42298 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

Dated: August 30, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Application of the Countervailing Duty 

Law to Imports from the PRC 

V. Diversification of the PRC’s Economy 

VI. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 

Adverse Inferences 

VII. Subsidies Valuation 

VIII. Interest Rate Benchmarks, Discount 

Rates, Inputs and Electricity 

IX. Analysis of Programs 

X. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2017–18975 Filed 9–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P12 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Final Notice of a New Category of 

Special Use Permit Related to the 

Operation of Desalination Facilities 

Producing Potable Water for 

Consumption 

AGENCY: Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean 

Service (NOS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: On January 12, 2017, NOAA 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register proposing two new categories 

of special use permits (SUP) related to 

the operation of desalination facilities, 

and requesting public comment. NOAA 

hereby gives public notice that the 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 

will adopt a new SUP category pursuant 

to the requirements of Section 310 of the 

National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

(NMSA). The SUP category is for the 

continued presence of a pipeline 

transporting seawater to or from a 

desalination facility. The second 

category previously proposed for the use 

of sediment to filter seawater for 

desalination is removed. This notice 

also includes background information 

on the use of desalination in Monterey 

Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

(MBNMS) and ONMS regulations 

applicable to activities that disturb 

submerged lands or discharge into 

sanctuaries, explains why a SUP is 

appropriate for this category of actions, 

explains why issuance of a new SUP 

category will not result in additional 

regulatory review, explains how the 

SUP category will facilitate and 

streamline the administration and 

management of desalination permits, as 

appropriate, and provides responses to 

public comments received. At this time, 

most proposed desalination activity in 

sanctuaries occurs in MBNMS, and the 

scientific studies used for 

environmental impact and comparative 

cost analyses were regionally based, so 

the SUP category only applies to 

MBNMS. 

DATES: This notice becomes effective on 

September 7, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Please see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. This Federal 

Register document is also accessible via 

the Internet at: http://

montereybay.noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Bridget Hoover, Monterey Bay National 

Marine Sanctuary, 99 Pacific Street 

Bldg. 455A, Monterey, CA 93940, (831) 

647–4217, bridget.hoover@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to Section 310 of the National Marine 

Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. 1441, NOAA 

issues this notice of a Special Use 

Permit (SUP) category applicable to 

Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (MBNMS) for the continued 

presence of a pipeline transporting 

seawater to or from a desalination 

facility. 

I. Background 

Introduction to Desalination Projects in 

Sanctuaries 

There is a growing public concern 

about ensuring adequate water resources 

to support populations along the 

California coast. Communities have 

been working together to develop 

strategies for addressing the long-term 

drought California has recently 

experienced and the resulting water 

scarcity. In the Monterey Bay area, 

desalination has been identified as one 

of the essential components of water 

resource portfolios. NOAA’s initial 

proposal was to apply the proposed SUP 

categories across the National Marine 

Sanctuary System, which could have 

resulted in the SUP categories applying 

to Olympic Coast and Florida Keys 

national marine sanctuaries (the other 

two sanctuaries adjacent to land such 

that desalination facilities could be 

constructed) in addition to MBNMS (82 

FR 3751). However, since most 

desalination activity in sanctuaries 

occurs in MBNMS, and the scientific 

studies used for environmental impact 

and comparative cost analyses were 

regionally based, the SUP category only 

applies to MBNMS. 

Desalination is the process by which 

salts and other minerals are removed 

from seawater or brackish water to 

produce potable fresh water. The 

installation and operation of 

desalination facilities near a national 

marine sanctuary may involve access to 

and use of sanctuary resources and 

include activities prohibited by a 

sanctuary’s regulations. One potentially 

applicable prohibition is for activities 

that cause the alteration of, or 

placement of structures on or in the 

seabed 15 CFR 922.132(a)(4). For 

example, installation of certain 

desalination facility structures such as 

an intake or outfall pipeline on, 

beneath, or attached to the ocean floor 

would be prohibited by sanctuary 

regulations and could only occur with 

sanctuary approval. Another prohibition 

potentially applicable to desalination 

projects is discharging or depositing any 

material or matter from within or into 

sanctuaries 15 CFR 922.132(a)(2). The 

disposal of brine effluent from a 

desalination facility, and most other 

materials, into sanctuary waters would 

be prohibited unless approved by the 

sanctuary. 

Multiple federal, state and local 

permits are typically required for any 

construction and operation of 

desalination facilities, including when a 

facility is proposed near a national 

marine sanctuary. In 2010, NOAA, in 

collaboration with the California Coastal 

Commission and California Central 

Coast Regional Water Quality Control 

Board, published specific guidelines for 

new desalination plants in a report 

titled Guidelines for Desalination Plants 

in Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary (MBNMS 2010, http://

montereybay.noaa.gov/resourcepro/ 

resmanissues/pdf/050610desal.pdf). 

These non-regulatory guidelines were 

developed to help ensure that any future 

desalination plants in or adjacent to 

MBNMS would be sited, designed, and 

operated in a manner that results in 

minimal impacts to the marine 

environment. These guidelines address 

numerous issues associated with 

desalination including site selection, 

construction and operational impacts, 

plant discharges, and intake systems. 

The guidelines encourage the use of 

subsurface intake systems and 

associated pipelines, which have less 

potential to cause environmental harm 

to sensitive marine organisms and 

habitats than other types of intakes. 

Open water intakes have the potential to 

trap organisms on the intake screens 

(impingement) or impact organisms 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42299 

1This management approach has been applied 

with respect to submarine fiber optic cables in 

Olympic Coast and Stellwagen Bank national 

marine sanctuaries, where the installation of the 

infrastructure was considered via a separate 

authorization and the continued presence of the 

infrastructure was addressed through an SUP (76 

FR 56973; ONMS 2002). 

small enough to pass through the screen 

during the processing of the saltwater 

(entrainment). Subsurface intakes have 

the potential to minimize or eliminate 

impingement and entrainment impacts 

(Chambers Group Memo 2010). When 

subsurface intakes are not feasible, and 

a new pipeline for an open water intake 

is necessary, placement should be 

thoroughly evaluated to minimize 

disturbances to biological resources. In 

addition, the guidelines encourage colocation with existing facilities (e.g., 

sewage treatment plants) to dilute brine 

by blending it with existing effluent for 

ocean discharges. 

The guidelines also examine which 

statutory and regulatory authorities 

would apply to desalination projects 

located near national marine 

sanctuaries. The guidelines explain that 

NOAA could potentially allow the 

construction and operation of 

desalination facilities through sanctuary 

authorization of other state and federal 

permits, such as the State of California’s 

Coastal Development Permit and 

National Pollution Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit. 

Authorizations and Special Use Permits 

(SUP) 

This section provides information on 

the difference between authorizations 

and special use permits (SUPs); explains 

why an SUP category for the continued 

presence of a pipeline transporting 

seawater to and from a desalination 

facility is appropriate; explains how this 

SUP category will facilitate sanctuary 

management in a way that enables 

desalination facilities, as appropriate; 

and articulates the scope of coverage of 

this SUP category. 

