The meeting is open to the public. The following business will be conducted: Review proposed projects. If Committee members have enough information, they may choose to vote on project proposals submitted to the committee for Title II. Persons who wish to bring related matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who made written requests by Friday, May 6, 2011 will have the opportunity to address the Committee at those sessions.

The meeting agenda will focus on reviewing proposals for forest projects and recommending funding during the business meeting. The public forum begins at 11 a.m.

On July 11, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the antidumping duty orders on purified carboxymethylcellulose (purified CMC) from Finland and the Netherlands. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005). On June 2, 2010, the Department published a notice of initiation of its first five-year (sunset) reviews of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Finland and the Netherlands. See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 75 FR 30777 (June 2, 2010).

As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Finland and the Netherlands would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and, therefore, notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should these orders be revoked. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden: Final Results of the Expedited First Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 75 FR 61700 (October 6, 2010) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

On May 12, 2011, the ITC published its determination in the Federal Register , pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Finland and the Netherlands would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United Sates within a reasonably foreseeable time. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, Mexico, Netherlands and Sweden, 76 FR 27663 (May 12, 2011), and USITC Publication 4225 (May 2011), titled Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, Netherlands and Sweden (Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1084-1087 (Review)).

The merchandise covered by these orders is all purified CMC, sometimes also referred to as purified sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or cellulose gum, which is a white to off-white, non-toxic, odorless, biodegradable powder, comprising sodium CMC that has been refined and purified to a minimum assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does not include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and CMC that is cross-linked through heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC that has undergone one or more purification operations, which, at a minimum, reduce the remaining salt and other by-product portion of the product to less than ten percent. The merchandise subject to the orders is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the orders is dispositive.

As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Finland and the Netherlands.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of the continuation of these orders will be the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of continuation. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next sunset reviews of these orders not later than 30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of the effective date of continuation.

These sunset reviews and this notice are in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act.

On January 14, 2011, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on honey from Argentina for the period December 1, 2008 to November 30, 2009. See Preliminary Results. We invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Results , and received comments from the mandatory respondents Compania Inversora Platense S.A. (CIPSA), Patagonik S.A. (Patagonik), and TransHoney S.A. (TransHoney). We did not receive any rebuttal comments and no hearing was requested.

As explained in the memorandum from the Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS) for Import Administration, the Department exercised its discretion to toll Import Administration deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government from February 5, through February 12, 2010. Thus, all deadlines in this segment of the proceeding were extended by seven days. Therefore, the revised deadline for the final results of this review became May 14, 2011. 1 See Memorandum to the Record from Ronald Lorentzen, DAS for Import Administration, regarding “Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During the Recent Snowstorm,” dated February 12, 2010.

The POR is December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009.

The merchandise covered by the order is honey from Argentina. The products covered are natural honey, artificial honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, preparations of natural honey containing more than 50 percent natural honey by weight, and flavored honey. The subject merchandise includes all grades and colors of honey whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut comb, or chunk form, and whether packaged for retail or in bulk form. The merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 2106.90.99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States ( HTSUS ). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under this order is dispositive.

All issues raised in the case briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (I&D Memo), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in the I&D Memo, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. In addition, a complete version of the I&D Memo can be accessed directly by the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the I&D Memo are identical in content.

After considering Patagonik's supplemental cost response, which was submitted too close to the date of the Preliminary Results to be thoroughly analyzed and included in our preliminary cost analysis, the Department has made an adjustment to Patagonik's cost of production to properly account for its middleman costs. See Memorandum to Neal M. Halper, Director of Office of Accounting, “Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results—Patagonik S.A.,” dated May 16, 2011, and the Analysis Memorandum to the File through Angelica L. Mendoza, Program Manager, from David Cordell for Patagonik Regarding “Analysis Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2008-2009 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Honey from Argentina for Patagonik S.A.” dated May 16, 2011, for further details.

We determine that the following dumping margins exist for the period December 1, 2008, through November 30, 2009:

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. For assessment purposes, we calculated importer (or customer)-specific assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. Where appropriate, we calculated an ad valorem rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total entered values associated with those transactions. For duty assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting ad valorem rate against the entered customs values for the subject merchandise. Where appropriate, we calculated a per-unit rate for each importer (or customer) by dividing the total dumping margins for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales quantity associated with those transactions. For duty-assessment rates calculated on this basis, we will direct CBP to assess the resulting per-unit rate against the entered quantity of the subject merchandise. Where an importer (or customer)-specific assessment rate is de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.50 percent), the Department will instruct CBP to assess that importer (or customer's) entries of subject merchandise without regard to antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

The Department clarified its automatic assessment regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the company(ies) included in these final results of review for which the reviewed company(ies) did not know their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate un-reviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) For the companies covered by this review, no cash deposit will be required; (2) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, but was covered in a previous review or the original less than fair value (LTFV) investigation, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous review conducted by the Department, the cash deposit rate will continue to be 30.24 percent, which is the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order; Honey From Argentina, 66 FR 63672 (December 10, 2001). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation, which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

Background

On July 11, 2005, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the antidumping duty orders on purified carboxymethylcellulose (purified CMC) from Mexico and Sweden. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, the Netherlands and Sweden, 70 FR 39734 (July 11, 2005). On June 2, 2010, the Department initiated its five-year sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Mexico and Sweden. See Initiation of Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review, 75 FR 30777 (June 2, 2010).

As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Mexico and Sweden would be likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden: Final Results of the Expedited First Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 75 FR 61700 (October 6, 2010), and Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Mexico: Final Results of the First Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 4865 (January 27, 2011). The Department notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail should the antidumping duty orders be revoked.

On May 12, 2011, the ITC published its determination that, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), revocation of the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Mexico and Sweden would not be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. See Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, Netherlands and Sweden, 76 FR 27663 (May 12, 2011), and USITC Publication 4225 (May 2011), titled Purified Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, Mexico, Netherlands and Sweden (Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1084-1087 (Review)).

The merchandise covered by the orders is all purified CMC, sometimes also referred to as purified sodium CMC, polyanionic cellulose, or cellulose gum, which is a white to off-white, non-toxic, odorless, biodegradable powder, comprising sodium CMC that has been refined and purified to a minimum assay of 90 percent. Purified CMC does not include unpurified or crude CMC, CMC Fluidized Polymer Suspensions, and CMC that is cross-linked through heat treatment. Purified CMC is CMC that has undergone one or more purification operations, which, at a minimum, reduce the remaining salt and other by-product portion of the product to less than ten percent. The merchandise subject to the orders is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at subheading 3912.31.00. This tariff classification is provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the orders is dispositive.

As a result of the determination by the ITC that revocation of the antidumping duty orders is not likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department, pursuant to section 751(d) of the Act, is revoking the antidumping duty orders on purified CMC from Mexico and Sweden. Pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(i)(2)(i), the effective date of revocation is July 11, 2010 ( i.e., the fifth anniversary of the publication in the Federal Register of the notice of these orders). The Department will notify U.S. Customs and Border Protection to terminate suspension of liquidation and collection of cash deposits on entries of the subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse on or after July 11, 2010. Entries of subject merchandise prior to the effective date of revocation will continue to be subject to suspension of liquidation and antidumping duty deposit requirements. The Department will complete any pending administrative reviews of these orders.

These five-year sunset reviews and notice are in accordance with section 751(d)(2) of the Act and published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act.

The purpose of this meeting is to review and make recommendations regarding general policy for the Institute, its organization, its budget, and its programs within the framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the President and the Congress. The first day's agenda will include an update on NIST; an update on the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program and proposed changes; a progress report on the National Science and Technology Council's Subcommittee on Standards; and presentations and discussions on the NIST roles in manufacturing and in the President's Wireless Innovation Initiative. A VCAT Subcommittee on Manufacturing and a VCAT Subcommittee on Public Safety Networks will meet concurrently in open session at the end of the day. The VCAT subcommittees will reconvene on the second day, followed by the full Committee's wrap-up discussion and plans for future VCAT subcommittee activities. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/agenda.htm.

Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Committee's affairs are invited to request a place on the agenda. On June 7, 2011, approximately one-half hour will be reserved in the afternoon for public comments, and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-serve basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received, but is likely to be about 3 minutes each. The exact time for public comments will be included in the final agenda that will be posted on the NIST Web site at http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/agenda.htm. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to attend in person are invited to submit written statements to the VCAT, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, MS 1060, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, via fax at (301) 216-0529 or electronically by e-mail to gail.ehrlich@nist.gov.

All visitors to the NIST site are required to pre-register to be admitted. Please submit your name, time of arrival, e-mail address and phone number to Stephanie Shaw by close of business Thursday, June 2, 2011. Non-U.S. citizens must also submit their country of citizenship, title, employer/sponsor, and address. Ms. Shaw's e-mail address is stephanie.shaw@nist.gov and her phone number is (301) 975-2667.

NIST plans to host several NSTIC workshops. The workshop schedules, registration information, and a list of frequently asked questions regarding these workshops will be posted on the Internet as information becomes available at: ( http://www.nist.gov/nstic/ ).

NIST plans to publish a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) that will seek public comment from all stakeholders, including commercial, academic and civil society sectors, on potential models, key assumptions, and recommendations for structuring a private sector-led steering group for the NSTIC Identity Ecosystem.

The purpose of the first NSTIC Workshop, on June 9 and 10, 2011, is to provide further clarity on the upcoming NOI and to offer opportunities to meet with stakeholders and to gather feedback. Discussions and breakout meetings relating to structure, stakeholder representation, steering group initiation, and priorities of the steering group will be held.

Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register at https://www.fbcinc.com/nist_NSTIC/atreg1.aspx by 5 p.m. E.d.t. on June 3, 2011, in order to attend.

The NSTIC is available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/NSTICstrategy_041511.pdf. The NIST Web site for NSTIC and its implementation is available at http://www.nist.gov/nstic.

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is published in the Federal Register to provide public notice and initiate a 30-day comment period.

Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “* * * an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.”

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by Level B harassment as defined below. Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny the authorization. If authorized, the IHA would be effective for one year from the date of issuance.

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as:

On April 28, 2011, NMFS received an application from the MBNMS requesting an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for the potential harassment of California sea lions ( Zalophus californianus ) and harbor seals ( Phoca vitulina ) incidental to coastal fireworks displays conducted at MBNMS under permits issued by MBNMS. This would effectively constitute a renewed authorization; NMFS first issued an IHA to MBNMS on July 4, 2005 (70 FR 39235; July 7, 2005), and subsequently issued five-year regulations governing the annual issuance of Letters of Authorization under section 101 (a)(5)(A) of the MMPA (71 FR 40928; July 19, 2006). Those regulations expire on July 3, 2011.

The MBNMS adjoins 276 mi (444 km), or approximately 25 percent, of the central California coastline, and encompasses ocean waters from mean high tide to an average of 25 mi (40 km) offshore between Rocky Point in Marin County and Cambria in San Luis Obispo County. Fireworks displays have been conducted over current MBNMS waters for many years as part of national and community celebrations ( e.g., Independence Day, municipal anniversaries), and to foster public use and enjoyment of the marine environment. In central California, marine venues are the preferred setting for fireworks in order to optimize public access and avoid the fire hazard associated with terrestrial display sites. Many fireworks displays occur at the height of the dry season in central California, when area vegetation is particularly prone to ignition from sparks or embers.

In 1992, the MBNMS was the first national marine sanctuary (NMS) to be designated along urban shorelines and therefore has addressed many regulatory issues previously not encountered by the NMS program. Authorization of professional firework displays has required a steady refinement of policies and procedures related to this activity. Fireworks displays, and the attendant increase in human activity, are known to result in the behavioral disturbance of pinnipeds, typically in the form of temporary abandonment of haul-outs. As a result, pinnipeds hauled out in the vicinity of permitted fireworks displays may exhibit behavioral responses that indicate incidental take by Level B harassment under the MMPA. Numbers of California sea lions and harbor seals, the species that may be subject to harassment, have been recorded extensively at four regions where fireworks displays are permitted in MBNMS. Based on these data and MBNMS's estimated maximum number of fireworks displays, MBNMS is requesting authorization to incidentally harass up to 6,170 California sea lions and 1,065 harbor seals during the one-year time span of the proposed IHA, from July 4, 2011 to July 3, 2012.

