[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]






            Flower Garden                     Final Environmental
                           Banks              Impact Statement/
                      National                Management
                        Marine                Plan
                  Sanctuary












            U.S Department of Commerce                         @kOSST OF cq,@,
            National Oceanic and
            Atmospheric Administration


            Sanctuaries & Reserves
            Division
























                          UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE



                          FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
                          AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED
                          FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE
                                       SANCTUARY




                                       July 1991

           



         U S . DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
         COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
         2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
         CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413



                                          Prepared By;


                                          U.S. Department of Commerce
                                          National oceanic and Atmospheric
                                           Administration
                                          National Ocean Service
                                          Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                                          office of Ocean and Coastal
                                           Resource Management
                                          1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
                                          Suite 714
                                          Washington, D.C. 20235











			








           Designation:    Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management
                           Plan

           Title:          Final Environmental Impact Statement and
                           Management Plan for the Proposed Flower Garden
                           Banks National Marine Sanctuary

           Abstract:       The National oceanic and Atmospheric
                           Administration proposes to designate as a National
                           marine Sanctuary the Flower Garden Banks, located
                           due south of the Texas-Louisiana border at the
                           edge of the continental shelf. The East Flower
                           Garden Bank is approximately 120 nautical miles
                           south southwest of Cameron, Louisiana, and the
                           West Bank is 110 nautical miles southeast of
                           Galveston, Texas.

                           The proposed Sanctuary encompasses 41.70 square
                           nautical miles of ocean waters and submerged
                           lands: 19.20 square nautical miles at the East
                           Bank and 22.50 square nautical miles at the West
                           Flower Garden Bank. The Flower Garden Banks are
                           two of over thirty major outer continental shelf
                           geological features located in the northwest Gulf
                           of Mexico. They are isolated from other reef
                           systems by over 300 nautical miles and exist under
                           hydrographic conditions generally considered
                           marginal for tropical reef formations.

                           The designation of the Flower Garden Banks as a
                           National Marine Sanctuary would provide an
                           integrated program of resource protection,
                           research, and interpretation to assist in the
                           long-term management and protection of its
                           resources.

                           Fourteen Sanctuary regulations are proposed. They
                           govern: anchoring or otherwise mooring within the
                           Sanctuary; discharging or depositing, from within
                           the boundaries of the Sanctuary, any material or
                           other matter;-discharging or depositing, from
                           beyond the boundaries of the Sanctuary, any
                           material or other matter that then enters the
                           Sanctuary and injures Sanctuary resources or
                           qualities; drilling into, dredging or otherwise
                           altering the seabed of the Sanctuary; or
                           constructing, placing or abandoning any structure,
                           material or other matter on the seabed of the
                           Sanctuary; exploring for, developing or producing
                           oil, gas or minerals in the no-activity zones of
                           the Sanctuary; taking, removing, catching,
                           collecting, harvesting, feeding or injuring, or
                           attempting to take, remove, catch, collect,
                           harvest, feed or injure, a Sanctuary resource;









                           possessing within the Sanctuary a Sanctuary
                           resource or any other resource, regardless of
                           where taken, removed, caught, collected or
                           harvested, that, if it had been found within the
                           Sanctuary, would be a Sanctuary resource;
                           possessing or using within the Sanctuary, except
                           possessing while passing without interruption
                           through it,.any.fishing gear, device, equipment or
                           means except conventional hook and line gear;
                           possessing or using explosives or releasing
                           electrical charges within the Sanctuary.

                           Three major regulatory/boundary options were
                           identified: the Preferred Alternative (41.70
                           square nautical miles), Boundary Alternative 2,
                           which would establish a smaller sanctuary, and  .
                           Boundary Alternative 3, which would consist of a
                           larger boundary defined by a core and buffer.area.
                           The status quo alternative would continue
                           management of the area through existing activities
                           and controls. It should be noted, however, that
                           Congress has mandated that this sanctuary be
                           designated.

                           The preferred alternative promotes resource
                           protection by bolstering the existing regulatory
                           and enforcement regime, establishing an integrated
                           research program focused on management-related
                           issues facing the sanctuary, and promoting an
                           interpretivd program to strengthen public
                           understanding of the importance of the coral-reef
                           habitats and the need for long-term comprehensive
                           framework to protect them.

          Lead Agency:     U.S. Department of Commerce
                           National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                           National Ocean Service
                           Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

          Contact:         Edward Lindelof, Branch Chief
                           Gulf and Caribbean Region
                           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division
                           office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                           National Oceanic Service / NOAA '
                           1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 714
                           Washington, D.C. 20235
                           (202) 673-5122

















                FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
                                      FOR THE PROPOSED
                      FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY



                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS



                                                                              PAGE

           NOTE TO READER   .............................................       viii


           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   .....................       .........            x


           PART I: INTRODUCTION     .....................................       2

           A.   Authority for Designation    ...........  ...........           2

           B.   Goals of the National Marine Sanctuary Program       .......    3

           C.   Terms of the Designation      ............................      3

           D.   Status of the National Marine sanctuary Program        ......   3

           E.   History of the Proposal      .......  .....................     5

           F.   Purpose and Need for Action     ...........  o .............    7

           G.   The,Plan for Managing the Sanctuary      ........ o ........    8


           PART II: SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT PLAN       ......................      9

          .Section I: A Management Plan for the Proposed Flower
                          Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary       ......   10

           A.   Introduction          ......................   o ...........    10

           B.   Sanctuary Goals and objectives       ......................     10

                1. Resource Protection       .......    ...................     11


                2. Research     ................................    o  ......   11

                3. Interpretation     ...........  o......         .........    12














               Section II.- The Sanctuary'Setting           ...........................    14

              A.    The Regional Context        .................................          14

                    1., Sanctuary Location and@Proposed Boundaries                         14

                   @2. Regional Access        .....................................        14

              B.    Sanctuary Resources      ..................      ............   ...    17

                    1. Geology     ..............             .....................        .17

                    2. Environmental conditions          .......................           19

                    3. Benthic communities        ......  oa-.@ .............. I ......    23

                    4. Other Species Associated With,Benthos             .............     32

                    5. Historical/Cultural Resources           .....................       33

              C.    Human Activities      ........I.......  .................     .....    33

                    1. Oil and Gas Activities          ..............................      34

                    2.   Commercial Fishing       ..............................           34

                    3.   Recreation    .................             ...............       40

                    4.   Commercial-Shipping      .............      ...............       42

                    5.   Anchoring by Large Vessels            ....................        .42

                    6.   Research and Education        ..........................          43


                    7.   Ocean Incineration       ..............................           47

                    8.   Military Activity                       ................          47


              Section   III:. Action Plan      ..........................     .........    48

              A. overall Management and Development             ...................        48

              B. Resource Protection           ...................   ..........   I ....   49

                  1. General Context        for Management      ...................        49













                2. Designation Document and Sanctuary Regulations.... '49

                3. Contingency Plans for Major Emergencies            ...........  50

                4. Encouraging Compatible Use of the.Sanctuary           .......   51

                5. Surveillance and Enforcement       ..........          .......  51

           C. Research      ............................     a .................   52

                1. General.Context for Management          ....................    52

                2. Framework for Research ...       .................              53

                3. Selection and Administration ofResearch Projects. 55

                4. Information Exchange1.;..*!*.*.O*      ................   ....  56

           D.   Education   .................    o..o .............o .......  .... 56

                1. General Context.for Management         ........  o..... @@-O. 56

                2. Interpretation Opportunities:and Programs           .....       57


           Section IV: Administration        .............   o....... --ooo. 59

           Ao   Administrative Framework      ... oo ...  -oo .... ooo---o 59

           Bo   Resource Protection:      Roles and    Responsibilities......      60
           C.   Research: Roles and      Responsibi  ' lities                      61

           D.   Interpretation: Roles and Responsibilities...........              62

           E.   General Administration: Roles and Responsibilities            ...  62

           F.   Staffing Levels      ......... o-.ooooo      .....   .........  o  63

           G.   Visitor Center.Facilities,     .......  .........           0 0..  63



           PART III: ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE          PREFERRED
                        ALTERNATIVE.-oo- .... o-oo           ...... oo
                                                                       ......      64



           Section I: The Status Quo Alternative .... o ... 0.0         ........   6 5

                                                iii














             Section II: Designation of a National Marine Sanctuary            ...  68

             A. Regulatory/Boundary Alternatives          ......................    68

                  1. Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 1         ....                 68

                  2. Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 2         .......   ........   73

                  3. Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 3         ................     74

             B. Management Alternatives ... o..o      ................   o  ....... 76

                  1. Management Alternative 1       ......              .........   76
                  2. Management Alternative 2        .........................      76


             PART IV: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES         ......................     77

             Section I: Environmental Consequences of Alternatives            ....  78
             A.   Sanctuary Designation - The Preferred Alternative          .....  78

                  1. Resource Protection Regime        .......................      78

                  2. Research and Interpretation         ......................     85

                  3.  Boundary Alternatives     ...........................         85

                  4.  Management Alternatives       ..........................      86

             B. The   Status Quo   Alternative     ...........................      86

             Section  II: Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Effects...              90

             Section  III: Relationship Between the Short-Term Uses of
                             the Environment and the Maintenance and
                             Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity        .......   90

             PART V:    LIST OF PREPARERS    .................................      92

             PART VI: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS
                         RECEIVING COPIES    ......................    ..........   94

             PART VII: REFERENCES                      ........  .........    ....  99





                                                  iv

















           PART VIII: APPENDICES      ...................................       110

               1.   Designation Document and Proposed Regulations        .....  111
               2.   Legislative Authority for Ekisting Management,
                    Jurisdiction   ..............   ........................    133

               3.   Abbreviations    .......................................    143

               4.   Comments.and Responses     ...........................      145







































                                               v
















                                         LIST-OF FIGURES

             Figure Title                                                           FAge

                   1     National'Marin'e Sanctuary System'
                         Context ...................     .......................      4

                   3     Regional Context   .. .............................        15

                   4     Flower Garden Banks    Bathymetry    ............  o ....  16

                   5     Sediment Facies    .........  __     ..... o ...........   18

                   6     Current Patterns, Northwestern Gulf of
                                Mexico ...   ................................       20

                   7     Comparison of Environmental Conditions at
                                Selected Banks    ...... o...... -   .. .........   22

                   8     Conspicuous Biota, East Flower Garden
                                Bank ... o  .......o......................    o  ... 24

                   9     Biotic Zonation, East Flower Garden
                                Bank ....  ........................    o .........  25

                 10      Biotic Zonation, West Flower Garden
                                Bank  ..........  o........ o ...........  o ...... 26

                 11      Brine Seep, East Flower Garden Bank      ...... o  ....... 31

                 12      Leasing Blocks, East Flower Garden Bank        ..........  38

                 13      Leasing Blocks, West Flower Garden Bank...         ....... 39

                 14      Boundary Alternatives     .....     ..................   o 69













                                                  vi

















                                    LIST OF TABLES


          Table Title                                                   Pacte

               1    Flower Garden Corals-and Calcareous Algae  ........... 29

               2    Leasing status of Flower Garden Bank Tracts  ........ 35

               3    Recent Incidents of Anchoring at the Flower Garden
                    Banks  ................. ............................ 44














































                                         vii










            Note to Reader:


            A.    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA):

                  This document is a final management plan as well as a final
            environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed Flower
            Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Some of the section
            headings, and their order, are different from those frequently
            found in other environmental impact statements. To assist NEPA
            reviewers, the following table has been developed. Under the
            heading 11NEPA Requirement" are listed those topics normally
            discussed in an EIS. The corresponding sections of this document
            and the page numbers are provided in the other two columns.


            NEPA Reauirements                               Management Plan/EIS
                     Page

            Purpose and Need for Action      .............  Part I, F ...............    7

            Alternatives

               Preferred Alterative    ..................   Part III, Section II    ... 68


               other Alternatives   .........    .......... Part IV   ...............  77

            Affected Environment     ....................   Part II, Section II   .... 14


            Environmental Consequences

               A. General and Specific Impacts      ......  Part IV, Section I    ..... 78

               B. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental
                     ................  ; .................  Part IV, Section II   .... 90


               C. Relationship between Short-term
                     Uses of the Environment and the
                     Maintenance and Enhancement of
                     Long-term Productivity     ........... Part IV, Section III... 90

               D. Possible Conflicts between
                     the Proposed Action and the
                     objectives of Federal, State
                     Regional and Local Land Use
                     Plans, Policies and Contacts
                     for the Area Concerned    ...........  Part II, Section III ... 90




                                                 viii









          List of Preparers ....................... Part V ................. 92


          'List of Agencies, Organizations, and    I I
          Persons Receiving Copies of the FEIS .... Part I................  94


          B.    Endangered Species Act (ESA):

                Pursuant to ï¿½ 7 of the ESA, the US Fish and Wildlife Service
          and the National Marine Fisheries Service were consulted in the
          performance of a biological assessment of possible impacts on
          threatened or endangered species that might result from the
          designation of a national marine sanctuary at the Flower Garden
          Banks. The consultation confirmed that only one such species,
          the loggerhead turtle, a threatened species (cited Part II,
          Section II), had been identified at the Flower Garden Banks.


          C.    Resource Assessment:

                The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
          requires a resource assessment report documenting present and
          potential uses of the proposed sanctuary area, including uses
          subject to the primary jurisdiction of the Department of the
          Interior. This requirement has been met in consultation with the
          Department of the Interior. The assessment report is contained
          in Part II, Section II.


























                                           ix











           EXECUTIVE SUMMARY



                 The East and West Flower Garden Banks   are located due south
           of the Texas-Louisiana border at the edge of the continental
           shelf. I  'n accordance-with Title IIIof the Marine Protection,
           Research and Sanctuaries Act, as amended, 16.U.S.C..ï¿½ï¿½ 1431 et,
           sea., this final Environmental Impact Statement and Management
           Plan proposes  'the establishment of a,national marine-sanctuary to
           facilitate the long-term management and protection of the
           resources of the Flower Garden Banks_

                 Part I of this report reviews the authority for-sanctuary
           designation., the goals of the National Marine.Sanctuary Program,
           the development of this proposal, and the purpose of designating
           a national marine sanctuary at the Flower Garden Banks.

               ..Part II, Section I,  outlines sanctuary management goals and
           objectives in resource protection, research, interpretation and
           visitor use. Part II, Section II describes the environment and
           living resources of the proposed sanctuary and the human
           activities occurring in the,vicinity. Most of the information in
           Part II about the environment and resources,research'activities
           and the effects of anchoring on the coral reefs was prepared by
           Dr. Thomas Bright, Texas A&M University..

                 Two areas, centered on East  and West Flower Garden Bank, are
           recommended for inclusion in the   sanctuary. These areas,
           totaling 41.7 square nautical miles (143.02 square kilometers),
           provide habitats for a distinctiveassortment of living marine
           resources. The Flower Garden.Banks are capped bythe
           northernmost living coral reefs,on the U.-S.@continental shelf,
           and the East-Bank.is the location of the only known oceanic
           brine-seep community in continental shelf waters of the Gulf of
           Mexico.    The principal human activities in the vicinity of the
           Flower Garden Banks are oil and gas exploration and development,
           commercial fishing, recreational pursuits,. ship transiting, and
           research. Generally, these activities have small impact on
           Flower..,Garden resources, but anchoring by large vessels at the
           Banks has resulted in extensive-damage to the coral at a number
           of points.

                 The plan for managing the proposed sanctuary is   provided in
           Part II,  Section III. This plan contains guidelines    to ensure
           that all  management actions undertaken.in the first five years-
           after designation are directed toward resolving important issues.
           as a.means of meeting.sanctuary objectives. management actions
           are considered in three program,categories: resource protection,
           research, and interpretation. Resource protection will involve
           cooperation,with other agencies in formulating management
           policies and procedures, including the enforcement of
           regulations. Research will include monitoring and-predictive

                                             x









          studies to provide information needed in resolving management
          issues. Interpretation programs will be directed to improving
          public awareness of the sanctuary's resources and the need to
          protect them.

              ..The following activities may be regulated by NOAA under the
          terms of designation:

               a.   Anchoring or otherwise mooring within the Sanctuary;

               b.   Discharging or depositing,- from within the boundaries
                    of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter;

               @c.. Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundaries
                    of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter;

               d.   Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the
                    seabed of the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing or
                    abandoning any structure, material or other matter on
                    the seabed of the Sanctuary;

               e.   Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or
                    minerals within the Sanctuary;

               f.   Taking, removing, catching, collecting, harvesting,
                    feeding or injuring, or attempting to take, remove,
                    catch, collect, harvest, or feed or injure, a Sanctuary
                    resource;

               9-   Possessing within the Sanctuary  a-Sanctuary resource or
                    any other resource, regardless of where taken, removed,
                    caught, collected or harvested, that, if it had been
                    found within the Sanctuary, would be'a Sanctuary
                    resource.


               h.   Possessing or using within the S anctuary, any fishing
                    gear, device, equipment or means.

               i. I Possessing or using explosives or releasing electrical
                    charges within the Sanctuary.

          The proposed sanctuary regulations are contained in Appendix 1.

               The.administrative framework for managing the proposed
          sanctuary (Part II, Section IV) recognizes the need for
          cooperation and coordination among all participants in sanctuary
          management and delineates the roles of the National Oceanic and
          Atmospheric Administration's Sanctuaries and Reserves Division,
          the U.S. Coast Guard, Minerals-management Service of the
          Department of the Interior, and the Department of State in
          resource protection, research, interpretation, and general
          administration.


                                          xi









               NOAA considered a number of alternatives in developing the
          proposal to designate a national marine sanctuary at the Flower
          Garden Banks. These alternatives, described in Part III, were
          considered in terms of achieving optimum protection for the
          ecosystem, improving scientific knowledge of the area, and
          promoting public understanding of the value of Flower Garden Bank
          resources. The alternative of sanctuary designation was selected
          as preferable to no action (further, sanctuary designation is
          mandated by Congress), and preferred boundary, management, and
          regulatory alternatives were selected. The environmental
          consequences of the alternatives are described in Part IV.

               The emergence of new issues or other unforeseeable factors
          may affect specific aspects of sanctuary management as described
          in this plan. The plan may therefore be adjusted to changing
          circumstances in light of the experience gained in actual
          management. However, the overall goals, management objectives
          and general guidelines governing the plan's development will
          continue to be relevant.







































                                         xii










          PART 1:    INTRODUCTION












          PART I: INTRODUCTION



          A.   Authority for Desianation

               Title II I of the Marine Protection, Research, and
          Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA), 16 U.S.C. 1431 et  sea., as
          amended, authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to designate as
          national marine sanctuaries discrete areas of the marine
          environment of special national significance due.to their
          conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, research,
          educational, or esthetic value in order to promote comprehensive
          conservation and management of the'areas. National marine
          sanctuaries may be designated in those areas of coastal and ocean
          waters, the Great Lakes and their connecting waters, and
          submerged lands over which the United States exercises
          jurisdiction, consistent with international law. National marine
          sanctuaries are built around the existence of distinctive natural
          and cultural/historical resources whose protection.and beneficial
          use requires comprehensive planning and management. The National
          Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) manages the Program
          through the Sanctuaries and Reserves Division (SRD) in the.Office
          of ocean and Coastal Resource.Management.


          B.   Goals of the National Marine Sanctuary Progra

               Consistent with the mission of developing a system  of
          national marine sanctuaries for the purpose of serving the long-
          term benefit and enjoyment of the public, the foll,owing,goals
          were established for the Program:

          1.   Enhance resource protection through comprehensive and
               coordinated conservation and management tailored to the
               specific resources that complements existing regulatory
               authorities;

          2.   Support, promote and coordinate scientific research on, and
               monitoring of, the site-specific marine resources to improve
               management decisionmaking in national marine sanctuaries;

          3.   Enhance pub'lic awareness, understanding'. and wise use of the
               marine environment through public interpretive and
               recreational programs; and

          4.   Facilitate, to the extent compatible with the primary goal
               of resource protection, multiple use of these marine areas
               not prohibited pursuant to other authorities.










          C.   Terms of Designation

             . Section 304(a)(4), 16 U.S.C. 1434(a)(4), of the MPRSA
          provides that as a condition of establishing a national marine
          sanctuary, the Secretary of Commerce must set forth the terms of
          the Designation. The" terms must include: (a) the geographic area
          included within the Sanctuary; (b) the characteristics of the
          area that give.it conservation, recreational, ecological,
          historical, research, educational or esthetic value; and (c) the
          types of activities that will be subject to regulation in order
          to protect those characteristics. The terms of the designation
          may"be modified only by the same procedures through which the
          original designation was made.


          D.   Status of the National Marine Sanctuary Program

               Eight national marine sanctuaries have been established
          since the Program's inception in 1972 (Figure 1):

               0  The Monitor National Marine Sanctuary serves to
               protect the wreck of the Civil War ironclad, U.S.S.'
               MONITOR. It was designated in January 1975 and is
               an area one mile in diameter 16 miles southeast
               of Cape Hatteras, North Caroiina.

               0 The Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary, designated
               in December 1975, provides protection and management of
               a 100 square-nautical-mile, coral-reef area south of
               Miami, Florida.

               0 The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary,
               designated in September 1980, consists of an area of
               approximately 1,252 square nautical miles off the 'coast
               of California adjacent to the northern Channel Islands
               and Santa Barbara Island. The Sanctuary ensures that
               valuable habitats for marine mammals, including
               extensive' pinniped assemblages and seabirds, are
               protected.

               0 The Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary, designated
               in January 1981, consists of a submerged section of the
               Florida reef southwest of Big Pine Key. The site, five
               square nautical miles in size, includes a beautiful
               "spur and groove" coral formation supporting a diverse
               marine community and a wide variety of human uses.

               0 The Gray's Reef National marine sanctuary,
               designated in January 1981, is a submerged live bottom
               area located on the South Atlantic continental shelf
               due east of Sapelo Island, Georgia. The Sanctuary,
               which encompasses about 17 square nautical miles,

                                          3






                         Designated National Marine Sanctuaries





                    Cordell
                    Bank
            Gulf of      40
            the Farallones


                    Channel                                                      40 MONITOR
                    Islands

                    dF
                                                                             Gray's Reef


                own#&
                  Fagatele                                                    ey Largo
                  Bay, AS                                        Looe Key,      Florida Kcys.
             National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



                                                 Figure









              protects a highly productive and unusual habitat for
              a wide variety of species including corals, tropical
              fish, and sea turtles.

              0 The Point Reyes-Farallon Island National Marine
              Sanctuary, designated in January 1981, is a 948 square
              nautical mile area off the California coast north of
              San Francisco. It provides a habitat for a diverse
              array of marine mammals and birds as well:as.pelagic
              fish, plants, and benthic biota.

              0 The Fagatele Bay National Marine Sanctuary in
              American Samoa was designated in' July 1986. The 163-
              acre bay contains deepwater.. coral-terrace formations
              that are unique to the high islands of the tropical
              Pacific. It serves as habitat for a diverse array of
              marine flora and fauna lncluding@the endangered
              hawksbill turtle and the threatened green sea turtle.

              0 The Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary,
              designated in May 1989, protects 397 square nautical
              miles of "submerged mountaintop'.' supporting a large
              array of marine species. The Sanctuary,is-located
              northwest of San Francisco, California.

              The ninth national marine.'sandtuary designated by the
         Congressl'in November 1990 is the Florida Keys National Marine,
         Sanctuary (FKNMS) through the Florida Keys National Marine
         Sanctuary and Protection Act.. The Act designates 2,600 square
         nautical miles of coastal waters 'off the Florida Keys as the
         FKNMS. The FKNMS will provide.for protection of seagrass
         meadows, mangrove islands, and extensive living coral reefs upon
         development of the comprehensive management  'plan-and regulations.


         E.   History of the Proposal

              On April 13, 1979, NOAA  published proposed regulations (44
         FR 22081) and a draft environm6ntal.impact stateme,nt.(DEIS) on
         the proposed designation of the East,and West Flower Garden Banks
         as a national marine sanctuary. To bring the sanctuary proposal
         into line with newly revised Na 'tional Marine-Sanctuary Program
         regulations, NOAA placed the Flower Garden Banks on the List of,
         Recommended Areas (IRA) on October 31, 1979 (44 FR 62552).

              As a result of public comments on the DEIS and consultation
         with cooperating.agencies (the Department of the Interior, the
         Environmental Protection Agency, and the Department of Energy)j,.
         NOAA revised the original proposed regulations and reproposed
         them on June 30, 1980 (45 FR 33530) in accordance with Counci   on:
         Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1501.6). Previou
         restrictions on hydrocarbon operations were revised to conform@

                                          5









           with the lease stipulationsimposed by the Minerals Management
           Service in the Department of,the Interior. Following public
           comments on the reproposed regulations, further action on the
           project was suspended in late 1980. A final environmental impact
           statement (FEIS) was not prepared.

                On April 26, 1982 (47 FR 17845), NOAA announced its decision
           to remove the site from the LRA and to withdraw the DEIS. One of
           the major reasons forthis action was that a Coral Fishery
           Management Plan (FMP) for the Gulf of Mexico was about to be
           implemented. It was expected that the FMP would regulate vessel
           anchoring on the Banks, the:one remaining unresolved issue
           identified in the DEIS and by.public comment. However, the final
           regulations implementing the FMP (49 FR 29607 (1984, as amended))
           do not include any 11no anchoring" provisions for vessels on the
           Banks. Within the' Habitat Areas of Particular Concern'(HAPC's)
           at the East and West Flower Garden Banks (the area of each Bank
           shallower than the 50 fathom (300 foot) isobath), the regulations
           provide only the following restrictions: (1) fishing for coral is
           prohibited except as authorized by scientific and educational
           permit; (2) fishing with bottom longlines, traps, pots, and
           bottom trawls..is prohibited; and (3) the use of toxic chemicals
           to take fishor other marine organisms is prohibited except as.
           authorized by scientific or educational permit (See 50 CFR
           Part 638). The continted,lack of a ban on anchoring led to
           renewed interest in ensuring the site's protection by designating
           it as a national marine sanctuary.

                Meanwhile, NOAA had again revised the regulations for the
           National Marine Sanc'tuary Program (15 CFR Part 922), replacing
           the'LRA with the Site Evaluation List (SEL) and requiring the
           identification of sites for placement on the SEL by regional
           resource evaluation teams. The Flower Garden Banks was
           recommended for placement on the SEL on August 4, 1983 (48 FR
           35568) following an evaluation by the Gulf of Mexico Regional
           Resource Evaluation Team. The membership of this team consisted
           of Dr. Thomas Bright, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
           University,. College Station, Texas; Dr. William McIntire, Center
           for Wetland.Resources, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,
           Louisiana; Dr. David'Gettleson, Continental Shelf Associates,
           Tequesta, Florida,; and Dr. James Ray, Shell Oil, Houston, Texas.,

                Before listing a site on the SEL as an active candidate for
           nat'iohai marine sanctuary status, NOA'A seeks preliminary
           consultation in the Federal Register and local media in the
           region of the site. NOAA published a notice initiating
           preliminary consultation in the Federal Register on May 4, 1984,
           (49 FR 119094). A press release was sent to-the relevant media at
           the same time. Based on the comments received and the evaluation
           of the site in accordance with the criteria spec 'ified in ï¿½ 922.30
           of the regulations for the National Marine Sanctuary Program,
           NOAA named the East and West Flower Garden Banks as an Active


                                            6









          Candidate for further consideration as a na  Itional marine.
          sanctuary on August 2, 1984 (49 FR 30988 (1984)).

               On June 24, 19861 NOAA sponsored a public scoping meeting at
          the Texas A&M Mitchell Campus, Galveston, Texas to solicit public
          comment on the scope and significance.of issues involved in
          designating a Flower Garden Banks national marine    sapc'tuary.
          Those attending the meeting were asked to comment   on readily
          identifiable issues, to suggest additional issues     for
          examination, and to provide information useful in.evaluating    the
          site's potential as a national marine sanctuary.            the
          response was generally favorable to proceeding with the
          evaluation. On February 24, 1989, the Draft Environmental Impact
          Statement/Management Plan (DEIS/MP) was published.: Public
          hearings to receive comments on the DEIS/MP were held in Houston,
          Texas on March 30, 1989.


          F.   Purpose and Need for Designation

               The Flower Garden Banks sustain   the  northernmost living,
          coral reefs on the U. S. continental   shelf. The complex* and
          biologically productive reef communities,that cap'the Banks offer
          a combination of aesthetic appeal and recreational and research:
          opportunity matched in few other ocean areas. These'reef
          communities are in delicate ecological balance because of the
          fragile nature of coral and the fact that the Banks lie on the
          extreme northern edge of the zone in which extensive.reef
          development can occur. In addition to their coral reefs, the
          Banks harbor the only known oceanic brine seep-in continental
          shelf waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Because of these features,
          the Flower Gardens are particularly valuable as resources for
          scientific research.

               While the Flower Garden'Banks have thus far been able to
          withstand man-induced pressures, such success can not
          realistically'be expected in the future'withotit deliberate
          protection. The primary threat tothe-Flower Gardens results
          from vessel operations in the area. Shipping fairwayspass     .ing
          near the tanks are used by oil tankers' and other commercial
          vessels. A number of these vessels anchor at the Flower Gardens
          causing significant damage,to reef communities. Discharges,from
          the vessels could also pose a threat to Flowe  'r Garden 'resources.
          oil and gas resources are now being developed within a.few miles
          of the Flower Gardens, and asignificant increase in such,
          development operations is expected in the near future. These
          activities are regulated, however. Other activities in'the area
          of the Banks, such as commercial fishing, recreational pursuits,
          and scientific research ' pose.relatively little threat to the
          -resources of the Flower Garden Banks.




                                            7









                The existing regulatory regime does not adequately protect
           Flower Garden resources from the increasing pressure of human
           activities. The Minerals Management Service (MMS), for example,
           currently provides considerable protection to the Flower Garden
           Banks communities from damage due to oil and gas development and
           prohibits anchoring on the coral reefs by vessels involved in
           development operations, but the MMS does not have the authority
           to prohibit anchoring on the coral reefs by other vessels.
           Further, MMS's stipulations apply merely on a lease by lease
           basis.

                Under the Fishery Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs,
           published in 1982, the Flower Garden Banks was established as a
           habitat area of particular concern. The plan called for a
           prohibition on anchoring at the Flower Gardens by large ships
           but, as noted above (see section E), the implementing regulations
           did not include this prohibition-.

                In addition to a lack of control over anchoring under the
           present regime, there is no comprehensive program for the long-
           term assessment and management of the Flower Garden Banks
           resources. The designation of the Flower Gardens Banks as a
           national marine sanctuary would provide the means for filling
           such deficiencies to provide additional protection where needed.

                The management program planned for the proposed Sanctuary
           would: 1) include regulations to prevent damage to Sanctuary
           resource's, e.g., damage to coral reefs caused by vessel
           anchoring, 2) provide the long-term planning and management
           needed to protect Flower Garden Banks habitats and ecosystems,
           and 3) establish a resource assessment program to monitor the
           health of Flower Garden Banks communities and provide information
           needed for management decisions and interpretation programs.

           G.   The Plan for Managing the Sanctuary

                The remainder of this report consists of a final management
           plan and final environmental impact statement for the proposed
           Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. The plan provides
           information on the resources and uses of the proposed Sanctuary,
           as well as Sanctuary goals and objectives. It describes programs
           (Resource Protection, Research, and Interpretation) for
           implementing the goals and objectives, proposes actions for
           resolving immediate management concerns, and formulates
           guidelines for continued long-term management.








                                           8












           PART II: SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT PLAN












           PART II: SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT PLAN

           Section I,: A Management Plan for the Proposed Flower Garden
           Banks National Marine Sanctuary,



           A.   Introduction

                National marine sanctuaries are established in areas of the
           marine environment selected for their conservation, recreational,
           ecological, historical, research, educational, or esthetic
           resources,and.qualities. Regulationsimplementing the National
           Marine Sanctuary Program (15 CFR 922) require that a management
           plan be-prepared for all proposed sanctuaries. In general,
           management plans focus on Sanctuary goals and objectives,
           management responsibilities, research and interpretation
           programs,.and policies. to.guide plan implementation after.
           Sanctuary designation.

                The administrative framework established by a management
           plan takes into account the cooperation and coordination needed
           to ensure effective management. However, the Sanctuaries   and
           Reserves Division (SRD), National Oceanic and Atmospheric
           Administration (NOAA), has overall responsibility for management
           of the site...

                Variable funding for staff and program development over the
           next five-years may affect specific aspects of Sanctuary
           management as described in 'this plan. Modifications to the scope
           and scale of the programs may therefore have to be made because
           of unforeseeable changes in the level of funding. The goals and
           objectiv.es.of this plan will, however, remain unchanged.


           B.   Sanctuary Goals and Objectives

                Sanctuary goals and objectives provide the framework for
           developing the management strategies. The goals and objectives
           direct Sanctuary activities towards the dual purposes of public
           use and resource conservation and are consistent with the intent
           of the National Marine.sanctuary Program.

              -the management strategies planned,for the proposed Flower
           Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary are directed to the goals
           and objectives outlined.below. It should be noted that, although
           the,Sanctuary goals.are listed discretely, they are actually
           overlapping. For instance, research and interpretation efforts.
           contribute to' resource"protection and to enhancing public use of
           the Sanctuary.




                                           10











         1.   Resource Protection

              The highest priority management goal is to protect the
         marine environment, resources and qualities of the Flower Garden
         Banks National Marine Sanctuary. The specific objectives of the
        ,resource protection program are to:

              0 Coordinate policies and procedures among the agencies
              sharing responsibility for protection and management of
              resources;

              0 Encourage participation by interested;agencies and
              organizations in the development of procedures to
              address specific management concerns (e.g., monitoring
              and emergency-response programs);

              0 Develop an effective and coordinated program for the
              enforcement of Sanctuary regulations;

              0 Enforce Sanctuary regulation's in addition to other
              regulations already in place;

              0 Promote public awareness ofj and voluntary u set
              compliance with, Sanctuary regulations and objectives,
              through an education/interpretive program stressing resource
              sensitivity and wise use;

              0 Reduce threats to  Sanctuary resources raised-by major
              emergencies through contingency and emergency-response
              planning;

              0 Establish memoranda of agreement and other mechanism-for
              coordination among all the agencies participating in
              Sanctuary management; and

              0 Reduce threats to Sanctuary resources

         2.   Research

              Substantial, site-specific research has been conducted'at
         the Flower Garden Banks, particularly 'over the past 15 years.
         This work is discussed in section II.C. Sanctuary research will
         build upon this foundation to improve understanding of the kower
         Garden Banks' environment and resources and to resolve specific'
         management problems. Research results will be used in
         interpretation programs for visitors and others intere'sted-in the
         Sanctuary, as well as for resource protection. The specific
         objectives of the research program are to:





                                        11










                 0 Establish a framework and procedures for administering
                 research projects to ensure that they are responsive to
                 management concerns and that research results contribute to
                 improved management of the Sanctuary;

                 0 Gather necessary baseline data on the physical,
                 chemical and biological oceanography of the Sanctuary;

                 0 Monitor and assess environmental'changes as they'
                 occur;

                 0 Identify the range of effects on the environment
                 that would result from predicted changes in human
                 activity;

                 0 Incorporate research results into the interpretation
                 program in a format useful for the general public; and

                 0 'Encourage information exchange among all the
                 organizations and agencies undertaking management-rdlated
                 research in the Sanctuary to promote more informed
                 management.

            3.   Interpretation

                 The interpretation program is directed to improving public
            awareness and understanding of the significance of the Sanctuary
            and the need to protect its resources. The specific objectives
            of the interpretation program are to:

                 0 Provide the public with information on the Sanctuary, its
                 goals and objectives, with an emphasis on the need to use
                 these resources wisely to ensure their long-term viability;

                 0 Broaden support for the Sanctuary and Sanctuary
                 management by offering programs suited to visitors with
                 a range of diverse interests;

                 0 Provide for public involvement by encouraging
                 feedback on the effectiveness of the interpretation
                 program; and

                 0 Collaborate with other organizations to provide
                 interpretation services, including extension and outreach
                 programs and other volunteer projects, that explain the
                 purposes of the Sanctuary and the National Program.







                                           12











         4.   Visitor Use

              The Sanctuary goal for visitor management is to encourage
         commercial and recreational use of the Sanctuary compatible with
         resource protection. Specific objectives of this management
         effort are to:

              0 Encourage the public to respect sensitive Sanctuary
              resources and qualities;

              0 Provide relevant information about Sanctuary
              regulations and use policies;

              0 Collaborate with public and private organizations in
              promoting compatible use of the Sanctuary by exchanging
              information concerning its commercial and recreational
              potential; and

              0 Monitor and assess the levels of Sanctuary use to
              identify and control potential degradation of resources
              and minimize potential user conflicts.































                                         13









            Section II: The Sanctuary Setting


                The most important factors to be considered in developing a
            management plan for the proposed Flower Garden Banks National
            Marine Sanctuary are its location; its physical characteristics,
            environmental conditions, and biological resources; its uses; and
            the roles of the agencies with management responsibilities in the
            area. These factors will be summarized below to provide the
            background needed for understanding the plan.


            A.  The Regional Context


                 The East and West Flower Garden Banks are two of more than
            thirty major outer-continental shelf structures in the
            northwestern Gulf of Mexico. The depth of the continental shelf
            increases gradually from shore outward to the Flower Garden
            Banks. Water depths surrounding the Banks are 330 to 395 ft (100
            to 120 m). The East and West Bank are separated by'8 nautical
            miles (15 km) of open water 330 to 360 ft (10.0 to 110 m) deep.
            Seaward of the Banks, the slope descends more steeply, and depths
            in excess of 2,300 ft (700 m) occur less than 22 nautical miles
            (40 km) to the south (Figure 2).

            1.  Sanctuary Location and Proposed Boundaries

                The Flower Garden Banks are located due south of the Texas-
            Louisiana border at the edge of the continental shelf. The East
            Flower Garden Bank is approximately 120 nautical miles'(220 km)
            south southwest of Cameron, Louisiana, and the West Bank is 110
            nautical miles (203 km) southeast of Galveston, Texas (Figure 3).
            The midpoints of the East and West Banks, respectively, are
            27*55107.4411 north latitude, 93036108.4911 west longitude and
            27'52114.2111 north latitude, 93*48154.7911 west longitude.

                The boundaries of the proposed Sanctuary encompass an area
            of 41.70 square nautical miles (143.02 square km): 19.20 square
            nautical miles (65.85 square km) at the East Bank and 22.50
            square nautical miles (77.17 square km) at the.West Bank.

            2.  Regional Access

                Because of their distance from shore, the Flower Garden
            Banks are generally accessible only to vessels having adequate
            range and overnight facilities. Sport divers and sport fishermen
            visit the Banks occasionally, operating out of ports in Louisiana
            and Texas. Commercial fishermen from as far away as Florida also
            visit the Banks to catch snappers and groupers. The presence of
            increasing numbers of oil and gas platforms in the vicinity has



                                           14










                               1:4-1 4w GF -1L c@p rx -cx'.l                                 c), 1-1                  -tc



                                               oil                             NO                               as*                              84*                              93,                               112.                             91.


                                                                                                                                                                                                         LOUISIANA                                  4", 1-


                           3w -
                                                          TEXAs..,
                                                                                              somms fur



                                                                                                                                                                                                                         AUX&ISIArd        Ar
                                                                                                                                                               ...........%                                                                                       A
                                                                                                 we&#                                                                                                ...................
                            w -                                                                                                                                                                                                                   140aw"m may






                                                                                                                                                                                                                      .........................
                                                                                                                                                                                                         ...... ......                          ..........  .........
                                                                                                                                                      ............%
                                                                                                                                                                                                             Agdodke                     - - - - - -
                                                                                                                                         to                                                                                              --@ S
                                                                                                                           6060                                                                                                                1.1"Of           J,
                                                                                                               .. ........                                                  Is -                                                          a                     -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                     6 fa-101
                                                                                                                                                                                  I f','jw-                 fuelm         Soap&
                                                  0"11                                                                         will
                                                                                                                                      11110116001
                                                                                                                                                  "SillowlAWAM
                                                                                                                                                                           Sall Diapir Area

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  60       25       0
                                                               I-am
                                                                            flatIct Carbonate Sholl                                                                                                                                                                Kilt
                                            $...,            10,


                                                  fill                            He                               as"                             946                              930                              820



                                    Figure               2















                                  990                         960                           940


                                                                                                              LOUISI       A N A


                         30*





                                                                         Cabo""



                                                                    retopmt


                                                                                     #to mm
                                               Pon VC-i



                          280--                                                                          1,julpcr rardeto flunk
                                                                                                0
                                  C@V" Owhu                                                     lVest Mower Gantem Itank





                                                                                     -SHE
                                                                                              I----------


                                                                                                WUP SIFE
                                U N ITED
                                  STATES                                                      ----------


                           266

                                  MEXICO
                                                                                                      PROPOSEM lti'AST AND Wl-eST IP
                                                                                                     GARDEN BANKS MARINE SAN
                                                                                                                           SITE' LOCATION

                                    980                          960                         940                          920                          900




                     Figure 3










          made the Banks convenient to offshore service vessels, which
          often anchor for recreational fishing. These vessels are usually
          between 90 and 180 ft (27 and 55 m) in length.

              The Louisiana ports closest to the Flower Gardens are Morgan
          City and Cameron. The closest in Texas are Sabine, Galveston,
          Freeport and Port Aransas. Most of the traffic frequenting the
          Flower Gardens originates from these cities (Bright, 1985a).


          B.  Sanctuary Resources

              The Flower Garden Banks are unique among the banks of the
          northwestern Gulf of Mexico in that they bear the northernmost
          tropical Atlantic coral reefs on the continental shelf and
          support the most highly developed offshore hard-bank communities
          in the region. In addition to these resources, East Flower
          Garden Bank harbors a localized assemblage of organisms
          associated with a hypersaline, anoxic brine seep having a
          chemosynthetic energy base analogous to that found at deep-sea
          vents. Such communities are otherwise unknown on the world's
          continental shelves.

              East Flower Garden Bank is a single platform rising to a
          crest of about 50 ft (15 m) below the water surface. Within the
          100 m (328 ft) depth contour, the bank is 5.4 nautical miles (10
          km) long and 3.5 nautical miles (6.5 km) wide. West Flower
          Garden Bank consists of three platforms cresting at 65, 197, and
          230 ft (20, 60 and 70 m) depths and separated by intervening
          depths of 280 to 330 ft (85 to 100 m). Within the 100 m (328 ft)
          contour West Flower Garden Bank is 5.4 nautical miles (10 km)
          long and 3 nautical, miles (5.5 km) wide (Figure 4).

          1.  Geology

              The East and West Flower Garden Banks are seafloor
          expressions of domes (diapirs) formed by the intrusion of salt
          from Jurassic evaporite deposits approximately 6.2 statute miles
          (10 km) below the sea floor. Diapirism and faulting are
          currently active at both Banks. The faulting of Bank crusts
          resulting from a combination of tensional forces,due to domal
          uplift and the removal of salt by dissolution is more advanced at
          the West Bank. Consequently, it possess a larger and more
          conspicuous central graben (down-faulted depression) than does
          the East Bank.


              *The information in this subsection on Flower Garden Bank
          geology, environmental conditions, and natural resources was
          prepared by Dr. Thomas Bright, Texas A&M University (Bright,.,
          1985a).


                                         17














                930 58'                    93*61'                   .93044'                     93037'






                                                                          too




            27*55'
                                                      too
                                                                     too



                                                                    120

                                                                     030

                                                                   140
            27*50' -                                             160

                                                               to


                                                              200
                                                              210-,





             27*45'1   . . . . . .
                03058,                    93* 5 V                    930 4 4'                   93037#


                   Figure 4









               The salt plugs beneath both Banks are quite near the sea
          floor. High salinity brine seepage has been detected on the East
          Flower Garden at 45 m. depth, indicating that the top of the salt
          may lie directly beneath the central reef. A larger.brine seep
          on the southeastern edge of the Bank at a depth of 233 ft (71 m)
          flows at a rate of 400-700 cubic meters (14,125- 24,720 cubic ft)
          per day. This discharge of 200 parts per thousand (ppt) brine is
          thought to represent the removal of 10,000 to 22,000 cubic meters
          (353,300 to 776,900 cubic ft) of solid salt per year from beneath
          the East Flower Garden. Stratigraphic traps formed on the flanks
          of the salt plugs are known to contain natural gas deposits, and
          scattered seeps of natural gas of biogenic and petrogenic origin
          occur on both Banks from their crests to their bases.

               Surficial hard substratum at the Flower Gardens is
          exclusively carbonate rock, constructed primarily by contemporary
          populations of coralline algae and corals. Exposed sedimentary
          facies on the Banks and their environs are strongly correlated.
          with depth, and parallel closely the distribution of biotic
          communities, which, above approximately 280 ft (85 m) depths, are
          dominated by reef-building organisms (Figure 5).

               Living coral reefs, made up.of massive heads produced by 18
          species of tropical Atlantic corals are the primary features
          between 50 and 150 ft (15 and 46 m) depths. The coral debris
          facies at depths of 80 to 165 ft (25 to 50 m) consists of coarse
          carbonate sand and gravel in basins and valleys between coral
          heads and in narrow aprons surrounding the reefs. An Algal
          Nodule Zone (Gyppina-Lithothamnium Facies), consisting
          predominantly of gravel of algal nodules formed in-situ with
          occasional algal reefs and pavements, extends downward and
          outward from the coral debris facies to depths of 200-250 ft
          (60-75 m).

               Below the Algal Nodule Zone  are carbonate sands consisting
          mainly of the skeletal remains of the foraminifer,
          Amphistegina, derived from living populations on higher bank
          surfaces. The Amphistecrina Sand Facies extends to depths of 295
          to 330 ft (90-100 m), where it is replaced by a Quartz-Planktonic
          Foraminifers Facies consisting of planktonic foraminifers,
          pteropods, mollusc and echinoderm fragments, and reefal detritus
          in various mixtures with silt and fine, sand-sized quartz grains
          and clay. This facies represents a transition between the
          carbonate bank sediments and the terrigenous sediments.normally
          found on this part of the continental shelf.

          2.   Environmental Conditions

          (a) Clim!Ate

               The Flower Gardens are geographically situated in a warm
          temperate zone. Bay waters of the nearby coasts of Louisiana and

                                          19








                                                                                              cDo w4m 3v                  C3m3ra4imlix-i Mmrilorcm





                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            .... .... .........


                                                                                ..... ........





                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Vol
                                                                                                                'A
                                                                                                                                                              4p
                                                                            A

                                                                .... .........



                                                                                                                                                                                                                j

                                                                                                               lot
                                                                                                         of.                                                  41



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       lot
                                                                          4


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        to'
                                                                                                                 iA,
                                                                                  It                                     4, jr

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         t
                                                               r
                                                          IP
                                                               0   , ,          - -1. :v
                                                                            to.                                                                                                                 f
                                                                                                                                                                             ... to,,                                                     0,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              L -    I
                                                                JL                                                                                                                                                                       f
                                                                                                         ;go


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         r
                                                                                      :.,Aj
                                                                                              ILA*% j?.               0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Or

                                                                       SEDIMENTARY FACIES                                                                              some
                                                            Catbonales                                 Tordsencous
                                                          Worm Real                        Mad
                                                          Coal 0011%                       Glavellif Mud                           OU                                          s
                                                                                           SINIIIIII C-..wtlly M.14              felm
                                                          4o"Ptublegau Saw                 sh-111111 rmavellor 5.116d, U."I     191414
                                                          mushowask flasil             q   CO.Y                                      c                                                                                                                   -a G
                                                              it 144.1killow               sJoble sdl                               OZ
                                                                                                     Mallf1i smod                ems
                                                                                           sloyl-11i 104%.gly L1.1461; %   d                                            .64                                                                                           So
                                                                                                                                  H.G

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              VIM        4!1.u               _s
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       SID*
                                                                                                                                          4:1.p                                                   sm

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         04.1.
                                                                                                                                                                    So -So    --k

                                                                                                                                                           -c






                                                      Figure 5









          North Texas may experience temperatures in excess of 90* F (32*
          C) in late summer and may occasionally freeze in winter.

               Rainfall is substantial on the mainland northeast of the
          Banks, averaging 50 to 60 inches per year. Precipitation
          diminishes southward along the coast, approaching semi-arid
          conditions between Baffin Bay, Texas, and the Rio Grande River
          (25 inches per year). Runoff from rivers in Louisiana and north
          Texas greatly impacts coastal hydrography in the northwestern
          Gulf. At peak discharge, the Mississippi River alone can
          transport more than 100,000 cubic meters (3.5 million.cubic ft)
          of fresh water per second to the Gulf.

               Winds vary seasonally. In January, regional winds affecting
          the offshore waters in the northwestern Gulf are generally from
          the northeast. By March, they have shifted and blow primarily
          from the east. In summer, prevailing winds are out of the
          southeast. These average conditions are perturbed in winter by
          intrusions of polar air masses into the Gulf in the form of
          frontal passages (northers) which may result in severe storms at
          the Flower Gardens, with waves approaching 16 ft (5 m) in height.
          Furthermore, the northwestern Gulf is in the path of hurricanes
          which pass through the region during summer and fall.

          (b) Hydrography

               Due largely to conditions of climate and runoff, the coastal
          marine environment in the northwestern Gulf, though exceedingly
          productive in terms of biomass and fisheries, is too harsh to
          support the development of tropical reef systems such as those
          existing at the Flower Gardens. Waters over most of the
          continental shelf are too cold in winter and too turbid year
          round due to sedimentation and sediment resuspension. During
          periods of peak spring runoff, nearshore surface salinities may
          drop substantially below 30 ppt and may be as low as 20 ppt near
          the Mississippi and Atchafalaya deltas..

               There is a strong tendency for these coastal water masses to
          be held onshore and shunted west most of the year (particularly
          during February to May) by the general shelf circulation pattern
          and the prevailing winds, thereby allowing the tropical oceanic
          water masses of the open Gulf to predominate on the outermost
          shelf where the Flower Gardens are located. Typically, currents
          on the inner shelf between the Mississippi and central Texas are
          directed downcoast (westward and southwestward). Currents on the
          outer shelf usually,flowtoward.the northeast and east. In
          summer, this pattern may be disrupted, resulting in current
          reversals and considerable cross-shelf exchange west of the
          Mississippi (Figure 6).

               The net result of this tenuous balance between neritic and
          oceanic water movements is a shelf-edge zone wherein the near

                                         21






                     -y Lp :L c= aL              x- x, sms                @c It-- 40a X" r-I m























                                                                                GUS a VA-170PIS































                                                                               C= R S-.A'nC"

                                                                                           zw=

























                                                                               =M 2 STATXM

                                                                 --------------------------
                                                                               op     ap     op
                                                    up     lip    ap     sp









          surface water comes primarily from the south, is perpetually
          clear and well lit,.yaries little-in salinity beyond.34-36 ppt
          and ranges in temperature from 68* F (18* C) (barely above the
          minimal requirement for tropical reef development) to'86* F (300
          C) (Figure 7)-. The introduction of uplifted substratum into
          these waters by salt diapirism has provided a suitable habitat
          for the development of tropical Atlantic reef communities on at
          least 17 shelf-edge banks off Texas and,Louisiana. Only two,
          however, the East and West Flower Gardens Banks, possess crest
          depths shallow enough to support coral reefs comparable to those
          in the Caribbean and southern Gulf from which the Flo@Ter Garden
          biota are derived.


          3.   Benthic Communities

               The Flower Garden Banksharbor approximately 500   acres of
          submerged tropical coral reefs with 18 species of hermatypic
          corals. Cresting at approximately 50 ft (15 m.) below the water
          surtace, the reefs extend downward to 150 ft (46 m) depths, where
          the hermatypic corals are replaced by reefal communities
          dominated by coralline algae. This deeper "algal terrace" covers
          most surfaces down to a depth of 290 ft.

               The two coral reef zones  (Diploria-Montastrea-Porites and
          Madracis) on the shallowest crests of the' Flower Gardens have no
          counterparts on the 15 or so similar banks stretching eastward
          toward the Mississippi   The lower-lying benthic communities at
          the Flower Gardens, however, are representative of reef
          assemblages occurring on other outer continental shelf banks in
          the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. All of the biotic zones so far
          recognized on the other shelf-edge carbonate banks (except the
          Millepora-Sponge zone, which occurs*6nly on claystone-siltstone
          outcrops) are represented at the Flower Gardens (Figures 8, 9,
          10).

          (a) Diploria-Montastrea-Porites Zone

               The shallowest of the.Flower Garden biotic zones is the
          Diploria- Montastrea-Porites zone.*,'The coral reefs,in this zone,
          at depths of 50 to 120 @t (15 to 36 m), are of considerable
          interest to scientist's.because they are isolated from other reef
          systems by over 300 nautical miles,(550 km) and exist under
          hydrographic conditions generally considered marginal for
          tropical reef formation. Lar4ely because of their aesthetic
          appeal, the reefs in this zone have'been the primary focus of
          concern about the ecological fate of the Flower Gardens in light
          of the increasing impact of human activity.

               Possibly,because of their isolation and the marginal
          hydrographic Conditions in whichithey exist, the Flower Garden
          coral reefs are conside rably less diverse than their more
          southerly counterparts. The Flower Garden reefs,, made, up of 7

                                          23









                      m Ip -c-xv -t !s3 c) r-i c>                cnct= -t 4=    Z c@ rx 4@






                                        SUbSt2ndal N017ft Influence - Penodic
                                         High ruraidity and Reduced Salinity                   Oceanic Water
                                                  and TOMOOMM

                         pivor Puna#   Winmr rwmwmt&wm
                                      Oft" LM rhm Irc                         to Irc




                     20-



                     40-


                     W -
                                    Love"
                                EM Avasocra Soongs Zone                             3
                     flo-           c4ral Reeft                                         44'
                                    mgal-soonge Zone
                    100.            Anboaltmnan Une
                                    N""Osd Zone
                 CL                 Neonvaid Law (higM turbiditY aft
                    120-
                                    "dim"Mution)
                                    Plemesm-6-Ove Be"
                    1AO          I  C4"ie
                                 2  Sonnter
                    ISO.         3  C4ffee L&WW
                                 4  ScuVw"
                                    Alclardles
                                    Em Flower Garden
                    200m         7  JakkUla
                                    Gover
                    2201 *Uq" PQm@WmdW to
                         I        al%iVV. 0%V. Od light dIfFW


                Figure










                                                                                    c> x-i m         :L 4= xx 4c)mx m            13& C>IC M               MVICI           n        C31 -t= A C:-.
                                                                                                                         W X c> w4m 3r a m x- cl 4m riL n ma. r-i Ic


                                                                                     F
                                  <                M          a-d                                                        Note: High diversity coral reefs a P(plarfe-Abntastm-ftrites
                                        <!@W           J.04 040              i   :.:                                     Zone. Low diversity coral reefs          a StepAmmomia-Millepora Zone.
                                         dIMA                                                                            This figure is also representative of the Nat Flower Garden
                                                                                                                         Bank.


                                                                                                           NNW
                                3bb                                          a





                                                           me                                                                                                                                            >




                                             Cow" andomm" O"d
                                                                                                                                                                       "N
                                                            9"d

                                        4P   Low* 44-                       bomb bbo"
                                             Caftmoommob               d04 SAW-
                                                   .. WOMP      wzhi@"-m 806"Oom 60=60"

                                                                                                                                                                          _y
                                             &Wpdmd.

                                             Lhe hmms"ft



                                                                                                        C400"a" j"Os"O"

                                       do#   AftmWom                                   phmbd'
                                                                             bw"                                                        %P
                                                                                   A-0

                                                                                                                                                                                                       1W


                                                                                                  <34 VbPW"m Pena

                                                                                                  do* Dedba"S
                                             CdWW                      @::fj

                                             1pammom" bug$                                             86861"s
                                                                             r08001"
                                             Od 00 m"P                                              4                             Selftseme



                                         F1gure 8












                                     :L       -t -t c=               a) MaL I-- -t c> rx
                                                       mamm,t v2cn1w*--x- 00Lx-c14-.-z-x me-ax-lic







                                                                                                              Uving nqn amervirv core 'so
                                                                                                                                    Z.-4WI
                                                                                                              tavmg @ow dftwww cww few
                                                                                                                                     zoml
                                                                                                              'cnofft cover" wtm      31 tft c" unfects M-S
                                                                                                              IA"opmeds za"i
                                                                                                              Knolls or 09 UrUCtWn COV00411 -l" SDWVWt
                                                                                                                 isnaft of wft &*W fL*&#V A49W Zwel
                                                                                                      C= cmamme swm aw -AMW -her* Sals"m to ""mg cor"
                                                                                                              OWL C"Orrwo *1 oft vid am-is G"V" trol" tftft
                                                                                                              oco'sl 006"s Fect"l; *ameen2 AM 82m coolift
                                                                                                              cormarmwo at Ilarld and-aoons .7.1" a Sucamnlial
                                                                                                              Cof"V Or 000 -C tCrWftA-t@f 1110110lftS 1AM00"S"Re

                                                                                                              4     SON 1 actfol" coff""Ume" 001100 av
                                                                                                                     coram,ow AOCMW. @qft S"059011tow 0-ilwUpo"s of
                                                                                                              smilil sgsn .0 MM 4CS MD I-      Sna i#&FV a6qao:
                                                                                                                     Mg& MQGUM aftO rU0*la WIGOM94A air C*WW
                                                                                                                                                           no
                                                                                                              &Mortere SOF4 of ON M&M Dollom $Algal-Socroge Za I
                                                                                                              sftvop@@fwo -am"t"w. foge@ lwgdpv coverve
                                                                                                              CMAM Of COM" m4a*: *00091COY SJ"Wlsf to
                                                                              vt                              Deal'If-ata"woo 0111
                                                                                                              Partly afe-.10 MPM ammomnairrml, co"m -rm I,vwq
                                                                                                              mot"it Comm^@ Sigae. -M ocesmanst cr@ats Arle -*SOS
                                                            10                                                of r-ornnuvoc Car"
                                                                                                              amm"d reaft commol imin Amm at hAo $"I ano
                                                                                                              Deenng low armrs" itistramm commvwwrv lctuo"
                                                                                                              tooo. actocaryn am somewv M*tVoc

                                                                                                              5011. @ftmlll NNIA 00"00 4640041 DY OW04"N IMSWI
                                    p
                                                                                                              uw large man" ots"In-c ft""Oorm" am hiroas
                                                                                                                 St






                                                                                          V"  L





                                                                               0                                              BIOTIC ZONATION
                                                                                                                        LUT FLOWER GARCEN BANK
                                                                                                           0                Quv    OF kmaco - Tax"                 Irv

                                                                                                                                   comonuo By
                                                                                                                        r"OL4" j. SMIC.W. STt*%ef 7 VIACA
                                                                                                                            Wo cHmfST0 I- Comm

                                                                                                                         OVAATWff OF OCL4MOGPAPNY
                                                                                                                              rexAs Aam umvgRSITY
                                                                      'j                                                                 fool

                                                                                                                           COWOUPI 1#47IRVAL 10 MCTM
                                                                                                                                 0AnAk so LEM
                                                                         Z7


































                                    rigure 9










                       M:Lcnot--14--
                                        W40ftt-- V100Wft3r OMVaft" SMI-11C




                                                                                Olt                                        -ra



                                BIOTIC ZONATION
                           WEST FLOWER CARDEN BANK                                                '--7777-77= ..... ..
                              GULF OF MEXICO - TEXAS


                                    co"O.L.90 sy
                           -MCMAS@  SpiGmT STJP"ENT V1AQA
                              anc C"411STOP14611 L. COJAGS


                            zspAArmtr% -- '.)F CCEANOGRAP-M
                                rEXAS A&M UNIVUSITY


                                    M.NTSAYAL. to MIFT"Is
                                  DArum- 56A 6EVIL                                   J

                                         -A  011 *-M










                          lot                 all.
                                                             tow. W



                                     t



                         '4(



                              rot v/.                                         A.