Depending on the type of activity or 

project proposed, NOAA has various 

regulatory mechanisms it can use to 

allow otherwise prohibited activities to 

occur within national marine 

sanctuaries. Two of these mechanisms 

are authorizations and SUPs. 

Authorizations allow an entity to 

conduct an activity prohibited by 

sanctuary regulations 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 regulation (15 CFR 922.49). In 

contrast, SUPs can only be issued for 

activities that are needed: (1) To 

establish conditions of access to and use 

of any sanctuary resources; or (2) to 

promote public use and understanding 

of a sanctuary resource (16 U.S.C. 

1441(a)). In addition, the activities 

covered under an SUP must be 

compatible with the purposes for which 

the sanctuary is designated and with 

protection of sanctuary resources (16 

U.S.C. 1441(c)). SUPs may only be 

issued for activities that can be 

conducted in a manner that does not 

destroy, cause the loss of, or injure 

sanctuary resources (16 U.S.C. 1441(c)). 

Finally, SUPs may authorize the 

conduct of an activity for up to five 

years and may be renewed (16 U.S.C. 

1441(c)). 

As mentioned above, NOAA has the 

ability to issue an authorization for a 

desalination project. Authorizations 

would address the desalination projects’ 

pipeline installation, maintenance, and 

removal, and brine discharge within the 

national marine sanctuary. For a 

desalination facility intake or outfall, an 

authorization of a California Coastal 

Development permit would be required 

for any seafloor disturbance, prior to 

issuance of an SUP for the continued 

presence of a pipeline transporting 

seawater to or from a desalination 

facility. Brine discharges would be 

covered by an authorization of another 

approval, such as the NPDES permit. 

In addition, the NMSA gives NOAA 

authority to develop categories of SUP 

and to assess fees that may be applied 

to expenses of issuing and 

administering SUPs and expenses of 

managing national marine sanctuaries 

(16 U.S.C. 1441(d)(3)). In the case of a 

proposal for a desalination project in or 

near MBNMS, NOAA has found that 

there is a significant time and resource 

investment to review the environmental 

analysis and process a permit 

application for this type of large-scale 

coastal development project. Applicable 

SUP fees that may be assessed for 

permitting certain aspects of 

desalination projects would include the 

processing of applications, preparation 

and review of environmental analysis, 

as well as long-term monitoring of the 

impacts of the activity to sanctuary 

resources, and assessment of fair market 

value for the use of the resource. 

NOAA has determined that the 

continued use of sanctuary resources 

(namely, the substrate, seafloor, and/or 

water column) by the presence of the 

pipeline could be carried out in a 

manner that is consistent with Section 

310 of the NMSA. As such, an SUP is 

an appropriate mechanism for NOAA to 

approve the continued presence of a 

pipeline and recover applicable costs 

associated with managing the sanctuary 

in a manner that allows desalination 

projects to occur within or near MBNMS 

and facilitates the more efficient 

administration of desalination permits 

and allowances.1 NOAA has further 

determined that issuance of this new 

SUP category will not result in 

additional regulatory review of 

desalination proposals, because an 

applicant would still need only submit 

one permit application even if NOAA 

ultimately issues multiple permits for 

the action, and because the same 

environmental review process pursuant 

to the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) and California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as 

required, would apply. 

While NOAA could conceivably 

propose new SUP categories for other 

types of pipelines, utility lines, or use 

of sediment associated with activities 

other than desalination (e.g., sewage 

treatment, or power generating 

facilities), NOAA elected to limit the 

focus of this SUP category to 

desalination activities in MBNMS, as 

desalination is currently a pressing 

issue on the California central coast. 

There is enough information on the 

types of activities associated with the 

continued presence of pipelines for 

desalination to make a determination 

that under certain conditions, and if 

correctly sited and compliant with 

MBNMS Desalination Guidelines, the 

continued presence of desalination 

pipelines is not likely to result in injury 

to sanctuary resources, which is a 

requirement for SUPs. It would be too 

speculative at this point for NOAA to 

analyze impacts of other types of 

pipelines, or other project impacts in 

the absence of a more clearly defined 

need or proposal for such activities. 

The second category previously 

proposed for the use of sediment to 

filter seawater for desalination has been 

removed from this final notice as NOAA 

recognizes that it may be a disincentive 

for the industry to select subsurface 

seawater intake, which is considered to 

have a smaller environmental impact 

than other types of intake. Moreover, the 

remaining SUP category will apply only 

to MBNMS because NOAA is not able 

to determine that the activities covered 

under this SUP category would always 

meet the ‘‘no injury’’ criteria for SUPs 

specified in the NMSA for all sites, at 

this time. 

NMSA Special Use Permits 

This section provides more 

information of the history of SUPs, how 

SUPs are applied, and how SUP fees are 

assessed and applied. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42300 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

Congress first granted NOAA the 

authority to issue SUPs for the conduct 

of specific activities in national marine 

sanctuaries in the 1988 Amendments to 

the National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

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

100–627). NMSA section 310 allows 

NOAA to issue SUPs to establish 

conditions of access to and use of any 

sanctuary resource or to promote public 

use and understanding of a sanctuary 

resource. In the National Marine 

Sanctuaries Amendments Act of 2000 

(Pub. L. 106–513), Congress added a 

requirement that prior to requiring an 

SUP for any category of activity, NOAA 

shall give appropriate public notice. 

NMSA section 310(b) states that 

‘‘[NOAA] shall provide appropriate 

public notice before identifying any 

category of activity subject to a special 

use permit under subsection (a).’’ On 

January 30, 2006, NOAA published a 

list of five categories for which the 

requirements of SUPs would be 

applicable (71 FR 4898). NOAA further 

refined this list of categories for which 

an SUP could be issued on May 3, 2013 

(78 FR 25957). 

In January 2013, NOAA clarified that 

simply being consistent with one of the 

categories does not guarantee approval 

of an SUP for any given activity. 

Applications are reviewed for 

consistency with the SUP requirements 

in section 310(c) of the NMSA, 16 

U.S.C. 1441(c), as well as the published 

description of the category. Of particular 

importance, SUPs may only be issued 

for activities NOAA determines can be 

conducted in a manner that does not 

destroy, cause the loss of, or injure 

sanctuary resources (NMSA section 

310(c)(3), 16 U.S.C. 1441(c)(3)). 

Individual permit applications that 

would require an SUP are also reviewed 

with respect to all other pertinent 

regulations and statutes, including 

NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq, and any 

required consultations, permits or 

authorizations. NOAA would assess 

whether activities associated with 

proposed desalination projects are 

appropriate for this new SUP category 

on a case-by-case basis, and as part of 

the federal environmental review 

process required by NEPA. Under 

NEPA, NOAA would analyze the 

environmental impacts of the entire 

proposed federal action (i.e., the 

approval or denial of a desalination 

project) including the issuance of any 

SUPs and sanctuary authorizations. 

