Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Oil and Gas Exploration Activities in the Arctic Ocean off Alaska, 66912-66915 [E6-19485]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
66912
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Notices
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification
of the return/destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a violation
which is subject to sanction.
This new shipper review and notice
are in accordance with sections
751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h).
Dated: November 9, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–19471 Filed 11–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 101906B]
Taking and Importing Marine
Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Conducting Oil and Gas
Exploration Activities in the Arctic
Ocean off Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement; request for comments.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS and the Minerals
Management Service (MMS) announce
their intention to prepare a
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (PEIS) pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA). This PEIS is being
prepared to assess the impacts of MMS’
annual authorizations under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) to
the U.S. oil and gas industry to conduct
offshore geophysical seismic surveys in
the Chukchi and Beaufort seas off
Alaska, and NMFS’ authorizations
under the Marine Mammal Protection
Act (MMPA) to incidentally harass
marine mammals while conducting
those surveys. Publication of this notice
begins the official scoping period that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:31 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
will help clarify previously identified
issues and alternatives to be considered
in the PEIS. The NMFS and MMS will
consider comments received in response
to this notice in determining the scope
of the PEIS. The public will have
additional opportunities to comment on
the draft PEIS and any applications
received under the MMPA as part of this
action.
DATES: Written comments and
information must be received no later
than December 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the contents
of the Draft PEIS should be addressed to
Mr. P. Michael Payne, Chief of the
Permits, Conservation and Education
Division, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315
East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD
20910–3225. The mailbox address for
providing email comments is
PR1.101906B@noaa.gov. Comments sent
via e-mail, including all attachments,
must not exceed a 10–megabyte file size.
A copy of MMS’ Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (PEA) for
seismic survey operations in Arctic
Alaska waters for the 2006 open water
season is available on-line at:https://
www.mms.gov/alaska/ref/pealbe.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301–
713–2289, ext 128 or Jill Lewandowski,
MMS at 703–787–1703
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In 2006, the MMS prepared a Draft
PEA for the 2006 Arctic Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) Seismic
Surveys. The MMS assumed in this PEA
that up to eight marine seismic surveys
(4 each in the Chukchi and Beaufort
seas) were likely to occur in 2006 in the
Arctic Ocean. NMFS was a cooperating
agency in the preparation of the MMS
Draft and Final PEAs and made the
Draft PEA available upon request (e.g.,
71 FR 26055, May 3, 2006). A Final PEA
was published and released on June 20,
2006. In accordance with NOAA
Administrative Order 216–6
(Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, May 20,
1999), NMFS subsequently determined
that the MMS Final PEA contained an
in-depth and detailed description of the
affected environment, a reasonable
range of alternatives to the proposed
action, mitigation and monitoring
measures to reduce impacts on the
human environment to non-significant
levels, and an analysis of the potential
effects of the action and alternatives on
the human environment. In view of the
information and the analyses contained
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in the supporting Final PEA, on June 28,
2006, NMFS adopted the Final PEA,
issued its own Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) and determined that
issuance of Incidental Harassment
Authorizations (IHAs), under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, to oil-and-gas
companies for conducting seismic
surveys in 2006 in the Arctic Ocean
would have a negligible impact on
affected marine mammal stocks and not
have an unmitigable adverse impact on
the availability of such species or stocks
for taking for subsistence uses of marine
mammals.
This FONSI determination was
predicated on full implementation of
standard mitigation measures for
preventing injury or mortality to marine
mammals, in addition to area-specific
mitigation measures, which included
but were not limited to:
(1) a 120–dB rms (root-mean-squared)
monitored safety zone for fall migrating
cow/calf pairs of bowhead whales in the
Beaufort and Chukchi seas;
(2) a 160–dB rms monitored safety
zone for aggregations of feeding
bowhead and gray whales in the
Beaufort and Chukchi seas;
(3) a 180–dB rms exclusion zone for
all cetaceans and a 190–dB rms
exclusion zone for pinnipeds except the
walrus;
(4) seismic shut-down criteria to
protect bowhead and/or gray whales,
under specific circumstances, when
inside the 120–dB or 160–dB
monitoring-safety zones; and for all
cetaceans within the 180–dB zone and
all pinnipeds, except walrus, within the
190–dB zone); and,
(5) a joint industry cooperative
program on marine mammal research in
the Chukchi Sea.
These mitigation measures were
incorporated into NMFS’ Selected
Alternative and IHA conditions for the
2006 seismic survey operations.
Accordingly, NMFS adopted MMS’
Final PEA and determined that the
preparation of an EIS for this action was
not necessary.
Notice of Intent
During the public comment period on
MMS’ Draft PEA, several comments
were received recommending
preparation of a Draft EIS under NEPA
for this action. While preparation of an
EIS on this action was considered,
NMFS and MMS determined that the
goals and objectives of NEPA could be
met, given the level of proposed
activities for 2006, by completing a
Final PEA and implementing a
mitigated FONSI for 2006 that would
ensure that all authorized activities
would not have a significant effect on
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Notices
the human environment. At the time,
NMFS also began to explore the need to
prepare an EIS for future years, if
seismic operations were to continue and
expand in scope as anticipated.
