Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal School training operations at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, 51341-51347 [05-17224]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
federal and commercial contracting and
financing opportunities, the size of the
market, and the need for MBDA
resources in the applicant’s defined
service area should also be discussed. (5
Points)
4. Proposed Budget and Supporting
Budget Narrative (20 Points)
The applicant’s proposal will be
evaluated on the following sub-criteria:
• Reasonableness, allowability and
allocability of costs (5 points). MBDA
anticipates that 75% of the funding
level will be allocated to key staff, such
as the Executive Director and senior
business development persons.
• Proposed cost sharing of 30 percent
is required and must be documented,
including whether client fees for
brokering will be charged and applied to
the cost share. Applicants choosing to
charge fees should set forth a fee
schedule in their proposals (5 points).
• Performance-based Budget. Discuss
how the budget is related to the
accomplishment of the work
requirements and the Performance
measures. Provide a budget narrative
that clearly shows the connections. (10
points)
• Non Federal Cost sharing exceeding
30 percent that is related to additional
staff (5) bonus points).
Intergovernmental Review
Applications under this program are
not subject to Executive Order 12372,
‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs.’’
Limitation of Liability
Applicants are hereby given notice
that funds have not yet been
appropriated for this program. In no
event will MBDA or the department of
Commerce be responsible for proposal
preparation costs if this program fails to
receive funding or is cancelled because
of other agency priorities. Publication of
this announcement does not oblige
MBDA or the Department of Commerce
to award any specific project or to
obligate any available funds.
Universal Identifier
Applicant should be aware that they
may be required to provide a Dun and
Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering
system (DUNS) number during the
application process. See the June 27,
2003 (68 FR 38402) Federal Register
notice for additional information.
Organization can receive a DUNS
number at no cost by calling the
dedicated toll-free DUNS Number
request line at 1–866–705–5711 or on
MBDA’s Web site at https://
www.mbda.gov.
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
Department of Commerce Pre-Award
Notification Requirements for Grants
and Cooperative Agreements
The Department of Commerce PreAward Notification Requirements for
Grants and Cooperative Agreements
contained in the Federal Register notice
of December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78389) are
applicable to this solicitation.
Application Forms and Package
A completed proposal submitted by
mail, hand delivery, or electronically
consists of the following sections:
—Program Narrative;
—Budget and Budget Narrative;
—Standard Forms 424; 424A; 424B;
and SF LLL; and
lDepartment of Commerce forms
CD–346; and CD–511.
Failure to include, by the deadline, a
signed, original SF–424 with the paper
application, or separately in conjunction
with an electronically submitted
application, will result in the
application being rejected and returned
to the applicant. Failure to sign and
submit the remaining forms with the
paper application, or separately in
conjunction with an electronically
submitted application, by the deadline,
will automatically cause an application
to lose two (2) points in the overall
score. MBDA shall not accept any
changes, additions, revisions or
deletions to competitive applications
after the closing date for receiving
applications. MBDA may contact
applicants for additional clarifications.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This document contains collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) the use
of standard forms 424, 424A, 424B, CD
346, and SF–LLL have been approved
by OMB under the respective control
numbers 0348–0043, 0348–0044, 0348–
0040, 0605–0001, and 0348–0046.
Notwithstanding any other provisions
of law, no person is required to respond
to, nor shall any person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that
collection displays a currently valid
OMB control Number.
Executive Order 12866
This notice has been determined to be
not significant for purposes of E.O.
12866.
Administrative Procedure Act/
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Prior notice for an opportunity for
public comment are not required by the
Administrative Procedure Act for rules
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51341
concerning public property, loans,
grant, benefits and contracts (5 U.S.C.
533(a)(2)). Because notice and
opportunity for comment are not
required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 533 or any
other law, the analytical requirements of
the regulatory flexibility Act (5 U.S.C
601 et seq.) are inapplicable. Therefore,
a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required and has not been prepared.
Dated: August 26, 2005.
Ronald J. Marin,
Financial Management Officer, Minority
Business Development Agency.
[FR Doc. 05–17233 Filed 8–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–21–U
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 031005B]
Small Takes of Marine Mammals
Incidental to Specified Activities; Naval
Explosive Ordnance Disposal School
training operations at Eglin Air Force
Base, Florida
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental
harassment authorization.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
provisions of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) as amended,
notification is hereby given that NMFS
has issued an Incidental Harassment
Authorization (IHA) to Eglin Air Force
Base (EAFB) to take marine mammals by
Level B harassment incidental to Naval
Explosive Ordnance Disposal School
(NEODS) training operations, which
include up to 30 detonations per year of
small C–4 charges, off Santa Rosa Island
(SRI) at EAFB.
DATES: Effective from August 1, 2005,
through July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and the
application are available by writing to
Steve Leathery, Chief, Permits,
Conservation, and Education Division,
Office of Protected Resources, National
Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910–3225, or by telephoning the
contact listed here. A copy of the
application containing a list of
references used in this document may
be obtained by writing to this address,
by telephoning the contact listed here
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT)
or online at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/
protlres/PR2/SmalllTake/
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
51342
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
smalltakelinfo.htm#applications.
Documents cited in this notice may be
viewed, by appointment, during regular
business hours, at the aforementioned
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolie
Harrison, Office of Protected Resources,
NMFS, (301) 713–2289, ext 166.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the
MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct
the Secretary of Commerce to allow,
upon request, the incidental, but not
intentional taking of marine mammals
by U.S. citizens who engage in a
specified activity (other than
commercial fishing) within a specified
geographical region if certain findings
are made and either regulations are
issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, notice of a proposed
authorization is provided to the public
for review.
Authorization for incidental takings
may be granted if NMFS finds that the
taking will have no more than a
negligible impact on the species or
stock(s), will not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of the
species or stock(s) for subsistence uses,
and that the permissible methods of
taking and requirements pertaining to
the monitoring and reporting of such
taking are set forth.
NMFS has defined ‘‘negligible
impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 as:
an impact resulting from the specified
activity that cannot be reasonably expected
to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on
annual rates of recruitment or survival.
Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA
established an expedited process by
which citizens of the United States can
apply for an authorization to
incidentally take small numbers of
marine mammals by harassment. The
National Defense Authorization Act of
2004 (NDAA) (Public Law 108–136)
amended the definition of ‘‘harassment’’
in section 18(A) of the MMPA as it
applies to a ‘‘military readiness activity’’
to read as follows:
(i) any act that injures or has the significant
potential to injure a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A
Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs or
is likely to disturb a marine mammal or
marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns,
including, but not limited to, migration,
surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering, to a point where such behavioral
patterns are abandoned or significantly
altered [Level B Harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45–
day time limit for NMFS review of an
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
application followed by a 30–day public
notice and comment period on any
proposed authorizations for the
incidental harassment of small numbers
of marine mammals. Within 45 days of
the close of the comment period, NMFS
must either issue or deny issuance of
the authorization.
Summary of Request
On March 11, 2004, NMFS received
an application from EAFB, under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
requesting authorization for the
harassment of Atlantic bottlenose
dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and
Atlantic spotted dolphins (Stenella
frontalis) incidental to NEODS training
operations at EAFB, Florida, in the
northern Gulf of Mexico (GOM). Each of
up to six missions per year would
include up to five live detonations of
approximately 5–pound (2.3–kg) net
explosive weight charges to occur in
approximately 60–ft (18.3–m) deep
water from 1–3 nm (1.9 to 5.6 km) off
shore. Because this activity will be a
multi-year activity, NMFS also plans to
develop proposed regulations for
NEODS training operations at EAFB.
Specified Activities
The mission of NEODS is to train
personnel to detect, recover, identify,
evaluate, render safe, and dispose of
unexploded ordnance (UXO) that
constitutes a threat to people, material,
installations, ships, aircraft, and
operations. The NEODS proposes to
utilize three areas within the Eglin Gulf
Test and Training Range (EGTTR),
consisting of approximately 86,000
square miles within the GOM and the
airspace above, for Mine
Countermeasures (MCM) detonations,
which involve mine-hunting and mineclearance operations. The detonation of
small, live explosive charges disables
the function of the mines, which are
inert for training purposes. The
proposed training would occur
approximately one to three nautical
miles (nm) (1.9 to 5.6 km) offshore of
SRI six times annually, at varying times
within the year.
Each of the six training classes would
include one or two ‘‘Live Demolition
Days.’’ During each set of Live
Demolition Days, five inert mines would
be placed in a compact area on the sea
floor in approximately 60 ft (18.3 m) of
water. Divers would locate the mines by
hand-held sonars. The AN/PQS–2A
acoustic locator has a sound pressure
level (SPL) of 178.5 re 1 microPascal at
1 meter and the Dukane Underwater
Acoustic Locator has a SPL of 157–160.5
re 1 microPascal at 1 meter. Because
these sonar ranges are below any current
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
threshold for protected species, noise
impacts are not anticipated and are not
addressed further in this analysis.
Five charges packed with five lbs (2.3
kg) of C–4 explosive material will be set
up adjacent to each of the mines. No
more than five charges will be detonated
over the 2–day period. Detonation times
will begin no earlier than 2 hours after
sunrise and end no later than 2 hours
before dusk and charges utilized within
the same hour period will have a
maximum separation time of 20
minutes. Mine shapes and debris will be
recovered and removed from the water
when training is completed. A more
detailed description of the work
proposed for 2005 and 2006 is
contained in the application which is
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Military Readiness Activity
NEODS supports the Naval Fleet by
providing training to personnel from all
four armed
services, civil officials, and military
students from over 70 countries. The
NEODS facility supports the Department
of Defense Joint Service Explosive
Ordnance Disposal training mission.