Pursuant to NMSA section 310(d), 

NOAA may assess three types of fees 

associated with the conduct of any 

activity under an SUP: (1) 

Administrative costs of issuing the 

permit; (2) implementation and 

monitoring costs; and (3) fair market 

value (FMV) of the use of the sanctuary 

resource (16 U.S.C. 1441(d)). On 

November 19, 2015, NOAA published a 

Federal Register notice finalizing the 

methods, formulas and rationale for the 

calculations it uses to assess fees 

associated with the existing seven SUP 

categories (80 FR 72415). 

NOAA will use the same methods 

previously established in the Federal 

Register for assessing an application fee, 

administrative costs, and 

implementation and monitoring costs of 

this new SUP category. NOAA will 

require a non-refundable $50 

application fee. The labor costs 

assessed, as part of administrative costs, 

will be based on a Federal regional labor 

rate that will be updated every year to 

account for staff changes as well as 

inflation. Administrative costs will 

include: Any environmental analyses 

and consultations associated with 

evaluating the SUP application and 

issuing the permit; equipment used in 

permit review and issuance (e.g., 

vessels, dive equipment, and vehicles); 

and general overhead. The 

administrative fees may be assessed 

even if after full environmental review, 

it is deemed that an authorization or 

SUP is not appropriate and will not be 

issued by MBNMS. Where applicable, 

applicants would be notified of the 

estimate of the fees resulting from 

administrative costs at the onset of the 

application process and would need to 

acknowledge willingness to pay before 

NOAA processes the permit application. 

The permit issuance would be 

conditioned on payment of these fees. 

For desalination projects that have 

submitted complete permit applications 

and are in the environmental review 

process as of the effective date of this 

notice, SUP fees will not be assessed 

retroactively but may be assessed 

moving forward beginning on the 

effective date of this notice. 

NOAA may also assess a fee for costs 

associated with the conduct or 

implementation of a permitted activity 

as well as the costs of monitoring the 

activity. The latter costs would cover 

the expenses of monitoring the impacts 

of a permitted activity and compliance 

with the terms and conditions of the 

permit. Examples of implementation 

and monitoring costs can include the 

cost of site preparation, site 

examination, and the use of vessels and 

aircraft. 

Lastly, NOAA can assess a fee for fair 

market value (FMV) for use of sanctuary 

resources. NOAA’s method for assessing 

FMV for this new category of SUP is 

described in subsequent sections of this 

Federal Register notice. 

II. Description of New Special Use 

Permit Category 

With this final notice, NOAA adds a 

new category of SUP for ‘‘the continued 

presence of a pipeline transporting 

seawater to or from a desalination 

facility’’. At this time, the special use 

permit category goes into effect 

immediately upon the effective date of 

this notice and fees may be assessed 

from this date going forward. 

NOAA determined that pipelines 

transporting seawater for purposes of 

onshore desalination, that have been 

laid on, attached to, or drilled or bored 

within the submerged lands of a 

national marine sanctuary, after 

appropriate environmental review, 

application of best management 

practices, and compliance with MBNMS 

Desalination Guidelines, could remain 

in place without causing injury to 

sanctuary resources. Therefore, NOAA’s 

establishment of an SUP category is 

appropriate. For purposes of this SUP 

category, NOAA is using ‘‘transporting 

seawater to or from a desalination 

facility’’ to mean water being pumped 

from MBNMS or the submerged lands of 

MBNMS into a facility and/or 

concentrated brine water being pumped 

out of a facility through a pipe and into 

MBNMS (brine discharge is addressed 

below). 

In order to avoid or minimize impacts 

to the marine environment due to the 

presence of the pipeline, the best 

management practices (BMP) from the 

MBNMS Desalination Guidelines will be 

followed to ensure proper siting, sizing, 

engineering, and configuration of intake 

and outfall pipelines. New desalination 

pipelines are manufactured with high 

tensile stainless steel to avoid breakage 

or corrosion in seawater and would be 

monitored annually to evaluate their 

continued integrity. Submerged 

pipelines should have little propensity 

for movement or shifting. There are 

many pipelines associated with power 

plants and wastewater facilities in this 

region that have been in existence for 

more than 50 years with little to no 

adverse impacts due to their presence 

on the seafloor (MLML 2006; MRWPCA 

2014). 

Existing pipelines installed prior to 

the publication of the final Federal 

Register notice for this new SUP 

category are exempt from this SUP 

category. Moreover, existing pipelines 

that do not fall under the purview of 

this SUP category include sewage 

treatment plant, power plant and 

aquaculture facility pipes. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42301 

III. Fair Market Value Calculation 

NOAA will use the same methods 

previously established in the Federal 

Register for assessing an application fee, 

administrative costs, and 

implementation and monitoring costs of 

the new SUP category (November 19, 

2015; 80 FR 72415). 

The annual fair market value for the 

continued presence of a pipeline 

transporting seawater to or from a 

desalination facility will be calculated 

by assessing the volume of the pipeline 

in cubic inches multiplied by a value of 

$0.02 per cubic inch. The annual FMV 

equation is: 

Annual FMV = ((V × $0.02/in3) × N)/yr 

Where: 

V = volume of the pipeline (in3) = ((p × r2) 

× L); 

p = 3.14159; 

r = radius of the pipeline (in); and 

L = length of the pipeline (in) for the portion 

within the sanctuary. For more than one 

pipeline, the average length of all 

pipelines will be calculated. 

N = number of pipelines. 

FMV costs will be paid as annual rent 

for the duration of the permit. In 

developing the FMV calculation for this 

SUP category, NOAA examined: A 

conceptually similar SUP category for 

the continued presence of submarine 

cables; the California State Lands 

Commission (CSLC) lease process for 

pipelines, conduit, or fiber optic cables; 

and offset requirements established by 

CSLC for an open water desalination 

project in Southern California. 

NOAA’s FMV calculation for the 

continued presence of submarine cables 

in a national marine sanctuary uses the 

overall linear distance (length) the 

infrastructure occupies on or within the 

seafloor within the sanctuary in 

assessing FMV (‘‘Fair Market Value 

Analysis for a Fiber Optic Cable Permit 

in National Marine Sanctuaries’’; 67 FR 

55201). NOAA’s FMV methodology to 

assess a fee for the presence of a 

pipeline uses the volume of the 

pipeline, which includes both its length 

(linear distance) and area, thus 

accounting for its total presence on or 

within the submerged lands. 

In addition, NOAA surveyed 

comparable fees assessed by the State of 

California for the issuance of leases in 

submerged lands of the state for 

pipelines, conduits or fiber optic cables. 

The value of $0.02 per cubic inch of 

pipeline was established because NOAA 

considers this to be a similar metric (i.e., 

a state lease for allowing pipelines) to 

one of the options the CSLC uses to 

calculate the cost of the issuance of 

leases in submerged lands of the state 

for pipelines, conduits or fiber optic 

cables (CCR Title 2. Division 3. Chapter 

1. Article 2 CCR 2003. (Rent and other 

considerations)(a)(4)). In order to 

calculate the cost, the CSLC uses one of 

three approaches: A cost based on a 

linear value (cost per diameter inch per 

lineal foot of pipe, cable, conduit within 

the state lands); a case by case rate to 

process an environmental impact report 

which is paid upfront; or nine percent 

of the appraised value of the leased 

land. In order to calculate the FMV of 

the continued presence of a pipeline, 

NOAA selected to use a mathematical 

approach based on the size and 

footprint of the project pipelines within 

the sanctuary. Therefore, NOAA’s 

monetary multiplier is comparable to 

the first approach the CSLC could 

consider. 

