Rule2024-28931
Modification of the Duration of Certain Permits and Letters of Confirmation Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 12, 2024
Effective
January 13, 2025
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Abstract
NMFS hereby modifies the regulations for Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) section 104 permits, including scientific research, enhancement, photography, and public display permits and Letters of Confirmation (LOCs) under the General Authorization. The modification removes the 5-year regulatory limitation on the duration of section 104 permits and LOCs. This change gives NMFS the discretion to issue these permits for longer than 5 years, if such a duration is appropriate. This rule applies only to permits and LOCs issued under section 104 of the MMPA.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 239 (Thursday, December 12, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 100393-100402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-28931]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 216
[Docket No. 241126-0301]
RIN 0648-BK65
Modification of the Duration of Certain Permits and Letters of
Confirmation Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS hereby modifies the regulations for Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) section 104 permits, including scientific
research, enhancement, photography, and public display permits and
Letters of Confirmation (LOCs) under the General Authorization. The
modification removes the 5-year regulatory limitation on the duration
of section 104 permits and LOCs. This change gives NMFS the discretion
to issue these permits for longer than 5 years, if such a duration is
appropriate. This rule applies only to permits and LOCs issued under
section 104 of the MMPA.
DATES: This rule is effective on January 13, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Young or Carrie Hubard, Office of
Protected Resources, NMFS, (301) 427-8401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 100394]]
Authority for Action
Under section 104 of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1374), NMFS may issue
permits for the take or importation of marine mammals for:
<bullet> Scientific research (section 104 (c)(3));
<bullet> Enhancing the survival or recovery of the species or stock
(section 104 (c)(4));
<bullet> Public display (section 104 (c)(2));
<bullet> Commercial or educational photography (section 104(c)(6));
and
<bullet> Scientific research that may result only in taking by
Level B harassment, via LOCs issued under the MMPA's General
Authorization (GA) provisions (section 104 (c)(3)). Level B harassment
refers to activities that have the potential to disturb but not injure
a marine mammal.
The implementing regulations for scientific research, enhancement,
public display, and photography permits can be found at 50 CFR 216.31-
216.41. The implementing regulations for issuing LOCs under the GA can
be found at 50 CFR 216.45. Applying for an LOC is a simpler and more
expedited process than applying for a scientific research permit, and
it does not require a public comment period. An LOC confirms that an
applicant's proposed research activities will only result in Level B
harassment (i.e., activities with the potential to disturb but not
injure) and will only target marine mammals that are not endangered or
threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). A scientific
research permit is required for research that will result in take of
ESA-listed species or for research that involves more than Level B
harassment of marine mammals.
Background
Section 2 of the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361, provides that it is the
sense of Congress that marine mammals ``should be protected and
encouraged to develop to the greatest extent feasible commensurate with
sound policies of resource management and that the primary objective of
their management should be to maintain the health and stability of the
marine ecosystem.'' Section 2 also includes Congress' finding that
there is inadequate knowledge of the ecology and population dynamics of
marine mammals. Since the MMPA was enacted in 1972, NMFS has issued
permits to allow research on marine mammals as well as other permits
and LOCs allowing take of marine mammals as specified in section 104.
Take, as defined in section 3 of the MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1362, and in
Sec. 216.3, means to harass, hunt, capture, collect, and kill marine
mammals, or any attempt to do so. While all permits that are the
subject of this rule authorize take of marine mammals, the majority of
the take authorized under these permits is for low-level harassment of
marine mammals or collection of biological samples rather than lethal
take.
Section 104 permits like those described below authorize activities
that promote the goals set out in section 2 of the MMPA. The vast
majority of permits issued under section 104 (93 percent of current
permits) authorize scientific research on marine mammals. Research
permits cover a wide variety of projects, such as capturing, sampling,
tagging, and releasing seals to find out how deep they dive, remotely
biopsy sampling and tagging large whales to study their migrations, or
conducting physiology studies on permanently captive marine mammals in
academic facilities. In addition to fieldwork activities, some research
permits authorize scientists to import and export marine mammal parts
(i.e., biological samples) to study topics such as disease, genetics,
prey species, and hormones; and for curation in scientific collections.
Some scientists have permits for both research and enhancement
activities, such as vaccinating a wild endangered population against
disease or maintaining endangered animals that cannot be released to
the wild to contribute to the survival or recovery of the species. LOCs
may be issued to researchers who study non-listed marine mammals and
whose research methods may only result in low-level (i.e., Level B)
harassment. An example would be photographing bottlenose dolphins
(Tursiops truncatus) to identify individuals and study distribution and
social patterns. As scientists conduct permitted research, they expand
our knowledge of the abundance, distribution, and health of these
animals. Resource managers then use the best available science to
inform their decisions.
Under section 104, NMFS also issues permits for commercial and
educational photography of non-listed marine mammals. For example, a
typical photography permit authorizes filming of marine mammals by
underwater divers or from a vessel or drone to collect footage for a
documentary. Filmmakers working under a commercial photography permit
are restricted to activities that only have the potential to disturb
(not physically contact, injure, or kill) marine mammals. Often the
final product of these permits is a documentary television series or
similar project that may inspire awe and educate the public about
marine mammals.
Additionally, NMFS also issues section 104 permits for the import
of non-depleted and non-listed marine mammals for the purpose of public
display. For example, a public display permit may authorize the import
of dolphins from a foreign facility for public exhibition at a U.S. zoo
or aquarium. These permits mandate a conservation or education program,
as well as provide opportunities for the public to view marine mammals.
Section 104(b) of the MMPA requires that all permits specify ``the
period during which the permit is valid.'' The MMPA does not limit how
long section 104 permits or LOCs can be valid. Currently, there are
regulatory limitations that prevent section 104 permits and LOCs from
being valid longer than 5 years (Sec. Sec. 216.35 and 216.45,
respectively), with the provision for 1-year extensions (Sec. Sec.
216.39 and 216.45, respectively). This rule removes the 5-year
regulatory limitation on the duration of section 104 permits and LOCs.
This will allow NMFS to issue section 104 permits and LOCs for longer
than 5 years, as appropriate. Each permit will have an expiration date,
tailored to the specific activities proposed by the applicant, which
will be subject to public comment.
Need for the Action
NMFS has been issuing marine mammal permits under section 104 for
almost 50 years, and NMFS' implementing regulations have not been
updated since 1996. Having issued MMPA permits since 1972, NMFS has a
better understanding of marine mammal research and the effects of that
research than when the 5-year restriction was promulgated in 1996.
Based on decades of experience with the issuance of these permits and
the activities conducted pursuant to them, NMFS believes a change is
warranted to allow section 104 permits with durations greater than 5
years, in certain circumstances, as discussed below. As described in
our comment responses below, NMFS routinely receives feedback from
permit holders about the burden of the permit application process.
Seventy-five percent of comments received in support of NMFS' proposed
rule referenced the burden of the permit application process.
An important benefit of removing the 5-year restriction on permits
is to make the MMPA permitting regulations consistent with those of the
ESA. Many permits are issued under both the MMPA and ESA because the
target species are marine mammals that are
[[Page 100395]]
listed as threatened or endangered, and thus protected under both
statutes. Unlike the current MMPA regulations, the ESA section 10
permit regulations do not limit the number of years an ESA section
10(a)(1)(A) scientific research and enhancement permit may be valid (50
CFR part 222). Consistency between the MMPA and ESA permitting
regulations with respect to permit duration will allow NMFS to issue
joint MMPA-ESA permits with terms of longer than 5 years, if warranted.
Since 2017, NMFS has been issuing 10-year ESA permits for scientific
research and enhancement on species such as sawfish, sea turtles, and
sturgeon, when such duration is warranted. NMFS will now be able to
issue longer duration permits, if warranted, involving marine mammals,
improving consistency and efficiency.
This rule provides greater flexibility and efficiency to permit and
LOC applicants and the agency. Removing the limit on section 104 permit
durations decreases how often researchers need to apply for a permit,
thus decreasing the amount of time and effort required in reapplying to
continue their research. As shown below, decades of permit data show
that researchers tend to apply for multiple permits throughout their
career. Lengthening permit duration where appropriate promotes
efficiency and lessens the burden on our permit holders, while still
providing the protections for marine mammals mandated by the MMPA.
As noted above, most section 104 permits are permits for scientific
research, which results in data that informs management and
conservation of marine mammal species. Rigorous studies of these long-
lived species often require years, even decades, of data collection.
Sixty percent of the current scientific research permit holders have
had a permit for 20 or more years, meaning four or more permit cycles.
Seventeen permit holders have held a permit for more than 40 years.
Many researchers have dedicated their careers to conducting
longitudinal studies. For example, one research group has been studying
the population dynamics of Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii)
since 1968, while another scientist has been studying dolphins in
Florida for over 50 years. NMFS science centers have held MMPA research
permits since the enactment of the MMPA and continue to hold 13 permits
today. The MMPA requires NMFS to conduct research to assess marine
mammal populations, which typically requires scientific research
permits. NMFS is also required to compile abundance and distribution
data on marine mammals and publish the findings as Stock Assessment
Reports. These long-term research efforts, some of which are mandated
by the MMPA, are examples of ongoing projects where a longer duration
permit may be warranted.
Another example of a permit that may merit a longer time period is
for permanently captive marine mammals maintained for the duration of
their lives in academic facilities, zoos, and aquariums for research or
enhancement purposes. Under this change in regulations, these permit
holders might request a permit for longer than 5 years, and the agency
may, in certain circumstances, depending on the specifics of the
research or enhancement, issue a permit for a longer term. However, if
an applicant proposes activities that are considered novel or are
likely to be controversial, a shorter permit duration may be warranted.
The need for long-term research activities is expected to continue
into the foreseeable future and permits or LOCs of longer than 5 years
in duration may be appropriate in some instances. Regardless of the
requested duration of research, all applications for permits or LOCs
will include a proposed duration as well as a justification for this
duration. All permits and LOCs issued will have definitive expiration
dates.
Because NMFS has been issuing permits for decades, the effects of
specific permitted activities on marine mammals, including particular
research techniques, are well known and documented. Most research
methodologies have become standardized over time. Permit holders tend
to request and use the same techniques year after year because they are
effective and create continuity across their long-term data sets. As a
result, the impacts of their activities conducted under consecutive
permits are often expected to be the same or similar. Historically,
these section 104 permits have not raised significant public concern,
as described below.
As required by statute, NMFS gives the public the opportunity to
comment on all scientific research, enhancement, photography, and
public display permit applications it processes, via notice in the
Federal Register. Although NMFS receives infrequent input from the
public, the agency takes all substantive public comments into
consideration when making a decision on whether to grant a requested
permit. All applications are evaluated to ensure the proposed
activities are humane and that other required issuance criteria are met
(see Implementation and Oversight section).
Comments and Responses
On May 2, 2024, NMFS published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register and requested comments from the public (89 FR 35769). On May
3, 2024, NMFS received a request for a 60-day extension of the public
comment period from the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI). On June 3,
2024, NMFS announced a 15-day extension of the public comment period
(89 FR 47508). During the 45 days of public comment, NMFS received 23
comment submissions, including comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (MMC), state, academic, and non-profit researchers, non-
governmental organizations, and private citizens. All comments can be
found at: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/document/NOAA-NMFS-2024-0054-0001">https://www.regulations.gov/document/NOAA-NMFS-2024-0054-0001</a>.
Twenty of the comments received expressed support for NMFS'
proposed action. Commenters stated that the proposed change is positive
and will improve efficiency in the permitting process. The majority of
commenters said that the changes will decrease the burden on
researchers, who must take time away from their research to reapply for
a permit every 5 years. Some commenters, including permit holders with
long-term experience applying for permits, used words such as
``cumbersome'' when describing the permit application process. Multiple
researchers stated that the permit application process interferes with
their ability to conduct field research or to apply for the grants that
fund their research. One researcher said that allowing longer duration
permits will save their program many weeks or months of time.
Multiple letters included comments on the expertise of the NMFS
staff who review and process section 104 permits and LOCs, including
several mentions of a thorough and organized application review
process. Commenters expressed confidence in NMFS' ability to make
decisions about the appropriateness of a particular permit duration,
saying that NMFS staff have the necessary experience and perspective to
do so. Multiple comments stated that annual reports will continue to
hold permit holders accountable and be a useful tool to track
compliance and indicate if any changes are needed.
Three commenters discussed the potential benefits of the proposed
rule changes for permanently captive marine mammals held under
scientific research or enhancement permits. These commenters mentioned
that the current 5-year permit limit is a ``regulatory burden'' that
does not comport with the
[[Page 100396]]
potential lifespan of marine mammals. The Alliance for Marine Mammal
Parks and Aquariums (AMMPA) recommended that NMFS consider a permit
duration that lasts for the life of permanently captive animals and
pointed out that the facilities conducting captive research or
enhancement activities on non-releasable marine mammals have agreed to
cover potentially long-term, expensive medical care for the animals.
The AMMPA and Association of Zoos and Aquariums supported NMFS' effort
for increased consistency between MMPA and ESA permits, but the AMMPA
cautioned against assigning arbitrary time limits to permit durations.
A comment submitted jointly from the Natural Science Collections
Alliance and the Society for the Preservation of Natural History
represents another type of permit holder, those curating scientific
collections of marine mammal specimens. Their letter points out that,
currently, natural history collections must re-apply every 5 years for
a new permit to import, export, or receive parts even though,
typically, there are no changes to research techniques, impacts to live
animals, or activities that could negatively affect wild populations.
The comment states that a longer permit duration could ``support the
longstanding role of collections as stable repositories and save
scientific and administrative effort both for museum collections staff
and for NOAA, without negatively impacting the important function that
these permits serve in marine mammal protection.''
Four commenters stated they support changing the MMPA permit
durations to be in alignment with the ESA permit durations. As noted
above, marine mammals listed under the ESA may also require permitting
under ESA section 10(a)(1)(A) for scientific research or enhancement
activities. The ESA and its applicable regulations do not limit the
duration of such permits.
The MMC comment letter expressed general support of NMFS' proposed
action but provided several comments about the implementation of the
rule, which are addressed below.
Three comment letters explicitly disagreed with NMFS' proposal to
remove the duration limit on section 104 permits and LOCs. Two of these
comments did not contain substantive information and expressed general
opposition to NMFS' proposed rule. The third comment letter, from AWI,
contained substantive comments; summaries of the MMC and AWI's comments
and NMFS' responses are provided below.
Comment 1: The MMC recommended that NMFS develop and consistently
apply objective criteria for determining whether a longer duration
permit or LOC is ``justified and appropriate'' and clearly communicate
those criteria to permit holders and applicants. The MMC commented that
clear criteria specifying when permit holders are eligible for a longer
duration permit will (1) ensure consistency in duration determinations,
(2) allow researchers to know whether their experience and proposed
methods meet the criteria for a longer duration, and (3) improve
reviewers' ability to assess whether a longer duration is warranted.
Response 1: As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, in
addition to consideration of the permit issuance criteria at Sec.
216.34, NMFS will also consider whether the applicant has previously
held a permit, and if so, whether they have successfully achieved their
objectives. If an applicant proposes activities that are considered
novel or are likely to be controversial, a shorter permit duration may
be warranted. Regardless of the requested duration, every application
for a permit or LOC will be required to include justification for the
requested duration. NMFS will update the permit and LOC application
instructions to include this requirement. NMFS will take into
consideration the requested duration of the permit when determining if
the applicant has met the applicable statutory and regulatory issuance
criteria and restrictions (see Implementation and Oversight section).
NMFS will further consider all comments received on a proposed permit
application, including the proposed duration, prior to making a
decision about permit issuance (except LOCs, which do not require a
public comment period).
Comment 2: The MMC recommended that before this rule is finalized,
NMFS should prioritize finalizing its draft of standard methods for
marine mammal research (in the context of scientific research permits).
The MMC also requested that NMFS provide the MMC with a timeline for
when the standard methods will be available for review.
Response 2: At this time, NMFS has prioritized finalizing this rule
because a proposed rule has already been published. There is greater
potential for permitting efficiencies from finalizing this rule than
halting the rulemaking to pursue standard methods. The standard methods
framework is in a preliminary drafting phase and is not yet ready for
public review and comment. While NMFS will continue to develop standard
methods, the standard methods initiative is not linked to the
implementation of permit duration regulation changes. NMFS will keep
the MMC, marine mammal researchers (i.e., permit holders), and the
public apprised of the status of the marine mammal standard methods.
Comment 3: The MMC emphasized that an accurate and complete
application is essential for reviewers to determine whether the
proposed duration is appropriate and justified. The MMC recommended
that prior to publication of any application in the Federal Register,
NMFS staff review each application in light of the applicable
application instructions to ensure that all required information has
been included, is consistent with NMFS's policies, and has been
reviewed and deemed sufficient by relevant internal experts.
Response 3: NMFS reviews applications to ensure they meet the
requirements of our application instructions, derived from the
regulations for section 104 permit applications at 50 CFR 216.33 and
the issuance criteria at Sec. 216.34. NMFS' process follows a protocol
whereby, prior to sending an application to the MMC, external
reviewers, or the public, NMFS conducts a comprehensive review
involving our relevant internal experts. This process will remain the
same when reviewing applications for longer duration permits.
Comment 4: In anticipation of future changes to NMFS' acoustic
thresholds for marine mammals, the MMC recommended that NMFS include a
general condition in all permits or permit amendments involving active
acoustics requiring permit holders to base their estimation of Level A
and B harassment zones on NMFS's current thresholds at the time field
work occurs rather than the thresholds in place when the permit was
issued. More broadly, the MMC recommended that NMFS develop a plan to
ensure that all future changes affecting research activities are
communicated to longer duration permit holders and incorporated as
permit conditions or through permit modifications. The MMC also
recommended that NMFS should consider establishing new general
conditions for all longer duration permits to address this issue and
adopt outreach strategies to inform permit holders whenever relevant
changes occur.
Response 4: As any changes to NMFS' acoustic thresholds have not
been finalized, NMFS cannot speak to how any such changes to research
permits would be implemented. Changes, such as new conditions, will be
applicable to
[[Page 100397]]
all section 104 permits authorizing active acoustics, regardless of
their duration.
NMFS already has mechanisms in place, such as permit contact
emails, our online application system, and web pages, to disseminate
relevant information to permit holders. Through NMFS' experience
issuing permits for greater than 5 years for non-mammal ESA species,
NMFS has found that the mechanisms currently in place are sufficient to
manage longer duration permits and communicate necessary changes or
updates to permit holders. NMFS will continue these efforts and
consider additional outreach strategies for longer permits if the need
arises.
Comment 5: AWI disagreed with the assertion that NMFS' prior
experience issuing section 104 permits and LOCs justifies allowing
permit durations of greater than 5 years.
Response 5: Because NMFS has been issuing section 104 permits and
LOCs for decades, the effects of specific permitted activities on
marine mammals, including particular research techniques, are well
known and documented in the record. This allows NMFS to meaningfully
assess whether a permit application, regardless of the applicant's
requested duration, meets the necessary issuance criteria under the
MMPA, and whether the requested duration is appropriate for the
activity proposed. This record is coupled with NMFS' experience in
issuing approximately 45 permits for greater than 5 years for non-
mammal ESA-listed species since 2017. This history of ESA permit
issuance for durations greater than 5 years demonstrates NMFS' ability
to manage issuance and oversight of longer term permits. NMFS' review
of incident and annual reports and use of adaptive management, for
example through permit amendments, has ensured appropriate mitigation
is incorporated into permits as warranted (see Agency Oversight section
below).
Comment 6: AWI does not view reapplying for permits every 5 years,
even for established research projects, to be overly burdensome for
permit holders or the agency.
Response 6: As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule, the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) estimated number of burden hours to
complete a scientific research permit application is 50 hours, with an
estimated average hourly rate of $32.58. Thus, an applicant for a
scientific research permit will spend approximately $3,258 and 100
hours to apply for two consecutive 5-year research permits. By removing
the duration limit for section 104 permits, the number of burden hours
and costs to apply for a scientific research permit could be reduced,
for example, to approximately $1,629 and 50 hours for a 10-year permit,
if a permit of such duration were to be deemed appropriate.
Additionally, 15 comments received on the proposed rule, including from
permit holders experienced with the application process, referenced the
significant burden of applying for section 104 permits and LOCs. This
is further reinforced by feedback received by NMFS during the course of
permit processing as well as through the PRA process.
The applications submitted by recurrent researchers every 5 years
also creates a burden for the agency. Processing a section 104 permit
takes approximately 6 months. NMFS processed an average of 40 section
104 permits and LOCs annually over the last 5 years. As NMFS has found
with the issuance of longer duration ESA section 10(a)(1)(A) permits,
processing fewer permits annually allows additional focus on
conservation and recovery, including compiling and summarizing
information from permit annual reports for use by ESA section 7
biologists, ESA recovery coordinators, and managers.
Comment 7: AWI commented that the 5-year duration limit was
established with a precautionary principle in mind, and with a primary
goal of protecting marine mammal populations, which can decline
precipitously without scientific detection.
Response 7: The 1993 proposed rule stated that periodic review is
needed and that there should not be indefinite permits for captive
marine mammals. As AWI stated later in their letter, the goal of the
MMPA is to protect marine mammals such that they can be maintained at
optimum sustainable population (OSP). To determine if a population is
at OSP and detect potentially precipitous declines, NMFS must
periodically assess the status of the population, which is typically
achieved through long-term population monitoring under research permits
or LOCs. Permits with durations of longer than 5 years may facilitate
this long-term population monitoring research and inform management
decisions to achieve healthy marine mammal populations.
The issuance of permits for longer than 5 years does not negate the
ability to take a precautionary approach to permitting scientific
research. Because NMFS has been issuing section 104 permits and LOCs
for decades, the effects of specific permitted activities on marine
mammals, including particular research techniques, are well known and
documented in the record. The effects of permitted marine mammal
research are continually monitored by NMFS through management
mechanisms built into the permit process, such as submission of annual
reports and incident reports, which are available to the public through
the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). If, for example, there were
sudden declines in marine mammal populations, NMFS retains the ability
to modify permits to add conditions or otherwise amend a permit, as
well as suspend or revoke permits. These actions can be taken at any
time during a permit's duration.
Comment 8: AWI commented that a 5-year permit duration allows
timely oversight of permit applicants who may be acting in bad faith,
who violate permit conditions, or who provide misinformation on permit
applications. AWI believes that all permit holders should be monitored
closely and be required to reapply for permits on a reasonable
schedule, where permit holders must clarify discrepancies between
permit conditions and actual outcomes. AWI also commented that annual
reports, which are not published in the Federal Register and require
public initiative to review, are insufficient to ensure adequate
transparency. If NMFS proceeds with the proposed rule, AWI commented
that it will likely become more difficult for NMFS to meaningfully
assess whether applicants are applying in good faith and ensure that
the criteria continue to be satisfied throughout the duration of the
permit.
Response 8: NMFS will make its determination on permit issuance
based on whether an application includes all of the required
information and meets NMFS' issuance criteria for conducting activities
over the proposed duration of the permit. If a permit applicant
requests a permit duration longer than 5 years, NMFS will determine if
the applicant has demonstrated they meet all of the issuance
requirements for that proposed duration. Once a permit is issued,
permit noncompliance constitutes a violation and is grounds for permit
modification, suspension, or revocation, and for enforcement action.
All instances of permit noncompliance are required to be reported to
our office, which allows NMFS' to continually track permit compliance.
NMFS reviews annual and incident reports to ensure compliance with the
permit as issued. Additionally, reports from cooperating Federal
partners may be used to evaluate permit compliance. For example, in the
case of permitted captive research and enhancement, NMFS requires
facilities to be compliant
[[Page 100398]]
with the Animal Welfare Act and its regulations. Thus, the U.S.
Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service's reports may be evaluated to assess permit compliance.
The frequency of reporting (e.g., annually) and the types of
reports required will not change regardless of permit duration. AWI did
not provide evidence to support the statement that annual reports are
insufficient to ensure transparency; however, as stated above in
Response 5, since 2017, NMFS has issued approximately 45 permits with
durations greater than 5 years for non-mammal ESA-listed species. This
demonstrates NMFS' ability to manage issuance of longer-term permits.
NMFS' review of incident and annual reports and use of adaptive
management, for example through permit amendments, has ensured
appropriate mitigation is incorporated into permits as warranted (see
Agency Oversight section below). These reports also allow NMFS to
assess if permit holders are making results available to the scientific
community in a timely manner, increasing transparency in research and
enhancement activities.
Comment 9: AWI is concerned about the agency potentially setting
negative regulatory precedent, as NMFS stated in its 1993 proposed rule
``an indefinite valid period for a permit authorizing the captive
holding of marine mammals is unacceptable for a number of reasons''
including the need for public review and comment. The 1993 proposed
rule further detailed that periodic review of permits is necessary to
ensure permit compliance and address any changing circumstances
associated with the captive holding of marine mammals. AWI claimed that
it is arbitrary and capricious for the agency to reverse course on its
longstanding policy.
Response 9: NMFS is not proposing indefinite periods for permits.
As NMFS stated in the 2024 proposed rule, ``each permit would have an
expiration date, tailored to the specific activities proposed by the
applicant, which would be subject to public comment. . . Regardless of
the requested duration of research, every application for a permit or
authorization would include justification for the requested duration
and all permits and authorizations issued would have expiration
dates.'' MMPA section 104 (a)(2)(C) requires that permits specify ``the
period during which the permit is valid,'' and 50 CFR 216.33(d)
requires that an application provides ``the requested period of the
permit,'' which will include a specified expiration date.
NMFS considers the process of evaluating permit compliance to be
continuous, beginning with assessing the standing of an applicant when
a permit application is submitted and continuing through processing of
annual reports and incident reports when submitted. Since the 1993
proposed rule, NMFS has taken a more systematic approach to reporting,
ensuring all applicants are required to provide answers to certain key
questions. Permit holders can now submit annual reports online, making
the process easier for them and also making it easier for NMFS to track
timeliness of required reports. NMFS monitors active permits via
reports to make sure permit holders are in compliance with permit terms
and conditions and that the effects of the permitted activities are
consistent with those described in NMFS' analysis conducted for permit
issuance. In addition to annual reports, permit holders are required to
contact NMFS and submit incident reports within 2 weeks if serious
injury or mortality of protected species occurs (if not authorized) or
reaches that specified in the permit; or, if authorized take is
exceeded in any of the following ways: more animals are taken than
allowed in the permit; animals are taken in a manner not authorized by
this permit; or protected species other than those authorized by a
permit are taken. In such cases, permit holders must stop permitted
activities and request permission from NMFS to resume. Both annual
reports and incident reports are available to the public through FOIA.
As to AWI's concerns about periodic public review, the public will
continue to have an opportunity to comment on section 104 permit
applications when a Notice of Receipt is published in the Federal
Register. The public is notified of permit issuance via the Federal
Register as well. Once a permit is issued, the reports submitted by
permit holders are available to the public through FOIA. In addition to
public review and comments when an application is in progress, the
following will still constitute a major amendment according to 50 CFR
216.39(a)(1) and will be subject to the public comment process: any
changes to (1) number and species of marine mammals; (2) the manner of
taking, import, or export if it may result in an increased level of
take or risk of adverse impact; (3) the location; and (4) the duration,
if extending a permit for more than 12 months.
Comment 10: AWI commented that captures from the wild or import for
public display are not always conducted immediately after the permit is
issued, in some cases not for years after a permit has been issued. AWI
commented that a duration of 5 years is most appropriate, as conditions
in the wild and at a captive facility may change in that time period.
AWI believes a new permit application and review are the most
precautionary way to account for any such changes.
Response 10: NMFS has not issued a permit for the direct capture of
marine mammals from the wild for public display since 1988. Across 15
import permits for public display since 2010, the average time to
import was 2.7 years. Some permit holders cannot conduct their
requested activity in any given year for various reasons (e.g.,
pandemic, logistics, funding). Authorized activities can only be
conducted during the term of validity of a permit, which means the
necessary analyses are conducted to meet the required issuance criteria
for the requested time period. If, during the term of permit validity,
circumstances change such that NMFS decides that action is warranted
(e.g., if there is a sharp decline in the abundance of a population of
wild marine mammals, or if a facility is no longer in compliance with
the Animal Welfare Act), NMFS retains the ability to modify permits to
add conditions or otherwise amend a permit, as well as suspend or
revoke permits. Further, as described above in Response 9, the
following will still constitute a major amendment according to 50 CFR
216.39(a)(1) and will be subject to the public comment process: any
changes to (1) number and species of marine mammals; (2) the manner of
taking, import, or export if it may result in an increased level of
take or risk of adverse impact; (3) the location; and (4) the duration,
if extending a permit for more than 12 months. As NMFS stated in our
proposed rule (89 FR 35769, May 2, 2024), ``each permit would have an
expiration date, tailored to the specific activities proposed by the
applicant, which would be subject to public comment.'' NMFS would
consider public comments on the proposed duration prior to issuing any
permit, including permits for public display.
Comment 11: AWI questioned why NMFS is proposing to change the
duration of all section 104 permits and LOCs when 93 percent of NMFS'
current permits are scientific research permits. The other types of
permits tend to be for singular or discrete activities, and a 5 year-
duration limitation is more appropriate.
Response 11: Removing the 5-year limitation on permit durations
does not mean that all permits will be issued for
[[Page 100399]]
more than 5 years. Regardless of the requested duration, every
application for a permit or LOC will be required to include
justification for the requested duration. NMFS will update the permit
and LOC application instructions to include this requirement. NMFS will
take into consideration the requested duration of the permit when
determining if the applicant has met the applicable statutory and
regulatory issuance criteria and restrictions (see Implementation and
Oversight section). NMFS will further consider all comments received on
a proposed permit application, including the proposed duration, prior
to a decision about permit issuance (except the LOCs, which do not
require a public comment period).
Comment 12: AWI commented that the proposed rule leaves too much to
the discretion of the agency, stating that the duration of a permit
should not be left to the discretion of individuals who may not know
the history of a permit applicant.
Response 12: Over the years, NMFS has created numerous internal
resources to make the processing of permits and LOCs as objective as
possible, as well as maintained the Federal records, which allow all
analysts to access relevant past permit information. All issued permits
are required to have a clear expiration date. Regardless of the
requested duration, every application for a permit or LOC will be
required to include justification for the requested duration. NMFS will
update the permit and LOC application instructions to include this
requirement. NMFS will consider all comments received on a proposed
permit application including the proposed duration, prior to a decision
about permit issuance (except LOCs, which do not require a public
comment period). The duration will be proposed by the applicant,
reviewed by NMFS, and provided to the public and expert reviewers for
their review; it is not at the discretion of individual analysts but
rather the product of a series of rigorous reviews and analyses to
determine if the applicant has demonstrated they meet the applicable
statutory and regulatory issuance criteria and restrictions for the
duration proposed. NMFS' Response 1 above provides additional detail
about the criteria that may be considered when evaluating an
application's requested duration in addition to the applicant's
justification. Additionally, analysts review the annual and incident
reports of the most recent prior permit held by an applicant.
Collectively, this information provides a history of the applicant for
analysts, regardless of their tenure within the agency. The annual and
incident reports are also available to the public through FOIA, which
provides additional opportunity for public review of permitted and
reported activities.
Comment 13: AWI stated that with a 5-year permit duration, the
disposition of captive animals can be reassessed in a transparent
manner within a time frame relevant to the lifespan of the species. AWI
further stated that extending a permit ad infinitum could be used as a
``cover'' for public display of animals imported for research and/or
improper post-research disposition of animals, and that a 5-year permit
duration allows the issue to be periodically reviewed by the public and
the scientific community.
Response 13: As stated in Response 1 above, if an applicant
proposes activities that are considered novel or are likely to be
controversial, which captive marine mammal permits can be, a shorter
permit duration may be warranted. As stated in Response 9, NMFS is not
proposing indefinite periods for any permits. As NMFS stated in the
proposed rule, ``each permit would have an expiration date, tailored to
the specific activities proposed by the applicant, which would be
subject to public comment . . . Regardless of the requested duration of
the proposed activity, every application for a permit or authorization
would include justification for the requested duration and all permits
and authorizations issued would have expiration dates.'' MMPA section
104(a)(2)(C) requires that permits specify ``the period during which
the permit is valid,'' and 50 CFR 216.33(d) requires that an
application provides ``the requested period of the permit,'' which will
include a specified expiration date. Further, as stated in Response 11,
NMFS will take into consideration the requested duration of the permit
when determining if the applicant has met the applicable statutory and
regulatory issuance criteria and restrictions (see Implementation and
Oversight section). NMFS will further consider all comments received on
a proposed permit application, including the proposed duration, prior
to a decision about permit issuance.
Comment 14: AWI commented that NMFS should periodically examine
whether scientific research conducted under a research permit remains
bona fide. NMFS shouldn't assume that all longitudinal studies are bona
fide. Long-term research projects have the potential to become
duplicative or to produce results that are no longer likely to be
accepted for publication in a refereed scientific journal.
Response 14: NMFS does not assume longitudinal studies are bona
fide. Bona fide scientific research is defined at 50 CFR 216.3 as
research on marine mammals by qualified personnel, the results of which
are likely to be accepted for publication in a scientific journal, are
likely to contribute to basic knowledge of marine mammal biology or
ecology, or are likely to identify, evaluate, or resolve conservation
problems. Bona fide determinations are supported by a number of
factors, including but not limited to: (1) a permit applicant's
previously published research and history as a permitted researcher;
(2) whether the proposed research is appropriately designed to meet the
objectives; (3) whether the results of the proposed research are likely
to qualify for publication; and (4) whether the proposed research will
contribute to our knowledge of the species, or address conservation
problems over a given time period. Evaluation of annual reports informs
NMFS if the research conducted under the permit remains bona fide.
Annual reports allow NMFS to assess if permit holders are making
results available to the scientific community in a timely manner, such
as journal publications and presentations. NMFS' application
instructions ask researchers to describe how their study is different
from, builds upon, or duplicates past research. Duplicative research
may be warranted, for example, when validating previous study results.
Applicants are required to describe how they coordinate with other
researchers to effectively manage research efforts and any potential
impacts to the marine mammals in the area.
Comment 15: AWI provided a hypothetical scenario in which a zoo
bred a non-releasable animal that was precluded from breeding,
resulting in a permit violation. AWI commented that requiring the
permit holder to reapply for a new permit after 5 years will ensure the
permit holder offers a justification--which will be assessed by the
agency and outside reviewers, including outside scientists and members
of the public--for the violation.
Response 15: Permit holders are required to report all instances of
permit noncompliance, as part of NMFS' continual evaluation of permit
compliance. Permit holders are required to contact NMFS and submit
incident reports within 2 weeks if serious injury or mortality of
protected species occurs (if not authorized) or reaches that specified
in the permit; or, if authorized
[[Page 100400]]
take is exceeded in any of the following ways: more animals are taken
than allowed in the permit; animals are taken in a manner not
authorized by this permit; or protected species other than those
authorized by a permit are taken. In such cases, permit holders must
stop permitted activities, describe the incident and any future
mitigation measures to prevent the incident from happening again, and
request permission from NMFS to resume. NMFS can take action including
modifying, suspending, or revoking the permit. In addition, the annual
report requires permit holders to discuss any incidents, problems, or
unexpected effects of their activities.
Comment 16: AWI commented that most photography permits are issued
for singular or discrete actions so no need seems to exist for altering
the current regulations to allow permits greater than 5 years in
duration. AWI commented that if a permit holder for photography is
unable to complete a permitted action before the 5-year permit duration
expires, it is appropriate for the permit holder to reapply for a
permit, as circumstances outlined in the original permit application
may have changed.
Response 16: Most photography permits are for periods of less than
5 years, but there are instances where a project of greater than 5
years could be requested and justified. Whether a permit is ultimately
issued for longer than 5 years will depend on the permit application,
including the requested duration, and whether the applicant is able to
meet the required issuance criteria for the proposed action. Removing
the 5-year restriction does not prohibit NMFS from issuing permits for
less than 5 years.
Comment 17: AWI commented that if the process for applying for an
LOC is already streamlined, it does not seem justifiable to remove the
5-year duration limitation as well.
Response 17: The statute does not prohibit NMFS from implementing
additional streamlining measures, provided the relevant issuance
criteria are met. See also Response 16 above.
Comment 18: AWI commented that they see no reason for consistency
between the MMPA and ESA with regard to permit duration as they are
different statutes with different standards and different goals. They
commented that the MMPA seeks to maintain species at an ecologically
relevant level, while the ESA seeks to recover species that have
already declined to a dangerously low level. AWI commented that the
existing regulations as described in NMFS's final rule on 50 CFR parts
216 (MMPA) and 222 (ESA) (61 FR 21926, May 10, 1996) are already
consistent for marine mammals. Given the different purposes of the MMPA
and the ESA, AWI does not believe further consistency is needed.
Response 18: NMFS issues permits jointly under both statutes in the
cases of marine mammals that are listed as endangered or threatened.
Both statutes provide for the issuance of permits for the purposes of
scientific research and enhancement; neither the ESA nor the agency's
implementing regulations limit the duration of those permits, even
though they focus exclusively on species that are endangered or
threatened and thus require heightened protection. Since 2017, NMFS has
issued permits for scientific research of non-marine mammal ESA-listed
species (e.g., sea turtles, sturgeon) for durations greater than 5
years.
Comment 19: AWI commented that both the individual and cumulative
effects of climate change--and the difficulty researchers face in
monitoring marine mammals, which Congress explicitly recognized in the
MMPA--mean that takes such as those authorized by section 104 should be
reconsidered regularly enough for NMFS to recognize and respond to
problematic trends in marine mammal populations.
Response 19: NMFS acknowledges that climate change may have
unanticipated effects on marine mammals and that long-term research is
required to assess the effects to marine mammal populations (Gulland et
al., 2022; Orgeret et al., 2021; Sanderson & Alexander, 2020). The
ability to issue permits for longer than 5 years does not negate NMFS'
ability to monitor the effects of the permitted activity and take
action as warranted. As stated in Response 7, the effects of permitted
marine mammal research are continually monitored by NMFS through
management mechanisms built into the permit process, such as submission
of annual reports and incident reports, which are available to the
public through FOIA.
If, for example, there are climate-driven changes to marine mammal
populations that cause concern, NMFS retains the ability to modify
permits to add conditions or otherwise amend a permit, as well as
suspend or revoke permits. These actions can be taken at any time
during a permit's duration.
Comment 20: AWI commented that if the agency does away with
mandatory time limits for section 104 permits, those seeking to exploit
marine mammals in other ways may push for adjustments to duration
requirements for other types of permits. AWI also commented that even
for purposes of national defense, a 7-year consecutive time limit
cannot be exceeded when it comes to the permitted take of marine
mammals, as outlined in MMPA section 101(a)(5).
Response 20: As noted above, NMFS is not ``doing away'' with time
limits on permits. Every permit will have an expiration date.
Furthermore, section 104 is a distinct section of the MMPA with its own
requirements, which do not include a specific maximum duration. As
noted above, section 104(a)(2)(C) requires only that permits specify
``the period during which the permit is valid;'' the statute does not
specify a limit to permit duration for permits and LOCs issued under
section 104.
Incidental take authorizations under MMPA section 101(a)(5) (16
U.S.C. 1371(a)(5)), as cited by AWI, are distinct from section 104
permits, and contain a duration limit explicitly imposed by the
statute. In fact, the plain language of the MMPA demonstrates that
where Congress intended there to be a defined period, it explicitly
provided one (e.g., MMPA sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D)). These types of
authorizations are not a part of this rulemaking. The 5-year limitation
on section 104 permits, by contrast, was established by NMFS 30 years
ago via a rulemaking process. For the reasons provided in this final
rule, the blanket 5-year limit is no longer an effective or efficient
method of managing section 104 permits and LOCs.
Implementation and Oversight
Once this rule becomes effective, NMFS will begin accepting new
applications for permits and LOCs that may propose durations of longer
than 5 years. Requiring new permit applications, rather than amendment
requests, will allow the public to review the entirety of the proposed
activity. This will also allow the agency to manage its workload and
continue processing new permit applications as anticipated based on
current permit expirations.
Information Required in Applications
Applications for section 104 permits and LOCs will be evaluated and
processed in the same manner as they are now in accordance with 50 CFR
part 216. Applicants will still have to follow the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB)-approved permit and LOC application instructions and
include their proposed start and end dates, as well as a description of
the frequency and seasonality of their proposed
[[Page 100401]]
activities in their application. Currently, applicants for section 104
permits and LOCs can request a time period of 5 years or less. Under
the changed regulations, applicants may request a permit duration
longer than 5 years, which may be more appropriately aligned with a
project's goals rather than an arbitrary 5-year duration. Regardless of
the requested duration, every application for a permit or LOC will be
required to include justification for the requested duration. NMFS will
update the permit and LOC application instructions to include this
requirement.
Opportunity for Public Comment
This regulatory change will not remove the public's opportunity to
comment on permit applications and any major permit amendments. NMFS
will continue to publish notices in the Federal Register for a 30-day
public comment period when complete permit applications and requests
for major amendments are received consistent with statutory and
regulatory requirements (16 U.S.C. 1374(d) and 50 CFR 216.33(d),
respectively). These notices provide the public an opportunity to
comment on the proposed permit duration for each application. NMFS will
also continue to solicit comments from the MMC consistent with Sec.
216.33(d)(2), and other relevant Federal and State agencies in
accordance with Sec. 216.33(d)(3), typically concurrent with the
public comment period. NMFS will continue to consider all public and
expert comments on a proposed permit application, including the
proposed duration, prior to permit issuance. LOCs do not currently
require a public comment period and that will not change.
When this final rule becomes effective, NMFS will begin
implementing the duration changes upon the receipt of new permit and
LOC applications. Applicants must provide a justification for the
proposed duration when they apply for a new permit or LOC. This process
will ensure that the public is able to review and comment on permit
applications with durations longer than 5 years. Currently active
permits with durations of 5 years or less will not automatically be
changed to longer durations; we will not be amending those permits to
extend their duration other than issuance of minor amendments for
extensions of 12 months or less if justified (e.g., to allow activities
to continue uninterrupted prior to obtaining a new permit). As stated
above, we will consider permit durations of more than 5 years in new
permit applications. See Amendments to Extend the Permit or LOC
Duration below for additional information.
Permit Issuance
Issuing a longer term permit will require that the duration as
proposed in a permit or LOC application is justified and appropriate
for the applicant's project and objectives, is supported by the
applicant's history with previous MMPA permits, has undergone public
comment (except for LOCs, which do not require public comment), and
meets all statutory and regulatory issuance criteria. All permits and
LOCs issued will have expiration dates printed on the permit
documentation. Despite removing the 5-year regulatory maximum duration,
NMFS expects that there will continue to be projects for which a permit
for a term of 5 years or less will be appropriate. For example, permits
such as those for commercial or educational photography are issued for
discrete projects that take place at specific times, rarely requiring
more than a year or two. Similarly, permits for importation of marine
mammals for public display are issued for a singular or discrete
action, which typically warrant a permit of short duration. Thus, the
duration of the permit will be determined based on the specific project
proposed and the justified duration of that project.
To obtain a section 104 permit for scientific research or
enhancement, applicants must meet certain statutory and regulatory
issuance criteria. This includes, among other things, the regulatory
issuance criteria at Sec. 216.34, which require applicants to
demonstrate, for the time period proposed, that the activity is:
<bullet> Humane and with no unnecessary risks;
<bullet> Consistent with regulatory restrictions;
<bullet> Consistent with the purposes and policies of the ESA (if
threatened or endangered species are involved);
<bullet> Not likely to have a significant adverse impact on the
species or stock;
<bullet> Conducted by personnel with expertise and adequate
facilities and resources;
<bullet> Conducted by personnel with adequate resources for marine
mammals held captive or transported; and
<bullet> That any requested import or export will not likely result
in additional taking.
Additional criteria apply for depleted, threatened, and endangered
marine mammals. These criteria will still apply regardless of permit
duration.
In addition to the regulatory criteria above, NMFS will also
consider whether the applicant has previously held a permit or LOC, and
if so, whether they have successfully carried out the permitted
objectives. For example, for research permits, this may include whether
the permit holder obtained funding, collected data, and made the
results available to the scientific community in a reasonable period.
As explained above (see Need for the Action), most permits issued under
section 104 have not raised substantial public concern, and the impacts
of most activities conducted under section 104 permits are well known.
If an applicant proposes activities that are considered novel or are
likely to be controversial, a shorter permit duration may be warranted.
Agency Oversight
Under the regulation change, permit and LOC holders will still be
subject to agency oversight. For example, permit and LOC holders must
submit annual reports as required by the regulations at Sec. Sec.
216.38 and 216.45(d)(2), respectively. This requirement is universal,
regardless of how long their permit or LOC is valid. Further, permit
holders are required to stop permitted activities and submit incident
reports for incidents such as mortalities, exceeding authorized take,
and taking protected species that were not authorized. LOC and
photography permit holders must temporarily stop authorized research if
they exceed Level B harassment. Annual and incident reports allow NMFS
to monitor permit and LOC compliance and impacts to protected species
and are available to the public. NMFS maintains its authority for
permit or LOC modification, suspension, or revocation. For example,
NMFS may determine a permit modification is warranted to add permit
conditions in response to information provided in annual or incident
reports.
The agency will continue to publish in the Federal Register notices
of receipt of requests for major amendments to increase the number of
animals, add species, add methods that will increase adverse impacts,
and change locations, for a 30-day public comment period, and notices
of issuance of all major amendments and minor amendments extending a
permit or LOC up to 1 year.
For any amendment to a permit or LOC, the agency will also
reexamine the National Environmental Policy Act analysis based on
information provided in the amendment request, taking into
consideration information in annual and incident reports and in
published literature. Likewise, if ESA-listed species are involved and
the action is covered under an ESA section 7
[[Page 100402]]
consultation and, for example, a new species is listed or critical
habitat is designated, NMFS will review the new information to
determine if consultation needs to be reinitiated in accordance with 50
CFR 402.16. If these analyses produce new information that warrants a
change to a permit or permits, NMFS retains the ability to amend
permits to add conditions, such as mitigation measures to minimize
impacts to protected species, as described in Sec. 216.36(b).
Amendments To Extend the Permit or LOC Duration
As mentioned above (see Opportunity for Public Comment) and
consistent with current practice, permit and LOC holders may request a
minor amendment to extend the duration of their permit up to 1 year, if
justified. The regulations at 50 CFR 216.39 state that a major
amendment may include an extension of a permit beyond 12 months;
however, NMFS typically issues extensions for 12 months or less.
Classification
Pursuant to the procedures established to implement E.O. 12866, the
Office of Management and Budget has determined that this rule is not
significant.
Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Permit and LOC
applicants including individuals, academic institutions, business or
other for-profit organizations, not-for-profit institutions, and
government organizations are the only entities that are subject to the
requirements in these regulations. The number of small governmental
jurisdictions, small organizations, or small businesses affected is
approximately less than 150 entities total, and less than 35 applicants
annually (some of which submit multiple applications). The change in
duration of permits will not affect the cost to these small entities,
as it will require the same amount of time and resources to apply for a
5-year permit as it will to apply for a permit of a longer duration.
Overall, this rule may reduce the costs to these entities by
potentially spending less time applying for permits. For example, the
estimated number of burden hours to complete a scientific research
permit application is 50 hours, with an estimated average hourly rate
of $32.58. Thus, an applicant for a scientific research permit will
spend approximately $3,258 and 100 hours to apply for two consecutive
5-year research permits. By removing the duration limit for section 104
permits, the number of burden hours and costs to apply for a scientific
research permit could potentially be reduced to approximately $1,629
and 50 hours for a 10-year permit, if issued. An applicant for an LOC
will spend approximately 10 hours and $325.80 to complete a 5-year LOC
application, which if issued for a longer period, will reduce that
cost. Because of this, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required, and none has been prepared.
A person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be
subject to a penalty for failure to comply with an information
collection subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) of 1995 unless the information collection has a currently valid
OMB Control Number. This rule contains collection-of-information
requirements subject to the provisions of the PRA.\1\ No changes to the
reporting requirements or to the information collection instrument is
required as a result of this regulatory change, other than removing the
5-year duration restriction and requesting justification for an
applicant's proposed permit duration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The information collection is currently approved by OMB
under control no. 0648-0084, Basic Requirements for Special
Exception Permits and Authorizations to Take, Import, and Export
Marine Mammals, Threatened and Endangered Species, and for
Maintaining a Captive Marine Mammal Inventory Under section 104 of
the MMPA, the Fur Seal Act, and/or section 10(a)(1)(A) of the
Endangered Species Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 216
Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Imports, Marine
mammals.
Dated: December 4, 2024.
Samuel D. Rauch, III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
For reasons set forth in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part 216
as follows:
PART 216--REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE
MAMMALS
0
1. The authority citation for part 216 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 216.35, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 216.35 Permit restrictions.
* * * * *
(b) Special exception permits expire on the date specified in the
permit, unless limited or extended in duration by the Director in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 216.36 and 216.39.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 216.45, revise paragraphs (b)(2)(iv) and (d)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 216.45 General Authorization for Level B harassment for
scientific research.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) The period of time over which the research project or program
will be conducted (i.e., the requested period of the LOC), including
the field season(s) for the research, if applicable;
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) Authorization to conduct research under the General
Authorization is for the period(s) of time identified in the letter of
confirmation issued under paragraph (c) of this section, unless limited
or extended by the Director, or modified, suspended, or revoked in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this section;
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-28931 Filed 12-11-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 12, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.