                              low.
                          44




                                                                                                               . .. ................




                           4
                                                                                   M   Ltvmq Mqft (111001 fir WrIP MO

                                                                                            low an"
                                                                                       U.Ing        IV Coro me

                                                                                       carbonate 1111100 am flifted: w"vv amscom To IMAQ Come
                                                                                         "Wis. Or ON * so" on coonii cm v tram owl
                                                                                             'g;;@-p7"j. between 7'
                                                              -of                        (cargo                 . ane M fP not
                                                                                         Cafflonsoo of Sam and dews weth 8 suomm"Im
                                                                                         Conigigrigm ol bemnse forev"Mirter formbift tAmontstepind
                                                                                         Psomi
                                                                                       Nor d go 911V WON bomm Conwnkw*ov GOWAnsed OV
                                                                                                  -01410 810M. WAM UMMOMW 000"11000110.
                                                                                             a mild am AOSorms SM W?" am 101611f vq".I
                                                                                         Comwo a" nodums am fume Wndensin ov Wargo
                                                                                         catoonew tow or "m mm M110m fA"op-Saisn" Zone.
                                                                                   am              mm            -M wit" Im"
                                                                                                                     crustsar" nowas
                                                                                         of nmepkipp"m ..
                                                                                       OIWM rnft cumbirm VAM VWIOM at Own soch"m am
                                                                                               iow dime my simitiliv- cam"nunstv .004"
                                                                                                 oemmoorm am mom" ar4wwdm"w

                                    Ar                                                 SOL is". OMA Doom domwwmo Wt moi ovm -Atm&paom
                                                                                         W" Rowan"      mommisperem arm Imines


                                                                                     IWtv imal Pak.



                           lrig%Lre 10









           large, closely-packed heads and dominated by the star coral,
           Montastrea annularis, conspicuously lack populations of shallow-
           water octocorals (sea fans, sea whips) and branching corals of
           the genus Acropora (staghorn and elkhorn corals) which are
           abundant on reefs to the south. There are only 18 species of
           reef building corals in the Diploria-Montastrea-Porites Zone
           (Table 1), compared to 34 in the southern Gulf and 55 in the
           Caribbean.

           (b) Madracis Zone

                The other reef zone occurring at the Flower Gardens, but not
           at other banks in the region, is the Madracis zone. It is
           dominated almost entirely by thickets of the small branching
           coral, Madracis mirabilis. Knolls composed of the skeletal
           remains of this species are found at the margins of the Diploria@
           Montastrea-Porites zone in water depths of 90 to 150 ft (28 to 46
           m). Some of the knolls are covered with Madracis thickets while
           others have been overgrown by the.main.reef, possibly indicating
           a successional relationship between the two zones.. Several
           knolls are covered seasonally with dense populations of macro-
           algae and are known as a Leafy Algae zone.

           (c) Lower Diversity Reef Zone

                Lower diversity coral reefs occur in places at the Flower
           Gardens and on two other neighboring banks at depths between 120
           and 180 ft (36 and 55 m). These reefs harbor only 12 varieties
           of reef building corals, the dominant varieties being
           stephanocoenia michelini, and the fire coral MilleRora sp.
           Stephanocoenia-Millepora zone.

           (d) Algal-Sponge-Zone

                The Algal-Sponge zone is the most important source of
           carbonate substratum produced on the Flower Gardens and the other
           shelf-edge banks. This zone, at depths from 150 to 290 ft (46 to
           88 m), is overwhelmingly dominated by crustose coralline algae,
           primarily Lithothamnium, Lithoporella and Tenarea. Forming vast
           areas of algal nodules as well as algal reef patches and
           pavements, these organisms are responsible for most of the reef-
           building activity in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. Leafy
           algae are common within the zone and the assemblage of epibenthic
           invertebrates is probably as diverse here as on the coral reefs
           that have grown upward from the algal platforms.

           (e) Nepheloid Laver

                Below the Algal-Sponge zone there is generally insufficient
           light to support reef-building activity by either corals or
           coralline algae. However, evidence of previous reef-building is


                                          28


									

									TABLE

					FLOWER GARDEN CORALS AND CALCAREOUS ALGAE




											Cenus of
											Collection					Abundance
                									  and or	____________________________________________________
							     				Observation 		DMP		Mad		SM		AS
					____________________________________________________________________________________________________
					Red calcareous algae
					  Corallinaceae			
						Poroiithon				23-32								?
						Hydroiithon				23-65								?
						Archaeoiithothamnium		23-72								?
						Lithophyllum			23-80								?
						Lathoporella			23-85								?
						Tenarea				23-90-							?
						Lithothamruum			23-90-							?
						Mesophyllum				23-85								?
						Fosiieila?				  23								?
					
					   Squamariaceae
						Peyssonneiia			23-90-							?

					Green calcareous algae
				 	   Codiaceae
						Haiimeda spp.			21-91						?
						Haiimeda tuna			48-61				
						Udotea spp.				40-64				?
						Udotea cyathiformus		  58

					   Foraminiferans
						Gypsina piana			21-68								?

				 	  Corals	
					    Astrocoenidae
						Stephanocoenia michelini	21-52
					    Pocilloporidae	
						Madracis spp.			15-92
						Madracis asperula			48-84
						Madracis decaciis			15-41
						Madracis ef. formosa*		  62
						Madracis murabiis			23-40
						Madracis myriaster*		 113
					    Agaricidae
						Agaricidae (saucer-shaped)+ 	18-12
						Agaricia spp.			15-76
						Agaricia agaricites		20-24						?
						Agaricia fragiis ?		20-53						?
						Helioseris 				20-84						?
					    Siderastreidae
						Siderastrea siderea		21-50		
					    Poritidae	
						Porites astreoides		21-40
						Porites fureata			  21
					    Favijdae
						Colpophylia spp.			21-47
						Colpophyllia amararthus		21-26
						Colpophyllia natans		21-26
						Diploria strigosa			15-55
						Montastrea annularis		21-43
						Montrastrea cavernosa		19-60
					
					   Mussidae
						Mussa angulosa			21-54
						Scolymia sp. (spp. ?)+		18-46
						Scolymia cubensis			21-27								?
					   Milleporidae
						Millepora alcicornis		15-55
					   Caryophylliidae
						Oxysmilia sp.?			82-101		
						Pararyathus sp.?			19-?							?	?








          present in the form of drowned reefs, which occur abundantly
          around the bases of the Banks below 300 ft (90 m)-depth levels.
          These remnants imply that the water was shallower at some time in
          the past as a result of a sea-level rise or local subsidence, or
          both. The drowned reefs are typically laden with silt that
          continually settles out of the turbid bottom waters (nepheloid
          layers) surrounding the Banks. The biota associated with these
          drowned reefs are low in diversity and abundance and quite
          different in species content from those occupying the living reef
          zones above 290 ft (88 m).

          (f) Brine Seeps

               A unique feature of the Flower Garden Bank ecosystem is the
          existence of two brine seeps at the East Bank. The more recently
          discovered of the two is at a depth of 157 ft (48 m) on the
          southwest flank of the bank. The other, more well known, issues
          from hard substratum at a depth of 233 ft (71 m) on the eastern
          margin of the East Bank (Figure 11). This seep, named Gollum's
          Lake and Gollum's Canyon by researchers, this 200 ppt brine
          spring and its associated biota are worthy in their own right of
          Sanctuary protection. The brine lake occupies most of the sand
          floor of a 13 ft (4 m) deep, amphitheater-shaped basin 165 (50 m)
          long by 100 ft (30 m) wide. The lake is approximately 10 inches
          (25 cm) deep and overflows into Gollum's Canyon. The canyon is
          33 to 50 ft (10-15 m) wide, and it winds 315 ft (96 m) from the
          basin to the edge of the Bank.

               The brine in the lake results from the dissolution of salt
          by interstitial sea water at the crest of the salt plug beneath
          the Bank. Heavier than sea water, it percolates downward through
          porous reef rock and exits through the sand on the basin floor.
          In addition to containing large amounts of salt, the solution
          becomes highly charged with sulfides and loses all dissolved
          oxygen. This heavy, high salinity, high sulfide, anoxic brine is
          toxic to most marine organisms, but its toxicity diminishes as it
          overflows from the lake into a stream at the bottom of the canyon
          and progressively mixes with overlying sea water on its passage
          to the edge of the Bank.

               Whereas typical Algal-Sponge zone biota surround the seep
          system, the community of organisms within the system is
          structured in response to balances between the sulfide and oxygen
          content of the water and the resultant toxicity gradients. Thus,
          the lake is occupied by a community of sulfur bacteria capable of
          chemosynthetic and photosynthetic primary production using
          sulfide or sulfate either in the absence of oxygen or at the
          oxic-anoxic boundary. Some of these bacteria extend into the
          mixing stream where sulfide and oxygen temporarily co-exist.




                                          30
















                                 ve- X, X"I





             W-W       W-41      W-W





                                                   Note: (A) Brine lake (Gollum's lake), (8) overflow from
                                              lake at 71 m (233 ft) depth, (C) stream of mixing brine and
                                              seawater. Arrow to right of (C) indicates small brine pool
                                              (Corner Pool) below overflow. Canyon mouth is 79 m (249 ft)
                                              deep.' Area indicated as Chaetowrp& my be mixtures of
                                              Chwtmrphe &W Cladophwa.








                               M-W.d IPW








                                                        r?
                                                       A








                                               40

                                                      Alas











                                                                         Wb




                                                   WAO
                                               &lt;M *"meow"        40K        hw
                                               4dIM Wow= wwmew@  49=XIM "-W
               am 4@          do ANOWUM
               PWINWAd vwr@                                           OWUMS

                                               40  cftpv@             &MMMM
                              10

                                                                            wm@









                Mats of bacteria from the mixing stream, plus bacterial
           biomass overflowing from the lake, provide a source of food for
           certain interstitial animals (largely gnathostomulids) which are
           capable of resisting high levels of usually toxic sulfide in the
           upper part of the mixing stream. Farther downstream, the
           gnathostomulid community is replaced gradually by tanaidaceans,
           amphipods and similar organisms less tolerant of sulfide but
           capable of using the bacterial input as food.

                The brine-seep system is an interesting shallow .water
           analogy to sulfide-dependent, deep-sea, hydrothermal vent
           communities and has great potential as a natural laboratory for
           the study of processes of considerable current interest to the
           marine science community.

           4.   Other Species Associated With Benthos

                The Flower Garden Banks harbor at least 80 species of algae,
           196 known macro-invertebrate species and more than 175 fish
           species. The reef-building corals and coralline algae construct
           and maintain the substratum and, through a multitude of
           intraspecific and interspecific relationships, largely control
           the structure of benthic communities occupying the Banks. Thus
           they are by far the most important organisms in the Flower Garden
           ecosystem.

                Reef surfaces shallower than 100 ft (30 m) provide a habitat
           for various types of mollusks. Mollusks present in these areas
           include: the Atlantic thorny oyster (Spondylus americanus),
           several varieties of scallops (F. Malleidae), the turtle cone
           (Conustestudinarius), the Mindanao cone (C.-mindanus), cowries
           (Genus Cypraea), the Hawk-wing conch (Strombus raninus), the
           brown-lined latirus (Latirus Infundibulum), and the Atlantic
           Hairy Triton (Cvmatiu Rileare) (Lipka, 1974). Other
           invertebrates found at the Flower Gardens include: the brittle
           stars (Q. Ophiurida), sea urchins (Class Echinoidea), the feather
           duster worm (Hypsicomus elegans), spiny lobsters (Panulirus argus
           and Panulirus auttatus), and the Spanish lobster (Scyllarides
           aecruinoctialis)

                Pelagic fish at the Flower Gardens include a number of
           small, brightly colored reef fishes such as the blue tang
           (Acanthurus coruleus), the gobies (F. Gobiidae), the bluehead
           (Thalassoma bifasciatum), the damsel fishes (F. Pomacentridae),
           the butterfly fishes (F. Chaetodontidae), some of the
           parrotfishes (F. Scaridae), and some of the triggerfishes (F.,
           Balistidae) (Bright and Cashman, 1974). The most important of
           the larger, harvestable fish are groupers of various kinds and
           red, vermilion, and other types of snapper.

                Benthic and demersal fish, such as snappers and groupers,
           play a major role in the coral-reef ecosystem. Some larger

                                          32








          carangids and some species of trigger fish occasionally move or
          uproot coral during their feeding and nest-building activities
          (Glyn, Steward and McClosker, 1972). Parrotfish and other
          species feed on corals directly (see Randall, 1974, for a review
          of fish predation on coral). Although such activities are
          destructive to coral, they reflect normal ecological
          relationships among biota in the reef system.

               Snappers and other demersal fish, grazing on algae in the
          live-coral and hard-bank zones, may also generate much of the
          detritus (Hiatt and Strasburg, 1960; Stephenson and Searles,
          1960; Randall, 1976) that could form the base of the coral-reef
          food chain. Hobson and Chess (1978) monitored the activities of
          planktivorous and detritivorous fishes that feed on assorted
          biota in nearby waters and then return to the reef where they
          defecate particles essential to the diet of coral polyps. A
          similar nutrient cycle from algae to corals has been suggested by
          Lewis (1977) for herbivorous fishes. All feeding and excreting
          activities contribute to the suspended detritus load that forms
          the bulk of coral-polyp diets. The complex energetics of these
          interrelationships are discussed by Baka (1966, 1969).

               Sea turtles are occasionally seen at the Flower Gardens,
          both at the surface and on the reef, but only the loggerhead,
          Caretta caretta, has been reliably identified. The loggerhead,
          it should be noted, is a threatened species. The only marine
          mammal frequently reported near the Flower Gardens is the spotted
          dolphin, Stenellaplagiodon. Other species of turtles and marine
          mammals are probably casual visitors. Although the Flower
          Gardens are too far offshore for the typical occurrence of
          coastal sea birds other than an occasional tern or booby, nearby
          oil platforms attract migrating land birds, especially cattle
          egrets, and sometimes warblers, vireos and other small species.
          The land birds are usually exhausted from long overwater-flights.

          5.   Historical/Cultural Resources
               The Flower Garden Banks lie well seaward of any area
          identified as having a high probability of containing either
          historical or prehistorical cultural resources (Interagency
          Archeological Services, 1977). It is considered unlikely that
          historical/cultural resources of any significance exist in the
          vicinity of the Banks.


          C.   Human Activities

               The principal human activities in the area of the Flower
          Garden Banks are oil and gas exploration and development,
          commercial fishing, recreational pursuits, ship transiting, and
          research. Generally, these activities have a small impact on
          Flower Garden resources, but anchoring by large vessels at the

                                          33









           Banks poses a special problem. The existing and proposed
           regulatory regimes governing these activities are discussed in
           Part III, Alternatives Including the Preferred Alternative. The
           environmental impacts of the activities are discussed in Part IV,
           Environmental Consequences.

           1.   oil and Gas Activities

                All current oil and gas operations at the Flower Garden
           Banks are subject to special stipulations, imposed by the
           Minerals Management Service (MMS) to protect sensitive biological
           resources. The stipulations include the establishment of a no-
           activity zone at each Bank.

                Hydrocarbon reserves at the Flower Gardens are generally
           expected to be natural gas, but the presence of oil at the Banks
           cannot be discounted; at least small quantities of oil are
           normally recovered from gas wells. The closest crude oil
           production is located approximately 6.5 nm (12 km) northwest of
           the West Bank. oil company activity involving the leasing of
           tracts (Table 2), exploratory drilling, and production operations
           seems to indicate a favorable outlook for the development of
           hydrocarbon deposits in the vicinity of the Banks. A Mobil Oil
           production platform was constructed in 1981 one nautical mile
           southeast of the East Bank in block A-389 (Figure 12), and 42
           blocks had been leased in the vicinity by October, 1987 (MMS,
           1987).

           2.   Commercial Fishing

                Several species of fish occurring at the Flower Gardens and
           other regional banks are of proven or potential value to
           fisheries. Red and vermilion snappers and groupers have been
           harvested in the vicinity of the Flower Gardens by commercial
           hook-and-line fishermen since the 1880's. Currently, the
           commercial-fish harvest consists predominately of snappers. The
           Flower Gardens and other banks rimming the Gulf are frequented by
           a fleet of 14 to 20 snapper boats, based largely in Pensacola,
           Florida. Most of the effort at the Flower Gardens is directed
           toward the fringe of the coral reef cap in 100 to 165 ft (30 to
           50 m) water depths where snappers seem most abundant. Fishing
           vessels apparently do not anchor at the Flower Gardens during
           fishing operations.

                Some types of commercial fishing gear used in the Gulf of
           Mexico could result in appreciable physical damage to Flower
           Garden bottom formations. Fish trawls being dragged along the
           bottom, for example, could cause scarring of the living reefs
           similar to the damage caused by anchoring. The use of fish
           trawls at the Flower Gardens, however, is impractical because



                                          34











                                              Table 2


          TRACTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE EAST AND WEST FLOWER GARDEN BANKS
          SUBJECT TO THE MMS BIOLOGICAL STIPULATION (ALSO REFER TO FIGURES
          12 and 13)

          TRACT   LOCATION           LEASE STATUS
                                       (L--LEASED)

          A-351   EAST FLOWER GARDEN(L)
          A-352
          A-353                      (L)
          A-354
          A-355
          A-361   WEST FLOWER GARDEN(L)
          A-362          11          (L)
          A-363          of
          A-364   EAST & WEST FLOWER GARDEN
          A-365   EAST FLOWER GARDEN(L)
          A-366          it          (L)
          A-367          to          (L)
          A-368          of          (L)
          A-373          of          (L)
          A-374          of          (L)
          A-375          It
          A-376          Is          (L)
          A-377   EAST & WEST FLOWER GARDEN
          A-378   WEST
          A-379   WEST
          A-380   WEST FLOWER GARDEN(L)
          A-381   WEST
          A-382   WEST FLOWER GARDEN(L)
          A-383          if          (L)
          A-384          It          (L)
          A-385          it          (L)
          A-386   EAST & WEST FLOWER GARDEN
          A-387   EAST
          A-388
          A-389                                                        L
          A-390                EAST  FLOWER GARDEN                     L
          A-394
          A-395                                                        L
          A-396                EAST  &WEST FLOWER  GARDEN
          A-397                       WEST                             L
          A-377                       WEST
          A-398                       WEST                             L
          A-399                       WEST                             L
          A-400                       WEST                             L
          A-401                       WEST                             L











              A-402                                                       L
              A-403                                                       L
              A-173                                                       L
              A-217                                                       L
              A- 95               EAST FLOWER  GARDEN
              A- 96                      EAST
              A- 97                        to                             L
              A-133                      West                             L
              A-134
              A-135                      WEST                             L
              A-136                      WEST
              A-138                      EAST
              A-139                      EAST                             L
              A-140                      EAST                             L
              A-177                      WEST                             L
              A-178                        11
              A-180                                                       L











                                        TABLE 2



                 FLOWER GARDEN BANK TRACTS SUBJECT TO MMS    BIOLOGICAL
                                     STIPULATION


                                  LEASING STATUS* - OCTOBER, 1987


          EAST FLOWER GARDEN         WEST FLOWER GARDEN         EAST & WEST
          FLOWER GARDEN


             TRACT STATUS               TRACT STATUS                  TRACT
          STATUS*


             A- 95    L                 A-133                         A-364


             A- 96    L                 A-134     L                   A-377


             A- 97    L                 A-135                         A-386
             A-138    L                 A-136                         A-396
             A-139    L                 A-173
             A-140    L                 A-177
             A-351    L                 A-178
             A-352    L                 A-179
             A-353    L                 A-180     L
             A-354    L                 A-217     L
             A-355    L                 A-361     L
             A-365    L                 A-362     L
             A-366    L                 A-363     L
             A-367    L                 A-378     L
             A-368    L                 A-379     L
             A-373    L                 A-380     L
             A-374                      A-381     L
             A-375                      A-382     L
             A-376    L                 A-383
             A-387    L                 A-384     L
             A-388                      A-385
             A-389    L                 A-397     L
             A-390    L                 A-398
             A-394                      A-399     L
             A-395    L                 A-400     L
             A-403    L                 A-401     L
                                        A-402
                                        A-573     L
                                        A-596     L


          Source: MMS 1987.
          *"L" indicates that the tract is leased; no notation indicates
          that it is not leased.






                                           -am _1L vi                         c@          m








                                                                                                                        (17)                   MACNEILBANK



                      -355                          A-354                              -353                          A-352
                    A                                                                A                                                                   -351

                                                                                                                                X_3,76@,000     00,          A
                                                                                                                                Y_ 109,30c),00,

                  V-102,960.00'






                  A-364                             A-365                           A,366                            A-367                             A-W

                                                                                                                                                         (201



                                                                                           4       en                                                    (21)
                                                                                                                                                         (22)
                      87,120.00'




                                                                                                             EAST F LOWE R G.            I BAN K                (23
                                    LO                                             N
                      14)
                  A-377                            A-375                            AV'5                           A-374                               A-373



                                    I                                x
                                                                                                                                                  4 MILE ZONE
                                                                                                               NI
                  V-71,21i0.00'

                                      4 MILE ZONE
                                                                                    X,
                                                                                                                            Mobile     Oil                         (24)
                                                                                                                             orporation
                                                                                                                           Platform
                  A-386                            A,387                            A-M                             A-389                             A-390


                                                                                       Do


                         (331                                                                                                                                (25?
                          a
                  Y-SISA40.0


                                                                                                                         C,
                                                                                                                                           96
                                                                                                                SIS       -
                                                                                                                          v                       (26
                  A-396                           A-395                             A-394
                                          (32)                                                                               y-10 IOS 920.00'
                                                                                                                                      (27


                                                                                                                              28)
                       500.0o,                                        t                                      129)                                                 141
                      M -HIGH DIVERSITY CORAL REEF                                                         1                                140              Ix
                      EE3 PROTECTIVE RESTRICTIONS BOUNDARIES                                                     a                   20 Thousand Feet
                                        @
                                                       354
                                                    A



                  @I                                                                                                                                            (23
                                                                                                                                                             I@E





















                      EL'"M NOAcriviTYZONE-                                                      (30



               Figure         12












                                                             C@ W4-- Jr        0 aL 3r a 4-M r*36 3B 4m ri 1.p-"





                                       A-3130                       A-361                                                 A-363
                                                                                                 62
                            z
                            0
                                                                                                                           (12

                            LU
                            I--     V-87,120.00'
                  -Z X-
                            LU                                                                                                             (13)


                          co
                            cn
                            z
                            0          A-381                        A-380                     A-379                       A-378
                          m                                                      Iwo                                                     as
                                                                                 0
                          &lt;                                                                                                              Ix
                          LU



                            LU
                          z
                                                                                                                                    4 MILE ZONE
                          &lt; &lt;
                          .j LLJ



                                       A-382                       A-383                     A-384                        A-385
                            &lt;

                                                   WVb I r LUVvr-m GAROEN BAf





                                 4 MILE ZONE





                                       A-400                             A-391                                           A-397





                                   Y-39;soo.oo,



                                                                                                                                   136
                                                                                                                 135
                                                                                         134
                                               z                    AAOI
                      A)      173              &lt;  133
                                            UA co
                                               z

                                                                                                            V-10.090 080.00,
                                             LU &lt;
                                (4)             W                                                                 179
                                                            177                          178
                          HIGH DIVERSITY CORAL REEF                                                                   136       d
                    EEE]PROTECTIVE RESTRICTIONSBOUNDARIES                                                                               ISO
                    jo NO ACTIVITY ZONE             2)   (1)                         0                20 Thcound Feet



                 Figure 13










            1) the bottom is such rough terrain that trawl nets would be
            subject to snag.ging, and 2) fish trawls and traps, long lines,
            and gill or hoop nets have very limited potential in catching
            snappers. Reef fish, including snappers, are best caught with
            handlines (NMFS, 1981), the only commercial fishing method
            documented at the Banks. In any case, the use of bottom trawls,
            bottom longlines, traps and pots is.now prohibited at the Flower
            Gardens on the portions of the Banks shallower than the 50'fathom
            (300 foot). isobath by regulations implementing the Fishery
            Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs.


            3.  Recreation

                The principal recreational attractions at the Flower Garden
            Banks are their regionally unique coral communities and the
            abundance,and diversity of fish found in their ecosystems. Some
            recreational boats travel to the Flower Gardens solely for sport
            fishing purposes, but the majorit'y in the past have probably
            carried SCUBA divers (Bright, 1986, personal communication). The
            primary base-ports for recreationists are Freeport, Houston-
            Galveston, and Port Arthur, Texas, and Cameron, Louisiana. Peak
            recreational use occurs in July, August, and September when .
            weather conditions,are generally most favorable and leisure time
            is greatest.

                only the most experienced private recreational boat
            operators are willing to attempt the trip. Because of the often
           .rigorous offshore conditions, private recreational boats visiting
            the reefs are seldom smaller than 30 ft (9 m) in length. Trips
            to the Flower Garden Banks and back require an average of 16
            hours, and'therefore many boats remain overnight, weather
            permitting.

                In the late 19701s, between 50 and 150 b  oats were estimated
            to visit the reefs over the course of a year (Blood, 1978,
            personal communication). Since the emplacement of an oil
            production platform near East Flower Garden in 1981, navigation
            to the site has become easier and boat traffic at the Banks has
            probably increased (Bright, 1986, personal communica@ion). With
            improved public awareness of the site after designation,
            recreational visits to Flower Garden waters could increase
            further. Moreover, as oil and gas development c  'ontinues in the
            region, the attractiveness of the area for recreational fishing
            could be enhanced by the emplacement of additional oil production
            platforms.' Platforms provide new habitats for fish, and platform
            crews can furnish emergency assistance to boats in distress.
            Nonetheless, the Banks' distance from shore will continue to
            limit recreational usage.

                Sport fishermen visit the Flower Gardens in small parties on
            private boats or in larger groups on charter vessels. Fishermen

                                             40









          on both classes of vessels spend one to several days in the area
          using handlines to fish for snappers and groupers (Blood, 1978).
          These vessels tend to anchor along the reef margins in water 100
          to 150 ft (30 to 36 m) deep where snappers and groupers are most
          likely to be found (Pulley, 1978, personal communication).

               In addition to fishing by hook and line, some spearfishing
          occurs in Flower Garden waters. Snappers are seldom found at
          depths shallow enough to attract divers, and thus they are not
          normally caught by spear fishermen. The target species for
          spearfishing are generally the larger, predatory species such as
          hinds, groupers, jacks, and possibly sharks. If these fish
          became sufficiently depleted, predator/prey relationships could
          be adversely affected (Bright, 1986, personal communication).

               Recreational boats visiting the Flower Garden Banks for
          diving purposes anchor on the shallowest portions of the reefs.
          Although the more experienced divers may explore the deeper water
          at the edges of the reefs, charter boat divers, and probably most
          divers visiting in private craft, tend to limit their dives to 80
          ft (25 m) (Blood, 1978, personal communication; Schaefer, 1978,
          personal communication). Because the waters at the East Bank are
          shallower, it receives considerably heavier recreational use than
          the West Bank (Blood, 1978, personal communication). Anchoring
          by recreational boats on the upper portions of the Banks is of
          potential concern in protecting reef resources, but it does not
          present nearly as severe a threat as anchoring by large vessels
          (see Part IV, Section I: Environmental'Consequences of
          Alternatives).

               Other activities of recreational visitors, in addition to
          spearfishing and anchoring, that may adversely affect Flower
          Garden resources are overboard trash disposal and the collection
          of specimens or souvenirs by divers. Many recreational visitors
          to the Flower Gardens discard beer cans, soda bottles and other
          items over the side rather than stowing them until they return to
          port. Such non-biodegradable litter may remain in place for many
          years, impinging upon the site's aesthetic quality and thereby
          reducing its recreational value. Plastic items included in this
          litter',ptesent a hazard to turtles and other creatures that may
          ingest or become entangled in them.

               The collection of souvenirs and specimens is associated with
          virtually all recreational diving, but it is particularly
          prevalent in coral reef environments because of the abundance of
          attractive and removable items,. These items,.collected typically
          for display in private homes, are generally small enough to be
          carried underwater easily and are usually aesthetically pleasing
          in form or color. They include various types of shellst corals,
          starfish, sea urchins, anemones, small shrimp, feather duster
          worms, and brightly colored reef fish.


                                         41










                 The most common method of collecting souvenirs and specimens
            is simply to grasp them with the hand. However, a range of other
            techniques may be employed, depending on the ambitiousness of the
            diver and the size or characteristics of the object he wishes to
            collect. For example, collectors may use crowbars to pry corals
            or shells loose; a block and tackle to raise heavy objects; and
            slurp guns, hand nets, or fish-stunning chemicals to capture
            small reef fish.

                 Tropical fish collecting for display in private marine
            aquaria is a popular hobby and a growing commercial enterprise
            throughout the Gulf of Mexico. A strong market exists in the
            Gulf states and throughout the country for small, colorful,
            coral-reef fishes. Some collection of tropical fish at the
            Flower Garden Banks was reported in the late 1970's (Blood,     1978,
            personal communication). Now, growing public awareness of the
            regionally unique nature of the Flower Garden Banks could make
            them increasingly attractive as a source of aquarium fish.
            However, because recreational divers seldom dive deeper than 80
            feet, souvenir collection may be generally limited to the
            shallower portions of the Flower Garden coral-reef caps.

            4.   Commercial Shipping

                 The area surrounding the Banks is transited by commercial
            cargo-carrying vessels en route to and from Texas coastal ports.
            A maj or east-west shipping fairway, the "Gulf Safety Fairway,"
            passes 6 nautical miles (11 km) south of West Flower Garden Bank.
            This fairway leads to Corpus Christi, Texas, and connects with
            other fairways serving major Texas and Louisiana ports. One of
            these connecting fairways is located some 35 nautical miles (65
            km) west of the West Bank and another is located about 45
            nautical miles (83 km) east of the East Bank. Although use of
            fairways by vessel traffic is not mandatory, traffic pattern data
            collected in 1978 indicates that most vessels passing close to
            the Banks follow the Gulf Safety Fairway (Naval Ocean
            Surveillance Information Center (NOSIC), 1978). The traffic
            patterns plotted by NOSIC in 1978 indicated that most of the
            vessels using the fairway were traveling between Corpus Christi
            and other U.S. ports. The remainder of the commercial vessel
           .traffic in the vicinity of the Flower Garden Banks was engaged in
            domestic trade involving Lavaca, Point Comfort, and Freeport
            (NOSIC, 1978).

            5.   Anchoring by Large Vessels

                 The MMS stipulations prohibiting oil and gas development
            operations within the no-activity zones apply to anchoring by
            vessels engaged in development activities, including platform
            service vessels, but anchoring by other vessels remains
            unregulated and continues to be a threat to Flower Garden
            resources. Further, the MMS stipulations apply merely on a lease

                                             42









          by lease basis. Both the 'coral reefs above 150 ft (46 m) depths
          and the algal terraces below have been subjected to damage by
          ground tackle (anchors, chains, cables) from vessels for many
          years. Anchor damage probably began in the late 1800's with the
          onset of the commercial snapper-grouper fishery, and it has
          become more serious in recent times.

               Research groups have reported large tankers anchored on the
          reefs as early as 1972 (CSA, 1984). Other more recent sightings
          are listed in Table 3. The NICK CANDIES anchoring is the best
          documented incident to date (See 6. Research and Education and
          Part IV, Section 1, B. Environmental Consequences, The Status Quo
          Alternative).

            I obviously, most anchoring instances have gone, and continue
          to go, unobserved. However, lost anchors, chains and cables are
          not uncommon on the Banks and have been encountered repeatedly.
          In their numerous traverses of the Flower Gardens by researchers
          in a submersible, Bright and Rezak (1976; 1978; Rezak and Bright,
          1981) often observed.apparent anchor damage in the form of scars
          or drags on the bottom. The largest anchor scar found extended
          for approximately one mile on the algal terrace at West Bank and
          was apparently continuous with a "roadcut-like" gouge into the
          coral reef (Bright, 1983). Bright notes that anchoring appears
          to be increasing in frequency at the Flower Gardens, though there
          are no hard data to support this opinion. Vessel traffic is
          certainly increasing, due in part to the development of offshore
          oil and gas in the area (Bright, 1985b).

          6.   Research and Education

               Scientific interest in the Flower Garden Banks was expressed
          initially in a 1930 paper by A. C. Trowbridge on the Mississippi
          Delta. The Banks first appeared on U.S. charts following a 1936
          hydrographic survey made by the Coast and Geodetic Survey (now
          the National ocean-Survey) along the continental shelf break in
          the northwestern Gulf. One year later, Francis Shepard suggested
          correctly that the banks mapped during the survey were formed as
          a result of salt diapirism. Contour maps of the East and West
          Flower Gardens were published by Carsey in 1950.

               H. C. Stetson stated in 1953 that the Banks were either
          reefs which had kept pace with rising sea level, or salt domes
          (diapirs) with thin caps of calcareous organisms. Parker and
          Curray dredged coral fragments from the Flower Gardens and in
          1956 published another generalized map of the Banks. In the
          following year, Nettleton confirmed the salt dome origin for the
          West Flower Garden through bottom gravity surveys. Subsequent
          studies that included the taking of drill cores have firmly


               Based on Bright, 1985b.

                                         43















                                                                     TABLE 3


                          Recent Incidents of Anchoring.at _the Flower Garden Banks Witnessed by _R@searchers




                   DATE         VESSEL                TYPE                  ANCHORING SITE                      REMARKS


                    1978                         Liberian tanker        1/2 mi. from reef crest


                    1978    77-UCO FLORIDA       Tanker                 3/8 mi. from reef crest
                                                                        in 27-30 m (89-98 ft)
                                                                        water depths

                    1979    RACHEL SANCHEZ       Liberian tanker        On nodule terrace              Eeft within 45 min. of
                                                                                                       radio/telephone contact

                    1979    OGDEN CHAMPION       U.S. tanker            East Flower Garden Reef        Destroyed monitoring
                                                                                                       site marker t*ioy

                    2980    WIL.LIAM! LAMAR      Tanker                 Did not anchor -               Left after contact by
                                MELMN                                   Intended to anchor             radio/telephone
                                                                        within 100 m (328 ft)
                                                                        of research vessel


                    1983    NICK CANDIES         Tug and tow            East Flower Garden Reef        Reef damage assessment
                                                 barge                  crest in 24-30 m (79-98        by Continental Shelf
                                                                        ft) water depths               Assoc. Inc.

                     1985                        Oil field              East Flower Garden Reef        Fishing at anchor
                                                 service vessel         crest










          established that both of the Flower Garden Banks, as well as the
          other shelf-edge banks in the region, are salt diapirs.

               The true nature of living benthic communities at the Flower
          Gardens was uncertain until Dr. Thomas E. Pulley, Director of the
          Houston Museum of Natural Science, staged trips to the Flower
          Gardens, using SCUBA divers to make observations and photographs
          and to collect specimens. In 1961, Dr. Pulley published the
          first description of tropical coral reefs occupying the crests of
          the Banks. At present, Pulley's extensive collection of Flower
          Garden corals and mollusks resides in the Houston museum, where
          there is also an excellent display depicting the reef.

               In 1969, Levert and Ferguson published a brief review of
          previous Flower Garden studies and an account of living reef
          facies. At this time, interest in the Flower Gardens as objects
          of scientific study was increasing due to Dr. Pulley's activities
          in the preceding decade. A doctoral dissertation was produced in
          1971 by G. S. Edwards of Texas A&M describing in detail the
          geology and sedimentology of the West Flower Garden. The Flower
          Garden Ocean Research Center, under the direction of Robert
          Alderdice, was created at the.University of Texas Medical Branch
          in Galveston. The results of studies carried out for the center,
          including descriptions of reefal communities to depths exceeding
          150 meters, were published in a 1974 book, Biota of the West
          Flower Garden Bank, edited by T. Bright and L. Pequegnat.

               During the same period it was realized that, because of
          their structure, the outer continental shelf banks could well be
          associated with commercial deposits of oil and gas. Hearings and
          meetings were held by the Department of the Interior in 1973 and
          1974, in part for the purpose of identifying the potential
          environmental impacts of leasing the sea bed in the vicinity of
          the Flower Gardens for petroleum exploration and development.
          Drawing upon existing scientific information about the Banks and
          advice from researchers then working at the Flower Gardens, lease
          stipulations were devised for the reefs. These lease
          stipulations have since been further developed and refined.

               Another result of the combination of industrial interest in
          the offshore banks with concern for their ecological integrity
          was a substantial acceleration of environmental research at the
          Flower Gardens and neighboring structures. In 1974, the U.S.
          Bureau of Land Management (BLM) undertook a modern electronic
          positioning project, finally obtaining an accurate position for
          the Flower Gardens. BLM established a contract with Texas A&M in
          1975 to study the biology, geology and hydrography of the Flower
          Gardens and, eventually, 38 other banks in the northwestern Gulf.
          This multidisciplinary study, known as the BLM Topographic
          Features Study, lasted through 1983 and resulted in the 1985
          publication of Reefs And Banks of the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico
          by three of the principal investigators, R. Rezak, T. Bright and

                                         45










             D. McGrail. This book contains the most thorough account to date
             of the geological, biological and physical dynamics of the Flower
             Gardens and other northwestern Gulf,banks. It'also contains a
             comprehensive bibli6graphy-of*published literaturel reports,,
             theses and dissertations pertaining to these banks. Brightand-
             E. Powell,'with partial.,support from SRD, recently studied And
             described a  unique sulfide-dependent, brine seep ecosystem at the
             East Flower  Garden BAnk. These studies resulted@in the discovery
             of at least  three new species of nematodes, previously unknown to
             science.

                   During a survey conducted immediately after the      damage
             caused by the NICK CANDIES'anchoring in    .1 1983 (se'e 5. Anchoring by
             Large Vessels), precise-positions were-determined,,'16 mm motion-
             picture film-of the damage was; shot, and,numerous,still
             photographs were taken. In addition, repetitive photographic
             transects and quadrants were established, marked and sampled
             within and adjacent to the damaged area. These observations
             served as a basis for the initial damage assessment (CSA, 1984)
             (see Part IV, Section I, B. Environmental Consequences,      .The
             Status Quo-Alternativ'e). In 1985--s1986, Gittings and Bright',
             supported by SRD, again surveyed the site to ass@ess-therecovery
             of the coral. The data from'this survey were analyzed in
             comparison with'damage-assessment data collected two years
             earlier.'@The study'f6und tha"t-all corals for which growth rate's
             were measured appeared to be regrowing and that encrusting growth
             rates along damaged coral borders may be more rapid than growth
             rates along non-damaged borders.

                  As an educational resource, the Flower Gardens has'served as
             the study area for the thesis or dissertation research of at
             least 15 graduate students from regional universities, including
             the University of Texas, Texas A&M, University of Houston, and
             the University of Southwestern Louisiana. Video tapes, movies
             and photographs made at the Flower Gardens have provided material
             for lectures at educational institutions and presentations to a
             variety of interest groups and for educational T.V. shows and
             video news features as well.

                  The Flower Gardens' unique position as the northernmost
             tropical coral reefs on the Atlantic continental shelf, combined
             with their isolation from other comparable reef systems by some
             .300 nautical miles of open ocean will insure continued interest
             in them by researchers. Studies of the Flower Garden reef
             communities may improve our knowledge of the effects of isolation
             and near-stressful environmental conditions on such factors as
             coral recruitment, growth and mortality, reef community structure
             and diversity, and the extent to which reef systems can tolerate
             the effects of man's increasing activity on the outer continental
             shelf. If for no other reason, their protection is justified
             because of their value as a scientific resource.



                                                46










          7.   Ocean Incineration

               Ocean incineration is regulated by the U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to Title I of the Marine
          Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended (33
          USC 1401 et seq). The EPA has designated one deepwater disposal
          .area in the Gulf of Mexico as a site for the incineration of
          toxic wastes. The disposal site, located about 50 nautical miles
          (100 km) south of the Banks (see Figure 3, p. 15), was designated
          in 1976 for the incineration of hazardous wastes for a five year
          period (41 FR 39319 (1976)). It was subsequently redesignated by
          EPA in-1982 for continuing use (47 FR 17817). Burning operations
          require an EPA permit, but currently no permit applications will
          be reviewed until promulgation of the final ocean incineration
          regulations. The site is described in 40.C.F.R. 228,12(b)(1)
          (MMS, 1987).

          8.   Military Activity

               The boundary of Military Warning Area W-602 is located just
          southwest of the proposed Flower.Garden Banks National Marine
          Sanctuary. Military operations within warning areas in the Gulf
          include carrier maneuvers, missile testing,,.rocket firing, pilot
          training, air-to-air gunnery, air-to-surface gunnery,
          minesweeping operations, submarine operations, air combat
          maneuvers, aerobatic training, missile testing and development,
          and instrument training (MMS, 1987).


























                                         47











           Section III: ACTION PLAN

           A.   Overall Management and Development

                The long-term protection of resources is the highest
           management priority for this,plan. Ensuring the protection of
           Sanctuary resources depends on several factors affecting the
           feasibility of proposed programs and actions. Factors affecting
           management of the proposed Sanctuary include: its depth and
           location; its proximity to hydrocarbon development operations and
           shipping lanes; and the need to coordinate the responsibility for
           comprehensive management of the site with other authorities.
           These factors are discussed briefly below.

                Visitor use of the Flower Garden Banks is severely limited
           by their distance from shore and conditions at sea. These
           conditions also present special problems for enforcement efforts
           and research and educational activities. Because of these
           constraints,, and the nature of actions planned for the proposed
           Sanctuary, there is no need for a permanent, on-site Sanctuary
           management structure. Management of the proposed Flower Garden
           Banks National Marine Sanctuary will be the function of a
           sanctuary manager assisted by a small staff.

                Understanding the population dynamics of Flower Garden Banks
           biota on a continuing basis and their interrelation with man's
           activities in the area is of prime importance in protecting these
           resources. The management plan calls for a research effort to
           assess the impact of various human activities on Flower Garden
           Banks ecological communities and the ability of these communities
           to recover from the effects of anchor damage and other injuries.
           Management oriented research studies will provide Sanctuary
           management with a basis for assessing the need for additional
           measures to protect and manage the Flower Garden Banks resources.

                Interested organizations and the public in general will play
           an important role in attaining resource protection goals in the
           Sanctuary. Interpretation programs fostering public
           understanding and support for Sanctuary regulations and
           objectives are inherent in the plan's concept. The
           interpretation program will depend largely on publications and
           exhibits that convey the significance of the Sanctuary's
           resources and the importance of following its regulations.

                The management plan proposes actions tailored to the
           specific issues affecting the Sanctuary. The plan recognizes the
           need for a balanced approach reflecting the multiple use
           character of the area as well as resource protection priorities.
           Implementation of this plan will entail cooperation and
           coordination among several agencies including NOAA, the U.S.C.G.,
           the DOS, and the DOI. Because of the proximity of drilling and
           production operations to the Banks, and the site's relative

                                          48









          isolation, the cooperation of oil and gas industry operators will
          be solicited to assist in cost-effective, on-site management
          activities.

               The plan is designed to guide management of the proposed
          Flower Garden Banks National'Marine Sanctuary for the first five
          years after implementation. During this period, management
          initiatives will generally fall into three basic program areas:
          Resource Protection, Research, and Interpretation. The remainder
          of this section describes guidelines and initiatives for each
          program area.


          B.   Resource Protection

          1.   General Context for Management
               The proposed designation of the Flower Garden Banks as a
          national marine sanctuary focuses attention on the value of the
          area's resources. To ensure that these resources are protected,
          the Sanctuary resource protection program includes: (1)
          coordination of policies and procedures among the agencies
          sharing responsibility for resource protection; (2) participation
          by other agencies and organizations in the development of
          procedures to address specific management concerns (i.e.,
          monitoring and emergency-response programs); and (3) the
          enforcement of Sanctuary regulations in addition to those
          regulations already in place.

          2.   Designation Document and Sanctuary Regulations

               A summary of the existing regulatory regime in the area of
          the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary is
          included in Part III--The Status Quo Alternative. The proposed
          Designation Document (Appendix 1) describes the relationship
          between Sanctuary designation and other regulatory programs. The
          proposed Designation Document also includes:

               0 a list of activities subject to regulation now or in the
               future;

               0 provisions for additional regulations, as necessary.

               To ensure protection of Sanctuary resources and qualities
          and conserve the Flower Garden Banks habitat, NOAA proposes
          regulations governing: exploration for, development, or
          production of oil, gas or minerals; anchoring or otherwise
          mooring? discharging or depositing materials or other matter;
          alteration of the seabed; possessing various marine resources;
          injuring or taking or attempting to injure or take Sanctuary
          resources; possessing or using explosives or releasing electrical
          charges; feeding fish; and possessing (except while passing

                                          49









          without interruption through the Sanctuary) or using fishing gear
          except conventional hook and line gear. (This is   *a summary., See
          the regulations themselves for specifics.) NOAA also proposes,
          for areas of the Sanctuary where oil, gas,. and mineral activities
          are allowed (i.e., outside the no-activity zones), a requirement
          to shunt all drilling cuttings and fluid 's to the seabed through a
          downpipe that terminates an appropriate distance, but no more
          than ten meters, from the seabed. A more detailed summary of
          these regulations iS found in Part III, Section It A.

          3.   Contingency Plans for Major Emergencies.

               The resources of the proposed Flower Garden Banks National
          Marine Sanctuary are susceptible to natural and human-related
          changes. Many of these changes are gradual and can be detected
          only througli long-term monitoring of various environmental- and
          biological indicators. However, certain changes in conditions
          (due to an accidental oil spill,,for example) could seriously
          impact resourcesand present severe health and safety.hazards.

               Under the National Contingency Plan for the removal of oil
          and hazardous substances, remedial action.to control or remove
          such material is the responsibility of Regional Response Teams
          acting through an on-scene Coordinator.and.a.Regional Response
          Center. The Galveston Marine Safety Office, 8th USCG District
          provides.on-scene coordination and Regional Response Center
          facilities for response to oil or hazardous substance spills in
          the area of the Flower Garden Banks.

               Toprovide further protection to Flower Garden Banks,
          resources, the,SRD will assess and monitor the state of
          preparedness as it relates to the Sanctuary. This action will
          entail exchanging information with government and industry
          response teams and seeking their support in assessing detection
          and clean-up capabilities that can be used to protect Sanctuary
          resources.

               A SRD-level contingency and emergency-response plan is now
          under preparation. After its completion, a Sanctuary-specific
          contingency and emergency-response plan'will be prepared. This.
          plan will:

               0 describe emerqency response procedures and  coordination
               requirements;

               0 outline procedures  for emergency research; and

               0 provide damage assessment guidelines.

               In conjunction with this plan, agreements   may be formulated,
          to improve spill detection programs and.augment containment


                                          50









          capabilities (i.e., with additional equipment, personnel, and
          deployment plans)..

          4.   Encouraging Compatible Use of the Sanctuary

               Encouraging the public to use the Sanctuary in ways that are
          compatible with the'protecti6n of significant resource's is an
          important aspect of'the resource program. SRD willencourage
          compatible visitor use'by undertaking the following:

               0 Monitoring commercial and recreational activities in the
               Sanctuary and encouraging other agencies to do so to detect
               incidents of particular management-concern;

               6 Exchanging information on commercial and recreational.
               activities in the Sanctuary;

               0 Consulting with other agencies on policies and
               proposals for the management of activities which may
               affect protection of Sanctuary resources; and

              .6 Displaying.Sanctuary boundaries on nautical charts
               Iwith a notice summarizing Sanctuary regulations
              @governing anchoring and vessel dipcharg Ie.s.

               0 Developing brochures' and other information materials
               for the purpose of enhancing public awareness of the
               Sanctuary's resources and their need for protection.

               Monitoring and information exchange programs are dealt with-
          further under research (Subsection C). The development of
          informational materials is discussed.further under interpretation
          (Subsection D).

          5.   Surveillance and'Enforcement

               The greatest problem in the enforcement of Sanctuary
          regulations to protect Flower Garden Banks resources will be
          surveillance. Neither NOAA nor the-USCG has the resources to
          conduct systematic surveillanceafid enforcement operations to
          ensure compliance with Sanctuary regulations. However, both the
          USCG and the MMS conduct operations in the area. The USCG may be
          able to provide limited surveillancd.in conjunction with multi-
          mission, surface or aerial operations. MMS inspectors,
          traversing the area to monitor oilexploration and production
          operations, may occasionally be able to provide information
          useful in identifying and prosecuting violators of Sanctuary
          regulations. Additional surveillance information could be
          provided by personnel'working on offshore platforms a 'nd by boat
          operators in the area. NOAA,plans to initially rely on observers
          from other agencies and cooperating organizations, including
          excursion and service boat operators, to provide surveillance

                                          51









           information. Suspected violations will be reported'to the
           Sanctuary Manager, who will investigate the reports and take
           appropriate action. Emphasis will be placed onresponding to
           reports of'violations and pursuing enforcement actions. The
           reporting of violations by vessels,at the site will be
           facilitated by putting violation reporting instructions in the
           notice on nautical charts.

                The enforcement program is expected to'be sufficiently
           strong to deter widespread violation of SanctUary regulations.
           However, because of the remoteness of,the site, compliance with
           regulations is dependent more than usual on effective information
           transfer, coupled with the cooperation of users. Information
           development and dissemination will theteforebe a high priority
           to engender voluntary compliance with Sanctuary regulations.

           (a) Public-Education and Information

                Because the most effective enforcement is prevention, the
           Sanctuary interpretation program will make every effort to inform
           visitors of the need to use the Sanctuary environment wisely.
           Much of this effort will involve the preparation of easily
           understood brochures and other materials on Sanctuary
           regulations, and the reasons for them.' These materials will be
           made available to all Sanctuar'           . ;  ally through
                                         y users, princip
           information centers and outreach programs.

           (b) Planning and Coordination*
                information obtained through the'research program and
           surveillance and enforcement efforts on Sanctuary use patterns,
           frequently occurring violations, and potentially sensitive
           resources will be evaluated periodically by the Sanctuary Manager
           to assess the adequacy of surveillance efforts.


           C.   Research

           1.   General Context for Management

                Effective management of the Flower Garden Banks National
           Marine Sanctuary requires the inauguration of a'Sanctuary
           research program that addresses management issues. Research
           funded by the SRD will be directed toward improving knowledge of
           the Sanctuary's environment and resources and how they may be
           affected by'various types of human activity@ SRD-sponsored
           research at the Flower Garden Banks will be planned and monitored
           throug h the headquarters office. To avoid duplication of effort
           and achieve maximum benefits from the research, SRD will
           coordinate its research efforts with those of MMS and other
           agencies. The general direction of the research program and the


                                           52









          process for preparing an annual Sanctuary Research Plan is
          discussed below.


          2.   Framework for Research

               The res earch program consists of three generic project
          categories:

               0 Baseline studies to gather additional data on the
               features and processes of the ecosystem and to describe
               the pattern of human activity in the Sanctuary;

               0 Monitoring to document changes in environmental
               quality, ecology, and human activity; and'

               0 Analysis and prediction studies to determine the
               causes and effects of environmental and ecological
               changes.

               Each of these categories is described in more detail below:

          (a) Baseline Studies

               A considerable body of scientific baseline information on
          the Flower Garden Banks has been produced by the research studies
          of the past 30.years (see Part II, Section II. C..6. and Part
          VII). However, improved, management-oriented,,baseline
          information is needed on such factors as the characteristics and
          environmental effects of.user activities. For example, more
          needs to be known about vessel traffic patterns in the area and
          the type and intensity of recreational use. A particularly
          worthwhile study would be an assessment.of the effects of
          recreational-vessel anchoring on coral at various projected use
          levels to provide data needed in evaluating alternative mooring
          systems.

               With respect to scientific research, studies of active salt
          diapirism, associated faulting, and consequent uplift or sinking
          of the reefs could be important as basic research, and therefore
          of interest to other funding agencies. Such studies could also
          generate data on geological processes that may affect coral
          growth, recruitment and survival as well as biotic ionation,
          community structure and similar ecological relationships of
          interest in managing the resources. other research opportunities
          include studies of the sulfide-dependent, brine seep ecosystem at
          East Flower Garden Bank, which could result in a better
          understanding of similar systems existing elsewhere.

               Although the potential for research at the Flower'Garden
          Banks remains substantial,, research at the sites has been, and
          will continue to be, relatively expensive because of the need for
          comparatively large research vessels and because research divers

                                          53










           must operate at depths in excess of 65 ft (20 m). The'use of
           submersibles, one of the most effective research tools for sites
           such as the Flower Garden Banks, is especially costly.

           (b) Monitoring

                Effective sanctuary management requires a continuing  program
           of data collection on natural processes and human activities that
           may modify the environment or the ecology within a sanctuary.'
           These data must providean understanding of what is happening to
           the resources and an indication of their relative health.
           Properly implemented, monitoring results in data indicative@of
           the health of resources and provides the means for detecting
           environmental.and ecological trends.

                The Sanctuary research program should include monitoring
           studies of-dischlarges from offshore oil and gas operations in the
           area and studies to monitor the dynamics of species recruitment,
           growth, mortality, abundance, distribution and competition for
           space on the coral and algal reefs capping the Banks. Changes in
           these processes, especially as they relate to the dominant corals
           and calcareous algae, could indicate the existence of natural or
           man-caused threats to Bank resources.

           (c) Analysis and Prediction

                In addition to baseline research and monitoring, the
           Sanctuary research program will include studies, as needed, to
           analyze the causes and consequences of changes in the ecosystem
           and to predict the effects on it of new or more intense human
           activity in the area. Such studies will be concerned with the
           investigation of specific problems or issues affecting the status
           of resources. A study of this type was recently supported by the
           SRD to assess the recovery of coral on East Flower Garden two
           years after the infliction of anchor'damage,to the reef by the
           anchoring of the NICK CANDIES (see Part,II, Section II, C. 5, 6,
           and 7).

                Analysis and prediction studies could be useful-in resolving
           a number of management problems that might arise after Sanctuary
           designation. For example, if the monitoring program indicates
           that a substantial increase in recreational boat anchoring on the
           reefs is causing unforeseen damage to the coral, a study could be
           initiated to determine the need for further restrictions on
           anchoring and to evaluate the risks and advantages of implanting
           additional mooring buoys.







                                          54









          3. Selection and Administration of Research Projects

               To ensure that projects considered for funding by the SRD
          are directed to the resolution of management issues and concerns,
          the Sanctuary Project Manager will follow procedures, developed by
          SRD to ensure that each Sanctuary's research program is
          consistent with National Marine Sanctuary Program policies.
          These procedures include: preparing an annual Sanctuary Research
          Plan (SRP) and monitoring the progress of research in the
          Sanctuary.

          (a) Preparing n Annual Plan

               Each year a SRP will be prepared for,the Flower Garden Banks
          National Marine Sanctuary. The SRP will then be incorporated
          into a national-plan that includes annual plans for each
          sanctuary. Steps involved in the annual planning process
          include:

               '0 Management issues for the Sanctuary with supporting@
               evidence or rationales are identified and listed.

               0 Research priorities based on the list,of management issues
               are established. The most important factors to be
               considered in establishing annual research-priorities will
               be the following:

                    (1) Immediate or evolving management issues
                    that may be resolved through directed
                    research projects;

                    (2) The prospects of research already-in
                    progress; and

                    (3) The availability of funds, instruments
                    and equipment for,research support.

               0 Research workshops are held on an occasional basis to
               facilitate the identification of research problems. ,
               After the management issues and research:,priorities are
              -developed, a draft SRP is prepared.

               0 The draft SRP is circulated by the SRD for peer,
               review.

               0 A final SRP is prepared. This SRP includes documentation.,
               of how each project meets the national selection criteria.
               The final SRP is then incorporated by SRD into a National
               Sanctuary Research Plan. The highest ranking research
               projects are.selected from the national plan for funding.



                                          55









                0 A research announcement and request for proposals
                (RFP) is prepared. The announcement discusses management
                concerns and summarizes past and on-going research. Its
                purpose is to solicit proposals from the scientific
                community for specific research to carry out the SRP.

                If research proposals include activities that are prohibited
           by Sanctuary regulations, a permit to conduct these activities
           may be issued by NOAA, or it may be determined that all or part
           of the activities should be conducted outside the Sanctuary. As
           noted earlier, coral collection is allowed only for research or
           educational-purposes and requires the issuance of a permit. The
           permit must specify the type and amount of coral to be taken, as
           well as the location and time of intended collection. A report
           of the collecting procedure and results is required after the
           project has been completed. Research also may require additional
           research permits from other agencies.

           (b) Resegrch Supervision

                The Sanctuary Project Manager will monitor the performance
           of research projects and keep records of research underway,
           equipment being used on site, frequency of researchers' visits,
           and progress to date. Performance reports and draft and final
           technical reports will be required as well as conformance to
           schedules outlined under the terms of the contract. Draft
           technical reports may be reviewed by recognized scientists and
           resource managers before approval by the SRD. Outstanding
           project reports will be published by the SRD in its Technical
           Report Series.

           4.   Information Exchange

                Direct SRD funding for research is limited. To complement
           directly funded research, the SRD will encourage research funded
           from other sources particularly where it supports Sanctuary
           management objectives. 'In this regard, the SRD will make.
           available to other agencies and private institutions current
           Sanctuary resource data obtained from past and ongoing research
           projects.


           D.   Education

           1.   General Context for Management

                Increased public understanding and appreciation of the
           natural value of Flower Garden Bank resources is essential for
           their protection. The interpretation program for the Flower
           Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary will be focused on
           improving public awareness of the Sanctuary and its resources and
           of the Sanctuary regulations designed to protect them.

                                          56









           2.   Interpretation opportunities and Programs

                The type of information to be conveyed to the public about
           the Flower,Garden Banks is similar to that offered in relation to
           other habitat-oriented marine sanctuaries. The primary
           difference relates to the distance from shore of the Flower
           Garden Banks and the concomitant need to provide information to
           user groups whose activities could have an adverse impact on
           Flower Garden resources or who may otherwise play a role in
           resource protection.

