Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Open Water Marine Seismic Survey in the Chukchi Sea, Alaska, 32379-32398 [2010-13753]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 109 (Tuesday, June 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32379-32398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13753]





[[Page 32379]]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



RIN 0648-XW13




Takes of Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; 

Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Open Water Marine Seismic Survey in 

the Chukchi Sea, Alaska



AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.



ACTION:  Notice; proposed incidental harassment authorization; request 

for comments.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



SUMMARY: NMFS received an application from Statoil USA E&P Inc. 

(Statoil) for an Incidental Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take 

marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to a proposed open water 

marine seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea, Alaska, between July through 

November 2010. Pursuant to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 

NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an IHA to Statoil 

to take, by Level B harassment only, twelve species of marine mammals 

during the specified activity.



DATES:  Comments and information must be received no later than July 8, 

2010.



ADDRESSES:  Comments on the application should be addressed to Michael 

Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of 

Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. The mailbox address for providing 

email comments is PR1.0648-XW13@noaa.gov. NMFS is not responsible for e 

mail comments sent to addresses other than the one provided here. 

Comments sent via e mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 

10 megabyte file size.

    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted to https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm without change. All Personal Identifying Information 

(for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the 

commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential 

Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

    A copy of the application used in this document may be obtained by 

writing to the address specified above, telephoning the contact listed 

below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or visiting the internet 

at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm. Documents cited 

in this notice may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular 

business hours, at the aforementioned address.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Shane Guan, Office of Protected 

Resources, NMFS, (301) 713 2289, ext 137.



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 small numbers 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, a notice of a proposed authorization is 

provided to the public for review.

    Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds 

that the taking will have 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 (where 

relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings 

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.''

    Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process 

by which citizens of the U.S. can apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of marine mammals by 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 marine 

mammals. Within 45 days of the close of the comment period, NMFS must 

either issue or deny the authorization.

    Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the 

MMPA defines ``harassment'' as:

    any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the 

potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the 

wild [``Level A harassment'']; or (ii) has the potential to disturb 

a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, 

migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

[``Level B harassment''].



Summary of Request



    NMFS received an application on December 24, 2009, from Statoil for 

the taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to a 3D marine 

seismic surveys in the Chukchi Sea, Alaska, during the 2010 open-water 

season. After addressing comments from NMFS, Statoil modified its 

application and submitted a revised application on April 12, 2010. The 

April 12, 2010, application is the one available for public comment 

(see ADDRESSES) and considered by NMFS for this proposed IHA.

    This proposed marine seismic survey will use two towed airgun array 

consisting of 26 active (10 spare) airguns with a maximum discharge 

volume of 3,000 cubic inch (in\3\). The proposed 3D survey will take 

place in a 915 mi\2\ (2,370 km\2\) survey area approximately 150 mi 

(241 km) west of Barrow in water depth of approximately 100 to 165 ft 

(30 to 50 m). The seismic survey is designed to collect 3D data of the 

deep sub-surface in Statoil's Chukchi leases in support of future oil 

and gas development within the area of coverage. The data will help 

identify source rocks, migration pathways, and play types. In addition, 

a 2D tie line survey has been designed as a second priority program to 

acquire useful information in the region. The four stand alone 2D lines 

(with a total length of approximately 420 mi or 675 km) are designed to 

tie the details of the new high resolution 3D image to the surrounding 

regional geology to facilitate interpretation of more regional trends. 

The number of 2D km acquired will to some degree be dependent on the 

2010 season's restrictive ice coverage and the 3D data acquisition 

progress.

    Statoil intends to conduct these marine surveys during the 2010 

Arctic open-water season (July through November). Impacts to marine 

mammals may occur from noise produced by airgun sources used in the 

surveys.



Description of the Specified Activity



    Statoil plans to conduct geophysical data acquisition activities in 

the Chukchi Sea in the period July 15 through November 30, 2010. Data 

acquisition is expected to take approximately 60 days (including 

anticipated downtime), but the total period for this request is from 

July 15 through November 30 to allow for unexpected downtime. The 

project area



[[Page 32380]]



encompasses approximately 915 mi\2\ (2,370 km\2\) in Statoil lease 

holdings in the Minerals Management Service (MMS) Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) Lease Sale 193 area in the northern Chukchi Sea (Figure 1 

of the Statoil IHA application). The activities consist of 3D seismic 

data acquisition and a 2D tie line survey as a second priority program.

    The entire 3D program, if it can be completed, will consist of 

approximately 3,100 mi (4,990 km) of production line, not including 

line turns. A total of four 2D well tie lines with a total length of 

approximately 420 mi (675 km) are included in the survey plan as a 

second priority program. The 3D seismic data acquisition will be 

conducted from the M/V Geo Celtic. The M/V Geo Celtic will tow two 

identical airgun arrays at approximately 20 ft (6 m) depth and at a 

distance of about 902 ft (275 m) behind the vessel. Each array is 

composed of three strings for a total of 26 active G-guns (4 60 in\3\, 

8 70 in\3\, 6 100 in\3\, 4 150 in\3\, and 4 250 in\3\) with a total 

discharge volume of 3000 in\3\. Each array also consists of 5 clusters 

of 10 inactive airguns that will be used as spares. One of the smallest 

guns in the array (60 in\3\) will be used as the mitigation gun. More 

details of the airgun array and its components are described in 

Appendix B of Statoil's IHA application. In addition to the airgun 

array, pinger systems (DigiRANGE II, or similar systems) will be used 

to position the streamer array relative to the vessel.

    The estimated source level for the full 3000 in\3\ array is 245 dB 

re 1 microPa (rms) at 1 m. The maximum distances to received levels of 

190, 180 160, and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) from sound source 

verification (SSV) measurements of the 3,147 in\3\ airgun array used in 

the Chukchi Sea during 2006-2008 were used to model the received levels 

at these distances, which show that the maximum distances are 700, 

2,500, 13,000, and 120,000 m, respectively.

    The estimated source level of this single 60 in\3\ airgun is 230 dB 

re 1 microPa (rms) at 1 m, and the modeled distances to received levels 

of 190, 180 160, and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) are 75, 220, 1,800, and 

50,000 m, respectively.