The Navy and the Marine Corps believe
that the ability of Sailors and Marines to
detect, characterize, and neutralize
mines from their operating areas at sea,
on the shore, and inland, is vital to their
doctrines.
The Navy believes that an array of
transnational, rogue, and subnational
adversaries now pose the most
immediate threat to American interests.
Because of their relative low cost and
ease of use, mines will be among the
adversaries’ weapons of choice in
shallow-water situations, and they will
be deployed in an asymmetrical and
asynchronous manner. The Navy needs
organic means to clear mines and
obstacles rapidly in three challenging
environments: shallow water; the surf
zone; and the beach zone. The Navy also
needs a capability for rapid clandestine
surveillance and reconnaissance of
minefields and obstacles in these
environments. The NEODS mission in
the GOM offshore of EAFB is considered
a military readiness activity pursuant to
the NDAA (Public Law 108–136).
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the EAFB
application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on
June 7, 2005 (70 FR 33122). During the
comment period, NMFS received
comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission) and one
individual.
Comment 1: The Commission notes
that the proposed weapons test appears
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
to fit within the definition of a ‘‘military
readiness activity’’ as defined in section
315(f) of Public Law 107–314, which
includes ‘‘the adequate and realistic
testing of military equipment, vehicles,
weapons, and sensors for proper
operation and suitability for combat
use.’’ As such, the revised definition of
harassment adopted in the NDAA
(Public Law 108–136) would seem to be
applicable in this instance. However,
NMFS’ analysis of the small take request
does not seem to have employed this
definition. If NMFS’ preliminary
conclusion that ‘‘no take by serious
injury and/or death is anticipated, and
the potential for temporary or
permanent hearing impairment is low
and will be avoided through the
incorporation of (proposed) mitigation
measures is correct, it may be that no
taking by harassment can be expected
and that no authorization is needed. The
Commission therefore recommends that
NMFS analyze the request for an IHA
and the small take regulations being
contemplated in light of the applicable
definition of the term ‘‘harassment.’’
Although the Commission appreciates
NMFS has yet to promulgate regulations
or take other steps to implement the
new definition, the statutory change
cannot be ignored.
Response: In the preamble to the
notice of proposed authorization and in
this document, NMFS cited the NDAA
definition of Level B harassment for
military readiness activities. While
NMFS believes that the monitoring to be
implemented by EAFB will ensure that
Level A harassment or mortality is
highly unlikely, an authorization under
section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA is
warranted because some animals could
be injured (estimate is 0.4 animals per
year) if the mitigation and monitoring
overlooks an animal.
Given the uncertainty associated with
predicting animal presence and
behavior in the field, NMFS accords
some deference to applicants requesting
an MMPA authorization for an activity
that might fall slightly below the NDAA
definition of harassment, so that they
are covered for impacts that may rise to
the level of take. Equally important,
such an authorization also carries with
it responsibilities to implement
mitigation and monitoring measures to
protect marine mammals.
Comment 2: The Commission remains
concerned that NMFS assessment of
potential harassment levels fails to
apply the statutory definition of
‘‘harassment’’ in the MMPA. It is the
Commission’s view that an across-theboard definition of temporary threshold
shift (TTS) as constituting no more than
Level B Harassment inappropriately
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
dismisses possible injury and
biologically significant behavioral
effects to the affected animals.
Response: As mentioned in previous
Federal Register documents, second
level impacts due to a marine mammal
having a temporary hearing impairment
cannot be predicted and are, therefore,
speculative. The principal reason that
second level impacts are not considered
in classification is that any Level B
disruption of behavior could, with
suppositions, be seen as potentially
dangerous and, therefore, considered
potential Level A harassment or even
lethal. Similarly, Level A injuries could
be seen as being accompanied by some
disruption of behavior and, therefore,
Level B disturbances as well as Level A
injuries. Such reasoning blurs the
distinctions that the definitions of
harassment attempt to make. NMFS
believes that Level B harassment, if of
sufficient degree and duration, can be
very serious and require consideration,
as has been done here. Moderate TTS
does not necessarily mean that the
animal cannot hear, only that its
threshold of hearing is raised above its
normal level. The extent of time that
this impairment remains is dependent
upon the amount of initial threshold
shift which in turn depends on the
strength of the received sound and
whether the TTS is in a frequency range
that the animal depends on for receiving
cues that would benefit survival. It
should be noted that increased ambient
noise levels, due to biologics, storms,
shipping, and tectonic events may also
result in short-term decreases in an
animal’s ability to hear normally. NMFS
scientists believe that marine mammals
have likely adopted behavioral
responses, such as decreased spatial
separation, slower swimming speeds,
and cessation of socialization to
compensate for increased ambient noise
or shifts in hearing threshold levels.
Ship strikes of whales by large vessels
suggest that at least certain species of
large whales do not use vessel sounds
to avoid interactions. Also, there is no
indication that smaller whales and
dolphins with TTS would modify
behavior significantly enough to be
struck by an approaching vessel.
Finally, a hypothesis that marine
mammals would be subject to increased
predation presumes that the predators
would either not be similarly affected by
the detonation or would travel from
areas outside the impact zone,
indicating recognition between the
signal of a single detonation at distance
and potentially debilitated food sources.
Therefore, NMFS does not believe the
evidence warrants that all (or an
unknown percentage) of the estimated
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51343
numbers of Level B harassment be
considered as Level A harassment or as
potential mortalities.
Comment 3: The Commission believes
that NMFS needs to provide a better
explanation of, and justification for,
using the dual criteria established for
determining non-lethal injury (i.e., the
onset of slight lung hemorrhage and a 50
percent probability for eardrum
rupture).
Response: Explanation and
justification were provided in detail in
both the SEAWOLF and CHURCHILL
Final EISs (DoN 1998 and DoN 2001).
An updated summary for using the dual
injury criteria from those documents
was provided in a recent Federal
Register notice, published August 19,
2005, announcing the issuance of an
IHA for the Navy’s Precision Strike
Weapons.
Comment 4: The Commission states
that defining Level B acoustic
harassment from explosive detonation
events in terms off TTS exclusively (i.e.,
behavioral changes related to temporary
hearing impairment), like NMFS does,
implies that behavioral changes not
related to TTS would not constitute
harassment as defined in the MMPA,
which is inconsistent with the term
‘‘harassment’’ as it is defined generally
in the MMPA.
Response: NMFS justification for the
way Level B Harassment is defined as
related to explosive detonations is
addressed in detail in a recent Federal
Register notice, published August 19,
2005, announcing the issuance of an
IHA for the Navy’s Precision Strike
Weapons.
Comment 5: The Commission believes
that additional clarification and
justification is needed concerning the
threshold for ‘‘non-injurious behavioral
response’’ proposed in the application
(6 dB below TTS (i.e., 176 dB re 1
microPa2-sec).
Response: Based on the science used
to develop the CHURCHILL criteria, for
single detonations a significant response
by a marine mammal is not expected to
occur other than by TTS. As noted in
the proposed authorization, NEODS
training operations consist of six
training sessions a year, and each
session consists of five single small
detonations over the course of 2 days.
Due to the infrequent test events, the
potential variability in target locations,
and the continuous movement of marine
mammals in the GOM, NMFS does not
anticipate sub-TTS behavioral
modification because the same animal
will not be repeatedly exposed. The
discussion in the application and
Federal Register notice is relevant to
actions involving multiple detonations.
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
51344
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
NMFS will address comments on this
threshold criterion in an applicable
proposed IHA application with multiple
detonations.
Comment 6: The Commission believes
that NMFS should provide a better
explanation of and justification for
using the 23 psi criterion (versus 12 psi)
for estimating the TTS pressure
threshold.
Response: This issue remains under
review by the Navy, the U.S. Air Force
and NMFS. Navy acousticians believe
that Ketten (1995), which summarized
earlier acoustic research, does not fully
support using a 12–psi peak pressure
threshold for TTS for underwater
explosion impacts on marine mammals
from small detonations. The original
basis in Ketten (1995) for the use of the
12–psi threshold for the SEAWOLF and
CHURCHILL actions (which were
10,000 lb (4,536 kg) detonations) is the
use of a combination of in-air and inwater peak pressure measurements
without adjustment for the medium. A
re-examination of the basis for the 12–
psi threshold by Navy acousticians
indicates that, for underwater
explosions of small charges, a higher
threshold may be warranted. This led
the Navy and Eglin to suggest scaling 12
psi for small charges, which was used
in the proposed authorization notice
and analysis. Although this issue
remains under review by NMFS and the
Navy for future rulemaking actions, as
an interim criterion for this IHA and for
the Navy Precision Strike Weapon
(PSW) IHA, NMFS is adopting the
experimental findings of Finneran et al.
(2002) that TTS can be induced at a
pressure level of 23 psi (at least in
belugas). As explained here, this is
considered conservative since a 23–psi
pressure level was below the level that
induced TTS in bottlenose dolphins.