Example 

In the FMV example provided below, 

a special use permit for a desalination 

plant project includes one, 100-foot long 

seawater intake pipelines with a 15-inch 

radius to be bored into the submerged 

lands of a sanctuary. 

Annual FMV = ((V × $0.02/in3) × N)/yr 

V = (p r2 × L) 

p = 3.14159 

r = 15 in 

L = (100 ft) × (12 in/ft) = 1200 in 

V = 3.14159 × (15 in)2 × 1200 in = 848,230 

in3

N = number of pipelines = 1 

Annual FMV = ((848,230 in3 × $0.02/in3) × 

1)/yr 

Annual FMV for a pipeline of this size = 

$16,964/yr. 

This annual cost would be applicable 

for the length of the permit. 

Using the above calculation, a single 

pipeline of this size would have an 

annual FMV of $16,964/yr. This 

arrangement could be used for a 

desalination facility that would produce 

approximately one million gallons of 

water per day or 365 million gallons of 

water per year. Thus, the example of the 

FMV for the continued presence of 1 

pipeline within MBNMS would add a 

cost of $0.0000465/gallon, or 

approximately 1 cent for every 215 

gallons of freshwater produced. This 

figure is obtained by dividing the FMV 

for the continued presence of a pipeline 

by 365 million gallons/year, since the 

example assumes a one million gallons 

per day capacity. The calculation is: 

($16,964/year)/(365 million gallons/ 

year) = $0.0000465/gallon. 

Cost Comparison for Open Water Intake 

Desalination Facility 

In addition to the comparison method 

described above for charging for the 

volume of the pipeline in cubic inches, 

NOAA also looked at a similar open 

water pipeline project in Southern 

California that uses desalination to 

provide drinking water in order to 

estimate the magnitude of costs of 

regulatory compliance (not fair market 

value) associated with the permitting of 

desalination facilities in a real-world 

setting. That open water pipeline project 

was proposed by Cabrillo, LLC and 

Poseidon, LLC and received a permit by 

the California Coastal Commission in 

2008. The CSLC required the project to 

invest in various offset and restoration 

efforts to mitigate the impacts of the 

facility, such as obtaining 25,000 tons of 

carbon offsets for the construction and 

operational impacts. In that project, the 

average offset price from 2011 to 2016 

was $14.87 per ton of carbon offset, for 

a total of $371,750. In addition, the 

facility was required to restore a 

minimum of 37 acres of wetlands (up to 

55.4 acres) with a non-cancelable 

deposit of $3.7 million and to provide 

a deposit of $25,000 to the CSLC to 

reimburse staff expenses incurred to 

monitor compliance with the terms of 

the lease. While these costs associated 

with environmental compliance are not 

directly comparable with the FMV for 

this new SUP category, they provide 

context for the scale of costs required by 

various agencies to permit or authorize 

large coastal projects such as a 

desalination plant. 

Conclusion 

The fees that NOAA may assess per 

the above calculations are comparable to 

other agencies’ fees for desalination 

facilities and not prohibitively 

expensive. For a proposed desalination 

project that would require an SUP, 

NOAA considered the annual cost of the 

fees based on the example presented in 

this notice, and converted it to a dollar 

per gallon figure that can be applied to 

future proposed projects of varying size 

and scale. NOAA determined that the 

total cost of the fair market value using 

the SUP category would amount to 

approximately $0.0000465/gallon for a 

facility of a scale similar to the example 

used in this notice (i.e., one 100-foot 

pipelines for a 1 MGD facility). As 

stated above, this would be in addition 

to the potential administrative cost 

associated with the issuance of the 

permit, including the environmental 

review and application review of an 

SUP, and implementation and 

monitoring costs, as appropriate. 

This notice finalizes the list of eight 

categories for which the requirements of 

SUPs would be applicable: 

1. The placement and recovery of 

objects associated with public or private 

events on non-living substrate of the 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42302 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

submerged lands of any national marine 

sanctuary. 

2. The placement and recovery of 

objects related to commercial filming. 

3. The continued presence of 

commercial submarine cables on or 

within the submerged lands of any 

national marine sanctuary. 

4. The disposal of cremated human 

remains within or into any national 

marine sanctuary. 

5. Recreational diving near the USS 

Monitor. 

6. Fireworks displays. 

7. The operation of aircraft below the 

minimum altitude in restricted zones of 

national marine sanctuaries. 

8. The continued presence of a 

pipeline transporting seawater to or 

from a desalination facility in the 

Monterey Bay National Marine 

Sanctuary. 

IV. Waiver or Reduction of Fees 

As described in the November 19, 

2015, Federal Register notice (80 FR 

72415), NOAA may accept in-kind 

contributions in lieu of a fee, or waive 

or reduce any fee assessed for any 

activity that does not derive profit from 

the access to or use of sanctuary 

resources. NOAA may consider the 

benefits of the activity to support the 

goals and objectives of the sanctuary as 

an in-kind contribution in lieu of a fee. 

V. Changes Between Proposed Notice 

and Final Notice 

Based on NOAA’s analysis of the 

topics raised during the public comment 

period, NOAA made several changes 

between the notice of proposed new 

SUP categories and this final notice. 

First, NOAA removed the proposed 

SUP category for the use of sediment to 

filter seawater for desalination. While 

NOAA is confident in the method it 

developed for the calculation of FMV 

for this category, it recognizes that this 

SUP category may not always meet the 

‘‘no injury’’ criteria for SUPs specified 

in the NMSA for all sites. In addition, 

it may be interpreted as a disincentive 

against the use of subsurface intakes of 

water, which is the method 

recommended in the 2010 guidelines. 

Second, NOAA has limited the 

applicability of the remaining SUP 

category (for the continued presence of 

a pipeline transporting seawater to and 

from a desalination facility) to MBNMS 

instead of applying it to the National 

Marine Sanctuary System, for the 

following reasons. While all of the 

sanctuaries have authority to issue 

SUPs, only six national marine 

sanctuaries currently have regulations 

enabling them to issue authorizations: 

Florida Keys, Flower Garden Banks, 

Monterey Bay, Olympic Coast, 

Stellwagen Bank, and Thunder Bay. Of 

these sites, Florida Keys and Olympic 

Coast NMSs are the only sites adjacent 

to land where desalination facilities 

could be placed; therefore, they are the 

only two national marine sanctuaries in 

addition to MBNMS where the proposed 

SUP categories could have applied. 

These two national marine sanctuaries 

are in very different ecosystems than 

MBNMS, and NOAA based its 

evaluation of the likelihood of injury to 

sanctuary resources on central 

California examples. In addition, the 

cost methods for this category were 

regionally based in California. 

Therefore, NOAA decided that it was 

not appropriate to extend the remaining 

SUP category to other national marine 

sanctuaries at this time, although it may 

revisit this issue in the future as 

necessary and appropriate. 