Since 1993, the MBNMS, a component of NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, has processed requests for the professional display of fireworks that affect the Sanctuary. The MBNMS has determined that debris fallout ( i.e., spent pyrotechnic materials) from fireworks events may constitute a discharge into the sanctuary and thus violate sanctuary regulations, unless a permit is issued by the superintendent. Therefore, sponsors of fireworks displays conducted in the MBNMS are required to obtain sanctuary authorization prior to conducting such displays (see 15 CFR 922.132).

Professional pyrotechnic devices used in fireworks displays can be grouped into three general categories: aerial shells (paper and cardboard spheres or cylinders ranging from 2-12 in (5-30 cm) in diameter and filled with incendiary materials), low-level comet and multi-shot devices similar to over-the-counter fireworks ( e.g., roman candles), and ground-mounted set piece displays that are mostly static in nature.

Aerial shells are launched from tubes ( i.e., mortars), using black powder charges, to altitudes of 200 to 1,000 ft (61 to 305 m) where they explode and ignite internal burst charges and incendiary chemicals. Most of the incendiary elements and shell casings burn up in the atmosphere; however, portions of the casings and some internal structural components and chemical residue may fall back to the ground or water, depending on prevailing winds. An aerial shell casing is constructed of paper/cardboard or plastic and may include some plastic or paper internal components used to compartmentalize chemicals within the shell. Within the shell casing is a burst charge (usually black powder) and a recipe of various chemical pellets ( i.e., stars) that emit colored light when ignited. Chemicals commonly used in the manufacturing of pyrotechnic devices include: potassium chlorate, potassium perchlorate, potassium nitrate, sodium benzoate, sodium oxalate, ammonium, perchlorate, strontium nitrate, strontium carbonate, sulfur, charcoal, copper oxide, polyvinyl chloride, iron, titanium, shellac, dextrine, phenolic resin, and aluminum. Manufacturers consider the amount and composition of chemicals within a given shell to be proprietary information and only release aggregate descriptions of internal shell components. The arrangement and packing of stars and burst charges within the shell determine the type of effect produced upon detonation.

Attached to the bottom of an aerial shell is a lift charge of black powder. The lift charge and shell are placed at the bottom of a mortar that has been buried in earth/sand or affixed to a wooden rack. After a fuse attached to the lift charge is ignited with an electric charge or heat source, the lift charge explodes and propels the shell through the mortar tube and into the air to a height determined by the amount of powder in the lift charge and the weight of the shell. As the shell travels skyward, a time-delay secondary fuse ignites the burst charge within the shell at peak altitude. The burst charge then detonates, igniting and scattering the stars, which may, in turn, produce small secondary explosions. Shells can be launched one at a time or in a barrage of simultaneous or quick succession launches. They are designed to detonate between 200 and 1,000 ft (61 to 305) above ground level (AGL).

In addition to color shells (also known as designer or starburst shells), a typical fireworks show will usually include a number of aerial `salute' shells. The primary purpose of salute shells is to signify the beginning and end of the show and produce a loud percussive audible effect. These shells are typically 2-3 in (5-7 cm) in diameter and packed with black powder to produce a punctuated explosive burst at high altitude. From a distance, these shells sound similar to cannon fire when detonated.

Low-level devices consist of stars packed linearly within a tube which, when ignited, exit the tube in succession producing a fountain effect of single or multi-colored light as the stars incinerate during the course of their flight. Typically, the stars burn rather than explode, thus producing a ball or trail of sparkling light to a prescribed altitude where they extinguish. Sometimes they may terminate with a small explosion similar to a firecracker. Other low-level devices emit a projected hail of colored sparks or perform erratic low-level flight while emitting a high-pitched whistle, or emit a pulsing light pattern or crackling or popping sound effects. In general, low-level launch devices and encasements remain on the ground or attached to a fixed structure and can be removed upon completion of the display. Common low-level devices are multi-shot devices, mines, comets, meteors, candles, strobe pots and gerbs. They are designed to produce effects between 0 and 200 ft (61 m) AGL.

Set piece or ground level fireworks are primarily static in nature and remain close to the ground. They are usually attached to a framework that may be crafted in the design of a logo or familiar shape, illuminated by pyrotechnic devices such as flares, sparklers and strobes. These fireworks typically employ bright flares and sparkling effects that may also emit limited sound effects such as cracking, popping, or whistling. Set pieces are usually used in concert with low-level effects or an aerial show and sometimes act as a centerpiece for the display. They may have some moving parts, but typically do not launch devices into the air. Set piece displays are designed to produce effects between 0 and 50 ft (15 m) AGL.

Each display is unique, according to the type and number of shells, the pace and length of the show, the acoustic characteristics of the display site, and the weather and time of day. The vast majority (97 percent) of fireworks displays authorized in the Sanctuary between 1993 and 2005 were aerial displays that usually included simultaneous low-level displays, and this trend has continued. An average large display may last twenty minutes and include approximately 700 aerial shells and 750 low-level effects. An average smaller display may last approximately seven minutes and include 300 aerial shells and 550 low-level effects. Recent displays have shown a declining trend in the total number of shells used in aerial displays, likely due to increasing shell costs and/or fixed entertainment budgets. Low-level displays sometimes compensate for the absence of an aerial show by squeezing a larger number of effects into a shorter timeframe. This results in a dramatic and rapid burst of light and sound effects at low level. A large low-level display may expend 4,900 effects within a seven-minute period, and a small display will use an average of 1,800 effects within the same timeframe. Some fireworks displays are synchronized with musical broadcasts over loudspeakers and may incorporate other non-pyrotechnic sound and visual effects.

The MBNMS has issued 87 permits for professional fireworks displays since 1993. However, the MBNMS staff projects that as many as 20 coastal displays per year may be conducted in, or adjacent to, MBNMS boundaries in the future. Thus, the number of displays will be limited to not more than 20 events per year in four specific areas along 276 mi (444 km) of coastline. Fireworks displays will not exceed 30 minutes (with the exception of up to two displays per year, each not to exceed 1 hour) in duration and will occur with an average frequency of less than or equal to once every two months within each of the four prescribed display areas. NMFS believes—and extensive monitoring data indicates—that incidental take resulting from fireworks displays will be, at most, the short-term flushing and evacuation of non-breeding haul-out sites by California sea lions and harbor seals.

A more detailed description of the fireworks displays permitted by MBNMS may be found in MBNMS' application, in MBNMS' Assessment of Pyrotechnic Displays and Impacts within the MBNMS 1993-2001 (2001), or in the report of Marine Mammal Acoustic and Behavioral Monitoring for the MBNMS Fireworks Display, 4 July 2007 (2007), which are available at: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm .

The Monterey Bay area is located in the Oregonian province subdivision of the Eastern Pacific Boreal Region. The six types of habitats found in the bay area are: (1) Submarine canyon habitat, (2) nearshore sublittoral habitat, (3) rocky intertidal habitat, (4) sandy beach intertidal habitat, (5) kelp forest habitat, and (6) estuarine/slough habitat. Monterey Bay supports a wide array of temperate cold-water species with occasional influxes of warm-water species, and this species diversity is directly related to the diversity of habitats.

Pyrotechnic displays within the sanctuary are conducted from a variety of coastal launch sites ( e.g., beaches, bluff tops, piers, offshore barges, golf courses). Permitted fireworks displays will be confined to only four general prescribed areas (with seven total sub-sites) within the sanctuary, while displays along the remaining 95 percent of sanctuary coastal waters will be prohibited. These sites were approved for fireworks events based on their proximity to urban areas and pre-existing high human use patterns, seasonal considerations such as the abundance and distribution of marine wildlife, and the acclimation of wildlife to human activities and elevated ambient noise levels in the area.

The four conditional display areas are located, from north to south, at Half Moon Bay, the Santa Cruz/Soquel area, the northeastern Monterey Peninsula, and Cambria (Santa Rosa Creek) (see Maps A-J in MBNMS' application). The number of displays will be limited to not more than 20 total events per year within these four specific areas combined, along the whole 276 mi (444 km) of coastline.

This site, at Pillar Point Harbor, is typically used annually for a 20-minute, medium-sized Independence Day fireworks display on July 4. The launch site is on a sandy beach inside and adjacent to the east outer breakwater, upon which the aerial shells are launched and aimed to the southwest.

The harbor immediately adjacent to the impact area is home to a major commercial fishing fleet that operates at all times. The harbor also supports a considerable volume of recreational boat traffic. Half Moon Bay Airport is located adjacent to the harbor and approach and departure routes pass directly over the acute impact area. The airport is commonly used by general aviation pilots for training, with an annual average attendance of approximately fifteen flights per day. On weekends, with good weather, the airport may accommodate as many as fifty flights per day. Beachgoers and water sports enthusiasts use the beaches to the south of the launch site. The impact area is also used by recreational fishermen, surfers, swimmers, boaters, and personal watercraft operators. To the north, around Pillar Point, is an area known as `Mavericks', considered a world-class surfing destination. Surfing contests are held periodically at Mavericks. The impact area is also subjected to daily traffic noise from California Highway 1, which runs along the coast and is the primary travel route through the area.

Concentrations of harbor seals are present to the north around Pillar Point and on the coast to the south of the launch site. It is possible that individual elephant seals ( Mirounga angustirostris ) may enter the area from breeding sites at Año Nuevo Island and the Farallon Islands, but breeding occurs in the winter and displays in Half Moon Bay are limited to summer. Gray whales ( Eschrichtius robustus ) typically migrate west of the reefs extending south from Pillar Point.

Three separate fireworks display sites (Santa Cruz, Capitola, and Aptos, from west to east) are located within the Santa Cruz/Soquel area. The Santa Cruz launch site is typically used annually for City of Santa Cruz anniversary fireworks displays in early October. The launch site is on a sandy beach, adjacent to the Santa Cruz boardwalk and the San Lorenzo River and along the west bank. The aerial shells are aimed to the south.

The harbor immediately adjacent to the Santa Cruz impact area is home to a commercial fishing fleet that operates at all times. The harbor also supports a large volume of recreational boater traffic. The launch site is in the center of the shoreline of a major urban coastal city. The beaches to the west of the launch site are adjacent to a large coastal amusement park complex and are used extensively by beachgoers and water sport enthusiasts from the local area as well as San Jose and San Francisco. The impact area is used by boaters, recreational fishermen, swimmers, surfers, and other recreational users. Immediately southwest of the launch site is a mooring field and the Santa Cruz Municipal Pier which is lined with retail shops, restaurants, and offices. To the west of the pier is a popular local surfing destination known as `Steamer Lane'. Surfing contests are routinely held at the site. During the period from sunset through the duration of the fireworks display, 40-70 vessels may anchor within the acute impact area to view the fireworks, with vessels moving throughout the waters south of the launch site to take up position. In addition, U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and harbor patrol vessels motor through the impact area to maintain a safety zone around the launch site.

The Capitola launch site has been used once since 1993 for a 50-year City of Capitola anniversary fireworks display, on May 23, 1999. This display was one of the largest volume fireworks displays conducted in the MBNMS, incorporating 1,700 aerial shells and 1,800 low-level effects and lasting 25 minutes. The launch site was on the Capitola Municipal Pier, adjacent to the City of Capitola. The aerial shells were aimed above the pier.

The Capitola impact area is immediately adjacent to a small urban community. The beaches to the east and west of the launch site are used daily by beachgoers and water sport enthusiasts from the regional area. The impact area is used by boaters, recreational fishermen, swimmers, surfers, and other recreational users. To the east of the pier is a mooring field and popular public beach.