It is important to note that subsequent
to issuance of the IHAs for the 2006
seismic season to Shell (71 FR 50027,
August 24, 2006), ConocoPhillips
Alaska (CPAI) (71 FR 43112, July 31,
2006), and GX Technology (GXT) (71 FR
49418, August 23, 2006), a District Court
Judge in Anchorage in the case of
ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc v. National
Marine Fisheries, et al. issued an order
on September 18, 2006, granting a
motion to stay the implementation of
the CPAI IHA condition requiring a
120–dB monitoring safety zone to
protect bowhead whale cow/calf pairs
during their annual fall migration out of
the Arctic Ocean. The Court agreed that
CPAI raised a ‘‘serious question’’
regarding the propriety of this
additional requirement, meaning that
the IHA condition requiring a 120–dB
monitoring safety zone would be
suspended until the Court is able to
fully resolve the dispute. However, the
120–dB mitigation measure was
essential to allow NMFS to conclude
with a FONSI, especially given the level
of uncertainty on the effects of seismic
surveys on bowhead whales in Arctic
waters. This measure, therefore, became
a basic condition for NMFS being able
to issue IHAs to Shell, CPAI and GXT
in the 2006 seismic season.
It should be recognized that the MMS
PEA analyzed the effects of 4 concurrent
seismic surveys in the Chukchi Sea and
4 concurrent seismic surveys in the
Beaufort Sea during the bowhead
migration while in fact, in 2006, only a
single company operated at any one
time in the Chukchi Sea during the
bowhead migration (CPAI from
September 25 - October 12 and GXT
from October 13 - present). As a result,
this significant reduction in the
anticipated amount of seismic activity
around the bowhead whale migration
reduced NMFS’ concern this year that
the suspension by the Court of one
measure by one company would result
in an increase of negative impacts to
bowhead whales or subsistence hunters.
However, there are indications that a
similar (4 and 4) or even an increased
level of seismic activity may occur in
2007 and beyond. These events may
lead to an increased impact to marine
mammals, particularly to fall migrating
bowhead whale cow/calf pairs.
Moreover, if in 2007 or beyond, the
level of seismic survey activity in the
Chukchi and Beaufort seas increases, it
may exceed the level analyzed in the
Final PEA. As a result, NMFS has
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:31 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
determined that it needs to analyze
impacts resulting from a higher level of
potential seismic activity over a longer
time frame than was addressed in the
Final PEA and to reanalyze the range of
practical mitigation measures for
protecting marine mammals in more
detail through preparation of a Draft
PEIS for issuing: (1) permits for oil and
gas exploration in the Arctic Ocean by
MMS, and (2) authorizations to the
seismic industry from NMFS to take
marine mammals incidental to oil and
gas seismic surveys in the Arctic Ocean.
Description of the Specified Activity
Marine geophysical seismic surveys
are conducted to obtain information on
surface and near-surface geology (highresolution surveys) and on subsurface
structures and formations (2–D and 3–
D seismic surveys and vertical seismic
profile surveys). Airguns are the
acoustic source for 2D and 3D seismic
surveys. Their individual size can range
from tens to several hundred cubic
inches (in3). A combination of airguns is
called an array, and operators vary the
source-array size during the seismic
survey to optimize the resolution of the
geophysical data collected. Airgun array
sizes for 2D/3D seismic surveys in
Arctic waters have ranged from 1,800–
4,000 in3 but may range up to 6,000 in3.
These arrays emit pulsed rather than
continuous sounds. While most of the
energy is directed downward and the
short duration of each pulse limits the
total energy, the sound can propagate
horizontally for several kilometers
(Greene and Richardson, 1988; Hall et
al., 1994).
Marine-streamer 3D seismic surveys
vary markedly depending on client
specifications, subsurface geology, water
depth, and geological target reservoir.
The vessels conducting these surveys
generally are 70–90 meters (m) (230–295
ft) long. A 3D source array typically
consists of two to three subarrays of six
to nine airguns each, and is about 12.5–
18 m (41–59 ft) long and 16–36 m (52–
118 ft) wide. Vessels tow one to three
source arrays, depending on the
technical survey-design specifications
required for the geologic target, to
generate the acoustic energy. The
sound-source level (zero-to-peak)
associated with 3D seismic surveys
ranges between 233 and 240 decibels re
1 microPascal at 1 m. The arrays usually
are aligned parallel with one another
and towed 50–200 m (164–656 ft)
behind the vessel. Following behind the
source arrays by another 100–200 m
(328–656 ft) are multiple (4–12)
streamer-receiver cables, and each
streamer can be 3–8 kilometers (km;
1.86–5 mi) long and spread out over a
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66913
width of 400–900 m (1312–2953 ft).
Streamers are passive listening
equipment consisting of multiple
hydrophone elements.
The airgun array produces a burst of
underwater sound by releasing
compressed air into the water column
that creates an acoustic energy pulse.
The release of compressed air every
several seconds creates a regular series
of strong acoustic impulses separated by
silent periods lasting 7–16 seconds,
depending on survey type and depth to
the target formations. Acoustic signals
are reflected off the subsurface
sedimentary layers and recorded near
the water surface by hydrophones
spaced within the streamer cables. Some
surveys employ ocean-bottom
seismometers as the receiving
instrument. Vessel speed is typically
4.5–6 knots (about 4–8 mph) with gear
deployed.
Three-Dimensional (3–D) seismic
surveying enables a more accurate
assessment of potential hydrocarbon
reservoirs to optimally locate
exploration and development wells, and
minimize the number of wells required
to develop a field. State-of-the-art
interactive computer mapping systems
can handle much denser data coverage
than older 2–D seismic surveys.