                Educational programs for the Flower Garden National Marine
           Sanctuary will fall into three broad categories: interpretation
           for visitors to the site, interpretation for visitors to
           information centers, and outreach programs by Sanctuary
           personnel.

           (a) Site Visitor Programs

                Interpretation for visitors to the Flower Garden Banks will
           consist of written material describing the Sanctuary and
           explaining its regulations. Information materials will be
           available at information centers (see (b), below) and will also
           be sent to excursion boat operators,known to have an interest in
           taking groups to the Flower Garden Banks.

           (b) Information Center Programs

                Information on the Flower Garden Bankst consisting of
           displays, video 'sequences, or brochures and other literature will
           be made available at selected information centers in coastal
           Texas and Louisiana. SRD is evaluating such information outlets
           for Texas, including Padre Island National Seashore; Aransas
           National Wildlife Refuge; Texas A&M Sea Grant Marine Information
           Service; the Houston Museum of Natural Science; the Texas
           Aquarium; and Texas State Coastal Parks such as Sea Rim,
           Galveston Island, and Mustang Island. Similar outlets will be
           considered for establishment at such Louisiana sites as McNeese
           University in Lake Charles; Louisiana universities Marine
           Consortium in Cocodrie; Louisiana Nature and Science Center and
           the New Orleans Aquarium in New Orleans; Louisiana Department of
           Wildlife and Fisheries' Natural Heritage Program; Department of
           Natural Resources' Coastal Management Division; and LSU's Sea
           Grant Program in Baton Rouge.

           (c) Outreach Programs

                The outreach program will stress efforts to provide
           information to special-interest groups and industry associations
           that present a potential threat to Flower Garden Banks resources
           or that may otherwise play a role in resource protection. The
           major targets of outreach efforts will be merchant vessels bound

                                          57









          to and from Corpus Christi, Houston and New Orleans and other
          nearby ports; the crews of offshore platforms and platform
          service vessels based largely in Morgan City, Louisiana; and
          commercial fishermen operating primarily out of Pensacola,
          Florida.

               Other projects will include the preparation of brochures,
          films, slides, and other materials for use in educational
          presentations in the school systems, by private organizations and
          the media. For example, numerous high quality video tapes and
          photographs from all depths at the Flower Garden Banks are
          available through the Texas A&M Department of Oceanography.
          These could be used effectively to construct presentations on
          such themes as biotic community structure and distribution; the
          snapper-grouper fishery; the brine seep ecosystem; salt daipirism
          and the geologic origin of the Banks; oil and gas operations.;
          sport diving; and research, including the use of-research
          submersibles.









































                                          58









          Section-,IV... Administration


              A.   Administrative Framework

              This section of the management plan describes the roles of
          the agenciesthat will.be i'nvolved in Sanctuary management,
          proposes strategies to coordinate their activities, and provides,
          for periodic evaluation of the effectiveness. ofthe management
          plan. Sanctuary management consists,-of three functions: resource
          protection, research, and interpretation. Administration -
          oversees these functions and establishes who is@responsible for
          implementing specific programs. The administrative framework
          also ensures-that all management activities are coordinated.

              The-SRD is responsible for the overall-management of the
          proposed.Flower Garden,Banks National Marinesanctuary. The SRD
          coordinates its on-site activities with the U.S. Coast Guard
          (USCG), the Minerals Management Service (MMS), and the Department
          of State. The general administrative role of each agency is as
          follows.


          1.  Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

              The National Marine Sanctuary Program is administered by the
          SRD. A site-specific management plan is prepared for each
          sanctuary to ensure that on-site activities in resource
          protection, research, and interpretation are coordinated and
          consistent with sanctuary goals and objectives.

              The SRD establishes policies and procedures in response to
          specific issues in the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
          Sanctuary and develops a sanctuary budget setting out
          expenditures for program development, operating costs, and
          staffing. Funding will be reviewed and adjusted annually to
          reflect the priorities and requirements of the National Marine
          Sanctuary Program and evolving conditions at the Flower Garden
          Banks. Detailed SRD responsibilities are listed below.

              The Sanctuary Manager for the Flower Garden Banks reports
          directly to the SRD. The Sanctuary Manager has responsibility
          for all day-to-day activities affecting the Sanctuary and is its
          primary spokesperson.

          2.  U.S. Coast Guard

              The USCG is responsible for enforcing all Federal laws in
          navigable waters under U.S. jurisdiction. The USCG also manages
          operations for the control and removal of oil and hazardous
          substances resulting from offshore spills and is responsible for
          regulating vessel traffic and maintaining boater safety,
          including the coordination of rescue operations.

                                         59









          3.   Minerals Management service

               The MMS is charged with the management of OCS hydrocarbon
          and mineral exploration, development and production. This
          responsibility includes-the formulation and enforcement of
          special lease stipulations designed to protect specific
          geological and biological features.

          4.   Department of State

               The Department of State provides policy guidance on
          activities involving foreign policy issues and international law.


          B.   Resource Protection: Roles and Responsibilities.

          1.   Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

               (a) Develops funding priorities for resource protection;

               (b) Develops and monitors the effectiveness of interagency
               agreements for surveillance and-enforcement and negotiates
               changes where required;

               (c) Develops contingency and emergency-response plans and,
               based on these plans, negotiates applicable interagency
               agreements;

               (d) Monitors the effectiveness of existing sanctuary
               regulations and promulgates changes where necessary;

               (e) Coordinates efforts to manage and protect Sanctuary
               resources with other Federal and international agencies and
               with public and private organizations; and

               (f) Evaluates overall progress toward the resource
               protection objectives of the National Marine Sanctuary
               Program.

          2.   U.S. Coast Guard

               (a) Enforces all Federal laws in the Sanctuary as the
               availability of enforcement personnel and resources permits;
               and

               (b) Provides on-scene coordination and Regional Response
               Center facilities under the National Contingency Plan for
               the removal of oil and hazardous substances in the event of
               a spill that threatens the Sanctuary.




                                         60









          3.   Minerals Management Service

               (a) Enforces lease stipulations in the Flower Garden Banks
               area, including the prohibition of anchoring on the reefs by
               oil and gas production service vessels.

          4.   Department of State

               (a) Provides counsel to ensure that regulatory
                    proscriptions are applied against foreign persons and
                    foreign-flag vessels in accordance with international
                    law and applicable international conventions.

          C.   Research: Roles and Responsibilities

               1.   Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

               (a)  Prepares an annual Flower Garden Banks Sanctuary
                    Research Plan (SRP) based on management requirements
                    and research continuity;

               (b)  Prepares an annual National Research Plan (NRP) and
                    budget based on the SRP's of individual sanctuaries and
                    in accordance with priorities determined at the
                    national level;

               (c)  Sets dates for procurement based on the NRP;

               (d)  Administers interagency agreements and contracts for
                    research;

               (e)  Monitors research activities in the Sanctuary and
                    coordinates Sanctuary research program with research
                    activities sponsored by MMS and other agencies;

               (f)  Reviews all interim and final research reports; and

               (g)  Issues permits, through OCRM, for research activities
                    to ensure consistency with Sanctuary regulations and
                    provides for additional technical review where
                    necessary.

          2.   Minerals Management Service

               (a) Sponsors research in support of the OCS leasing
               program.









                                          61










          D.    Interpretation: Roles and Responsibilities

          1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

                (a)  Prepares an.annual list of priorities for
                     interpretation and an annual budget;

                (b)  Administers interagency agreements and contracts for
                     interpretation;

                (c)  Encourages local and regional organizations to
                     participate in sanctuary interpretation;

                (d)  Disseminates information about the National Marine
                     Sanctuary Program and the Flower Garden Banks National
                     Marine Sanctuary;

                (e)  Evaluates progress towards accomplishing objectives for
                     interpretation, adjusting long-term priorities
                     accordingly; and

                (f)  Issues permits, through OCRM, for education activities
                     to ensure compliance with Sanctuary regulations and
                     provides additional technical review where necessary.

          E.    General Administration: Roles and Responsibilities

          1.    Sanctuaries and Reserves Division

                (a)  Ensures that'the Sanctuary is operated in a manner
                     consistent with established National Program policies
                     and with applicable national and international laws;

                (b)  Formulates long-term management plans for the Sanctuary
                     and revises them as necessary;

                (c)  Directs the implementation of the management plan;

                (d)  Identifies, analyzes, and resolves Sanctuary management
                     problems and issues;

                (e)  Coordinates sanctuary management with Federal agencies,
                     organizations and private citizens;

                (f)  Evaluates the effectiveness of Sanctuary management and
                     regulatory measures;

                (g)  Prepares a program budget for the Sanctuary; and





                                          62









              (h) Provides funding for overall sanctuary management and
                  administration.


        F.    Staffing Levels

              The management of the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
        Sanctuary will rely during the first year on a Sanctuary Manager
        assisted by a secretary. An Assistant Sanctuary Manager will be
        employed during the second year of operation. The details of
        further staffing will be determined during the first two years of
        operation. However, it is anticipated that additional support
        and technical staff will eventually be needed on a part-time or
        seasonal*basis. Such personnel may include enforcement rangers
        and part-time or seasonal interpretation or education specialists
        to staff excursion-boat cruises and information centers and to
        provide outreach services.


        G.    Visitor Center Facilities

              Sanctuary information distribution points will be
        established at suitable locations in the Texas and Louisiana
        coastal-regions (See Section III, D).



























                                        63










          PART III: ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE











          PART III: ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE


               In evaluating the proposal to designate the Flower Garden
          Banks National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA has analyzed institutional,
          boundary, regulatory, and management alternatives in terms of
          achieving optimum protection of the ecosystem, improving
          scientific knowledge of the area and promoting public
          understanding of the value of Bank resources. This section
          describes the alternatives considered in the evaluation process.
          Part IV describes the environmental consequences of the
          alternatives described below.

               The fundamental choice of alternatives is between the two
          institutional alternatives: (1) no action or continuing the
          status quo and (2) the preferred alternative, Sanctuary
          designation, as a complementary measure to existing programs.
          Boundary, management and regulatory alternatives are considered
          in the context of the preferred institutional alternative.


          Section I: The-Status Ouo Alternative

               The proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
          is located well beyond the limits of state authority and is
          therefore wholly under the jurisdiction of Federal statutes. The
          Federal agencies with primary existing responsibilities in the
          area of the Flower Garden Banks are the Minerals Management
          Service (MMS) of the Department of the Interior; the National
          Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of NOAA, Department of Commerce;
          the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) of the Department of Transportation;
          and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This section will
          review the responsibilities of these agencies in the Flower
          Garden Banks area. Additional information on existing
          authorities is provided in Appendix II.

               The MMS is responsible for regulating activities associated
          with offshore oil and gas exploration and development in
          accordance with the provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf
          Lands Act. The MMS has established biological lease
          stipulations, applied on a lease-by-lease basis, to mitigate the
          potential impact of oil and gas exploration and development
          activities on high relief banks of the Gulf of Mexico OCS. The
          stipulations include the establishment of no-activity zones to
          protect the biological resources of the Flower Garden Banks. The
          no-activity zones are somewhat larger than the areas over the
          Banks encompassed by the 100 meter isobaths.

               Current lease stipulations provide that no oil development
          activities, including anchoring or the emplacement of structures,
          drilling rigs, or platforms, are allowed within the no-activity

                                          65









                                   r'         Ition ap               c      les
            zones. Thus the ancho inq prohib          plies only to a tiviti
            associated with MMS-regulated OCS oil and gas development. Lease
            stipulations for development operations within the four-nautical
            mile zones extending beyond the no-activity zones require
            shunting all drill cuttings and drilling fluids from development
            operations to the bottom through a downpipe that terminates an
            appropriate distance, but no'more than 10 meters, from the
            bottom.

                 The NMFS is charged,  under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation
            and Management Act, with approving and enforcing fishery
            management plans (FMPs) prepared by regional fishery management
            councils. The NMFS relies heavily on theUSCG for enforcement
            operations. Flower Garden Banks resources regulated by FMPs
            include coral and coral reefs and reef fish. The FMP for coral
            and coral reefs is particularly important in the present
            regulatory regime. The'regulations implementing the FMP for
            coral and coral reefs establishes a.Habitat Area of Particular
            Concern (HAPC) at the Flower Garden Banks. The boundaries,of
            this HAPC is the 50 fathom (300 foot) isobath around each Bank.
            Within the HAPC, fishing for coral and the use of toxic chemicals
            to collect fish or other marine organisms is prohibited except as
            authorized by a scientific or educational permit under the FMP
            regulations. Fishing With bottom longlines, traps, pots or
            bottom trawls is also prohibited. 50 CFR Part 638.

                 The regulations implementing the FMP for reef fish resources
            of the Gulf of Mexico, 50 CFR Part 641, set bag and size limits,
            place restrictions on the use of certain types of fishing gear,
            and establish reporting and permit systems. They also prohibit
            the use of poisons and explosives to take reef fish; however,
            they allow powerheads to be used outside of stressed areas (the
            Flower Garden Banks are not a stressed area for reef fish.) They
            also prohibit vessels in the reef fish fishery from possessing on
            board any dynamite or similar explosive substance.

                 The U8CG, in addition to its enforcement of fishing and
            other regulations, is responsible for enforcing regulations under
            the Clean Water Act, the Act to Prevent Pollution From Ships and
            the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which regulate discharges of oil,
            hazardous substances and other pollutants. The USCG is also
            responsible for coordinating spill response activities under the
            National Contingency Plan and for regulating vessel traffic,
            maintaining boater safety, and conducting search and rescue
            operations.

                 EPA administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
            System (NPDES) under the authority of the Clean Water Act. The
            NPDES permit for discharges near the Flower Garden Banks and
            other topographic features requires no operational restrictions
            on discharges as long as the MMS biological stipulations,
            establishing no-activity zones and requiring shunting in buffer

                                            66









         zones.beyond, are in effect. If these stipulations cease to be
         applied, EPA may require a variety of restrictions, including
         limitations on discharge rates or a full prohibition on
         di,scharges.

              EPA also has regulatory responsibilities with regard to
         ocean dumping. Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and
         Sanctuaries Act prohibits the transportation of materials from
         the United States for the purpose of dumping them into ocean
         waters without a permit from EPA (the Corps of Engineers in the
         case of dredged materials).

              Under the status.quo alternative, existing activities and
         controls would continue as presently administered. These
         regulatory activities are.not performed in the context of a
         comprehensive management plan, and there are no restrictions on
         anchoring by vessels other than those associated with OCS oil and
         gas development operations (see Part IV, Section I, B.
         Environmental Consequences, Status Quo Alternative).
































                                        67









           Section II: Designation as a National Marine Sanctuary

               This alternative, NOAA's Preferred Alternative, proposes to
           designate the East and West Flower Garden Banks as a national
           marine-sanctuary, in accordance with the provisions of Title III
           of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972,
           as amended (16 U.S.C. 1431 et sea.). The alternative is
           detailed in Part II of this document, the Sanctuary Management
           Plan.' Through the management plan and the implementing
           regulations (Appendix I), this alternative protects the Banks,
           resources and vital habitat, offers research opportunities, and
           provides for an interpretation program to enhance public
           awareness of the Flower Garden Banks. This program is not
           possible under any of the existing institutional structures
           alone.

                The preferred boundaries, Alternative 1, were selected
           because they roughly encompass the depth of reef-building
           organisms. These boundaries are somewhat larger than the MMS no-
           activity zones, and larger than the HAPC established by the Coral
           Fishery Management Plan. They encompass the present boundaries
           of the MMS no-activity zones, rounded out to allow easy
           identification of the boundaries of the Sanctuary for enforcement
           purposes. The management and regulatory alternatives included in
           Alternative 1 were selected because they are more cost-effective
           than other alternatives and conform closely to the goals of the
           National Marine Sanctuary Program.

                The preferred alternative will cost some $200,000 per year
           or $650,000 over five years. Approximately one-half of these
           funds will be allocated to research and one-half to resource
           protection and interpretation.


           A.   RegulatorvZBoundary Alternatives

                A number of regulatory/boundary options were identified in
           the evaluation process. These options were narrowed to three
           regimes, which were then considered in terms of (1) the
           distribution of living resources requiring protection;
           (2). regulatory issues; and (3) management concerns.

           1.   Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 1

                This alternative, the preferred alternative, establishes a
           sanctuary of 41.70 square nautical miles (143.02 square
           kilometers), 19.20 square nautical miles (65.85 square km) at the
           East Bank and 22.50 square nautical miles (77.17 square km) at
           the West Bank (Figure 14). As stated above, the alternative
           encompasses the no-activity zones established by MMS at each of
           the Flower Garden Banks (see Section I, Status Quo Alternative).
           The Sanctuary boundaries, however, have been rounded out to allow

                                           68













                                                                                                                                              X 355                A-354               A.3s3



                                                                                                                         TERNATIVE BOU,,DAR,
                                       4.547                                                                                                                                                          AST FL(WER
                                                                                                                         A 363               A.                                                      9ABI)EN BANK
                                                                                                                                                                                                          A-367              A-361




                                       A-572
                                                                                                    A'379                X378
                                                                                                                                                                 A-376                A,375                 A.
                                 HIGH ISLAND                                                    HIGH ISLAN AREA            EAST ADDITI           so      EXTENSION                          Pi
                                                                                                                                                                                             +                 ERNATIVE SouNDAR,
                                  UTH ADDMO                              WES      LOWER                                                                                                      ION
                                                                         GARDFN BANK
                                                          A-                  A-383
                                                                        so         2                                   A.355                A-396               A-397
                                                                                                                                                                                                             389


                                                                                                                                                                                                                 VE     UN


                                                                                 399              A.3ee                                                                                              95               96
                                                                                                                                        A-                     A-395                                                                       97
                                                                                           10 A(:Mfy Zof*




                                172                                                                             33S                                                                                                    140                 141
                                                                             A401
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        GARDEN      RANKS



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      I
                                           BREA__"@                      GARDEN BANKS                                             -.8-D                  lei                 182                  183                  184                 185
                                    EAST         'S
                                216                217                   177-
                                                                                                                                       r I C




                                                                 --2-21                     222                 223                  224                 225                 226                  227                 226                  229                .230


                                                    LEGEND                                                               UNIVERSAL TRANSVERSE MERCATOR SYSTEM                                                              UNITED STATES - GULF COAST
                                                                                                                                             ZONE 15                                                                                GULF OF MEXICO
                                            DIG171ZFD TURNING POINTS FOR                                                      PLANE r1JURDINATE VAIMES ARE IN FEFT                                                          SOUTHEAST OF GALVESTON
                                            ALTERNATIVE SOUNDARI EB I &I
                                                                                                                                       NAUTICAL MILES
                                                                                                    wit                                                                                                      PROPOSED EAST AND WEST FLOWER
                                                  Figure 14                                                                                                  El                                              GARDEN BANKS MARINE SANCTUARY
                                                                                                                              0       1      2       3       4      5









            easy identification of areas managed under the Sanctuary for
            enforcement purposes.

                 Under this alternative, fourteen prohibitions and one
            affirmative requirement would apply to activities that NOAA has
            determined might adversely impact sanctuary resources and
            qualities. The fourteen prohibitions are:


                 (1) Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or
                 minerals within a no-activity zone.

                 (2) Anchoring or otherwise mooring within the Sanctuary a
                 vessel greater than 100 feet (30.48 meters) in registered
                 length.

                 (3) Anchoring a vessel of less than or equal to 100
                 feet (30.48 meters) in registered length within an area of
                 the Sanctuary where a mooring buoy is available.

                 (4) Anchoring a vessel within the Sanctuary using more than
                 fifteen feet (4.57 meters) of chain or wire rope attached to
                 the anchor.

                 (5) Anchoring a vessel within the Sanctuary using anchor
                 lines (exclusive of the anchor chain or wire rope permitted
                 by (4) above) other than those of a soft fiber or nylon,
                 polypropylene, or similar material.

                 (6) Discharging or depositing, from within the boundaries
                 of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter except:

                      (i) fish, fish parts, chumming materials or bait used
                      in or resulting from fishing with conventionalhook and
                      line gear in the Sanctuary;

                      (ii) biodegradable effluents incidental to vessel use
                      and generated by marine sanitation devices approved in
                      accordance with Section 312 of the Federal Water
                      Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C.ï¿½ 1322;

                      (iii) water generated by routine vessel operations
                      (e.g., cooling water and deck wash down, and graywater
                      as defined by Section 312 of the Federal Water
                      Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1322)
                      excluding bilge pumping; or

                      (iv) engine exhaust.

                 The prohibitions in this paragraph (6) would not apply to
                 the discharge, in areas of the Sanctuary outside the no-
                 activity zones, of drilling cuttings and drilling fluids

                                           70









               necessarily discharged incidental to the exploration for,
               development of, or production of oil or gas in those Areas
               unless such discharge injures a Sanctuary resource or
               quality. (See below for the shunting requirement applicable
               to such discharges.)

               (7) Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundaries
               of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter, except those
               listed in paragraph (6)(i)-(iv) above, that subsequently
               enters the Sanctuary and injures a Sanctuary resource or
             .quality.

               (8) Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the
               seabed of the Sanctuary (except by anchoring); or
               constructing, placing or abandoning any structure, material
               or other matter on the seabed of the Sanctuary.

               (9) Injuring or removing, or attempting to injure or
               remove, any coral or other bottom formation, coralline algae
               or other plant, marine invertebrate, brine-seep biota or
               carbonate rock within the Sanctuary.

               (10) Taking any marine mammal or turtle within the
               Sanctuary, except as permitted by regulations, as amended,
               promulgated under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, as
               amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1361 et sea., and the Endangered
               species Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1531 et sea.

               (11) Injuring, catching, harvesting, collecting or feeding,
               or attempting to injure, catch, harvest, collect or feed,
               any fish within the Sanctuary by use of bottom longlines,
               traps, nets, bottom trawls or any other gear, device,
               equipment or means except by use of conventional hook and
               line gear.

               (12) Possessing within the Sanctuary (regardless of where
               taken, collected, caught, harvested or removed), except for
               valid law enforcement purposes, any carbonate rock, coral or
               other bottom formation, coralline algae or other plant,
               marine invertebrate, brine-seep biota, fish (except for fish
               caught by use of conventional hook and line gear), turtle or
               marine mammal.

               (13) Possessing or using within the Sanctuary, except
               possessing while passing without interruption through it or
               for valid law enforcement purposes, any fishing gear,
               device, equipment, or means except conventional hook and
               line gear.

               (14) Possessing, except for valid law enforcement purposes,
               or using explosives or releasing electrical charges within
               the Sanctuary.

                                         71











                Note: (a) The regulatory prohibitions would not apply to
            (see the-regulations themselves for the exact provisions):

                i)   Activities necessary to respond to emergencies
                threatening life, property or the environment.

                ii) With regard to Department of Defense activities:
                activities being carried out as of the effective date of
                Sanctuarydesignation; activities that have no potential for
                any significant adverse impacts on Sanctuary resources or
                qualities; and activities having the potential for
                significant adverse impacts that are exempted by NOAA after
                consultation between NOAA and the Department of Defense.
                (There would be requirements that the Department of Defense
                carry out its activities in a manner that minimizes any
                adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and qualities and that
                it, in the event of threatened or actual destruction of,
                loss of, or injuring to a Sanctuary resource or quality
                <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="245641575148504d4a436442564b490a454a">[email&#160;protected]</a> untoward incident including resulting but
                not limited to spills and groundings, caused by it, promptly
                coordinate with-NOAA for the purpose@of taking appropriate
                actions to respond to and mitigate the harm, and, if
                possible, restore or replace the Sanctuary-resource or
                quality.

                iii) Activities authorized by a National Marine Sanctuary
                permit. (Such-permits may b Ie granted if NOAA finds that the
                proposed.activity will: further research related to
                Sanctuary resources; further the educational, natural or
                historic resource value of the Sanctuary; further salvage
                recovery operations in or near the Sanctuary in connection
                with a recent air.or marine casualty; or assist in managing
                the Sanctuary.)

                iv). Activities authorized by a valid lease, permit, other
                authorization or right in existence on the effective date of
                Sanctuary designation, provided that the holder complies
                with any terms and conditions on the exercise of such
                authorization or right imposed by-NOAA as a condition of
                certification as deemed necessary to achieve the purposes
                for which the Sanctuary is designated.

                V)   Activities authorized by a valid lease, permit or other
                authorization issued@after the effective date of Sanctuary
                designation, provided that NOAA notifies the applicant and
                authorizing agency that it does not object to issuance of
                the authorization and the applicant complies with any terms
                and conditions-NOAA deems necessary to protect Sanctuary
                resources and qualities.


                                            72









               (b) Regulatory prohibitions 2, 4, 5, 8, and 14 would not
          apply to necessary activities conducted in areas of the Sanctuary
          outside the no-activity zones and incidental to exploration for,
          development of, or production of oil or gas in those areas.

               (c) In no event would NOAA be allowed to issue a permit
          authorizing, or otherwise approve, the exploration for,
          development of, or production of oil, gas, or minerals in a no-
          activity zone.

               The affirmative requirement imposed by Alternative 1 is, in
          areas of the Sanctuary where oil, gas and mineral activities
          would be allowed (i.e., outside the no-activity zones) to shunt
          all drilling cutting and fluids to the seabed through a downpipe
          that terminates an appropriate distance, but no more than ten
          meters, from the seabed.

               Prohibitions, restrictions and conditions validly imposed by
          any other Federal authority would remain in effect, provided,
          however, that if any valid regulation issued by any other Federal
          authority, regardless of when issued, conflicts with a Sanctuary
          regulation, the regulation deemed by NOAA as more protective of
          Sanctuary resources and qualities shall govern.

               Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 1 is compatible with the
          existing MMS regime for OCS oil exploration and development and
          the Coral Fishery Management Plan for the Flower Garden Banks
          HAPC. The no-activity zone boundaries follow the 100 m (328 ft)
          isobaths around each Bank, and include some areas outside of the
              m isobath. The horizontal distance between the 50 m
          isobaths, which contain the coral reef zones, and the 100 m
          isobaths is 400 to 4,430 m (1,300 to 14,500 ft) at the East Bank
          (Bright, 1977) and 300 to 1,000 m (1,000 to 3,300 ft) at the West
          Bank (Bright and Pequegnat, 1974).

               The preferred alternative would thus provide adequate buffer
          zones around the Flower Garden Banks coral reefs to protect them
          from damage resulting from large-vessel-anchoring. NOAA has the
          authority under existing international law, and NOAA intends. to
          apply its anchoring regulations, including.prohibition, to
          foreign flag vessels. This view is shared by the Department of
          State and Congress. NOAA consulted with the Department of State
          as the regulations were being drafted.



               2.   Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 2

               This alternative establishes a sanctuary area of 25.94
          square nautical miles (88.97 square km), 12.93 square nautical
          miles (44.35 square km) at the East Bank and 13.01 square
          nautical miles (44.62 square km) at the West Bank. The

                                         73









             alternative encompasses all waters within the 100 meter isobaths
             surrounding each of the two Banks (Figure 14). The regulatory
             regime under this alternative would be identical to the one
             embodied in Alternative 1, except:

                  A. (1) would be changed to read:

                  Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals
                  within the Sanctuary.

                  B.    Because of the change in (1), (6) would be shortened to
                  delete the exception for drilling cuttings and fluids; (b),
                  regarding regulatory prohibitions 2, 4, 5, 8,, and 14, would
                  be deleted; and the shunting requirement would be deleted.

                  This alternative, like the preferred alternative, would
             provide management "tailored to specific resources" in accordance
             with the goals of the National Marine Sanctuary Program, and it
             is compatible with existing MMS stipulations and the Coral
             Fishery Management Plan. However, the 100 m isobaths around the
             Banks are so irregular that the boundaries cannot be plotted by
             geographic coordinates for enforcement purposes.

             3.   Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 3

                  This alternative would establish a sanctuary of 259.22
             square nautical miles (889.09 square km) and would encompass an
             area of approximately four nautical miles (7.4 km) around the
             Banks (Figure 14). As with Alternative 1, the sanctuary would be
             divided into two different regulatory zones: (1) the core, no-
             activity zones (see Status Quo Alternative) and (2) the remaining
             buffer area extending from the no-activity zones to the sanctuary
             boundaries.

                  In addition to the sanctuary regulations described under the
             preferred alternative, the following restrictions would apply:

                  (a) In areas of the sanctuary outside the no-activity
                  zones:
                        (1) Bulk discharges of drilling fluids or
                        drilling muds must be found by NOAA to be
                        consistent with the purpose of the sanctuary
                        and to result in no significant adverse
                        impact to sanctuary resources.

                        (2) The effects of this discharge of
                        drilling fluids, drilling muds, cuttings or
                        produced water, must be certified by NOAA to
                        be adequately monitored. Such certification
                        shall include the condition that it shall be
                        revoked or suspended if the monitoring


                                              74









                    discloses significant adverse impacts on
                    sanctuary resources.

               (b) Permits issued prior  to the effective date of
               these regulations are not subject to the monitoring
               certification requirements of this section for a period
               of one year from such effective date.

               In substance, this was the preferred alternative in the
          proposed rules for the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
          Sanctuary published on June 26, 1980 (45 Federal Register 43205)
          (1980). As noted in Part I, Section E, History of the Proposal,
          after these regulations were proposed NOAA dropped the site from
          consideration as a national marine sanctuary.

               This alternative would protect Flower Garden Banks resources
          and incorporate the entire 4-mile zones established by MMS around
          the Banks. NOAA recognizes that activities occurring in the 4-
          mile zones may potentially generate pollutants that could
          threaten the significant resources of the Flower Garden reefs.
          NOAA therefore agrees that the reefs must be protected from the
          possible adverse impacts of buffer zone activities. Alternative
          1 requires drilling operations to comply with a sanctuary
          regulation prohibiting discharges and deposits that enter the
          sanctuary and injure a sanctuary resource or quality. NOAA
          believes that this regulation, applying to other discharges and
          deposits as well as drilling wastes, provides broad protection to
          sanctuary resources. NOAA has also modified Alternative 1 by
          including a shunting requirement for oil and gas activities in
          the sanctuary (which are allowed only in the areas outside the
          no-activity zones).

               The goal of the National Marine Sanctuary Program is to
          designate discrete areas of special national significance to
          promote effective conservation of their resources, in this case
          the coral and associated resources within the 100 meter isobaths
          surrounding each of the Flower Garden Banks. These coral reef
          areas are particularly susceptible to anchor damage, but they
          would be adequately protected under the preferred altermnative.
          NOAA is of the opinion that the Alternative 1 boundaries, which
          encompass the present boundaries of the no-activity zones,
          rounded out to allow more easy identification of the boundaries
          of the sanctuary for enforcement purposes, are more in keeping
          than the Alternative 3 boundaries with section 922.1(c)(2) of the
          National Marine Sanctuary program regulations (15 CFR Part 922),.
          which states that sanctuary size will be no larger than necessary
          to ensure effective management.

               With respect to activities within the no-activity zones,
          NOAA agrees that the alternative 3 provision explicitly
          prohibiting hydrocarbon exploration, development or production
          within these zone provides stronger protection than the

                                          75









           prohibition on altering the seabed, the primary means of
           regulating hydrocarbon activities within these zones under
           Alternative 1. NOAA has therefore modified Alternative 1 by
           incorporating into it an explicit prohibition of hydrocarbon
           exploration, development and production activities within the
           no0activity zones. Thus modified, Alternative 1 remains the
           preferred alternative.


           B.   Management Alternatives

                Two management alternatives were identified and considered
           in terms of (1) resource protection, research, and interpretation
           and (2) cost-effectiveness.

           1.   Management Alternative 1

                Under this alternative, a Project Manager on the staff of
           the SRD in Washington, D.C. would oversee the management and
           administration of the sanctuary, at least for the next three to
           five years. Surveillance of sanctuary activities for resource
           protection would rely on cooperating organizations and
           individuals to report suspected violations, which would then be
           investigated by an enforcement officer provided by NOAA or
           contracted for on an as needed basis.


                This alternative would reduce the administrative costs of
           the resource protection, research and interpretation programst
           but the lack of an on-site manager would make it difficult for
           management to be aware of sanctuary problems and to respond to
           them effectively.

           2.   Management Alternative 2

                Under this alternative, the preferred alternative, NOAA
           would establish a site-specific management and administrative
           system for the Flower Garden Banks sanctuary in an appropriate
           location in the Texas/Louisiana coastal region. Using this
           approach, minimum staffing needs entail the employment of a
           Sanctuary Manager and secretary the first year at a cost of about
           $50,000 and an assistant sanctuary manager the second year at an
           additional cost of about $25,000. office space would be leased
           at an estimated cost of $10,000 per year. The total cost of this
           alternative for personnel and administration is estimated at
           about $70,000 the first year and $90,000 the second year.

                The Sanctuary Manager would represent SRD in the day-to-day
           administration and management of the sanctuary. His/her
           responsibilities would include local management of the
           enforcement, interpretation and research programs.



                                           76










          PART IV: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES










           PART IV: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

                 In selecting institutional, boundary, regulatory, and
           management alternatives for the proposed Flower.Garden Banks
           National Marine Sanctuary, NOAA evaluated the environmental
           consequences of their implementation., This section discusses
           these consequences.


           Section I: Environmental Conseguenc   es of Alternatives


            A.    Sanctuary Designation-The Preferred Alternative

                 The preferred alternative would promote resource protection
           in three ways. First, it would bolster the existing regulatory
           and enforcement regime. second, it would establish an integrated
           research program focused on management-related issues facing the
           sanctuary. Third, it would include an interpretation program to
           strengthen public' understanding of the importance of the Banks'
           coral-reef habitat 's and of the need for a long-term comprehensive
           management framework to protect them.

           1.    Resource Protection Regime

                 The proposed designation is designed to improve the existing
           regulatory regime by instituting new regulatory measures and,
           where feasible, by augmenting surveillance and enforcement
           activities. The primary environmental consequences of the
           proposed designation would result from these measures. 'The
           proposed regulations for the sanctuary include restrictions on
           exploration for, development, or production of oil, gas or
           minerals; anchoring or otherwise mooring; discharging or
           depositing materials or other matter,-, alteration of the seabed;
           possessing various marine resources; injuring or taking or
           attempting to injure or take sanctuary resources; possessing or
           using explosives or releasing electrical charges; feeding fish;
           and possessing (except while passing without interruption through
           the sanctuary) or using fishing gear except conventional hook and
           line gear. (This is a summary. See the regulations themselves
           for specifics.) NOAA also proposes, for areas of the sanctuary
           where oil, gas, and mineral activities are allowed (i.e., outside
           the no-activity zones), a requirement to shunt all drilling
           cuttings and fluids to the seabed through a downpipe that
           terminates an appropriate distance, but no more than ten meters,
           from the seabed., See Par t II1, Section II for a list of
           exceptions. The potential impacts of each regulation are
           discussed below.






                                            78









         (a) Hydrocarbon and Mineral Exnloration. Development and
              Production

              Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals
         within the no-activity zones would be prohibited. Such
         activities are currently prohibited by the MMS stipulations on a
         lease-by-lease basis. This sanctuary regulation makes the
         prohibition permanent. Another sanctuary regulation would make
         the following MMS stipulation also permanent in the Sanctuary:
         Persons engaged in the exploration for, development of, or
         production of oil or gas in areas of the Sanctuary outside the
         no-activity zones must shunt all drilling cuttings and drilling
         fluids to the seabed through a downpipe that terminates an
         appropriate distance, but no more than ten meters, from the
         seabed.

         (b) Vessel Anchoring

              Anchoring or otherwise mooring by"veasels of over 100 feet
         in registered length would be prohibited within the sanctuary.
         This and all other regulatory provisions would be applied to ,
         foreign persons and foreign vessels in accordance with recognized
         principles of international law, and in accordance with treaties,
         conventionst and other international agreements to which the
         United States is a party. (See also Part III Section II, A. 1.)
         Anchoring under emergency conditions would not be affected, and
         the prohibition would have no socio-economic impact.

              The prohibition on anchoring by large vessels is considered
         the most important provision in the'proposed regulations for the
         protection of sanctuary resources. It closes a gap in the
         existing regulatory regime that has resulted in extensive damage
         to the Flower Garden Banks coral reefs. The primary threat to
         these reefs is presented by.vessel anchoring (see Subsection B,-
         The Status Quo Alternative). Because the Flower Garden Banks
         coral reef zones occur within the 50 m isobaths around each Bank,
         this prohibition an anchoring within the Sanctuary (which is at
         all points greater than or equal to the 100 m isobath) provides
         substantial protective buffer zones around the reefs (see Part
         III, Section II, A. 1. Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 1). The
         prohibition should cause no hardship to vessel operators.

              Under the regulations, vessels of less than or equal to ' 100
         feet in registered length would not be permitted to anchor in
         areas of the sanctuary where a mooring buoy is available. They
         would, however, be permitted to anchor in areas of the sanctuary
         where a mooring buoy is not available provided that they use
         anchor lines of soft fiber, nylon, polypropylene, or similar
         material with no more than 15 feet of chain or wire rope attached
         to their anchors. This provision would reduce anchor damage
         caused by recreational boats while allowing continued
         recreational activity.

                                         79









                Requiring recreational boats and other boats less than or
           equal to 100 feet in registered length to anchor on sand flats
           was considered, but does not appear to be practical. The sand
           flats at the Flower Garden Banks reefs are small and are thus
           difficult anchoring targets (Blood, 1978, personal
           communication). Moreover, if anchors are successfully lowered
           into these areas, they may be dragged near or into the corals
           before taking hold. Such anchoring near coral heads could result
           in chafing by anchor chains that damage the coral. The
           restriction on the type of anchor lines used, however, would
           provide some protection-even though anchoring on coral is
           permitted under certain circumstances as indicated above.
           Requiring recreational boatersto anchor completely outside of
           the reef zone would offer more protection, but would eliminate
           most recreational use of the reefs. The water beyond the reefs
           is too deep for most anchoring and its distance from attractive
           reef diving sites would make diving unsafe.

                Permitting recreational boats and other boats less than or
           equal to 100 feet in registered length to anchor on the reefs in
           the absence of mooring buoys would involve accepting the
           possibility of some continuing anchor damage to corals, but at
           least such anchoring Would be unlawful where buoys are installed
           over the reefs. Mooring buoys could be placed in sand flats
           within safe diving distance of-attractive dive sites or in good
           fishing areas, very few of which are over the reefs. In addition
           to their use as mooring stations, these buoys could serve to mark
           reef areas for navigation and surveillance by sanctuary
           enforcement officers.

                A potential disadvantage to a mooring buoy system is that it
           could result in a concentration of recreational use in particular
           areas in the sanctuary. These areas would be expected to
           experience more littering, souvenir collecting, and handling of
           corals than other areas of the sanctuary. Such activities,
           although prohibited, can be expected to occur and to -impact
           resources at buoy sites. Present use levels, however, would
           probably not cause great impacts to resources.

                If use levels increased to the point where severe impacts
           resulted, it might be possible to mitigate the effects of
           concentrated use by initiating.a rotational system whereby only a
           portion of the buoys would be available at any one time.
           Alternatively, the buoys could be moved to spread the impact'of
           concentrated use more evenly throughout the sanctuary.

                The.,restrictions on anchoring (except the one regarding
           anchoring vessels of less than or equal to 100 feet in areas of
           the sanctuary where a mooring buoy is available) would not apply
           to necessary activities conducted in areas of the Sanctuary
           outside the no-activity zones and incidental to the exploration
           for, development of, or production of oil or gas in those areas.

                                           80









             @'If the regulations' restrictions on an choring and the use of
          anchor lines by recreational vessels or other vessels less than
          or equal to 100 feet do not adequately prevent damage to Flower
          Garden Banks corals, other.regulatory management options are
          available. NOAA could further restrict or prohibit all anchoring.

          (c) Discharges,

               it would be prohibited for any person to discharge or
          deposit within the boundaries of the sanctuary any material or
          other matter of any kind or description except: fishl fish parts,
          chumming materials-or bait used in or resulting from fishing with
          conventional hook and line gear in the sanctuary; biodegradable
          effluents incidental to vessel use and generated by marine
          sanitation devices approved in accordance with Section 312,of the
          Federal Water Pollution Control Act; water generated by routine
          vessel operations (e.g,.- cooling water, deck wash down, and
          graywater as defined by Section 312 of the Federal Water
          Pollution Control Act) excluding oily wastes from bilge pumping;
          or engine exhaust.

               This prohibition would not apply to the discharge, in.areas
          outside of the no-activity zones, of drilling cuttings and fluids
          necessarily discharged incidental to the,exploration.for, - .
          development of, or production of oil or gas in those areas unless
         .such discharge injures a Sanctuary resource or quality.-
          Depositing or discharging, from beyond the boundaries of the
          sanctuary,any@material or other matter except for the exclusions
          discussed above would also be prohibited if it enters the
          sanctuary and injures a sanctuary resource or quality.
          Additionally, there would be a regulatory requirement of shunting
          of drilling cuttings and fluids for persons engaged in oil and
          gas activities in the sanctuary outside the no-activity zones.


               The discharges that probably produce-the-most public concern
          are those involving oil and hazardous'substances. From 1974.to.
          1981, there were 81 oil spills of more than 1,000 barrels in U.S.
          waters. Forty-one of the spills were in the Gulf of Mexico: 35
          in port,and three at sea (The Futures Group,1982). During this
          period, however, there were only four spills of crude oil from
          outer continental shelf oil and gas facilities, including
          pipelines, that were greater than 1,000 barrels. Although the.
          sanctuary.regulations establish a scheme of strict liability and
          therefore of course apply to spills,-spills, because they are
          unintentional, cannot be totally deterred by sanctuary
          regulations. It is hoped that the sanctuary regulations.that
          prohibit discharges will be very successful in deterring
          intentional discharges and deposits.

               'The regulations would, for example, prohibit the use in the
          sanctuary of chumming materials for purposes other than

                                          81









           conventional hook and line fishing, for example to bring fish
           into the area to be viewed or photographed. This practice has
           been found to change the behavior of some fish in the Florida
           marine sanctuaries.

                These regulations would also prohibit the disposal of solid
           matter, e.g., fishing lines and plastic or metal objects. marine
           mammals, turtles, and birds may eat or become entangled in solid
           wastes. The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, as amended by
           the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987,
           and its implementing regulations prohibit the the disposal of
           plastic or garbage mixed with plastic into the Exclusive Economic
           Zone, whichtincludes the sanctuary. They do not, however,
           prohibit the disposal of paper, rags, glass, metal bottles,
           crockery and similar refuse in the sanctuary. The sanctuary
           regulations would. Such refuse may reduce the aesthetic
           qualities of the reefs and thereby detract from their
           recreational value and may also pose a risk to marine mannals,
           turtles and birds, who may eat them. These regulations would
           also prohibit dredged-material disposal within the sanctuary.

                The impact of adhering to these regulations on the
           operations of vessels and oil platforms is expected to be minor.
           Potentially harmful wastes, i.e., wastes not falling under one of
           the exceptions to the regulations, would have to be retained on
           vessels until they could be disposed of properly. If a valid
           regulation issued by another Federal authority conflicts with a
           sanctuary regulation, the more protective regulation shall
           govern.

                The disposal of dredged material in Flower Garden Banks'
           waters has not been proposed in the past, does not now occur, and
           the area seems unlikely to become attractive for this purpose in
           the future. This prohibition makes permanent the existing
           situation and should thus have no burdensome impact on dredge
           disposal activities.

           (d) Altering the Seabed

                Altering the seabed for purposes of hydrocarbon exploration
           and development is presently prohibited within the no-activity
           zones by MMS lease sale stipulations. This sanctuary regulation
           would prohibit drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the
           seabed for any purpose, or unintentionally, other than by
           anchoring. (The regulatory restrictions on anchoring are
           described above.) The regulation would also prohibit
           constructing or abandoning any structure, material or other
           matter on the seabed of the sanctuary. The regulation would not
           apply to necessary activities conducted in areas outside the no-
           activity zones and incidental to exploration for, development of,
           or production of oil or gas in those areas. The regulation would
           ensure the protection of sanctuary resources from, for example,

                                          82









           all dredging and construction operations. It is not expected to
           have any socio-economic effects. Construction of any structure
           and any excavation or fill activity in the territorial sea or on
           the outer continental shelf is already prohibited without a
           permit from the Corps of Engineers under section 10 of the Rivers
           and Harbors Act, 33 U.S.C. 403.


           (e) Injuring or Removing sanctuary Resources

               It would be prohibited to injure or remove, or attempt to
           injure or remove, any coral or other bottom formation, coralline
           algae or other plant, marine invertebrate, brine-seep biota or
           carbonate rock within the Sanctuary. This regulation would go
           beyond the regulations implementing the coral fishery management
           plan in two ways: 1) the latter regulations only cover the 50
           fathom isobath; and 2) As indicated above, the sanctuary
           regulation addresses more than just coral and coral reefs.

           (f) Taking Marine Mammals or Turtles

               It would be prohibited to take any marine mammal or turtle
           within the Sanctuary, except as permitted by regulations, as
           amended, promulgated under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, as
           amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1361 et 'sea., and the Endangered Species
           Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1531 et sea. This regulation would
           track the Marine Mammal Protection Act and Endangered Species Act
           with regard to marine mammals and turtles.

           (g) Catching or Feeding Fish

               Injuring, catching, harvesting, collecting or feeding, or
           attempting to injure, catch, harvest, collect or feed, any fish
           within the Sanctuary except by use of conventional hook and line
           gear would be prohibited within the Sanctuary. This regulation
           would go beyond the regulations implementing the coral fishery
           management plan in three main ways: 1) the latter regulations
           only cover the 50 fathom isobath; 2) the sanctuary regulations
           would prohibit spearfishing; and 3) the sanctuary regulations
           would prohibit fish feeding. This regulation is not expected to
           diminish recreational or commercial opportunities in the
           sanctuary significantly. Hook and line fishing is by far the
           most popular and successful method used by commercial and
           recreational fishermen to catch reef fish. During the period
           1972-1974, 94 percent of all reef fish taken were caught with
           handlines. This fishing method would not be restricted by the
           sanctuary regulations, except, however, that use of bottom
           longlines would be prohibited and fishing with bottom longlines
           is already prohibited with the 50 fathom isobath by the
           regulations implementing the fishery management plan for coral
           and coral reefs. 50 CFR Part 638.



                                           83










          Fish feeding would be prohibited because it is believed to
          significantly alter the behavior of fish by disrupting normal
          feeding patterns.


          (h) Possession of Resources

               The sanctuary regulations would also prohibit the following:
          possessing within the Sanctuary (regardless of where taken,
          collected, caught, harvested or removed) any carbonate rock,
          coral or other bottom formation, coralline algae or other plant,
          marine invertebrate, brine-seep biota, or fish (except.for fish.
          caught by use,of conventional hook and line gear). The
          regulations implementing the coral fishery management plan do.not
          contain a prohibition on possession. This sanctu  'ary,regulation
          would.aid the enforcement of the prohibitions discussed under
          (e), (f) and (g) above.

          (i) -Possession of Fishing Gear

               Possessing or using within the Sanctuary, except possessing
          while passing without interruption through it, any fishing.gear,
          device or equipment except conventional hook and line gear would
          be prohibited. The regulations implementing the coral reef
          fishery management plan do not contain a prohibition on
          possession, only use.. This regulation would aid the enforcement
          of the sanctuary regulation discussed under (g).

          (j) Possession or Use of Explosives or Release of Electrical
               Charges

               Possessing or using explosives or releasingelectrical
          charges within the Sanctuary would be prohibited. The intent of
          this prohibition'is to protect Sanctuary resources from the
          harmful effects of explosives and electrical.charges. The
          regulations implementing the fishery management plan for reef -
          fish in.the Gulf of Mexico, 50 CFR Part 641, already prohibit the
          use of explosives to take reef fish and prohibit vessels in the
          reef fish fishery from possessing any dynamite or similar
          explosive substance. The use of explosives and electrical charges
          in seismic operations, for example, has been documented to be
          lethal or damaging to fish eggs and larvae, disturbing to fish
          and other marine life, and possibly destructive to commercial
          fishing gear (Gulf of Mexico Sales 131, 135, and 137: Central,
          Western and Eastern Planning Areas DEIS, USDOI, MMS, 1990).

               One exception to the Sanctuary regulatory prohibition has
          been carved out in order to allow necessary activities conducted
          in areas of the Sanctuary outside the no-activity zones and
          incidental to exploration for, development of, or production of
          oil or gas in those areas.

                                          84










          (k) Enforcement

               The impact of the enhanced surveillance and enforcement
          efforts focused on sanctuary resources should be beneficial.
          Enforcement at the sanctuary will focus on a coordinated program
          with emphasis on resource protection at the Banks rather than an
          elaborate surveillance and enforcement presence.

          2.   Research and Interpretation

               The impacts resulting from-the implementation of the
          research and interpretation programs are expected to be positive.
          The research program should result in a coordinated mechanism for
          studying the sanctuary's resources-and developing effective
          management strategies. The research program would provide a'
          coordinated effort to obtain management-oriented data,6n the
          sanctuary environment and resources and possible impacts on them
          resulting from projected levels of human activity. These data
          can then be used in formulating measures to preserve the health
          of sanctuary resources.

               The interpretation prog ram would improve public awareness of
          the importance and fragility of the Flower Garden Banks resources
          and thus engender support for resource protection efforts. 'The
          program would provide audiovisual material, exhibits, and other
          information products for individuals, schools and interested
          groups.

          3.   Boundary Alternatives

               All three regulatory/boundary alternatives would protect the
          coral and associated resources at the,Banks. Both of the first
          two regulatory/boundary alternatives provide protection to-the
          areas of significant coral and associated resources, but the
          second, the preferred alternative@ would present fewer
          enforcement problems because it rounds out the Sanctuary -
          boundaries so they can be plotted by geographic coordinates for
          enforcement purposes. The third alternative would also protect
          the critical core areas of the Flower Garden Banks coral reefs,-
          but it would incorporate the entire 4-mile zones established by
          MMS around the Banks.

               NOAA recognizes that activities occurring in the 4-mile
          zones may potentially generate pollutants that could threaten the
          significant resources of the Flower Garden reefs.. NOAA therefore
          agrees that the reefs must be protected from the possible adverse
          impacts*of buffer zone activities.@ Alternative 1 requires
          drilling operations comply with a sanctuary regulation
          prohibiting discharges and deposits that enter the sanctuary and
          injure a sanctuary resource or quality. NOAA@believes that this
          regulation, applying to other discharges <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="accdc2c8ecc8c9dcc3dfc5d8df82cddf">[email&#160;protected]</a> well as

                                          85









           drilling wastes, provides broad protection to sanctuary
           resources. NOAA has also modified Alternative 1 by including a
           shunting requirement for oil and gas activities-in the sanctuary
           (which are allowed only in the areas outside the no-activity -
           zones). NOAA is therefore of the opinion that the Alternative 1
           boundaries, which encompass the present boundaries of the no-
           activity zones, rounded out to allow more easy identification of
           the boundaries of the sanctuary for enforcement purposes, are
           more in keeping than the Alternative 3 boundaries with section
           922.1(c)(2) of the National Marine Sanctuary program regulations
           (15 CFR Part 922), which states that sanctuary size will be no
           larger than necessary to ensure effective management.

                With respect to activities within the no-activity zones,
           NOAA agrees that the Alternative 3 provision explicitly
           prohibiting hydrocarbon exploration, development or production
           within these zones provides stronger protection than the
           prohibition on altering the seabed, the primary means of
           regulating hydrocarbon activities within these zones under
           Alternative 1. NOAA has therefore modified Alternative 1 by
           incorporating into it an explicit prohibition of hydrocarbon
           exploration, development and production activities within the no-
           activity zones. Thus modified, Alternative I remains*the
           preferred alternative.

           4.   Management Alternatives

           Alternative 1 is less costly, but Alternative 2 is far more
           effective in day-to-day management and in responding to emergency
           situations.



           B.   The Status Ouo Alternative

                Under the status cruo, the Flower Garden Banks would not have
           the degree of management or protection warranted by the
           significance of their marine resources. In the existing regime,
           management is provided by individual Federal agencies, each of
           which is responsible for regulating specific activities under the
           authority of statutes directed to specific and sometimes narrow
           objectives. Although this regime is able to provide some degree
           of protection to Flower Garden Banks resources against most
           potentially damaging human activities, it, for example, provides
           no protection from the effects of anchoring by large vessels,
           considered the most serious continuing threat to the Flower
           Garden Banks coral reefs (MMS, 1987), and it provides less
           protection from discharges and harmful fishing practices than
           would sanctuary regulations.

                The MMS stipulations (see Part III,, Section I), prevent most
           of the impacts to the Flower Garden Banks that may result from
           OCS oil and gas development. Such impact producing factors

                                          86









          include oil spills, blowouts, structure emplacement, and drilling
          discharges, as well as anchoring by vessels engaged in drilling
          and production activities. The protection provided by the MMS
          stipulations, however, is not permanent. The stipulations are
          imposed on a lease-by-lease basis and can be modified or
          eliminated at any time.

              Oil spills may result from sea-surface sources (tanker
          accidents, platform leaks) and seafloor sources (pipeline
          accidents, oil well blowouts). Most small spills occur from
          surface sources, while medium-sized or large spills are equally
          likely to occur from surface or seafloor sources. Although it is
          possible that spills from seafloor sources could impinge directly
          on the Banks and cause significant adverse impacts to the biota,
          the probability of such a spill occurring and reaching the Flower
          Garden Banks is low (MMS, 1987). The threat of a seafloor spill
          directly over the Banks has currently been eliminated by MMS1
          establishment of the no-activity zones. If a subsurface spill
          were to occur under normal conditions nearby, the contaminants,
          instead of being deposited on the reefs, would be swept around
          the banks by the subsurface currents (Rezak et al., 1985).

               The Flower Garden Banks coral reefs are also currently
          protected from the effects of oil industry construction and
          drilling discharges by the MMS stipulations. Construction
          activities by the oil industry are prohibited within the no-
          activity zones, and restrictions on the disposal of drilling
          wastes within four mile zones beyond the no-activity zones
          require them to be shunted to the bottom. The MMS notes (MMS,
          1987) that "shunting of drilling effluent to the nephloid layer
          contains the effluent to a level deeper than the level of the
          living reef of a high relief topographic feature. Shunting is
          therefore an effective measure for protecting the biota of high
          relief topographic features (Bright and Rezak, 1978; Rezak and
          Bright, 1981; and NAS, 1983). Biological effect on the benthos
          from the deposition of unshunted discharge is mostly limited to
          within 1,000 m of the discharge (NAS, 1983).11

               A large blowout occurring near a biologically sensitive area
          could have severe environmental consequences. Large amounts of
          sediment resuspended by a blo@out could smother coral communities
          causing mortality. Accordingito MMS (MMS, 1987), the biological
          stipulation "would not protect the banks from the adverse effects
          of ..... a large blowout on a nearby oil or gas operation.
          Fortunately, blowouts are rar6 in the Gulf." Because of their
          rarity, blowouts generally pose far less environmental risk than
          do oil spills. Since 1970, no oil spill of 1 bbl or more has
          occurred as a result of a blowout during drilling operations.
          Moreover, the amount of oil pollution during blowouts has been
          decreasing. The amount of gas escaping during a blowout is
          difficult to determine; however, no identifiable environmental


                                          87










           damage was caused by blowouts during the period 1979-1984 (MMS,'
           1987).

                Aside from their rarity,lblowouts are unlikely  to damage-the
           Flower Garden Banks because of the greater depth of  the water
           outside of the no-activity zones where drilling may  occur.' The
           flow of water at the base of the Flower Garden Banks is so *
           strongly stratified-that little vertical motion is possible as
           the,flow encounters the banks.' The"flow then diverges around the
           banks with a very modest vertical excursion (on the order of 10
           m) on the point of the banks where the flow diverges (Rezak et
           al., 1985). Consequently, the contaminants from blowouts'would
           normally be swept around the banks by the currents instead of
           being deposited on the reefs.

                The Flower Garden Banks are not as well protected from-the
           impact of other activities as they are from oil and gas
           exploration and development. The amount of@petroleum entering'
           Gulf waters from vessels engaged in maritime transportation, most
           of it as the result of operational discharges from tankers, is
           eight times the amount caused by offshore oil exploration and
           production (MMS, 1987). Although the Clean Water Act (CWA)
           provides for the establishment'of the National Contingency Plan
           to contain, disperse, or remove oil and'hazardous substances
           after a spill (Part II, Section III), neither this act nor the
           Protocol of 1978 Relating to the International Convention for the
           Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, contains 'a general
           prohibition on the discharge of oil and hazardous substances into
           waters beyond 50 nautical miles (93 km) from the shore. The
           Flower Garden Banks, being more than twice that distance from
           shore and only 6 nautical miles (11"km) from a major shipping
           fairway, are located in a general area where vessel discharges  of
           oil or oily,mixtures might,be expected.

                Small surface spills, however, are unlikely to have any
           significant impact on the health of Flower Garden Banks corals.
           oil from surface spills, driven into the water column to depths
           of 33 ft (10 m), is foundonly at concentrations several orders
           of magnitude lower than those shown to have an effect on corals.
           oil released in surface-spills@and driven 50 ft (15 m) deep to
           the shallowest point on the Flower Garden Banks would be in such
           low concentrations that it would have no impact on these reefs
           (MMS, 1987)., Chronic oil pollution in shallow-waters above the
           reefs could, however,'damage the environment aesthetically'and
           thus detract from the recreational value of the area.

                Although the CWA does not specifically prohibit  the
           discharge 'of oil and other hazardous substances in the vicinity
           of the Flower Garden Banks, it does prohibit such discharges in
           harmful quantities "which may affect natural resources.-.under
           the exclusive management authority of the United'States.19
           Moreover, the EPA permit under the National Pollutant Discharge

                                           88









          Elimination System for,discharges near the Flower Garden Banks
          requires compliance with the MMS biological stipulations that
          establish no-activity zones and requiring shunting in buffer
          zonesbeyond. If these stipulations cease to be applied, EPA may
          require a variety of restrictions, including limitations on
          discharge rates or a full prohibition on discharges. Further,
          the Oil Pollution Act of 1990provides that any party responsible
          for'the di scharge, or the substantial threat of discharge, of oil
          into the Exclusive Economic Zone is liable for removal costs and
          damages.

               The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, as amended by the
          Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987, and
          its implementing regulations prohibit the disposal of plastic or
          garbage mixed with plastic into the Exclusive Economic Zone.
          They do not,,however, prohibit the disposal 12 nautical miles and
          more from themearest land of.paper, tags, glass, metal bottles,
          crockery and similar refuse. Such litter may reduce the
          aesthetic qualities of the reefs and thereby detract from their
          recreational value and may also pose a risk,to marine mammals,
          turtles and birds, who may eat them.

               Anchoring in the no-activity zones by vessels engaged in oil
          and gas exploration and development activities is prohibited on a
          lease by lease basis by MMS, but neither MMS nor NMFS has the .
          authority.to regulate anchoring by other vessels, e.g., vessels
          engaged in maritime commerce. Thus anchoring by these vessels
          continues to pose the greatest continuing threat to Flower Garden
          Banks resources.

