NOAA has published a final programmatic environmental impact statement that identifies 10 aquaculture opportunity areas in federal waters off the Southern California Bight, Marine Planning Committee co-chair Mike Conroy said during the committee's Nov. meeting. The document evaluates program-level impacts across 22 resource areas but, Conroy said, "it does not propose any avoidance, minimization, mitigation, or monitoring measures for siting of those facilities."

Why it matters: The PEIS establishes areas NOAA deems suitable for aquaculture at a program level, but it does not authorize specific projects. Any commercial operation proposed inside an AOA will be required to complete project-specific permitting and NEPA analysis (an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement), which could add site-specific avoidance or mitigation measures. That means community and fishing-industry concerns will be addressed later in the review process for each proposal.

Details and context: Conroy said the final PEIS selects NOAA's Alternative 4B, which allows shellfish, macroalgae (seaweed), finfish and multispecies aquaculture within the identified AOAs. He summarized the geography as 10 discrete locations, "8 of them off Ventura and Santa Barbara, and 2 others that are within Santa Monica Bay." The final PEIS added multiple appendices after public comment, including protected-resources data, an index and summary of public comments, and the full text of comments; Conroy pointed attendees to ES Table 1 as a concise comparison of impacts across alternatives. The committee was also told the document is lengthy (Conroy cited about 670 pages).

What could come next: Conroy said the most likely near-term proposals include Ocean Rainforest's commercial-scale kelp project (which has an Army Corps permit application pending) and a potential renewed effort by the Ventura Shellfish Enterprise to permit up to "20 10-acre plots" for submerged long-line mussel cultivation. He said the Army Corps of Engineers is expected to be the lead federal permitting authority in most cases and that the California Coastal Commission will perform federal consistency reviews for project-specific actions in state waters. Conroy also referenced NOAA's June guide to leasing, permitting and authorizing aquaculture off California as a public resource.

Discussion and next steps: Committee members asked whether NOAA's preferred alternative is final; Conroy clarified that NOAA selected Alternative 4B in the final PEIS and that subsequent proposals will "tier" from the programmatic document with their own NEPA analysis. Several members suggested the Habitat Committee and the Marine Planning Committee stand ready to prepare comment letters on project proposals or on BOEM and NOAA documents, "depending upon whether or not the comment period overlaps" with the council's meeting schedule.

Quote: "It is envisioned that those would be considered in project specific NEPA as appropriate," Conroy said, describing topics NOAA deemed out of scope for the PEIS such as broodstock sourcing and force majeure events.

Where to watch: Parties interested in proposals should watch Army Corps, NOAA and state channels for project-level permit notices and public comment opportunities. The committee also plans to monitor the Ocean Rainforest Army Corps application, which Conroy said remains pending.