Multiple-source and multiple-streamer
technologies are used for 3–D seismic
surveys. A typical 3–D survey might
employ a dual array of up to 18 guns per
array. Each array might emit a 3,000
cubic-inch burst of compressed air at
2,000 kilojoule (kJ) of acoustic energy
for each burst. The hydrophone
streamer array might consist of 6–8
parallel cables, each 6–8 km (3.7–5 mi)
long, spaced 75 m (246 ft) apart. A series
of 3–D surveys collected over time (4–
D seismic survey) is used for reservoir
monitoring and management (the
movement of oil, gas, and water in the
reservoirs can be observed over time).
The overall energy output for the
permitted activity will be the same, but
the firing of the source arrays on the
individual vessels will be alternated.
A source array is activated
approximately every 10–15 seconds,
depending on vessel speed. The timing
between activations varies between
surveys to achieve the desired spacing
required to meet the geological
objectives of the survey; typical spacing
is either 25 or 37.5 m (82 or 123 ft).
Depending on the shotpoint interval,
airguns are fired between 20 and 70
times per mile.
Characteristics of Airgun Pulses
Discussion on the characteristics of
airgun pulses have been provided in the
Final PEA and in previous Federal
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
66914
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Register notices (see 69 FR 31792 (June
7, 2004). Reviewers are referred to those
documents for additional information.
Scoping
The environmental review of the
offshore seismic industry activity and
related IHA applications will be
conducted in accordance with the
requirements of NEPA, its regulations
(40 CFR 1500–1508), other appropriate
Federal laws and regulations, and the
NMFS policies and procedures for
compliance with those regulations
(NOAA Administrative Order 216–6
-Environmental Review Procedures for
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, May 20,
1999).
The activities that will be analyzed in
the Draft PEIS will include conducting
marine-streamer 3D and 2D seismic
surveys, high-resolution site seismic
surveys, and ocean-bottom-cable
seismic surveys. NMFS and MMS will
analyze the effects of seismic noise on
marine mammals, fish and fishery
resources, and marine birds found in the
Chukchi and Beaufort seas. An analysis
of the potential socioeconomic impacts,
including potential impacts on
subsistence uses of marine mammal
resources, will also be included. The
Draft PEIS’ cumulative activities
scenario and cumulative impact
analysis will focus on oil and gasrelated and non-oil and gas-related
noise-generating events/activities in
both Federal and State of Alaska waters
that have been authorized or conducted
in the past and that are reasonably likely
and foreseeable. Noise contributions
from community and commercial
development, military activities, and
arctic warming will also be considered.
Additional issues may be identified as
a result of written scoping comments.
The Draft PEIS will analyze the
potential adverse impacts of the
proposed activities and other nonseismic related activities on
environmental resources, and will
identify and describe any mitigation
measures that could be adopted to avoid
and/or minimize those impacts. The
Draft PEIS will include, but not be
limited to the following issues and
concerns: (1) Protection of subsistence
resources and the Inupiat culture and
way of life; (2) impacts to marine
mammals including disturbance to
bowhead whale migration patterns; (3)
impacts of seismic survey operations on
marine fish reproduction, growth, and
development; (4) harassment and
potential harm of wildlife, including
marine birds, by vessel operations and
movements; (5) impacts on water and
air quality; (6) changes in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:31 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
socioeconomic environment; (7) impacts
to threatened and endangered species;
(8)risks of oil spills and their potential
impacts on area fish and wildlife
resources; (9) incorporation of
traditional knowledge in the decisionmaking process; and, (10) a description
of any potential marine mammal
mitigation and monitoring measures and
an analysis of their potential
effectiveness.
PEIS Alternatives
NMFS will explore and evaluate a
reasonable range of alternatives in the
Draft PEIS, including the proposed
action and the no-action alternative. At
this time, NMFS has identified 7
alternatives for this action: (1) No
seismic-survey permits issued for
geophysical exploration activities (No
Action); (2) seismic surveys for
geophysical-exploration activities
would be permitted with existing
Alaska OCS G&G (geological and
geophysical) exploration stipulations
and guidelines; (3) seismic surveys for
geophysical exploration activities would
be permitted incorporating existing
Alaska OCS G&G exploration
stipulations and guidelines but would
include additional protective measures
for marine animals, including a 120–dB
monitored safety and/or exclusion zone
for marine mammals; (4) seismic
surveys for geophysical-exploration
activities would be permitted
incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G
exploration stipulations and guidelines
and additional protective measures for
marine animals, including a 160–dBmonitored safety and/or exclusion zone
for marine mammals; (5) seismic
surveys for geophysical-exploration
activities would be permitted
incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G
exploration stipulations and guidelines
but would include additional protective
measures for marine animals, including
160–dB- and 120–dB monitored safety
and/or exclusion zones for marine
mammals (Alternatives 3 and 4
combined); (6) seismic surveys for
geophysical exploration activities would
be permitted incorporating existing
Alaska OCS G&G exploration
stipulations and guidelines but would
include additional protective measures
for marine animals, including a 180/
190–dB exclusion zone for marine
mammals to prevent acoustic injury;
and, (7) seismic surveys for geophysical
exploration activities would be
permitted incorporating existing Alaska
OCS G&G exploration stipulations and
guidelines but would include additional
protective measures for marine animals,
including a 180/190–dB exclusion zone
and 160–dB and 120–dB monitored
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
safety and/or exclusion zones for marine
mammals (Alternatives 5 and 6
combined). Alternative 7 was the
Selected Alternative by MMS and
NMFS in the 2006 PEA. No
identification of a preferred or selected
alternative has been made at this time.