The estimated cost per gallon of 

desalinated water as proposed in the 

January notice is reduced from 

$0.00008/gallon to approximately 

$0.00005/gallon in this final notice, 

reflecting the annual FMV for the 

continued presence of a pipeline and 

removing the additional cost for the use 

of sediment to filter the water in the 

example provided. 

IV. Response to Comments 

NOAA received seven individual 

submissions on the draft Federal 

Register notice, docket #NOAA–NOS– 

2016–0156. NOAA sorted and organized 

the seven submissions into 27 unique 

comment topics. NOAA’s response to 

these comments follows. 

Comment 1: Marine sanctuaries were 

designated for having special resources, 

and as such, they deserve enhanced 

protection. These activities should be 

sited outside of sanctuary boundaries, or 

NOAA should not allow any new 

pipelines in sanctuaries. 

Response: The NMSA directs NOAA 

to allow public and private uses of the 

resources to the extent compatible with 

resource protection. NOAA evaluates 

impacts of any intake pipelines through 

the NEPA (and CEQA analysis as 

appropriate). An SUP could only be 

issued if the activity is conducted in a 

manner that does not destroy, cause the 

loss of, or injure sanctuary resources. 

Comment 2: Requiring two permits for 

a single pipeline appears inconsistent 

with ONMS’s statutory authority under 

16 U.S.C. 1441(a). 

Response: Under 16 U.S.C. 1441(a), 

NOAA has the authority to issue special 

use permits if necessary to ‘‘establish 

conditions of access to and use of any 

sanctuary resource; or promote public 

use and understanding of a sanctuary 

resource.’’ The issuance of an SUP for 

desalination activities would establish 

conditional long-term use of a sanctuary 

resource (the substrate, seafloor, and/or 

water column); therefore, NOAA 

believes that the SUP category is 

consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1441(a). 

The general sanctuary and MBNMS 

regulations also provide for the 

authorization of other State and Federal 

permits as a separate type of permit 

necessary to allow an activity otherwise 

prohibited by regulation. The activities 

that may be subject to such 

authorization (for example, a NPDES 

permit for discharges) are different from 

the activity within the scope of this SUP 

category. Together, the issuance of SUPs 

and authorizations ensure sanctuary 

resource protection while allowing 

compatible uses, in alignment with the 

policies and purposes of the NMSA. 

Comment 3: The proposed new SUP 

categories are duplicative of approvals 

ONMS can grant using existing 

authority and would impose 

unnecessary regulatory burden and 

substantial unjustified costs. 

Response: The authorization of the 

applicable State permits for a 

desalination plant would only address 

allowing the prohibited activity at issue, 

and if issued for a desalination plant it 

would cover the construction of a 

pipeline or discharge of brine. The 

activities that may be subject to such 

authorization are different from the 

activity within the scope of this SUP 

category. Authorizations do not address 

the FMV of the private use of a public 

resource or provide a mechanism for 

assessing and applying costs of the use 

of this resource to sanctuary 

management. 

As described above, NOAA has 

determined that an SUP is an 

appropriate mechanism for NOAA to 

approve the continued presence of a 

pipeline and assess and apply 

applicable costs in a manner that allows 

desalination projects to occur within or 

near MBNMS and to facilitate the more 

efficient administration of desalination 

permits. In addition, the current ONMS 

permit application process allows for 

multiple permits and authorizations to 

be issued under one permit application, 

thereby streamlining the permit 

application process. 

The fees associated with SUPs have 

been used by NOAA for various other 

SUP categories. The fee categories 

include administrative costs per 16 

U.S.C. 1441(d)(2)(A), implementation 

and monitoring costs per 16 U.S.C. 

1441(d)(2)(B), and FMV per 16 U.S.C. 

1441(d)(2)(C) for use of sanctuary 

resources. NOAA believes these costs 

are appropriate to properly assess a 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42303 

desalination facility operating in a 

national marine sanctuary. 

Comment 4: Test slant well permits 

were issued without this SUP category, 

and permits issued for that project 

contained conditions, such as requiring 

monitoring. NOAA should do what it 

has previously done. 

Response: NOAA began consideration 

for this new SUP category during the 

NEPA review for the California 

American Water test well pilot project, 

and has now completed the SUP process 

through the issuance of this final notice. 

As described above, NOAA has 

concluded that an SUP category was 

needed and appropriate for the 

continued existence of pipelines 

transporting seawater to and from a 

desalination facility; therefore, NOAA 

began to pursue the new category for 

desalination facilities. This approach is 

in line with past large-scale and 

intensive infrastructure projects like the 

submarine cable SUP category. In 

looking at NOAA’s history, SUPs for 

‘‘the continued presence of submarine 

cables’’ were issued along with 

authorizing other state and federal 

permits as needed prior to the 

development of that category for SUPs. 

Since the two authorizations for the test 

well were issued prior to this final 

notice, that pipeline will be considered 

existing and therefore exempted. 

Comment 5: California American 

Water commented that the company 

provided some financial assistance for 

environmental review of the large-scale 

Monterey Peninsula Water Supply 

Project (MPWSP) by paying for a portion 

of the Federal labor costs, and should 

not be charged additional administrative 

fees. 

Response: The environmental review 

for the MPWSP involved re-writing an 

extensive environmental impact review 

(EIR), as required by CEQA, and adding 

the components necessary to meet the 

standards of an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) under NEPA. This 

resulted in a document that was over 

1,500 pages for the joint EIR/EIS, and 

included over 2,000 pages of 

appendices. The applicant was required 

by the State of California to pay for the 

cost of the California Public Utilities 

Commission (CPUC) environmental 

review, which involved a large team, 

working over multiple years to produce 

the document. CalAm paid for a NEPA 

consultant through the CPUC, but has 

not paid for any federal labor costs for 

MBNMS staff related to the NEPA 

process or permit application. No 

retroactive fees would be assessed; fees 

may only be assessed following the 

effective date of this notice and 

appropriate notice to CalAm. For the 

reasons stated throughout this notice, 

NOAA has determined that SUP fees for 

the continued existence of desalination 

pipelines are needed and appropriate. 

Comment 6: If ONMS decides to 

finalize the new SUP categories, they 

should not apply to the MPWSP because 

of the retroactive effect they would have 

on the project. This project has been 

underway for many years, and NOAA’s 

action would add significant costs to the 

project. 

Response: NOAA would not 

retroactively assess fees for any costs 

incurred prior to the publication of this 

final notice. When the new category 

takes effect, existing applicants will be 

notified that the SUP category exists, 

and that fees may start to be assessed for 

the processing of that permit 

application. After that notification to the 

applicants, fees will be assessed from 

that date going forward. 

The MPWSP permit application was 

received in 2015, and NOAA has made 

every effort to inform the permit 

applicants of its intent to develop a new 

SUP category for desalination to cover 

some of these federal costs for the 

environmental review as well as future 

monitoring and other costs. 

Comment 7: Adding SUP categories 

for some desalination activities and 

using existing authority for others (i.e.; 

brine discharge and construction) 

creates additional regulatory barriers for 

desalination projects. 