The Aptos site is typically used annually for a large fundraiser, conducted by the Monte Foundation, for Aptos area schools in October. The launch site is on the Aptos Pier and part of a grounded historical cement vessel at Seacliff State Beach. The aerial shells are aimed above and to the south of the pier. The large aerial show typically lasts for approximately 20 minutes.

The Aptos impact area is immediately adjacent to a recreational beach. The beaches to the east and west of the launch site are used daily by beachgoers and water sport enthusiasts from the regional area. The impact area is used by boaters, recreational fishermen, swimmers, surfers, and other recreational users, but typically at moderate to light levels of activity. To the east and west of the pier are public use beach areas and private homes at the top of steep coastal bluffs. During the period from sunset through the duration of the fireworks display, 30-40 vessels anchor within the acute impact area to view the fireworks, typically traveling throughout the waters seaward of the cement vessel to take up position. In addition, USCG and State Park Lifeguard vessels motor through the impact area to maintain a safety zone around the launch site.

California sea lions routinely use the Santa Cruz Municipal Pier as a haul-out and resting site. Gray whales typically migrate along a southerly course, west of Point Santa Cruz and away from the pier. At the seaward end of the Aptos Pier is a 400 ft (122 m) grounded cement vessel, which was purposefully set in position as an extension of the pier, but has since been restricted to public access. The exposed interior decks of the barge have created convenient haul-out surfaces for harbor seals. In a 2000 survey, the MBNMS recorded as many as 45 harbor seals hauled out on the barge in the month of October.

Two separate fireworks display sites (City of Monterey and Pacific Grove) are located within the Monterey Peninsula area. For Independence Day, the City of Monterey typically launches approximately 750 shells and an equal number of low-level effects from a barge anchored approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) east of Municipal Wharf II and 1,000 feet (305 meter) north of Del Monte Beach. The aerial shells are aimed above and to the northeast. The City's display typically lasts approximately 20 minutes and is accompanied by music broadcasted from speakers on Wharf II. A Monterey New Year's festival has at times used the City's launch barge for an annual fireworks display. This medium-size aerial display typically lasts approximately 8 minutes, when it occurs. In addition, several private displays have been authorized from a launch site on Del Monte Beach, including an aerial display and low-level displays, lasting approximately 7 minutes.

The Monterey fireworks impact area lies directly under the approach/departure flight path for Monterey Peninsula Airport and is commonly exposed to noise and exhaust from general aviation, commercial, and military aircraft at approximately 500 ft (152 m) altitude. The airport supports approximately 280 landings/takeoffs per day in addition to touch-and-goes (landing and takeoff training). Commercial and recreational vessels operate at all hours from the adjacent harbor. A thirty-station mooring field lies within the acute impact area between the launch barge and Municipal Wharf II. The moorings are usually completely occupied during the annual fireworks event. Auto traffic and emergency vehicles are audible from Lighthouse and Del Monte Avenues, main transportation arteries along the adjacent shoreline. The impact area is heavily utilized by recreational users and harbor operations. During the period from sunset through the duration of the fireworks display, 20-30 vessels anchor within the acute impact area to view the fireworks, with vessels transiting through the waters south of the launch site to take up position. In addition, USCG and harbor patrol vessels motor through the impact area to maintain a safety zone around the launch site.

The Pacific Grove site is typically used for an annual `Feast of Lanterns' fireworks display in late July. The Feast of Lanterns is a community event that has been celebrated in the City of Pacific Grove for over 100 years. The fireworks launch site is at the top of a rocky coastal bluff adjacent to an urban recreation trail and public road. The aerial shells are aimed to the northeast. The small aerial display typically lasts approximately twenty minutes and is accompanied by music broadcasted from speakers at Lover's Cove. The fireworks are part of a traditional outdoor play that concludes the festival.

The Pacific Grove launch site is in the center of an urban shoreline, adjacent to a primary public beach in Pacific Grove. The shoreline to the east and west of the launch site is lined with residences and a public road and pedestrian trail. The impact area is used heavily by boaters and other recreational users. The center of the impact area is in a cove with 30-40 ft (9-12 m) coastal bluffs. Immediately north of the launch site is a popular day use beach area. At peak usage, the beach may support up to 500 visitors at any given time. Surfing activity is common immediately north of the site. During the period from sunset through the duration of the fireworks display, 10-20 vessels anchor within the acute impact area to view the fireworks. A USCG vessel motors through the impact area to maintain a safety zone seaward of the launch site.

The largest concentration of marine mammals near the Monterey impact area are California sea lions resting at the Monterey breakwater approximately 700 yd (640 m) northwest of the center of the impact area. Harbor seals routinely use offshore rocks and wash rocks for haul-outs and also forage in the area.

The site is typically used annually for a 20-minute, small Independence Day fireworks display on July 4. The launch site is on a sandy beach at Shamel County Park, and the aerial shells are aimed to the west. Immediately north of the launch site is the mouth of Santa Rosa Creek and Lagoon. The impact area is immediately adjacent to a county park and recreational beach. The impact area is used by boaters, recreational fishermen, swimmers, surfers, and beachgoers. The shoreline south of the launch site is lined with hotels, abuts a residential neighborhood, and is part of San Simeon State Beach.

Low concentrations of harbor seals are typically present in the impact area. California sea lions are present in the impact area in moderate numbers. It is possible that individual elephant seals may enter the area from breeding sites to the north at Point Piedras Blancas, but breeding occurs in the winter and displays at Cambria are limited to the summer. Gray whales migrate along the coast in this area and may pass through the acute impact area, but displays typically occur outside of peak gray whale migration period.

Twenty-six species of marine mammals are known from the Monterey Bay area. Only six of these species, however, are likely to be present in the acute impact area (the area where sound, light, and debris effects may have direct impacts on marine organisms and habitats) during a fireworks display. These species include the California sea lion, harbor seal, southern sea otter ( Enhydra lutris ), bottlenose dolphin ( Tursiops truncatus ), harbor porpoise ( Phocoena phocoena ), and gray whale. The northern elephant seal is rarely seen in the area.

Though the three aforementioned cetaceans are known to frequent nearshore areas within the sanctuary, they have never been reported in the vicinity of a fireworks display, nor have there been any reports to the MBNMS of stranding events or of injured/dead animals discovered after any display. Because sound attenuates rapidly across the air-water interface, these animals would likely not encounter the effects of fireworks except when surfacing for air. NMFS does not anticipate any take of cetaceans and they are not addressed further in this document.

Past sanctuary observations have not detected any disturbance to sea otters as a result of the fireworks displays; however, past observations have not included specific surveys for this species. Sea otters do frequent all general display areas. Sea otters and other species may temporarily depart the area prior to the beginning of the fireworks display due to increased human activities. Some sea otters in Monterey harbor have become well acclimated to very intense human activity, often continuing to feed undisturbed as boats pass simultaneously on either side and within 20 ft (6 m) of the otters. It is therefore possible that select individual otters may have a higher tolerance level than others to fireworks displays. Otters in residence within the Monterey harbor display a greater tolerance for intensive human activity than their counterparts in more remote locations. However, otters are not under NMFS' jurisdiction. The MBNMS consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) regarding effects on southern sea otters. The USFWS concluded in a biological opinion that takes of sea otters are not likely.

The northern elephant seal is seen so infrequently in the areas with fireworks displays that they are not likely to be impacted by fireworks displays. Therefore, the only species likely to be harassed by the fireworks displays are the California sea lion and the harbor seal. Information relevant to the distribution, abundance and behavior of the species that are most likely to be impacted by fireworks displays within the MBNMS is provided below.

The population of California sea lions ranges from southern Mexico to southwestern Canada (Carretta et al. 2007). In the United States, pupping typically occurs in late May to June. Most individuals of this species breed during July on the Channel Islands off southern California (100 mi (161 km) south of the MBNMS) and off Baja and mainland Mexico (Odell 1981), although a few pups have been born on Año Nuevo Island (Keith et al. 1984). Following the breeding season on the Channel Islands, most adult and sub-adult males migrate northward to central and northern California and to the Pacific Northwest, while most females and young animals either remain on or near the breeding grounds throughout the year or move southward or northward, as far as Monterey Bay.

Since nearing extinction in the early 1900s, the California sea lion population has increased and is now robust and growing at a current rate of 5.6 to 6.5 percent per year (based on pup counts) with an estimated minimum population of 141,842 animals. The total population level is estimated at 238,000 animals. The population is not listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA, nor is this a depleted or strategic stock under the MMPA.

In any season, California sea lions are the most abundant pinniped in the area (Bonnell et al. 1983), primarily using the central California area to feed during the non-breeding season. After breeding farther south along the coast and migrating northward, populations peak in the Monterey Bay area in fall and winter and are at their lowest numbers in spring and early summer. A minimum of 12,000 California sea lions are probably present at any given time in the MBNMS region. Año Nuevo Island is the largest single haul-out site in the sanctuary, hosting as many as 9,000 California sea lions at times (Weise 2000; Lowry 2001).

Harbor seals are distributed throughout the west coast of the United States, inhabiting near-shore coastal and estuarine areas from Baja California, Mexico, to the Pribilof Islands in Alaska. They generally do not migrate, but have been known to travel extensive distances to find food or suitable breeding areas (Carretta et al. 2006). In California, approximately 400-600 harbor seal haul-out sites are widely distributed along the mainland and on offshore islands (Carretta et al. 2006).

The harbor seal population in California is healthy and growing at a current rate of 3.5 percent per year with an estimated minimum population of 31,600 animals (Carretta et al. 2006). The total California population is estimated at 34,233 animals. The population is not listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA, nor is this a depleted or a strategic stock under the MMPA.

Harbor seals are residents in the MBNMS throughout the year, occurring mainly near the coast. They haul out at dozens of sites along the coast from Point Sur to Año Nuevo. Within MBNMS, tagged harbor seals have been documented to move substantial distances (10-20 km (3.9-7.8 mi)) to foraging areas each night (Oxman 1995; Trumble 1995). The species does breed in the sanctuary; pupping within the sanctuary occurs primarily during March and April followed by a molt during May and June. Peak abundance on land within the sanctuary is reached in late spring and early summer when they haul out to breed, give birth to pups, and molt (MBNMS FEIS 1992).

Temporary (auditory) threshold shift (TTS) is the mildest form of hearing impairment that can occur during exposure to a strong sound (Kryter 1985). When an animal experiences TTS, its hearing threshold rises and a sound must be stronger in order to be heard. TTS can last from minutes or hours to (in cases of strong TTS) days. Richardson et al. (1995) noted that the magnitude of TTS depends on the level and duration of noise exposure, among other considerations. For sound exposures at or somewhat above the TTS threshold, hearing sensitivity recovers rapidly after exposure to the noise ends.

Permanent (auditory) threshold shift (PTS) occurs when there is physical damage to the sound receptors in the ear. In some cases there can be total or partial deafness, while in other cases the animal has an impaired ability to hear sounds in specific frequency ranges. Although there is no specific evidence that exposure to fireworks can cause PTS in any marine mammals, physical damage to a mammal's ears can potentially occur if it is exposed to sound impulses that have very high peak pressures, especially if they have very short rise times (time required for sound pulse to reach peak pressure from the baseline pressure). Such damage can result in a permanent decrease in functional sensitivity of the hearing system at some or all frequencies.

Temporary or permanent hearing impairment is a possibility when marine mammals are exposed to very strong sounds, but there has been no specific documentation of this for marine mammals exposed to fireworks. Some factors that contribute to onset of PTS are as follows: (1) Exposure to single very intense noises, (2) repetitive exposure to intense sounds that individually cause TTS but not PTS, and (3) recurrent ear infections or (in captive animals) exposure to certain drugs.