Identified Draft PEIS Mitigation and
Monitoring Measures
The alternatives in the Draft PEIS will
address a suite of potential mitigation
and monitoring measures, including:
(1) Exclusion/Safety Zones—A 180/
190 dB rms isopleth exclusion zone
from the sound source that must be free
of marine mammals before the survey
can begin and must remain free of
mammals during the survey. The
purpose of an exclusion zone is to
protect marine mammals from Level A
harassment (injury/harm); the purpose
of a safety zone is to prevent
interruption of critical natural behaviors
that, if significantly disrupted, could
result in population level effects, or to
avoid an unmitigable adverse impact on
subsistence resources. The 180 dB
(Level A harassment-injury) applies to
cetaceans and walrus and 190 dB (Level
A harassment-injury) applies to
pinnipeds, other than walrus.
(2) Monitoring exclusion/safety
zones—Trained marine mammal
observers (MMOs) and Inupiat hunters
monitor the area around the survey
vessel for the presence of marine
mammals to maintain a mammal free
exclusion zone, monitor for avoidance,
or take behaviors. Visual observers
monitor the exclusion zone to ensure
that marine mammals do not enter the
exclusion zone for at least 30 minutes
prior to ramp up, during the conduct of
the survey, or before resuming seismicsurvey work.
(3) Shut-down/power-down—The
seismic array must be shut-down or
powered-down until the exclusion zone
is free of marine mammals. All MMOs
have the authority to, and will, instruct
the vessel operators to immediately stop
or de-energize the airgun array
whenever a marine mammal is seen
within the exclusion zone.
(4) Ramp-up—Ramp up is the gradual
introduction of sound to deter marine
mammals from potentially damaging
sound intensities and from approaching
the exclusion zone. This technique
involves the gradual increase (usually
5–6 dB per 5-minute increment) in
emitted sound levels, beginning with
firing a single airgun and gradually
adding airguns over a period of at least
20–40 minutes, until the desired
operating level of the full array is
obtained. Ramp-up procedures may
begin after MMOs ensure the absence of
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 222 / Friday, November 17, 2006 / Notices
marine mammals for at least 30 minutes
within the exclusion zone.
(5) Field Verification—Before
conducting the survey, the operator
must verify the radii of the exclusion
zone within real-time conditions in the
field. This provides for a more accurate
exclusion-zone radii rather than relying
on modeling techniques before entering
the field.
(6) Aerial Surveys—Aerial surveys are
flown in advance of initiating seismic
surveys and related ice-breaking
activities over an area that includes the
area to be surveyed.
(7) Temporal/Spatial/Operational
Restrictions— Dynamic management
approaches to avoid or minimize
acoustic exposure, such as temporal or
spatial limitations are based on the
presence of a marine mammal in a
particular place or time, or during a
particularly sensitive behavior (such as
feeding or maternal care). In the past,
these restrictions have included: (a) A
prohibition on surveys in the Chukchi
Sea spring-lead system before July 1; (b)
under specific circumstances to protect
migrating bowhead cow/calf pairs, the
standard 180–dB exclusion zone for
cetaceans is extended to a monitored
120–dB safety zone; (c) under specific
circumstances to protect feeding
aggregations of bowhead and/or gray
whales, the standard 180–dB exclusion
zone for cetaceans is extended to a
monitored 160–dB safety zone.
(8) Dedicated aerial and/or vessel
surveys—As appropriate, dedicated
aerial and/or vessel surveys are
conducted in the Beaufort and Chukchi
seas during the fall bowhead whale
migration period to detect migrating
bowhead cow/calf pairs, and
concentrations of feeding bowhead and
gray whales.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Comments
The NMFS requests comments from
state, local, and tribal governments;
Native Alaskan organizations; Federal
agencies; environmental and fish and
wildlife organizations; the oil and gas
industry; other interested organizations
and parties in order to assist in the
preparation of a Draft PEIS for the Arctic
Ocean OCS Seismic Surveys. In
particular, NMFS requests comments on
the scope of issues and range of
alternatives that should be considered
in the Draft PEIS.
Additional opportunities for public
review and comment will be provided
when the Notice of Availability of the
Draft PEIS is published in the Federal
Register. After release of the Draft PEIS,
MMS and NMFS intend to hold public
information meetings in Anchorage,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:31 Nov 16, 2006
Jkt 211001
Barrow, Kaktovik, Nuiqsuk,
Wainwright, Point Lay and Point Hope.
Dated: November 7, 2006
James H. Lecky,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E6–19485 Filed 11–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 111406A]
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone off Alaska; Application for an
Exempted Fishing Permit
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of an
application for an exempted fishing
permit.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt
of an application for an exempted
fishing permit (EFP) from the Aleut
Enterprise Corporation (AEC). If
granted, this permit would be used to
support a project to assess pollock
abundance in a portion of the Aleutian
Islands subarea and to test the feasibility
of managing pollock harvest at a finer
temporal and spatial scale using near
real-time acoustic surveying. The
project is intended to promote the
objectives of the Fishery Management
Plan (FMP) for Groundfish of the Bering
Sea and Aleutian Islands Management
Area (BSAI) by improving the use of
pollock in the Aleutian Islands subarea.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the EFP
application and the environmental
assessment (EA) are available by writing
to Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional
Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries,
Alaska Region, NMFS, P. O. Box 21668,
Juneau, AK 99802, Attn: Ellen Walsh.