               A good example of the extent of damage caused by anchoring
          is contained in a report prepared by Continental Shelf
          Associates, Inc. (1984), describing the October 1983 anchoring by
          a tug, M/V NICK CANDIES, and tow barge at the East Flower Garden
          Banks (see Part II, Section II, C. 5. Anchoring). The impacted
          area was on the coral reef between 55 and 90 ft (17 m and 27 m)
          depths. Newly broken and overturned coral heads, gouges and
          abrasions were observed in a band approximately 10 ft (3 m) wide
          extending for 200 ft (61 m) or so across the shallower portion of
          the.lanchor drag. The band of damage narrowed to about 5 ft (1.5
          m) in deeper water, but extended.for an additional length of 400
          ft (12'2 m).. Damage was considerably less on the deeper part of
          the drag. Swimming approximately 150 ft (46 m) along the shallow
          dam aged area,.Bright counted 205 damaged coral heads (Bright,
          1985b). The "softer" corals (Colipophyllia.and Diploria) suffered
          more extensive disruption than did the more solidly built forms
          (e.g. Montastrea).

               The NMFS regulations implementing the coral fishery
          management plan make it unlawful without a scientific or
          educational permit to fish for coral or to use toxic chemicals to
          take fish or other marine organisms. Fishing with bottom

                                           89









            longlines, traps, pots or bottom trawls is also prohibited. (See
            Part III, Section I). The proposed Flower Garden Banks marine
            sanctuary regulations are substantially similar (see Part III,
            Section-II),'but the sanctuary regulations would Apply within the
            100 m (328 ft) isobath around each Bank, whereas the NMFS
            regulations apply within the 50 fathom.(300 ft) isbbath only-
            Further, the sanctuary regulations would prohibit-spearfishing
            and fish feeding.   Moreover, the penalties for violating
            sanctuary regulations would be more severe than those for
            violating the regulations issued under the coral fishery
            management plan. Sanctuary regulations should therefore be more
            effective in deterring prohibited activities.

                 Finally, little literature or other educational information
            on the Flower Garden Banks and its habitat values is available to
            the general public. The public is largely unaware of the Banks'
            existence. Conse'quefitly, there is no informed public that can
            appreciate the worth of its resources and support efforts to
            protect them.

                 Under the status -quo alternative, existing activities and
            controls will continue as presently administered. Although this
            regime affords some protection to Flower Garden Banks reefs, it
            does not provide the protection needed, especially from large-
            vessel anchoring. Despite the widely acknowledged natural
            significance of the Banks, there is no comprehensive plan for the
            management of the Banks' resources and no organizational
            structure to coordinate research and regulation and apply
            research findings to.the resolution of management issues.


            Section II: Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Effects

                 No unavoidable adverse environmental impacts due to the
            implementation of the management plan and regulations are
            foreseen.



            Section III: Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the
            Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term
            Productivity

                 Sanctuary designation emphasizes the importance of the
            natural resources of Flower Garden Banks. The quality of the
            Flower Garden Banks' environment is still pristine. Designation
            provides long-term assurance that the natural resources of the
            area will be available for future use and enjoyment, particularly
            in terms of research and public awareness of the marine
            environment. Implementation of the preferred alternative ensures
            that changes in use patterns which could degrade Bank
            environments are monitored.



                                           90









              The interpretation and s.urveillance/enforcement programs
         will provide information, management and protection that develops
         a foundation for wise public use of the area and results in long-
         term productivity. Similarly, information collected in the    I
         research program will assist Federal managers in making better
         management decisions. Better management will in turn help
         resolve use conflict and mitigate the adverse impacts of human
         activities.



















































                                         91












          Part V: LIST OF PREPARERS












           Part V: LIST OF PREPARERS


           Dr. Thomas Bright
           Texas A&M University
             College Station, Texas

           Ms. Darlene Finch - Program specialist
           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA

           Ms. Annie Hillary - Senior Project Manager
           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA

           Mr. Rafael Lopez - Regional Manager
           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA

           Mr. Joseph Uravitch - Chief
           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA

           Mr. William Windom - Project Manager
           Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, NOAA
































                                          92









           PART VI: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING
           COPIES





                                    I






































































                                                                 I .










           PART VI: LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND PERSONS RECEIVING
             COPIES

           Federal Agencies

           Advisory Council on Historic  Preservation
           Council on,Efivironmen-tal Quality
           Department of Agriculture
           Department of the Air Force
           Department of the Army
           Department of the Army/Corps  of Engineers
           Department of Commerce
           Department of Defense
           Department of Energy
           Department of the Interior
           Department of Justice
           Department of the Navy
           Department of State
           Department of Transportation
           Environmental Protection Agency
           Federal Emergency Management Agency
           Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
           Gulf of Mexico Fishery-Management Council
           Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission
           Marine Mammal Commission
           Maritime Administration
           National Science Foundation
           U.S. Coast Guard


           Congressional

           Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.;
              United States Senate
           Committee on Merchant Marine and-Fisheries;
              U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Lloyd Bentsen, United State Senate
           Honorable John B. Breaux, United States Senate
           Honorable Phil Gramm, United States Senate
           Honorable J. Bennett Johnston,,United States Senate
           Honorable Michael A. Andrews, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Bill Archer, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Lindy Boggs, U.S. House of Representatives'
           Honorable Jack Brooks, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Tom DeLay, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable E. (Kika) de la Garza, U.S. House of'Representatives
           Honorable Jack Fields, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Jimmy Hayes, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Craig A. Washington, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Bob Livingston, U.S. House of"@Representatives
           Honorable Solomon P. Ortiz, U.S. House of Representatives
           Honorable W. J. (Billy) Tauzin, U..S. House of Representatives
           Honorable Charles Wilson, U.S.'House of Representatives

                                           94'










          State Government and Agencies

          Honorable  Bill Clements, Governor of Texas
          Honorable  Buddy Roemer, Governor of Louisiana
          Honorable  Debre Danburg, Texas House of Representatives
          Louisiana  Coastal Management Program
          Louisiana  Department  of Culture, Recreation,and Tourism
          Louisiana  Department  of Environmental Quality.
          Louisiana  Department  of Natural Resources
          Louisiana  Department  of State
          Louisiana  Department  of Wildlife and Fisheries
          Louisiana  Geological  Survey
          Louisiana  office of Intergovernmental Affairs
          Louisiana  office of State Parks
          Louisiana  State Office of Conservation
          President, Louisiana Senate
          Speaker, Louisiana House of Representatives
          Speaker, Texas House of Representatives
          Speaker Pro-Tem, Texas Senate
          Texas  Attorney General
          Texas  Committee on Natural Resources
          Texas  General Land Office
          Texas  Governor's Office of-Budget and.Planning
          Texas  Office of IntergovernmentalAffairs
          Texas  Office of State-Federal Relations
          Texas  Parks and Wildlife Department
          Texas  Secretary of State
          Texas  Tourist Development Agency

          Interest  Groups

          Alliance  for Environmental Education, Inc.
          Anadarko  Petroleum Corporation
          American  Association of Port Authorities
          American  Bureau of Shipping
          American  Conservation Association
          American  Fisheries Society
          American  Gas Association
          American  Institute of Merchant    Shipping,
          American  Littoral.Society
          American  Petroleum:,@Institute
          American  Recreation Coaliti
                                        ion
          Americans for the Environment
          Amoco Production Company,--.
          Atlantic Richfield Company,
          Audubon Society
          Boating Industry Association
          CONOCO Inc.
          Center for Law and   Social Policy,
          Center forMarine Conservation
          Cities Service Oil,  and,Gas.,Corporation
          Citizens Advisory Committee"on-the-Gult      Initiative

                                             95'











            Citizens Environmental Coalition
            Clean Water Action Project
            Coast Alliance
            Coastal Society
            Coastal States Organization
            Conservation Education Association
            Conservation Foundation
            Conservation Fund
            Continental Oil Company
            Continental Shelf Associates
            Council of State Planning Agencies
            Council on Ocean Law
            Cousteau Society
            Defenders of Wildlife
            Edison Electric Institute
            El Paso Natural Gas Company
            Environmental Action Foundation
            Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
            Environmental Law Institute
            Environmental Policy Center
            Environmental.-Policy Institute
            Exxon Company, U.S.A.
            Federation of American Controlled Shipping
            Friends of the Earth
            Galveston Bay Foundation
            Galveston Island Diving Association
            Greenpeace
            Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute
            Gulf Coast Authority
            Gulf Oil Exploration and Production Company
            Houston Sierra Club
            Houston Sportsmen's Club
            Houston Underwater Club
            Institute for the Human Environment
            International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
            International Oceanographic Foundation
            Izaak Walton League of America, Inc.
            Louisiana University Marine Consortium
            Louisiana Wildlife Federation
            Marine Science Institute
            Marine Technology Society
            Mobile Oil Corporation
            National Association of Conservation Districts
            National Association of Counties
            National Association of State Recreation Planners
            National Audubon Society
            National Coalition for Marine Conservation
            National Federation of Fisherman
            National Fisheries Institute
            National Marine Education Association
            National Maritime Council
            National Ocean Industries Association


                                            96










          National Parks and Conservation Association
          National Recreation and Parks Association
          National Wildlife Federation
          Natural Resources Defense Council
          Nature Conservancy
          New Orleans Steamship Association
          Oceanic Society
          Petroleum Information Corporation
          Port of Corpus Christi Authority
          Port of Houston Authority
          Port of Lake Charles
          Port of Orange
          Resources for the Future
          Rigs to Reefs Company
          Rinn Boats, Inc.
          Shell Oil Company
          Sierra Club
          Sport Fishing Institute
          Sportsmen's Clubs of Texas, Inc.
          Standard oil Company
          Texaco, Inc.
          Texas Conservation Foundation
          Texas Environmental Coalition
          Texas Shrimp Association
          Texas State Aquarium
          Union Oil Company
          United Nations Environment Programme
          United States Chamber of Commerce
          United States Tourist Council
          Water Pollution Control Federation
          West Gulf Maritime Association
          Wilderness Society
          Wildlife Management Institute
          Wildlife Society, Louisiana Chapter
          Wildlife Society, Texas Chapter
          World Resources Institute
          World Wildlife Fund  U.S.



















                                          97











          PART VII: REFERENCES











         PART VII: REFERENCES

         Abbott, R.E. 1975. "The Faunal Composition of the Algal-Sponge
         Zone of the Flower Garden Banks, Northwest Gulf of Mexico." M.S.
         Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College
         Station.

         Abbott, R.E. 1979. "Ecological Processes Affecting the Reef
         Coral Population at the East Flower Garden Bank,.Northwest Gulf
         of Mexico." Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
         University, College Station.

         Antoine, J.W., W. Bryant and B. Jones. 1967. "Structural
         features of continental shelf, slope, and scarp, northeastern
         Gulf of Mexico." AAPG Bull. 51, pp. 257-262.

         Bakas, G.J. 1966. "Some relationships of fishes to benthic,
         organisms on coral reefs." Nature 210 (5033), pp. 280-284.

         Bakas, G.J. 1969. Feeding and energetics in shallow marine
         waters." International Review of Gen. and Expertl. Zool. 4, pp.
         275-369.


         Blood, A. 1978. Personal communication. Charter boat captain,
         Port Arthur, Texas.

         Bright, T.J. 1977. "Coral reefs, nepheloid layers, gas seeps
         and brine flows on hard-banks in the northwestern Gulf of
         Mexico." Proc. Third Int. Coral Reef Symp., University of
         Miami, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, 1,
         pp. 39-46.

         Bright, T.J. 1983. "Flower Garden reefs - Fragile Beauty."
         Texas Parks & Wildlife 41 (4), pp. 8-11.

         Bright, T.J. 1985a. Enclosure to letter dated July 26.
         Professor, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

         Bright, T.J. 1985b. Enclosure to letter dated September 26.

         Bright, T.J. 1986. Personal communication.

         Bright, T.J. And Cara Cashman. 1974. "Fishes." In T.J. Bright
         and L.H. Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank.
         Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, pp. 339-409.

         Bright, T.J., C. Combs, G. Kraemer, and G. Minnery. 1982. In
         Environmental Studies at the Flower Gardens and Selected Banks.
         Final Report to U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals
         Management Service, Contract #AA851-CTO-25, Chapter III, NTIS
         Order No. PB83-101303, pp. 39-102.


                                         99










             Bright,T.J., G.P. Kraemer, G.A. Minnery, and S.T. Viada. 1984.
             "Hermatypes of the Flower Garden Banks." Bull. Mar. Sci., 34
             (3), pp. 461-176.

             Bright, T.J. P.A. LaRock, R.D. Lauer, and J.M. Brooks. 1980.
             "A brine seep, at the East Flower Garden Bank, northwest Gulf of
             Mexico." Int. Rev. Gesamten Hydrobiol., 65, pp 535-549.

             Bright, T.J. and  L.H. Pequegnat, Eds. Biota of the West Flower
             Garden Bank. Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, 1974.

             Bright,  T.J., E. Powell, and R.   Rezak. 1980b. "Environmental
             effects  of a natural brine seep    at the East Flower Garden Bank,
             northwestern Gulf of Mexico." In R.A. Geyer, Ed., Marine
             Environmental Pollution, "Elsevier Oceanography Series, 27A. New
             York, pp. 291-316.

             Bright, T.J. and R. Rezak.      1976. A Biological     and Geological
             Reconnaissance,of Selected     Topographical Features on the Texas
             Continental Shelf. Final Report to U.S. Department of the
             Interior. Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.

             Bright, T.J. and R. Rezak. 1977. "Reconnaissance of reefs and
             fishing banks of the Texas Continental Shelf." In R.A. Geyer,
             Ed., Submersibles and    Their Use in Oceanography. New York,
             pp. 113-150.

             Bright, T.J. and R. Rezak.      1978. Northwestern Gulf of Mexico
             Topographic Features Study. Final Report to U.S. Department of
             the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.        Texas A&M University,
             College Station, Texas.

             Bright, T.J., J.W. Turnell, L.H. Pequegant,       T.E. Burke, C.W.
             Cashman, D.A. Cropper, J.P. Ray,     R.C. Tresslar, J. Teerling, and
             J.B. Wills. 1974. "Biotic Zonation on the West Flower Garden
             Bank." In T. Bright and L. Pequegnat, Eds,. Biota of the West
             Flower Garden Bank. Houston: Gulf Publishing company, pp. 4-54.

             Bright, T.J., S. Viada,  C. Combs, G. Dennis, E. Powell, and G.
             Denoux. 1981."East Flower Garden monitoring study." In
             Northern Gulf of Mexico Topographic Features Study. Final Report
             to U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
             Contract #AA551-CT8-35, Vol. 3. Part C, NTIS Order No. PB81-
             24876.

             Brooks, J.M., T.J. Bright,  B.B. Bernard, and    C.R. Schwab. 1979.
             "Chemical aspects of a brine pool at the East Flower Garden Bank,
             northwest Gulf of Mexico." Limnol. & Oceanogr., 24(4), pp. 735-
             745.






									100








           Burke, T.E,. 1974A. "Echinoderms.11 In T.J. Bright and L.H.
           Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Banks. Gulf
           Publishing Company, Houston, pp. 311-332.

           Burke, T.E. 1974B. "Echinoderms of the West Flower Garden Reef
           Bank." Master's Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
           University, College Station.

           Cashman, Cara W. 1973. "Contributions to the IchihyefaunAs of
           the West Flower Garden Reef and other reef sites-in the Gulf of
           Mexico and Western Caribbean." Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of
           Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station.

           Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. 1984. "Impact assessment
           following an anchoring incident at the East Plower Garden Bank
           coral reef." Report to Mobil Producing, Texas and'New Mexico,'
           Inc., Offshore Texas Division, The Woodlands, TX.

           Cropper, Dennis A. 1973. "Living Cheilostome Bryozoa of West
           Flower Garden Bank, Northwest Gulf of Mexico." @Masterls Thesist
           Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College
           Station.

           Curray, J.R. 1960. "Sediments and history of Holocene
           transgression, continental shelf, northwest Gult-of Mexico."      In
           F.P. Shepard, F.B. Phleger, and T.H. Van Andel, Eds., Recent
           Sediments, Northwest Gulf of Mexico. AAPG. Tulsa, Oklahoma,       pp.
           221-266.


           Defenbaugh, R.E. 1974. "Hydroids.11     In T.J. Bright and,L.H.
           Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank. Gulf
           Publishing Company, Houston, pp. 93-114.

           Defenbaugh, R.E. 1976. "A Study of the Benthic
           Macroinvertebrates of the Continental Shelf of the Northern     Gulf
           of Mexico." Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
           University, College Station.

           Department of State. 1988. Letter dated April 8 to Chief,
           Marine and Estuarine Management Division, NOAA, from Deputy
           Assistant Secretary for oceans and Fisheries Affairs.

           Dubois, Random. 1975. "A Comparison of the Distribution of the
           Echinodermata of a Coral Community with that of a Nearby Rock.
           Outcrop on the Texas Continental Shelf." Master's Thesis,
           Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College
           Station.

           Edwards, G.S. 1971. Geology of the West Flower Ga     rden Bank.
           Texas A&M Sea Grant Publ., TAMU-SG-71-215.



                                            101









           Eiseman, N.J. and S.M. Blair. 1982. "New records and range
           extensions of deepwater algae from East Flower Garden Bank,
           Northwestern Gulf of Mexico." Contrib. Mar. Sci., 25, pp. 21-26.

           Etter, P.C. and J.D. Cochrane     1975. Water Temperature on the
           Texas-Louisiana Shelf. marine Advisory Bulletin, Commerce.
           Texas A&M Sea Grant Publ., TAMU-SG-75-604.

           Futures Group. 1982. Final Technical Report, Outer Continental
           Shelf Oil Spill Probability Assessment. Prepared by The Futures
           Group, Glastonberry, Connecticut, for the Bureau of Land
           Management, Department of the Interior. ..

           Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1980. "Offshore Petroleum
           Resource Development and Marine Mammals: a Review and Research
           Recommendations." Marine Fisheries Review, Nov.   1980.

           Geraci, J.R. and D. J. St. Aubin. 1982. Study of the Effects of
           Oil on Cetaceans. Prepared for the Department of the Interior
           and cited in MMS, 1984.

           Geraci, J.R. and D.J. St. Aubin. 1983. "Fifth Interim
           Report-Study of the Effects of Oil on Marine Mammals." Prepared
           for MMS and cited in MMS, 1984.

           Giammona, Charles P. 1978. IlOctocorals in the Gulf of Mexico-
           Their Taxonomy and Distribution with Remarks on Their
           Paleontology." Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Oceanography,
           Texas A&M University, College Station.

           Gittings, S.R. 1983. "Hard-Bottom Macrofauna of the East Flower
           Garden Brine Seep: Impact of a Long-Term, Point-Source Brine
           Discharge." M.S. Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
           University, College Station.

           Glynn, P.W., R.H. Stewart, and J.E. McClosker. 1972. "Pacific
           coral reefs in Panama: structure, distribution and predators."
           Geologische Rundschann 61, pp. 483-519.

           Goedicke, T.R. 1955.   origin of the pinnacles on the continental
           shelf and slope of the.Gulf of Mexico. Tex. J. Sci., 7, pp. 149-
           159.

           Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. 1981. Final
           Environmental Impact Statement for the Reef Fish Fishery of the
           Gulf of Mexico. National Marine Fisheries Service, St.
           Petersburg,.Florida.






                                          102









         Harrington, D.L4 1966. "Oceanographic observations on the
         Northwest Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Mexico: 1963-1965.11
         Contribution No.. 329, National Marine Fisheries Service
         Biological Laboratory, Galveston, Texas.

         Hiatt, R.W. and D.W.*Strasburg. 1960. "Ecological relationships
         of the fish fauna on coral reefs of the Marshall Islands.19
         Ecolog. Monog. 30 (1), pp. 65-127.

         Hobson, E.S. and J.R. Chess. '1978. "Trophic relationships among
         fishes and plankton in the lagoon at Enewetak Atoll, Marshall
         Islands." Fish. Bull. 76 (11, pp.133-153.

         Hoese, H.D. and R.H. Moore. 1977. @Fishes of the Gulf of Mexico,
         Texas, Louisiana, and Adjacent Waters. Texas A&M University
         Press, College Station.

         Hudson, J.H. and D.M. Robbins. 1980. "Effects of drilling mud
         on the growth rate of the reef building coral, Montastrea
         annularis.11 In R.A. Geyer, Ed., Marine Environmental Pollution,
         Elsevier Oceanography Series, 27A. New York, pp. 455-470.

         Humphris, C.C.', Jr. 1978. "Salt movement on continental slope,
         northern Gulf of Mexico." In A.H. Bouma, G.T. Moore and J.M.
         Coleman, Eds., Framework Fagies and Oil Trapping Characteristics
         of the Upper Continental Margin, AAPG, Studies in Geology No. 7.
        .Tulsa, Oklahoma, pp. 69-85.

         Interagency Archeological Services. 1977. Cultural Resources,
         Evaluation of the Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Shelf.
         Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation, National Park
         service, U.S. Department of the Interior, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

         Johnston, C.S. 1979. "Sources and Effects of Hydrocarbons in
         the Marine Environment,." The Marine Environment and oil
         Facilities. Inst. of Civil Engrs., London.

         Knap, A.H., S.C.. Wyers, R.E. Dodge,,T.D. Sleeter, H.R. Frith,
         S.R. Smith, and C.B. Cook. 1985. "The effects of chemically and
         physically dispersed oil on the brain coral Diploria strigosa
         (Dana) - a summary review." In: Proceedings, 1985 Oil Spill
         Conference, February 25-28, 1985, Los Angeles, CA. Washington,
         DC:American Petroleum Institute, pp. 547-551.

         Kraemerl G.P.  1982. "Population Levels   and Growth Rates of
         Scleractinian Corals Within the Diploria Montastrea-Porites Zone
         of the East and West Flower Garden Banks.11 M.S. Thesis,
         Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College
         Station.






                                         103









           ,Lange, R. 1985. "A 100 ton experimental oil spill at Halten
           Bank off.Norway.11 In: Proceedings 1985 Oil Spill Conference,
           February 25-28, 1985, Los Angeles, CA. Washingtonj DC: American
           Petroleum Institute.

           Leuterman, Arthur. 1979. "The Taxonomy and Systematics of the
           Gymnolaemate and Stenolaemate Bryozoa of the Northwest Gulf of
           Mexico." Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Oceanography, Texas
           A&M University, College Station.

           Levert, C.F. and H.C. Ferguson, Jr. 1969. "Geology of the
           Flower Garden Banks, northwest Gulf of Mexico." Trans. Gulf
           Coast Assoc, Geol. Soc. , 19, pp. 89-100.

           Lewis, J.B. 1977. "Processes of organic production on coral
           reefs." Biol. Rec. 52, pp. 305-347.

           Lipka, D.A. 1974. "Mollusks." In T.J. Bright and L.H.
           Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank. Houston:
           Gulf Publishing Company, pp. 131-198.

           Maddocks, R".F. 1974. "Ostracodes.11 In T.J. Bright and L.-H.
           Pequegnat, Eds. Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank. Houston:-
           Publishing Company, pp. 1-99-230.

           McAuliffe, C.D., A.E. Smalley, R.D. Groover, W.M. Welsh, W.S.
           Pickle, and G.E. Jones. 1975. "Chevron Main Pass Block 41 oil
           spills: chemical and biological investigation." In:
           P.roceedings 1975 Conference on Prevention and Control of Oil
           Pollutio , March 25-27, 1975, San Francisco, CA, Washingtoni DC:
           American Petroleum Institute.

           McGrail, D.W. 1977. IlShelf edge currents and sediment transport
           in the northwest Gulf of Mexico." (Abs.) Trans. Am. Geophys.
           Union, 58, p. 1110.

           McGrail, D.W. 1982. "Anomalous flow on the Outer Continental
           Shelf in the Gulf of Mexico and its effect on sediment
           transport." (Abs.) Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 63(3), p. 65.

           McGrail, D.W. and M.R. Carnes. 1983. I'Shelfedge dynamics and
           the nepheloid layer." In D.J. Stanley and G.T. Moore, Eds.,
           Shelf Break: Critical Interface on Continental Margins, Soc.
           Econ. Paleontol. Mineral.., Special Pub. No. 33, pp. 251-264.
                                                           i
           McGrail, D.W., M. Carnes, D. Horne, T. Cecil, J. Hawkins, and F.
           Halper. 1982a. In Environmental Studies at the Flower Gardens
           and Selected Banks. Final Report to Minerals Management Service,
           Contract #AA851-CTO-25, NTIS Order.No. PB83-101303, pp. 103-226.




                                          104









          McGrail, D.W., M. Carnes, D. Horne, and J. Hawkins. 1982b.
          HydrograRhic Data ReRort. Northern Gulf of Mexico Topographic
          Features Study. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
          Management, Contract #AA851-CTO-25. Department of Oceanography,
          Texas A&M University, Tech. Rep. #82-4T.

          McGrail, D.W., T.M. Cecil, and F.B. Halper. 1982e. "Stacking of
          nepheloid and boundary layers at the shelf edge in the Gulf of
          Mexico." (Abs.) Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 63, p. 988.@

          McGrail, D.W., F. Halper,. D. Horne, T. Cecil, M. Carnes. 1982c.
          Time Series Data ReRort. Northern Gulf of Mexico Topographic
          Features Study.   U.S. Department,of the Interior,-Bureau of Land
          Management, Contract #AA851-CTO-25. Department of Oceanography,
          Texas A&M University, Tech. Rep. #82-5T.

          McGrail, D.W. and D. Horne. 1979. "Currents, thermal structure
          and suspended sediment distribution induced by internal tides on
          the Texas Continental Shelf." Paper presented at the spring
          meeting of the American Geophysical Union SANDS Symposium.

          McGrail, D.W. and''D. Horne.. 1981, "Water and sediment dynamics
          (Flower Garden Banksj." In Northern Gulf of Mexico Topographic
          Features Study. Final Report to U.S. Department of the Interior,
          Bureau of Land Management. Contract #AA551-CT8-35, Vol. 3 NTIS
          Order No. PB81-246676,', Part-B, pp. 9-@-45.

          McGrail, D.W. and D.W. Huff. @1978. "Shelf sediment and local
          flow phenomena: in'situ observations." .(Abs.) Program AAPG-SEPM
          Annual Convention, p., 93.

          McGrail, D.W., D.W. Huff, and S. Jenkins. 1978.    "Current
          measurements and dye'diffusion.studies.", In T.  Bright and,R.
          Rezak, Eds., Northwestern Gulf of Mexico Topographic Features
          Study. Final Report to the U.S. Department of the
          Interior, Bureau of Land Management. Contract #AA550-CT7-15,
          NTIS Order No.PB-294-769/AS, pp. 111-3 to 111-72..

          McGrail, D.W. and R. Rezak., 1977. "Internal waves and the
          nepheloid layer on continental shelf in the Gulf of Mexico."
          Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc.-Geol. Soc., 27, pp. 123-124.

          McGrail' D.W., R. Rezak, and T.J. Bright. 1982d.     Environmental
          Studies at the Flower Gardens and Selected Banks.   Northwest Gulf
          of Mexico, 1979-1981. Final Report to Minerals Management
          Service, Contract #AA851-CTO-25, NTIS Order No. PB83-101303.

          Minerals Management Service,, U.S. Department of the Interior.
          19.84. Final Environmental Impact-Statement, OCS Sale No. 90.
          Minerals Management Service, Atlantic OCS Region, Vienna,
          Virginia.


                                         1015









           Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
           1986a. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Proposed oil and
           Gas Lease Sales 110 and 112. Minerals Management Service, Gulf
           of Mexico OCS Region, Metairie, Louisiana.

           Minerals Management Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
           1987. Final Environmental Imr)act Statement, ProOosed Oil and Gas
           Lease Sales 113/1151116. Minerals Management Service, Gulf of
           Mexico Region, Metairie, Louisiana.

           Minnery, Gregory. 1984. "Distribution, Growth Rates and
           Diagenesis of Coralline Algal Structures on the Flower Garden
           Banks, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico." Ph.D. Dissertation,
           Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College
           Station.

           National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council - marine
           Board. 1983. Drilling Discharm in the Marine Environment.
           National Academic Press. Washington, D.C. cited in MMS, 1984.

           Naval ocean Surveillance Information Center (since abolished).
           1978. Computer analysis of merchant vessel traffic, January-June
           1978.

           Nowlin, W.D., Jr. 1972.    "Winter circulation patterns and
           property distributions." In L.R.A. Capurro and J.L. Reid, Eds.,
           Texas A&M University Oceanographic Studies, Vol. 2. Houston:
           Gulf Publishing Company, pp..3-53.

           Nowlin, W.D., Jr., and H.J-. McLellan. 1967. "A characterization
           of the Gulf of Mexico waters in winter." J. Mar. Res, 25(l), pp.
           29-59.

           Nowlin, W.D., Jr., and C.A. Parker. 1974, "Effects of a cold-
           air outbreak on shelf waters of the Gulf of Mexico." J. Phys.
           Oceanogr 40), pp. 467-486.

           Parker, R.H. and J.R. Curray. 1956. "Fauna and bathymetry of
           banks on continental shelf, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico." Bull.
           Am. Assoc.-Petrol. Geol., pp. 2428-2439.

           Pequegnat, L.H. and J.P. Ray. 1974. "Crustaceans and other
           Arthropods." In T.J. Bright and L.H. Pequegnat, Eds., Biota-of
           the West Flower Garden Bank. Houston:Gulf Publishing Company,
           pp. 231-290.

           Pequegnat, W.E. 1970. "Deep-water brachyuran crabs." In W.E.
           Pequegnat and F.A. Chace, Jr., Eds., Contributions on the Biolggy
           of the Gulf of Mexico, Vol. 1. Texas A&M University, College
           Station, pp.'. 171-204.



                                          106









          Poag, C.W. 1973. "Late Quaternary sea levels in the Gulf of
          Mexico." Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc., 23, pp. 394-400.

          Powell, E.N. and T.J. Bright. 1981. "A thiobios does exist-
          Gnathostomulid domination of the canyon community at the East
          Flower Garden brine seep." Int. Rev. Gesgmien Hydrobiol., 66(5),
          pp. 675-683.

          Powell, E.N., T.J. Bright, A. Woods, and S. Gitting@s. 1983.
          "Meiofauna and the thiobios in the East Flower Garden Brine
          Seep." Mar. Biol., 73, pp. 269-283.

          Pulley, T.E. 1952. "A zoogeographic study based on   the bivalves
          of the Gulf of Mexico." Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University, @15
          pp., Cambridge.

          Pulley, T.E. 1963. "Texas to the tropics." Houston Geol. Soc.
          Bull., 6, pp. 13-19.

          Pully, T.E. 1978. Personal communication. Director, Houston
          Museum of Natural Science, Houston,*, Texas.

          Randall'J.E. 1974. "The effect of fishes on coral reefs." In
          Proceedings of the Second International SyMiposium on.Coral Reefs,
          I, June 22-July 2, 1973. The Great Barrier Reef Committee,
          Brisbane, Australia, pp. 159-166.

          Ray, J.P. 1974. "A Study of the Coral Reef Crustaceans
          (Decap6da and Stomatopoda) of Two Gulf of Mexico Reef Systems:
          West Flower Garden, Texas and Isla De Lobos, Veracruz, Mexico."
          Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of oceanography, Texas A&M
          University, College Station.

          Reid, R.O. and R. Whitaker, in press. "Numerical Model for
          Astronomical Tides in the Gulf of,Mexico.11 U.S. Army Engineer
          Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg.- Mississippi.

          Rezak, R. 1977. "West Flower Garden Bank, Gulf of Mexico."
          Stud. Geol., 4, pp. 27-35.

          Rezak, R. 1981. "Geology." In Northern Gulf of Mexico
          Topographic Features Study.  Final Report to U.S. Department of
          the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Contract #AA851-CT8-35,
          Vol. 1, NTIS Order No. PB83-101303, pp. 23-59.

          Rezak, R. 1982a. "Geology of the Flower Garden Banks." In
          Environmental Studies at the Flower Gardens and Selected Banks.
          Final Report to Minerals Management Service, Contract #AA851-CTO-
          25, Chapter II, NTIS Order No. PB83-101303, pp. 19-37.




                                         107









            Rezak, R. 1982b. Geology of selected banks. In Environmental
            Studies at the Flower Gardens and Selected Banks. Final Report
            to Minerals'Management Service, Contract #AA851-C,TO-25,.Chapt  er
            VI, NTIS Order No. PB83-101303, pp. 253"300

            Rezak, R. and T.J. Bright. 1981a. Northern Gulf     of Mexico
            Topographic Features Study. Final Report to U.S.    Department of
            the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Contract    #AA551-CT8-35,
            5 vols. NTIS Order Nos.: Vol. I, PB81-248650; Vol. II, PB81-
            248668; Vol. III, PB81-248676; Vol. IV, PB81-248684; Vol. V,
            PB81-248692. Texas A&M University, o@ollege Station, TX.

            Rezak, R. and T.J. Bright. 1981b.    I'Seafloor instability at East
            Flower Garden Bank, northwest Gulf  of Mexico."- Geo-MarineLett.,
            1(2), pp. 97-103.

            Rezak, R., T.J. Bright, and D.W. McGrail. 1985.      Reefs and
            Banks of the Northwest Gulf of,Mexico.- Their Geological,
            Biological, and Physical bynamics. John Wiley and Sons: A
            Wiley-Interscience Publication.

            Rezak  R-%'and W.R. Bryant. 1973. "West Flower Garden Bank."
            Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 23rd Annual Conv. (Oct. 24-
            26), pp. 377-382.

            Rezak, R. and G.S. Edwards. 1972. IlCarbonate sediments of the
            Gulf,of Mexico." Texas A&M Univ. Ocean. Stud.1 3, pp. 263-280.

            Schaefer, L. 1978. Personal communication. Oil company salvage
            and dive boat captain, Freeport, Texas.

            Sonnier, F., J. Teerling, and H.D. Hoese. 1976. "Observations
            on the Offshore Reef and Platform Fish Fauna of Louisiana.11
            CoReia, 1, pp. 105-111.

            Stafford, J.M. 1982. "An Evaluation of the Carbonate Cements
            and Their Diagenesis on Selected Banks, Outer Continental Shelf,
            Northern Gulf of Mexico." M.S. Thesis, Department of
            Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station.

            Stephenson, W. and R.B. Searles. 1960. "Experimental studies on
            the ecology of intertidal environments at Heron Esland.
            Australian J. Mar. Freshw. Res. 11 (2), pp. 241-267.

            Stetson, H.C. 1953. "The sediments of the western Gulf of
            Mexico, Part 1-The continental terraces of the western Gulf of
            Mexico: Its surface sediments, origin, and development." Papers
            in Phys. Oceanogr. Meteorol., M.I.T./W.H.O.I., 12(4), pp. 1-45.

            Teerling, Joyce. 1975. "A Survey of Sponges from the
            Northwestern Gulf of Mexico." Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of
            Biology, University of Southwestern Louisiana, Lafayette.

                                            106









         Temple, R.F., D.S. Harrington, and J.A. Martin. 1977. Monthly
         Temperature and Salinity Measurements of Continental Shelf Waters
         of the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 1963-1966. U.S. Department
         of Commerce, National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and
         National Marine Fisheries Service, Tech. Rept. #SSRF-707.

         Tresslar, R.C. 1974a. "The Living Benthonic Foraminiferal Fauna
         of the West Flower Garden Bank Coral Reef and Biostrome.11
         Master's Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M
         University, College Station.

         Tresslar, R.C. 1974b. "Foraminifers." In T.J. Bright and L.H.
         Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank,
         Houston:Gulf Publishing Company, pp. 67-92.

         Tresslar, R.C. 1974c. "Corals." In T.J. Bright and L.H.
         Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank,
         Houston:Gulf Publishing Company, pp. 116-139.

         Viada, S.T. 1980. "Species Composition and Populations Levels
         of Scleractinian Corals Within the Diploria-Montastrea-Porites
         Zone of the East Flower Garden Bank, Northwest Gulf of Mexico."
         M.S. Thesis, Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University,
         College Station.

         Wills, J.B., 1976. "Benthonic Polychaeta of the West Flower
         Garden Bank." Master's Thesis, University of Houston, Department
         of Biology, Houston.

         Wills, J.B. and T.J. Bright. 1974. "Worms."    In T.J. Bright and
         L.H. Pequegnat, Eds., Biota of the West Flower Garden Bank.
         Houston: Gulf Publishing Company, pp. 291-310.




















                                         109










          PART VIII: APPENDICES












         APPENDIX 1: FINAL DESIGNATION DOCUMENT FOR THE FLOWER GARDEN
         BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY


         PREAMBLE



                              DESIGNATION DOCUMENT FOR
                  THE FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

              Under the authority of.Title III of the Marine Protection,
         Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended (the ItAct"),
         16 U.S.C. H 1431 et seq., two separate areas of ocean waters
         over and surrounding the East and West Flower Garden Banks, and
         the submerged lands thereunder including the Banks, in the
         northwestern Gulf of Mexico, as described in Article II, are
         hereby designated as the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
         Sanctuary for the purposes of protecting and managing the
         conservation, ecological, recreational, research, educational,
         historic and esthetic resources and qualities of these areas.

         Article I. Effect of Designation

              The Act authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue such
         final regulations as are necessary and reasonable to implement
         the designation, including managing and protecting the
         conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, research,
         educational, and esthetic resources. and qualities of a sanctuary.
         Section 1 of Article IV of this Designation Document lists those
         activities that may have to be regulated on the effective date of
         designation or at some later date in order to protect Sanctuary
         resources and qualities. Thus', the act of designation empowers
         the Secretary of Commerce to regulate the activities listed in
         section 1. Listing does not necessarily mean that an activity
         will be regulated; however, if an activity is not listed it may
         not be regulated, except on an emergency basis, unless section 1
         of Article IV is amended by the same procedures by which the
         original designation was made.

         Article II. Description of the Area

              The Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary consists
         of two separate areas of ocean waters over and surrounding the
         East and West Flower Garden Banks, and the submerged lands
         thereunder including the Banks, in the northwestern Gulf of
         Mexico. The area designated at the East Bank is located
         approximately 120 nautical miles south-southwest of Cameron,
         Louisiana, and encompasses 19.20 square nautical miles, and the
         area designated at the West Bank is located approximately 110
         nautical miles southeast of Galveston, Texas, and encompasses
         22.50 square nautical miles. The two areas encompass a total of
         41.70 square nautical miles (143.21 square kilometers).


                                         ill









           Appendix I to this designation document sets forth the precise
           Sanctuary boundaries.

           Article III. Characteristics of the Area That Give It Particular
           Value

                The Flower Garden Banks sustain the northernmost living
           coral reefs on the U.S. continental shelf. They are isolated
           from other reef systems by over 300 nautical miles (550
           kilometers) and exist under hydrographic conditions generally
           considered marginal for tropical reef formation. The
           composition, diversity and vertical distribution of benthic
           communities on the Banks are strongly influenced by this physical
           environment. Epibenthic populations are distributed among
           several interrelated biotic zones, including a DiRloria-
           Montastrea-Porites zone, a Madracis mirabilis zone, and an algal
           sponge zone.

                The complex and biologically productive reef communities
           that cap the Banks offer a combination of esthetic appeal and
           recreational and research opportunity matched in few other ocean
           areas. These reef-communities are in delicate ecological balance
           because of the fragile nature of coral and the fact that the
           Banks lie on the extreme northern edge of the zone in which
           extensive reef development can occur.- In addition to their coral
           reefs, the Banks contain the only known oceanic brine seep in
           continental shelf waters of the Gulf of Mexico. Because of these
           features, the Flower Garden Banks are particularly valuable for
           scientific research.

           Article IV. Scope of Regulations

           Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation

                The following activities are subject to regulation,
           including prohibition, to the extent necessary and reasonable to
           ensure the protection and management of the conservation,
           recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational and
           esthetic resources and qualities of the area:

                a.  Anchoring or otherwise mooring within the Sanctuary;

                b.  Discharging or depositing, from within the boundaries
                    of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter;

                C.  Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundaries
                    of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter;

                d.  Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the
                    seabed of the Sanctuary; or constructing, placing or
                    abandoning any structure, material or other matter on
                    the seabed of the Sanctuary;

                                          112









               e.   Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or
                    minerals within the Sanctuary;

               f.   Taking,.removing, catching, collecting, harvesting,
                    feeding, injuring, destroying or causing the loss of,
                    or attempting to take, remove, catch, collect, harvest,
                    feed, injure, destroy or cause the loss of, a Sanctuary
                    resource;

               g.   Possessing within the Sanctuary a Sanctuary resource or
                    any other resource, regardless of where taken, removed,
                    caught, collected or harvested, that, if it had been
                    foundwithin the Sanctuary, would be a Sanctuary
                    resource.

               h.   Possessing or using within the Sanctuary, any fishing
                    gear, device, equipment or means.

               i.   Possessing or using explosives or airguns or releasing
                    electrical charges within the Sanctuary.

          Section 2. Consistency with International Law

               The Sanctuary regulations shall be applied to foreign
          persons and foreign vessels in accordance with generally .
          recognized principles of international law, and in,accordance
          with treaties, conventions, and other international agreements to
          which the United States is a party.

          Section 3. Emergencies

               Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of,
          loss of, or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality,.or
          minimize the imminent risk of such destruction, loss or injury,
          any and all activities, including those not listed in section 1
          of this Article, are subject to immediate temporary regulation,
          including prohibition.

          Article V. Effect on Other Regulations, Leases. Permits,
          Licenses, and Rights


          Section 1. Fishing Regulations. Licenses, and Permits

               The regulation of fishing is authorized under Article IV.
          All regulatory programs pertaining to fishing, including fishery
          management plans promulgated under the Magnuson Fishery
          Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1801 et  'sea., shall
          remain in effect. Where a valid regulation promulgated under
          these programs conflicts with a Sanctuary regulation, the



                                         113









            regulation deemed by the Secretary of Commerce or designee as
            more protective of Sanctuary resources and qualities shall
            govern.

            Section 2. Other

                 If any,valid regulation issued.by any Federal authority of
            competent jurisdiction, regardless of when issued, conflicts with
            a Sanctuary regulation, the regulation deemed by the Secretary of
            commerce or designee as more protective of Sanctuary resources
            and qualities shall govern.

                 Pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the Act,   16.U.S.C.
              1434(c)(1), no valid lease, permit, license,   approval, or other
            authorization issued by any Federal authority of competent
            jurisdiction, or any valid right of subsistence use or access,
            may be terminated by the Secretary of Commerce  'or designee as.a
            result of this designation or as a result of any Sanctuary
            regulation if such authorization or right was in existence on the
            effective date of this designation. However, the Secretary     of
            Commerce or designee may regulate the exercise of such
            authorization or right consistent with the purposes for which the
            Sanctuary is designated.

                 Accordingly, the prohibitions set forth in the.Sanctuary
            regulations shall not apply to any activity authorized by any.
            valid lease, permit, license, approval, or Other authorization in
            existence on the effective date of Sanctuary designation and
            issued by any Federal authority of competent jurisdiction, or by
            any valid right of subsistence use or access-in existence on the
            effective date of Safictuary'designation, provided that the holder
            of such authorization or right complies with Sanctuary .
            regulations regarding the certification of such authorizations
            and rights (e.g., notifies the Secr 'etary or designee of the
            existence of, requests certification of, and provides requested
            information regarding such authorization or right) and complies
            with any terms and conditions on the exercise of such authoriza-
            tion or right imposed as a condition of certification by-the
            Secretary or designee as he or she deems necessary to achieve the
            purposes for which the Sanctuary was designated.

                 Pending final agency action.on the certification    request,
            such holder may exercise such authorization or right without
            being in violation of any prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary
            regulations, provided the holder is in compliance withSanctuary
            regulations regarding certifications.

                 The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary regulations
            shall not apply to any activity authorized by any valid lease,
            permit, license, approval or other authorization issued after the
            effective date of Sanctuary designation by any Federal authority
            of competent jurisdiction, provided that the applicant complies

                                            114









         with Sanctuary regulations regarding notification and review of
         applications (e.g., notifies the Secretary or designee of the
         application for such authorization and provides requested
         information regarding the application), the Secretary or designee
         notifies the applicant and authorizing agency that he or she does
         not object to issuance of the authorization, and the applicant
         complies with any terms and conditions the Secretary or designee
         deems necessary to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities.'

              The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary regulations
         shall not apply to any activity conducted in accordance with the
         scopel, purpose, terms, and conditions of a National Marine
         Sanctuary permit issued by the Secretary or designee in
         accordance with the Sanctuary regulations. Such permits may only
         be issued if the Secretary or designee finds that the activity
         for which the permit is applied will:' further research related
         to Sanctuary resources; further the educational, natural or
         historical resource value of the Sanctuary; further salvage or
         recovery operations in or near the Sanctuary in connection with a
         recent air or marine casualty; or assist'in managing the
         Sanctuary.

              The prohibitions set forth in the Sanctuary regulations
         shall not apply to any activity conducted in accordance with the
         scope, purpose, terms, and conditions of a Special Use
         permit issued by the Secretary or designee in accordance with
         Section'310 of the'Act.

              if the Sanctuary regulations prohibit oil, gas, or   mineral
         exploration, development or production in any area of the
         Sanctuary, the Secretary or designee may in no event permit or
         otherwise approve such activities in that area, and any leases,
         licenses, permits, approvals, or other authorizations issued
         after the effective date of Sanctuary designation authorizing the
         exploration, development, or production of oil, gas, or minerals
         in that area shall be invalid.

         Article VI. Alterations to This Designation

              The terms of designation may be modified only by the Same-
         procedures by which the original designation is made, including
         public hearings, consultation with any appropriate Federal,
         State, regional and local agencies, review by the appropriate
         congressional committees and approval by the Secretary of
         commerce or designee.








                                         115









            Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, 15 CFR is amended
            as follows:


                  1. Part 943 is added to read as follows:
            Part 943 - Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
            Sec.


            943.1      Purpose.

            943.2      Boundaries.


            943.3      Definitions.


            943.4      Allowed activities.

            943.5      Prohibited activities.

            943.6      Shunting requirements applicable to hydrocarbon-

                       drilling discharges.

            943.7      Emergency regulations.

            943.8      Penalties.

            943.9      National Marine Sanctuary permits - application
                       procedures and issuance criteria.

            943.10     Certification of pre-existing leases, licenses,
                       permits, approvals, other authorizations, or rights to
                       conduct a prohibited activity.

            943.11     Notification and review of applications for leases,
                       licenses, permits, approvals, or other authorizations
                       to conduct a prohibited activity.

            943.12     Appeals of administrative action.

            Appendix  I--Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
            Boundary  Coordinates

            Appendix  II--Coordinates for the Department of the Interior
            topographic lease stipulations for OCS lease sale 112.

            Authority: Sections 302, 303, 304, 305, 307, and 310 of

            Title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act

            of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1431 et sea.




                                             116










         ï¿½ 943.1 Purpose.

             The purpose of the regulations in this Part is to implement
         the designation of the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
         Sanctuary by regulating activities affecting the Sa'nctuary
         consistent with the terms of that designation in order to protect
         and manage the conservation, ecological, recreational, research,
         educational, historical and esthetic resources and qualities of
         the area.


            943.2   Boundaries.

             The Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary consists
         of two separate areas of ocean waters over and surrounding the
         East and West Flower Garden Banks, and the submerged lands
         thereunder including the Banks, in the northwestern Gulf of
         Mexico. The area designated at the East Bank is located
         approximately 120 nautical miles south-southwest of Cameron,
         Louisiana, and encompasses 19.20 square nautical miles, and the
         area designated at the West Bank is located approximately 110
         nautical miles southeast of Galveston, Texas, and encompasses
         22.50,square nautical miles. The two areas encompass a total of
         41.70 square nautical miles (143.21 square kilometers). The
         boundary coordinates for each area are listed in Appendix I,
         following ï¿½ 943.11.

         ï¿½ 943.3 Definitions.

              (A) "Act" means Title III of the Marine Protection,
         Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, 16 U.S.C.
         ï¿½ï¿½ 1431 et "e .

              (B) "Administrator" or "Under Secretary" means the
         Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
         Administration/Under Secretary of Commerce for oceans and
         Atmosphere.

              (C) "Assistant Administrator" means the Assistant
         Administrator for Ocean Services and Coastal Zone Management,
         National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
         Administration.

              (D) "Conventional hook and line gear" means any fishing
         apparatus operated aboard a vessel and composed of a single line
         terminated by a combination of sinkers and hooks or lures and
         spooled upon a reel that may be hand- or electrically operated,
         hand-held or mounted. This term does not include bottom
         longlines.

              (E) "Director" means the Director of the office of Ocean
         and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
         Administration.


                                        117









                 (7) "Effective date of Sanctuary designation" means the
            .date the regulations implementing the designation of the
            Sanctuary become effective.

                 (G). "Historical resource"'-means a resource possessing
            historical, cultural, archaeological or paleontological signifi-
            cance,.including sites, structures, districts, and objects sig-
            nificantly associated with or representative of earlier people,
            cultures, and human activities and events.

                 (H) "Injure" means change adversely, either in the long or
            short term, a chemical, biological.or physical attribute of, or
            the viability@of. To "injure" therefore includes, but is not
            limited to,, to cause the loss of and to destroy.

                 (I) "No-activity zone" means one of the two geographic
            areas delineated by the Department of the Interior in
            stipulations for OCS lease sale 112 over and surrounding the East
            and West Flower.Garden Banks as areas in which activities
            .associated with exploration for, development of, or production of
            hydrocarbons are prohibited. The precise coordinates of these
            areas are provided in Appendix II. These particular coordinates
            define the geographic scope of the "no-activity zones" for
            purposes of the regulations in this Part. These coordinates are
            based on the-111/4 1/4 1/411 system formerly used by the Department
            of the Interior, a method that delineates a specific portion of-a
            block rather than the actual underlying isobath.

                 (J) "Person" means any private individual, partnership,
            corporation, or other entity; or any officer, employee, agent,
            agency, department or instrumentality of the Federal government,
            of any State or local.unit of government, or of any foreign
            government.

                 (K) "Sanctuary" means-the Flower Garden Banks National
            Marine Sanctuary.

                 (L) "Sanctuary quality" means a particular and essential
            characteristic of the Sanctuary, including but not limited to
            water,quality and air quality.

                 (M) "Sanctuary resource"  means any living or non-living
            resource of the Sanctuary that contributes to its conservation,
            recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational or
            esthetic value, including, but not limited to, carbonate rock,
            corals and other bottom formations, coralline algae and other
            plants, marine invertebrates, brine-seep biota, fish, turtles and
            marine mammals.

                 (N) "Shunt" means to discharge expended drilling cuttings
            and fluids near the ocean seafloor.



                                           118









               (0) "Vessel" means a watercraft of any description capable
          of being used as a means of transportation in the waters of the
          Sanctuary.

               Other terms appearing in the regulations in this Part are
          defined at 15 CFR. ï¿½ 922.2 and/or in the Marine Protection,
          Research, and-Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended (33 U.S.C.
          H 1401 et gjeq. and 16 U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1431 et s

          ï¿½ 943.4 Allowed activities.

               All activities-except those prohibited by section 943.5 may
          be undertaken subject to the requirements of section 943.6,
          subject to any emergency regulations promulgated pursuant to
          section 943.7, and subject to all prohibitions, restrictions, and
          conditions validly imposed by anyother Federal authority of
          competent jurisdiction. If any valid regulation issued by any
          Federal authority of competent jurisdiction, regardless of when
          issued, conflicts with a Sanctuary regulation, the regulation
          deemed by the Director or designee as more protective of
          Sanctuary resources and qualities shall govern.

          ï¿½ 943.5 Prohibited activities.

               (a) Except as specified in paragraphs (c) through.(h)
          below, the following activities are prohibited and thus unlawful
          for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

               (1) Exploring fori developing or producing oil, gas or
          minerals,within a no-activity zone.

               (2) Anchoring or otherwise mooring within the Sanctuary a
          vessel greater than 100 feet (30.48 meters) in registered length.

               (3) Anchoring a vessel of less than or. equal to 100''
          feet (30.48 meters) in registered length within an area of the
          Sanctuary where a mooring buoy is available.

               (4) Anchoring a-vessel within the Sanctuary'using more than
          fifteen feet (4.57 meters) of chain.or wire rope attached to the
          anchor.

               (5) Anchoring a vessel within the Sanctuary using anchor
          lines (exclusive of the anchor chain or wire rope permitted by
          (4) above) other than those of a soft fiber or nylon,
          polypropylene, or similar material.

               (6) Discharging or depositing, from within the boundaries
          of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter except:




                                         119









                     (i) fish, fish parts,.chumming,materials or bait used
                     ,in or resulting from fishing with conventional hook and
                     line gear in the Sanctuary;

                     (ii) biodegradable effluents incidental to vessel use,
                     and generated by marine sanitation devices approved in
                     accordance with Section 312 of the Federal Water
                     Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1322;

                     (iii) water generated by routine vessel operations
                     (e.g., cooling water, deck wash down, and graywater as
                     defined by Section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution
                     Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. ï¿½ 1322) excluding
                     oily wastes from bilge pumping; or

                     (iv),.engine exhaust.

           The prohibitions in this paragraph (6) do not apply to the
           discharge, in areas of the Sanctuary outside the no-activity
           zones,'of drilling cuttings and drilling fluids necessarily
           discharged incidental to the exploration for, development of, or
           production of oil or gas in those areas unless such discharge
           injures a Sanctuary resource or quality. (See section 943.-6 for
           the shunting requirement applicable to such discharges.)

                (7) Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundaries
           of the Sanctuary, any material or other matter, except those
           listed in paragraph (6)(i)-(iv) above, that subsequently enters
           the Sanctuary and injures a Sanctuary resource or quality.

                (8) Drilling into, dredging or otherwise altering the
           seabed of the Sanctuary (except by anchoring); or constructing,
           placing or abandoning any structure, material or other matter on
           the seabed of the Sanctuary.

                (9) Injuring or removing, or attempting to injure or
           remove, any coral or other bottom formation, coralline algae or
           other plant, marine invertebrate, brine-seep biota or carbonate
           rock within the Sanctuary.

                (10) Taking any marine mammal or turtle within the
           Sanctuary, except as permitted by regulations, as amended,
           promulgated under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, as amended,
           16 U.S.C. H 1361 et secr., and the Endangered Species Act, as
           amended, 16.U.S.C. ï¿½ï¿½ 1531 et ggeq.

                (11) Injuring, catching, harvesting, collecting or feeding,
           or attempting to injure, catch, harvest, collect or feed, any
           fish within the Sanctuary by use of bottom longlines, traps,
           nets, bottom trawls or any other gear, device, equipment or means
           except by use of conventional hook and line gear.


                                          120









                (12) Possessing within the Sanctuaryjregardless of where
           collected, caught, harvested or removed), except for valid law
           enforcement purposes, any carbonate rock, coral or other bottom
           formation, coralline algae or other plant, marineinvertebrate,
           brine-seep biota or fish (except for fish caught by use of
           conventional hook and line gear).

                (13) Possessing or using within the Sanctuary, except
           possessing while passing without interruption through it or for
           valid law enforcement purposes, any fishing gear, device
           equipment or means except conventional hook and line gear.

                .(14) Possessing, except for valid law enforcement purposes,
           or using explosives or releasing electrical charges within the
           Sanctuary.

                (b) The regulations in this Part shall be applied to
           foreign persons and foreign vessels in accordance with generally
           recognized principles of international law, and in accordance
           with treaties,.conventions, and other international agreements to
           which the United States is a party.

                (c) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2),(4),(5),(8)
           and (14) do not.apply to necessary activities conducted in areas
           of the Sanctuary outside the no-activity zones and incidental to
           exploration for, development of, or production of oil or gas in
           those areas.

                (d) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2)-(14) do not.apply
           to activities necessary to respond to emergencies threatening
           life, property, or the environment.

                (e)(1) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2)-(14) do not
           apply to activities being carried out by the Department of
           Defense as of the effective date of Sanctuary designation. Such
           activities shall be carried out in a manner that minimizes any
           adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and qualities. The
           prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2)-(14) do not apply to any new
           activities carried out by the Department of Defense that do not
           have the potential for any significant adverse impacts on
           Sanctuary resources or qualities. Such activities shall be
           carried out in a manner that minimizes any adverse impact on
           Sanctuary resources and qualities. New activities with the
           potential for significant adverse impacts.on Sanctuary resources
           or qualities may be exempted from the prohibitions in,paragraoh
           (a)(2)-(14) by the Director or designee after consultation
           between the Director or designee and the Department of Defense.
           If it is determined that an activity may be carried out, such
           activity shall be carried out in a manner that minimizes any
           adverse impact on Sanctuary resources and qualities.



                                          121









                    (2) In the event of threatened or actual destruction of,
            loss of, or injury to a Sanctuary resource or quality resulting
            from an untoward incident, including but not limited to spills
            and groundings, caused,by a component of the Departmentof
            Defense, the cognizant component shall promptly coordinate with
            the Director or designee for the purpose of taking appropriate
            actions to respond to and mitigate the harm and, if possible,
            restore or replace the Sanctuary resource or quality.

                 (f) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2)-(14) do not apply
            to any activity executed in accordance with the scope, purpose,
            terms, and conditions of a National Marine Sanctuary permit
            issued pursuant to section 943.9 or a Special Use permit.issued
            pursuant to Section 310 of the Act.

                 (g) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2)-(14) do  not,a pply@
            to any activity authorized by a valid.lease,'permit, license, ap-
            proval, or other authorization in existence on the effective date
            of Sanctuary designation and issued by any F'ederal authority of
            competent jurisdiction, or by any valid right of subsistence use
            or.access in existence on the effective date of Sanctuary
            designation, provided that the holder of such authorization or
            right complies with section 943.10,and with any terms and condi-
            tions on the exercise of such lease,.permit, license, approval,
            other authorization, or right imposed by the Director or
            designee.as a condition of certification as he or she deems
            necessary to achieve the purposes for which the Sanctuary was
            designated.

                 (h) The prohibitions in paragraph (a)(2) - (14) do not
            apply to any activity authorized by any lease, permit, license,
            approval or other authorization issued after the effective date
            of Sanctuary designation, provided that theapplicant complies
            with section 943.11, the Director or designee notifies the
            applicant and authorizing agency that he or she does not object
            to issuance of the authorization, and the applicant complies with
            any terms and conditions the-Director or designee deems necessary
            to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities.

                 (i) Notwithstanding paragraphs (f), (g) and (h) above, in
            no event may the Director or designee issue a National Marine
            Sanctuary permit under section 943.9 or a Special Use permit
            under Section-310 of the Act.authorizing, or otherwise approve,
            the exploration for, development of, or production of oil, gas or
            minerals-in a no-activity zone, and any.leases, licenses,
            permits, approvals, or other authorizations authorizing the
            exploration for, development of, or production of oil, gas or
            minerals in a no-activity zone and issued after the effective
            date of Sanctuary designation shall be invalid.




                                           122









         ï¿½ 943.6 Shunting requirements applicable to hydrocarbon-
         drilling discharges.