Finneran et al. (2000; as described in
Finneran et al. (2002)) conducted a
study designed to measure masked TTS
(MTTS) in bottlenose dolphins and
belugas exposed to single underwater
impulses. This study used an
‘‘explosion simulator’’ (ES) to generate
impulsive sounds with pressure
waveforms resembling those produced
by distant underwater explosions. No
substantial (i.e., 6 dB or larger)
threshold shifts were observed in any of
the subjects (two bottlenose dolphins
and 1 beluga) at the highest received
level produced by the ES:
approximately 70 kPa (10 psi) peak
pressure, 221 dB re re 1 micro Pa peakto-peak (pk-pk) pressure, and 179 dB re
1 microPa2–s total EFD. In Finneran et
al. (2002), a watergun was substituted
for the ES because it is capable of
producing impulses with higher peak
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
pressures and total energy fluxes than
the pressure waveforms produced using
the ES. It was also preferable to other
seismic sources because its impulses
contain more energy at higher
frequencies, where odontocete hearing
thresholds are relatively low (i.e., more
sensitive). Hearing thresholds were
measured at 0.4, 4 and 30 kHz. MTTSs
of 7 and 6 dB were observed in the
beluga at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively,
approximately 2 minutes following
exposure to single impulses with peak
pressures of 160 kPa (23 psi), pk-pk
pressures of 226 dB re 1 microPa, and
total EFD of 186 dB re 1 microPa2–s.
Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of
the pre-exposure value approximately 4
minutes post exposure. No MTTS was
observed in the single bottlenose
dolphin tested at the highest exposure
conditions: peak pressure of 207 kPa (30
psi), 228 dB re 1 microPa pk-pk
pressure, and 188 dB re 1 microPa2–s
total energy flux. Therefore, until more
scientific information is obtained,
NMFS has determined that the pressure
criterion for small explosions can be
raised from 12 psi to 23 psi. At this
time, NMFS believes that setting the
pressure metric at 23 psi is conservative.
Analyses indicate that the ranges for
the 23–psi TTS metric at depths of 60
ft (18.3 m) (depth of NEODS missions)
are slightly less conservative than the
originally provided ranges for the 182–
dB (re 1 microPa2–s) TTS energy metric.
For the NEODS activity, NMFS will use
the more conservative values to
determine impacts and areas that need
to be monitored.
Comment 7: Based on the information
contained in the application and
Federal Register notice, the
Commission believes that NMFS’
preliminary determinations are
reasonable, provided that the proposed
mitigation and monitoring activities are
adequate to detect all marine mammals
in the vicinity of the proposed
operations and sufficient to ensure that
marine mammals are not being taken in
unanticipated ways or numbers. The
Commission notes however, that even
under the best of conditions and using
experienced observers, there is greater
than an 80–percent likelihood that small
cetaceans will not be observed if they
are in the vicinity of the test site. Thus,
although there may be a low probability
that certain marine mammal species
will be within the area where
mortalities are considered possible at
the time of weapon deployment, it is
unclear that the proposed monitoring
effort will be adequate to detect them if
they are present. This being the case, the
proposed monitoring activities may be
insufficient to provide assurance that
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
marine mammals are not being exposed
to sound pressures or energy levels that
could cause lethal injuries. Thus,
NMFS, before issuing the requested
authorization, should further explain its
rationale for determining that the
takings will only be by harassment.
Response: The vessel monitoring
effort for NEODS is similar to that used
in previous Navy ship-shock actions,
with the differences being that the zone
of influence is significantly smaller and
the water is shallower, both of which
make it even more likely that a marine
animal will be detected. In these past
ship-shock actions, detonations of
10,000 lbs (4536 kg) were used without
any serious injuries or mortalities being
noted during extensive follow-up
monitoring. Though aerial surveys were
also incorporated into the ship-shock
monitoring measures, they were
considered less effective than vessel
monitoring for NEODS, and in fact, the
Navy found that detection of bottlenose
dolphins and spotted dolphins by
shipboard observers was 100 percent
(DON, 1999, Appendix C). Since, for
safety reasons, the observer vessel will
need to move out of the testing area
immediately prior to the detonation (but
will continue to monitor the ZOI), we
can probably assume that the detection
of dolphins within the ZOI is somewhat
less than 100 percent. However, since
the estimated (based on density
estimates) number of any marine
mammals that could potentially be
exposed to energy levels that may cause
Level A Harassment or death during the
course of the 30 individual detonations
per year, without any observers present,
is only 0.4, NMFS is confident that no
marine mammals will be killed as a
result of EAFB’s NEODS training
operations.
Comment 8: The Commission
recommends that, if NMFS determines
that the potential for lethal injuries is
sufficiently remote to warrant the
issuance of an authorization under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, any
such authorization explicitly require
that operations be suspended
immediately if a dead or seriously
injured animal is found in the vicinity
of the test site, pending authorization to
proceed or issuance of regulations
authorizing such takes under section
101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA.
Response: NMFS concurs with the
Commission’s recommendation and has
included the requirement in the IHA.
Description of Marine Mammals and
Habitat Affected by the Activity
Marine mammal species that
potentially occur within the EGTTR
include several species of cetaceans and
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
the West Indian manatee. While a few
manatees may migrate as far north as
Louisiana in the summer from southern
Florida (where there are generally
confined in the winter), they primarily
inhabit coastal and inshore waters and
rarely venture offshore. NEODS
missions are conducted at a distance of
between 1 and 3 nm (5.6 km) from shore
and effects on manatees are therefore
considered very unlikely and not
discussed further in this analysis.
Cetacean abundance estimates for the
project area are derived from GulfCet II
aerial surveys conducted from 1996 to
1998 over a 70,470 km2 area, including
nearly the entire continental shelf
region of the EGTTR, which extends
approximately 9 nm (16.7 km) from
shore. The dwarf and pygmy sperm
whales are not included in this analysis
because their potential for being found
near the project site is remote. Although
Atlantic spotted dolphins do not
normally inhabit nearshore waters, they
are included in the analysis to ensure
conservative mitigation measures are
applied. The two marine mammal
species expected to be affected by these
activities are the bottlenose dolphin
(Tursiops truncatus) and the Atlantic
spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis).
Descriptions of the biology and local
distribution of these species can be
found in the application (see ADDRESSES
for availability), other sources such as
Wursig et al. (2000), and the NMFS
Stock Assessments, which can be
viewed at: https://www.NMFS.noaa.gov/
pr/PR2/StocklAssessmentlProgram/
sars.html.
The habitat at the NEODS test sites is
approximately 60–ft (18.3–m) deep open
water. The EGTTR contains many reefs,
both natural and artificial, but the
closest reef to the NEODS test site is an
artificial reef over 2 mi (3.2 km) away.
2004). The proposed action would occur
on the ocean floor at a depth of
approximately 60 ft (18 m) and therefore
has the potential to affect both the
continental shelf and inshore stocks.
Continental shelf stock assessments
were estimated using data from vessel
surveys conducted between 1998 and
2001 (at 20– to 200–m (66– to 656–ft)
depths). The minimum population
estimate for the northern GOM
continental shelf stock of the Atlantic
bottlenose dolphin is 20,414 (Waring et
al., 2004).
The most recent inshore stock
assessment surveys were conducted
aerially in 1993 and covered the area
from the shore or bay boundaries out to
9.3 km (5.0 nm) past the 18.3 m-depth
(60.0 nm-depth) isobath (a slightly
different area than that defined as
inshore in the more recent stock
assessment above). The minimum
population estimate of the northern
GOM coastal stock of the Atlantic
bottlenose dolphin was 3,518 dolphins
(Waring et al., 1997).
Texas A&M University and the NMFS
conducted GulfCet II aerial surveys in
an area including the EGTTR from 1996
to 1998. Density estimates were
calculated using abundance data
collected from the continental shelf area
of the EGTTR. In an effort to provide
better species conservation and
protection, estimates were adjusted to
incorporate temporal and spatial
variations, surface and submerged
variations, and overall density
confidence. The adjusted density
estimate for Atlantic bottlenose
dolphins within the project area is 0.810
individuals/km2. A small number of
dolphins could not be identified
specifically as Atlantic bottlenose or
Atlantic spotted and their estimated
density was 0.053 individuals/km2.
Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphins
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins are
distributed worldwide in tropical and
temperate waters and occur in the slope,
shelf, and inshore waters of the GOM.
Based on a combination of geography
and ecological and genetic research,
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have been
divided into many separate stocks
within the GOM. The exact structure of
these stocks is complex and continues
to be revised as research is completed.
For now, bottlenose dolphins inhabiting
waters less than 20 m (66 ft) deep in the
U.S. GOM are believed to constitute 36
inshore or coastal stocks, and those
inhabiting waters from 20 to 200 m (66
to 656 ft) deep in the northern GOM
from the U.S.-Mexican border to the
Florida Keys are considered the
continental shelf stock (Waring et al.,
Atlantic Spotted Dolphins
Atlantic spotted dolphins are endemic
to the tropical and warm temperate
waters of the Atlantic Ocean and can be
found from the latitude of Cape May,
New Jersey south along mainland shores
to Venezuela, including the GOM and
Lesser Antilles. In the GOM, Atlantic
spotted dolphins occur primarily in
continental shelf waters 10 to 200 m (33
to 656 ft) deep out to continental slope
waters less than 500 m (1640.4 ft) deep.
One recent study presents strong genetic
support for differentiation between
GOM and western North Atlantic
management stocks, but the Gulf of
Mexico stock has not yet been further
subdivided.
Abundance was estimated in the most
recent assessment of the northern GOM
stock of the Atlantic spotted dolphin
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51345
using combined data from continental
shelf surveys (20 to 200 m (66 to 656 ft)
deep) and oceanic surveys (200 m (656
ft)) to the offshore extent of U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone) conducted
from 1996 to 2001. The minimum
population estimate for the northern
GOM is 24,752 Atlantic spotted
dolphins (Waring et al., 2004).