The EA also is available from the Alaska
Region, NMFS Web site at https://
www.fakr.noaa.gov/index/analyses/
analyses.asp.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melanie Brown, 907–586–7228 or
melanie.brown@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the domestic groundfish
fisheries in the BSAI under the FMP.
The North Pacific Fishery Management
Council (Council) prepared the FMP
under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act.
Regulations governing the groundfish
fisheries of the BSAI appear at 50 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66915
parts 600 and 679. The FMP and the
implementing regulations at §§ 679.6
and 600.745(b) authorize issuance of
EFPs to allow fishing that would
otherwise be prohibited. Procedures for
issuing EFPs are contained in the
implementing regulations.
NMFS received an application for an
EFP from the AEC. The purpose of the
EFP is to support a project to assess
pollock abundance in a portion of the
Aleutian Islands subarea and to test the
feasibility of managing pollock harvest
at a finer temporal and spatial scale
using near real-time acoustic surveying.
The goal of the project is to improve the
use of Aleutian Islands pollock. NMFS
currently does not have the resources to
conduct acoustic surveys of Aleutian
Islands subarea pollock. This project has
been developed in cooperation with
stock assessment scientists at the NMFS
Alaska Fisheries Science Center. The
acoustic and biological information
from the project would provide a
baseline assessment of pollock biomass
and distribution in the area that may be
fished by small vessels from Adak,
Alaska. This information also would be
used to determine if the local
aggregations of pollock are stable
enough during the spawning season to
allow for fine-scale spatial and temporal
management. Additionally, genetic
samples would be collected for stock
structure analysis. Better information
may lead to improved conservation and
harvest management at finer spatial and
temporal scales for the Aleutian Islands
subarea pollock. Improved harvest
management of the Aleutian Islands
subarea pollock is needed based on the
high uncertainty in the stock structure
and the potential effects of the fishery
on Steller sea lion populations.
The western distinct population
segment (DPS) of Steller sea lions occurs
in the Aleutian Islands subarea and is
listed as endangered under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). Critical
habitat has been designated for this
DPS, including waters within 20
nautical miles (nm) of haulouts and
rookeries (50 CFR 226.202) and in the
Seguam Foraging Area. Pollock is a
principal prey species of Steller sea
lions.
The U.S. Congress, in Section 803 of
the Consolidated Appropriations Act of
2004 (Public Law 108–199), required
that the directed fishing allowance of
pollock in the Aleutian Islands subarea
be allocated to the Aleut Corporation.
Only fishing vessels approved by the
Aleut Corporation or its agents are
allowed to harvest this allowance. To
harvest the fish, the Aleut Corporation
is allowed to contract only with vessels
under 60 feet (18.3 m) length overall
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 222 (Friday, November 17, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66912-66915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-19485]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 101906B]
Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals
Incidental to Conducting Oil and Gas Exploration Activities in the
Arctic Ocean off Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS and the Minerals Management Service (MMS) announce their
intention to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement
(PEIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA). This PEIS is being prepared to assess the impacts of MMS'
annual authorizations under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act
(OCSLA) to the U.S. oil and gas industry to conduct offshore
geophysical seismic surveys in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas off
Alaska, and NMFS' authorizations under the Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) to incidentally harass marine mammals while conducting those
surveys. Publication of this notice begins the official scoping period
that will help clarify previously identified issues and alternatives to
be considered in the PEIS. The NMFS and MMS will consider comments
received in response to this notice in determining the scope of the
PEIS. The public will have additional opportunities to comment on the
draft PEIS and any applications received under the MMPA as part of this
action.
DATES: Written comments and information must be received no later than
December 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the contents of the Draft PEIS should be
addressed to Mr. P. Michael Payne, Chief of the Permits, Conservation
and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-
3225. The mailbox address for providing email comments is
PR1.101906B@noaa.gov. Comments sent via e-mail, including all
attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size.
A copy of MMS' Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) for
seismic survey operations in Arctic Alaska waters for the 2006 open
water season is available on-line at:https://www.mms.gov/alaska/ref/
pea_be.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301-
713-2289, ext 128 or Jill Lewandowski, MMS at 703-787-1703
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In 2006, the MMS prepared a Draft PEA for the 2006 Arctic Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) Seismic Surveys. The MMS assumed in this PEA
that up to eight marine seismic surveys (4 each in the Chukchi and
Beaufort seas) were likely to occur in 2006 in the Arctic Ocean. NMFS
was a cooperating agency in the preparation of the MMS Draft and Final
PEAs and made the Draft PEA available upon request (e.g., 71 FR 26055,
May 3, 2006). A Final PEA was published and released on June 20, 2006.
In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental
Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS subsequently determined that the MMS Final PEA
contained an in-depth and detailed description of the affected
environment, a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed action,
mitigation and monitoring measures to reduce impacts on the human
environment to non-significant levels, and an analysis of the potential
effects of the action and alternatives on the human environment. In
view of the information and the analyses contained in the supporting
Final PEA, on June 28, 2006, NMFS adopted the Final PEA, issued its own
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and determined that issuance
of Incidental Harassment Authorizations (IHAs), under section
101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, to oil-and-gas companies for conducting
seismic surveys in 2006 in the Arctic Ocean would have a negligible
impact on affected marine mammal stocks and not have an unmitigable
adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking
for subsistence uses of marine mammals.