    The DigiRANGE II pinger system produces very short pulses, 

occurring for 10 ms, with source level approximately 180 dB re 1 

microPa (rms) at 1 m at 55 kHz, 188 dB re 1 microPa (rms) at 1 m at 75 

kHz, and 184 dB re 1 microPa (rms) at 1 m at 95 kHz. One pulse is 

emitted on command from the operator aboard the source vessel, which 

under normal operating conditions is once every 10 s. Most of the 

energy in the sound pulses emitted by this pinger is between 50 and 100 

kHz. The signal is omnidirectional. Using simple spherical spreading 

modeling for sound propagation, the calculated distances to received 

levels of 180, 160, and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) are 2.5 m, 25 m, and 

2,512 m, respectively. These distances are well within the radii for 

airgun arrays and that of a single mitigation gun.

    The vessel will travel along pre-determined lines at a speed of 

about 4 - 5 knots while one of the airgun arrays discharges every 8 - 

10 seconds (shot interval 61.52 ft [18.75 m]). The streamer hydrophone 

array will consist of twelve streamers of up to approximately 2.2 mi (4 

km) in length, with a total of 20,000 - 25,000 hydrophones at 6.6 ft (2 

m) spacing. This large hydrophone streamer receiver array, designed to 

maximize efficiency and minimize the number of source points, will 

receive the reflected signals from the airgun array and transfer the 

data to an on-board processing system.

    A 2D tie line survey has been designed as a second priority program 

to allow the vessel to acquire useful information in the region. The 

four stand alone 2D lines have a total length of approximately 420 mi 

(675 km) and are designed to tie the details of the new high resolution 

3D image to known surrounding regional geology.

    The approximate boundaries of the total surface area are between 

71[deg] 30' N and 72[deg] 00' N and between 165[deg] W and 162[deg] 30' 

W. The water depth in the survey area varies from 100 to 165 ft (30 to 

50 m).

    The vessels involved in the seismic survey activities will consist 

of at least three vessels as listed below. Specifications of these 

vessels (or equivalent vessels if availability changes) are provided in 

Appendix A of Statoil's IHA application.

     One (1) seismic source vessel, the M/V Geo Celtic or 

similar equipped vessel, to tow the two 3,000 in\3\ airgun arrays and 

hydrophone streamer for the 3D (and 2D) seismic data acquisition and to 

serve as a platform for marine mammal monitoring;

     One (1) chase/monitoring vessel, the M/V Gulf Provider or 

similar equipped vessel, for marine mammal monitoring, crew transfer, 

support and supply duties.

     One (1) chase/monitoring vessel, the M/V Thor Alpha or 

similar equipped vessel, for marine mammal monitoring, support and 

supply duties.

    The M/V Geo Celtic, or similar vessel, will arrive in Dutch Harbor 

around mid July 2010. The vessels will be resupplied and the crew 

changed at this port. Depending on ice conditions, all three vessels 

will depart Dutch Harbor around mid/end July with an expected transit 

time of approximately 5 days (weather depending). Directly upon arrival 

in the 3D survey area, depending on ice conditions, the M/V Geo Celtic 

will deploy the airgun array and start operating their guns for the 

purpose of sound source verification measurements (see Statoil IHA 

application for more details). The startup date of seismic data 

acquisition is expected to be early/mid August but depends on local ice 

conditions.

    Upon completion of these measurements the seismic data acquisition 

in the Chukchi Sea will start and, depending on the start date, is 

expected to be completed in the first half of October. This is based on 

an estimated duration of 60 days from first to last shot point 

(including anticipated downtime). The data acquisition is a 24-hour 

operation.



Description of Marine Mammals in the Area of the Specified Activity



    Eight cetacean and four pinniped species under NMFS jurisdiction 

could occur in the general area of Statoil's open water marine seismic 

survey area in the Chukchi Sea. These species most likely to occur in 

the general area project vicinity include two cetacean species: beluga 

(Delphinapterus leucas) and bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus), and 

three seal species: ringed (Phoca hispida), spotted (P. largha), and 

bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus). Most encounters are likely to 

occur in nearshore shelf habitats or along the ice edge. The marine 

mammal species that is likely to be encountered most widely (in space 

and time) throughout the period of the open water seismic survey is the 

ringed seal. Encounters with bowhead and beluga whales are expected to 

be limited to particular regions and seasons, as discussed below.

    Other marine mammal species that have been observed in the Chukchi 

Sea but are less frequent or uncommon in the project area include 

harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), narwhal (Monodon monoceros), 

killer whale (Orcinus orca), fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus), minke 

whale (B. acutorostrata), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), gray 

whale (Eschrichtius robustus), and ribbon seal (Histriophoca fasciata). 

These species could occur in the project area, but each of these 

species is uncommon or rare in the area and relatively few encounters 

with these species are expected during the proposed marine seismic 

survey. The narwhal occurs in Canadian waters



[[Page 32381]]



and occasionally in the Beaufort Sea, but it is rare there and is not 

expected to be encountered. There are scattered records of narwhal in 

Alaskan waters, including reports by subsistence hunters, where the 

species is considered extralimital (Reeves et al. 2002). Point Barrow, 

Alaska, is the approximate northeastern extent of the harbor porpoise's 

regular range (Suydam and George 1992). Humpback, fin, and minke whales 

have recently been sighted in the Chukchi Sea but very rarely in the 

Beaufort Sea. Greene et al. (2007) reported and photographed a humpback 

whale cow/calf pair east of Barrow near Smith Bay in 2007, which is the 

first known occurrence of humpbacks in the Beaufort Sea. Savarese et 

al. (2009) reported one minke whale sighting in the Beaufort Sea in 

2007 and 2008. Ribbon seals do not normally occur in the Beaufort Sea; 

however, two ribbon seal sightings were reported during vessel-based 

activities near Prudhoe Bay in 2008 (Savarese et al. 2009).

    The bowhead, fin, and humpback whales are listed as ``endangered'' 

under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and as depleted under the MMPA. 

Certain stocks or populations of gray, beluga, and killer whales and 

spotted seals are listed as endangered or proposed for listing under 

the ESA; however, none of those stocks or populations occur in the 

proposed activity area. Additionally, the ribbon seal is considered a 

``species of concern'' under the ESA, and the bearded and ringed seals 

are ``candidate species'' under the ESA, meaning they are currently 

being considered for listing.

    Statoil's application contains information on the status, 

distribution, seasonal distribution, and abundance of each of the 

species under NMFS jurisdiction mentioned in this document. Please 

refer to the application for that information (see ADDRESSES). 

Additional information can also be found in the NMFS Stock Assessment 

Reports (SAR). The Alaska 2009 SAR is available at: https://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/sars/ak2009.pdf.