Response: The addition of an SUP 

does not result in additional regulatory 

barriers for desalination projects. With 

the use of a single permit application for 

various authorizations and permits, 

NOAA intends to streamline the 

application process and reduce the 

burden on the applicant. An applicant 

would still need only submit one permit 

application, and NOAA determines the 

types of permits required for any 

activities, as it always has. Similarly, 

SUP categories are assessed through the 

same federal environmental review 

process pursuant to the NEPA and 

CEQA, as required, by which permits for 

disturbance of the seabed or discharge 

activities are evaluated. 

Moreover, as described above, NOAA 

has determined that a SUP category is 

necessary and appropriate to cover the 

continued existence of pipelines 

transporting seawater to and from a 

desalination facility. Carrying out a 

proposed desalination project in or near 

a national marine sanctuary requires 

agency review and permit approval 

before going forward. NOAA’s 

authorizing state and federal permits for 

construction (coastal development) and 

brine discharge (NPDES) are considered 

under authorization regulations, and do 

not require that NOAA make a finding 

of no injury or loss to sanctuary 

resources. NOAA may also issue general 

permits for short-term activities, which 

are generally not ‘‘intrusive’’. Because a 

pipeline would continually be in longterm use (at least five years up to the life 

of the project), NOAA has considered 

this operation and extractive use as a 

separate activity under the statutory 

authority of NMSA Section 310, which 

requires monitoring and a fair market 

value for its use of a sanctuary resource 

(the substrate, seafloor, and/or water 

column). 

Comment 8: Open ocean intakes 

should be precluded from use in 

sanctuary waters as a matter of policy. 

Response: In 2010, NOAA published 

guidance recommending subsurface 

water intake for desalination projects 

rather than open ocean intakes. The 

comment to preclude open ocean 

intakes through regulation is beyond the 

scope of this action. 

Comment 9: NOAA should establish a 

third category of SUP for open ocean 

intakes, or combine open ocean intakes 

with subsurface intakes into a single 

SUP category for intakes. 

Response: The SUP category for the 

‘‘presence of a pipeline’’ being finalized 

with this action includes pipelines 

placed both below and attached to the 

surface of the seafloor and would 

include open water intakes. 

Comment 10: Commenters also 

advocate for the inclusion of an 

additional category of SUP for brine 

discharges from desalination facilities 

primarily because additional monitoring 

would be needed. 

Response: SUPs cannot be issued for 

any activity that injures sanctuary 

resources. At this time, NOAA cannot 

determine categorically that brine 

discharges would not have negative 

impacts on sanctuary resources; 

therefore, brine discharges are not 

appropriate categories for an SUP. 

However, NOAA is reviewing and may 

authorize the NPDES permit for brine 

discharges for desalination, with terms 

and conditions for monitoring any 

potential impacts as needed. Both an 

SUP and an authorization may require 

continued monitoring and reporting for 

the life of the project. 

Comment 11: Authorization of 

permits granted by other agencies may 

or may not prevent sanctuary resources 

(including marine life) from being 

destroyed, lost, or injured. 

Response: The comment is accurate. 

The NMSA directs NOAA to allow 

public and private uses of the resources 

to the extent compatible with resource 

protection. 16 U.S.C. 1431(b)(6). The 

MBNMS regulations do not require a 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42304 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

finding of no injury for the issuance of 

an authorization (15 CFR 922.49,). An 

authorization can be issued for certain 

prohibited activities to occur, after 

thorough analysis of impacts to 

sanctuary resources through the NEPA 

process. 

Comment 12: As currently written, it 

is unclear whether a desalination 

project would need to obtain one or two 

separate permits for the ‘‘continued 

presence of a pipeline’’ category to 

accommodate both an intake pipeline 

and discharge pipeline. This could lead 

to inconsistent application of rule, as 

well as create yet another disincentive 

for using subsurface intakes. 

Response: NOAA does not 

differentiate between an intake or 

discharge pipeline. This SUP category is 

intended to apply to any new pipeline 

transporting seawater to or from a 

desalination facility that will have a 

continued presence in the sanctuary. 

Comment 13: The category 

description should use clear language so 

that permit standards are consistent 

with the most current information 

available. Does NOAA intend to update 

the MBNMS Desalination Guidelines 

published in 2010 to account for new 

information? 

Response: At this time, the 

recommendations in the 2010 

Desalination Guidelines are still 

appropriate. If new information 

becomes available that would require 

NOAA to update the guidelines with 

new recommendations, NOAA would 

do so. NOAA will incorporate the most 

current standards in any permit 

condition when issuing an authorization 

or an SUP. 

Comment 14: NOAA’s proposed SUP 

fees for the continuing presence of 

pipelines are duplicative of other state 

or local agencies fees (e.g.; CSLC). 

Response: It is not uncommon for 

multiple agencies to charge a fee for 

permits and/or leases for use of a public 

resource. When a project is proposed 

within the boundaries of MBNMS, it is 

NOAA’s responsibility to assess the risk 

of issuing the permit and, if appropriate, 

apply its permitting authority as 

mandated by the NMSA. The fees 

associated with this SUP are designed to 

facilitate and streamline the federal 

responsibility to assess and monitor the 

potential impacts of a private use of a 

public resource. This is separate from, 

and occurs in addition to, the fees and 

costs associated with the issuance of the 

state permits. 

Comment 15: The costs imposed by 

these new SUP categories could deter 

investments in desalination plants, 

which are needed in California to 

alleviate water shortages. 

Response: NOAA understands and 

appreciates the need to alleviate water 

shortages in California. NOAA’s action 

in creating this permit category is taken 

in response to this need to fulfill the 

NMSA purpose of facilitating uses of 

sanctuary resources to the extent 

compatible with resource protection. 

The SUP fees would be a small 

percentage of the overall costs of the 

desalination project and would be 

calculated in a way comparable to State 

fees and fees previously assessed by 

NOAA in similar circumstances (such as 

for submarine cables in sanctuaries). 

Based on NOAA’s analysis of these prior 

transactions and experience with 

infrastructure projects in sanctuaries, 

the SUP fees are unlikely to have a 

significant deterrent effect. 

Comment 16: The two categories of 

SUP fees will discourage the 

development of subsurface intakes, the 

very design that NOAA has 

recommended and prefers to reduce 

environmental impacts in sanctuaries. 

Response: NOAA believes that 

subsurface feasibility will be 

determined by the appropriate studies, 

design and citing of the project. The 

SUP category for ‘‘presence of a 

pipeline’’ would apply to varied types 

of intakes. In addition, NOAA’s decision 

to eliminate the proposed second 

category, for the use of sediment for 

filtration, reduces the overall fees and 

results in equal treatment for the 

continuing presence of a pipeline 

regardless of the type of intake. 

Comment 17: The agency should not 

charge fees when the ‘‘FMV’’ of the 

sediment, however calculated, is offset 

by increased costs incurred to minimize 

impacts to marine life in the sanctuary 

(i.e. the subsurface wells cost more 

money to install than open-ocean 

intakes). 