Density estimates for the Atlantic
spotted dolphin within the EGTTR were
calculated using abundance data
collected during the GulfCet II aerial
surveys. In an effort to provide better
species conservation and protection,
estimates were adjusted to incorporate
temporal and spatial variations, surface
and submerged variations, and overall
density confidence. The adjusted
density estimate for Atlantic spotted
dolphins within the project area is 0.677
individuals/km2. A small number of
dolphins could not be identified
specifically as Atlantic bottlenose or
Atlantic spotted and their estimated
density was 0.053 individuals/km2.
Potential Effects of Activities on Marine
Mammals
The primary potential impact to the
Atlantic bottlenose and the Atlantic
spotted dolphins occurring in the
EGTTR from the proposed detonations
is Level B harassment from noise. There
is a slight potential, absent mitigation,
that a few mammals would be injured
or killed due to the energy generated
from an explosive force on the sea floor.
Analysis of NEODS noise impacts to
cetaceans was based on criteria and
thresholds presented in both Finneran
et al., 2002, and in the U.S. Navy
Environmental Impact Statements for
ship shock trials of the SEAWOLF
submarine and the WINSTON
CHURCHILL vessel and subsequently
adopted by NMFS.
Non-lethal injurious impacts (Level A
Harassment) are defined in as tympanic
membrane (TM) rupture and the onset
of slight lung injury. The threshold for
Level A Harassment corresponds to a 50
percent rate of TM rupture, which can
be stated in terms of an energy flux
density (EFD) value of 205 dB re 1
microPa2s. TM rupture is wellcorrelated with permanent hearing
impairment (Ketten (1998) indicates a
30–percent incidence of permanent
threshold shift (PTS) at the same
threshold). The zone of influence
(ZOI)(farthest distance from the source
at which an animal is exposed to the
EFD level referred to) for the Level A
Harassment threshold is 52.2 m (171.6
ft).
Level B (non-injurious) Harassment
includes temporary (auditory) threshold
shift (TTS), a slight, recoverable loss of
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
51346
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
hearing sensitivity. The energy criterion
used for TTS is 182 dB re 1 microPa2’s
maximum EFD level in any 1/3–octave
band above 100 Hz for toothed whales
(e.g., dolphins). The ZOI for this
threshold is 229.8 m (754.0 ft). The
pressure criterion, 23 psi, has recently
been established by NMFS based on the
more current work of Finneran et al.,
2002. The ZOI for 23 psi is 222 m (728
ft). A detailed justification for the recent
change in NMFS’ pressure exposure
criteria may be found in the Federal
Register notice for the issuance of an
IHA to the Navy for Precision Strike
Weapons, published August 19, 2005.
Level B Harassment also includes
behavioral modifications resulting from
repeated noise exposures (below TTS) to
the same animals (usually resident) over
a relatively short period of time. No
strictly sub-TTS behavioral responses
(i.e., Level B harassment) are anticipated
with the NEODS training activities
because there are no successive
detonations (5 small detonations in the
course of 2 days, some of which may be
separated by less than 20 minutes, but
which would be in separate locations)
which could provide causation for a
behavioral disruption rising to the level
of a significant alteration or
abandonment of behavioral patterns
without also causing TTS. Also,
repetitive exposures (below TTS) to the
same resident animals are highly
unlikely due to the infrequent NEODS
training sessions (6 sessions per year),
the potential variability in target
locations, and the continuous
movement of marine mammals in the
northern GOM.
Because of mitigation measures
proposed, NMFS anticipates that only
Level B harassment will occur
incidental to the NEODS training
operations and that these events will
result in no more than a negligible
impact on marine mammal species or
their habitats.
Mitigation and Monitoring
Mitigation will consist primarily of
surveying and taking action to avoid
detonating charges when protected
species are within the ZOI. A trained,
NMFS-approved observerwill be staged
from the highest point possible on a
support ship and have proper lines of
communication to the Officer in
Tactical Command. The survey area will
be 460 m (1509 ft) in every direction
from the target, which is twice the
radius of the ZOI for Level B
Harassment (230 m (755 ft)). To ensure
visibility of marine mammals to
observers, NEODS missions will be
delayed if whitecaps cover more than 50
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
percent of the surface or if the waves are
greater than 3 feet (Beaufort Sea State 4).
Pre-mission monitoring will be used
to evaluate the test site for
environmental suitability of the
mission. Visual surveys will be
conducted 2 hours, 1 hour, and 5
minutes prior to the mission to verify
that the ZOI (230 m (755 ft)) is free of
visually detectable marine mammals,
sea turtles, large schools of fish, large
flocks of birds, large Sargassum mats, or
large concentrations of jellyfish and that
the weather is adequate to support
visual surveys. The observer will plot
and record sightings, bearing, and time
for all marine mammals detected, which
would allow the observer to determine
if the animal is likely to enter the test
area during detonation. If an animal
appears likely to enter the test area
during detonation, if marine mammals,
sea turtles, large schools of fish, large
flocks of birds, large Sargassum mats, or
large concentrations of jellyfish are
present, or if the weather is inadequate
to support monitoring, the observer will
declare the range fouled and the tactical
officer will implement a hold until
monitoring indicates that the test area is
and will remain clear of detectable
marine mammals or sea turtles.
Monitoring of the test area will
continue throughout the mission until
the last detonation is complete. The
mission would be postponed if:
(1) Any marine mammal is visually
detected within the ZOI (230 m (755 ft)).
The delay would continue until the
animal that caused the postponement is
confirmed to be outside the ZOI
(visually observed swimming out of the
range).
(2) Any marine mammal or sea turtle
is detected in the ZOI and subsequently
is not seen again. The mission would
not continue until the last verified
location is outside of the ZOI and the
animal is moving away from the mission
area.
(3) Large Sargassum rafts or large
concentrations of jellyfish are observed
within the ZOI. The delay would
continue until the Sargassum rafts or
jellyfish that caused the postponement
are confirmed to be outside of the ZOI
either due to the current and/or wind
moving them out of the mission area.
(4) Large schools of fish are observed
in the water within of the ZOI. The
delay would continue until large fish
schools are confirmed to be outside the
ZOI.
In the event of a postponement, premission monitoring would continue as
long as weather and daylight hours
allow. If a charge failed to explode,
mitigation measures would continue
while operations personnel attempted to
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
recognize and solve the problem
(detonate the charge).
Post-mission monitoring is designed
to determine the effectiveness of premission mitigation by reporting any
sightings of dead or injured marine
mammals or sea turtles. Post-detonation
monitoring, concentrating on the area
down current of the test site, will
commence immediately following each
detonation and continue for at least two
hours after the last detonation. The
monitoring team will document and
report to the appropriate marine animal
stranding network any marine mammals
or turtles killed or injured during the
test and, if practicable, recover and
examine any dead animals. The species,
number, location, and behavior of any
animals observed by the teams would be
documented and reported to the Officer
in Tactical Command.
Reporting
EAFB will notify NMFS 2 weeks prior
to initiation of each training session.
Any takes of marine mammals other
than those authorized by the IHA, as
well as any injuries or deaths of marine
mammals, will be reported to the
Southeast Regional Administrator,
NMFS, by the next working day. A
summary of mission observations and
test results, including dates, times, and
locations of detonations as well as preand post-mission monitoring
observations, will be submitted to the
Division of Permits, Conservation, and
Education, Office of Protected Resources
(NMFS) and the Southeast Regional
Office (NMFS) within 90 days after the
completion of the last training session.
Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected
to be Harassed
Estimates of the potential number of
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins and
Atlantic spotted dolphins to be harassed
by the training were calculated using
the number of distinct firing or test
events (maximum 30 per year), the ZOI
for noise exposure, and the density of
animals that potentially occur in the
ZOI. The take estimates provided here
do not include mitigation measures,
which are expected to further minimize
impacts to protected species and make
injury or death highly unlikely.
The estimated number of Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic
spotted dolphins that could potentially
be exposed to the Level A Harassment
threshold (205 dB re 1 microPa2 s)
during one year is less than one (0.22
and 0.19, respectively).
For Level B Harassment, two separate
criteria were established, one expressed
in dB re 1 microPa2s maximum EFD
level in any 1/3–octave band above 100
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 30, 2005 / Notices
Hz, and one expressed in psi. The
estimated numbers of Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic
spotted dolphins potentially exposed to
182 dB and 23 psi, during one year, if
mitigation measures were not effectively
implemented within the 230–m (754 ft)
ZOI, are 4 and 3 individuals.
Possible Effects of Activities on Marine
Mammal Habitat
The Air Force anticipates no loss or
modification to the habitat used by
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic
spotted dolphins in the EGTTR. The
primary source of marine mammal
habitat impact resulting from the
NEODS missions is noise, which is
intermittent (maximum 30 times per
year) and of limited duration. NMFS
does not anticipate that either debris
(which will be recovered following test
activities) or the minimal chemical
residue from the detonated charges will
affect marine mammal habitat.
Possible Effects of Activities on
Subsistence Needs
There are no subsistence uses for
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins Atlantic
spotted dolphins in Florida waters, and
thus, there are no anticipated effects on
subsistence needs.
Endangered Species Act
In a Biological Opinion issued on
October 25, 2004, NMFS concluded that
the NEODS training missions and their
associated actions are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
threatened or endangered species under
the jurisdiction of NMFS or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat that
has been designated for those species.