Potential Effects of the Specified Activity on Marine Mammals



    Operating active acoustic sources such as an airgun array has the 

potential for adverse effects on marine mammals.



Potential Effects of Airgun Sounds on Marine Mammals



    The effects of sounds from airgun pulses might include one or more 

of the following: tolerance, masking of natural sounds, behavioral 

disturbance, and temporary or permanent hearing impairment or non-

auditory effects (Richardson et al. 1995). As outlined in previous NMFS 

documents, the effects of noise on marine mammals are highly variable, 

and can be categorized as follows (based on Richardson et al. 1995):

(1) Tolerance

    Numerous studies have shown that pulsed sounds from airguns are 

often readily detectable in the water at distances of many kilometers. 

Numerous studies have shown that marine mammals at distances more than 

a few kilometers from operating seismic vessels often show no apparent 

response. That is often true even in cases when the pulsed sounds must 

be readily audible to the animals based on measured received levels and 

the hearing sensitivity of that mammal group. Although various baleen 

whales, toothed whales, and (less frequently) pinnipeds have been shown 

to react behaviorally to airgun pulses under some conditions, at other 

times, mammals of all three types have shown no overt reactions. In 

general, pinnipeds and small odontocetes seem to be more tolerant of 

exposure to airgun pulses than baleen whales.

(2) Behavioral Disturbance

    Marine mammals may behaviorally react to sound when exposed to 

anthropogenic noise. These behavioral reactions are often shown as: 

changing durations of surfacing and dives, number of blows per 

surfacing, or moving direction and/or speed; reduced/increased vocal 

activities, changing/cessation of certain behavioral activities (such 

as socializing or feeding); visible startle response or aggressive 

behavior (such as tail/fluke slapping or jaw clapping), avoidance of 

areas where noise sources are located, and/or flight responses (e.g., 

pinnipeds flushing into water from haulouts or rookeries).

    The biological significance of many of these behavioral 

disturbances is difficult to predict, especially if the detected 

disturbances appear minor. However, the consequences of behavioral 

modification could be expected to be biologically significant if the 

change affects growth, survival, and reproduction. Some of these 

significant behavioral modifications include:

     Drastic change in diving/surfacing patterns (such as those 

thought to be causing beaked whale stranding due to exposure to 

military mid-frequency tactical sonar);

     Habitat abandonment due to loss of desirable acoustic 

environment; and

     Cease feeding or social interaction.

    The onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise 

depends on both external factors (characteristics of noise sources and 

their paths) and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, 

experience, demography) and is also difficult to predict (Southall et 

al. 2007).

    Currently NMFS uses 160 dB re 1 microPa at received level for 

impulse noises (such as airgun pulses) as the onset of marine mammal 

behavioral harassment.

(3) Masking

    Chronic exposure to excessive, though not high-intensity, noise 

could cause masking at particular frequencies for marine mammals that 

utilize sound for vital biological functions. Masking can interfere 

with detection of acoustic signals such as communication calls, 

echolocation sounds, and environmental sounds important to marine 

mammals. Since marine mammals depend on acoustic cues for vital 

biological functions, such as orientation, communication, finding prey, 

and avoiding predators, marine mammals that experience severe acoustic 

masking will have reduced fitness in survival and reproduction.

    Masking occurs when noise and signals (that animal utilizes) 

overlap at both spectral and temporal scales. For the airgun noise 

generated from the proposed marine seismic survey, these are low 

frequency (under 1 kHz) pulses with extremely short durations (in the 

scale of milliseconds). Lower frequency man-made noises are more likely 

to affect detection of communication calls and other potentially 

important natural sounds such as surf and prey noise. There is little 

concern regarding masking due to the brief duration of these pulses and 

relatively longer silence between airgun shots (9 - 12 seconds) near 

the noise source, however, at long distances (over tens of kilometers 

away), due to multipath propagation and reverberation, the durations of 

airgun pulses can be ``stretched'' to seconds with long decays (Madsen 

et al. 2006). Therefore it could affect communication signals used by 

low frequency mysticetes when they occur near the noise band and thus 

reduce the communication space of animals (e.g., Clark et al. 2009) and 

cause increased stress levels (e.g., Foote et al. 2004; Holt et al. 

2009). Nevertheless, the intensity of the noise is also greatly reduced 

at such long distances (for example, the modeled received level drops 

below 120 dB re 1 microPa rms at 14,900 m from the source).

    Marine mammals are thought to be able to compensate for masking by 

adjusting their acoustic behavior such as



[[Page 32382]]



shifting call frequencies, increasing call volume and vocalization 

rates. For example, blue whales are found to increase call rates when 

exposed to seismic survey noise in the St. Lawrence Estuary (Di Iorio 

and Clark 2010). The North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) 

exposed to high shipping noise increase call frequency (Parks et al. 

2007), while some humpback whales respond to low-frequency active sonar 

playbacks by increasing song length (Miller el al. 2000).

(4) Hearing Impairment

    Marine mammals exposed to high intensity sound repeatedly or for 

prolonged periods can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is 

the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Kastak et 

al. 1999; Schlundt et al. 2000; Finneran et al. 2002; 2005). TS can be 

permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is 

unrecoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's hearing 

threshold will recover over time (Southall et al. 2007). Just like 

masking, marine mammals that suffer from PTS or TTS will have reduced 

fitness in survival and reproduction, either permanently or 

temporarily. Repeated noise exposure that leads to TTS could cause PTS. 

For transient sounds, the sound level necessary to cause TTS is 

inversely related to the duration of the sound.

    Experiments on a bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncates) and beluga 

whale showed that exposure to a single watergun impulse at a received 

level of 207 kPa (or 30 psi) peak-to-peak (p-p), which is equivalent to 

228 dB re 1 microPa (p-p), resulted in a 7 and 6 dB TTS in the beluga 

whale at 0.4 and 30 kHz, respectively. Thresholds returned to within 2 

dB of the pre-exposure level within 4 minutes of the exposure (Finneran 

et al. 2002). No TTS was observed in the bottlenose dolphin. Although 

the source level of pile driving from one hammer strike is expected to 

be much lower than the single watergun impulse cited here, animals 

being exposed for a prolonged period to repeated hammer strikes could 

receive more noise exposure in terms of SEL than from the single 

watergun impulse (estimated at 188 dB re 1 microPa2-s) in the 

aforementioned experiment (Finneran et al. 2002).