This FONSI determination was predicated on full implementation of
standard mitigation measures for preventing injury or mortality to
marine mammals, in addition to area-specific mitigation measures, which
included but were not limited to:
(1) a 120-dB rms (root-mean-squared) monitored safety zone for fall
migrating cow/calf pairs of bowhead whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi
seas;
(2) a 160-dB rms monitored safety zone for aggregations of feeding
bowhead and gray whales in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas;
(3) a 180-dB rms exclusion zone for all cetaceans and a 190-dB rms
exclusion zone for pinnipeds except the walrus;
(4) seismic shut-down criteria to protect bowhead and/or gray
whales, under specific circumstances, when inside the 120-dB or 160-dB
monitoring-safety zones; and for all cetaceans within the 180-dB zone
and all pinnipeds, except walrus, within the 190-dB zone); and,
(5) a joint industry cooperative program on marine mammal research
in the Chukchi Sea.
These mitigation measures were incorporated into NMFS' Selected
Alternative and IHA conditions for the 2006 seismic survey operations.
Accordingly, NMFS adopted MMS' Final PEA and determined that the
preparation of an EIS for this action was not necessary.
Notice of Intent
During the public comment period on MMS' Draft PEA, several
comments were received recommending preparation of a Draft EIS under
NEPA for this action. While preparation of an EIS on this action was
considered, NMFS and MMS determined that the goals and objectives of
NEPA could be met, given the level of proposed activities for 2006, by
completing a Final PEA and implementing a mitigated FONSI for 2006 that
would ensure that all authorized activities would not have a
significant effect on
[[Page 66913]]
the human environment. At the time, NMFS also began to explore the need
to prepare an EIS for future years, if seismic operations were to
continue and expand in scope as anticipated.
It is important to note that subsequent to issuance of the IHAs for
the 2006 seismic season to Shell (71 FR 50027, August 24, 2006),
ConocoPhillips Alaska (CPAI) (71 FR 43112, July 31, 2006), and GX
Technology (GXT) (71 FR 49418, August 23, 2006), a District Court Judge
in Anchorage in the case of ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc v. National
Marine Fisheries, et al. issued an order on September 18, 2006,
granting a motion to stay the implementation of the CPAI IHA condition
requiring a 120-dB monitoring safety zone to protect bowhead whale cow/
calf pairs during their annual fall migration out of the Arctic Ocean.
The Court agreed that CPAI raised a ``serious question'' regarding the
propriety of this additional requirement, meaning that the IHA
condition requiring a 120-dB monitoring safety zone would be suspended
until the Court is able to fully resolve the dispute. However, the 120-
dB mitigation measure was essential to allow NMFS to conclude with a
FONSI, especially given the level of uncertainty on the effects of
seismic surveys on bowhead whales in Arctic waters. This measure,
therefore, became a basic condition for NMFS being able to issue IHAs
to Shell, CPAI and GXT in the 2006 seismic season.
It should be recognized that the MMS PEA analyzed the effects of 4
concurrent seismic surveys in the Chukchi Sea and 4 concurrent seismic
surveys in the Beaufort Sea during the bowhead migration while in fact,
in 2006, only a single company operated at any one time in the Chukchi
Sea during the bowhead migration (CPAI from September 25 - October 12
and GXT from October 13 - present). As a result, this significant
reduction in the anticipated amount of seismic activity around the
bowhead whale migration reduced NMFS' concern this year that the
suspension by the Court of one measure by one company would result in
an increase of negative impacts to bowhead whales or subsistence
hunters. However, there are indications that a similar (4 and 4) or
even an increased level of seismic activity may occur in 2007 and
beyond. These events may lead to an increased impact to marine mammals,
particularly to fall migrating bowhead whale cow/calf pairs. Moreover,
if in 2007 or beyond, the level of seismic survey activity in the
Chukchi and Beaufort seas increases, it may exceed the level analyzed
in the Final PEA. As a result, NMFS has determined that it needs to
analyze impacts resulting from a higher level of potential seismic
activity over a longer time frame than was addressed in the Final PEA
and to reanalyze the range of practical mitigation measures for
protecting marine mammals in more detail through preparation of a Draft
PEIS for issuing: (1) permits for oil and gas exploration in the Arctic
Ocean by MMS, and (2) authorizations to the seismic industry from NMFS
to take marine mammals incidental to oil and gas seismic surveys in the
Arctic Ocean.
Description of the Specified Activity
Marine geophysical seismic surveys are conducted to obtain
information on surface and near-surface geology (high-resolution
surveys) and on subsurface structures and formations (2-D and 3-D
seismic surveys and vertical seismic profile surveys). Airguns are the
acoustic source for 2D and 3D seismic surveys. Their individual size
can range from tens to several hundred cubic inches (in\3\). A
combination of airguns is called an array, and operators vary the
source-array size during the seismic survey to optimize the resolution
of the geophysical data collected. Airgun array sizes for 2D/3D seismic
surveys in Arctic waters have ranged from 1,800-4,000 in\3\ but may
range up to 6,000 in\3\.
These arrays emit pulsed rather than continuous sounds. While most
of the energy is directed downward and the short duration of each pulse
limits the total energy, the sound can propagate horizontally for
several kilometers (Greene and Richardson, 1988; Hall et al., 1994).