               Persons engaged in the exploration for,  development of, or
         production of oil or  gas in areas of the Sanctuary outside the
         no-activity zones must shunt all drilling cuttings and drilling
         fluids to the seabed through a downpipe that terminates.an
         appropriate distance, but no  more than ten meters,  from the
         seabed.


         ï¿½ 943.7 Emergency regulations.

               Where necessary to prevent or minimize the destruction of,
         loss of, or injury to a Sanctuary res  .ource or quality,, or
         minimize the imminent risk of such destruction, loss or injury,
         any and all activities are subject to immediate-temporary
         regulation, including prohibition.

         ï¿½ 943..8 Penalties for-commission   of prohibited activities.

               (a) 'Each violation'of the Act, any regulatiori in this Part,
         or any permit issued pursuant'-thereto, is subject to a civil..
         penalty of not more than $50','000. Each day of a continuing
         violation constitutes a separate violation.

               (b) Regul ations setting forth the procedures governing'
         administrative proceedings for assessment of civil penalties'.
         permit sanctions and denials for enforcement reasons, issuance
         and use of written warnings, and release or forfeiture of seized
         property appear at 15 CFR Part 904.

               (c) Under Section 312 of the Act, any person who':destroys,
         causes the loss of, or injures any sanctuary resource is liable
         to the United States for response costs and damages resulting
         from'such destruction, loss,@or injury, and any-vessel used toL.
         destroy, cause the loss of, or injure any sanctuary resource is
         liable in rem to the United States for response costs'and damages
         resulting from such destruction, loss, or injury.

         ï¿½ 943.9 National Marine sanctuary permits      Application
         procedures and issuance criteria.

               (a) A person may conduct an activity prohibited by section
         943.5(a)(2) - (14) if conducted in accordance with the scopel
         purpose, terms, and conditions of a permit issued under this
         section.

               (b) Applications for such permits should'be addressed to
         the Director of the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Manage-
         ment; ATTN: Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, Office of Ocean
         and Coastal Resource Management, National Ocean service, National
         Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1825 Connecticut Avenue,

                                         123










            N.W., Washington, D.C. 20235. An application must include a
            detailed description of the proposed activity including a
            timetable for completion of the activity and the equipment,
            personnel, and methodology to be employed. The qualifications
            and-experience of all personnel must be set forth in the.
            application.' The application must set forth the potential
            effects of the activity, if any, on Sanctuary resources and
            qualities. Copies of all other required licenses, permits,
            approvals, or other authorizations must be attached.

                 (c) Upon receipt of an application, the Director or
            designee may request such additional information from the
            applicant as he or she deems necessary to act on the application
            and may seek the views of any persons.

                 (d) The Director or designee, at his or her discretion, may
            issue a permit, subject to such terms and conditions as he or she
            deems appropriate, to conduct an activity prohibited by section'
            943.5(a)(2) - (14), if the'Director or designee finds that the
            activity will: further research related to Sanctuary resources;
            further the educational, natural or historical resource value of
            the Sanctuary; further salvage or recovery operations in or near
            the Sanctuary in connection with a recent air or marine casualty;
            or assist in managing the Sanctuary. In deciding whether to
            issue a permit, the Director or designee shall consider such
            factors as: the professional qualifications and financial
            ability of the applicant as related to the proposed activity; the
            duration of the activity and the duration of its effects; the
            appropriateness of the methods and procedures proposed by the
            applicant for the conduct of-the activity; the extent to which
            the conduct of the activity may diminish or enhance Sanctuary
            resources and qualities; the cumulative effects of the activity;
            and the end value of the activity. In addition, the Director or
            designee may consider such other factors as he or she deems
            appropriate.

                 (6) A permit issued'pursuant to this section is
            nontransferable.

                 (f) The Director or designee may amend, suspend, or revoke
            a permit issued pursuant to this section or deny a permit
            application pursuant to this section, in whole or in part, if it
            is determined that the permittee or applicant has acted in
            violation of the terms or conditions of the permit or of these
            regulations or for other good cause. Any such action shall be
            communicated in writing to the permittee or applicant and shall
            set forth the reason(s) for the action taken. Procedures
            governing permit sanctions and denials for enforcement reasons
            are set forth in Subpart D of 15 CFR Part 904.




                                           124









              (g) It shall be a condition of any permit issued that the
         permit or a copy thereof be displayed on board all vessels or
         aircraft used in the conduct of the activity.

              (h) The Director or designee may, inter alia, make it a
         condition of any permit issued that any information obtained
         under the permit be made available to the public.

              (i) The Director or designee may, inter alia, make it a
         condition of any permit issued that a NOAA official be allowed to
         observe any activity conducted under the permit and/or that the
         permit holder submit one or more reports on the status, progress,
         or results of any activity authorized by the permit.

              (j) The applicant for or holder of a National Marine
         Sanctuary permit may appeal the denial, conditioning, amendment,
         suspension, or revocation of the permit in accordance with the
         procedures set forth in section 943.12.

         ï¿½ 943.10 Certification of pre-existing leases, licenses,
         permits, approvals, other authorizations, or rights to conduct a
         prohibited activity.

              (a) The prohibitions set forth in ï¿½ 943.5(a)(2) - (14) do
         not apply to any activity authorized by a valid lease, permit,
         license, approval or other authorization in existence on the
         effective date of Sanctuary designation and issued by any Federal
         authority of competent jurisdiction, or by any valid right of
         subsistence use or access in existence on the effective date.of
         Sanctuary designation, provided that: 1) the holder of such
         authorization or right notifies the Director or designee, in
         writing, within 90 days of the effective date of Sanctuary
         designation, of the existence of such authorization or right and
         requests certification of such authorization or right;
         2) the holder complies with the other provisions of this section
         943.10; and 3) the holder complies with any terms and conditions
         on the exercise of such authorization or right imposed as a
         condition of certification, by the Director or designee, to
         achieve the purposes for which the Sanctuary was designated.

              (b) The holder of a valid lease, permit, license, approval
         or other authorization in existence on the effective date of
         Sanctuary designation and issued by any Federal authority of
         competent jurisdiction, or of any valid right of subsistence use
         or access in existence on the effective date of Sanctuary
         designation, authorizing an activity prohibited by
         section 943.5(a)(2) - (14) may conduct the activity without being
         in violation of section 943.5, pending final agency action on his
         or her certification request, Provided the holder is in
         compliance with this section 943.10.



                                        125









                   (c) Any holder of a valid lease, permit, license, approval,
             or other authorization in existence on the effective date of@.
             Sanctuary designation and issued by any Federal authority of
             competent jurisdiction, or any holder of a valid right of
             subsistence use or access in existence on the effective date of
             Sanctuary designation may request the Director or designee to
             issue a finding as to whether the activity for which the
             authorization has been issued, or the right given, is prohibited
             under section 943.5(a)(2) - (14).

                   (d) Requests for findings or certifications    should be
             addressed to the Director, office of ocean and Coastal Resource-
             Management; ATTN: Sanctuaries and Reserves.Division, office of
             ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Ocean service,
             National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1825 Connecticut
             Avenue, N.W.@, Washington, D.C. 20235. A copy of the lease,
             permit, license, approval or other authorization must accompany
             the request.

                   (e) The Director or designee may request additional
             information from the certification requester    as or he deems
             necessary to condition appropriately the exercise of the
             certified authorization or right to achieve the purposes for
             which the Sanctuary was designated.. The information requested
             must be received by the Director or designee within 45 days of
             the postmark date of the request. The Director or designee-.may
             seek the views of any persons on the certification request.-

                   (f) The Director or designee may amend any certification
             made under this section,whenever additional information-becomes
             available justifying such an amendment.

                   (g) The Director or designee shall communicate any decision
             on a certification request or any Action taken with respect,to
             any certification made under this section, in writing, to both
             the holder of the certified lease, permit, license, approval,
             other authorization or right, and the issuing agency,.And shall
             set forth the reason(s) for the decision or action taken.

                   (h) Any time limit prescribed in or established under this.,
             section may be extended by the Director or designee for good
             cause.

                   (i) the holder may appeal any action conditioning,
             amending, suspending, or revoking any certification in accordance
             with the procedures set forth in section 943.12.

                   (j) Any amendment, renewal or extension not in existence on@
             the effective date of Sanctuary designation of a lease, permit,
             license, approval, other authorization or right is subject to the
             provisions of section 943.11.


                                              126









        ï¿½ 943.11 Notification and review of applications for leases,
        licensest permits, approvals, or other,authorizations to conduct
        a prohibited activity.

             (a) The-prohibitions set forth in section 943.5(a)(2)
        (14) do not apply to any activity authorized by any valid lease,
        permit, license, approval or other authorization issued after the
        effective date of Sanctuary designation by Any Federal authority
        of competent jurisdiction, provided that: 1) the applicant
        notifies the Director or designee, in writing, of the application
        for such authorization (and of any application for an amendment,
        renewal or dxtension.of such authorization) within fifteen (15)
        days of the date of application or of the-effective date of
        Sanctuary designation, whichever is later; 2) the applicant
        complies with the other provisions of this section 943.11; 3) the
        Director or designee notifies the applicant and authorizing
        agency that,he or she does-not object to-issuance of the
        authorization (or amendment, renewal or extension); and'4) the
        applicant complies with any terms and conditions the Director or
        designee deems necessary to protect Sanctuary resources and
        qualities.

             (b) Any  potential applicant for a lease, permit, license,
        approval or other-authotization from any Federal authority (or
        for an amendment, renewal or extension of such,authorization) may
        request the Director or designee to issue a finding as to whether
        the activity for which an application is intended to be made is
        prohibited by section 943.5(a)(2) - (14).

            ..:(c) Notifications of filings of'applications and requests
        for findings should be addressed to .the Director, Office of ocean
        and Coastal Resource Management; ATTN: sanctuaries and Reserves
        Division, office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management,
        National Ocean Service, National oceanic and Atmospheric
        Administration, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
        20235. A copy of the application must accompany the
        notification.

             (d) The  Director or  designee may request additional
        information from the applicant as he or she deems necessary to
        determine.whether to object to issuance of such lease, license,
        permit, approval or other authorization (or to issuance of an
        amendment, extension or renewal of such authorization), or what
        terms and conditions are necessary protect Sanctuary resources
        and qualities. The information requested must be received by    Ithe
        Director or designee within 45 days of the postmark date of the
        request. The Director or designee may seek the views of any
        persons on the application.

             (e) The  Director or designee shall notify, in writing, the
        agency to which application has been made of his or her review of
        the application and possible objection to issuance. After review

                                        127









             of the application and information received with respect thereto,
             the Director or designee shall notify both the agency and
             applicant, in writing, whether he or she has an objection to
             issuance and what terms and conditions he or she deems necessary
             to protect Sanctuary resources and qualities. The Director or
             designee,shall state the reason(s) for any objection or the
             reason(s) that any terms and conditions are deemed necessary to
             protect Sanctuary resources and qualities.

                   (f) The Director or designee may amend the terms and
             conditions deemed necessary to protect Sanctuary resources and
             qualities whenever additional information becomes available
             justifying such an amendment.

                   (g) Any time limit prescribed in or established under this
             section may be extended.by the Director or designee for good
             cause.

                   (h) The applicant may appeal any objection by, or terms or
             conditions imposed by, the Director or designee to the Assistant
             Administrator or designee in accordance with the procedures set
             forth in section 943.12.

             ï¿½ 943.12 Appeals of   administrative action.

                   (a) Except for permit actions taken for enforcement reasons
             (see Subpart D of 15 CFR Part 904 for applicable procedures), an
             applicant for, or a holder of, a section 943.9 National Marine
             Sanctuary permit, an applicant for, or a holder of, a Section 310
             of the Act Special Use permit, a section 943.10 certification
             requester, or a section 943.11 applicant (hereinafter appellant)
             may appeal to the Assistant Administrator or designee: 1) the
             grant, denial, conditioning, amendment,'suspension, or revocation
             by the Director or designee of a National Marine Sanctuary or
             Special Use permitJ: 2) the conditioning, amendment, suspension,
             or.revocation of a certification under section 943.10; or 3) the
             objection to issuance or the imposition of terms and conditions
             under section 943.11.

                   (b) An appeal under paragraph (a) of this section must be
             in writing, state the action(s) by the Director or designee
             appealed and the reason(s) for the appeal, and be received within
             30 days of the action(s) by the Director or designee. Appeals
             should be addressed to the Assistant Administrator, Office of
             Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, ATTN: Sanctuaries and
             Reserves Division, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
             Management, National Ocean service, National Oceanic and
             Atmospheric Administration, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.,
             Washington, D.C. 20235.

                   (c) While the appeal is pending, appellants requesting
             certification pursuant to section 943.10 who are in compliance

                                              128









          with such section may continue to conduct their activities
          without being in violation of the prohibitions in section
          943.5(a)(2) - (14). All other appellants may not conduct their
          activities without being subject to the prohibitions in section
          9 4 3. 5 (a) (2) - (14) .

               (d) The Assistant Administrator or designee may request the
          appellant to submit such information as the Assistant
          Administrator or designee deems necessary in order f or him or her
          to decide the appeal. The information requested must be received
          by the Assistant Administrator or designee within 45 days of the
          postmark date of the request. The Assistant Administrator may
          seek the views of any other persons. The Assistant Administrator
          or designee may hold an informal hearing on the appeal. If the
          Assistant Administrator or designee determines that an informal
          hearing should be held," the Assistant Administrator or designee
          may designate an officer before whom the hearing shall be held.
          The hearing officer shall give notice in the Federal Register of
          the time, place, and-subject matter of the hearing.   The
          appellant and the Director or designee may appear personally or
          by counsel at the hearing and submit such material and present
          such arguments as deemed appropriate by the hearing officer.
          Within 60 days after the record for the hearing closes, the
          hearing officer shall recommend a decision in writing to the
          Assistant Administrator or designee.

               (eL) The Assistant Administrator or designee shall decide
          the appeal using the same regulatory criteria as for the initial
          decision and shall base the appeal decision on the record before
          the Director or designee and any information submitted regarding
          the appeal, and, if a hearing has been held, on the record before
          the hearing officer and.the.,hearing officer's recommended
          decision. The Assistant Administrator or designee shall notify
          the appellant of the final decision and the reason(s) therefor in
          writing. The Assistant Administrator or designee's decision
          shall constitute final agency action for the purposes of the
          Administrative Procedure Act.

               (f) Any time limit prescribed in or established under this
          section other than the 30 day limit for filing an appeal may be
          extended by the Assistant Administrator, designee, or hearing
          officer for good cause.











                                         129






                   Appendix I:           Coordinates for the Flower Garden Banks National
                   Marine Sanctuary


                            East Flower Ga@ Bank                              West F2c;.."-- Ca--,dm Bank,


                     Point No. Latitude            LcngitLvje         Point No. Latitude           Lmvitude

                      E-1       27*52'52.13"      93037'46.52"          W-1      27*t9'09. 24"    93050143.3VI
                      E-2       27053133.811,     93038'22.330          W-2      27*50'10.'23"    93*52107-96'@
                      E-3       27055113.31"      93038139.07"          W3       27*51113.14"     93"52150.6a"
                      E-4       27057130.14"      93"38132-26"                                    93052149.79"
                      E-5       27'056'27-7911    9303742.93"           W-5      27*52149.55"     93052121.69"
                      E-6       27*59100.2911                                    27"54159.08"     93*49141.87"
                      E-7       27058159.23"      93035'09.91"          W-7      27*54'57.06"     93048'38-52"
                      E-8       27*51120.23"      93*34113-75"                   27054133.46"     93*47110-36"
                      E-9       27*54103.3511,    93*34118.42n          W-9      27*54"  13.51"   93 *46148 -*96"
                      E-10      27053125.9511     93*35'03.79"          P-10     '27*53-137.67"   93*46150.67"
                      E-:11     27*52'51.14"      93*36157.59ff         W-11     27*52116.44"     93047114-10"
                                                                        W-12     27*50'3a.31"     93*47122.E6"
                                                                        W-13     27*49'11.2311    93*48142.39"









































                                                           130





                                        AIIIV-pendix M.                              Coordinates for the Department of the Interior
                                        Topographic                       Lease Stipulations for OCS Lease-.Sale 112


                                                                                     7LZW---A alizrN                                                             VEST

                                                        Block
                                                                                                                                                Kock A-393
                                                                                                                                                                  sz@' $--L; S";'
                                                                 S'I,-               sz@                               S-.;                    31.ock A-334
                                                                 S@'     SrL.

                                                                                                                                                          Sh, szk' Nz@;
                                                                                     S W'-'      S";h'
                                                    -Blcck A-374                                                                                                  S";                   N-'      S
                                                                                                                                                                                           swk' 5;4'
                                                                Sri,,
                                                                S -'; k        h , - S            Wk, S;;k
                                                                W'-                                           -h                               Block A-@as
                                                                    ' S-@' S;;k;                S Z'        S-       S;;@.                               SA, S";h,            Nwh;
                                                    Block A-375
                                                                E                                                                                        zrwk*                             S-Wh' S-4h.
                                                                                                                                              Block A         @-397
                                                                                                                                                         Wk              N',;'
                                                                                                                                                         w1k,
                                                                                                                                             Block X-:98


                                                                                                                                             B-7=ck A-399


                                                                                     Eli, Nzh, S-;k;                                                                                             STh'
                                                                        );-h,        S'W L, ;                        S";,-.;                             E@' Fzh' S-,;k; SA, 2;-Z@' s-.;-.,-
                                                                        sIrk,        SW-11.                                                              N--;" szk' S-Wk.
                                                                                     5          W@' yz--@' S                                Block A-401
                                                             F,;k,      S-7k;        N-Wk,      s;;h, S--h.                                              N-zh,                N4, MA, NEU
                                                 Block A-329                                                                                             N--k,
                                                             yz-@'             ;     N-,;3- '   N-.;h; swk, N-,;.;                          Block 134
                                                                                                         S-h'                                            That portic3 of the blzck north
                                                                                                                                                         Q@ a I-Ine cannecting points 17
                                                                                                                                                         and 13, de!-;ned rnder the u-n4vez-sal
                                                                                                                                                         -wisverse =zz'--allor 5zid systa=
                                                                                                                                                         as follows:
                                                                                                                                                         Point 17: X- 1,378,080.009
                                                                                                                                                                             Y-10,096,193.00'
                                                                                                                                                         I)Cint 18: X- 1,376,079.411


                                                                                                                                           Block 135
                                                                                                                                                         viat Portion of the block
                                                                                                                                                         narthwest of a line conna=ting
                                                                                                                                                         points 16 and 17# defined tLida=
                                                                                                                                                         the. tnive=sal transvezse mem-cator
                                                                                                                                                         g--id syst@n as follows:
                                                                                                                                                         Point 16: X- 1,383,293.S4'
                                                                                                                                                                            Y-10,103,251.931
                                                                                                                                                         Pz-;il. 17: X- 2,378,030,001















                                                                                                               131











           APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FOR EXISTING MANAGEMENT
           JURISDICTION












         APPENDIX 2: LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FOR EXISTING MANAGEMENT
         JURISDICTION

         Major Legislative Authority for Existing Federal Management
         Jurisdiction in the Area of the ProRosed Flower Garden Banks
         National Marine Sanctuary

             This appendix is designed to provide reviewers additional
         information beyond that provided in the status quo section of the
         FEIS/MP (Part III, Section I) on existing Federal jurisdiction
         over activities conducted at the Flower Garden Banks. The
         appendix serves as a basic reference to the status quo (Part III,
         Section I) and environmental consequences (Part IV) sections of
         the FEIS/MP.

         1.  Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MFCMA) (16
         U.S.C. 1801 et secr.)

              The MFCMA provides for the conservation and management of
         all fishery resources in the zone between 3 and 200 nautical
         miles (5.6-370 km) offshore. The National Marine Fisheries
         Service (NMFS), NOAA, of the Department of Commerce is charged
         with establishing guidelines for, and approving, fishery
         management plans (FMP's) prepared by Regional Fishery Management
         Councils for selected fisheries. These plans determine levels of
         commercial and sport fishing that are consistent with the goal of
         achieving and maintaining an optimum yield for each fishery. The
         Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is responsible for
         preparing FMP's governing fisheries in the area of Flower Garden
         Banks. The MFCMA is enforced by the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and
         NMFS.

              In July 1983, the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
         approved an FMP to protect the coral and coral reefs of the Gulf
         of Mexico and the South Atlantic. This FMP provides the primary
         basis for fishery management at the Flower Garden Banks. The
         final rules implementing the FMP were published on July 23, 1984
         (49 FR 29607 (1984), codified at 50 CFR Part 638). These
         regulations establish management measures to be applied in coral
         habitat areas of particular concern (HAPC's) such as the Flower
         Gardens. The areas within the 50 fathom (300 foot) isobath
         surrounding the East and West Flower Garden Banks are established
         by the regulations as an HAPC. Within the HAPC, the following
         restrictions apply:

              (1) Fishing for coral is prohibited except as authorized by
              scientific or educational permit; and

              (2) Fishing with bottom longlines, traps, pots, and bottom
              trawls is prohibited.


                                        133









                  (3) The use of toxic chemicals to take fish or other marine
                  organisms is prohibited except as authorized by scientific
                  or educational permit.

                  Another FMP that has some application to Flower Garden
            resources is the FMP for the reef fish resources of the Gulf of
            Mexico. The regulations implementing this FMP, 50 CFR Part 641,
            set bag and-size limits, place restrictions on the use of certain
            types of fishing gear, and establish reporting and permit
            systems. They also prohibit the use of poisons and explosives to
            take reef fish; however, they allow p6werheads to be used outside
            the stressed areas. They also prohibit vessels in the reef fish
            fishery from possessing on board any dynamite or similar
            explosive substance. Further, they establishes a stressed area
            in Gulf, where reef fish are subject to special management
            measures, and a longline and buoy gear restricted area. The
            Flower Garden Banks are not included in these areas.

            2.    Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.   C. 1531 et secF.)

                  The ESA provides protection for listed species of plants and
            animals in the territorial sea and upon the high seas. The Fish
            and Wildlife Service (FWS), in the Department of the Interior,
            and NMFS determine which species need protection and maintain the
            lists of endangered and threatened species. The most significant
            protection provided by the ESA is the prohibition on taking. The
            term "take" is defined broadly to mean "harass, harm, pursue,
            hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to
            attempt to engage in such conduct" (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)). The FWS
            regulations define the term "harm" to include significant habitat
            modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures
            wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral
            patterns, including breeding, feeding or sheltering. The
            regulations define the term "harass" to mean "an intentional or
            negligent act or omission which creates the likelihood of injury
            to wildlife by annoying it to such an extent as to significantly
            disrupt normal behavioral patterns which include, but ate not
            limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering" (50 CFR 17.3).

                 'The ESA also provides some protection to endangered species
            and their habitats from less direct threats. This is
            accomplished by means of a consultation process (known as section
            7) designed to ensure that projects authorized, funded, or
            carried out by Federal agencies are not likely to jeopardize the
            continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or
            result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat of
            such species which is determined by the Secretary (of the
            Interior or@Commerce, as the case may be) to be critical, unless
            an exemption is granted by a Cabinet-level committee set up for
            that purpose under the ESA (16   'U.S.C. 1536).    Critical habitat
            areas for endangered species are designated by the FWS or NMFS
            depending on the species.

                                              134









          3.. Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1361 et
          .ge
           A.)

               The MMPA is designed to protect all species of marine
          mammals. Its provisions apply in the territorial sea and on the
          high seas. The MMPA establishes the Marine Mammal commission,
          which advises the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National
          Marine Fisheries Service on marine'mammal matters and sponsors
          relevant scientific research. The National Marine Fisheries
          service is responsible for implementation of the MMPA's
          provisions with respect to cetaceans (whales, porpoises,
          dolphins), and pinnipeds other than sea lions and walruses. The
          Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for all other marine
          mammals.

               The primary management features of the MMPA include:. 1) a
          moratorium on "taking" of marine mammals; 2) the development of
          management designed to achieve an "optimum sustainable
          population" (OSP) for all species or population stocks of marine
          mammals; and 3) protection of marine mammal populations
          determined to be "depleted."

               The MMPA defines "take" broadly to include "harass, hunt,
          capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, or kill
          any marine mammal" (16 U.S.C. 1362(12)). The term "harass" has
          been interpreted to encompass acts which cause unintentional
          adverse effects on marine mammals, such as operation of motor
          boats in waters where marine mammals are found. The MMPA allows
          certain exceptions to the moratorium on taking. For example, to
          implement a recent MMPA amendment, the National Marine Fisheries
          service issued in May 1989 an interim rule, providing a five-year
          exemption for certain incidental takings of marine mammals during
          commercial fishing operations.

               The MMPA also directs officials to seek "an optimum
          sustainable population (of marine mammals]" (16 U.S.C.
          1361(6)). optimum sustainable population (OSP) is defined   as,
          "with respect to any population stock, the number of animals
          which will result in the maximum productivity of the population
          or the species keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the
          habitat and the health of the ecosystem of which they form a
          constituent element" (16 U.S.C. 1362(8)).

               Marine mammal species whose populations are determined to be
          "depleted" receive additional protection under'the MMPA. With
          the exception of scientific research permits, no permits for
          taking depleted species may be issued. Species occurring within'
          the area of the proposed Sanctuary which have been determined to
          be depleted include the humpback whale, fin whale, northern right
          whale, sei whale, and blue whale, based on their "endangered"
          status under the Endangered Species Act.









           4.   Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly known as the
           Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1251 et gm-)

                The CWA establishes the basic scheme for restoring and
           maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of
           the Nation's waters.

                (a) Discharges in General

                The CWA's chief mechanism for preventing or reducing water
           pollution is the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
           (NPDES), administered by EPA. Under the NPDES program, a permit
           is required for the discharge of pollutants from a point source
           into navigable waters of the U.S.,the waters of the contiguous
           zone, or ocean waters. For example, an NPDES permit is required
           for discharges associated with oil and gas development pursuant
           to Feder'al (outer continental-shelf) lease sales. EPA generally
           grants NPDES permits for offshore oil and gas activities based on
           published effluent limitation guidelines (40 CFR Part 435).
           other conditions beyond these guidelines may, however, be imposed
           by the Regional Administrator on a.case-by-case basis.

                (b) Oil Pollution

                The CWA prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous
           substances in quantities that may be harmful to the public health
           or welfare or the environment, including but not limited to fish,
           shellfish, wildlife, and public and private property, shorelines
           and beaches: 1) into navilgable'waters.of the U.S., adjoining
           shorelines, or into the waters of the contiguous zone, and 2) in
           connection with activities under'the Outer Continental Shelf
           Lands Act or,the Deepwater Port Act of 1974, or which may      affect
           natural resources belonging to, appertaining to". or under the'
           exclusive management authority of the U.S., except, in the case
           of such discharges into the'waters of the contiguous zone or
           which may affect the above-mefitioned natural resources, where
           permitted under the Protocol of 1978 Relating to the
           International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
           Ships.

                When harmful 'discharges do occur, the   National   Contingency
           Plan for the removal of oil and hazardous substances takes
           effect. The U.S. Coast'Guard, in cooperation with EPA,
           administers the Plan, which establishes the organizational
           framework for clean-up, including of oil spills resulting from
           activities under the outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. The
           National Contingency Pianis discussed in greater detail      in the
           FEIS/MP in PART II, Section III, B. 3.





                                            136









               (c) Vessel Sewage
               The CWA (33 U.S.C. 1322) requires vessels equipped with.
          installed toilet facilities to contain operable and certified
          .marine sanitation devices.

               (d) Discharging Dredged or Fill Materials
               Section 404 permits, issued by the Army Corps,of Engineers
          and based on EPA-developed guidelines, are required prior to
          discharging dredged or fill materials within three nautical miles
          of shore.

          5.   The Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 401 et

               Section 10 (33 U.S.C. 403) prohibits the unauthorized
          obstruction of navigable waters of the United States. The
          construction of any structure or any excavation or fill activity
          in the territorial pea or on the outer continental shelf is
          prohibited without 4 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.
          Section 13 (33 U.S.C. 407) prohibits the discharge of refuse into'
          navigable waters, but has been largely superseded by the CWA,
          discussed above.

          6.   Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA) (33 U.S.C. 1231
          et secr.

               The PWSA, as amended by the Port and Tanker Safety Act of
          1978, is designed to promote navigation and vessel safety and the
          protection of the marine 'environment. The PWSA applies out ' to
          200 nautical miles. The I*SA authorizes the U.S. Coast Guard
          (USCG) to establish vessel traffic services for ports, harbors,
          and other waters subject to congested vessel traffic or otherwise
          hazardous. Two such services are the Vessel Traffic Separation
          Scheme (VTSS) and designation of necessary fairways.

               In addition to vessel traffic control, the USCG  regulates
          other navigational and shipping activities and has promulgated
          numerous regulations relating to vessel design, construction, and
          operation designed to minimize the likelihood of accidents-and to
          reduce vessel source pollution. The 1978 amendments to the PWSA
          establish a comprehensive program for regulating-the design,
          construction, operation, equipping, and banning'of all tankers
          using U.S. ports to transfer oil and hazardous materials. These
          requirements are, for the most part, in agreement with protocols
          (passed in 1978) to the International Convention for the
          Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, and the International
          Convention on Safety of Life at Sea, 1974.

               The USCG is also vested with the primary responsibility for
          maintaining boater safety, including the conduct of routine
          vessel inspections and coordination of rescue operations.

                                         137












             7.   Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) (43 U.S.C. 1331 et
             sea.)

                  The OCSLA, as amended in 1978 and 1985, establishes Federal
             jurisdiction over the mineral resources of the Outer Continental
             Shelf (OCS) beyond 3 nautical miles, and gives the Secretary of
             the Interior primary responsibility for managing OCS mineral
             exploration and development. The Secretary's responsibility
             has been delegated to the Minerals Management Service (MMS).

                  The MMS has overall responsibility for leasing OCS lands.
             In unique or special areas, MMS may impose special lease
             stipulations designed to protect specific geological and
             biological phenomena. These stipulations may vary among lease
             tracts and sales. As noted in the FEIS/MP (Part II, Section II,
             C. 1, Oil and Gas Activities) the MMS has established biological
             stipulations for tracts at, and adjacent to, the Flower Garden
             Banks.

                  The MMS is also charged with supervising OCS operations,
             including the approval of plans for exploratory drilling and
             applications for pipeline rights-of-way on the OCS. Several
             types of regulatory authority are used in carrying out its
             supervisory role. Such authority includes the enforcement of
             regulations made pursuant to the OCSLA (30 CFR Parts 250 and 256)
             and the enforcement of stipulations applicable to particular
             leases.

             8.   Title I of the Marine Protection, Research,and Sanctuaries
             Act (MPRSA) (33 U.S.C. 1401 gt aeg.)

                  The MPRSA, also known asthe Ocean Dumping Act, prohibits:
             1) any person from transporting, without a permit, from the U.S.
             any material for the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters
             (defined to mean those waters of the open seas lying seaward of
             the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured) and 2)
             in the case of a vessel or aircraft registered in the U.S. or
             flying the U.S. flag or in the case of a U.S.* agency, any person
             from transporting, without a permit, from any location any
             naterial for the purpose of dumping it into the ocean waters.
             The MPRSA also prohibits any person from dumping, without a
             permit, into the territorial sea, or the 12-nautical-mile
             contiguous zone to the extent that it may affect the territorial
             sea or the territory of the U.S., any material transported from a
             location outside the United States. EPA regulates, through the
             issuance of permits, the transportation, for the purpose of
             dumping, and the dumping of all materials except dredged
             material; COE, the transportation, for the purpose of dumping, of
             dredged material.

                                               138








           9.   Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS) (33 U.S.C.
           1901 et sea-)

                The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
           of the Sea by Oil, 1954; and the Oil Pollution Act of 1961 have
           been superseded by the International Convention for the
           Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the
           related 1978 Protocol (MARPOL 73/78.), and implemented in the
           United States by the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 1980,
           as amended in 1982 and 1987 (APPS). APPS, in implementing Annex
           I of MARPOL 73/78, regulates the dischargeof oil and oily
           mixtures from seagoing ships, including oil tankers._ APPS, in
           ,implementing Annex II of MARPOL 73/78, regulates the discharge of
           noxious liquid substances from seagoing ships. Enforcement of
           APPS is the responsibility of the U.S.Coast Guard.

                When more than 12 nautical miles from the nearest land, any
           discharge of oil or oily mixtures into the sea from a ship
          ,subject to APPS other an oil tanker or from machinery space
           bilges of an oil tanker subject to APPS is prohibited except
           when: 1) the oil or oily mixture does not originate from cargo
           pump room bilges; 2) the oil or oily mixture is not mixed with
           oil cargo residues; 3) the ship is not within a Special Area (the
           Flower Garden Banks are not a Special Area for.purposes of APPS);
           4) the ship is proceeding en route; 5) the oil content of the
           effluent without dilution is less than 100 parts per million; and
           6) the ship has in operation oiiy-water separating equipment, a
           bilge monitor, bilge alarm or combination thereof. 33 CFR
           151.10(a). The restrictions on discharges 12 nautical miles.or
           less from the nearest land are more stringent. 33 CFR 151.10(b).

                A tank vessel subject to APPS may not discharge an oily
           mixture into the sea from a cargo tank, slop tank or cargo pump
           bilge unless the vessel: 1) is more than 50 nautical miles from
           the nearest land; 2) is proceeding en route; 3) is discharging at
           an instantaneous rate of oil content not exceeding 60 liters per
           nautical mile; 4) is an existing vessel and the total quantity of
           oil discharged into the sea does not.e,xceed 1/15000 of the total
           quantity of the cargo that the discharge.formed a.part (1/30000
           for new vessels); 5) discharges, with certain exceptions, through
           the above waterline discharge point; 6) has in operation a cargo
           monitor and control system that is designed for use with the oily
           mixture being discharged; and 7) is outside.the Special Areas.
           33 CFR 157.37.

                APPS is amended by  the Marine Plastic Pollution Research and
           Control Act of 1987 (MPPRCA), which implements Annex V of MARPOL
           73/78 in the U.S. The MPPRCA and implementing 'regulations at 33
           CFR 151.51 to 151.77 apply to U.S. ships (except warships and
           ships owned or operated by the.U.S.) everywhere, including
           recreational vessels, and to other ships subject to MARPOL 73/78









           while in t .he navigable waters.or the Exclusive Economic Zone of.
           the U.S. They,prohibit the discharge o     'f Plastic or,garbage mixed
           with plastic into any waters and the discharge of dunnage, lining
           and.packing mate  ,rials that float within 25 nautical miles of the
           nearest land.. Other unground garbage may be discharged beyond 12
           nautical miles from   the nearest land. other garbage ground to
           less than one inch may be discharged beyond three nautical miles
           of the nearest land. Fixed and floating platforms and associated
           vessels are subject to morestrinqent restrictions. "Garbage" is
           defined as all kinds of victual., domestic and operational waste,
           6xcluding fresh fish and parts therof,     generated during.the
           normal operations of the ship and liable to be disposed of
           continuously or periodically, except dishwater, graywater and
           certain substances.. 33 CFR 151.05.

           10. Oil Pollution,  Act of 1990 (OPA).(P.L. 101-38.0)

                 The OPA addresse's a wide range of problems associated.with
           preventing, responding to, and paying foroil spills. It does so
           by creating a comprehensive regime for dealing with vessel and
           facility-caused oil pollution. The OPA provides for
           environmental, safeguards in'oil transportation greater than those
           existing before its passage by: setting new standards for vessel
           construction, crew licensing, and manning; providing for better
           contingency planning; enhancing Federal response capability,;
           br6adenin4-enforceme'nt authority";'increasing penalties; and
           authorizing 'multi'-agency research and development. A one.billion
           dollar trust fund is available to cover clean-up costs and
           damages not compensated by the spiller.

                  itle I,establishes liability and    limit
                 T                                       I s to liability.

                 Liability: Any party responsible   for the discharge, or the
           substantial threat of discharge, of oil into navigable waters or
           adjoining shorelines or the Exclusive Economic Zone is liable for
           removalicosts and damages.. [ï¿½ 1002(a))

                 Damages: Recoverable damages,include damages for injury to
           natural'resources, real or personal property, subsistence use,
           reIvenues, profits.and earning capacity,.public 'Services, and.the
           cost of assessing those damages. (ï¿½ï¿½ 1002(b),,1001(5)]

                 The measure of damages for natural resources is the,cost of
           restoring, rehabilitating, replacing, or acquiring the .
           equivalent; the diminution in value pending restoration; plus       the
           reasonable cost of assessing damages. [ï¿½ 1006(d)(1)) NOAA has
           the responsibility'of promulgating damage assessment regulations
           and following the regulations will create a rebuttable
           presumption in favor of a given assessment. [ï¿½ 1006(e)]




                                            140









          Sums recovered by a trustee for natural resource damages are
          retained in a revolving trust account to reimburse or pay costs
          incurred by the trustee with respect to those resources.

               Title II'makes numerou's amendments to conform other Federal
          statutes, particularly section 311, of the Clean, Water Act, to the
        .provisions of the OPA.

               Title III encourages the establishment of an international
          inventory of spill removal equipment'and personnel and requires
          the Secretary of State to review relevant agreements and treaties
          with Canada.

               Title IV, subpart A, Prevention, gives added responsibility
          to the Coast Guard regarding merchant marine personnel. * It also
          imposes new requirements on the operation of oil tankers (double
          hulls on new vessels, and eventually on older vessels)..

               Title IV, subpart B, Removal, substantially amends
          subsection 311(c) of the Clean Water Act, requiring the Federal
          government to effectively ensure immediate removal from navigable
          waters or adjoining shorelines or the Exclusive Economic Zone of
          harmful quantities of oil or hazardous substances.'[ï¿½ 4261(a)]
          It also requires A revision and republication of the National
          Contingency Plan within one year Cï¿½4201(c)] that will include,
          among other things, a fish and wildlife re'sponse,plan developed
          in consultation with NOAA and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
          Cï¿½4201(b)]

               Title IV, subpart C, Penalties and Miscellaneous,
          substantially alters and increases the penalties for illegal
          discharges and violations of regulations promulgated under the
          Clean Water Act.

               Title V relates to Prince William Sound.

               Title VI addresses the Oil Spill Liability  Trust'Fund.

               Title VII creates an interagency committee  to coordinate a
          program of oil pollution research and technology development and
          requires monitoring of long-term environmental effects of large
          oil spills.

               Title'VIII provides for improvements to the Tran-Alaska
          Pipeline System.

              Title X'addresses the Oil Spill Liability Trust  Fund.





                                         141













                APPENDIX 3: ABBREVIATIONS
























































 I












         APPENDIX 3: ABBREVIATIONS


         bbls   barrels
         BIM   Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior
         C - Celsius
         CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
         CSA - Continental Shelf Associates
         CWA - Clean Water Act
         DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement
         DOS - Department of State
         DOD - Department of Defense
         DOI - Department of the Interior
         EIS - Environmental Impact Statement
         EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
         F   Fahrenheit
         F.   Family (biological classification)
         FEIS -Final Environmental Impact Statement
         FMP - Fishery Management Plan
         ft - foot
         HAPC -Habitat Area of Particular Concern
         km - kilometer
         LRA - List of Recommended Areas
         m - meter
         MMS - Minerals Management Service, Department of the Interior
         MPRSA - Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972
         NAS   National Academy of Sciences
         NEPA   National Environmental Policy Act
         NMFS   National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, Department of
                Commerce
         NOAA   National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
         Department of Commerce
         NOSIC - Naval Ocean Surveillance Information Center
         NRP - National Research Plan (prepared by the MEMD)
         OCS - outer continental shelf
         ppt - parts per thousand
         RFP - Request for Proposal
         SEL - Site Evaluation List
         sp. - species
         SRP - Sanctuary Research Program
         SRD - Sanctuaries and Reserves Division, Ocean and Coastal
               Resource Management, NOAA, Department of Commerce
         USC - United States Code
         USCG - United States Coast Guard












                                         143











           APPENDIX 4: COMMENTS AND RESPONSES









                                       I


              Appendix 4 includes the comments received on the Draft
         Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan (DEIS/MP) prepared
         on the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary,
         and provides the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
         Administration's responses to these comments. Generally, the
         responses to comment are provided in one or a combination of
         forms:
              1.   Expansion, clarification of other revision of the
                   DEIS/MP,

              2.   Generic Responses to comments raised by several
                   reviewers, and/or

              3.   Brief responses to detailed comments received from each
                   reviewer.

              Written comments from individuals, organizations, State and
         local governments and Federal, State and local agencies are
         printed verbatim, and verbal comments, received at public
         hearings, have been summarized.

              Eleven general issues were raised frequently by reviewers of
         the DEIS/MP. The responses to these issues are presented below.
         Commenters will be referred to these generic in the text.




























                                        145








											AMERICAN LITTORAL SOCIETY
                                                                 CORAL REEF CONSERVATION CENTER
                                                        For The Study and Conservation of Marina Life
                                               75 VIRGINIA BEACH DRIVE - KEY BISCAYNE - MIAMI, FLORIDA 33149 - (305) 361-4495


                                                                                                       April 19, 1989
                                          Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                          OCRH - HEMD / NOAA
                                          1825  Connecticut Ave., NW.
                                          Washington, D.C.       20235

                                                       re: Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                                                          Review of DEIS / Draft Management Plan
                                                       subject: Need for Designation

                                          Dear Mr.     Uravitch:

                                                    The American   Littoral Society strongly supports the desi-
                                          nation of a Flower Garden Books National Marine Sanctuary.

                                                    NOAA's resource     Inventory has revealed         the     Flower     Garden
                                          banks  to be   "unique among the banks of the northwestern Gulf                   of
                                          
                                               in that they bear the northernmost tropical Atlantic coral
                                          reefs  on the continental shelf and support               the most highly         deve-
                                          loped offshore hard-bank communities in the region." (DEIS, p. 16)

                                                    This  same   resource Inventory finds that           "the Flower Garden
                                          Banks     harbor approximately 500 acres of submerged tropical                   coral                        NO
                                          reefs     with  18   species  of   hermatypic      (reef-building)        corals.
                                          Cresting     at approximately 50 feet below the          water   surface ,     the
                                          reefs     extend    downward    to 150-foot depths ... The two          coral     reef
                                          zones on the shallowest crests of the Flower Garden Banks have                       no
                                          counterparts      on  the 15 or so similar banks            stretching     eastward
                                          towards the Mississippi." (DEIS, p. 23)*

                                                    The shallowest of the 2 coral reef zones           mentioned above (the
                                          Diploria-Muntastrea-Porites zone) is found at                depths of 50 to        120
                                          feet      and is even more remarkable in that the            coral reefs in       that
                                          zone      "are isolated from other reef systems by over 300                 nautical
                                          miles and exist under hydrographic conditions generally considered
                                          marginal for tropical reef formation." (DEIS. p. 25)

                                                    We find that the resource assessment above clearly qualifies
                                          the       Flower Garden Banks under 16 USC 1431 et-seq.             as a "discrete
                                          marine    area of special national significance '(with)                  distinctive
                                          natural      resources  whose protection and beneficial use               requires
                                          comprehensive planning and management (of its) conservation, rec-
                                          restional, ecological, research. educational and esthetic values."

                                                    The Flower   Garden    Banks     clearly merit       designation      as    a
                                          national    marine    sanctuary,       with     boundaries     and      regulations
                                          adequate to fulfill the  protective intent of that designation.

                                                                                                       Sincerely,


                                                                                                       ALEXANDER STONE
                                          AS:hm                                                        Center Director







                  AMERICAN LITTORAL SOCIETY
                                 CORAL REEF CONSERVATION CENTER
                         For The Study and Conservation of Marine Life
               75 VIRGINIA BEACH DRIVE - KEY BISCAYNE - MIAMI, FLORIDA 33149 - (305) 361-4495


                                                                 April 19. 1989

             Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
             OCRm - MEND / NOAA
             1825 Connecticut  Ave.,  NW,
             
             Washington. D.C. 20235
                       re: Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                            Review of DEIS / Draft Management Plan
                       subject: Prohibited Activities (15 CFR 943.6)


             Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                  The American Littoral Society strongly supports the desig-
             nation of a Flower Garden Banks National Marine         Sanctuary.      To
             achieve  the protective Intent of that designation,        we request the
             following Improvements to the sanctuary's regulatory regime.
                     
           		Anchoring by Vessel   (15 CFR 943.6 (a)(l)i,ii & iii)
                  NOAA has inarguably shown the need for anchoring restrictions
             to protect the Flower Carden Banks' coral reefs (DEIS.     p. 44-46).
             NOAA  has also documented that offshore platform          service     vessels
             traversing the area are 90 to 180 feet long (DEIS. p. 14).
                  The DEIS provides no evidence that the anchoring damage from                  1.     Several of the excursion vessels that take divers to the
             a  90-foot  vessel is materially different than the damage from a                        Flower Garden reefs are between 90 and 100 feet in length.
             100-foot vessel.                                                                            N0AA considers the passengers of these vessels to be
                  Therefore; we request that 15 CFR 943.6(a)(I)i, ii, and iii                         legitimate users of the sanctuary. As NOAA has no evidence
             be changed to apply to vessels "greater than 90 feet in registered                       that the anchoring damage from a 100 foot vessel is materially
             length." instead of the currently proposed 100-foot limit.                              different from that of a 90 foot vessel, NOAA reaffirms its
                            Altering the Seabed (15 CFR 43.6(a)(3))                                   decision to permit anchoring of 100 foot vessels subject to
                  The need for regulations to protect sanctuary resources from                        sanctuary regulations.            See also Generic Responses E and F.
             direct and indirect effects of seabed alteration is illustrated by                       Note that the sanctuary regulations have been revised to
             the recent leasing of 42 "blocks" in the vicinity of the sanctuary                       prohibit anchoring of vessels of less than or equal to 100
             for hydrocarbon exploration and development (DEIS. p. 36).                               feet within an area of the sanctuary where a mooring buoy is
                                                                                                     available.
                  Most of the natural values meant to be protected by a sanc-
             tuary designation in this area are related to coral reef resources
             and their attendant reef fish communities.          The potential impacts
             of hydrocarbon operations on these resources is very high.

                  The coral reefs of the Flower Garden Banks have already been
             declared a Habitat Area of Particular Concern by the Gulf of
             Mlexico Fishery Management Council (DEIS. p. 8).             More recently,
             the same Council's review of its Reef Fish Fishery Management Plan


0











                concluded that one of the "primary threats to (reef fish) offshore
                 habitat     comes    from  oil and gas development         and     production..."
                (CNFMC.            32-33.      attached).       The  GHFMC'S  findings       are
                 incorporated to this review by refererance.

                       These    findings;    conclude "adverse effects on fish          and    other
                 biota    from the discharge of drilling mudz,         drill     cutttings.      and
                minor petroleum   pollution due to wasdown         ottivities.      effluent
                 dicharges and trash disposal." (CHrMC.             attached).       Given. these
                 findings.     even   "discharges authoaized for [Outine operations" of
                 offshore platforms (DEIS.. p.' 55) should be restricted.                                  2.     NOAA has added a regulation,                  5 943.6, re
                                                                                                                  drilling cuttings and drilling fluids to
                       NOAA     finds that      the. MinersIs Hatingessent.        Service      has            where oil and gas activities are allowed
                 established biological            lease stipulations to prevent damage to                        no-activity zones.             See also Generic Res
                 sensitive natural resources to the Flower Carden Banks area (DEIS.
                 p. 74).     However. 110AA has also found that           the e-stipulations way
                 primary among lease tracts and sales." (DEIS, ;. 1336). Additionally,
                 ur    inuiries have        found   that NOAA-"END staff         does    not    know
                 whether     or under what conditth:cMinerals Management. Service
                 c. d ova t.0      C  oge a.,  d/  0r coon:l a   h stipulations.
                   ul a             ba
                       This    highly    uncertain     situation cannot       be 'considered       to -
                 provide adeuate      assurtrace of protection. for sensitive ' 'eigactuary
                 resources.      It is essential that. VO&A codify an acceptable #at of
                 bi6logical lease stipulations as specific sanctuary regulatiting.

                       NOAA has acknowledged           the   wisdom of,such a         sanctuary
                 regulatory codification for           "the  existing situation on dredge
                 dinposa,l activities" (DEIS.        p. 90). The sane logic should apply
                 to hydrocarbon development operations.
                       Therefore. we reuest that I5FR 943.6(a)(3) specifically                            3.     Sea Generic Response A.
                 Ito corporfite and list out the biological lease stipulations listed
                 n page 74 of the PEIS, preferably using the language appearing on
              [DFIS pages 81-8       under Regulatory/Poun4ory Alternative3.                             4.
                                                                                                                    NOAA has added the definition of the
                       Similarly. we reu,-st that 15 CFR 943.3 specifically Incorp-                                formerly       contained         in    j    943.6(a)(3)
                 rate  a  nd list*out.the "too activity zones" for hydrocarbon explo-                               definitions in 1 943.3.
                 ation appearing an DEIS Table-4 (DEIS. p. 75).                                                                                          It thus becomes
                                                                                                                    these Zones elsewhere in the regulations
                               Activfties Necessary for the National Defense
                                           jis CFR 943.6_,a,        I (b!!      , .
                       As proposed.     HOAA's sanctuar     y re;:f.tj     a exempt the Depart-
                    rent of Defense from any a        nof all activity prohibitions, -Including
                 8..rRe    vessel    anchoring      and the detonation of       explosives      where
                 "any activity necessary for the national. defense" is Involved.-

                       Although     the defenne of the United States'is             trauestionably
                 necessary, jt is NOT unuestionsSly necessary to 'Conduct                 training
                 nnery and other habitat -destructive operations in the sanctuary.
                                                                                                           5.     See Generic Response K.
                       Therefore, we reuest that NOAA negotiate with DOD and incor-
                 porate   I n.t a 15 CFR 943.6 appropriate         restrictions        on  military
                 training operations and their attendant vessel anchorings..

                                                                          'Sincerely,


                                                                          ALb-XANDERSTONE
                 AS:hm!enc.                                              Center Director








                                     AMENDMENT NUMBER I



                                            TO THE



                            REEF FISH FISHERY MANAGEMENT PLAN



                            (includes Environmental Assessment,
                               Regulatory impact Review, and
                              Regulatory Flexibility Analysis)





                                        FEBRUARY 1989










                         GULF OF MEXICO   FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
                                 5401 WEST KENNEDY BOULEVARD
                                           SUITE 881
                                    TAMPA , FLORIDA 33609
                                         (913)228-2815





           6.3. Habitat    Threats

           Currently, the.,primary threat to     offshore,habitat   comes   from  oil-,
           and "gas development and'production, offshore 'dumping,          platform
           removals, and the discharge of contaminants by -river systems,       'such
           as the Mississippi River,,which empty into the Gulf of Mexico. The-,
           destruction of suitable reefs .(natural and man-made) or other types'
           of hard bottom areas also -may prove deleterious to this fishery as
           most of the-:current data indicate an affinity for these habitats
           by reef fish (Starck, 1968; Bright And Pequegnat, 1974;.. Shinn,,
           1974; Gallaway et al., 1981; Gallaway and Lewbel, 1982;' Huntsman
           and Waters, 1987). Natural impacts on reef habitat may arise from
           severe weather conditions such as hurricanes-, red . tide, and
           excessive freshwater discharge resulting -from heavy rai       n.. Human
           impacts on reef habitat result from -activities such as'pollution'
           dredging and treasure salvage, boat anchor         .dam-age,, f ishing an@
           diving related perturbations, and petroleum 'hydrocarbons .(Jaap,,
           1984). Ocean dum ing and nutrient overenrichment also ma
                               p                                         I y pause
           local problems. An additional problem occurs in the northern Gulf "
           mainly off Louisiana, where large @ areas of oxygen depleted waters
           have been observed (Stuntz et al., 1982; Boeschi: 1983';. Renaud,,.
           1986). The effect of this 11hyppxia" is, unknown.


                                               31








            Nearsho're reefs, especially off Florida, may be impacted. by coastal
            pollution such as sewage and non-point-source discharges, u     *rban
            runoff, herbicides, and pesticides (Jaap, 1984). Residues of the
            organochlorine pesticides DDT, PCB, dieldrin, and endrin have been
            found in gag, red grouper, black grouper, and red snapper (Stout,
            1980). Heavy metal accumulations in sediment and reef biota near
            population centers have been noted (Manker, 1975).        Disposal-of
            wastes has created local problems.         Jaap (1984) reports of
            batteries and refuse disposed of on the reef flat at Carysfort
            Lighthouse in Florida. Juvenile snapper and grouper temporarily
            residing in estuaries may be adversely affected by coastal
            pollutants and alterations. The habitat section for the amended
            Red Drum FMP (NMFS, 1986) provides details on the value of
            estuaries and the impacts to them.

            Dredging and salvaging near or on    reefs is potentially the most
            damaging physical human activity.     Dredge gear impacts'reefs by
            dislodging corals and other organisms and by creating lesion's or
            scars that lead to infection or mortality.       Sedimentation f rom
            dredging may seriously damage reef s.     Dredged sediments may be
            anaerobic and bind up available oxygen thereby stressing corals
            and other sessile reef organisms'.   If the organisms cannot purge
            the sediments deposited on them, they generally are killed. Silt
            generated by dredging may remain in the area for long periods and
            continue to impact reefs when suspended during storms.          Reef
            habitat also may be removed by dredging for borrow materials and
            disposal on beaches and by dredging and filling associated with
            navigation channel construction and maintenance.

            Anchor damage is a significant threat to reefs, especially those
            composed of corals. Anchors, ground tackle, lines, and chains can
            break hard and soft corals, scar reefs, and open lesions which can
            become infected. Heavy use of redf areas by boaters can compound
            the problem. Although anchoring by oil and gas lease operators is
            prohibited on most of the coral reefs in the Gulf of Mexico,
            anchoring for otiher purposes is not restricted. -Fishing gear such
            as -bottom trawls, bottom longlines, @and traps 'a!-..o may damage
            reefs. Effects would be similar to anchor damage. Hook-and-line
            fishing and related losses of line, leaders, hooks, and sinkers
            also may damage corals. - Disposal of garbage by boats has been
            identified as a problem at Pulaski Shoal near Dry Tortugas (Jaap,
            1984).

            Recreational spearfishing has damaged corals and may     become more
            of a problem in areas,of.heavy diver concentration. Divers often
            illegally overturn corals and cause -other damage.           Specimen
            collecting also- may result in localized reef damage, especially
            when chemical collecting agents are improperly used. Collecting
            corals and the use of chemicals are regulated under the   *Coral FMP
            (GMFMC and SAFMC, 1982).       Although there are some potential
           .positive aspects of existing operational platforms -acting as
            artificial reefs, unfortunately, these positive aspects are

                                             32








         severely compromised due to adverse effects on fish and other biota
         from the discharge of drilling muds, drill cuttings, and -minor
         petroleum pollution due to wash down activities,- effluent
         discharges, and trash disposal. Malins (1982) reviewed laboratory
         experiments describing the deleterious effects of petroleum
         fractions on fish. Grizzle (1981) and Pierce et al., (1980) have.
         documented that wild fish have been injured by petroleum
         pollutants. Grizzle (1983) suggested that larger liver weights in
         fish collected in the vicinity of production platforms versus
         control reefs could have been caused by increased toxicant levels
         near the platforms.      He also suspected that severe gill lamella
         epithelium hyperplasia and edema in red snapper, vermilion snapper,
         wenchman, sash flounder, and creole fish were caused by toxicants
         near the platforms.      These types of lesions are consistent with
         toxicosis and their prevalence and severity increased near drilling
         platforms.    The kinds of effects listed above could. result from
         typical. daily activities at platforms.              In addi   'tion, the
         possibility of. major spills and/or well blowouts exists.

         Extensive environmental impact statements were a prerequisite to
         the installation of offshore platforms. However, prior.to 1986 no
         formal environmental monitoring* of structure removals was required.
         The U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management Service
         (1987), estimates that there were 3,435 platforms in the federal
         outer continental shelf as of December, 1986 and predicts between,
         60 and 120 platforms will be removed annually for- the next five
         years i .    The   National    Research    Council     (1985) , estimates
         approximately 1,700 platforms will. be removed between 1984 and
         2000.   The Council predicts about 100 to 130          removals annually
         between 1990 and 2000. This- projection raises questions about the
         impacts of the potential loss of valuable habitat to a wide variety
         of marine life. Serious consideration should be given@ to research
         projects centered on, assessing the importance of      platf orms@ to reef.
         fish productivity-

         Besides the loss of potential habitat, the removal of a platform
         often destroys -the associated platform ecosystem where one exists.
         In addition to killing fish at a platform removal site, platform
         removal will result in dispersal of survivors. , This would
         adversely affect some of the commercial and recreational. fishermen
         that fish near platforms.            For example, approximately 112
         commercial snapper/grouper boats from Florida fish the platforms
         off Mississippi and Louisiana on a regular basis (Dimitrof f, 1982) .
         The removal of platforms in the Gulf of Mexico may reduce the
         catches of reef . f ish. Accordingly, new methodologies for platform
         removals aside from the standard use of bulk explosives should be
         devised.

         6.4. Habitat'Information Needs

         The following research needs-relative         to reef fish habitat are.
         provided so that state, federal, and private research efforts-can

                                              33










                     AMERICAN LITTORAL SOCIETY
                                  CORAL REEF CONSERVATION CENTER
                             For the Study and Conservation of Marine Life
                 75 VIRGINIA BEACH DRIVE KEY BISCAYNE - MIAMI, FLORIDA 33149 - (.305) 361-4495


                                                                April 19_1989
              Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
              CRM - MEND / ROAA
                  5 Connecticut Ave., NW.
                       ton
               Ing        D.C.   20235
                         re: Fiower Garden,Banks National Marine     Sanctuary,
                             Review of DEIS / Draft.Management Plan
                         subject; Sanctuiry Boundaries


              Dear Mr..Uravitch:'

                     The American Litioral   Society strongly   supports  the desig-
              nation of'a Flower garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.             To
              achieve the protective intent of that designation. we reuest the
              adoption of Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 3 (DEIS. p. 81).
                     The preferred Regulatory/Boundary Alternative I (DEIS, p. 79-                     The DEIS states (p. BOY that there is
              80) leaves sections of the sanctuary's coral reefs very exposed to                       bank and 1300 feet on the east bank b
              the potential impacts of hydrocarbon operations.           On  the West                  and   the    100   meter                  (not
              ank,   this   alternatiye allows as little-as.1000 feet between the                                                  isobaths
              coral reefs and the boundary of the mineral Management -Service's                       boundaries).      The 100    meter isobaths e
              No     Activty Zone. On the East Batik, as little as 1300 feet . is                    reefs are well inside        the no-activity
              aIlowed, between the reefs and potential siting of a hydrocarbon                          and just inside the no-activity zone c
              :Iatf  ,r (VE , p. 80). These buffers cannot be considered to be                        Considers these distances to provide a
              adeuate   to safeguArd'sensitive coral reefs and their        associated                safeguard the reefs.
              fish communities from the impacts of hydrocarbon operations.
                     Regulatori/Boundary Alternative 3 provideslor an,' adeuate
              buffer area around the core No Activity Zone;

                     NOAA states that such a boundary       alternative would       "add
              little Substantive- prote6tion to that already provided by "MS
              stipulations" .(DEIS,    0.   83).    However,   it  would   codify    the
              existing situation and assure NOAA of adeuate future protection.
                                                                                                2.     See Generic Response A.
                     OAA   has acknowledged     the wisdom of such a Sanctuary
        14 preregultory codification for        the "existing situation on dredge
              disposal activities" (DEIS, p. 90). The same logic should'apply
              to     hydrocarbon development operations and the     establishment     of
              sanctuary   boundaries that provide an appropriate buffer         between
              sanctuary resources and potential hydrocurbon impacts.
                                                                Sincerely,


                                                                ALEXANDER STORE
              AS:hm/enc.                                         CenterDirector


0






                                       AMERICAN            LITTORAL SOCIETY
                                                 CORAL REEF CONSERVATION CENTER

                                 For the study and consrevation of marine life
                                       75 BIRGINIA BEACH DRIVE KEY BISCAYNE MlAMI. FLORIDA 33149-305 361-4495



                                                                                 April 19. 1989

                                       Joseph A. Uravitch. Chief
                                       OCRN- HEND / NOAA
                                       1825 Connecticut Ave.. NW..
                                       Washington. D.C. 20235

                                       re: Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                                           Review of DEIS / Draft Management Plan
                                       subject: Interpretation and Education PIan


                                       Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                       The American Littoral Society   strongly supports the       desig-
                                       nation of a Flower, Garden Banks National Marine  Sanctuary.     To
                                       achieve the protective intent of such a designation. we reuest a
                                       total redrafting of NOAA's plans for Interpretation and education.