    For baleen whales, there are no data, direct or indirect, on levels 

or properties of sound that are required to induce TTS. The frequencies 

to which baleen whales are most sensitive are lower than those to which 

odontocetes are most sensitive, and natural ambient noise levels at 

those low frequencies tend to be higher (Urick 1983). As a result, 

auditory thresholds of baleen whales within their frequency band of 

best hearing are believed to be higher (less sensitive) than are those 

of odontocetes at their best frequencies (Clark and Ellison, 2004). 

From this, it is suspected that received levels causing TTS onset may 

also be higher in baleen whales. However, no cases of TTS are expected 

given the small size of the airguns proposed to be used and the strong 

likelihood that baleen whales (especially migrating bowheads) would 

avoid the approaching airguns (or vessel) before being exposed to 

levels high enough for there to be any possibility of TTS.

    In pinnipeds, TTS thresholds associated with exposure to brief 

pulses (single or multiple) of underwater sound have not been measured. 

Initial evidence from prolonged exposures suggested that some pinnipeds 

may incur TTS at somewhat lower received levels than do small 

odontocetes exposed for similar durations (Kastak et al. 1999, 2005; 

Ketten et al. 2001). However, more recent indications are that TTS 

onset in the most sensitive pinniped species studied (harbor seal, 

which is closely related to the ringed seal) may occur at a similar SEL 

as in odontocetes (Kastak et al., 2004).

    NMFS (1995, 2000) concluded that cetaceans and pinnipeds should not 

be exposed to pulsed underwater noise at received levels exceeding, 

respectively, 180 and 190 dB re 1 microPa rms. The established 180- and 

190-dB re 1 microPa rms criteria are not considered to be the levels 

above which TTS might occur. Rather, they are the received levels above 

which, in the view of a panel of bioacoustics specialists convened by 

NMFS before TTS measurements for marine mammals started to become 

available, one could not be certain that there would be no injurious 

effects, auditory or otherwise, to marine mammals. As summarized above, 

data that are now available to imply that TTS is unlikely to occur 

unless bow-riding odontocetes are exposed to airgun pulses much 

stronger than 180 dB re 1 microPa rms (Southall et al. 2007).

    No cases of TTS are expected as a result of Statoil's proposed 

seismic activity due to the fact that much higher received levels than 

180- and 190-dB would be needed to induce TTS. In addition, the strong 

likelihood that baleen whales (especially migrating bowheads) would 

avoid the approaching airguns (or vessel) before being exposed to 

levels high enough for there to be any possibility of TTS, and the 

mitigation and monitoring measures prescribed (described below in the 

document) will largely prevent marine mammals from being exposed to SPL 

above 180 and 190 dB re 1 microPa (rms).

    There is no empirical evidence that exposure to pulses of airgun 

sound can cause PTS in any marine mammal, even with large arrays of 

airguns (see Southall et al., 2007). However, given the possibility 

that mammals close to an airgun array might incur TTS, there has been 

further speculation about the possibility that some individuals 

occurring very close to airguns might incur PTS. Single or occasional 

occurrences of mild TTS are not indicative of permanent auditory damage 

in terrestrial mammals. Relationships between TTS and PTS thresholds 

have not been studied in marine mammals, but are assumed to be similar 

to those in humans and other terrestrial mammals. That is, PTS might 

occur at a received sound level magnitudes higher than the level of 

onset TTS, or by repeated exposure to the levels that cause TTS. 

Therefore, by means of preventing the onset of TTS, it is highly 

unlikely that marine mammals could receive sounds strong enough (and 

over a sufficient duration) to cause permanent hearing impairment 

during the proposed marine seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea.

(5) Non-auditory Physical Effects

    Non-auditory physical effects might occur in marine mammals exposed 

to strong underwater pulsed sound. Possible types of non-auditory 

physiological effects or injuries that theoretically might occur in 

mammals close to a strong sound source include stress, neurological 

effects, bubble formation, and other types of organ or tissue damage. 

Some marine mammal species (i.e., beaked whales) may be especially 

susceptible to injury and/or stranding when exposed to strong pulsed 

sounds. However, there is no definitive evidence that any of these 

effects occur even for marine mammals in close proximity to large 

arrays of airguns, and beaked whales do not occur in the proposed 

project area. In addition, marine mammals that show behavioral 

avoidance of seismic vessels, including most baleen whales, some 

odontocetes (including belugas), and some pinnipeds, are especially 

unlikely to incur non-auditory impairment or other physical effects.

(6) Stranding and Mortality

    Marine mammals close to underwater detonations of high explosive 

can be killed or severely injured, and the auditory organs are 

especially susceptible to injury (Ketten et al. 1993; Ketten 1995). 

Airgun pulses are less



[[Page 32383]]



energetic and their peak amplitudes have slower rise times. Up-to-date, 

there is no evidence that serious injury, death, or stranding by marine 

mammals can occur from exposure to airgun pulses, even in the case of 

large airgun arrays.

    However, in numerous past IHA notices for seismic surveys, 

commenters have referenced two stranding events allegedly associated 

with seismic activities, one off Baja California and a second off 

Brazil. NMFS has addressed this concern several times, and, without new 

information, does not believe that this issue warrants further 

discussion. For information relevant to strandings of marine mammals, 

readers are encouraged to review NMFS' response to comments on this 

matter found in 69 FR 74905 (December 14, 2004), 71 FR 43112 (July 31, 

2006), 71 FR 50027 (August 24, 2006), and 71 FR 49418 (August 23, 

2006). In addition, a May-June 2008, stranding of 100-200 melon-headed 

whales (Peponocephala electra) off Madagascar that appears to be 

associated with seismic surveys is currently under investigation (IWC 

2009).

    It should be noted that strandings related to sound exposure have 

not been recorded for marine mammal species in the Beaufort and Chukchi 

seas. NMFS notes that in the Beaufort Sea, aerial surveys have been 

conducted by MMS and industry during periods of industrial activity 

(and by MMS during times with no activity). No strandings or marine 

mammals in distress have been observed during these surveys and none 

have been reported by North Slope Borough inhabitants. As a result, 

NMFS does not expect any marine mammals will incur serious injury or 

mortality in the Arctic Ocean or strand as a result of proposed seismic 

survey.