Response: NOAA’s consideration of 

the proposed SUP categories for 

desalination facilities has taken into 

account most costs and fees related to 

these projects. Nonetheless, NOAA has 

eliminated the proposed second 

category, for the use of sediment for 

filtration. This would reduce the overall 

fees for a subsurface intake project. 

Comment 18: SUP categories of 

general applicability that target one state 

are inappropriate. 

Response: NOAA initially proposed to 

apply the SUP categories for 

desalination to the whole National 

Marine Sanctuary System, but noted 

that only three sanctuaries would ever 

likely need to consider a desalination 

project: Olympic Coast, Florida Keys, 

and Thunder Bay NMSs. NOAA 

acknowledges that the majority of 

studies from desalination projects used 

in the analysis were based in California, 

because that was the best available 

information. This is one of the reasons 

NOAA has decided to narrow the scope 

of the SUP so that it only applies to 

MBNMS. 

Comment 19: Pipelines related to 

sewage treatment and power generation 

are more widespread than desalination 

plants and should be analyzed in a 

similar fashion. ONMS offers no valid 

justification for singling out 

desalination plants in California for 

SUPs. 

Response: The proposed SUP Federal 

Register notice explicitly noted that the 

need for new additional pipelines for 

sewage treatment and power generation 

has not been established as most of the 

infrastructure for the existing facilities 

has been in place for many years. In 

contrast, desalination, or the need for a 

stable potable water supply, is a current 

issue along the West Coast with well 

documented studies on the topic. This 

is the same approach NOAA has taken 

in the past. In the 2006 SUP notice 

NOAA stated: 

The list of categories of activities in this 

notice are not necessarily those activities 

NOAA thinks will be increasing in frequency 

in the future. Rather, the list represents all 

categories of activities for which NOAA has 

issued special use permits in the last few 

years or for which NOAA expects to receive 

an application in the near future (71 FR 

4898). 

Moreover, given NOAA is now 

finalizing this SUP category to apply 

only in MBNMS, it is worth noting that 

MBNMS has specific regulatory 

language that does not allow permits to 

be issued to allow new sewage disposal 

facilities in the sanctuary. 15 CFR 

922.132(f). 

Comment 20: The FMV calculation for 

the pipeline SUP is unreasonable and 

should be revisited. 

Response: The FMV calculation is a 

similar metric to one of the options the 

State uses to calculate the cost of the 

issuance of leases in submerged lands of 

the State for pipelines, conduits, or fiber 

optic cables. The calculation for the 

volume of the pipeline, which includes 

both its length and area, accounts for its 

total presence on or within the 

submerged lands. NOAA believes the 

FMV would add very little additional 

cost to the production of fresh water (at 

approximately 1 cent for every 215 

gallons of water produced), for one 

hypothetical design comparable to what 

is being considered for coastal 

California. 

Comment 21: Some of the pipelines in 

question will actually be bored as slant 

wells into subsurface aquifers. This is 

not ‘‘filtering’’ and no fee should be 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42305 

charged for the use of sand as 

‘‘filtration’’. 

Response: NOAA believes that the 

proposed SUP category for the use of 

sediment as filtration was justified and 

provided references in the proposed 

notice. Nevertheless, NOAA has elected 

to remove the SUP for ‘‘use of sediment 

to filter seawater for desalination’’. 

Comment 22: In the fiber optic cable 

context, NOAA economists issued an 

economic report describing and 

applying accepted methodologies for 

calculating FMV. This FMV should 

undergo the level of analysis conducted 

in that example. 

Response: Given the limited 

availability of studies for this activity, 

NOAA believes the level of analysis 

conducted for the desalination SUP 

category is sufficient, but will continue 

to monitor this activity. If additional 

information becomes available or 

relevant for FMV calculation, NOAA 

will revisit the issue and may, as 

needed, revise the FMV calculation. 

Comment 23: The FMV for sand 

filtration bases its calculation on the 

price of a commercially sold cubic foot 

of sand, discounted for overhead. This 

is not a reasonable comparison, given 

less costly means of filtration. 

Response: NOAA did not base the 

calculation of the FMV on the price of 

a commercially sold cubic foot of sand. 

Rather, NOAA compared that cost to the 

FMV calculated for this use to provide 

perspective in an area where little data 

is available. NOAA has elected to 

remove the SUP for ‘‘use of sediment to 

filter seawater for desalination’’ as 

described above. 

Comment 24: The agency fails to 

recognize that pretreatment is still 

necessary even for subsurface intakes. 

Response: NOAA did not intend to 

imply that pre-treatment was not 

necessary for subsurface intakes. Rather, 

NOAA compared the information about 

pre-treatment cost to provide 

perspective in an area where little data 

is available. 

Comment 25: SUPs were not raised as 

a potential requirement for desalination 

projects prior to this notice. SUPs were 

also not included in the 2010 

Desalination Guidelines. 

Response: While NOAA did not 

formally have categories for this activity 

until now, NOAA has made every effort 

to inform existing permit applicants of 

its intent to develop new SUP categories 

for desalination since 2015. It is 

NOAA’s responsibility to determine the 

appropriate type of permit for any 

permit application, whether a sanctuary 

general permit, authorization, or SUP. 

At the time of publishing the 2010 

guidelines, NOAA had not yet 

conducted a full analysis of potential 

SUP categories for desalination 

facilities. Since then, NOAA has 

conducted this analysis and has 

considered statutory and regulatory 

factors, including the no-injury 

threshold for SUPs, the nature of a 

desalination pipeline as a continued use 

of public resources in a way that may 

preclude other use of the resource, the 

ability of the agency to combine and 

streamline its permitting and 

environmental review regardless of an 

additional SUP category, and the ability 

to apply SUP fees to facilitate more 

efficient issuance and administration of 

desalination permits and sanctuary 

management under NMSA Section 

310(d)(3). 

Comment 26: The agency should 

clarify that it does not intend to charge 

fees for portions of the pipeline that are 

not on or below the sanctuary lands. 

Response: The explanation on 

charging fees only for portions of 

pipelines in the sanctuary is included in 

this Federal Register notice under 

Section III. When defining the length of 

the pipeline for the pipeline SUP 

category, it states ‘‘L = length of the 

pipeline (in) for the portion within the 

sanctuary’’. NOAA will not include the 

portion of the pipeline that is above the 

mean high water mark. 

Comment 27: NOAA should allow 

recreational fishing in sanctuaries. 

Response: This comment is beyond 

the scope of this action. 

V. Classification 

A. National Environmental Policy Act 

NOAA has concluded that this action 

will not have a significant effect, 

individually or cumulatively, on the 

human environment. This action is 

categorically excluded from the 

requirement to prepare an 

Environmental Assessment or 

Environmental Impact Statement in 

accordance with the NOAA Categorical 

Exclusion G7 and because there are no 

extraordinary circumstances precluding 

the application of this categorical 

exclusion. Specifically, this action is a 

notice of an administrative and legal 

nature, and any future effects of 

subsequent actions are too broad, 

speculative, or conjectural to lend 

themselves to meaningful analysis and 

will be subject to later NEPA analysis. 