NMFS has issued an incidental take
statement (ITS) for 4 species of sea
turtles (leatherback sea turtle
(Dermochelys coriacea), green sea turtle
(Chelonia mydas), Kemp’s ridley sea
turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), and
loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta))
pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act. The ITS contains
reasonable and prudent measures with
implementing terms and conditions to
minimize the effects of this take. This
IHA action is within the scope of the
previously analyzed action and does not
change the action in a manner that was
not considered previously.
National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on the
Issuance of Authorizations to Take
Marine Mammals, by Harassment,
Incidental to Naval Explosive Ordnance
Disposal School Training Operations at
VerDate Aug<18>2005
15:17 Aug 29, 2005
Jkt 205001
Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Therefore,
preparation of an EIS on this action is
not required by section 102(2) of the
NEPA or its implementing regulations.
A copy of the EA and FONSI are
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Conclusions
NMFS has determined that the
NEODS training operations, as
described in this document and in the
application for an IHA, will result in no
more than Level B harassment of
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins and
Atlantic spotted dolphins and will have
no more than a negligible impact on
these stocks. The effects of the NEODS
training are expected to be limited to
short-term and localized TTS-related
behavioral changes, and these takes will
be at the lowest level practicable due to
incorporation of the mitigation
measures mentioned previously in this
document. With the application of the
mitigation measures, as well as the
potential density of dolphins in the area
of the NEODS training operations,
NMFS believes it highly unlikely that
the proposed action will result in any
injury or mortality of marine mammals.
Additionally, the NEODS training
operations will not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of
marine mammal stocks for subsistence
use, as there are no subsistence uses for
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic
spotted dolphins in Florida waters.
Authorization
NMFS has issued a 1–year IHA to
EAFB for the take of Atlantic bottlenose
dolphins and Atlantic spotted dolphins,
by harassment, incidental to NEODS
training operations, which include up to
30 detonations of small C–4 charges per
year, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting requirements are incorporated.
Dated: August 23, 2005.
Donna Wieting,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05–17224 Filed 8–29–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 082305D]
ACTION:
51347
Notice of public meetings.
SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council (Council) will
convene public meetings.
DATES: The meetings will be held
September 12 16, 2005.
ADDRESSES: These meetings will be held
at the Wyndham Bourbon Orleans, 717
Orleans Street, New Orleans, LA 70116.
Council address: Gulf of Mexico
Fishery Management Council, 2203
North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa,
FL 33607.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wayne E. Swingle, Executive Director,
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; telephone: (813) 348–1630.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Council
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
1:30 p.m. Convene.
1:45 p.m. – 5 p.m. – Receive public
testimony on (a) Final Reef Fish
Amendment 18A/Environmental
Assessment (EA), (b) Final Red Grouper
Regulatory Amendment, and (c)
Exempted fishing permits (if any).
5 p.m. – 5:15 p.m. – Receive the Budget/
Personnel Committee Report.
5:15 p.m. – 5:30 p.m. – Receive the
Mackerel Management Committee
Report.
Thursday, September 15, 2005
8:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. – Receive the
joint Reef Fish/Shrimp Management
Committees Report.
1 p.m. – 3 p.m. – Receive the Reef Fish
Management Committee Report.
3 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. – Receive the
Migratory Species Management
Committee Report.
3:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. – Receive the joint
Reef Fish/Mackerel/Red Drum
Committees Report.
4:30 p.m. – 5 p.m. – Receive the
Administrative Policy Committee
Report.
Friday, September 16, 2005
8:30 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. – Receive the
Enforcement Reports.
8:45 a.m. – 9 a.m. – Receive the
Regional Administrator’s Report.
9 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. – Receive the State
Director’s Reports.
9:30 a.m. – 10 a.m. – Other Business.
10 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. – Election of Chair
and Vice-Chair.
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council; Public Meetings
Committee
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
8:30 a.m. – 12 noon – The Reef Fish
Management Committee will review
public hearing summaries, public
letters, Advisory Panel (AP)
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Monday, September 12, 2005
E:\FR\FM\30AUN1.SGM
30AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 167 (Tuesday, August 30, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51341-51347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-17224]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 031005B]
Small Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities;
Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal School training operations at Eglin
Air Force Base, Florida
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of an incidental harassment authorization.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the provisions of the Marine Mammal
Protection Act (MMPA) as amended, notification is hereby given that
NMFS has issued an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to Eglin
Air Force Base (EAFB) to take marine mammals by Level B harassment
incidental to Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal School (NEODS) training
operations, which include up to 30 detonations per year of small C-4
charges, off Santa Rosa Island (SRI) at EAFB.
DATES: Effective from August 1, 2005, through July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the IHA and the application are available by
writing to Steve Leathery, Chief, Permits, Conservation, and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225, or by
telephoning the contact listed here. A copy of the application
containing a list of references used in this document may be obtained
by writing to this address, by telephoning the contact listed here (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) or online at: https://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR2/Small_Take/
[[Page 51342]]
smalltake--info.htmapplications. Documents cited in this
notice may be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours, at
the aforementioned address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolie Harrison, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, (301) 713-2289, ext 166.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.)
direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the
incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S.
citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial
fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are
made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to
harassment, notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the
public for review.
Authorization for incidental takings may be granted if NMFS finds
that the taking will have no more than a negligible impact on the
species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the
availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, and that
the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the
monitoring and reporting of such taking are set forth.
NMFS has defined ``negligible impact'' in 50 CFR 216.103 as:
an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be
reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely
affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of
recruitment or survival.
Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited
process by which citizens of the United States can apply for an
authorization to incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by
harassment. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2004 (NDAA)
(Public Law 108-136) amended the definition of ``harassment'' in
section 18(A) of the MMPA as it applies to a ``military readiness
activity'' to read as follows:
(i) any act that injures or has the significant potential to
injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A
Harassment]; or (ii) any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a
marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing
disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not
limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or
sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned
or significantly altered [Level B Harassment].
Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45-day time limit for NMFS
review of an application followed by a 30-day public notice and comment
period on any proposed authorizations for the incidental harassment of
small numbers of marine mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the
comment period, NMFS must either issue or deny issuance of the
authorization.
Summary of Request
On March 11, 2004, NMFS received an application from EAFB, under
section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, requesting authorization for the
harassment of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) and
Atlantic spotted dolphins (Stenella frontalis) incidental to NEODS
training operations at EAFB, Florida, in the northern Gulf of Mexico
(GOM). Each of up to six missions per year would include up to five
live detonations of approximately 5-pound (2.3-kg) net explosive weight
charges to occur in approximately 60-ft (18.3-m) deep water from 1-3 nm
(1.9 to 5.6 km) off shore. Because this activity will be a multi-year
activity, NMFS also plans to develop proposed regulations for NEODS
training operations at EAFB.
Specified Activities
The mission of NEODS is to train personnel to detect, recover,
identify, evaluate, render safe, and dispose of unexploded ordnance
(UXO) that constitutes a threat to people, material, installations,
ships, aircraft, and operations. The NEODS proposes to utilize three
areas within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR), consisting
of approximately 86,000 square miles within the GOM and the airspace
above, for Mine Countermeasures (MCM) detonations, which involve mine-
hunting and mine-clearance operations. The detonation of small, live
explosive charges disables the function of the mines, which are inert
for training purposes. The proposed training would occur approximately
one to three nautical miles (nm) (1.9 to 5.6 km) offshore of SRI six
times annually, at varying times within the year.
Each of the six training classes would include one or two ``Live
Demolition Days.'' During each set of Live Demolition Days, five inert
mines would be placed in a compact area on the sea floor in
approximately 60 ft (18.3 m) of water. Divers would locate the mines by
hand-held sonars. The AN/PQS-2A acoustic locator has a sound pressure
level (SPL) of 178.5 re 1 microPascal at 1 meter and the Dukane
Underwater Acoustic Locator has a SPL of 157-160.5 re 1 microPascal at
1 meter. Because these sonar ranges are below any current threshold for
protected species, noise impacts are not anticipated and are not
addressed further in this analysis.
Five charges packed with five lbs (2.3 kg) of C-4 explosive
material will be set up adjacent to each of the mines. No more than
five charges will be detonated over the 2-day period. Detonation times
will begin no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and end no later than
2 hours before dusk and charges utilized within the same hour period
will have a maximum separation time of 20 minutes. Mine shapes and
debris will be recovered and removed from the water when training is
completed. A more detailed description of the work proposed for 2005
and 2006 is contained in the application which is available upon
request (see ADDRESSES).
Military Readiness Activity
NEODS supports the Naval Fleet by providing training to personnel
from all four armed
services, civil officials, and military students from over 70
countries. The NEODS facility supports the Department of Defense Joint
Service Explosive Ordnance Disposal training mission. The Navy and the
Marine Corps believe that the ability of Sailors and Marines to detect,
characterize, and neutralize mines from their operating areas at sea,
on the shore, and inland, is vital to their doctrines.
The Navy believes that an array of transnational, rogue, and
subnational adversaries now pose the most immediate threat to American
interests. Because of their relative low cost and ease of use, mines
will be among the adversaries' weapons of choice in shallow-water
situations, and they will be deployed in an asymmetrical and
asynchronous manner. The Navy needs organic means to clear mines and
obstacles rapidly in three challenging environments: shallow water; the
surf zone; and the beach zone. The Navy also needs a capability for
rapid clandestine surveillance and reconnaissance of minefields and
obstacles in these environments. The NEODS mission in the GOM offshore
of EAFB is considered a military readiness activity pursuant to the
NDAA (Public Law 108-136).