Potential Effects from Pinger System on Marine Mammals



    A pinger system (DigiRANGE II) will be used during seismic 

operations to position the airgun array and hydrophone streamer 

relative to the vessel. The specifications of the DigiRANGE II pinger 

system (source levels and frequency ranges) are provided above. The 

pinger produces sounds that are above the range of frequencies produced 

or heard by mysticetes. However, the beluga whales and other 

odontocetes have good hearing sensitivity across the pingers major 

frequency range, which is at 50 - 100 kHz (Au et al. 1978; Johnson et 

al. 1989). Some seals also can hear sounds at frequencies up to 

somewhat above 55 kHz. In general, the potential effects of the pulse 

pinger on marine mammals are similar to those from the airgun, but the 

magnitude of the impacts is expected to be much less due to much lower 

intensity and higher frequencies. Estimated source levels and zones of 

influence from the pinger system are discussed above.



Vessel Sounds



    In addition to the noise generated from seismic airguns, various 

types of vessels will be used in the operations, including source 

vessels and support vessels. Sounds from boats and vessels have been 

reported extensively (Greene and Moore 1995; Blackwell and Greene 2002; 

2005; 2006). Numerous measurements of underwater vessel sound have been 

performed in support of recent industry activity in the Chukchi and 

Beaufort Seas. Results of these measurements were reported in various 

90-day and comprehensive reports since 2007 (e.g., Aerts et al. 2008; 

Hauser et al. 2008; Brueggeman 2009; Ireland et al. 2009). For example, 

Garner and Hannay (2009) estimated sound pressure levels of 100 dB at 

distances ranging from approximately 1.5 to 2.3 mi (2.4 to 3.7 km) from 

various types of barges. MacDonald et al. (2008) estimated higher 

underwater SPLs from the seismic vessel Gilavar of 120 dB at 

approximately 13 mi (21 km) from the source, although the sound level 

was only 150 dB at 85 ft (26 m) from the vessel. Compared to airgun 

pulses, underwater sound from vessels is generally at relatively low 

frequencies.

    The primary sources of sounds from all vessel classes are propeller 

cavitation, propeller singing, and propulsion or other machinery. 

Propeller cavitation is usually the dominant noise source for vessels 

(Ross 1976). Propeller cavitation and singing are produced outside the 

hull, whereas propulsion or other machinery noise originates inside the 

hull. There are additional sounds produced by vessel activity, such as 

pumps, generators, flow noise from water passing over the hull, and 

bubbles breaking in the wake. Icebreakers contribute greater sound 

levels during ice-breaking activities than ships of similar size during 

normal operation in open water (Richardson et al. 1995). This higher 

sound production results from the greater amount of power and propeller 

cavitation required when operating in thick ice. Source levels from 

various vessels would be empirically measured before the start of 

marine surveys.



Anticipated Effects on Habitat



    The primary potential impacts to marine mammals and other marine 

species are associated with elevated sound levels produced by airguns 

and other active acoustic sources. However, other potential impacts to 

the surrounding habitat from physical disturbance are also possible.



Potential Impacts on Prey Species



    With regard to fish as a prey source for cetaceans and pinnipeds, 

fish are known to hear and react to sounds and to use sound to 

communicate (Tavolga et al. 1981) and possibly avoid predators (Wilson 

and Dill 2002). Experiments have shown that fish can sense both the 

strength and direction of sound (Hawkins, 1981). Primary factors 

determining whether a fish can sense a sound signal, and potentially 

react to it, are the frequency of the signal and the strength of the 

signal in relation to the natural background noise level.

    The level of sound at which a fish will react or alter its behavior 

is usually well above the detection level. Fish have been found to 

react to sounds when the sound level increased to about 20 dB above the 

detection level of 120 dB (Ona 1988); however, the response threshold 

can depend on the time of year and the fish's physiological condition 

(Engas et al. 1993). In general, fish react more strongly to pulses of 

sound rather than a continuous signal (Blaxter et al. 1981), and a 

quicker alarm response is elicited when the sound signal intensity 

rises rapidly compared to sound rising more slowly to the same level.

    Investigations of fish behavior in relation to vessel noise (Olsen 

et al. 1983; Ona 1988; Ona and Godo 1990) have shown that fish react 

when the sound from the engines and propeller exceeds a certain level. 

Avoidance reactions have been observed in fish such as cod and herring 

when vessels approached close enough that received sound levels are 110 

dB to 130 dB (Nakken 1992; Olsen 1979; Ona and Godo 1990; Ona and 

Toresen 1988). However, other researchers have found that fish such as 

polar cod, herring, and capeline are often attracted to vessels 

(apparently by the noise) and swim toward the vessel (Rostad et al. 

2006). Typical sound source levels of vessel noise in the audible range 

for fish are 150 dB to 170 dB (Richardson et al. 1995).

    Some mysticetes, including bowhead whales, feed on concentrations 

of zooplankton. Some feeding bowhead whales may occur in the Alaskan 

Beaufort Sea in July and August, and others feed intermittently during 

their westward migration in September and October (Richardson and 

Thomson [eds.] 2002; Lowry et al. 2004). However, by the time most 

bowhead



[[Page 32384]]



whales reach the Chukchi Sea (October), they will likely no longer be 

feeding, or if it occurs it will be very limited. A reaction by 

zooplankton to a seismic impulse would only be relevant to whales if it 

caused concentrations of zooplankton to scatter. Pressure changes of 

sufficient magnitude to cause that type of reaction would probably 

occur only very close to the source. Impacts on zooplankton behavior 

are predicted to be negligible, and that would translate into 

negligible impacts on feeding mysticetes. Thus, the proposed activity 

is not expected to have any habitat-related effects that could cause 

significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or 

their populations.



Proposed Mitigation



    In order to issue an incidental take authorization under Section 

101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods 

of taking pursuant to such activity, and other means of effecting the 

least practicable adverse impact on such species or stock and its 

habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and 

areas of similar significance, and on the availability of such species 

or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses.

    For the proposed Statoil open water marine seismic survey in the 

Chukchi Sea, Statoil worked with NMFS and proposed the following 

mitigation measures to minimize the potential impacts to marine mammals 

in the project vicinity as a result of the marine seismic survey 

activities.

    As part of the application, Statoil submitted to NMFS a Marine 

Mammal Monitoring and Mitigation Program (4MP) for its open water 

seismic survey in the Chukchi Sea during the 2010 open-water season. 

The objectives of the 4MP are:

     to ensure that disturbance to marine mammals and 

subsistence hunts is minimized and all permit stipulations are 

followed,

     to document the effects of the proposed survey activities 

on marine mammals, and

     to collect baseline data on the occurrence and 

distribution of marine mammals in the study area.