Marine-streamer 3D seismic surveys vary markedly depending on
client specifications, subsurface geology, water depth, and geological
target reservoir. The vessels conducting these surveys generally are
70-90 meters (m) (230-295 ft) long. A 3D source array typically
consists of two to three subarrays of six to nine airguns each, and is
about 12.5-18 m (41-59 ft) long and 16-36 m (52-118 ft) wide. Vessels
tow one to three source arrays, depending on the technical survey-
design specifications required for the geologic target, to generate the
acoustic energy. The sound-source level (zero-to-peak) associated with
3D seismic surveys ranges between 233 and 240 decibels re 1 microPascal
at 1 m. The arrays usually are aligned parallel with one another and
towed 50-200 m (164-656 ft) behind the vessel. Following behind the
source arrays by another 100-200 m (328-656 ft) are multiple (4-12)
streamer-receiver cables, and each streamer can be 3-8 kilometers (km;
1.86-5 mi) long and spread out over a width of 400-900 m (1312-2953
ft). Streamers are passive listening equipment consisting of multiple
hydrophone elements.
The airgun array produces a burst of underwater sound by releasing
compressed air into the water column that creates an acoustic energy
pulse. The release of compressed air every several seconds creates a
regular series of strong acoustic impulses separated by silent periods
lasting 7-16 seconds, depending on survey type and depth to the target
formations. Acoustic signals are reflected off the subsurface
sedimentary layers and recorded near the water surface by hydrophones
spaced within the streamer cables. Some surveys employ ocean-bottom
seismometers as the receiving instrument. Vessel speed is typically
4.5-6 knots (about 4-8 mph) with gear deployed.
Three-Dimensional (3-D) seismic surveying enables a more accurate
assessment of potential hydrocarbon reservoirs to optimally locate
exploration and development wells, and minimize the number of wells
required to develop a field. State-of-the-art interactive computer
mapping systems can handle much denser data coverage than older 2-D
seismic surveys. Multiple-source and multiple-streamer technologies are
used for 3-D seismic surveys. A typical 3-D survey might employ a dual
array of up to 18 guns per array. Each array might emit a 3,000 cubic-
inch burst of compressed air at 2,000 kilojoule (kJ) of acoustic energy
for each burst. The hydrophone streamer array might consist of 6-8
parallel cables, each 6-8 km (3.7-5 mi) long, spaced 75 m (246 ft)
apart. A series of 3-D surveys collected over time (4-D seismic survey)
is used for reservoir monitoring and management (the movement of oil,
gas, and water in the reservoirs can be observed over time). The
overall energy output for the permitted activity will be the same, but
the firing of the source arrays on the individual vessels will be
alternated.
A source array is activated approximately every 10-15 seconds,
depending on vessel speed. The timing between activations varies
between surveys to achieve the desired spacing required to meet the
geological objectives of the survey; typical spacing is either 25 or
37.5 m (82 or 123 ft). Depending on the shotpoint interval, airguns are
fired between 20 and 70 times per mile.
Characteristics of Airgun Pulses
Discussion on the characteristics of airgun pulses have been
provided in the Final PEA and in previous Federal
[[Page 66914]]
Register notices (see 69 FR 31792 (June 7, 2004). Reviewers are
referred to those documents for additional information.
Scoping
The environmental review of the offshore seismic industry activity
and related IHA applications will be conducted in accordance with the
requirements of NEPA, its regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508), other
appropriate Federal laws and regulations, and the NMFS policies and
procedures for compliance with those regulations (NOAA Administrative
Order 216-6 -Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999).
The activities that will be analyzed in the Draft PEIS will include
conducting marine-streamer 3D and 2D seismic surveys, high-resolution
site seismic surveys, and ocean-bottom-cable seismic surveys. NMFS and
MMS will analyze the effects of seismic noise on marine mammals, fish
and fishery resources, and marine birds found in the Chukchi and
Beaufort seas. An analysis of the potential socioeconomic impacts,
including potential impacts on subsistence uses of marine mammal
resources, will also be included. The Draft PEIS' cumulative activities
scenario and cumulative impact analysis will focus on oil and gas-
related and non-oil and gas-related noise-generating events/activities
in both Federal and State of Alaska waters that have been authorized or
conducted in the past and that are reasonably likely and foreseeable.
Noise contributions from community and commercial development, military
activities, and arctic warming will also be considered. Additional
issues may be identified as a result of written scoping comments.
The Draft PEIS will analyze the potential adverse impacts of the
proposed activities and other non-seismic related activities on
environmental resources, and will identify and describe any mitigation
measures that could be adopted to avoid and/or minimize those impacts.
The Draft PEIS will include, but not be limited to the following issues
and concerns: (1) Protection of subsistence resources and the Inupiat
culture and way of life; (2) impacts to marine mammals including
disturbance to bowhead whale migration patterns; (3) impacts of seismic
survey operations on marine fish reproduction, growth, and development;
(4) harassment and potential harm of wildlife, including marine birds,
by vessel operations and movements; (5) impacts on water and air
quality; (6) changes in the socioeconomic environment; (7) impacts to
threatened and endangered species; (8)risks of oil spills and their
potential impacts on area fish and wildlife resources; (9)
incorporation of traditional knowledge in the decision-making process;
and, (10) a description of any potential marine mammal mitigation and
monitoring measures and an analysis of their potential effectiveness.