                                       In the particular case of the Flower Garden      Banks    National
                                       "marine Sanctuary. "Interpretation" must be strategically redefined
                                       and implemented as a resotorce protection tactic and NOT as the
                                       soft" public education activity envisioned by NOAA. (DEIS. p. 11)
                                       The primary target audience  of such a -redefined        interpre-                  1.     See Generic Reel
                                       ton plan most be the potrotial impactor-ugers of the   sanctuary
                                       NOT the more general "Individuals.    schools  and    Interested
                                       groups being targeted by NOAA. (DEIS, p. 91)
                                       Interpretation as a.Resource Protection Strategy
                                       NOAA acknowledges that "neither MOAA nor the U.S. Coast Guard
                                       has the  resources to conduct systematic surveillance and enforce-
                                       ment operations to ensure compliance...     Because of the remoteness
                                       of the site. compliance with regulations Is dependent more    then
                                       usual on effective information transfer. coupled with good will of
                                       users. Emphasis must therefore be placed on Information develop-
                                       ment and dissemination." (DEIS. p. 58-59)         .1.

                                       This self-assessment clearly calls for proactive     information
                                       transfer aimed, at Identified. major, Impactor-user  groups    and
                                       implemented at the locations where these groups can be reached.

                                         Targeting the Primary Impactor-User Groups
                                       "V The primary *impactor-user groups are NOT  the    recreational
                                       sitars to the site. visitors.to Information centers (or)
                                       Interested groupi; not visiting the site of' the centers." that NOAA
                                       sees as the appropriate interpretation audiences. (DEIS. p. 65)















                   It is imperative that NOAA focus its information transfer
              efforts    on the groups NOAA itself has identified an the sapc-
              tuary's primary users and/or potential lepactors:  the   commercial
              fishermen coming primarily fine Pensacola.      Florida (DE14. p. 40).
              the   general  shipping traffic using nearby vessel    fairways *pri-        2.    See Generic Response J.
              marily headed to or from Corpus Christi.    Texas (DEIS. p. 44). and
              the offshore hydrocarbon platform working crews and service        vise-
              L!els coming primarily from Morgan City. Louisiana (DEIS, p. 14).
               	Additionally, NOAA's total dependence an Coast Guard and                 3.    NOAA fully intends to keep personnel from other agnecies
              Minerals Management Service personnel for surveillance activities                  informed about matters that may assist them in developing
              mandates that proactive and ongoing Information transfer be sited                  surveillance information for the enforcement of sanctuary
              at those agencies' constantly changing and uninformed personnel.                   regulations.
                       Appropriate Siting for the Interpretation Activities
                   Information   transfer and Interpretation for the  sanctuary's  on
              primary  user-impactor groups ins not be accomplished through the
              passive intaking of visitors to information centers sited at parks
              and museums. as envisioned by 11044. (DEIS. p. 66)
                   To be effective and to reach the right target groups.      Inter-
              pretation at this sanctuary must be primarily a proactive outreach
              activity designed to reach the groups identified above an site in
              Corpus Christi. Morgan City. Pensacola and to a lesser extent some
              other ports identified by NOAA. (DEIS, p. 14)
                  This outreach can be accomplished by a formal program of                 4.    see Generic Response J.
              sanctuary   staff travel,  communications with user industry     naso-
              iations.   sanctuary staff and Information display siting at those
              locations.  and/or contract services provided through non-govern-
              mental  organizations (NGOs),   consultants or educational centers.

                                Redefining Sanctuary Staff Roles
                   This proactive   Interpretation and information  transfer
              strategy requires restructuring of the sanctuary staff's roles and
              activities.  Until additional funding and staffing to achieved,
              the sanctuary 'tanager and assistant manager want take am the tasks
              and travel necessary to achieve Information transfer to the sanc-             5.   See Generic Response      j.
              188qn.17's primary user-impactor groups.     This is justifiable, given
              that (1) NOAA's management plan for the sanctuary doesn't envision
              urveillance/patrolltng duties for      the staffs      (2)  personnel
              management needs will be minimal. and (3) research administration
              annot logically take up most of the sanctuary manager's time.
                          Adequat Funding Priority for Intepretaqtion..
                  Currently.    NOAA has allocated for interpretation an
              inadequate 5% of the flint year's sanctuary budget and 82 of the
              second year's budget for a "grand" two-year total of q$19,000.
              fDesignation-Prospectus, p. 33-34) in line with the above restruc-             6.    See Generic Response J.
              turing of the interpretation program. funding must be realigned.

                                                              Sincerely,  
                                                              ALEXANDER STONE
              AS:hm                                           Center Director













                           American Petroleum Institute
                           1220 L Street, Norlhwesl
                           Wash,nglon. D.C. 20005
                           202 682-8140



                           C I Sa-yet                         April 2S, 1989



                           Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch
                           Chief, Marine and Estuarine management Division
                           Offices of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                           National Ocean Service
                           National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                           1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
                           Washington, D.C. 20235

                           Re:  Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary,
                                54 Fed. Reg. 7953, February 24, 1989

                           Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                           The American Petroleum Institute (API) welcomes this opportunity
                           to comment on the proposed regulations implementing the Flower
                           Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.  API is a petroleum
                           industry trade association representing more than 200 companies,
                           many of which are engaged in oil and gas leasing and development
                           operations in the Guif of Mexico. The designation of the Flower
                           Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary and the regulations
                           proposed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                           JNOAA) for the implementation of the sanctuary are of great
                           interest to our members.

                           API commends NOAA for the agency's concern that the regulations
                           proposed for the implementation of the Flower Garden Banks
                           Sanctuary do not utinecessarily interfere with oil and gas
                           activiti,es that are located near the sanctuary.  However, API
                           believes that the regulations, as proposed, are not sufficiently
                           clear or precise so as to ensure that oil and gas operations in
                           the Gulf of Mexico are not unduly restricted. Therefore, API
                           submits the following comments.

                           A. Proposed Sanctuar Boundaries

                           Under Section 943.3 of the proposed regulations, the sanctuary
                           consists of two areas of marine waters located 110 nautical miles
                           sou      of Galveston, Texas. The boundaries include the "no
                           a !heast
                           c ivity zone* established by the Department of Interior over the
                           East and West Flower Garden Banks.  From the draft environmental
                           impact statement/managenient. plan for the sanctuary, it appears
                           that the sanctuary boundaries have been "rounded out" to
                           facilitate identification of the sanctuary.
                           API is concerned that these 'rounded out" boundaries could have






                           A@ emal vnp@-jy C-V",


0


















                                Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch
                                April 25, 1909
                                Page Two



                                an adverse invact on oil and gas activities in the area.
                                Therefore, API recommends that MOAA:

                                      1)  Make the boundaries of the sanctuary identical to the
                                          boundaries of the current noactivity zone. or                               See Gemric

                                      2)  Exempt oil and gas operations from the various
                                          prohibitions listed under Section. 943.6(a) of the
                                          regulations if these activitiestake place outside the
                                          current no activity zone.


                                0.   P      d Prohibition on Deposits or Discharges of materials
                                     Lro  sea
                                     analugstincesu side the Sanctuily

                                F. Under Section 943.6(a),(2)Aii) of the proposed regulations, NOAA
                                has banned the deposit or discharge of materials or substances of
                                any kind from any location beyond the boundaries of the sanctuary
                                which may, ter the sanctuary and injure a sanctuary resource.
                                However,      draft environmental Impact statement prepared for
                                the Flower Garden Banks Sanctuary, clearly points out that                        2.   See Gerwric
                                stipulations found In current oil and gas leases are sufficient
                                to protect the sanctury from any potential damage. Since
                                current restrictions provide adequate protection, API believes
                                that the no discharge prohibition should specifically exempt oil
                                and gas operations.


                                                                   Sincerely,
                                                                   -A
 

0











      AMA  A MR PIE 104CL I UIA COMPOMAT ION 1,6001 G*9tft%P0-! rAQ% 1-vt I-0US$ON VEXAS 77060 702,015 0950







          April 20, 1989


          Marine and Estvarine
          Management Division
          office of ocean and Coastal
          Resource Management
          ational Ocean Service/140AA
          1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
          Washington, D.C. 20235

          Attn: Messrs. Joseph A. Urovitch, Chief
                          Rafael V. Lopez, Regional Manager

          Anadarko Petroleum,Corporatioff   is very interested In NOAA's efforts
          to establish the Flower Garden    Bank! as a-national Mari ne Sanctuary.,
          As you are aware, Anadarko has    operated An oil and gas production
          platform on Block A-376 since the early eighties have reviewed
          the draft Environmental <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f69a9b8697b6d8db82">[email&#160;protected]</a> Statement/Draft Management Plan and
          support the Section   11, Alternative I proposal.
                            oilI                                          rs           No re Ispons.e necessary.     See also Part II
          we believe that     and  gasproduction operations such.as ou
          have proven that oil and gas activities can be harmoniously                  Public Hqbarings.
          conducted within the Sanctuary*s boundaries. Anadarko supports        the
          prohibition of oil and gas. activities. within the "No Activity Zone"
          as it does the other prohibited activities listed under Section 1-1.
          regulatory Boundary Alternative I in order to protect the natural
          beauty of the Flower Gardens.     Further, we believe that the minerals
          Management Service and Coast Guard guidel,ines presently in place
          provide substantial protection for the Ranks and that the other
          prposed alternatives would add very little substantive protection
          for the Flower Gardens.

          Should you wish to discuss our views. further please contact the
          undersigned at (713) 675-0858.

                                              Sincerely,

                                                   

                                              Paul Lankford
                                              Coordinator of Rpgulatory
                                              Affairs and Safety

          PFL/ncl
          PLNOSLE

          cc:  Mr. David Cottingham
               Director, Office of Ecology
               and Conservation
               U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Rm.   6222                         j'.
               Washington, D.C. 20230                                   r.1. VI
 

0









                                                                Center for Marine Conservatin
                                                                   











                                                                                                                 4/6/89



                                         Ralph Lopez
                                         National Marine.Sanctuary Program
                                         Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                                         National ocean Service
                                         National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                         1625 Connecticut AVenije, N.W.@
                                         Washington. DC 2023S


                                         Deat Mr. Lopez,

                                               Please find enclosed the Center's written comments regarding
                                         the proposed designation and DEIS for the Flower Garden Ranks
                                         National Marine Sanctuary.
                                              Thank    your for your considerati           on of our views. We strongly                                          See Generic Resp
                                         upport the saInctuary, Out feel that h1ternative  provides the
                                         inimum protection necessary to adequately protect the nations                              lly
                                         ignificant resources of this spectacular site.
                                     Is

                                                                                           Sincerely,.


                                                                                          J@c  k  Sobel
                                                                                          Director, Marine Protected Areas










                                         I D Sales Suee NW       %ushwWon DC 20D)6 i        02i 429-56P          14elax 00218720619
 

0











                                Center for Marine Conservation


                        CHC TBSTIMONT 2N DRIS YOR FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NMS

                     The Center for Marine Conservation strongly supports the
                desig at ion 0f Flower Gar den San ka as a National Marine
                Sanctuary. We are pleased to. see that action Is finally being
                taken to designate this worthy site following more than t8ft Years
                of consideration.  The presence 0f the northernmost and best
                developed living coral sets on the U.S. Gulf Coaste and the only
                known oceanic brine-seep community In continental shelf wStegf of
                the Atlantic Ocean, certainly merit sanctuary status for this
                outstanding site. We applaud the decision to include thill
                site in the program due to three significant national treefUges.

                    Although we agree that the resources of Flower Garden Banks
                are indeed worthy of the protection that can be afforded only
                through the National marine Sanctuary Program, we are convinced.
                that the preferred alternative outlined in the DEIS does not
                properly safeguard these resources.  HOAA claims to have analyzed
                the institutional, boundary, regulatory, and management
                alternatives In terms of achieving optimum protection of the
                ecosystem. Such consideration for environmental protection is
                consistent with the.sanctuary program's primary objective of,
                protecting the national ly significant resources that quality a
                site for inclusion in the program.   Unfortunately. NOAA19
                preferred alternative is riot compatible with the program's
                Congress I onal ly-mandated priority of protecting those resources.

                    We believe that had WOAA analyzed the alternatives in terms
          Joe achieving optimum protection of the Flower Garden Banks
                ecosystem  Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 3 would have been                   2.   See Generic Response A.
                 lected as  the preferred alternative. we strongly support this
                1.  ternative over Regulatory/Boundazy Alternative I which NOAA
                selected as its preferred alternative in the 691S and urge HOAA
                to adopt it as, the preferred alternative in the FEIS.  Such action
                would ensure the adequate and comprehensive protection that this
                important area deserves. Failure to take this action would be
                inconsistent with the primary objective of the sanctuary program
                to protect notionally significant marine areas and with President
                Bush's stated concerns for protecting sensitive marine areas.
                    Alternative 3 would create a 259 square nautical mile
                sanctuary extending four nautical miles around the banks and
                would include two regulatory zones.  Under this alternative, a
                core zone consisting of the Mineral Management Service's (MKS)
                no-activity zone would be surrounded by a buffer zone. The same
                regulations would apply to the core zone as under Alternative 1            3.    This specific prohibition of oil and
                with the addition that oil and gas exploration would be                          no-activity zones has been inco
               0n
                specifically prohibited. Hydrocarbon exploration and development                 regulations.     See Generic Response A
                ould be allowed in the buffer. zone subject to applicable



                 DeSales Street NW       Washington DC 20036    202 429 5609 Tele/Fax 2028720619













                 regulations.   Sanctuary regulations would further require
                 hydrocarbon activities in the buffer zone to shunt cuttings and
                 drilling mods to within 10 meters of the bottom, to receive a
                 finding from the Assistant Administrator that bulk discharges
                 will not significantly impact sanctuary resources, and to obtain
                 certification from the Assistant Administrator that discharges
                 will be adequately monitored.

                      Alternative 3 would guarantee the long-term comprehensive
                 protection of the Flower Garden Banks ecosystem.. NOAA recognized
                 this in 1988 when it selected an essentially identical plan as
                 the preferred alternative for Flower Garden Banks. We do not
                 know of any new information that has surfaced since that time to
                 invalidate that selection. In fact, additional information that
                 has surfaced since 1980 supports the need for the type of
                 regulatory regime provided by Alternative 3.

                      NOAA cites two arguments against making Alternative 3 the
                 preferred alternative. First, NOAA argues that the additional
                 regulations add little protection to that already provided by the
                 MMS stipulation on current oil leases. The regulations are
                 indeed very similar to and compatible with the MMS stipulation.
                 MMS stated in its FEIS on lease sales 113, 115, and l16, "The
                 stipulation would prevent damage to the biola of the banks from                     4.    See Generic Response A.
                 the routine oil and gas activities resulting from the proposal.
                 Furthermore, oil and gas resources present near such areas could
                 be recovered."   If this assessment is correct, it seems
                 reasonable to permanently provide similar protection for the
                 banks.  However, the stipulations do not provide permanent
                 protection.   They are applied on a lease by lease basis.
                 Permanent protection is essential for nationally significant
                 sanctuary resources such as Flower Garden Banks and would be
                 provided by Alternative 3.
                      The only additional oil and gas requirements contained in
                 alternative that are not in the stimulation are the finding by
                 the Assistant Adminsistrator that discharges will not result in
                 significant impact to sanctuary resources and the certification
                 by the Assistant Administrator that discharges age adequately
                 monitored. These additional requirements are minor and                            5.    NOAA intends to address the issue of monitoriny the effects
                 necessitated by the fragile and sensitive nature of coral reefs                        of oil and gas oil sanctuary resources as part of sanctuary
                 and by the uncertainty concerning the effects of oil and gas                           research. See also Generic Response A.
                 activities on them. Although a 1983 National Research Council
                 study found that discharges have minimal impact except on the
                 Immediate environment, more recent studies, including a 1985 EPA
                 study not mentioned in the DEIS, have shown considerable impacts
                 an benthic communities several miles away. The monitoring of
                 effects certainly fits well within both the research and
                 protection objectives of the program.
                
                     The most disturbing aspect of NOAA's approach to oil and gas
                 regulations is their complete deference to MMS an these matters.
                 This deference is troubling because of the divergent missions of               6.     The proposed regulations were intended to have the effects of
                 MMS with respect to oil and gas development and NOAA with respect                     making permanent the protection provide to the Flower Gardens
                 to the marine sanctuary program. MMS is charged with fostering                        on a lease-by-lease basis by the MMS
                                                                                                       sanctuary regulatory provisions have been strengthened. See
                                                    2                                                  Generic Response A.











               offshore oil and gas development. With regards to the sanctuary
               program, NOAA's primary responsibility is to protect sanctuary
               resouces. Therefore, it is incumbent upon NOAA to independently                      7.     The MMS regulatory regime is described in considerable detail
               evaluate oil and gas regulations as they relate to protection of
               sanctuary resources. Unlike MMS,NOAA's evaluation should be                               in the DEIS/MP, p. 74. The regulatory regime at the Flower
                                                                        				         Gardens is based on the MMS Topographic Features Stipulation
               based solely on resource protection. We do not believe that such
               an evaluation was performed in the DEIS. Furthermore the                                  for the Western Planning Area. In its application to the
               present MMS regulatory regime applicable to Flower Garden Banks                           Flower Gardens, the stipulation reads as follows: "No
         7.    was not described in enough detail to allow a decision maker to                           activity including structures, drill rigs, pipelines, or
               make an informed decision regarding alternatives.                                         anchoring will be allowed within the listed isobath ('No
                                                                                                         Activity Zone') of the banks as listed above. Operations
                   Even MMS recognized in its FETS that, "the stipulation would                          within the area shown as '1 Mile Zone' shall be restricted by 
               not protect the banks from the effects of an accident, such as a
               large blowout on a nearby oil or gas operation." NOAA did not                            shunting all drill cuttings and drill fluids to the bottom
               address the possibility of such an accident or the potential                             through a downpipe that terminates an appropriate distance,
               effects of such an accident on sancutary resources. Recent                               but no more than 10 meters, from the bottom." The listed  
               events in Alaska demonstrate that accidents do happen! While                             isobath for the Flower Gardens is the 100 meter isobath as
               they may not be entirely preventable, accidents should not be                            defined by 1/4 1/4 1/4 system, and the shunting requirement applies
               ignored. More predictable threats to sanctuary resources, such
               
               as those posed by routine oil and gas operations, deserve even                           in a 4 mile zone instead of a 1 mile zone.
               greater attention. The regulations proposed in Alternative 3 are
               a reasonable, moderate approach that would allow recovery of oil                      8.     The DEIS/MP contained brief references to the rarity of
               and gas from the area while providing some protection for the                               blowouts, their possible impacts, and the improbability of a
               Flower Garden Banks ecosystem. The degree of protection afforded                            seafloor spill's impinging on Flower Garden resources (pp. 93-
               under Alternative 3 is the minimum amount that should be
                                                                                                           94) (see also Generic Response D). This discussion has been
               considered acceptable for a sanctuary.
                                                                                                            expanded in the FEIS/MP.
                   The second argument made by NOAA against Alternative 3 is
               that the larger boundaries would somehow contradict the goal of                     9.     The bottom area of the Flower Garden reefs and nearby bank
               the program to designate discrete areas of special national                                surfaces are markedly distinct from the undifferentiated soft-
               significance to promote effective conservation of their                                    bottom areas of the surrounding continental shelf. NOAA	is
               resources.  Although NOAA does not state how the larger
               boundaries would contradict this goal, the implication seems to                            unaware of any distinctive natural resources in these zones
               be that such a sanctuary would not be a discrete area. However,                            that warrant protection by the National Marine Sanctuary
               it is not clear how NOAA made this determination. The area                                 Program.
               within the boundaries specified in Alternative 3 does not seem                                            
                                                                                                   10.    See Generic Response A.
               any more or less distinct than those specified in Alternative 1.                    11. NOAA finds little similarity between the circumstances at 
               Furthermore, the goal of promoting effective conservation is 
               better served by the inclusion of the buffer area surrounding a
               shallow water feature makes the area less discrete, this is                            Cordell Bank and at the Flower Gardens. A large deepwater
                
               inconsistent with their recent decision to include such a                              area was included in the Cordell Bank National Marine
           
               deepwater area in the preferred alternative for the Cordell Bank                       Sanctuary to reduce the threat of pollutant discharges in this
               Sanctuary.                                                                             area that could be carried to the resources at the higher
                   In summary, we strongly support the decision to finally                            levels of Cordell Bank by upwelling, to protect habitat and
               designate Flower Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary.                          foraging area used by marine mammals and birds, and to
               The richness and diversity of the area certainly merit the                             facilitate management by making the boundaries of the Cordell
               comprehensive management and increased protection that                                 Bank and Gulf of the Farallones sanctuaries more fully
               designation will bring. However, we feel that the primary goal                         contiguous.There are no comparable factors - upwelling to
               of the program to promote effective conservation of a sanctuary's
               nationally significant 'resources would be better served via                           transport pollutants, significant marine mammal and bird
               Alternative 3. Therefore, we urge NOAA to select Alternative 3                         populations, or opportunities to combine sanctuary manaagment
               as the preferred alternative.                                                          resources- to be considered at the Flower Gardens.















                                      	ABILENE  AMSTERDAM ANCHORAGE  - - BRUSSELS - CHICAGO - COPENHAGEN DUBLIN
                       	FORT LAUDERDALE GOTHENBURG HAMBURG LEWES UR LONDON LUXEMBURG MADRID MINTREAL OSLO PALMA OF MALLOREA
					PARIS ROME SAN FRANCISCO SAN JOSE COSTA RICA SEATTLE STOCKHOLM SYDNEY TORONTO VANCOUVER VIENNA
								WASHINGTON WORLD PARK EASE ANTARCTICA ZURICH




                                        Greenpeace USA - 1436 U Street NW - Washington DC 2009 - Tel (202) 462-1177           
                                                         
                                                        IN 89 2359. Fax (202)462-4507

                                                                                       19 April 1989


                                Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                                Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                                National Ocean Service/NCAA
                                1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW
                                Washington. DC 20235


                                     Re: Comments on the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
                                Sanctuary Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan


                                Dear Mr. Uravitch,

                                     Greenpeace-firmly supports the,decision to finally designate
                                the East and West Flower Garden Banks as a National Marine
                                Sanctuary. These biologically rich and unique coral reef
                                ecosystems are a national treasure which deserve the highest
                                degree of protection.

                                     We continue to be disappointed. however. by  NOAA's
                                capitulation to MMS and the offshore oil Industry.     We have seen
                                no evidence that coral reefs and offshore oil development are
                                compatible, In fact we have seen considerable evidence to
                                Indicate the it they are not. 'For -instance. every 'time an offshore
                                well is drilled, an a*jeragp of 1,500 to 2,000 tons of drilling
                                fluids (which 1q@ibricate the drill bit and maintain down-hole                1.   See Generic Response D.
                                pressure) asd drill cuttings (pieces of rock ground by the drill
                                bit) are discharged Into the ocean.   This constitutes an enormous
                                quantity of drilling dincharges.         Research has shown that
                                components of drilling fluids - are highly toxic to marine
                                organisms generally and that coral reef ecosystems are composed
                              
                                 of extremely sensitive marine organisms.        Greenpeace firmly
                                believes that exceptions for iesource ..protection should not be
                                made for oil exploration and development.,

                                      e I ave read the testimony of the Center for Marine
                                2qEonseWrvatq!ion. presented on 30 March 1989 In Houston Texas.      and
                                although we believe that they understate the case, the points
                          2qL4q(they raise are well ED      'ade and need not be repeated here.        We       2.    See Generic Response A.
                                concur that boundary Alternative 3 is the preferree alternative,
                                and the only oite that offers any -hope of protecting the Flower
                                Gardens.














                                    Although the DEIS states that vessel anchoring is considered
                                  the most Important Provision In the proposed regulations for the
                                  protection of sanctuary resources, it is not clear how the marine
                                  sanctuary ptogram plans on implementing this regulation.
                                  Therefore Greenpeace would like     to offer the       following
                                  suggestions.

                                    *The international regulations which govern the safety of
                                  navigation at sea (the Convention on the international Regulation
                                  for preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, and the International
                                  Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea. 1974). also include
                                  provisions which are being used for the protection of specific
                                  environmentally sensitive sea areas through the establishment o f
                                  ship routing measures.

                                    one of these -provisions is the  designation of an area such
                                  as 'the Flower Garden Banks as an "Area to be Avoided" by ships.
                                  There are several examples of where this has already been used to
                                  achieve protection for coral reefs. Part of the Great Barrier
                                  Reef in Australia and part.of the reef track of Bermuda have been
                                  designated as Ateas to be Avoided. as' well as an area north-west
                                  of the Hawaiian Islands.

                                    A decision to designate  the Flower Garden Banks as an Area
                                  to be Avoided must be Laken by the International Maritime
                                  organization (IMO) . The Organization is currently discussing -how
                                  to better use existing , IMO regulations for the envirormental
                                  protection of specific sea areas.   A- draft manual discussing
                                  criteria for .'Particularly Sensitive Sea Area" status is on the
                                  agenda for the next meeting.  This manual is aimed at making
                                  further improvements in the protection offered to specific,
                                  relatively small, sensitive sea areas from damage by ships.
                                  - A proposal to. designate the Flo"e-r_Garden Banks as an Area           3.    See Generic ReSponse-F.
                                  to be Avoided would have. to be submitted by the Government of the
                                  United States, and N0AA*s work on this proposal would have to be
                                  coordinated with the US Coast Guard.

                                    The following criteria must be discussed in the proposal:
                                    (a)  the ecological sensitivity of the area;
                                    (b)  the. shipping patterns in the, area which can cause
                                         damage to the reef,.
                                    (c)  the scientific value of the area; and
                                    (d)  the Importance to fisheries.

                                    We  believe this course of action         would help with
                                  notifi.cation to foreign vessels of the anchoring problems
                                  t
                                  0
                                  t
                                  P
                                  0
                                  r
                                  0
                                  0
                                  crIt
                             are
                                  9
                                  rurt
                                  reIa



                                  tob
                                  n.t











                                  associated With the Flower Garden Banks. as well as providing a
                                  buffer against the discharge of sewage and other matter from
                                  ships in the.vicinity of the Marine Sanctuary.,





                                                          2


















                               In surmnary, Greenpeace folly supports the designation of the
                         East and West Flower Garden Bankm as a National Marine Sanctuary;
                         we recommend that Boundary Alternative 3 be considered the
                         preferred alternative; we further recommend that resourCS
                         protection take piecedence over oll and gas exploration and
                         development; and, Lhat a recommendation be made to the INO that
                         the Flower Garden Banks be designated as an Area to be Avoided by
                         ships.

                            @ Thank you for the opportunity to   comment on this important
                         matter.


                                                                  Sincerely.




                                                                  Lynn Davidson.
                                                                  Marine Habitat
                                                                  Policy Coordinator

























                                                                          APR IS39










                         PENNZOIL EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION COMPANY.
                                    U S OFFSHORE DIVISION PENNZOIL PLACE  - PO BOX 2967 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77252-2987 -(713) 548-0050


                                                    April 24, 1999


                         Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
				 Marine and estuarine Management Division
				 Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
				 National Ocean Service
				 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
				 1825 Connecticut Avenue, Nw
				 Washington, DC 20235

				
				 RE: Proposal
                             Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary REgulations
                             54 FR 7953 (February 24, 1989)

                         Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                            Pennzoil Company is a natural resources company engaged
				 thorough its subsidiaries in the exploration, production,
				 refining and sales of petroleum products, and in the mining and
				 sales of sulphur. Pennzoil through its subsidiary, Pennzoil
				 Exploration and Production Company (PEPCO), engages in oil and
				 gas exploration and development operations on U.S. leases in the
				 gulf of Mexico. One of these leases is in the vicinity of the
				 proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Because
				 of this proximity, we appreciate the opportunity to comment on
				 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
				 proponed regulations designating the Flower Garden Banks a
				 marine sanctuary.

				    We agree with NOAA that delicate environmental areas such as
				 the Flower Garden Banks should be protected to maintain the
				 value of the area's resources. We also agree that activities
				 that could infure the Sanctuary should be prohibited.  We
				 believe that the no discharge prohibition for facilities in or
				 outside the Sanctuary included in this regulation needs to be
				 changed to specifically exempt oil and gas operations.  Our
				 comments will center on this issue.

                         No Discharge Prohibition

                            In the proposal, NOAA bans certain activities inside the
				 boundaries of the Sanctuary, Section 943.6(a)(ii) specifically
				 prohibits the discharge of any material or substance within
				 boundaries of the Sanctuary. In addition, it prohibits the
				 discharge from outside the boundaries of any material or
				 substance that would enter the Sanctuary and injure a resource
				 therein. We believe that normal discharges fromoil and gas	
				 operations both inside and outside the Sanctuary should be




                                              a subsidiary of PENNZOIL COMPANY


















                                      Flower Garden Baitks
                                      April 24, 1989
                                      Paae 2


                                      exempted    from    this prohitition because        current    rules    and
                                      reqtjlations   provide     adequate    protection     to    the     marine
                                      environment including the Sanctuary.

                                          Under the Minerals Kanagement Service            (11DIS) lease sale
                                      notice for areas around the Sanctuary, all operators of offshore
                                      oil and gas leases must shunt their drill cuttings and drilling
                                      fluids discharges to a depth of no more than ten meters from the
                                      ocean floor (52 ER 7549, March 11, 1967).                  Any material
                                      discharged at the depth requiredl by shunting remains at this
                                      depth, and cannot rise up to the shallower area of the reefs,
                                      due to the phenomenon known as., the nephelold layer or, mcre
                                      comncnly, the bottom boundary layer.             A report by Texas A&M               1.    See Generic Response B.
                                      University demonstrates this point:
                                          W7ter arid    sediment dvnemics studies        indicate that water
                                          f ows around topograp@ic prominences on the seafloor rather
                                          than flowing upslope and over the crest of the prominence.
                                          In terms of sediments or pollutants of any kind entrained in
                                          the nepheloid layer which exists around the bases of many
                                          hiqh relief banks, it is physically impossible to transport
                                          sediment to the crest of the reef or bank. This conclusion
                                          is supported by both g,volcgical and biological evidence. No
                                          clay minerals have been found in sediments collected from
                                          depths shallower titan 70 m at the Flower Carden Btnks, and
                                          only traces have been found at depths of 80 to 85 m.


                                      The mmS shunting r     equirements were obviously designed with the
                                      intent to prevent the discharges from presenting a problem.
                                      Consequently,    these current requirements provide sufficient
                                      protection    for    the    Sanctuary    from any potential damage
                                  L'.@egardless of the location of the discharge.
                                      conclusion

                                          We   believe     that current HMS requirements specifically
                                      tailored  for the Flower Garden Banks provide 'adequate protectioit
                                      from aoiy adverse     impacts of oil and gas discharges, such that
                                      that NOAA should specifically exempt oil and gas operations from















                     Flower Garden Banks
                     April 24, 1989
                     Page 3


                     the no discharge prohibition. Alternatively, HOAA could simply
                     incorporate into its own regulations the same shunting and Ao
                     activity requirements imposed by the KMS.


                        Texas A&M University. Reefs and Banks of the
                     fiulf of nexico:    Their Geological, Biological, and Physical
                     Dynamics. Final Report, no. 83-1-T. 1983, page 4.


                                                    Ver     ly yours,



                                                    Ronald L.  wris, Ph.D.
                                                    U.S. offshore Division Manager















                                                                         




                      PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY
                      BARTLESVILLE OKLAHOMA 74004     916-661-6600         


                      EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION GROUP                 


                      April 25, 1989

                      15 CFR Part 943
                      Docket No. 80851-8151
                      Flower Garden Banks National
                      Marine Sanctuary                   
                        




             Joseph A. Uravitch
             Chief, Marine and Estuarine
               Management Division
             Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource
              Management
             National Ocean Service
             National Oceanic and Atmospheric
             Administration
             1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
             Washington, D.C. 20235

             Dear Sir:

             Phillips Petroleum company appreciates the opportunity to
             comment on the proposed rules in 15 CFR Part 943 pertaining
             to the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.

             Phillips acquired leases on Blocks 366 and 367 in OCS Lease
             Sale 84 in 1984 which are in the immediate vicinity of the
             designated sanctuary. In fact, Alternative Boundary 1, the
             preferred alternative in the proposed rules, encompasses
             approximately the southern one-third of Block-366 and the
             southwest one-eighth of Block 367. We agree with the selec-
             tion of Alternative Boundary I as preferable and the finding
             that Alternative Boundary 3 would be unsatisfactory.

             In the proposed rules, we refer to Section 943.6 Prohibited    
             activities (a) (6) Explosives. Electrical Charges and Toxins.
             This section prohibits the detonation of explosives or the
             release of electrical charges within the Sanctuary.   We would
             ask you to consider adding to this section a speeific exemp-              1.   NOAA has no intention of regulating the use of air guns in 
             tion for the useof air guns in the acquisition of seismic                      seismic surveys at the present time.  This activity has been  
             data. We, and others, have acquired seismic data by this                       listed for regulation, however, so that if the use of air guns
             method on Blocks 366 and 367 and seek to acquire additional                    is later demonstrated to have an adverse impact on sanctuary
             such data as part of our exploration program.                                  resousrces, additional requlations can be proposed.  if such
                                                                                            regulations are eventually proposed, the public will have an 
                                                                                            opportunity to comment on them at that time.
                                                                                                                                  
















                                                                             page 2



                       We are, of course, aware of the stipulation attached to our
                       leases by the Minerals Management Service which bans
                       development drilling in the "no-activity zones" surrounding
                       the Banks. The prohibition on drilling in no way diminishes
                       the value of seismic data we seek to obtain in the portions
                       of our lease blocks which would become part of the proposed
                       Sanctuary!  Our goal is to understand the geology of the
                       blocks as thoroughly as possible in our attempt to locate new
                       petroleum reserves.

                       Thank you for your consideration of this request.

                                                      Sincerely,



                                                      Susan J. Robb    
                                                      Staff Director, Legislative
                                                      Regulatory Affairs


                       SJR/te  









                                SEASPACE





                April 21, 1989                        COPY



                Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                Marine and Estuarine Management Division,
                Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                National Ocean Service/NOAA
                1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
                Washington. D.C. 20235

                RE: Flower Garden Banks National Hering Sanctuary
                Dear Mr. Uravitch,

                The Houston underwater Club is delighted to hear that the Flower      
                Garden Banks will be designated a National Marine Sanctuary no later
                than September of this year.  I am writing to repeat the concerns    
                expressed by members of the diving community at the Houston public             
                hearing.                                                                   1.     See Generic Response E.       
                First, as anchor damage is a primary concern, we would like to see         2.     NOAA plans to consult with the local diving community and any
                permanent moorings, with anchoring prohibited, in the very near                   other group that can be of use in managing the santuary.
                Future, Should the cooperation of the Houston-Galveston-Freeport           3.     See Generic Response G.
                diving community be of use in this matter, please advise us.               4.     See Generic Response I.
                                                                                                                              
                  
                Second, we would like this sanctuary to be truly a safe haven for all    
                marine life, with no fishing of any kind no live collecting
                allowed.                                                                                                           
                                                                       

                Houston Underwater Club spearheaded the effort for this sanctuary.
                and our 500+ members hope very much that our opinions will influence     
                the future management of this delightful resource. 

                Thank you,
                                           

                (lis.) Page S. Williams              
                Environmental Chairperson

                cc: David Cottingham, Director, Office of Ecology and Conservation     
                    Room 6222, U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington D.C. 20230






                                             Houston Underwater Club, Inc. P.O. Box 3753  Houston, Texas 77253-3753






                  SIERRA                                                LONE STAR CHAPTER
                    CLUB                                                Houston Group of the Sierra Club
                                                                     
                                                                        April 2, 1959  


                  Joseph M. Uravitch						Attentions Freedon of Information Request
                  Marine and Estuarine management Division                  
                  Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource management                  
                  National ocean Service/NOAA 
                  1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.      
                  Washington, D.C. 20235         

                  Dear Mr. Uravitch,   
                      Enclosed are the comments of the Houston Sierra Club concerning the Draft Environ-                       
                  mental Impact Statement/Management Plan for the proposed Flower Garden Banks National                        
                  Marins Sanctuary.  The Club has had over a decade of interest is seeing the Flower                     
                  Carlens (PG) protected as a National Marine Sanctuary (WWS) and is cautiously opinl-
                  atic that this time designation will occur.                                              
                                                                     

                      Before we look at the document and glve you our specific consents we want to men-  
                  tion several other items.  We appraciated the fact that NOAA held the public hearing  
                  In Houston. Texas and that one session of the bowing was in the evening so that the
                  general public could attend after work. We are concerned, however, with the short                 
                  public notice given. The public notice appeared in The Houston papers on March 26th,   
                  Sunday, only four days prior to the public hearing and the mailed public notice was
                  received on March 29th only one day before the Public hearing. In the future at least
                  a minimum of two weeks should be given for public notice and preferably one mouth.

                     I also had trouble getting an your mailing list to receive the DEIS; Even though
                  over the past year I wrote to N00AA at least twice to ensure that my name would be on the
                  list I heard that the DEIS was available from a friend who had already received his copy.
                  Therefore I hod to write NOAA again and once more for a copy of the document. This Is
                  not acceptable public participation procedure and I request that NOAA ensure that my
                  ease and addressl, shown at the and of this letter. Is on the mailing list to receive any
                  information about the FG that NOAA sends out in the future.
                     
				The Club also wants to Input Into the level contingency and emergency response         1.     NOAA intends to consider any suggestions received for the 
                  plan (page 57) which MEMD will develop. This to a crucial plan since It Is acknowledged             development of contingency and emergency response plans.
                  In the BITS that more ship traffic and oil and gas drilling Is ongoing and expected to
                  Increase In the future. Therefore we need to ensure that adequate additional spill           2.     Representatives from other agencies, academic institutions,
                  controls and prevention measures are available right at the WMS and other areas to ensure           and environmental organizations may be invited to participate
                  quick enough response times.                                                                        in workshops and other planning processes as the research plan
                  	We also would Ilke to participate In the annual, research plan update. We would               is developed.  Sierra Club representatives may be considered
                  like to mention however that an annual update may be too frequent since research needs              for participation as appropriate in the future planning of 
                  several years to occur with data collection and analysis. A more realistic timeframe                research for the Flower Gardens sanctuary.
                  way be every 3-5 years for a research update.  Emergency situations which require un-
                  anticipated research can always be worked Into the budget each year.  We also request   
                  under the FOIA a copy of the research protocol an the East FC coral recovery from
                  anchorine study which is now ongoing.                    


                             "When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe." John Mair.  
                                                    recycled paper


Also , as mentioned on page 54, please keep us informed about development of procedures to address specific management concerns.
The club wants to be actively involved in this effort. Now we would like to have specific, page- comments about the DEIS and management plan.
1) Page 4. We see the need to list all potentially inspecting activities now so that NCAA can regulate them quickly and not have 
to seek specific approval for an amendment to this plan. Therefore collecting, spearfishing, oil and gas drilling, recreational 
fishing, etc. all need to be listed and if possible have regulations drawn up now to maximize protections for this ecological area
that has already had much damage visited upon it. 2) 9 It is not acceptable, if true protection for thge Fg is to occur, to say 
4. that the scope and scale of programs may be reduced due to budget constraints. If true long-term protection of the FG is to 
occur a steady source of funding is needed.NOAA must and Mr. Mossbacher, our Texas Secratary of Commerce Department, educated about 
the importance of his homegrown FG. Then Mr Mossbacher can see that President Bush and Congress are informed about the need for 
more monies. This is the only way to guarrantee that sufficient recources will be available to protect the FG. In addition Mr.
Mossbacher can see that the Coast guard sets sufficient funds to enforce the NFS so that people willl be disuaded form abusing 
the area. NOAA cannot relie on people's good faith efforts to ensure that enforcment of the FG will occur. We do not need laisefaire
enforcement. NOAA also needs to enforce EPA to accept its responsibility to enforce out in the Gulf the NPDES watewater peraits
so that the FG will be protected. EPA and the CG need to do most of the enforcement because EPA has an inheritent conflict of intrest 
in promoting oil and gas drilling as well as protecting recources.In addition to their personnel are not trained to look at environmental 
damage the way EPA and CC personnel are.3) page 10. NOAA could also deputise other state and federal agencies that more policing 
of the NFS will occur.4) Page 11. For interpretation and public education NOAA needs to have an extensive very actice outreach 
program with slide shows, movies, brochures, speakers, buttons to wear, radio and TV talk shows and FSA's, visits to the oil industry ,
insurers, shippers, pilots, pilot associations, tanker owners, sharter boat captains, etc. to inform the user groups about the
importance of their cooperation to the continued interrity of the Flower Gardens.Perhaps a non profit organization, like the National
Park Service has many of its parks, could be projects, and specific projects like marker and tie-up buoys.Although NOAA says 
on page 53 that interested orginizations and the public will play an important role in attaining resource protection goals it 
is not stated what this role is and how it will be helped by the public. It is obvious that since onsite users (page 65) are 
using the area and thus have tthe highest potential for direct damage to th EG their education and cooperation should be sought 
has had a long history of interest in the FG that the information center be located there either at the  NOAA lab or at the 
Texas A&M campus on Pelican Island.5) Page 40. Regulations for commercial fishing with the respect to reef fisheries would be better
coordinated with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council. They have a new Reef Fishery Management Plan out in draft form 
which NOAA needs to take a look at. In addition since Red Snapper, other snappers, groupers, and other reef fish apppear at.
to be overfished NOAA needs to seriously consider whether regulations for recreational and commercial fishing needs to be pro-
mulated.These regulations would be different than 


3. These activities are listed in the Designation Document. See Generic Responce A with regard to oil and gas drilling. See 
Generic Responses G and H with regard to fishing.

4. U.S. Government budgets are quthorized on an annual basis.It is not possible therefore for NOAA, EPA, or the U.S. Coast  Guard 
to have a constantly predictable flow of funds available for their programs.Budgets may fluctuate, and unforeseeable budgetary 
constraints may couse modifications in the scope and scale of programs.

5. The Flower garden Banks are well beyond the jurisdiction of coastal states. However, NOAA does plan to work with other federal 
agencies to maximize surveillance efforts.

6. See Gezneric Responce J.


7. NOAA plans to work with non-profit orginizations and volunteers whenever possible. See also Generic Responce E. 

8. The role of the public was explained more fully on pp. 58-59 of the DEIS. See also Generic Responce J. 

9. These and other sites are being considered for the location of information centers.

10.As required by the Marine Protection, Reasearch and Sanctuarries Act and the national marine Sanctuary Program regulations, 
NOAA consulted with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Managment Council in prepairing its proposed Flower Garden Banks Sanctuary regulations. See 
also generic Responce G.


  
  







            11.     See Generic Response H.

            12.     See Generic Response G.

            13.     See Generic Response H.

            14.     See.Generic Response J.
                                                                                                                                             See Generic      Response H.
            15.     see Generic Responses A                and B.

            16.     See Generic Response F 
            17.     See Generic Response A                                                                                           12. See Generic Response G.

            18.     See Generic Response B.
            19.     see   Generic response D.                                                                                        13.    see Generic see Responce n.
                    a result of oil and gas exploration                        somewhere.

            20.     NOAA acknowledges that oil                  entering      the area       from vessels is                                                                       aenam at manssenent allows damage                       way not
                be  reversible before anytninig is done and then NCAA prooaed to study the damage done
                that was revealed by monitoring to see If regulation Is seededl This 13 not protective
                of the resource.
                    6) Pass 44. As mentioned earlier under 4 above special education efforts are needed for
                users of the area. Here NCAA shows       that most of the bast traffic comes from Corpate
                C
                     it
               qhr  Lavaca. Palmt Comfort aid irresport with respect to commercial shipping am
                therefore these are precisely the places that WOO should Otart with fastest th Its edu-
                cation endeavors so trash disposal anchoring, tanker wishing and other activities that
                "as ships might be Involved In that might impact the VC.                                                              14.  See Generic Responce J.

                    7   Pop    7.            
                                                           We are deeply troubled by 0MA's lack of willingness
                                        drilling operations. It to admitted that there Is Increased                             15.  See Generic Response A and B.
                velopment In deep offshore areas for oil and gas and that tanker traffice or all vessel
                raffic is lncresstng In the Area (page 47). Many of the deeper areas that will be drilled
                     use tankers Instead of pipelines and could be a direct tqliroat to the FC. In addl-
                ton-the realonal Interacts of long-term oil and gas withdrawl. an the stability of the banks                           16. See Generic Response F.
                and their potentlaior active faulting and subsidence Is not known.
                     We finish It unacceptable that NOAA would allow any seabed alternations by. hydrocarbon
                extr,setion activities. go need to protect the entire roof form the top to the bottom
                alone with areas of clean water to ersuro & sufficient buffer zone Is In place that if
                a bad accident does occur there may be some mitigation via dellution to keep harmful
                 tortals away from the redfa In Impacting quantities. Kbore yet knows 110           V the bottom                    17. see   Generic     Response A.
                : the entire roof structure Is ralted to' the corals or reef building zones. It Is not
                cnsclousable to allow such experiments with the natural resources here. Prevention Is
                the key ard that Is why we support strongly alternative boundary three with 4 nautical
                miles of clean water to provide a mitleatine buffer from oil arid gas incidents.
                        disagree strongly that reculation of oil anbffas acitivittes are not needed more
            the that M already qjoes. In 1403 PM allowed a lease tract which Included part of the                              IS  See  Generic    Responce B.
                G to be lessed by Exxon. Only a last istrute intercession by Texas Governor Mark White
                covnitced Exxon to drop Its lease bid and not drill In this sensitive tract.           We cannot
                so















            






                be assured that this  will not occur In sometimes In the future. It Is also ridiculous
                to say a subsea oil spill will simply be swept around the banks. No one has the do& donts
                volthls and the more likely scenario to that sons would reach the PC and Impactareas.                             19. See Generic RespMse D.
                I
                Ie be leve. as we have stated over arA over that the HAIr study Is a fliw0qW one which
                rc4ed conctusions which were not tenable with wxlstlnc Information. We also remind
                 (page 91.) that oil enterina the area from vessels Ii a result of oll2pppas explar-
                a
                 saewqre aA needs to  be acknowled as such.                                                          20,
                                                                                                                                         "0q" acknOwledges that oil entering
                                                                                                                                         result Of oil and gas e00qTIOnation sqoqeqm

















                      404 shculd be       c-tref-A in 7e:re,:e-tc-!-x the F.FS-, ZTS because they often are
                   lawpd dorime its then solves. Studios kra referinced which have been discredited in publlc
                   or which h&v never faced peer review bpenune they are gray literature or which were long
                   by the oil conpantes oi censultants hired bv that     coon&nlea. We have dolnimened pro-
                   lems In the past with these documents and would before than happy, ici and YOU copies
                   of our canmenta if you so desire the.

                     Oil drill was operations should a o be rtwulned for the same reason that you repru-
                   ale other activillts. For Instance on pale 90 you prohibit dredging even though it
                   potentally will not occur how so why of do the same for oil a           -ationa    A-' so.
                   [.I                                                                 gas opei-
                   :
                   I pace 96 you talk ï¿½@Uut r-egulatt-ut Ln:i ustne        zenalties to discaurwe 4tv3as           21.     see Generic Response A.
                   7211 ch also could be a recd deterent for any oil ard- ras'act!7!tles that havoi 'protle-to
                   nd Inpinve am the CYPS. We want the stiffer oerzaltle:t to aculy to &I-' actlvttes that      22.     Spe Gic-neric Response
                   atentially could lo@act the FC.
                                                                                                                   23.     Vessel discharges permitted include
                   M) Fare        We believe all anchorinc should to regulated since all anchors damage                    down, graywater, non-oily dischar4g4
                   010a coral. The impacts. even from recreatinal anchoring tire curmlative ard there are                 effluents-from approv d sanitation
                                                                                                                                                         e
                   obvious alternatives It like moor1r buoys that can be utilizedo We need to put  a
                   LOV svstem now and not wait for gore damage to occur.                                                  are considered necessary to the oper
                                                                                                                          the"' sanctuary.       NOAA has no eviden
                   9) Past 5  We are not In favor of allowing any Uschwwas over the reefs Copling,                       threaten sanctuary resources.                As 7
                   a ter2 may have all In them and arine sanitatior devices can fall. Ut particularly                   G, NOAA intends to facilitate compat
                   r a asainst the phrase "or routine operations". This Is do burad and has not definition                and therefore will not make it impos
                   [that almost anything could im allowed. We want no discharges in the M NVS.                             there.
                   10) Fare    . We are totally opposed to any With lonal Security exemption for explo-              24.     See Generic Response K.
                   as or electrical charites or anythinc else. There Is no earthly excuse for using the
          L4      at any time for  security purposes. The FC must be protected fruit all                  25.     comment accepted. The FEIS/NP has
                   r cats period.                                                                               26.     The wording of this phrase should
                   I )         a.7            acknowledge EPA's Importantal I                                    FEIS/MP has been-co
                   
                                                                                                                     cruises." The
                             n.6
                                         For some reason ICOAA'do*s no,
                                        n addition NOAA heads to hook Into EPA's Gulf Initiative aid
                   ther ace4m programs to ensure that the rG'Is recognized aid perhpas funding can case
                   Mis EPA for research In particular areas.
                   12) Paae 71. Mature viewine boat cruises are mentioned. Please intive a complete
                   G planation of what this Is. Now will It Impact the FG?                                       27.     The preferred alternative, describ
                                                                                                                           discusses regulations to be proll
                   13) Paso M . The description of the preferred alternative leaves out recreational                       sanctuary designation.               On p.         54
                   1charinn which to Included on pias 54.                                                                possibility that additional regulat
                    We approcItte this opportunity to comment and look forward to receiving a copy of                      a later date.
                   te rEIS aid management plan and bet" Included on the ROAA selling list to be kept
                   apprised of all future 110AA activities as they relate to the FC NFS@ Thank you.


                                                        Pincerely,
                                                           -d --t :M@@a n nc' % a
                                                        Conservation Committee
                                                        Houston Sierra club
                                                        629 Euclid
                                                        Houston, Texas 77009
                                                        H713-efil-llc,52, W713-640-4311
 

0



          SIERRA                                           LONE STAR CHAPTER
                                                              COASTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
                 CLUB

                                                       .ps                                                     2C                      of      tp_rLi             z.
               "t1p.e                   cttt
               p?r
                                     .?nl e ctu
               pi d                 1p3r
               t  ft        
                            it        . rt of t                        f my rt epic1pm-
                                            d1p, 1 o :prt- for
                  -1pz coral        reef v r   from ps, @arttt1p*          1pa lone 4Cptr econd ly, what
               We p3pjhieve In a . The              tof these coat Ions *to hr seeks
               tnbll1pn bition of
                                  which In on a v brs     y l1ps               If Cie cl vpppavs be               rpA feels t         11pre
               In  condition perceived as nobody 1pv1pipr_
               e2p-de1pw:-:1phorpk from u               causes. To co1paph                                                  e slotits           rizontal distance between the 5                           which
               p--poscovered                     contain the coral reef zones and the' 100 m isobaths,                         which
                fox In  chickens.
                                                                                                         lie well within the no-;-actives, is 400 to
                  p:t, a site -.there continues                         4430 m (1300 to 145st Bank (Bright, 1977     uurbed. For ell tpdTps by                         300 to 1000 a (1000 to 3300'ft) at thet and
               fishermen e oil 2p. ton                Peuegnat, 1974.).          Contaminant spills at depths would be
                   then, as 2pI this eco                           carried     around      the'    Banks      (see    Generic      Response       D)
                 r s pW?y of det1pT per p:                   Contaminants in surface layers are unlikely to reach the reefs
               declared                zo1pe lInt                   50 to 120 feet below (see DEIS).               The no-activity zones thus
               even pee to do Studies to verify Vila! The  has             e.11ur@ 1pmp-                   appear to be adeuate. If they are later demonstrated to be
                                                                                                         inadeuate, Ntemporary emergency regulations,
               .jpn1pl cn2pitIve of
               vested -interests, 2pjud Upon                      during which time more permanent measures can be devised.
               1ps1plk u1pitpnherefore
               acp%00.e nt1popw1p2.      -The agreement among Anadarko Production Co., the Pennzoil Co.,
            to l1p. by l p, a              1pa1p@n1pon1pape                    National Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, and EPA
                                                                                                         resolved a dispute about the granting of NPDES permits to the
                     -or l,been                                                                                                         oil companies. NOAA was not a party to the dispute and does
                                                                                                         not believe that it must consider the agreement in developing
                                                                                                          managing the proposed sanctuary.                           e.
                                                                                                                      however, intend to conduct monitoring studies of the effects
                                                                                                         of discharges on t resources.
 








Joseph A grevisch							20 April, 1989

To indiction as included in the EIS that there is any question about the safety of any hydrocarben activity, whether pipeline or drilling activity .
The doubt that the EIS has not expressed is uppermost in out minds, and MUST be addressed in the next EIS. Very simply stated, the Flower Garden Banks 
are in a mobile environment. Even an addition of the four mile zone to the current no-activity zone may be inadequate, but to permit continuation of   
hydrocarbon activities in and about the BAnks is not at all in keeping with the term SANCTUARY. The cessation fo activity of oil companies will be 
difficult. But it must be addressed.
First of all, no new drilling blocks may be leased; that is the easy step.  Next, existing leases without activity, backdated to some prior date, so 
that the leaseholder doesn't quickly bring in drilling equipment, must be cancelled, perhaps bought out.      
This would include no more dollars than had been paid for the lease plus appropriate interest that might have been generated.
In return, a promise will be made that in perhaps 20 years, following completion of adequate studies, if that lease blcok is then made available, the
same leasor will be given presidence.  That to do about existing drilling or producing activities? 
The best is to shut them down; but that is likely impractical, and yet, the continued extraction of gas or oil may cause fault elicare, perhaps even 
subsidence, and other geologic processes IN THIS UNDERSEA LOCATION which nothing is known about (and which is not at all addressed in the DEIS!).
The first step may well be to control the rate of production from existing wells; while an independent geological group studies the potential problem 
at this location. And in some years (5,10,maybe as much as 20) the production will cease and the equipment removed - or it could perhaps be converted,
e.g. the cobil platform in block 389, as as an anchoring-tie-up site, monitoring base, or whatever suits.
In short, the DEIS avoids questioning hydrocarbon activities, and we do. When "offshore service vessels...are usually between 90 and 180 ft in length"   
(page 14) and the proposed limitation on anchoring uses 100 feet, there is something woefully wrong in someone's thinking.  100 is as arbitrary as           
110 or 50. The choice is not defended. Certainly no offshore service vessels should be allowed to anchor, no matter how long they are! Anchoring should
also be a function of currents and wind, since these are the forces that cause anchor dragging with an unpowered vessel. 
Folks, let's think about these things and be rational in order to PROTECT the Banks!
Spearfishing should be prohibited also; perhaps limited permits can be issued in later years. For the present there is no control over this and  that
situation could lead to decimation of specific desireable, or (probably) predator, species if unregulated. "e" on page 117 should be as generic as                  
statement "a"; thus statement one in article 5 on that page should be deleted.
On page 2 is stated that a ONE MILE surround (diameter) is now a sanctuary for the U.S.S. Monitor. WOW. Doesn't it make sense to make at least the four     
mile zone around a biologically unique reef part of its sanctuary? 
3.  NOAA believes that its preferred alternative, as modified (see Generic Response A), will provide adequate protection to the
    Flower Gardens.  It may be worth noting, however that a ban on additional lease sales in the area might not have a  sizeable
    effect on future oil and gas activities because many of the 20 currently unleased tracts, lying wholly or partly within the 
    the outer boundaries of the four-mile buffer zones, may be unattractive for leasing.  Twelve of the 20 were previously leased. 
    Their current unleased status may indicate that they have little potential for development.  Another two of the unleased tracts
    (A-375 and A-398) are entirely, or almost entirely, within the no-activity zones, and three (133, 136, & 138 are extremely         
    small. Of the total of 59 tracts, leased and unleased, only three (179, A-386, & A-394) have not recently been under lease, are
    of standard size, and lie entirely beyond the no-activity zones.

4.  Title III, 304 (c), of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act specifically states that the Act does not grant the
    Secretary of Commerce the right ot terminate valid leases in existence at the time of sanctuary designation.

5.  If it is indicated to NOAA in the future that fault slippage or subsidece is occurring, NOAA will consult with MMS to                
    determine what measures should be taken.

6.  Several of the excursion vessels that take divers to the Flower Garden reefs are between 90 and 100 feet in length.  NOAA considers
    the passengers of these vessels to be legitimate users of the sanctuary.  As NOAA has no evidence that the anchoring damage from a
    100 foot vessel is materially different from that of a 90 foot vessel, NOAA reaffirms its decision to permit anchoring of 100 foot
    vessels subject ot anctuary regulations. See also Generic Responses E and F.