    The 4MP may be modified or supplemented based on comments or new 

information received from the public during the public comment period 

or from the peer review panel (see the ``Monitoring Plan Peer Review'' 

section later in this document).



Mitigation Measures Proposed in Statoil's IHA Application



    For the proposed mitigation measures, Statoil listed the following 

protocols to be implemented during its marine seismic survey in the 

Chukchi Sea.

(1) Sound Source Measurements

    As described above, previous measurements of similar airgun arrays 

in the Chukchi Sea were used to model the distances at which received 

levels are likely to fall below 120, 160, 180, and 190 dB re 1 microPa 

(rms) from the planned airgun sources. These modeled distances will be 

used as temporary safety radii until measurements of the airgun sound 

source are conducted. The measurements will be made at the beginning of 

the field season and the measured radii used for the remainder of the 

survey period.

    The objectives of the sound source verification measurements 

planned for 2010 in the Chukchi Sea will be to measure the distances in 

the broadside and endfire directions at which broadband received levels 

reach 190, 180, 170, 160, and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) for the energy 

source array combinations that may be used during the survey 

activities. The configurations will include at least the full array and 

the operation of a single mitigation source that will be used during 

power downs. The measurements of energy source array sounds will be 

made by an acoustics contractor at the beginning of the survey and the 

distances to the various radii will be reported as soon as possible 

after recovery of the equipment. The primary radii of concern will be 

the 190 and 180 dB safety radii for pinnipeds and cetaceans, 

respectively, and the 160 dB radii for zone of influence (ZOI). In 

addition to reporting the radii of specific regulatory concern, nominal 

distances to other sound isopleths down to 120 dB (rms) will be 

reported in increments of 10 dB.

    Data will be previewed in the field immediately after download from 

the ocean bottom hydrophone (OBH) instruments. An initial sound source 

analysis will be supplied to NMFS and the airgun operators within 120 

hours of completion of the measurements, if possible. The report will 

indicate the distances to sound levels between 190 dB re 1 microPa 

(rms) and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) based on fits of empirical 

transmission loss formulae to data in the endfire and broadside 

directions. The 120-hour report findings will be based on analysis of 

measurements from at least three of the OBH systems. A more detailed 

report including analysis of data from all OBH systems will be issued 

to NMFS as part of the 90-day report following completion of the 

acoustic program.

(2) Safety and Disturbance Zones

    Under current NMFS guidelines, ``safety radii'' for marine mammal 

exposure to impulse sources are customarily defined as the distances 

within which received sound levels are micro180 dB re 1 microPa (rms) 

for cetaceans and micro190 dB re 1 microPa (rms) for pinnipeds. These 

safety criteria are based on an assumption that SPL received at levels 

lower than these will not injure these animals or impair their hearing 

abilities, but that at higher levels might have some such effects. 

Disturbance or behavioral effects to marine mammals from underwater 

sound may occur after exposure to sound at distances greater than the 

safety radii (Richardson et al. 1995).

    Initial safety and disturbance radii for the sound levels produced 

by the survey activities have been estimated from measurements of 

similar seismic arrays used in the Chukchi Sea in previous years. These 

radii will be used for mitigation purposes until results of direct 

measurements are available early during the exploration activities.

    The basis for the estimation of distances to the four received 

sound levels from the proposed 3000 in\3\ airgun array operating at a 

depth of 20 ft (6 m) are the 2006, 2007 and 2008 sound source 

verification (SSV) measurements in the Chukchi Sea of a similar array, 

towed at a similar depth. The measured airgun array had a total 

discharge volume of 3,147 in\3\ and was composed of three identically-

tuned Bolt airgun sub-arrays, totaling 24 airguns (6 clusters of 2 

airguns and 12 single airguns). The proposed 3,000 in\3\ array is also 

composed of three strings with a total of 26 active airguns in 13 

clusters. The difference in discharge volume would lead to an expected 

loss of less than 0.2 dB and is neglected in this assessment. The 

estimated source level for the full 3,000 in\3\ array is 245 dB re 1 

microPA (rms). Without measurement data for the specific site to be 

surveyed, it is reasonable to adopt the maximum distances obtained from 

a similar array during previous measurements in the Chukchi Sea. Table 

1 summarizes the distances to received levels of 190, 180 160, and 120 

dB re 1 microPa (rms) that are adopted for the analysis for the 

proposed survey. Distances for received levels of 120 dB are highly 

variable, in part because the bottom geoacoustic properties will have a 

major effect on received levels at such distances.



[[Page 32385]]



    To estimate the distances to various received levels from the 60 

in\3\ mitigation gun the data from previous measurements of a 30 in\3\ 

gun were used. In general the pressure increase relative to a 30 in\3\ 

gun can be derived by calculating the square root of (60/30), which is 

1.41. This means that the dB levels for the sound pressure levels of a 

60 in\3\ will increase by approximately 3 dB (20Log[1.41]) compared to 

the 30 in\3\ gun. The distances as summarized in Table 1 were derived 

by adding 3 dB to the constant term of the equation RL = 226.6 - 

21.2log(R) - 0.00022R. The estimated source level of this single 60 

in\3\ airgun is 230 dB re 1 microPa (rms).



 Table 1. Estimated distances to received sound levels micro190, 180, 170, 160, and 120 dB re 1 microPa (rms) from the 3,000 in\3\ airgun array and the

    60 in\3\ mitigation gun of the proposed seismic survey. These distances are based on measurements in the Chukchi Sea from a similar airgun array.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                Distance (m)

      Received Levels (dB re 1 microPa rms)       ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                3,000 in\3\ (full airgun array)                      60 in\3\ (mitigation airgun)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

190                                                                                                     700                                          70

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    An acoustics contractor will perform the direct measurements of the 

received levels of underwater sound versus distance and direction from 

the energy source arrays using calibrated hydrophones. The acoustic 

data will be analyzed as quickly as reasonably practicable in the field 

and used to verify (and if necessary adjust) the safety distances. The 

field report will be made available to NMFS and the MMOs within 120 hrs 

of completing the measurements. The mitigation measures to be 

implemented at the 190 and 180 dB sound levels will include power downs 

and shut downs as described below.