PEIS Alternatives
NMFS will explore and evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives
in the Draft PEIS, including the proposed action and the no-action
alternative. At this time, NMFS has identified 7 alternatives for this
action: (1) No seismic-survey permits issued for geophysical
exploration activities (No Action); (2) seismic surveys for
geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted with existing
Alaska OCS G&G (geological and geophysical) exploration stipulations
and guidelines; (3) seismic surveys for geophysical exploration
activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G
exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include additional
protective measures for marine animals, including a 120-dB monitored
safety and/or exclusion zone for marine mammals; (4) seismic surveys
for geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted incorporating
existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines and
additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 160-dB-
monitored safety and/or exclusion zone for marine mammals; (5) seismic
surveys for geophysical-exploration activities would be permitted
incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and
guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine
animals, including 160-dB- and 120-dB monitored safety and/or exclusion
zones for marine mammals (Alternatives 3 and 4 combined); (6) seismic
surveys for geophysical exploration activities would be permitted
incorporating existing Alaska OCS G&G exploration stipulations and
guidelines but would include additional protective measures for marine
animals, including a 180/190-dB exclusion zone for marine mammals to
prevent acoustic injury; and, (7) seismic surveys for geophysical
exploration activities would be permitted incorporating existing Alaska
OCS G&G exploration stipulations and guidelines but would include
additional protective measures for marine animals, including a 180/190-
dB exclusion zone and 160-dB and 120-dB monitored safety and/or
exclusion zones for marine mammals (Alternatives 5 and 6 combined).
Alternative 7 was the Selected Alternative by MMS and NMFS in the 2006
PEA. No identification of a preferred or selected alternative has been
made at this time.
Identified Draft PEIS Mitigation and Monitoring Measures
The alternatives in the Draft PEIS will address a suite of
potential mitigation and monitoring measures, including:
(1) Exclusion/Safety Zones--A 180/190 dB rms isopleth exclusion
zone from the sound source that must be free of marine mammals before
the survey can begin and must remain free of mammals during the survey.
The purpose of an exclusion zone is to protect marine mammals from
Level A harassment (injury/harm); the purpose of a safety zone is to
prevent interruption of critical natural behaviors that, if
significantly disrupted, could result in population level effects, or
to avoid an unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence resources. The
180 dB (Level A harassment-injury) applies to cetaceans and walrus and
190 dB (Level A harassment-injury) applies to pinnipeds, other than
walrus.
(2) Monitoring exclusion/safety zones--Trained marine mammal
observers (MMOs) and Inupiat hunters monitor the area around the survey
vessel for the presence of marine mammals to maintain a mammal free
exclusion zone, monitor for avoidance, or take behaviors. Visual
observers monitor the exclusion zone to ensure that marine mammals do
not enter the exclusion zone for at least 30 minutes prior to ramp up,
during the conduct of the survey, or before resuming seismic-survey
work.
(3) Shut-down/power-down--The seismic array must be shut-down or
powered-down until the exclusion zone is free of marine mammals. All
MMOs have the authority to, and will, instruct the vessel operators to
immediately stop or de-energize the airgun array whenever a marine
mammal is seen within the exclusion zone.
(4) Ramp-up--Ramp up is the gradual introduction of sound to deter
marine mammals from potentially damaging sound intensities and from
approaching the exclusion zone. This technique involves the gradual
increase (usually 5-6 dB per 5-minute increment) in emitted sound
levels, beginning with firing a single airgun and gradually adding
airguns over a period of at least 20-40 minutes, until the desired
operating level of the full array is obtained. Ramp-up procedures may
begin after MMOs ensure the absence of
[[Page 66915]]
marine mammals for at least 30 minutes within the exclusion zone.
(5) Field Verification--Before conducting the survey, the operator
must verify the radii of the exclusion zone within real-time conditions
in the field. This provides for a more accurate exclusion-zone radii
rather than relying on modeling techniques before entering the field.
(6) Aerial Surveys--Aerial surveys are flown in advance of
initiating seismic surveys and related ice-breaking activities over an
area that includes the area to be surveyed.
(7) Temporal/Spatial/Operational Restrictions-- Dynamic management
approaches to avoid or minimize acoustic exposure, such as temporal or
spatial limitations are based on the presence of a marine mammal in a
particular place or time, or during a particularly sensitive behavior
(such as feeding or maternal care). In the past, these restrictions
have included: (a) A prohibition on surveys in the Chukchi Sea spring-
lead system before July 1; (b) under specific circumstances to protect
migrating bowhead cow/calf pairs, the standard 180-dB exclusion zone
for cetaceans is extended to a monitored 120-dB safety zone; (c) under
specific circumstances to protect feeding aggregations of bowhead and/
or gray whales, the standard 180-dB exclusion zone for cetaceans is
extended to a monitored 160-dB safety zone.
(8) Dedicated aerial and/or vessel surveys--As appropriate,
dedicated aerial and/or vessel surveys are conducted in the Beaufort
and Chukchi seas during the fall bowhead whale migration period to
detect migrating bowhead cow/calf pairs, and concentrations of feeding
bowhead and gray whales.
Comments
The NMFS requests comments from state, local, and tribal
governments; Native Alaskan organizations; Federal agencies;
environmental and fish and wildlife organizations; the oil and gas
industry; other interested organizations and parties in order to assist
in the preparation of a Draft PEIS for the Arctic Ocean OCS Seismic
Surveys. In particular, NMFS requests comments on the scope of issues
and range of alternatives that should be considered in the Draft PEIS.
Additional opportunities for public review and comment will be
provided when the Notice of Availability of the Draft PEIS is published
in the Federal Register. After release of the Draft PEIS, MMS and NMFS
intend to hold public information meetings in Anchorage, Barrow,
Kaktovik, Nuiqsuk, Wainwright, Point Lay and Point Hope.
Dated: November 7, 2006
James H. Lecky,
Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
[FR Doc. E6-19485 Filed 11-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
