[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26654-26659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10672]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

15 CFR Part 922

[Docket No. 130403324-4310-02]
RIN 0648-BC94


Boundary Expansion of Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary

AGENCY: Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS), National Ocean 
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 
Department of Commerce (DOC).

ACTION: Amendment to proposed rule; request for public comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 
hereby amends a proposed rule published on June 14, 2013. The June 14, 
2013 proposed rule sought to expand the boundary of Thunder Bay 
National Marine Sanctuary (TBNMS or sanctuary) and revise the 
corresponding sanctuary terms of designation. This rule focuses 
specifically on modifying the proposed boundary of the sanctuary, 
addressing questions and concerns on ballasting operations within the 
proposed expansion area, and clarifying the correlation between TBNMS 
regulations and Indian tribal fishing activities. NOAA is soliciting 
public comment only on the amendments in this proposed rule. Previously 
submitted public comments need not be resubmitted.

DATES: Comments will be considered if received by June 9, 2014.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on this document, identified by 
NOAA-NOS-2012-0077, by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 
www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NOS-2012-0077, click the 
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields and enter or attach 
your comments.
     Mail: Submit written comments to Thunder Bay National 
Marine Sanctuary, 500 W. Fletcher, Alpena, Michigan 49707, Attn: Jeff 
Gray, Superintendent.
    Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other 
address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period 
may not be considered by NOAA. All comments received are a part of the 
public record and will be posted for public viewing on 
www.regulations.gov without change.

[[Page 26655]]

All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 
confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information 
submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NOAA 
will accept anonymous comments. If you are submitting electronic 
comments and wish to remain anonymous, enter ``N/A'' in the required 
fields. Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in 
Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Gray, Superintendent, Thunder Bay 
National Marine Sanctuary at 989-356-8805 ext. 12 or 
[email protected].
    Copies of the amended proposed rule and related material can be 
downloaded or viewed on the Internet at www.regulations.gov (search for 
docket  NOAA-NOS-2012-0077) or at http://thunderbay.noaa.gov. 
Copies can also be obtained by contacting the person identified under 
For Further information Contact.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (NMSA) (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) 
authorizes the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to designate and 
protect as a national marine sanctuary areas of the marine environment 
that are of special national significance due to their conservation, 
recreational, ecological, historical, scientific, cultural, 
archeological, educational, or esthetic qualities. Day-to-day 
management of national marine sanctuaries has been delegated by the 
Secretary to NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS). The 
primary objective of the NMSA is to protect sanctuary resources.
    NOAA designated Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary in October 
2000 (65 FR 39042). The existing sanctuary boundary encompasses 
approximately 448 square miles of waters, submerged lands, and 
underwater cultural resources located in northwestern Lake Huron, 
adjacent to one of the most treacherous stretches of water within the 
Great Lakes system. The port of Alpena is included within the current 
boundary of the sanctuary. The sanctuary is located entirely in state 
waters, off the northeast coast of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, and is 
jointly managed by NOAA and the State of Michigan under the umbrella of 
a 2002 Memorandum of Agreement (December 2002). The primary purpose of 
the sanctuary is to provide comprehensive, long-term protection for the 
nationally-significant collection of underwater cultural resources 
(i.e., historical shipwrecks and maritime heritage sites) found within 
the area. To date, 45 shipwrecks are protected within the sanctuary. 
These shipwrecks and related maritime heritage sites in and around 
Thunder Bay represent a microcosm of Great Lakes maritime history 
spanning well over 150 years.

II. Original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    On June 14, 2013, NOAA published in the Federal Register notice of 
a proposed rule (78 FR 35776) and availability of an accompanying draft 
environmental impact statement (DEIS) (78 FR 35928). As proposed, the 
rule would increase the geographic size of the sanctuary from 448 
square miles to 4,300 square miles and more than double the number of 
nationally significant shipwrecks that are protected under the NMSA. 
The proposed boundary would extend from Alcona County, Michigan to 
Presque Isle County, Michigan, include selected submerged maritime 
heritage resources in Cheboygan and Mackinaw counties, and run east to 
the United States/Canada international boundary. The proposed expansion 
also includes the ports at Rogers City and Presque Isle, as shown in a 
map of the area at http://thunderbay.noaa.gov/management/expansion.html.
    Three public meetings on the proposed rule were held in July 2013 
in Michigan, and the public comment period was extended on three 
separate occasions, eventually closing on December 19, 2013 (78 FR 
49700, 64186 and 73112). NOAA extended the comment period to gather 
more information from stakeholders and consult with the U.S. Coast 
Guard (USCG) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), both of 
whom have regulations that apply to national marine sanctuaries. In 
response to public comments and information received, NOAA has decided 
to amend the proposed rule and provide additional time for the public 
to submit comments on the proposed amendments.