(3) Power Downs and Shut Downs

    A power-down is the immediate reduction in the number of operating 

energy sources from all firing to some smaller number. A shutdown is 

the immediate cessation of firing of all energy sources. The arrays 

will be immediately powered down whenever a marine mammal is sighted 

approaching close to or within the applicable safety zone of the full 

arrays but is outside or about to enter the applicable safety zone of 

the single mitigation source. If a marine mammal is sighted within the 

applicable safety zone of the single mitigation airgun, the entire 

array will be shut down (i.e., no sources firing).

    Following a power-down or shutdown, operation of the airgun array 

will not resume until the marine mammal has cleared the applicable 

safety zone. The animal will be considered to have cleared the safety 

zone if it:

     Is visually observed to have left the safety zone;

     Has not been seen within the zone for 15 min in the case 

of small odontocetes and pinnipeds; or

     Has not been seen within the zone for 30 min in the case 

of mysticetes.

(4) Ramp Ups

    A ramp up of an airgun array provides a gradual increase in sound 

levels, and involves a stepwise increase in the number and total volume 

of airguns firing until the full volume is achieved.

    The purpose of a ramp up (or ``soft start'') is to ``warn'' 

cetaceans and pinnipeds in the vicinity of the airguns and to provide 

time for them to leave the area and thus avoid any potential injury or 

impairment of their hearing abilities.

    During the proposed seismic survey, the seismic operator will ramp 

up the airgun arrays slowly. Full ramp ups (i.e., from a cold start 

after a shut down, when no airguns have been firing) will begin by 

firing a single airgun in the array. The minimum duration of a shut-

down period, i.e., without air guns firing, which must be followed by a 

ramp up, is typically the amount of time it would take the source 

vessel to cover the 180-dB safety radius. The actual time period 

depends on ship speed and the size of the 180-dB safety radius. That 

period is estimated to be about 15 - 20 minutes based on the modeling 

results described above and a survey speed of 4 knots.

    A full ramp up, after a shut down, will not begin until there has 

been a minimum of 30 min of observation of the safety zone by MMOs to 

assure that no marine mammals are present. The entire safety zone must 

be visible during the 30-minute lead-in to a full ramp up. If the 

entire safety zone is not visible, then ramp up from a cold start 

cannot begin. If a marine mammal(s) is sighted within the safety zone 

during the 30-minute watch prior to ramp up, ramp up will be delayed 

until the marine mammal(s) is sighted outside of the safety zone or the 

animal(s) is not sighted for at least 15 - 30 minutes: 15 minutes for 

small odontocetes and pinnipeds, or 30 minutes for baleen whales and 

large odontocetes.

    During turns and transit between seismic transects, at least one 

airgun will remain operational. The ramp-up procedure still will be 

followed when increasing the source levels from one airgun to the full 

arrays. However, keeping one airgun firing will avoid the prohibition 

of a cold start during darkness or other periods of poor visibility. 

Through use of this approach, seismic operations can resume upon entry 

to a new transect without a full ramp up and the associated 30-minute 

lead-in observations. MMOs will be on duty whenever the airguns are 

firing during daylight, and during the 30-min periods prior to ramp-ups 

as well as during ramp-ups. Daylight will occur for 24 h/day until mid-

August, so until that date MMOs will automatically be observing during 

the 30-minute period preceding a ramp up. Later in the season, MMOs 

will be called out at night to observe prior to and during any ramp up. 

The seismic operator and MMOs will maintain records of the times when 

ramp-ups start, and when the airgun arrays reach full power.



Additional Mitigation Measures Proposed by NMFS



    Besides Statoil's proposed mitigation measures discussed above, 

NMFS proposes the following additional protective measures to address 

some uncertainties regarding the impacts of



[[Page 32386]]



bowhead cow-calf pairs and aggregations of whales from seismic surveys. 

Specifically, NMFS proposes that

     A 160-dB vessel monitoring zone for large whales will be 

established and monitored in the Chukchi Sea during all seismic 

surveys. Whenever an aggregation of bowhead whales or gray whales (12 

or more whales of any age/sex class that appear to be engaged in a 

nonmigratory, significant biological behavior (e.g., feeding, 

socializing)) are observed during an aerial or vessel monitoring 

program within the 160-dB safety zone around the seismic activity, the 

seismic operation will not commence or will shut down, until two 

consecutive surveys (aerial or vessel) indicate they are no longer 

present within the 160-dB safety zone of seismic-surveying operations.

     Survey information, especially information about bowhead 

whale cow/calf pairs or feeding bowhead or gray whales, shall be 

provided to NMFS as required in MMPA authorizations, and will form the 

basis for NMFS determining whether additional mitigation measures, if 

any, will be required over a given time period.

    Furthermore, NMFS proposes the following measures be included in 

the IHA, if issued, in order to ensure the least practicable impact on 

the affected species or stocks:

    (1) All vessels should reduce speed when within 300 yards (274 m) 

of whales, and those vessels capable of steering around such groups 

should do so. Vessels may not be operated in such a way as to separate 

members of a group of whales from other members of the group;

    (2) Avoid multiple changes in direction and speed when within 300 

yards (274 m) of whales; and

    (3) When weather conditions require, such as when visibility drops, 

support vessels must adjust speed accordingly to avoid the likelihood 

of injury to whales.



Mitigation Conclusions



    NMFS has carefully evaluated the applicant's proposed mitigation 

measures and considered a range of other measures in the context of 

ensuring that NMFS prescribes the means of effecting the least 

practicable impact on the affected marine mammal species and stocks and 

their habitat. Our evaluation of potential measures included 

consideration of the following factors in relation to one another:

     the manner in which, and the degree to which, the 

successful implementation of the measure is expected to minimize 

adverse impacts to marine mammals;

     the proven or likely efficacy of the specific measure to 

minimize adverse impacts as planned; and

     the practicability of the measure for applicant 

implementation.

    Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as 

well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily 

determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of 

effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or 

stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, 

mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.



Proposed Monitoring and Reporting



    In order to issue an ITA for an activity, Section 101(a)(5)(D) of 

the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth ``requirements pertaining to 

the monitoring and reporting of such taking''. The MMPA implementing 

regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for ITAs 

must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary 

monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the 

species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine 

mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area.



Monitoring Measures Proposed in Statoil's IHA Application



    The monitoring plan proposed by Statoil can be found in the 4MP. 

The plan may be modified or supplemented based on comments or new 

information received from the public during the public comment period 

or from the peer review panel (see the ``Monitoring Plan Peer Review'' 

section later in this document). A summary of the primary components of 

the plan follows.

(1) Vessel-Based MMOs

    Vessel-based monitoring for marine mammals will be done by trained 

MMOs throughout the period of marine survey activities. MMOs will 

monitor the occurrence and behavior of marine mammals near the survey 

vessel during all daylight periods during operation and during most 

daylight periods when airgun operations are not occurring. MMO duties 

will include watching for and identifying marine mammals, recording 

their numbers, distances, and reactions to the survey operations, and 

documenting ``take by harassment'' as defined by NMFS.

    A sufficient number of MMOs will be required onboard the survey 

vessel to meet the following criteria: (1) 100% monitoring coverage 

during all periods of survey operations in daylight; (2) maximum of 4 

consecutive hours on watch per MMO; and (3) maximum of 12 hours of 

watch time per day per MMO.

    MMO teams will consist of Inupiat observers and experienced field 

biologists. An experienced field crew leader will supervise the MMO 

team onboard the survey vessel. The total number of MMOs may decrease 

later in the season as the duration of daylight decreases.

    Statoil anticipates one crew change to occur approximately half-way 

through the season. During crew rotations detailed hand-over notes will 

be provided to the incoming crew leader by the outgoing leader. Other 

communications such as email, fax, and/or phone communication between 

the current and oncoming crew leaders during each rotation will also 

occur when possible. In the event of an unexpected crew change Statoil 

will facilitate such communications to insure monitoring consistency 

among shifts.

    Crew leaders and most other biologists serving as observers in 2010 

will be individuals with experience as observers during one or more of 

the 1996-2009 seismic or shallow hazards monitoring projects in Alaska, 

the Canadian Beaufort, or other offshore areas in recent years.

    Biologist-observers will have previous marine mammal observation 

experience, and field crew leaders will be highly experienced with 

previous vessel-based marine mammal monitoring and mitigation projects. 

Resumes for those individuals will be provided to NMFS for review and 

acceptance of their qualifications. Inupiat observers will be 

experienced in the region, familiar with the marine mammals of the 

area, and complete a NMFS approved observer training course designed to 

familiarize individuals with monitoring and data collection procedures. 

A marine mammal observers' handbook, adapted for the specifics of the 

planned survey program, will be prepared and distributed beforehand to 

all MMOs.

    Most observers, including Inupiat observers, will also complete a 

two or three-day training and refresher session on marine mammal 

monitoring, to be conducted shortly before the anticipated start of the 

2010 open-water season. Any exceptions will have or receive equivalent 

experience or training. The training session(s) will be conducted by 

qualified marine mammalogists with extensive crew-leader experience 

during previous vessel-based seismic monitoring programs.

    Primary objectives of the training include:



[[Page 32387]]



     review of the marine mammal monitoring plan for this 

project, including any amendments specified by NMFS in the IHA (if 

issued), by USFWS and by MMS, or by other agreements in which Statoil 

may elect to participate;

     review of marine mammal sighting, identification, and 

distance estimation methods;

     review of operation of specialized equipment (reticle 

binoculars, night vision devices, and GPS system);

     review of, and classroom practice with, data recording and 

data entry systems, including procedures for recording data on marine 

mammal sightings, monitoring operations, environmental conditions, and 

entry error control. These procedures will be implemented through use 

of a customized computer database and laptop computers;

     review of the specific tasks of the Inupiat Communicator.

    The MMOs will watch for marine mammals from the best available 

vantage point on the survey vessels, typically the bridge. The MMOs 

will scan systematically with the unaided eye and 7 50 reticle 

binoculars, supplemented during good visibility conditions with Fujinon 

25x150 ``Big-eye'' binoculars mounted on a bride wing or flying bridge 

(seismic vessel only), and night-vision equipment when needed (see 

below). Personnel on the bridge will assist the marine mammal 

observer(s) in watching for marine mammals. Data from the infrared 

radar will be monitored in order to investigate if this could improve 

the detection and record keeping of mammals, especially during periods 

of low visibility.

    Information to be recorded by marine mammal observers will include 

the same types of information that were recorded during recent 

monitoring programs associated with industry activity in the Arctic 

(e.g., Ireland et al. 2009). When a mammal sighting is made, the 

following information about the sighting will be recorded:

    (A) Species, group size, age/size/sex categories (if determinable), 

behavior when first sighted and after initial sighting, heading (if 

consistent), bearing and distance from the MMO, apparent reaction to 

activities (e.g., none, avoidance, approach, paralleling, etc.), 

closest point of approach, and behavioral pace;

    (B) Time, location, speed, activity of the vessel, sea state, ice 

cover, visibility, and sun glare; and

    (C) The positions of other vessel(s) in the vicinity of the MMO 

location.

    The ship's position, speed of support vessels, and water 

temperature, water depth, sea state, ice cover, visibility, and sun 

glare will also be recorded at the start and end of each observation 

watch, every 30 minutes during a watch, and whenever there is a change 

in any of those variables.

    Distances to nearby marine mammals will be estimated with 

binoculars (Fujinon 7 x 50 binoculars) containing a reticle to measure 

the vertical angle of the line of sight to the animal relative to the 

horizon. MMOs may use a laser rangefinder to test and improve their 

abilities for visually estimating distances to objects in the water. 

However, previous experience showed that a Class 1 eye-safe device was 

not able to measure distances to seals more than about 230 ft (70 m) 

away. The device was very useful in improving the distance estimation 

abilities of the observers at distances up to about 1,968 ft (600 m)-

the maximum range at which the device could measure distances to highly 

reflective objects such as other vessels. Humans observing objects of 

more-or-less known size via a standard observation protocol, in this 

case from a standard height above water, quickly become able to 

estimate distances within about =20% when given immediate feedback 

about actual distances during training.



Monitoring At Night and In Poor Visibility



    Night-vision equipment (Generation 3 binocular image intensifiers, 

or equivalent units) will be available for use when/if needed. Past 

experience with night-vision devices (NVDs) in the Beaufort Sea and 

elsewhere has indicated that NVDs are not nearly as effective as visual 

observation during daylight hours (e.g., Harris et al. 1997, 1998; 

Moulton and Lawson 2002).

    A prototype infrared radar will be mounted on the source vessel in 

order to try to improve the visual observations during times of poor 

visibility. The infrared radar detects thermal contrasts and its 

ability to sense these differences is not dependent on daylight. It may 

therefore improve the ability to detect marine mammals during 

nighttime. The ability of the IR radar to detect marin