Based on current information, NMFS takes a precautionary approach in using an exposure threshold of 190 dB re 1 µPa (rms) for onset of Level A harassment (injury) for pinnipeds under water (NMFS 2000). This level would approximately equal an A-weighted airborne sound intensity level of 128 dB re 20 µPa. Precise exposure thresholds for airborne sounds have not been determined; however, monitoring of marine mammal reactions to rocket launches at Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB) has indicated that behavioral harassment may occur for harbor seals at received levels of 90 dB re 20 µPa, while similar reactions may occur at levels of 100 dB re 20 µPa for other pinniped species. In those studies, not all harbor seals left a haul-out during a launch unless the Sound Exposure Level (SEL) was 100 dB or above (which, in the case of the VAFB launch locations and durations, is equivalent to an SPL of 89 to 95 dB), and only short-term effects were detected.

In order to determine if harbor seals experience any change in their hearing sensitivity as a result of launch noise, researchers at VAFB conducted Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) testing on ten harbor seals prior to and after the launches of three Titan IV rockets (one of the loudest launch vehicles used at VAFB). Detailed analysis of the changes in waveform latency and waveform replication of the ABR measurements showed that there were no detectable changes in the seals' hearing sensitivity as a result of the launch noise, an A-weighted SPL of approximately 111 dB and an A-weighted SEL from 96.6 to 103.6 dB (SRS Technologies 2001).

In 2001, the MBNMS and USFWS conducted in-depth quantitative monitoring of the July 4 City of Monterey fireworks display. Monitors recorded species abundance before, during, and after the event and measured the decibel level of exploding fireworks. A hand-held decibel meter was located aboard a vessel adjacent to the Monterey Breakwater, approximately one-half mile from the fireworks launch site. The highest sound pressure level (SPL) reading observed on the decibel meter during the fireworks display was 82 dB. The typical decibel levels for the display ranged from 70 to 78 dB, and no salute effects were used in the display. An ambient noise level of 58 dB was recorded at the survey site 30 minutes following the conclusion of the fireworks. MBNMS conducted additional in-depth acoustic and behavioral monitoring at the breakwater, where sea lions typically haul out, during the 2007 City of Monterey July 4 celebration. This effort is described later in this document (see “SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS MONITORING”).

Given the frequency, duration, and intensity of sounds (maximum measured 82 dB for larger aerial shells) that marine mammals may be exposed to, it is unlikely that they would sustain temporary, much less permanent, hearing impairment during fireworks displays.

In some display locations, marine mammals may avoid or temporarily depart the impact area during the hours immediately prior to the beginning of the fireworks display due to increased human recreational activities associated with the overall celebration event ( e.g., noise, boating, kayaking, fishing, diving, swimming, surfing, picnicking, beach combing, tidepooling), and as a fireworks presentation progresses, most marine mammals generally evacuate the impact area. In particular, a flotilla of recreational and commercial boats usually gathers in a semi-circle within the impact area to view the fireworks display from the water. From sunset until the start of the display, security vessels of the USCG and/or other government agencies often patrol throughout the waters of the impact area to keep vessels a safe distance from the launch site.

Sea lions have been observed evacuating haul-out areas upon initial detonation of fireworks, and then returning to the haul-out sites within 4 to 15 hours following the end of the fireworks display. Harbor seals have been seen to remain in the water after initial fireworks detonation around the haul-out site. Sea lions in general are more tolerant of noise and visual disturbances than harbor seals. Adult sea lions have likely habituated to many sources of disturbance and are therefore much more tolerant of nearby human activities. For both pinniped species, pups and juveniles are more likely to be harassed when exposed to disturbance than older animals.

NMFS and MBNMS found no peer-reviewed literature that specifically investigates the response of California sea lions and harbor seals to commercial fireworks displays. However, as described previously, extensive studies have been conducted at VAFB to determine responses by pinnipeds to the effects of periodic rocket launches, the light and sound effects of which would be roughly similar to the effects of pyrotechnic displays, but of greater intensity. This scientific research program was conducted to determine the long-term cumulative impacts of space vehicle launches on the haul-out behavior, population dynamics and hearing acuity of harbor seals at VAFB. In addition, on some occasions, the effects of sonic booms on pinniped populations in the northern Channel Islands have been studied.

The response of harbor seals to rocket launch noise at VAFB depended on the intensity of the noise (size of the vehicle and its proximity) and the age of the seal (SRS Technologies 2001). The highest noise levels are typically from launch vehicles with launch pads closest to the haul-out sites. The percentage of seals leaving the haul-out increases with noise levels up to approximately 100 dB A-weighted SEL, after which almost all seals leave, although recent data has shown that an increasing percentage of seals have remained on shore, and those that remain are adults. Given the high degree of site fidelity among harbor seals, it is likely that those seals that remained on the haul-out site during rocket launches had previously been exposed to launches; that is, it is possible that adult seals have become acclimated to the launch noise and react differently than the younger inexperienced seals. Of the 20 seals tagged at VAFB, eight (forty percent) were exposed to at least one launch disturbance but continued to return to the same haul-out site. Three of those seals were exposed to two or more launch disturbances. Most of the seals exposed to launch noise appeared to remain in the water adjacent to the haul-out site and then returned to shore within 2 to 22 minutes after the launch disturbance. Of the two remaining seals that left the haul-out after the launch disturbance, both had been on shore for at least 6 hours and returned to the haul-out site on the following day (SRS Technologies 2001).

The launches at VAFB do not appear to have had long-term effects on the harbor seal population in this area. The total population of harbor seals at VAFB is estimated to be 1,040 animals and has been increasing at an annual rate of 12.6 percent. Since 1997, there have been five to seven space vehicle launches per year and there appears to be only short-term disturbance effects to harbor seals as a result of launch noise (SRS Technologies 2001). Harbor seals will temporarily leave their haul-out when exposed to launch noise; however, they generally return to the haul-out within one hour.

On San Miguel Island, when California sea lions and elephant seals were exposed to sonic booms from vehicles launched at VAFB, sea lion pups were observed to enter the water, but usually remained playing in the water for a considerable period of time. Some adults approached the water, while elephant seals showed little to no reaction. This short-term disturbance to sea lion pups does not appear to carry the possibility of any long-term effects to the population. The conclusions of the 5-year VAFB study are almost identical to the MBNMS observations of pinniped response to commercial fireworks displays. Observed impacts have been limited to short-term disturbance only.

The primary causes of disturbance are sound effects and light flashes from exploding fireworks. Pyrotechnic devices that operate at higher altitudes ( e.g., aerial shells) are more likely to have a larger acute impact area, while ground and low-level devices have more confined effects. Acute impact area is defined as the area where sound, light, and debris effects may have direct impacts on marine organisms and habitats. Direct impacts include, but are not limited to, immediate physical and physiological impacts such as abrupt changes in behavior, flight response, diving, evading, flushing, cessation of feeding, and physical impairment or mortality.

The largest commercial aerial shells used within the Sanctuary are 10-12 in (25-30 cm) in diameter and reach a maximum altitude of 1,000 ft (305 m) AGL. The bursting radius of the largest shells is approximately 850 ft (259 m). The acute impact area can extend from 1-2 mi (1.6-3.2 km) from the center of the detonation point, depending on the size of the shell, height and type of the explosions, wind direction, atmospheric conditions, and local topography.

Aerial shells produce flashes of light that can be brilliant (exceeding 30,000 candela) and can occur in rapid succession. Loud explosive and crackling sound effects stem primarily from salutes and bursting charges at altitude. Humans and wildlife on the ground and on the surface of the water may feel the sound waves and the accompanying rapid shift of ambient atmospheric pressure. Sound propagates further from high altitude shells than low altitude shells, thus ensonifying more surface area on the ground and water, as they are not blocked significantly by buildings and landforms. The sound from the lifting charge detonation is vectored upward through the mortar tube opening and reports as a dull thump to bystanders on the ground, far less conspicuous than the high-level aerial bursts. The intensity of an aerial show can be amplified by increasing the number of shells used, the pace of the barrage, and the length of the display.

Low-level devices reach a maximum altitude of 200 ft (61 m) AGL. The acute impact area can extend to 1 mi (1.6 km) from the center of the ignition point depending on the size and flight patterns of projectiles, maximum altitude of projectiles, the type of special effects, wind direction, atmospheric conditions, and local structures and topography. Low-level devices also produce brilliant flashes and fountains of light and sparks accompanied by small explosions, popping, and crackling sounds. Since they are lower in altitude than aerial shells, sound and light effects impact a smaller area. Low-level devices do not typically employ large black powder charges as do aerial shells, but are often used in large numbers in concert with one another and in rapid succession, producing intense localized effects.

Set pieces are stationary, do not launch any encased effects into the air, and produce effects between 0 and 50 ft (15 m) AGL. Small pellets of a pyrotechnic composition, such as those from sparklers or roman candles, may be expelled a short distance into the air. Loud, but not explosive, noises ( e.g. , crackling, popping, whistling) may emanate from a set piece, though they are usually used in concert with low-level effects and aerial displays. Depending on the size and height of the structure, the number and type of effects, wind direction, and local topography, the acute impact area can extend up to 0.5 mile (0.8 km) from the center of the ignition point, though fallout is generally confined within a 300 ft (91 m) radius. Residue may include smoke, airborne particulates, fine solids, and slag.

The primary impact noted in past observations is disturbance of marine mammals from the light and sound effects of the exploding aerial shells. The loud sound bursts and pressure waves created by the exploding shells appear to cause more wildlife disturbance than the illumination effects. In particular, the percussive aerial salute shells have been observed to elicit a strong flight response in California sea lions in the vicinity of the impact area (within 0.45 mi (0.72 km) of the launch site).

Increased boat traffic is often an indirect effect of fireworks displays as boaters move in to observe the event. The more boats there are in the area, the larger the chance that a boat could potentially collide with a marine mammal or other marine wildlife. The number of boats present at any one event is largely dependent upon weather, sea state, distance of the display from safe harbors, and season. At the MBNMS, some events have virtually no boat traffic, while there may more typically be anywhere from 20 to 70 boats present, ranging in size from 10 to 65 ft (3 to 20 m) in length.

Prior to and during fireworks displays at the MBNMS, boats typically enter the observation area at slow speed (less than 8 kts (15 km/hr)) due to the presence of other vessels and limited visibility ( i.e., most fireworks displays occur at night). The USCG and/or other Federal agency vessels are on site to enforce safe boating laws and keep vessels out of the debris fallout area during the display. Most boaters anchor prior to the display, while others drift with engines in neutral for convenient repositioning.

MBNMS staff have observed boat traffic during several fireworks displays and generally found that boaters are using good boating and safety practices. They have also never witnessed the harassment, injury, or death of marine mammals or other wildlife as a result of vessels making way at these events. In general, as human activity increases and concentrates in the viewing areas leading up to the display, wildlife avoid or gradually evacuate the area. As noted before, the fireworks venues are marine areas with some of the highest ambient levels of human activity in the MBNMS. Many resident animals are accustomed to stimuli ( e.g., emergency sirens, vehicle and crowd noise, marine and beach recreation). Due to the gradual nature of the increase in boat traffic, its infrequent occurrence and short duration, and the slow speed of the boats, NMFS does not believe the increased boat traffic is likely to significantly impact marine mammals.

Debris —The fallout area for the aerial debris is determined by local wind conditions. In coastal regions with prevailing winds, the fallout area can often be projected in advance. This information is calculated by pyrotechnicians and fire department personnel in selection of the launch site to abate fire and public safety hazards. Mortar tubes are often angled to direct shells over a prescribed fallout area, away from spectators and property. Generally, the bulk of the debris will fall to the surface within a 0.5-mi (0.8-km) radius of the launch site. In addition, the tops of the mortars and other devices are usually covered with aluminum foil to prevent premature ignition from sparks during the display and to protect them from moisture. The shells and stars easily punch through the aluminum foil when ignited, scattering pieces of aluminum in the vicinity of the launch site. Through various means, the aluminum debris and garbage generated during preparation of the display may be swept into ocean waters.

Some low-level devices may project small casings into the air (such as small cardboard tubes used to house flaming whistle and firecracker type devices). These casings will generally fall to earth within a 200-yd (183-m) radius of the launch site, because they do not attain altitudes sufficient for significant lateral transport by winds. The acute impact area for set piece devices is typically within 300 ft (91 m), but can extend to a 0.5 mi (0.8 km) radius from the center of the ignition point depending on the size and height of the fixed structure, the number and type of special effects, wind direction, atmospheric conditions, and local structures and topography. Like aerial shells, low-level pyrotechnics and mortars are often covered with aluminum foil to protect them from weather and errant sparks, pieces of which are shredded during the course of the show and initially deposited near the launch site.

The explosion in a firework separates the cardboard and paper casing and compartments, scattering some of the shell's structural pieces clear of the blast while burning others. Some pieces are immediately incinerated, while others burn totally or partially on their way to the ground. Many shell casings part into two halves or into quarters when the burst charge detonates and are projected clear of the explosion. However, during the course of a display, some devices will fail to detonate after launch (duds) and fall back to earth/sea as an intact sphere or cylinder. Aside from post display surveys and recovery, there is no way to account for these misfires. The freefalling projectile could pose a physical risk to any wildlife within the fallout area, but the general avoidance of the area by wildlife during the display and the low odds for such a strike likely present a negligible potential for harm. Whether such duds pose a threat to wildlife once adrift is unknown. After soaking in the sea for a period of time, the likelihood of detonation rapidly declines, and it is unlikely that any animal would attempt to consume such a device. At times, some shells explode in the mortar tube (referred to as a flower pot) or far below their designed detonation altitude. It is highly unlikely that mobile organisms would remain close enough to the launch site during a fireworks display to be within the effective danger zone for such an explosion.

The MBNMS has conducted surveys of solid debris on surface waters, beaches, and subtidal habitat and has discovered no visual evidence of acute or chronic impacts to the environment or wildlife. Aerial displays generally produce a larger volume of solid debris than low-level displays. The MBNMS fireworks permits require the permittee to clean area beaches of fireworks debris for up to 2 days following the display. In some cases, debris has been found in considerable quantity on beaches the morning following the display.

The MBNMS staff have recovered many substantial uncharred casing remnants on ocean waters immediately after marine displays. Other items found in the acute impact area are cardboard cylinders, disks, and shell case fragments; paper strips and wadding; plastic wadding, disks, and tubes; aluminum foil; cotton string; and even whole unexploded shells (duds or misfires). In other cases, virtually no fireworks debris was detected. This variance is likely due to several factors, such as type of display, tide state, sea state, and currents. In either case, due to the requirement for the permittee to clean up following the displays, NMFS does not believe the small amount of remaining debris is likely to significantly impact the environment, including marine mammals or their habitat.

Chemical Residue —Possible indirect impacts to marine mammals and other marine organisms include those resulting from chemical residue or physical debris emitted into the water. When an aerial shell detonates, its chemical components burn at high temperatures and are efficiently incinerated. Pyrotechnic vendors have stated that the chemical components are incinerated upon successful detonation of the shell. However, by design, the chemical components within a shell are scattered by the burst charge, separating them from the casing and internal shell compartments.

Chemical residue is produced in the form of smoke, airborne particulates, fine solids, and slag (spent chemical waste material that drips from the deployment canister/launcher and cools to a solid form). The fallout area for chemical residue is unknown, but is probably similar to that for solid debris. Similar to aerial shells, the chemical components of low-level devices produce chemical residue that can migrate to ocean waters as a result of fallout. The point of entry would likely be within a small radius (about 300 ft (91 m)) of the launch site.

The MBNMS has found only one scientific study directed specifically at the potential impacts of chemical residue from fireworks upon the environment. That study (DeBusk et al . 1992) indicates that chemical residues (fireworks decomposition products) do result from fireworks displays and can be measured under certain circumstances. The report, prepared for the Walt Disney Corporation, presented the results of a 10-year study of the impacts of fireworks decomposition products upon an aquatic environment. Researchers studied a small lake in Florida subjected to 2,000 fireworks displays over a 10-year period to measure key chemical levels in the lake. The report concluded that detectable amounts of barium, strontium, and antimony had increased in the lake but not to levels considered harmful to aquatic biota. The report further suggested that “environmental impacts from fireworks decomposition products typically will be negligible in locations that conduct fireworks displays infrequently” and that “the infrequence of fireworks displays at most locations, coupled with a wide dispersion of constituents, make detection of fireworks decomposition products difficult.” A report author hypothesized, via personal communication with MBNMS staff, that had the same study been conducted in California, the elevated metal concentrations in the lake would not have been detectable against natural background concentrations of those same metals, due to naturally higher metal concentrations in the western United States. Based on the findings of this report and the lack of any evidence that fireworks displays within the Sanctuary have degraded water quality, it is likely that chemical residue from fireworks does not pose a significant risk to the marine environment. No negative impacts to water quality have been detected.

Past monitoring by the MBNMS has identified at most only a short-term behavioral disturbance of animals by fireworks displays, with the primary causes of disturbance being sound effects and light flashes from exploding fireworks. Additionally, the VAFB study of the effects of rocket-launch noise, which is more intense than fireworks noise, on California sea lions and harbor seals indicated only short-term behavioral impacts. With the mitigation measures proposed below, any takes will be limited to the temporary incidental harassment of California sea lions and harbor seals due to evacuation of usual and accustomed haul-out sites for as little as fifteen minutes and as much as 15 hours following any fireworks event. Most animals depart affected haul-out areas at the beginning of the display and return to previous levels of abundance within 4 to 15 hours following the event. This information is based on observations made by Sanctuary staff over an 8-year period (1993-2001), quantitative surveys conducted in 2001 and 2007, and pre- and post-event monitoring conducted under MMPA authorizations from 2005-2010. Empirical observations have focused on impacts to water quality and selected marine mammals in the vicinity of the displays.

Sea lions in general are more tolerant to noise and visual disturbances than harbor seals. In addition, pups and juveniles are more likely to be harassed when exposed to disturbance than the older animals. Adult sea lions have likely habituated to many sources of disturbance and are therefore much more tolerant of human activities nearby. Of all the display sites in the sanctuary, California sea lions are only present in significant concentrations at Monterey. The following is an excerpt from a 1998 MBNMS staff report on the reaction of sea lions to a large aerial fireworks display in Monterey:

In the 2001 Monterey survey (discussed previously in this document), most animals were observed to evacuate haul-out areas upon the initial report from detonated fireworks. Surveys continued for 4.5 hours after the initial disturbance and numbers of returning California sea lions remained at less than one percent of pre-fireworks numbers. When surveys resumed the next morning (thirteen hours after the initial disturbance), sea lion numbers on the breakwater equaled or exceeded pre-fireworks levels. Nearly two decades of observing sea lions at the City of Monterey's Fourth of July celebration gives the following general observations: (1) Sea lions begin leaving the breakwater as soon as the fireworks begin; (2) clear completely off after an aerial salute or quick succession of loud effects; (3) usually begin returning within a few hours of the end of the display; and (4) are present on the breakwater at pre-firework numbers by the following morning.

Up to fifteen harbor seals may typically be present on rocks in the outer Monterey harbor in early July. The seal haul-out area is approximately 2,100 ft (640 m) from the impact zone for the aerial pyrotechnic display. Only two harbor seals were observed on and near the rocks adjacent to Fisherman's Wharf prior to the 2001 display. Neither were observed to haul out after the initial fireworks detonation, but remained in the water around the haul-out. The haul-out site was only surveyed until the conclusion of the fireworks display; therefore, no animal return data is available from the 2001 study. However, the behavior of the seals after the initial disturbance and during the fireworks display is similar to the response behavior of seals during the VAFB rocket launches, where they loitered in the water adjacent to their haul-out site during the launch and returned to shore within 2 to 22 minutes after the launch disturbance.

A private environmental consultant monitored the Aptos fireworks display each October from 2001 through 2005 (per California Coastal Commission permit conditions) and concluded that harbor seal activity returned to normal at the site by the day following the display. Surveys have detected no evidence of injury or mortality in harbor seals as a result of the annual thirty-minute fireworks display at the site.

Since harbor seals have a smaller profile than sea lions and are less vocal, their movements and behavior are often more difficult to observe at night. In general, harbor seals are more timid and easily disturbed than California sea lions. Thus, based on past observations of sea lion disturbance thresholds and behavior, it is very likely that harbor seals evacuate exposed haul-outs in the acute impact area during fireworks displays, though they may loiter in adjacent surface waters until the fireworks have concluded.

In 2007, MBNMS conducted acoustic monitoring in conjunction with in-depth behavioral monitoring for the City of Monterey Independence Day fireworks display. MBNMS was required to: (1) Conduct counts of marine mammals present within the fireworks impact area immediately before and one day after the event; (2) conduct behavioral observations of marine mammals present during the display; and (3) conduct NMFS- approved acoustic monitoring of sound levels for the duration of the event. The full report (Marine Mammal Acoustic and Behavioral Monitoring for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Fireworks Display 4 July 2007) is available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.

Two separate systems for monitoring sound levels—with one customized for recording low frequency sounds associated with impulsive noise, such as explosions—were placed at the east end of the USCG pier, approximately 800 m from the fireworks launch site. Acoustic monitoring began approximately 3 hours prior to the beginning of the fireworks display. During those three hours, the average one-hour sound level (L eq 1 hour) was approximately 59 dB, and included sea lion vocalizations, private fireworks in the local area, and recreational boat traffic.

The fireworks display began with two sets of fireworks detonations and ended with a grand finale of multiple explosions after 20 minutes. The average sound level measured during the hour containing the fireworks display was 72.9 dB, approximately 14 dB greater than ambient levels recorded before the display. The loudest sound recorded during the event was associated with a detonation of a 10-in shell, and was measured at 133.9 dB re: 20 μPa (peak). The detonation of the 10-in shell had an unweighted SEL of 105 dB re: 20 μPa 2 -s. The second loudest sound recorded was associated with detonation of an 8-in shell, measured at 127 dB re: 20 µPa (peak) with an unweighted SEL of 90.1 dB re: 20 μPa 2 -s. Overall, sound generated during the display was low- to mid-frequency and ranged from 97 to 107 dB re: 20 μPa, while the majority of the fireworks detonations ranged from 112 to 124 dB re: 20 μPa.

A marine mammal observer conducted observations aboard a MBNMS vessel in the vicinity of the southern side of the jetty and the western end of Monterey Harbor. The observer used binoculars during the daytime and night vision goggles after dark, and counted species present, including location, age, class, and gender of the species. Visual monitoring was conducted from approximately 5 hours prior to the display until approximately two hours after the conclusion of the fireworks display. The weather and harbor state provided optimal conditions for observations.

Pre-event behavioral monitoring showed a total of 258 sea lions located on the north and south sides of the jetty and underneath the USCG pier from. Most were yearlings or juveniles, though two subadult males were also observed and appeared to be practicing holding territory in the water. With the exception of the subadult males, the observer was unable to determine gender. The number of sea lions hauled out was relatively constant until approximately one-half hour prior to the beginning of the display, when several recreational vessels passed nearby and shot off their own fireworks and firecrackers, causing approximately one-third of the sea lions to enter the water. During pre-event monitoring, eight harbor seals were hauled out on exposed rocks just offshore of the western end of the harbor. Because it was high tide (0.8 m), there were few places for harbor seals to haul out. Approximately one-half hour prior to the display, the observer recorded four harbor seals hauled out and two harbor seals in the water.

By the time the fireworks display commenced, the majority of sea lions had already fled the haul-out areas due to recreational vessels in the area and individuals shooting private fireworks in the area. Six sea lions remaining under the USCG pier entered the water during the display. This last flush is likely correlated with detonation of the 8-in shell described previously. Despite the detonations, the observer noted that the sea lions entered the water at a relatively slow rate, and without apparent injury. There were eighteen different instances of sea lion vocalizations recorded throughout the fireworks display, indicating that, although sea lions flushed into the water, at least some individuals remained in the harbor during the fireworks display. The observer reported that all of the remaining harbor seals at the western end of the harbor had flushed at the beginning of the fireworks display after hearing the first set of detonations.

The first sea lion (a subadult male) returned to the jetty approximately 20 minutes after the conclusion of the fireworks, and was apparently practicing holding a territory at the end of the jetty. Three additional sea lions returned after approximately one hour. No harbor seals were observed during post-event monitoring. A census was conducted the morning following the display, and revealed approximately 291 California sea lions and 31 harbor seals at their respective haul-out sites. No injured or dead animals were observed. These data indicate that California sea lions and harbor seals were only temporarily displaced from haul-out sites during the fireworks display. This monitoring event indicates that a majority of individuals will flush prior to the beginning of a fireworks display, due to the presence and associated noise of recreational boaters and private, un-permitted fireworks, and that any remaining individuals will likely flee the haul-out at the start of the display. In conclusion, fireworks displays likely result in temporary displacement from haul-outs, constituting a short-term disruption in behavior, and pinnipeds are likely to resume normal behavior and full utilization of haul-outs within twelve hours.

From 2006-2010, under the auspices of the regulations currently in effect (71 FR 40928; July 19, 2006), twenty fireworks events were permitted in the MBNMS. For each display, observers conducted a pre-event census to document abundance of marine mammals and post-event surveys to record any injured or dead wildlife species. Pre-event censuses were assumed to be a reasonable proxy for the number of incidental takes, as all animals present within the vicinity of the display area would be expected to temporarily abandon haul-outs prior to or during fireworks displays. Table 1 summarizes these monitoring efforts. In all cases, no marine mammals other than those authorized for taking were observed, and post-event monitoring revealed no injured or dead marine mammals.

Because of mitigation measures proposed NMFS preliminarily finds that only Level B harassment may occur incidental to authorized coastal fireworks displays and that these events will result in no more than a negligible impact on marine mammal species or their habitats. NMFS also preliminarily finds that no impact on the availability of the species or stocks for subsistence uses will occur because there is no subsistence harvest of marine mammals in California.

In order to issue an incidental take authorization under section 101 (a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on such species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (where relevant). The MBNMS and NMFS worked to craft a set of mitigation measures designed to minimize fireworks impacts on the marine environment, as well as to outline the locations, frequency, and conditions under which the MBNMS will authorize marine fireworks displays. These mitigation measures, which were successfully implemented under NMFS-issued ITAs from 2005-2010, include four broad approaches for managing fireworks displays:

• Establish a sanctuary-wide seasonal prohibition to safeguard pinniped reproductive periods. Fireworks events will not be authorized between March 1 and June 30 of any year, since this period is the primary reproductive season for pinnipeds.

• Establish four conditional display areas and prohibit displays along the remaining 95 percent of sanctuary coastal areas. Traditional display areas are located adjacent to urban centers where wildlife has often become habituated to frequent human disturbances. Remote areas and areas where professional fireworks have not traditionally been conducted will not be considered for fireworks approval. Permitted fireworks displays will be confined to four prescribed areas of the sanctuary while prohibiting displays along the remaining 95 percent of sanctuary coastal areas. The conditional display areas (described previously in this document) are located at Half Moon Bay, the Santa Cruz/Soquel area, the northeastern Monterey Peninsula, and Cambria (Santa Rosa Creek).

• Create a per-annum limit on the number of displays allowed in each display area. If properly managed, a limited number of fireworks displays conducted in areas already heavily impacted by human activity can occur with sufficient safeguards to prevent any long-term or chronic impacts upon local natural resources. There is a per-annum limit of 20 displays along the entire sanctuary coastline in order to prevent cumulative negative environmental effects from fireworks proliferation. Additionally, displays will be authorized at a frequency equal to or less than one every two months in each area.

• Retain permitting requirements and general and special restrictions for each event. Fireworks displays will not exceed thirty minutes with the exception of two longer displays per year that will not exceed one hour. Standard requirements include the use of a ramp-up period, wherein salutes are not allowed in the first five minutes of the display; the removal of plastic and aluminum labels and wrappings; and post-show reporting and cleanup. The sanctuary will continue to assess displays and restrict the number of aerial salute effects on a case-by-case basis, and will implement general and special restrictions unique to each fireworks event as necessary.

These measures are designed to prevent an incremental proliferation of fireworks displays and disturbance throughout the sanctuary and minimize area of impact by confining displays to primary traditional use areas. They also effectively remove fireworks impacts from 95 percent of the sanctuary's coastal areas, place an annual quota and multiple permit conditions on the displays authorized within the remaining five percent of the coast, and impose a sanctuary-wide seasonal prohibition on all fireworks displays. These measures were developed in order to assure that protected species and habitats are not jeopardized by fireworks activities. They have been well received by local fireworks sponsors who have pledged their cooperation in protecting sanctuary resources.

NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation measures in the context of ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:

• The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize adverse impacts to marine mammals;

• The proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to minimize adverse impacts as planned; and

• The practicability of the measure for applicant implementation.

Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures and their efficacy over the past 6 years of permitting fireworks, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

In order to issue an ITA for an activity, section 101 (a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must, where applicable, set forth “requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking”. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.

The MBNMS has monitored commercial fireworks displays for potential impacts to marine life and habitats for many years, beginning in 1993. In July 1993, the MBNMS performed its initial field observations of professional fireworks at the annual Independence Day fireworks display conducted by the City of Monterey. Subsequent `documented' field observations were conducted in Monterey by the MBNMS staff in July 1994, July 1995, July 1998, March 1998, October 2000, July 2001, and July 2002. MBNMS staff have observed additional displays at Monterey, Pacific Grove, Capitola, and Santa Cruz, but those observations were primarily for permit compliance purposes, and written assessments of environmental impacts were not generated. Documented field observations were also made at Aptos each October from 2000 to 2005, and have been made for all permitted fireworks under NMFS-issued authorizations, beginning in 2005. Though monitoring techniques and intensity have varied over the years and visual monitoring of wildlife abundance and behavioral responses to nighttime displays is challenging, observed impacts have been consistent. Wildlife activity nearest to disturbance areas returns to normal (pre-display species distribution, abundance, and activity patterns) within 12-15 hours, and no signs of wildlife injury or mortality have ever been discovered as a result of managed fireworks displays.

In order to continue the long-term understanding of the effects of fireworks displays on pinnipeds, as well as to estimate levels of incidental take and ensure compliance with MMPA authorizations, MBNMS will require its applicants to conduct a pre-event census of local marine mammal populations within the acute fireworks impact area. Each applicant will also be required to conduct post-event monitoring in the acute fireworks impact area to record injured or dead marine mammals.

MBNMS must submit a draft annual monitoring report to NMFS within 60 days after the conclusion of the calendar year. MBNMS must submit a final annual monitoring report to the NMFS within thirty days after receiving comments from NMFS on the draft report. If no comments are received from NMFS, the draft report will be considered to be the final report. In addition, the MBNMS will continue to make its information available to other marine mammal researchers upon request.

With respect to the activities described here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as:

All anticipated takes would be by Level B harassment, involving temporary changes in behavior. The proposed mitigation and monitoring measures are expected to minimize the possibility of injurious or lethal takes such that take by Level A harassment, serious injury or mortality is considered remote. However, as noted earlier, there is no specific information demonstrating that injurious or lethal “takes” would occur even in the absence of the planned mitigation and monitoring measures.

As discussed previously, the two marine mammal species likely to be taken by Level B harassment incidental to fireworks displays authorized within the sanctuary are the California sea lion and the harbor seal, due to the temporary evacuation of usual and accustomed haul-out sites. Both of these species are protected under the MMPA, and neither is listed under the ESA. Numbers of animals that may be taken by Level B harassment are expected to vary due to factors such as tidal state, seasonality, shifting prey stocks, climatic phenomenon (such as El Niño events), and the number, timing, and location of future displays. The estimated take of sea lions and harbor seals was determined by using a synthesis of information, including unpublished data gathered by MBNMS biologists at the specific display sites, unpublished aerial survey data from Point Piedras Blancas to Bodega Rock, results of independent surveys conducted in the MBNMS and personal communication with those researchers, and population estimates from surveys covering larger geographic areas. Numbers of animals that may be present were analyzed for four general areas: Half Moon Bay (HMB), North Monterey Bay (NMB; containing Santa Cruz/Soquel sites), South Monterey Bay (SMB; containing Monterey Peninsula sites), and Cambria. Please see Table 2 for more information.

Stage structure of California sea lions within the sanctuary varies by location, but generally, the majority are adult and subadult males. Weise (2000) reported on the stage structure of California sea lions at two historic fireworks display areas within the MBNMS, noting maximums of 186 animals at the Santa Cruz wharf and 937 animals on the Monterey jetty. At all four designated display sites combined, 20 fireworks events per year could likely disturb a maximum total of 6,170 California sea lions out of a total estimated population of 238,000. This number is small relative to the population size (2.6 percent).

Nicholson (2000) studied harbor seals on the northeast Monterey Peninsula (an area with the largest single concentration of animals within the sanctuary) for 2 years. Using mark recapture methods based on re-sightings of recognizable individuals, Nicholson (2000) estimated a population of 520 seals, with an approximate stage structure of 38 percent adult females, 15 percent adult males, 34 percent sub-adults, and 13 percent yearlings or juveniles. For harbor seals, a maximum of 1,065 animals out of a total estimated population of 34,233 could be disturbed within the sanctuary as a result of twenty fireworks events per year at all four designated display sites combined. These numbers are small relative to the population size (3.1 percent).

With the incorporation of mitigation measures proposed later in this document, the MBNMS expects that only Level B incidental harassment may occur associated with the proposed permitted coastal fireworks displays, and that these events will result in no detectable impact on marine mammal species or stocks or on their habitats.

NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “* * *an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” In making a negligible impact determination, NMFS considers a variety of factors, including but not limited to: (1) The number of anticipated mortalities; (2) the number and nature of anticipated injuries; (3) the number, nature, intensity, and duration of Level B harassment; and (4) the context in which the take occurs.

NMFS has preliminarily determined that the fireworks displays, as described in this document and in MBNMS' application, will result in no more than Level B harassment of small numbers of California sea lions and harbor seals. The effects of coastal fireworks displays are typically limited to short term and localized changes in behavior, including temporary departures from haul-outs to avoid the sight and sound of commercial fireworks. Fireworks displays are inherently highly limited in duration and will not occur on consecutive days at any fireworks site in the sanctuary. The mitigation measures proposed by MBNMS—and implemented as a component of NMFS' incidental take authorizations since 2005—further reduce potential impacts. As described previously, these measures ensure that permitted fireworks displays avoid times of importance for breeding, as well as limiting displays to five percent of sanctuary coastline that is already heavily used by humans, and generally limiting the overall amount and intensity of activity. No take by injury and/or death is anticipated, and harassment takes will be at the lowest level practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned previously in this document. Additionally, the MBNMS fireworks displays will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of marine mammal stocks for subsistence use, as there are no subsistence uses for California sea lions or harbor seals in California waters.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the mitigation and monitoring measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that MBNMS' authorization of coastal fireworks displays will result in the incidental take of small numbers of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only, and that the total taking from coastal fireworks displays will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks.

There are no relevant subsistence uses of marine mammals implicated by this action.

As mentioned earlier, the Steller sea lion and several species of ESA-listed cetaceans may be present at MBNMS at different times of the year and could potentially swim through the fireworks impact area during a display. In a 2001 consultation with MBNMS, NMFS concluded that this action is not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed species under NMFS' jurisdiction. There is no designated critical habitat in the area. This action will not have effects beyond those analyzed in that consultation.

The USFWS is responsible for regulating the take of the southern sea otter. The MBNMS consulted with the USFWS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA regarding impacts to that species. The USFWS issued a biological opinion on June 22, 2005, which concluded that the authorization of fireworks displays, as proposed, is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of endangered and threatened species within the sanctuary or to destroy or adversely modify any listed critical habitat. The USFWS further found that MBNMS would be unlikely to take any southern sea otters, and therefore issued neither an incidental take statement under the ESA nor an IHA.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq .), as implemented by the regulations published by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and NOAA Administrative Order 216-6, NMFS and MBNMS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) on the Issuance of Regulations Authorizing Incidental Take of Marine Mammals and Issuance of National Marine Sanctuary Authorizations for Coastal Commercial Fireworks Displays within the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, to consider the direct, indirect and cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from issuance of sanctuary permits for fireworks displays and issuance of an IHA to MBNMS. NMFS signed a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on June 21, 2006. NMFS has reviewed MBNMS's application and determined that there are no substantial changes to the proposed action and that there are no new direct, indirect, or cumulative effects to the human environment resulting from issuance of an IHA to MBNMS. Therefore, NMFS has determined that a new or supplemental EA or Environmental Impact Statement is unnecessary, and reaffirms the existing FONSI for this action. The existing EA and FONSI for this action are available for review at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm.

As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to authorize the take of marine mammals incidental to coastal fireworks displays, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated.

On 3/11/2011 (76 FR 13362-13363) and 3/25/2011 (76 FR 16733-16734), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notices of proposed additions to the Procurement List.

After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will provide the services to the Government.

2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to provide the services to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the services proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following services are added to the Procurement List:

Service Type/Location: Mailroom Operation, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 290 North D Street, San Bernardino, CA

NPAs: ServiceSource, Inc., Alexandria, VA (Prime)

Pacific Coast Community Services, Richmond, CA (Subcontractor)

Contracting Activity: DEPT OF TREAS/INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, CONTRACTS & ACQUISITION DIVISION NATIONAL OFFICE, WASHINGTON, DC

Service Type/Location: Base Operations Support Service, Mark Center Campus, Washington Headquarters Services, 4800 Mark Center Drive, Alexandria, VA

NPAs: ServiceSource, Inc., Alexandria, VA (Prime)

CW Resources, Inc., New Britain, CT (Subcontractor)

Able Forces, Inc, Front Royal, VA (Subcontractor)

Contracting Activity: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, ACQUISITION DIRECTORATE, WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS SERVICES, WASHINGTON, DC

Service Type/Locations: Mail Management Support Service, Official Mail Center Indian Head, 4072 N Jackson Road, Suite 101, Indian Head, MD

Official Mail Center Philadelphia, 1498 Constitution Ave, Building 44, Philadelphia, PA

Official Mail Center Carderock, 9500 MacArthur Boulevard, West Bethesda, MD

NPAs: NewView Oklahoma, Inc., Oklahoma City, OK (Prime)

ServiceSource, Inc., Alexandria, VA (Subcontractor)

Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE NAVY, FISC NORFOLK, Norfolk, VA

On 3/25/2011 (76 FR 16733-16734), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List.

After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the services listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to provide the services to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the services deleted from the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following services are deleted from the Procurement List:

Service Type/Locations: Janitorial/Custodial

U.S. Army Reserve Center: York, SC,

U.S. Army Reserve Center: 515 South Cherry Road, Rock Hill, SC

NPA: York County Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Board, Rock Hill, SC

Contracting Activity: DEPT OF THE ARMY, W40M NATL REGION CONTRACT OFC, WASHINGTON, DC

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to procure the products and services listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products and services to the Government.

2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the products and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List.

Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information.

The following products and services are proposed for addition to Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0001 Engineer's Hammer, 2 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0002 Engineer's Hammer, 3 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0003 Engineer's Hammer, 4 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0004 Drilling Hammer, 3 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0005 Drilling Hammer, 4 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0006 Single Bit Axe, Michigan, 3.5 lb

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0007 Double Bit Axe, Michigan, 3.5 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0008 Sledge Hammer, 16 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0010 Sledge Hammer, 20 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0011 Splitting Maul, 6 lb.

NSN: 5120-00-NIB-0012 Splitting Maul, 8 lb.

Contracting Activity: General Services Administration, FSS Tools Acquisition Division II, Kansas City, MO

NPA: Keystone Vocational Services, Inc., Sharon, PA

Coverage: B-List for the Broad Government requirement as aggregated by the General Services Administration.

Service Type/Location: Total Facility Maintenance, FCC—Equipment Developmental Group, 3600 Hiram-Lithia Springs Road, SW., Hiram, GA.

NPA: Bobby Dodd Institute, Inc., Atlanta, GA.

Contracting Activity: Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC

Service Type/Location: Laundry Services, U.S. Naval Hospital & Naval Dental Clinic Base, Farenholt Road, Agana Heights, GU.

NPA: ICAN Resources, Inc., Dededo, GU.

Contracting Activity: Dept of the Navy, FISC Pearl Harbor, HI.

Service Type/Location: Janitorial Services, Muskogee Armed Force Reserve Center, 6800 S. Cherokee St., Muskogee, OK.

NPA: Golden Rule Industries of Muskogee, Inc., Muskogee, OK.

Contracting Activity: Dept of the Army, W7NV USPFO ACTIVITY OK ARNG, Oklahoma, OK.

Service Type/Location: Custodial and Maintenance Services, NOAA-Atlantic Oceanographic & Meteorological Laboratory (AOML), 4301 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL.

NPA: Goodwill Industries of South Florida, Inc., Miami, FL.

Contracting Activity: Dept of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Kansas City, MO.

The Corporation is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate the questions being asked and data being collected.

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are expected to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology ( e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses).

The Annual Progress Report will be completed by grantees of the AmeriCorps State and National program. The purpose of the information collection is to elicit accurate information from CNCS grantees in order to assess impacts and respond to requests for information from stakeholders.

The Corporation seeks to renew their Annual Progress Report. The information collection will otherwise be used in the same manner as the existing report. The Corporation also seeks to continue using the current report until the revised application is approved by OMB. The current report due to expire on July 31, 2011.

Type of Review: Renewal.

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

Title: Annual Progress Report.

OMB Number: 3045-0101.

Agency Number: None.

Affected Public: Current/prospective recipients of AmeriCorps State and National funding.

Total Respondents: 154.

Frequency: Annually.

Average Time Per Response: Averages 8 hours.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 1232 hours.

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Corporation, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

A 60-day public comment Notice was published in the Federal Register on January 12, 2011. This comment period ended March 13, 2011. No public comments were received from this Notice.

Description: The Corporation is seeking approval of the Financial Management Survey which the Corporation uses to collect information from new grantees about their financial management systems. This allows the Corporation to meet its responsibilities as a Federal grantee agency to determine if appropriate systems are in place to manage federal grant funds or, if not, to identify training and technical assistance a new grantee may need to implement appropriate financial systems. The Corporation requires new grantees who have not received Corporation funds before to complete the form.

Type of Review: Renewal.

Agency: Corporation for National and Community Service.

Title: Financial Management Survey.

OMB Number: 3045-0102.

Agency Number: None.

Affected Public: Organizations that are new grantees to the Corporation.

Total Respondents: 20.

Frequency: Once.

Average Time per Response: Averages 45 minutes to complete the form and one hour to gather and submit the requested documents.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 35.

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): None.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): None.

1. Proposed Action. Sutter Basin Feasibility Study. USACE is conducting a feasibility study to evaluate structural and non-structural flood-risk-management measures, including re-operation of existing reservoirs; improvements to existing levees; construction of new levees; and other storage, conveyance, and non-structural options. The Sutter Basin study area covers approximately 285 square miles and is roughly bounded by the Feather River, Sutter Bypass, Wadsworth Canal, Sutter Buttes, and Cherokee Canal. Flood waters potentially threatening the study area originate from the Feather River watershed and/or the upper Sacramento River watershed, above Colusa Weir. The study area is essentially encircled by project levees and the high ground of Sutter Buttes. Geotechnical analysis and historical performance during past floods indicates the project levees are at risk of failure due to underseepage. The risk of levee failure coupled with the consequence of deep flooding presents a threat to public safety and property. Considering the collective changes to riparian and aquatic ecosystems brought about by agriculture, urbanization, mining, and flood risk management and water supply infrastructure, and the national concern for environmental quality and protection, every opportunity to restore and protect natural resources should be taken whenever changes in the water management system are being contemplated. Ecosystem restoration measures likely would include restoration of floodplain function and habitat. Recreation measures include those outdoor recreation opportunities associated with sustainable water resource development. The feasibility phase of this project is cost-shared 50% Federal, 50% non-Federal with the project sponsors, the State of California CVFPB and the SBFCA. The study will focus on alternatives in the study area that comprise flood risk management, ecosystem restoration, and recreation management measures. As part of the study, an EIS/EIR will be prepared with USACE as the lead agency under NEPA and SBFCA in cooperation with CVFPB as the lead agency under CEQA.

FRWLP. SBFCA is proposing a levee improvement project along the Feather River west levee under the California DWR's Early Implementation Program to expeditiously complete flood-risk reduction measures in advance of the Sutter Basin Feasibility Study. Known as the FRWLP, the project proposes to construct levee improvements between the Thermalito Afterbay and the Feather River/Sutter Bypass confluence. Primary deficiencies of the levee include through-seepage, under-seepage, and embankment instability ( e.g., overly steepened slopes). Alternatives considered may include measures such as slurry cutoff walls, seepage berms, stability berms, internal drains, relief wells, sheet-pile walls, slope flattening, and potential new levee alignments. As part of the project, an EIS/EIR is being prepared. USACE has authority under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (as amended) (33 U.S.C. 408), over alterations to Federal flood control project levees and any such alterations as proposed by SBFCA are subject to approval by USACE. USACE also has authority under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) over activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill material to waters of the United States, which are known to be in the project area. Due to these authorities, USACE is acting as the lead agency for the EIS pursuant to NEPA. SBFCA will be acting as the lead agency for the EIR according to CEQA as an agency of the State of California with delegated authority to approve the project.

2. Alternatives. The EIS/EIRs will consider several alternatives for reducing flood damage. Alternatives analyzed during the investigation will consist of a combination of one or more measures to reduce the risk of flooding. These measures include installing cutoff walls, and constructing seepage berms.

3. Scoping Process.

a. A series of public scoping meetings will be held on June 27 and 28, 2011, to present information to the public and to receive comments from the public on both the feasibility study and the FRWLP. These meetings are intended to initiate the process to involve concerned individuals, and local, state, and Federal agencies.

b. Significant issues to be analyzed in depth in the environmental documents include effects on hydraulics, wetlands and other waters of the U.S., vegetation and wildlife resources, special-status species, aesthetics, cultural resources, recreation, land use, fisheries, water quality, air quality, transportation, and socioeconomics; and cumulative effects of related projects in the study area.

c. USACE is consulting with the State Historic Preservation Officer to comply with the National Historic Preservation Act and with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to comply with the Endangered Species Act. USACE also is coordinating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to comply with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

d. A 45-day public review period will be provided for individuals and agencies to review and comment on the draft environmental documents. All interested parties are encouraged to respond to this notice and provide a current address if they wish to be notified of the draft EIS/EIR circulation.

4. Availability. The draft EIS/EIR for the FRWLP is scheduled to be available for public review and comment in late 2011. The draft EIS/EIR for the Sutter Basin Feasibility Study is scheduled to be available for public review and comment in mid 2012.

1. Background. The Emergent Sandbar Habitat (ESH) program is being implemented by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for the benefit of the interior population of the Interior least tern (least tern) and the northern Great Plains piping plover (piping plover). This implementation program resulted from a Biological Opinion (BiOp) issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in which the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) called for the Corps to provide sufficient ESH acreage in order to meet biological metrics (fledge ratios) to avoid jeopardizing continued existence of the species, as defined by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

The FPEIS is needed to provide National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) coverage for the mechanical and artificial construction of ESH in the riverine segments of the Upper Missouri River, pursuant to the 2003 BiOp Amendment RPA IV(b) 3, and to compare impacts among a range of alternatives. The goal is to inform the selection of a preferred alternative that allows for the creation and replacement of sufficient habitat to support tern and plover populations on the Missouri River in a safe, efficient and cost-effective manner that minimizes negative environmental consequences.

Alternatives to the proposed project that are considered in the FPEIS include (1) no action, including existing program activities and no action; (2) and 6 action alternatives of various acreage creation. Environmental issues addressed in the FPEIS include hydrology, water quality, aggradation and degradation, biological resources, air quality, noise and recreation.

After detailed consideration of the environmental and social impacts, and cumulative effects, of the Alternatives, the Corps has identified an Adaptive Management Implementation Process (AMIP) as the preferred alternative, and not one of the specific acreage alternatives. The key aspect of the AMIP is that, rather than selecting a specific acreage alternative and pursuing such construction, actions would be progressively implemented with the focus on monitoring a combination of biological and physical metrics (measurements). Implementation of progressively larger acreage amounts of habitat would continue until the desired biological response is attained and sustained.

However, the exact number of acres needed to be constructed and maintained is uncertain at this time. Based on the analysis in the PEIS, the impacts of the larger alternatives (3, 2 and 1) are deemed to be moderate to high. The Corps has chosen a maximum construction ceiling of Alternative 3.5 (4,370 acres) at this time. Impacts of lesser alternatives (3.5, 4 and 5) are deemed to be moderate to low. This checkpoint of Alternative 3.5 is proposed because it represents a midrange of habitat available at a time when the birds were productive (biological metric), and it is anticipated that a positive, sustainable biological response will be met before fully implementing up to Alternative 3.5. If Alternative 3.5 is fully implemented and the birds are not meeting biological metrics, the Corps can consider continuing to higher acreage alternatives or look at other methodologies. Appropriate coordination and disclosure would be pursued if Alternative 3.5 was exceeded (potential amended Record of Decision or additional NEPA).

2. Document Availability. The Emergent Sandbar Habitat Programmatic EIS is available online at http://www.moriverrecovery.org/mrrp/MRRP_PUB_DEV.download_documentation_peis, or see the ADDRESSES section. For more information about the Emergent Sandbar Habitat program, please visit http://www.moriverrecovery.org under “BiOp/Mit Efforts.”

Discharges of fill material into waters of the United States are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, with the permitting responsibility administered by the USACE. The proposed project must also address environmental impacts relative to the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA). In accordance with the NEPA, the FEIS evaluates practicable alternatives for the USACE's decision making process. As required by NEPA, the USACE also analyzes the “no action” alternative as a baseline for gauging potential impacts.

Written comments should be sent to Mr. Darvin Messer (see ADDRESSES ). The comments are due no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Copies of the FEIS may be obtained by contacting USACE Fort Worth District Regulatory Branch at (817) 886-1731 or downloaded/printed from the Fort Worth District USACE Internet Web site at: http://www.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/environ/regulatory/permitting/rusk.asp.

Copies of the FEIS are also available for inspection at the locations identified below:

(1) Tatum Public Library, 335 Hood Street, Tatum, TX 75691.

(2) Sammie Brown Library, 522 West College Street, Carthage, TX 75633.

(3) Longview Public Library, 222 West Cotton Street, Longview, TX 75601.

(4) Rusk County Library, 106 East Main St., Henderson, TX 75652.

(5) Marshall Public Library, 300 South Alamo Boulevard, Marshall, TX 75670.

(6) Henderson City Hall, 400 West Main Street, Henderson, TX 75652.

(7) Tatum City Hall, 680 Crystal Farms Road, Tatum, TX 75691.

(8) Longview City Hall, 300 West Cotton Street, Longview, TX 75601.

(9) Carthage City Hall, 812 West Panola Street, Carthage, TX 75633.

(10) Marshall City Hall, 401 South Alamo Boulevard, Marshall, TX 75785.

After the public comment period ends, the USACE will consider all comments received, revise the FEIS as appropriate, and issue a Final Environmental Impact Statement.

1. Proposed Action. The Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) is proposing to construct an all-season transportation access road from the Dalton Highway to Umiat, to increase access to potential oil and gas resources for exploration and development along the northwestern foothills of the Brooks Range, and within the National Petroleum Reserve—Alaska (NPR-A). The project is considered an important investment by the State of Alaska to further oil and gas resource exploration and development opportunities to benefit Alaska's economy.

The proposed Foothills Project area is within the North Slope Foothills Areawide Oil and Gas Lease Sale Area between the Dalton Highway and Umiat. The project area is within the North Slope Borough; south of the Umiat baseline (principal east-west line dividing survey townships 1 north and 1 south of the Umiat Quadrangle, Alaska), west of the Dalton Highway, north of the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, and east of the National Petroleum Reserve—Alaska.

Construction components of this project would include an all-season gravel road, associated bridges and other crossing structures (i.e., culverts), pull-outs, maintenance facilities, temporary construction camps, and material sites. The road would be designed to safely accommodate industrial traffic in arctic conditions. Although the road may be closed to the public during periods of exploration, development and production activities, the road may eventually be open to the general public. Depending upon the final route alignment, there could be up to six major river crossings. These are the Anaktuvuk, Chandler, Colville, Itkillik, Kuparuk, and Toolik rivers. Bridges and other crossing structures would be designed to accommodate industrial activities and weight loads associated with oil and gas pipelines. While subsequent efforts by industry to develop infrastructure such as oil and gas pipelines and their associated components are reasonably foreseeable, these elements are not proposed by this action.

2. Alternatives. A reasonable range of alternatives will be identified and evaluated through scoping and the EIS process. The DOT&PF has identified several possible road corridors between the Dalton Highway and Umiat within the Foothills Project area, including a preferred corridor that goes from Galbraith Lake at milepost 278 on the Dalton Highway and heads in a northerly, and then northwesterly, route to Umiat. The intent of the DOT&PF is to identify a feasible corridor that concurrently accesses areas with high oil and gas potential, minimizes the distance between the road corridor and likely exploration areas, and traverses as much state land as possible. One or more corridors will be identified through scoping. Within the corridor(s), additional analysis would be conducted to determine optimal road alignments and river crossing locations.

3. Scoping Process. The scoping period will begin on May 20, 2011 and end on July 5, 2011.

a. Public involvement. The Corps invites full public participation to promote open communication on the issues to be addressed regarding the proposed action. All Federal, state, Tribal, and local agencies, and other interested persons or organizations with an interest are urged to participate in the NEPA scoping process. Scoping meetings will be held to receive public input on the development of proposed alternatives to be reviewed in the EIS, and to identify significant issues to be analyzed.

b. Scoping meetings. The Corps plans to hold scoping meetings in Anaktuvuk Pass, Anchorage, Barrow, Fairbanks, and Nuiqsut. Information about these meetings and meeting dates will be published locally, posted at http://www.foothillswesteis.com, or available by contacting the Corps as described above. A description of the proposed project will be posted on the project Web site prior to these meetings to help the public focus their scoping comments.

4. Major Issues To Be Analyzed in the DEIS. The DEIS will analyze the potential social, economic, physical, and biological impacts on the affected areas. The following major issues will be analyzed in depth in the DEIS: road construction and operation and its effect on the surrounding communities; water resources; fish and wildlife; cultural and subsistence resources; hazardous materials; human health; socioeconomics; and secondary and cumulative impacts.

5. Other Environmental Review and Consultation Requirements. Other environmental review and consultation requirements include: Magnuson Stevens Act for Essential Fish Habitat identification, Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments; Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899; and subsistence uses in accordance with Section 810 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).

6. Land Ownership. The lands within the Foothills Project area are mostly state lands, but also include Federal lands administered by the BLM, Arctic Slope Regional Corporation lands, and private lands.

7. Estimated Date DEIS Available to Public. It is anticipated that the DEIS will be available June 2012 for public review.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that Federal agencies provide interested parties an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. The Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Information Management and Privacy Services, Office of Management, publishes this notice containing proposed information collection requests at the beginning of the Departmental review of the information collection. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title of Collection: Migrant Education Program Final Regulations and Certificate of Eligibility.

OMB Control Number: 1810-0662.

Agency Form Number(s): N/A.

Frequency of Responses: Annually; Biennially; Once.

Affected Public: Individuals or household; State, Local, or Tribal Government, State Educational Agencies or Local Educational Agencies.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 230,047.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 406,297.

Abstract: The regulations for Title I, Part C establish minimum requirements for a State Educational Agency comprehensive needs assessment, plan for service delivery, and program evaluation. The regulations also establish minimum requirements for documenting eligibility, re-interviewing, and establishing a system of quality controls. The Secretary will use the information collected to monitor the accuracy of program eligibility determinations, make needed improvements, and adjust State Migrant Education Program allocations based on reported defect rates.

Copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 4619. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection and OMB Control Number when making your request.

Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that Federal agencies provide interested parties an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. The Director, Information Collection Clearance Division, Information Management and Privacy Services, Office of Management, publishes this notice containing proposed information collection requests at the beginning of the Departmental review of the information collection. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

Type of Review: Revision.

Title of Collection: Annual Performance Report for the State Grant for Assistive Technology Program under the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, as Amended.

OMB Control Number: 1820-0572.

Agency Form Number(s): N/A.

Frequency of Responses: Annually.

Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Government, State Educational Agencies or Local Education Agencies.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 190,456.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 23,968.

Abstract: Section 4 of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, as amended (AT Act), requires states to submit annual data reports. This instrument helps the grantees report annual data related to the required activities implemented by the state under the AT Act. This data is used by the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) in order to prepare required annual reports to Congress. RSA calls this data collection an annual progress report.

Copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 4623. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection and OMB Control Number when making your request.

Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

The Department published a notice inviting applications for new awards under the Professional Development Grant program for FY 2010 in the Federal Register on December 18, 2009 (74 FR 67182). In response to the notice inviting applications, we received a significant number of high-quality applications and made eight awards. However, many applications that received high scores from peer reviewers did not receive grants in FY 2010 because of the limited funds available for the program. In addition, we made additional awards from FY 2011 funds to two applicants that were inadvertently not funded in FY 2010 due to an administrative error.

The FY 2010 slate was based on the selection criteria, application requirements, and definitions referenced in the December 18, 2009 notice inviting applications (74 FR 67182).

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: http://www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

The Department published a notice inviting applications for new awards under the Demonstration Grants for Indian Children program for FY 2010 in the Federal Register on December 3, 2009 (74 FR 63398). We extended the closing date announced in that notice from February 18, 2010, to February 25, 2010 by a notice published in the Federal Register on February 8, 2010 (75 FR 6192). In response to those notices, we received a significant number of high-quality applications and made 10 awards. However, many applications that received high scores from peer reviewers did not receive grants in FY 2010 because of the limited funds available for the program. In addition, we made additional awards from FY 2011 funds to two applicants that were inadvertently not funded in FY 2010 due to an administrative error.

The FY 2010 slate was based on the selection criteria, application requirements, and definitions referenced in the December 3, 2009 notice inviting applications (74 FR 63398).

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys . At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: http://www.federalregister.gov . Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

Tentative Agenda:

1. Recommendation Development: Greater-Than-Class C Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

2. CAU 106 Soils Update

3. Site-Wide EIS Work Plan Development

Public Participation: The EM SSAB, Nevada, welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Denise Rupp at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral presentations pertaining to agenda items should contact Denise Rupp at the telephone number listed above. The request must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing to Denise Rupp at the address listed above or at the following Web site: http://nv.energy.gov/nssab/MeetingMinutes.aspx .