III. Summary of Changes to the Proposed Rule

    This proposed rulemaking would:
    A. Propose a new boundary for the sanctuary that would not include 
the ports at Rogers City, Presque Isle, and Alpena;
    B. Address questions and concerns related to ballasting in the 
expanded sanctuary; and
    C. Clarify and update TBNMS regulations pertaining to treaty 
fishing rights of area Indian tribes.

A. Sanctuary Boundary

    NOAA received several comments on the proposed rule regarding the 
inclusion of the ports at Rogers City (also recognized as Calcite 
Quarry, Carmeuse), Presque Isle (also recognized as Stoneport Quarry), 
and Alpena (also recognized as LaFarge North America) within the 
proposed revised boundaries of TBNMS. In particular, the Governor of 
Michigan, the Lake Carriers' Association, the Canadian Shipowners 
Association, the Shipping Federation of Canada, local government 
officials, other commercial interests, and members of the general 
public requested these ports not be included within the boundary to 
avoid any limitation or prohibition on port operations ``critical to 
the local, regional, and national economies.'' (A map of this expanded 
area, including the exclusion of the ports mentioned above, can be 
found on the TBNMS Web site at http://thunderbay.noaa.gov/management/expansion.html.)
    In response to these concerns, and because NOAA knows of no 
nationally significant maritime resources within these port areas, NOAA 
proposes to not include the ports at Rogers City, Presque Isle, and 
Alpena within the TBNMS boundary.

B. Ballasting Within the Proposed Sanctuary Expansion

    The Great Lakes shipping industry also expressed concern that the 
proposed TBNMS expansion would limit or prohibit ballasting operations 
for vessels transiting the sanctuary, given USCG and EPA requirements 
that require certain vessels equipped with ballast tanks to ``avoid the 
discharge and uptake of ballast water in areas within, or that may 
directly affect marine sanctuaries, marine preserves, marine parks, or 
coral reefs.'' NOAA appreciates and applauds the current management 
efforts implemented by both USCG and EPA in mitigating negative 
environmental effects from ballasting both within, and outside of, the 
Great Lakes. NOAA also appreciates the critical role ballasting plays 
in the operation of vessels operating within the Great Lakes, 
especially with regard to safety.
    According to many commenters, the uptake and discharge of ballast 
may occur while transiting the sanctuary ``in response to weather 
conditions, to accommodate a port call, enter a restricted channel, or 
as part of routine operations known as trimming''. To illustrate when 
ballasting might be performed in response to weather conditions, one 
commenter explained:

[[Page 26656]]

``Ballast is used to lower a vessel deeper into the water and by doing 
so stabilize the vessel so there is less exposure of a vessel's profile 
to the winds.''
    Another commenter highlighted the importance of ballast 
``trimming'' by explaining a vessel may take on ballast water ``to slow 
its speed and eventually come to a complete stop as it approaches a 
port and eventually reaches the dock.'' Yet another commenter noted 
``The `trimming' process involves the adjustment of levels of ballast 
water in the vessel for reasons that involve the safety, stability, and 
efficiency of the vessel. Some have analogized the trimming of a vessel 
to the necessary and important operational adjustments that an airline 
pilot makes as [the pilot] flies and lands an airplane.''
    Consistent with these comments, the Great Lakes shipping industry 
requested NOAA clarify, by the adoption of regulatory text or 
otherwise, that the uptake and discharge of ballast water in the 
sanctuary while transiting the lake is permissible, even in light of 
USCG and EPA requirements regarding the avoidance of ballast in areas 
such as national marine sanctuaries. NOAA has seriously considered this 
request, and has consulted with the USCG, EPA, and stakeholders to 
inform its decision-making. Based on information in the written 
comments, other literature on Great Lakes ballasting, and input from 
USCG and EPA on their respective requirements (which continues in 
effect) NOAA believes ballasting operations, to include safety and to 
control or maintain trim, draught or stability of the vessel, are 
consistent with the maritime heritage protection mission of the TBNMS, 
and therefore, are an allowable activity within the proposed boundaries 
of the sanctuary.

C. Indian Tribal Rights

    NOAA proposes to amend the TBNMS regulations in order to clarify 
that the exercise of Indian treaty fishing rights are not modified, 
altered, or in any way affected by the proposed boundary expansion. In 
particular, NOAA plans to add and define the term ``treaty fishing 
rights'' to the TBNMS definitions at 15 CFR 922.191. The definition was 
specifically suggested during tribal consultations undertaken pursuant 
to E.O. 13175 with the Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority (CORA) which 
represents all 1,836 treaty fishing tribes and contained in several 
written public comments received from a federally-recognized Indian 
tribe and an interested tribal resource agency. The purpose of the 
definition is to clarify that the term ``treaty fishing rights'' refers 
to those rights reserved in the 1836 Treaty of Washington and in 
subsequent related court decisions because the tribes believe the 
existing TBNMS regulations are ambiguous. This definition would not 
replace, but would rather complement, the existing definition of 
``traditional fishing'' which also refers to the 1836 Treaty of 
Washington currently codified in 15 CFR 922.191.
    In addition, based on the comments received during tribal 
consultation and during the comments received during the comment 
period, NOAA is amending 15 CFR 922.197 to ease concerns raised by the 
federally-recognized tribes that sanctuary expansion potentially 
undercuts its treaty fishing rights. Under 15 CFR 922.193(b), NOAA 
already states that members of a federally-recognized Indian tribe may 
exercise treaty-secured rights without regards to the regulations that 
apply to TBNMS, as long as these rights are authorized by the tribe by 
regulation, license, or permit. This provision was added to the final 
regulations promulgating the sanctuary designation in 2000 in response 
to comments from federally-recognized Indian tribes. However, NOAA 
believes that by adding a statement to a separate section of the TBNMS 
regulations at 15 CFR 922.197 the action would provide further 
assurance and clarification to the tribes that treaty fishing rights 
would not be adversely impacted by sanctuary expansion.

IV. Summary of Proposed Changes to the Sanctuary Terms of Designation

    Section 304(a)(4) of the NMSA requires that the terms of 
designation for national marine sanctuaries include: (1) The geographic 
area included within the Sanctuary; (2) the characteristics of the area 
that give it conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, 
research, educational, or esthetic value; and (3) the types of 
activities subject to regulation by NOAA to protect those 
characteristics. This section also specifies that the terms of the 
designation may be modified only by the same procedures by which the 
original designation is made.
    On June 14, 2013, NOAA proposed to make changes to the TBNMS terms 
of designation, which were previously published in the Federal Register 
on June 22, 2000 (65 FR 39042). The changes sought to: (1) Change the 
geographic size and description of the sanctuary in Article II 
``Description of the Area''; (2) change the description of the 
nationally significant characteristics of the sanctuary identified in 
Article III ``Characteristics of the Area That Give It Particular 
Value''; and (3) amend Article V ``Effect on Other Regulations, Leases, 
Permits, Licenses, and Rights'' to reflect the new organization within 
NOAA. While no new changes are being made to the modifications of 
Articles III and V as proposed in 78 FR 35776, Article II is being 
further modified to reflect the changes made in this amended proposed 
rule.
    Article II of the revised terms of designation is proposed to read 
as follows (new text in brackets):

[. . .]

Article II. Description of the Area

    The Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater 
Preserve consists of an area of approximately 4,300 square miles of 
waters of Lake Huron and the submerged lands thereunder, over, 
around, and under the underwater cultural resources in Thunder Bay. 
The boundaries form a polygon by extending along the ordinary high 
water mark of the Michigan shoreline from approximately the northern 
and southern boundaries of Presque Isle and Alcona counties, 
respectively, cutting across the mouths of rivers and streams, 
[excluding the harbors at Alpena, Rogers City and Presque Isle,] and 
lakeward from those points along latitude lines to the U.S./Canada 
international boundary. A more detailed description of the boundary 
and a list of coordinates are set forth in the regulations for the 
sanctuary at 15 CFR part 922 subpart R.

[. . .]

END OF TERMS OF DESIGNATION

V. Classification

A. National Environmental Policy Act

    Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (43 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.) and the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) regulations 
implementing NEPA, an agency is required to prepare a supplemental 
environmental impact statement (EIS) if ``(i) The agency makes 
substantial changes in the proposed action that are relevant to 
environmental concerns; or (ii) There are significant new circumstances 
or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the 
proposed action or its impacts.'' 40 CFR 1502.9(c).
    Federal courts have upheld agencies' decisions not to supplement 
where the relevant environmental impacts of the proposed change have 
been fully considered. In so holding, federal courts have interpreted 
the ``substantial change'' provision of the CEQ regulations to require 
agencies to issue a supplement if the changes will impact the 
environment ``in a significant manner * * * not already considered by 
the federal agency.'' Ark. Wildlife Fed'n v. U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, 431 F.3d 1096, 1102 (8th Cir. 2005)

[[Page 26657]]

(quoting Airport Impact Relief, Inc. v. Wykle, 192 F.3d 197, 204 (1st 
Cir. 1999)). Under applicable case law, a change is considered 
``substantial'' under the regulations only if ``it presents a 
`seriously different picture of the environmental impact' '' than that 
previously considered. Id. (quoting South Trenton Residents Against 29 
v. Fed. Highway Admin., 176 F.3d 658, 663 (3d Cir. 1999)). In addition 
to asking whether the agency has fully considered the environmental 
impact of the proposed change, federal courts have also asked whether 
the change is `` `qualitatively within the spectrum of alternatives 
that were discussed' in a prior [EIS].'' In re Operation of the 
Missouri River System Litigation, 516 F.3d at 693 (quoting Dubois v. 
U.S. Dep't of Agric., 102 F.3d 1273, 1292 (1st Cir. 1996)). This 
language first appeared in a 1981 CEQ guidance document, commonly 
referred to as the CEQ ``Forty Questions.'' See Forty Most Asked 
Questions Concerning CEQ's National Environmental Policy Act 
Regulations, 46 FR 18026, 18035 (1981).
    In this instance, NOAA has decided that a supplemental NEPA 
analysis is not required for this proposed amended rule because the 
draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) presented the public with a 
comprehensive analysis of the spectrum of environmental impacts. 
Specifically, the DEIS, made available to the public in June 2013 (78 
FR 35928), analyzed three regulatory alternatives for this proposed 
rulemaking. The alternatives included a non-action alternative, an 
alternative that would barely double the geographic size of the 
proposed expanded sanctuary, and the preferred alternative which would 
increase the geographic size of the sanctuary from 448 square miles to 
4,300 square miles and more than double the number of national 
significant historic shipwrecks that are protected under the NMSA. 
Based on the evaluation of the alternatives, NOAA determined that no 
significant adverse impacts to resources and the human environment are 
expected if the preferred alternative is adopted. Instead, long-term 
beneficial impacts were anticipated if the proposed action is 
implemented.
    Copies of the DEIS are available at the address and Web site listed 
in the ADDRESSES section of this proposed rule. NOAA will analyze the 
comments that have been previously received on the DEIS when the final 
rule and FEIS are prepared and issued. NOAA also invites the public to 
provide additional comments on the DEIS.

B. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact

    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant within 
the meaning of Executive Order 12866.

C. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Assessment

    NOAA has concluded this regulatory action does not have federalism 
implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a federalism 
assessment under Executive Order 13132.

D. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Concurrent with the development of this proposed rule, NOAA invited 
the Chippewa Ottawa Resource Authority (CORA) to participate in 
government-to-government consultation. CORA gathers representatives 
from the Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and 
Chippewa Indians, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Little Traverse 
Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians 
under its mantle. NOAA plans to continue collaboration with the CORA 
and invite each individual tribe to government-to-government 
consultation. Consultation under E.O. 13175 resulted in the publication 
of this amended proposed rule and is expected to be completed before 
the publication of the final rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended and codified at 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to the notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) or any other statute, unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Under section 605(b) of the RFA, however, if 
the head of an agency (or his or her designee) certifies that a rule 
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
entities, the statute does not require the agency to prepare a 
regulatory flexibility analysis. Pursuant to section 605(b), the Chief 
Counsel for Regulation, Department of Commerce, submitted a memorandum 
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Small Business Administration, 
certifying that original proposed rule would not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The rationale for 
that certification was set forth in the preamble (78 FR 35776; Jun. 14, 
2013). This rule proposes to modify the proposed boundary of the 
sanctuary, address questions and concerns on ballasting operations 
within the proposed expansion area, and clarify the correlation between 
TBNMS regulations and Indian tribal fishing activities. The only 
substantive regulatory change made in this amended proposed rule is the 
change to the proposed sanctuary boundary that would not include the 
ports of Alpena, Rogers City and Presque Isle. Current operations in 
those three ports would not be affected with the absence or presence of 
sanctuary regulations; therefore, no economic impact, significant or 
otherwise, is expected to result from these proposed changes. There is 
no substantive regulatory change from the original proposed rule on the 
topics of ballasting operations within the proposed expansion area and 
of the correlation between TBNMS regulations and Indian tribal fishing 
activities; therefore, no economic impact is expected to result from 
these either. In conclusion, the provisions contained in this amended 
proposed rule do not change the original determination that this rule 
will not result in a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) which has been approved by 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0648-
0141. As explained in the original proposed rule published at 78 FR 
35776 (Jun. 14, 2013), the public reporting burden for national marine 
sanctuary general permits is estimated to average 1 hour 30 minutes per 
response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching 
existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and 
completing and reviewing the collection of information. This rulemaking 
would not appreciably change the average annual number of respondents 
on a national level or the reporting burden for this information 
requirement. Therefore, NOAA has determined that the proposed 
regulations do not necessitate a modification to its information 
collection approval by the Office of Management and Budget under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act.

G. National Historic Preservation Act

    The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA; Pub. L. 89-
665; 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.) is intended to preserve historical and 
archaeological sites in the United States of America.

[[Page 26658]]

The act created the National Register of Historic Places, the list of 
National Historic Landmarks, and the State Historic Preservation 
Offices. Section 106 of the NHPA requires Federal agencies to take into 
account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, and 
afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a 
reasonable opportunity to comment. The historic preservation review 
process mandated by Section 106 is outlined in regulations issued by 
ACHP (36 CFR part 800). The Michigan State Historic Preservation 
Office, which implements section 106 of the NHPA, is located in the 
Michigan State Housing Development Authority. NOAA has and continues to 
consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer on matters related 
to Section 106 of the NHPA. A programmatic agreement will be developed 
if the expansion of the sanctuary is finalized and if it is determined 
to be necessary.

VI. Request for Comments

    NOAA requests comments on this proposed rule for 30 days after 
publication of this document.

VII. References

    A list of references is available upon request and online at: 
http://thunderbay.noaa.gov/management/expansion.html.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 922

    Administrative practice and procedure, Coastal zone, Fishing gear, 
Marine resources, Natural resources, Penalties, Recreation and 
recreation areas, Wildlife.

(Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog Number 11.429 Marine Sanctuary 
Program)

    Dated: May 2, 2014.
Holly A. Bamford,
Assistant Administrator, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration.
    Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, NOAA proposes 
amending part 922, title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations as 
follows:

PART 922--NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY PROGRAM REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for part 922 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart R--Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater 
Preserve

0
2. Revise Sec.  922.190 to read as follows:


Sec.  922.190  Boundary.

    (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the 
Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve 
(Sanctuary) consists of an area of approximately 3,247 square nautical 
miles (sq. nmi) (4,300 sq. mi.) of waters of Lake Huron and the 
submerged lands thereunder, over, around, and under the underwater 
cultural resources in Thunder Bay. The eastern boundary of the 
sanctuary begins at the intersection of the southern Alcona County 
boundary and the U.S./Canada international boundary (Point 1). The 
eastern boundary of the sanctuary approximates the international 
boundary passing through Points 2-5. The boundary continues west 
through Point 6 and then back to the northeast until it intersects with 
the 45.83333[deg] N line of latitude at Point 7. The northern boundary 
follows the line of latitude 45.83333[deg] N westward until it 
intersects the -84.33333[deg] W line of longitude at Point 8. The 
western boundary extends south along the -84.33333[deg] W line of 
longitude towards Point 9 until it intersects the ordinary high water 
mark at Cordwood Point. From there, the western boundary follows the 
ordinary high water mark as defined by Part 325, Great Lakes Submerged 
Lands, of P.A. 451(1994), as amended, cutting across the mouths of 
rivers and streams until it intersects the line formed between Point 10 
and Point 11 south of Rogers City, MI. From there the boundary moves 
offshore through Points 11-15 in order until it intersects the ordinary 
high water mark along the line formed between Point 15 and Point 16. At 
this intersection the boundary continues to follow the ordinary high 
water mark south until it intersects with the line formed between Point 
17 and Point 18 near Stoneport Harbor Light in Presque Isle, MI. From 
there the boundary moves offshore through Points 18-20 in order until 
it intersects the ordinary high water mark along the line formed 
between Point 20 and Point 21. At this intersection the boundary 
continues to follow the ordinary high water mark south until it 
intersects the line formed between Point 22 and Point 23 near the 
Lafarge dock in Alpena, MI. At this intersection the boundary moves 
towards Point 23 until it intersects the ordinary high water mark. At 
this intersection the boundary follows the ordinary high water mark 
south until it intersects the southern Alcona County boundary along the 
lined formed between Point 24 and Point 25 in Greenbush, MI. Finally, 
at this intersection the boundary moves eastward and offshore until it 
reaches Point 25.
    (b) Excluded from the Sanctuary boundary are the following ports:
    (1) Rogers City;
    (2) Presque Isle;
    (3) Alpena;
    (c) The coordinates of each boundary area appear in Appendix A of 
this Subpart.
0
3. Amend Sec.  922.191(a) to revise the definition for ``Traditional 
fishing'' and add a definition for ``Treaty fishing rights'' in 
alphabetical order to read as follows:


Sec.  922.191  Definitions.

    (a) * * *
    Traditional fishing means those commercial, recreational, and 
subsistence fishing activities that were customarily conducted within 
the Sanctuary prior to its designation or expansion, as identified in 
the relevant Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan 
for this Sanctuary. Traditional fishing includes tribal fishing rights 
as provided for in the 1836 Treaty of Washington and subsequent court 
decisions related to the Treaty.
    Treaty fishing rights means those rights reserved in the 1836 
Treaty of Washington and in subsequent court decisions related to the 
Treaty.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec.  922.197 to read as follows:


Sec.  922.197  Effect on affected federally-recognized Indian tribes.

    The exercise of treaty fishing rights is not modified, altered, or 
in any way affected by the regulations promulgated in this Subpart. The 
Director shall consult with the governing body of each federally-
recognized Indian tribe mentioned in the 1836 Treaty of Washington and 
in subsequent court decisions related to the Treaty regarding any 
matter which might affect the ability of the Tribe's members to 
participate in treaty fishing activities in the Sanctuary.
0
5. Revise Appendix A to Subpart R of Part 922 to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart R of Part 922--Thunder Bay National Marine 
Sanctuary and Underwater Preserve Boundary Coordinates [Based on North 
American Datum of 1983]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Point ID               Latitude (north)    Longitude (west)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1..............................  44.512834            -82.329519
2..............................  44.858147            -82.408717
3..............................  45.208484            -82.490596
4..............................  45.335902            -82.52064
5..............................  45.771937            -83.483974

[[Page 26659]]

 
6..............................  45.773944            -83.636867
7..............................  45.833333            -83.584432
8..............................  45.833333            -84.333333
9 *............................  45.662858            -84.333333
10 *...........................  45.41733             -83.77327
11.............................  45.42103             -83.79487
12.............................  45.42708             -83.79371
13.............................  45.42343             -83.75318
14.............................  45.41748             -83.75333
15.............................  45.41210             -83.76805
16 *...........................  45.40738             -83.76785
17 *...........................  45.29672             -83.41908
18.............................  45.29682             -83.40965
19.............................  45.29010             -83.40965
20.............................  45.29464             -83.41914
21 *...........................  45.29681             -83.42277
22 *...........................  45.06632             -83.40715
23 *...........................  45.06560             -83.40810
24 *...........................  44.511734            -83.320169
25.............................  44.512834            -82.329519
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Note: The coordinates in the table above marked with an asterisk 
(*) are not part of the sanctuary boundary. These coordinates are 
landward reference points used to draw a line segment that 
intersects with the shoreline for the purpose of charting the 
boundary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10672 Filed 5-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-NK-P