7.  Comment accepted.  See Generic Response H.

8.  The criteria used by NOAA in establishing the size of the MONITOR National Marine Sanctuary are irrelevant to the resource protection        
    requirements at the Flower Garden Banks and thus have no value in determining the appropriate size of the proposed Flower Garden Banks
    National Marine Sanctuary.                                               





















                           

0






                                                                                                 pr'                                                                                                                                          1p.-i
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   pr                                  c                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ibit fep, or
                                                                                                                                                                                           9.              The -regulations have been changed to
                                                                                             p, or                                ::a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            f ish.
                                v                                 lit is                                                                           attempting to feed,
                                                                                                                             2p.26
                                  .                 t2put       Other
                                t it 1prp2                                                                                                                                                                             nt #23 in-letter from                                       Brandt                                                                                                          3 for                                                 lo.             See response to COMO
                                                     pe           At" n                         J1               
                                                      1p5u                                                               or                                                                                                                                    Or     
                                                            p9 r
                                                                                        pe !,:1                                                   J r - -                                                                -                                                                                                                                                                                      These and other sites are being considered.
                                                     o                          :-p.p-         It is                                               :c st                                                                                                      12.             This role was listed an p. 70 of the DEIS under D.                                               2pIp.-ort2p-                                           1                                                      -t4:ou
                                                     -upf-                                                                                                                      The inclusion an nautical charts of information about
                                                                                                                                                                                          sanctuary regulations
                                r                     -,                                         -IOU -::.-a t@t .. .                                                                                                                           was discussed on pp. 57 and 58 of the
                                -r.1p!-tpae sr                                                               t                                                                                                                              2p.3 lot       !                  t !I.-  -to                  .                                                                                                         r     r                                                   I  r I a a             I                                                                                                                                                                                             a L                                                                       2p_     14.             NOAA         has            incorporated                            into              the           management                         plan:                                    If tp5 -p.v-?! sp3                                             bimV                                  proscriptions of the NNFthe Flower Garden
                                                                                                                             1. .p.     2p:                                HAPC; 2) proscriptions of the MKS pertaining to hydrocarbon
                                ph!O;1p.-                            to                                                                 activities within.t zones; and 3) proscriptions
                                                                           of 31                                                                                           of other agencies pertaining to pollutant discharges.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          proscriptions applying in the four-mile buffer zones have not
                                                                  it                                                                            1pooa                                                                                                                                                                                              been incorporated into the management plan, but other
                                par3 pa : p-h1po1p.                                                                                          provisions of th              plan are designed                                                 the same or
                                                           -pr: tIn                                                                r                             broader protection (See Generic Response A.).
                                                            1p!r1pr1pg- c                               ni                               It 2p.'or o                                                                        p:                      11p13c-i-                  rv                         pOrrps_eturpirs                                                                              See response                      m                 about boundary
                                Of pUrr-x.: pi-r p-                                             1perpmpA                             1p11pV                                                   alternatives from the Amel Society.
                                                                               t       2pi2p'pa to
                                lpDoatpat. But Clio bstill r                                                                                  1e-Generic Response D.
                                                                                                                                             2p-                                           -c, 
                                                                                                                 I                              2p- 
                                  .  Cs-ps                              c                                                17.             This paragraph -ii
                                t 2po           -pd ,                                                  11p@                                                                                                 not concerned with                                       Proposed sanctuary
                                                                                                                                                                                                           regulations*                          The         paragraph describes existing regulations
                                                              1                       7.1ps1pI                               at        :nprs                               3reLt                                                       promulgated under                               the Fishery Management Plan for coral and
                                                                                                                                                                                                           coral reefs.
                                p1 loc          t1pip-.e                                                      ,pd,
                                1p@ cites "t1p!-v                                       Iph ctnt                                                                                                               18.          That part of the regulation now reads "any material or other
                                                                                                                                                                                                           matter." By this NOAA means                                                  everything;g of
                                c                 First off . 2pc Cp9 I---                                                               be                                       specific                    items                included               unnecessary                         possibly
                                                                                        -p-py1pl                0p-ti                                                                                                                                                                                                e not
                                                     -                                                                                                                                    misleading, because it implies that some things. ar
                                                     ::2_1p,r                  1pir, I                                                              included.
                                                                                             I                       -or I- in                  zp;                     r .                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Generic Responses A and B.
                                                                                                                                                                                              20.          comment accepted. NOAA will explore the feasibility of using
                                                                                                                                                                                                           NASA remote sensing data for sanctuary monitoring and
                                                                                                                                                                                                           enforcement activities.
 

0








                            , w            l-                      r1pi1pi-1py1.      See Generic Response E                                                                                                                                .v                                                                                  about labelling                                                     @1pnds             directions for their use and -similar" measures will'be made by
                          i-s                                                         r' --?a a                                                 NOnctuary..
                                1prp. ear                                                                                       1pi      See D.
                          it              Lpf   l                    u:p)- currz                      1pr tart 1          not i1ps
                                           pzp.'sell           science                              p,2p:tar!t 2p1t 1pick
                                                      pspo
                          :pcr-, pn `1p4                                     i':p0


                                a ?n               rpI                          ap-r             6v1pipst   23.      See Generic Response E.
                                  "2pl0p- still be
                          to                                                                             24.      See Generic Response F.
                                     !pl     of .pTcrn,               ,-pti zone, .h In cpmi  lose tp-                         25.      Divers are attracted               to   the Flower Gardens primarily because
                          dr1p: mud,  tssr! pnly tpe                                     or the presence of                the high elevation coral areas.                             NOA  re ccishould not be
                       L  a1ptlt here.                                                                          believes that diving in                  these areas should be considered a
                                                                                                                                  legitimate use of sanctuary resources.                                 However, if such
                          I   ed phe                                  diving is later demonstrated to have an adverse impact on the
                          1pVy lp1-tt much -more                                     high elevation corals, NOAmooring buoys over
                                                                     I                                                            these corals. NOAA also has the ability to regulate div                    1pn   here. woul
                                    of ratum.                                                                                                                                                                               n                                                                                                                    in these areas an a temporary emergency basis, during which
                           o-pfp-cp,                    time more permanent measures can be formulated for resolving
                          3rp.             -this has b1pear             the problem.
                          1 pI! pel:  d:ir                parr ith a p,                        2ic Response K.
                          for'.-" lne the Pin. tcan r            he rIopn 1prctivities
                          bl-prp;1plP
                          p.y 1Y 1p.pion                                 Paid o                       14n to at- , 2pe               the com                      .pi2pf the o              b,             A9 which 1pwerent ro e                     these comments by If 1, too, hod cited 
                          think you f1pn opportunity                                                           S1p?                                                                   1pept, Ph.D.
                                                                  members it                                                            Lane er,
                                                                  ec1pr, Sierra Club
 











                                     TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
                                    COLLEGE OF GEOSCIENCES
                                  COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77843                          MAR 30 1989


Reply to
Department of 
OCEANOGRAPHY


       Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
       Marine and Estuarine Management Division
       Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
       National Ocean Service/NOAA
       825 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
       Washington D.C. 20235

       March 28, 1989

       Dear Mr. Uravitch

                 I am pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIS/ management
                 plan for the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. In
                 general, the DEIS/management plan is very thorough and well researched. I
                 would like to comment on several specifics. As information to qualify me for
                 comment, I have spent considerable time on the Flower Garden Banks involved in
                 numerous research efforts (a total of 28 cruises, 186 scuba dives (also submersible
                 and heliox-supplied bell dives), and 223 sea-days on the banks].

                 (p 31) An additional brine seep was discovered at the East Flower Garden Bank
                 at a depth of48 m (27* 54.37'. 93' 36.49') during the three year National Marine       1.     Comment      accepted.         This information has been added in the 
                 Fisheries study. Ecological Effects on Energy Development on Reef Fish of the               FEIS/Mp.
                 Flower Garden Banks (Boland d. at. 1983)
                  In support of your premise that snappers are seldom found within diving
                 depths (p 42): 1 quantitatively analyzed a total of 357 hours of video transect
                 records at the banks resulting in surveyed areas of 1.335.532 m2 and 427, 108 qM2 at   2.     No response necessary.
                 the East and West Banks respectively. The commercially important red snapper.
                 Lntivinoys cAnmerhminvis and verqmillion snapper, Rhornhoplites allrornhens were
                 never observed in the coral reef habitat. The only snapper species occurring with
                 any frequency at all on the high or low diversity reef in the gray snapper, Lutianus
                 griseus (Boland et. aL 1983)
                 
                 (p 55) One major concern or myself and several colleagues is the matter of
                 spearfishing within the Marine Sanctuary. My personal feeling in that large          3-      See Generic Response H.
        3.       groupers (the only highly desirable food fish in the coral habitat) are very rare.
                 and depletion by spearfishing would essentially eliminabe this resource from
                 enjoyment by other divers. To be consistent with the "highest priority
                 management goal" of protecting Lim resources of the Flower Garden Banks. it
                 would seem this activity should be totally prohibited.
                 
                                 










                Marine Sanctuary Boundary Alternative I (p 78) seems far superior to the
             tremendous area included in Alternative 3 encompassing primarily softbottom
             habitat prevalent throughout the shelf at these depths. I believe any theoretical               4.      No response necessary.
             additional protection beyond current MMS stipulations provided by the additional
             restrictions on oil and gas development has been shown by existing literature and
                reviously performed monitoring studies to be negligible.
             [
                'p 80) Mention might be included about capture or injury to marine turtles, even
                ough they are all protected by the Endangered Species Act. I have personally
             h@d the opportimity to have contact with a large resident loggerhead turtle on
             numerous occasions at the West Flower Gard6n Bank.
                With regard to lobster resources on the banks: During the NWS study of 1980-              @5.      Comment accepted.                Turtles have been included among the
             82, numerous night dives were performed. Except for a few uncertain                                   resources mOntioned in ï¿½ 943.5 (a) (10) of the sanctuary
             observations, 100% of the lobster aightings were of the spotted lobster, EanulimA                     regulations.
             guUjd". Interestingly. I did observe spiny lobsters. (PAnuhrun arkrug on the
             Mobil platform 3 weeks after installation and on numerous occasions afterwards.
             but spotted lobsters were never seen on the platform.
             Spotted lobsters appeared to be numerous on the Flower Garden Banks. but                     6.      The     injury       or     removal        of    spotted        lobsters        or      other
             unrestricted collection could possibly deplete t1xis resource. Restriction for                       invertebratea is prohibited by ï¿½ 943.5 (a)                                   (9)    of the
             collection of this invertebrate could be included specifically in the regulations,                   sanctuary regulations.                   S . 945. (a)      (13) prohibits use of
             assuming divers would attempt to use spear fiaNng "equipment" for collection (p                      spearfishing equipment.
             80).
                (p 83) 1 believe a professional on-aite manager would be fir superior to relying          7.      A professional# site-specific manager and staff is provided
             on public cooperation (and probable observational biases) for surveillance of                        for in Nanagament Alternative 2, the preferred alternative.
             sanctuary activities and resource condition. Direct involvement in research and
             actual visitation to the Flower Garden Banks is invaluable for informed
             contribution to management decision&


             Reference:

             Boland, G.S., B.J. Gallaway. J.S. Baker, G.S. Lewbel. 1983. Ecological 6ffects on
                energy development on reef fish of the Flower Garden Banks. LGL Ecological
                Research Aasoq. Inc. Final Report to National Marine Fisheries. Galveston,
                Texas. Contract No. NA80-GA-C-00057. 466 p.


             Sinc




             Gregory & Boland
             Research Associate

             cc: Mr. David Cottingham
                Dr. Thomas J. Bright
                Mr.'Ralph Lopez
             0













                                                          TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY

                                                              COLLEGE OF GEOSCIENCES



                             Reply to
                             Department of
                             OCEANOGRAPHY                                                22 March 1989

                                         Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                         Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                                         Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                                         National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                         1825 Connecticut Avenue. N.W.
                                         Washington, D.C. 20235


                                         Door Mr. Uravitch,

                                              I welcome the opportunity for written comment on the draft
                                         environmental impact statement/management plan (DEIS/MP) prepared for
                                         the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. members
                                         of our Texas ALM Flower Gardens group have been discussing the
                                         document since It arrived. and the topic most often discussed has been
                                         the question of spearfishing within the Sanctuary.

                                             My personal views on this topic are tempered by two decades of
                                         working with and around fellow, SCUBA users. Including spearfishermen.
                                         with the result that I strongly oppose permitting. spearfishing within
                                         this or any other National Marine Sanctuary.   In fact. since
                                         spearfishing is already officially prohibitted at least at the Key
                                         Largo and Lone Key National Marine Sanctuaries, I believe that It
                                         would be at best philosophically Inconsistent to permit spearfishing
                                         at the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Also. my
                                         experience-in other fisheries management situations suggests that it
                                         would be such more difficult to stop   spearfishing. once allowed, than
                                         to prohibit it initially. The word "sanctuary" Itself seem
                                         at odds with the mental images conjured by the term "spearfishiq".
                                         There are more compelling reasons. described below. to not permit
                                         spearfishing at the Flower Gardens.

                                             Most often in my work. SCUBA is used an a aeons of getting us to
                                         our work/study sites, and permitting underwater data-gathering.
                                         However, I have on many occasions dealt with sport-divers whose
                                         primary use of SCUBA was recreational. Spearfishermen are primarily
                                         recreational divers and these cow In all sizes, ages. and
                                         personalities. Spearguns range from the venerable. simple. and
                                         relatively safe Hawaiian slings and polespears,to very sophisticated.
                                         powerful. and relatively dangerous gas-operated and mult-rubber
                                        













                                         powered guns. The latter types. In the hands of inexperienced and
                                         even experienced halry-chested deep-sea underwater hunter-gatherer
                                                                              
                                         sportsmen. can be extremely hazardous    sure Ono just the targetted
                                         fish.  Even the simpler types of spearguns in the- hands of the                                        Generic Re
                                         inexperienced pan be very dangerous. Because of the distance of the                               See
                                         Flower Garden Banks from shore and proper medical emergency care.
                                       think that spearguns -should not be permitted simply from the
                                         standpoint of Sanctuary user-safety. The question of liability in
                                         case of serious injury or death due to a speargun accident within a
 















                                                                                             C.L. Combs
                                                                                             3/22/89
                                National Marine Sanctuary may also need to be considered.    Would the
                                federal government or any of Its Sanctuary Office employees be liable?
                                This Is probably not an easily answered question. but might be totally
                                avoided by making spearfishing officially Illegal.
                                    From a biological standpoint. spearfishing at the Flower Garden
                                Sanctuary should not. at least initially. be permitted. Because of
                                the working" water depths (70 to 100 feet or to). and hence the
                                limits on time which may be spent on the bottom by divers. there to
                                such more not known than known about the population densities of fish
                                and other critters there which would be probable targets of      
                                spearfishermen. What is empirically known by those of us who have
                                orked out there over the years is that greater concentrations of
                                large fish arm found under and around oil-platforms than at our
                                "working" sites at the Flower Gardens. This Is not to say that there
                                are not concentrations of large fish at other places at the Flower
                                Gardens - it is to say that we do not now hove an answer to that
                                question, and that spearfishing should obviously not be permitted
                                until we do. Population densities and diversities of fish. corals.
                                and other organisms found at the Flower Gardens are in part defined by
                                geography. The fact that this site. at typically subtropical to,.-
                                temperate latitudes, displays so marry tropical characteristics 16 why
                                It is biologically unique and worthy of biological protection by -
                                designation as a National Marine Sanctuary.

                                   Some of the species found there. such as spiny lobsters. appear
                                to be there only "by accident" and almost certainly are not capable of
                                sustaining a reproducing population. Lobsters, for instance. hove a
                                long-lived. multi-molt phyllosome planktonic larval stage which my
                                float around the Caribbean and Gulf for up to a year, and perhaps
                                more. Under certain yet unknown circumstances. these larvae settle to
                                the bottom and molt Into juvenile lobsters. I have seen very few
                                lobsters at the Flower Gardens; those seen were very large In
                                comparison to those that we (Florida Sea Grant) studied during 1975.
                                1978 in the Florida Keys; those seen at the Flower Gardens were      
                                comparable in size to similarly large (and scarce) lobsters which I
                                have previously seen (Into 60's. early 70's) at the Florida Middle
                                Grounds (at similar latitude. similar distance from shore. similar
                                depths, but in the' eastern Gulf); of the very few lobsters seen at the
                                Flower Gardens none showed signs of reproductive activity. I have
                                personally seen/studied spiny lobsters (Panulirus arugs) in the
                                Florida Keys, a11 around the Caribbean, all around
                                the southwestern (Mexico). northeastern and northwestern Gulf of
                                Mexico. and have never seen a lobster larger than one I saw at the
                             ,Flower Gardens.  It is my considered opinion that if spearfishing were
                                permitted within the Flower Garden Sanctuary. such unique creatures
                                would rapidly be harvested (even though it has long been illegal to
                                capture lobsters using spears). Since they appear to be rare, and
                                since their exceptional size is probably due to great age and lock of
                                competition. I feel sure that once gone, the lose would be permanent.
                                I feel the some about the fate of large fish and turtles now residing
                                at the Flower Gardens if spearfishing is permitted. Such losses may


                                                               2
 













                                                                                      C. L. Combs
                                                                                      3/22/89

                          have unpredictable effects on the overall ecosystem, so should be
                          prevented If possible.

                               the study of unique ecosystems has helped elucidate generalized
                          mechanisms driving our global ecosystem.  Biological protection of the
                          Flower Garden Banks through designation as a National Marine Sanctuary
                          should go far toward assuring the "undisturbed" survival of this
                          unique site. Ongoing biological studies and monitoring programs should                
                          assure that this site will continue to serve as a living laboratory
                          which over time can provide baseline data on the biological health of
                          the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, and perhaps the entire Gulf.

                               It has been my privilege to have had the opportunity to be a part
                          of Tom Bright's Flower Gardens study group, now in the capable hands
                          of Steve Gittings.  It Is a deep personal pleasure to see Dr. Bright's
                          considerable efforts to attain Sanctuary status for the Flower Gardens
                          apparently paying off. We ail greatly appreciate the ongoing efforts
                          toward this end by your offices, and again I thank you for this
                          opportunity to comment on the DEIS/MP.



                                                                    Sincerely,




                                                                    Christopher L. Combs
                                                                    Graduate Research Assistant


                          cc: Mr. David Cottingham
                              Dr. Thomas J. Bright





                                                                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                         
 














                                          	TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
                                              COLLEGE OF GEOSCIENCES
                                              Department of Oceanography
                                             College Station, Texas 77843-3146

                                                     22 March 1989




Joseph A. Uravich, Chief
Marine and Estuarine Management Division
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
National Ocean Service/NOAA
1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20235

Dear Mr Uravitch,

	I have recently reviewed the draft environmental impact
statement/draft management plan (DEIS/MP), prepared by your office, on the
proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS).  Below 
are brief discussions of two concerns I have with policies outlined in the
document.

	Regulations regarding the taking of lobsters from the banks should be
specified in the final EIS/MP.  There have been a small number of sitings of 
lobsters on the banks.  They are apparantly limited in number, but some are
quite large, probably due to limited fishing pressure.  The proposed regulations
under Section III.B2(e)  (Fishing) do not address this issue.  Due to the
apparently limited stock of lobsters, my personal recommendation is to 
prohibit lobster fishing until stock and repopulation rate assessments can be 
made.

	I am concerned with NOAA's decision to allow spearfishing within the
Sanctuary.  the issue is addressed in several places in the DEIS/MP (e.g. pages
54, 55, 60, 62, 80, and 123, and probably elsewhere).  It is made clear that
spearfishing will be allowed until managers and/or researchers determine
that the fish stocks are being seriously depleted.  the first problem with this
strategy is that we know very little about the current stocks of commonly
speared fish on the Flower Garden Banks.  My own observations convince me
that stocks offish of a size suitable to this sport are low and would not support
a significant level of spearfishing.  the depletion problem could be 
exaccerbated if, as some research suggests, visitation to the reefs increases
after sanctuary designation.  Increased levels of visitor use may result from
new divers patronizing new dive facilities that are expected to emerge in the 
near future, or simply from concentrtration of northwestern Gulf divers at the 
Sanctuary.  
	The second problem is that repopulation rates of fish stocks on these
isolated banks are probably quite low compared to other Western Atlantic 
reefs.  the closest tropical coral reefs are on the Yucatan Peninsula, over 400
miles away.  It is likely that fish stocks, once depleted will take a long time to
recover.  Our research group's observations on the (lack of) recovery of the sea
urchin population decimated by a disease-caused mass mortality that occurred
in 1983 and 1984 support this.

                   












                                            There are  plenty of diving. sites in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico
                                     capable of supporting     the activities of spearfishing enthusiasts. These include
                                     hundreds of oil platforms. a number Of infrequently visited banks. and
                                     submerged artificial reefs and wrecks. It would be more prudent to allow these
                                     alternative sites to support the spearfishing community than to pressure the
                                     Flower Gardens to support both increased use by divers and spearishing.
                                     Furthermore. if future research determines that the population levels and the
                                     recovery potential of large fish stocks at the Flower Garden Banks can support
                                     spearfishing. it seems. that it, would  by easier from an enforcement standpoint
                                     to repeal the spearfishing ban, than to impose , a prohibition at some future
                                     date.

                                     Thank you  for considering my comments     in your  review process.


                                    Sincerely.
                                     Dr. Stephen R. Gittings
                                     Dept. of Oceanography
                                     Texas A&M University
                                     College  Station, TX 77843-3146


                                     cc:   Mr. David    Cottingham
                                           Mr. Ralph   Lopez
                                           Dr. Thomas J. Bright
 










                           00                        THE UNIVERSITY Or MASSACHUSETTS AT BOSTON
                                                                   HARBOR CAMPUS
                                                         BOSTON. MASSACHUSETTS 02126-3391






                                   April 21, 1989



                                   Joseph A. Uravitch
                                   Chief
                                   Marine and Estuaries
                                    Management Division
                                   Office of Ocean and Coastal
                                    Resource Management
                                   National Ocean Service/KOAA		
                                   1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.V.
                                   Washington, D.C. 20235

		
            	                      Re: Comments on the draft environmental Impact statement/management
                                     plan for the proposed Flower Garden Danko National Marine Sanctuary


                                   Dear Joe:


                                     I as pleased to see that you and NORA are moving ahead with this
                                   designation of Flower Gardens. after much delay It needs to be said. I also
                                   appreciate your staff soliciting my comments before the close of the comment
                                   period -- otherwise I might have missed the opportunity of submitting then.


                                     My comments on the draft environmental impact statement /management plan
                                   (DEIS) will be limited to two issues. The first concerns the necessity under
                                   the Marine Sanctuaries Act (primarily sections 303(2)(2), 304 and 305). and
                                   under the National Environmental Policy Act. to consider and identify in the
                                   DEIS the legal authority according to which NOAA and the United States will
                                   regulate the navigational rights (such as the right to anchor) of foreign
                                   vessels within the United States Exclusive Economic Zone and on Its
                                   Continental Shelf. The second concerns the necessity under the sum Acts to
                                   examine the potential effect of hydrocarbon activities taking place near this
                                   proposed sanctuary upon its resources.


                                   Regulating Anchoring by Foreign Vessels
                                
                                     NOAA has stated upon several occasions. and in notices published to the
                                   Federal Register (e.g., see 49 Federal Register 30990 (1984)). that the
                                   pr
                                   imary threat to the coral resources of the Flower Gardens arises because of
 







                     anchoring of vessels on the Banks. Tbe DEIS Itself reiterates the Agency's
                     position on this matter. curiously, however, there in almost no discussion
                     in the DEIS of the Agency's view of its authority (and of course the
                     authority of the United States) to regulate anchoring br foreign vessols an               One purpose of the regulatory pro
                     Flower Garden Banks. The views of the Department of State are also                        regulations shall be applied in acc
                     unexpressed. in this respect, one would have to conclude that thoDglg Is                 legal principles is to preserve
                     seriously detective.                                                                      MPRSA     regulations        consistently
                                                                                                               principles as they evolve, since i
                         The authority of the United States to   protect resources such so the coral           static body of law.              As to the a
                     resources of the Flower Gardens is crucial to fulfilling the statutory                    considers       that      it    has     the      a
                     purposes that Congress clearly had in mind according the status of a                   international law, and NOAA intend
                     national marine sanctuary under the Marine Sanctuaries Act Act upon the Flower              regulations, including            prohibitions
                     Garden Banks, as a consequence of the 1988 amendments to the Act. These                 This view is shared by           the Departm
                     resources cannot be adequately protected unless the United States acts.                   0KOAA consulted with the          Department o
                     pursuant to Its coastal state and port state authority under international                were being drafted.          NOAA has not f
                     and national law. to regulate (and prohibit) anchoring on the banks by                    MPRSA or of the NEPA that require
                                                                                                               specific legal theory or theories qt
                     foreign vessels.                                                                          A paragraph has been added un
                         it in not sufficient. I .a my view, for XOAA merely -to assert that It will           Regulatory/Boundary Alternative 1 i
                     regulate the activities of forelys vessels consistently with intermational
                     legal principles with respect to anchoring on the Banks. That is simply a
                     truism. it in necessary. however. for the Agency to state publicly the
                     grounds of its position that regulating or prohibiting the anchoring by
                   foreign vessels on the Banks Is consistent with International low. Such
                     grounds exist. is my opinion. and in tbV oplalon of officials of the United
                     States Government, as stated in communications to OOKA sod in the agency's
                     files (e.g., see citation to oise such document at 49 Federal neglater 309tO
                     11984)). For Informational purposes, I as attaching a copy of a paper
                     entitled "The Proposed Flower Garde@ Banks Narino Smactuary,"'31 Oceanus 54-
                     So 11988). treating many of theme imase.

                         I also call to your attentlom that the Congress has adopted the view that
                     sufficient grounds exist for prohibiting the harmful macborlog of foreign
                     vessels on Flower Garden banks. pursuant to the Marine Sanctuaries Act and
                     international law:


                         Vitb respect to the Flower Gardens Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                         qItqIbe Committee to pleased to learn that NOAA and the State Department
                         have now reached an understanding witb respect to NORA's authority to
                         prohibit harmful anchoring of foreign flag vessels within the proposed
                         Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary. This Committee believes
                         that NOAA's exercise of this authority in fully consistent with
                         conventioal and customary International law, Including the 1958 Geneva
                         Convention an the Continental Shelf, the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
                         provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the haw of the Sea.
                         and thin nation's traditional port state authority. Therefore. the
 














                                                  Committee believes that the deadline of March 31, 1989, for the final
                                                  designation for Flower Garden banks National Marine sanctuary is
                                                  reasonable and achievable.


                                                         H.R.. Rep. 100-739, 100th Cong. , 2d Sesa. ,  pt. 1. at 25-26 (1988).


                                                  It is also the case that, by virtu@ of the      approval of the 1988
                                              amendments to the Marine Sanctuaries Act by the President (Pub. L. 100-621,
                                              approved November 7, 1988), this view of the authority of the United State#
                                              as a coastal and port state. under international law, to prohibit anchoring
                                              by foreign vessels on Flavor Garden Banks. Pursuant to the Marine Sanctuaries
                                              Act,is now the law of the United States.

                                                  I very strongly suggest that these matters not be swept under the rug,
                                              and that they be discussed clearly and fully In the NEPA documents, as
                                              required by law, to order to dispel any doubt that NOAA will apply the law of
                                              the United States to protect the resource of the Flower Garden Banks. Such
                                              doubt arises necessarily when the Agency Ignores In the DEIS the single most
                                              significant issue involved in the designation of the Flower Garden Banks, and                                               one explicitly Identified by the Congress to legislatively mandating the
                                              designation of this site as a national series sanctuary.

                                                  Finally, I recommend  that the DEIS specifically discuss the advantages of
                                              securing additional protection of the resources of the Flower Garden Banks by
                                              applying to the International Maritime Organization for recognition of the
                                              Banks as a protected ocean area to be avoided by vessels. The cooperation of                   2 .     see GeneriC Re
                                              the Department of State and the Coast Guard will be necessary to achieve such
                                              status, and should be sought by NOAA.

                                              Hydrocarbon Activities

                                                  This Issue can be treated briefly. I assume that there is no doubt that
                                              the Marine Sanctuaries Act provides sufficien authority to regulate and to
                                              prohibit oil and gas activities within a sanctuary, despite the views of the
                                              industry or the Department of the interior. it any, to the contrary.


                                                  Hydrocarbon activities were identified by NOAA. In the draft
                                              environmental.impact statement prepared and published by the Agency to 1979
                                              for Flower Garden Banks. an a source of major impacts as sanctuary resources
                                              to be addressed in managing the Banks as a national  marine sanctuary.
                                              Responding to pressure from the Department of the interior and the oil and
                                              gas Industry, NOAA abandoned its intention to regulate such activities within
                                              the proposed sanctuary, citing the oil and gas stipulations issued by
                                              Interior as sufficient to protect the resources of the sanctuary. At or near
                                              the same time. NOAA Issued management plans and regulations applicable to
                                              Sanctuaries offshore California that prohibited new hydrocarbon activities.
 

   The resources of the "California" sanctuaries were arguable subject to the same degree of protection,
under rules issued and actions then taken by the Department of the Interior, as the coral resources of the 
Flower Garden Banks are today.  Yet, in 1979, these same "protective measures" taken by the Department of 
the Interior were judged to be inadequate to preserve the resources of the Califorinia sanctuaries.

   What has changed since 1979? The DEIS fails completely to treat this very significant issue, and merely
defers to the Minerals Management Service to protect the resources of the proposed sanctuary from adverse affects of 
oil and gas exploration and development activities.  At the least, a full enquiry into the record of such atipulations 
and rules in protectin sanctuary resources, and into the record of actions taken by Department oftheInterior officials
form 1979 until the present, particularly with respect to the California sanctuaries, should be undertaken before NOAA
decides, pursuaat to its own, independest authority, to relyupon the authority of another agency to protect sancturay 
resources.  Such as enquiry, at a minimum, must consider the adequacy of such other authority (the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act Amendments) to provide the same degree of protection of sanctuary resources as that which is required
by the Marine Sanctuaries Act.  The DEIS is totally without any analysis of these matters, and, is my opinion, must 
be considered inadequate.

   I want to thank you and your staff again for making a special effort to secure these comments on the Flower Garden 
Banks DEIS.  Such solicitude for informed public participation in the sanctuary designation process should not pass
without comment.

      Sincerely,

       
     Jack H. Archer, Esq.
     Associate Professor
     Environmental Sciences Program &
     Urban Harbors Institute



3.  NOAA intends to protect the resources of the sanctuary from adverse effects of oil and gas exploration and
    development activities through, e.g., the enforcement of
       943.5 (a) (1-4) and   943.6 of the sanctuary regulations.
    See also Generic Responses A and B.

4.  See Generic Respones A and B.










                                                                                          CR



                                                       Volume 31, Number 1, Spring 1988












                      The Proposed Flower
                     Garden Banks Marine
                                      Sanctuary
                  Protecting Marine Resources Under
                                    International Law
                                  C)ceanus












                                         by Jack H. Archer





                                        The Proposed Flow                                                                    er
                                      Garden Banks Marine
                                                                 Sanctuary
                                  Protecting Marine Resources Under
                                                             International Law

                                                                     by lack H. Archer

                        The Flower Garden Banks in the Gulf of Mexico                    through or near   .the Banks. Vessels dropping and
                        were first proposed as a marine sanctuary in 1977                dragging anchors on the shallow coral reef have
                        to protect some geograph ically- unique coral reefs              been identified by the Nationa(Oceanic and
                        and related resources. Vessels anchoring and                     Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) as a majo               'r
                        discharging wastes and pollutants in or near the                 threat to the unique resources of the Flower
                        Banks were thought to be major threats. Oil and                  Garden Banks. Because of the massive size and
                        gas exploration and develcipment activities, which               weight of ship anchors, even infrequent
                        were beginning in this part of the Gulf, also were               occurrences rhay have devastating effects.
                        considefed significant risks to these resources. To                     Shortly after passage of the Marine
                        date, no final action has been taken to designate                Sanctuaries Act (MSA) in 1972, interest developed
                        the Banks as a sanctuary, although it is still under             in establishing the Banks as a national marine
                        .active' consideration.                                          sanctuary, with controls on the activities of both
                                In the 10 years since the original proposal,             domestic and foreign vessels traveling in or near
                        concern has focused on anchoring by foreign and                  the Banks to protect their coral and associated
                        domestic vessels as the primary source of injury to              resources. In 1977, the Flower Garden Banks were
                        the Flower Carden Banks. The coral resources of                  formally proposed for designation as a sanctuary
                        zhe Banks may be protected under U.S. law. But,                  under the MSA.
                        prohibiting anchoring by foreign vessels in the                         Since the original proposal in 1977, NCIAA
                        Banks interferes with freedom of navigation, which               has pursued a shifting course in considering the
                        includes the right for all to anchor on the high seas.           status of the Flower Carden Banks area. In 1979,
                        There are, however, several possible legal bases for             NOAA published a Draft Environmental Impact
                        exercising authority over anchoring by foreign                   Statement (DEIS) and propos@d regulationso
                        vessels within the boundaries of the proposed                    applicable to oil and gas, marine pollutiorf, and
                        %wer Carden Banks marine sanctuary. Thus,                        recreational activities, as well as anchoring within
                        authority over anchoring in this area would appear               the proposed sanctuary-a relatively small area @of
                        !o be consistent with principles of international law.           approximately 175 square nautical miles. Revised
                        Background                                                       proposed regulations were issued in 1980 that
                                                                                         relaxed previously proposed sanctuary restrictions
                        The Flower Carden Banks, located approximately                   an hydrocarbon activities, and relied on the oil and
                        1 10 nautical milessoutheast of Galveston, Texas,                gas lease stipulations developed by the
                        ,'Figure 1) are the northwestern-mosi living      coral          Department of the Interior under the Outer
                        reei.s on the continental shelf of the Gulf of                   Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of 1978
                        Mexico. They are the only truly tropical coral reefs             to protect sanctuary resources. But no final'action
                        in this area of the Gulf. They contain at least 18               to establish the sanctuary was taken, primarily           . .1
                        cora( species, moTe than 100 species of Caribbean                because of continuing opposition by the oil and gas
                        reef fish, and more than 200 invertebrate species.               industry, which viewed any proposed regulations
                        Scientific interest in the Banks is relatively high; the         potentially affecting the industry under the
                        3anks also are valued by recreational divers and                 authority of the Secretary of Commerce (rather
                        other visitors. Becaluse the proposed sanctuary is               than the Secretary of the Interior) as an obstacle to
                        located near. shipping lanes   -leading to U.S. ports in         offshore energy development and bad precedent.
                        Texas and Louisiana, concern has arisen over the                        in 1982, NOAA removed the Banks from its
                        potentially destructive activities of vessels passing            list of sites under consideration for sanctuary

                        54















                                                                                                                               LOUISIAkA
                                                                        rEXAS                         rt Artnur
                                                                                             Houstone                   Carneron            New  Orleans
                                                                                                                                     (Z)       Morgan
                                                                                             Gaiveston
                                                                                             Freeport
                                                                     Port      Matagorda                              Ves.se' Fa,r@ays
                                                                        O'Connor



                                                                                Port Aransas
                                                                            Corpus                              0                                                       23
                                                                              Cristi                                             rden  Banks
                                                                                                                       Marine Sanctuary
                                                                                                                             Proposed





                                                                             Port Isabel
                                                                              Brownsville
                         rhe proposed flower Carden
                         Banks      Marine      Sanctuary,
                         nearby Cuff ports, and vessel                                       L
                         traffic'Janes.                                                                                             92'



                         designation, in part because a proposed Gulf of                            the authority is extended to foreign citizens and
                         Mexico Coral Fishery. Management Plan prepared                             foreign vessels that legal questions arise.
                         under the U.S. Fishery Conservation and                                            The Marine Sanctuaries Act regulations are
                         Management Act would regulate vessel anchoring                             applicable to a person who is not a citizen of the
                         in the Flower Garden Banks-'the one remaining                              United States if they are in'accorci with either
                         unresolved issue identified in the DEIS,' according                        generally recognized principles of international law
                         to NOAA. The final Coral Fishery Management                                or agreements between the' United States and the
                         Plan, however, did not include regulations.                                foreign state of which the person is a citizen, or, if
                         applicable to anchoring.                                                   the person is a crewmember of a vessel, between
                                  In response, in 1984, NOAA revived its                            the United States and the flag state of the vessel. in
                         proposaf to estab(ish the Banks as a national marine'                      the case of the Flower Garden Banks, the activities
                         sanctuary, and announced the preparation of a                              of foreign vessels. have received primary attention.
                         dtaft management plan and environmental imoact                                      In 1984, before publishing its intention to
                         statement. Since 1984, N         'OAA has taken no further                 proceed with,clesignating the Flower Garden Banks
                         action on the designation of the sanctuary. Thus,                          as a marine sanctuary, NOAA obtained the opinion
                         more than 10 years after the original nomination,                          of the State Department on whether the United
                         NOAA has not yet created a national marine                                 States could regulate anchoring on the Banks by
                         sanctuary on the Banks-despite considering the.                            foreign vessels in accordance with recognized
                         resources of the area to be of substantial                                 principles of international law. The response
                         significance.                                                              asserted in part:
                         Protection Under International Law                                               The Depaftment believes that the United States
                         Because the Flower Garden Banks lie outside the                                  does have jurisdiction to prohibit anchoring (by
                         boundaries of the U.S. territorial sea (3 nautical                               foreign vessels] in the [FG81, except for
                         miles), where national sovereignty and jurisdiction                              anchoring by force majeure [unanticipated or
                         is certain, and within the 200-nautical-mile                                     bncontrollable events].
                         Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), whereffiere is a                                  Communication from the Deputy Assistant
                         blending of national jurisdiction and international                              Secretary for Oceans and Fisheries Affairs to
                         rights, protecting the resources within the                                      Chief, Sanctuary Programs Division, NOAA
                         proposed sanctuary involve's a balancing of both                                 (April 19, 1984), cited at 49@ Federal Register
                         national and international interests.                                            30990(1984).
                                  The Marine Sanctuaries Act authorizes the
                         Secretary of Commerce to regulate activities within                        This position, however, impairs the traditional
                         a marine sanctuary to protect nationally siSnificant                       freedom to navigate the high seas, codified in
                         .resource or humanruse values.* It is in the                               Article 2 of the 1958 Convention on the High Seasf
                         exercising of this, authority where legal nuances are
                         encountered. Jurisdiction over both persons and                                  The high seas being open to all nations, no
                         vessels is involved. While the authority over U.S.                               State may validly Ourport to subject any part of
                         citizens and U.S.-flagged vessels is clear, it is when                           them to its sovereignty. Freedom of the high

                                                                                                                                                                      55









                               seas is exercised under the conditions laid down             The 1958 Continental Shelf Convention
                               by these articles and by the other rules of
                               international law. It comprises @among other                 Under Article 2 of the 1958 Convention on the
                               things] both for coastal and non-coa5tal states:             Continental.Shelf, the United States has "sovereig
                               7) Freedom of navigation ...                                 rights [over the continental shelf) for the purpose
                                                                                            of exploring it and exploiting its natural resources
                                                                                            Moreover, such sovereign rights are "exclusive."
                          Moreover, Article 6 of the 1958 Convention                        and do not depend on occupation or any express
                          provides that flag state jurisdiction is "exclusive" on           proclamation with respect to the shelf. These
                          the high seas. That is, authority over a vessel on the            conventional rights over the resources of the
                          high seas rests solely with the nation in which the               continental shelf also are recognized generally to
                          ship is registered.,                                              be customary rights in international law, and are
                                  Like the State 'Depart ment, NOAA asserted                replicated in Article 77 of UNCLOS.
                          in principle jurisdiction by the United States to                         There is no doubt that the coral reefs of the
                          prohibit anchoring by foreign vessels in ocean                    Banks are natural resources of the continental she
                          areas outside U.S',, territorial waters. The 19             '84   and that  the'sovereign rights of the United States
                          announcement reviving NOAA's proposal to                          under the 1958 Convention are sufficient to
                          designate the Flower Carden Banks as-a sanctuary,                 prohibit any activity harmful to them. A U.S. court
                          however, did not indicate any basis for tfiis                     has held that, under the terms of the 1958
                          assertion.                                                        Convention, activities on the continental shelf
                                 Clearly, the  right to anchm on the high seas              damaging to coral (for example, dredging of and
                          is an esiential part of freedom of navigation. Thus,        -     the construction of facilities on a coral formation)
                          any abridgment of the right of ioreign vessels to                 may be prohibited (United States v. Ray, [ 19701).
                          anchor in the Flower Carden Banks must find its                   While Ray was a U.S. citizen, the matter of interest
                          justification in other, countervailing principles. @Twp.          is that the court found that coral is a resource
                          relevant principles. examined in this article focus on            protectable under the 1958 Convention. Further,
                          the authority of coastal states to protect marine                 Article 5.of the 1958 Convention, which provides
                          resources beyond national territory but subject to                that the exploration and exploitation of the
                          coastal state resource lurisdiction, and/or to                    resources of the continental shelf must not result in
                          condition entry to ports upon compliance with                     any unjustifiable interference with navigation,"
                          regulations applicable to such resources.                         implicitly recognizes that the coastal state's
                                                                                            sovereign rights over the resources of the
                          Sources of International Law                                      continental shelf include the authority to impose
                                                                                            'justifiable* limits on navigation. Article 78 of
                          The Marine Sanctuaries Act applies sanctuary                      UNCLOS employs language similar to Article 5 of
                          regu lations to persons who are not citizens.of the               the 1958 Convention. Thus, a prohibition on
                          United States only if such regulations are in accord.             anchoring within the relatively small area (175
                          with either i I, the body of international law referred           square nautical miles) included within the
                          to as 'customary international law'-or 'generally                 boundaries of the proposed marine sanctuary, for
                          accepted rules of international law' that has                     the purpose of preventing damage to its unique
                          developed from the practice of the states of the                  coral resources, would appear to be justifiable
                          world, or 2) international agreements, treaties, and              under international law. That is, the principle of
                          conventions binding on the contracting stites and                 freedom of-navigition land anchoring) on the high
                          permitting such regulation. In certain'                           seas can be superseded if the United States acts
                          circumstances, and often subject to controversy,. -               narrowly (defining'a relatively small area) and
                          international agreements, whether ornot they'have%                responsibly (pr.6tecting a valuable resource).
                          come into force between the contracting parties.,
                          may -be regarded as sources of, or indicative of                  palt State Auowr%y
                          emergingtrends in, customary international law.
                          Indeed, the United States, although'hot A.signa'tory,'            There is:a second fegatp.rinciple that may be called
                          to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law.,                on. Although it has been argued that there is a
                          of the Sea (UNtLOS), considers that this. @                 - .I  eneral rule of intemational law allowing entry by
                          agreement, except for the provisions pertaining to                loreign vessels to a state's ports, the prevailing view
                          deep seabed mining:                                               is that states may deny entry subject to relatively
                                                                                            few restrictions. William T. Burke,- Professor of Law,
                                  contains provisions wi    Ith res e& to                   University*of Washington, Seattle, Washington, and
                                                                 V                          co-authors have stated'.
                               traditional uses of-the oceans which generally
                               confirm exi.sti.ng maritime lav@ and practice and
                               fairly balance' the interests of all States.                     There is no doubt that a state may condition
                               Statement by t  .he'President on'the Exclusive                   entry into its ports as it wishes and that such
                               Economic Zone ol@ the United States (March                       conditions may effectively regulate acts outside
                               10, 1983).                                                       national territory. -The limits on these broad
                                                                                                competences are to be found in the reciprocity
                                                                                                and,retaliations that maintain effective
                          There are, however, sources of authority other than                   international exchange of goods by vessels.
                          UNCLOS that justify U.S. jurisdiction to prohibit                     National and international Law Enforcement in
                          anchoring in the Flower Garden Banks.                                 the. Ocean 0 975), page 47.

                          56










                            In accordance with this rule of internation,,l
                     law, the United States has enacted legislation
                     denying entry by foreign vessels to U.S. ports if
                     such vessels have a history of incidents indicating
                     that they-are unsafe, 'create a threat to the marine
                     environment,' or fail to comply with applicable
                     U.S. law (1972 Ports and Waterways Safety Act).
                     The Act defines 'marine environment' to include
                     the 'seabed and subsoil of the Outer Continental
                     Shelf of the United States, the resources thereof
                     and the waters superjacent thereto.' Certainly the
                     Marine Sanctuaries Act seeks to protect the
                     resources of the 'marine environment,' a term
                     employed and defined similarly in the Act. Thus,
                     regulations issued under the marine Sanctuaries
                     Act would appear to be "appficabie' and
                     enforceable under the Ports and Waterways Safety
                     Act. Therefore, in cooperation with the-Coast
                     Guard, which administers the Ports and Waterways                                                                 _4
                     Safety Act, the Department of Commerce may
                     issue regulations under the Marine Sanctuaries Act
                     prohibiting anchoring by any foreign vessels on the.
                     Flower Garden Banks, and advising that any                                                                            0
                     violation of such regulations may result in the
                     denial of entry to U.S. ports. Enforcement actions,
                     of course, would be the responsibility of the Coast
                     Guard. Because a majority of foreign vessels                 A tankerat anchor on the East Flower Garden Bank in April
                     passing over or near the Banks are transiting to or,         1979. (Courtesy Dept. of Oceanography, Texas A&M
                     from U.S. ports, use of this authority as an                 University)
                     enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance
                     with sanctuary regulations would likely prove
                     effective.


                     Exclusive Economic Zone Authority
                     The United States is one among 72 states that have
                     declared an Exclusive Economic Zone extending
                     200 nautical miles from their shores. Using
                     language closely paralleling Article 56 of UNCLOS,
                     the United States asserts, 'sovereign tights for the
                     purpose of exploring, exploiting, conservip              and,
                     managing natural resources, both living anl`non@
                     living, of the seabed and subsoil and. the
                     superjacent waters' of the zone (A Proclamation by
                     the President: Exclusive Economic Zone of the
                     United States (March 10, 1983)-see Oceanus
                     Vol. 27, No. 4, pages 3-6).Thus, as a matter of state.
                     practice, the establishment of exclusive economic
                     zones and the broad principles of coastal state
                     jurisdiction over the livin and non-living resources
                                                              d under
                     of such zones are generally recognize
                     customary international law. However, whether the
                     detailed provisions of Part V of UNCLOS setting-
                     forth the legal re me of the Exclusive Economic
                     Zone also are tote viewed as customary law is not                                                    m
                     certain. Surely they may be regarded as indicating -
                     developing international practice.
                            Considered in this light, several articles
                                              ercising rights and duties
                     should be noted. In ex'
                     respecting the Exclusive Economic Zone, coastal
                     states are required to have 'due regard to the rights
                                                                                            41
                     and duties of other States and shall act. in a. manner
                     compatible with the provisions of (UNCLOS
                     (Article 56.2.). Reciprocally, other states Inust            Coral head fractured by the anchor of a commercial vessel
                     extend the same regard to the rits of the coastal            on the East Flower Garden Bank in 1983. (Courtesy
                     state, and must comply with the aws and                      Continental Shelf Associates, Inc., Irequesta, Florida)

                                                                                                                                       57









                         regulations adopted by the coastal state in                     entry to foreign vessels violating sanctuary
                         accordance with international law (Article 58.3.).              regulations, the United States may choose to
                             . In cases of conflict where UNCLOS does not                ensure compliance through the offices of the
                         attribute rights or jurisdiction in the Exclusive               International Maritime Organization (IMOY
                         Economic Zone to the coastal state or to other                  Member states may propose, and IMO may adopt,
                         states, the conflict should be resolved on the basis            vessel routing systems that avoid environmental
                         of 'equity and in the light of all the relevant                 conservation areas such as the Flower Carden
                         circumstances, taking into account the respective               Banks. Designation of the Banks as a national
                         importance,of the interests involved to the parties             marine sanctuary under the Act would obviouslv
                         as well as to the international community as a                  assist in achieving international recognition of the
                         whole" JArticle 59).                                            Banks as a protected area.
                                As argued under the language of the 1958                         This article has addressed only the issue of
                         Convention on the Continental Shelf, the rights of              protecting the coral resources of the Flower
                         the United States to protect the coral resources of             Carden Banks under international law, from harm
                         the Flower Garden Banks are in accord with both                 caused by vessels anchoring on them. if the United
                         conventional and customary international law.                   States seeks to restrict other activities of foreign
                         Therefore, Article 58.3. requiring that other states            vessels (for example, polluting the waters of the
                         comply with coastal state law would be pertinent                Banks and damaging its resources), then other
                         to resolving conflicts arising from U.S. regulation of          authority must be considered. However, actions by
                         anchoring by ioreign vessels on the Banks. Where                coastal and port states to protect marine resources
                         f he attribution of rights among coastal and other              under their jurisdiction from such harmful activities
                         states is not evident, Article 59 indicates principles          also would be justified by the described principles.
                         to foilow in settling disputes.                                 Careful Decisions Are Required
                         Enforcement Under the MSA                                       Because protecting important marine resources
                         if we accept that domestic law is consistent with               outside the territory of a coastal state may affect.
                         international law, then there are grounds for                   the navigation rights of other states, it is prudent to
                         extending U.S. law and policy to foreign persons or             conclude on a note of caution. The U.S. Congress
                         vessels. If an incident occurs within a marine                  has already declared a policy of protecting such -
                         sanctuary, the MSA authorizes civil penalties for               resources in the marine Sanctuaries Act. Yet, the
                         violating sanctuary regulations. As noted                       execution of that policy allows considerable
                         previously, a majority of foreign vessels passing               discretion to program managers, and requires close
                         through the Flower Garden Banks are bound to or                 consultation with the State Department when
                         from U.S. ports; therefore, denial of entry for                 issues such as those raised by the proposed Flower
                         violating sanctuary regulations would probably                  Garden Banks sanctuary must be resolved.
                         ensure compliance.                                                      Decisions to protect these resources can be
                                For most practical purposes, however,                    carefully framed to have minimum impact on the
                         enforcing the civil law under other circumstances               rights of other states. Some impact, however, is
                         depends on the person or vessel being physically                unavoidable. But if no action is taken to protect the
                         within U.S. juri sd iction -that is, within U.S.                resources of the Flower Garden Banks and similar
                         territorial waters. Therefore, if an offending vessel           areas, however justified and well-considered,
                         voluntarily enters a U.S. port, the United States               because of its effect on the principle of free
                         may assert jurisdiction to assess civil penalties for           navigation, however slight, then the national policy
                         violations of regulations issued under the marine               to protea unique marine resources under U.S.
                         Sanctuaries Act. In cases of actual physical harm to            jurtsdiction is effectively checked. The oversight
                         the coral resources of the Flower Garden Banks,                 and reauthorization hearing on the Marine
                         the United States, by virtue of its 'protectable                Sanctuaries Acrto be held 30 March 1988 provides
                         sovereign interest' in the resources of its                     an opportun4y for the Congress to consider this
                         continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone,                  matter afresh.
                         may seek damages (see page 44).
                         Regulating Vessels Under International Law
                         In addition to application of appropriate civil law,
                         there also are opportunities to pursue direct
                         international agreements. The Marine Sanctuaries
                         Act authorizes the Secretary of State to negotiate              lack H. Archer is a Senior Fellow, Marine Policy and Ocean
                         .necessary arrangements for the protection of any               Management Center, Woods Hole Oceanographic
                         national marine sanctuary.' Keeping in mind the                 Institution. He is a former Counsel to the U.S. House
                         effective limitation ('reciprocity and retaliations*)           5ubcommittee on Oceanography, and a former Senior
                         upon the exercise of port state authority to deny-              Attorney, NOAA.





                         58


                    TEXAS MEMORIAL MUSEUM
                    THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
                     2400 Trinity Austin, Texas 78705- (412)471-1604

                                                          March 16, 1989

Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
Marine and Escuarine Management Division
Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
National Ocean Service/NOAA
1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20235.

Dear Chief Uraviech,

    I am delighted to hear that the ecologically-distinct and unique reefs and brine seeps on the Flower Gardens
Bands finally are going to be included in the National Marine Sanctuaries Program.  As you know, the reef coral 
communities on the summits of these banks currently are especially vulnerable to destruction by the anchors and
chains of large vassels.  Given the limited resources directly available to your agency for surveiliance and
enforcement, may I wish you useful collaborations with the USGS, MMS and the private oil companies working in this
areas.

                                  Yours sincerely,

                                  
                                  Judith C. Lang, Ph.D.                         NO response necssary.
                                  Curator of Invertebrate Zoology

  cc:  David Cottingham, Office of Ecology & Conservation
       Terrance Leary, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
       Thomas Bright, Texas A&M University

APR 25 '89 14:07 FROM UXP RESION MAIL ROOM

       Unocal Oil & Gas Division                  P.2
       Unocal Corporation
       4635 Southwest Freeway
       900 Executive Plaza West
       Houston, Texas 77027
       Telephone (713) 423-8000

                             UNOCAL

                                         April 21, 1989

                                         Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                         Marine and Estaurine Mgmt Division
                                         Nat'l Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin.
                                         1825 connecticut Ave., NW
                                         Washington, D.C. 20235

                                         SUBJECT

                                         Comments on Flower Garden Banks
                                         National Marine Sanctuary Regulations
                                         15 CFR Part 943
                                         (Docket No. 80851-8151)


Dear Mr. Uravitch:

Union Exploration Partners, Ltd., is operator of three leases at the West Flower Garden Banks portions of which are
included in the proposed marine sanctuary.   These leases are High Island Block A-384 (OCS-G-3316), High Island 385
(OCS-G 10311), and High Island 397 (OCS-G 8578).  Union agrees it is desirable to establish the marien sanctuary,
however certain provisions of the rule limit operating flexibiltiy, reduce acreage which may be used, increase cost
of operation-and reduce the potential-value of leases.

In the preamble of the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary Regulations rule (Fed Reg Vol 54 No. 36 Reg. 24, 
1989 p. 7956) the following statement appears:  "The third activity prohibited would be dredging, constructing 
structures or otherwise altering the seabed or attempting to do so. for any purpose other than the authorized 
installation of navigational aids or incidental to hydrocarbon exploration and development in areas of the Sanctuary
lying outside of the no-activity zones established by the Department of the Interior and defined by the topographical
lease sale 112."

The Minerals Management Service (MMS) no-activity boundary utilizes the 1/4, 1/4. 1/4 fo lease blocks system for
definition of areas of biological concern   The MMS boundary is designed to provide a            around the
truly sensitive area which is contained within the continuous 100 meter isobath.  The results of the 1980 public
hearings and resultant settlement agreement regarding the Environmental Protection Agency National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System permit for the Flower Garden Banks indicate a recognition that the area of biological
concern was actually described within the 100 meter contiguous isobath containing the shallower water reefs





















                 Oocket No. BOSSI-8151
                 April 21. 1989
                 Page 2

                                                                                                                           sobaths around the Banks.                 This alternative was not
               [
                 t the East and West Flower GardensI   Therefore the logical boundary for the             1.     AeItternaitive 2 Provides for a boundary that follows the 100
                 anctuary and restrictions on anchoring should be based on the contiguous                        selected because the 100 meter isobaths are so irregular that
                 S00 otter Isobath containing the roof rather        thaA the MMS no-activity                    they can not be plotted by geographic coordinates for
                 .boundary which is outside the 100 mmt*r contiguous isobath in all Instances                    enforcement purposes.
                 nd provides a buffer zone for the biologically sensitive are&.
                 he lease stipulations for sale 112 provide for no anchoring Inside the no-              2.      NOAA disagrees.          Vessels of less than or equal to loo feet
                 ctivity area but anchoring may be approved by the MNS subject to close on                       will be permitted to anchor, Using specified anchoring gear,
                 Ite supervision by the MS. The proposed rule requires additional approval                       in areas of the               anctuary where no omoootrhienrgwisbeuomyosorainreg
                                                                                                                 available. The prohsbition on anchoring
                 f NOAA. This would be time consuming and an additional regulation which Is                                                  I
                 *It to be unwarranted.                                                                          applies only to vessels greater than 100 feet. All vessels,
                                                                                                                 however, will be permitted to anchor under emergency
                 he no-activity boundaries extend further than those for sale 112 and thus                       conditions.          HOAA believes that these restrictions are
                 further restrict Oil   and gas operations and may require more complex and                      warranted by the history of anchor damage to the reefs.
                 expensive directional drilling to develop the leases'
                                                                         . A map is attached
                 which shows the sale 112 boundary and that of the proposed rule by the West
                 Flower Garden Banks. Usable property under lease at the West Flower Garden              3.      See Generic Response C.
                 Banks will be diminished by the Proposed rule.

                 In sumimary. the rule should provide for regulation of Oil and Gas operations
                 to rest solely with the MNS and not require additional NOAA permitting
                 requirements or sore stringent requirements. . Also the marine sanctuary
                 boundary should be limited to the 100 meter contiguous Isobath for Flower
                 Garden Banks.

                                                       Yours very truly.
                                                       Union Exploration Partners, Ltd..
                                                       Limited Partnership
                                                       By: Union Oil Comipaity of California.
                                                            Managing General Partner
                                                       ti@a- oma@@
                                                       R. A. Oliver
                                                       Region&) Engineer

                 RAO:ta
                 Attachment























                                                                                see

                                                                               07




                                A-303 C4w-'FvAty


                                                                                                                        Awn

                                                                                                 AL





                                                                                                                                                                                                     ror

                                                                                                                                                                                               swulft a
                                                                                                                                                                                               vappm a
                                                                ......                                                                                                                               TU4



                                           ............
                                         ......... .                     ...                                                                                  M M "now"



                                                                                                                                           rrw


                                                                             .. ...                                                                                         AND CAS
                                                                         ..........


                                                                   . .......                                                                                   wal- FWWU GARDEf BAN][
                                A-401                                                                                                                            00 =AM AM- OPP                Tau






                                                                                                                                                                                                      WA Lam



          N                                                  -or w

                               SC= M FM



                                 UNITED STATES         Soil                  101 South Main
                                 DEPARTMENT OF       Conservation          Temple, Texas
                                 AGRICULTURE         Service               76501-7682






                                                                                       March  13,  1989







                                 Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief:
                                 marine and Estuarine Management Division
                                 office of Ocean  and Coastal Resource Management
                                 National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                 1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.M.
                                 Washington, DC 20235

                                 Mr. Uravitchs
                                 We have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and                    No response necessary                            No response nec
                                 Management Plan for Plower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.
                                 At this time we have no comments to make an this projeCt.
                                 Thank you for allowing us to review this, document.

                                 Sincerely.






                                 HARRY W. ONETH
                                 State Conservationist


                                 cc:
                                 David Cottingham, Director,  Office  of Ecology and Conservation
                                 Pate Wright, AC, SCS, Alice, Texas









                                                    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                                    National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                                    NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
                                                    Southeast Fisheries Center
                                                    Galveston Laboratory
                                                    4700 Avenue U
                                                    Galveston, TX 77551-5997

                                                    March 10, 1989 F/SEC6:RE:EFX:re



              Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
              Marine and Estuarine Management
                Division
              office of Ocean and Coastal
                Resource Management
              National Ocean Service/NOAA
              1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
              Washington, DC 20235

              Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                  Thank you for the opportunity to review the draft environmental impact
              statement/draft management plan on the proposed Flower Garden Banks National   1. Comment accepted. The FEIS/MP has been corrected accordingly.
            Marine Sanctuary. There were some minor corrections on pages 10 and 18 (see
             attached), otherwise, it looks good.