This action would only establish the 

two new special use permit categories 

and the methods for calculating fair 

market value for applicable projects. It 

does not commit the outcome of any 

particular federal action taken by 

NOAA. Furthermore, individual permit 

actions taken by ONMS will be subject 

to additional case-by-case analysis, as 

required under NEPA, which will be 

completed as new permit applications 

are submitted for specific projects and 

activities. In addition, NOAA may, in 

certain circumstances, combine its 

special use permit authority with other 

regulatory authorities to allow activities 

not described above that may result in 

environmental impacts and thus require 

the preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement. In these situations, NOAA 

will ensure that the appropriate NEPA 

documentation is prepared prior to 

taking final action on a permit or 

making any irretrievable or irreversible 

commitment of agency resources. The 

NEPA analysis would describe the 

impacts of the full project (i.e., both 

construction (allowed with an 

authorization) and operations (allowed 

with an SUP)). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Notwithstanding any other provisions 

of the law, no person is required to 

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. Applications for 

the special use permits discussed in this 

notice involve a collection-of 

information requirement subject to the 

requirements of the PRA. OMB has 

approved this collection-of-information 

requirement under OMB control number 

0648–0141. The collection-ofinformation requirement applies to 

persons seeking special use permits and 

is necessary to determine whether the 

proposed activities are consistent with 

the terms and conditions of special use 

permits prescribed by the NMSA. Public 

reporting burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 

twenty four (24) hours per response 

(application, annual report, and 

financial report), including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. This estimate does not 

include additional time that may be 

required should the applicant be 

required to provide information to 

NOAA for the preparation of 

documentation that may be required 

under NEPA. 

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

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42306 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

Dated: August 11, 2017. 

John Armor, 

Director, Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries. 

References 

1. MBNMS Guidelines for Desalination 

Plants in the MBNMS; May 2010, online: 

http://montereybay.noaa.gov/ 

resourcepro/resmanissues/pdf/ 

050610desal.pdf. 

2. ONMS Fair Market Value Analysis for a 

Fiber Optic Cable Permit in National 

Marine Sanctuaries, Aug 2002. 

3. NOAA Final Notice of Applicability of 

Special Use Permit Requirements to 

Certain Categories of Activities 

Conducted Within the National Marine 

Sanctuary System; May 2013, online: 

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ 

management/fr/78fr25957.pdf. 

4. NOAA Notice of Applicability of Special 

Use Permit Requirements to Certain 

Categories of Activities Conducted 

Within the National Marine Sanctuary 

System; January 2013, online: https://

sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/fr/

78fr2957.pdf. 

5. NOAA Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries Final Policy and Permit 

Guidance for Submarine Cable Projects; 

September 2011, online: http://

sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/fr/ 

submarinecablespolicy.pdf. 

6. Moss Landing Marine Lab, Ecological 

Effects of the Moss Landing Powerplant 

Thermal Discharge; June 2006. 

7. Ballard Marine Construction report 

prepared for Monterey Regional Water 

Pollution Control Agency; 2014. 

8. Chambers Group Memo: Pretreatment and 

Design Considerations for Large-Scale 

Seawater Facilities; 2010, online: http:// 

www.mwdoc.com/cms2/ckfinder/files/ 

files/Evaluation%20of%20Potential

%20Impacts%20%20to%20

Marine%20Life%20by%20Slant%20

Wells%20-%20MLPA%20DEIR

%20Comment%202010-10-13.pdf. 

9. NOAA National Centers for Environmental 

Information Web site; Table 1; online: 

https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/

etopo1_ocean_volumes.html. 

10. Final Notice of Fee Calculations for 

Special Use Permits; 80 FR 72415 

(November 19, 2015); online: https://

www.federalregister.gov/documents/

2015/11/19/2015-29524/final-notice-offee-calculations-for-special-use-permits. 

11. Final Notice of Applicability of Special 

Use Permit Requirements to Certain 

Categories of Activities Conducted 

Within the National Marine Sanctuary 

System; 71 FR 4898 (January 30, 2006); 

online: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2006/01/30/06-808/finalnotice-of-applicability-of-special-usepermit-requirements-to-certaincategories-of-activities. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18995 Filed 9–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XF640 

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone Off Alaska; Alaska Groundfish 

and Halibut Seabird Working Group; 

Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: NMFS Alaska Groundfish and 

Halibut Seabird Working Group will 

meet to discuss emerging seabird 

mitigation technologies and additional 

seabird species that could warrant more 

attention as bycatch in fisheries off 

Alaska. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

September 21, 2017, from 1 p.m. to 5 

p.m., and on September 22, 2017, from 

8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., Alaska Daylight 

Time. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the NMFS Alaska Regional Office 

located at 709 W. 9th St., Room 445C, 

Juneau, AK. Photo identification is 

required to enter this facility. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anne Marie Eich, 907–586–7172. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Alaska Groundfish and Halibut Seabird 

Working Group formed as a result of the 

2015 biological opinion on effects of the 

Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea/Aleutian 

Islands groundfish fisheries on shorttailed albatross. The working group is 

tasked with reviewing information for 

mitigating effects of the groundfish 

fisheries on short-tailed albatross and 

other seabirds. The working group will 

hold its first in-person meeting in 

Juneau, AK, on September 21 and 22, 

2017. Meeting topics include emerging 

seabird mitigation technologies and 

additional seabird species that could 

warrant more attention as bycatch in 

fisheries off Alaska. NMFS will keep the 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council (Council) apprised of the 

working group’s activities and any 

resulting recommendations for methods 

to reduce seabird bycatch. Any changes 

to seabird avoidance regulations are 

expected to follow the standard Council 

process. 

Special Accommodations 

This workshop will be physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Anne Marie Eich, 

907–586–7172, at least 5 working days 

prior to the meeting date. 

Dated: September 1, 2017. 

Alan D. Risenhoover, 

Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18960 Filed 9–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XF603 

Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to 

Specified Activities; Taking Marine 

Mammals Incidental to Casitas Pier 

Fender Pile Replacement 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental 

harassment authorization; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request 

from Venoco, LLC (Venoco) for 

authorization to take marine mammals 

incidental to fender pile replacement at 

Casitas Pier in Carpinteria, CA. Pursuant 

to the Marine Mammal Protection Act 

(MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments 

on its proposal to issue an incidental 

harassment authorization (IHA) to 

incidentally take marine mammals 

during the specified activities. NMFS 

will consider public comments prior to 

making any final decision on the 

issuance of the requested MMPA 

authorizations and agency responses 

will be summarized in the final notice 

of our decision. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than October 10, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to Jolie Harrison, Chief, 

Permits and Conservation Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Physical 

comments should be sent to 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 

and electronic comments should be sent 

to ITP.Young@noaa.gov. 

Instructions: NMFS is not responsible 

for comments sent by any other method, 

to any other address or individual, or 

received after the end of the comment 

period. Comments received 

electronically, including all 

attachments, must not exceed a 25- 

megabyte file size. Attachments to 

electronic comments will be accepted in 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES