance Smith 

by phone 808–944–2258, fax 808–973– 

2941, or e-mail lance.smith@noaa.gov; 

Lisa Van Atta by phone 808–944–2257, 

fax 808–973–2941, or e-mail 

alecia.vanatta@noaa.gov; or Marta 

Nammack by phone 301–713–1401. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Critical habitat is defined in the ESA 

(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) as: 

‘‘(i) the specific areas within the 

geographical area currently occupied by the 

species, at the time it is listed... on which are 

found those physical or biological features (I) 

essential to the conservation of the species 

and (II) which may require special 

management considerations or protection; 

and (ii) specific areas outside the 

geographical area occupied by the species at 

the time it is listed upon a determination by 

the Secretary that such areas are essential for 

the conservation of the species.’’ 

Our implementing regulations (50 

CFR 424.12) describe those essential 

physical and biological features to 

include, but not limited to: (1) space for 

individual and population growth, and 

normal behavior; (2) food, water, air, 

light, minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; (3) cover or 

shelter; (4) sites for breeding, 

reproduction, rearing of offspring; and 

(5) habitats that are protected from 

disturbance or are representative of the 

historic geographical and ecological 

distribution of a species. We are 

required to focus on the primary 

constituent elements (PCEs) which best 

represent the principal biological or 

physical features. PCEs may include, 

but are not limited to: nesting grounds, 

feeding sites, water quality, tide, and 

geological formation. Our implementing 

regulations (50 CFR 424.02) define 

‘‘special management considerations or 

protection’’ as any method or procedure 

useful in protecting physical and 

biological features of the environment 

for the conservation of the species. 

Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us 

to designate and make revisions to 

critical habitat for listed species based 

on the best scientific data available and 

after taking into consideration the 

economic impact, the impact on 

national security, and any other relevant 

impact, of specifying any particular area 

as critical habitat. The Secretary may 

exclude any particular area from critical 

habitat if he determines that the benefits 

of such exclusion outweigh the benefits 

of specifying such area as part of the 

critical habitat, unless he determines 

that the failure to designate such area as 

critical habitat will result in the 

extinction of the species concerned. We 

are required to consider whether the 

petition contains information indicating 

that areas petitioned contain physical 

and biological features essential to, and 

that may require special management to 

provide for, the conservation of the 

species. Section 4(b)(3)(D)(i) of the ESA 

requires us to make a finding as to 

whether a petition to revise critical 

habitat presents substantial scientific 

information indicating that the revision 

may be warranted. Our implementing 

regulations (50 CFR 424.14) define 

‘‘substantial information’’ as the amount 

of information that would lead a 

reasonable person to believe that the 

measure proposed in the petition may 

be warranted. In determining whether 

substantial information exists, we take 

into account several factors, including 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
57584 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

information submitted with, and 

referenced in, the petition and all other 

information readily available in our 

files. To the maximum extent 

practicable, this finding is to be made 

within 90 days of the receipt of the 

petition, and the finding is to be 

published promptly in the Federal 

Register. If we find that a petition 

presents substantial information 

indicating that the revision may be 

warranted, within 12 months after 

receiving the petition, we are required 

to determine how we intend to proceed 

with the requested revision and 

promptly publish notice of such 

intention in the Federal Register. See 

ESA Section 4(b)(3)(D)(ii). 

Analysis of Petition 

On July 9, 2008, we received a 

petition from the Center for Biological 

Diversity, Kahea, and the Ocean 

Conservancy (Petitioners) to revise the 

Hawaiian monk seal critical habitat 

designation (Center for Biological 

Diversity et al., 2008). Currently 

designated critical habitat consists of all 

beach areas, sand spits, and islets, 

including all beach crest vegetation to 

its deepest extent inland, lagoon waters, 

inner reef waters, and ocean waters out 

to a depth of 20 fathoms (36.6m) around 

the following areas in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands: Kure Atoll; Midway 

Islands, except Sand Island and its 

harbor; Pearl and Hermes Reef; Lisianski 

Island; Laysan Island; Maro Reef; 

Gardner Pinnacles; French Frigate 

Shoals; Necker Island; and Nihoa Island 

(53 FR 18988; May 26, 1988). The 

Petitioners seek to revise the critical 

habitat designation to include key beach 

areas, sand spits, and islets, including 

all beach crest vegetation to its deepest 

extent inland, lagoon waters, inner reef 

waters, and ocean waters out to a depth 

of 200 meters around the main 

Hawaiian Islands, and to extend critical 

habitat designation in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands to Sand Island and 

ocean waters out to a depth of 500 

meters. 

The petition contains a detailed 

description of the species’ natural 

history and status, including 

information on distribution and 

movements, feeding and prey selection, 

reproduction, population status and 

trends, and factors contributing to the 

current status of the species in the 

Pacific Ocean. The petition describes 

the importance of the terrestrial and 

marine habitat for monk seals around 

the entire Hawaiian Archipelago. The 

Petitioners cite studies indicating that, 

while a significant portion of the 

species’ population is found throughout 

the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands 

(NMFS, 2007), it is likely that monk 

seals are recolonizing the main 

Hawaiian Islands (Baker, 2006) since 

Hawaiian monk seals have been sighted 

on each of the eight main Hawaiian 

Islands and their presence is increasing 

(NMFS, 2007). The petition cites studies 

demonstrating that births have 

increased on the main Hawaiian Islands 

since the mid–1990s (NMFS, 2007), and 

that pups born on the main Hawaiian 

Islands have been healthier and more 

likely to survive to adulthood than those 

born on the Northwestern Hawaiian 

Islands (Baker et al., 2006). The 

Petitioners further cite studies that 

assert that these larger sizes and 

healthier physical condition reflects 

greater prey availability and, thus, better 

foraging conditions in the main 

Hawaiian Islands (Baker et al., 2006; 

Baker, 2006; Baker and Johanos, 2004). 

The Petitioners claim that the 

population of monk seals on the main 

Hawaiian Islands is likely below the 

carrying capacity of those islands. The 

Petitioners believe that the petitioned 

habitat area contains the PCEs or the 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of 

Hawaiian monk seals. The Petitioners 

claim that the petitioned area provides 

space for population growth and normal 

behavior, and thus the main Hawaiian 

Islands will provide important habitat 

for recovery of the species. They offer 

that the habitat components essential for 

feeding, pupping, nursing, resting, 

molting, and migrating include all 

marine waters, along with associated 

marine aquatic flora and fauna in the 

water column, as well as the underlying 

marine benthic community, all of which 

occur in the main Hawaiian Islands. The 

Petitioners assert that this is evidenced 

by the increasing use of the area by 

monk seals as well as their visibly 

healthier body condition. As for 

extending the area of designation in the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the 

Petitioners cite new studies that have 

contradicted the previous belief that 

monk seals foraged only on shallow reef 

habitats (Parrish and Littnan, 2007). The 

Petitioners cite from Baker et al. (2007) 

that monk seals forage in a variety of 

marine habitats within approximately 

500 meters of the surface in the 

Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Thus, 

the Petitioners suggest that the 

designation of critical habitat for the 

Hawaiian monk seal in the main 

Hawaiian Islands and the extension of 

the designation in the Northwestern 

Hawaiian Islands are consistent with the 

recovery plan for the species. 

Finally, the Petitioners request that, if 

we determine some portion of the 

petitioned area does not meet the 

criteria for critical habitat, we analyze 

whether some subset of this area should 

be designated as critical habitat. 

Petition Finding 

Based on the above information and 

information readily available in our 

files, and pursuant to criteria specified 

in 50 CFR 424.14(c), we find the 

Petitioners present substantial scientific 

information indicating that a revision to 

the critical habitat designation for 

Hawaiian monk seals may be warranted. 

Our Pacific Islands Fisheries Science 

Center has conducted research on 

Hawaiian monk seals foraging, pupping, 

nursing, resting, and migrating within 

the petitioned area, in both the main 

and Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, 

and the area in general represents 

principal habitat for Hawaiian monk 

seals. The Petitioners have requested 

broad areas to be considered as critical 

habitat for this species. It is not clear 

whether such a broad designation is 

warranted at this time, but we will 

review the best scientific information 

available to determine whether these 

petitioned areas or a subset of these 

petitioned areas meet the definition of 

critical habitat. 

To ensure that the review of critical 

habitat for Hawaiian monk seals is 

complete and based on the best 

available data, we solicit information 

and comments on whether the 

petitioned area, or some subset thereof, 

qualifies as critical habitat. Areas that 

include the physical and biological 

features essential to the conservation of 

the species and that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection should be identified. As 

stated earlier, essential features include, 

but are not limited to, space for 

individual growth and for normal 

behavior, food, water, air, light, 

minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements, cover or 

shelter, sites for reproduction and 

development of offspring, and habitats 

that are protected from disturbance or 

are representative of the historical, 

geographical, and ecological 

distributions of the species (50 CFR 

424.12). 

We request that all data, information, 

and comments be accompanied by 

supporting documentation such as 

maps, bibliographic references, or 

reprints of pertinent publications. 

Comments and materials received will 

be available for public inspection, by 

appointment, during normal business 

hours at the above address (see 

ADDRESSES). 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 193 / Friday, October 3, 2008 / Proposed Rules 57585 

Peer Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

issued its Final Information Quality 

Bulletin for Peer Review on December 

16, 2004. The Bulletin went into effect 

June 16, 2005, and generally requires 

that all ‘‘influential scientific 

information’’ and ‘‘highly influential 

scientific information’’ disseminated on 

or after that date be peer reviewed. 

Because the information used to 

evaluate this petition may be considered 

‘‘influential scientific information,’’ we 

solicit the names of recognized experts 

in the field that could serve as peer 

reviewers of such information we may 

disseminate as we evaluate this petition. 

Independent peer reviewers will be 

selected from the academic and 

scientific community, applicable tribal 

and other Native American groups, 

Federal and state agencies, the private 

sector, and public interest groups. 

References Cited 

Baker, J.D. 2006. The Hawaiian Monk 

Seal: Abundance Estimation, Patterns in 

Survival, and Habitat Issues. 

Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis. University 

of Aberdeen, UK. 182 p. 

Baker, J.D., and T.C. Johanos. 2004. 

Abundance of the Hawaiian Monk Seal 

in the Main Hawaiian Islands. 

Biological Conservation 116: 103–110. 

Baker, J.D., C.L. Littnan, and D.W. 

Johnston. 2006. Potential Effects of Sea 

Level Rise on the Terrestrial Habitats of 

Endangered and Endemic Megafauna in 

the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. 

Endangered Species Research 2:21–30. 

Baker, J.D., J.J. Polovina, and E.A. 

Howell. 2007. Effect of Variable Oceanic 

Productivity on the Survival of an 

Upper Trophic Predator, the Hawaiian 

Monk Seal Monachus schauinslandi. 

Marine Ecology Progress Series 346: 

277–283. 

Center for Biological Diversity, Kahea, 

and Ocean Conservancy. 2008. Petition 

to Revise Critical Habitat for the 

Hawaiian Monk Seal (Monachus 

schauinslandi) Under the Endangered 

Species Act. 41 pp. http:// 

www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/ 

mammals/Hawaiianlmonklseal/pdfs/ 

Petition-Monk-Seal-CH–07–02–08.pdf 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

(‘‘NMFS’’). 2007. Recovery Plan for the 

Hawaiian Monk Seal (Monachus 

schauinslandi). Second Revision. 

National Marine Fisheries Service, 

Silver Spring, MD. 165 pp. 

Parrish, F.A. and C.L. Littnan. 2007. 

Changing Perspectives in Hawaiian 

Monk Seal Research Using AnimalBorne Imaging. Marine Technology 

Society Journal 41:30–34. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

Dated: September 29, 2008. 

Samuel D. Rauch III, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator for 

Regulatory Programs, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–23467 Filed 10–2–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 679 

[Docket No. 080721859–81206–01] 

RIN 0648–AX01 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska, Groundfish of the 

Gulf of Alaska 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes a regulatory 

amendment to exempt fishermen using 

dinglebar fishing gear in federal waters 

of the Gulf of Alaska from the 

requirement to carry a vessel monitoring 

system (VMS). This action is necessary 

because the risk of damage posed to 

protected corals in the Gulf of Alaska by 

the dinglebar gear fishery is minor and 

insufficient to justify the costs of VMS. 

This action is intended to promote the 

goals and objectives of the Magnuson– 

Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act, the Fishery 

Management Plan for Groundfish of the 

Gulf of Alaska, and other applicable 

law. 

DATES: Comments must be received no 

later than November 3, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Sue 

Salveson, Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries 

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: 

Ellen Sebastian. You may submit 

comments, identified by RIN 0648– 

AX01, by any one of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal website at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 

99802. 

• Fax: 907–586–7557. 

• Hand delivery to the Federal 

Building: 709 West 9th Street, Room 

420A, Juneau, AK. 

All comments received are a part of 

the public record and will generally be 

posted to http://www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

fields, if you wish to remain 

anonymous). Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Microsoft 

Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe 

portable document file (pdf) formats 

only. 

Copies of the Environmental 

Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review/ 

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

(EA/RIR/IRFA) prepared for this action 

may be obtained from the NMFS Alaska 

Region at the address above or from the 

Alaska Region website at http:// 

alaskafisheries.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie 

Scheurer, 907–586–7356. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Groundfish fisheries in the Gulf of 

Alaska (GOA) are managed under the 

Fishery Management Plan for 

Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP). 

The North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) prepared the FMP 

under the authority of the Magnuson– 

Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act (Magnuson–Stevens 

Act). Regulations implementing the 

FMP appear at 50 CFR part 679. General 

regulations governing U.S. fisheries also 

appear at 50 CFR part 600. 

The FMP designates essential fish 

habitat and habitat areas of particular 

concern (HAPCs) in the Gulf of Alaska. 

HAPCs are areas within essential fish 

habitat that are of particular ecological 

importance to the long–term 

sustainability of managed species, are of 

a rare type, or are especially susceptible 

to degradation or development. The 

Council may designate specific sites as 

HAPCs and may develop management 

measures to protect habitat features 

within them. In order to protect HAPCs, 

certain habitat protection areas and 

habitat conservation zones have been 

designated. A habitat protection area is 

an area of special, rare habitat features 

where fishing activities that may 

adversely affect the habitat are 

restricted. 

Two HAPCs are designated in the 

Fairweather Grounds and one HAPC is 

designated near Cape Ommaney in the 

Gulf of Alaska. Within these HAPCs, 

five Coral Habitat Protection Areas were 

identified where high concentrations of 

sensitive corals occur. Fishing is 

restricted only in the Coral Habitat 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS