NAO 216-6, Environmental Review Procedures, requires all proposed projects to be reviewed with respect to environmental consequences on the human environment.

The proposed project is to renovate and expand the existing main structure at the research facility known as The Cooperative Oxford Laboratory, Oxford, Maryland.   The scope of the proposed project is:
 

Expansion and renovation involves furnishing materials, tools, equipment, supervision, and incidentals by the Federal Government.  In a cost sharing arrangement with the State of Maryland, the state will provide the funds for labor as required.  All work will be conducted by state employees or licensed contractors in conformance with applicable conventional engineering and construction practices.  Work will be performed on site, in one location at Oxford, Maryland.

This proposed project represents repair, renovation, and
expansion activities to an existing Federal facility.  Expansion of the facility will occur.  Appropriate State and Federal agencies with jurisdictions over waterfront and shore lands have been advised of the proposed project.  A copy of the Maryland State Department of Natural Resources May 9, 1995, memorandum of Federal Consistency with the State’s Coastal Zone Management Program, as are required by Section 307 of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, is attached.  Also attached is the Maryland State Department of Natural Resources “Stormwater Management and Sediment & Erosion Control Approval/Waiver” dated June16, 1995.

This project would not result in any changes to the human environment.  As defined in Sections 5.05 and 6.03a.3b. of NAO 216-6, this is an action of limited size or magnitude.  As such, it is categorically excluded from the need to prepare an Environmental Assessment.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), under the authority of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA), is proposing to restrict the import of Atlantic bluefin tuna (ABT) from Panama, Belize, and Honduras.  This proposed action would require minor changes to the existing regulations for the ABT fishery.

After reviewing the proposed rule (copy attached) in relation to NOAA 216-6, including the criteria used to determine significance, we have concluded that the proposed action would not have a significant effect, individually or cumulatively, on the human environment.  Further, we have determined that the proposed action is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement in accordance with Section 6.03a.3b. of NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.  Specifically, this is an “action of limited size or magnitude” that does not result in a significant change in the original environmental action and involves only minor changes to the regulations.

BACKGROUND

In an effort to conserve and manage North Atlantic bluefin tuna, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) adopted two recommendations at its 1996 meeting requiring its Contracting Parties to take the appropriate measures to the effect that the import of Atlantic bluefin tuna and its products in any form from Belize, Honduras, and Panama be prohibited.

ICCAT has been concerned about the status of North Atlantic bluefin tuna for many years.  The most recent scientific stock assessment shows that mid-year spawning biomass (age 8+) of the western management stock in 1995 was estimated to be 13 percent of the 1975 level (which is considered an appropriate proxy for the spawning stock biomass level corresponding to maximum sustainable yield (MSY).  Eastern Atlantic bluefin tuna is estimated to be at 19 percent of the level that would produce MSY.

The U.S. Atlantic bluefin tuna fishery is managed under ATCA. Regulation of the fishery is required to implement applicable ICCAT recommendations and ATCA and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA) requirements.  Over the years, ICCAT has adopted numerous conservation and management measures aimed at addressing the decline in this resource.  These measures have included establishing (1) catch limits and quotas, (2) time and area closures to protect spawning fish, (3) a minimum size to protect juvenile fish, (4) the Bluefin Tuna Statistical Document (BSD) program to track the trade of bluefin tuna, (5) the Bluefin Tuna Action Plan Resolution that establishes a process to identify non-Contracting Parties whose vessels are fishing in a manner that diminishes the effectiveness of ICCAT’s bluefin tuna conservation recommendations, and, after giving identified counties an opportunity to rectify the activities of their vessels, can lead to a recommendation of trade measures, (6) measures to enhance Contracting Party compliance with ICCAT’s bluefin tuna quotas that can result in quota penalties and, ultimately, trade restrictions.  Environmental assessments, resulting in Findings of No Significant Impact, were prepared by NMFS for the actions that resulted in these recommendations. All substantive ABT regulations to date have been evaluated consistent with NEPA.  This proposed action does not significantly alter those regulations.

Under the proposed trade restrictions, U.S. dealers would be prohibited from importing ABT products from Belize, Honduras, or Panama.  No bluefin tuna were imported from Belize, Honduras, or Panama during 1979-196.  It is unlikely that any importers, wholesalers, or freight forwarders have any significant dependence on bluefin tuna imports from these three countries and there are no extraordinary circumstances that would remove this action from consideration as a categorical exclusion.

Following are the most salient factors contributing to our determination that a categorical exclusion is appropriate for this action:

1.  The principal effect of the proposed action would be to penalize, through trade restrictions, countries that do not support conservation and management measures recommended for ABT by ICCAT.

2.  The action would not, in the United States, result in any increase in fishing mortality; change any basic fishing practices (i.e., fishing effort, areas fished, etc.); or pose any significant threat to the human environment.

3.  The action is of “limited size”; requires only minor changes to existing regulations; and does not result in “a significant change in the original environmental action.”  It is intended to help ensure effective implementation of ICCAT conservation recommendations for bluefin tuna.

Attachments

Enclosure

Enclosures

Under the National Environmental Policy Act, an environmental
review has been performed on the following action.
 
 

Enclosure

 Based on the subject environmental assessment, I have determined that no significant environmental impacts will result from the proposed action.  I request your concurrence in this determination by signing below.  Please return this memorandum for our files.