Comments and Responses
A notice of receipt of the EAFB application and proposed IHA was
published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2005 (70 FR 33122). During
the comment period, NMFS received comments from the Marine Mammal
Commission (Commission) and one individual.
Comment 1: The Commission notes that the proposed weapons test
appears
[[Page 51343]]
to fit within the definition of a ``military readiness activity'' as
defined in section 315(f) of Public Law 107-314, which includes ``the
adequate and realistic testing of military equipment, vehicles,
weapons, and sensors for proper operation and suitability for combat
use.'' As such, the revised definition of harassment adopted in the
NDAA (Public Law 108-136) would seem to be applicable in this instance.
However, NMFS' analysis of the small take request does not seem to have
employed this definition. If NMFS' preliminary conclusion that ``no
take by serious injury and/or death is anticipated, and the potential
for temporary or permanent hearing impairment is low and will be
avoided through the incorporation of (proposed) mitigation measures is
correct, it may be that no taking by harassment can be expected and
that no authorization is needed. The Commission therefore recommends
that NMFS analyze the request for an IHA and the small take regulations
being contemplated in light of the applicable definition of the term
``harassment.'' Although the Commission appreciates NMFS has yet to
promulgate regulations or take other steps to implement the new
definition, the statutory change cannot be ignored.
Response: In the preamble to the notice of proposed authorization
and in this document, NMFS cited the NDAA definition of Level B
harassment for military readiness activities. While NMFS believes that
the monitoring to be implemented by EAFB will ensure that Level A
harassment or mortality is highly unlikely, an authorization under
section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA is warranted because some animals could
be injured (estimate is 0.4 animals per year) if the mitigation and
monitoring overlooks an animal.
Given the uncertainty associated with predicting animal presence
and behavior in the field, NMFS accords some deference to applicants
requesting an MMPA authorization for an activity that might fall
slightly below the NDAA definition of harassment, so that they are
covered for impacts that may rise to the level of take. Equally
important, such an authorization also carries with it responsibilities
to implement mitigation and monitoring measures to protect marine
mammals.
Comment 2: The Commission remains concerned that NMFS assessment of
potential harassment levels fails to apply the statutory definition of
``harassment'' in the MMPA. It is the Commission's view that an across-
the-board definition of temporary threshold shift (TTS) as constituting
no more than Level B Harassment inappropriately dismisses possible
injury and biologically significant behavioral effects to the affected
animals.
Response: As mentioned in previous Federal Register documents,
second level impacts due to a marine mammal having a temporary hearing
impairment cannot be predicted and are, therefore, speculative. The
principal reason that second level impacts are not considered in
classification is that any Level B disruption of behavior could, with
suppositions, be seen as potentially dangerous and, therefore,
considered potential Level A harassment or even lethal. Similarly,
Level A injuries could be seen as being accompanied by some disruption
of behavior and, therefore, Level B disturbances as well as Level A
injuries. Such reasoning blurs the distinctions that the definitions of
harassment attempt to make. NMFS believes that Level B harassment, if
of sufficient degree and duration, can be very serious and require
consideration, as has been done here. Moderate TTS does not necessarily
mean that the animal cannot hear, only that its threshold of hearing is
raised above its normal level. The extent of time that this impairment
remains is dependent upon the amount of initial threshold shift which
in turn depends on the strength of the received sound and whether the
TTS is in a frequency range that the animal depends on for receiving
cues that would benefit survival. It should be noted that increased
ambient noise levels, due to biologics, storms, shipping, and tectonic
events may also result in short-term decreases in an animal's ability
to hear normally. NMFS scientists believe that marine mammals have
likely adopted behavioral responses, such as decreased spatial
separation, slower swimming speeds, and cessation of socialization to
compensate for increased ambient noise or shifts in hearing threshold
levels.
Ship strikes of whales by large vessels suggest that at least
certain species of large whales do not use vessel sounds to avoid
interactions. Also, there is no indication that smaller whales and
dolphins with TTS would modify behavior significantly enough to be
struck by an approaching vessel. Finally, a hypothesis that marine
mammals would be subject to increased predation presumes that the
predators would either not be similarly affected by the detonation or
would travel from areas outside the impact zone, indicating recognition
between the signal of a single detonation at distance and potentially
debilitated food sources. Therefore, NMFS does not believe the evidence
warrants that all (or an unknown percentage) of the estimated numbers
of Level B harassment be considered as Level A harassment or as
potential mortalities.
Comment 3: The Commission believes that NMFS needs to provide a
better explanation of, and justification for, using the dual criteria
established for determining non-lethal injury (i.e., the onset of
slight lung hemorrhage and a 50 percent probability for eardrum
rupture).
Response: Explanation and justification were provided in detail in
both the SEAWOLF and CHURCHILL Final EISs (DoN 1998 and DoN 2001). An
updated summary for using the dual injury criteria from those documents
was provided in a recent Federal Register notice, published August 19,
2005, announcing the issuance of an IHA for the Navy's Precision Strike
Weapons.
Comment 4: The Commission states that defining Level B acoustic
harassment from explosive detonation events in terms off TTS
exclusively (i.e., behavioral changes related to temporary hearing
impairment), like NMFS does, implies that behavioral changes not
related to TTS would not constitute harassment as defined in the MMPA,
which is inconsistent with the term ``harassment'' as it is defined
generally in the MMPA.
Response: NMFS justification for the way Level B Harassment is
defined as related to explosive detonations is addressed in detail in a
recent Federal Register notice, published August 19, 2005, announcing
the issuance of an IHA for the Navy's Precision Strike Weapons.
Comment 5: The Commission believes that additional clarification
and justification is needed concerning the threshold for ``non-
injurious behavioral response'' proposed in the application (6 dB below
TTS (i.e., 176 dB re 1 microPa\2\-sec).
Response: Based on the science used to develop the CHURCHILL
criteria, for single detonations a significant response by a marine
mammal is not expected to occur other than by TTS. As noted in the
proposed authorization, NEODS training operations consist of six
training sessions a year, and each session consists of five single
small detonations over the course of 2 days. Due to the infrequent test
events, the potential variability in target locations, and the
continuous movement of marine mammals in the GOM, NMFS does not
anticipate sub-TTS behavioral modification because the same animal will
not be repeatedly exposed. The discussion in the application and
Federal Register notice is relevant to actions involving multiple
detonations.
[[Page 51344]]
NMFS will address comments on this threshold criterion in an
applicable proposed IHA application with multiple detonations.
Comment 6: The Commission believes that NMFS should provide a
better explanation of and justification for using the 23 psi criterion
(versus 12 psi) for estimating the TTS pressure threshold.
Response: This issue remains under review by the Navy, the U.S. Air
Force and NMFS. Navy acousticians believe that Ketten (1995), which
summarized earlier acoustic research, does not fully support using a
12-psi peak pressure threshold for TTS for underwater explosion impacts
on marine mammals from small detonations. The original basis in Ketten
(1995) for the use of the 12-psi threshold for the SEAWOLF and
CHURCHILL actions (which were 10,000 lb (4,536 kg) detonations) is the
use of a combination of in-air and in-water peak pressure measurements
without adjustment for the medium. A re-examination of the basis for
the 12-psi threshold by Navy acousticians indicates that, for
underwater explosions of small charges, a higher threshold may be
warranted. This led the Navy and Eglin to suggest scaling 12 psi for
small charges, which was used in the proposed authorization notice and
analysis. Although this issue remains under review by NMFS and the Navy
for future rulemaking actions, as an interim criterion for this IHA and
for the Navy Precision Strike Weapon (PSW) IHA, NMFS is adopting the
experimental findings of Finneran et al. (2002) that TTS can be induced
at a pressure level of 23 psi (at least in belugas). As explained here,
this is considered conservative since a 23-psi pressure level was below
the level that induced TTS in bottlenose dolphins.
Finneran et al. (2000; as described in Finneran et al. (2002))
conducted a study designed to measure masked TTS (MTTS) in bottlenose
dolphins and belugas exposed to single underwater impulses. This study
used an ``explosion simulator'' (ES) to generate impulsive sounds with
pressure waveforms resembling those produced by distant underwater
explosions. No substantial (i.e., 6 dB or larger) threshold shifts were
observed in any of the subjects (two bottlenose dolphins and 1 beluga)
at the highest received level produced by the ES: approximately 70 kPa
(10 psi) peak pressure, 221 dB re re 1 micro Pa peak-to-peak (pk-pk)
pressure, and 179 dB re 1 microPa\2\-s total EFD. In Finneran et al.
(2002), a watergun was substituted for the ES because it is capable of
producing impulses with higher peak pressures and total energy fluxes
than the pressure waveforms produced using the ES. It was also
preferable to other seismic sources because its impulses contain more
energy at higher frequencies, where odontocete hearing thresholds are
relatively low (i.e., more sensitive). Hearing thresholds were measured
at 0.4, 4 and 30 kHz. MTTSs of 7 and 6 dB were observed in the beluga
at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively, approximately 2 minutes following
exposure to single impulses with peak pressures of 160 kPa (23 psi),
pk-pk pressures of 226 dB re 1 microPa, and total EFD of 186 dB re 1
microPa\2\-s. Thresholds returned to within 2 dB of the pre-exposure
value approximately 4 minutes post exposure. No MTTS was observed in
the single bottlenose dolphin tested at the highest exposure
conditions: peak pressure of 207 kPa (30 psi), 228 dB re 1 microPa pk-
pk pressure, and 188 dB re 1 microPa\2\-s total energy flux. Therefore,
until more scientific information is obtained, NMFS has determined that
the pressure criterion for small explosions can be raised from 12 psi
to 23 psi. At this time, NMFS believes that setting the pressure metric
at 23 psi is conservative.
Analyses indicate that the ranges for the 23-psi TTS metric at
depths of 60 ft (18.3 m) (depth of NEODS missions) are slightly less
conservative than the originally provided ranges for the 182-dB (re 1
microPa\2\-s) TTS energy metric. For the NEODS activity, NMFS will use
the more conservative values to determine impacts and areas that need
to be monitored.
Comment 7: Based on the information contained in the application
and Federal Register notice, the Commission believes that NMFS'
preliminary determinations are reasonable, provided that the proposed
mitigation and monitoring activities are adequate to detect all marine
mammals in the vicinity of the proposed operations and sufficient to
ensure that marine mammals are not being taken in unanticipated ways or
numbers. The Commission notes however, that even under the best of
conditions and using experienced observers, there is greater than an
80-percent likelihood that small cetaceans will not be observed if they
are in the vicinity of the test site. Thus, although there may be a low
probability that certain marine mammal species will be within the area
where mortalities are considered possible at the time of weapon
deployment, it is unclear that the proposed monitoring effort will be
adequate to detect them if they are present. This being the case, the
proposed monitoring activities may be insufficient to provide assurance
that marine mammals are not being exposed to sound pressures or energy
levels that could cause lethal injuries. Thus, NMFS, before issuing the
requested authorization, should further explain its rationale for
determining that the takings will only be by harassment.
Response: The vessel monitoring effort for NEODS is similar to that
used in previous Navy ship-shock actions, with the differences being
that the zone of influence is significantly smaller and the water is
shallower, both of which make it even more likely that a marine animal
will be detected. In these past ship-shock actions, detonations of
10,000 lbs (4536 kg) were used without any serious injuries or
mortalities being noted during extensive follow-up monitoring. Though
aerial surveys were also incorporated into the ship-shock monitoring
measures, they were considered less effective than vessel monitoring
for NEODS, and in fact, the Navy found that detection of bottlenose
dolphins and spotted dolphins by shipboard observers was 100 percent
(DON, 1999, Appendix C). Since, for safety reasons, the observer vessel
will need to move out of the testing area immediately prior to the
detonation (but will continue to monitor the ZOI), we can probably
assume that the detection of dolphins within the ZOI is somewhat less
than 100 percent. However, since the estimated (based on density
estimates) number of any marine mammals that could potentially be
exposed to energy levels that may cause Level A Harassment or death
during the course of the 30 individual detonations per year, without
any observers present, is only 0.4, NMFS is confident that no marine
mammals will be killed as a result of EAFB's NEODS training operations.
Comment 8: The Commission recommends that, if NMFS determines that
the potential for lethal injuries is sufficiently remote to warrant the
issuance of an authorization under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA,
any such authorization explicitly require that operations be suspended
immediately if a dead or seriously injured animal is found in the
vicinity of the test site, pending authorization to proceed or issuance
of regulations authorizing such takes under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the
MMPA.
Response: NMFS concurs with the Commission's recommendation and has
included the requirement in the IHA.
Description of Marine Mammals and Habitat Affected by the Activity
Marine mammal species that potentially occur within the EGTTR
include several species of cetaceans and
[[Page 51345]]
the West Indian manatee. While a few manatees may migrate as far north
as Louisiana in the summer from southern Florida (where there are
generally confined in the winter), they primarily inhabit coastal and
inshore waters and rarely venture offshore. NEODS missions are
conducted at a distance of between 1 and 3 nm (5.6 km) from shore and
effects on manatees are therefore considered very unlikely and not
discussed further in this analysis.
Cetacean abundance estimates for the project area are derived from
GulfCet II aerial surveys conducted from 1996 to 1998 over a 70,470
km\2\ area, including nearly the entire continental shelf region of the
EGTTR, which extends approximately 9 nm (16.7 km) from shore. The dwarf
and pygmy sperm whales are not included in this analysis because their
potential for being found near the project site is remote. Although
Atlantic spotted dolphins do not normally inhabit nearshore waters,
they are included in the analysis to ensure conservative mitigation
measures are applied. The two marine mammal species expected to be
affected by these activities are the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops
truncatus) and the Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella frontalis).
Descriptions of the biology and local distribution of these species can
be found in the application (see ADDRESSES for availability), other
sources such as Wursig et al. (2000), and the NMFS Stock Assessments,
which can be viewed at: https://www.NMFS.noaa.gov/pr/PR2/Stock--
Assessment--Program/sars.html.
The habitat at the NEODS test sites is approximately 60-ft (18.3-m)
deep open water. The EGTTR contains many reefs, both natural and
artificial, but the closest reef to the NEODS test site is an
artificial reef over 2 mi (3.2 km) away.
Atlantic Bottlenose Dolphins
Atlantic bottlenose dolphins are distributed worldwide in tropical
and temperate waters and occur in the slope, shelf, and inshore waters
of the GOM. Based on a combination of geography and ecological and
genetic research, Atlantic bottlenose dolphins have been divided into
many separate stocks within the GOM. The exact structure of these
stocks is complex and continues to be revised as research is completed.
For now, bottlenose dolphins inhabiting waters less than 20 m (66 ft)
deep in the U.S. GOM are believed to constitute 36 inshore or coastal
stocks, and those inhabiting waters from 20 to 200 m (66 to 656 ft)
deep in the northern GOM from the U.S.-Mexican border to the Florida
Keys are considered the continental shelf stock (Waring et al., 2004).
The proposed action would occur on the ocean floor at a depth of
approximately 60 ft (18 m) and therefore has the potential to affect
both the continental shelf and inshore stocks.
Continental shelf stock assessments were estimated using data from
vessel surveys conducted between 1998 and 2001 (at 20- to 200-m (66- to
656-ft) depths). The minimum population estimate for the northern GOM
continental shelf stock of the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin is 20,414
(Waring et al., 2004).
The most recent inshore stock assessment surveys were conducted
aerially in 1993 and covered the area from the shore or bay boundaries
out to 9.3 km (5.0 nm) past the 18.3 m-depth (60.0 nm-depth) isobath (a
slightly different area than that defined as inshore in the more recent
stock assessment above). The minimum population estimate of the
northern GOM coastal stock of the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin was 3,518
dolphins (Waring et al., 1997).
Texas A&M University and the NMFS conducted GulfCet II aerial
surveys in an area including the EGTTR from 1996 to 1998. Density
estimates were calculated using abundance data collected from the
continental shelf area of the EGTTR. In an effort to provide better
species conservation and protection, estimates were adjusted to
incorporate temporal and spatial variations, surface and submerged
variations, and overall density confidence. The adjusted density
estimate for Atlantic bottlenose dolphins within the project area is
0.810 individuals/km\2\. A small number of dolphins could not be
identified specifically as Atlantic bottlenose or Atlantic spotted and
their estimated density was 0.053 individuals/km\2\.
Atlantic Spotted Dolphins
Atlantic spotted dolphins are endemic to the tropical and warm
temperate waters of the Atlantic Ocean and can be found from the
latitude of Cape May, New Jersey south along mainland shores to
Venezuela, including the GOM and Lesser Antilles. In the GOM, Atlantic
spotted dolphins occur primarily in continental shelf waters 10 to 200
m (33 to 656 ft) deep out to continental slope waters less than 500 m
(1640.4 ft) deep. One recent study presents strong genetic support for
differentiation between GOM and western North Atlantic management
stocks, but the Gulf of Mexico stock has not yet been further
subdivided.
Abundance was estimated in the most recent assessment of the
northern GOM stock of the Atlantic spotted dolphin using combined data
from continental shelf surveys (20 to 200 m (66 to 656 ft) deep) and
oceanic surveys (200 m (656 ft)) to the offshore extent of U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone) conducted from 1996 to 2001. The minimum
population estimate for the northern GOM is 24,752 Atlantic spotted
dolphins (Waring et al., 2004).
Density estimates for the Atlantic spotted dolphin within the EGTTR
were calculated using abundance data collected during the GulfCet II
aerial surveys. In an effort to provide better species conservation and
protection, estimates were adjusted to incorporate temporal and spatial
variations, surface and submerged variations, and overall density
confidence. The adjusted density estimate for Atlantic spotted dolphins
within the project area is 0.677 individuals/km\2\. A small number of
dolphins could not be identified specifically as Atlantic bottlenose or
Atlantic spotted and their estimated density was 0.053 individuals/
km\2\.
Potential Effects of Activities on Marine Mammals
The primary potential impact to the Atlantic bottlenose and the
Atlantic spotted dolphins occurring in the EGTTR from the proposed
detonations is Level B harassment from noise. There is a slight
potential, absent mitigation, that a few mammals would be injured or
killed due to the energy generated from an explosive force on the sea
floor. Analysis of NEODS noise impacts to cetaceans was based on
criteria and thresholds presented in both Finneran et al., 2002, and in
the U.S. Navy Environmental Impact Statements for ship shock trials of
the SEAWOLF submarine and the WINSTON CHURCHILL vessel and subsequently
adopted by NMFS.
Non-lethal injurious impacts (Level A Harassment) are defined in as
tympanic membrane (TM) rupture and the onset of slight lung injury. The
threshold for Level A Harassment corresponds to a 50 percent rate of TM
rupture, which can be stated in terms of an energy flux density (EFD)
value of 205 dB re 1 microPa\2\s. TM rupture is well-correlated with
permanent hearing impairment (Ketten (1998) indicates a 30-percent
incidence of permanent threshold shift (PTS) at the same threshold).
The zone of influence (ZOI)(farthest distance from the source at which
an animal is exposed to the EFD level referred to) for the Level A
Harassment threshold is 52.2 m (171.6 ft).
Level B (non-injurious) Harassment includes temporary (auditory)
threshold shift (TTS), a slight, recoverable loss of
[[Page 51346]]
hearing sensitivity. The energy criterion used for TTS is 182 dB re 1
microPa\2\'s maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave band above 100 Hz for
toothed whales (e.g., dolphins). The ZOI for this threshold is 229.8 m
(754.0 ft). The pressure criterion, 23 psi, has recently been
established by NMFS based on the more current work of Finneran et al.,
2002. The ZOI for 23 psi is 222 m (728 ft). A detailed justification
for the recent change in NMFS' pressure exposure criteria may be found
in the Federal Register notice for the issuance of an IHA to the Navy
for Precision Strike Weapons, published August 19, 2005.
Level B Harassment also includes behavioral modifications resulting
from repeated noise exposures (below TTS) to the same animals (usually
resident) over a relatively short period of time. No strictly sub-TTS
behavioral responses (i.e., Level B harassment) are anticipated with
the NEODS training activities because there are no successive
detonations (5 small detonations in the course of 2 days, some of which
may be separated by less than 20 minutes, but which would be in
separate locations) which could provide causation for a behavioral
disruption rising to the level of a significant alteration or
abandonment of behavioral patterns without also causing TTS. Also,
repetitive exposures (below TTS) to the same resident animals are
highly unlikely due to the infrequent NEODS training sessions (6
sessions per year), the potential variability in target locations, and
the continuous movement of marine mammals in the northern GOM.
Because of mitigation measures proposed, NMFS anticipates that only
Level B harassment will occur incidental to the NEODS training
operations and that these events will result in no more than a
negligible impact on marine mammal species or their habitats.
Mitigation and Monitoring
Mitigation will consist primarily of surveying and taking action to
avoid detonating charges when protected species are within the ZOI. A
trained, NMFS-approved observerwill be staged from the highest point
possible on a support ship and have proper lines of communication to
the Officer in Tactical Command. The survey area will be 460 m (1509
ft) in every direction from the target, which is twice the radius of
the ZOI for Level B Harassment (230 m (755 ft)). To ensure visibility
of marine mammals to observers, NEODS missions will be delayed if
whitecaps cover more than 50 percent of the surface or if the waves are
greater than 3 feet (Beaufort Sea State 4).
Pre-mission monitoring will be used to evaluate the test site for
environmental suitability of the mission. Visual surveys will be
conducted 2 hours, 1 hour, and 5 minutes prior to the mission to verify
that the ZOI (230 m (755 ft)) is free of visually detectable marine
mammals, sea turtles, large schools of fish, large flocks of birds,
large Sargassum mats, or large concentrations of jellyfish and that the
weather is adequate to support visual surveys. The observer will plot
and record sightings, bearing, and time for all marine mammals
detected, which would allow the observer to determine if the animal is
likely to enter the test area during detonation. If an animal appears
likely to enter the test area during detonation, if marine mammals, sea
turtles, large schools of fish, large flocks of birds, large Sargassum
mats, or large concentrations of jellyfish are present, or if the
weather is inadequate to support monitoring, the observer will declare
the range fouled and the tactical officer will implement a hold until
monitoring indicates that the test area is and will remain clear of
detectable marine mammals or sea turtles.
Monitoring of the test area will continue throughout the mission
until the last detonation is complete. The mission would be postponed
if:
(1) Any marine mammal is visually detected within the ZOI (230 m
(755 ft)). The delay would continue until the animal that caused the
postponement is confirmed to be outside the ZOI (visually observed
swimming out of the range).
(2) Any marine mammal or sea turtle is detected in the ZOI and
subsequently is not seen again. The mission would not continue until
the last verified location is outside of the ZOI and the animal is
moving away from the mission area.
(3) Large Sargassum rafts or large concentrations of jellyfish are
observed within the ZOI. The delay would continue until the Sargassum
rafts or jellyfish that caused the postponement are confirmed to be
outside of the ZOI either due to the current and/or wind moving them
out of the mission area.
(4) Large schools of fish are observed in the water within of the
ZOI. The delay would continue until large fish schools are confirmed to
be outside the ZOI.
In the event of a postponement, pre-mission monitoring would
continue as long as weather and daylight hours allow. If a charge
failed to explode, mitigation measures would continue while operations
personnel attempted to recognize and solve the problem (detonate the
charge).
Post-mission monitoring is designed to determine the effectiveness
of pre-mission mitigation by reporting any sightings of dead or injured
marine mammals or sea turtles. Post-detonation monitoring,
concentrating on the area down current of the test site, will commence
immediately following each detonation and continue for at least two
hours after the last detonation. The monitoring team will document and
report to the appropriate marine animal stranding network any marine
mammals or turtles killed or injured during the test and, if
practicable, recover and examine any dead animals. The species, number,
location, and behavior of any animals observed by the teams would be
documented and reported to the Officer in Tactical Command.
Reporting
EAFB will notify NMFS 2 weeks prior to initiation of each training
session. Any takes of marine mammals other than those authorized by the
IHA, as well as any injuries or deaths of marine mammals, will be
reported to the Southeast Regional Administrator, NMFS, by the next
working day. A summary of mission observations and test results,
including dates, times, and locations of detonations as well as pre-
and post-mission monitoring observations, will be submitted to the
Division of Permits, Conservation, and Education, Office of Protected
Resources (NMFS) and the Southeast Regional Office (NMFS) within 90
days after the completion of the last training session.
Numbers of Marine Mammals Expected to be Harassed
Estimates of the potential number of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins
and Atlantic spotted dolphins to be harassed by the training were
calculated using the number of distinct firing or test events (maximum
30 per year), the ZOI for noise exposure, and the density of animals
that potentially occur in the ZOI. The take estimates provided here do
not include mitigation measures, which are expected to further minimize
impacts to protected species and make injury or death highly unlikely.
The estimated number of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic
spotted dolphins that could potentially be exposed to the Level A
Harassment threshold (205 dB re 1 microPa\2\ s) during one year is less
than one (0.22 and 0.19, respectively).
For Level B Harassment, two separate criteria were established, one
expressed in dB re 1 microPa\2\s maximum EFD level in any 1/3-octave
band above 100
[[Page 51347]]
Hz, and one expressed in psi. The estimated numbers of Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic spotted dolphins potentially exposed
to 182 dB and 23 psi, during one year, if mitigation measures were not
effectively implemented within the 230-m (754 ft) ZOI, are 4 and 3
individuals.
Possible Effects of Activities on Marine Mammal Habitat
The Air Force anticipates no loss or modification to the habitat
used by Atlantic bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic spotted dolphins in
the EGTTR. The primary source of marine mammal habitat impact resulting
from the NEODS missions is noise, which is intermittent (maximum 30
times per year) and of limited duration. NMFS does not anticipate that
either debris (which will be recovered following test activities) or
the minimal chemical residue from the detonated charges will affect
marine mammal habitat.
Possible Effects of Activities on Subsistence Needs
There are no subsistence uses for Atlantic bottlenose dolphins
Atlantic spotted dolphins in Florida waters, and thus, there are no
anticipated effects on subsistence needs.
Endangered Species Act
In a Biological Opinion issued on October 25, 2004, NMFS concluded
that the NEODS training missions and their associated actions are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of threatened or
endangered species under the jurisdiction of NMFS or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat that has been designated for those
species. NMFS has issued an incidental take statement (ITS) for 4
species of sea turtles (leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea),
green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), Kemp's ridley sea turtle
(Lepidochelys kempii), and loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta))
pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The ITS contains
reasonable and prudent measures with implementing terms and conditions
to minimize the effects of this take. This IHA action is within the
scope of the previously analyzed action and does not change the action
in a manner that was not considered previously.
National Environmental Policy Act
NMFS prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) on the Issuance of Authorizations to Take
Marine Mammals, by Harassment, Incidental to Naval Explosive Ordnance
Disposal School Training Operations at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.
Therefore, preparation of an EIS on this action is not required by
section 102(2) of the NEPA or its implementing regulations. A copy of
the EA and FONSI are available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Conclusions
NMFS has determined that the NEODS training operations, as
described in this document and in the application for an IHA, will
result in no more than Level B harassment of Atlantic bottlenose
dolphins and Atlantic spotted dolphins and will have no more than a
negligible impact on these stocks. The effects of the NEODS training
are expected to be limited to short-term and localized TTS-related
behavioral changes, and these takes will be at the lowest level
practicable due to incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned
previously in this document. With the application of the mitigation
measures, as well as the potential density of dolphins in the area of
the NEODS training operations, NMFS believes it highly unlikely that
the proposed action will result in any injury or mortality of marine
mammals. Additionally, the NEODS training operations will not have an
unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of marine mammal stocks
for subsistence use, as there are no subsistence uses for Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins or Atlantic spotted dolphins in Florida waters.
Authorization
NMFS has issued a 1-year IHA to EAFB for the take of Atlantic
bottlenose dolphins and Atlantic spotted dolphins, by harassment,
incidental to NEODS training operations, which include up to 30
detonations of small C-4 charges per year, provided the previously
mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are
incorporated.
Dated: August 23, 2005.
Donna Wieting,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 05-17224 Filed 8-29-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S