                                                    Sincerely,



                                                    Edward F. Klima, Ph.D.
                                                    Laboratory Director

              Enclosure
              cc: FX1 - David Cottingham
                 F/SEC6- Gregg Gitachlag








                                        


              73 Years Stimulating America's Progess * 1913-1988










                                    coordination among all the agencies participating in sanctuary
                                    management:

                                     Develope an effective and coordinated program for the enforcement
                                     of sanctuary regulations;

                                     Promote Public awareness of and voluntary User compliance with
                                     regulations through an interpretation program stressing resources
                                     sensitivity and wise use: and

                                    Reduce threats to sanctuary resources raised by major emergencies
                                    through contingency and emergency-response planning.

                            2. Research

                                       Substantial, site-specific research has been conducted at the Flower
                                       Garden Banks, particularly over the past 15 years. This Work is
                                       discussed in section II.C.  Sanctuary research will build upon this foundat.

                            to improve understanding of the Flower Garden Banks' environment and  resour
                            and to resolve specific management problems. Research results Will be used
                            interpretation Programs for Visitors and others interested In the sanctuary

                                                                       10














                                     or salt by dissolution is more advanced at the West Bank.
                                                                       
                                     Consequently, it posses a larger and more conspicious central graben (down
                            faulted depression) than does the East Bank.
                                 The salt Plugs beneath both Banks are quite near the sea floor.  High
                               salinity brine seepage has been detected on the East Flower Garden at 45 m
                              dept, indicating that the top of the salt may lie directly beneath the                      
                          central reef.  A large brine seep on the southeastern edge of the Bank at
                            depth of 233 ft (71 m) flows at a rate of 400-700 cubic meters (14,125-24 
                           cubic ft) per day.  This discharge of 200 parts per trillion (ppt) brine
                            thought to represent the removal of 10,000 to 22,000 cubic meters (353,300
                            775,900 cubic ft) of solid salt per year from beneath the East Flower Gard
                            Stratigraphic trape formed on the flanks of the salt plug are known to
                            
                            













                                                  UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                                                  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                                  NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE


                                                  HABITAT CONSERVATION Division
                                                  4700 Avenue U
                                                  Galveston, TX 77551-5997

                                                  April 21, 1989 F/SER112/DM:sP
                                                                    409/766-3699



                 MEMORANDUM FOR:   N/ORM2 - Joseph  A. Uravitch
                 FROM:              F/SER112 - Donald Moore

                 SUBJECT:           Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                                    Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Management
                                    Plan (DEIS/MP)



                 We are pleased that the above DEIS/MP was Issued In February 1989

                 along with the Proposed Rules  issued In the Federal Register on

                 February 24, 1989 (52 FR 7953-7960).          Implementation of the

                 proposed regulations should  Improve the conservation of this

                 sensitive habitat.



                 The likelihood of the proposed sanctuary providing sufficient

                 protection to maintain these   coral reef habitats would   be greatly
                 enhanced by eliminating all vessel anchoring on them.   Along with                                              
                                                                                       1.    See Generic Response E. See also Generic Response F.
                 this, continued access to the reefs could be provided by  Installing
                 sufficient mooring buoys, like those at the Key Largo National

                 Marine Sanctuary, to eliminate   any need for future anchoring on the
                 banks.



                                                                                  












                                                                        DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
                                                                   GALVESTON DISTRICT. CORPS of ENGINEERS
                                                                                P.O. BOX 1229
                                                                        GALVESTON, TEXAS 77533-1229

                                                    REPLY To
                                                    ATTENTION OF                April 26. 1989

                                                 Environmental Resources
                                                 Branch



                                                 Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch
                                                 Chief, Marine and Estuarine
                                                   Management Division
                                                 Office of Ocean and Coastal
                                                   Resource Management
                                                 National Ocean Service/NOAA.
                                                 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW.
                                                  Washington, DC 2023S
                                                   

                                                 Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                                      Thank you for submitting the Draft Environment Impact Statement
                                                 (DEIS) /Management Plan for the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
                                                 Sanctuary for our review and comments. We have the following
                                                 comment: Designating a site as a marine sanctuary is not subject                                  No response necessary.
                                                 to permit requirements. However, we still have regulatory authority
                                                 over the Flower Garden Banks under Section 10 of the Rivers and
                                                 Harbors Act and Section 103 of the Marine Protection. Research
                                                 and Sanctuaries Act.
                                                      We appreciate the opportunity to    review the DEIS.     If you
                                                 have questions concerning our comment, please contact Mr. Jim
                                                 Barrows, Environmental Resources Branch, at 409/766-3068.

                                                                                     Sincerely,
                                                                                     Sidney H. Tanner
                                                                                     Acting Chief, Planning Division

                                                 Copy furnished:

                                                 Mr. David Cottingham
                                                 Director, Office of Ecology and Conservation
                                                 U.S. Department of Commerce
                                                 1825 Connecticut Avenue,NW., Room 6222
                                                 Washington, DC    20235
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       MOVED         


0














                                        

                                                 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                                                            REGION VI           
                                                                      IASI Moss AVENUE SUITE 1200
                                                                        DALLAS TEXAS 75238
                                                                          APR 12 1989




                                      Joseph A. Uravitch
                                      Chief, Marine and Estuarine
                                        management Division
                                      office of Ocean and Coastal
                                        Resource Management
                                      National Ocean Service/NDAA
                                      1825 Connecticut Avenue. N.V.
                                      Washington, D.C. 20235

	                                Dear Mr. Uravitch:


                                      in accordance with responsibilities under Section 309 of the Clean Air
                                      Act and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). the Region 6 office
                                      of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has reviewed your
                                      Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed designation
                                      of the East and West Flower Garden Banks within the Gulf of Mexico as
                                      a national marine sanctuary pursuant to the provisions of Title III of
                                      the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. as amended.
                                      Through the proposed sanctuary management plan and the Implementing
                                      regulations. this proposed action will facilitate the long-term management
                                      and protection of this valued marine resource. offers research opportunities,
                                      and provides an interpretation program to enhance public awareness of the
                                      Flower Gardens.

                                      The East and West Flower Garden Banks are located approximately 120
                                      nautical miles due south of the Texas-Louisiana border at the edge of the
                                      continental shelf and encompasses an area of 41.70 square nautical miles.
                                      The Flower Garden Banks are unique among the banks of the northwestern
                                      Gulf of Mexico in that they bear the northernmost tropical Atlantic coral
                                      reefs on the continental shelf and support the most "highly. developed off-
                                      shore hard Kok communities in the region.
                                      We classify your Draft EIS as Lack of Objection (LO). Specifically. we
                                      have no objection and fully support the proposed designation of the East
                                      and West Flower Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary. Our classi-                       
                                      fication will be published in the Federal Register according to our
                                      responsibilities to Inform the public 0f our views on proposed Federal
                                      actions, under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
 

0
















                                                               -2-
                             we appreciate the opportunity to review your Draft EIS. Please send our
                             office one (1) copy of the Final [IS at the same time it IS Sent to the
                             office of Federal Activities. U.S. Envirornmental Protection Agency.
                             Washington, D.C.
                             Sincerely yours,
                             Robert E. Layton Jr. P.E.           
                             Regional Administrator
                               
                               






                                                                                                                                                                                                       

0







                                               Federal Emergency Management Agency
                                                         Region. VI. Federal Center. 800 North Loop 288
                                                              Denton, Texas 76201-3698

                                                                                                  March 13. 1981





                                 Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                 Marine and Estuarine-
                                  Management Division
                                 1825 Connecticut Avg.. N.W.
                                 Washington. D.C. 20235

                                 Dear Mr.Uravitch:

                                 Thank you for your letter of February 16. 1989. and the copy of Flower Carden
                                 Banks National Marine Sanctuary. Draft EIS Management Plan.
                                 Since this project Is proposed in open water of the Culf of Mexico and will                   No response necessary.
                                 not involve coastal high hazard area. identified floodplains cc wetlands. the
                                 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has no comments.

                                 Thank you again for providing our office with an opportunity to comment.

                                                                           Sincerely,




                                                                           Jim Lagrotte       
                                                                           Natural Hazards Program
                                                                             Specialist         
                                                                           Natural   Technological
                                                                            Hazards Division




                                 cc: Mr. David Cottinghas
 

0












                           DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES                         Public Health Service 


                                                                                        Centers for Disease Control
              
                                                                                        Atlanta GA 30333

                                                                                        April 25, 1989



                           Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                           Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                           Office Of Oman and Coastal
                             Resource Management
                           National Oman Service/NOAA  
                           1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.M.
                           Washington, DC 20235

                           Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                           We have reviewed the Draft Enviromental Impact Statement (DEIS)
                           for the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary.
                           We are responding an behalf of the U.S. Public Health Service.
                           We concur with the preferred alternative to designate the Flower
                           Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary. This designation
                           will insure the optimal management and protection of this
                           ecologically sensitive area.                                                 NOAA will encourage and promote diver sa

                           In our review, we concentrated on prosposed human activities in
                           the santuary area, particularly recreation. The DEIS suggests
                           a much higher recreation usage of this area in the future (page
                           41) with a concurrent increase in underwater recreational
                           activities. Die to the predictable hazards of underwater
                           recreational activity (e.g. diving). we recommend that Final
                           Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) include now proposed
                           guidelines -for limiting the potential for accidents and injury.

                           Thank You for sending this document for our review. Please
                           insure that we are included an yaw mailing list for the FEIS
                           for this project as well as future documents with potential
                           public health impacts which am developed under the National
                           Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).


                                                            Sincerely yours,




                                                            David E. Clapp,  Ph.D.,P.E.,CIH
                                                            Enviromental Health Scientist
                                                            Center for Enviromental Health
                                                              and Injury Control    
 











                                                                U.S. Department Of Housing and Urben Development
                                                                Fort Worth Regional Office, Region, VI
                                                                1600 Tiwockmorton 
                                                                P0 Box 2905                                                                  
   

                                                                Fort Worth, Texas 75173-2905

                           March 3, 1989

                               Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                               Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                               Office Of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                               National Ocean Service/NOAA
                               1825 Connecticut Avenue N.W.
                               Washington, D. C. 20235

                               Dear Mr. Uravitchs:

                                   This office has reviewed the Draft Environmental impact
                               Statement/Management Plan for the Flower Garden Banks National
                               Marine Sanctuary In accordance with Section 1503.2 of the
                               Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for
                               the implementation of the National Environmental Policy
                               Act (NEPA).
                                   Inasmuch as the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
                               has no jurisdiction by law or special expertise in the area of 

                               

                               marine biology, we submit a "no comment" response.

                                                                Sincerely,



                                                                I. J. Ramsbotton 
                                                                Regional Environmental Officer










                                            United States Department of the Interior

                                                          OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
                                                           WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240







                               In Reply Refer To:
                               ER-89/158

                               Joseph A. Uravitch
                               Chief, Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                               Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                               National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                               182S Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
                               Washington, D.C. 20235

                               Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                               The Department has reviewed and provides the enclosed comments on the National
                               Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration proposed regulations and draft environmental
                               impact statement for designating two marine areas in the Gulf of Mexico known as the
                               Flower Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary (54FR7953; February 24, 1989). if
                               you have any questions about these comments, please contact Dr. John, H. Farrell, Acting
                               Director, Office of Environmental Project Review.
                               We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this proposal.

                                                                            Sincerely,





                                                                            Michael McElwarth
                                                                            Deputy Assistant Secretary
                                                                            Policy and Analysis

                               Enclosure
                               
                             










                                                  United States Department of the Interior

                                                     OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT REVIEW
                                                                WASHINGTON, D.C 20240
                               MEMORANDUM                                                             APR 21 1989

                               TO:                Deputy Assistant Secretary - Policy and Analysis

                               FROM:              Office of Environmental Project Review

                               SUBJECT:           Comments on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
                                                  Proposal to Designate a National Marine Sanctuary at the Flower
                                                  Garden Banks in the Gulf of Mexico               (ER-89/158)


                               The Department has reviewed and we have prepared the following comments on the
                               National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA's) regulations (15CFR943)
                               published on February 24, 1989 (54 FR 7953). The proposed rule would designate two
                               areas In marine waters of the Gulf of Mexico known as the Flower Garden Banks as a
                               national marine sanctuary. We have also prepared comments on the draft environmental
                               impact statement (EIS) supporting that proposal. General comments on both the
                               proposed rules and the draft EIS follow, and specific comments are attached.

                               No objection has been raised within Interior regarding the proposed designation of the
                               Flower Garden Banks as a national marine sanctuary.  The "Regulatory/Boundary
                               Alternative I" (the "preferred alternative" described in the EIS) establishes an
                               appropriate sanctuary boundary and management scheme. for protecting the Bank%.
                               resources without Inhibiting Interior's OCS hydrocarborn development program. Under
                               this alternative, hydrocarbon activities would be permitted to continue outside the                           1.     See Generic Response A, B and C.
                               already established "no activity zone." Further. hydrocarbon development activities
                               would continue to be regulated by Interior and would be exempt from future sanctuary
                               regulations.
                               With respect to the proposed sanctuary regulations, it will be necessary for NOAA to
                               clarify that the prohibition on using explosives or electrical charges within the sanctuary                    2.    See Generic Response C.


                               does not apply to uses associated with hydrocarbon development activities regulated by
                               interior. Under Its existing regulations. the Department's Minerals Management Service
                               (MMS) requires that platforms be removed when they are no longer needed to support
                               hydrocarbon development activities. These platforms may be removed using either
                               mechanical or explosive methods to free them from the sea floor. The sanctuary
                               regulations should explicitly state that platform removal undertaken In accordance with
                               MMS regulations will be exempt from sanctuary regulation.
                               With respect to the overall objective or protecting the Flower Garden Banks from                           3.      See Generic Response E.
                               unacceptable harm, we note that anchor damage from small recreational boats is widely
                       3 .     held as the single largest cause of environmental damage to Flower Garden corals. In
                               view of this, we urge that anchor buoys he placed in the sanctuary at the time of
                               designation, rather than awaiting a formal determination of need.




                                                                                   John H. Farrell
                                                                                   Acting Director
                                    































































                                                                               
                                                                              
                                                                          
                               Attachment


















                                                                                                   Attachment


                            Department of the Interior Specific Comments on the Proposed Regulations
                                      for the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                          Page 7954, under "I. Background"  it may he useful to underline briefly the 1988
                          amendments to Title 111 of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act as                         4.     Comment accepted.
                          relevant to the Flower Garden Banks.
                          Page 7954, second column, last paragraph - In the sixth line from the end of the
                          paragraph, It appears that "Atlantic Ocean" should he "Gulf of Mexico." If "Atlantic                     5.     Comment Accepted.
                          Ocean" is correct, an explanation should be provided since the Flower Garden Banks
                          are clearly located in the Gulf of Mexico. Same comment applies for page 7955. 
                         
                         
                          Page 7955, third column, Article 4, section 1, f - Should add "except activities
                          regulated by the Department of Defense and the Minerals Management Service as 
                          provided below under Article 5, Section 2." at the end of this section.                          6   &     7.      Provisions regarding the Department of Defense and 
                                                                                                                                             regarding oil and gas activities in areas of the 
                          Page 7956, first column, Article 5, Section 2 - Should add "and platform removals                                Sanctuary outside the no-activity zones have been added 
                 7.     
                          regulated by the Minerals Management Service." at the end of the first sentence.                               to the regulations.  See Generic Responses C and K. 
                          
                          Page 7958. third column, under "(2) Depositing or Discharging Materials and
                 8.       Substances" - Should add a new subsection "(C) any discarges authorized by the U.S. 
                          Environmental Protection Agency under a National Polutant Discharge Elimination 
                          System (NPDES) permit."                                                                                8.     15 C.F.R. #5  943.10 and 943.11 address treatment of 
                                                                                                                                        authorization from other authorities.
                                                             
                               
                                                                                                                            9.       NOAA disagrees. The MKS Stipulations may be sufficient to 
                          Page 7958, third column, under "(3) Altering the Seabed" - last two fines should be
                   9.                                                                                                                protect sanctuary resources, but these stipulations are 
                          replaced with "Interior through officially adopted topographic features stipulations 
                          that include the Flower Garden Bank's."                                                                    applied on a lease by lease basis and may be discontinued at 
                                                                                                                                     any time.  Those stipulations that are incorporated into 
                          Page 7959, first column, second paragraph, under item (6) - Should add "except for                         sanctuary regulations, however, are made permanent.  NOAA
                 10.      activities regulated by the Department of Defense and the Minerals Management                              believes that it must be able to regulate activities affecting  qa
                          Service." at the end of the paragraph.                                                                     the Sanctuary in order to protect Flower Garden resources. 
                                                                                                                                     If NOAA can not control the size of the no-activity zones, 
                                   Department of the interior Comments on the Draft EIS for the                                      NOAA regulations lose effectiveness, and NOAA's ability to 
                                   - Proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary                                          provide protection to Flower Garden resources is diminished. 
                                                                                                                                     NOAA therefore reaffirms its intention to fix the boundaries 
                     o    General Comment - The Minerals Management Service has funded many studies on                              of the no-activity zones as they were defined by the 
                          the biology of the Flower Garden Banks and other areas of the Gulf of Mexico. MMS                         topographic lease stipulation for OCS oil and gas lease sale 
                          would be happy to provide relevant information from these studies to NOAA for use
            11.           in developing the final EIS.                                                                               112.
             12.          Page 18, first full paragraph, third -sentence. The brine seep discharge rate "ppt"          10.      See response to 6 & 7 above.
                          should be parts per thousand, not parts per trillion.
                                                                                                                       11.      No response necessary.
                          Page 37, Figure 12 - The "Mobile oil Platform" shown in the figure is incorrect and
                          misleading as it might be thought of as a mobile offshore drilling unit. It is actually
               13.        a permanent platform operated by the Mobil Oil Corporation and should be libeled as          12.      Comment accepted. The FEIS/MP has been corrected accordingly. 
                          such.
                                                                                                                       13.      Comment accepted. The FEIS/MP has been corrected accordingly. 
            14.           Page 39, Table 2 - This table should be amended to show that blocks A-97, A-
                          354, A-337, A-390, A-361, A-363, and A-396. are now under oil and gas leases. Also,          14.      Comment accepted. The FEIS/HP has been corrected accordingly. 


























                      block A-103 was not included on the list For east flower Garden. This block is not
                      under lease but should be listed. The mms  records also indicate that the following
                      blocks are no longer under lease: a-388, a-135, a-173, a-177, a-178, a-383, a-402,
                      a-364, a-377.
                      15. o page 74, first paragraph - the reference to the "quarter, quarter, quarter: system is
confusing and unnecessary. this reference should either be further explained or
eliminated (see also comments for page 75 below).
16. o page 75, table 4 - there are several mistakes in this table which, on the whole, does    15. comment accepted. the feis/mp has been corrected accordingly.
not seem very useful. maps prepared and available from mms fully describe the " no 
activity zone" of the flower garden banks, and the "quarter, quarter, quarter"                 16. comment accepted. the feis/mp has been corrected accordingly.
system is no longer used. the table should either be corrected or eliminated .
17.o page 80, last paragraph- the second sentence should read: "the no activity zone           17. comment accepted. the feis/mp has been corrected accordingly. 
boundaries enclose the 100 m (328 ft) isobaths around each bank, thus including some
areas outside of the 100 m isobath."
18. o page 89, first full paragraph- the spill data in this paragraph should be  
supplemented to show that, from 1974 to 1981, there were only four spills of crude             18, comment accepted. the feis/mp has been corrected accordingly.
oil greater than 1000 barrels from ocs oil and gas facilities (including pipelines).
19. o page 117, article 4, section 1, c, would in effect incorporate mms's topographic
features stipulation for sale 112 as part of future sancuturay regulations. while mms          19. NOAA disagrees. the application of NOAA regulations for the        
may, in fact, adopt similar stipulations for future sales affecting the flower garden          protection of flower garden bank resources can not be subject
banks, the proposed incorporation of the stipulation into sancutary regulations would          to being changed by other federal agencies with entirely
tend to deprive mms of the flexibility of changing the stipulation in the future when          different missions.
better technologies and procedures become available. in addition, the future
sanctuary regulations which incorporate the sale 113 stipulations may conflict with
existing stipulations appliciable to leases issued under other sales which contain
somewhat different requirements than those of sale 112. thereford, it would be
preferable to 'spell out the "no activity zone" rather than citing an mms leas
stipulation as part of future sancturary regulations.                                           20.comment accepted. the paragrah has been deleted in the
20. o page 136, second paragraph- the reference "secretarial order 2974" should be              feis/mp.
clarified to indicate that it was replaced several years ago by a section of the 
department of the interior manual (i.e., dm 055). 











                                        United States Department  of the Interior
                                                   NATIONAL PARK service
                                                  padre  ISLAND NATIONAL seashore
                                                   9405 south padre island drive
                                                   corpus christi, texas 79418
                        in reply refer to



                                N16

                                April 14. 1989




                                Joseph A, Uravitch. Chief
                                Marine & Estuarine Management Division
                                Office or Ocean & Coastal Resource Management
                                National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                1825 Connecticut Avenue. n.W.
                                Washington D.C. 20235

                                Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                Padre Island national Seashore supports the proposed
                                designation or the Flower garden Banks as a national marine
                                sanctuary. These coral reers are complex; biologically
                                productive systems deserving protection Including
                                regulations covering the following:
                                a) anchoring or vessels prohibited within the sanctuary
                                b) depositing/discharging materials or substances
                                c) seabed alteration
                                d) removal. or Injuring coral or other resources
                                e) use or fishing gear other then conventional book and
                                   line
                                f) detonating explosives or releasing electrical charges.

                                Padre Island supports NOAA preferred Regulatory/Boundary                    No response necessary
                                -Alternative I estabishing a sanctuary of 4J.7 nautical
                                miles concentrated in two rings 100 meter isobaths)
                                surrounding the two coral banks. This provides additional
                                protection specifically to the discrete areas or special
                                national significance. We also support NOAApreferred
                                Management Alternative 2.provision or site-specific
                                management in an appropriate location in the Texas/
                                Louisiana coastal region.

                                Sincerely.
                                                                                       
                                John D. Hunter
                                superintendent
 

Us department                commanders                     washington dc 20593-0001
of transportation            united states coast guard           symbol g-mps-1

united states
coast guard                                                 phone (202) 267-0504



                                                 5000
mr. joseph a uravitch
chief
marine and estuarine
management division
office of ocean and coastal
resource managemennt
national ocean service/noaa
1825 connecticut ave. nw
washington, d.c. 20235

dear mr. uravitch:

we have reviewed the draft environmental impact statement/draft management
plan one the proposed flower garden banks national marine sancturary. we have      No response necessary.
no objection to the eis or draft plan.

thank you for providing us the opportunity to review this project

sincerely,

commander, u. s. coast guard
chief, pest operations branch
by directies of the commanders


copy: director, office of ecology
and conservation










apr 1939
received


Buddy roemer                                                                                      henry trudillo
governor                                                                                             secretary
                                            state of louisiana                                    
paul hardy                               department of culture, recreation and tourism            bob leblanc
lieutenant governor                                office of tourism                            assistant secretary
and commissioner

March 9, 1989

Mr. joseph a uravitch, chief
marine and estuarine management division
office of ocean and coastal resource management
national ocean service/NOAA
1825 connecticut avenue, n.w.

RE: comments relative to proposed marine sanctuary status for the flower
garden banks areas off the coasts of louisiana and texas

dear mr. uravitch:
we have received our copy of the 139-page draft environmental impact statement
and management plan regarding the proposed marine sanctuary designation. 

obviously, we cannot comment on the actual environmental impact or ecological
needs for this protection, but wish to offer our support to the plan in the
sense of its positive contribution to our marine fisheries resources.

such a designation can only help preserve the reef area and thus the fishing
and diving opportunities tied to those resources. ultimately, we see a
positive construbution to our tourism industry by offering another attration
and resource to that element of the interested population. charter fishing, 
skin diving and other recreational interests will have yet another area to
visit, thus enhancing the economy of the portial from which they sail.

we hope that the flower grden banks do indeed obtain the marine sancturary
designation which will enhance its preservation.
                                                                              no response necessary.

sincerely,

robert a budden, cpm
deputy assistant secretary


rad:ean/lan





received march 
















                                       DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

                                       LOUISIANA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
                                       University Station,     G. Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70893-4107 (504) 388- 5320

                                                                          April 5, 1989



                                 Joseph A. Uravitch. Chief
                                 Marine and Estuarine Management Division
                                 Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
                                 National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                 1825 Connecticut Ave.. N.W.
                                 Washington, DC 20235

                                                                                          RE. Flower Carden Banks DEIS/MP

                                 Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                    We support the designation of the Flower Carden Banks as a marine sanctuary and
                                 the recommended regulatory/boundary and management alternatives presented in the
                                 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan. It is important to protect
                                 the natural resources in this unique area from anchoring. harmful discharges, alterations
                                 of the seabed, removal and injury of coral, destructive fishing gear, and explosives. In
                                 addition. provisions for flexibility in the plan are also important since new issues may
                                 emerge and additional factors may become important to provide protection to the Banks.

                                    Informing the public about this unique resource is also etremely important. In the
                                 document approximately nine areas for Information Centers in Texas are idenified and
                                 none in Louisiana. While providing for Information Center and Outreach Programs in
                                 Louisiana is mentioned no specific sites are listed. The following are suggestions that                        
                                 NOAA should consider for location in Louisana: McNeese University in Lake Charles;
                                 Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium(LUMCON) in Cocodrie; Louisiana Nature and
                                 Science Center and the upcoming New Orleans Aquarium in New Orleans, and Louisiana                     1.	Comment accepted. These sites have been added to the list of
                                 Department of Wildilife and Fisheries' Natural Heritage Program, Department of Natural                         sites to be considered as information centers in the FEIS/MP
                                 Resources' Coastal Management Division, and LSU's Sea Grant Program in Baton Rouge.                                 ites to be considered as information
                                           
                                 Finally, on page 18 there seems to be an error in the description of the salinity of the               2. 	Comment accepted. The FEIS/MP has been corrected accordingly.                                          
                                 brine seeps of approximately 200 ppt. The text identifies the acronym as parts per trillion,                              
                               

                                                                                 Sincerely,



                                                                                 C. G. Groat
                                                                                 Director and
                                                                                 State Geologist
                                 cc; David Cottingham
                                    Room 6222                                                                         
                                    U.S. Department of Commerce                                                                       
                                    Washington, DC 20230

                                                                                                                                    
                                        


                             
















                                                                 An Equal Oppurtunity Employer







                                                                                    Senate

                                                                           State of Louisiana

                                        P 0. Box 94183
                                   Boton Rouge, Louisiana 70804
                                        (504)342-2040



                                            April 12, 1989



                                            Mr. Joseph A. Pravitch, Chief
                                            Marine & Estuarine Management Div.
                                            National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                            1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
                                            Washington, D.C. 20235

                                            RE: Draft ELS/Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary

                                            Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                            Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact
                                            Statement/Management Plan for the Flower Garden Banks National Marine
                                            Sanctuary.

                                            The proposal to establish a national marine sanctuary in the waters offshore Texas-
                                            Louisiana appears to have merit in that additional protection would be extended to
                                            the coral reefs and associated resources of the Flower Garden Banks. Adequate
                                            safeguards appear to be built into the management scheme for the sanctuary and I                            No response To
                                            understand that the Coastal Management Division, Louisiana Department of
                                            Natural Resources, has found no consistency problems with the proposed sanctuary.

                                            Sincerely,



                                            Samuel B. Nunez, Jr.
                                            President Pro Tempore

                                            SB/bj

                                            cc: David Cottingham, Director
                                                 Office of Ecology and Conservation





















                                                               STATE OF TEXAS
                                                          OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
                                                            AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711


                              WILLIAM P. CLEMENTS, JR.
                                   GOVERNOR                    April 20,  198S




                                       Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch,   Chief
                                       National Ocean Service/(NOAA)
                                       1825 Connecticut Avenue, N.V.
                                       Washington, D.C. 20235

                                       RE: TX-R-89-03-07-0002-50
                                             Flower Garden banks National Marine Sanctuary

                                       Dear Mr. Uravitch:

                                       Attached are subsequent comments received on the above                            
                                       captioned proposal.

                                       If we can be of further assistance, please let me know.

                                       Sincerely,





                                       T. C. Adams
                                       State Single Point of Contact

                                       TCA/pon

                                       Enclosure













                                                                                                           















                                                       TEXAS REVIEW AND COMMENT SYSTEM

                                                             REVIEW NOTIFICATION


                                 Applicant/Originating Agency: National Ocean Service/(NOAA)

                                 Project Title: FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

                                 SAI/EISI: 7X-R-89-03-07-0002-5O-00

                                 Date Received: March 1,1989               Date Comments Due BPO: 03/30/89

                                                             REVIEW PARTICIPANTS .... .........


                                     Texas Attorney General's Office
                                     General Land Office
                                     Texas Parks and Wildlife Department




















                                 Special Notes/ Comments: NOAA provided copies under seperate mail.  We
                                 have provided additional copies to Bureau of  Economic Geology and
                                 Texas Water Commission.

                                      No Comment.
                                                          Review Agency                     Signature

                                 Return Comments to:
                                                       J.C. Adams, State Single Point of Contact
                                                             Governor's Office of Budget and Planning
                                                             P.O. Box 12428
                                                             Austin. Texas 78711
                                                             (512) 463-1778










                                                                                                              


                                                              Texas General Land Office

                              Sally S. Davenport                                                           Garry Mauro
                              Director                                                                     Commissioner
                              Coastal Division




                                 March 29, 1989



                                 Mr. T. C. Adams, State Single Point of Contact
                                 Governor's Office of Budget and Planning
                                 P. 0. Box 2428
                                 Austin, Texas 78711

                                 RE. Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary
                                      SAI/EIS No. TX-R-89-03-07-0002-50-00

                                 Dear Mr.Adams:
                                 My staff has reviewed the referenced document and we make the following
                                 comments. East and West Flower Garden Banks have been under consideration as 
                                 a national marine sanctuary for at least a decade. Both before and during
                                 this period a great deal has been learned of the values of these two complex
                                 marine structures. Also, a great deal has been learned of their vulnerability
                                 to man's activities. We support the designation of these areas as the newest
                                 unit of The National Marine Sanctuary System.

                                 We agree that anchoring of ships presents the most probable significant reef                           NO response nec
                                 damaging activity, at least near-term. And we encourage close monitoring to
                                 evaluate the effects of smaller vessels anchoring on the reefs, even with
                                 their anchor line proscriptions.

                                 Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this document of such importance
                                 to Texas and the nation.

                                 Sincerely,



                                 Sally  S. Davenport 
                                 Director
                                 Coastal Division

                                 SSD/HI/flw


                                                               Stephen F. Austin Building
                                                                1700 N. Congress Ave.
                                                                    Austin, Texas  76701
                                                                     (512) 463- 5059

































































                                                              





















                                     STAFF COMHE"S

               Although,   staff   supports    Boundary   Alt@tnttiV*     1,
               Alternative III is preferred. While Alternative I provides
               a protective umbrella- to the physical area of the Flower
               Gardens, it does not provide a coordinating protective             1.     See GeneriC Response A.
               umbrella to the surrounding area. obviously, the Flower
               Gardens are directly dependent on surrounding water quality
               and any development acttivity@ (especially resulting An
               increased turbidity) in their vicinity may adversely affect
               the coral's growth. However, the potential threat fron
               development close to the Flower Giordano Is mitigated by the       2.    See  Generic Response D.
               Minerals Management Service rule riquiring, all drilling
               cuttings and fluids to be shunted to no oiare than 10a from
               the bottom.
               Also, staff would prefer  a different management approach
               than that offered by Management Alternative I (pg. 83-84)
               or Alternative 11 (pg. 84). Under management Alternative
               I the sanctuary manager-in in Washington, D.C. and In too
               far removed from -developing the personal knowledge about
               the reefs required to make timely recommendations and             3.     This  and similar approaches have been considered, but they
               ecisions. Under Alternative 11 the hiring of &'sanctuary                 have been rejected as inadequate to provide the staff
               manager and assistant manager requires a substantial cost
               to the tax payer ($90,000/year). Instead one of the                      capabilities needed to carry out sanctuary management
               existing staff at the National Marine Fisheries service,                 responsibilities.
               Galveston Laboratory, -could function as sanctuary manager.
               This approach would place the manager in an area where he
               has access to the resource and would keep the cost or the
               program to that required to promote a staff member and
               ossibly hiring one person to maintain the program. Should
               t is approacb -not be possible,        Alternative 11 is
               acceptable.

               Also Article 4. Section I.E should be   worded so that any
               fishing activity could be restricted by a rule change
               instead of categorically permittingthook and line fishing.
               The current wording assumes hook and line fishing cannot
               be a threat to the reef, however, recent studies are              4.    Comment accepted. See also Generic Response G.
               showing intensive hook and line gear can threaten fish
               populations.  Rewording this section would ease the
               regulation procedures for the U.S. Secretary of Commerce.
              [
               A


               G
               u
               G


              [d
               a
               t
               a
               G
               T













                                                      TEXAS                                  

                         Commissoners           PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
                             



                            
                                         April 18, 1989

                                         Mr. T. C. Adams
                                         State Single Point of Contact
                                         Governor's Office of
                                           Budget and Planning
                                         Post Office Box 12420
                                         Austin, Texas 78711

                             	           Re: 	Draft Environmental  Impact Statement/Managagement Plan
                                               Flower Garden Ranks National Matins Sanctuary

                                         Dear Mr. Adams:
                             
                                         The document entitled Flower Garden Banks National Marine
                                         Sanctuary: Draft Envirnmental Impact Statement/ Management
                                         Plan has been reviewed by Department staff. The staff
                                         recommends the Governor's office supportthe U.S. Secretary
                                         of Commerce in designating the valuable and unique coral
                                         reef Flower Gardens a National Marine Sanctuary. Although
                                         several other U.S. regulatory agencies have passed rules
                                         to protect this resource, the anchoring of large ships on
                                         this beautiful underwater reef remains unregulated and this
                                         poses a serious physical threat to the slow growing corals
                                         which make up and maintain the reef. In addition, the
                                         designation of the Flower Gardens as a National Marine
                                         Sanctuary will provide a coordinating focus for future
                                         management practices of the U.S. Department of the
                                         Interior, the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the U.S.
                                         Department of Transportation.

                                         This plan in needed to provide protection to the Flower
                                         Garden which is not currently available. Therefore this                    
                                         agency support the plan and the attached staff comments                                        agency supports the plan and the attached staff comments
                                         are provided for consideration to the final plan.

                                         I appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments.

                                         Sincerely,



                                         Charles D. Travis
                                         Executive Director

                                         CDT:AWG:bls

                                         Attachment










March 6, 1989

1. I am concerned about item "C" regarding the altering of the seabed except for     1. The DEIS exemption from the regulation prohibiting altering
 hydrocaron exploration. The seabed of the Flower Gardens should not be                 the seabed applied only outside of the no-activity zones, the
 disturbed for the exploration of oil and gas or any other thing. Protected             boundaries of which are well beyond the reefs.     The
 should be protected.                                                                   prohibition on oil and gas development activities within the         
                                                                                        no-activity zones has been strengthened (see Generic Response
 Mary Ellender                                                                          A).
1521 Cypress St.
Sulphur, LA 70663

	Existing regulatory authorities in the proposed sanctuary ( Appendix II)
will be unaffected by sanctuary designation. However, the following 
activities may be regulated by NOAA under the terms of designation:

	a. Anchoring by vessels ( initially, only vessels greater than 100 feet
         in registered length would be prohibited from anchoring in the 
         sanctuary):
      b. Depositing or discharging of materials or substances:
	c. Altering the seabed except in the conduct of hydrocarbon exploration
         and development in sanctuary areas lying outside of the no-activity
         zones established by the Department of the Interior;
	d. Removing or injuring coral or other resouces;
	e. Using fishing gear other than conventional hook and line gear; and
	f.            explosives or releasing electrical charges.

The proposed sanctuary regulations are contained in the Designation Document,
which appears in Appendix I.

	The administrative framework for managing the proposed sanctuary (Part
II, Section IV) recognizes the need for cooperation and coordination among all
participants in sanctuary managment and delinates the roles of the National
Oceanic and Atmosheric Administration's Marine and Estuarine Management
Division, the U.S. Coast Guard, the Minerals Management Service, and the 
Department of State in resource protection, research, interpretation, and
general administration.

	NDAA considered a number of alternatives in developing the proposal to 
designate a national marine sanctuary at the Flower Garden Banks. These
alternatives, described in Part III, were considered in terms achieving
optimum protection for the ecosystem, improving scientific knowlege of the 
resources. The alternative of sanctuary designation was selected as
preferable to no action, and the preferred boundary, management, and
regulatory alternatives were selected. The environmental consequences of the
alternatives are described in Part IV.

	The emergence of the new issues or other unforeseeable factors may affect
specific aspects of sanctuary management as described in this plan. The plan
gained in actual management. However, the overall goals, management
objectives and general guidelines governing the plan's development will
continue to be relevant.











                                                                                  GULF OF MEXICO FISHERY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
                                                                                    Lincoln Center Suite 881 5401 w. Kennedy Blvd.
                                                                                       Tampa. Florida 33609-2406  813 228-2815


                                            March 16, 1989



                                            Mr. Joseph A. Uravitch, Chief
                                            Marine and Estuarine
                                             Management Division
                                            Office of Ocean andd Coastal
                                              Resource Management
                                            National Ocean Service/NOAA
                                            1825 Connecticut Ave., N.W.
                                            Washington, DC 20235

                                            Dear Mr. Uravitch:
                                            Reference is made to the draft environmental impact statement/drafts
                                            management plan on the proposed Flower Garden Banks National Marine
                                            Sanctuary.

                                            We have reviewed the document and find it to be in accord with our fishery
                                            management plan for corals in which we identified the Flower Garden
                                            Banks as habitat areas of particular concern. We continue to endorse the                                               
                                            candidacy of the banks as a National Marine Sanctuary and urge the
                                            adoption of the management measures proposed in your DEIS/DMP to
                                            protect the corals.  Particularly important is the proposal to limit
                                            anchoring on the banks to vessels under 100 feet in length.

                                            We appreciate the opportunity to comment and continue to offer our
                                            support in achieving sanctuary designation.

                                            Sincerely,



                                            William D. Chauvin
                                            Chairman

                                            WDC:TRL:bab

                                            cc:  David Cottingham
                                                 Gulf Council
                                                 Staff









                                      A council authorized by the Magnuson Fishery Conservation & Management Act










                              Scuba
                              Divers
                              Anonymous





                   MARINE & ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                   NATIONAL 0CEAN SERVICE.  NOAA
                   1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE.  N.W.
                   WASHINGTON. DC   20235


                   TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

                       WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH THE FLOWER
                   GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY LOCATED IN THE GULF OF MEXICO OFF
                   TEXAS AND LOUISIANA.
                       WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL ENABLE SPORT
                   DIVERS TO ENJOY THE  BEAUTY OF THAT, WHICH LIES BENEATH THE, SURFACE. THE                   1.  See Generic Response A.
                   ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL SANCTUARY RIGHT IN "OUR BACKYARD", WILL BE
                   CHERISHED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SPORT DIVERS.
                                                                                                               2.  See Generic Response H.                      TO PRESERVE THIS  NATURAL BEAUTY ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL/PREVENT 1. WASTE
                   DISPOSAL 2. SPEARFISHING. 3. ANCHORING. 4. SOUVENIR COLLECTION. AND 5. HYDROCARBON          3.  See Generic Response E.
                   EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOUR-
                   CES OF THE AREA, MUST BE ESTABLISHED                                                        4.  See Generic Response I.                   TO ESTABLISH SUCH A SANCTUARY AND THEN LET   IT BE STRIPPED OF ITS                       
                   NATURAL BEAUTY, RESOURCES, AND INHABITANTS IS SUCH A WASTE                                  5.  See Generic Response A.
                       WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FLOWER
                   GARDENS AS A NATIONAL SANCTUARY BUT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BECOME A TRUE
                   "SAFE HAVEN" FOR ITS INHABITANTS MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT OUR
                   MARINE LIFE.



                                                      


SINCERELY,       4/14/
K. A. BENNINGTON
11062 Trader's Ct.
Houston, Tx  77086


                                                             

















                                                                   533 Tenth Street
                                                                   Santa Monica, Ca 90402


                                                                   March 9, 1989



                           Flower Garden Banks Request
                           Marine and Estuarine Mgmnt. Div.
                           Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Mgmnt.
                           National Ocean Service
                           National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                           1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW, #714
                           Washington, DC 20235

                           Gentlemen:

                           I shall be pleased to receive a copy of the of the DEIS/MP and any
                           follow-up information on the Flower Garden Banks National
                           Marine Sanctuary.
                           I wish to express my approval of the Executive Summary from                         No response necessary.
                           the DEIS/MP for this proposed marine sanctuary.

                                                            Sincerely yours,



                                                            Alex Castelli














                                                                                             MAR
                                                                                          RECEIVED









                                  Scuba
                                  Divers
                                 Anonymous






                      MARINE & ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                      NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE, NOAA
                      1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
                      WASHINGTON, DC 20235


                      TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:


                         WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH THE FLOWER
                      GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY LOCATED IN THE GULF OF MEXICO OFF
                      TEXAS AND LOUISIANA.

                        WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL ENABLE SPORT
                      DIVERS TO ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THAT WHICH LIES BENEATH THE SURFACE.  THE                   1.  See Generic Response A.                   ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL SANCTUARY RIGHT IN "OUR BACKYARD" WILL BE
                      CHERISHED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SPORT DIVERS.                                         2.  See Generic Response H.                                                                                       
                         TO PRESERVE THIS NATURAL BEAUTY ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL/PREVENT 1. WASTE                 3.  See Generic Response E.                   DISPOSAL. 2. SPEARFISHING. 3. ANCHORING. 4. SOUVENIR COLLECTION, AND 5. HYDROCARBON
                      EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT, WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOUR-
                                        
                      CES OF THE AREA MUST BE ESTABLISHED.                                                      4.  See Generic Response I.                        TO ESTABLISH SUCH A SANCTUARY AND THEN LET IT BE STRIPPED OF ITS                               
                      NATURAL BEAUTY, RESOURCES, AND INHABITANTS IS SUCH A WASTE!

                         WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FLOWER                       5.  See Generic Response A.
                      GARDENS AS A NATIONAL SANCTUARY BUT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BECOME A TRUE
                      "SAFE HAVEN" FOR ITS INHABITANTS MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT OUR
                      MARINE LIFE






                                                              SINCERELY,     4/14/59
                                                  





























                         MARINE & ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                         NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE, NOAA
                         1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.W.
                         WASHINGTON, DC 20235


                         TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:


                            WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH THE FLOWER
                         GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY LOCATED IN THE GULF OF MEXICO OFF
                         TEXAS AND LOUISIANA.

                            WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL ENABLE SPORT
                         DIVERS TO ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THAT WHICH LIES BENEATH THE SURFACE. THE
                         ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL SANCTUARY RIGHT IN "OUR BACKYARD" WILL BE
                         CHERISHED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SPORT DIVERS.                                  1. See Generic Response A.                            TO PRESERVE THIS NATURAL BEAUTY ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL/PREVENT 1. WASTE          
                         DISPOSAL. 2. ANCHORING. 3. SOUVENIR COLLECTION, AND 4. HYDROCARBON                 2. See Generic Response E.
                         EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT.  WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOUR-           3. See Generic Response I.
                         CES OF THE AREA. MUST BE ESTABLISHED.                                              4. See Generic Response A.
                            TO ESTABLISH SUCH A SANCTUARY AND THEN LET IT BE STRIPPTED OF ITS               
                         NATURAL BEAUTY, RESOURCES, AND INHABITANTS IS SUCH A WASTE!

                            WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FLOWER
                         GARDENS AS A NATIONAL SANCTUARY BUT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BECOME A TRUE
                         "SAFE HAVEN" FOR ITS INHABITANTS MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT OUR
                         MARINE LIFE.






                                                               SINCERELY,
                                                                          Jina & Jack Kasel
                                                                          2031 Old Dixie Dr.
                                                                          Richmond, Tx  77469

                                                                      
















                                                           MARYE MYERS




                                                            March 9. 1989









                                    Flower Garden Banks Request
                                    Marine and Estuarine Mgmnt. Di v.
                                    office of ocean and Coastal Resource Mgmnt.
                                    National Ocean Service
                                    National oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
                                    1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW. #714

                                    Gentlemen:

                                    I shall I be pleased to receive a copy of the DEIS/MP and any
                                    follow-up information on the Flower Garden Barks National
                                    Marine Sanctuary.
                                    I wish to express my approval of the Executive Summary from                      No response necessary.
                                    the DEIS/HP for this proposed marine sanctuary.

                                                                 Yours sincereLy,



                                                                   rye




                                    MM:ct
















                                                                                                    received















           31 March, 1989


          Joseph Uravitch, Chief
          Marine & Estuarine Management Division
          Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management
          National Ocean Service/NOAA
          1825 Connecticut Ave., NW
          Washington, DC 20235




          Dear Mr. Uravitch,

                    I would like to see the East and West Flower Garden
        Banks designated as a national marine sanctuary. I would pro-
         for the Alternative 3 Regulatory Boundary to estblish additional    1.    See Generic Response A.
         protection although I can appreciate the difficulties involved
          with enforcement. I believe  Management Alternative 2  is certain-
                                                                                                         Management Alternat
         ly the best one.                                                       2.    NOAA agrees.
                                                                                      alternative.


                                                 Sincerely,



                                                 Ms. Lyn Rosen Springut
                                                 216 Orford St.
                                                 Rochester, NY 14607



        David Cottingham
















                 21 April 1989





                 JOSEPH A. URAVITCH, CHIEF
                 MARINE AND ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                 OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
                 NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE/NOAA
                 1825 CONNECTICUT AVE, N.W.
                 WASHINGTON, DC 20235

                 DEAR SIR

                 REF:  DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR
                      THIS PROPOSED FLOWER GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

                 I AGREE WITH THE MANAGEMENT PLAN AS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING
                 EXCEPTIONS:
                 
                     ALL EXPLORATION FOR GAS AND OIL SHOULD BE PERMANENTLY BANNED
                 FROM THE AREA BOUNDARIES AS DESIGNATED IN THE FINAL PLAN.                               1.     See Generic Response A.
                 WOULD ASSURE PROTECTION TO SOME DEGREE FROM BLOW OUTS, BUT WOULD
                 
                 PROTECT THE AREA FROM DAMAGE BY SESMIC EXPLOSIONS.                                       2.     This activity has been listed for reulation so that if the
                 REGULATORY/BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVE 3 SHOULD BE CHOSEN AS THE                                       use of air guns is later demonstrated to have an adverse
                 PREFERRED CHOICE.  THE TWO REGULATORY ZONES SHOULD BE CONSI                                     impact on sanctuary resources, additional regulations can be
                 AS NO-ACTIVITY ZONES BY THE MINERAL MANAGEMENTERNATIVE                                          proposed.
                 3 WOULD GUARANTEE THE LONG TERM COMPREHENSIVE PROTECTION OF THE
                 FLOWER GARDEN BANKS ECOSYSTEM.
                                                                                                          3.     See Generic Response A.
                 I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE DECISION TO DESIGNATE FLOWER GARDEN BANKS
                 AS A NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY.  THE RICHNESS AND DIVERSITY OF THE
                 AREA CERTAINLY MERIT THE COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT AND INCREASED
                 PROTECTION THAT DESIGNATION WILL BRING.


                 SINCERELY



                 HARRY E WILSON
                 2120 N CALLOW AVE
                 BREMERTON, WA 98312-2908
                 COPY TO: DAVID COTTINGHAM, DIRECTOR
                          OFFICE OF EOCOLOGY & CONSERVATION
                          ROOM 6222
                          DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                          WASHINGTON, DC 20230
              































                   MARINE &  ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                   NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE, NOAA
                   1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE. N.W
                   WASHINGTON. DC 20235


                   TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:


                       WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH THE FLOWER
                   GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY LOCATED IN THE GULF OF MEXICO OFF
                   TEXAS AND LOUISIANA.

                       WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL ENABLE SPORT
                   DIVERS TO ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THAT WHICH LIES BENEATH THE SURFACE. THE
                   ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL SANCTUARY RIGHT IN "OUR BACKYARD" WILL BE
                   CHERISHED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SPORT DIVERS.                                                      1.    See Gene
                       TO PRESERVE THIS NATURAL BEAUTY ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL/PREVENT 1.WAST                                  2.    See Gene
                   DISPOSAL. 2.ANCHORING. 3.SOUVENIR COLLECTION. AND HYDROCARBON   
                   EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT.  WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOUR-
                   
                   CES OF THE AREA, MUST BE ESTABLISHED.                                                                 3.    See Gene
                       TO ESTABLISH SUCH A SANCTUARY AND THEN LET IT BE STRIPPED OF AS                                     4.    See Gene
                   NATURAL, BEAUTY, RESOURCES. AND INHABITANTS IS SUCH A WASTE!

                       WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FLOWER
                   GARDENS AS A NATIONAL SANCTUARY BUT IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BECOME A TRUE
                   SAFE HAVEN- FOR ITS INHABITANTS MEASURES MST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT OUR
                   MARINE LIFE.






                                                           SINCERELY,


                                                           2022 OLD DIXIE DRIVE
                                                           RICHMOND, TX 77469 
                                                                          
                               









                                    2q*q48q%qb


                     MARINE & ESTUARINE MANAGEMENT DIVISION
                     NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE, NOAA
                    1825 CONNECTICUT AVENUE, N.V.
                     WASHINGTON. DC 20235


                     TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:


                         WE WHOLEHEARTEDLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH THE FLOWER
                     GARDEN BANKS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY LOCATED IN THE GULF OF MEXICO OFF
                     TEXAS AND LOUISIANA.

                         WE COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS PROJECT WHICH WILL ENABLE SPORT
                     DIVERS TO ENJOY THE BEAUTY OF THAT WHICH LIES BENEATH THE SURFACE. THE
                     ESTABLISHMENT OF A NATIONAL SANCTUARY RIGHT IN "OUR BACKYARD" WILL be                                1.    See Generic Response A.
                     CHERISHED FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SPORT DIVERS.
                         TO PRESERVE THIS NATURAL BEAUTY ACTIVITIES TO CONTROL/PREVENT WASTE                   2.    See Generic Response E.
                     DISPOSAL. 2 ANCHORING, 3 SOUVENIR COLLETION, AND 4 HYDROCARBON
                      EXPLORATION AND DEVLELOPMENT. WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE NATURAL RESOUR-
                     CES OF THE AREA. MUST BE ESTABLISHED.                                                    3.    See Generic Response I.    
                         TO ESTABLISH SUCH A SANCTUARY AND THEN LET IT BE STRIPPED  OF ITS                    4.    See Generic Response A.
                     NATURAL BEAUTY, RESOURCES, AND INHABITANTS IS SUCH' A WASTE!

                         WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONCERN IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE  FLOWER
                     GARDENS AS A NATIONAL SANCTUARY BUT III ORDER FOR THIS TO BECOME A TRUE
                     "SAFE HAVEN" FOR ITS INHABITANTS MEASURES MST BE TAKEN TO PROTECT OUR
                     MARINE LIFE.





                                                          SINCERELY,
                               4qV8qA










                      ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AT PUBLIC HEARINGS

                                   March 30, 1989






























i









                           COMMENT SUMMARIES AND RESPONSES


          Commentor:     Linda Maraniss - Regional Director, Center for
                         Marine Conservation - Morning Session.'

                         Summariz6d@ written @ comments sent by -Center for
                         Marine Conservation.


          Response:

               See  responses to written comments from Center for Marine
               conservation.


          Commentor:     Monte Thornton - Manager, Aquaventures Scuba Dive
                         Shop - Morning Session.

               1.   Collecting should be prohibited.

               2.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

               3.   All fishing, including with hook and line, should be
                    restricted.

               4.   Restricting the number of divers visiting the reefs
                    should be considered.


          Response:

               1.   See Generic Response I.

               2.   See Generic Response H.

               3.   See Generic Response G.
               4.   NOAA has no evidence that present levels of diving
                    present a threat     to Flower Garden Bank resources.
                    However, if diving intensity is later demonstrated to
                    have an adverse impact on sanctuary resources, NOAA has
                    the abiLity to regulate diving on a temporary basis,
                    during which time more permanent measures for resolving
                    the problem can be decided upon.









          commentor:     Dean Lewis - Dive Shop operator- Morning session.

               1.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

               2.   Collecting shoul.d be prohibited.

               3.   Mooring. systems should be installed to protect the reefs
                    from anchoring.

               4.   Hook and line bottom fishing can pull up coral.@
         Response:

               1.   See Generic Response H.

               2.   See Generic Response I.

               3.   See Generic Response E.

               4.   See Generic Response G.,









           Commentor:     Page,Williams - Environmental Chairperson,-Houston
                                             Morning Session.
                          Underwater Club

                1.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

                2.1  Permanent moorings. should be emplaced. - "Between the
                     clubs and the - Council and the dive shops, we could
                     probably work up.some sort of.matching funds, if you all
                     would consider putting some in."

                3.   1 like the idea of limiting access to the Flower Gardens.
                     The number of divers in diving excursions to the Flower
                     Gardens could be registered ahead of time at the
                     sanctuary office, which could then    provide them with
                               to go.


          Respqnse:

                1.   see Generic Response  H.

                2.   NOAA will continue to collaborate with   local groups in
                     establishing a mooring buoy system. See Generic Response
                     E.

                3.   See response to comment #4 (above)  by Monte Thornton at
                     hearings.









          Commentor:      William Jadkson - Southwest Regional' Liaison
                          officer, National marine Fisheries Service -Morning
                          Session.

                1.   The  prohibition on using explosives is unenforceable
                    ;.because of its wording. Its impossible to catch 'anyone-
                     in the act of  using explosives.- The regulation should
                     therefore be   reworded to prohibit' the* possession of
                     explosives or  explosive devices aboard any vessel other
                     than one used  for geophysical exploration.-

                2.   Because there  seems' to be, such concern about diving,
                     spearfishing,  and* the use of explosive 'devices such as
                     shark repellant sticks, the use of some sort of federal
                     registration and permits f or visiting the Flower Gardens
                     should be considered. Some kind of reporting requirement
                     following visits might also be desirable as a means of
                     compiling data for effective   management of such.remote
                     areas as the Flower Gardens.

           Response:
                l.-  Comment accepted.  'The regulAtion has 'been reworded
                     accordingly.



                2.   Comment accepted in part.        NOAA will   examine the
                     feasibility of establishing     reporting procedures to
                     compile management data.     With regard to restricting
                     access to the Flower Gardens, see response to comment #4
                     (above) by Monte Thornton at hearings.








            Commentor:     Paul Lankford      Anadarko' tletrole'um Corporation
                           Morning-Session.

                1.    The use of explosives.to remove platforms is regulated
                by MMS.    'Would sanctuAr'y * regulations restrict'this use of
                explosives?

                2.    Would sanctuary regulation*s"r'estrict dischairges under EPA
                permits by platforms just outside of the no-activity zones?

                3.    Would sanctuary- regulations- further restrict MMS shunting
                requirements?


           Reponse:

                1.    See Generic Response C.


                2.    See Generic Responses A   and-C.


                3.    See Generic Respontes'A   and'B.








          Comme,ntor:   Dick zingula,-.Scuba Diver-.Evening session.
              1.   Spearfishing should  be prohibited.

              2.   Trawling should,be  prohibited.

              3.   The transit of large  ships over the Flower Garden Reefs
                   should be prohibited.

              4.   if. mooring buoys   are to be   placed over  the Flower
                   Gardens, there should be,multiple moorings.
              5.   Educational material about the Flower Garden's should
                   inform people that not all changes in the ecosystem are
                   man-made. Many such changes, are due to natural causes.

         Reponse:

              1.   See Generic Response H.

              2.   See Generic Response G.

              3.   See Generic Response F. The emplacement.of <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f69b999984b69891d89483998f85">[email&#160;protected]</a>
                   over thereefs will also discourage transiting by large
                   ships.

              4.   See Generic Response E.     The feasibility of various
                   arrangements for employing multiple moorings is being
                   considered.

              5.   NOAA agrees and plans to include such information in its
                   education and interpretation program.








           Commentor:     Chuck Boyd - Bay Area Divers - Evening Session.. ..,
               1.    Moorin systems should-be,installed to protect the reefs
                           9,
                     from anchoring.

               2.    Commercial fish.ing-should be prohibited...

               3.    Electrically operated reels should be prohibited.-


               4.    Spearfishing should be prohibited.

               5.    All collecting should be prohibited.

               6.    The $50,000 penalty allowed for violations of regulations
                     is unrealistic.


          Raisponse:

               1.    See Generic Response E.

               2.    See Generic Response G.

               3.    NOAA has@ no evidence that the use of        electrically
                     operated reels threatens Flower Gardens resources. See
                     also Generic Response G.

               4.    See Generic Response H.

               5.    See Generic Response I.

               6.    The $50,000 pe'nalty was established by Congress as the
                     maximum penalty for each violation. The penalties that
                     are actually invoked vary considerably depending on the
                     nature of the offense and mitigating factors involved.









          Commentor:     Randy Widaman - Diver@- Evening Session.

               1.,  Mooring systems should be installed to protect the reefs
                    from anchoring.

               2.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

          Response:

               1.   See Generic Response-E.


               2.   See Generic Response H@









            Commentor:    Gary Rinn - Rinn Boats,@ Inc. - Evening Session.

                1.   All live collecting should be prohibited.

                2.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

                3.   Multiple mooring bouys should be installed to protect the
                     reefs from anchoring. "I am in the process of organizing
                     a non-profit organization to fund and maintain permanent
                     mooring buoys."

                4.   Regarding enforcement "I'll go on record  in  volunteering
                     our efforts to monitor any@possible violations."


           Response:

                1.   See Generic Response I.

                2.   See Generic Response H.

                3.   See Generic Response     E.     NOAA looks forward to
                     cooperating with Mr. Rinn and any other individuals or
                     organizations that wish to provide assistance.

                4.   Again, NOAA looks forward to cooperating with Mr. Rinn
                     and any other individuals or organizations that wish to,
                     provide assistance.









         Commentor:      Jesse Cancelmo, - Evening Session.-

              1.   Spearfishing should be prohibited.

              2.   How soon after designation will t     'he Flower  Garden's
                   national marine sanctuary status appear on        nautical
                   charts.


         Response:

              1.   See Generic Response H.

              2.   Notice that the Flowe r Garden Banks are a national marine
                   sanctuary will appear after designation on new navigation
                   charts as they are produced.










                   Commentor:                  jesse cancelmo - Evening Session.

                             1.       Spearfishing should be prohibited.

                             2.       How soon after designation will the Flower Garden's
                                      national marine sanctuary status appear on nautical
                                      charts.

                   Response:

                             1.       See Generic Response H.

                             2.       Notice that the Flower Garden Banks are a national marine
                                      sanctuary will appear after designation on new navigation
                                      charts as they are produced.

















































                          *U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1991-298-129/40630

























































                                       3 6668 00000 5746


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body></html>